Agenda for Environment, Transport & Sustainability Cabinet Members Meeting on Tuesday, 24th January, 2012, 2.00pm

skip navigation and tools

Agenda, decisions and minutes

Venue: Committee Room 3, Hove Town Hall. View directions

Contact: John Peel  Democratic Services Officer

Items
No. Item

61.

Procedural Business

    (a)   Declarations of Interest by all Members present of any personal interests in matters on the agenda, the nature of any interest and whether the Members regard the interest as prejudicial under the terms of the Code of Conduct.

     

    (b)   Exclusion of Press and Public - To consider whether, in view of the nature of the business to be transacted, or the nature of the proceedings, the press and public should be excluded from the meeting when any of the following items are under consideration.

     

    NOTE:  Any item appearing in Part 2 of the Agenda states in its heading either that it is confidential or the category under which the information disclosed in the report is exempt from disclosure and therefore not available to the public.

     

    A list and description of the categories of exempt information is available for public inspection at Brighton and Hove Town Halls.

    Minutes:

    61(a)      Declarations of Interests

    61.1       There were none. 

    61(b)      Exclusion of Press and Public

    61.2            In accordance with section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972 (“the Act”), the Cabinet Member considered whether the press and public should be excluded from the meeting during an item of business on the grounds that it was likely, in view of the business to be transacted or the nature of the proceedings, that if members of the press and public were present during that item, there would be disclosure to them of confidential information (as defined in section 100A(3) of the Act) or exempt information (as defined in section 100I(I) of the Act). 

    61.3           RESOLVED - That the press and public not be excluded from the meeting.

62.

Minutes of the previous meeting pdf icon PDF 106 KB

    Minutes of the Meeting held on 29 November 2011 (copy attached).

    Minutes:

    62.1               RESOLVED – That the minutes of the previous meeting held on 29 November 2011 be agreed and signed by the Cabinet Members.

     

63.

Cabinet Members' Communications

    Minutes:

    63.1               Councillor West presented the following communication:

     

    ‘I am pleased to announce that we have been successful in our funding bid to improve The Level.  We have secured £2.2 million of external funding to transform the park in the heart of our city.

    The Level is in much need of improvement and the money will be used to restore key heritage features, build a new café and toilets, an exciting new water feature and a new play ground.  We will also see the restoration of Rose Walk and the installation of new seating and lighting.

    A garden manager will be appointed who will work with volunteers and community groups to make sure the park is maintained to a high standard. 

    Separately work is continuing to increase the amount of funding for a new skatepark on The Level.

    Securing the money has been a lot of hard work.  A huge number of people got involved in the consultation and helped shape the plans.  I would like to thank everyone for their efforts and hope they will continue to work with us to once again make The Level a park we can all be proud of’.

     

64.

Items reserved for discussion

    (a)   Items reserved by the Cabinet Members

     

    (b)   Items reserved by the Opposition Spokespersons

     

    (c)    Items reserved by Members, with the agreement of the Cabinet Members.

     

    NOTE: Public Questions, Written Questions from Councillors, Petitions, Deputations, Letters from Councillors and Notices of Motion will be reserved automatically.

    Minutes:

    64.1               RESOLVED – That all items be reserved for discussion.

     

65.

Petitions pdf icon PDF 73 KB

    Report of the Strategic Director, Resources (copy attached).

    Minutes:

    65(i)     Parking- One Hour Option- Ms McMinn

     

    65i.1     The petitioner did not attend the meeting therefore a response was provided in writing and is set out below:

     

    65i.2      Councillor Davey provided the following response:

     

    ‘Thank you for your petition, which was presented to Full Council on 15 December and which I formally note here.

