If you require further information about this agenda please contact: Anthony Lumley on 020 8583 2248 or [email protected]

LOCAL STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIP

A meeting of the Local Strategic Partnership will be held at the Civic Centre, Lampton Road, Hounslow on Thursday, 14 September 2006 at 6:00 pm

MEMBERSHIP

Councillor Mark Bowen – London Borough of Hounslow Satvinder Buttar – Hounslow Racial Equality Council CS Ali Dizaei– Metropolitan Police John Foster – Hounslow Primary Care Trust Gerard Hollingworth – London Fire Brigade Mark Gilks – London Borough of Hounslow Rory Gillert – Hounslow Voluntary Sector Forum Russell Harris – West London Business Christine Hay – Hounslow Primary Care Trust Robert Innes – London West Learning & Skills Council Councillor Peter Thompson – London Borough of Hounslow

AGENDA

1. Apologies for Absence

2. Minutes (Pages 1 - 5)

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 8 March 2006

3. Local Area Agreement Performance Report for Quarter 1 (Pages 6 - 12)

Report by Councillor Peter Thompson

4. Community Plan (Pages 13 - 83) (a) Performance Update March 2006 (b) Consultation Plan (c) Framework and Content – Discussion Paper (d) Consultation Questionnaire

5. LSP Awayday Update (Pages 84 - 90)

6. LSP Stakeholder Conference Feedback (Pages 91 - 94)

7. Brentford Plan (Pages 95 - 197)

8. Any Urgent Business

9. Date of Next Meeting

Meetings of the LSP are currently scheduled to be held at the Civic Centre at 6.00pm on the following dates:

• Wednesday 14 December 2006 • Thursday 15 March 2007 • Thursday 14 June 2007

but please bring your diary to the meeting as it may be necessary to arrange some additional dates.

10. Invest to Save (as a potential option for delivery of LAA employment (Pages 198 - objectives and related issues) 202)

Report by the Head of Economic Development and Business Support

DECLARING INTERESTS

Committee members are reminded that if they have a personal interest in any matter being discussed at the meeting they must declare the interest and if the interest is also a prejudicial interest then they may not take part in any discussion or vote on the matter.

T.WELSH, Director of Legal Services London Borough of Hounslow, Civic Centre, Lampton Road, Hounslow TW3 4DN

12 September 2006

Agenda Item 2

At a meeting of the Local Strategic Partnership held at 6pm on Wednesday 8 March 2006 at the Civic Centre, Lampton Road, Hounslow

Present:

Councillor Colin Ellar London Borough of Hounslow Councillor Jagdish Sharma London Borough of Hounslow John Foster Hounslow Primary Care Trust Satvinder Buttar Hounslow Racial Equality Council Russell Harris West London Business Robert Innes Learning and Skills Council Mark Gilks London Borough of Hounslow

Also in Attendance:

Sharon Daye Hounslow Primary Care Trust Simon Phipps Metropolitan Police Russell Evans Metropolitan Police Howard Simmons London Borough of Hounslow Mike Jordan London Borough of Hounslow Mark Stevenson London Borough of Hounslow Celia Golden London Borough of Hounslow Lesley Underwood London Borough of Hounslow Savi Bhamra London Borough of Hounslow Nasreen Bhatti London Borough of Hounslow Patricia John Observer Helen Wilson London Borough of Hounslow Valerie Whitaker London Borough of Hounslow

1. Apologies for Absence

CS Ali Dizaei Metropolitan Police (Hounslow) Mick Newton London Fire Brigade (Hounslow) Christine Hay Hounslow Primary Care Trust Rory Gillert Hounslow Voluntary Sector Forum

The Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting, particularly Patricia John who was attending as an observer under the LSC’s BME Women on Board programme

2. Minutes

The minutes of the meeting held on 30 January 2006 were agreed and signed by the Chair.

3. CPA and JAR Update

Howard Simmons reported that feedback to date on both the CPA and JaR had been fairly encouraging but there was also a number of issues that remained to be clarified before the process entered its more formal stage and the final report

1 was issued. Mark Gilks observed that it was a long drawn out process that had entailed considerable work on the part of the Council and its key partners and the final outcome should be known by the end of April. Councillor Ellar said that the outcomes of the CPA and JAR were of great importance to the Borough and had led to significant improvements in the past.

4. Local Area Agreement (LAA) Update

Following negotiations with the Government Office for London and ODPM some changes had been required to the draft LAA discussed at the previous meeting. Howard Simmons referred to the difficulties encountered during the negotiations in championing local themes as opposed to central Government priorities. It was noted that performance would be carefully managed and monitored against the set targets. Howard Simmons commended the block leaders and Helen Wilson for all their hard work. The final version of the LAA will be circulated to key partners and signed off by the Leader and Chief Executive later in the month.

5. Stakeholder Conference Planning and 6. Community Plan 2007-2010 Preparation

Helen Wilson explained that it was intended to hold the Stakeholder conference at the end of June/beginning of July ie after the elections but before the summer holidays. It was hoped to be possible to hold the conference at GSK as in previous years. The conference would focus on progress made but also launch the next stage of the Community Plan. Howard Simmons stressed the importance of ensuring that the Community Plan tied in with the Local Area Agreement and was seen to move it forward. Mark Gilks spoke of the need to look to the 2020 vision, focusing on the likely business set up in the area and the skills levels required. The LSP welcomed Robert Innes’s offer to reconvene the economic development block working group to consider issues relating to the Community Plan and LAA. It was also noted that the structure of the Learning and Skills Council was changing and would be borough based in future. The LSP recognised the positive contribution that the West London regional office had made to its work.

Howard Simmons undertook to ensure that all key partners were engaged in work carried out during the course of preparations for the Community Plan and all feedback sessions.

7. The Brentford Plan – Preferred Options for Consultation

Lesley Underwood updated the LSP on progress on the consultation process on plans for the future development of the Brentford area. The LSP noted that there had been a good response from the local community during the early stages of the consultation process, with a well-attended stakeholder day and a two-day exhibition to which members of the public had come along to talk to officers and councillors. The main themes of the feedback received thus far had been that local residents wanted continued regeneration, more housing and mixed development and were concerned that attention should be paid to looking closely

2 at how the local community and social infrastructure would cope with the changes. Local people were also concerned that sustainable living should be prioritised and local heritage protected.

The report set out the timetable for progressing the Brentford Area Action Plan and presented objectives, policies and proposals to be considered at this stage of the consultation – ‘The Preferred Options’. Key to the consideration of this report was the Brentford Area Action Plan Preferred Options and Questionnaire accompanying the report. All preferred options had been subject to a sustainability appraisal which assessed their environmental, social and economic impact. The LSP were asked to give their own comments on the Plan, particularly with regard to the effects of the new development on key areas such as health.

Whilst welcoming the Plan, Satvinder Buttar wondered about the effect on the existing community and whether the proposals would reflect the diverse nature of the local population. Lesley Underwood explained that it was intended to develop better facilities for current residents, enhancing rather than eliminating the local environment and identity, and providing a range of good housing, business and job opportunities. Satvinder Buttar asked whether it was possible to persuade developers to employ local people and Mark Gilks indicated that this had been a feature of the ongoing discussions with developers. Lesley Underwood added that there was also an emphasis on developing training opportunities for local residents. Mark Gilks said it was important to have clear priorities in order to make the most of opportunities as they became available and spoke of the need to build up the local skills base. John Foster endorsed this comment and added that the timing of the recent Health Impact Assessment had been particular significant and that dialogue on the use of S106 money had also been very useful.

Russell Harris asked whether there was a strategy for alerting potential investors to the opportunities available in the area. Lesley Underwood confirmed that part of the test of soundness of the proposals would be whether the plans wee deliverable so it was vital to have the developers on board. Bearing in mind the fact that not all of the redevelopment land belongs to the Council Councillor Ellar indicated that the Council was brokering discussions with relevant parties wherever possible.

