CHAPTER 5

London Borough of Brent LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN POLICIES AND PROPOSALS

Contents

Section Introduction A Strategies 4 Sections B, C and D: Public transport—Context 31 B 36 C Rail 40 D Bus 51 E Streets 62 F Car user 94 G Walking 100 H Cycling 110 I Freight 120 J Water 130 K Taxis, Private Hire and Community Transport 131 L Accessible Transport 135 M Integration 141 N Major Projects N/A

Maps 1 London Plan Key Diagram (West London Sub-region) 2 Public Transport Accessibility Levels 3 Network Holes 4 LBPN, London Underground, , Interchange and NORP lines. 5 Area-based schemes 6 CPZ’s and off-street car parks 7 Walking map: public rights of way, Capital Ring, Blue Ribbon (River Brent; ). 8 Brent’s Cyclists’ network 9 London Cycle Network + including links 10 Regeneration Areas 11 Indices of Multiple Deprivation—map

Programme Forms-1, Form 2 and Table 12.1 in Appendix 2

Introduction

The London Borough of Brent is committed to the sustainable management of its transport network in accordance with the London Plan 2004, the Mayor’s Transport Strategy 2001 and other relevant Mayoral policy documents. The Mayor of London, through , is responsible for regional transport planning decisions as well as for cross-cutting strategies dealing with spatial development (the London Plan), economic development, air quality, biodiversity, noise, waste and culture.

1 The boroughs, including Brent, play a key role in the planning and delivery of transport in the capital ranging from land use planning policies and decisions through to controlling 95 per cent of London’s streets. Almost all journeys in the Capital are affected in one way or another by a borough transport role.

2 This Local Implementation Plan sets out the Borough’s policies and proposals in response to the Mayor’s Transport Strategy 2001, in which Policy 5.4 states that:

Partnership will be sought with the London boroughs in developing and implementing transport policies and plans. The London boroughs are required to set out their proposals for the implementation of the Transport Strategy in their areas. Local Implementation Plans (LIPs) will reflect the Transport Strategy’s objectives, policies, proposals and priorities. The Mayor will issue guidance to the London boroughs setting out detailed requirements for their LIPs. Guidance will ensure the LIPs implement the Transport Strategy, are co-ordinated with each other and with the plans of other implementation agencies, and are effectively implemented and monitored. If necessary, the Mayor will issue directions to ensure the Transport Strategy is implemented.

3 This chapter sets out the Council’s policies and proposals for transport, in the context of the five cross-cutting goals:

1. Promoting safety and the perception of safety for all travel modes; 2. Encouraging sustainable means for travel; 3. Balanced road space allocation; 4. Requirements for Sustainable Developments; and 5. Equality and inclusion, particularly in relation to target groups.

Structure of this Chapter

4 This chapter is divided into 12 subsections labelled A-K. Each subsection contains a review of relevant background policies and other supporting contextual information. This is followed by the Council’s response to each of the policies in the Mayor’s Transport Strategy (MTS). Many of the responses make reference to completed proposals forms, maps, technical appendices and other information that are contained in Volume 2 of the LIP.

5 Each relevant policy and proposal from the Mayor’s Transport Strategy is set out below, together with the Council’s response, for example:

2

3.Po1 The paragraph ‘number’ to the left refers to the relevant MTS policy or proposal. Bold text in this paragraph is either the Council’s Policy or Proposal response or a heading for the subsequent numbered paragraphs. If there is more than one part to the policy or proposal, a Roman numeral is placed in brackets after the policy number, e.g.: 3.Po1 (I); 3.Po1 (II) etc.

3.Po1 (1) This and subsequent paragraphs set out the Council’s response to the MTS policy. They are numbered with the policy or proposal reference as a prefix. The same numbering continues through any multi-part policy responses.

3.Po1 (2) Any programme forms, appendices and other references (in Volume 2) to which the policy / proposal response refers are generally listed in the final paragraph of the policy or proposal, although occasionally they may be found in other paragraphs. Example: Programme E4 Road Danger Reduction Schemes.

3 Section A Strategies.

National Policies

A1 The objectives and strategic policies contained in the Unitary Development Plan, Interim Local Implementation Plan and annual Borough Spending Plans to 2005/6 were prepared in the years following the 1998 Government White Paper on Integrated Transport. The emphasis of the White Paper was to reduce the environmental impact of motor transport, by reducing the need to travel, particularly by car.

A2 The 1998 White Paper remains Government policy as expressed in Planning Policy Guidance Note 13 (Transport), however it was replaced with a new White Paper in July 2004, titled The Future of Transport – a Network for 2030, which conceded to demands for additional road building and a relaxation of the progressive aims of the 1998 White Paper.

The 2004 Traffic Management Act.

A3 The Traffic Management Act 2004 seeks to provide better conditions for all road users and reduce congestion through the management of the road network. The Act includes a duty on all highway authorities to appoint a Traffic Manager whose role it will be to keep traffic (including motorised and non-motorised modes) moving and to draw up a plan that shows how the Council will respond to its Network Management Duty.

London Plan—strategic context

A4 The London Plan was finalised in 2004 and sets out the strategic development strategy for land use planning in London. The plan states that London’s transport needs are not simply local, but also national and international. Improvements in access to airports, international rail stations and the Channel Tunnel are necessary to match London’s growth and economic pre-eminence. Public transport has an essential role to play in both national and local travel; key projects and proposals include for example, , Thameslink 2000, the Docklands Light Railway extension, bus and tram schemes and river crossing schemes. Improved provision of public transport across London plays an important part in easing congestion and making better use of London’s streets.

A5 The integration of land use and transport planning is key to London’s development. The London Plan integrates both of these into its spatial development strategy, and the Mayor’s Transport Strategy sets out a fifteen year programme for planning and investment in partnership with the 33 London local authorities. The first section of the London Plan’s transport chapter sets out the Mayor’s policies with regard to the integration of transport and land use planning:

• Policy 3C.1 states with regard to the integration of transport and development, that: “The Mayor will work with TfL, the Strategic Rail Authority, the government, boroughs and other partners to ensure the integration of transport and land use development by:

4

- encouraging patterns and forms of development that reduce the need to travel, especially by car; - seeking to improve public transport capacity and accessibility where it is needed, for areas of greatest demand and areas designated for development and regeneration including… opportunity areas, areas for intensification and town centres; - in general, supporting high trip generating development only at locations with both high levels of public transport accessibility and capacity, sufficient to meet the transport requirements of the development. Parking provision should reflect levels of public transport accessibility…”

• Policy 3C.2 sets out the plan’s approach to matching development to transport capacity at corridor and local level and includes a requirement for developments with significant transport implications to include transport assessments and travel plans as part of their planning applications;

• Policy 3C.3 states that the Mayor and strategic partners will support walking, cycling and public transport accessibility improvements to and within town centres and their residential hinterlands and improved sustainable accessibility between centres and employment areas;

• Policy 3C.4 states that UDPs (LDFs) should ensure the supply of sufficient land for the development of an expanded transport function to serve the economic, social and environmental needs of London.

Other policies • Policy 3D.4 and 5 state the Mayor’s commitment to supporting culture in the context of the Mayor’s Cultural Strategy, tourism and the development of London’s sporting facilities in the context of a sequential approach to development, ensuring high levels of public transport and active travel mode accessibility. Stadium is identified as a Strategic Cultural Area.

Draft Sub-regional Development Framework—West London

A6 The Sub-regional development framework brings together a wide range of data and information about West London and makes suggestions to the boroughs of issues they should address in the preparation of their Local Development Frameworks and other planning policy documents. The frameworks are an important stage in the implementation of the London Plan.

With regard to transport and accessibility, the plan states that people in West Londonmake some four million trips in an average weekday, just over half of which are made by car; 30 per cent are by walking or cycling and 16% are by public transport. Approximately ten per cent of trips are to central London. Key issues of relevance to Brent include:

• enhancements—links between Junction and Clapham Junction with new stations planned as part of wider measures to improve orbital travel;

5 • Significant upgrades to London Underground services including upgrades to stations, rolling stock, line capacity and reliability. These include enhancements to the signalling system on the to improve capacity by 45 per cent and replacing the stock from 2009. • Road corridor improvements to reduce congestion, and the development of the LCN+ cycle network. • All development (including transport) should seek to enhance biodiversity. Priorities are identified in the Mayor’s and Borough Biodiversity Action Plans. As well as improving biodiversity on transport corridors, the plans also contain proposals to increase public access to areas with biodiversity value, including parks, open spaces and walks including the Blue Ribbon network of riverside paths and the Grand Union Canal towing path. • Brent is one of the six West London Sub-regional boroughs to have declared an air quality management area for nitrogen dioxide and PM10s, to which road traffic contributes 60 per cent of emissions. Brent Council has contributed towards the development of a joint West London Air Quality and Transport Action Plan which focuses on tackling vehicle emissions and reducing the pressure on local roads.

Unitary Development Plan

A7 The revised Unitary Development Plan (UDP) was adopted in January 2004 and will be superseded by a suite of documents collectively known as the Local Development Framework. The UDP responds to the planning needs of Brent, which is one of the most ethnically diverse boroughs in London and which is also diverse in character, encompassing tight high density, largely Victorian suburbs to the south and lower density interwar and contemporary suburban development to the north. The plan sets out the Council’s vision for the future, in terms of the ‘green agenda’, regeneration and priority neighbourhoods and crime reduction.

A8 The UDP will be superseded by a suite of planning documents known as the Local Development Framework. The completion of this draft Local Implementation Plan is therefore timely as it introduces an unrivalled opportunity to strengthen the link between planning and transportation.

The Mayor’s Transport Strategy

A9 The Mayor’s Transport Strategy (MTS) was adopted in 2001 and forms the London-wide framework for this Local Implementation Plan (LIP). It has regard to the current national policy framework as set out in the Government’s Transport White Paper 2004, the ten year plan (review) and Planning Policy Guidance and Statements (PPG / PPS) for transport (PPG13) and the London Plan.

A10 The MTS requires the active involvement and partnership of the Boroughs to implement many of the London-wide proposals of the strategy, including those for which individual Boroughs are asked to take the lead. The following borough responses are to the strategic policies of the Mayor’s Transport Strategy:

6 3.Po5 The Council will promote and support sustainable forms of residential development including residential quality principles for residential areas and ensuring that development is in easy reach of existing or new public transport and pedestrian environments and sustainable forms of residential and town centre development.

London Plan 3.Po5 (1) Policy 3C.1 sets out the London Plan’s commitment to ensuring the integration of transport and land use / development by encouraging development patterns that reduce the need to travel, especially by car, seeking to improve public transport and public transport capacity and by supporting high trip generating development in locations that are accessible by a range of modes whilst facilitating reduced car dependency.

3.Po5 (2) Annex 4 of the plan sets out the Mayor’s parking standards (maximum provision of car parking) and provides information on transport assessments, which provide estimates of parking demand, and public transport accessibility levels, which help to determine the suitability of sites for development. 3.Po5 (3) Policy 3c.20 states that UDP policies should: • Ensure that safe, convenient, accessible and direct pedestrian access is provided from new developments to public transport nodes and key land uses, taking account of the need to connect people to jobs, to town centres and to schools; • Identify, complete and promote high quality walking routes identified in the MTS; • Take account of the Walking Plan for London; • Improve the safety and convenience of pedestrian routes to schools. 3.Po5 (4) The Council seeks to ensure that new development in the borough contributes to improving the convenience, conviviality, connectedness, coherence and conspicuity of the walking environment. This should be achieved both within the development (including seeking good quality urban realm) and, via s.106 agreements, in the public realm beyond the boundaries of the development. Associated infrastructure serving new development should be designed in accordance with the borough’s Road Danger Reduction Plan (Core Principles and Engineering).

Unitary Development Plan

3.Po5 (5) The challenges of accommodating housing growth and need are addressed in the UDP. Housing demand also presents significant challenges in terms of accommodating travel demand and potential traffic growth. The Council, through its UDP seeks to reduce and mitigate the impact of new development on transport in the borough in a number of ways, as follows:

7 • UDP policy BE11 states that proposals for higher residential densities will be encouraged in appropriate locations, including town centres and areas with excellent to good public transport accessibility. The policy also takes into account the need to include in appropriate locations an element of secondary uses such as shops and live-work.

• The UDP also supports in policy BE12, sustainable construction techniques, referring readers to the DETR’s publication, Building a better quality of life: a strategy for More Sustainable Construction and the Council’s own publication, SPG19: Sustainable design, construction and pollution control . Applicants are expected to consider sustainability issues from the outset of their proposals, including measures to promote and achieve energy efficiency, quality robust design and consistency with good urban design principles. Residential developments should also have regard to biodiversity, materials recycling and re-use, and measures to reduce the impact of poor air quality in the AQMAs and proposed LEZ.

3.Po5 (6) The Council welcomes applications for housing and other development (in accordance with its policies in the UDP) that meet high environmental standards; these include for example:

• Minimising the distance that materials are transported from source (ideal maximum 30 miles);

• Sourcing materials that have minimal environmental impact, which are renewable or recycled, or whose extraction will result in better environmental quality and biodiversity (such as through the formation of lakes). The use of lime mortar is favoured;

• Maximising the ‘robustness’ of new development, so that it can be changed and converted to suit the lifestyles and needs of successive occupants over a long period rather than having to be demolished and rebuilt;

• Maximising the role of urban design to create liveable, safe and attractive environments that are conducive to walking and cycling in particular;

• Maximising the variety of uses of larger sites – to include residential, offices, small scale workshops and other compatible uses;

• Minimising carbon emissions emanating from the construction and ultimate use of the development, such as a ‘carbon-neutral’; and

• Minimising the use of private cars in the development, by pooling low emissions vehicles or encouraging car-free development (provided that CPZ’s are in place).

8 3.Po6 The Council will develop and review its transport plans associated with the cultural life of London and transport schemes as part of the overall transport plan for the London Olympics 2012.

3.Po6(1) The Wembley developments will provide improved scope for sporting events including the 2012 Olympic Games and concerts at both the remodelled 12,000-capacity Arena and the new 90,000-seater National Stadium. These developments will have significant transport implications in the Borough and beyond; there are also large hotel and conference facilities in the area. Venue capacity and transport demand for all of these have been modelled, and car parking provision will be limited on the assumption that Wembley will remain a major public transport venue.

Celebrations are an important feature of the diverse ethnic and cultural life of Brent; the Council encourages and often sponsors events to celebrate festivals such as Diwali, Christmas, Eid al-Fitr, Chanuka and other significant religious and cultural events. Some of these take the form of street parades, parties in local parks and events at large public venues such as Brent Town Hall. This requires flexibility and detailed forward planning of transport needs, with particular emphasis on the encouragement of sustainable travel modes.

Cultural tourism is still relatively undeveloped in Brent but there are several temples and buildings of religious significance; perhaps the most notable of these is the Swaminarayan Hindu Temple at Neasden, which attracts some 600,000 visitors per year to Neasden. The transport requirements for this are an important component of both short and long term transportation planning policies.

Fountain Studios at Wembley Park, the largest purpose-built TV studio in the UK, depends largely on public transport access for the 100,000 people each year who come to take part in the recording of audience-participation shows. There are also other performance venues in the Borough including the Tricycle Theatre and the former State Theatre in Kilburn, which once had the largest capacity seating in London and still attracts much attention for its Art-Deco frontage and interior design. Willesden Green Library Centre attracts 1.2 million annual visits for a mixture of cultural events and exhibitions.

Brent UDP

3.Po6 (2) Policy WEM13: Transport Impact of the Proposed National Stadium states that:

“…Planning applications for the proposed National Stadium should include a transport impact assessment demonstrating how transport networks will be able to cope with peak event demand, by all modes, within 90 minutes. This should also show how the public transport share of trips can be increased significantly, with an associated phased reduction in parking, having regard to the targets set in the Stadium planning brief…”

9 “The wider objectives for transport are supplemented by a number of more detailed transport objectives for Wembley as follows:

• To achieve regeneration in the area whilst ensuring that the transport network can operate efficiently;

• To develop an enhanced transport system capable of safely clearing all event pedestrians and vehicles broadly within 90 minutes, in line with the objective of the Stadium planning brief;

• To provide links to strategic rail proposals such as Crossrail and the Heathrow-City Link;

• To achieve a balanced upgrading of the capacity, quality and ease of interchange of the three railway stations in Wembley;

• To create a road access to the Stadium that, as well as serving as the main vehicular access from the TLRN/PRN is also of a high quality in environmental terms providing a world class setting for the National Stadium;

• To improve bus priority and interchange in Wembley, especially on orbital routes linking stations, and to improve the frequency and penetration of bus services to the east of the Stadium;

• To reduce traffic, improve servicing and reduce pedestrian/ vehicular conflict in Wembley High Road so that a pedestrian friendly environment is created.”

3.Po6 (3) Policy WEM10: Improved Rail Stations and Pedestrian Links states that:

"An upgrading of all three rail stations in Wembley will be secured, including improved interchange facilities and pedestrian links to them, and, if necessary, an increase in the capacity of the rail networks serving them. Development should be in accordance with the general policy on the design of new stations (TRN8).”

New road alignments are being developed as part of the Wembley Stadium development. The UDP outlines these as follows:

“…The Stadium Access Corridor, from Hannah Close to the Stadium complex, will provide for event related traffic flows… The route should incorporate cycle facilities and structural landscaping…The Estate Access Corridor will enhance general access to the industrial estate as well as the residential area off North-End Road, and will provide a level of independent access to these areas during events. Both of these road proposals are likely to have a fundamental effect on the area and will create new potential development sites. Both roads will incorporate provision for pedestrians and cyclists.”

10 Local Implementation Plan

3.Po6 (4) This Local Implementation Plan takes forward the relevant policies in Brent’s Unitary Development Plan and Cultural Strategy with regard to transportation planning for cultural attractions and events and sporting events in the Borough. In addition, the LIP contains cross-cutting policies with regard to:

• Walking, cycling and road danger reduction;

• Public transport, in particular buses, coach parking, improved accessibility to stations and improved interchange / integration;

• Park and Ride, traffic management, parking enforcement and car parking standards for development; and

• Travel awareness and travel plans supported by the implementation of this Local Implementation Plan.

3.Pr7 The Council will work with the London Health Commission to deliver transportation-related health initiatives including the promotion of active travel.

3.Pr7(1) According to the Health Survey for England, 60 per cent of men and 70 per cent of women are not active enough to benefit their health. Young people are increasingly less active too; the National Diet and Nutrition Survey (1999) found that 40 per cent of young males and 60 per cent of young females do not meet the recommended hour per day of exercise of moderate intensity.

One in five adults are obese and most adults are overweight (National Audit Office 2004). Treating illness and obesity related to exercise and diet deficiencies costs the NHS at least half a billion pounds annually; the wider costs to the community in terms of lower productivity and lost output are estimated to be in the region of two billion pounds annually.

3.Pr7(2) Brent Council supports the Department for Health and the Health Commission’s views that adults should take at least half an hour’s exercise of moderate intensity per day and that young people should take part in an hour’s moderate exercise per day (dependent on individuals’ health needs).

The Council therefore supports healthy travel in the following ways:

1. The Borough promotes walking and cycling as active modes of travel through its cycling action plan and school travel plan strategy (Chapter 8) and by supporting the Mayor’s Walking Plan, and recognises that for most people, incorporating exercise into travel would be the most sustainable way of bringing exercise into their daily routines.

2. The Council has developed a progressive Road Danger Reduction Plan (see Chapter 6). The plan sets out the Council’s policies to achieve the complementary objectives of reducing the fear and

11 reality of road danger and promoting more widespread use of the sustainable modes.

3. The Borough supports the development of school travel plans, giving particular emphasis to the role of walking and cycling. Our School Travel Plan Strategy (see Chapter 8) emphasises the benefits of exercise and reduced air pollution.

The School Travel Plan Strategy is supported by investment in safer routes to school and DfEE / DfT funding for projects including cycle parking shelters and ‘walking buses’.

Transport for London distributes via the Boroughs, a ‘Transition Booklet’ for school leavers, which provides advice and encouragement with regard to safe and healthy modes of travel.

4. The Borough supports the development of Workplace Travel Plans. As with school travel plans, the role of active travel modes for the benefit of the workforce and their employers is emphasised. The Council has set an example through the ongoing development and promotion of its own travel plan.

5. The Council believes that raising travel awareness is central to the long-term transfer to sustainable modes of transportation. The Council concentrates on three main areas in partnership with the Government and TfL; these are: ‘Walk to School Week’; ‘National Bike Week’; and ‘Good Going Week’ (lead borough Lambeth).

6. Specifically with regard to , the Council is working with the Park Royal Partnership to deliver progressive policies to deliver sustainable accessibility, with walking and cycling forming a central role for journeys to and within this industrial area.

3.Pr7(3) The Council will work with the London Health Commission to deliver active travel for the health and welfare of its residents and in accordance with its Road Danger Reduction Plan, Cycling Action Plan and the Mayor’s Walking Strategy.

3.Pr7 (4) Air pollution is harmful to human health, aggravating respiratory ailments such as asthma and bronchitis. The Government estimates that high air pollution episodes are responsible for causing 25,000 premature deaths in the UK each year, many amongst the very young and the elderly. More information can be found under 3.Pr2.

3.Pr7 (5) Programmes: A4 Faith travel plans ; E8 Education, training and encouragement; G11 School travel plan development; H7 Cycle training; L2 Travel Awareness.

12 3.Po7 The Council supports the location of high density trip generating development in areas that have or will have both high levels of public transport accessibility and capacity, sufficient to meet the needs of development and how parking provision reflects levels of public transport accessibility.

Brent Unitary Development Plan

3.Po7 (1) The Council supports new high-density trip-generating development in areas that are or will be made accessible by a range of alternatives to the car, taking into account transport capacity and the management of car parking.

UDP policy STR5 states that: “a pattern of development which reduces the need to travel, especially by car, will be achieved through:

a. Locating trip-generating activity in areas most accessible to public transport, in particular at the transport interchanges listed in Part II of the [UDP];

b. Giving priority to public transport, walking and cycling;

c. Encouraging developments with a mix of uses in appropriate locations;

d. Increasing residential densities, particularly in walkable neighbourhoods (STR19); and

e. Securing significant public transport improvements.”

Policy TRN6 states that: “ Intensive development is supported on appropriate sites at / adjoining the following existing or proposed transport interchanges:

• Kilburn (Jubilee Line); • Kilburn High Road; • Park Royal Interchange; • Queens Park; • Willesden Junction Hub; • Wembley Central (see policy WEM 30); and • Wembley Stadium (see policy WEM 31)

3.Po7 (2) Brent’s planning polices support and enhance the role of town centres by providing sustainable access through land use planning, development and transport policies, in accordance with Planning Policy Guidance Note 6:

Policy STR29 states that: “Development should sustain and enhance the vitality and viability of the Borough’s town and district centres. In particular, the role of Wembley and Kilburn as major centres within London will be supported.”

13 Policy STR30 states that: “A widespread distribution of local shopping facilities and other local services will be maintained”.

Policy SH3, Major Town Centres and District Centres, states that: “In the Major Town Centres and District Centres proposals for retailing and other key town centre uses which attract a lot of people will be determined in accordance with the sequential approach set out in paragraph 8.7.2. Proposals should be consistent with the scale and function of the centre within which they are located.”

3.Po7 (3) For many developments, Council makes use of developer contributions and planning agreements to promote and facilitate sustainable accessibility.

As a general rule developer contributions will be sought to secure transport improvements sufficient to overcome any transport impact objections arising from the development.

Policy TRN4 states that: Measures to Make Transport Impact Acceptable states that: “Where transport impact is unacceptable, measures will be considered, individually or in combination, which could acceptably mitigate this and enable the development to go ahead—and where necessary secured at the developer’s expense.”

3.Po7 (4) The Council oversees transport assessments for major new trip generating proposals, including ways in which travel behaviour will be influenced by the proposed development, how walking and cycling will be encouraged, and how workplace travel plans are produced where appropriate. UDP policies are as follows:

Policy TRN1: Transport Assessment states that: “Planning applications will be assessed, as appropriate, for their transport impact, including cumulative impacts—on the environment and on the road network, and all transport modes, including public transport, walking and cycling. Developments having a potentially significant impact on the transport network should submit a Transport Assessment (TA). This should incorporate proposed traffic reduction measures by the developer (e.g. Green Transport Plans).”

Policy STR7 states that: “The implementation of the London Bus Priority Network and the London Cycle Network will be a priority, including requiring its provision as part of the development of appropriate sites.”

Policy TRN2 states that: “Development should benefit and not harm the operation of the public transport network, and should be located where the public transport accessibility is sufficient to service the scale and intensity of the use .”

Policies TRN9, TRN10, and TRN12 are also relevant.

14 Travel Plans

3.Po7 (5) The Council recognises the significant role that Travel Planning must play in the development of a healthy, vibrant, socially inclusive borough.

In response to this the Council has secured approximately 20 Workplace Travel Plans, mainly via Planning Obligations but also on a voluntary basis. The need for a more robust monitoring and enforcement procedure to manage their development is recognised. In light of the development of the iTRACE- Travel Plan Monitoring Database application, The Council aims to complete a thorough review of the current Travel Plan situation in Brent by the end of the 2005/2006 financial year.

iTRACE is a Travel Plan Monitoring Database developed by West London Alliance and iBase Systems Ltd with funding from Transport for London; it provides a centralised software suite designed to monitor and report on the performance of Workplace and School Travel Plans as they implement behavioural and physical initiatives to reduce the dependency on car travel and promote the use of sustainable travel methods and practices.

The iTRACE application is currently being rolled out by West London Alliance to all 33 London local authorities and will soon be at the stage where borough Travel Plan data can be entered into the system.

Once the data is entered into iTRACE, the Council will have the capability to comprehensively record, report and enforce any Travel Plans secured, adopted and implemented. It will enable the Council to determine modal shift for both individual and collective Travel Plans and ensure that realistic targets can be set for any future developments.

This initiative will help the Council to work more closely with the West London Sub Regional Travel Plan Co-ordinator towards the implementation of a Sub Regional Travel Plan Strategy that will offer a centralised structured approach to travel plan development in West London.

Public transport accessibility

3.Po7 (6) The UDP deals with public transport accessibility as follows:

Transport for London’s Public Transport Accessibility Level map and Network Holes map ( Maps 2-3) show how accessible areas are by public transport. Generally, Brent’s town centres and major roads are highly accessible by public transport, however there are significant areas lying beyond a 400m walking distance from frequent services. The Council is seeking to address these issues by securing additional bus services with funding from TfL, developer contributions and other sources. By national standards, the levels of

15 accessibility to public transport across Brent are good; however, by London standards, they remain poor.

Planning Policy and Transportation Strategy together make use of the Public Transport Accessibility Map and the Network Holes Map to introduce location policies for development, similar to the Dutch ‘ABCD’ system, in order to:

• Decide where development should be located in the Borough in relation to the actual or potential availability of public transport;

• Decide on densities and nature of development in the context of public transport availability and the proximity of, or need to enhance local shops, services and employment;

• Decide where public transport frequency and/or routes should be increased, and how increases can be funded/facilitated;

• Identify those parts of the Borough where a reduction in the use of the private car might most easily be achieved, through for example the provision of car-free development, car clubs or development with reduced parking provision; and

• Link parking provision with the level of accessibility by public transport and the proximity of local services. Higher parking standards may be required to offset accessibility deficiencies, however the amount of additional parking required may be reduced through the introduction of car clubs, car pools, travel plans and public transport improvements.

3.Po8 - I Through the Unitary Development Plan and emerging Local Development Framework, the Council will support high quality, higher density and mixed use development in locations where there are, or will be, high levels of public transport accessibility and capacity.

Brent Unitary Development Plan

3.Po8 (1) Policy BE11: Intensive and Mixed-Use Developments states that: “Proposals for higher densities than that prevalent in the surrounding area will be encouraged in appropriate locations, which will include town centre locations in Areas of Very Good & Good Public Transport Accessibility (as defined in the Transport Chapter section 6.7), and transport interchanges (Policy TRN6). Proposals in these areas are encouraged to include a mix of compatible land uses.

Proposals in the above locations, or for a change of use, that fail to incorporate an appropriate element of secondary use(s), where single uses would undermine the existing character or prejudice the regeneration prospects of an area, will be resisted, taking into account:

16 a. The scale and nature of the proposed development relative to the mix of land uses in the surrounding area, and

b. The feasibility of incorporating secondary use(s) given the nature of the primary use and the site characteristics.”

Policy TRN6 is also relevant.

3.Po8 II The Council will seek to safeguard suitable sites for public transport and freight distribution centres and interchanges.

London Plan

3.Po8 (2) Policies 3C.24 and 3C.25 set out policies to promote the sustainable development of the full range of road, rail and water-borne freight facilties in London and seeks to improve integration between the modes and between major rail interchanges and the areas they serve. The plan supports the development of strategic, intermodal rail-freight facilities.

Brent Unitary Development Plan

3.Po8 (3) Sites identified for railfreight development: Policy TRN32: ‘ Provision and Protection of Rail and Water Freight facilities’ states that:

“There will be a presumption in favour of the transfer of freight from road, to rail and water movement & transhipment. For longer distance movements the provision of sidings, within suitable new developments adjoining railway lines, is supported.

“Warehousing development, adjoining rail lines where rail access can be provided, should include sidings. Existing sidings will be protected where these are adaptable to serve anticipated needs.”

The LDF will identify opportunities for railfreight related development within the Park Royal and Wembley (Brent Park) Strategic Employment Areas in consultation with the West London Freight Quality Partnership and the business community.

Wembley Stadium

3.Po8 (4) Station improvement and redevelopment schemes in connection with the Wembley Stadium development will provide three major interchanges between bus, rail and Underground services. The three stations are already connected together by a number of frequent bus services. In addition, a major push to increase and accommodate pedestrian movement, through capacity increases and public realm improvement is an integral part of the Stadium development and the creation of a new retail, residential and employment focus in the Quintain development currently underway.

The Council will use this experience to develop high quality interchanges in the rest of the Borough in accordance with the TfL Interchange Plan and at more locations besides.

17

3.Po9 The Council will support adequate transport provision for deprived areas and all social groups, particularly equality and inclusion target groups.

Social Services and Brent Community transport

3.Po9 (1) Social Services provides door-to-door transport services free of charge to users attending day care services and other services within the borough.

Brent Community Transport (BCT) currently operates a Community Car Scheme and Group Transport Services under a service level agreement with Brent Social Services. The purpose of the car scheme is to provide accessible transport services for individuals and groups who are unable to access mainstream public or private transport. The group transport scheme ensures that, wherever possible, social care organisations in Brent have access to subsidised transport in the Borough.

3.Po9 (2) Social Services provides a transport grant to six social care organisations in the borough, including voluntary organisations, enabling them to transport their clients to and from activities provided by the organisations.

3.Po9 (3) Residents with social care needs also have access to the London- wide taxi card scheme and dial a ride schemes.

Brentlink

3.Po9 (4) Other accessible transport is provided by Brent Community Transport, including:

• Shopping bus service in Harlesden area scheme; and • Urban Bus Challenge – Brent Link Project, Stonebridge, Park Royal, Willesden, Wembley Park, Kingsbury and Queensbury.

Brentlink is a fully-accessible minibus service operating five days per week on a scheduled basis using three minibuses, with funding from the DfT through its Urban Bus Challenge award. The buses are operated by Brent Community Transport and three routes now serve a number of areas of Brent.

The service is proving increasingly popular with those who find difficulty in accessing conventional bus services due to disability, infirmity and sensory impairment. By providing on-demand flexible routings within the advertised schedule, it is possible to provide a near equivalent to a door-to-door service where necessary. The service differs from Dial-a-ride in offering greater flexibility of timings combined with a high level of reliability which ensures that those who use it are able to attend medical, social and other appointments and facilities.

18 Arguably, Brentlink is also a more efficient use of resources which complements the personal service provided by Dial-a-ride. Funding is currently due to expire in 2006/7 and an exit strategy/alternative source of funding is required.

3.Po9 (5) The Council is committed to working with partners to improve bus service coverage in deprived areas. Activities in relation to Brentlink and discussions with London Buses Network Development, together with monitoring of network holes and PTAL, continue to contribute to increasing the density and accessibility of services to all members of the community.

3.Po9 (6) Programmes: D10 Brentlink services 1 and 2; D11 Brentlink services 2 and 3; D12 New premises for Brent Community Transport; K2 Group transport scheme; K3 Home to school and workplace transport; K4 Brent Disability and Learning Partnership; L2 Community Car scheme.

3.Pr1 The Council will ensure that local voluntary and community organisations, including disabled groups, are fully consulted on relevant proposals developed by boroughs.

3.Pr1 (1) Brent has a well-established and robust stakeholder engagement structure in place that enables the Council and its partners to involve stakeholders in many and varied aspects of service development and delivery. The structure is based around open, selective and targeted consultation methods. Taken as a whole, these methods are capable of giving a comprehensive form of dialogue with stakeholders.

Mobility and accessibility issues are discussed in all of the borough’s consultation forums when the need arises, and it is noted that in all cases, transport and accessibility are ‘hot topics’. There is no specific mobility forum (for disabled and sensory impaired people) though there is a general Transport Forum at which relevant issues can be raised. In addition, the council has access to a database of several thousand interested consultees, who are asked to complete surveys on a wide variety of issues.

The results of discussions and opinion surveys from all service user forum participants can be forwarded to the London-wide forum.

The basic stakeholder engagement structure consists of:

• The Brent Citizens' Panel: 2,000+ local residents recruited to reflect the demographic profile of the borough. The Panel is managed for the Council by the market research company MORI. It provides quick and reliable access to a subset of the population and is used for a range of quantitative and qualitative research. The Panel is scheduled to be renewed during 2005. The major piece of work produced by the Panel is the Residents' Attitude Survey conducted every three years.

19 • Five Area Consultative Forums (ACFs) —these are open public meetings covering the geographical entirety of the borough. Each forum meets four times per year and looks at a mixture of local and borough-wide issues. Agendas for forum meetings are set by local people through forum steering groups. A database of 5,000+ records of people who have attended an area forum at some time is maintained.

• Eight Service User Consultative Forums (UCFs) —these cover Children, Young People, Pensioners, Disabilities and Mental Health, Private Sector Housing, Voluntary Sector, Transportation, and the Black and Minority Ethnic Service User Consultative Forum. As with the ACFs, the UCFs meet four times per year and generally consider issues of particular relevance to their user group.

• Children and Young People The Council has set out a Statement of Commitment to ensure that children, young people and their families living in Brent can participate and are fully involved in the development, structure, delivery and evaluation of services they use. This is underpinned by the ‘Hear by Right’ values based on a model developed by the National Youth Agency as good practice for children and young people’s participation.

• The Built Environment Focus Group was established as a one-off meeting to feed into the Local Implementation Plan consultation process and comprised members of the Black and Ethnic Minority Groups Forum (15 attended the meeting out of 700 members) and Brent Association of Disabled People (13 attended the meeting from a membership of 300). The group was formed in response to the Borough’s performance obligations with regard to the Equalities Impact Assessment and Impact Needs Resources Assessment.

Developing the Structure

3.Pr1 (2) It is important to note that the information given above relates to forums whose terms of reference are contained in the Council's Constitution. In addition however, there are many other user groups in existence in the Borough that can be engaged with, and will be included in the Council’s emerging audit of stakeholders.

The Council is also keen to develop the potential of additional user groups, or groups with limited effectiveness because of the limited frequency of their meetings. Proposals will be developed in order to enable more regular consultation with these groups through their databases and online consultation.

