Transport Overview and Scrutiny Committee - Thursday 19 June 2025, 7:30pm - Wandsworth Council Webcasting

Transport Overview and Scrutiny Committee
Thursday, 19th June 2025 at 7:30pm 

Agenda

Slides

Transcript

Map

Resources

Forums

Speakers

Votes

 
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
  1. Webcast Finished

Good evening, everyone, and welcome to this meeting of the Transport Overview and Screeds
in the Committee.
This meeting is being webcast and hello to everyone watching us online or who will watch
it back.
Some of the officers may be accessing this virtually.
Please bear with us if there are any technical difficulties.
My name is Councillor Lawless and I am Deputy Chair of the Committee and I'm Chair in this
meeting and as we're a new committee it would be good if we could go around the
room starting with councillor Yates and people introduce themselves what what
they are or what function they have here and thank you chair I'm councillor Jenny
Yates and I'm the cabinet member for transport good evening chair I'm Tony
Middleton, Councillor for Battersea Park Ward in Battersea.
Councillor Leonie Cooper and I represent Fersdown Ward in Tooting.
Hi Councillor Anna Marie Crichard I'm a Labour member for Tootingbeck Ward in Tooting.
Councillor Matthew Tiller, Councillor Ray Hampton.
Hello, Councillor Locker. I represent Thamesfield Ward in Putney.
Good evening everyone. I'm Councillor Owens and I represent Northcote Ward in Battersea.
Good evening, Daniel Hamilton, Conservative Councillor for Ballon.
Fabulous. We have apologies from Councillor Milakas.
Attendees, please remember to turn your microphone off if you're not speaking.
When officers speak, could they please introduce themselves and bear in mind that the committee must remain core at all times.
Cool. So agenda item one, are there any declarations of interest?
Councillor Cooper.
Thank you, Chair. I don't consider this to be a pecuniary interest but I am the London Assembly Member for Merton and Wandsworth
and obviously one of the functions and bodies that's provided by the Greater London Authority of which the Assembly is a part is Transport for London
and I think that's mentioned in virtually every single item on this agenda.
So for transparency I'd like it to be recorded. Thank you.
Fabulous. That has been recorded.
Any other questions of interest? Fabulous.
The minutes of the last Transport Committee meeting held on Tuesday the 6th of February
were circulated. Do we have any matters of rising in terms of accuracy? Agreed.
Agreed. Fabulous. Councillor Hamilton, you had something? Thank you, Chair. I just wanted to raise this
juncture but it's become something we've raised almost every single meeting but I
didn't receive my papers again by post so I think I know other members of other
committees are facing the same troubles but it does seem to be something that's
going on a couple of years now so the officers could take a look at why that continues to
happen, I would appreciate it.
We have nods, so I think that's been noted.
Okay, so we will sign and date the minutes.
Perfect.
We'll get a copy.
Agenda item 3, the corporate plan actions and KPI performance monitoring, paper number
25194.
Officers, would you like to introduce them?
Good evening Councillors, I'm Jamie Fisher, Head of Policy and Strategy.
So this paper provides an overview of the performance against the key performance indicators that were set in July last year
and also an update against the corporate plan actions that were agreed for 2425.
The KPI data set shows that of the nine indicators for this committee, eight are
green rated, so a meeting target, and only one is amber rated, which means it's
within 5 % of hitting target. That's the one relating to percentage of trips made
by borough residents, made by active modes, where performance was 47 % against
the target of 49%. The corporate plan actions also include updates against key
projects, including things like the local plan review, adoption of the borough
approach to strategic CIRL and various cycle and walking improvement schemes.
Thank you. Any questions, comments? Councillor Locker and then Councillor Hamilton.
Thank you chair. We often sort of go through these sort of papers page by
page and just ask for any questions on it. So my question now is on page five. I
local partial plan review.
I just wonder what has been the feedback from City Hall?
Thank you, Chair.
I'm Christine Cook, Head of Spatial Planning.
So obviously the Mayor is a statutory consultee
in our local plan process and we've consulted.
I'm sorry, I can't hear you.
I don't know if others can.
There is a box buzzing away,
which I'm probably sure we're very thankful for because I'm sure it's keeping us cool, but if you could speak slightly closer to the microphone, I'd really appreciate it.
Sorry.
Is that better?
Yeah.
Okay, so the mayor is a statutory consultee throughout the local plan process, so we consulted him at each of the relevant stages.
We are also in close liaison with the Mayor as part of our duty to cooperate, which is
required under the regulations when you are developing a local plan.
So obviously the Mayor has submitted responses, including to the latest Regulation 19 consultation,
and all those comments will now be taken forward.
They have been submitted to the Inspector and will be considered in due course by the
Inspector through the examination in public.
which we're hoping will start this autumn but we are entirely dependent on
the planning inspectorate and their timetable and their priorities.
Just a supplementary thank you very much Miss Cook for talking us through the process.
I just wonder in terms of the comments then that we had from City Hall
overall were they in line with what is being proposed or did they suggest
amendment. Thank you. So the mayor takes a strategic position across London and
is very keen to have a threshold approach which is consistent amongst the
entirety of London. The council's position is that we think that there's
variability in land values and viability and that we have the evidence
which we've presented to the Inspector that will support our position for a more ambitious
policy at the local level.
Councillor Hamilton.
Thank you very much, Chair. It's just a follow -up question on the local plan partial review
as well. I note in the report that it mentions the examination in public will take place
in the summer or autumn of 25. It would be great just to get a little bit more information
about the amount of time that examination in public will be open for, but also what
kind of notice period we will receive it when that's likely to happen given we
are heading towards July and I think there's a lot of interest locally and
making sure that people's views are taken on board as opposed to it being
lost inside the summer months. Yes thank you so we are eagerly awaiting the
inspectors scheduling of our hearing sessions we we have indicated that we'd
the
committee and
So we would, again it's up to the Inspector, but we wouldn't envisage more than a week of hearing sessions
and then we'd move on to the next stage in the process.
Councillor Critchard.
Thank you. A bit further on the local plan.
Just asking more widely, is the Government have published other planning guidance?
will that how will that affect what we're suggesting in our local plan?
Thank you. So the partial review because of the time frame for its submission the
partial review because of its time frame for submission will be examined under
the last iteration of the national planning policy framework so the
Emerging planning reforms do not affect the partial review at the moment.
However, we are mindful we're expecting secondary legislation at some point over the summer slash autumn period,
which will bring in the new planning system whereby local plans will have to be completed within 30 months from start to finish.
So that would be quite a fundamental shift and would impact any future review of the full local plan.
Pick up on on that is so what you're saying is what we've got at the moment is going to be reviewed under the old regs
Even if the and even if the new regulations come in
Before the review it's still under the old regulations. Is that what you're saying? Yes, that's correct
I'll take Councillor Cooper first and then Councillor Locker.
I just wanted to slightly update my declaration of interest because I forgot to mention also
that the GLA doesn't just include TFL but also obviously is the Regional Planning Authority

