Hillingdon Council Cabinet Member and Officer Decisions
Objection to the proposed removal of part of the Zone SR permit holder parking place outside No. 19 Canfield Drive, Ruislip to accommodate a new vehicle crossover
Report Document
Can't see the PDF? Download Report
Decision / Minutes Document
No Decision PDF available.
Text extracted from PDFs
View Report Text
Democratic Services Location: Phase II Ext: 0692 DDI: 01895 250692 CMD No: 1083 To: COUNCILLOR JONATHAN BIANCO CABINET MEMBER FOR PROPERTY, HIGHWAYS AND TRANSPORT c.c. All Members of the Property, Highways & Transport Select Committee c.c. Kevin Urquhart, Place Directorate c.c. Ward Councillors for South Ruislip Date: 26 March 2024 Non-Key Decision request Form D OBJECTIONS TO THE PROPOSED REMOVAL OF PART OF THE ZONE SR PERMIT HOLDER PARKING PLACE OUTSIDE NO. 19 CANFIELD DRIVE, RUISLIP TO ACCOMMODATE A NEW VEHICLE CROSSOVER Dear Cabinet Members, Attached is a report requesting that a decision be made by you as an individual Cabinet Member. Democratic Services confirm that this is not a key decision, as such, the Local Authorities (Executive Arrangements) (Meetings and Access to Information) (England) Regulations 2012 notice period does not apply. You should take a decision on or after Friday 05 April 2024 in order to meet Constitutional requirements about publication of decisions that are to be made. You may wish to discuss the report with the Corporate Director before it is made. Please indicate your decision on the duplicate memo supplied, and return it to me when you have made your decision. I will then arrange for the formal notice of decision to be published. Ryan Dell Democratic Services Title of Report: Objections to the Proposed Removal of Part of the Zone SR Permit Holder Parking Place Outside No. 19 Canfield Drive, Ruislip t o Accommodate a New Vehicle Crossover Decision made: Reasons for your decision: (e.g. as stated in report) Alternatives considered and rejected: (e.g. as stated in report) Signed ……………………………………………………… Date…………………….. Cabinet Member for Property, Highways and Transport Cabinet Member Report – 26 March 2024 Page 1 Part I – Public OBJECTIONS TO THE PROPOSED REMOVAL OF PART OF THE ZONE SR PERMIT HOLDER PARKING PLACE OUTSIDE NO. 19 CANFIELD DRIVE, RUISLIP TO ACCOMMODATE A NEW VEHICLE CROSSOVER Cabinet Member Councillor Jonathan Bianco Cabinet Portfolio Cabinet Member for Property, Highways and Transport Officer Contact Kevin Urquhart – Place Directorate Papers with report Appendix A – Proposed plan for the removal of part of the Zone SR parking place outside No. 19 Canfield Drive, Ruislip to accommodate a new vehicle crossover. HEADLINES Summary To inform the Cabinet Member that objection s have been received to proposed amendments outside No. 19 Canfield Drive, Ruislip to accommodate a new vehicle crossing. Putting our Residents First Delivering on the Council Strategy 2022-2026 This report supports our ambition for residents/ the Council of: Live in good quality, affordable homes in connected communities This report supports our commitments to residents of: Safe and Strong Communities. Financial Cost The estimated cost of the recommendations set out in this report is £1,000, to be managed within existing Highways revenue budgets Relevant Select Committee Property, Highways and Transport Select Committee. Relevant Ward South Ruislip. RECOMMENDATIONS That the Cabinet Member: 1) Notes the objections received during the statutory consultation for the proposed removal of a section of the permit holder parking place outside No. 19 Canfield Drive, Ruislip; and 2) Following advice from the Council’s Highways Team, approves that the section of the parking place outside No. 1 9 Canfield Drive, Ruislip be removed and replaced with a section of 'Monday to Friday 9am to 5 pm' waiting restrictions as proposed and indicated on Appendix A. Cabinet Member Report – 26 March 2024 Page 2 Part I – Public Reasons for recommendation To allow clear vehicular access to a planned individual vehicle crossing being constructed outside No. 19 Canfield Drive, Ruislip. Alternative options considered/ risk management None at this stage. Select Committee comments None at this stage. SUPPORTING INFORMATION 1. The Council’s Highways Team received a request for an additional vehicle crossing to be constructed outside No. 19 Canfield Drive, Ruislip . Prior to work commencing on the construction of this new vehicle crossing, a section of Zone SR permit holder parking place will need to be removed from directly outside where the new vehicle crossing is planned in order to ensure unimpeded access and egress to the off-street parking facility that is being created at this property. 2. Following the above, statutory consultation was carried out on these amendments to facilitate the installation of this and other new vehicle crossings within Parking Management Schemes. During this period street notices were erected, and public notices were placed in the London Gazette and a local newspaper. 