The Council regularly explores different ways of attracting a more diverse audience to consultative groups, through the use of targeted leaflet drops and radio advertising. There is always an element of self-selection; however the Council recently conducted a second Area Forum satisfaction survey with very positive results. The Council also uses its databases to recruit people for focus and

20 discussion groups; using the database, it is also possible to control (and even exclude) the obvious ‘usual suspects’.

3.Pr1 (3) Information Technology - The Consultation Team have recently launched 'Consultation Tracker', an online interactive consultation database. They are also developing Online consultation as an addition to their toolkit of options using SNAP software supplied through the West London Alliance and the Pathfinder Project.

Strategy Development

3.Pr1 (4) Corporate Stakeholder Engagement Strategy—The current iteration (Appendix 3) covers the period 2005 - 2008. This will reflect the key priorities contained in the Corporate Strategy. There are a number of weaknesses in the current User Forum structure; the strategy will include measures for increasing the effectiveness of engagement activites with these groups.

The Council is particularly keen to strengthen the role of the Disabilities and Mental Health and Pensioners Forums in 2005. Furthermore, the Council is working with the Children Forum Steering Group to identify more comprehensive proposals for consulting with Children & Young People, to meet the requirements of implementing the Children Bill once enacted.

Please refer to Chapter 10 and Appendix 3 for full details of the Borough’s arrangements for consultations including the methodology and influence of the consultation process for the Local Implementation Plan.

3.Pr1 (5) Programmes: A1 Public engagement.

3.Pr2 – I The Council will address priorities and policies relevant to its transportation policies in the Mayor’s air quality strategy, through the Local Implementation Plan and Brent Air Quality Action Plan.

3.Pr2 (1) Air pollution is harmful to human health, aggravating respiratory ailments such as asthma and bronchitis. The Government estimates that high air pollution episodes are responsible for causing 25,000 premature deaths in the UK each year, many amongst the very young and the elderly.

Not only is the right to good air quality a necessity for a decent quality of life for all those who live and work in Brent; it is also a requirement under European and National legislation.

The European Union (EU) has introduced legally binding targets (air quality limit values) for national governments to reduce pollution to levels at which no or minimal effects on human health are likely to occur. In response, the UK government has introduced revised National Air Quality Strategy (NAQS) objectives for nine main air pollutants for which the Mayor has a statutory duty to achieve seven of these objectives in London. The Environment Act 1995 statutorily requires Local Authorities to undertake a Review and Assessment of

21 air quality against revised NAQS objectives. The Council has completed the following review and assessment of air quality to date:

• Stage 1 concluded that investigation of carbon monoxide, fine particles (PM10), sulphur dioxide and nitrogen dioxide (NO 2) was required at stage 2.

• Stage 2 concluded that no further action was appropriate for carbon monoxide but further investigation was required for sulphur dioxide, fine particles as PM10 and nitrogen dioxide.

• Stage 3 concluded that the annual mean objectives for nitrogen dioxide and PM10 would not be met in the borough and that an Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) should be declared. In April 2001, large parts of the Borough were declared AQMA’s. The AQMA is for nitrogen dioxide and fine particles (PM10). This includes the entire area south of the and all housing, schools and hospitals along the North Circular Road, Harrow Road, Bridgewater Road, Ealing Road, Road, Kenton Road, Kingsbury Road, Edgware Road, Blackbird Hill, Forty Lane, Forty Avenue and East Lane.

• The Stage 4 Review and Assessment confirmed the Stage 3 findings that the statutory objectives for both nitrogen dioxide and fine particles would be exceeded in 2005. The modelled scenarios demonstrated that the main source of nitrogen dioxide concentrations within the borough is road traffic. PM10 concentrations can be attributed mainly to background sources (with road traffic making up between 20-40% of the total depending on the location).

The areas within the borough that are monitored and predicted to have high pollution levels are associated with major traffic routes such as the North Circular Road (A406), Kilburn High Road, and Edgware Road (A5) and substantiate the Council’s decision to declare large parts of the Borough Air Quality Management Areas. However, these roads are the responsibility of Transport for London and therefore outside the direct control of the Council. The Council will work with Transport for London to reduce emissions from these roads where possible and push for mitigation options.

The Environment Act 1995 also requires Brent to produce an action plan detailing measures or proposals for change which will improve air quality in the declared AQMA and ensure that the national objectives are met. Brent has written an Air Quality Action Plan (AQAP) setting out 99 measures to achieve this; more information can be found in section 3.Pr2 (3) of the LIP.

The LIP has been devised to take account of the air quality impact of the transport network and sets out a range of policies which comply with the Borough’s AQMA. In addition, the LIP proposes 5 additional measures to support the AQMA and the requirements of the MTS and MAQS which are specifically targeted at air quality. These support

22 the Borough to meet their obligations under MTS 3.Pr2 and 4K.Pr4 and are shown in table 3.Pr2 1:

Table 3.Pr2 (1): LIP Programmes specifically targeted at Air Quality

LIP Description MTS Ref Programmes Promotion of Alternative Fuels 4K.Pr4 I1; I3 and Transport Related Air Quality Issues. Transport Emissions & Air Quality 3.Pr2 A3 Impact in Brent Town Centres.

Brent Vehicle Fleet Management 3.Pr2 & I2 for Air Quality. 4K.Pr4

Smoothing Traffic Flows for Air 3.Pr2 A7 Quality.

Air Quality and Noise Traffic 3.Pr2 A2 Calming Mitigation.

I4 Noise barriers 3.Pr2; 3.Pr4

3.Pr2 (2) Brent is working in close partnership with the West London Alliance (WLA), a group which represents six London Boroughs and supports the West London Transport Strategy (WLTS). WLA recognises that because of the trans-boundary nature of air pollution, mitigation measures will have potentially greater benefits by working together. The WLA commissioned a study to develop new solutions to West London’s shared traffic emission air pollution problems. Three key themes were identified by the WLA to be important, forming the basis of three independent yet complementary work streams:

• Work stream One—Identification of air quality hotspots and potential measures that could be applied;

• Work stream Two—The potential benefits for increasing the uptake of cleaner fuels and vehicles; and

• Work stream Three—Gauging the status of public transport hubs and links to encourage modal shift.

The study has been particularly concerned with the levels of nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and fine particles (PM10). One of the first stages of the study was to derive air quality performance indicators to provide a concise mechanism for Boroughs to measure whether mitigation measures are having the desired effect. Brent will continue to work with the WLA and will actively support the WLA Joint Action Plan to Improve West London's Air Quality.

23 3.Pr2 – II The Council will develop policies and proposals in relation to low emission zones.

3.Pr2 (3) UDP policy EP3 states that, “In considering development proposals and in preparing traffic management measures, regard will be given to impacts upon air quality, particularly where they are within or affect designated air quality management areas. Development proposals should not harm the achievement of national air quality objectives .” The UDP also states that, “Air quality management areas will be defined where air quality levels are forecast to be unacceptable. Development proposals that would significantly contribute to air pollution are required to submit with their planning application, a report of the assessment of the likely dispersion of pollution.”

3.Pr2 (4) Air pollution in London is trans-boundary in nature and air quality modelling indicates that a large proportion of air pollutants in Brent are derived from outside the Borough or on major road corridors such as the A406 North Circular over which Brent has no jurisdiction. Combined with the high levels of background pollution in Brent, this makes it difficult to devise air quality improvement measures targeted at transport emissions which will be effective at specific locations.

3.Pr2 (5) Brent is proposing to undertake a range of measures to tackle traffic emissions and air pollution locally but the main improvements in air quality are expected to be derived from London-wide initiatives which will influence background air pollution. This includes the proposed London Low Emission Zone (LEZ) which is predicted to reduce the total area of London exceeding the PM10 and NO 2 2010 air quality targets by 43% and 19% respectively.

An LEZ is a defined area that bars entry to polluting vehicles that do not comply with set emission standards, the purpose being to encourage targeted vehicle owners and businesses to adopt cleaner engine technologies, or to purchase newer, cleaner vehicles. This would be implemented by local authorities introducing Traffic Regulation Orders (TROs) to ban certain classes of vehicle.

The London Borough of Brent is currently working with neighbouring local authorities, the West London Transport Strategy, the Association of London Government (ALG), the Authority (GLA), TfL and DEFRA in a London Low Emission Zone (LEZ) Steering Group. This group commissioned a feasibility study of LEZs in London to assess air quality impact, costs and benefits which concluded that the most realistic LEZ would:

• Cover the whole of Greater London; • Target Heavy Duty Vehicles (HDV), i.e. lorries, buses and coaches; • Start in late 2006 or early 2007; and • Could be extended in 2010 to include Light Duty Vehicles.

24 3.Pr2 (6) The London LEZ is central to the Brent AQAP and the LEZ is therefore fully supported by the Council. Brent welcomes a London-wide LEZ and will undertake all the work necessary to ensure a smooth implementation. Through the LIP, Brent will seek to proactively accelerate the development of the London wide LEZ and will compliment the LEZ through local air quality initiatives funded through the LIP specifically targeted at traffic emissions.

3.Pr2 – III Brent Air Quality Management Area action plan.

3.Pr2 (7) The Council has produced an Air Quality Management Area Action Plan. It incorporates all of the measures to implement the various proposals in the Mayor’s Air Quality Strategy, and complements measures introduced into the Mayor’s Transport Strategy. The AQAP recognises the need to bring about an improvement of conditions for walking and cycling and to expand the public transport network. In addition, the Council is committed to other traffic reduction measures, such as travel plans, to raise awareness and promote modal shift.

3.Pr2 (8) Three important contributors to achieving lower emissions are the Low Emission Zone, which covers the Borough to the south of the North Circular (see policy 4K.Pr4); Policy 4G.Pr12, which outlines how the Borough will reduce traffic growth by a third by 2012 and sets out proposals to provide facilities for supplying cleaner fuels; and the Road Danger Reduction Plan, which makes health and air quality relevant to road danger and prioritises strategic investment based on air quality management areas.

3.Pr2 (9) Programmes: A2 Air quality and traffic calming noise mitigation; A3 Measuring air quality impacts on Brent’s town centres; I5: Noise and air quality monitoring.

3.Pr4 The Council will develop and review policies and proposals with regard to reducing and mitigating traffic and transport related noise.

Traffic and transport related noise

3.Pr4 (1) The main sources of ambient noise in Brent are road traffic, rail transport and industrial noise. An estimated 39,000 vehicles per hour enter, pass through or move around the borough during the morning peak.

Exposure to unacceptable noise levels is a problem in Brent, worsening health conditions, causing annoyance and generally reducing the quality of life. Unfortunately, the data available on environmental noise exposure in Brent is poor in comparison to other pollution issues. A useful guide was provided by the London Household Survey, which found that 13% of Londoners said that road traffic noise was a serious problem, compared with 4% who considered noisy neighbours as a serious problem.

25 The Assessment and Management of Environmental Noise Directive, (2002/49/EC) has required member states to develop noise maps for large agglomerations (above 250000 inhabitants), major roads, major railways and major airports. In the UK the National Ambient Noise Strategy requires Local Authorities to develop a Local Ambient Noise Strategy, which will grade areas of the Borough according to the levels of noise and noise sensitive areas.

In developing its Noise Strategy, Brent will have regard to the London Mayor’s Ambient Noise Strategy and the Mayor’s Transport Strategy. DEFRA’s road noise mapping and Ambient Noise Strategy have not been published.

Further policies to prevent traffic noise from affecting quality of life are contained in the Unitary Development Plan, which states that “noise from external sources affecting the proposed development (e.g. road traffic)” should be considered by the Council prior to the development being approved.

3.Pr4 (2) To meet these statutory requirements, noise mapping has commenced in Brent, partly through a London wide study sponsored by DEFRA and by Brent itself. Further studies will examine the proportion of residents affected and the presence of vulnerable receptors i.e. schools, nursing homes etc.

Road noise

These preliminary studies have identified that key road links including the North Circular, the Harrow Road and the access corridor to the M1 are highlighted as particular concerns with regard to noise nuisance. Noise levels generated by the A406 North Circular are in excess of 75 Decibels and of primary concern.

The Council commissioned a study in 2003 to examine options and the Borough now has plans to introduce noise barriers at specific locations with regard to practicalities and public consultation.

The borough is also pressing for TfL to consider resurfacing with more effective modern noise attenuating surface materials. Both proposals are constrained by the fact that Brent has no authority over the A406, it being part of the TLRN. Brent will therefore lobby TfL to incorporate noise barriers and noise reducing surface materials when designing and implementing schemes on the A406.

The LIP will take into account the Brent Local Ambient Noise Strategy when it is finalised. The LIP will also ensure that traffic related noise arising from LIP schemes and programmes will be minimised through the following measures:

• Any LIP schemes in noise sensitive areas, i.e. in close proximity to noise sensitive receptors such as schools, residential care homes and hospitals, should seek to mitigate noise generation. This will be achieved through appropriate design to minimise traffic noise where possible and given the

26 practical constraints, through advice sought from the Environmental Health Team.

• LIP Programme A2 : Air Quality and Noise Traffic Calming Mitigation. Traffic calming can be a significant source of both local ambient noise and vibration if poorly constructed or an inappropriate design employed. This proposal seeks to research and pilot traffic calming techniques which reduce road danger without negatively affecting ambient noise levels.

3.Pr4 (3) Programmes: A2 Noise mitigation; I4 Noise barriers; I5: Noise and air quality monitoring.

Freight movement

3.Pr4 (4) Brent welcomes the transfer of freight movements away from roads onto rail and water and will seek to achieve this. However, for many local residents of Brent, noise and vibration from rail freight is a source of irritation and discomfort. It is therefore important that appropriate mitigation measures are deployed for any environmental impact on local residents.

Vibration from the movement of rail freight on the through the London Borough of Brent is a contentious issue with local residents who back on to the railway. Vibration assessments have been undertaken by the borough but results indicate that the levels are deemed not to be a statutory nuisance within the given context of current legislation.

It is further understood that this line plays an integral part in the distribution of freight reducing road usage. However there is a concerted movement by local residents who are directly affected to seek a review of the line usage with a preference for redirecting rail freight around rather than through London.

3.Pr5 The Council will work in partnership with the GLA to deliver locally the Mayor’s Biodiversity Strategy and set out in its local Biodiversity Action Plan how the borough’s natural habitats and biodiversity will be protected and enhanced with regard to transportation corridors.

Mayor’s Biodiversity Action Plan

3.Pr5 (1) The Mayor’s Biodiversity Strategy (MBS) was published in July 2002 and sets out how the Mayor will protect and enhance biodiversity in London and what action will be expected from the London Boroughs. A number of its policies and proposals relate to transport and those that are relevant to Brent include:

• Protection of Sites of Nature Conservation Importance; • Improvement of accessibility to Biodiversity sites; • Management of highway verges, off-road cycle tracks and footpaths for biodiversity;

27 • Biodiversity value and management of Railside Land; • Street trees; and • Grand Union Canal and Canal Feeder.

Brent Biodiversity Action Plan

3.Pr5 (2) Brent’s Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) was adopted in 2001 and is broadly in conformity with the 14 policies and 72 proposals of the MBS. Through the Brent BAP the Council is working to implement those policies and proposals of the MBS that are relevant to the Brent area.

The Brent BAP comprises 24 Action Plans but does not include a Brent-specific Species Action Plan. For this, the Council relies on the London Species Action Plan together with best practice examples from across the UK. Brent BAP Action Plans that are of relevance to Transportation include:

• Streetscape • Woodland, Hedgerows and Trees • Species Action Plans • Narrow-leaved Bitter-cress • Sites of Nature Conservation Importance • Grand Union Canal and Canal Feeder • Railside Habitats • Environmental Education

BBAP includes in addition, a number of site-specific Action Plans. The biodiversity of parks and green spaces has important impacts on transportation in terms of providing pleasant, user-friendly local routes for pedestrians, for example between home, work, shops, school and leisure facilities. Local green spaces also provide opportunities for leisure and recreation, usually within short distances of people’s homes in Brent, and thus reduce the need to travel out of the Borough by road to access parks and open spaces.

The greening of Brent’s streetscape is an important contributor to both local biodiversity and improving the quality of life of residents. Planting and landscaping can assist in Road Danger Reduction objectives too, if they are incorporated in schemes designed to reduce road danger (for instance, as part of the development of town centre regeneration and streets for people).

In addition to the policies of the Brent BAP, the LIP and Brent’s UDP will ensure that Brent meets the requirements of the MBS through the following specific policies:

• UDP policies to protect Sites of Nature Conservation Importance, Local Nature Reserves and Sites of Borough Importance. These policies provide strong protection of these sites from development and transport schemes;

28 • Improving accessibility to the Borough’s green spaces by seeking to complete and improve the ‘Capital Ring’ walking route in Brent;

• LIP policies to maximise and preserve the biodiversity value of highway verges and transport routes through sensitive management. LIP Programme A5 (Management of Roadside Habitats for Biodiversity) sets out how this will be achieved; and

• LIP policies to preserve and enhance the Borough’s 25,000 street trees by bolstering the existing ‘Tree Removal and Replacement’ programme.

3.Pr5 (3) The greening of Brent’s streetscape is an important contributor to both local biodiversity and improving the quality of life of residents. Planting and landscaping can assist in Road Danger Reduction objectives too, if they are incorporated in schemes designed to reduce road danger (for instance, as part of the development of town centre regeneration, self-explaining streets and streets for people). The Road Danger Reduction Plan (Chapter 6) seeks to reduce danger and at the same time, increase people’s propensity to walk, cycle and use public transport in preference to their cars.

3.Pr5 (4) Programmes A5 Biodiversity; A6 Street trees; G4 Capital Ring G6 Walking routes through parks; G7 Local signed routes and public rights of way.

3.Pr6 The Council will encourage the movement of waste by rail or water and generally seek to reduce the impact of the transport of waste.

3.Pr6 (1) Aside from waste that was recycled, in 2004/5, some 117,406 tonnes of waste were transported to Oxfordshire for disposal by landfill. 91 per cent of this waste was transported to landfill by rail, mainly from West London Waste Authority’s major transfer stations at Brentford and South Ruislip. A further 1,000 tonnes was transported by river barge; the remainder was carried by road.

3.Pr6 (2) The Council will support proposals to transport more waste by canal and to increase the proportion carried by rail. Please refer to policy 4K.Pr4 and the Common Statement by the West London Freight Quality Partnership, in Chapter 3 (Borough Policy Statement).

3.Pr6 (3) The Borough will continue to comply with the principles of seeking the Best Possible Environmental Option (BPEO) when considering options and future contracts for the transportation and disposal of waste and is committed to ensuring that waste is moved by the most sustainable available modes.

3.Pr6 (4) The Council’s waste management and recycling section has recently purchased seven recycling vehicles which were specified to operate at EURO-III efficiency. (A new standard, Euro IV will be introduced in 2006.) The 2007 refuse and recycling contract will specify the use of EURO-IV vehicles to take into account greater fuel efficiency, and

29 will also consider the use of alternative fuels, provided that resultant vehicle operating power is adequate for the purpose.

3.Pr6 (5) The Council supports the Mayor’s proposals (set out in his response to draft PPS10—Planning for sustainable Waste Management ) for the GLA to take on the role as waste planning authority for London in the same way as County Councils act as the Waste Planning Authorities for their areas.

The core proposals is for the existing responsibilities for wider waste planning, including both plan making and development control, to be transferred to the Mayor. This would ensure the protection of existing waste management sites (circa 750), identify and deliver new sites and reconcile at the strategic and local levels the need for waste facilities, housing and other concerns. It will mean that there is one integrated waste plan for London, rather than 33 local waste plans.

30 Sections B, C and D: Public Transport – Context

Introduction

BCD1 Car ownership in Brent is low compared with the national average— 37 per cent of households have no access to a car, with marked variations throughout the Borough (source: 2001 Census). Most trips made by Brent residents are to places within the Borough or to other parts of outer north-west London. Only 16 per cent of all daily trips are made into Central London, however between 75 and 100 per cent of trips to work in the outer suburbs are made by car (LATS 1991).

BCD2 Brent has a complex road and rail-based public transport network, with 45 daytime bus routes, five night bus routes and 26 and Underground stations. Whilst the overall network is a good one, the borough has poor interchange in key regeneration areas such as Park Royal, Wembley and Harlesden.

BCD3 The current trend is for traffic levels to continue to grow with increasing car ownership and consequent decreasing average journey speeds. This growth is having unacceptable economic, social and environmental impacts, particularly upon urban realm, quality of life and health. Brent’s SATURN model which shows motor traffic levels and trends needs to be updated following the implementation of the Congestion Charge, and as a consequence of initiatives including bus priority and controlled parking zones. See Policy 4G.Pr12.

BCD4 The Council believes that the regeneration and development of some areas may be severely hindered if measures are not taken to manage its infrastructure by reducing car dependency and improving public transport and its infrastructure. On this basis, the Council’s partnership with TfL to take forward sustainable network management is particularly valuable.

BCD5 Public transport is a crucial component in the transport mix; this is reflected in the level of importance that the public, when questioned, places upon investment to bring about improvements.

BCD6 The Council also believes that integration is key to developing a seamless public transport network that acts as a realistic and attractive alternative to the private car for more journeys. Existing investment, including ticketing, interchanges and operating hours, needs to be built upon to deliver a first-class transport network.

BCD7 Linkages between modes need to be improved and there are also significant ‘holes’ in the network. Transport for London’s aspirational standard for access to bus services is that no property should be more than a ten minute (or 3-400m) walk from a bus stop. At the very least, it is considered essential to provide connections between the main residential areas of the Borough and the destinations people wish to reach, including shops, schools, employment and leisure.

31 London Plan

BCD8 The London Plan sets out the Mayor’s commitment to improving Underground services. Policy 3C.2 states that: “The Mayor and TfL will improve the Underground…service and ensure its development supports the spatial strategy of this plan by:

- seeking improvements in safety and security, reliability, customer service and effective capacity; - identifying and taking forward improvements to the network that support the priorities of this plan…”

BCD9 Policy 3C.9 and 10 state that the Mayor will work with strategic partners to increase the capacity, quality and integration of public transport by up to 50 per cent over the plan period to meet London’s needs and improve the quality, integration, reliability, safety, quality, frequency and attractiveness of the system. The Mayor will work with strategic partners to phase the implementation of public transport improvements.

BCD10 Policy 3C.13 states that the Mayor will work with TfL, the Boroughs and other partners to implement additional priority measures to assist buses and new bus transit schemes. This policy should be supported in LDFs.

BCD11 Policy 3C.19 states that: “The Mayor will work with TfL and the Boroughs to implement London Wide improvements to the quality of bus services for all. UDP/LDF policies should actively promote and give priority to the continued development of the London bus network, including:

- the allocation of road space and the high levels of road priority required for buses on existing or proposed bus routes; - ensuring good bus access to and within town centres, major developments and town centres; - ensuring that walking routes to bus stops from homes and workplaces are direct, secure, pleasant and safe; - ensuring that bus layover and turning areas, driver facilities, bus stations and garages are available where needed.

Mayor’s Transport Strategy

BCD12 The Mayor’s Transport Strategy (MTS) states that the Mayor’s first priority is to create a world-class transport system for London which enhances business efficiency, ensures a wider spread of the fruits of economic prosperity and improves the quality of life of every Londoner.

Brent Unitary Development Plan

BCD13 The UDP’s strategy is to focus investment in public transport on supporting key regeneration opportunities (including town centres) and to provide additional capacity in areas of high demand in order

32 to achieve a significant shift away from the private car. The strategy will be reinforced through proper parking control and enforcement.

Particular attention will be given to reducing those types of car- borne trips that can most easily be shifted to more sustainable modes, for example school trips and trips to work.

BCD14 Public transport Policies are summarised as follows:

• Policy TRN2 states that, “ Development should benefit and not harm the operation of the public transport network and should be located where the public transport accessibility is sufficient to service the scale and intensity of the use, in particular:

a) “The capacity of the public transport network, within safe and convenient walking distance of the site…;

b) “Any significant increase in traffic caused by the development should not cause material harm to the speed and reliability of bus services, especially on the LBPN; and

c) The proposal should make proper opportunity for interchange facilities between public transport modes or services”.

• Policy TRN4 seeks to ensure that the traffic impacts of development can be made acceptable – “Where traffic impact is unacceptable, measures will be considered individually or in combination which could acceptably mitigate this and enable the development to go ahead – and where necessary secured at the developer’s expense, including:

a) “Public transport improvements sufficient to service the scheme or to integrate it with the surrounding area…;

b) “The extension or bringing forward of on-street parking controls and waiting restrictions;

c) “Improvements to pedestrian and walking facilities;

d) “Traffic calming measures;

e) “Acceptable road safety and essential highway improvements, not necessarily restricted to junctions and road lengths adjacent to the development, providing these improvements are limited to measures necessary to make the transport impact acceptable;

f) “Management measures to reduce car usage to an acceptable level (e.g. green transport plans)…”

• Policy TRN6 states that, “Intensive development is supported on appropriate sites at / adjoining the following existing or proposed transport interchanges:

- Kilburn; - Kilburn High Road;

33 - Park Royal Interchange (see also Policy PR5); - Queens Park; - Willesden Junction Hub; - Wembley Central (see policy WEM30); - Wembley Park (See policy WEM31); - Wembley Stadium (see policy WEM32).

Development should make full and effective use of the site, have a mix of land uses and should be orientated around pedestrians, cyclists and buses, rather than the private car”.

• Policy TRN7 states that, in relation to new rail and underground infrastructure: “ The following new rail and underground infrastructure projects are supported and will, where necessary, be safeguarded:

a) “East-West Crossrail; b) “Park Royal Interchange; c) “Willesden Junction Hub.

Planning decisions should ensure that development proposals are fully integrated with the development”.

• Policy TRN8 states that with regard to new rail stations, “The upgrading of existing stations and the formation of new interchange facilities on appropriate sites is supported...”

BCD15 The UDP sets out Brent’s vision for the development of the rail and underground network. Details of these are set out in the relevant parts of the Local Implementation Plan; in summary the Borough’s ‘shopping list’ includes the following:

• Three stations strategy for Wembley – including the redevelopment of Wembley Park, Wembley Stadium and Wembley Central stations to provide additional capacity for event days at the new National Stadium (this is not a printed document).

• Orbital Rail Services Provision for additional and improved services on the North and West lines and longer term potential to link these as an ‘outer circle’ line.

• The Chiltern Line Proposals for frequency enhancement and station improvements (Chiltern Metro).

• East-West Crossrail Formal safeguarding for the originally- proposed alignment of this route remains in the UDP. The safeguarding will remain in force until satisfactory implementation of an alternative alignment is guaranteed.

• Park Royal Interchange The Council, with Ealing Council, are seeking a new Central Line station with a link to the Piccadilly Line as part of the Park Royal Western Gateway development

34 proposals, with improved pedestrian access and bus interchange facilities (see policy PR5).

• Intermediate Modes The Council has examined the potential for long-term options for the provision of an ‘intermediate’ mode route from Wembley to Park Royal interchange. This could be a tram or guided bus.

BCD16 Efficient handling and transport of freight is crucial for the regeneration of the industrial areas of the borough. Rail and water are much more sustainable means of freight transport than lorries, and have a lower impact on the majority of residents.

BCD 17 UDP Policy TRN32 states that with regard to the provision and protection of rail and water freight facilities, “There will be a presumption in favour of the transfer of freight from road to rail and water and transhipment. For longer distance movements, the provision of sidings within suitable new developments adjoining railway lines is supported. Warehouse development adjoining rail lines where rail access can be provided should include sidings. Existing sidings will be protected where these are adaptable to serve anticipated needs.”

• Policy TRN9 states that with regard to bus priority, “The Bus Priority Action Plan will be implemented in partnership with the bus operators, Transport for London and other strategic bodies.

“Developments that abut the bus priority network will, where appropriate, be required for the efficient operation of bus services including bus facilities and / or highway improvements and / or service improvements where the need for such facilities arise directly from the need to service the development by public transport

“The loss of existing bus garages will be resisted where this would result in the deterioration in the frequency, coverage or reliability of bus services. The improvement of existing, and provision of new bus garages is encouraged”

BCD18 With regard to community transport, the UDP states that this sector presents an opportunity to ‘bridge the gap’ between more traditional forms of public transport and wholly demand-responsive means of transport, such as the car or pedal cycle.

The UDP supports the provision of facilities for coaches and taxis. Policy TRN30 states that, “Developments likely to attract significant numbers of visiting members of the public should include adequate taxi parking facilities where boarding and alighting does not obstruct the public highway. Developments likely to attract significant coach traffic should include adequate coach stopping and parking facilities which ensure that unloading and alighting do not obstruct the public highway.”

35 Section B London Underground.

Introduction

B1 London Underground serves 20 stations and 58 million passengers per year on the four lines running through Brent. The Underground is therefore an important part of the Borough’s transport system.

B2 The Council is keen to work with London Underground in connection with future train design and service quality enhancement. The Council is particularly keen to see the early replacement of trains and track on the , which in its current condition provides a poor travelling environment.

B3 The Council is also keen to work with London Underground to enhance the accessibility, integration and safety of stations, especially at the Kingsbury, Willesden Green, Alperton, Queen’s Park, Harlesden and Stonebridge Park where step-free access to platforms and trains is desirable.

Mayor’s Transport Strategy

B4 LIP Programme B1 sets out proposals for scoping the potential for improving accessibility to Underground stations from their surrounding areas. B2 sets out Brent’s programme for ensuring high levels of personal safety around Tube and Rail stations.

4C.Pr12 – I The Council will develop and regularly review a Crime, Disorder and Misuse of Drugs Strategy.

4C.Pr12 (1) Brent’s Crime, Disorder and Misuse of Drugs Strategy ( Appendix 5) was finalised in the Autumn of 2005 and covers the three year period from 2005-2008. The strategy will be monitored and reviewed annually and updated in 2008. The GLA and Transport for London will be consulted on the draft version of the strategy’s next iteration.

The strategy has been developed by the Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnership, members of which are as follows:

Gareth Daniel Chief Executive, Brent Council

Chief Superintendent Brent Borough Commander, MPS Andy Bamber

Gerard Hollingworth Brent Borough Commander London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority

Stephen Jones Brent Primary Care Trust

Will Jones Assistant Chief Probation Officer, London Probation

David Riddle Chief Clerk, Metropolitan Police Authority

36 Joan Hooper Brent Community Network (of voluntary groups)

Jenny Goodall Chair, Brent Drug and Alcohol Action Team

4C.Pr12 (2) The Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnership recognises that crime and disorder on public transport systems can have serious consequences for their operation.

Many crime and disorder problems occurring in the wider community also occur in the public transport environment. However this environment is particularly conducive to certain problems, such as robbery and snatches, theft from vehicles, indecent assault, graffiti and vandalism. For many people, the perception of crime, rather than actual events, is what influences their experiences of public transport.

In recognition of this, the partnership has worked on a number of initiatives to impact on crime within certain locations. A few examples of these are as follows:

• Crime prevention – working with the British Transport Police and Transport for London on increasing crime prevention advice within stations, particularly in ‘hotspot’ locations. Examples include a monthly partnership meeting with the Metropolitan Police and British Transport Police units responsible for policing Underground and National Rail lines in Brent at which specific problems are discussed and solutions devised.

• Robbery – Concentration of Partnership days at hotspot stations. This has included the Community Safety Team and Crime Prevention Officers giving advice and increasing awareness in stations, alongside the use of the Territorial Support Group (TSG) and plain clothed police in streets around the stations.

• Ticket touts / antisocial behaviour – A partnership approach with British Transport Police and Transport for London has resulted in increased information, increased vigilance of staff and support through training. The approach has led to three potential Anti- social Behaviour Orders being issued to ticket touts at a particular station in the borough.

• Partnership – Steps have been taken to increase partnership working around transportation. For example, a member of British Transport Police attends weekly police tasking meetings. Similarly, staff from the Council’s transportation unit also attend the Community Safety Partnerships operational meetings.

4C.Pr12 (3) More specifically, the Crime, Disorder and Misuse of Drugs Strategy sets out the following objectives for reducing the amount of crime on Brent’s transport system:

37 Anti-social behaviour • Transport hubs attract various forms of antisocial behaviour, two of the most prevalent being ticket touting and begging at tube stations. Links with the various agencies involved in transport (TfL, , BTP, NORP, etc), will be formalised in the anti- social behaviour strategy.

Acquisitive crime • Transport interchanges are highly related to hotspot locations for robbery, with many offences taking place on public transport or in roads surrounding transport interchanges. There is often also increased theft of and from motor vehicles in car parks and areas around Tube and rail stations and a problem of cycle theft. The acquisitive crime group will work to increase awareness and target operations at these locations, including ‘awareness days’. The group also works with TfL and BTP to increase the amount of information at transport hubs.

Guns • Intelligence-led policing operations are able to target offenders travelling across the borough by private transport, whilst ‘Operation Gobstopper’ will help to catch offenders travelling by bus. ‘Not another Drop’ has, in partnership with the Serious Crime Directorate, pioneered the use of bus advertising to raise public awareness about gun crime.

Sexual offences • The Council will develop a ‘Home Safe and Sound’ initiative, which is a club and taxi partnership aimed at safeguarding women from stranger and sexual assault. The initiative is an integral part of the Council’s support for TfL’s Safer Travel at Night initiative.

Drugs and alcohol • Buses and taxis are essential around drinking hubs in order to minimise the incidence of drink-driving. However transport hubs are attractive to street drinkers and drug addicts as they provide a means of income (begging and ticket touting) and shelter. The Drug and Alcohol Action Team will work closely with enforcement agencies to ensure an holistic approach to the problems caused by drug and drink-related anti-social behaviour.

Other initiatives • Programmes MISC 1-3 and 6 and K1 set out a range of related initiatives in support of the Strategy which is included in Appendix 5; these include equipping police officers with cycles, as bicycles have proven to be an effective tool for preventing and resolving criminal activity.

4C.Pr12 (4) Monitoring: Please refer to Chapter 9 (Performance Measures) in this LIP for details of how the outcomes of the Crime and Disorder and Community Safety Strategy will be monitored. Please also refer to the Strategy itself (available on request when completed).

38

4C.Pr12 – II The Council will promote TfL’s ‘Safer Travel at Night’ initiative for improving personal safety and security in getting to and from Underground and national rail stations.

4C.Pr12 (5) Safer Travel at Night was launched by the GLA in 2001 and seeks to raise awareness among people travelling at night of the dangers of walking alone or taking unlicensed minicabs. In January 2005, TfL engaged the Good Going programme to develop a strategy to promote Safer Travel at Night to the residents of the 32 London Boroughs and the Corporation of London. Brent will promote Safer Travel at Night by targeting vulnerable groups such as shift workers, pub-goers, students and women.

The initiative’s award-winning website and advertising / publicity campaign, aimed principally at women, has been successful at reducing the number of people using unlicensed cabs. A single telephone number for booking taxis is in operation – 0871 871 8710 .

Brent is the first borough to have produced a Safer Travel at Night map of showing Night Bus routes throughout the borough in relation to the Tube and Rail network to ensure better awareness and navigability of the Night Bus Network in the borough. This complements the significant improvements in frequencies and coverage of Night Bus services which TfL has implemented in the past three years.

4C.Pr12 (6) The following investment is programmed for the years 2006/7— 2008/9 to improve the safety of travel at night (see also Programme B2 ): CCTV, new signage, removal of 'hiding' places, removal of obstructions to escape routes, wider footpaths and improved crossings. These proposals are external to station operational areas and will be additional to TfL London Rail's expenditure in new shelters, improved lighting, new seats and CCTV on each station.

Station Year Cost £k Stonebridge Park* --* --* Harlesden* --* --* Dollis Hill 2009/10 100 Queen’s Park 2008/9 100 Wembley Central* --* --* Kilburn 2008/9 100 Brondesbury* --* --* Kensal Rise* --* --* Kensal Green* --* --* Willesden Green 2008/9 100 Kilburn Park 20010/11 100 * stations within the North Orbital Rail Partnership. Measures will be funded as part of the Area Based Scheme system.