3 Corporate Plan Actions and KPIs Performance Monitoring (Paper No. 25-194)

so I'd like to update that and the second thing is that obviously as the local assembly
member I got sent the comments from the Mayor of London and they are available publicly
on the Greater London Authority website should you wish to find them. I did share
them with the members of the Planning Applications Committee I thought and so
on a cross -party basis so your colleagues on the Planning Applications
Committee should be able to share them but should you have difficulty obtaining
them from colleagues or finding them on the website I can obviously forward the
it's a completely public set of comments so I'm very happy to send on
and the copy that was sent to me, if that is helpful. Thank you.
Councillor Locher.
Thank you. Can I thank Councillor Cooper for her kind offer?
That's very helpful.
This is, I think, a question or a comment for the administration,
rather, for officers.
I'm really pleased that we're still monitoring planning,
strategic planning matters in this committee.
I understand that there are committee and scrutiny changes,
and I think there have also been changes in terms of the strategic planning cabinet member
that have taken place.
Could I make a request that in future when we actually come to making decisions on the
local plan that the cabinet member for planning attends, because we didn't have that over
the last three years?
Thank you.
I think that's noted.
Councillor Belton, you had your hand up before.
Thank you.
Chair, it's no secret that there's some conflict between the current plan and the ideas that
the government have in waiting for legislation.
It wouldn't be doing its job if there wasn't a conflict, I guess you might say.
Is there any, has there been any observations, views put in by the Council that have been
depended in any sense on officer input in terms of the Government's proposals?
Meaning by that that councillors themselves, the leader, may have well have lobbied Mrs Rayner or whatever, and you may not know about that and that's fair enough.
I'm asking if the office has been involved in any sense in lobbying the government about its proposed changes.
Yes, so there's been a raft of consultation on government proposals, both the broad planning
reform but also detailed technical consultations as well and I think there's currently four
live at the moment that we're working on. So we do take great care to feed into those
opportunities to engage with the government and we publish all our responses on our council
website.
Thank you.
Councillor Critchard, did you have?
Yeah, if we've finished with the London plan and thinking about sheet by sheet, I've got...
We weren't necessarily going sheet by sheet, but do you have a question?
I do, it's all about viability but the only…
Well, I mean it's a shame that some of the responses then if they've gone into the
government haven't been shared with us to have a look at this evening.
I just wondered if there was also a response that has gone back to City Hall talking about
the Greater London Authority and its London Plan 21.
Since the 8th of May there's been a consultation window on a new document called Towards a
New London Plan.
The closing date is actually this Sunday the 22nd and I presume that we have commented on that and I think it would be helpful if we are considering strategic planning at this meeting if perhaps any response that we've made could be shared.
I mean obviously we wouldn't be able to be consulted on that because it's got to be in by the 22nd and indeed it may already have been sent in but I think that would be really helpful for us to have that shared with us if that would be possible, Chair.
So yes, we have prepared a very detailed response to the Towards the London Plan consultation.
It's fair to say the timescales were very tight, turnaround responses to that many questions.
We did however manage to tie in with the cycle for Cabinet and the paper was considered by
Cabinet and approved on Monday evening for submission obviously before the deadline on
Sunday. Are there any other topics people would like to ask questions on?
Councillor Critchard, do you want to take a chance now? Yes, so sorry, my next question there's a big section
about the viability inspector, the new viability criteria which we I think we
passed we went through at this committee a couple of cycles ago and I just
wondered if we could have a bit more about how well this is working at the
moment. I was particularly interested in, for example, the numbers of extra
houses that we think, or extra affordable houses that we think we've got
because of our inspectors, and how that's working with the developers.
I will let Mrs Cook give you an answer from the team point of view.
I would like to make a couple of comments at the end of that.
So it is quite early days.
The team are doing really well and they are embedding viability right at the heart of
our planning application discussions in close liaison with development management and housing
colleagues.
There's a couple of examples in the report around the gas holders and a scheme on Foolsburt
Road.
I think it's safe to say because of where we are at the moment, a lot of the discussions
they're involved in are on live applications.
So it wouldn't be appropriate in this form to discuss planning applications that haven't
yet reached decision point, but we're acutely aware of the interest in monitoring the benefits
that the work of this team are doing, so we're tracking as they work through schemes what
the uplifts are in terms of both numbers of affordable dwellings, better tenure mixes,
improved commuted sums and even other benefits like switching from other uses to conventional
housing to benefit from sill payments as well. So yes, there will be information in due course,
we've just not got a great deal of monitoring data at the moment.
Yeah, good evening members, can you hear me okay? Name's Paul Moore, Interim Director of Place.
I'd just like to say a couple of things in relation to viability work. I think the work
the team has done to bring clarity to the developer process so they're really clear up front has been
super beneficial. A number of developers I've spoken to have found that useful. They know what
they need to submit, they know how they can help themselves to move through the development cycle
reasonably swiftly, they know what the rules are and they appreciate that. I sat in several planning
committees in the last few months and I've seen the team help members
deliberate on some pretty complex planning applications where affordable
housing has been a balancing factor. Councillor Belton I'm sure could say more
about that than I ever will be able to. So from my point of view the team's
supporting members to make some of those tricky decisions. I would definitely
commend members to look at page 15 of the March Planning Committee. That I
think breathes life to the words in this report you before you this evening in
relation to the gas holder site application. 620 homes approved there. I
think 182 of those were social rent. 38 % I think the profile is 40 % by habrumes. I
I can honestly say the team did good work in that space and as Mrs Cook said there are other
applications moving through the pipeline currently and I see the team's work on those. So I think
there are a number of young officers, they will serve this council well in the years ahead.
members. Thank you. Thank you. Miss Cook, you said in due course. I just wondered roughly
how long you thought you think in due course would be given that obviously we're doing
a operating in a slightly different way now with our committees and whether we would be
interested in having that item, a review of that on the agenda at a later stage. So if
We knew when in due course was, which meeting it should go to, if it should.
I mean there's a couple of options.
We could follow the corporate reporting cycle, which is quarterly I believe, so half yearly,
sorry.
Yeah.
So we could provide a regular update as part of this reporting or we could do a deeper
dive at an appropriate time in the future through the new terms of reference of the
I think it's a good thing that we're not going to have a lot of discussion about that.
I think that's a good thing.
both good and bad, which would be good to get a bit of a temperature check on how that's going.
Hello, Councillors. David Tidley, the head of transport strategy.
The scheme has been up and running for a few weeks now and usage is at around about three
and a half thousand trips per week. There was a sort of a rapid increase to get to that sort of
level. The operators appear to be happy with those numbers. We've received very little
comment or complaint or concern from other road users relating to the trial of the e -scooters.
It's fair to say that the number of e -scooter journeys is much lower than the number of
e -bike trips which are running at tens of thousands per month. But no, it's still relatively
early days but there's been no noticeable concerns or complaints or
mitigation that we've needed to do to help with it.
Councillor de la Sejour.
Hi thanks and apologies for being late and actually my question is related to the reason I was late which is I came here on a
line bike and I couldn't park and it took me a while to find a spot to park
and funny enough the same happened to me on Saturday when I was going to my
I was in my counsellor's surgery at Bassy Library and I couldn't park my bike in front
of the library, which is fine, just to be clear.
This is not what I'm moaning about.
But I couldn't understand because the app was saying, oh, you can't park there.
I said fine, I'll go to the parking spot.
Lo and behold, when I come out with my counsellor's surgery, there's a line bike right in front
of the library.
I'm like, how on earth did they manage that?
Same this evening, I was trying to park my bike and there's another one just there but
I can't park mine.
So my question is about enforcement.
Clearly I'm a law abiding citizen and clearly others are not.
How do we enforce that to ensure that people can't park the bikes when they're not supposed to?
I don't know who I'm addressing the question to.
David?
I'll have a go at that one as well.
So the line bike system works on the basis of, we start with a position whereby you can leave your bikes on pavements
or you can use the dedicated parking bays for them.
Within the busier town centres and other areas of narrow footways and parkland and locations like that,
those have generally been geofenced out of the scheme.
So if you try, as you've tried to leave your bike in certain locations,
you won't be allowed to end your journey on them and you have to move it until you find a location
where you will be allowed to end your journey.
That doesn't mean, of course, then there's still a lot of roads, a lot of streets out there
where somebody could just leave a bicycle in a poor location and try and end their journey.
And the quality of the of the app, the AI app that the operators use might occasionally allow you to end your journey in such a location.
And in those circumstances, we do monitor those examples, those numbers.
We get regular comments and concerns from users about those locations and they're constantly
bringing those to the attention of the operators.
I think the one thing I would say, to come back to where I've sort of started, there
are literally tens and hundreds of thousands of journeys by e -bikes now and the numbers
of users that are doing things which are wrong or getting complaints about is a very small
number. But it's something that we clearly continue to monitor. At the most extreme,
we are prepared to remove the bikes put in our depot and the company will need to pay
to get them back. So that's the ultimate enforcement.
Yeah, follow up.
What we're saying is it's possibly a fault -risk app which allows people to park where they're
not supposed to park. Is that what we're saying? Because moving beyond my personal experience,
that obviously represents St Mary's Ward and I still get complaints from people about bikes
being parked on the riverside walk when they're not supposed to.
