Hounslow Council


Agenda, decisions and minutes

Venue: Committee Rooms 1 & 2, Civic Centre, Lampton Road, Hounslow

Contact: Irene Bowles, email  irene.bowles@hounslow.gov.uk, telephone 020 8583 2075 

Items
No. Item

98.

Apologies for Absence, Declarations of Interest or any other Communications from Members

Decision:

Apologies had been received from Councillors Lily Bath, Raj Bath, Kamiljit Kaur, Amrit Mann and Sohan Sangha.

 

Councillor Rajawat declared an interest in the item on proposed zebra crossings on Cranford Lane, as he had been involved in the earlier stages of this.

 

Items not on the Agenda

Councillor Virdi advised Members that he had requested two items be included on the Agenda for this meeting, which had not been.  He asked for reasons for this.

a)     Licensing issue.  Although Councillor Virdi accepted that this matter should not be discussed as an individual case, he had wished to raise a general point in respect of crime and extended alcohol sale hours.  He confirmed that he would raise this under Any Other Urgent Business.

b)     Planning Application – 99 Green Lane.  The Clerk reminded Councillor Virdi that reasons for the non-inclusion had been communicated to him following his request.  She tried to recall the reason, and thought that it might have been a withdrawn application.  The Clerk agreed to check on this and contact Councillor Virdi to advise him.  Councillor Virdi asked that the details on the withdrawal be recorded in the minutes.

[Afterminute: The Clerk had confused this planning application with another request; 99 Green Lane had not been withdrawn, but the proper channel for this to be raised was through Planning, not the Area Forum.  Councillor Virdi has been notified accordingly, and Planning Officers would liaise with him on the current situation.]

Minutes:

Apologies had been received from Councillors Lily Bath, Raj Bath, Manjit Buttar, Kamiljit Kaur, Amrit Mann and Sohan Sangha.

 

Councillor Rajawat declared an interest in the item on proposed zebra crossings on Cranford Lane, as he had been involved in the earlier stages of this.

 

Items not on the Agenda

Councillor Virdi advised Members that he had requested two items be included on the Agenda for this meeting, which had not been.  He asked for reasons for this.

a)    Licensing issue.  Although Councillor Virdi accepted that this matter should not be discussed as an individual case, he had wished to raise a general point in respect of crime and extended alcohol sale hours.  He confirmed that he would raise this under Any Other Urgent Business.

b)   Planning Application – 99 Green Lane.  The Clerk reminded Councillor Virdi that reasons for the non-inclusion had been communicated to him following his request.  She tried to recall the reason, and thought that it might have been a withdrawn application.  The Clerk agreed to check on this and contact Councillor Virdi to advise him.  Councillor Virdi asked that the details on the withdrawal be recorded in the minutes.

[Afterminute: The Clerk had confused this planning application with another request; 99 Green Lane had not been withdrawn, but the proper channel for this to be raised was through Planning, not the Area Forum.  Councillor Virdi has been notified accordingly, and Planning Officers would liaise with him on the current situation.]

99.

Police Update (Sgt Limebear) pdf icon PDF 45 KB

Decision:

Members found the report from Sgt Limebear very useful.  They noted that, although the crime figures for the Borough were coming down, there were issues with Heston and Cranford: burglaries were up by 13.46%; robberies by 26.19%; theft from motor vehicles 27%.  Members asked Sgt Limebear to convey to his senior officers that more police resources were needed in Heston and Cranford.  Sgt Limebear agreed to do this.

Minutes:

Inspector Dee O’Brien had been unable to attend the meeting, so Sgt Limebear led Members through the Police report.  MOPAC7 targets had been set at 20% reduction in those 7 crimes; this had been met in all 7 crimes across Hounslow overall, although not in Heston and Cranford.  Councillor Lal found the report from Sgt Limebear very useful.  He noted that, although the crime figures for the Borough were coming down, there were issues with Heston and Cranford: burglaries were up by 13.46%; robberies by 26.19%; theft from motor vehicles 27%.  Members asked Sgt Limebear to convey to his senior officers that more police resources were needed in Heston and Cranford.  Sgt Limebear agreed to do this.

 

Councillor Saeed noted that the number of burglaries had increased and asked whether these had taken place during the day when properties were empty or at night.  Sgt Limebear advised Members that most burglaries took place during the daytime, or between 4pm and 6pm, when occupants had not returned home from work and no lights were on in properties.  He confirmed that burglaries during the night were rare.

 

Councillor Virdi stated that residents of Heston and Cranford were justified in their fear that crime was rising in their locality and felt that they should receive an apology that this was the case when crime figures showed reductions in other parts of the Borough.  Councillor Virdi was also disappointed that no publicity had been given to a police officer who had been arrested.  Sgt Limebear informed Members that he had no knowledge of the arrest, so was unable to comment.