It was noted that the Government Office for London would appoint an inspector to consider public examination of the Brentford Plan in early 2007 and that his/her ruling would be binding on the Council.

8. Consultation on Employment Development Plan Document – Preferred Options

Mark Stevenson explained that the Employment Development Plan Document (DPD) and Brentford Area Action Plan were identified as priorities in preparation of the Council’s Local Development Framework, which would eventually replace the Unitary Development Plan (December 2003). The current report,

3 Employment Preferred Options Paper and questionnaire presented the Council’s preferred options as part of formal consultation in preparation of the Employment DPD. This followed on from public consultation in June 2005 on options as the initial stage in preparation of the Employment Development Plan Document. Key to the consideration of this report was the Employment Development Plan Preferred Options and Questionnaire accompanying the present report.

It was noted that the preferred options had been prepared on the basis of responses to the initial consultation, review of national and regional guidance, and a sustainability appraisal of the options for their impact on the economy, environment and community. The preferred options sought to address a range of issues concerned with the future planning of all industrial and commercial land, including whether there was enough land to provide for the demands of business; where the most important industrial and office sites were; where new development providing jobs should be directed including offices, industrial and warehousing uses; which locations hotels should be directed to; and whether release to other land uses should be encouraged. The LSP noted that employment land was in short supply and therefore limits were placed on the amount permitted to be turned over to housing with the Council seeking to protect sites it had designated of local significance together with those of strategic importance to the Mayor of London. The LSP was informed that small and medium size business still played a critical part in the borough and future work would look at the pressures involved and ways of meeting the demand for suitable locations. Efforts would also be made to seek greater diversification of business so that the local community was not quite so dependent on Heathrow airport. As well as safeguarding employment prospects in the event of an economic downturn, Satvinder Buttar stressed the importance of being prepared to make the most of any business opportunities that arose. Robert Innes suggested that it would be useful for the strategic skills employment group to consider the document in detail.

Key partners were encouraged to submit their thoughts on the proposals.

9. Corporate Equalities and Community Cohesion Plan

Celia Golden presented the Council’s Corporate Equalities and Community Cohesion Plan explaining that it was being considered by the LSP as part of the Level 3 equalities standard. The Plan referred to the legal duties involved and the Council’s priorities and current activities. In particular, Celia Golden drew attention to the crossover between priorities in the Community Plan and the Equalities and Community Cohesion Plan. Howard Simmons spoke of the importance of the Council engaging with key partners such as the Police, PCT and HREC on the contents of the Plan. Whilst it was noted that this would not remove the statutory duty on each public body to produce an equalities plan, the LSP discussed the possibility of pooling experience and resources to identify crossover issues which, in future, could be brought together in a single document, perhaps as part of the Community Plan.

4 10. Any Urgent Business

Satvinder Buttar tabled a paper outlining proposals for the HREC to its expertise to assist locally based public bodies, such as those on the LSP, to achieve their desired objectives of promoting race equality and ensuring that there was equality of opportunity eg the HREC could review and assess an organisation’s race equality scheme.

Mark Gilks said that the proposals merited serious consideration as the work would enhance what LSP partners were already doing. However it was noted that HREC would require resources in the region of £30,000 to carry out this role It was possible that this might be addressed by the Council as principal and with other key partners contributing to the cost.

It was agreed that this matter would be given further consideration and a decision taken at a later stage.

11. Date of Next Meeting

The next meeting of the LSP will be held at 6pm on Thursday 13 July 2006. (This meeting was subsequently cancelled as it clashed with the LSP Stakeholder Conference).

Meeting closed at 7.45pm

5 Agenda Item 3 Contact: Helen Wilson, Policy Officer Tel: 020 8583 2461 E-Mail: [email protected]

Local Strategic Partnership - 14 September 2006

THE LOCAL AREA AGREEMENT 2006 - 2006 REVIEW OF PERFORMANCE TARGETS - QUARTER ONE

Report by: Cllr Peter Thompson

Summary

The Local Area Agreement (LAA) was agreed in March 2006. It was agreed that LAA performance would be reported on every quarter to the Local Strategic Partnership (LSP) and every six-months to Government Office for London (GOL).

The First Quarter Review of performance highlights that a number of areas of work have yet to begin. The review has been used as an opportunity to ensure that performance management arrangements are effective and efficient.

The report outlines the methodology used to collate the performance information and provides a review of progress made so far.

1.0 RECOMMENDATION

1.1 That the report be noted.

1.2 That it is agreed to continue with the methodology outlined for the performance review in Quarter Two (October 2006).

1.3 That performance reporting takes this format for the Quarter Two/ Six-Month report to the LSP.

1.4 That with the agreement of GOL performance reporting takes this format for the Six-Month Review.

2.0 METHODOLOGY

2.1 A proforma was sent to each Block Lead requesting performance information for Quarter One. 2.2 The information submitted in the proforma has been catergorised using a traffic light system to show performance for the LAA as a whole and for each block. The following categories have been used: • Green – Performance is on target or exceeding it • Amber – Performance is within 5% of the target • Red – Performance is off target by more than 5%

6 • N/A – This option denotes when performance is either: reported annually; the targets have yet to be set; or performance information for this quarter was unavailable N.B. For some of the indicators it was agreed that the level of performance tolerance would be larger or smaller than the 5% stated above. 2.3 Commentary was requested to provide detail and contextual information on the target’s progress. 2.4 The source of evidence for each indicator was requested. In Quarter One it was agreed that Block Leads would not have to supply actual evidence to the LAA Policy Officer. 2.4 The above methodology will be used for monitoring performance in Quarter Two, however Block Leads will be requested to supply evidence when necessary.

3. LAA REWARD TARGET PERFORMANCE SUMMARY 3.1 The majority of the LAA reward element stretch targets are progressing well, with the exception being those in the Economic Development and Enterprise Block.

Block Number Indicator Target Actual Progress Target Commentary Q1 Q1 06/07 Children and LAA1 Percentage of Looked After 53% 66% 53% Figure is a snapshot of Young young people aged 11-16 years performance as at 30 June People placed in non-Hounslow 2006. There have been 18 Placements (out borough positive enquiries from commissioned potential foster carers and they have been committed to undergo a full assessment. It takes approximately 4 months for a foster carer to be approved. It is anticipated that this figure will rise over the year. Children and LAA2 a(i) Percentage of 14 year old pupils 76.5% 76% 77% These figures are Young in schools maintained by the provisional and subject to People LEA achieving Level 5 or better change. The annual target in the Key Stage 3 tests in for maths and science has English been exceeded and it is hoped that this will be the same for English once final figures are released. Children and LAA2 Percentage of 14 year old pupils 74.5% 76% 75% These figures are Young a(ii) in schools maintained by the provisional and subject to People LEA achieving Level 5 or better change. The annual target in the Key Stage 3 tests in for maths and science has Maths been exceeded and it is hoped that this will be the same for English once final figures are released. Children and LAA2 Percentage of 14 year old pupils 72% 73% 74% These figures are Young a(iii) in schools maintained by the provisional and subject to People LEA achieving Level 5 or better change. The annual target in the Key Stage 3 tests in for maths and science has Science been exceeded and it is hoped that this will be the same for English once final figures are released. Children and LAA2 b(I) Percentage of half days missed 5.4% 4.21% 5.4% Improved summer weather Young due to total absence in primary and reduced illness have People Schools maintained by the LEA impact on actual number Children and LAA2 Percentage of half days missed 6.5% 5.66% 6.5% Improved summer weather Young b(ii) due to total absence in and reduced illness have People Secondary Schools maintained impact on actual number

