Agenda and minutes

Apologies were submitted by Councillor S Butt.

Members are invited to declare at this stage of the meeting, the nature and existence of any relevant disclosable pecuniary, personal or prejudicial interests in the items on this agenda and to specify the item(s) to which they relate.

For purposes of transparency, Councillor Nerva advised that he was a registered supporter of Tottenham Hotspurs.

To hear any deputations received from members of the public in accordance with Standing Order 67.

None.

To approve the minutes of the previous ordinary meeting held on 14 March 2019 and the minutes of the special committee meeting held on 3 April 2019 to consider a call-in of a Cabinet decision.

RESOLVED: that the minutes of the meetings held on 14 March 2019 and the and 3 April 2019 be agreed as an accurate record of the meeting.

To consider any matters arising from the minutes of the previous meeting.

The Chair advised that as agreed by the committee at the last ordinary meeting, a letter had been sent to the Chair of the Health and Wellbeing Board. The response would be shared once received.

The attached paper includes notes from the chair of the committee on the agenda for the April meeting, including reasons for the selection of topics, as well as work of the committee outside of public meetings.

The committee considered the Chair’s report which set out details regarding the selection of topics for the current meeting and work undertaken by the committee outside of public meetings.

Councillor Nerva expressed his thanks to the Chair and officers for arranging the meeting with the Communities and Local Government Parliamentary Committee, highlighting that this had been a really useful and interesting exercise.

RESOLVED: that the Chair’s report be noted.

When the new stadium was built, one of the conditions placed upon the owners of the stadium - the Football Association (FA)  - was that they needed to analyse the impact of their activities on the local area.  The FA commissioned the respected accountancy firm Deloitte to produce this report.  The most recent iteration was published earlier this year and is attached for members’ consideration. Representatives from the FA and Deloitte will be in attendance at the meeting to discuss the report.

The Chair welcomed Chris Bryant (Head of Operations, FA), Jake Wilson (Senior Manager, Deloitte) and Tom Hammond (Assistant Manager, Deloitte) to the meeting, noting that the committee had before them the report prepared by Deloitte Sport Business Group on behalf of the Football Association on the Economic Impact of Wembley Stadium for 2017/18 event season. The committee subsequently received a short presentation highlighting the key findings of the report for the Brent area.

During the presentation, Members were advised that there had been a record 58 events held at Wembley Stadium during 2017/18. The usual number of events was around 32. These events had attracted 3.8 million spectators, including 350k from overseas and high numbers of first-time visitors.  The report stated that the Wembley Stadium events had delivered a major economic boost to Brent and that Tottenham Hotspur’s residency had further increased the local economic impact, accounting for over one third of the total economic impact from events in 2017/18. At least 1,800 full time equivalent jobs were supported due to events at the stadium in this period and there had been £190m gross expenditure in local businesses in Brent on accommodation, tickets, food and drink, retail, groceries, travel and other expenditures. Overall the local economy of Brent had been boosted by £150m due to Stadium events. Spectator perceptions had been surveyed and consultations held with key stakeholders including Brent Council, local businesses and local residents’ groups. Spectators had been largely positive about the Stadium and Brent. Local residents had in particular expressed concerns around issues with noise, antisocial behaviour and littering. The FA was working with the council and other organisations to address these issues.

The Chair thanked the representatives of the FA and Deloitte for the presentation and invited questions from the committee.

Several queries were subsequently raised. Members questioned whether the economic impact could be broadened to include areas outside the immediate vicinity by discouraging car use and directing public transport users to surrounding tube stations. It was queried how the FA encouraged visitors to use public transport and concern was expressed regarding the impact on neighbouring boroughs which did not have event day enforcement in place. It was further queried whether the views of residents from the neighbouring borough of Harrow had been surveyed for the report. Questions were raised regarding the consultation and feed-in of the FA into kick-off times and the consideration given to ensuring viable public transport routes out of Wembley following events. Members sought details of parking and other transport provision made for disabled customers attending events at the Stadium. Queries were also raised regarding consultation between the FA and the council regarding low capacity events and event day parking.

The committee sought clarification regarding the £150m total economic impact figure for Brent, whether this included expenditure in the Stadium itself, and for those areas outside of the Stadium, whether any further detail could be provided about those benefiting most from this economic boost. It was subsequently queried whether any economic risk  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

This report outlines the challenges the Council faces when dealing with illegally dumped rubbish on private land and explores the scope and potential of tackling the issue of dumped rubbish – in particular mattresses through electronic tagging.