 

Mr Blackett asked for information on police officers equipped with body cameras.  Sgt Limebear explained that, in Hounslow, body cameras were issued to response officers on emergency calls; they were not in use by neighbourhood officers.

 

The Chair thanked Sgt Limebear for his report.

 

 

100.

Civic Centre/redevelopment of Lampton Road site - Presentation

Decision:

This item was taken after item 2 on the Agenda.

Minutes:

Hendrik Heyns and two colleagues gave a short presentation on the proposed plans for the existing Civic Centre site, and the new Civic Centre.  Members were reminded that these two planning applications would go before the Planning Committee on 7 December 2015.  Extensive opportunities for Members and residents to view the models and displays had been given. Members noted that there would be approximately 920 homes on the existing Civic Centre site: 40% of these would be affordable homes (12% shared ownership, 28% affordable rent).  There would be 441 parking spaces on the site.

 

The new Civic Centre would be compact, with a ramp to the basement leading to 48 parking spaces.  There had been a focus on making the public experience of the building a positive one, with the building being open and inviting.

 

Mr Blackett asked what materials would be used for the outside of the building, and was advised that it was an anodised aluminium, silver and bronze in colour.  This would reflect the light, accentuating the folds in the building.

 

Councillor Rajawat (who declared that he was a member of the Planning Committee) noted that parking spaces on the existing Civic Centre site would be a reduction against the current facilities, and there were over 900 proposed homes.  Mr Heyns advised that they were working with the LGA to reduce parking in London.  The brief had been for a parking ratio of approximately 0.5 per housing unit.  It was hoped that a Car Club would be introduced, and that residents would use the tube.  The issue was still under discussion with the GLA and TfL.

 

The Chair thanked Mr Heyns and his colleagues for their informative presentation.

 

101.

Minutes of the meeting held on 24 September 2015 pdf icon PDF 132 KB

Matters Arising:

 

a)   Item 89(a) 331 Great West Road, Advertising Site

See attachment for response

Additional documents:

Decision:

The minutes of the meeting held on 24 September 2015 were agreed as a true and accurate record with the following amendment, and were signed by the Chair:

 

a) Item 85 Police Update – before para 5, insert:

Councillor Virdi reminded Members that knife crime in London had risen by 18%.

 

Matters Arising:

i)                    Item 88 s106 Update

Councillor Dennison had agreed to re-circulate the lists of current proposed projects for s106 funding to Ward Councillors, as well as the “wish-list” documents.  These had not yet been received by Councillors, who asked that Councillor Dennison be reminded of this action.

[Afterminute: Councillor Dennison advised that the lists were being updated, and would be circulated shortly]

 

ii)                  Actions Update

Councillor Rajawat requested an update on actions agreed at the previous meeting.  The Clerk agreed to annotate the Decision Sheet from the September 2015 meeting with updates and circulate it to Members.

 

iii)                Item 89(a) 331 Great West Road Advertising site

Members had seen the response from Planning Enforcement, included at Item 3 of the Agenda pack.  Desmond Adumekwe, Planning Enforcement Team Leader, advised members that the Council could not impose a Management Plan on the site operators, as this was not a condition of the consent.  He confirmed that the site operators had been contacted, and warned that a breach of condition notice could be issued if the visual amenity of the site warranted it.  The lines of communication remained open.

 

Minutes:

The minutes of the meeting held on 24 September 2015 were agreed as a true and accurate record with the following amendment, and were signed by the Chair:

 

a) Item 85 Police Update – before para 5, insert:

Councillor Virdi reminded Members that knife crime in London had risen by 18%.

 

Matters Arising:

i)                    Item 88 s106 Update

Councillor Dennison had agreed to re-circulate the lists of current proposed projects for s106 funding to Ward Councillors, as well as the “wish-list” documents.  These had not yet been received by Councillors, who asked that Councillor Dennison be reminded of this action.

[Afterminute: Councillor Dennison advised that the lists were being updated, and would be circulated shortly]

 

ii)                  Actions Update

Councillor Rajawat requested an update on actions agreed at the previous meeting.  The Clerk agreed to annotate the Decision Sheet from the September 2015 meeting with updates and circulate it to Members.

 

iii)                Item 89(a) 331 Great West Road Advertising site

Members had seen the response from Planning Enforcement, included at Item 3 of the Agenda pack.  Desmond Adumekwe, Planning Enforcement Team Leader, advised members that the Council could not impose a Management Plan on the site operators, as this was not a condition of the consent.  He confirmed that the site operators had been contacted, and warned that a breach of condition notice could be issued if the visual amenity of the site warranted it.  The lines of communication remained open.

 

102.

