To receive a report from the Corporate Director of Place.

The Head of Operations and Service Improvement introduced Keith Harris Senior Engineer from the One Trafford Partnership. The Senior Engineer informed the Committee that TROs were used where parking affects traffic flow and so action needs to be taken. Residents were able to report possible TROs to the Council asking for action to be taken where they deem the traffic flow was being disturbed.

The report contained a list of the outstanding TROs in Trafford. The appendix to the report outlined the matrix the Council used to prioritise requests and decide which ones would be actioned. The Committee were told that new schemes could not be introduced ad hoc as a scheme could not be stopped once it had been been started and the Council had a limited number of projects they could do each year. As requests were ordered using the urgency matrix some requests that had been there for a long time continued to move further and further down the list as more urgent requests came in.

Following the introduction Committee Members asked a wide range of questions about TRO list and the matrix used to evaluate them. Councillor Thompson asked whether the system factored in the location of works done to ensure they were spread across Trafford. The Senior Engineer responded that the matrix did not factor in location and it was based upon the variables listed within the matrix.

Councillor Newgrosh noted the length of the list and asked whether there was another way for requests to be taken off the list other than a TRO being put in place. The Senior Engineer responded that they understood the frustration this practice could cause however the list needed to be kept for reference when repeat requests came in. Councillor Newgrosh responded that he felt that the public’s expectations needed to be adequately handled so that they are aware that it was unlikely that their request would be fulfilled.

Councillor Winstanley asked a series of questions about the process and how disabilities and equalities fitted into the matrix. The Senior Engineer explained that those factors were figured in as part of the matrix within section six. Councillor Winstanley noted that due to the waiting of the system and the fact that even minor adjustments required a TRO there were a number of issues regarding disability access across the borough that would never be addressed. 

Councillor Newgrosh asked what guidance was available and where could it be accessed. The Senior Engineer responded best way to receive guidance was to contact the One Trafford Partnership regarding the issue and they would provide guidance appropriate to that situation, as it is on a case by case basis.

The Chair asked how Trafford compared to other Councils in terms of length of lists and the matrixes that they were using. The Senior Engineer responded that the lists in other areas were as long or longer and the matrix used by Trafford was more robust than many others that they had seen.

Councillor Holden stated that he found seeing the matrix to be very useful in understanding how TROs were prioritised and asked that he be sent an updated copy if any changes were made. The Chair agreed that the matrix was a useful document and requested that a copy be sent to all Councillors.

RESOLVED:

1)    That the report be noted.

2)    That a copy of the matrix be sent to all Councillors.