    I am pleased to say that the tariff proposals put forward at the 29th November Cabinet Member Meeting did include for the introduction of a 1 hour tariff, citywide.  This has been out for consultation through the TRO’s, the results of which will be reported back to this meeting in February where I will consider if to go ahead or not with a 1 hour tariff band’

     

    65i.3     RESOLVED- That the petition be noted

     

    65(ii)     Stop the leafleting ban- Mr Nick Thorne

     

    65ii.1     The petitioner did not attend the meeting therefore a response was provided in writing and is set out below:

     

    65ii.2     Councillor West provided the following response:

     

    Thank you for your petition, which was presented to Full Council on 15 December and which I formally note here.

    Issuing leaflets in the city is not banned. The free distribution of printed matter is a popular form of advertising for some organisations in the city but it does contribute to littering, particularly in the centre and has a detrimental impact on the appearance of the city.

    It is recognised that flyering is a popular way of advertising particularly and the licensing scheme does not seek to ban the handing out of leaflets.  Instead the licensing is designed to allow flyering but in a controlled way with the sole purpose to prevent the litter.  The charges levied pay for the costs of operating the scheme. Charities, political and religious organisations are exempt from payment but are expected to comply with the conditions. However, I note that the scheme is unfavourable to community groups and small businesses who do have to pay and I will be asking officers to look into a solution to this matter.

    The licensing of those people who want to hand out printed material was agreed by the Environment Committee in January 2007 after a  consultation period during which the proposals were sent out to organisations affected by the scheme including city night clubs and the business community.

    Since introducing the scheme, there has been less litter from flyering and this is important for a city economy which relies on tourism and visitors. I am conscious that there have been issued arising from this policy in the last five years and I will be examining ways to address these and move forward’.

     

    65ii.3     RESOLVED- That the petition be noted.

     

    65(iii)    Falmer Road Cycleway- Ms Joanna Goddard

     

    65iii.1   The petitioner did not attend the meeting therefore a response was provided in writing and is set out below.

     

    65iii.2   Councillor Davey provided the following response:

     

    ‘Thank you for your petition, which was presented to Full Council on 15 December and which I formally note here.

    There is an existing ‘permissive bridleway’ which runs alongside the Falmer Road from Woodingdean to Falmer and the quality and accessibility of this route has been highlighted as a priority for Brighton & Hove Local Access Forum.

    This important 'missing link' remains a priority for providing a safe sustainable route for walkers and cyclists as an alternative to the very busy and narrow B2123 road. 

    A few hundred metres of route from The Droveway are inside Brighton & Hove City Council’s boundary and earlier this year the city council funded accessibility improvements for all users across the previously inaccessible bunding which has been very well received.  This includes the installation of a pedestrian refuge to assist users crossing the junction at Bexhill Road.

    I am pleased to inform you that Brighton & Hove City Council has committed further funding to upgrade the surfacing of the section of route in our city boundary this financial year.  This has the support of tenant farmers who have willingly provided land to create a path of sufficient width and further support from the South Downs National Park authority.

    This route will strengthen walking and cycling links to the Falmer Stadium, however, the remaining two-thirds of the route to Falmer are inside East Sussex County Council’s boundary.  Officers at Brighton & Hove have been working with ESCC to improve the route and will continue to support ESCC in completing the section within their boundary’.

     

    65iii.3   RESOLVED- That the petition be noted.

     

    65(iv)    Speed bumps on St Leonards and adjoining roads- Councillor Pissaridou

     

    65iv.1   Councillor Pissaridou presented a petition signed by 69 people calling for the construction of speed bumps in the St Leonards Road area to reduce speed limits.

     

    65iv.2   Councillor Davey provided the following response:

     

    ‘Thank you for your petition, which I formally note.

    There are almost 1,000 collisions each year in the City in which people are injured, and the Council must prioritise where it directs its limited resources. Priority is given to locations where there is a clearly indentified road safety problem.

    There have been no recorded collisions in St Leonards Road during the last three years and only one in Seaford Road, caused by somebody climbing onto a moving vehicle.  Given the good safety record of this area, introducing speed bumps is not something we could consider.

    However, I’m pleased to inform you that the Council is working to develop a programme to incrementally implement wider use of 20mph speed restrictions, particularly in residential areas.