Petitions pdf icon PDF 85 KB

a)                 To note the receipt of a petition (September 2015) to improve the facilities at Avenue Park

 

Note from minutes of meeting held on 24 September:

 

“Members noted the receipt of the petition, and heard a statement read on behalf of the lead petitioner, but raised concerns that the petitioners did not appear to be local residents.  Ward Councillors and residents therefore objected to the petition on these grounds.  The Chair asked that this be investigated.

[Afterminute: Advice had been sought from the Deputy Monitoring Officer, who had confirmed that it was not necessary for any petitioner, or signatory to a petition, to live in the locality – or even the Borough.  This petition will therefore be brought back to the next Area Forum meeting.]”

 

 

Decision:

a)                 Note the receipt of a petition (September 2015) to improve the facilities at Avenue Park

Members had considered this petition at the previous meeting, but had asked for some clarification on eligibility of petition signatories.  This had been received, and the petition was returned to the Area Forum for re-consideration.

Mr Sultan, the Lead Petitioner, expanded on the request in his petition, which Members noted.  Sarah Ruane, Head of Preventative Health & Leisure advised Members that investment had been made in Avenue Park, but unfortunately the Park was not on the priority list to have changing facilities upgraded.

 

Resolved:

That the petition be rejected.  Members voted unanimously not to progress the petition further.

Minutes:

a)            Note the receipt of a petition (September 2015) to improve the facilities at Avenue Park

Members had considered this petition at the previous meeting, but had asked for some clarification on eligibility of petition signatories.  This had been received, and the petition was returned to the Area Forum for re-consideration.

 

Mr Sultan, the Lead Petitioner, expanded on the request in his petition, including the potential use by local football and cricket clubs.  Mr Sultan reminded Members that park facilities were available to all users, not just those who lived very close to them. Members noted Mr Sultan’s comments.

 

Sarah Ruane, Head of Preventative Health & Leisure advised Members that her Department fully supported proposals to improve health, and wanted to make parks and open spaces more attractive.  She reminded Members that investment had been made in Avenue Park – including the provision of a parcour area, but unfortunately the Park was not on the priority list to have changing facilities upgraded, which would require a significant investment which was not available. Sarah Ruane informed Members that it would be a struggle to source external funding for this; the Football Association would not be willing to assist. 

 

Councillor Saeed asked how much it would cost to upgrade the changing rooms. Sarah Ruane advised that no condition survey had been undertaken, but that typical costs would be between £500K and £1 million.  To make this a sustainable project, a business model to incorporate a café or similar revenue generating idea, which was not feasible in this location.

 

Resolved:

That the petition be rejected.  Members voted unanimously not to progress the petition further.

103.

Verbal Update on potential Bus stop on Great West Road near Lampton School (Gareth James)

Decision:

Gareth James advised Members that TfL would provide an update in January 2016, during the detail design stage, to advise on the likely date for installation of the bus stop.

Minutes:

Gareth James advised Members that TfL would provide an update in January 2016, during the detail design stage, to advise on the likely date for installation of the bus stop.

104.

Open Forum for questions from the public (maximum of 30 minutes)

1.         Brian Smith, Borough Co-ordinator, Hounslow Cycling Campaign:  Cycling infrastructure in Heston and Cranford

Decision:

6.1.           Cycling Infrastructure in Hounslow.  Mr Brian Smith, Borough Co-ordinator, Hounslow Cycling Campaign, reminded Members of the commitment to which most of them signed up at the last Council election. These were:

Cranford

Greenway along River Crane passing through Cranford Park and connecting Hatton Cross and Twickenham

Heston Central

A 20mph limit on roads around schools

Heston East

A traffic-free greenway path from Lamton Park to Tentelow Lane, connecting with Heston School

Heston West

Safe routes to Cranford Community College and Berkeley Primary School

 

Mr Smith asked if an update on progress could be given at the next Area Forum meeting, to which the Chair agreed.

 

6.2.           Problems with access to Prospect Close, Hounslow, caused by vehicles parked on double yellow lines.  Mr Bawa had experienced difficulties in August 2015 in contacting agencies to take responsibility for removing vehicles from double yellow lines, at 6pm.  The Police advised that it was the responsibility of the Council, but Council offices were closed.  There had been a suspected gas leak in Prospect Close, but Mr Bawa was concerned that essential vehicles would not have been able to negotiate the road in a real emergency.  The Chair agreed to ask traffic officers for advice.

 

6.3.           Stronger Neighbourhood strategies.  Mr Kevin Sarwar-Polley reminded Members that his organisation “Flourish” had a remit to ensure resident-led activities.  He asked if he could make a presentation at the January 2016 meeting to explain what Flourish had achieved and what the next steps would be.  The Chair agreed this.