39 Section C National Rail.

Train services in Brent

C1 Three Train Operating Companies provide train services on National Rail lines serving Brent - Silverlink Metro, Chiltern Railways and Southern. The Silverlink Metro service to Euston shares platforms and track with London Underground Bakerloo Line trains between Queens Park and Harrow and Wealdstone.

Legislative background C2 The Railways Bill 2004 (and Railways Act 2005 when on the Statute Book) will significantly change the relationship between TfL and the National Rail system in the London area. TfL will assume a number of the Strategic Rail Authority's roles in the planning and management of London's National Rail services when that organisation is abolished in 2005 . The Council has already had discussions with senior executives of TfL London Rail in order to highlight Brent's needs in relation to the changes to the legislative framework which the Railways Act will bring, and will actively support improvement of rail services.

TfL London Rail C3 Statements by Ian Brown, Chairman of TfL London Rail in January 2004 (The case for investing in London's Railways) and April 2004 (The case for a London Rail Authority) were fully supported by Brent Council.

C4 The Council has also welcomed TfL London Rail's investment during 2004/5 in station and security improvements, notably on the Chiltern Line at Wembley Stadium Station (new signage, new waiting shelters, re-painting) and on Silverlink Metro (security improvements including train and station CCTV, Customer Information Systems, public address systems and help points).

C5 Following the Future of Rail conference on 26 November 2004, Brent Council officers look forward to working in partnership with TfL London Rail to support its expected role in the tendering of the Silverlink Metro franchise. Three of Silverlink Metro's four routes serve Brent:

- Euston - Watford ('D.C. line') - North London Line (Richmond - Willesden Junction - North Woolwich) - West London Line (Willesden Junction-Clapham Junction)

C6 The Council looks forward to working with TfL London Rail to ensure that the future management and operation of these routes provides an enhanced service to Brent and the other London Boroughs which are served by this network.

40 Funding of rail projects C7 Whilst the Council does not have direct control of funds which are available directly for rail infrastructure projects, there are several areas in which there has been close co-operation on funding for various rail projects in recent years. These range from the major reconstruction of the three Wembley Stations involving large inputs of LDA and Section 106 funding, to medium size access projects (such as the re-design of frontage to improve access) and minor projects which improve the external appearance and signage at stations.

Importance of National Rail services to Brent

Silverlink Metro C8 Silverlink Metro (and London Underground Bakerloo Line) trains provide a lifeline service across Brent, from Kenton to Queens Park and onwards to Central London. This includes some areas of very high social deprivation such as Stonebridge Park, Harlesden and Kensal Green. The service is in urgent need of upgrading in terms of infrastructure and rolling stock, but has particularly urgent security issues, containing a number of Brent's crime hotspots in the vicinity of its stations.

Wembley C9 A particular role of this service is to provide a significant share (up to 15%) of public transport capacity for access to the New National Stadium, via the redeveloped . The role of Silverlink (Metro and on event days, County services) and Bakerloo Line trains will be key to the successful operation of the Stadium, and the inclusion of Wembley Central as part of the three station strategy for Wembley's Public Transport policy reflects this. (The other two stations are Wembley Stadium - Chiltern Railways and Wembley Park - London Underground).

Operational issues - Watford DC line C10 The fragmented operation of the Watford DC line is reflected in poor punctuality, shabbily maintained stations which are badly lit and lack clear signage/identity, and the lack of staff. There is serious confusion about who is responsible for the service (not only among the travelling public, but in the railway industry itself). The service not surprisingly fails to fulfil its potential in terms of providing an attractive alternative to car for journeys across Brent and into Central London. Indeed since the introduction of articulated buses in 2003, the 18 bus route appears to have attracted some short distance rail passengers, as the services are largely parallel between Wembley and Euston. (This may be as much to do with London Buses failure to enforce revenue collection as to deficiencies with the train service. However there is no doubt that frequent disruption of timetable and perceived security threat on trains and at stations undermine the perception of speed, reliability and security which should be the hallmark of an excellent train service).

Operational issues - North and West London Lines C11 Similar comments apply to the North and West London Lines, though the fragmentation here is more the result of competing demands for limited Network Rail infrastructure than lack of co-ordination between operators of the passengers service. (It should be noted however that on the West London Line where there are two operators, timetables are not co-

41 ordinated and the basic three trains per hour service have gaps of under 10 minutes and up to 30 minutes. This will become more noticeable when new stations at Shepherds Bush and Imperial Wharf are introduced.) These lines do not have parallel bus services, with the result that if there is disruption to the service, the alternative often involves a much longer journey via Central London. TfL's investment in additional train services and station improvements on the North London Line is a welcome indication that this route is assuming its rightful strategic significance in London's transport network rather than its current role as the 'Cinderella Line'.

Refranchising C12 TfL London Rail's role in the re-franchising of the network currently operated by Silverlink Metro offers a major opportunity to address many of the problems which affect this line. The Council will work closely with TfL Rail, and as required with Silverlink Metro and London Underground, to ensure that standards are raised so that these routes provide a service which is attractive to passengers, rather than symbolising the decay of the National rail system as the service does now.

Funding C13 The improvements will require considerable additional funding, which TfL London Rail has already started to provide. The Council will use all appropriate funding mechanisms (particularly Section 106) to ensure that support is provided to improve stations and their surrounding areas. A precedent for this has already been set at Wembley Central, where a partnership approach worked successfully for improvement of personal security in the station itself, and at Harlesden and Willesden Junction, where the Council and Park Royal Partnership have contributed to significant improvements in station and interchange facilities.

Willesden Junction C14 The increasing focus of the Silverlink Metro network on the Willesden Junction hub is welcome news for Brent and adjoining boroughs, particularly in terms of employment opportunities. As well as becoming more significant as an operational hub, the Council would like to see Willesden Junction station become a major interchange on the network which will link the North, East and West London Lines when the long term plans for services from Clapham Junction via Peckham to Dalston Junction and Highbury and Islington come to fruition.

C15 The unique connections which are already available could be strengthened by the reinstatement of the platforms for semi fast trains on the , and possibly future cross-London services. This would reduce pressure on the Central London tube network by making it unnecessary to travel via the London termini to get from, for example, Milton Keynes to Eastbourne, or Harrow to Bromley. The proximity of Willesden Junction to the Park Royal industrial area is significant and offers considerable scope for the enhancement of public transport access to an area which is planned to have some 60,000 jobs within the timescale of this plan.

42 Chiltern Railways C16 There are only two Chiltern Railways stations in Brent, Wembley Stadium and Sudbury and Harrow Road. A third station, Sudbury Hill Harrow, lies just over the borough boundary, but serves many Brent residents. Chiltern is also building a train maintenance depot adjacent to Wembley Stadium Station, which will provide local employment as well as releasing space at Marylebone to allow expansion of platform space there.

Stations C17 TfL has contributed to the upgrade of signage and waiting facilities at Wembley Stadium Station, and the entrance to Sudbury and Harrow Road was enhanced as part of a station accessibility project in the 2002/3 BSP. However both stations are normally unstaffed and offer minimal facilities apart from ticket machines, customer information screens, help points and CCTV surveillance.

C18 Sudbury and Harrow Road station is an unstaffed halt with a single island platform. It features train information monitors, but has few other amenities and not many trains -see below.

Wembley Stadium—three stations C19 Wembley Stadium Station is being improved as part of the three station strategy for Wembley. This includes the construction of the new White Horse Bridge (with lift and stair access to the platforms) which also forms part of the pedestrian route to Wembley Central, lengthening and widening of platforms to accommodate eight-car trains and crowds; and passive provision for a future ticket hall in anticipation of possible future demand when the Quintain Development is fully operational. In addition to local passengers, the station is also expected to handle charter train shuttle services to and from Marylebone on stadium event days. Marshalling areas for crowd control will be provided between the station and stadium on event days.

C20 At Wembley Park station, considerable investment has been made to include larger station concourses, flow-based internal layouts, improved access between platforms and improved ticketing facilities. The stairs leading from the station to Olympic Way have been significantly widened and the Olympic Square now includes new hard landscaping and a relocated taxi rank. Improved bus stop facilities will be provided on Bridge road, near the station access. Covered cycle parking has been installed on the forecourt of the station and this may be augmented by more secure long- stay cycle parking provision.

C21 At Wembley Central station, a new footbridge has been installed at the rear of the existing station and Station Grove stairs will be widened to accommodate event day crowds. Linked with the St. Modwin development, a row of shops in front of the existing station will be demolished to create a new public square, to be managed by the developers, St. Modwin.

Train service - Wembley Stadium, Sudbury and Harrow Road stations C22 Although journey times to and from Marylebone are very rapid (an average of eleven minutes to Wembley Stadium and fifteen to/from Sudbury and Harrow Road) the train service is not designed to provide a regular interval local service. Calls at these stations are fitted in around the rest of the

43 timetable from stations as distant as Kidderminster, Stratford on Avon and Birmingham. This results in a dearth of trains at peak hours (except at Sudbury and Harrow Road which now has only nine trains in total on weekdays, morning peak into London/evening peak out of London) and some irregular intervals at other times. Whilst the punctuality of Chiltern is the best of any trains serving Brent, the idiosyncrasies of the timetable mean that the service prevents Brent passengers from enjoying the full benefits of rapid transport to and from central London. Alternatives to Chiltern Railways are slower, less reliable and generally less comfortable than the Chiltern route.

Sudbury Hill Harrow C23 On a more positive note, Chiltern has increased its service from Sudbury Hill Harrow from occasional trains to a basic hourly service throughout the day on weekdays. This is welcome, but represents maximum utilisation of existing infrastructure and there would be a need for expensive track duplication as well as extra rolling stock to provide a higher frequency local service.

Chiltern Metro C24 The Chiltern Metro concept of regular interval, high frequency trains on the inner section of the Chiltern Line has been dormant for several years. The Council would welcome a review of this, together with a cost-benefit study . The abandonment of plans for Crossrail in North West London makes it important that alternative plans for future development of rail services are developed. Growth in car transport continues apace, and it is vital that the full use is made of this important existing transport corridor. It is interesting to note that the survival of the Chiltern Route to Marylebone as a rail route owes much to the foresight of Brent Council in opposing closure plans in the 1980's. Regrettably, with the exception of Sudbury Hill station, there has been no significant improvement to the timetable on this line since then.

Southern C25 Southern provides a service of sixteen trains on weekdays only between Wembley Central and Clapham Junction, with a number of through trains to and from Brighton via Gatwick Airport. The Council welcomes this service of direct trains from Wembley Central, which avoid the need to change trains in Central London when travelling to destinations such as Croydon, Gatwick and Brighton.

C26 The possible curtailment of the Southern service south of Clapham Junction has been strongly resisted. Further development of this service is urgently required , including calls at Wembley Central by all trains on the Watford- Clapham/Brighton route (most of which pass through Wembley non-stop) and the new stations at Shepherd's Bush and Chelsea. The route could contribute to a reduction in the number of cross-London journeys made by car; furthermore, the direct link to Gatwick Airport has great potential to enhance accessibility for Brent's large international community, as well as visitors to the New National Stadium.

44 4E.Pr7 Brent’s planning policy context, the London Plan and the implementation of the “London Metro” concept, including “Orbirail”.

4E.Pr7 (1) The UDP supports the development of new and improved public transport facilities and infrastructure (see ‘Context’ above) and will be adapted in the Local Development Framework to support plans for the London Metro concept including Orbirail. The safeguarding of the originally proposed Crossrail alignment and Willesden Junction Hub are integral to these proposals. The Crossrail alignment will continue to be protected until a satisfactory alternative alignment has been guaranteed.

4E.Pr7 (2) Brent Council has actively supported the Group in order to help ensure that a) the East London Line extension is built; and b) it can be integrated into Orbirail, including the development of services to and from Willesden Junction.

4E.Pr7 (3) For information on Willesden Junction Hub, please see Proposals 3.Po7, 4E.Pr7 and paragraphs C14-15.

4E.Pr7 (4) The London Metro is a brand name applied to routes with at least a 15 minute ‘turn up and go’ frequency of service. There are three National Rail routes in Brent which the Council would like to see incorporated under this concept; they are Silverlink Metro (Euston / Watford and North London lines) and the Chiltern Marylebone service to Wembley Stadium and the Sudbury stations. Discussions are already in hand with TfL Rail in relation to the future of the Silverlink routes and the Council would welcome the revival of the Chiltern Metro concept which has been dormant for several years.

4E.Pr8 The Council will identify and / or safeguard potential sites for freight handling / transfer from road to rail.

4E.Pr8 (1) The Unitary Development Plan supports the transfer of freight from road to rail (see Context above). In addition, the plan supports the retention or provision of sidings in association with the development of warehousing or development requiring access to the rail network. However there are no sites specifically identified for freight handling.

4E.Pr8 (2) The future of the Royal Mail rail network at Stonebridge Park will be closely monitored. The Council is keen to ensure continued use of rail facilities at this site, whether by Royal Mail or other operators. The Council is concerned about the possibility of this facility becoming solely a lorry terminal with its attendant impacts on Brent’s environmental quality.

4E.Pr8 (3) Brent has a number of existing freight handling facilities, including the major freight handling terminal at Willesden and the Brent Yard, which acts as a sidings facility for International freight services, and Neasden. Proposals have also been discussed in relation to a new freight terminal at Cricklewood.

45 The Council supports the retention, improvement and further development of rail freight sidings for intermodal transfer and will therefore support (in principle) the improvement of existing road infrastructure where appropriate to improve access to the termini from the principal road network, having regard to other policies, particularly the Road Danger Reduction Plan and stakeholder input.

4E.Pr8 (4) London’s railways are congested and there is ‘frustrated demand’ for both passenger and freight services. The Council supports TfL Rail’s strategic proposals, summarised in the document Freight on Rail in London: London’s need—Britain’s benefit to seek the development of the freight ‘bypass’ between Felixtowe and Nuneaton.

4E.Pr9 The Council will seek, through negotiation with London Underground, TfL Rail and train operators, to improve the sense of personal security felt by passengers and to raise more stations in London to the ‘Secure Stations’ standard.

4E.Pr9 (1) New investment in stations at Wembley Stadium and Wembley Central will incorporate measures to improve personal safety of customers. The Council is committed to improving safety at all of the Borough’s stations where necessary; good practice includes:

• Installing closed circuit television on stations and approaches to deter criminal and anti-social activity;

• Improving and maintaining lighting to a high standard that does not leave dark corners (having regard to the need to avoid light spillage pollution);

• Ensuring that in the design of routes to stations, poor sightlines, hiding places and long, narrow paths and passages are avoided wherever possible;

• Providing additional emergency help points, including on approaches to stations;

• Providing and maintaining a clean and welcoming environment for people, including the use of white painting, public art, encouraging retail, cycle parking stations and other positive activity; providing planters and trees on approaches to stations; and ensuring that vigorous maintenance deters and reduces as far as possible the impacts of vandalism including graffiti and dumping;

• Ensuring that staff presence is maintained on stations and encouraging operators to be vigilant in the inspection of tickets;

• Bringing station entrances to the street frontage where they are currently set back, in order to act as a deterrent to problems such as robbery, drug dealing and prostitution in unsupervised passageways leading to stations; and

46 • Ensuring that signage is clear and unambiguous, to prevent street criminals from preying on people who appear unfamiliar with the area.

4E.Pr9 (2) The GLA and TfL will be consulted on future iterations of the Crime, Disorder and Misuse of Drugs Strategy. The Community Safety Partnership will invite relevant officers to take part in key meetings that relate to the strategy’s development and forward consultation versions for comment.

4E.Pr9 (3) Please refer to Proposal 4C.Pr12 for additional information.

4E.Pr10 The Council will have regard to the TfL Interchange Plan.

4E.Pr10 (1) A number of major initiatives are in progress or planned for major transport interchanges in Brent. Wembley Central and Wembley Park stations are being rebuilt in order to provide increased capacity and enhanced facilities in connection with the new National Stadium and Quintain developments. Wembley Stadium station is also being redeveloped and has the potential to provide a public transport interchange given its proximity to the Wembley Boulevard (bus and pedestrian only route to Wembley Park). Elsewhere in the Borough, consultation is in progress or due to start on projects to improve interchanges at Queen’s Park, Brondesbury and Kensal Rise stations.

Existing interchanges (bus /rail)

4E.Pr10 (2) Brent has no large public transport facilities which provide fully integrated interchange between bus, taxi and rail/tube. Willesden Junction is the nearest such facility which, although serving Brent, has most of its bus facilities situated on the LB Hammersmith and Fulham side of the borough boundary. At the majority of rail/tube stations in Brent, buses stop nearby, normally on overbridges which in some cases (e.g. Wembley Central) are situated on busy main roads. As a result, bus stop locations (and taxi ranks where provided) are often sub-optimal in relation to passenger needs, with longer walking distances than desirable, and a lack of covered access between bus, taxi and train.

4E.Pr10 (3) There are only four rail/tube stations in the borough with step-free access to platforms: Kilburn (Jubilee Line), Willesden Junction Low Level (Bakerloo and Silverlink Euston-Watford DC lines), Wembley Stadium (Chiltern Railways) and Sudbury Town (Piccadilly Line). These will be augmented by Wembley Central (Bakerloo, Silverlink Euston-Watford DC lines and Southern Clapham Junction/Gatwick route) and Wembley Park (Metropolitan and Jubilee Lines) in 2006, along with rebuilt access to Wembley Stadium station. These projects are part of the three station strategy serving the new National Stadium at Wembley, and will have improved links between bus, taxi and train.

The Council welcomes these developments but is keen to encourage provision of high quality interchange facilities at other stations in the borough.

47

Future interchanges

4E.Pr10 (4) In addition to the Wembley developments referred to above, the Council is seeking improvements at the following interchanges:

• Queen's Park - relocation of bus stops and re-routing of non-bus traffic to provide shorter walking distances between buses and trains via a buses only route on the south side of the rail bridge. Dialogue is in progress with TfL and the developer of a major regeneration scheme in this area to achieve this objective;

• Stonebridge Park - improvement of this existing interchange to provide a northern gateway to Park Royal and relieve pressure on Wembley Central, in conjunction with the Wembley Fastbus proposal. This could also form part of a future Orbital interchange network(see below);

• First Central - a new tube/bus interchange which also provides a western gateway to Park Royal. This is still at an early stage, in conjunction with the redevelopment of the Guinness/Diageo site in Coronation Road. The bus terminus is complete but a new Central Line station is several years away. Meanwhile an upgrade to the footway linking the bus terminus and Park Royal Piccadilly Line station will form the next stage of the project. This station could also form part of an orbital interchange network (q.v):

- Kilburn High Road and Brondesbury Park (Silverlink Metro network in conjunction with LB Camden): Station and streetscape improvement with better interchange access;

- Northwick Park (Metropolitan Line): Step-free access and improved route to new hospital development;

- Willesden Junction (in conjunction with LB Hammersmith and Fulham, Park Royal Partnership, Silverlink, TfL Rail, Network Rail): Rail network improvements and provision of step-free access to North London Line and West London Line platforms).

• Kenton (in conjunction with LB Harrow): Reduction of walking distances between station and bus stops; and

• Wembley—further works. The extensive regeneration of Wembley as a public transport-based initiative over a time scale of up to fifteen years will require additional bus facilities in the future. The existing and planned interchanges at the three Wembley stations will need to be capable of expansion, particularly as the Quintain Estates Development proceeds, with the Wembley Park Boulevard buses-only route at its heart.

48 4E.Pr10 (5) Programmes C1 Area Based schemes: Station access; C2 Non-NORP station access. For information on bus/bus interchanges in Brent, please refer to paragraph D15.

4E.Pr13 The Council will develop programmes and work with London Underground, TfL Rail and train operating companies to improve the accessibility of rail stations.

4E.Pr13 (1) Physical accessibility at stations is being addressed where appropriate as part of the Rail Improvement Plan for North Orbital Railways Partnership (NORP) in the case of Silverlink Metro stations, as part of area redevelopment schemes in other cases, e.g. Queen’s Park, and within the London Underground station enhancement programme being carried out as part of the PPP.

The Council recognises that investing in DDA compliant accessibility at every rail station would incur very high capital costs and whilst a desirable objective, could deprive other rail improvement projects of funds if applied universally. In order to address the key priorities for step-free access at rail stations, Brent has established a five- point scale for station accessibility projects which is being applied throughout the NORP partnership.

The scale allows stations to be prioritised according to a combination of need, feasibility and likely cost in relation to providing step-free platform access. An allied objective is to provide the best possible spread of stations with step-free platform access across the borough.

4E.Pr13 (2) Step-free access to platforms already exists at Kensal Rise (westbound only), Sudbury Town, Willesden Junction and Kilburn stations, it is being developed at Wembley Park, Wembley Central and Wembley Stadium stations, and has a high priority for future implementation at Stonebridge Park, Harlesden, Queen’s Park and Northwick Park stations. The Council is also keen to work with London Underground to enhance the accessibility of stations, especially at Kingsbury, Willesden Green, Alperton, Queen’s Park, Harlesden and Stonebridge Park where step-free access to platforms and trains is desirable.

As part of the station accessibility programme, provision will be made for drop-off points and appropriate adaptation of footways where required. Where possible, enhanced car parking will be included for disabled people.

4G.Pr13 (3) Programmes C1 Area-based schemes: Station Access; C2: Non-NORP scoping for station access schemes. For more information on Area Based scheme submissions, please refer to 4G.Pr11 (3).

4E.Pr14 The Council will not develop ‘park & ride’ in the borough.

4E.Pr14 (1) There are no plans to introduce rail-based Park and Ride within Brent. However, schemes are being provided outside the borough on the Chiltern Line, as part of the promotion of public transport for

49 access to the Wembley Stadium development. This will minimise as far as possible demand for direct travel to the stadium by car and at the same time provide staged sustainable long distance park and ride for other purposes, such as commuting.

4E.Pr14 (2) The Council considers that park and ride would make an unsustainable contribution to London’s transport network, by increasing car dependency for short journeys to stations that are otherwise well-served by the bus network. The Council prefers to continue with its work to enhance the coverage provided by the bus network to make connections and to provide secure cycle parking facilities at stations.

4E.Pr14 (3) Nevertheless, the UDP provides for the development of park and ride as follows:

“If the enhanced public transport system is unable to cope adequately with peak crowds [at Wembley Stadium] then additional measures, such as park & ride, will be sought.”

4E.Po3 Review of existing parking provision in response to the framework for expansion of park & ride facilities in zones 4-6.

4E.Po3 (1) Park and Ride is not supported in this LIP for the reasons stated in 4E.Pr14. However the Council has included programmes for bus network improvements and cycle parking provision as a means of integrating sustainable modes. Consequently there are no proposals for park and ride in the Borough.

4E.Po3 (2) At the very small number of locations in the Borough where station car parks exist, emphasis will be placed upon ensuring adequate access for blue-badge holders, before making other spaces available for general use. At Wembley Park Station, the provision of blue- badge spaces will be in association with the new step-free access to platforms.

4E.Po3 (3) Brent’s Parking and Enforcement Plan (Chapter 7) sets out the Council’s general commitment to reviewing the provision of on and off street parking across the borough. Car parking for rail and Tube passengers will be a consideration in such reviews and the Council notes that many of its parking bays allow for long-stay rail-user parking. However, it is not the Council’s policy to actively encourage railheading by car, which would be the likely result of any increase in parking provision for passengers.

50 Section D Bus

Introduction

D1 Buses are the most important mode of motor transport in Brent, with over 80 million trips served by buses each year. We estimate that almost 70m of these journeys started, finished or were totally within the borough. Annual growth for the past four years has consistently exceeded the London-wide average (2004 estimated increase of more than 14%). The popularity of buses in Brent is in part due to relatively low levels of household car ownership in parts of the borough; however there is an increasing realisation that the bus is the most practical form of transport for most journeys by people in all age groups. Future growth in bus usage is likely to continue and may benefit from modal shift from car users. The Council has some specific proposals to encourage this trend.

D2 The Council welcomes London Buses’ major and continuing investment in the Brent bus network. Additional frequencies and capacity on most routes has greatly improved the attractiveness of bus travel. The entire bus fleet is now low-floor and consists largely of vehicles less than five years old. Bus stops and shelters have been improved and a greatly enhanced provision of information means that there is now much greater awareness of bus services in the borough. The Council aims to work in partnership with London Buses and the lead borough and sector lead borough for the London Bus Priority Network, to complete and maintain a major programme of bus priority measures to ensure optimum use of funding through the Borough Spending Plan. The Council continues to promote improvements, particularly on routes which were once considered to be of minor importance but due to consistent growth are now on a par with some of the original LBPN routes in terms of patronage five years ago.

D3 In addition to conventional London bus services, Brent has been fortunate to attract DfT funding under the Urban Bus Challenge for a small network of demand-responsive minibus services which is operated using low-floor vehicles by Brent Community Transport. The Council is seeking to ensure the continuation of these Brentlink services by applying for additional funding which is required from 2007 onwards. Public demand for Brentlink continues to grow and the routes have enabled people who would otherwise rely on door-to-door transport or be housebound to lead more independently mobile lives. In many cases, the conventional bus network is not appropriate, however Brentlink does interchange with other bus routes and many passengers are now able to access the mainstream bus network thanks to a more direct link which takes them closer to their homes.

D4 Brentlink forms an important element of the public transport hierarchy which in Brent can be described as follows:

• Mainline bus routes (London buses); • Mobility buses (reducing in coverage); • Brentlink demand responsive services; • Dial-a-ride; • Taxicard and taxis.

51 This enables residents of Brent to benefit from a fully-inclusive and affordable transport network.

Freedom Passes

D5 These are available to all senior citizens in Brent. The Council purchases these annually from TfL and the mobility which they confer on the borough’s over 60’s population is essential in ensuring adequate mobility for an increasing section of the population.

London Bus Priority Network

D6 The London Bus Priority Network (LBPN) was originally an 865km network of borough roads across London that complemented the Priority (Red) Routes. It was developed in 1994 by the 33 boroughs and London Transport, who jointly developed in liaison with the Government Office for London (GOL) and the then Traffic Director for London, a cross boundary bus network for the whole of London. To aid boroughs with funding and to assist buses on routes not covered by the original LBPN, the network now covers all borough roads that carry buses.

D7 The LBPN partnership is well established and recognised by TfL and boroughs alike. The LBPN is now in its eleventh year and has been preparing a consistently accepted annual bid on behalf of boroughs for bus priority.

Project Development

D8 The implementation of bus priority schemes on the London Bus Priority Network should continue to be financed at no cost to local authorities. Over the eleven years the project has been allocated a total of £146.65 million and the recent announcement of a further £19 million for expenditure in 2005/06 is testimony to the success of the LBPN as a partnership delivering effective bus priority schemes across the Capital

D9 Up to the end of March 2004 the LBPN as a project has resulted in the boroughs implementing over 3,500 bus priority schemes, and there have been major benefits in Brent, particularly on the Edgware Road and Harrow Road corridors.

Continuing support for the LBPN Partnership

D10 Brent Council is committed to continuing partnership support for the LBPN, to:

• Allow a co-ordinated approach to bus priority and provide a strategy that matches or exceeds the London-wide standard;

• Ensure that the management structure remains in place to allow the boroughs to make the best of their local knowledge and at the same time provide a co-ordinated approach and effective partnership working on the project; and

• Co-ordinate future years’ package bids for funding through the appropriate bidding processes.

52

An Orbital Interchange network using bus based transport?

D11 The planned and proposed improvements to interchanges at Wembley Park, Stonebridge Park and First Central could form the nucleus of a unique opportunity. Together with the concept of Wembley-Park Royal Transit (q.v.) it would be possible to forge a high quality orbital public transport link between five London Underground lines and two or more National rail lines in North West London. The distance from Wembley Park Station to Park Royal Station is just 2.5 miles but the journey by public transport takes anything from 45 minutes to 1.5 hours or longer (and is often best achieved via Central London rather than by a combination of slow and indirect bus routes).

Wembley Fastbus D12 A direct link between Wembley Park, Wembley Stadium, Stonebridge Park and First Central stations (see Wembley-Park Royal transit proposal) would provide interchange between Jubilee, Metropolitan, Chiltern, Bakerloo, Silverlink Metro, Central and Piccadilly lines. With appropriate bus priority measures, or even a dedicated public transport corridor along certain sections (already planned between Wembley Stadium and Wembley Park stations), this could give relatively fast journey times. With appropriate infrastructure at the four interchanges, it would also be fully accessible for all passengers.

D13 This is clearly a long term project but as well as linking key destinations in North West London, it would provide a viable alternative to private car transport on a highly congested part of the North Circular Road corridor. With short extensions to Ealing Broadway and Hendon Central, two more tube lines (District and Northern) and a range of National rail services (Heathrow Connect/Crossrail, First Great Western and Thameslink) could be accessed.

D14 Apart from the benefits to the local transportation network of offering potential for a major reduction in car usage, this concept would provide considerable relief to the Underground and National Rail networks. It would provide for the first time a viable link avoiding Central London interchanges, and offer faster journeys by public transport than will be possible by any other mode on the North Circular Road corridor.

D15 The Council has identified an unprecedented opportunity to create a new public transport corridor between Wembley and Park Royal using a combination of existing bus priority measures and dedicated busways in developments such as Quintain at Wembley and Guinness in Park Royal.

D16 A pre-feasibility study and draft business case has been produced for consultation purposes with various departments within TfL and local stakeholders such as Park Royal Partnership, regeneration agencies and major developers. An incremental approach is recommended starting with a fast bus service using largely existing priority measures and complementing the existing bus network. As demand increases, this can be upgraded to a higher capacity transit type operation (which in the present context would almost certainly be bus-based).

53 D17 Before the project can proceed, it will be essential to identify long term sources of capital and revenue funding. London Buses is unable to provide these at present. But further work is in progress to ensure that the route is safeguarded and alternative sources of funding are being sought.

The New National Stadium

D18 The plans for Wembley National Stadium to be a predominantly public transport venue do not assume significant use of local bus services. Historically, these have tended to be suspended in the Wembley area during major events with the emphasis on maintaining service on sections of routes not affected by extreme congestion at Wembley. The welcome reduction in the number of car parking spaces at the new stadium and correspondingly greater emphasis on public transport (train and Tube) should provide an opportunity for greater integrity of local bus services during major events. Whilst the majority of those attending Wembley events will use rail based public transport, it is important to give access to bus services wherever this is feasible.

D19 A forum for transport operators has been established to ensure that event day traffic planning facilitates this wherever possible, taking into account the implications of increased pedestrian movements in Wembley town centre. Close liaison between London Buses, the bus operators Metropolitan Police traffic section, stadium management and the Council’s Wembley Planning team (including a new event control centre) will ensure that buses play an appropriate part in the transport plan for Wembley events.

Interchanges: (bus/bus)

D20 There are no major bus stations in the borough. This is for largely historical reasons arising from the connectivity between bus and rail/tube as explained above. However as part of its public transport strategy the Council encourages provision of improvements for interchange between bus routes through development of good stop, shelter and passenger information provision at key bus destinations, generally supermarkets.

D21 Purpose-built facilities are exemplified at Alperton (Sainsbury's), Brent park (Tesco, with access to IKEA), and Queensbury (Morrisons). Several Brent routes (including the Brentlink fully accessible service) also serve Asda in Park Royal, which has similar facilities just over the LB Ealing boundary.

D22 At the two main hospitals in the borough, Northwick Park Hospital now has a convenient layout of bus stops, stands and shelters which are close to the main entrance, and Central Middlesex Hospital will have similar facilities on completion of its redevelopment.

D23 The Council will work in partnership with London Buses and developers to ensure that the bus network serves, and is served by, interchanges which promote best practice in meeting the needs of bus passengers. The interchanges will also be developed to take account of operational needs, including reasonable provision of standing space for buses and rest/toilet facilities for drivers.

54 4F.Pr2 – I The Council will enforce of bus priority measures in the borough.

4F.Pr2 (1) Brent Council is committed to enforcing bus priority measures including bus lanes serving many routes. Camera enforcement has been implemented and has proved highly effective. The parking and enforcement plan (see Chapter 7 of the LIP) also demonstrates the Council’s commitment.

Bus lane enforcement cameras are operational in the following locations, principally on Harrow Road (route 18):

• High Street Harlesden, Junction of Manor Park Road; • High Road Wembley, junction with Ealing Road; • High Road Wembley, junction with Park Lane • High Road Wembley junction with Cecil Avenue; • Kilburn High Road at Kilburn Square; • Harrow Road, junction with Napier Road, Wembley; • Harrow Road, junction with Neald Crescent, Wembley; • Harrow Road, junction with Sylvia Gardens, Wembley; • Craven Park, junction with Park Road, Harlesden; • Manor Park Road, opposite Tavistock Road, Harlesden; • Bodiam Way, Park Royal (bus and taxi road—two cameras).

The option of installing camera enforcement of waiting and loading restrictions will be investigated, although at the time of writing there were no funds available to LBPN. However it is noted that in the pilot Operation Flowsafe scheme in Harlesden, a period of intensive enforcement resulted in bus delays falling from an average of 22 minutes, to just two minutes. With recent investment in new technology to provide an evidential record of infringements of bus lane and parking/loading regulations, the Council is now in a better position to enforce de-criminalised offences.

Six to 12 months following the implementation of any bus priority measures, the Council undertakes a review of their enforcement, effectiveness and impacts upon other motor traffic. The Council is particularly keen to ensure that new bus lanes do not result in a diversion of rat-running motor traffic into residential areas.

4F.Pr2 (2) The Council also enforces bus lanes using parking attendants (PA’s), subject to and financed through a joint agreement between TfL and the borough which states that, subject to a threshold, should revenues from PCNs produce a shortfall, a subsidy can be claimed from TfL to cover the remainder of the scheme’s running costs. The cost of PA’s and other parking-related staff in 2004/5 was £397,000, of which 100 % was covered by PCN revenues. Since there has been no shortfall in funding, the Council does not anticipate bidding to TfL for running costs subsidy for the foreseeable future. However, capital funding is required to fund additional cameras in order to ensure that the parking account can continue to contribute to other necessary transport schemes.

4F.Pr2 (3) The Council monitors the effectiveness of the operational times of existing bus lanes in conjunction with TfL. To increase the

55 effectiveness of its bus priority measures, the borough will undertake a review of parking and waiting/loading restrictions with a view to identifying areas for enhanced restrictions, particularly at congestion hot-spots.

4F.Pr2 (4) Programme: D1 Ensuring high levels of enforcement on bus lanes.

4F.Pr2 – II The Council will work with London Buses, TfL and partner boroughs to achieve LIP Target 4 (borough contribution to improving bus times through the management of road space) by 2005.

4F.Pr2 (5) Transport for London has published a consultation draft Borough Bus Target and Monitoring Framework for the target, “Boroughs are to reduce, or maintain at 2005 levels, bus journey times on London Bus Priority Initiative bus routes”. More information on this target can be found in Chapter 9, Performance Measures.

4F.Pr2 – III The Council will establish and maintain standards for gritting on bus routes during periods of cold weather.

4F.Pr2 (6) The Council grits the Borough’s roads when ice or snow is predicted. The Council’s main priority in icy weather is to clear a network of roads, including all of those used by daily bus services and to make sure that all road users only have to travel a short distance to get onto a salted route. The Winter maintenance period is 01 November to 31 April.

4F.Pr2 (7) Certain roads in Brent are on ‘gritting routes’. Priority is given to those roads carrying the highest volume of traffic (shopping areas and daily bus routes) and where the risk of collisions is greatest (hilly areas and known seepage areas).