    St Leonards Road is likely to be included in the proposed wider use of 20mph speed limits and a report will be coming to a CMM in the coming months outlining proposed timescales for implementation’.

     

     

    65iv.3   RESOLVED- That the petition be noted.

     

     

    65(v)     Safer streets- Tivoli/Matlock/Maldon- Marayam Teschke-Panah

     

    65v.1    Ms Teschke-Panah presented a petition signed by 152 people calling for a reduction of the speed limit to 20mph in the Tivoli, Matlock and Maldon area.

     

    65v.2    Councillor Davey provided the following response:

     

    Thank you for your petition, which I formally note.

    The Council is currently implementing two pilot 20mph speed limit schemes in the Portslade and Prestonville areas of the City and is hoping, subject to available funding, to roll-out further 20mph limits across the City, particularly within residential areas.

    An incremental approach has to be taken to achieve this, but scoping work on how it can be done most effectively and quickly is underway.

    During the last three years there has been one recorded injury collision within the area which was not speed related.

    We are unable to justify the immediate implementation of a 20mph speed limit.  However I am pleased to inform you that the area is likely to be included in the proposed wider use of 20mph speed limits and a report will be coming to a Cabinet Member Meeting in the coming months outlining proposed timescales for implementation. I will also ask officers to examine why signage was removed in the area’.

     

    65v.3    RESOLVED- That the petition be noted.

     

    65(vi)    Say no to pay and display in Preston Park- Ms Leia Monsoon

     

    65vi.1   The petitioner did not attend the meeting therefore a response was provided in writing and is set out below.

     

    65vi.2   Councillor West provided the following response:

     

    Thank you for your petition which I formally note.

    You may be aware that in 2010 the council was presented with a petition with 2201 signatures urging the council to address the problem of commuters and residents using Preston Park as a free car park. 

    Through this and the results of the consultation we know many people feel the current situation is unacceptable.

    The only way we can address the problem in the park is to put controls in place.  In order to fund these controls without reducing the park maintenance budget we have to put charges in place.

    The proposed charges are a lot lower than on street parking, for example staying up to an hour would cost £0.50 in the park compared to £1.00 on the nearby street.  Blue Badge holders will be able to park free of charge.

    The scheme is anticipated to generate an additional £10k which will be ring fenced to improvements for the park.

     

    65vi.3   RESOLVED- That the petition be noted.

66.

Public Questions pdf icon PDF 573 KB

    (The closing date for receipt of public questions is 12 noon on 17 January 2012)

     

    No public questions received by date of publication.

    Minutes:

    66.1               The Cabinet Member reported that one public question had been received.

     

    66.2               Mr Nicholas White asked the following question:

     

    ‘Traffic Signs exist across the City prohibiting motor vehicles etc on mown verges. Such signs appear to be in compliance with relevant legislation.

    In many areas vehicles are damaging verges by parking in contravention of the regulatory signs. These public amenity spaces contribute to the character of the City and therefore deserve protection from vehicular encroachment.

    Please explain why the Council’s Civil Enforcement Officers do not routinely issue Fixed Penalty Notices for the offence “Failure to comply with traffic signs” (s36 Road Traffic Act 1988) which does not require road markings or extra signage’.

     

    66.3               Councillor Davey provided the following response:

     

    ‘Thank you for your question.

    I have taken legal advice on this matter and the position is that the signs you refer to cannot be enforced by a Civil Enforcement Officer (CEO).

    Section 36 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 only relates to the signs set out in regulation 10(1)(b) and 29(1) of the Traffic Signs Regulations and General directions 2002 that are civilly enforceable under the Traffic Management Act 2004 .

    The signs you refer to come under separate legislation and are enforceable only by the police or PCSO.

    This is why it would be necessary to have waiting restrictions, (which extends across the whole width of the highway) in order for a CEO to issue a penalty charge notice.  Proposed waiting restrictions would have to be advertised as part of a Traffic Regulation Order.