 

6.4.           Western International Market Site – s106 payments.  Mr David Blackett reminded Members that, following concerns raised at the March 2015 Area Forum meeting by Ms Pam King in respect of the West London Waste Plan, he had requested an update – at the July 2015 meeting - on the s106 payment of £300K to be made by the developer of the Western International Market site.  At that meeting, the Chair was asked to obtain detailed information on this.  To date (12 November 2015) no response had been received, despite further requests to the Lead Member for Finance and Citizen Engagement, Councillor Theo Dennison.  Mr Blackett stated that it was unacceptable that no response had been made, or that it was not proving possible to track the progress made in collecting and spending this s106 money.  As Mr Blackett had made the request for information on 9 July 2015, he informed the Chair that he wished this matter to be treated as a request under the Freedom of Information Act.  The Clerk agreed to check on the procedure for making such requests, and to contact Mr Blackett on 13 November 2015.

 

6.5.           Alleyways.  Mr David Blackett reminded Members that Councillor Mann (not present at the meeting) had agreed to liaise with Aled Richard’s team in respect of alleyways across the Borough that appeared to have fallen out of the system when the contract had passed to Hounslow Highways.  Mr Blackett asked that Norman Crescent, in Heston  ...  view the full decision text for item 104.

Minutes:

6.1.        Cycling Infrastructure in Hounslow.  Mr Brian Smith, Borough Co-ordinator, Hounslow Cycling Campaign, reminded Members of the commitment to which most of them signed up at the last Council election. These were:

Cranford

Greenway along River Crane passing through Cranford Park and connecting Hatton Cross and Twickenham

Heston Central

A 20mph limit on roads around schools

Heston East

A traffic-free greenway path from Lampton Park to Tentelow Lane, connecting with Heston School

Heston West

Safe routes to Cranford Community College and Berkeley Primary School

 

Mr Smith asked if an update on progress could be given at the next Area Forum meeting, to which the Chair agreed.

 

6.2.        Problems with access to Prospect Close, Hounslow, caused by vehicles parked on double yellow lines.  Mr Bawa had experienced difficulties in August 2015 in contacting agencies to take responsibility for removing vehicles from double yellow lines, at 6pm.  The Police advised that it was the responsibility of the Council, but Council offices were closed.  There had been a suspected gas leak in Prospect Close, but Mr Bawa was concerned that essential vehicles would not have been able to negotiate the road in a real emergency.  The Chair agreed to ask traffic officers for advice.

 

[Afterminute:  The Interim Head of Parking has advised:

The removal truck is only available until 18:00, however, where an issue arises near to this time it will depend on both the location of the truck and the contravening vehicle as to whether they will be able to respond. There is no out of hours team to deal with these issues and the police will not remove vehicles.

 

I instructed the enforcement team to ensure that adequate visits are made to the area towards the end of their shifts. This may deter motorist from parking on the short stretches of double yellow line. Currently the enforcement team only work until 19:00. We are looking into later evening patrols but this will be limited in scope. I will ensure this area is included where appropriate. However, it will not include any removal facility.]

 

6.3.        Stronger Neighbourhood strategies.  Mr Kevin Sarwar-Polley reminded Members that his organisation “Flourish” had a remit to ensure resident-led activities.  He asked if he could make a presentation at the January 2016 meeting to explain what Flourish had achieved and what the next steps would be.  The Chair agreed to this.

 

6.4.        Western International Market Site – s106 payments.  Mr David Blackett reminded Members that, following concerns raised at the March 2015 Area Forum meeting by Ms Pam King in respect of the West London Waste Plan, he had requested an update – at the July 2015 meeting - on the s106 payment of £300K to be made by the developer of the Western International Market site.  At that meeting, the Chair was asked to obtain detailed information on this.  To date (12 November 2015) no response had been received, despite further requests to the Lead Member for Finance and Citizen Engagement, Councillor Theo  ...  view the full minutes text for item 104.

105.

Community Streets Verbal Update (Gareth James)

Minutes:

Gareth James, Area Participation Officer, led Members through a series of slides showing the development of a community streets project around Berkeley Avenue, and Cranford Primary School.  He acknowledged the contribution that Cultivate London had made in supplying plants for the raised planters in the area, and thanked all Ward Councillors for their support.  Feedback on the project had been very positive, and the results would make a huge difference.

 

Councillor Virdi thanked Gareth James and his team for their work on this project.

106.

Citizen Engagement (Geoffrey Hugall and Melek Ergan) pdf icon PDF 78 KB

Decision:

Geoffrey Hugall (Planning), Melek Ergan (Planning) and Desmond Adumekwe (Planning Enforcement) led Members through the Report on the Review of Citizen Participation.