4f.Pr2 (8) During icy and snowy weather, priority routes are gritted first until snow and ice are seen to have melted. After that, resources are directed towards secondary routes (through roads and major roads that lead to bus routes). When all secondary routes are clear, then side roads are gritted where particular problems have been identified. Map 4 shows Brent’s bus priority network.

4F.Pr3 The Council will support the safeguarding and provision of bus standing and garage facilities at agreed locations in association with London Buses.

4F.Pr3 (1) Brent has five bus garages, at Cricklewood, Alperton, , Willesden and Willesden Junction. The Council will resist the loss of bus garages and will seek suitable locations for new and relocated facilities.

4f.Pr3 (2) The Council is concerned that the amount of available bus garaging is both insufficient and poorly located in the Borough. There is a clear need for alternative sites with additional capacity that are better integrated with the operational requirements of routes.

56

4F.Pr3 (3) The Council will identify and agree additional bus standing facilities with London Buses as and when the need for them arises. It will also seek to ensure that sites are allocated in the Local Development Framework.

4F.Pr3 (4) Programmes D2 New bus garages and stands; D3 No.18 bus terminus at Butler’s Green; D12 New premises for Brent Community Transport.

4F.Pr6 The Council will implement effective bus priority programmes for Brent (streetspace allocation and operational hours) to significantly reduce bus delay and journey time variability across the bus network.

4F.Pr6 (1) The Borough Spending Plan supports the further development of bus priority, which it will implement in partnership with London Buses and the operators.

The location of lanes and other measures such as pre-signals, together with bus lane operational hours, are determined at joint route inspection meetings with TfL (including London Buses). The meetings include bus operators, the Police and Council representatives. There is no specific bus users’ group in Brent although the interests of bus users are represented through the public meetings of the Brent Transport and Mobility Forum q.v. 3.Pr1.

Additional pre-scoping studies were commissioned from consultants in late 2005 by TfL / LBPN for a series of bus routes in Brent. Their aim was to assess the effects that predicted motor traffic growth and new development will have on selected bus routes over the next ten years. From the pre-scoping studies, a selection of routes or sections of route will be made to be taken forward for more detailed study to facilitate, where necessary, investment in appropriate bus priority measures.

The Council and North West sector leading borough (Barnet) provided the following information to TfL and LBPN to assist with the study:

• Motor traffic counts where available for route sections within the borough;

• Details of significant development proposals which might affect routes (most notable in Brent is Wembley Stadium which will be a predominantly public transport-accessed cultural/sports destination);

• Details of any significant traffic management changes that are planned which might affect capacity, for example all-green pedestrian phases and new one-way working arrangements; and

57 • Any significant bus priority measures which the Council would like to develop along the route but which have not been raised due to the previous annualised nature of the bus priority programme.

The results of this and other pre-scoping studies (WLTS including Wembley-Park Royal Transit proposals) will be fed into a programme that will be incorporated in the first LIP Annual Progress Report (‘New Programme, Programmes and Proposals’).

4F.Pr6 (2) TfL have provided the Council with a list of 32 bus congestion hotspots. Following analysis of the causes of the congestion, the Council either takes action through enforcement or submits bids for further bus priority schemes where physical measures are needed to alleviate delays to buses. These can take the form of relatively large schemes (for example new bus lanes and signals), or smaller schemes, such as easing kerblines whilst maintaining minimum acceptable footway widths—see standards set out in 4I.Pr2/3.

4F.Pr6 (3) Programmes A1 Public engagement; D4 Bus priority on routes away from ‘A’ roads and busy bus routes; D6 Delivering high levels of bus priority on ‘A’ roads and busy bus routes.

4F.Pr7 - I The Council will work in partnership with TfL to implement, regularly review and monitor a joint bus lane enforcement Service Level Agreement.

4F.Pr7 (1) A new joint service level agreement is being developed that will include the current arrangements with regard to the processing of enforcement evidence from Council and TfL cameras, on-board bus cameras and dedicated parking attendants on foot. Data will be collected by the borough and/or parking enforcement contractors for their monthly reports. The service level agreement will be reviewed annually or when contracts are renewed, to take into account the outcomes of the monitoring.

4F.Pr7 (2) Programme D1 Ensuring high levels of enforcement of bus lanes.

4F.Pr7 – II The Council will introduce clearways at all LBPN bus stops by December 2007/8.

4F.Pr7 (1) The borough will continue with the Bus stop Accessibility programme, introducing clearways at all bus stops on LBPN routes as its first priority. In the second and subsequent years this programme will be extended to cover ‘non-LBPN’ routes focussing in particular on areas with high demands for on-street parking.

All bus stops in the borough will have clearways by the end of the 2006/7 financial year. This will be funded by TfL through the LBPI programme at a cost of £150,000.

4F.Pr7 (2) Programme D5 Review of provision of bus stop clearways.

58 4F.Pr8 – I The Council will implement a programme for achieving high levels of bus priority on ‘A’ roads and busy bus routes (LBPN Phase 1).

4F.Pr8 (1) The Council strongly supports the development of bus priority measures where appropriate across the entire bus network. Proposal 4F.Pr6 describes the pre-scoping report that was commissioned by TfL from Steer Davies Gleave in late 2005 to identify schemes for development over the ten year period 2005-2015 on the LBPN.

Besides bus lanes, the borough will design and implement bus gates, pre-signals and bus only streets with camera enforcement to give buses greater priority and travel advantages over general motor traffic.

The borough notes that, due to the success of investment in new buses, routes and infrastructure, almost all of the borough’s bus routes are now ‘busy’; in response, the programme for busy bus routes will be rolled out across the borough. The Council’s priority is increasingly to enforce completed bus priority measures and to provide new schemes on other routes.

4F.Pr8 (2) Programme D6 Delivering high levels of bus priority on ‘A’ roads and busy bus routes.

4F.Pr8 – II The Council will ensure that high levels of traffic enforcement are an integral part of LBI phase 2 proposals, consistent with the accessible bus network proposals.

4F.Pr8 (2) The Council is committed to the provision of new bus lanes in order to ensure the free flow of buses wherever possible. We have recently increased our Control Room facility and have given our parking contractor the authority to increase staffing levels. This has led in turn to an increase in PCNs.

4F.Pr8 (3) The Council is also re-tendering its Parking Enforcement contract, which has allowed the re-specification of enforcement levels and their variation as necessary. The contract also gives the Council the IT capability to enhance its enforcement capability by processing offences captured by onboard bus cameras and TfL cameras.

4F.Pr8 (4) Bus lanes are fully enforced during hours of operation.

4F.Pr8 (5) Programmes D1 Ensuring high levels of enforcement of bus lanes; D4 Bus priority routes away from ‘A’ roads and busy bus routes; D6 Delivering high levels of bus priority on ‘A’ roads and busy bus routes and others.

4F.Pr8 – III The Council’s traffic engineering proposals and programmes will incorporate measures to mitigate any significant adverse impacts on buses along major bus corridors.

4F.Pr8 (6) The Council’s aim is to effectively manage its street network; part of this aim is to encourage more widespread use of sustainable modes. This means that greater emphasis will be placed upon the Council’s

59 hierarchy of street users (see Chapter 6, the Road Danger Reduction Plan) with regard to all highway design proposals.

The Hierarchy of Road Users has led to the development of a sustainable accessibility audit procedure. The procedure means that all highway schemes must substantially avoid and mitigate any adverse effects with regard to the hierarchy and where possible improve conditions for pedestrians and disabled people, cyclists and bus users.

4F.Pr8 (7) As a result, all schemes will take into consideration the needs of pedestrians and disabled people and cyclists first; then buses, taxis, business access, freight and private motor vehicles.

The Council contacts London Buses and the bus operators in connection with proposed highway schemes to identify any potential problems to find ways of mitigating them.

4F.Pr8 (8) Programme D7 Mitigating the impacts of infrastructure schemes on buses.

4F.Pr11 The Council will ensure that all bus stops are accessible and designed in accordance with TfL guidance.

4F.Pr11 (1) The Council supports the need for both passenger access to bus stops, and bus access to passengers at the kerbside.

4F.Pr11 (2) Standards of access for buses to the kerbline varies across the Borough, taking into account the congested city streets towards the south and some wider, free-flowing avenues to the north. In all cases the Council will aim to provide bus stop cage markings of appropriate length, together with clearway markings and signage as a minimum.

4F.Pr11 (3) The Council will safeguard passenger access to buses by ensuring that the location of bus stops is convenient and consistent with safety requirements and access between footway and bus is as seamless as possible, if necessary with raised kerbing and / or partial kerbline build outs. Street furniture will be minimised in the vicinity of bus stops to ensure safe access and reduce congestion on the footway. In a number of suburban locations, bus stops are located on grass verges and it is the Council’s policy to replace all of these with hard-standing to minimise the risk of accidents caused by passengers slipping when boarding or alighting from buses.

4F.Pr11 (4) The Council is developing an asset register of over 600 bus stop locations which will identify what has been completed already and what is needed, particularly in relation to lighting, footway condition, shelters and kerbs. An update together with any monitoring information will be provided in the Annual Progress Report, together with a prioritisation of bus stop accessibility schemes and a list of schemes already completed with monitoring.

4F.Pr11 (5) Programme D8 Bus stop accessibility.

60

4F.Pr21 The Council will produce a strategy and programme for the implementation of coach parking in cooperation with TfL. (particularly in relation to the National Stadium in the case of Brent).

4F.Pr21 (1) Brent Council is committed to ensuring that where new development is likely to attract coach traffic, suitable coach parking and setting down/picking up facilities are provided. Coaches can perform a role as part of a more sustainable transport mix by reducing dependency on private motor cars and relieving pressure on mass transportation systems, notably rail and Underground.

4F.Pr21 (2) Larger developments will, where appropriate, be required to include in their travel plans details for the provision and management of facilities for coaches; the Council will work with developers to review parking and loading arrangements where necessary to ensure that coach traffic can be accommodated, having particular regard to the safety of passengers boarding and alighting via off-side doors.

4F.Pr21 (3) Wembley Stadium is a major new development of National importance in Brent. As part of the proposals to minimise the need to access the site by car, a strategy for coach parking has been published.

4F.Pr21 (4) The UDP states that: “Essential coach parking facilities are also important for tourism. The strategy for dealing with these in the National Stadium area is contained in the Wembley Regeneration Area chapter”.

Policy TRN30: Coaches and Taxis, states that:

“Development likely to attract significant coach traffic (e.g. larger hotels and exhibition facilities) should include adequate coach stopping and parking facilities [one coach parking space per 50 rooms for hotels with more than 50 rooms] which ensure that unloading and alighting do not obstruct the public highway”.

4F. Pr21 (5) The Council is committed to developing a coach parking strategy and a programme for implementing coach parking in co-operation with TfL to complement its existing activities described above and as soon as the need arises.

61 Section E Streets.

Transport Act 2000

E1 The Transport Act 2000 provides in s.268, that a local authority may designate any road in its control as a home zone, including the creation of speed orders, and permits the use of a road for purposes other than passage, provided that persons do not wilfully obstruct the lawful use of the road by others, nor use the road in a way that would obstruct access to premises situated on or adjacent to the road.

E2 The Act also extends the operating hours of school crossing patrols by removing the previous restriction altogether and leaving the authority to decide on operating periods as it sees fit.

E3 The Act also makes provision for the review by the Secretary of State of the provisions in other Acts covering street works, driver training, vehicle licensing and driver hours.

The Traffic Management Act 2004

E4 The Traffic Management Act 2004 seeks to provide better conditions for all road users through the management of the road network. Part 2 of the Act places a network management duty on local authorities to keep traffic flowing, taking account of their other duties and responsibilities, and to co- operate with other authorities to that end.

E5 As part of the arrangements for delivering the network management duty, the Act requires that all traffic authorities appoint a ‘traffic manager’. Whilst the precise duties and responsibilities of the traffic manager are for the local authority to decide, the authority must be in a position to exercise the functions that have an impact on traffic flows in a more co-ordinated way.

E6 The Secretary of State has issued guidance to local authorities on the network management duty. If it can be demonstrated conclusively that the Authority is failing with regard to network management, the Act provides for the Secretary of State to appoint a Traffic Director for that authority. Different levels of intervention apply; at one level the Director may perform a monitoring and advising role; at another, the Director may take over some of the traffic management roles of the authority.

E7 The Act also covers road works by Utilities and Highway authorities by seeking to tighten up the regulatory framework within which these undertakers are allowed to dig up local roads and carry out works. Authorities now have more power to ensure the effective co-ordination of works to minimise disruption and improve management. The Act covers the operation of permit schemes and other measures to control utility works, such as restrictions on working times.

E8 Significantly, the Act also allows authorities to require Utilities to resurface large areas of highway, including for example its entire width or a whole lane, in order to avoid scarring and structural weakening.

62 E9 Part 6 of the Act extends the scope for local authorities to take over the enforcement of a number of moving traffic offences (such as ignoring rules at box junctions and banned turns). Authorities are also able to use camera detection and to issue parking enforcement notices by post, and to issue penalty charges for parking on pedestrian crossings.

E10 Section 95 of the Act allows local authorities additional freedom to spend surpluses from their on-street parking account on local environmental improvements as well as parking facilities, road improvements and provision of public transport passenger services. It also enables the Secretary of State to give prescribed authorities complete freedom in how they spend their surpluses from parking accounts.

The London Plan

E11 Policy 3C.14 states that all road schemes in London should:

- Contribute to London’s economic regeneration and development; - Not increase the net traffic capacity of the corridor unless essential to regeneration; - Provide a net benefit to London’s environment; - Improve safety for all users; - Improve conditions for pedestrians, cyclists, disabled people, public transport users and business; - Integrate with local and strategic planning policies.

Schemes should NOT proceed if when judged against these criteria unless their benefits very substantially outweigh their disbenefits.

E12 Policy 3C.16 states that the Mayor will work with strategic partners to reduce motor traffic growth in Outer London by a third and seek zero growth in Outer London town centres.

E13 Policy 3C.17 states that UDPs should contain policies that reflect the Mayor’s Transport Strategy with regard to the London road hierarchy.

E14 Policy 3C.18 states that the boroughs should make better use of London’s streets and secure transport, environmental and regeneration benefits through a comprehensive approach to tackling all of the adverse transport impacts in an area. Such local area treatments may cover:

- Town centres; - Business improvement districts; - Interchange areas; - Neighbourhood renewal areas; and - Other residential areas.

E15 Policy 3C.22 sets out the strategic parking strategy, which is to ensure that on-site car parking in new developments is the minimum necessary and that there is no over-provision that could undermine the use of more sustainable modes. The only exception to this is to ensure that there is adequate parking for disabled people.

63 E16 Policy 3C.23 states that parking standards for town centres should help to enhance the attractiveness of town centres and reduce congestion. The standards should take into account: - The standards set out in Annex 4 of the London Plan; - The current vitality and viability of town centres (policies 3D.1 and 3D.2); - Existing on-and-off street parking provision and controls; - Regeneration and town centre management objectives; - Public transport provision and the need to reduce the need to travel by car; and - Pedestrian and cycle access.

Brent Unitary Development Plan

E17 The Unitary Development Plan supports development that enhances the quality of the built environment and contributes to sustainable transport. The Transport chapter of the plan contains policies that have relevance to this section, including in summary:

• The requirement of large developments to submit transport assessments including proposals to reduce the transport impacts of development in order to make them acceptable through measures such as developer contributions;

• The requirement of certain developments to include travel plans;

• The roles and jurisdiction of different roads in the borough;

• Public transport and public transport accessibility; and

• The creation of walkable and cycleable environments in new development and more generally the environmental enhancement and regeneration of the borough.

E18 UDP policies relating to parking and town centres are set out in more detail in response to the MTS below.

Brent Road Danger Reduction Plan

E19 Brent’s Road Danger Reduction Plan (Chapter 6) will be a key influence on the design and planning of transportation infrastructure in Brent. The plan will form the basis of a Streetscape and Road Danger Reduction Design Manual that will form the interface between policy and design, to ensure that policy is implemented on the ground. This document will be developed independently, and with the involvement of the Council’s traffic management unit.

Please refer to the Road Danger Reduction Plan for relevant policies in the Traffic Management Act, Road Safety Bill and Mayor’s Road Safety Plan.

Brent Parking and Enforcement Plan

E20 The Parking and Enforcement Plan (Chapter 7) sets out the Borough’s parking policies in relation to motor vehicles, powered two wheelers and

64 pedal cycles. It also includes information on how the Borough will use its powers under the Traffic Management Act 2004 and how it will work with TfL and the Metropolitan Police to enforce moving traffic offences.

Mayor’s Transport Strategy

E21 London has a total of 13,600km of streets which are used for a wide variety of purposes. Most streets have frontage development; they cater for pedestrians, cyclists, street activity (such as markets) as well as motor vehicles. Over seven million people live beside a street and over four million people use the streets to get to work. Including motorways, London’s streets cater for some 30 billion vehicle kilometres every year and at the same time most streets act as a social space where people meet, shop, trade, play and exercise.

E22 However, the Strategy recognises that London’s streets fall short of the needs of those that use them. They are too often severely congested; kerbside parking and loading is often badly organised and regulations are often badly enforced. Too many traffic signs are out of date and footways are poorly maintained. Collisions are too prevalent (streets are unnecessarily hazardous) and many people feel insecure when using the streets at night.

The Mayor’s Transport Strategy deals with streets according to a set of priorities (see Chapter 9), road hierarchy and the allocation of street space, traffic management and enforcement. The strategy outlines measures which can be taken to affect the functional allocation of street space to different users, including:

• Vehicle priorities, for example buses or cycles (see Chapter 6, the Road Danger Reduction Plan for the Council’s hierarchy of road users);

• No-stopping controls, parking and loading controls;

• Pedestrian and cycle crossing facilities, pedestrianisation and enhanced footways;

• Speed limits and traffic calming;

• Junction layouts and signal timings (traffic management); and

• Amenity measures, for example landscaping.

Policy 4G.Po1 states that: “ London’s streets should be managed to assist the movement of people, goods and services safely, reliably, expeditiously and with minimum negative environmental impact; to ensure reasonable access to property, and to recognise their use as social spaces.”

E23 The plan includes measures to support the objective of making streets safer and more secure. Brent’s Road Danger Reduction Plan (Chapter 6) supports these objectives and takes an approach to road safety that delivers the dual aim of reducing the number and severity of road collisions and promoting sustainable transport in accordance with the MTS.

65

E24 Parking and enforcement plans are identified as a key part of effective management of the street network, and contribute to safety and convenience for all road users. Please refer to Chapter 7 for Brent’s Parking and Enforcement Plan.

E25 Chapter 40 of the MTS states how the Mayor intends to respond to the needs of disabled people. (Please refer to Brent’s responses to relevant MTS policies and to Chapter 4, which explains how the Council is responding to the Disability Discrimination Act.)

4G.Pr1 The Council will implement motorcycle parking spaces to meet operational requirements and essential need only.

4G Pr1 (1) The Council will install a limited number of motorcycle parking spaces to serve essential needs, however it will not seek specifically to meet projected demand due to safety concerns arising from increasing motorcycle usage, both for motorcyclists themselves and other road users.

4G.Pr1 (2) Programme E1 Powered two-wheeler parking

4G.Pr2 The Council will work with other Authorities to improve data- sharing protocols.

4G.Pr2 (1) The Council contributes information to the DVLA with regard to persistent evaders. In addition, parking attendants are required to provide details of vehicles with expired VED discs. The Council can tow away vehicles but its powers are limited to requiring the payment of fines for the incident for which the vehicle was towed away and not the driver’s backlog of unpaid fines.

4G.Po2 – I The Council will have regard to the functions of the Transport for London Road Network (TLRN) and borough’s street network as follows: On the TLRN and most other ‘A’ roads, there is a general presumption in favour of distribution, particularly for those making business journeys, bus passengers and commercial vehicle operators. On other London roads there is a presumption in favour of access and amenity, particularly for residents, buses, pedestrians and cyclists and where necessary, business access.

The Council will also have regard in the design of schemes to its locally-defined hierarchy of streets and will seek the wider adoption of the network at TfL and among other London boroughs.

4G.Po2 (1) The Transport for London Road Network in Brent comprises the A406 North Circular Road. On this and on certain stretches of Borough ‘A’ roads there is a general presumption in favour of distribution of motor traffic, however it will generally be the case that in town centres and at other key pedestrian and cyclist destinations, this presumption is made secondary to the social function of streets: motor traffic is cautiously welcomed; however the design of the road will seek to influence driver behaviour in ways that reduce the

66 amount of road danger, alter perceptions of risk in favour of vulnerable road users and encourage more walking and cycling.

4G.Po2 (2) The Road Danger Reduction Plan contains the following local hierarchy of road function which seeks to reverse conventional thinking and bring social sustainability considerations to the fore:

The Environmental/social realm :

• Social streets (generally home zones and other streets with motor speed and access restricted); and

• Social streets with a distributor function (having a primary social function and appearance but which are also adapted to carry larger volumes of motor traffic. Example: Exhibition Road.

The intermediate realm:

• Social streets with a through motor traffic and distributor function where motor traffic has priority, but is not allowed to dominate the space. Measures include de-engineering, removal of guardrailing and excessive signage, making wide, direct at- grade pedestrian crossings, providing cycle parking in the median strip and introducing lower speed limits. Example: Kensington High Street and 20mph zones.

The travel (inter-urban) realm :

• Streets that facilitate the distribution of large volumes of motor traffic. Such streets would include the North Circular, the motorway network and lengths of borough principal roads. Other than on motorways, cyclists and pedestrians would be welcomed and their movement appropriately facilitated, however for those who would wish to avoid using such roads, an alternative well- signed network (for cyclists, comprising alternative roads and connecting (off-road) links to maximise permeability and minimise diversion) should exist.

This hierarchy was agreed as a local principle by Brent’s Public Realm Theme Group at its meeting of 7 th November 2005. A map of the network will appear in the Streetscape and Road Danger Reduction Design Manual.

4G.Po2 – II The Council will work with other agencies to improve data sharing protocols, including the borough’s participation in or support of the work of the enforcement task force (the ALG, TfL, Metropolitan Police), whose job it is to improve the coordination of traffic enforcement strategy London.

4G.Po2 (3) The Council has regular meetings with TfL to improve data sharing protocols. These meetings include bus operators and the Traffic Operational Command Unit (TOCU). The Council also exchanges intelligence with the police / TOCU on pinch-points in traffic management, and also provide monthly statistics to TfL, to help

67 monitor SLA-defined enforcement levels. In return, the Council receives TfL’s own monitoring data and responds with plans for identified improvements.

4G.Po2 (4) The Council supports the work of the Enforcement Task force comprising the ALG, TfL and the Metropolitan Police to improve the coordination of traffic enforcement in London.

4G.Pr3 The Council will consider decriminalised enforcement of traffic management regulations including issue of penalty charge notices to drivers for traffic offences including U-turns and stopping in box junctions.

4G.Pr3 (1) The Council’s new Parking and Enforcement Contract allows for traffic regulations to be enforced in future, following the completion of pilot schemes and the subsequent release of enforcement guidance by TfL. Please refer to Chapter 7 , the Parking and Enforcement Plan.

4G.Pr4 The Council will continue to ensure that Orders, signs and lining are in place to ensure that all bus lanes on borough streets are enforceable.

4G.Pr4 (1) There are currently approximately four kilometres of bus lane in Brent which have been successfully enforced using static and on- board cameras. A further four kilometres of bus lane is proposed for implementation in 2005/06.

Bus Lanes in Brent have been implemented from comparatively recently, hence all signage associated with the bus lanes is new. Signage for bus lane enforcement is in accordance with The Traffic Signs Regulations & General Directions 2002, a DfT approved ‘standard’.

4G.Pr4 (2) Bus lane signage and camera enforcement signage is already compliant with DfT standards across the borough. The Council will maintain its bus lane enforcement signs.

4G.Pr7 The Council has developed a Road Danger Reduction Plan setting out how it will meet National and Mayoral targets for reducing the number of reported KSI’s and slight injury incidents by identifying and tackling the principal sources of danger.

4G.Pr7 (1) Brent’s Road Danger Reduction Plan forms Chapter 6 of this LIP and is also available as a separate document. The plan adopts the Road Danger Reduction Forum’s Charter and a hierarchy of road users, in order to link road safety, health, environment and sustainable transportation. It encompasses engineering, enforcement, public engagement, health, air quality and marketing as its key work areas and provides a foundation for the Council’s response to the Mayor’s Transport Strategy and principal targets.

The plan will be reviewed annually to provide an update on progress with meeting casualty reduction targets and provide the outcomes of

68 new ways of measuring and tackling road danger. Brent’s Road Danger Reduction team regularly and continuously updates the situation on the borough’s roads and will extend its remit to include other measures and new approaches to design.

4G.Pr7 (2) Programmes E4 Road Danger Reduction schemes; E5 Streetscape and Road Danger Reduction manual; Powered two-wheeler rider danger reduction, engineering, education and training programme; E7 Review of road danger outside schools by 2008; E8 Education, training and Encouragement; E9 School travel plans—programme for investment; E10 School crossing patrols, minor engineering works.

4G.Pr9 The Council will identify the level and perception of road danger around all primary and secondary schools, and, where relevant, other sites by 2008.

4G.Pr9 (1) The Road Danger Reduction Plan (Chapter 6) sets out the Borough’s approach to road safety. The Council will review road safety around schools by 2008, drawing from data collected by the schools themselves as part of their travel plans, in addition to Stats-19 data and other measures of road danger.

4G.Pr9 (2) Programmes E9 School travel plans—programme for investment; E10 School crossing patrols, minor engineering works.

4G.Pr10 – I The Council will develop a programme for ‘Streets for People’ schemes.

Background 4G.Pr10 (1) Streets-for-People schemes result in a transformation in the environmental quality and safety of areas receiving treatment. The main benefit of schemes will be to alter people’s perception of how their streets can be used: rather than being merely a conduit for motor traffic and parking, streets can become social spaces for community interaction, walking, cycling, play and enjoyment as an extension of people’s living space.

Streets-for-People schemes should not lead to a significant loss of parking space; cars will continue to be welcomed into the area, however their presence should no longer dominate.

Residents will be involved in the design and implementation of schemes from the commencement of the detailed design stage, once funding has been secured. Schemes will provide an opportunity to build existing community capacity to enable local people to work together to improve their environment. The use of community planning techniques will enable the council to ensure the involvement of normally excluded groups, such as elderly people and children.

The focus of Streets for People schemes will be upon reducing car dependency and the dominance of streetscapes by motor vehicles. On this basis, schemes will include secure long-stay cycle parking and city car clubs, normally funded through s.106 contributions. The

69 Council will prioritise investment in locations within areas of high deprivation where danger and other negative externalities of traffic have the greatest impact.

4G.Pr10 (2) Programme E12 Area based schemes: Streets for People. Map 5 Area Based Schemes Please see 4G.Pr11 (3) for further information.

4G.Pr10 – II The Council supports the Mayor’s programme for 100 Public Spaces and will respond by investing in improving the quality of the borough’s public realm.

4G.Pr10 (2) Brent Council does not have any pedestrianised squares or other areas at the present time. However, the MTS proposal is noted and a programme and management principles will be developed if appropriate for the Annual Progress Report. The St. Modwen development in Wembley will include a new public square, in private ownership and under private management arrangements.

4G.Pr11 The Council will work in partnership with TfL to develop a plan of environmental street improvements to enhance the attractiveness of the borough’s town centres.

4G.Pr11 (1) The MTS states that with regard to town centres:

“London’s town centres have diverse character and different locations will require different packages of transport priorities. In some locations the priority will be to improve accessibility, sometimes in conjunction with regeneration or intensification initiatives, whereas in others the priority is likely to be reducing congestion. In many locations, environmental improvements to enable safe and convenient pedestrian movement are required”

4G.Pr11 (2) The UDP also supports measures to improve town centres (in partnership with TfL as follows:

Policy SH1: Network of Town Centres p.174, states that: “The Council will, resources permitting, use its powers to improve the attractiveness of the borough’s town centres listed below. This will include measures to attract appropriate investment and to improve accessibility, the range of facilities and the environment:

MAJOR TOWN CENTRES: OTHER DISTRICT CENTRES:

Wembley* Wembley Park Kilburn* Colindale Kensal Rise MAIN DISTRICT CENTRES: Preston Road Queens Park Burnt Oak Sudbury Cricklewood Neasden* Harlesden Kenton Kingsbury Willesden Green *Asterisked centres have recently Ealing Road* received investment.

70

Policy SH2: Major Town Centres states that:

“Planning proposals should support the maintenance and improvement of shopping and other facilities in Kilburn and Wembley town centres in accordance with their status as major town centres .”

4G.Pr11 (3) The Council will work with Transport for London to deliver significant improvements to the public realm, accessibility and attractiveness of its town centres. This will be achieved as follows:

1. Submission of an Area-based scheme stage 1 programme for consideration by Transport for London. TfL considers these applications according to need, compared with other ABS programmes put forward by Brent or other London boroughs.

2. Upon confirmation of funding, the council will proceed with Stage 2 which includes the extensive involvement of stakeholders in the design and implementation of the scheme, in accordance with the policy for public engagement contained in the Road Danger Reduction Plan.

3. Funding of the schemes will be from a variety of sources:

• Transport for London ABS / BSP • Section 106 planning agreements • Other BSP funded schemes • Council’s own resources • Local BIDs schemes • Regeneration initiatives • Work undertaken in kind

4G.Pr11 (4) Programme E13 Area based schemes: town centres. Map 5 Area Based Schemes.

4G.Pr12 – I Brent’s local traffic growth forecasts

4G.Pr12 (1) A SATURN model was completed in 1999 at a cost of approximately £100,000. This measured the amount of traffic in the borough and congestion with a two-stage forecast to 2003 and 2018. Since the GLA was established, major changes have taken place, including investment in public transport, controlled parking zones and the introduction of the Central London Congestion Charge. The data therefore needs to be updated before any accurate measuring and forecasting can be included in this LIP – information on traffic growth forecasts and the trajectory of traffic growth reduction is not available at present; neither is an annual LAT survey.

4G.Pr12 (2) Traffic data is collected using LATS and the DfT National Road Traffic Survey, which sets an indicator for area-wide vehicle kilometres on borough roads (i.e., not including the TLRN or motorways). All types of vehicular traffic are included in the survey;

71 a separate indicator applies to pedal cycles (LTN3). The current baseline year is January-December 2004, and the indicator is used as a proxy for air quality improvements and reductions of greenhouse emissions. For LATS to be an effective indicator for London, the Council regards it important for the survey to be undertaken annually; alternatively, the Council will seek agreement on a sample of local automatic and manual traffic counts.

4G.Pr12 (3) Programme E14 Updating SATURN; Chapter 9 Performance Measures includes a trajectory for traffic growth by comparison with associated targets.

4G.Pr12 – II The Council anticipates that the robust application of its LIP policies and programmes will contribute to meeting the traffic reduction targets (reduction in the rate of growth of one-third, and zero growth in town centres by 2011).

Background

4G.Pr12 (4) The affirmation by Local Elected Members in December 2004 of their support for the Council’s ‘network management’ approach, which incorporates support for the Mayor’s Transport Strategy, commits the Council to achieving reductions in the present rate of motor traffic growth and achieving zero motor traffic growth in town centres.

4G.Pr12 (5) The Council believes that current levels of motor traffic are detrimental to achieving inward investment, and economic, social and environmental sustainability; increasing pressures are being placed upon the network by background population, economic and traffic growth. The Council is therefore committed to improved management of its network and has set targets to reduce the growth of motor traffic by 2011, with the aspiration of eventually achieving motor traffic reduction compared to the 2001 baseline.

4G.Pr12 (6) A study carried out by Lynn Sloman in association with the Royal Commission Built Environment Fellowship, Transport 2000 and the University of Westminster (2003) studied the traffic reduction effect of various traffic schemes. The report, entitled Less Traffic where people Live, How local transport schemes can help cut traffic suggested that the following measures would produce a reduction in the amount of traffic, either modest in an ‘enlightened business as usual’ model, or substantial in an ‘ambitious change’ model. The study, which also points to a number of useful publications, includes the following information:

• Buses Coordinated bus strategies are a feature of this Local Implementation Plan in terms of promoting interchange, bus priority and the integration of Brent’s bus network into that of the rest of London, through TfL’s franchising arrangements. Sloman includes data from TAS Partnership Quality Bus Partnerships – good practice guide (2001) to state that comprehensive conventional route upgrades (such as LBPI) could produce revenue increases on affected bus routes of between

72 five and 50 per cent. Bus improvements generally could cut national car travel demand by between 0.5 and 0.9 per cent.

The London Travel Report (2004) finds that total passenger kilometres by bus have increased every year since 1998/99 and has increased by almost 50 per cent between 1998/99 and 2003/4. Meanwhile, bus fares have fallen by 12 pence per kilometre since 1999/2000. Sloman suggests that the continuation of simpler fare structures and bus priority measures could lead to bus travel doubling by 2010, with the introduction of congestion charging (expansion) giving a further boost.

• Travel Plans are an important tool in Brent. The Park Royal Partnership has expressed the business view that travel planning is essential, not only for sustainability, but to maintain Park Royal’s attractiveness and viability as a location for business. Studies have shown that enlightened businesses, including business parks and major centres such as Canary Wharf, value the introduction and proper management of travel plans because of the benefits of reduced congestion and the ability to attract workforces.

Sloman suggests that rigorously maintained and monitored, travel plans could, if introduced widely, reduce national car travel demand by between 3.4 per cent and seven per cent in the peak hours. The best performers cited from the DTLR guidance, Making Travel Plans Work (2002) produced peak hour car travel demand reductions of 66% (Orange, Temple Point); 55% (Bluewater); 31% (Plymouth Hospitals NHS Trust); 20% (University of Bristol); 5% (Stockley Park and Boots). The average performance among the best companies was a car travel demand reduction of 18 per cent.

• Information Technology could reduce national peak hour car travel demand by between 5.4 per cent and 9.7 per cent. This involves encouraging employees to work at home (‘telework’). Sloman cites a data review for the DTLR by HOP Associates and the Transport Research Group at the University of Southampton which examined the travel behaviour of employees who teleworked.

Whilst some of the advantages of this approach may be compromised by additional non-work based journeys, Sloman concludes that it does seem clear that teleworking does reduce car mileage among teleworkers.

• Reducing car trips to school Sloman suggests that school travel plans could cut national car travel demand by between 1.4 per cent and 4.5 per cent in the morning and evening peaks.

The proportion of children being driven to school by car increased from around ten per cent of school trips in 1975 to 30 per cent in 1999/2001. A number of reasons are cited; these are parental choice of school, linked trips (parents dropping children

73 off at school on their way to other destinations), lack of awareness of alternatives and concern about road danger and personal safety.

Brent’s School Travel Plan Strategy (Chapter 8) sets out the Council’s plans to introduce and secure good management and monitoring of school travel plans. The Council is the lead borough for school travel planning. See also Programme G8: School Travel Plans—proposals for investment; M4: School Travel Plan development ; MISC 6: Community Safety officers on school buses.

• Individual Marketing . Sloman suggests that individualised marketing could cut national car travel demand by as much as five per cent in urban areas. Individual marketing includes providing travel advice and information to people. The idea works on the basis that for many (or most) journeys by car, a suitable alternative exists, of which people are unaware. A number of methods were reviewed by the DTLR in 2002 – A review of the Effectiveness of personalised journey planning techniques .

