Agenda item

To receive a report from the Director of Environment and Regeneration outlining a Call-In received for consideration by Overview and Scrutiny on the following reason: (Report Ref: 152)

Decision by Cabinet (14 December 2016): Approval of Cycle Enfield – Proposals for the A1010 (North)

Cabinet Decision included on Publication of Decision List No: 47/16-17 Key

Decision KD4115 (List Ref: 2/47/16-17) issued on Friday 16 December 2016.

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 Members responsible for taking the decision.

·         Debate by Overview

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

·      Councillor Neville referred to the main area of concern, the response to the consultation exercise, detailing that of the 663 responses, only 43% supported this scheme. Cabinet should have considered these figures in more detail. He added that this lack of support is presumably as a result of the upheaval that will be caused. The A1010 North is a narrow road, with a high volume of traffic, often heavy vehicles and lots of buses.

·         The Cabinet report does not give any results from the ‘business walk’ and this lack of clear evidence of support is due to the impact that the scheme will have on retailers.

·         With a number of bus routes along this road, there should have been direct consultation with bus company operators. This is a bus dependent area but buses will be delayed. The emergency services are more in agreement with this scheme than Enfield Town but the London Ambulance Service have noted that minutes will be put on response times and they would prefer hump-free roads.

·         The impact on parking for residents and businesses must be considered further. Almost half of the resident’s bays will be removed and approximately a quarter of all loading and waiting bays which are highly utilised. Free footpath cross-overs are to be offered to residents who require one, however, officers have been unable to quantify this number.

·         The economic impact must be carefully considered. Many of the shops along this corridor are suffering and further disruption could see them go under.

·         In relation to air quality, Councillor Neville asked that the issues raised in relation to the Enfield Town scheme be applied to the A1010 north.

·         Councillor Neville concluded by saying that a dramatic modal shift is required but in his opinion that will not be achieved.

Councillor Neville 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 the points raised in both call-ins were similar and he would ask Officers to respond on specific issues.
• In addition to the 663 people who responded directly to the consultation, Officers spoke to over 1,000 people as part of a survey. This was discussed at the Cabinet meeting
• Engagement is often challenging in the Eastern part of the borough so to mitigate this the business walk was carried out to ensure that businesses along the A1010 were aware of the opportunity to engage with the process of design and proved to be a useful event.
• The Council and relevant TfL stakeholders (including representatives from London Buses) meet regularly to discuss all Cycle Enfield schemes. As the detailed design for the A1010 North progresses, further engagement with TfL and the bus operators will continue.
• Figures quoted by Councillor Neville in relation to loss of parking were refuted and statistics given showing more detail of the impact on parking along the A1010.
• Cllr Pite commented that people are likely to start using bicycles when safe bicycle lanes are available.
• Modal shift may be a challenge, however, not impossible. In Holland, 25% of journeys by people over 75 are by bicycle.

The following questions and comments were then taken from Members of the Committee:

Councillor Smith asked Councillor Anderson to give an undertaking to measure some of the issues, for example, air quality and journey times once the scheme is implemented.

Cllr Anderson replied that he agreed in principle as evaluation is very important. 

In response to a question it was confirmed that design changes following public consultation will be highlighted in an exhibition to illustrate that consultation has been considered.

The Chair asked Councillor Anderson to summarise but Councillor Anderson stated that he had nothing further to add.

In summary, Councillor Neville reiterated concerns regarding support available to struggling businesses and commented that Cabinet should have challenged detail on the economic impact and mitigation issues. Councillor Neville requested that the decision be referred back to the Cabinet Member for Environment for reconsideration.

The Committee then voted on the decision as follows:

Councillors Chibah, Abdullahi and Keazor voted in favour of the decision.

Councillors Hayward and Smith voted to refer the decision back to the Cabinet member.

The Chair CONFIRMED the decision.