 

Members noted:

8.1             The report on Review of Citizen Engagement approved by Borough Council on 15 September 2015;

8.2             The procedures for call-ins of minor applications from the Pending List;

8.3             The procedures for call-ins of proposed enforcement cases on the Pending List and procedures for authorising enforcement notices;

8.4             The recommendations for engagement in major planning applications.

Minutes:

Geoffrey Hugall (Planning), Melek Ergan (Planning) and Desmond Adumekwe (Planning Enforcement) led Members through the Report on the Review of Citizen Participation.

 

Geoffry Hugall reminded Members that a report had been presented and approved at Borough Council on 15 September 2015, that made changes to the planning enforcement process.  The four main changes were:

a)    Call ins on planning applications on the pending list could be instigated by recognised amenity societies, in addition to Ward Members of Area Chairs.

b)    Minor Applications could be designated to Ward Forums for consideration. Area Forum Chairs could set up the Ward Forums, who would determine how they made decisions and then publicise them.

c)    Desmond Adumekwe reminded Members that there would no longer be an Enforcement Sub-Committee; the authority to serve enforcement notices had been delegated to the Head of Development Management in conjunction with the Vice Chair of the Planning Committee.  If a Member or recognised amenity society wished to call in an enforcement case, a discussion would take place, in the first instance, with the relevant enforcement officers on the proposed enforcement action.  If no resolution is reached, an Enforcement Advisory Panel would be convened – this would consist of trained Members, invited by the Chair or Vice-Chair of Planning.  The Panel would decide on any enforcement action, and advise Enforcement Officers in writing; this would then be recorded on the Council website.

d)    Melek Ergan advised that developers of major applications would be encouraged to hold public meetings or attend Area Forums as part of their local consultation.

 

Q: Councillor Rajawat asked if there was a backlog of cases, and if so, under what process they would be considered.  Desmond Adumekwe confirmed that there was no backlog; there were some older cases where a management process was already in place.

 

Q:  Mr Marbrow was concerned that not enough information was published in the pending lists to enable an informed and effective judgement to be made by recognised amenity societies on the call in process.  He was assured by Officers that additional information to the pending list could be obtained from officers on request.  Mr Marbrow was also reminded that there was an appeal process that could be followed, with amendments made to any incorrect action.

 

Members noted:

8.1         The report on Review of Citizen Engagement approved by Borough Council on 15 September 2015;

8.2         The procedures for call-ins of minor applications from the Pending List;

8.3         The procedures for call-ins of proposed enforcement cases on the Pending List and procedures for authorising enforcement notices;

8.4         The recommendations for engagement in major planning applications.

107.

Draft Leisure & Culture Strategy 2015-2020 - Consultation (Fiona Hart) pdf icon PDF 198 KB

Decision:

Sarah Ruane led Members through her presentation, reminding them that the Consultation was currently live.  She advised Members that the Department wanted feedback – no decisions had yet been made, and innovative ideas were welcomed.  Once the consultation period is closed, a menu of options will be drawn up and another consultation process will take place early in 2016.

Minutes:

Sarah Ruane led Members through her presentation, reminding them that the Consultation was currently live.  She advised Members that the Department wanted feedback – no decisions had yet been made, and innovative ideas were welcomed. 

Councillor Virdi asked how many responses had been received (Members noted that the deadline was 16 November 2015); who looked at the data; and who would decide on the way forward?  Sarah Ruane explained that there were many ways for information to be submitted: paper surveys; online; in libraries and leisure centres; and focus groups in each Area Forum locality.  She was therefore unable to provide the number of responses to date.  She advised Members that an external company was collating and coding information, and they would then produce a summary report.  Although this incurred a cost, it was important that the consultation was conducted in a proper and comprehensive manner.

 

Councillor Virdi noted that some of the services included in the consultation were currently managed by Carillion, and asked if any libraries would close or if Library Managers would be lost in a restructure.  Sarah Ruane reiterated that no decisions had been made; once the consultation period had closed, a menu of options would be drawn up and another consultation process would take place early in 2016.  She was aware of Carillion’s restructure, and confirmed that they had provided evidence that there would be no reduction in service as a result.  In response to a question about blacklisting, Sarah Ruane advised Members that she would look into that, but was unable to comment at the meeting.

 

Councillor Virdi asked if Hounslow was subsidising other Boroughs serviced by Carillion, and was assured that this was not the case.

 

Mr Kevin Sarwar-Polley (Flourish) asked if the focus groups had been extended to individual resident and community groups, charities, etc – to bring the “People’s Voice” into the decision making process.  Sarah Ruane confirmed that a wide variety of groups and voluntary sector meetings had been attended.  She informed Members that the present consultation was aimed at a strategic high level, to establish principles; no decision-making had yet started,  A menu of options would be set up early in 2016, when there would be ample opportunity for residents to give feedback.  Mr Sarwar-Polley advised that Flourish had some very good community-based models for asset management that were cost-effective.