• Car Clubs Sloman suggests that car clubs could cut national car travel demand by between 0.02 and 1.6 per cent by 2010. The numbers of schemes in the UK are increasing; however there is some scepticism among people about the relevance of schemes to themselves. Market research by Avis for their Oxford ‘Carvenience’ scheme demonstrated that car clubs are likely to appeal at the present time to a very narrowly defined socio- economic group – namely people who have settled into their careers and are ‘climbing the ladder’. It is essential for successful schemes to identify clusters of this group living in the same areas.

• Increasing cycling . Sloman suggests that measures to increase the amount of cycling could reduce national car travel demand for short trips (of up to 5km) by five per cent or more. UK experience remains that the proportion of journeys remains low with some exceptions, compared to the experience of other EU countries.

The London Travel Report 2004 states that Londoners make over 300,000 cycle trips per day, accounting for less than two per cent of all trips. Men make almost three quarters of cycled trips and about half are made for commuting or in the course of work. Leisure cycling accounts for a further 25 per cent. The London Cycling Action Plan retains headline targets to achieve an 80% increase in cycling levels in the Capital by 2010 and a 200% increase by 2020, compared to cycling levels in 2000.

• Encouraging walking. Sloman suggests that increasing the amount of distance covered by walking could reduce national car travel demand by between 0.1 per cent and 0.2 per cent – these figures are net of the effects of school and workplace travel plans and

74 individualised marketing, which if included would produce a gross reduction in car travel demand of between 0.7 per cent and 1.6 per cent.

Reducing the need to travel, particularly by car, is essential to encouraging walking for local trips to facilities such as schools, libraries, leisure facilities, local employment and shops. The amount of walking is also affected by factors such as trip patterns, land use, densities, perceptions of danger and environmental quality. Higher density developments close to public transport and facilities are more likely to produce walking trips than developments that are remote from facilities.

• Sloman combines all of the measures proposed in her study to produce a total reduction in car travel demand. Under the ‘enlightened business as usual’ scenario, demand could be reduced by nearly five per cent; under an ambitious change scenario, car travel demand could be reduced nationally by just over ten per cent. The estimate excludes additional benefits arising from technology (such as the internet), travel plans relating to non-school or work journeys (such as leisure travel plans) and spatial change arising from land use planning policies, including raising densities and locating development in highly accessible locations. Transport policies including parking restraint, congestion charging and controlled parking zones could further cut car travel demand.

4G.Pr12 (7) In A guide to achieving traffic reduction targets in England and Wales (Professor John Whitelegg, Liverpool John Moores University, December 1997), it is shown that UK traffic reduction targets envisaged by the Road Traffic Reduction Bill were both practical, feasible and beneficial to people. The proposed targets were a 5% reduction in road traffic by 2005 and a 10% reduction by 2010, based on 1990 levels.

In urban areas, the report demonstrated (using specific examples of best practice, mainly from mainland Europe) that a motor traffic reduction of one third could be achieved through the large scale adoption of a range of tried and tested measures, namely:

• Land use policies: the location of higher density development on sites that maximise access on foot, cycle and public transport and which encourage greater use of brownfield sites and empty buildings. This would be the equivalent to the very ‘energetic’ application of PPG13. • Parking policies: Reducing parking provision and increasing its price and enforcement, whilst at the same time bringing about improvements to public transport, cycling and walking—the ‘carrot and stick’ approach; • Walking, cycling and bus promotion techniques including ‘Travelwise’ and school / employer travel planning. This also includes providing better information at public transport nodes and easily-understood, reliable ticketing systems;

75 • Traffic management: Increasing pedestrian, cycle and bus priority at junctions and improving bus priority measures, together with restoring two-way working on gyratories. Reallocating space away from private motor vehicles to give priority to walking, cycling and public transport usage; • Auditing of local authority and large employer travel needs to identify travel efficiencies as part of travel plans. • Co-ordination of the activities of groups of authorities.

4G.Pr12 (8) Oxford City Council completed measures associated with the Oxford Transport Strategy in 1999. It undertook an assessment of the impact of the scheme on traffic flows in 2000, compared with the 1991 baseline. The results show a significant reduction (20%) in the amount of traffic in central Oxford, with no increase on scheme boundary roads onto which traffic might have been displaced, and a substantial increase in walking and public transport use:

• The closure of the High Street to all motors except buses and taxis resulted in a 63 per cent reduction in traffic and no displacement to other / scheme boundary roads; • The scheme produced an increase in the number of visitors: reduced occupancy of city centre car parks (-14%) was outweighed by the increase in the use of buses and park and ride (2,000 additional trips), and local pedestrian flows increased by up to 6,000 people per day; • Traffic flows reduced by 20% across the inner cordon in the year June 1999-2000; • Bus modal share increased from 27% to 44% from 1991-2000; the modal share of cycling remained at around 17% despite the increase in bus patronage and general increase in the number of visitors to the city centre. • The town centre shop vacancy rate has only been 1% since the scheme’s introduction, and two major stores have invested in the city centre, with one offering to pay for customers’ bus fares, subject to a minimum spend.

Source: Oxford City Council / Oxfordshire County Council, Oxford Transport Strategy, Assessment of Impact November 2000.

4G.Pr12 (9) The Mayor’s Transport Strategy and Brent Local Implementation Plan contain progressive policies to achieve modal shift and reduce or eliminate traffic growth across London. Broadly, if rigorously applied, the Council will achieve MTS targets for reducing motor travel demand in the following ways:

Method LIP policies and proposals

2004 Traffic Management Act: The Council Traffic interprets the meaning of “traffic” as including Management pedestrians and cyclists in accordance with its Act; Road Danger road user hierarchy. The Council will design its Reduction Plan; infrastructure so that the borough becomes Cycling Action

76 conducive to walking, cycling and public Plan. transport use in accordance with its Road Danger Reduction Plan and will seek to maximise the contribution of the sustainable modes to resolving the borough’s transport problems.

The Council will support sustainable forms of UDP BE 11; development, including higher density TRN2, TRN4, development in the vicinity of public transport TRN23; TRN63, nodes, development with reduced car parking PS6; Po5, 3.Po7; (appropriate to the amount of local public 3.Po8; 4G.Pr15; transport provision) and city car clubs, and seek 4H.Pr3; to minimise the distance that building materials are transported from source to site.

The Council supports the development of travel UDP TRN2, TRN4, plans (including residential plans) and requires TRN6; 3.Po6, transport assessments for major developments 3.Po7; 4P.Pr4. and requires that new development will benefit and not harm the efficient operation of public transport and accessibility to and from interchanges.

The Council will seek improved integration of 4E.Pr10, 4I.Pr8; public transport services through the 4J.Pr7; 4P.Po2; enhancement and development of interchanges 4P.Pr3; 4P.Pr4; in accordance with the TfL London Interchange 4P.Pr5. Plan and improved accessibility on foot, cycle and taxi. This will promote near-seamless journeys and make public transport a more attractive option.

The Council will seek investment in new and UDP TRN8; 3.Po6 improved station and rail infrastructure for rail and Tube lines, and will work in partnership with the relevant bodies to achieve this objective. The Council will also work in partnership with TfL to invest in station access and personal safety schemes.

The Council supports the retention or relocation UDP TRN9; and enhancement of bus garages and bus stands 4F.Pr3; 4F.Pr21 and the provision of coach parking which contributes to reducing the number of car trips.

The Council supports the development of new PPS6, UDP STR5, high-density trip-generating development in PS6; 3.Po7; locations that are accessible by a choice of 3.Po8; 4G.Po6; modes. In the case of town centres, this will be in accordance with the sequential approach set out in PPS6. In accessible locations, the Council will respond by setting tighter restrictions on parking for the development and/or car

77 clubs/car free development.

The Council will support and enhance the role PPS6, UDP of town centres in order to localise facilities STR29, UDP and reduce dependence on travel, particularly STR30 3.Po7; by car. 3.Po8; 4G.Pr11

The Council will seek developer contributions to UDP TRN4; 3.Po7 support sustainable accessibility, both to and around new development.

The Council will prioritise the implementation, UDP STR7; maintenance and enforcement of the LBPN 3.Po7; 4F.Pr2; ; including bus lanes, bus stop clearways and bus 4F.Pr6; 4F.Pr7; stop accessibility in order to encourage and 4F.Pr8; 4F.Pr9; facilitate additional bus use. The Council will 4F.Pr11; 4G.Pr4; also seek improvements in capacity and the 4I.Pr8; density of the bus network to alleviate overcrowding, improve the convenience and attractiveness of buses and resolve network holes as a key alternative to private cars. General infrastructure schemes will be designed (as far as possible, taking into account Brent’s Hierarchy of Road Users) to minimise and mitigate adverse effects on bus priority.

The Council will, as part of the West London UDP TRN32; Freight Quality Partnership, support a modal 3.Po8; 4E.Pr8; shift of freight from road to rail or water by 4K.Pr2; 4K.Pr3; promoting these modes, protecting existing freight facilities and supporting the development of new ones.

The Council will engage with community groups 3.Pr1; Road and stakeholders to deliver its Local Danger Implementation Plan, in recognition that local Reduction Plan. people are often the best qualified to comment on their areas, and that involvement promotes a sense of ownership of collective activities.

The Council will manage its network to minimise 4G.Po1; Brent disruption to journeys, giving priority to Road Danger movement on foot, cycle and public transport Reduction Plan; (including taxis) in the event of conflict. 4G.Po2 (Priority for general motor traffic is NOT, however an unquestioned priority overriding the social function of the majority of the borough’s streets.)

The Council will enforce parking and other 4G.Po2; 4G.Pr3; regulations and restrictions, including CPZ’s, in 4G.Po5; 4G.Pr15; order to manage traffic and demand for parking Brent Parking space. Parking spaces are a major tool to and Enforcement achieve motor traffic restraint in favour of Plan;

78 public transport, cycling and walking and, together with other measures, can contribute to modal shift.

A high quality public realm can influence driver 4G.Pr10; behaviour and promote local trips on foot and 4G.Pr11; MISC4 cycle. The Council will invest in improving the Brent Road borough’s public realm in accordance with its Danger hierarchy of road users, local street hierarchy Reduction Plan; and framework for engineering investment.

The Council will promote school travel plans to Brent School encourage more trips to and from school on Travel Plan foot, cycle and public transport. Strategy; Proposal M4.

The Council supports the Westward extension of 4G.Pr14 the Congestion Charging Scheme and will seek funding to lock in the benefits of motor traffic reduction and increased use of public transport and cycling.

The Council will not invest in park and ride or 4H.Pr2; 4G.Pr1; station parking, except for use by disabled E21. drivers; nor will it invest in motorcycle parking except for that which is necessary for operational purposes.

The Council will actively support walking in the UDP TRN10, borough and will seek to ensure that the OS21; 4G.Po2; Borough becomes conducive to walking. A wide 4I.Po1; 4I.Pr2; range of proposals, from town centre 4I.Pr3; 4I.Pr6; regeneration projects to enhancements of 4I.pr7; 4I.Pr8. pedestrian links and the provision of leisure Brent Road walks such as the Capital Ring serve to support Danger this objective. Improvements to the public Reduction Plan. realm will be central to future investment in walking. The Council’s locally-defined hierarchy of streets will assist the objective of increasing the amount of walking and reducing the use of the car for short trips.

The Council will actively support cycling in the London Cycling borough in accordance with the London Cycling Action Plan; Action Plan and will seek to ensure that the LTN1; 4J.Po1; cyclists’ network, as defined in Brent Cycling 4J.Pr1; 4J.Pr3; Action Plan, is properly maintained as a whole 4J.Pr4; 4J.Pr5; network that promotes cycle permeability. The 4J.Pr6; 4J.Pr7; Council will also invest strongly in cycle training 4J.Pr8. to the National syllabus for adults and children, to promote a modal shift from the car for trips of an average of 3km in length.

79 If the background research information given for Proposal 4G.Pr12 is correct, then the above measures combined and rigorously applied could produce a reduction in traffic (growth) of between 5% (in an ‘enlightened business as usual’ scenario) and 33% (in an ‘ambitious change’ scenario). The Council’s success at achieving the upper end of this range will depend on the public acceptability of individual proposals and the level of funding available to introduce speedy changes. For this reason, and until further information becomes available, the Council will pursue MTS targets and indicators for motor traffic reduction (please refer to Chapter 9 for target indicators for traffic volumes from the DfT National Road Traffic Survey).

The success of individual measures will be determined by rigorous monitoring, particularly in relation to people’s perceptions of using alternatives to the car for more trips and the need to travel in the first place. All schemes assume an allowance for monitoring activities, which will generally be in the region of 5% of scheme costs.

4G.Pr14 The Council will consider the implications for Brent of the Western Extension of the Mayor’s congestion charging zone.

4G.Pr14 (1) The Council supports the principle and recognises the benefits of congestion charging as an effective measure for reducing the amount of traffic and encouraging modal shift. The Mayor of London agreed the Congestion Charging Scheme extension in September 2005.

4G.Pr14 (2) Only 16 per cent of journeys in the Borough are to Central London. Therefore in four out of five cases, the Congestion Charge extension will have minimal effect. Benefits may be felt however, on arterial routes leading to central London - particularly in the south of the Borough. The Council’s policies for motor traffic reduction, increasing the use of walking, cycling, public transport, public realm and car clubs will seek to ensure that traffic reduction benefits outside of the Congestion Charge are not lost through background local motor traffic increases.

4G.Pr14 (3) The Council’s programme of investment to support the Congestion Charging scheme extension includes the regeneration of Harlesden Town Centre. This Area Based Scheme will be one link in a chain of investment along the Harrow Road. It is estimated that investment in the town centre could reduce bus delays from an average of 22 minutes in the current situation, to just 2 minutes.

4G.Po5 The Council will identify, review and implement new controlled parking zones.

4G Po5 (1) A great deal of work has already been done particularly in the south of the borough to reduce car journeys with the introduction, extension and review of controlled parking zones (CPZs) in residential areas . In the 2005 / 2006 financial year, Brent introduced one new CPZ and carried over four more into 2006/7; in 2006/7, the Council planned to introduce eight schemes including extensions and

80 to review a further seven. The Wembley special parking scheme will be completed by March 2007.

4G.Po5 (2) To maximise the benefits of parking control and traffic calming schemes these measures need to be introduced on an area-wide basis to minimise the migration of traffic and parking from one area to another. Furthermore, both parking and traffic management measures need to be programmed simultaneously to achieve maximum benefit. Brent is therefore committed to continuing to extend CPZs where appropriate, particularly in areas with high parking stress, such as Willesden, Harlesden, Dollis Hill and Neasden.

4G.Po5 (3) CPZs are a key part of an integrated transport policy designed to encourage a modal shift from the car to sustainable modes of transport and to reduce parking stress. Additional benefits include the presence of enforcement personnel on the streets which can act as a deterrent to crime, as well as a means of identifying and removing abandoned vehicles and identifying untaxed vehicles. As part of ‘traffic management areas’, CPZs can form part of an effective strategy to encourage a shift to more sustainable modes.

4G.Po5 (4) Programme E3 Review and provision of CPZs.

4G.Pr15 The Council will take into account the parking needs of disabled motorists and the servicing and delivery needs of businesses. The approach to reviewing parking and loading restrictions on ‘A’ roads and busy bus routes will be similar to that taken on the TLRN and help to facilitate the development of a parallel approach as set out by MTS Proposal 4G.Pr18.

4G Pr15 (1) The Council is undertaking a review of parking and loading restrictions on bus routes identified in the London Bus Priority Network programme. For non-LBPN routes, there will be an ongoing review which will include liaison with the bus operators to identify ‘hotspots’ and a review of infringements of waiting and loading restrictions on ‘A’ and busy bus routes.

4G.Pr15 (2) Brent provides designated disabled persons’ parking bays in the Borough. ‘Blue Badge’ holders are also allowed to park on single yellow lines where there are no specific restrictions and in metered and residents’ bays.

4G.Pr15 (3) The Council has a PCN cancellation policy for Blue Badge holders, where they can prove that they have a badge and were complying with the scheme of relaxed restrictions. In addition, the Council allows vehicle users with badges issued by other London Boroughs to park in Brent.

4G.Pr15 (4) Loading and unloading is permitted throughout the Borough, including on double-yellow line restrictions, except where it is specifically prohibited. The Council’s enforcement policy allows for an observation period for commercial vehicles before PCN issue. PCNs issued to drivers are normally cancelled if drivers show

81 evidence that they were in fact loading or unloading and that it would be impractical to do this at a legal loading location.

4G.Pr15 (5) A Legal Loading Plan will be developed for town centres in partnership with local businesses to resolve the issue of goods vehicles being unable to service businesses without parking illegally. The Plan will be developed in conjunction with the West London Freight Quality Partnership.

4G.Pr15 (5) The Council adopts a similar approach to reviewing parking and loading restrictions on ‘A’ roads and busy roads that takes into account Road Danger Reduction objectives including the hierarchy of road users; the need to give greater priority to pedestrians, disabled people and cyclists; and the need to reduce or eliminate traffic growth in accordance with the MTS. 4G.Pr15 (6) The Parking and Enforcement Plan sets out the borough’s approach to consultation on parking matters. The Council, when reviewing or designing parking control arrangements will work with businesses to ensure fair and locally-applicable arrangements that include measures for legal loading.

4G.Pr15 (7) Programme E15 Review of parking and loading restrictions on ‘A’ roads and busy bus routes; E21 review of parking for disabled drivers; Chapter 7 Parking and Enforcement Plan. Map 6 CPZs.

4G.Po6 The Council will use its planning powers to limit the amount of parking provided through public off-street car parks (including temporary car parks) and parking provided for employment development and residential parking standards, having regard to the parking standards set out in the London Plan.

4G.Po6 (1) The UDP states that with regard to off-street public car parks:

Policy TRN26: The loss to alternative uses of car parking will be permitted—where the transport impact of the loss is acceptable; where the retention of the parking would not be acceptable; and where station parking is no longer appropriate.

Policy TRN27: Development which results in the net loss of essential off-street parking will be resisted. Essential parking is defined as operational or non-residential parking, town centre or off-street parking complying with the local parking plan [or borough PEP] and off-street residential parking complying with minimum parking standards.

Policy TRN28: Public off-street car parking will only be allowed where it can be shown to meet an essential parking need and providing the applicant enters into an agreement for a management regime and pricing structure including annual reviews to deter commuter parking. Contract parking will only be allowed where it is part of the acceptable residential or operational parking of a named occupier.

82 Planning permissions [for car parks] will be for a temporary period only (normally three years) to prevent the development potential of sites being sterilised, and for parking needs to be reviewed.

4G.Po6 (2) Parking standards set out in the Unitary Development Plan 2004 have regard to the London Plan and are as follows. They will be updated in the Local Development Framework.

Car parking standards

Use Class and description Maximum Standard (note—these describe pre-changes (note—this information is not comprehensive: please refer to the Unitary use classes) Development Plan for the definitive standards. Transportation Strategy does not accept responsibility for any inaccuracy). A1 shops 2,000sqm and over 1 space per 50sqm GFA in town centres; 1 space per 25 sqm GFA in other areas.

2,000sqm or less Up to 400sqm 1 space, plus 1 space per additional 100sqm pro rata thereafter.

The standard also covers ‘quasi-retail’ units including private members’ clubs, advice centres, estate agents, amusement centres, lauderettes, internet cafes and international phone centres. Special attention is paid to shops requiring large amounts of on-street servicing for customers. A3 food and drink Up to 400sqm, 1 space plus 1 space per extra 100sqm pro-rata. Use classes A2, B1, B2 and Maximum of 1 space per 300sqm GFA in or adjacent to town B8 business centres; elsewhere 1 space per 150sqm applies. For changes of use to A2 in shopping centres, no additional parking will be required in addition to its current use. Use class C1 Hotels Maximum of 1 space per 5 bedrooms plus maximum 1 space per 5 employees. Use class D2 assembly and Spaces equivalent to one per 60 patrons plus one space per leisure and theatres 200sqm non-seating /assembly area. A maximum of one space per 5 employees. Employee parking is based on maximum accumulation level; ancillary restaurants may apply the A3 standards. For hotels with over 50 spaces, one coach space should be provided per 50 bed rooms. Use class C2—non residential institutions and D1— hospitals 2 spaces per 5 visitors, based on maximum capacity Places of worship 1 space per 5 beds Hospitals 1 space per 5 workers. Education, other health and community facilities For all education and health uses, the maximum additional visitor / student parking should be 20% of the employee parking. For community uses, the maximum additional parking for visitors should be 5% of the maximum attendance. Use class C2: Residential institutions

Residential One space per 10 bedrooms (standard excludes permanent housing for elderly residents) Hostels 1 space per 16 bedrooms

Maximum employee parking as hotels.

83 Use class C3: Residential development

1 bedroom 1.0 2 bedroom 1.2 3 bedroom 1.6 Over 4 bedrooms 2.0

Elderly persons’ accommodation

Category 1 0.5 Category 2 0.25 Category 2.5 (very sheltered) 0.1 plus one warden space.

Wide bay requirements:

Use classes—A1, A2, A3, C1, 5% of spaces (minimum) should be set aside as wide bays for C2, D1, D2, B1, B2, B8. disabled drivers.

New dwellings (C3) One space per wheelchair unit, adjacent to the dwelling

Spaces should be provided not more than 50m from the building entrance.

Cycle parking standards

Type of Land Use No. of Spaces (minimum) A1 - Shops - Food 1 space per 125 sqm - Non-food 1 space per 300 sqm A3 - Food and Drink - Take-away/ 1 space per 50 sqm - Restaurant 1 space per 20 seats with a minimum of 2 [4] spaces - Public house/wine bar 1 space per 100 sqm licensed floor space B1/A2 - Business/financial and professional 1 space per 125 sqm with a minimum of 2 [4] spaces services B2-B7 - Industrial and B8 - Storage & 1 [2] space per 500sqm with a minimum of 2 [4] Distribution spaces C1 - Hotels and hostels Hotels - Parking for hotel guests is not normally required but [Minimum of 2 spaces should be provided near to or within the hotel entrance lobby for visitors and a minimum of 2 spaces should be provided in addition for hotel patrons] 1 [2] space per 10 members of staff should be provided.

Student Hostels- 1 space per 2 students in students hostels; 1 [2] space per 10 bedrooms for other hostels C2 - Residential institutions 1 space per 8 staff C3 - Dwellings 1 space per unit (garages count) [1 space per bedroom; garages and communal storage areas count if there is sufficient space for cycle storage. Cycle parking should be secure, sheltered (with a roof) and easy to access. Sheffield-type stands, hallway storage or purpose-built locker units are preferred]

84 D1 – Schools – Primary 1 [2] space per 10 staff – Secondary 1 [2] space per 10 staff / students D1 – Non-residential institutions - Doctors’ surgeries, dentists’ surgeries, health centres and clinics 1 space per 5 staff plus 1 space per 5 visitors – Libraries 1 space per 10 staff plus 1 space per 10 visitors - Other, Universities, colleges etc 1 [2] space per 8 [10] staff/students

D2 – Assembly and Leisure – Theatres and Cinemas 1 [2] space per 50 seats with a minimum of 2 spaces

– Leisure/sports/swimming pools 1 space per 10 staff plus additional 1 space per 5 staff for visitors [In some cases an upper threshold for cycle parking standards may be appropriate. These will be considered on the merits of each case presented. In all cases, developers should demonstrate that cycle parking is easily accessible and where possible situated near to the main entrance and / or within the building itself].

4G.Po6 (3) The programme for review of current parking standards will reflect the Council’s commitment to reducing traffic growth by 33 per cent by 2011 outside of town centres and zero per cent in town centres, as follows (refer to Policy 4G.Pr12):

• May 2005 – July 2005 Consultation on options of changes to current Standards.

• Feb 2006 – March 2006 Drafting of Standards.

• July 2006 Final draft of Standards.

• Feb 2007 – May 2007 Inspectors’ examination of Standards.

• September 2007 Adoption date.

4G.Po6 (4) The following developments have been given planning permission as car-free housing:

• 20-22 Station Road, Harlesden (six flats) • 120 High Street Harlesden (nine flats) • 42 Station Parade Willesden (16 flats) This is supported by a car club • 307 Kilburn Lane (five flats) • 169-171 Cricklewood Broadway (six flats) • 251-253 Kilburn High Road, Kilburn (11 flats) • 136 Willesden Lane, Kilburn (nine flats) • 4-8 High Street Harlesden (14 flats) • 79 Leghorn Road, Harlesden (11 flats) • Rear of 37-41 High Street (12 flats) • 20a Rosemead Avenue (five live-work units)

85 • A further nine car free developments are being developed with five or fewer dwellings • Future developments anticipated include 377 Kilburn Road (50 flats) and South Kilburn NDC.

Residents of car free housing developments sign agreements that they will not own cars; in addition, they do not have residents’ parking permits. The provision of CPZ schemes facilitates the development of car-free housing.

4G.Pr16 Off-street public car parks, charging and spaces for disabled drivers.

4G.Pr16 (1) The borough has twelve operational off-street car parks providing 650 parking spaces and additional spaces for disabled drivers. A list of car parks and parking charges are shown in the following tables:

Car Park Number of standard Number of bays Tariff / Charges Name bays for disabled drivers 1. Barham Park 11 2 See tariff below 2. Cecil Avenue 22 0 See tariff below 3. Church Road Not known 0 Free parking 4. Disraeli Road 74 0 Free parking 5. Elm Road* Currently closed* - - 6. Kingsbury Road 60 4 See tariff below 7. Lonsdale 33 0 See tariff below Avenue 8. Neasden Town 35 0 See tariff below Centre 9. Preston Road 167 2 See tariff below 10. Salusbury Road 29 1 See tariff below 11. St.Johns Road 77 3 See tariff below 12. Wendover 29 0 See tariff below Road *100 spaces will become available at the Elm Road Car Park upon completion of the development. Total spaces 537 12 Totals not including Elm Road.

Tariff for Off-Street Parking from April 2006 50p for 1 hour £1 for 2 hours £1.50 for 3 hours £3 for 4 hours or more. These charges will be reviewed to become consistent with Principle 5 (see XXXX)

4G.Pr16 (2) A number of privately owned and operated car parks exist in the borough, and the Council ensures that they operated in accordance with parking policies on strategic matters, pricing and disabled parking. The Council’s ability to intervene in the private operations of public car parks is severely limited in the absence of site-specific planning conditions relating to, for example, the annual review of parking charges.

86 4G.Pr16 (3) Generally, the Council encourages the redevelopment of privately- owned car parks for other uses, particularly those that will increase footfall in town centres and contribute to sustainable accessibility.

4G.Pr6 (4) A map showing public off-street car parks is provided in LIP Chapter 2 (Supporting Contextual Maps).

4G.Pr17 The Council will develop and regularly review a Parking and Enforcement Plan

4G.Pr17 (1) Please refer to Chapter 7 (Parking and Enforcement Plan) which covers all aspects of parking in the borough.

4G.Pr18 The whole of the TLRN has now been converted to red route controls. The Council will implement parallel initiatives on the borough street network having regard to the locally defined hierarchy of streets. Parallel initiatives include:

- Determination of the principal functions of the section of network in terms of the importance of the different road users based on the MTS with TfL by July 2005.

- Assessment of the problems experienced on the section of network by road users taking account of the priorities for main roads identified above by December 2006.

- Design and development of schemes to address the problems identified above by March 2011.

4G.Pr18 (1) The design and location of parking and other Traffic Management Orders in Brent will have regard to the safe and expeditious movement of all traffic, including pedestrians, cyclists, public transport and general motor traffic. On this basis the Council will support parallel initiatives as follows: • The Council will take into account the provisions of the 2004 Traffic Management Act through the application of parallel initiatives in line with the Mayor’s Transport Strategy, whilst recognising the need to bring about innovation, reflect local priorities and have regard to the needs of businesses and residents in the borough. • The Council will determine the principal functions of the borough’s streets on the basis of both statutory street classifications and the locally-determined Hierarchy of Streets (see para. 4G.Pr18(5)) which itself if compliant with the draft Manual for Streets being compiled by consultants WSP and TRL for the Department for Transport. • The Traffic Manager will assess the network in terms of the problems experienced by all road users (pedestrians, disabled people, cyclists, public transport users and drivers of other motor vehicles), taking account of the functions of the network as determined from the above bullet point by December 2006.

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 87 • The Council continues to design and implement schemes to address the problems faced by different road users and will use the outcome of the Assessment to focus investment. • The Council continues to innovate new traffic management and parking measures on borough roads and will share the outcome of scheme development with TfL and other boroughs. Notwithstanding, it is not the Council’s objective to continuously increase capacity for private motor traffic. Instead, the Council’s objective will be to manage the network to ensure that demand for travel is accommodated on a range of mode choices with emphasis on walking, cycling and public transport use.

4G.Pr18 (2) The Council will design and develop schemes to address the problems encountered by different road user groups in accordance with the Road User Hierarchy (methodologies will vary according to road functionality and intensity of usage), Brent Streetscape and Road Danger Reduction Design Manual (to be drafted in 2005) and General principles for Infrastructure design, Implementation and Auditing in the Road Danger Reduction Plan (see Chapter 6).

4G.Pr18 (3) The Transport for London Road Network in Brent comprises the A406 North Circular Road. On this and on certain stretches of Borough ‘A’ roads there is a general presumption in favour of distribution of motor traffic, however it will generally be the case that in town centres and at other key pedestrian and cyclist destinations, this presumption is made secondary to the social function of streets: motor traffic is welcomed; however the design of the road will be to influence driver behaviour in ways that reduce the amount of road danger, alter perceptions of risk in favour of vulnerable road users and thereby encourage more walking and cycling.

For this reason, the Council does not fully support the concepts behind TfL’s parallel initiatives for the Borough’s principal road network (see policy 4G.Po2); however its position is in accordance with 4G.Po1 (see Para E18).

4G.Pr18 (4) The Road Danger Reduction Plan contains the following hierarchy of road function which reverses conventional thinking to bring social considerations to the fore:

The Environmental/social realm :

• Social streets (generally 20mph zones, homezones and other streets with motor speed and access restricted)

• Social streets with a distributor function (having a primary social function and appearance but which are also adapted to carry larger volumes of motor traffic. Example: Exhibition Road.

The intermediate realm:

• Social streets with a through motor traffic and distributor function where motor traffic has priority but is not allowed to

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 88 dominate the space. Measures include de-engineering, removal of guardrailing and excessive signage, making wide, direct at- grade pedestrian crossings, providing cycle parking in the median strip and introducing lower speed limits. Example: Kensington High Street.

The travel (inter/intra-urban) realm :

• Streets that facilitate the distribution of large volumes of traffic. Such streets would include the North Circular, the motorway network and lengths of borough principal roads. Other than on motorways, cyclists and pedestrians would be welcomed and their movement appropriately facilitated, however for those who would wish to avoid using such roads, an alternative well-signed network (for cyclists, comprising alternative roads and connecting (off-road) links to maximise permeability and minimise diversion) should exist.

This hierarchy was agreed as a local principle by Brent’s Public Realm Theme Group at its meeting of 7 th November 2005.

4G.Pr19 The Council will notify the London Traffic Control Centre when incidents, events and works are likely to have an impact on the street network.

4G Pr19 (1) Information will be provided to the LTCC whenever incidents, works or events are likely to have an impact on the borough’s street network. This will be in the form of individual notifications to LTCC whenever congestion is anticipated, or Londonworks whenever the Strategic Road Network (SRN) is affected.

4G.Pr20 The Council will review and implement measures to resolve the borough’s worst congestion bottlenecks.

4G.Pr20 (1) A ‘Saturn’ model of the Borough was developed in 1999 which identified congestion bottlenecks. However the model needs to be updated to take into account changes in travel patterns, increased car ownership and initiatives such as the Central London Congestion Charge, London Bus Priority Network Initiative, the LCN+ and controlled parking zones in the vicinity of rail and tube stations. A typical SATURN study time framework is 12 months following which action to reduce the amount of congestion will be undertaken in accordance with the priorities identified in the Road Danger Reduction Plan which requires the inclusion of pedestrians and cyclists as traffic. In the interim, there is sufficient information available to proceed with a programme for addressing congestion in Kilburn and Neasden.

4G.Pr20 (2) Programme E14 Updating SATURN.

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 89 4G.Pr22 The Council will address current deficiencies in secondary and local signing and street name signing.

4G.Pr22 (1) The Council has a budget of £170,000 dedicated to improving signage in the Borough. The budget is allocated as follows:

- The traffic team has £90,000 to survey directional and regulatory signage on the principal road network and create a database; and

- Streetcare has £80,000 to survey the Borough’s street name plates, create a database and replace or install nameplates as necessary.

The programme for achieving this is:

In 2005: - Borough survey - Complete signage on PRN - Complete signage on roads off the A406 North Circular Road (Harrow Road to Staples Corner) - Unclassified roads (prioritised) In 2005/6: - Complete any remaining PRN signage - Complete Non-Principal Classified Road Network - Unclassified Roads (prioritised) In 2006/7: - Unclassified roads (all remaining)

4G.Pr22 (2) Programme E17 Local street signing and name plates.

4G.Pr23 The Council supports Transport for London’s streetworks taskforce, ensuring ensure the effective coordination and advance planning of all streetworks on the TLRN.

4G.Pr23 (1) Brent’s Traffic Manager attends regular Traffic Liaison Meetings to assist TfL in co-ordinating temporary traffic management measures whilst streetworks are taking place on the TLRN. It is important to ensure that TLRN works are timed not to coincide with works on borough streets that would result in traffic management problems; this also applies vice versa . Contact: Gary Moreira [email protected] .

4G.Pr24 The Council will meet the statutory Network Management Duty in the Traffic Management Act 2004 and will ensure that its Network Management Team acts effectively to ensure that the Duty is carried out.

4G.Pr24 (1) Brent’s traffic manager has been appointed to ensure that the Council meets its statutory Network Management Duty. As part of the duty, a Network Management team has been established to co- ordinate all works or events on the borough’s street network. The Council proposes to co-ordinate all works through a GIS mapping system that will be made available to all road users, including pedestrians and cyclists, via the Council’s website.

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 90

4G.Pr24 (2) The Council is establishing close links and developing open channels of communication with its neighbouring boroughs and TfL with the aim of facilitating the expeditious movement of traffic across borough boundaries.

4G.Pr25 The Council will prepare and regularly review a five year Asset Management Plan.

4G Pr25 (1) The Council is in the process of developing a five-year Asset Management Plan. It is anticipated that it will be completed by 30 th September 2007.

4G.Pr25 (2) Programmes E20 Asset Management Plan.

4G.Pr26 The Council will develop an asset management plan based on TfL’s Street Maintenance Strategy to include details of hours of operation for streetworks.

4G.Pr26 (1) Transport for London’s Street Maintenance Strategy sets out how maintenance will be delivered on the TLRN in accordance with the GLA Act 1999, the Mayor’s Transport Strategy and related policy documents, the Highways Act 1980, the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 and the Environmental Protection Act 1990.

The TfL strategy has two key elements:

• A commitment to work with the London boroughs, users and other stakeholders to develop a long-term transparent approach to the funding and management of all aspects of street maintenance throughout London;

• A commitment to addressing the backlog of road and bridge maintenance as a priority and ensure that these assets are brought back to a good state of repair.

The delivery of the TfL street maintenance strategy is underpinned by:

• A comprehensive asset management planning process (see details of Brent’s plans under 4G.Pr25 above);

• An adaptable business planning process;

• Mechanisms for developing a partnership approach to prioritising maintenance funding on a consistent basis with London boroughs, stakeholders and other users; and

• A clear sense of purpose amongst TfL staff based on an understanding of the aims and objectives of the maintenance service and the skills, competencies, experience, expertise and technical tools needed to deliver the service.