When I go back to them and say, well, the council officers are telling me they're not
allowed to park there. Clearly there are some that fall in the gap. So what can we do to
close this all?
I wouldn't necessarily describe it as a fault with the app. It's simply that, you know,
it's the sensitivity of the app just isn't that perfect in every single location. That's
improving over time and will continue to improve over time.
Councillor Owens and then I think we're looking to move on soon.
Thank you I have a question in relation to the Putney High Street item but just quickly
following on from what Councillor de la Sejol was saying I'm always confused why the line
bikes seem to be at the bike racks which are the normal bike racks for people like that
and me that have my own bicycle and again that may be a fault of the app but I can't
seem to park my own bike a bit like Councillor de la Sejol when all the line bikes are there
but my point actually relates to Putney High Street
and the ongoing problems there
and the ongoing congestion
and problems for cyclists, pedestrians
and I know you recently had a meeting
about what Flora Anderson did.
I was just wondering, given the changes,
how much has been spent so far
and how much the final amount is expected to be
in relation to all the changes that are happening?
The residents are constantly asking, thank you.
Thank you. Good evening councillors I'm Henry Chung assistant director of
engineering regarding out showing costs for Putney High Street it is still a
work in progress the scheme is still live there are still activities going on
in terms of doing back -office works to help establish and the predictive
modeling and the actual data that we're gathering now on site. Regarding
congestions the council is really aware of further congestions on Putney High
itself and on roads like Putney Bridge Road and also Lower Richmond Road. So TfL
recently completed their signalized optimization but they still got further
work to do in terms of improving access from Putney Bridge Road and on Lower Richmond
Road. There are ongoing activities currently behind the scenes to improve
those movements and at present you know we're due to conclude our investigation
and a review of the junctions towards the end of October this year. Thank you.
Councillor Hamilton.
It's okay. I'm looking to move on soon.
So, Councillor Locari and then Councillor Critchard.
And then I think that's it.
Sorry, Chair. I didn't understand.
I wanted to ask some questions about the Putney situation.
I'm sure we were all surprised about that.
It must have been Christmas, I think, when this council put out a press statement
saying that the works had been completed. So it's quite interesting that the
officers are now saying there is still a fair bit to do. I've fed back
consistently to officers and I think to the cabinet member that we're being
inundated with residents concerns. There's been a huge impact not just on
the high street and the main roads but a lot of the adjoining residential streets.
So I went back and looked at the original OSC paper,
and there was no warning or mention that there would be traffic problems on the nearby residential streets.
I remember being told when we asked about it that there was this extensive modelling taking place
to understand what the impact would be on traffic flows.
So I just want to really probe, when will this committee hear back
on how the actual experience of traffic congestion in the area compares with what we were informed
and told about the modeled expectation. Thank you.
Thank you, Councillor. Just touching on the works completed at Christmas, so the traffic
signals junction was completed at Christmas, but obviously that was the physical works
in terms of the signalized modeling and the screeting,
that will form part of the resurfacing works
which was completed around February time in early March.
In terms of a review, as I mentioned earlier,
the interview, we intend to complete the review
by end of October, so the next opportunity
will probably be February committee
if the cabinet member wish to take a paper
back to this committee.
Fabulous.
Councillor Critchard and then we're going to move on.
Okay, well I've actually got three questions, two of which are about strategic planning
and one is something else. Just going back to the strategic planning, we also involved,
I'll combine the two questions on that, we had a new engagement strategy template and
And one of the things that a lot of residents complain about is actually engagement with planning applications.
So I just wondered if we've got any feedback about how well that's working and
whether there's been any particular successes where using the new guidance has actually
meant that more of the residents have been more able to be involved.
And then the second one on strategic planning, and yes I have something else on another bit,
was one of the actions was to coordinate the infrastructure board activities and work programs.
But there isn't any comment about how well that's going.
And I can't remember if I actually saw that paper at finance or here,
but I'd like to hear a bit more about how the infrastructure board is working as well.
Great. Yeah.
Thank you, Chair.
If I take the infrastructure board question first,
There is a distinction between the infrastructure board and the infrastructure funding board,
which I think the latter is what was presented to committee.
The infrastructure board is an officer level group at director level.
So it's a stage before the formal capital governance process.
And it's essentially where lead officers in different directorates come together to discuss
emerging projects so we can better align with each other's service areas. We look at how
projects that are coming forward align with corporate priorities and the objectives of
the council and the strategies of the council and we help shape those projects as they're
emerging so by the time they get to the infrastructure funding board, which is the formal process,
they're better developed, they've had some critique, they've had feedback, so hopefully
that answers your question.
Actually, I think it doesn't because...
This is your third question.
No, she asked if I answered the question.
Okay, let's hear your very third question as well.
Councillor Lawless, I think we might have had this paper at Finance as well, so I'm
really asking not what does it do but how useful is it being how's it working
and I think that wasn't really answered.
Mr Moore. Members just to contribute it's really important that we've got a
corporate group that comes together regularly helps guide shape major and
and sometimes less major capital projects and programmes.
I sit on that board, it's a corporate group.
It does good work, I believe, for the borough.
That will get more important in the years ahead.
Obviously, members will be tracking changes
in government financial priorities.
Also the work of the GLA, we've already talked this evening
about the London Growth Plan,
changes in the London Planning Framework.
So the work of that group will I think evolve and become increasingly important as we move to the next cycle of growth and infrastructure funding changes.
What I see is a group that helps shape priorities, help form bids for the future and help harness corporate energy behind those projects.
So that's my assessment of the work of that group. Thank you.
And your final point?
Ms Cook said she was dealing with the engagement.
Yes, so the engagement template itself is quite new.
That's a recent addition to our engagement web page.
So how that is helping, we probably need to wait a bit longer to see.
but the engagement team are applying the raising the bar guidance,
which was adopted by the Transport OSC, and it's going really well.
We're already seeing developers doing a lot more than they would have before,
because they know that if they don't, they're going to get critiqued
and they're going to get asked questions as to why they haven't been more proactive
in speaking to the local communities that are affected by their development.
So we are really starting to see the quality of engagement begin to pick up and the developers
also know that their level of engagement will be referenced in committee reports going forwards.
So if they haven't done enough, they could get a harder time at committee as well.
Thank you.
that sounds like it's something we're doing that's working.
Okay, can I go for my last question?
Unless you've got one.
Okay.
Charge points, page 10.
We still don't have a strategy to address cold spots,
as far as I'm aware.
And I've been going on about this
because I have residents in my ward
who are thinking about moving to electric vehicle,
but the charge points in the next parking zone, although they're not very close,
so they have to drive the car some distance and leave it where they can't see it.
What are we going to do to make sure, what can we do to change this?
So we move away from the people who asked to get them to us going,
oh actually nobody in Beaches Road, for example, has a charging point,
there isn't one, let's put one in.
Thank you, Councillor. I think I would probably challenge that premise
in the question there because there's a lot of charge points around and I don't think
there are any areas that are now missing charge points. It is the case that we have an online
request form which residents complete asking for charge points in their streets and we
use that to help map that demand.
And that's very important when working with the contractors,
because these are private companies who clearly
wish to make a return on their investment,
and therefore they do need to provide significant numbers
of charge points where there's demand for them,
and not just provide charge points which
are not going to be used.
That said, we do insist on a geographical spread of charge
points in our contracts.
It could be something that the committee might want to look
in a future scrutiny of charge point strategy and how we plan to roll out the scheme going forward.
Fabulous. Thank you everybody.
I'm going to move on to agenda item number four, paper number 25.
Sorry, Chair. I was very patient and I did give way in the expectation I would have the final question.
Oh, sorry you gave way. I thought you asked the question.
No, I think in a Councillor's degree.
Sorry, Councillor Lococo.
Thank you.
You do go.
Well I don't have three questions. I have a piece of advice and then I do have a
question on page nine. My piece of advice first of all just goes back to the
Putney High Street situation. I would advise the cabinet member and the
administration that leaving this the problems in Putney to continue until
October is far too long. The residents are deeply unhappy. They've put up with
this situation since before Christmas and they were promised that things would
be fixed and get done. So that's my advice. The question relating to page nine is about
the contraflow cycling schemes. I'm aware of one contraflow cycling scheme on Jews Row.
I've asked about it several times and the reason I'm reminded about it, so it's the
connecting bit along the riverside path around the ship pub, is that I signed off the SO -83
on it so that tells you how long ago that scheme was approved it still hasn't
been done why not and when when is it going to be done regarding Jews Road I
think in the previous committee we advised that that will be implemented as
part of the ones with bridge cycle corridor scheme and at present Georgia
TFL works on Battersea Bridge Road. We do not have a firm date on starting
Wandsworth Bridge Road corridor roads. Just a quick follow -up, given that there is no
date to finish the Wandsworth Bridge Works, why not just get on with
completing the Jews Road contraflow cycling scheme which is a really
important part of connecting CS8 and the Riverside Thames path which is used by
pedestrians and cyclists.
The reason why it's being picked up as part of the bridge work is because of the site
compound and various measures that will be necessary.
We need all the road space we need on Jews Road as part of the works on ones with bridge
work.
Thank you.
Okay.
We are definitely going to move on now to agenda item 4.
The budget monitoring quarter 4 report.

