Agenda, decisions and minutes

Members are invited to declare at this stage of the meeting, any relevant financial or other interest in the items on this agenda.

The Chair confirmed that he lived close to but not within the consultation area, in relation to Appendix B and that his mother, Councillor V Brown, lived within the consultation area of Appendix I of Item 5, Report on (i) Progress on the 2009/10 Controlled Parking Zones Programme and (ii) the Proposed 2010/11 Programme.  However, he did not regard these as personal or prejudicial interests and remained present for discussion and to vote on this item.

The minutes are attached.

RESOLVED:-

that the minutes of the previous meeting held on 18^th November 2008 be approved as an accurate record of the meeting.

None.

The following petition has been verified by Democratic Services and contains in excess of 50 signatures:-

Petition for Parking Availability on East Lane, along the Parade of Shops Adjacent to North Wembley Train Station

This petition, submitted on behalf of local traders, requests the following:-

“We the traders of East Lane request your support in our petition for more parking availability along our parade of shops.”

A report in regarding this petition appears under Item 6 in the agenda.

Petition for Parking Availability on East Lane, along the Parade of Shops Adjacent to North Wembley Train Station

RESOLVED:-

that the petition on parking availability on East Lane, along the parade of shops adjacent to North Wembley train station, be noted.

Petition for Parking Availability on East Lane, along the Parade of Shops Adjacent to North Wembley Train Station

RESOLVED:-

that the petition on parking availability on East Lane, along the parade of shops adjacent to North Wembley train station, be noted.

This report informs the Committee of the progress on the Controlled Parking Zones (CPZs) implementation programme in Brent, since it was last reported in November 2009.  The report also addresses a petition received from the traders of East Lane (near North Wembley station) requesting the introduction of short term pay and display bays outside their premises.  The report outlines a proposed programme of CPZ work for 2010/11 and seeks approval to progress that programme.

RESOLVED:-

(i)           that the petition received from businesses on East Lane be noted and it be agreed that organisers be informed of the Committee’s decision to include a scheme to address the petitioners concerns in the 2010/11 work programme, subject to decision (iv);

(ii)          that the decisions taken by the Head of Transportation in respect of the review of Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) MW (as set out in paragraph 3.11 of the report) and CPZ HW extension (as set out at 3.17) be noted;

(iii)         that the consultation to be carried out with residents of the HY CPZ extension area as outlined at 3.19-3.21 be noted, and that it be agreed to delegate authority to the Head of Transportation to consider the results of the consultation and make a decision on the implementation of the scheme;

(iv)         that the proposed CPZ programme for the 2010/11 financial year as set out in the table at 3.22 to 3.24 be approved, subject to confirmation of the budget through the Council’s 2010/11 budget setting process; and

(v)          that the Head of Transportation be authorised to consider objections and representations during the statutory consultation on Traffic Orders relating to schemes mentioned within this report and that the Head of Transportation report back to members, if there are significant and substantial objections or concerns raised, otherwise he be authorised to implement the schemes.

Taher Chaudhary (Senior Engineer, Transportation Unit) introduced this item and drew Members’ attention to the recommendations as set out in the report.  Irfan Malik (Assistant Director – Streets and Transportation, Environment and Culture) added that the area south-east of Kingsbury Station referred to in the work programme was in Fryent ward and not Barnhill ward as it had been referred to.

During discussion, Councillor Wharton referred to Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) Zone ST and commented that consideration needed to be given to future housing developments in Roundtree Road and Saunderton Road.  Irfan Malik agreed that this issue be taken into account when considering the extension of CPZ Zone ST during the 2010/11 programme.