3. It was proposed that a section of the parking place be removed and replaced with a 'Monday to Friday 9am to 5pm' waiting restriction in order to prevent other drivers from causing an obstruction once the dropped kerb had been constructed. Attached as Appendix A to this report is a plan of the proposals. 4. During the consultation period the Council received two objections from residents who live within the same road where the amendments have been proposed . The main concern of these residents is in relation to the loss of on- street parking as a result of the proposed changes to the parking places. Quoted below are the two objections received , with a redaction of some comments to protect this resident’s identity: Objection 1 “Thank you for your recent letter regarding the proposal to remove part of the permit holder parking outside 19 Canfield Drive. It appears from the plan that 2 of the 4 spaces available will be lost if this proposal goes ahead. There are currently 6 spaces available in the Drive for 30 houses, however it appears from the plan this will reduce to 4, 2 at each end. Whilst there are resident bays in Cavendish Avenue these are regularly filled with residents cars from Dudley Drive and Cavendish Avenue where at here a few spaces available. These bays are poorly lit and not outside residential properties. I have had one car stolen and cars broken into 4 times when parking in these bays. Cabinet Member Report – 26 March 2024 Page 3 Part I – Public Having looked at all the other dropped kerbs in the street, none go in front of the adjoining properties and I cannot see why this proposal should be dealt with differently. The plan shows the dropped kerb going 1 metre across a neighbouring property. The residents of 19 Canfield do have an accessible garage for parking at the rear of the property, which was always used by the previous resident. I also object to having the new post. Again having looked at all the other posts they are in between houses and not directly in front of anyone’s home. Recently the cost of resident permits has increased significantly and although I know that purchasing a permit does not guarantee parking I would expect to be able to park somewhere near my home. I hope you take my points into consideration and I would welcome the chance to meet with you in Canfield Drive so you can see the predicament I face.” Objection 2 Thank you for your notification of the proposed new driveway at 19 Canfield Drive. I am thoroughly against this proposal. From no.17- no.23, this is the last set of terrace houses in the Acol Avenue/ Dudley Drive/ Canfield Drive area that doesn't have any driveways, and to put one in would reduce the amount of on street parking. I am not saying this because it will affect me, it won't, as I have access to a garage, and I would like to point out that no.19 also have a garage to the rear of their property, accessed via the alley on Acol Cresent, which the previous owner used to use every day. From what I see, they are a two car household. If they use their garage, they only need one space on the road for which there is plenty of space, leaving more space for residents and visitors. My other concern is that from your diagram, it looks like you will have to go over no.17's boundary line on the pavement by 1.0m. I don't think this is fair to them as it will reduce the space outside their house for parking, which I know they use all the time. 5. The plan attached as Appendix A to this report shows the proposed amendments outside No. 19 Canfield Drive . The measurement indicated refers to the start reference point of where the revised extent of the parking place begins , it is not representative of the total loss of parking or where the crossover will be installed. When positioning parking places in relation to vehicle crossovers, a gap of between 0.5 metre and 1 metre is left to avoid vehicles overhanging driveway when parking in an adjacent parking place. 6. Within Parking Management Schemes every parking place must be signed. Where possible signage is positioned as close to boundaries to try and reduced the visual impact that these have. In this case a new sign and post is required outside the neighbouring property. If a sign and post cannot be installed, then there is the potential another parking space could be lost as a result. It is therefore recommended that Council's Highways officers try to position a new signpost carefully to try and avoid as much visual intrusion as possible from within the adjacent property. Cabinet Member Report – 26 March 2024 Page 4 Part I – Public 7. The main concern of residents opposing these amendments relates to the total loss of parking that would result from these changes. The Council's Highways policy for new crossover applications states that crossovers will not be permitted where they would result in the loss of more than one space in residents’ parking places in a Parking Management Scheme. To help minimise the overall loss of parking, the length of parking place that needs to be removed has been kept as small as possible by maintaining an existing space outside No. 17 Canfield Drive and two spaces outside Nos. 21 and 23 Canfield Drive. 