27 by the LEA Children and LAA Percentage of young people 1.755 0.56% 31.98% Low target was set for Young 2c(ii) aged 13-19 gaining accredited % quarter one to reflect that People outcomes compared to the staff use this period for percentage of young people planning and preparing. who participate in youth work in Activity has now begun and the local authority area: this will impact on the Accredited Outcome number of young people being awarded accredited outcomes. Healthier LAA3 a Increase the proportion of 85.25 n/a 86% Data available from Communities individuals completing treatment % Quarter Two and Older People Healthier LAA3 b Increase the proportion of 40% 57% 50% Communities individuals with a positive skin and Older test completing the contact People tracing ‘Follow-up Programme’, in order to reduce the likelihood of spread of the disease. Healthier LAA4 a Number of 4 week quitters 260 85 1793 There was a low number of Communities attending NHS Stop Smoking referrals in the first quarter. and Older Services. We had a total target The figures provided are a People of 3,740 4-week quitters over snapshot, The Strategic first 3 years 2003 – 2006 (800 + Health Authority figures will 1200 + 1740 be reported on the 8th September, after this report has been circulated. Healthier LAA4 b Number of 52 week quitters 104 30 716 193 letters have been sent Communities to people who had a and Older successful 4 week quit in People Q1 in 2005-06. We have had 30 returns to date. Comprehensive data for the full year of 2005-06 will available from June 2007. However, the SSS will report actual snapshot figures per quarter for this indicator Healthier LAA5 a Council supported admissions 69.50 66.79 69.5% Communities of people aged 65 and over to % % and Older residential care (PAF C26) People Healthier LAA5 b Intensive home care (PAF C28) n/a n/a 16.9% Data collected in Communities September of each year. and Older People Healthier LAA5 c Numbers of people aged 65 and 57 72 75 Communities over in receipt of Direct and Older Payments (part of PAF C51) People Safer LAA6 a The proportion of relevant land 16% 13% 15% Stronger and highways (expressed as a Communities percentage) from which unacceptable levels of graffiti are visible Safer LAA6 b To reduce offences recorded as 987 1024 3948 The trend to reduce Stronger criminal damage, which includes criminal damage is heading Communities graffiti downwards and the target is expected to be met. Safer LAA7 To increase the rate of 219 247 33% Stronger sanctioned detection for Communities domestic violence Safer LAA8 a Number of perpetrators brought 11 11 49 Stronger to justice through use of civil Communities legal remedies and non legal action: (Indicator will be measured using activities below) Safer LAA8 b Number of race crime incidents 55 57 211 Stronger reported to social housing Communities providers Economic LAA9 Number of (workless) lone 0 0 0 To date no resources have Development parents assisted into sustained been identified for Job- and work of 16 hours a week or brokerage. See paper on Enterprise more for 13 consecutive weeks. “Invest to Save” elsewhere on 83 this LSP Agenda Economic LAA10 Number of people aged 16-19 0 0 150 Outcome figures for 06-07 Development place on apprenticeship will not be available from and programmes and retained for LSC until 2007-08. Enterprise the first year of their course (if Council Apprenticeship the course is less than one year scheme under way. then they should complete the Delegated Authority sought course) for grant to Carillion Training to tie new Construction training centre into LAA delivery Economic LAA11 Jobs retained/ created as result 0 0 80 Outcome figures for 06-07 Development of identified businesses referred will not be available from and to existing channels of business WLB until 2007-08. £50k Enterprise support 12 months after allocated to delivery of diagnostic consultations scheme; Mapping consultants appointed

4. PERFORMANCE SUMMARY 4.1 A snapshot of performance overall and by block is detailed below. Full reporting of performance by target can be accessed through the LAA Performance Spreadsheet and supporting files. Should you request a copy of this information please contact Helen Wilson on the details supplied above.

4.2 LAA Performance April 2006 – June 2006 LAA performance for quarter one shows that just over half of all indicators have yet to make progress. The N/A category illustrates that performance for the indicator is reported annually, or that baseline and targets have yet to be established, or that performance information for this quarter was unavailable.

Total for Quarter 1

23% Green 3% Amber Red 57% N/A 16%

49

4.3 Cross Cutting Themes There are 3 cross-cutting themes reflected in the table below: Transport, Air Pollution and the Mixed-use Community Hub.

Cross Cutting Themes

0% 0% 0% Green Amber Red N/A

100%

4.4 Children and Young People Block As demonstrated in section 3, this block is doing well with the majority of its reward element stretch targets. The N/A category in this block is high because a number of indicators are reported annually and the data collection period for the first quarter occurred over the school summer holidays where a number of key staff were on annual leave. For some indicators, it is too early in the year to see evidence of the impact of the activities and actions underway to support the LAA process hence the red category.

Children and Young People Block

18%

5% Green Amber Red 53% N/A 24%

4.5 Healthier Communities and Older People

105 The N/A category is high due to a mix of factors: there are a number of annually reported targets in this block, there is a number of indicators where baseline data and targets have yet to be established and there are a few indicators where performance information was not available.

Healthier Communities and Older People Block

19%

2% Green Amber Red 15% N/A 65%

4.6 Safer Stronger Communities Block As demonstrated in section 3, this block is doing well with its reward element stretch targets. The N/A category in this block is high because a number of indicators are reported annually or they have yet to establish targets.

Safer Stronger Communities Block

37% 38% Green Amber Red N/A

20% 5%

116

4.7 Economic Development and Enterprise Block Progress in this block has been slow (especially on LAA 9, which is reported elsewhere on this agenda), due to the delayed release of the Pump Priming Grant and the need to identify extra funding streams to help deliver the activity.

Economic Development and Enterprise Block

0% 0% 0% Green Amber Red N/A

94%

5. NEXT STEPS 5.1 The performance review for Quarter One has highlighted a number of areas where the indicators have poor baseline information and it is difficult to set targets. This will be addressed in the LAA refresh. 5.2 Work on the LAA refresh will begin in October.

Background Papers: LAA Performance Spreadsheet and supporting files are available upon request. This report has been or is due to be considered by: n/a This report is relevant to the following wards/areas: n/a

127 Agenda Item 4 Contact: Helen Wilson Tel: 020 8583 2461 E-Mail: [email protected]

Local Strategic Partnerhip/Executive/CMT - 30 June 2006

ANNUAL REVIEW OF COMMUNITY PLAN SOFT TARGETS

Report by: Cllr Peter Thompson

Summary The current Community Plan is due to expire March 2007. Performance outlined in this report reflects progress made during the past 2 years and demonstrates that the LSP is on-track to complete the majority of targets set in 2004.

The report highlights that 90% of targets are either 'complete' or 'in progress and on target to achieve'.

All targets were considered by Community Plan theme, and key responsible officers consulted on progress. The methodology used and summary performance is detailed below.

The information detailed in this report has been prersented to LSP Members at the Away Day and to the Stakeholder Conference.

1.0 RECOMMENDATION

1.1 That the report be noted.

1.2 That is agreed to next report Community Plan performance in April 2007.

2.0 METHODOLOGY

2.1 A proforma was sent to each named responsible officer requesting an update position as at the mid year point. 2.2 Officers were asked to rate the target’s progress according to four categories: • Completed • In progress – on track • In progress – behind schedule • Not started 2.3 Commentary was requested to provide detail and contextual information on the target’s progress. 2.4 All claims regarding the target’s status required evidencing; this took the form of statistical data, reports, and other available supporting information. 2.5 Due to the nature of the review, target status assessment is subjective in that it is the opinion of an individual officer. However, this is tempered by the need to provide evidence for all claims, which does confer some reliability to the results. 13

3.0 PERFORMANCE SUMMARY 3.1 A snapshot of performance by theme is detailed below. Full reporting of performance by target is provided in the accompanying appendices:

• Appendix A – A Safer Community • Appendix B – A Healthier Community • Appendix C – An Accessible Community • Appendix D – A Thriving Community • Appendix E – A Greener Community • Appendix F – A Creative Community

3.2 Summary of performance of Community Plan Targets Current performance demonstrates that the LSP is on-track to meet the majority of targets set in the 2004-2007 Community Plan.