    Officers are considering the issue of verge and pavement parking across the whole city as part of the strategic parking review.  They are visiting community groups such as Local Action Teams which are attended by the Neighbourhood policing team in order to get local views on the problem and what action to take.

    Officers have written to the LAT which covers this area with the suggestion that they attend a meeting to talk about local issues.

    How the council addresses the verge parking will depend on the result of consultation with communities and ward members but will be constrained by the limited resources available for traffic orders and signs. Currently funding is only available to advertise proposed changes to traffic orders within existing resident parking schemes.

    Officers would also have to consider the potential for displacement that may be caused by such restrictions’.

     

67.

Deputations

    (The closing date for receipt of deputations is 12 noon on 17 January 2012)

     

    No deputations received by date of publication.

    Minutes:

    67.1               There were none.

     

68.

Letters from Councillors pdf icon PDF 54 KB

    No letters have been received.

    Minutes:

    68.1               A letter had been received from Councillors Bennett and Brown requesting single yellow line parking in Hove Park Way to prevent inconsiderate parking.

     

    68.2               Councillor Davey provided the following response:

     

     ‘I understand that residents are concerned about inconsiderate parking, commuter parking and displacement of vehicles from neighbouring streets with existing restrictions

    To resolve the problem residents have requested single yellow lines with a time restriction or if this is not possible double yellow lines

    Single yellow lines on both sides of the road with a time restriction would need to be considered as part of the City Wide Parking Review consultation.

    This is because they would constitute a form of residents parking control that would have wider implications on the local area and would require wider consultation as part of that Strategic Review.  I will ensure that officers consider your request as part of that review which will report back with recommendations later this year

    In regard to Double yellow lines in order for any changes to be made, the proposals need to be put to the public, in the form of a draft Traffic Order, followed by the correct signing and lining on site (or removal of them) if the proposals are approved. This requires substantial time and cost; also we receive many such requests from over the city. 

    However, you may be aware that there are national and local budget savings required given the current economic situation. As part of the budget implications, it may not be possible in the future to carry out any more changes to parking restrictions outside of resident parking schemes, with the exception of disabled bay requests.

    I will know more about citywide financial constraints from April 2012 and if residents do request double yellow lines then officers will be back in touch with further information then’.

     

    68.3      RESOLVED – That the letter be noted.

69.

Written Questions from Councillors

    No written questions have been received.

    Minutes:

    69.1               There were none.

     

     

     

70.

Notices of Motions

    No Notices of Motion have been received by the date of publication.

    Minutes:

    70.1               There were none.

71.

Fees and Charges 2012/13 pdf icon PDF 71 KB

    Report of the Strategic Director, Place (copy attached).

    Additional documents:

    Decision:

    That the Cabinet Member agrees the proposed fees and charges for 2012/13 as set out in the report.

    Minutes:

    71.1                  The Cabinet Members considered a report of the Strategic Director, Place that set out the proposed fees and charges for 2012/13.

     

    71.2                  Councillor West explained that the Budget Process Report 2010/11 agreed at Cabinet in July 2009 specified that Fees and Charges are assumed to increase by a standard inflation rate each year, which is 2% for 2012/13. It was not always possible when amending a fee to increase it by exactly 2% each year, therefore there may be some rounding to the nearest whole figure.The implications of any additional revenue had been included in the budget setting process for 2012-13. Councillor West went on to highlight the unprecedented financial pressure placed upon the authority by central government austerity measures and the effect this had placed upon the budget setting process.

     

    71.3                  The Head of City Infrastructure further explained that detailed comparative work with similar sized authorities had been undertaken which had shown a number of areas in which the local authority charges less than others. A proportion of the rises in fees and charges could also be attributed to an increase in covering the cost of administration.