 

The Chair thanked Sarah Ruane for her presentation.

108.

Community Engagement Update (Councillor Daanish Saeed pdf icon PDF 72 KB

The Chair informed Members and residents that a webpage on the Council website had been created for the Area Forum.

(http://www.hounslow.gov.uk/index/council_and_democracy/areaforums/   heston_cranford_area_forum.htm)

A suggestion box, with an e-mail address to send items for consideration at future Area Forum meetings, or photos for the web page, can be found there.

 

See Attached screen shot of the webpage.

Decision:

Councillor Daanish Saeed asked Residents to share the Area Forum web page details with as many other residents as possible; Councillors wanted this to be an interactive page.

 

She also advised Members that an application would be made early in the New Year to secure funding to improve the Cranford Lock-up through the Traffic and Transport section’s “Street Improvement Fund”.

Minutes:

Councillor Daanish Saeed asked Residents to share the Area Forum web page details with as many other residents as possible; Councillors wanted this to be an interactive page.

 

She also advised Members that an application would be made early in the New Year to secure funding to improve the Cranford Lock-up through the Traffic and Transport section’s “Street Improvement Fund”.

109.

Crosslands Avenue, Heston - Petition for Parking Bays - Christopher Deakins pdf icon PDF 95 KB

Additional documents:

Decision:

Members had received this petition at the September 2015 meeting of the Area Forum, and had referred it to the Traffic and Transport Team for investigation.  A briefing note had been prepared by Amarpal Soor, which was presented to Members by Christopher Deakins.  Mr Tal, the Lead Petitioner, addressed Members, requesting that the end time be extended to 10pm, and not 5.30pm, as recommended by Officers.

 

Resolved that:

1.                  Members noted the receipt of the petition, and agreed that officers proceed to formal (statutory) consultation on the introduction of limited waiting parking bays.

2.                  Following the period of consultation, the matter will return to the Area Forum for decision.

Minutes:

Members had received this petition at the September 2015 meeting of the Area Forum, and had referred it to the Traffic and Transport Team for investigation.  A briefing note had been prepared by Amarpal Soor, which was presented to Members by Christopher Deakins.  Mr Tal, the Lead Petitioner, addressed Members, requesting that the end time be extended to 10pm, and not 5.30pm, as recommended by Officers.

 

Councillor Lal reported that he had discussed this petition with Councillor Mann (who was unable to be present at this meeting), and they were mindful of the impact of the proposed action, but felt that it should go to formal consultation before returning to the Area Forum.

 

Mr Blackett reported that local residents supported the petition, and reminded Members that there was a busy and well-supported Surgery at this junction which was open until after 7pm.

 

Resolved that:

1.            Members noted the receipt of the petition, and agreed that officers proceed to formal (statutory) consultation on the introduction of limited waiting parking bays.

2.            Following the period of consultation, the matter will return to the Area Forum for decision.

110.

Proposed Zebra Crossings on Cranford Lane (Christopher Deakins) pdf icon PDF 90 KB

Representatives objecting to the proposed zebra crossings have been advised that they will have a total of no more than 5 minutes to convey their concerns to Members.

Additional documents:

Decision:

Christopher Deakins led Members through his report, and asked them to note the recommendations.

Mr Khanna and Mr Sarin addressed Members, expressing their objections to the proposed Zebra crossing.  Mr Khanna and Mr Sarin were concerned that letters informing residents and businesses about the consultation had not been received in a timely manner.  They believed that a 24 hour parking restriction was unfair and would cause traffic problems.

 

Members acknowledged that there would be an impact on businesses, but also had to ensure the safety of children in proximity to the school.  Councillors understood that detailed designs would be shown to them prior to implementation.  Christopher Deakins advised Members that there had been some changes already to those on the original proposal.

 

Resolved that:

11.1         Members noted the results of the informal and statutory consultation held with local residents directly and indirectly affected by the proposed zebra crossing, undertaken between 25 September 2015 and 16 October 2015.

11.2         Members noted and considered the objections and comments received, including a 259 signature petition opposing the scheme, and officer’s response to the consultation in Appendix C (attached to item 11 in the Agenda pack).

11.3         Authority be delegated to the Executive Director for Regeneration, Economic Development & Environment (REDe) to undertake detailed design for the revised proposals as set out in the report and Appendix A (attached to item 11 in the Agenda pack) and carry out implementation.

Members voted unanimously to agree the proposals made.

Minutes:

Christopher Deakins led Members through his report, and asked them to note the recommendations.

Mr Khanna and Mr Sarin addressed Members, expressing their objections to the proposed Zebra crossing.  Mr Khanna and Mr Sarin were concerned that letters informing residents and businesses about the consultation had not been received in a timely manner.  They believed that a 24 hour parking restriction was unfair and would cause traffic problems.