% of Target Status Number Total Completed 22 28% In progress – on track 48 62% In progress – behind schedule 34% Not started 23% Awaiting information 00% Totals 78 100%

Overall Summary

4% 3% 0% 29% Completed In Progress - On Track In Progress - Behind Schedule Not Started Awaiting Information 62%

142

3.3 A Safer Community

% of Target Status Number Total Completed 11 69% In progress – on track 5 31% In progress – behind schedule 0% Not started 0% Awaiting information 0% Totals 16 100%

A Safer Community

31% Completed In Progress - On Track In Progress - Behind Schedule Not Started 69% Awaiting Information

A few specific achievements so far include: • A reduction in the number of offences committed by persistent young offenders. • A reduction in domestic burglary across the borough. • The local community feel safer using the parks and open spaces. • An increase in the number of domestic violence incidents reported.

3.4 A Healthier Community % of Target Status Number Total Completed 2 15% In progress – on track 10 77% In progress – behind schedule 0% Not started 18% Awaiting information 0% Totals 13 100%

153 A Healthier Community

0% 8% 0% 15% Completed In Progress - On Track In Progress - Behind Schedule Not Started Aw aiting Information 77%

A few specific achievements so far include: • A fully integrated Children’s Services Department has been established. • Developed a young people’s substance misuse service. • Improved the number of adoptions of children in care to permanent families.

3.5 An Accessible Community % of Target Status Number Total Completed 5 50% In progress – on track 5 50% In progress – behind schedule 0% Not started 0% Awaiting information 0% Totals 10 100%

An Accessible Community

Complet ed

I n P r ogr ess - On T r ack

I n P r ogr ess - Behin d S chedule

Not Started 50% 50% Awaiting Information

A few specific achievements so far include: • Promotion of sustainable transport modes including public transport, cycling and walking. Promotion is ongoing and includes advice to employers on how they can encourage employees to use these modes of transport to work. • Increase in bus priority, pedestrian and cycling facilities throughout the borough.

164

3.6 A Thriving Community % of Target Status Number Total Completed 0% In progress – on track 12 92% In progress – behind schedule 18% Not started 0% Awaiting information 00% Totals 13 100%

A Thriving Community

8%

Completed In Progress - On Track In Progress - Behind Schedule Not Started Aw aiting Information 92%

A few specific achievements so far include: • Continued regeneration of the three town centres at Hounslow, Feltham and Brentford. • Continued improvement to the quality of social housing in the borough.

3.7 A Greener Community

% of Target Status Number Total Completed 0% In progress – on track 9 82% In progress – behind schedule 2 18% Not started 0% Awaiting information 0% Totals 11 100%

175 A Greener Community

18%

Completed In Progress - On Track In Progress - Behind Schedule Not Started Aw aiting Information 82%

A few specific achievements so far include: • Continued development of a borough-wide air quality action plan. • Continued improvement of community involvement in volunteer programmes that support work done in Hounslow’s parks and open spaces. • Continued promotion of renewable energy technologies.

3.8 A Creative Community

% of Target Status Number Total Completed 4 27% In progress – on track 10 67% In progress – behind schedule 0% Not started 17% Awaiting information 0% Totals 15 100%

A Creative Community

7% 27% Completed In Progress - On Track In Progress - Behind Schedule Not Started Aw aiting Information 66%

186

A few specific achievements so far include: • The development of a new library on Beavers estate in 2004. (The work done on the HUB stretched beyond the original objective of just developing a new library. It is now a community facility that includes the library and access to Surestart resources.)

• There have been 750 new childcare places created, which well exceeds the target set of 300 set in 2004. • A continued reduction in the number of pupil absences from primary and secondary schools.

4.0 SUMMARY OF AREA COMMITTEE PERFORMANCE Each Area Committee continues to monitor community priorities agreed in 2004. A full set of area priorities is listed in the ‘Area Profiles’ section of the Community Plan. The following is a summary of key achievements so far.

4.1 West Area Committee The area priorities are: • Reduction in Crime. • Better use of allotments/parks and open spaces • Improving facilities for Young People • Improving access to Health facilities e.g. GP Services • A new pedestrian footbridge on the Bedfont Road • Better services for the elderly The West Area study is now complete and a number of recommendations were made. The area priorities are picked up in the resulting action plan.

4.2 Heston and Cranford Area Committee Examples of progress made against the area priorities: • Reduction in crime (including improved street lighting and use of CCTV cameras) The committee invested their capital allocation and Section 106 monies in street lighting schemes (incl Wheatlands) and gave financial support to the Police iniative for mobile CCTV cameras. Helped by these investments crime overall in Heston and Cranford has been reduced.

• Improvement to the environment (including clean streets, maintenance of parks and improved quality of life) There has been capital investment agreed by the Executive for improvements to some of the main roads in Heston & Cranford. Small environmental schemes have been approved by the Committee and funded through their environment budget allocation.

• Impact of Heathrow Airport (including traffic noise and pollution)

197 The Committee are regularly updated by officers on noise & pollution issues in relation to Heathrow Airport. They are also advised about the actions being taken by central government and BAA in response to the concerns of local residents. The Committee continues to encourage that the provision of information on the BAA Noise Insulation scheme be available to local residents.

4.3 Central Hounslow Area Committee Progress against the area priorities: • Reduction in traffic A number of traffic calming measures have been implemented, including waiting restrictions on Frampton Road and Brookwood Road. Members also agreed the extension of the Town Centre Central Pedestrian Zone to include Sunnycroft Road, Ellington Road and Elmworth Avenue. • Tackling crime and the fear of crime 2005 – 2005 members approved £75,000 expenditure for CCTV cameras in the Central Hounslow Wards; cameras are now installed in Whitton Road and Midsummer Avenue. A number of Neighbourhood Watches have been introduced and are proving very successful. Safer Neighbourhood Team continues to operate effectively in Hounslow West and a dispersal order that was introduced in Tivoli Road appears to have been effective in reducing anti social behaviour.

• Development in the town centre and improving the evening economy

Phase 1 – of Key Site One (Blenheim Centre) is well underway. Members have been highly involved in the ensuring that this site is progressing well. A topping out ceremony was held just recently. Plans for landscaping the area and the covered tube walkway are to come before the June planning meeting for determination.

• Environmental improvements including open spaces, greening the area and street scene.

Funds were allocated to the Friends of Inwood Park to help to improve park facilities. Future work needs to be done in this area and members have agreed to allocate the ‘list of work’ to their wish list. In terms of greening the area members agreed to provide two benches in Wolsey Close, Heath Road and Central Avenue Junctions; and to provide a tree, some benches and rubbish bins in Chatsworth Crescent.

• Better schools

Members agreed the following financial packages to assist local schools: - Hounslow Manor School received £5,000 to facilitate the planting of trees native to members of our refugee and asylum seeker communities. - Grove Park Junior School recieved £5,000 to provide a wetland facility for the children. - Education S106 monies were freed up to provide essential new classrooms in the area.

4.4 Isleworth and Brentford Area Committee

Progress against the area priorities:

208

• Reduction in traffic Members have approved various traffic calming measures across the area, designed to encourage drivers to use main roads and to provide a deterrent to the use of local residential roads.

• Access to health facilities

Member support of PCT Health Delivery Plan

• Improvement in air quality

Air Quality Action Plan (AQAP) is now approved and available on the website. Work on implementing the measures is continuing. We cannot categorically say that there have been reductions in air pollution. Such reductions can only materialise if for example there is a modal shift away from private cars. The proposed London Low Emission Zone is another measure that will deter heavily polluting diesel freight vehicles from operating in Hounslow. This is currently under consultation. With regards to CO2 levels, we can only track this through the London Atmospheric Emissions Inventory (LAEI) produced by The GLA. The latest inventory is for 2003. We can compare the figures for each year of the inventory and look for any discernible trends.