     

    71.4                  Councillor Mitchell commented that she had several concerns regarding the proposed fees. She believed a 67% rise in allotment rents was not warranted when the maintenance service provided by the council was not of a satisfactory standard, highlighted her unease with significantly increased fees for donated trees, plaques benches and blue badges and with the cumulative impact of fee rises in general. In particular, Councillor Mitchell felt that an increase in skip hire which would come into effect at the same time as the proposed increase in parking permits, would have a significantly detrimental effect upon tradespersons in the city and feared that these costs would be passed on to consumers at a time economic downturn.

     

    71.5                  Councillor West responded that the council had been disproportionately hit by the central government austerity measures and had to find savings where they could to preserve jobs. Councillor West believed the administration had justified savings and the rises in fees where applicable and relayed his interest in hearing proposals from the opposition groups. He agreed with Councillor Mitchell that an improvement in allotment maintenance was necessary and he would be examining options for doing so.

     

    71.6                  The Head of City Infrastructure agreed that allotment maintenance needed to be improved and she had met with the Allotments Federation to discuss this and the rise in fees. She clarified that large skips (usually roll on roll offs) often caused damage to the road network and it was necessary to increase costs to account for repairs. In addition, the rise in blue badge fees was due to the fact that the service was now administered by central government who had decided to implement an increased charge.

     

    71.7                  Councillor Theobald noted his disagreement that the authority had been disproportionately hit by the central government austerity measures. He believed the administration were implementing savings in the wrong areas in particular toward the business sector. He suggested the subsidy provided to allotment holders was a historic one to assist people in improving their health and it should be maintained.

     

    71.8                  RESOLVED- That the Cabinet Member agrees the proposed fees and charges for 2012/13 as set out in the report.

72.

Traveller Waste Contract Procurement pdf icon PDF 80 KB

    Report of the Strategic Director, Place (copy attached).

    Decision:

    That the Environment Cabinet Member approves the tender of a Traveller Waste Contract and give delegated authority to the Strategic Director Place in consultation with the Director of Finance to award the contract.

     

    Minutes:

    72.1               Councillor West considered a report of the Strategic Director, Place that sought approval for the procurement of a new Traveller Waste contract.

     

    72.2               Councillor West explained that the report proposed the procurement of a new contract to manage waste and recycling for Traveller sites in the city.

    The contract would cover waste removal and disposal from official and unauthorised Travellers sites on council land in Brighton & Hove, and some associated services.  The scope of the proposed contract also includes some services for the Horsdean Transit Site.

    Councillor West stated the he had asked a team of officers to look at how the council could ensure it gets value for money out of the new contract and they had looked at what elements of the service could be better provided in-house.

    The officers had identified potential savings in the region of £24K per annum if the in-house CityClean team took over weekly collections from the Horsdean Transit site and he was therefore proposing that this element is brought in-house.

    Councillor West stated that he was pleased that this saving was identified and would also ensure that travellers visiting Horsdean get the same level of service as other residents in the city

    Councillor West explained that officers would also look to utilise the council’s Housing Repairs & Improvement partner Mears Limited for some of the repairs to the Horsdean site

    Councillor West noted that the contract would aim to increase levels of recycling and reduce waste, litter and fly-tipping associated with unauthorised encampments at the Horsdean transit site.  The Council would also work to increase awareness amongst Travellers and take enforcement action where necessary in order to achieve this

    Councillor West stated that the procurement would include stipulations to ensure the successful bidder had high sustainability standards including minimising carbon emissions from their operations, reducing waste sent to land-fill and maximising recycling

    The procurement would follow European Union OJEU regulations and the new contract should be awarded towards the end of August 2012.

     

    72.3               Councillor Theobald suggested that this policy could lead to more unauthorised encampments. He also believed the costs of the service provision to official sites should be paid for by the Travellers based there. Councillor Theobald also commented that the financial implications of the report were of a poor standard and out-dated.

     

    72.4               Councillor West replied that the report recommended savings to a contract agreed by Councillor Theobald when he was Cabinet Member for Environment. Councillor West stated that it was essential to normalise conditions at unauthorised sites to reflect those across the city.