4 Budget Monitoring: Quarter 4 (Paper No. 25-195)

Can we have officers give us two minutes?
Good evening, committee.
My name is Alex Muehl and I'm the assistant director of finance and performance within
environment and community services director.
So this paper sets out the out turn for the 2024 -25 financial year for the services within
the remit of this committee.
The overall out turn is a net income position of 728 ,000 against a budget target of 930,
So they're a small shortfall of 202.
The summary of those positions is set out on the page in page 20,
sorry, with further details set out as part of the appendices.
The position is broadly that that has been reported throughout the year.
I think with the main service areas as being the ones we would expect,
we have a couple of movements between our previous forecasts and
on our final out turn which I'm very happy to talk about if anyone has any particular questions following the report.
Questions?
Fabulous. Councillor Critchard.
I would be remiss if I didn't think about the budget.
First question is when will we get to see the budget for 25 -26 actually because obviously not in here.
I don't think it is, is it?
It's not in this report, no, Councillor, but it will be available.
We presented the initial version of it in the February committee, I believe, and it
should be available on the Council's website.
I can provide a link and circulate that to everyone for 25 -26.
Okay, brilliant.
And then thinking more about the budget stresses, just wondered about the, I think it's in here,
isn't it, is the planning software, which there's been a big overspend on this, but
at what point will we start to see the benefits and the financial benefits particularly of
that new software?
It just seems that's come up several times.
It might have been because I've seen it at finance as well, but it's a reasonable chunk of money for the place budget, I think.
So my understanding of the current timetable is that we expect to have
broad completion of that within the rest of this calendar year, unless that has changed looking at Christine or Paul.
No, so I think from that you would expect therefore to be kind of efficiency improvements gradually from this
I think it will take a bit of time for the members of staff to get to get used to the system and for it to
be refined
and
Kind of worked with us as as as as it evolved so we think into the year after the current financial year
We would hope to see efficiency improvements and benefits to the the speed of the planning service
Can I ask does that planning software offer benefits to residents who are trying to make comments on planning?
I've got no idea whether it's just a technical thing for you or whether it would do and if so when will they see it?
Chair if I might take that one.
So the website will go live at the point that the planning system goes live.
So according to the schedule which we're aiming for the end of this calendar year at present,
we have the benefit of having been through this process in Richmond and the Richmond
website is up and live and functioning and we've had some very positive feedback both
from members and residents of the public and developers.
So the public facing aspects of the website have gone down quite well.
I've used it a little bit myself and I find in particular the street search function functionality is much improved.
You don't have to scroll through a long list of street names to find what you're looking for.
So yeah, hopefully it will be an improvement for the customers as well.
Thank you. Any other questions? Councillor Critchard, do you want one more?
Yeah, page 27. We've got the, and I don't necessarily expect anyone to be able to
answer this in the meeting, we've got the number of applications. Could we also
find out how many homes this will equate to? And I fully expect somebody to say
I'll have to go away and add it up, but would you be able to circulate that to
committee because and over the years it partly to give a sense because you might
have one big planning application that gives you lots of homes so the numbers
of applications don't necessarily reflect what's being built yes that's
that's certainly possible we've got very detailed monitoring information we don't
actually publish information on the number of homes deriving from
applications on our website. We focus on the number of homes given permission but
we can do the analysis to get the number of applications and the homes associated
with them.
Perfect, thank you very much. I'm not seeing any other hands. So we'll move to agenda item five, the annual review of
traffic and engineering petitions.
And is it Mr. Chung?