• Reducing noise pollution

Transport related noise pollution from both aircraft and road traffic is a contentious issue. For aircraft noise, the work is mainly mitigative, for example, lobbying for better insulation measures for Hounslow’s schools, opposing the introduction of mixed mode operation at the airport and insisting on more stringent night flight control. With regards to road traffic noise, only managing the demand for transport can create an appreciable reduction in road noise. Hounslow has recently acquired noise monitoring equipment and are now in a position to conduct environmental noise surveys. We aim to be in a position to suggest noise mitigative measures such as noise barriers where applicable.

• Better children’s play facilities

Members supported the establishment of the area’s Detached Outreach Team (DOT) and have been involved in monitoring its continuing progress. Strong support has also been given to the Young People’s Strategy and Change for Children policy. • Developing open spaces

Members have supported the continuing developments under the Sports & Active Recreation Strategy and Tree Management Policy. In 2005 Green Corridor presented proposals for work along the Great West Road under the Golden Mile strategy.

• Access to river and canal

Improvements to signage and access in relevant river frontage developments.

• Better youth and community centres and their activities

Member support of local sustainable projects such as “Soul in the City 2004”, “Griffin Park Learning Zone” and “@ Liberty”.

219

• Improving community safety

With the full support of the members, the local Metropolitan Police Service Inspector lobbied to have Brentford recognised by the Metropolitan Police Association as a town centre, the consequence of which has been the ability to bid for additional funding for local initiatives to tackle crime. Safer Neighbourhood teams were rolled out across the entire area from April 2006.

4.5 Chiswick Area Committee

Progress against the area priorities: • Complete river wall and make best use of river frontage

Members receive regular updates on the river wall and river related activities; also consider the aspects of the river in respect of Planning.

• Improve public transport

Members contributed to the Local Implementation Plan and have supported Transport for London funded projects to improve bus access.

• Reduction in crime

Crime statistics are improving.

• Get value for money from London Borough of Hounslow

This is considered and reflected in all Committee’s decisions.

• Promote Chiswick Heritage Regeneration Area

Members receive regular reports on the project and in particular sponsored a special meeting to consult local people on the Chiswick House and Gardens project

• CCTV

CCTV has been installed at Turnham Green Station and there are ongoing projects with Domehawk cameras, currently seeking funding to install in underpasses.

• The Library

Work has yet to start on this priority.

• Provision for elderly residents

Members sponsor a health profile exercise of Duke’s Meadows area and have received reports regarding work on Cliften Gardens.

2210 • Facilities for children

S106 money has been committed to improvements in parks, open spaces and play areas.

• Improve Streetscene

Extensive improvements along the High Road, Turnham Green and other areas funded from S106 monies.

5.0 COMMUNITY PLAN PERFORMANCE MONITORING 5.1 The Community Plan has so far been monitored in September 2005 and March 2006. Progress has been shown to be good and that the majority of targets have either been met or are on track to be met. 5.2 It is suggested that Community Plan performance does not need to be monitored again until April 2007. This will coincide with the launch of the next Community Plan 2007- 2010.

Background Papers: Appendix A - F This report has been or is due to be considered by:

This report is relevant to the following wards/areas:

2311 MID YEAR REVIEW OF COMMUNITY PLAN TARGETS (MARCH 2006) 1. A SAFER COMMUNITY

Who Objective Rating Commentary Risk update Christine 1.1 Reduce rates of Completed Total Cohort Population in 2004 (Oct-Dec 2004) = At the mid year point the Pangbourne youth offending of all 103 success of the target was young offenders Target for 2005/06 is 31% at risk. However, good Each Quarter it should be 7.75% performance in the third and fourth quarters The target for 05/06 was 31%. The target was redressed the position. exceeded with an outcome of 24.27%.

The target was achieved through the identification of target young people and the concentration of resources to address risks and needs. 24 Christine 1.2 Reduce average Completed The target for 05/06 was 3.15 offences per PYO. This objective was on Pangbourne number of offences The target was exceeded with an outcome of 0.98 target throughout the year. committed by offences per PYO. persistent young offenders (PYO) Persistent Young Offenders were flagged and particular attention was paid to their assessments and supervision throughout the year. Resources were targeted towards them to address risks and needs. Kirti Sisodia 1.3 Reduce domestic Completed Reducing burglary across the borough is also an integral part burglary of the borough’s Community Safety Strategy and Hounslow’s contribution to national home office targets.

A domestic burglary stakeholder group has been overseeing this work; their action plan has focused on target hardening properties in residential areas that have been subject to burglary. Hotspots across the borough were identified where residential burglary was occurring or projected to occur. Visits to victim’s homes were carried out by Crime CH/8542 1 Page Who Objective Rating Commentary Risk update Prevention Officers and supported by leaflet drops in targeted areas. A number of undercover operations were carried out on venues that were identified as receiving stolen property together with deployment of surveillance equipment.

Despite the coordinated efforts of the multi-agency partnership the PSA target set of 1830 has not been achieved. Local police data shows domestic burglaries peaking to 333 during the months of February and March, this was above average, and combined with the spate of burglaries in quarter 3 the end of year target has been exceeded by 18 crimes.

Although the PSA target was not achieved the detection rates (crimes solved) for 2005/06 for domestic burglary in Hounslow Borough was19%. This rate of solving residential burglary is one of the highest in the MPS (MPS average is

25 14%).

The Community Safety Partnership is continuing to reduce domestic burglary, and to support victims and likely victims of domestic burglary as part of delivering the Community Safety Strategy 2005-08.

Yvonne Birch 1.4 Reduce number of Completed This is the PSA 5 target which is split into two parts, part a) youth nuisance reduce the number of youth nuisance incidents; and part b) Zee Rawn incident reports by reduce the percentage of residents who perceive youth extending the warden nuisance to be a problem. scheme Youth Nuisance Incidents rose for the first two years of the PSA and concern was that they would continue to rise. However within the last year the number of incidents have been consistently dropping, bringing Part a) of the PSA on target at the end of the three year project. Part a) accounts for 60% of the total PSA reward (£297,000) which should be payable to LBH upon successful audit and acceptance of the figures. CH/8542 2 Page Who Objective Rating Commentary Risk update

Residents perception of youth nuisance had been declining over the first two years but the 2005 Tenant Satisfaction Surveys revealed perceived Youth Nuisance, (as well as most other Anti-Social behaviour) as more of a problem than the previous year. It is unclear why this trend has emerged, given that Hounslow Homes have invested considerable resources in dealing with Anti-Social behaviour. Part b) constitutes 40% of the total PSA reward (£198,000) and will now unfortunately not be payable to LBH.

1.5 Engage with hard Completed Every, 3 years Hounslow Community Safety to reach sectors of the Partnership is required to conduct a Crime and Drugs community during Audit for the borough. As part of this process the consultation on the Partnership is required to consult with key stakeholders, Crime Audit residents and hard to reach groups. 26 An extensive public consultation exercise was conducted between October and December 2004. During this period various stakeholders, members of the local community and hard to reach groups were engaged through a combination of presentations, focus groups, one to one interviews, use of residents panel, presentation at area committees, and a questionnaire in Hm magazine which went out to all residents in the Borough.

In total 57 consultation events were held, the results of the public consultation were analysed and compared to the findings of the Crime and Drugs Audit. The first stage of analysis identified common priorities. The second stage examined differences between what people said and the findings of the Crime Audit. These were grouped and similarities and differences were perceived and plotted in the form of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats. The findings of CH/8542 3 Page Who Objective Rating Commentary Risk update this exercise formed the basis of the key crime reduction target areas for the Community Safety Strategy 2005-2008.