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 91 4G.Pr26 (2) A borough street maintenance strategy is being developed for Brent Council, using the TfL Street Maintenance Strategy as a scoping template. The strategy will incorporate the borough’s forward programme for major footway upgrade projects, road surfacing schemes, improvements to grass verge areas and accessibility, renewal of marginal highway land, new street signage, gully maintenance and the maintenance of road channels and footway boundaries to facilitate street cleansing. In 2005/6, the Executive approved expenditure of £3.95m for the capital programme. This was split as follows:

2005/6 (giving typical % of budget Amount of programme and costs) budget Major footway upgrade 59.5 £2,350k Major carriageway resurfacing 23.0 £900k Improvement to grass verges and 3.0 £130k accessibility Renewal of marginal highway land 2.5 £100k New street signs 4.5 £170k Gully replacement/maintenance 2.5 £100k Concrete roads 2.5 £120k Maintenance of road channels and 2.5 £80k* footway boundaries to facilitate street cleansing (*The amount given is insufficient to keep up with the rate of fault-finding)

Highway priorities

4G.Pr26 (3) The results of annual independent Borough condition surveys, incorporating details of carriageways requiring structural maintenance, are used to determine priorities in accordance with the UK Pavement Management System (PMS) for the footway upgrade and carriageway resurfacing programme. The priority list is set out for inclusion in the annual Borough Spending Plan and is also influenced by factors such as collision statistics and level/nature of usage.

As part of footway maintenance schemes, dropped kerbs and tactile paving are provided at crossing points in accordance with Department for Transport guidelines and best practice. Specific concerns about accessibility are discussed with Brent Association of Disabled People. In 2004, the Council achieved 100% compliance with regard to the percentage of controlled pedestrian crossings at traffic signalled junctions with facilities for the disabled (BVPI 165: see also Chapter 9, Performance Indicators).

The borough has a small number of concrete-finished carriageways, completed some 50 years ago. Many of these roads were subsequently overlaid with bituminous macadam some 30 years ago. Many sections of this overlay are now ‘plucking out’, revealing the original concrete surface, and maintenance is urgently required in order to minimise the chance of more expensive repairs being required in future.

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 92

4G.Pr26 (4) There are approximately 25,000 gullies in the borough and increasing. Most of them were installed in the 1920’s and 1930’s and are now reaching the end of their lifespan. Approximately 100 of these gullies can be replaced annually with existing budgets, though a faster rate of replacement would be desirable as the number of gullies found to be defective each month (10 on average) exceeds the this rate of repair/replacement.

4G.Pr26 (5) In 2004/5, the Council completed a database of street name plates and managed a renewal programme based on a priority list of some 800 plates on the principal road network, roads adjoining the A406 North Circular Road and prioritised unclassified roads.

Funding will be used to survey and renew or rationalise directional and regulatory signs.

Roadworks: hours of operation

4G.Pr26 (6) The Council is committed to delivering a high standard of maintenance and construction of its highway network and associated signage. Part of this commitment is ensuring that disruption, inconvenience and disturbance are minimised as far as possible.

To this end, residents and businesses are informed of any maintenance works and the Council always attempts to accommodate for deliveries and other activity where possible.

Hours of works operation are determined by the individual situations encountered, for instance:

• In quiet residential areas, works will be undertaken during the daytime between the hours of 0800 and 1700 in order to minimise the amount of disturbance caused by the works; and

• In busier streets, the police are contacted to determine the most suitable operating hours; in many instances night time work is necessary to avoid disruption to traffic, and measures are taken to minimise the amount and of disturbance to residents.

4G.Pr26 (7) Programmes E17 Local street signing and name plates; E18 Bridges, structures drainage and sewer works; E19 Highway maintenance; E20 Asset Management Plan.

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 93 Section F Car User.

Transport White Paper 2004

F1 The Transport White Paper 2004 sets out the Government’s policies for transport to 2030. The strategy sets out the Government’s plans to ensure sustained investment to deliver improvements to infrastructure; improvements in transport management and a long term future strategy. For motor traffic, the Government pledges to:

• Invest in new road capacity where it is most needed, assuming that social and environmental costs are justified;

• Lock in the benefits of investment through various measures including some tolling and carpool lanes where appropriate;

• Lead the debate on road pricing and its capacity to lead to better choices for motorists;

• Achieve better network management, exploiting the possibilities of new technology to avoid problems and deal with them rapidly where they occur;

• Use technology to keep people informed both before and during their journeys;

• Achieve freer-flowing local roads to enhance local journeys; and

• Mitigate the environmental impacts of traffic including noise and air pollution.

Transport Act 2000, Traffic Management Act 2004 and Planning Policy Guidance Notes

F2 The Transport Act 2000 provides a statutory basis for a number of measures in the 2004 Transport White Paper and provides a statutory basis for the provision of ‘home zones’ (streets for people). The Traffic Management Act places a network duty upon traffic authorities to appoint a traffic manager, whose role will be to keep traffic moving - more information can be found in the context for section E (Streets).

F3 PPG6 requires developers to adopt a sequential approach to (retail) development in order to protect and enhance town centres and reduce car dependency.

F4 PPG13 seeks to reduce the need to travel, particularly by car, by pairing transportation policy objectives with land use planning and development control. The guidance states that the use of cars can be reduced in the pattern of development and mix of land uses is conducive to walking, cycling and public transport. The PPG states that planning policies can help to maximise the contribution of transport to improving quality of life.

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 94 F5 The objectives of the PPG are set out as follows:

• To promote the use of more sustainable transport choices for both people and for moving freight.

• To promote accessibility to jobs, shopping, leisure facilities and services by public transport, walking and cycling; and

• To reduce the need to travel, especially by car.

F6 The PPG includes guidance for the setting of maximum parking standards for development. Guidance is also included on parking controls and charges, park and ride schemes and traffic management.

F7 With regard to traffic management, PPG13 states that measures should be promoted to improve the quality of local neighbourhoods, enhancing the street environment and improving safety, particularly in sensitive locations, such as residential areas and in the vicinity of schools. In established residential areas, the guidance encourages the ‘creative use of traffic management tools’ including 20mph zones and ‘home zones’ (streets for people).

Road Safety Bill 2004

F8 The Road Safety Bill is in progress and was mentioned in the Queen’s Speech (November 2004). The aim of the Bill is to demonstrate the Government’s commitments on road safety, casualty reduction and enforcement of road traffic law. More information on the Bill can be found in Chapter 9, the Road Danger Reduction Plan.

London Plan

F9 The London Plan contains a number of policies which contain reference to reducing the need to travel, particularly by car. In summary these are:

- 3C.1: Integrating transport and land use policies to encourage patterns of development that reduce the need to travel, particularly by car; - 3C.3: Improving access to and between centres by public transport so as to reduce car dependency; - 3C.15: Only approving new road schemes subject to six criteria relating to regeneration, environment, capacity, safety, walking and cycling and integration of transport and land use policies; - 3C.16: Working to tackle congestion and reduce traffic growth by a third or zero percent in Outer London; - Identifying and implementing a road hierarchy; - 3C.18: Tackling adverse transport impacts in town centres, business improvement districts, interchange areas, neighbourhood renewal areas and other residential areas.

Unitary Development Plan

F9 Car ownership in Brent is low compared to the national average: 63 per cent of households in Brent own a car, with marked variations across the

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 95 borough. Increased traffic levels have reduced the environmental quality of residential and shopping areas in the borough.

F10 The key objectives of the UDP in relation to private cars are as follows:

• Prioritising locations and land uses to achieve sustainable development; • Reducing the need to travel [by car]; and • Protecting and enhancing the environmental quality of the borough.

F11 The three key aims of the UDP – improving the environment, regenerating run-down areas and providing access to the whole community, are conflicting if unsustainable modes such as the private car predominate. The UDP states that early attention needs to be given to reducing the types of car borne trips that can easily be transferred to public transport, cycling or walking. Longer term measures need to be focussed on the more difficult issues of commuter and long distance journeys, through measures such as parking restraint including CPZs.

F12 With the national shift away from building large roads, more emphasis will be placed on making better use of existing roads, through effective traffic management. The UDP includes a framework for making better use of the Borough’s roads—with emphasis on sustainable management of the network and reducing the potential traffic impact of new development.

Mayor’s Transport Strategy

F13 The MTS states that about half of all trips in London are made by car. In outer London, the strategy aims to promote the transfer from cars to public transport, walking and cycling, whilst recognising that the car will remain the most used means of travel, due in large part to the low densities of jobs and population making public transport relatively less effective compared to Inner London. Over 80 per cent of all London car journeys start or finish in Outer London.

F14 Policy 4H.Po1 provides the context for the Mayor’s policies for the car user: “Within the context of the Transport Strategy, targets set out in 4G.Pr13 and the boroughs’ road traffic reduction targets, Transport for London and the London boroughs will work towards making car journeys safer and journey times more reliable, as well as minimising the car’s environmental impacts.”

4H.Pr1 The Council will, resources permitting, implement schemes to provide real-time information on traffic conditions and parking to complement TfL’s initiatives in this area.

4H.Pr1 (1) The Council currently provides details of its controlled parking zones, road closures and works on its website. This information will be enhanced through the introduction of a GIS mapping system displaying all current and future closures, works and events. In addition, significant progress has been made developing a Traffic Management Order database for all the traffic and parking regulations in the borough. Once complete, it is anticipated that information on all waiting restrictions and parking places throughout the borough will be available through the Council website.

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 96

4H.Pr1 (2) The Council aims to investigate the suitability of various intelligent transport systems and integrate these with existing and future TfL initiatives. The use of existing digital CCTV and variable message signs within the borough will be developed to assist with the management of incidents, closures and events .

4H.Pr1 (3) Programme F1 Real-time information for drivers.

4H.Pr2 Park and Ride

4H.Pr2 (1) There are no plans to review sites for or to introduce Park and Ride within Brent. However, schemes are being provided outside the borough on the Chiltern Line, as part of the promotion of public transport for access to the Wembley Stadium development. This will minimise as far as possible demand for direct travel to the stadium by car and at the same time provide staged sustainable long distance park and ride for other purposes, such as commuting.

4H.Pr2 (2) The Council considers that park and ride would make an unsustainable contribution to London’s transport network, by increasing car dependency for short journeys to stations that are otherwise well-served by the bus network. Instead, the Council will continue its work to enhance the coverage provided by the bus, National Rail and Tube network, improve interchange, pedestrian and cycle links and provide secure cycle parking facilities at stations.

4H.Pr2 (3) However, the UDP states that, in relation to station car parking: “The future of car parks serving stations will be reviewed in the plan period. Their loss will only be accepted where on-street parking controls and necessary replacement ‘feeder’ bus services are in place or secured”

“A number of tube and rail stations in the borough have associated car parks. This can produce ‘rail heading’, with traffic attracted to an area to achieve lower rail fares. Drivers seeking to avoid the charges for these facilities also cause severe parking problems in nearby residential streets”

4H.Pr2 (4) The UDP also recognises the need for parking for disabled drivers at and around rail stations, new developments and town centres and improving and maintaining the accessibility of all of its stations. The provision of adequate parking for disabled drivers forms an integral part of this requirement. The Council will therefore (encourage station car park operators to) work with disability groups in Brent to determine the appropriate level of provision in each case.

4H.Pr2 (5) Programmes E3 Review and provision of CPZs; E21 Review of parking provision for disabled drivers; Chapter 7 Parking and Enforcement Plan; C1 and 2 Station accessibility.

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 97 4H.Pr3 The Council will establish and promote car share and car club schemes in Brent.

Car share

4H.Pr3 (1) Brent Council, together with the other five WLTS Boroughs, is a member of the West London Car-Share Scheme which has been funded with £30,000 from TfL through the 2003/4 WLTS Borough Spending Plan. A five year contract was signed with Liftshare in March 2004 to provide a car-sharing database.

4H.Pr3 (2) West London Carshare: A five year contract was signed on 31 st March 2004 and a marketing strategy was agreed between all six boroughs (Harrow are the lead borough). Within the first six months of promotion the scheme showed a very healthy increase in the numbers of members it attracted.

In May 2004, the Mayor of London advised boroughs operating Carshare schemes against promoting them to the general public, owing to fears about personal safety. However, development of the West London Carshare Scheme will be via Section 106 agreements or as part of Business Travel Plans. In this way, there will be considerable scope for growth and future development of the scheme whilst also providing a highly developed, inexpensive initiative for businesses to adopt as part of any Travel Plan scheme.

Car Clubs

4H.Pr3 (3) Brent Council was one of the founder members (together with six other London Boroughs) of the ‘London City Car Club’. Their delivery programme set out over two years (August 2002-March 2004) a four year Car Club project, with TfL agreeing to fund the first two years.

Six Boroughs, with Camden acting as the lead borough, took over the project costs between them and have continued with the scheme; it is anticipated that Brent will rejoin the scheme subject to available funding.

‘London City Car Club’ is continuing to grow, with Brent Council closely monitoring its development with respect to re-integration with the London City Car Club partnership of boroughs. The Council is committed, via Section 106 and wider planning agreements, to promoting the adoption of Car Club schemes in association with new development.

4H.Pr3 (4) Developments that have included car club schemes are as follows:

• 41 out of 54 flats at 92 Walm Lane, Willesden are car-free (no private cars) and there is a car club;

• 108 flats in association with a Sainsbury’s development at Alperton will have a car club, pending the implementation of a CPZ in the area;

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 98 • 16 flats at 42 Station Parade, Willesden have a car club;

• The Quintain Development and Wembley Park Development will comprise a combined total of 4,221 dwellings and a car club. It is hoped that residents will opt to join the club rather than rent private car parking space;

• Residential development at Grange Road, Willesden;

• Future car-club developments are anticipated at Donnington Road, Willesden; South Kilburn NDC; Copland School; Kilburn Square and at 377 Kilburn High Road.

4H.Pr3 (5) Brent also has a number of car-free developments. These are listed in paragraph 4G.Po6 (4).

4H.Pr3 (6) Programmes F2 City Car Clubs; F3 WLTS Car Sharing.

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 99 Section G Walking.

Context

PPG13 / LTN on policy and planning for walking and cycling

G1 PPG13 seeks to reduce the need to travel, particularly by car. It states that walking is the most important mode of travel at the local level, and offers the greatest potential to replace short car trips. Guidance on the preparation of local transport plans requires local authorities to prepare local walking plans which set out how the authorities are to improve conditions for pedestrians, and set targets for increasing the amount of walking.

G2 Local Transport Note 1 – Policy and Planning for Walking and Cycling seeks to achieve schemes that represent a real improvement over existing situations, and where possible, offer an advantage to walking over motor traffic. The LTN contains a hierarchy of solutions that should be considered when planning and designing specific facilities for pedestrians:

Consider first Traffic reduction Speed reduction Reallocation of road space to pedestrians Provision of direct at-grade crossings Improved pedestrian routes on existing desire lines Consider last New pedestrian alignment or grade separation (including indirect crossings)

The Mayor’s Walking Plan

G3 The Mayor’s vision is to make London one of the world’s most walking- friendly cities by 2015. The aim of the walking plan for London is to see more people making walking their first choice of transport for short journeys and to make more trips by a combination of walking and public transport.

G4 The walking environment should be:

• Connected – to public transport interchanges and key attractors by the most direct route;

• Convivial – walking should be a pleasant activity in terms of interaction with other people and the built and natural environment;

• Conspicuous – spaces should be inviting and safe, with attention given to lighting, visibility and surveillance.

• Comfortable – walking should be more enjoyable because of the quality of footways, attractive landscaping and the efficient allocation of roadspace and control of other traffic; and

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 100 • Convenient – the extent to which walking is able to compete with other modes in terms of efficiency, through the implementation of the other factors above.

G5 Local authorities are central to the successful delivery of the walking plan for London. Working in partnership with a broad range of public, voluntary and business sector providers, they can provide the leadership to deliver policy into action in a way that reflects the needs and aspirations of their communities.

G6 Each local authority should develop its own walking plan in response to the London Walking Plan, ensuring that walking becomes part of an integrated transport strategy, with support and participation from all interested organisations. The plan sets out its actions under a series of objectives:

• Objective 1: Improve co-ordination and inclusiveness in the walking plan development. This relates to the involvement of stakeholder groups in partnerships to deliver the walking plan in ways that are tailored to local needs;

• Objective 2: Promoting walking – media and publicity including school travel initiatives such as ‘Walk on Wednesdays’;

• Objective 3: Improving street conditions – including streetscape enhancement and maintenance;

• Objective 4: Improving development proposals and interchanges – to ensure the needs of pedestrians are fully considered in new developments, all proposals should be assessed to make sure that designs maximise pedestrian access and convenience and minimise opportunities for crime. The TfL Interchange programme will similarly aim to improve pedestrian accessibility to and within interchanges;

• Objective 5: Improving safety and security: The plan supports the implementation of Home Zones and 20mph zone areas where these are the most appropriate method of increasing pedestrian safety and priority. Vehicle speed is a key factor affecting the number and severity of pedestrian casualties. Where appropriate, these measures should be incorporated into area treatments and identified in management and maintenance plans. The proposed audit of public spaces will help provide guidance on how to increase personal security through good design; and

• Objective 6: The plan states that timely delivery of the Mayor’s vision will require significant funding and resource input at the regional and local level. Funding will be dependent on the TfL business plan. Funding is available through the BSP under the headings of travel awareness; Safer Routes to School; town centre, residential and interchange treatments; interchange programmes; road safety; accessibility; walking; and highways maintenance.

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 101 London Plan

G7 Policy 3C.20 sets out the Mayor’s policy for improving conditions for walking. It states that UDP/LDF policies should:

- Ensure safe, convenient, accessible and direct pedestrian access is provided from new developments to public transport nodes and key land uses including employment areas, town centres and schools; - Identify, complete and promote high quality walking routes including strategic walks such as the Capital Ring; - Ensure that the pedestrian environment is accessible to the disabled; - Take into account the measures set out in the TfL Walking Plan for London; and - Improve the safety and convenience of pedestrian routes to schools.

Brent Unitary Development Plan

G8 More and more Londoners are using their car instead of walking for relatively short journeys. But more car use makes walking feel unpleasant and unsafe, leading to a vicious circle of decline. Walking makes up approximately 21 per cent of trips (or half of all trips if the use of public transport is included in a journey).

G9 The UDP reflects the policies in the London Walking Plan, in terms of its commitment to making the walking environment connected, convivial, convenient, comfortable and conspicuous; it also recognises that ‘pedestrians’ include people with mobility impairments.

G10 Policy TRN10 states that, ‘The ‘walkability’ of the public environment should be maintained and enhanced – especially to the key destinations such as schools, shopping centres and public transport, and for those with mobility difficulties. This applies both to the impact of development proposals, and traffic management and pedestrian improvement measures.

‘New developments should have safe walking routes which are overlooked, convenient and attractive, within the site and to surrounding facilities and areas. These should normally be along streets, or where not practical or desirable, overlooked (sic) pedestrian routes.

‘There should be level access at pedestrian crossing points.

‘Developments or applications which would block or unacceptably divert public rights of way will not be permitted.’

G11 Policy OS21 identifies and protects ‘Metropolitan Walks’, including the Capital Ring, stating that, ‘The character of paths and other routes which form Brent’s network of Metropolitan Walks will be protected. Development on or near to the route will be expected to take full account of Brent’s Metropolitan Walks network (shown on the proposals map).’ The UDP sets out the Council’s intention to implement the network, and ensure that it is signposted and features information boards along its length.

G12 Other policies for open space, recreation, built environment, town centres and shopping and tourism also have relevance to walking.

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 102

Brent Walking Plan

G13 Brent’s Walking Plan will be drafted in 2006. It will take into account the policies of the Walking Plan for London, the MTS and the UDP. The Road Danger Reduction Plan will provide a key baseline for the plan, which will influence the LDF and other future policy documents.

Brent Road Danger Reduction Plan

G14 The Road Danger Reduction Plan (Chapter 6) represents a progressive approach to delivering road safety in Brent to encourage more widespread use of the sustainable modes including walking. It sets out a road user hierarchy, with pedestrians and disabled people considered first in new highway schemes. It also establishes a set of principles in relation to engineering. The plan will be augmented by a new Streetscape and Road Danger Reduction Design Manual, to be developed early in 2006.

The Mayor’s Transport Strategy

G15 The Mayor’s Transport Strategy states that London needs to be planned for the pedestrian. The pedestrian environment is an important aspect of the quality of life for those who live, work and/or visit in London – promoting walking should involve environmental regeneration and reducing the unpleasantness, inconvenience and danger caused by motor vehicles. Walking is particularly important for children and people without direct access to cars; it is also important as a mode that enables people to make effective use of public transport.

G16 Promoting walking can have significant benefits in environmental, social, health and economic terms. In the past 20 years, motor vehicle use has risen in London whilst walking has declined by 15 per cent. At the same time, premature deaths associated with inactive lifestyles have risen.

G17 Policy 4I.1 states that, ‘The Mayor, through Transport for London and the London Boroughs, and working with relevant organisations, will aim to create and promote a connected, safe, convenient and attractive environment that encourages people to walk and enriches their experience of being out and about, making London one of the world’s most walking friendly cities by 2015.’

4I.Pr2 The Council will deliver infrastructure improvements to ensure better conditions for pedestrians;

4I.Pr3 The Council will contribute towards the effective implementation of the London Walking Plan.

4I.Pr2/3 (1) For many road users, particularly the more vulnerable, the road environment is unnecessarily hazardous. The perception and reality that ‘roads are dangerous places’ means that people’s willingness to walk, and indeed to allow their children to do so independently, is severely curtailed. The Road Danger Reduction Plan sets out a policy that:

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 103 “In accordance with the Hierarchy of Road Users, the Council adopts the position that the principal function of most of the borough’s streets is a focus of the local community. The function and capacity of these streets as a conduit for motor traffic is important but secondary to their social function as part of the public realm; therefore capacity for motor traffic is not an unquestioned priority.”

The Council’s local hierarchy of streets (set out in 4G.Po2 and 4G.Pr18) further emphasises a commitment to improving conditions for pedestrians and encouraging walking.

The Council is committed to improving the pedestrian environment by ensuring that footways are maintained to an accessible standard and more generally in accordance with its obligations under the Disability Discrimination Act (see paragraph 4I.Pr8 (2) below). The Road Danger Reduction Plan (Chapter 6) commits the Council to increasing the amount of pedestrian priority and creating environments that are conducive to walking. The Council’s programme of activities will, in addition to other considerations, have regard to the following:

• Removal of obstructive and / or unnecessary street furniture, including sign posts, poorly placed bollards etc., for example by reviewing the need for and location of street furniture or investigating ways of mounting signs on lamp columns;

• Undertaking measures to increase the amount of pedestrian priority, such as the provision of additional crossings and crossing islands; footway widening, junction tables and traffic calming; and responding to an audit of dropped kerbs;

• Understanding and accommodating pedestrian movement, by identifying and incorporating pedestrian desire lines;

• Ensuring that minimum comfortable footway widths apply where proposals for inset loading and parking bays are being considered (for example as part of bus priority schemes):

- In areas with heavy footfall (‘crowded’ footways in primary shopping areas, public transport nodes and other busy locations), the minimum remaining width excluding private forecourts shall be 3.5m;

- In areas with medium footfall (for example secondary or local shopping areas or locations with short ‘peak’ periods of high pedestrian flows), the minimum remaining footway width excluding private forecourts shall be 2.5m; and

- In areas with light footfall (for example suburban residential streets), the minimum remaining footway width excluding private forecourts shall be 1.9m

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 104 Any exceptions may only be implemented with the extended involvement of pedestrian and disability stakeholder groups. In any case, regard must be had to the needs of sensory-impaired pedestrians and wheelchair users.

This policy notes that many footways may not reach the prescribed minimum standards set out above, in which case they should not be narrowed further.

• Identifying and resolving physical constraints to walking, such as grade separated crossings, busy roads, guard railings and poorly- lit paths by planning to ensure that routes are connected, convivial, conspicuous, comfortable and convenient;

• Enforcing against portable obstructions to walking, such as retailers’ ‘A’ boards and vehicles parked on footways. Seeking ways of resolving the problems created by bursting rubbish bags and road works;

• Ensuring that accessibility to public transport including bus stops is maximised. The Council will seek the provision of raised bus boarders to enable buses to draw up to the kerb (these will be designed so that other traffic can pass waiting buses);

• Ensuring adequate signing including Braille signing for pedestrians, to enhance accessibility and legibility.

4I.Pr2/3 (2) The Council recently commissioned stakeholder group Living Streets (Pedestrian Association) to carry out a Community Street Audit in Harlesden. The project had a number of phases, these were:

1. To engage with local residents and stakeholders by facilitating a Community Street Audit to identify barriers to walking and potential improvements to streets and spaces, and to manage community expectations for the lifetime of the project. This service continues to be provided for the Council free of charge;

2. To recommend ideas and solutions in the form of a report;

3. To assist the Council in the development of funding bids in the Borough Spending Plan;

4. To be involved in the design and implementation of solutions (assuming a successful bid); and

5. To monitor changes in levels of walking and perceptions of the local environment.

The Association of London Government funded the cost of pilot Community Street Audits carried out by Living Streets, whilst the Council contributed officer time in kind. The Council’s partnership with Living Streets has led to the formation of a town centre working group to deliver transportation and regeneration objectives.

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 105 4I.Pr2/3 (3) A new Streetscape and Road Danger Reduction Design Manual, based on best practice and incorporating the policies of the Road Danger Reduction Plan, will be developed in partnership with disabled people’s and pedestrians’ stakeholder groups to enable an effective contribution to be made to the Mayor’s Walking Plan.

4I.Pr2/3 (4) Space Syntax and Intelligent Space are specialists in studying pedestrian desire lines for a number of purposes. Space Syntax have recently modelled desire lines for the Council’s Crime and Disorder Reduction partnership. This work can be expanded to incorporate transportation projects in order to identify priorities for investment in the pedestrian environment. The work could also be expanded to include cyclist desire lines and potential work on improving cycle permeability.

4I.Pr2/3 (5) The Council promotes activities to encourage parents to allow their children to walk to school. Marketing includes ‘Walk to School Week’, ‘Walk on Wednesdays’ and TfL’s Transition booklet. Please see Chapter 8, the School Travel Plan Strategy, for more information; M4: School Travel Plan development.

4I.Pr2/3 (6) Soft measures including travel plans and individual marketing can support marketing strategies to increase the amount of walking in the borough. The Capital Ring and other strategic walking routes are also important tools to encourage more walking. Please refer to policies and proposals elsewhere in this LIP for more information.

4I.Pr2/3 (7) Programmes G1 Better conditions for Pedestrians; G2 Community Street Audits; G3 Improving the connectivity of the pedestrian network and targeting personal safety; G5 Engineering works to support and encourage walking.

4I.Pr 2 - II The Council will work towards improving personal safety and security, especially for women and vulnerable groups, particularly at night.

4I.Pr2 (8) Brent Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnership brings together Brent Council, the Metropolitan Police, London Fire and Emergency Authority, the National Probation Service and Brent Primary Care Service. It has been described as ‘leading community safety in London’.

The Crime, Disorder and Misuse of Drugs Strategy (2005-2008) recognises that the freedom of the public to travel safely within and outside of the Borough is a key factor affecting an individual’s quality of life. The partnership aims to reduce both the reality and the perception of crime and fear of crime associated with travelling.

The Council has recently invested in a safer walking route to Kilburn High Road. With community involvement, a scheme was developed and implemented to include better lighting and CCTV coverage, and so far the scheme has been successful at preventing crime and encouraging people to walk from the residential hinterland.

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 106 The measures introduced in Kilburn will be used as a baseline for future schemes to improve personal safety through the day and night. Please refer to Policy 4E.Pr9 for information on good practice features.

4I.Pr2 (9) Programmes G3 Improving the connectivity of the pedestrian network and targeting personal safety; MISC 5 Pedestrian route improvements on housing estates.

4I.Pr3 is grouped with 4I.Pr2 - I above

4I.Pr4 The Council will work in partnership with TfL and the police to ensure that ‘World Squares’ and other pedestrianised areas are effectively managed.

4I.Pr4 (1) Brent does not have any squares within the World Squares for All project at this time. The Council currently uses Community Wardens to police Squares and its Gardening teams to maintain green spaces.

4I.Pr6 The Council will develop a programme for the improvement and development of strategic routes and will use its planning powers to protect their alignments.

4I.Pr6 (1) The Capital Ring is the only major strategic walking route that passes through the Borough. Proposals to upgrade the route and provide safer and more attractive conditions that are conducive to walking on the route are included in Programme form G4 (Capital Ring).

4I.Pr6 (2) Promotional material is available at the Council’s libraries, recreation / sports centres, community centres and other appropriate locations to which the public have access including the Council’s One-Stop Shops, where translated copies are available in eight local languages and in a variety of accessible formats, including Braille and large print. The Council’s Website will also include publicity, and the Primary Health Care Trust will be given publicity to distribute to hospitals, health centres and directly to patients.

4I.Pr6 (3) The Capital Ring is not the only leisure walking route in the Borough that could be publicised and enhanced. The Grand Union Canal and the Borough’s network of public rights of way are also valuable routes; the public rights of way network is mapped on the Council’s definitive rights of way map and is surveyed annually to ensure that it is accessible and unobstructed, in accordance with the regulations. The Council’s walking plan will include proposals to develop a network of leisure routes including ‘feeder’ routes to the Capital Ring and the Grand Union Canal—see Programmes G6 Walking routes through parks; G7 (Local signed routes and public rights of way).

4I.Pr6 (5) The Council will develop a Rights of Way Improvement Plan in 2006- 7; this will be consistent with other policies of the Local Implementation Plan, the Mayor’s Transport Plan and other policies

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 107 and plans relating to tourism, planning and community. In the meantime, the Borough manages its public rights of way in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000, to maintain them in a usable condition and take opportunities to expand the network.

4I.Pr6 (4) Map 7 Walking Map—Capital Ring, Public rights of way, local signed routes including the Blue Ribbon network and Grand Union Canal.

4I.Pr7 The Council with TfL will review all traffic signal junctions and implement pedestrian phases wherever practicable, taking account of the impact on bus service operation.

4I.Pr7 (1) The application of all-green pedestrian phases at junctions across London is judged a success, because they reduce road danger and the severance effect of busy roads. Elderly, disabled and sensory- impaired people are the most likely to benefit from their introduction.

The Council will review all of its signalised junctions with the intention of including all-green or with-traffic pedestrian crossing phases where they are currently missing or inadequate. The results of this review together with costings will be published in the first LIP Annual Progress Report. At the same time, the Council will review the signals to identify opportunities to provide advance stop lines for cyclists (see Proposal 4J.Pr5).

The Council will incorporate measures to minimise adverse effects on bus services, although in any case it should be noted that pedestrians have a higher status in the Council’s hierarchy of road users.

4I.Pr7 (2) Programme G8 All-green pedestrian phases etc.

4I.Pr8 The Council will continue to develop and implement footway maintenance and improvement schemes with emphasis on enhancing their accessibility for people with mobility and sensory impairments. Stakeholders will be involved in the process of improving the accessibility of the borough on foot.

Bus stop accessibility 4I.Pr8 (1) Please refer to 4F.Pr11 and Programme D8 for information on bus stop accessibility.

Repairs to the footway 4I.Pr8 (2) A proportion of the Council’s annual capital and revenue spending programme is earmarked for improvements to those sections of footway that have been identified as being in greatest need of repair. These improvements are targeted at Borough roads for which no external funding is available. Like all London Boroughs, Brent receives funding from Transport for London through its annual Borough Spending Plan submissions.

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 108 Sections of footway on pre-determined roads are chosen on the basis of an independent condition survey carried out by a specialist contractor. The following criteria form the basis of the selection of roads to be inspected:

• Recommendations from highway engineers; • Nominations from Councillors; • Requests from Brent’s residents and other users of the highway network, supported by highway engineers.

Survey findings are produced as two lists giving a defect rating for each section of footway inspected. Senior officers then analyse the findings for the ‘top tier’ worst sections listed in the reports. The annual budget will only support the inclusion of a small proportion of roads in the annual major works programme.

To determine priorities, footways are prioritised according to the criteria of structural condition, safety implications and amount of usage. In addition, a smaller budget is available to resolve minor footway and carriageway defects.

Public involvement in the development of walking infrastructure 4I.Pr8 (3) The Road Danger Reduction Plan (Chapter 6) sets out how the Council will engage with the public in the development of the borough’s transportation infrastructure. Public engagement will include:

• Where appropriate, commissioning community street audits (or similar) to determine the accessibility of defined areas and to identify solutions that can be implemented using LIP or other funding; • Conducting surveys to determine public perceptions with regard to danger, crime and other matters and seeking solutions that would encourage more walking, particularly by children; • Engaging with schools to identify problems that prevent more children from walking to and from school; • Conducting studies following the implementation of schemes to gauge public satisfaction with completed works.

For further information on how the Council involves the public in transportation planning schemes, please refer to Programme A1 (Public engagement) and Chapter 6 Brent Road Danger Reduction Plan.

4I.Pr8 (4) Programmes G5 Engineering works to support and encourage walking; G8 All-green pedestrian phases etc; G9 Footway maintenance on ‘A’ roads and busy bus routes; G10 Brent Council highway maintenance.

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 109 Section H Cycling

Context

Brent Cycling Action Plan

H1 For a context to this section, please refer to Brent Cycling Action Plan in Appendix 4, which makes reference to the framework provided by all relevant National, London-wide and local policies.

H2 London-wide contextual policies outlined in the action plan include the Mayor’s Transport Strategy, the London Plan, Brent Unitary Development Plan and Brent Road Danger Reduction Plan.

H3 Brent Cycling Action Plan also provides a broad strategic programme for the implementation of the Cyclists’ Network in the borough which is given in more detail in the LIP—please refer to the policies in this section and Programmes H1-8.

H4 Map 9 shows Brent’s cycle network, including LCN+ and non-LCN+ routes and local links.

Mayor’s Transport Strategy

4J.Po1 TfL and the London Boroughs in consultation with stakeholders, will undertake and support measures to make the cycling environment safer and more convenient for all users.

4J.Po1 (1) Brent Cycling Action Plan establishes a new approach to planning and delivering cycling infrastructure, based on the concept of the “cyclists’ network”. The plan has been widely circulated among cycling stakeholders and has been substantially altered in response to their comments, whilst retaining its core principles.

The Plan sets out an aim and broad objectives to set the scene for how the Borough, in partnership with Transport for London, will undertake and support measures to make the environment for cycling safer and more convenient for all users by maximising cycle permeability and minimising cycle diversion. Cycle parking—both long-stay and short-stay forms an integral part of the Cyclists’ Network, and cycle training is an essential part of the Borough’s programme to increase the amount of cycling through modal shift.

The involvement of stakeholder groups for cycling is regarded as crucial to developing the cyclists’ network. Brent’s key stakeholder group, London Cycling Campaign in Brent (‘Brent Cyclists’), was re- launched in response to the draft Local Implementation Plan and the development of Brent’s cycling action plan and Road Danger Reduction Plan.

The borough has established a commitment to meeting with Brent Cyclists on a regular basis, to discuss progress and potential schemes that will contribute to making the cycling environment safer and

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 110 more convenient for users. The campaign will be encouraged to become actively involved in the design of schemes and the monitoring of levels of cycling in the borough. Their very important work in these respects will generate information that cannot be obtained using the Council’s existing staff resources.

4J.Po1 (2) Brent’s Cycling Action Plan is supported by other key policies, including:

• Brent Road Danger Reduction Plan , which establishes a set of principles including a hierarchy of road user groups; it also sets out a new approach to reducing danger and to alter the perception of risk of collision on the borough’s roads;

• LIP Policy 4G.Po2, which responds to the MTS policy on parallel initiatives with a new hierarchy of roads for the borough. The new hierarchy brings a social dimension to the function of streets that will significantly improve conditions for both cycling and walking;

• LIP policy 4G.Pr12, which supports cycling as a measure to reduce dependency on motor vehicles;

• Brent’s parking standards, which incorporate minimum cycle parking requirements for new development. These are being revised for the Local Development Framework to be in excedence of the Mayor’s targets for increasing the amount of cycling; and

• The LCN+ Common Statement, which is a commitment to maintain investment in the formal network across Brent.