5 Annual Review of Traffic and Engineering Petitions (Paper No. 25-196)

Yep, just thank you.
This is the seventh annual petition paper.
It highlights the number of petitions received
between June last year and May this year.
There were a total of eight in total
and all those are listed in Appendix A.
Thank you, Chair.
Councillor Lawrence.
Thank you.
I just have a question relating to pedestrian crossings at Honeywell School because that
happens to be in the ward that I represent.
For many years we wanted a pedestrian crossing up the up Webbs Road for Belleville School
and we were repeatedly told that that was not possible because there hadn't been a fatality
or something like that in how many years and we lost our lollipop as well.
I was just wondering, are both crossings going ahead?
Is the Web's road one going ahead as well as the one on Northcote Road?
Looking at that.
Both crossings are going ahead.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Councillor Critchard.
Thank you.
Mr Ching -Hua, I was just going to say, maybe one of the things that we could do this time and also for future papers
is a reminder to residents, we're referring back to something that happened in 2018, about what the rules are,
just to remind everyone what the rules are for doing petitions.
And the second thing was, I actually looked on our website for where we talk about petitions.
One of the things that is assumed on the website is everyone knows what a petition is.
And I did wonder whether we could also look at improving the website to make it...
Because we start from a position of knowledge about petitions,
I'm not necessarily sure everyone in the general public does.
So the two questions will be about clarify...
And that's just repeating what the rules are and then making it clear on the website.
Take the second question first.
So the petition process is a corporate one and it sets out and how to go about doing
a petition.
Currently there isn't one for traffic management or for the traffic engineering section specifically,
which is why the clarity around the requirements and to trigger an investigation for traffic
management intervention is not out there and on the website.
But it is something that we advise and the petitioners and counselors on the process and that it is something that we're happy to review
Come back to the first question. There are three criterias in our traffic management policy
The first one priority one relates to work collisions
So if there is 12 or more collisions within a kilometer road that would consider be a priority one scheme
another thing we would look at is the cluster of accidents there needs to be at least a minimum of three and
and similar accidents in relation to the root cause
of the accident.
So those are the criteria for triggering
a priority one scheme.
A priority two scheme, there are two forms.
There's one's 2A and the other is 2B.
So two looks at both speed and volume
and depending on those interventions.
If it's both, it's 2A.
If it's one of the two, it's 2B.
So in terms of traffic volume,
it's 300 vehicles per hour at peak hour
and in terms of mean speed it's 24 miles an hour.
There's also a priority -free scheme and these are exceptional circumstances.
For example, there's a new school so a crossing may be needed.
Alternatively, these are very low -cost interventions that would help the requester to fulfil or make the road safer.
And that's at the discretion of the cabinet member.
I mean if it's a corporate thing perhaps the cabinet member could take that back and we
could actually I can explain what I mean it's just the website doesn't tell you what a petition
is it just assumes you know what what why you would petition regardless.
And yeah thank you Councillor Crichard I'm sure we can work on the website to make sure
it's as clear as possible for residents as you suggested.
Councillor Hamilton.
I think to support really what Councillor Crichard says I think when you look at the
petition scheme it can be slightly unclear to residents but I think also to Councillors
in some cases about what exactly is admissible and I would just appreciate also some clarification
particularly about the 50 % plus one trigger point for the petitioners to be looked into.
Is that determined by officers on the basis of households or individuals on the electoral
role because there's some ambiguity I think in the past on that point?
Just one point before we move on, Councillor Hamilton, make sure your mic's talking so
people online can hear you too.
It's based on household, Councillor.
Thank you.
Councillor Cooper?
Mine's a pretty similar point actually to the one that Councillor Hamilton has just
made, which is the number of households that get to make a decision.
Would that, in the case of a CPZ, a controlled parking zone, include households who've already got their own off -street parking?
Would they be able to vote in such a petition and then decide that all of their neighbours effectively might have to pay for controlled parking while they themselves continue to park on their own drive?
And also we've got a number of roads in the borough, for example Bolingbroke Grove or
Elmbourn Road or indeed Clareview Road in my own ward, where there's only houses on
one side and do the residents who live on that side of the road conducting a petition
have the right to decide what happens to the other side of the road?
You know, because obviously there's nobody living on the other side of the road.
or is that something that the council itself might have bylaws about or make its own decisions
about because it seems a little strange to have a side of the road that's got nothing
to do with the residents on the other side making decisions.
For example, Bolingbroke Grove, if they all decided that they wanted to have residents
only parking on both sides of the road, it would be absolutely impossible.
and I think one side of the road we don't have any parking permitted at all
because we've got the 319 bus goes along it so I presume that we don't just allow
residents to make those decisions all the time and I just wondered if that
could be clarified because I think a petition has just been handed in where
people who don't park on the street and don't park on the other side of the
street opposite their house want to make a decision to have a you know households
to have a controlled parking zone that they themselves won't need to
participating. Thank you. Nick, if I might come in on that one. Sorry Nick O 'Donnell, the
Director of Traffic Engineering, stepping in for Paul Chadwick and also the author
of the original petitions traffic management policy back in 2018. Please
don't boo. But just just to clarify again hopefully it helps that the 51 % is just
a trigger for investigation. It's not a decision as in 51 % say we want it and
then you do it it doesn't work that way so the way we work is it allows us to go
forward in the confidence there is enough of a groundswell a majority of
people that support an idea a concept and then we will look at the detail of
that as you rightly say counselor there may be specific factors needs to be
taken to account which others will do so with CPZ that we down to a series of
factors of on street off street access movement etc we will take all those
facts into account and then we will look at and decide say for example you could
have 60 % people that support an idea or a suggestion but through the
investigation because it may be deemed you know unviable or create issues or we feel a disparity will come out of it
So it's a follow -up that comes from that process
Counselor for almost 20 years now
I'm very familiar with the way that the position system works so part of my question was saying
The 51 % of households on Claire view road who apparently voted in favor of having
Control parking includes a lot of people who have off -street parking and all those households
able to be included amongst the households in the first place because it
strikes me that if you're voting in a petition on controlled parking that it
you know if you're if you're if the only benefit that you're going to have is
that you don't like the vans that are parked on Clareview Road but you
yourself don't actually then have to pay it's a bit of an onerous imposition on
everyone else and why should they be included in the 51 % households?
I understand the point and I guess the two parts of those one is there's a
there's a petition trigger process but particularly in the case of CPZs there's a
separate consultation process that follows so separate data even if there
was a petition we go out to consult we have our own process of consultation
that will break down those responses look at those factors so it does get
picked up in terms of differentiation between the households and the access.
Thank you so we picked up at the later stage in the council's own process where
it does the consultation which may also include slightly more nuanced or neutral
In fact, actually, this is what I'm looking for.
And what we'd normally do, or what we've done historically,
we've then brought that Paper 2 Committee to debate,
to discuss, to look at those factors,
to consider whether they want to support that or not.
Great.
Can I ask a question about Aslet Street?
So I know that residents have had concerns
about the speeding, especially as there's a school there,
and it says here that the petition fell short,
but I assume we haven't just left it there.
We've probably done some work to make the street safer.
Thank you, Chair, yes.
and the petition was valid.
We did a survey and it didn't meet the criteria
of both speed and volume.
However, due to residents concern,
we have installed a speed indicator device
and to help and support the residents
encouraging speed compliance.
Fabulous, thank you.
No other hands, which is great.
Moving on to Agenda Item 6,
the major schemes projects update.
Any, which officer would like to introduce this?
Henry?
Thank you, Chair.