Liz Knight 1.6 Reduce deaths In progress The casualty reduction targets for the Borough follow and serious injuries on – on track those set by the Mayor of London in his revised Road the roads in Hounslow Safety Plan for London. This requires a 50% reduction in the number of people killed or seriously injured (KSI’s) and a 25% reduction in the number of slight injuries. These reductions are from a baseline figure based on the average number of casualties in the period 1994-1998 and must be achieved by 2010. In Hounslow our targets are a reduction in KSI’s from 226 to 113 and slights from 1352 to 1014 in 2010.

These targets are met by a range of engineering

27 measures in Local Safety Schemes, which aim to improve sites, such as road junctions where collisions are known to occur and to achieve an overall reduction in speed, which is closely related to collisions and crashes.

The other element is Road Safety Education which aims to protect the vulnerable road user. This ranges from cycle and motorcycle education in schools to advice and information for car users, new parents and minority ethnic groups. Richard Lee 1.7 Improve removal In progress In year 2005/6 Operation Scrap-It, part of the rates of abandoned – on track Community Environment Team, dealt with 3,467 vehicles reports of nuisance vehicles, which includes abandoned vehicles and untaxed vehicles. Of these 2,202 were recorded as abandoned and a total of 441 vehicles were subsequent taken for destruction and a further 50 vehicles removed into safe storage. In addition 569 vehicles were surrendered and removed under the CH/8542 4 Page Who Objective Rating Commentary Risk update Council's free surrender policy.

100% of abandoned vehicles reported were investigated within 24 hours (BV218a) and 61.7% of these vehicles were removed within 24 hours of the legal entitilement to do so, (BV218b) . 90% of abandoned vehicles were removed within 3 working days.

Included in the Nuisance Vehicle figures were untaxed vehicles on the public highway. In year 2005/6 a total of 576 untaxed vehicles were removed from the public highway. Richard Lee 1.8 Improve response In progress 100% of all reported racist or abusive graffiti was rates to reported – on track removed within 24 hours. incidents of graffiti and

28 fly posting An independent inspection by Capital Standards indicated that the level of unacceptable graffiti was 19%. This in on all property when viewed from the public highway, including graffiti on private property and other public utilities street furniture and infrastructure, for which the Council cannot accept liability. This data will provide the baseline for improvement targets over the next three years as part of the recently signed Local Area Agreement. Kirti Sisodia 1.9 Create a detached In progress The Detached and Outreach Team (DOT) was established at the Exit strategies from hot spot hotspot outreach team – on track beginning of 2004 to counteract anti-social behaviour and youth locations will have to be carefully to take forward a multi crime on Hounslow’s “Hotspot” estates, and was one of the success managed and monitored so as agency co-ordinated stories of the year. Funded by Hounslow’s Community Safety not to undo the work completed programme to tackle Partnership and managed by Hounslow Youth Service, the team of in that area. three full-time workers and a part-time support team made a real anti-social behaviour, difference to the communities in which they worked over the year. The Partnership has limited funds drugs and youth crime Estate clean-up days, multi-information fun days, murals, available to support initiatives such in five “hotspot” workshops, activities, trips and residentials for young people were as this one. If the DOT projects are locations in the all part of their successful work in offering young people positive not mainstreamed then this project borough and exciting alternatives to boredom. Continued funding via the would not be able to operate. CH/8542 5 Page Who Objective Rating Commentary Risk update Community Safety Partnership and a much-increased contribution from the Youth Service as a result of an increase in funding from the Local Authority meant that for 2005/6 DOT Team were able to expand the scope of the project from 3 to 5 area teams.

In addition to working face-to-face with young people on the streets of our estates, the DOT workers have also received substantial training in relevant aspects of the work. Including:

ƒ Heterosexism and Homophobia Awareness Training ƒ Domestic Violence Awareness Training ƒ Racist Incident Monitoring and Awareness Training

Area Updates:

The areas on which the teams focus are decided annually by discussions amongst all the partner organisations – The Youth 29 Service, Police, Hounslow Homes. Other Housing Associations, Community Safety Partnership. For 2005/6 these areas were:

West Area : Westmacott & Southern Avenue in Bedfont Hounslow Central Area: Benson & Estridge Estates, Treaty Centre Chiswick Area: Staveley Gardens, Alexander Gardens Heston & Cranford Area: Brabazon Road, Norman Crescent, Harlech Gardens, Convent Way, Heston Farm Brentford & Isleworth Area: Syon/Brent Lea estates, Haverfield/Brentford Towers estates

Further funding was negotiated to enable the DOT to extend the work to newly identified “hotspots” like Tivoli Road in Hounslow and South Road in Hanworth. The team is also continuing some of the work it began last year on Convent Way and Heston Farm estates.

The Community Safety Partnership have allocated funding to the DOT for 2006/07 to continue the outreach activity with young people across the borough.

CH/8542 6 Page Who Objective Rating Commentary Risk update The areas identified for activity are listed below:

Chiswick Area : Pinkham Mansions; Turnham Green Terrace; Hogarth Estate Brentford & Isleworth : Clayponds Estate, Syon Estate, West Middx Estate (Teck Close); Ivybridge Estate Central Hounslow: the High Street from Bell Road up to West Thames College (including the Bus Garage area) Heston & Cranford: Convent Way; Harlech Gardens/Norman Crescent/Brabazon Road/Redwood Estate; Heston Farm West Area: South Road, Hanworth; Bedfont Lane estates; Hatchet Road; - also possibility of further funding from London and Quadrant Housing for work on Highfields/Home Court area. 1.10 Reduce the fears Completed Target set as part of 2002-2005 Crime Reduction and community safety Strategy which has now come to an end and a new issues that dissuade Community Safety Strategy is being implemented for people from using 2005-2008. 30 parks and open spaces by extending The multi-agency stakeholder group working to reduce the Parks Watch anti-social behaviour across the borough has been Scheme across the working closely with CIP park sections to progress this borough objective.

The target set was to have 5 Park Watch Schemes across the borough.

Chiswick House Park Watch scheme was developed in 2002 and to date 18 friends of parks groups have been established, 2 of which have been set in the last 12 months.

Friends groups are working in partnership to organise events, festivals, improving community safety by supporting clean up events and graffiti removal initiatives across the borough. 1.11 Increase the Completed Target set as part of 2002 – 2005 Crime Reduction reporting of Strategy which has now come to an end and a new CH/8542 7 Page Who Objective Rating Commentary Risk update homophobic crime Community Safety Strategy is being implemented for incidents to the police 2005-2008. from the 2001 Crime Audit baseline figure The target set was to increase by 75% the reporting of homophobic incidents to the Police by March 2005 (baseline figure is 38 reports for 2000/2001)

Between April 2001 and March 2004, there have been higher levels of reporting of homophobic crime across the borough, although the partnership have not been able to the achieve the 75% increase in reporting.

The number of homophobic crime incidents increased from baseline figure of 38 to 61 in its first year. However in the 2 following years, the number dropped to 28 in the second and 56 in the third. The partnership

31 has made extensive efforts to raise the profile of this crime through a cinema publicity campaign, by distributing over 800 ‘Report It’ homophobic crime self- reporting packs, delivering training and financially supporting the Outwest conference ‘Delivering to Our Community?’ with guest speaker Police Commander Steve Allen, director of Diversity Directorate – New Scotland Yard.

Despite the low levels of homophobic incidents in the borough the partnership has maintained a funded stakeholder group to deal with this priority crime. In the current Community Safety Strategy the strategic aim is to provide more specialist support and to raise the profile of homophobic crime within the borough. Simon Gunn 1.12 To increase the In Progress No. of DTTO’s increased in year 2005/06 by 20%. The number of Drugs – On track target for year 2006/07 is 42 which represents an Treatment and Testing increase of 0% But the target for completions has Orders (DTTOs) increased by 8%. obtained CH/8542 8 Page Who Objective Rating Commentary Risk update To improve service the DTTO team have been moved from Ealing to Hounslow and a dedicated programme and centre established. 1.13 Increase the Completed Target set as part of 2002 – 2005 Crime Reduction reporting of domestic Strategy which has now come to an end and a new violence incidents to Community Safety Strategy is being implemented for the police from the 2005-2008. 2001 Crime Audit baseline The target set was to achieve a 15% increase in reporting DV incidents to the Police by March 2005 (baseline figure is 3865 for 2000/2001.