Councillor Krupa Sheth (Lead Member for Environment) introduced the report detailing the challenges faced by the council when dealing with illegal dumped rubbish non-council land.  Simon Finney (Head of Neighbourhood Management) was also in attendance to address the committee’s queries. Members heard that the Council’s approach to tackling illegal rubbish dumping both on Council and non-council owned land consisted mainly of a three pronged approach: education & engagement, to address people’s behaviour; enforcement, including reactive and proactive enforcement and investigative activity; and, clearance of the land. With regard to the latter element, the council’s clean-up remit did not extend to non-council owned land and the responsibility for keeping private land clean and tidy rested with the owner. As a consequence, the council utilised powers under the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act to issue Community Protection Notices (CPNs) requiring the owner to clear their land. This legislation also permitted the council to clear the land through works in default with a subsequent land charge added to the property or through a court order when owners were not responsive. In a minority of cases, it could be difficult to determine ownership of land. In such cases officers would work closely with Neighbourhood Managers and the community to try and address the issue through voluntary clean ups or by other means.  For some sites, these challenges could not be resolved and the council had a small budget set aside to clear these and subsequently focus enforcement activity to prevent further rubbish dumping. Simon Finney emphasised that the investigative process which sought to establish the perpetrators of illegal rubbish dumping was the same for both council-owned and privately owned land.

The report before the committee also explored: the use of technology to underpin an intelligence led approach; developments regarding extended producer responsibility; and, the council’s use of waste tagging. Addressing the issue of illegally dumped mattresses, it was concluded that any methodology to track mattresses to ensure owner responsibility would need to be supported by legislated processes to be effective. However, it was anticipated that strides made towards extended producer responsibly would have an impact on the overall volume of illegally dumped mattresses in Brent.

The Chair thanked the Lead Member and Officers for the introduction to the report and subsequently invited questions from the committee.

Members queried whether the use of Compulsory Purchase Orders (CPOs) had been explored to address those small pockets of land where persistent illegal rubbish dumping occurred. It was queried how the council addressed issues with domestic properties, whether the council encouraged a zero tolerance approach, and how the council engaged with communities on this matter. Members sought further details of the work regarding Houses in Multiple Occupation (HMOs) and landlord licensing with respect to the issue of illegal rubbish dumping. It was queried how members of the public could identify who owned land. The committee highlighted the importance of clear pictorial guides illustrating the council’s policy to assist the public in understanding when the council could intervene. Questions  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

This report informs the committee how the Council manages larger vehicles parked on street in Controlled Parking Zones (CPZs) and is implementing an electric vehicle charging network within the borough.

At the invitation of the Chair, Councillor Tatler (Lead Member for Regeneration, Highways and Planning) introduced the report detailing the use of on-street parking management processes and updating members on the four electric vehicle charging point (EVCP) implementation programmes currently underway. 

The report highlighted that the council regulated and charged for on street parking to: manage demand from residents, businesses and visitors; assist the smooth flow of traffic; reduce the number of vehicle trips, particularly at peak times; and encourage the uptake of sustainable travel options. Demand for parking in Brent was very high and there were currently 40 controlled parking zones in the borough – approximately 35% of the borough. The Wembley Stadium Protective Parking Scheme (WSPPS) covered a further 35% of the borough. The remaining 30% of the borough did not have area wide parking controls. In April 2017 the council introduced a revised carbon emissions-based residents’ permit scheme to encourage residents to purchase low emissions vehicles. Furthermore, following consultation in 2016, the council was due to implement a reduction in the maximum weight of 3.5t for resident parking permits.

With regard to delivering the EVCP network, the report set out that the council’s approach was informed by the locations of registered electric or hybrid vehicles, as well as the need to have minimum impact on the ever increasing pressure for parking. There was not a single overarching delivery programme for charging infrastructure and therefore, the different types of charges (Source London, Rapid Chargers and GULCS lamp column) were being implemented under an overarching strategic umbrella by Highways and Infrastructure and Transportation Planning, ensuring all types of electric vehicle users could access the charging network.

In the subsequent discussion, members: questioned the risk of the EVCP technology becoming obsolete over the contract period; sought an update on the usage of the charging points to date; and queried if any modelling had been undertaken with regard to air quality and electric car usage in the borough. Comment was sought on the ways in which the council could encourage the scrappage of diesel cars and promote the use of electric vehicles. Members questioned whether various commercial opportunities, such as the provision of finance or working directly with producers to promote particular vehicles, had been considered. It was further queried whether the local authority could implement a carbon levy on carbon intensive local businesses via for example, powers granted under the Localism Act, to subsidise a local scrappage scheme. It was emphasised that the council should be promoting their role in providing the EVCP network for the borough and consideration should be given to the application of the council logo to the charging points. Members questioned whether the providers of the charging points used electricity from renewable sources. Members sought an estimate on the length of time from resident request to installation of an EVCP and questioned whether any consideration had been given to further lowering the minimum weight for vehicles eligible for resident permits. Members raised concerns about commercial vehicles  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

Notice of items to be raised under this heading must be given in writing to the Head of Executive and Member Services or his representative before the meeting in accordance with Standing Order 60.

None.