6 Major Schemes Projects: Updates (Paper No. 25-197)

This is just a paper to highlight the current schemes that are on site.
This includes Burnwood Lane, Queenstown Road, O 'Yourke Road, and the current trial at Totterdam
Street.
It provides a high -level overview of the progress to date and potential next steps for moving
the project forward at Totterdam Street.
Thank you.
Councilor Hamilton and then Councilor Locker.
Thank you, Chair. I'll take the two questions together, that's okay, if I have.
First in relation to Old York Road, which I think is a fantastic scheme and looks aesthetically brilliant.
The problem I'm seeing though, just from a practicality point of view, is that many of the flower beds are not particularly well segmented from the footpaths.
And as a result of that, I often see
that people are sort of treading on them.
Mud is being displaced.
I've seen foxes have dug into them,
which I know there's very little that we can do about.
But sometimes, particularly when you go along there first thing
in the morning, they're quite sort of torn up.
And I wonder, actually, if a lot of that good work
and planting might be a little bit going to waste.
And we might need to think about some kind of segmentation
of those flower beds.
That's the first one.
The second is on Totterdown Street, which I think, again,
is a great scheme.
I sort of warmly welcomed it.
I think it's great to see something being
used in that space and to have a sort of outdoor area in Tooting where things like markets
can take place. The only question I would have on it is about the sort of vibrancy of
the scheme so far, because very often when I do go to the scheme and try and use it,
it appears as if there hasn't been a huge amount of footfall a lot of the time, it appears
as if there's not a huge take -up a lot of the time also in terms of the number of retailers
and food outlets that are operating there.
So I'd just be interested if any sort of modeling is being done about how vibrant that has been,
because I really want to see that succeed.
Thank you, Councillor.
Regarding the first question, rain gardens.
So the rain gardens on O 'Rourke Road are designed to take surface water from the road to provide
flood resilience as well, to aid flood resilience.
Therefore there isn't a border around it to restrain people walking, dogs walking, or
even the foxes, to get into it.
I think what's happening is we're at the early stage
of planting, so some plants went in today,
some went in at Christmas, some went in at February,
and it takes time for the plants to establish.
Once the vegetation is established,
then the soil becomes less exposed,
and as a result of that, that prevents the spillage,
you sort of highlight it as a concern.
Regarding Totterdown Street,
it's been relatively successful in a sense.
It's provided a good space outside the shooting market,
and both the Economic Development Office and ourselves are very keen to see that succeed.
There are further improvements planned and for example the fabric of the highway,
that is yet to be implemented and until such time that is implemented,
I think it will still need a bit more time to establish the setup and the arrangements
both in terms of the offering of the highway and also the general space for residents to socialise
without having to spend money, if you like,
on those stores outside the area.
If I may just add on a question before I introduce
Councillor Lockhart, because it's on Totterdam Street.
I think a lot of the residents who have said
they're unhappy or very unhappy are more commenting,
because it's in my ward, on the look of it
and because it's on a trial basis.
So are we gonna make sure that the permanent structures
give it a much better look and have we definitely taken into account the
concerns that businesses have about loading bays nearby? Thank you. I'm sorry
for getting a cheeky question. Yeah so on the loading most certainly and so at the
start of the scheme you know we've had planters all the way down to the age 24
and and that did provide a much better feel and look and to inviting people
towards the market but due to concerns raised by businesses and we took the
measure of removing those planters and to provide additional loading facilities
so that that would support the local businesses which is one is a little bit
of disconnect currently you know from the age 24 towards the duty market as
part of the permanent scheme you know we are and the redesigning the area
creating more in situ greening like we have on your your road and and providing
more marked pictures and and dedicate a loading base to provide the environment
for it to blossom. Thank you. I'll take Councillor Locker, Belton and Owens. Thank you. First of all,
can I congratulate and thank officers for their work on these schemes. I think they really are
bearing fruit. I know we've been working on them for some time, but for instance, the old York
Road scheme and the question about a sort of temporary measure, I think it was really
beneficial on old York Road because we started actually during COVID and by having planters,
we were able to move things around a bit and then give access to some roads that we'd initially
blocked off etc and we were able to really sort of work out the design first
before we made it permanent so I think there was real benefit to doing it that
way and I would pass on that encouragement to the people in Tooting
Ward and Totterdown that it allows you to see how things work before you
actually start digging up the road but it's good to see it's now being made
permanent. I also had a question on the Totterdown scheme which I think shows
great potential but on paragraph 23 we talked about the consultation and I'm
interested in this because I think I read somewhere else in the papers that we're
trying to broaden and improve our consultation methods including
using different platforms like commonplace that's mentioned here. I just
wondered how that experience went. I also could not see in the paragraph any
reference to how many people responded so there's a good breakdown of all the
different percentages but not absolute numbers. That always just makes me a
actual numbers of people who responded out of how many were invited to.
Thank you. Apologies, I don't have that number to hand, but I'm happy to furnish that after
the meeting and once I get hold of that information.
Commonplace has been a really useful platform. I think it's been really successful. We're
not asking binary questions and yes and no's and it allows people to put their comments
in and their ideas and officers have been able to review those comments specifically.
and if there was a cluster of those similar comments that gave officers an incentive to
look at specific changes that might improve the scheme further.
Thank you.
Councillor Belton.
Whilst agreeing with every word about Old York Road, I guess I have to exclude one,
and that's perhaps bus users.
As a fairly regular use of the 44 from here to Battersea Park Ward.
and both ways.
Going can be incredibly slow,
if not completely stopped as it winds its way around
the back streets behind Old York Road.
And coming, of course, you get left rather further away
from the Tonsleys than you might wish as an older person.
I'm just wondering whether you've had many complaints
or comments from either London Transport itself or from bus users?
I'm happy to take that one, Councillor.
So I think our preference would be to move to a system whereby the buses are running two -way on the same roads,
because that would be more comprehensible to users.
that would require the current northbound bus that uses Ferrier Street,
Moyers Street and Old York Road to also be rerouted on to Swandon Way. So in
the longer term buses would run two -way on Swandon Way which would also bring
them within touching distance or greater connectivity with all the new
developments that occur in on Swandon Way. That would require additional bus
facilities on that road particularly bus stops and it would also be ideally done
at the same time or in conjunction with the proposed reopening of the new
entrance into Wandsworth town station from the Swandamway side so it's
something that we are in discussions with Transport for London about what is
the best way going forward of managing buses in the area.
Follow up Councillor Melton?
coming back on that briefly.
For the new developments, that's clearly true,
and I could see, and it's obviously the Swannen way
can take the two lanes rather more easier than old York.
But the original problem with closing York Road,
which was first suggested in, oh my gosh,
but well into the 20th century,
and nothing like the 21st century,
was the older population of the Tonsies,
who said, this is so much for us to walk.
They are perhaps the most critical users of the bus service.
So what you're doing is making their bus journeys more difficult.
I'd just make that comment.
I mean, I can see the advantage of using Swan and Roy.
I think if I may just come back, it hasn't been something that's been raised, interestingly
enough.
It's not something that fills up our inbox at all now.
Councillor Owens.
Thank you.
Just quickly, I wanted to ask a question about Totterdam.
but just on the Burntwood Lane corridor works
and the various zebra crossings.
I do think it's great the way that I've certainly crossed
the one at Ellington and there's obviously one closer
to Burntwood School and I think it finally links
a lot of Springfield with the houses
and the magnet estate and this sort of sense
that you can quickly get across to the Sainsbury's
over in Springfield.
But just on Totterdown, I noticed I was down,
to the market and I noticed that the plans were sort of slightly hidden inside the market
and obviously the consultation ended in February and obviously there's the plans in place.
But if you are interested and you walk down and you want to see a bit about what is planned,
it's not particularly obvious.
But obviously it's because it's ended.
But I was just curious and they're sort of hidden behind a shop front somewhere in there.
So I don't know if there could be more displayed.
Thank you.
So the plans that were currently displayed, that formed part of the engagement exercise
we carried out during the initial trial phase.
So we held an engagement exercise with the local communities.
Suffice to say, we haven't updated those plans.
Those were still the original ones that were consulted upon.
In terms of the next phase, we'll be engaging with war counselors and taking a report to
Cabinet for the sign -off of the permanent scheme.
and that will give us a further opportunity to showcase the proposals, the permanent schemes,
and that will be updated and displayed in a more prominent location.
Councillor Crichard.
Just to say, Councillor Owen, Totterdam Street is half his, half mine, plus others,
and local councillors and the local MP have been pretty good at trying to,
when the consultation was open, making sure residents knew it was there and responded.
And the feedback I generally had on the doorstep has been very popular.
People have been very keen.
So that's good.
So I would just say it might have been hidden there,
but we were doing our best to make sure everyone knew about it.
Perfect. Fabulous. Thanks everybody.
And just a reminder that actions are being added to the action log,