RESOLVED:-

(i)           that the petition received from businesses on East Lane be noted and it be agreed that organisers be informed of the Committee’s decision to include a scheme to address the petitioners concerns in the 2010/11 work programme, subject to decision (iv);

(ii)          that the decisions taken by the Head of Transportation in respect of the review of Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) MW (as set out in paragraph 3.11 of the report) and CPZ HW extension (as set out at 3.17) be noted;

(iii)         that the consultation to be carried out with residents of the HY CPZ extension area as outlined at 3.19-3.21 be noted, and that it be agreed to delegate authority to the Head of Transportation to consider the results of the consultation and make a decision on the implementation of the scheme;

(iv)         that the proposed CPZ programme for the 2010/11 financial year as set out in the table at 3.22 to 3.24 be approved, subject to confirmation of the budget through the Council’s 2010/11 budget setting process; and

(v)          that the Head of Transportation be authorised to consider objections and representations during the statutory consultation on Traffic Orders relating to schemes mentioned within this report and that the Head of Transportation report back to members, if there are significant and substantial objections or concerns raised, otherwise he be authorised to implement the schemes.

At its meeting on 8^th December 2009, the Overview and Scrutiny Committee considered the councillor call for action (CCfA) submitted by Councillor Powney in relation to the traffic issues at Tubbs Road, Kensal Green Ward. Details of the CCfA are included as an appendix to this report.   The councillor call for action was made to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee because Councillor Powney wanted members to consider recommending solutions that would:

• Reduce traffic congestion, in what is a narrow, largely residential street.
• Reduce the air pollution, associated with the large volume of traffic.
• Allay concerns about road safety.

Full details of the discussion at the Overview and Scrutiny Committee meeting, and a previous site visit to Tubbs Road are included in this report. The Overview and Scrutiny Committee agrees with Councillor Powney and local residents that the Council should see if measures can be taken to reduce traffic congestion in Tubbs Road, but also appreciates there is not a straightforward solution to the traffic problems in the area. The Overview and Scrutiny Committee has made a number of recommendations on this issue which it hopes will be given full consideration by the Highways Committee. Of upmost importance to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee is that residents are involved in developing solutions to the traffic issues in the area.

RESOLVED:-

(i)         that the concerns of residents of Tubbs Road and Nightingale Road in relation to traffic conditions in those roads be noted;

(ii)        that it be noted that officers are currently undertaking work on an Area Based Scheme (ABS) for Harlesden, which if progressed, would improve the quality of the public realm in Harlesden and could address parking and traffic issues;

(iii)       that the Head of Transportation be instructed to write to the Chair of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee and Kensal Green ward members to confirm that the scope of the Harlesden ABS includes development of proposals to address the issues identified by the Overview and Scrutiny Committee, including the possible introduction of banned turns and furthermore will include engagement with residents of Tubbs Road, Nightingale Road and adjacent streets to determine their preferred solutions;

(iv)       that the Head of Transportation be instructed to (a) undertake a review of the signage relating to the width restriction signage and make appropriate improvements; (b) install signage to direct drivers to the A40 via Scrubs Lane (A219); and (c) contact map providers with a view to ensuring that the Tubbs Road width restriction is identified on maps and satellite navigation systems; and

(v)        that the request for re-phasing the signals at the western end of Tubbs Road so as to avoid queuing in this road be acknowledged but it be noted that this is likely to encourage traffic to use Tubbs Road and that the Head of Transportation be instructed to work with Transport for London to ensure that any future changes to those signals do not increase queues in Tubbs Road.

Members had before them a report with recommendations from the Overview and Scrutiny Committee who had considered the councillor call for action that had been submitted by Councillor Powney.

Councillor Jones addressed the Committee as the Chair of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee.  She stated that there were no easy solutions to the traffic problems in the Tubbs Road area, however the Overview and Scrutiny Committee had made a number of recommendations to this Committee to improve the situation.  This included de-classifying Tubbs Road as an ‘A’ road, although it was acknowledged that this was outside the Council’s authority and would require submissions to the Department for Transport.  It was felt a de-classification would reduce the volume of traffic and the damage that it had done to street furniture, with the problem exacerbated by the narrowness of Tubbs Road.  Councillor Jones then drew Members’ attention to the recommendations as set out in the report.

