Agenda and minutes

The Chair welcomed attendees to the meeting.

Apologies for absence were received from Simon Goulden and Alicia Meniru It was noted that Councillor Michael Rye was substituting for Councillor Joanne Laban.

The Chair then outlined how the meeting was to proceed. The meeting would focus on the reasons given for the  Call-in – ‘Approval of Cycle Enfield – Proposals for the A1010 South’; questions likewise would be only taken on these items in relation to the ‘Reasons for Call-in’, cited reasons being the exclusive basis for this and any other particular call-in meeting.

Members of the Council are invited to identify any disclosable pecuniary, other pecuniary or non-pecuniary interests relevant to items on the agenda.

No declarations of interest were received.

To receive a report from the Executive Director of Finance, Resources & Customer Services outlining a Call-In received for consideration by Overview & Scrutiny on the following reason: (Report No: 214).

Portfolio decision by Cabinet Member for Environment (7 February 2017): Approval of Cycle Enfield Proposals for the A1010 South.

Decision included on Publication of Decision List No: 54/16-17 Key Decision 4390 (List Ref: 1/54/16-17) issued on 7 February 2017.

It is proposed that consideration of the Call-In be structured as follows:

·         Brief outline of reasons for the Call-In by representative (s) of the Members who have called in the decision.

·         Response to the reasons provided for the Call-In by the Cabinet member responsible for taking the decision.

·         Debate by Overview & Scrutiny Committee and agreement on action to be taken.

The Chair invited Councillor Chamberlain to outline and substantiate the reasons for Call –In.

·     Councillor Chamberlain referred to one of the main areas of concern, which was parking for residents and local businesses. The report fails to mention how the final plans allow for flexibility mentioned in 5.2.8 of the report where the operation of parking bays will be monitored post implementation and adjustments made to the number of bays/method of control.

·     The London Ambulance Service needs 24/7 access, the proposed scheme’s infrastructure could impede that access. The LAS is currently not meeting its response times so any restriction will not help them achieve them which is of detriment to residents. This particular scheme is on the doorstep of North Middlesex Hospital and any delays caused by this scheme could be critical.

·     There is not much information in the report to justify the journey delay times stated and it was feared that journey times would get worse.

·     The report fails to mention how the communication will be delivered in terms of explaining how bus borders work to residents especially the elderly, the blind and others with additional needs.

·     The report fails to state the number of driveway crossovers that might be requested and the costs associated with providing them.

·     The report mentions that air quality will worsen at certain junctions as NO2 will increase yet the report fails to recommend additional air quality monitors be used in order to monitor this so that improvements can be made.

·     The decision does not comment upon the regeneration of the area including the White Hart Lane Stadium and Edmonton Heartlands Housing Zone and how the upscale in the development will affect the number of people using the A1010 and its impact on the scheme.

·     The level of engagement has been extremely low. Out of 20,000 leaflets sent out the consultation only received 30 responses and they were mainly online. The scheme does not seem to justify value for money and appears to have been based on blind hope rather than evidence.

Councillor Chamberlain requested that the decision be referred back to the Cabinet Member for Environment for reconsideration.

The Chair invited Councillor Anderson to respond, as follows:

• Councillor Anderson stated that many of the arguments raised, in particular Air Quality and the London Ambulance Service had been responded to and addressed at previous Cycle Enfield Call-Ins.
• The A1010 Cabinet Report had not been called in, which was interesting seeing as many of the substantive points raised by Councillor Chamberlain were covered in this.
• Although there were not a substantial number of responses to the consultation, it was a good response for this area which normally has a very low respondent rate.
• Evidence from similar schemes, for example in Camden, showed a 15/20% reduction in poor air quality and pollution. Air quality monitoring and modelling are currently undertaken and this will continue in the future.
• The London Ambulance Service did not object to the proposals for the A1010 South, and offered support for schemes  ...  view the full minutes text for item 369.

To note the dates of future meetings as follows:

Provisional Call-Ins:

Wednesday 8 March 2017

Wednesday 12 April 2017

Business meetings of the Overview & Scrutiny Committee will be held on:

Tuesday 21 March 2017 (Additional meeting)

Thursday 27 April 2017

NOTED the dates of future meetings:

Provisional Call-Ins:

Wednesday 8 March 2017

Wednesday 12 April 2017

Business meetings of the Overview & Scrutiny Committee will be held on:

Tuesday 21 March 2017 (Additional meeting)

Thursday 27 April 2017