4J.Po1 (3) Programmes H1 Permeability and local cycle links; H2 Targeted demand led measures for cyclists.

4J.Pr1 The CCE was set up in 2001. The Council will support the London Cycling Action Plan as follows:

4J.Pr2 (1) The London Cycling Action Plan Creating a Chain Reaction sets out how the TfL Cycling Centre of Excellence will work in partnership with the boroughs to deliver the Mayor’s target of an 80% increase in cycling by 2010* and a 200% increase in cycling by 2020, compared to levels in 2000. *This target has already been achieved in Inner London.

The associated performance targets are:

• To achieve, in the short term, measurable increases in the amount of cycling and to establish benchmarks; • To increase the modal share of cycled trips; • To increase the number of cycled trips per person per year (using LATS); and • To increase London’s ‘cyclability’ and user satisfaction with London’s cycling infrastructure and environment in terms of people’s perceptions.

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 111

The Council will work in partnership with the CCE to deliver cycle improvements, including the LCN+, local links, cycle parking, training, education and publicity, and monitor the effect of these measures on the level of cycling and satisfaction of cyclists.

The Council’s principal response to the London Cycling Action Plan is Brent Cycling Action Plan, in Appendix 4

The Council is also responding to the London Cycling Action Plan by: • Reviewing and enforcing its cycle parking standards for new development in the LDF; • Organising regular liaison meetings with Brent Cyclists; • Monitoring the amount of cycling and obtaining other relevant data with respect to the Performance indicators set out in the London Cycling Action Plan, namely:

- Surveys of current cycle traffic volume; - Asset and condition surveys of all cycle schemes; - Methodologies and surveys for measuring cyclists’ satisfaction; - Information on bicycle ownership and usage from the LATS surveys; - An inventory of existing cycle education programmes and other community-based projects; and - Methodologies and surveys to measure cyclists’ attitudes towards other road users, and vice versa.

• The Council will support the work of the CCE to finalise performance indicators with regard to cycling, based on the above list.

4J.Pr1 (2) Maps 8 and 9 and Programmes H1-H4 set out the Borough’s programme to invest in infrastructure as follows:

• Developing the Cyclists’ Network, which comprises all roads in the borough, together with other measures including advanced stop lines, cycle exemptions to general traffic regulations such as one-way streets; and cycle tracks and paths including routes across parks, along canals, through suitable short-cuts and through mode filters (LCAP 2.4; 4.1, 9.5) ;

• Supporting investment in infrastructure through promotional events including Good Going, National Bike Week and European In-town without my Car Day to promote cycling (LCAP 5.1, 5.2, 5.4);

• Ensuring that infrastructure is designed to facilitate and encourage more cycling throughout the borough—this includes providing cycle access to bus priority infrastructure schemes with due consideration of the needs of both modes, for example in the design of bus lanes (LCAP 1.4, 2.1, 2.2, 2.4, 4.1, 8.1, 9.2, 9.3, 9.5, 10.3).

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 112 4J.Pr1 (3) Programmes H1 Permeability and local cycle links on the cyclists’ network; H2 Targeted demand led measures; H4 LCN+ network; H5 Non-LCN+ local routes; Map 8 Brent’s cyclists’ network.

4J.Pr3 The CCE will co-ordinate the LCN+ in partnership with a lead London Borough. A project management model similar to the London Bus Initiative will be followed, with increased support to the Boroughs to ensure delivery. The London wide network will be identified by the end of 2003, with the aim of completing the extended high quality cycle routes programme within ten years.

4J.Pr3 (1) London Cycling Action Plan sets out a balanced package of measures that will help achieve the Mayor’s vision and deliver all the economic, social and environmental benefits of an increase in cycling.

Objective 1 in LCAP is to complete the delivery of the London Cycle Network+ (LCN+) by 2009/10. This is to be a 900 Km long network of strategic routes that will provide cyclists with fast, safe and comfortable conditions.

This authority is committed to the implementation of LCN+ network links numbered 15-19 on land under its control (as shown in Map 9 ). We confirm that these routes and sites are safeguarded, to give protection against contrary proposals.

In addition, the Council remains committed to working in partnership with TfL’s Lead Borough (London Borough of Camden, LBC), TfL and other stakeholders to achieve this.

4J.Pr3 (2) The Traffic Management Act imposes a network management duty on all local traffic authorities to secure the expeditious movement of traffic (including pedestrians and cyclists) on their road networks, and to facilitate the expeditious movement of traffic on other authorities’ networks.

In fulfilment of its responsibility to deliver LCN+ schemes, this authority is committed to securing the expeditious movement of traffic (including pedestrians and cyclists), and will ensure a balance of network capacity and safety for all modes. Since cyclists are vulnerable road users, the Council undertakes to pay particular attention to accommodating their needs through sites where works are taking place.

Programme 4J.Pr3 (3) LCN+ is programmed to be substantially completed by 2009/10.

The table below is an outline programme to deliver the LCN + network over this period.

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 113

Link Number CRISP Study Works Works commence complete 15 2004/5 2006/7 2008/9 16 2005/6 2006/7 2006/7 17 2005/6 2006/7 2006/7 19 2006/7 2006/7 2009/10 Wembley N/A 2005/6 2008/9 Strategic links

Process 4J.Pr3 (4) The LCN+ programme for the London Borough of (borough to insert name of borough) will be developed with our officers and the LCN+ team at LBC.

In order to ensure that the LCN+ network requirements are to be met, the individual scheme proposals will be initiated through the Cycle Route Implementation Stakeholder Plan (CRISP) process. This is a feasibility assessment on an LCN+ link that is intended to support this borough in scheme planning, programming, design and implementation by engaging stakeholders at an early stage. Using information gathered on existing conditions, opportunities and constraints, the CRISP assessments will recommend strategic solutions on each link. This borough is committed to use the CRISP process.

Additionally, the Council is committed to ensuring that schemes are designed in accordance with the TfL’s London Cycling Design Standards (LCDS).

In pursuance of this commitment, the Council will send scheme design proposals to TfL’s Lead Borough (LBC) for checking using the ‘LCN+ Design Check Procedure’.

All the links within the LCN+ network will have been subject to a CRISP assessment by 2007/8.

4J.Pr3 (5) The Council commits to using existing and new processes that may be developed to support the delivery of this programme, including for example: the Monthly Monitoring (MM) reporting forms and the variation pro-forma, for network and scheme change control.

This borough commits to using road safety and sustainable accessibility audit procedures on cycling schemes.

Monitoring and Performance 4J.Pr3 (6) Delivery of LCN+ by 2009/10 is a key task in LCAP as a contributor to the achievement of the LCAP objective of an 80% increase in cycling in London.

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 114 Progress on the LCN+ programme will be measured by:

• the number of CRISP assessments completed, • schemes designed and ready for implementation, • additional route length delivered.

A method for measuring additional route length (based on measures of level of service) is being developed by TfL

The above is reported through the LCN+ Annual Report produced for TfL by LB Camden.

Another action arising from LCAP is the need to support highway authorities to maintain cycling routes and facilities to give confidence and demonstrate the long term commitment of TfL. A pilot asset management initiative was undertaken in 2004/05 and this will be reviewed and developed further in 2005/06.

4J.Pr3 (7) Programmes H8 Monitoring of cycle and pedestrian flows E20 Asset Management Plan.

4J.Pr4 The Council will work with TfL and cyclist groups to develop extended high quality cycle routes beyond the LCN+.

4J.Pr4 (1) The LCN has been superseded by the LCN+, nevertheless the Cyclists’ network described in Brent Cycling Action Plan incorporates sections of the old LCN in Brent, which remains intact as an entity and will be developed as a high quality network alongside the LCN+. An audit has been undertaken to assess conditions on the old LCN and the wider Cyclists Network, as a basis for Brent’s programme to make the cycling environment safer and more convenient for all users.

In addition, Brent Council’s cycle audit procedure commits the Council to ensuring that the needs of all sustainable transport users are taken into account in the design of new of modified infrastructure.

4J.Pr4 (2) Programmes H1 Permeability and local cycle links on the cyclists’ network; H2 Targeted, demand led investment for cycling; H5 Non- LCN+ formal routes.

4J.Pr5 The Council and TfL will look at the problems that cyclists encounter, particularly key accident locations to see if these can be solved by specific junction treatment or other traffic management solutions.

4J.Pr5 (1) Local cyclists are requested to provide information about where they encounter problems on the whole road network and complementary links (as described in Brent Cycling Action Plan). There are a number of channels through which they can contact the council:

1. Cyclists can contact Streetcare to report general street maintenance issues such as potholes. Highways Maintenance operates in accordance with performance indicators and targets

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 115 to ensure the speedy repair of defects and the mitigation of problems such as slippery inspection chamber covers.

2. The annual Borough Spending Plan contains proposals for ‘targeted stakeholder led improvements’. These are specifically designed to deal with the problems that cyclists encounter on their cycling trips.

3. Information is collected at ‘Good Going’ events such as the Brent Big Bike Bonanza, National Bike Week, ‘Good Going’ Week and European In-Town Without my Car Day. The Council supports the work of local cycling and community stakeholders to promote cycling and provide Dr. Bike sessions etc; these provide further opportunities to collect information.

Requests for local treatments are prioritised and included in the annual Borough Spending Plan; alternatively, they are incorporated into bids, design and implementation of schemes covering the affected areas.

The Council will also undertake to review all signalised junctions to identify locations for advance stop lines. This review will be undertaken at the same time as the planned review of pedestrian green phases (LCAP 2.4) (see Proposal 4I.Pr7)

4J.Pr5 (2) All schemes, including local road danger reduction schemes (LSS), will be subject to sustainable accessibility audits for cyclists, to ensure that potential or actual impacts on the safety of cyclists are properly addressed, and that where possible, they will contribute to encouraging more cycling in the borough.

4J.Pr5 (3) Programme H2 Targeted demand-led measures for cycling.

4J.Pr6 The Council will undertake cycle and sustainable accessibility audits for all relevant traffic, highway and civil engineering schemes in accordance with best practice advice.

4J.Pr6 (1) Brent’s cycle audit arrangements are incorporated in its Sustainable Accessibility Audit Procedure for all traffic management schemes. The procedure is set out in Brent Cycling Action Plan ( Appendix 4)

4J.Pr7 – I The Council will work in partnership with TfL, rail operators, businesses and educational establishments to provide additional secure cycle parking facilities, including at shopping centres and transport interchanges.

4J.Pr7 (1) Short stay and long stay cycle parking are an integral part of the cyclists’ network, as described in Brent Cycling Action Plan. Brent’s programme comprises:

• Short-stay (on-street) cycle parking enables cyclists to park whilst visiting shops, services and other facilities. This type of parking should preferably be situated in areas with high pedestrian flows or adjacent to premises that cyclists are

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 116 visiting. The Council specifies the use of Sheffield stands with tapping rails to serve this purpose. Tapping rails exist to prevent damage to tapping canes used by partially sighted and blind pedestrians. Cycle parking will be provided where possible on space reclaimed from the carriageway, however where this is not possible, footway cycle parking will be installed, having regard to the needs of disabled and sensory-impaired pedestrians and the amount of obstruction that would result (LCAP 3.1).

• Medium to long stay cycle parking gives cyclists more confidence to park cycles for longer periods unsupervised. This means for example that pedal cycles can be used as a link in longer journeys involving public transport. The Council’s programme for providing this type of cycle parking provision involves partnership working with public transport providers (LCAP 3.2, 3.3, 3.5, 8.1, 8.2, 8.3).

• The Council is seeking to provide more cycle parking for its residential tenants and for housing association tenants. Funding for this type of parking is likely to be sourced from the housing providers themselves or the New Deal for Communities programme. Detailed information on home cycle parking can be found in Chapter 7 (Parking and Enforcement Plan and Appendix 4 (Brent Cycling Action Plan).

• The Council supports the Mayor’s School Cycle Parking Initiative as part of its School Travel Plan Strategy in Chapter 8 , which provides more information.

The exact locations of all proposed public cycle parking facilities are mapped (and marked out on the ground) once a financial allocation has been made. In addition to formal surveys to identify parking need, the Council receives public requests for cycle parking across the borough.

Once cycle parking has been installed, TfL is informed so that the Journey-planner website can be updated. LIP Annual Progress Reports will also include maps of cycle parking that has been implemented in the Borough.

4J.Pr7 – II The Council will seek to provide secure cycle parking and other facilities required by cyclists at workplaces and places of education and use its planning powers to require developers to provide good cycle access, install secure cycle parking and provide showers, lockers and changing facilities in all applicable new development.

4J.Pr7 (2) Brent’s parking standards incorporate requirements for the amount of cycle parking that should be provided in new development (LCAP 9.4). These are set out in Brent Cycling Action Plan with guidance that:

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 117 • Cycle access to the development should be of a high standard of design and implementation. It should also be prominent and, where necessary, signposted.

• Secure cycle parking should be provided, preferably comprising covered, lockable (smart-card or standard key access) areas with Sheffield parking stands spaced in accordance with the London Cycle Design Standards, or individual cycle lockers. Butterfly (‘wheelbender’) designs must NOT be used. Cycle parking should be provided in a prominent location that has a high level of natural surveillance to minimise the risk of theft or vandalism of cycles.

• Showers, lockers and changing facilities are good practice in the provision of cycle facilities at work. Developers and employers are required or encouraged to devise travel plans; it is acknowledged that investment in facilities encourages more people to cycle (run or walk) to work, rather than relying on cars or public transport. The Council encourages all employers to develop travel plans; grants are available for facilities.

4J.Pr7 (3) The Council encourages schools, colleges and universities to make adequate provision of cycle parking for staff and students and requires the provision of facilities in new development. It is often the case that cyclists travelling to educational campuses are able to make use of lockers and showers that are provided in association with sporting activity. The Council supports the Mayor’s School Cycle Parking Initiative as part of its School Travel Plan Strategy, (Chapter 8) , which provides more information.

Schools are eligible for TfL funding for cycle parking if they develop school travel plans that are approved by TfL and include a commitment to encouraging and facilitating cycling to school. TfL’s rolling programme will enable investment in cycle parking on receipt of travel plans; the speed of implementation will be subject to available funding.

4J.Pr7 (4) Programme H6 Cycle parking.

4J.Pr8 - I The Council will work with TfL and the Metropolitan Police to support effective training for children and adults for safer cycling.

4J.Pr8 (1) Cycle training is arguably the most effective of all measures to encourage more people to cycle and enhance safety by changing perceptions, techniques and attitudes. The Council believes that all residents, adult and child, in the borough should have access to free* high quality training on demand. The Council would also be supportive of any high-level proposals to introduce cycle training as part of motor vehicle driver training, starting with taxi, bus and HGV drivers and returning disqualified drivers. The Council would also support proposals for the eventual inclusion of cycle training as a key component of all driver training as a means of reducing road danger. (*£5 booking fee per hour.)

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 118 Brent Cycling Action Plan sets out the Borough’s commitment to providing cycle training to the National Syllabus, which has received the approval of the Department for Transport.

4J.Pr5 (2) Engineers working for Brent Council are encouraged to undertake CPD. Cycle training, delivered to the national syllabus, is probably the most effective available means of raising engineers’ awareness about the needs of cyclists, and TfL has been providing funding to train up to ten members of staff annually.

4J.Pr8 (3) Programme H6 Cycle training.

4J.Pr8 – II The Council will work with TfL and the voluntary and community sectors to increase awareness of the problems caused by cycling on the footway and other offences, and will develop effective measures for addressing them.

4J.Pr8 (4) The Council does not condone footway cycling or cyclists disobeying traffic regulations and signals any more than it condones contraventions of regulations by motorists. Pedestrians, including disabled people and people with sensory impairments, regularly complain about the poor behaviour of some cyclists on the borough’s roads. Furthermore, there is growing concern about cycle-mounted street robberies.

Whilst poor behaviour of cyclists is more irritating and alarming than dangerous (compared to similar behaviour by motorists), it nevertheless adds to perceptions of fear of danger among pedestrians and may lead to their further retreat from the street environment. The Council regards any retreat of vulnerable road users, including cyclists, as contrary to its policy objectives, particularly with regard to road danger reduction, equality and inclusiveness.

For this reason, the Council is working with TfL the Metropolitan police, town centre Wardens and other enforcement personnel to promote good cycling behaviour, complementing other work to enforce better driver behaviour. Activities include:

• Discussing behaviour and providing advice and information about cycle training to cyclists who are found to be making ‘courteous’ transgressions (for example crossing lights or riding on footways with due regard for pedestrians). Many cyclists in this group will be disobeying regulations for the benefit of their safety and it unlikely to be appropriate to issue penalty tickets if this is the case.

• Issuing penalty tickets or cycle training alternatives to cyclists found to be transgressing regulations in a discourteous manner, with scant regard to the impact of their behaviour on other road users.

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 119 • A campaign in conjunction with the borough police Commander to combat the growing incidence of cycle-mounted crimes including robbery.

• Other activities including support for appropriate application of TfL’s Share the Road campaign.

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 120 Section I Freight.

Context

Transport White Paper 2004

I1 The Government’s aims for freight are to facilitate the continuing development of a competitive and efficient freight sector, whilst reducing freight transport’s impacts on the environment. Policies focus on:

• Measures to reduce the amount of road congestion; • Taxation policies to encourage more environmentally-friendly freight operations; • Regulation where necessary to minimise danger and environmental risks from road freight transport in particular; • Promoting best practice, training and other measures to help the industry improve its efficiency and reduce negative impacts; • Active engagement with the rail freight industry, to promote freight on rail; and • Measures to encourage freight transfer from road to rail and water.

I2 The strategy seeks to achieve more sustainable distribution of goods via the following elements including:

• Local and regional regulation – the use of enforcement and travel restrictions to benefit local people; and • Modal shift programmes to promote transfer to rail and water;

PPG13 (Transport)

I3 PPG13 makes reference to the Government’s Sustainable Distribution Strategy (1999). It states that land use planning can help to promote sustainable distribution through including the movement of freight by rail and water. Development plans should have regard to identifying existing and potential routes for freight transport, locating major freight transport generating developments near to the trunk road, rail and waterways network.

Traffic Management Act 2004

I4 The Traffic Management Act places a network management duty upon local authorities, including the appointment of a traffic manager. More information on the Act can be found in Chapter 3, the Borough Policy Statement.

London Plan

I5 Policy 3C.4 sets out the Mayor’s strategy to promote the sustainable development of the full range of road, water-borne and rail freight facilities in London and seeks to improve integration between modes and between major rail interchanges and the centres they serve. The development of a London Freight Bypass rail route is supported. UDP policies should:

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 121 - Implement the spatial aspects of the freight element of the Mayor’s Transport Strategy as developed by the London Sustainable Distribution Partnership; - Seek to locate development that generates high levels of freight movement close to major transport routes; - Ensure that suitable freight transfer sites are available for transfer to rail and water; - Ensure that developments include suitable servicing facilities, off-road wherever practicable; - Ensure that collection and delivery can take place off the main bus routes.

I6 Policy 3C.25 states that the Mayor will and boroughs should support the provision of strategic rail-based intermodal freight facilities.

Unitary Development Plan

I7 The Unitary Development Plan makes a presumption in favour of transferring freight from road to rail and water, including preference for the siting of freight-generating development adjacent to rail lines. In addition, the UDP states that heavy goods vehicles will be excluded from residential areas. The loss of servicing areas in new developments will be resisted.

Mayor’s Transport Strategy

I8 Achieving an efficient and sustainable distribution system for goods and services is one of the greatest challenges facing London. The MTS states that the key to a successful freight and servicing strategy is to balance freight needs against the impacts of freight transport.

I9 Policy 4K.Po1 states that, ‘The Mayor and Transport for London will work with the London Boroughs, businesses and the freight, distribution and servicing industries, and other relevant organisations to ensure the needs of business and Londoners for the movement of goods (including waste) and services are met, whilst minimising congestion and environmental impacts in accordance with the objectives of the Mayor’s Transport, Air Quality, Noise and Waste Strategies. In respect of distribution and servicing, the Transport Strategy seeks to:

• Ensure that London’s transport networks allow for the efficient and reliable handling and distribution of freight and the provision of servicing in order to support London’s economy;

• Minimise the adverse environmental impact of freight transport and servicing in London;

• Minimise the impact of congestion on the carriage of goods and provision of servicing;

• Foster a progressive shift of freight from road to more sustainable modes such as rail and water, where this is economical and practicable.

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 122 4K.Pr1 The Council will work with TfL and the West London Transport Strategy to achieve the aims of the London Sustainable Distribution Partnership (LSDP), including facilitating trials and providing information from surveys.

4K.Pr1 (1) The Council is committed to working with Transport for London to achieve the aims of the London Sustainable Distribution Partnership. The Council will facilitate trials and respond to requests for survey information as required to support this work.

4K.Pr2 - I The Council will work with the LSDP to achieve freight-related objectives including participation in sub-regional partnerships as appropriate and implementation of activities and schemes.

4K.Pr2 (1) The Council is actively involved in the new West London Freight Quality Partnership steering group, which has been established to:

• Support the development of a London Freight Plan; • Develop local initiatives, including the design and implementation of signing and lorry route maps; • Develop links with businesses and operators; • Research and provide advice to enable operators and businesses to reduce fleet sizes, cut mileages, reduce costs and promote safer driving; • Contribute to ensuring that up-to-date information is made available to drivers, including real-time updates on traffic conditions; and • Contribute to the development and agreement of parking/loading restrictions and dynamic route planning.

4K.Pr2 (2) Brent’s contact for all aspects concerning freight is consultancy MVA, who are working for West London Freight Partnership: Mike Slinn, MVA 01483 728 051. [email protected] For waste management matters, please contact Chris Whyte, Head of Waste Management 020 8937 5342; [email protected] For environmental health (noise abatement and air quality monitoring), contact David Thrale, Director of Environmental Health 020 8937 5164. [email protected] For Planning and Development, contact Chris Walker, Director of Planning 020 8937 5246. [email protected]

4K.Pr2 – II The Council will develop and regularly update a Freight Forum / Freight Contacts map covering related activities including waste planning, development planning, fleet vehicle manager (goods vehicles), environmental health officer (delivery noise abatement).

4K.Pr2 (2) The Council will identify freight forum representatives and establish a freight contacts map covering freight-related activities including waste planning and development planning. The process will involve the participation of fleet managers and the Council’s Environmental

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 123 Health team to determine the impacts and benefits with regard to noise and exhaust emissions, particularly in the context of the proposed Low Emission Zone.

4K.Pr2 (3) The Council will establish strategies and schemes to be adopted in order to achieve LSDP freight-related objectives. This will include borough participation in sub-regional partnerships and the implementation of activities and schemes.

4K.Pr2 (4) The Council will identify local Freight Forum representatives, and from this will establish a freight contacts map, covering freight- related activities in the Borough.

4K.Pr3 – III The Council will work with TfL and WLTS to review the London Lorry Ban’s exempt network and access routes to it. The wider strategic context of the Ban will also be considered.

4K.Pr3 (1) The Council will work in partnership with TfL, Freight Forum representatives and the London Sustainable Distribution Partnership, to review the Lorry Ban’s exempt network and access routes to it. The review will take into account wider considerations including potential impacts on adjacent Boroughs, the road network, access to railheads and the proposed London-wide or Brent Low Emission Zone.

This section includes a commitment to engage with the London Lorry Control System (LLCS) consultation process, a commitment to seek ways to work with the ALG to modernise, where appropriate, the requirements of the LLCS in respect of vehicle specifications, routing requirements and driver training, or equivalent measures in response to the proposal.

4K.Pr3 (2) The Council will engage with the LLCS consultation process as its commitment to work with the ALG to seek ways of modernising as appropriate the requirements of the LLCS in respect of vehicle specifications, routing requirements and driver training.

4K.Pr3 (3) The Council will ensure that due regard is given to the proposed Low Emission Zone in this respect.

4K.Pr4 - I The Council will support in principle the London-wide LEZ proposals and work with TfL, Park Royal Partnership and WLTS to ensure that they are implemented in an appropriate manner.

4K.Pr4 (1) Please refer to 3.Pr2 .

4K.Pr4 (2) The Council is seeking to develop a Low Emission Zone in Brent, in order to deliver the health and environmental benefits of cleaner air. In order to deliver our commitment to reducing climate change emissions, this LIP and the Air Quality Action Plan contain policies in support of making the Borough’s streets conducive to walking and cycling, including a Hierarchy of Road Users (see Chapter 6, the Road Danger Reduction Plan).

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 124 A LEZ is a defined area that bars entry to polluting vehicles that do not comply with set emission standards, the purpose being to encourage targeted vehicle owners and businesses to adopt cleaner engine technologies, or to purchase newer, cleaner vehicles. Calculations comparing LEZ and non-LEZ zone scenarios for Brent have indicated that local air quality would be significantly improved where a LEZ is introduced.

New legislation is not required to implement such a zone; local authorities are able to use Traffic Regulation Orders (TROs) to ban certain classes of vehicle. The Environment Act 1995 also confirms that TROs could be introduced for air quality purposes. The key legislative tools in this respect are the Road Traffic Regulation Act, which permits the exclusion of vehicles that fail specific emissions standards and the Environment Act 1995, which extends the ability to make Orders to include air quality objectives.

The Council supports the development of a local LEZ within the Borough, however it strongly supports the development of a London- wide LEZ which will produce benefits for all Londoners, particularly those Londoners who might otherwise be affected by polluting vehicles diverting around Brent’s zone. Brent Council will work with Transport for London and the GLA to contribute to the development of the London-wide scheme.

4K.Pr4 (3) Programmes I2 Cleaner-fuelled vehicles for Brent; I3 Promotion of alternative fuels.

4K.Pr4 – II The Council will identify potential sites for refuelling with alternative cleaner fuels and will promote their increased provision and use, including for Council-owned vehicles.

4K.Pr4 (1) The provision of facilities for the sale of cleaner fuels is dependent on the availability of a market and support for cleaner fuel products.

This market may be fulfilled by the conversion of fleets by large fleet owners such as Brent Council and by the gradual implementation of travel plans arising from planning obligations and voluntary action by employers and schools.

The Council is seeking to establish a Low Emission Zone in the Borough and supports the application of such a zone across London. The zone will add to the incentive for fleet managers to invest in cleaner-fuelled vehicles, thus increasing the potential market for such products. In addition, the Congestion Charge does not apply to cleaner-fuelled vehicles.

The Local Development Framework will establish and strengthen policies in support of the provision of cleaner fuel facilities; in addition the Council has carried out research to produce a standard procedure in order to make the installation of on-street electrical charging facilities easier.

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 125 Following a query from a resident and subsequent to Westminster’s action, a working group was set up to address the issue of provision of public charging facilities for electric vehicles. A report is available on this, however to date no further action has been commissioned.

4K.Pr4 (2) The predominant model for biodiesel production from waste cooking oil is for a large scale processing facility which collects and transports oils from a radius of several hundred kilometres, processes them and distributes the resulting fuel regionally or nationally through the established network of filling stations. This has advantages in economy of scale but results in serious environmental impacts associated with the transportation of both waste oils and biodiesel.

4K.Pr4 (3) A complementary model and one which significantly reduces these environmental impacts is for localised processing to take place, making use of locally generated waste oils and providing fuel for local transport fleets, both public and private. This model is of particular relevance in urban areas where there is a predominance of food processing industries as well as catering establishments, as is the case with Brent and other West London boroughs.

4K.Pr4 (4) Energy Solutions (North West London) has secured part-funding from the European Union, through its Intelligent Energy Europe programme, for a major 3-year biodiesel study which will analyse the situation across West London with regard to:

• The availability of waste oils in terms of location, quality and volume; • Current methods of collection and final destinations; • Logistics and costs of localised collection; • Costs of and constraints on establishment of local processing plant; • Local markets for biodiesel in public/community transport fleets and private haulage fleets; • Supply/demand issues relating to small scale processing; • Legal structures for biodiesel companies linked to Energy Agencies; and • Financing capital investment for biodiesel production.

4K.Pr4 (5) The outcomes of the study will include:

• 1 new biodiesel from UCO project and at least 2 biodiesel filling stations initiated or established in the West London sub-region; • A report that studies the techno-economic feasibility of localised biodiesel production by potential supply chain members; • An electronic and printed handbook providing comprehensive guidance to the setting up and maintenance of local biodiesel projects and the promotion of biodiesel as a fuel; • A training programme combining workshops, seminars and distance learning materials to develop knowledge and expertise in this specific field for Energy Agencies and other market actors;

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 126 • A comprehensive synthesis of existing knowledge and experience in the field including a set of case studies demonstrating how existing local biodiesel; projects have been established, the barriers they have faced and how successful they have been in overcoming them and • A common, adaptable template for the development of Business Plans for new local biodiesel projects.

4K.Pr4 (5) Energy Solutions (North West London) is an independent Energy Advice Centre that is core-funded by the Council and looks to promote alternative fuels in the Borough. They currently have a small biodiesel producing plant on their premises, the fuel from which they are trialling in their own vehicles (at 100%). The Council would like this project to expand.

The Council will incorporate advice to fleet managers including Brent Community Transport about the current availability and potential of cleaner fuels and refuelling facilities, the influence of driver behaviour on vehicle efficiency, and vehicle performance in its literature associated with travel planning.

4K.Pr4 (6) Promoting uptake of cleaner fuels in Council’s own fleet

The Council’s Travel Plan highlights the role of the Council’s fleet in terms of achieving efficiency and air quality objectives. The plan seeks to increase the number of alternatively-fuelled vehicles.

At present, the Council’s fleet mainly comprises diesel light commercial vehicles. Brent Transport runs the majority of the fleet; and findings with regard to the condition and fuelling of the fleet are as follows:

• Compared to the London average, Brent’s fleet is relatively old – some 30 per cent of the fleet went into service before 1996, compared to around 14 per cent for all of the London Boroughs. 33 per cent of the fleet is pre-Euro2.

• Some 90 per cent of the Borough’s fleet vehicles run on diesel fuel. This compares with 80 per cent for other boroughs.

• Four of the Council’s vehicles are electrically driven or are hybrids. A further 12 run on LPG natural gas.

4K.Pr4 (7) The Council increasingly specifies the use of cleaner or alternatively- fuelled vehicles on renewing contracts with internal and external suppliers using road transport. This policy applies across the range of Council services unless exceptions are necessary or the environmental impact of the specification is demonstrated to be greater than the benefits to be achieved from cleaner or alternative- fuelling.

4K.Pr4 (8) Considerable scope exists for the purchase of new vehicles meeting higher Euro-Spec engines or using alternative fuels. However there are limitations to conversion:

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 127 • Parks service vehicles were converted from diesel to gas operation. This resulted in lower carbon and other emissions, however the lifting capacity of the vehicles was insufficient, so they have been converted back to diesel. Nevertheless some efficiency savings have been achieved through the use of higher specification engines.

• The main benefit of cleaner vehicles is of reducing localised air pollution: the benefits may not be felt in the wider environment unless renewable fuels such as biodiesel are used. The Council is particularly keen to promote those fuels / vehicles that are not fossil-fuel dependent (e.g. biofuel, electric and hydrogen), or expanding the trial of hybrids (together with more efficient vehicles and practices, and mitigatory equipment such as particulate traps as appropriate).

The Council will also, in its procurement policies, take into account the impacts of using remote energy sources and the environmental impact of purchasing new vehicles (resource use and energy consumption) versus the continued use of ‘dirty’ old vehicles until they reach the end of their usefulness.

The Council has recently introduced into its own Waste Services fleet, seven recycling vehicles meeting EUROIII efficiency standards. For more information, please refer to 3.Pr6 (3).

4K.Pr4 (9) Biodiesel is a renewable source of energy and ensures that a waste product is considered to be a valuable resource. Unlike conventionally-sourced LPG and electrical power, proposals to promote biodiesel facilities in the Borough are consistent with both local air quality objectives and wider objectives to reduce carbon emissions to the atmosphere. Please also refer to Proposal 3.Pr2.

4K.Pr4 (10) Programmes I1 Biodiesel; I2 Cleaner-fuelled vehicles for Brent Council; I3 Promotion of alternative fuels.

4K.Pr4 – III The Council will identify further measures to encourage waste transport by rail, river and canal where appropriate and taking account of environmental impacts.

4K.Pr4 (1) Please refer to Policy 3.Pr6 and 4M.Pr2.

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 128 4K.Pr5 The Council will (identify and) safeguard as appropriate potential and existing rail freight transfer locations.

4K.Pr5 (1) Willesden, Brent Yard, Neasden and Cricklewood are Brent’s main rail-freight transfer points, catering for containers and bulk-load traffic such as cement and aggregates. Wembley has arguably the most important marshalling yard in the UK, where most Channel Tunnel freight trains originate. The Council will continue to protect access to these sites in its Local Development Framework; its transport strategies will continue to recognise the role of these sites in providing sustainable freight transportation and local employment opportunities.

4K.Pr5 (2) In a wider freight context (see proposal 4E.Pr8 and waste transfer proposal 3.Pr6), the Council will support existing and future opportunities for companies to maximise the use of rail freight for distribution by the development of rail-connected sites in the Borough. The Council, through its involvement in the West London FQP and its Waste Management Contract, is encouraging the provision of sustainable waste transfer facilities including existing schemes for the removal of waste by sustainable modes including by rail and canal.

4K.Pr5 (3) The Council supports the retention, improvement and further development of rail freight sidings for intermodal transfer and will therefore support (in principle) the improvement of existing road infrastructure where appropriate to improve access to the termini from the principal road network, having regard to other policies, particularly the Road Danger Reduction Plan and stakeholder input. However, the Council notes TfL’s observation that London’s railways are congested and there is ‘frustrated demand’ for both passenger and freight services (see Proposal 4E.Pr8).

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 129

Section J Water

London Plan

Policy 3C.24 sets out the Mayor’s strategy to promote the sustainable development of the full range of road, water-borne and rail freight facilities in London and seeks to improve integration between modes.

The Mayor’s Transport Strategy

4M.Pr2 / Po2 The Council will work with the waste management and freight industries to (identify and) safeguard suitable freight wharves and facilities on the Grand Union Canal.

4M.Pr2 (1) The Council does not have any wharves or facilities that would enable the transport of waste by canal. However the borough does transport 1,000 tonnes of waste by water and supports the West London Freight Quality Partnership’s work with TfL to develop wharfage, winding holes and freight facilities at the Old Oak Lane materials recycling facility and at the Metronet depot at Croxley Green. The Park Royal Partnership are studying the opportunity for further use of the Grand Union Canal to transport freight to and from Park Royal.

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 130 Section K Taxis, private hire and community transport.

The Mayor’s Transport Strategy

K1 Taxis are an important part of London’s integrated transport network, fulfilling demands that cannot be met by the Underground, rail, buses, cycling or walking, especially late at night. The MTS seeks to achieve improvements to taxi operations, including public safety, increased supply of vehicles and customer service.

Use of taxis and other commercial transport providers by Social Services

Mini Cabs and Computer Cabs K2 Private hire vehicles are normally employed for urgent travel to hospitals, residential homes and nursing homes, or journeys that cannot be catered for by Brent Transport Services or Brent Community Transport. Social Services have a contract with Computer Cars, and other taxis are supplied via Brent Transport Services’ subcontractor.

Private Ambulance K3 The Social Services Department employ three accredited contractors to provide an ambulance service for users who are bed-bound but need to be transferred to residential/nursing accommodation.