 

Members acknowledged that there would be an impact on businesses, but also had to ensure the safety of children in proximity to the school.  They were mindful that the request for a zebra crossing at this location had been initiated a number of years ago, following a serious injury to a child.

 

Representatives from Berkeley Primary School and Children’s Centre spoke in support of the proposal.  Ms Janet Honey, a local resident was concerned that the chicane already present did not help to slow traffic, and felt that children would see the zebra crossing as a safe place to cross without considering traffic that might not stop.  Members noted that this area would also be included in the 20mph zones.

 

Councillor Lal reminded those objectors that every application was decided on its own merit; in this instance, although accident reports were not conclusive, Members believed that the Council needed to be proactive.  Consideration had been given to the objections raised, with the no parking markings being moved further away from the business.

 

Councillors understood that detailed designs would be shown to them prior to implementation.  Christopher Deakins advised Members that there had been some changes already to those on the original proposal.

 

Resolved that:

11.1      Members noted the results of the informal and statutory consultation held with local residents directly and indirectly affected by the proposed zebra crossing, undertaken between 25 September 2015 and 16 October 2015.

11.2      Members noted and considered the objections and comments received, including a 259 signature petition opposing the scheme, and officer’s response to the consultation in Appendix C (attached to item 11 in the Agenda pack).

11.3      Authority be delegated to the Executive Director for Regeneration, Economic Development & Environment (REDe) to undertake detailed design for the revised proposals as set out in the report and Appendix A (attached to item 11 in the Agenda pack) and carry out implementation.

Members voted unanimously to agree the proposals made.

111.

Staines Road Cycle Track (Christopher Deakins) pdf icon PDF 99 KB

Additional documents:

Decision:

Christopher Deakins led Members through his report.

 

Resolved that:

12.1         Authority be delegated to the Executive Director for Regeneration, Economic Development and Environment (REDe) to undertake detailed design for the proposals set out in Appendix A (attached to Agenda item 12 of the Agenda pack).

12.2         Authority be delegated to the Executive Director for REDe to carry out the required statutory consultation on the proposals.

12.3         Authority be delegated to the Executive Director for REDe to resolve where possible any objections received to the statutory consultation.

12.4         In the event that any objections received remain unresolved, the Chair of the Area Forum is delegated authority to determine the objections in consultation with Ward Councillors.

12.5         If no objections are received or once any objections received are resolved, authority is delegated to the Executive Director for REDe to implement the scheme.

Members unanimously agreed the proposals.

Minutes:

Christopher Deakins led Members through his report.  Councillor Virdi asked if the tarmac through the proposed cycle track would be black or coloured.  Christopher Deakins advised that it would be black.

 

Resolved that:

12.1      Authority be delegated to the Executive Director for Regeneration, Economic Development and Environment (REDe) to undertake detailed design for the proposals set out in Appendix A (attached to Agenda item 12 of the Agenda pack).

12.2      Authority be delegated to the Executive Director for REDe to carry out the required statutory consultation on the proposals.

12.3      Authority be delegated to the Executive Director for REDe to resolve where possible any objections received to the statutory consultation.

12.4      In the event that any objections received remain unresolved, the Chair of the Area Forum is delegated authority to determine the objections in consultation with Ward Councillors.

12.5      If no objections are received or once any objections received are resolved, authority is delegated to the Executive Director for REDe to implement the scheme.

Members unanimously agreed the proposals.

112.

Lampton Road Public Realm Improvements (Christopher Deakins) pdf icon PDF 122 KB

Additional documents:

Decision:

Christopher Deakins led Members through his report, reminding them that it applied to Central Hounslow Area Forum as well as Heston and Cranford.

 

Following discussion, Members resolved that:

13.1         Authority be delegated to the Executive Director for Regeneration, Economic Development and Environment (REDe) to undertake detailed design for the proposals set out in Appendix A (attached to Agenda item 13 of the Agenda pack).

13.2         Authority be delegated to the Executive Director for REDe to carry out the required statutory consultation on the proposals.

13.3         Authority be delegated to the Executive Director for REDe to resolve where possible any objections received to the statutory consultation,

13.4         In the event that any objections received remain unresolved, authority is delegated to the Chair of the Area Forum to determine the objections in consultation with Ward Councillors.

13.5         If no objections are received or once any objections received are resolved, authority be delegated to the Executive Director for REDe to implement the scheme.

Members unanimously agreed the recommendations.

 

Councillor Virdi noted that Satnam Sahota, Team Leader Development & Parking, had left the Council’s employment.  He asked that thanks be recorded for the hard work that Mr Sahota had carried out on behalf of the Area Forum.  Christopher Deakin agreed to pass on the vote of thanks.

Minutes:

Christopher Deakins led Members through his report, reminding them that it applied to Central Hounslow Area Forum as well as Heston and Cranford.