7 Queenstown Road Improvement Scheme (Paper No. 25-198)

which Miss Ritchie is keeping a note of. So moving on to agenda item 7, Queenstown Road improvement scheme.
David, yeah. Yes, thank you chair. So this paper sets out proposals to consult on improvements to
the southern section of Queenstown Road. Members will all be aware of exactly what Queenstown Road
is. It's a very busy cycle route, it's also a busy and important bus route, it has a lot of
pedestrians on it and it's a main road carrying significant volumes of traffic.
The northern part of the road, the sort of by Battersea Park is currently the subject of an
improvement scheme that would deliver step cycle, segregated cycles tracks on both sides of the road.
But along virtually along its entire length, that work is progressed and is ongoing and progressing well on site.
This paper now turns to what we might seek to achieve on the southern side of Queenstown Road,
which has an entirely different character to it and isn't really suitable for a single whole length intervention as has been possible on the northern side.
There's a small pack that's on your desk, Councillors, and just to very quickly run through the key elements of this.
Members will probably, members I'm sure, will be aware of the windy bendy road underneath the railway by Queenstown Road station
and the traffic that doesn't really work very well under there.
And that's primarily because once you get a lorry in the traffic lane, you can't then undertake it in the bus lane,
and the buses just therefore generally don't use the bus lane.
So the consultation proposes to remove the bus lane
underneath the railway bridge,
have one single nice, relatively wide traffic lane
that would serve all traffic,
and then we'd be able to also provide
for a cycle facility there,
as opposed to having the cyclist sharing spaces
with pedestrians and footways.
We also think there would be a good case
for a new pedestrian crossing
and safe of Queenstown Road Station.
They have numerous options for delivering that
as shown on the plan.
I'd also probably highlight the white arrow lines
towards the base of the paper there,
which is the connection between Ravenet Street
and Battersea Park Road,
which could potentially provide a really good
high quality alternative route for cyclists.
I mean, many cyclists who know about it use it.
But it's one of those routes that would clearly provide an alternative safe option as opposed to using Queenstown Road and the next
Several of the next papers show how the access to that
Tunnel and how the sort of the entrance the access could be improved and give it more of visibility and
Help to animate that that route through
The paper also proposes to provide a sort of tightening up the carriage way at the junction of Silverthorne Road and Queenstown Road.
Then moving further south to the point really of Broughton Street, which is hopefully again
you can find the pages which there's two plans that show say option for A option for B for
Broughton Street. But as you come down Queenstown Road and get to Broughton Street, that's quite
and it's an important junction in the network.
And you'll probably see this little plan
at the top corner of the page,
which shows the parallel routes,
which are Ingoloa and St. Philip.
And those are relatively quiet parallel routes
to Queenstown Road, which again could provide
good quality safe cycling.
That's not to say cyclists wouldn't be permitted
to continue to use Queenstown Road if they want to,
But there's quite clearly other options as well for moving through the area and to make greater use of those options
Would require or we suggest does require a change at that Broughton Street, Queenstown Road Junction
And there are a few options for doing that but ostensibly it's about providing additional
cycle and pedestrian facilities at that junction to give to give those sustainable modes priority
Moving just a little further south, we then hit a section of Queenstown Road that does have bus lanes on it, which could be utilised by cycling, some slight amendments to those and some improvements in the quality of the pedestrian realm along that stretch.
and then you'll see a page of St. Philip Street and Ingolo Road, again showing how relatively pleasant they might be just to have safe cycling on.
And then we move down towards the Boer boundary with Lambeth, and again options there of utilising the bus lane,
providing additional planting and additional public realm improvements and
additional pedestrian quality of environments. So subject to any comments
councillors may have tonight or indeed may wish to pass to me in the coming
days or weeks we plan to go out to consultation on this scheme. We will
of course have a range of media that we will be using and promoting that and
we will clearly have the local ward councillors as well fully informed and on board.
Thank you.
Thank you and thank you for preempting Councillor Critchard's inevitable question about printouts
and maps.
She loves it and it is on the board which Councillor Critchard has just seen.
Are there any questions?
Councillor Cooper.
As you point out, it is very close to the borough boundary.
So I just wonder what the arrangements might be for ensuring that we get some
feedback from the local councillors in the neighbouring ward which I think is
probably Clapham town I think because I think it would be worth getting the
feedback from them because I'm sure they themselves will get feedback from local
residents that might help us design the best scheme so I think the more I know
it's difficult when you get these sort of boundary situations but I think the
more information that you get I mean if we had a scheme that was in Tooting
Broadway Ward that was right next door to Tooting Beck Ward we wouldn't not
hear from the residents in Beck because they didn't happen to live in Broadway
or whatever the precise arrangement for Tottetown Street is but I think it's in
Broadway but lots of people in Beck probably had comments on it all the
other way around and I just think it would be really worth asking the
Councillors
From the neighboring borough. I think they might have some feedback
Thank you. Yeah, I can pick pick pick certainly pick that up
It is the case as you can imagine lots of the cyclists who arrive in at that point are coming from Clapham Common
up Cedars Road foot fruit through Lambeth and
We have made connections with Lambeth Council
And what we can do there. It's actually part of it's actually part of the what's called the Avenue there
which is a route from central London to Paris, which goes all the way down Queen's Town Road.
See there's an on and we're currently looking at how we with all the councils from from Paris to
London about how we might improve the avenue there. So what Lambeth are on that working group as well?
I mean I'm not suggesting chair that Mr Tilly needs to go as far as consulting people in Paris
as well but you know I'm sure some of us would be very willing to undertake the the onerous duty of
doing the trip to Paris if you felt that we should.
Universal sign up there.
Councillor Critchard.
Actually I thought the London to Paris cycle route also ran along Wandsworth,
along the River Wandle.
Two questions, that wasn't what I was going, right.
The first one picking up on what was said earlier about consultation and using commonplace.
I'm sort of okay with commonplace but it's got some other some other problems
just can we clarify how we're going to make sure that residents who aren't
particularly excuse me good with IT can actually feed back because I do rather
feel we're moving very much in an IT direction which is great but there are
some people who then get missed out. So that was the first question. And the second question
is around Ravenet Street, which is a total nightmare. Anyone who goes, can we not do
something about the wayfinding from Battersea Park through to Ravenet Street that isn't
part of this? So if you try coming along from, if you don't know how to do it, Councillor
just a few, I was just wondering, if you don't actually know where the route is, it's not
very well signed to get to the entrance, you know, where the underpass stops?
Yes we will look at alternatives and yes we will look at the full range of media in addition
to using commonplace and yes to your second question as well.
Oh, when?
Just some road markings.
Yeah, okay.
Fabulous.
Councillor Tiller. Thank you chair. So on the subject of cycling, yeah it seems as though
whenever I use Queen's Circus or across the junction between Queenstown Road and
Battersea Park Road, I'm liable to get knocked down, near misses there and yes
So I'm seeing cyclists really not paying any attention to pedestrians at that point.
I understand it's a difficult one for a local council to take control of, but is there anything we can do to improve cyclist behaviour at that point?
And would any of the changes improve the way cyclists cycle?
I think the enforcement against illegal cycling, as you suggest, which I assume is jumping
red lights and things like that, that does rest with the police rather than with the
council. It's certainly something that we can pick up with the cycle lobby organisations
that we work with on what education and publicity and promotion they can do with it. In terms
of whether or not something can happen there which might, in an engineering sense or traffic
management sense, which might help. Transport for London are currently improving Nine Elms
Lane which includes trying to sort out what happens at the junction with Battersea Park
Road and those traffic signals are linked with the signals at Queen's Circus. It's always
been a difficult spot to try and maximise how that works for all users but there may
be something that could could could could happen at that as part of that
project sorry it's relating to the earlier papers one is for council Owen
so I've just checked it is one crossing on Webbs Road and then the school
crossing patrol we've moved on to North Cut Road and the second item is for
councilor locker so there were eight hundred and seventy comments and and
there were 315 and just by agreements whether it's thumbs up or thumbs down
and there were 555 comments thank you thank you could you email those over to
us so we can add them to the right part of minutes thank you was there a
question over here councilor Locker and then belton thank you I'd like to thanks
officers again this I think is a very comprehensive piece of work I think it's
got the makings of a very good scheme.
I can see a lot of improvements,
and I can see a lot of justifications for the improvements.
I do, slightly picking up on Councillor Tiller's point,
though, I do worry, and I feel I can say this
as someone who cycled here this evening,
I do worry, though, that there are some times
we create these routes which are used
and we encourage pedestrians and cyclists to use,
and we end up almost designing in conflict or not dealing with the, I think
it's Councillor Tiller put it, not offering the encouragement of
considerate cycling and behaviors that one would hope. So I'm just looking at
the picture that you have provided us with in the additional pack of Ravenet
Street and that to me just looks like it's encouraging people to cycle very
quickly under that tunnel almost sort of racing track style and I yeah I don't
feel comfortable with that I'm sure we'll discuss it more in more detail
when we get to the actual actually design but I don't know if there's a
way of perhaps having something which is a bit more encouraging of a shared
space rather than of segregation thank you I think I probably say first of all
this clearly indicative and not a detailed design.
But generally, I have a feeling that the cyclists
really do need to be in the middle there
because of the height when you're on a bike
and therefore you've got to be in the middle.
So it's not obviously where you would segregate it,
but we'll look at it as part of the design obviously.
And sorry, I understand that and I've been under it.
But I'm just saying, why does there need to be
any segregation painted at all under that point?
You know because you know and I think I speak for other counselors you have those paths which are
Used by both cyclists and
pedestrians that it can be really difficult
And I think there are just better ways of doing things like rumble strips things like that
That you know encourage the cyclists to remember there are pedestrians coming along here as well
It's as much their space in fact under the highway code the pedestrian has priority
And that is noted as a comment
Councillor Belton?
I think this, I always worry that this conversation always gets a little bit too anti -cyclist.
Let's be anti -pedestrian as well. No seriously, pedestrians walk across streets regardless of the traffic lights in the middle of moving traffic.
I did it myself crossing here tonight across this incredibly busy road.
I don't suppose I'm the only one in the committee who did it.
So pedestrians do it a lot, cyclists do it a lot, and you get all this kind of conflict.
Anyone who knows Holland just a bit, you'd have to say this doesn't apply in either direction.
You can get people like kids racing at speed, or ladies usually,
was shopping and just traveling along very slowly.
And the pedestrians recognize the cycling lanes.
You don't very rarely that you get a pedestrian in Holland
just walking across the cycle lane without noticing it.
But the culture is so different.
They're so used to all that.
And I think if you're a cyclist, I'd say I was.
Going down this particular bit of Queenstown Road,
which is deadly, let's face it,
I mean, frightening, going around the S -Bend
between the two railway stations.
I'm not surprised that cyclists come out of it aggressive.
Everyone else is aggressive to them.
Pedestrians going across, motorists going across.
Why should I stop when I can see perfectly well there's no traffic coming either way.
It's all right for you, you can just accelerate away with the press.
I gotta get up speed, I lose all that speed.
I just think we're expecting a level that we don't necessarily expect of everyone else.
And we haven't provided them with the facilities.
Now I think providing them with the facilities might just mean there's a general, like in
Holland, there's a general improvement across the board.
So let's just be optimistic.
Improvement both as far as pedestrians are concerned and cyclists and hopefully motorists.
Thank you.
Councillor Owens.
Just briefly, and as someone who drove here, and I'm very conscious of this at the moment,
The 20 mile an hour situation in London now means
that cyclists effectively behave like cars
in the sense that they're going so fast,
they're going at, many cyclists, not all of them,
but at roughly the speed of a car.
So when I was behind, sorry, but there's a point to this.
I look at what Councillor Lococo was saying,
and I feel quite terrified looking at that,
but I understand, as a pedestrian,
but I understand that obviously there has to be a link
through to Queenstown Road.
But I find it curious that when we now have the speed
at 20 miles an hour.
It's not quite the same as it was a few years back,
whereby obviously if you're a cyclist,
you were more in danger.
Things have actually improved an awful lot for cyclists.
And we now see cyclists overtaking cars all the time.
That would be my point.
Thank you.
I think these comments are being logged.
Councillor Critchard.
Sorry, I just feel I need to come back slightly on this.
It's the most difficult thing that happened to me recently.
was I nearly got taken out by a lorry pulling out, not looking at a cyclist.
And that's something we have to remember that we do think...
Because I cycle, I'm actually... I might be podgey, but I'm probably slightly healthier.
And I think that's something you have to remember.
I was on holiday in Japan recently, and actually in Japan everyone goes on the pavements,
and if they're cyclists, they cycle on the pavements in quite busy places,
which is actually quite surprising, but everybody's used to it.
The other thing on Radnet Street is, God, that's low,
but maybe what we should do is think about a barrier,
because it's used as a cut -through by people who are on electric bikes
that are souped up that go too quickly.
There isn't a barrier at the moment as you turn in.
You don't have to sort of wiggle through, but that would stop a motorbike,
and I've seen motorbikes go through there.
Thank you.
I think veering into Japanese road layouts
probably showed us that maybe we were exhausting that.
I only get into a specific conversation
about pros and cons of cyclists or pedestrians,
but they're all noted,
so if there's no other points,
fabulous, we'll move on to Agenda Item 8,