Freedom passes, Taxicabs and blue badges K4 Social Services act as the primary centre for all referrals relating to Freedom Passes, taxi cards and blue badges, the latter of which are part of London-wide schemes.

4N.Pr1 – I The Council will develop new taxi and pedicab ranks in the borough where significant demand exists, having regard to the Public Carriage Office Best Practice Guidelines.

4N.Pr1 (1) The borough will undertake a review of existing taxi and pedicab ranks in order to plan improvements and new facilities, in locations including town centres, rail stations, interchanges, major bus stops and other key demand generators, in line with the PCO’s ‘Best practice guidelines’. Programme E2 sets out the Council’s commitment in this regard.

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 131 4N.Pr1 II The Council will promote the Mayor’s Safer Travel at Night initiatives and include Brent specific proposals for improving safety and security for women and vulnerable groups in relation to taxi/private hire vehicles.

4N.Pr1 (1) Safer Travel at Night was launched by the GLA in 2001 and seeks to raise awareness among people travelling at night of the dangers of walking alone or taking unlicensed minicabs. In January 2005, TfL engaged the Good Going programme to develop a strategy to promote Safer Travel at Night to the residents of the 32 London Boroughs and the Corporation of London. Brent will promote Safer Travel at Night by targeting vulnerable groups such as shift workers, pub-goers, students and women.

The initiative’s award-winning website and advertising / publicity campaign and Brent’s Safer Travel at Night map are aimed principally at women and have been successful at reducing the number of people using unlicensed cabs. A single telephone number for booking taxis is in operation – 0871 871 8710 .

4N.Pr1 (2) Programmes E2 Street signing to assist people with sensory impairments; K1 Minicab partnerships for personal safety at night; 4E.Pr12.

4N.Pr5 – I The Council will work with TfL and the community transport sector to take forward the objectives stated within MTS Proposal 4N.Pr5 (review of door-to-door services carried out by TfL).

4N.Pr5 (1) The Social Services Department works with Brent Community Transport to provide the following services:

• A community car scheme for individuals with social care needs • Group transport services for social care groups in the borough

These services are subsidised by the Department and are provided under a service level agreement (SLA). The Community Car Scheme receives the bulk part of the funding given to the organisation, and over 40 people access the service.

The group transport project started in 1975 and the Community Car Scheme started in 2001, and both services are based on the proposal to integrate different methods of providing door-to-door transport services for people with social care needs.

4N.Pr5 (2) The Council will work with Transport for London to take forward the objectives stated in Policy 4N.Po5 in the following ways, by:

1. Identifying good practice and taking on board the outcomes of the Commission for Accessible Transport pilots;

2. Ensuring that operators and drivers are fully aware of the needs of mobility, learning and sensory-impaired clients;

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 132 3. Increasing the flexibility and availability of transport services to ensure that target client groups are socially included;

4. Identifying ways to integrate demand-responsive and door-to- door transport services with the conventional public transport network;

5. Extending travel training for people with learning disabilities to increase their capacity with regard to independent travel;

6. Providing for paid and voluntary travel buddies to accompany clients on trips using conventional public transport;

7. Maximising accessibility for target groups to essential services and facilities that enable them to enjoy a full and varied lifestyle and quality of life.

Community Transport providers, including Brent Community Transport (BCT) already play an important role in providing complementary transport services, particularly personal transport for disabled and sensory impaired people. BCT also provides an increasing range of transport services to community organisations across the borough, covering the whole spectrum of age, ethnicity and activity. This is delivered in an affordable and cost-effective manner by a combination of voluntary and salaried staff. This contributes to improving the social cohesion and inclusion of many diverse communities in Brent.

The Council is particularly keen to see the development of organisations such as BCT as social and co-operative enterprises which will be competitive in the delivery of some mainstream public services such as recycling, London bus services and other transport- related contracts. This is particularly important in view of the organisations’ principles of providing local employment and services of most benefit to local people.

4N.Pr5 (3) Programmes D12 New premises for Brent Community Transport; K2 Group transport scheme; K3 Home to workplace and school travel; K4 Brent disability and Learning partnership; L2 Community Car scheme (Brent Community Transport.

4N.Pr5 – II The Council will consider taxi and other door-to-door services carrying out subsidised journeys for disabled people in terms of the need for vehicles to stop at an accessible point for the passenger and for the driver to offer assistance in entering and exiting the vehicle.

4N.Pr5 (4) The Council ensures that drivers of its vehicles and those of its subcontractors, including minicab operators, are aware of the needs of mobility-impaired clients, particularly when they are boarding and alighting vehicles. The general public is informed, via on-vehicle signs, of the need to allow sufficient space behind vehicles when parking, to allow access and egress for wheelchairs.

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 13 3 4N.Pr5 – III, 4O.Pr5 and 4O.Pr6 : The Council will have regard to the outcomes of the Commission for Accessible Transport (CAT) pilots including ensuring efficient and appropriate use of local community transport schemes and delivery of door-to-door transport within a coherent service delivery framework.

4N/O.Pr5-6 (5) The Council will have regard to the outcomes of the Commission for Accessible Transport pilots as it develops its strategies for ensuring efficient and appropriate use of community transport schemes.

4N.Po2 When reviewing contracts which entail the carrying of vulnerable passengers (e.g. schoolchildren, older people), the Council will ensure that contracting bodies require that drivers are checked at the Criminal Records Bureau.

4N.Po2 (1) The Council has an internal contract with the in-house transport provider (BTS). The contract states that all permanent and agency staff working with (including transporting) vulnerable children and adults must have an up to date CRB disclosure. This contract is reviewed every five years. BTS sub-contracts to other suppliers; the contract also applies to them and their own sub-contractors. The same applies to Brent Community Transport, which is currently the main external supplier of transport for disabled and vulnerable groups.

4N.Po2 Mechanisms for the ongoing monitoring of Public Hire Vehicle (PHV) operators and drivers used.

4N.Po2 (1) Brent’s internal contract with Brent Transport Services specifies that all PHV operators must be police checked. The main providers of transport services are minicab operators and Brent Community Transport. It is their contractual responsibility to monitor the suitability of sub-contractors / occasional PHV providers.

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 134 Section L Accessible Transport.

The role of Brent Social Services

L1 Brent Social Services exists to ensure that people in Brent with social care needs are provided with help, care and support to enable them to live independent, safe and dignified lives at home or elsewhere in the community. The Department provides services to some of the most vulnerable residents in Brent. These include

• Children in need and their families (including children with emotional and behavioural problems and/or who are disabled); • Children looked after away from home; • Adults (age between 18 and 64) with mental health problems, learning disabilities, physical and sensory impairment ; • Older People (aged 65 and over); • Residents of all age groups living with HIV/AIDS; • People affected by drugs and alcohol abuse; • Asylum seekers and refugees.

L2 The Department comprises 4 service areas:

• Community Care – older people, people with learning and physical disability, sensory impairment and people with mental health problems; • Children Services – children looked after, children with disabilities, children in need, adoption and fostering; • Quality and Support – Support the development and management of the Department; and • Finance – budget management and financial planning for the Department.

Social Services Transport Provision

L3 The Local Authority has a duty under Section 2 of the Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act 1970 to provide transport to and from day services. Although there is no legal obligation to provide transport to other services, most local authorities offer transport to vulnerable services users. Client groups include older people, people with learning and physical disabilities, people with mental health problems and children with special needs.

Brent Transport Service L4 Brent Social Services spend approximately £2.2m on transport each year. The main area of expenditure relates to services provided by Brent Transport Services (BTS), which is an internal service unit.

L5 Brent Transport Service provides passenger transport services mostly for users of day care centres and for meals on wheels delivery services. BTS carries about 500 passengers daily on 47 routes. Over 40 specially adapted vehicles are used with escorts to transport clients around the borough.

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 135 Brent Community Transport L6 In addition, the Social Services also funds Brent Community Transport (BCT) to provide a Community Care Scheme and Group Transport Services for people with social care needs living in Brent.

Day Care agencies L7 Some care agencies in the private and voluntary sector provide transport for clients placed with them. This mainly applies to out of borough placements, and the service is usually arranged by the care manager and is included in the cost of the placement.

Day Centre Buses L8 Some Council day centres have their own buses which they use to transport users to community based activities. There are 10 buses owned by Social Services that have been allocated to various centres. Usage varies depending on the activities organised by the centres.

Travel Training L9 Travel Training is offered to users with mild to moderate disability; the aim of the service is to train service users to travel independently using public transport.

Mileage allowances L10 Mileage allowances are paid to parents/carers who take children to school, colleges or to meetings in their own vehicles. This service is usually used by the Children’s Services Unit.

Secure Transport L11 Secure transport is needed for children and young people placed in secure accommodation to attend court hearing. Currently three organisations provide this service for Social Services.

Travel Warrants L12 Travel warrants are issued to clients who need to attend services outside the borough, to enable them to travel independently.

Fares and Parking expenses L13 Clients are repaid their fares and travel expenses when they attend day centre placements or services associated with their care.

Transport Grant L14 The Department provides a transport grant to six social care voluntary organisations, to enable them to transport their users to and from the activities provided by the organisations. Voluntary organisations funded by Social Services also provide transport for their clients to activities.

L15 Freedom Passes enable people over the age of 60 to travel off-peak free of charge.

Mayor’s Transport Strategy

L16 An estimated half a million Londoners have disabilities or illnesses that make it very difficult for them to get around on mainstream public transport. Many others also have difficulties travelling.

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 136

L17 The Greater London Authority Act 1999 places a duty on the Mayor to include policies and proposals for the provision of transport which is accessible to persons with mobility problems. The Disability Discrimination Act seeks to ensure that disabled people are not discriminated against when accessing employment, goods and services. The MTS aims to ensure that access is available to the full range of transport services; there are also policies for non-mainstream public transport services, including door-to- door transport, semi-scheduled services and community transport services.

4O.Po1 – I The Council will seek to improve the accessibility of the Borough’s transport system and identify benchmark accessibility standards for measuring outputs with performance targets for outcomes.

4O.Po1 (1) The Council is committed to auditing the accessibility of its transport system to enable improvements to be made to accessibility, in conjunction with assessments of performance against targets (such as BV187) and legislation (including the Disability Discrimination Act. It will also identify, with guidance from accessibility stakeholder groups such as Brent Association of Disabled People, benchmark accessibility standards for measuring outputs with performance targets for outcomes, including before and after patronage / usage by disabled and sensory impaired people and user comments.

Rail and conventional bus services in Brent.

4O.Po1 (1) The Council is keen to encourage provision of step-free access to platforms at rail and Tube stations where this can realistically be provided. Interchange between bus, taxi and rail is being improved at several stations in the Borough, for example in association with the Wembley Stadium development. There are other locations in the Borough where improvements to accessibility to rail and bus services can be achieved and the Council will work with TfL, rail and bus operators to deliver improvements. Please refer to proposals 4E.Pr13 / Programme C1 (station accessibility) and proposal 4F.Pr11 / Programme D8 (Bus stop accessibility) for more information.

Demand-responsive bus services

4O.Po1 (2) The Council successfully bid for a grant to establish a demand- responsive bus service (Brentlink), which is now operating on three routes in the Borough. This service is specifically aimed at widening access to mainstream public transport services for as many potential users as possible, especially those who are not well catered for by conventional bus services.

4O.Po1 (3) Programmes D10 Brentlink routes 1 and 2; D11 Brentlink routes 3 and 4; D12 New premises for Brent Community Transport.

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 137 Minicabs and taxis

4O.Po1 (4) The Council notes that minicabs and taxis should be well maintained and be, where appropriate, suitably equipped to carry mobility and sensory impaired people and wheelchairs. The Public Carriage Office also takes this need into account when processing applications for new and renewed operator licences.

Roads, Footways and accessibility of pedestrian crossings

4O.Po1 (5) The Council sets annual benchmark targets for Best Value Performance with reference to the condition of footways (BV187) and the percentage of pedestrian crossings with facilities for disabled people (BV165). Please refer to Chapter 9 for more information.

Policies and proposals 4F.Pr11 (bus stop accessibility), 4G.Pr10 (Streets for People and public spaces), Section G (Walking), 4O.Pr13 (parking for disabled drivers) and 4P.Po2 (direction signing for disabled and sensory-impaired pedestrians). Programmes E2 (street signing to assist mobility and sensory impaired pedestrians) and D8 (Bus stop accessibility).

4O.Po1 – II The Council will engage with older and disabled people and local stakeholder groups in the delivery of its transportation programmes.

4O.Po1 (6) The importance of engaging with disabled and older people cannot be underestimated. These are the groups that are the most prone to social exclusion and limitations on their mobility brought about by the built and transport environment.

The Council has developed a strategy for identifying and consulting with older and disabled people and relevant stakeholder groups; this forms part of the Corporate Consultation Strategy, relevant parts of which are summarised in Chapter 10 (Consultation). A full version of the document is included in Appendix 3. The outcome of a special forum consultation with disabled people is described in Chapter 10 ; it is the Council’s intention to continue with the forum and to involve accessibility stakeholder groups in the development of future policies and proposals and schemes arising from the LIPs programme.

4O.Po1 – III The Council will consider the feasibility of introducing “Shopmobility” schemes and will improve direction signing of accessible routes to assist mobility impaired people, especially in town centres and at tourist and other attractions.

4O.Po1 (7) The success of any Shopmobility scheme will be dependent on the accessibility of its location (in relation to accessible public transport and/or car parks with spaces set aside) and the size, capacity and accessibility of the town centre itself (level surfaces, suitable footway widths, reduced road danger and footways in good condition)

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 138

The Council will undertake or use accessibility appraisals of its major town centres (Harlesden, Willesden, Kilburn, Wembley) in 2006 and, at the same time, assess the potential viability of Shopmobility projects.

Some projects can be partially or fully funded through developer contributions. The Council will, where appropriate, seek contributions from developers towards shopmobility schemes.

4O.Po1 (8) Programme L1 Scootability. Proposal 4P.Po2-II and Programme E2 set out the Council’s commitment to improving direction signing for mobility and sensory impaired people.

4O.Pr1, 4O.Po2 and 4O.Pr3: The Council will deliver door-to-door transport services for disabled people and contribute to a consistent minimum London-wide eligibility standard.

4O.Pr1-3 (1) The Council will continue to deliver door-to-door transport (including the adoption of fair London-wide eligibility and entitlement criteria) in the following ways:

1. Via contracts with Brent Community Transport or other external contractors as the situation dictates;

2. Via internal contracts with Brent Transport Services, using additional vehicles in order to improve the availability of transport at times of high demand (for example when vehicles are required for school journeys). At present, many clients cannot enjoy full days’ attendance at day centres due to the need to fit their needs around school times;

3. Via contracts with minicab operators;

4. By supporting demand responsive services such as Dial-a-ride and voluntary transport; and

5. Through the continued and expanding provision of semi-demand responsive bus services such as BrentLink, which also provides an interface with conventional public transport services.

4O.Pr1-3 (2) Additional information will be provided in a future LIP Annual Progress Report when the recommendations of the TfL Door-2-door strategy are completed. Programmes D10 Brentlink routes 1 and 2; D11 Brentlink routes 3 and 4; D12 New premises for Brent Community Transport.

4O.Pr2 The Council will implement door-to-door services for disabled people.

4O.Pr2 (1) Mobility-impaired people in Brent currently have access to door-to- door transport services via the Taxicard scheme, demand responsive dial-a-ride and scheduled bus services and transport services provided by Brent Community Transport and Brent Transport Services. This arrangement enables people to access community

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 139 services, day centres, hospitals, shops, GPs, libraries and other attractions. Voluntary organisations also provide transport, most frequently for evening and weekend activities.

4O.Pr2 (2) The Council will support and contribute to the development of all- London eligibility criteria for access to door-to-door services in order to ensure fairness and social inclusion.

4O.Pr4 The Council’s proposals for door-to-door transport will integrate licensed private hire vehicles into appropriate service delivery mechanisms.

4O.Pr4 (1) The Council’s makes extensive use of commercial minicab services via its service level agreement with Brent Transport Services (BTS), at an annual cost of £2.1m. BTS provides a service comprising vehicles, drivers and escorts as specified by Social Services. It also sub-contracts to provide minicabs and taxis, fitted with special equipment as necessary, to carry children with special needs and to access streets that are unsuitable for coach or minibus access.

4O.Pr4 (2) The Council has a second service level agreement, with Brent Community Transport which does not contract out to taxi or minicab companies. The organisation does however provide a community car to convey disabled people to day centres.

4O.Pr9 The Council will establish, maintain and facilitate local mobility consultation mechanisms ensuring that disabled people are fully represented. A transport and mobility forum will be established to contribute to local policy development around accessible transport.

4O.Pr9 (1) The borough regularly engages with the Brent Association of Disabled People on transport policies and projects and sources potential respondents for forum group engagement events from the organisation’s own database. Comments from stakeholders influence the planning, design and appraisal of schemes in the borough.

4O.Pr9 (2) Brent’s Transportation Strategy Section established a quarterly Transport and Mobility Forum in 2004, to feed into discussions with TfL (including inviting senior TfL officials as speakers). Members of the public are invited through posters placed in libraries and other locations; the forum also has a database of over 100 individuals and organisations and an average attendance of up to 40. Recommendations from the meetings are fed back to the Council’s Public Transport Liaison meeting, which includes officers, transport operators and elected members. Outside of the forum, the Council’s public transport promotion officers welcome calls from the public about local public transport and mobility issues. Programme A1 (Public engagement); Appendix 5: (Consultation Strategy) ; Chapter 10 (Consultation).

4O.Pr9 (3) A number of members of Brent Transport and Mobility Forum have expressed an interest in representing the Forum at the London-wide forum. Members of both the stakeholder group and the Council will

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 140 therefore be willing to become representatives if invited. A list of names and contact details is held by Mike Evans, Senior Sustainable Transport Officer—020 8937 5179 / [email protected] .

4O.Pr12 The Council will assist the increased provision of powered wheelchairs and other mobility aids.

4O.Pr12 (1) The Council will work with Brent Transport Mobility Forum, Brent Association of Disabled People and Town Centre Managers to identify opportunities to develop Scootability and Shopmobility schemes and to develop a register of retailers and hirers of powered wheelchairs and other mobility aids. A feasibility report will be developed subject to the availability of funding during 2007 and will take into account the findings of the Shopmobility Feasibility Review.

4O.Pr13 The Council will seek to provide sufficient parking for disabled drivers at key locations.

4O.Pr13 (1) The Council’s Parking and Enforcement Plan ( Chapter 7 ) provides information on how the Council review existing provision and implement new car parking for disabled drivers at key locations across the borough. An action plan is included which outlines a timescale for commencing this ongoing review process. In addition, the Council provides parking for disabled people using public buildings, in accordance with the requirements set out in the Disability Discrimination Act.

4O.Pr13 (2) The views of Brent Association of Disabled People are sought on parking issues. They were last consulted in 2004 for feedback on their experiences with disabled parking in Brent; they will be consulted again as part of the implementation of the Parking and Enforcement Plan.

4O.Pr13 (3) Programme E20 Review of parking provision for disabled drivers.

4O.Pr14 The Council will work to ensure a robust and reputable “Blue Badge” scheme.

4O.Pr14 (1) Blue badges are issued to drivers with disabilities who need to be able to park near to home and other destinations. The badges, which are part of a London-wide scheme replacing the Orange Badge system, are personalised in order to prevent fraudulent use and thereby enable disabled drivers to have reasonable access to available parking spaces. Further information is included in Chapter 7 (Brent Parking Enforcement Plan).

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 141 Section M Integration

London Interchange Plan

K1 The Interchange Plan seeks to combine the transport objectives of improved accessibility and quality of service within the overall planning and policy aims for London. It considers all rail, Tube, bus, tram and major bus interchanges in the capital, to help guide priorities for investment. The plan is not prescriptive about where improvements should take place, nor is it the only source of available funding. The plan is intended for use in the following ways:

• To help Transport for London to prioritise funding and other resources for the development and implementation of particular interchange proposals;

• To help decide the level of involvement TfL should have with regard to schemes being developed by other parties;

• To complement the MTS;

• To provide a common benchmark for assessing all types of interchange and to compare against future updates of this document;

• To provide guidance to other stakeholders on TfL’s Interchange priorities;

• To complement projects that are already underway; and

• To enable consideration of area and system-wide initiatives, including facilities for walking and cycling adjacent to the interchanges.

Local interchange projects

Background

K2 The TfL Interchange Plan published in 2002 mentioned just two stations in Brent - Willesden Junction and Brondesbury Park. Since then, Willesden Junction (supported by a contribution of £75k from London Borough of Brent) has benefited from a new enclosed ticket hall, which completed the major improvement plan started at this station in the late 1990's. There has been no rationale offered for including Brondesbury Park as a candidate for major interchange expenditure. Brent Council sees no requirement for this, though the station is in need of minor enhancement. However there is an urgent need for improvements at nearby Brondesbury, for reasons described below.

Wembley Stations

K3 At the time of the Interchange Plan, Wembley Central attracted around £300k of funding from a TfL/Brent /Silverlink partnership in the Personal Security Around Transport Interchanges programme. Since then all three

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 142 Wembley interchanges (Central, Stadium and Wembley Park) have benefited from major investment projects in connection with the opening of the New National Stadium at Wembley. These have been funded by a mixture of LDA/Regeneration funds, Section 106 contributions and direct funding from TfL. All three stations will benefit from additional capacity and step-free accessibility to platforms conforming to DDA standards (with the minor exception of two lesser used platforms at Wembley Central).

The Mayor’s Transport Strategy

K4 The Mayor is committed to improving integration, making public transport more attractive throughout London, to better integrating all modes of travel. Policy 4P.Po1 states that, ‘Transport for London and the London boroughs will work in partnership with others to take a ‘whole journey’ approach, ensuring co-ordinated improvements to transport integration and facilitating greater use of public transport, cycling and walking.’

4P.Po2 – I The Council will work with TfL and other partners to improve interchange and access, where appropriate by supporting TfL’s Interchange Plan and according to the TfL Interchange Best Practice Guide and Good Practice Accessibility Guidelines as stated.

4P.Po2 (1) Brent has identified five further interchanges which are in urgent need of major improvement; these are:

• Brondesbury • Harlesden • Neasden • Queens Park • Stonebridge Park

4P.Po2 (2) There are also opportunities for smaller scale interchange improvement projects at a number of other stations including Kensal Rise, Kensal Green North Wembley, Kenton, Sudbury and Harrow Road and Dollis Hill.

4P.Po2 (3) With the exception of Neasden (London Underground) all the stations identified as in need of major improvement are Network Rail stations on the Silverlink Metro Network. They are therefore included in the NORP (North Orbital Rail Partnership) review of stations in partnership with TfL London Rail. The current status of each station is as follows:

• Brondesbury. Located on North London Line where it crosses Kilburn High Road, with excellent proximity to bus routes. However the station infrastructure is inadequate, poorly maintained and in urgent need of major refurbishment, including step-free access. Brent and Camden have agreed to seek opportunities for Section 106 grants from nearby development projects but these are unlikely to be sufficient to provide the funding necessary to make the significant improvements necessary.

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 143 • Harlesden. Located on the Watford DC and Bakerloo Lines between Harlesden Town Centre and Park Royal, with good proximity to bus routes. The station infrastructure has been improved as ticket hall level, but there is no step free access to platforms. (This could be achieved with ramps). There is also a need for improved access between bus stops on overbridge and the station entrance. This has been included in the Harlesden Town Centre project.

• Neasden. London Underground has commissioned a study to improve access between Neasden Station and surrounding areas, particularly Brent Park, Neasden Town Centre and the nearby Hindu Temple in Brentfield Road. Current access is tortuous on foot and by road, and there a high priority has to be placed on providing more direct access for pedestrians and public transport. A number of study projects are currently in progress in the Neasden Station area, sponsored by London Borough of Brent, TLRN, Tesco and IKEA. These are being co-ordinated and a master plan will be produced with the aim of providing major improvements to accessibility and ambience of this area. The impending 45% increase in Jubilee Line capacity makes this a high priority area for improvement.

• Queens Park. This is a key interchange between rail (Silverlink Metro) tube (Bakerloo) and bus (five routes) and also has the potential for greater use by trains serving the fast route to Euston and to the North London Line via Primrose Hill (TfL Rail proposal). There are major development proposals for adjacent land and these will include a bus interchange and terminus stands, and the station is the nearest to much of the South Kilburn regeneration area. However the station lacks step free access to platforms, and the layout of ticket hall and adjoining road bridge places severe restrictions on the movement of pedestrians between trains and buses.

• Stonebridge Park is located on Bakerloo/Silverlink Metro Watford DC Lines at the point where they cross the North Circular Road, and close to the Stonebridge regeneration area and Park Royal. There are three bus routes directly outside the station and two approximately 200 metres walk away. However the potential of the interchange is inhibited by relatively low frequency and unreliable bus services, due mainly to severe traffic congestion at the North Circular/Harrow Road junction. This is being addressed by the Council through the Wembley-Park Royal Transit project (see...... ). There is also an opportunity for a 40% increase in the number of northbound Bakerloo Trains calling at the station by providing accommodation for London Underground staff to terminate trains there. (At present this is done at Willesden Junction and trains run empty through Harlesden and Stonebridge Park stations to a turnback siding in the nearby LUL depot). Step free access to platforms would be feasible using ramps, and there is an urgent need to improve external access and ambience of the station area.

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 144 Proposals 4P.Po2 (4) Each station identified for major improvement work requires a feasibility study, at an estimated cost of £15k. This will concentrate on the area outside the station entrance, as TfL London Rail (London Underground in the case of Neasden) will provide the majority of input and funding for the operational areas of the station. The purpose of the feasibility studies will be to identify and assess requirements to improve the interface between station and surrounding pedestrian/bus environment. They will also provide a guide to the extent of funds needed to deliver significant improvements to station access.

4P.Po2 (5) A further aspect of the feasibility studies (a separate study costing approx £25k) is the assessment of stations which are in need of smaller scale schemes to improve accessibility.

Section 106 funds 4P.Po2 (6) There are existing section 106 finds which have been ring fenced for station improvement projects. A total of £180k has currently been identified for the stations mentioned above. There are further tranches likely at Queens Park (from South Kilburn New Deal for Communities project) and Stonebridge Park (Bridge Park and Unisys sites) which will be substantial. It should be noted that some of the section 106 funds may also be required to prime TfL Rail expenditure on rail infrastructure improvements at these stations.

NORP (North Orbital Rail Partnership) 4P.Po2 (7) In conjunction with TfL London Rail, Brent Council (as Lead Borough) is co-ordinating input to an improvement programme covering all stations on the Silverlink Metro network. A detailed list of aspirations has been produced and the projects at Silverlink Metro/Bakerloo stations referred to above take account of the NORP proposals. The partnership with TfL London Rail is designed to ensure seamless integration between projects to improve rail infrastructure (which will be part of the TfL Rail investment programme) and access improvements such as those within the scope of this LIP proposal.

4P.Po2 (8) Programmes C1 and C2 Station access.

4P.Po2 – II The Council will improve direction signing for accessible routes to assist mobility impaired people, especially in town centres and at tourist and other attractions.

4P.Po2 (2) Good quality signing is essential to ensure the permeability, legibility, accessibility and safety of the Borough for pedestrians. For mobility-impaired people in particular, it is essential to be able to identify level and direct routes to destinations using reliable direction signage.

The Council is committed to achieving the aims and objectives of the Mayor’s Walking Plan; signing is an important element of this commitment. Thus the Council will implement signs to a high standard, taking into account the following:

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 145

1. Signing and the accessibility of pedestrian routes will be audited across the Borough by an independent consultant and stakeholders from pedestrian and disabled groups; the most important qualification of these groups, aside from knowledge of specific needs, will be unfamiliarity with the Borough.

2. The Council will meet the reasonable demands arising from the outcomes of the signing and pedestrian routes review, including for example, provision of signs with sufficiently large lettering and Braille, provision of tactile and colour-coded route marking, improved lighting and footway surface improvements;

3. The Council will research and implement best practice examples, such as Bristol’s Legible City features and LB Camden’s Clear Streets Project. It will disseminate best practice of its own by innovating new approaches to pedestrian signing, taking into account its Streetscape Design Guidance and Road Danger Reduction Plan;

4. The Council will research and take into account pedestrian desire lines in order to inform planning for walking and accessibility, supported by its signing programme.

4P.Po2 (2) Programme E2 Street signing to assist people with sensory impairments.

4P.Pr3 The Council will respond to opportunities to contribute to and improve TfL’s journey planner facility (e.g. specifying location of walking and cycling routes).

4P.Pr3 (1) The LIP process has provided the Borough with the opportunity to review the provision of cycle parking, walking routes and other infrastructure. This information is available electronically on request for inclusion in the TfL Web-based Journey Planner.

4P.Pr4 The Council will facilitate and encourage the use of more sustainable modes of transport and how relevant promotional work (e.g. travel plans, travel awareness, demand management etc.) is being progressed and how these meet the communication requirements of local residents.

4P.Pr4 (1) The Council has developed a Good Going Strategy for 2005-2009 which sets out how the Council will deliver travel awareness in the borough. This will be updated regularly to expand its time horizon and take account of new initiatives. Brent adopted Good Going in 2004 and the range of activities that are attributed to the campaign has grown since. These campaigns include:

• Healthy travel. In September 2005, Sport England launched its campaign, Every Day Sport, which aims to increase the amount of physical activity in the population. The council regards walking and cycling as the only sustainable form of exercise for most people; it is essential for us therefore to support this initiative

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 146 and focus on encouraging walking and cycling as utility modes which provide the benefit of healthy exercise and travel combined.

• Travel planning. Brent's planning policies require all major development schemes to include a travel plan which sets out how the organisation will reduce car dependency and use and promote the use of more sustainable modes. The Council promotes employer travel plans through the West London Transport Strategy.

• Leisure travel. Various sponsorship deals with sports clubs and shopping centres have been achieved under the Good Going banner. A growing initiative has been making available reduced price tickets and other discounts for people travelling in a sustainable way to leisure destinations including cinemas and recreation complexes.

• Events. Brent Council provides event and organisational support for Walk to Work Week, National Bike Week, Good Going Week, and borough festivals and special events such as the Priory Park Road Street Party. Stakeholder groups are encouraged to become involved in the events; this increases their scope and the value that can be gained from organising them.

4P.Pr4 (2) The Transportation Strategy team relies to a large extent on the resources of other council and authority departments to deliver Good Going messages. These teams include Brent Communications, who co-ordinate press releases and council borough-wide newsletters; Brent Community Safety who advise on Safer Travel at Night and general transport-related crime issues. External authority assistance comes from the Police, NHS and Transport for London.

4P.Pr4 (3) Programme M2 Travel Awareness .

4P.Pr5 - I The Council will work to reduce transport-related crime and fear of crime including road crime (speeding, antisocial driving etc.).

4P.Pr5 (1) Please refer to Proposal 4C.Pr12 and Chapter 6 Brent Road Danger Reduction Plan and Programmes MISC1 Cycles for Metropolitan PC’s; MISC2 Community Safety partner training; MISC3 Community support officers (transport); MISC6 Community Safety Officers on school buses.

4P.Pr5 – II The Council will promote the Mayor’s ‘safer at night’ initiatives particularly in relation to personal safety in getting to and from rail stations, bus stations and bus stops.

4P.Pr5 (2) Please refer to Proposal 4C.Pr12, 4N.Pr1 and associated Programme K1 (Minicab Partnerships for personal safety).

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 147 4Q.Po1 The Council will work with TfL, TfL Rail, partner boroughs, bus and taxi operators to support increased public transport capacity.

4Q.Po1 (1) The success of recent investment in Brent’s bus services means that most of our routes can now be counted as ‘busy’. The Council has set out in this Local Implementation Plan a wide range of policies and proposals that will support London Buses’ investment in new vehicles and routes to meet future demand, continue to promote modal shift from private cars to public transport and be more inclusive of all members of the community.

The Council will seek improvements in the capacity and density of the bus network to alleviate overcrowding, improve the convenience, accessibility and attractiveness of buses and resolve network holes to promote bus travel as a key alternative to private cars. The Council will also promote new service routes to overcome problems encountered by people making orbital journeys.

4Q.Po1 (2) At the same time, the LIP and UDP contain a range of policies to reduce the need to travel by motorised modes, by promoting the use of local services, regenerating town centres, locating development and employment within walking and cycling distance of people’s homes and promoting walking and cycling. Cycling has a particularly valuable role to play in this regard, since it is a door-to-door mode that enables the user to reach destinations more quickly than other modes whilst delivering active travel and health benefits.

4Q.Po1 (3) The following table sets out the Council’s policies in the LIP that will support investment in increased capacity on Brent’s bus network:

Method Policies and proposals Increasing the level of bus priority in the 4F.Pr6; 4F.Pr8; borough on all roads, including extending 4G.Pr20; operating times where necessary and increasing Programmes D4; the capacity of existing bus priority measures D6; E16. where required. More generally managing the borough’s road network to minimise disruption to general traffic journeys, giving priority to movement on foot, cycle and public transport.

Improving the accessibility of bus stops and 4F.Pr7; 4F.Pr11; providing clearways. Programmes D5; D8. Increasing levels of enforcement and reviewing 4F.Pr2; 4F.Pr7; existing parking and loading arrangements 4F.Pr8; Programmes D1. Minimising and mitigating the effects of other 4F.Pr8; 4G.Pr20; investment on bus priority and accessibility; Programme D7. undertaking sustainable accessibility audits of all schemes.

Promoting sustainable forms of development, 3.Po8; UDP including higher density development in the policy BE11;

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 148 vicinity of public transport corridors; larger TRN6. developments may include measures to increase bus service capacity, such as new bus stops and interchanges.

Providing new bus stands, garages and longer 4F.Pr3; 4F.Pr7; bus stops Programmes D2; D3; D12. Working with London Buses to provide new bus 3.Po9; 4O.Po1; services in order to resolve network holes and to 4G.Pr12; Para. provide orbital links, notably the ‘Wembley D7-12; Fastbus’ between Wembley and Park Royal and Programme D9. ‘Brentlink’ services and service proposals in Stonebridge, Park Royal, Willesden, Wembley Park, Kingsbury and Queensbury.

Promoting and supporting the provision of bus- 4E.Pr10; 4P.Po2; bus and bus-rail/tube interchange. Paras D11-17; D20-23; K1-K2; Programmes D2; D3; D8. Continued engagement with bus operators, the 4F.Pr6; 4F.Pr8; general public, London Buses and the 4G.Po2; 4G.Pr15; Metropolitan Police regarding the improvement 4O.Po1; Paras of bus services and ensuring that buses play an BCD17; D19; All important role in serving major events and programmes destinations including the new National Stadium relating to bus at Wembley. priority.

Supporting adequate provision of bus services 3.Po9; 4O.Po1; for deprived areas and all social groups, Para D4; particularly equality and social inclusion groups. Programmes D10; D11; D12.

Conclusion

4Q.Po1 (4) The Council foresees continuing major growth in the use of bus services. Whilst recent increases in capacity and frequency are very welcome, we have concerns about the longer term ability of the bus network to cope with ever-increasing demand, particularly at peak times. It is therefore essential that TfL takes account of future growth patterns including those arising from initiatives such as free travel for under-16’s. An ongoing programme of capacity review and enhancement is therefore required by London Buses. Whilst this is normally implicit in the tendering process, we believe that within the current length of contracts, there may be situations where agreed capacity proves insufficient and requires augmentation within the period of the contract (this situation has already arisen on Route 18 and several other Brent routes since the introduction of free travel for under-16’s in September 2005).

BRENT LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2006-2011 CHAPTER 5 149