     

    72.5               Councillor Mitchell provided her support for the new contract if it was to deliver £24,000 in savings on the current contract. She enquired as to the cost of the current contract and the tendered contract. Councillor Mitchell expressed her disappointment that this information had not been included in the report.

     

    72.6               The Head of Housing & Social Inclusion replied that the specification of the new contract task-based with contractors bidding against this specification. He assured Councillor Mitchell that he would provide details of the cost of the current contract to her after the meeting.

     

    72.7               RESOLVED- That the Environment Cabinet Member approves the tender of a Traveller Waste Contract and give delegated authority to the Strategic Director Place in consultation with the Director of Finance to award the contract.

     

73.

Preston Park Parking Proposals pdf icon PDF 96 KB

    Report of the Strategic Director, Place (copy attached).

    Additional documents:

    Decision:

    1)     That the Cabinet Member notes the outcome of the consultation.

     

    2)     That the Cabinet Member approves the proposals to control parking in Preston Park set out in this report, subject to the statutory consultation process for Traffic Regulation Orders.

     

    3)     That the Cabinet Member instructs Officers to advertise the associated Traffic Regulation Orders.

     

    Minutes:

    73.1               Councillor West considered a report of the Strategic Director, Place that recommended new measures for parking regulation at Preston Park.

     

    73.2               Councillor West stated he was pleased to present the report which set out proposals to address the issue of long stay parking in Preston Park.

    Parking in Preston Park was currently uncontrolled and as a result it was becoming a free car park for commuters, residents and visitors to the city.  Park users had asked the administration to do something about this problem which was having a detrimental effect on their park.

    In 2011 a cross party group of councillors had met to discuss the issues and set out key points that should be addressed

    Proposals had now been drawn up and consulted on to control parking.

    The consultation showed that the majority of people feel parking is a problem and there was particular support from local residents and casual park users for the plans.

    To enforce the parking restrictions it had been necessary to introduce charges, but these had been kept lower than on street parking.  The main deterrent to long stay parking by non park users would be through limiting the maximum length of stay.

    Any income over and above the cost of enforcement, which was anticipated to be around £10,000 per year will be ring fenced to improvements to the park and park users would be informed as to how the money had been spent.

    The proposals are still subject to the statutory consultation process for Traffic Regulation Orders.

     

    73.3               The Head of Projects and Strategy clarified that there was a mistake in one of the maps provided and corrected that the disabled parking bays would remain near the chalet.

     

    73.4               Councillor Mitchell acknowledged that it was very difficult to regulate parking in the area and whilst it was regrettable that charges had to be introduced she was pleased that any profit made would be ring-fenced for improvements to the Park. She suggested the policy be strongly monitored to make sure it attained the desired effect.

     

    73.5               Councillor West thanked Councillor Mitchell for her agreement that the proposals were the right way to address the issue. He agreed it absolutely right to monitor the issue and he would be doing so.

     

    73.6               Councillor Mitchell suggested that the meeting receive a bi-annual progress update.

     

    73.7               Councillor West agreed that this would be a good idea to monitor developments.

     

    73.8               Councillor Theobald thanked officers for the report and welcomed the extension of the maximum length of stay on Preston Avenue. However, Councillor Theobald noted his disappointment that the first hour of stay was not free of charge.

     

    73.9               Councillor West replied that it was deemed necessary to charge for the first hour of parking as this would adequately cover the cost of enforcement with any surplus re-invested back into the Park.

     

    73.10          Councillor Theobald replied that he disagreed with a surplus in principle and that any deficit arising from the cost of providing the first hour of parking free of charge should be met by the central parks budget.

     

    73.11          The Head of City Infrastructure clarified that there was no guarantee that the new measures would generate a surplus and the system proposed assured that the measures could be enforced without significant cost.

     

    73.12          RESOVLED-  That the Cabinet Member-

     

    1)           Notes the outcome of the consultation.