8. The Cabinet Member will be aware that the public has a legal right to gain access to their property from the highway. When determining an application for a new vehicle crossing, Section 184 of the Highways Act gives guidance to Highway Authorities in so much as they are only able to ensure that, so far as is practicable, there is safe access to and egress from the premises and there is a need to facilitate so far as practicable the passage of vehicular traffic in highways. The Highways Authority should also take into consideration any physical obstruction preventing the installation. In this case the Council's Highways officers have assessed the points above and have identified no legal basis to reject the application and therefore propose to proceed with the installation of an additional new vehicle crossing. In addition, the vast majority of the properties in Canfield Drive have off- street parking areas within their frontages including some with rear garage access. 9. Officers have also been unable to identify another location nearby that is within the vicinity of the Canfield Drive where it would be possible to consider the installation of an additional permit holder parking place to offset the loss of parking as a result of these changes. 10. The removal of a section of parking place outside Nos. 19 Canfield Drive will result in the loss of one permit holder parking place. Highways colleagues have advised that the new driveway that has been constructed will off-set the loss of on-street parking. It is, therefore, recommended to proceed with the changes to the parking outside No. 1 9 Canfield Drive as proposed and indicated on Appendix A. Financial Implications The estimated cost to implement the proposed changes is £1,000, which can be contained within existing Highways revenue budgets. RESIDENT BENEFIT & CONSULTATION The benefit or impact upon Hillingdon residents, service users and communities The recommendation will provide clear access to a new vehicle crossing being constructed outside No. 19 Canfield Drive, Ruislip. Although this will result in the loss of some on -street parking, the off-street parking area being created would off-set the loss of on-street parking. Consultation carried out or required Statutory consultation was carried out between 24 January and 14 February 2024 by the insertion of public notices in the local newspaper and displayed on site. No further consultation is required. CORPORATE CONSIDERATIONS Corporate Finance Cabinet Member Report – 26 March 2024 Page 5 Part I – Public Corporate Finance has reviewed the recommendations to this report and concurs with the financial implications as set out above. Legal The Council's power to makes orders relating to parking places is set out in Part IV of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984. If the recommendation is implemented, this report indicates that a permit parking place will be removed, and additional waiting restrictions will be imposed on the road. The Council’s power to make orders imposing waiting restrictions is set out in Part 1 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984. The consultation and order making statutory procedures to be followed in this case are set out in The Local Authorities’ Traffic Orders (Procedures) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996 (SI 1996/2489). Section 122 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 requires the Council to balance the concerns of the objectors with the statutory duty to secure the expeditious, convenient, and safe movement of vehicular and other traffic. Availability of off -street parking and safe access to the driveway identified in this report are relevant considerations in deciding whether to make this form of order. In considering the consultation responses, decision makers must ensure there is a full consideration of all representations arising including those which do not accord with the officer's recommendation. The decision maker must be satisfied that responses from the public were conscientiously taken into account. The Council must also be mindful of its public sector equality duty under section 149 of the Equality Act 2010. The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016 govern road traffic signs and road markings. There are no special circumstances drawn to our attention that would prevent removal of the permit parking place and introduction of waiting restrictions provided that the appropriate statutory procedures are followed. Comments from other relevant service areas None at this stage. BACKGROUND PAPERS NIL. TITLE OF ANY APPENDICES Appendix A – Proposed plan for the removal of part of the Zone SR parking place outside No. 19 Canfield Drive, Ruislip to accommodate a new vehicle crossover.