 

In response to questions from Councillor Rajawat, Christopher Deakins advised that:

Ø  There would be some additional road markings to aid vehicles turning off Lampton Road, as well as the felling of the tree on the junction.

Ø  There would be a raised table at the junction.

 

Following discussion, Members resolved that:

13.1      Authority be delegated to the Executive Director for Regeneration, Economic Development and Environment (REDe) to undertake detailed design for the proposals set out in Appendix A (attached to Agenda item 13 of the Agenda pack).

13.2      Authority be delegated to the Executive Director for REDe to carry out the required statutory consultation on the proposals.

13.3      Authority be delegated to the Executive Director for REDe to resolve where possible any objections received to the statutory consultation,

13.4      In the event that any objections received remain unresolved, authority is delegated to the Chair of the Area Forum to determine the objections in consultation with Ward Councillors.

13.5      If no objections are received or once any objections received are resolved, authority be delegated to the Executive Director for REDe to implement the scheme.

Members unanimously agreed the recommendations.

 

Councillor Virdi noted that Satnam Sahota, Team Leader Development & Parking, had left the Council’s employment.  He asked that thanks be recorded for the hard work that Mr Sahota had carried out on behalf of the Area Forum.  Christopher Deakin agreed to pass on the vote of thanks.

113.

Planning call-in - 756 Bath Road, Hounslow, TW5 9TY (Geoffrey Hugall) pdf icon PDF 116 KB

Decision:

Geoffrey Hugall (Area Planning Manager) reminded Members that Planning Officers were minded to recommend refusal of this application, because the proposed property would provide substandard residential accommodation due to poor levels of light and outlook for the future occupants and the poor quality of usable amenity space.

 

Following discussion, Members resolved:

14.1         That the application outlined within the report (attached at item 14 of the Agenda pack) be determined by Officers under delegated authority.

14.2         Members recorded their support for refusing this application.

Members unanimously voted for the above.

Minutes:

Geoffrey Hugall (Area Planning Manager) advised Members that Planning Officers were minded to recommend refusal of this application, because the proposed property would provide substandard residential accommodation due to poor levels of light and outlook for the future occupants and the poor quality of usable amenity space.

 

Following discussion, Members resolved:

14.1      That the application outlined within the report (attached at item 14 of the Agenda pack) be determined by Officers under delegated authority.

14.2      Members recorded their support for refusing this application.

Members unanimously voted for the above.

114.

Small Grant Application (Gareth James) pdf icon PDF 127 KB

Additional documents:

Decision:

Councillor Shantanu Rajawat proposed that Standing Orders be suspended to allow all business to be concluded.  Members unanimously agreed.

 

a)         Small Grant application from Sunshine of Hounslow

Gareth James led Members through the small grant application, and advised them that it met the criteria required.

Resolved that:

The grant for £500 be agreed.

Members voted unanimously for the above.

Minutes:

Councillor Shantanu Rajawat proposed that Standing Orders be suspended to allow all business to be concluded.  Members unanimously agreed.

 

a)         Small Grant application from Sunshine of Hounslow

Gareth James led Members through the small grant application, and advised them that it met the criteria required.  Members noted that the aim was to provide sewing and knitting classes, adding to the range of activities already offered by this group.

Resolved that:

The grant for £500 be agreed.

Members voted unanimously for the above.

115.

Any other business, which the Chair considers to be urgent

Decision:

a)         Request to discuss the impact of crime in licensing applications to increase the hours when alcohol can be sold

Councillor Virdi raised this issue as one of importance.  At the last meeting of the Area Forum in September, Members had noted an increase in knife crime in London.  Councillor Rajawat agreed that this was a valid concern.  However, he reminded Members that the Police and Licensing Officers would raise these concerns if appropriate when considering applications.  There was also opportunity for any Member to request a review if owners of premises were not meeting the requirements of their licence.

Minutes:

a)         Request to discuss the impact of crime in licensing applications to increase the hours when alcohol can be sold

Councillor Virdi raised this issue as one of importance.  At the last meeting of the Area Forum in September, Members had noted an increase in knife crime in London.  Councillor Rajawat agreed that this was a valid concern.  However, he reminded Members that the Police and Licensing Officers would raise these concerns if appropriate when considering applications.  There was also opportunity for any Member to request a review if owners of premises were not meeting the requirements of their licence.

116.

Date of next scheduled meeting is 21 January 2016

Decision:

The next meeting is scheduled to take place at 7pm on 21 January 2016, in Committee Rooms 1 and 2, Civic Centre.

 

The meeting ended at 9.27pm.

Minutes:

The next meeting is scheduled to take place at 7pm on 21 January 2016, in Committee Rooms 1 and 2, Civic Centre.