     

    2)           Approves the proposals to control parking in Preston Park set out in this report, subject to the statutory consultation process for Traffic Regulation Orders.

     

    3)           Instructs Officers to advertise the associated Traffic Regulation Orders.

     

     

74.

Communal Recycling Trial pdf icon PDF 85 KB

    Report of the Strategic Director, Place (copy attached).

    Additional documents:

    Decision:

    1.      That the Cabinet Member notes the outcome of the consultation.

     

    2.      That the Cabinet Member approves the proposals for the trial which will commence by April 2012 and run for a period of 12 months.  The trial will be funded through the PFI reserve.

     

    3.      That the Cabinet Member approves the submission of a bid for Interreg funding towards the costs of the trial. Any funding received from Interreg will reduce the financial burden to the council.

     

    Minutes:

    74.1               Councillor West considered a report of the Strategic Director, Place that summarised the response to the consultation proposing a trial of communal recycling in Brunswick and Adelaide ward and permission to begin that trial.

     

    74.2               Councillor West explained that the existing black box recycling service performed less well in the city centre than elsewhere for reasons which included that people have less room to store their recycling, there is a higher turnover of population and many people do not know how to access the service. Plans for a communal recycling trial were set out in the waste strategy and support from Brunswick and Adelaide Wards came through the Community Waste Forum. Cityclean consulted with over 3,000 residents in the area asking them if they want to try communal recycling. 17% of people responded and of those 87% supported the trial.

     

    74.3               Councillor Mitchell communicated her support for the trial. She asked if problems were anticipated for the mixing of recycled and ordinary waste.

     

    74.4               The Head of Projects and Strategy replied the mixing of waste was unlikely as this was not the case at the 100 bring sites in the city but did occasionally happen. He stated Cityclean would monitor this issue as part of assessing whether the trial works or not.

     

    74.5               Councillor Theobald enquired as to the likelihood of Palmeira Square and Brunswick Square participating in the measures in the future.

     

    74.6               The Head of Projects and Strategy replied that he was unsure at this stage as they had not been consulted however, depending on the success of the trial proposed; Palmeira Square and Brunswick Square may decide to join the scheme in the future.

     

    74.7               RESOLVED- That the Cabinet Member-

     

    1)     Notes the outcome of the consultation.

     

    2)     Approves the proposals for the trial which will commence by April 2012 and run for a period of 12 months.  The trial will be funded through the PFI reserve.

     

    3)     approves the submission of a bid for Interreg funding towards the costs of the trial. Any funding received from Interreg will reduce the financial burden to the council.

     

75.

Pedestrian Crossing Assessment pdf icon PDF 76 KB

    Report of the Strategic Director, Place (copy attached).

    Additional documents:

    Decision:

    1)     That the Cabinet Member for Transport & Public Realm supports the priority crossing list and grants permission for officers to begin implementing the prioritised pedestrian crossing locations where funding has been identified. Where crossing points require higher funding levels these should be acknowledged and identified as part of future work plans.

     

    2)     That the Cabinet Member for Transport & Public Realm authorises officersto construct the prioritised pedestrian crossings for which funding has been identified within the financial year 2011/12, subject to Traffic Regulation Orders (TROs) being advertised prior to implementation of crossing points.

     

    Minutes:

    75.1               Councillor Davey considered a report of the Strategic Director, Place that outlined the results of the 2011/12 pedestrian crossing assessment using the new priority methodology which was developed in conjunction with the Environment & Community Safety Overview and Scrutiny Committee (ECSOSC) last year.