Over this period the Partnership has successfully worked with the Police to encourage reporting and the level of support given to survivors. There is a dedicated Domestic Violence outreach worker based in Feltham 32 Police Community Safety Unit.

At the end of the Crime and Drugs Audit 2001 – 2004 there was a 23% increase in reported crime to the police from 3865 (baseline figure in 2000) to 4758. This is turn reflects an increase in repeat victims from 16% to 34% in the first year of the Crime Reduction Strategy then 29% and 28% for years 2 and 3 respectively. During this period the partnership worked successfully with the Asian Women’s Refuge and the Police in securing funding for a dedicated outreach worker, provided additional security provisions for over 30 victims to keep them safely in their homes and produced an advice pack for professionals.

1.14 To reduce the Completed At the end of the Crime and Drugs Audit 2001 – 2004 number of repeat there was a 23% increase in reported crime to the victims of domestic police from 3865 (baseline figure in 2000) to 4758. This violence as a is turn reflects an increase in repeat victims from 16% proportion of reported to 34% in the first year of the Crime Reduction Strategy CH/8542 9 Page Who Objective Rating Commentary Risk update total crimes then 29% and 28% for years 2 and 3 respectively. During this period the partnership worked successfully with the Asian Women’s Refuge and the Police in securing funding for a dedicated outreach worker, provided additional security provisions for over 30 victims to keep them safely in their homes and produced an advice pack for professionals.

1.15 Increase the Completed Target set as part of 2002-2005 Crime Reduction reporting of race crime Strategy, which has now come to an end, and a new incidents to the police Community Safety Strategy is being implemented for from the 2001 Crime 2005-2008. Audit baseline The target set was to achieve a 5% increase in reports of race crime by March 2005 (baseline figure is 1,114

33 for 2000/2001).

The partnership has continued to forge stronger links with its partners and funded an ASB and Race Crime Coordinator. In addition to this, the partnership has supported victims by providing them with target hardening equipment, trained front line staff and undertaken a cinema campaign to raise awareness of race crime in the borough.

The actual figures for race crime show a reduction from 1114 to 778, which reflects pan London trends.

The specific details and reasons for the decrease in race crime incidents are difficult to establish by the police. There are concerns as to whether this reflects a reduction in race crime, under-reporting due to a fall in confidence in statutory agencies.

Alternatively, there is anecdotal evidence that suggests CH/8542 10 Page Who Objective Rating Commentary Risk update a number of initiatives undertaken by All partners has dramatically affected perpetrators of race crime e.g. Targeting repeat offending families resulting in a dramatic drop in the number of cases reported to agencies.

1.16 Improve highway Completed Success Measure: environment scene at By March 2005 – Targeted improvement in Convent four locations across Way, Beavers Estate, Vicarage Farm Road, Spring the borough Grove Road joining Lampton Road including footways, roads, lighting, street furniture and signage Progress: All four projects have now been completed.

34

CH/8542 11 Page MID YEAR REVIEW OF COMMUNITY PLAN TARGETS (MARCH 2006 – YEAR END 2005/06)

2. A HEALTHIER COMMUNITY

Who Objective Rating Commentary Risk update Sharon Daye 2.1 Improve patient In progress Awaiting information access through – on track developing key centres such as Thelma Golding and Heston Health Centre. Maggie Mcnab 2.2 Develop and In progress We have strategic plans completed and in place for The Health Service budget constraints implement plans to – on track Mental Health Promotion, Food and a LA led and decrease in PCT health service influence public health strategy on Sport and Physical Activity support, especially specialist clinical strategies on wide- We are currently well advanced with the strategic expertise and Public Health/Health range of issues plans for Suicide prevention, Obesity and Tobacco Improvement/Health Improvement including coronary heart control/Stop Smoking capacity is likely to affect the 35 disease, diabetes, leadership and implementation of these physical activity, strategic plans obesity, mental health promotion and tobacco. In view of the funding crisis we need a well supported agreement at a senior level to re-orientate resources and prioritise action/work plans in order to focus on the key health improvement areas. Simon Mitchell 2.3 Reduce inequalities In progress Health Impact Assessment completed for Brentford Health Inequalities Strategy in health through – on track Area, with final report awaiting approval through development delayed due to Council strategy development Scrutiny Panel (who commissioned work). restructure and move of Public Health and undertaking Health Unit from Chief Executives Equity Audits of key New worker recruited to support Inequalities and Department to Housing and health services to HIA work (due to start in April 06). Community Services. reduce inequities in access and provision Harminder Jagdev 2.4 Develop a fully In The development of an integrated Children’s Service Partners are engaging with the change integrated Children’s Progress - is well underway. Following inauguration of the agenda and are showing a willingness Service by joined up on track Children’s Services and Lifelong Learning to co-operate but limited capacity and CH/8542 1 Page Who Objective Rating Commentary Risk update delivery through the department in December 2005, the senior competing priorities in partner Children and Young management team has now been established, agencies may be potential risks. Future People’s Strategic including appointment to 3 Assistant Director posts. progress will also be partly reliant on Partnership The recruitment process for other key senior posts, recruitment and retention. such as a Head of Safeguarding, is in train. Consultation has been undertaken on restructuring and re-aligning functions within the department to ensure that previously separate areas of activity are fully integrated: these changes will be implemented over the coming weeks and months.

The multi-agency Children’s Partnership Board has representation from all key partners, including the Police, PCT and voluntary sector, and has strategic oversight of the planning, commissioning and delivery of co-ordinated services for children, young

36 people and families. The CPB has formally adopted Children’s Trusts arrangements as its defining principles, based on a commitment to common strategic direction, operational collaboration and shared accountability. Harminder Jagdev 2.5 Develop an In Good progress has been made towards developing Further progress will be heavily integrated service for Progress - integrated services for children with disabilities and dependent on the successful children with disabilities on track their families. It has been agreed that the first phase recruitment of a Project Manager. & their families. of integration will focus on provision for children 0- 5 and the second phase on transition at KS2/4 and post 16. Key achievements include:

ƒ The preparation of a draft strategy and action plan. The strategy will be subject to wide consultation. ƒ Identification of a Lead Professional for each of the outcomes. ƒ The recruitment of a Co-ordinator for Integrated Services (now in post). CH/8542 2 Page Who Objective Rating Commentary Risk update ƒ The development of an Assessment Nursery: the site is in the final stages of completion. ƒ Delivery of training on the Common Assessment Framework for trainers and identification of key staff who require training. ƒ The establishment of a Children’s Integrated Resource Panel (ChIRP), which has been operational since November.

The next stage of development will include the recruitment of a Project Manager to lead the co- ordination of services across all agencies and departments; development of a protocol in connection with the operation of the Assessment Nursery; and the implementation of the action plan. 37 Harminder Jagdev 2.6 Implement the In There are three main workstreams that form part of Discussions are underway to explore Preventative Strategy Progress - the current preventative strategy for vulnerable the suitability of a redundant for vulnerable children on track children: residential care home as a base for the to promote positive delivery of outreach work and outcomes and protect ƒ As part of a review of provision for vulnerable alternative and complementary children from becoming children, there has been a move towards educational support. Securing an socially excluded commissioning alternative and complementary appropriate site will be essential to educational support for children with emotional progressing the workstreams outlined and behavioural difficulties. There are plans to above. commission these services through an independent not-for-profit provider called Pupil Parent Partnership. ƒ Within children’s social care, work is underway to develop preventative outreach strategies to reduce the risk of vulnerable children becoming accommodated. It is intended that any services commissioned through Pupil Parent Partnership will work in partnership to identify children who are at risk of social and educational CH/8542 3 Page Who Objective Rating Commentary Risk update exclusion. ƒ A CAMHS educational outreach service is being established in place of the existing day unit provision with the aim of improving accessibility and co-ordination of services.