8 Transport Overview and Scrutiny Committee Work Programme (Paper No. 25-199)

the Transport Overview and Strewtony Committee Work Program
Ms. Ritchie.
Very simply, this lays out the new process for setting the work program for the committee.
Sorry.
I just said quite simply this report sets out the new process for setting the work program
for the committees.
I am Mariana Ritchie, Democratic Services Manager.
And if you have any queries or questions on how that's being put together, I'm happy to
answer any of those. Councillor Locher. Sorry, thank you Ms. Ritchie. I do just
want to double -check. So traditionally this committee has made decisions on
schemes and sometimes they can be quite local but they have been used as an
opportunity perhaps by residents to come and make deputations to this committee.
So I'm thinking back when I chaired it many years ago. I remember a
Street in furs down that was represented by Councillor Cooper
Where is a very interesting debate because we had half the street want one thing and half the street want the other
So we wrestled
We wrestled with that as
As a as a committee and I think you know we heard both sides
And I think the residents went away feeling appreciated and we made a decision. I just want to just double -check in this new
overview and scrutiny committee world,
that we wouldn't lose the richness of that.
Because on the one hand, one of the things
we obviously want to encourage is
strong resident engagement.
And yet this is one of the committees
which historically of all the OSCs
has had some of the best engagement from actual residents.
When something is happening in their street,
whether it's a CPZ or something like that,
we will get residents along.
And I wouldn't want to see those sorts of items lost from the agenda.
If I may, Chair.
Thank you.
Absolutely not.
And the new scrutiny model that we are engaging in is really trying to encourage
new formats of scrutiny as well as new ways of putting together your work program.
So if one of those formats is you have resident engagement, you have community groups coming to the committee and
giving witness statements or putting together petitions.
That's absolutely encouraged and your chair,
deputy chair and opposition speaker
have all been invited to their first work
programming session where we expect them
to think about those formats.
Any other questions?
Thank you very much.
So that concludes the business of the committee and thank you everyone for being so well behaved
on my first chairing.
Thanks Councillor Cooper.
I'm sorry we were going to challenge the chair, we forgot.
Meeting adjourned now though.