Councillor Thomas, a ward councillor for the area concerned, stated that the volume of traffic had long been an issue and he asserted that Tubbs Road had the slowest moving traffic for an ‘A’ road in the entire country.   He felt the situation would not improve until Tubbs Road was declassified as an ‘A’ road and he urged that the Council lobby the Department for Transport and Transport for London (TfL) for this to be undertaken.

Councillor Powney, who had submitted the councillor call for action and was a ward councillor for the area, reiterated support for the recommendations from the Overview and Scrutiny Committee and he suggested that banning right turns out of Furness Road into the High Street and adding signage would be particularly useful, whilst informing satellite navigation companies of the narrowness of Tubbs Road would be at no cost to the Council.  He stressed that the volume of traffic and the resulting pollution were the largest concerns.

Members noted a written statement circulated by Beatrice Barleon prepared on behalf of local residents.

Councillor Detre spoke on behalf of Councillor Joseph, a ward councillor for the area concerned.  Members heard that Councillor Joseph had attended a site visit with residents, officers and other councillors and had observed significant levels of traffic.  Although there had been some improvements as a result of the introduction of a CPZ in the area, problems remained and measures were necessary to address the volume of traffic.  Councillor Wharton enquired whether satellite navigation companies could be informed of the narrowness of Tubbs Road immediately.

In reply, Irfan Malik confirmed that satellite companies could be provided information about the narrowness of Tubbs Road immediately.  He then drew Members’ attention to the set of recommendations circulated at the meeting in response to those made by the Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

The Chair acknowledged the concerns of residents and councillors and stated that action would be taken where possible to address the high volume of traffic.

Members then agreed to the recommendations proposed by Irfan Malik.

RESOLVED:-

(i)  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

The predominant source of funding for schemes and initiatives to improve transport infrastructure and influence travel patterns in Brent is the annual Local Implementation Plan (LIP) allocation from Transport for London (TfL).  This report outlines recent changes to the arrangements for making that allocation, provides details of the LIP allocation and scheme programme for 2010/11 recently confirmed by TfL and seeks approval to implement the schemes and initiatives within that programme.

(i)        that the Transport for London capital allocation of £4,225,000 for the Transportation Local Implementation Plan for the 2010/11 financial year be noted;

(ii)       that the Head of Transportation be instructed to implement the schemes and initiatives as set out in the report and ensure their delivery using the allocated budget and resources, subject to compliance with the Council’s standing orders and financial regulations; and

(iii)      that the Head of Transportation be authorised to undertake any necessary non-statutory and statutory consultation, to consider any objections or representations and to implement the necessary Traffic Management Orders if there are no objections or representations, or if he considers the objections or representations are groundless or insignificant and otherwise to refer objections or representations to the Committee for further consideration.

Adrian Pigott (Principal Transportation Planner) introduced the report which outlined changes to the allocation of funding from TfL and details of the allocation.  He then drew Members’ attention to the recommendations as set out in the report.

(i)        that the Transport for London capital allocation of £4,225,000 for the Transportation Local Implementation Plan for the 2010/11 financial year be noted;

(ii)       that the Head of Transportation be instructed to implement the schemes and initiatives as set out in the report and ensure their delivery using the allocated budget and resources, subject to compliance with the Council’s standing orders and financial regulations; and

(iii)      that the Head of Transportation be authorised to undertake any necessary non-statutory and statutory consultation, to consider any objections or representations and to implement the necessary Traffic Management Orders if there are no objections or representations, or if he considers the objections or representations are groundless or insignificant and otherwise to refer objections or representations to the Committee for further consideration.

The next meeting of the Highways Committee is scheduled for Tuesday, 16^th March 2010 at 7.00 pm.

It was noted that the next meeting of the Highways Committee was scheduled for Tuesday, 16^th March 2010 at 7.00 pm.

Notice of items to be raised under this heading must be given in writing to the Democratic Services Manager or his representative before the meeting in accordance with Standing Order 64.

None.