     

    75.2               Councillor Davey explained that In total, 60 potential crossing locations were requested up to 30 June 2011 and these had all been assessed using the new methodology.   The full list of crossings in priority order was included as appendix 2 to the report and those finishing in the top 10 were discussed in more detail within the main report itself.  This list will be published on the Council’s website to ensure full transparency. Councillor Davey added that the intention was to deliver as many crossings from the top 10 as possible over the next 6 - 12 months using a variety of funding sources, including Local Transport Plan funding, S.106 developer contributions and the Local Sustainable Transport Fund.Those crossings not identified as a priority this year would remain on the priority list and any further new requests would be added to the list for assessment.  The next assessment would be undertaken in Summer 2012 and a new priority list created.  The process would continue on a rolling annual basis, subject to funding. 

     

    75.3               RESOLVED- That the Cabinet Member for Transport & Public Realm-

     

    1)     Supports the priority crossing list and grants permission for officers to begin implementing the prioritised pedestrian crossing locations where funding has been identified. Where crossing points require higher funding levels these should be acknowledged and identified as part of future work plans.

     

    2)     authorises officers to construct the prioritised pedestrian crossings for which funding has been identified within the financial year 2011/12, subject to Traffic Regulation Orders (TROs) being advertised prior to implementation of crossing points.

     

76.

Speed limit review pdf icon PDF 70 KB

    Report of the Strategic Director, Place (copy attached).

     

    Additional documents:

    Decision:

    That the Cabinet Member notes the objections but, owing to the rationale for the changes and the support for them outweighing the objections (see Appendix 2), gives approval to the TROs as advertised.

     

    Minutes:

    76.1               Councillor Davey considered a report of the Strategic Director, Place requesting consideration of objections to advertised Traffic Regulation Orders (TRO’s) for various speed limit reductions on roads throughout Portslade.

     

    76.2               Councillor Davey explained that the report presented enabled the Council to introduce a small number of speed limit reductions from 30mph to 20mph in Portslade and to reduce the speed limit from 60mph to 50mph on the southern section of the A293 Hangleton link road. These amendments were advertised in a Traffic Regulation Order in October, along with other speed limit reductions, but two objections were received which needed to be considered fully before he could accept the recommendation to proceed with the Traffic Regulation Order as advertised.  One of the objections received was on the grounds of cost to the ‘rate payer’ and the other on the grounds that the objector had not seen any evidence of ‘crashes’. These amendments are recommendations arising from the Speed Limit Reviews carried out using a robust methodology; there is well documented evidence that reduced speeds clearly correlate with a reduction in the severity of collisions and there is adequate funding secured to implement these changes.

     

    76.3               RESOLVED- That the Cabinet Member notes the objections but, owing to the rationale for the changes and the support for them outweighing the objections; gives approval to the TRO’s as advertised.

     

77.

Brighton Station Gateway Progress Update pdf icon PDF 91 KB

    Report of the Strategic Director, Place (copy attached).

    Additional documents:

    Decision:

    1)                 That the Cabinet Member for Transport & Public Realm formally notes the outcome of the recent public consultation.

     

    2)                 That the Cabinet Member for Transport & the Public Realm agrees the process set out in this Report that will see a preferred design for the Station Gateway environment developed over the next 6 months. 

     

    Minutes:

    77.1               Councillor Davey considered a report of the Strategic Director, Place that provided an update on the options for improvements to Brighton Station Gateway.

     

    77.2               Councillor Davey stated that he and many other people shared a desire to see the environment around Brighton Rail Station improved for all our residents and visitors. Given the importance and complexity of the Station Gateway enhancement project, it was vital that work was undertaken closely with stakeholders and the local community to identify a design solution that works for everyone. The visual report summarised the recent local consultation that would inform production of a design for public realm around the station, and the process that would be followed over the coming months to identify a preferred design.

     

    77.3               RESOLVED- That the Cabinet Member for Transport & Public Realm-

     

    1)     Formally notes the outcome of the recent public consultation.

     

    2)     Agrees the process set out in this Report that will see a preferred design for the Station Gateway environment developed over the next 6 months. 

     

 


Brighton & Hove City Council | Hove Town Hall | Hove | BN3 3BQ | Tel: (01273) 290000 | Mail: info@brighton-hove.gov.uk | how to find us | comments & complaints