Implementation of the above will need to be followed by a review of procedures for identifying and establishing appropriate support arrangements across children’s social care, health, education and lifelong learning to ensure effective co-ordination. Steve Barnes 2.7 Develop three multi- In Funding secured (via NW London Strategic Capital & Revenue implications of purpose older people Progress - Health Authority/Hounslow PCT) and planning developing new Resource Centres in resource centres on track permission agreed for an eight-bed extension at West & Central areas to form part of providing residential Clifton Gardens Residential Care Home, the options appraisal for consideration care and a range of providing specialist dementia care. Work due to in 2006/07.

38 other support services commence in July 2006, with the unit being operational by February 2007.

Contracts and leases for Feltham Dene and John Collin House extended to March 2008.

Options appraisal for West & Central Resource Centres to be considered in 2006/07. Steve Barnes 2.8 Implement services In West Middlesex University Hospital opened 14 bed to prevent unnecessary Progress - IARDS ward in October 2005, providing 14 hospital placements on track rehabilitation beds. IARDS is the joint Integrated and speed up return to Assessment, Rehabilitation and Discharge Service the community after a involving WMUH, Hounslow and Richmond period in hospital. Councils, and Hounslow and Richmond & Twickenham PCTs. It is planned to expand this to a 22-bedded ward in 2006/07.

Rapid Response Home Care service has spread to cover West Middlesex University Hospital following a successful pilot at Ashford and St. Peter’s CH/8542 4 Page Who Objective Rating Commentary Risk update Hospitals. 2.9 Improve the number Completed PSA 3a target for number of adoptions (42 • If funding is not continued post of adoptions of children since April 2002) exceeded in advance of April 2006, continued strong in care to permanent deadline at the end of March 2006 performance could be affected families • Continued improvement to recruitment and retention of social workers is key to achieve good performance in adoption 2.10 Develop an Completed Commenced July 2005, as a partnership Funding implications identifiable young between statutory and voluntary sectors people’s substance misuse service Nick Pratt 2.11 Develop and In progress The Sport and Active Recreation Strategy has Resources are need to fully implement a Sports and – on track been completed. The implementation of the implement the Strategy Objectives. Active Recreation strategy maximising the health benefits is Strategy which dependent on additional resources to enhance 39 addresses the health the sport development opportunities particularly issues within the in respect of increased participation. borough Nick Pratt 2.12 Increase In progress The introduction of the new Hounslow Leisure This target is limited by a lack of participation in sports – on track Card and establishment Hounslow Sport Forum resources to implement a more and active recreation forms part of a number of initiatives to increase targeted sport development participation. programme. Barbara Perry 2.13 To continue the Not started The pilot did not take place, mainly due to the It is unlikely to proceed without pilot Affordable Warmth withdrawal of funding from the utility company another funding source. programme by referring for this type of scheme. Heat Streets has in clients who suffer part replaced this. through ill health from cold and damp living conditions to grants which will help them improve the energy efficiency of their home

CH/8542 5 Page MID YEAR REVIEW OF COMMUNITY PLAN TARGETS (MARCH 2006 – YEAR END 2005/06)

3. AN ACCESSIBLE COMMUNITY

Who Objective Rating Commentary Risk update 3.1 To oversee the Completed For 2005/6, the Borough was allocated £4,476,500 from a design and total bid of £10,190,000. The Borough’s total claim for the implementation of year was £4,395,250, representing 98.2 percent of the all transport allocation. The unclaimed portion was due to schemes improvement unable to be progressed or completed due to delays by TfL’s projects funded by traffic signals division. Transport for London from the 2005/6 Borough Spending Plans process; this includes local street 40 improvement schemes, bus priority, road safety schemes, walking and cycling schemes Chris Calvi- 3.2 To develop a Completed The Local Implementation Plan was approved by the Freeman Local Council in January 2006 and was submitted to TfL in March. Implementation Hounslow is in the first third of London boroughs to submit Plan covering the its LIP. TfL, on behalf of the Mayor of London, are currently borough’s reviewing the LIP and are expected to recommend its transport, traffic adoption in August 2006. and highways responsibilities as required by the Mayor of London Chris Calvi- 3.3 Promote Completed A number of initiatives were progressed in 2005/6 including Freeman sustainable (ongoing) plans for a public transport guide (for completion 2006/7), a transport modes successful family cycle day, walking leaflets (reprinted) and including public advice to employers through a variety of channels. CH/8542 1 Page Who Objective Rating Commentary Risk update transport, cycling and walking, and provide advice to employers to help them encourage their employees to use these modes for their journeys to work 3.4 Achieve Completed A number of high quality schemes were implemented in significant increase (and 20005/6 with BSP funding. These included a major in bus priority, ongoing) improvement to Chiswick High Road at Gunnersbury station, pedestrian and benefiting buses, pedestrians and cyclists. Other schemes cycling facilities included an upgrade of Devonshire Road throughout the borough Additional walking and streetscape improvements were

41 implemented with Council capital and s106 funding.

Planning for several new schemes, for implementation in future years, was completed.

Andy Clement 3.5 Ensure that all In progress – Work on going. Changes to the Planning and Building new developments on track Regulations ensuring new development is more inclusive in provide adequate (ongoing) its design access for everyone including Section 42 of the Planning Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 people who have comes into force on the 10th August 2006. From this date impaired mobility onwards major planning applications need to be accompanied by an Access Statement

Lesley Rennie 3.6 Use the In progress – Success Measure - Increased demand for documents in • The Residents’ Panel is Residents’ Panel to on track minority ethnic languages demographically CH/8542 2 Page Who Objective Rating Commentary Risk update Zahira Miyanji assess the representative of the communications The onus for this target is being broadened from solely using resident of the borough preferences and the residents’ panel. as based on the needs of our ethnic • Where appropriate the resident’s panel will be asked Census 2001. This minority about language preferences, as in a recent question raises an issue of how communities on welfare benefits and social inclusion leaflets. The to update the panel panel has also been used to measure our membership to reflect performance in equalities PIs and to research Home the changing nature of Office community cohesion measures Hounslow’s community. • Information on community language use is available • Community Language through the Translation and Interpretation Unit use as measured • Hounslow Homes have carried out extensive through the Translation research on the provision of information to tenants, Unit reflects met need including updating the most frequently required and not the need that is community languages not currently being met. Life Long Learning carries out an annual survey across all • Tenants may not reflect 42 36000 pupils in Hounslow schools to identify the home the broader language. This has been carried out over a number of years demographics of the and can be used to identify the changing patterns of borough language. This data set is extensively used across partners. The school survey will also include data about pupils from outside the borough 3.7 Evaluate the Completed A report evaluating the needs and the level of access to Where recommendations needs and level of communication was completed and general and specific required extra resources access to recommendations were identified both for partners and for these will require greater communications the council’s departments. These have been discussed by budget planning and services for each department and also with the Disability Community prioritisation. disabled residents Forum. The majority of the recommendations were agreed and where recommendations have not been agreed the council will observe guidelines from the Royal Institute for the Blind and the Royal Institute for the Deaf as part of the minimum standards to follow.

Ralph La Fontaine 3.8 Place 400 In progress – Structural problems with the main job brokerage contractor caused Some outputs from smaller people from On track under performance in 2004-2005. Performance improved in 2005- delivery partners may be lost disadvantaged 2006. Further outputs were obtained in 2005-2006 through if the management CH/8542 3 Page Who Objective Rating Commentary Risk update groups into diversification of delivery partners. Final outputs will not be information is not sufficiently sustainable known until mid July in order to allow for 13 weeks minimum robust. Partnership work with employment by tracking period and time to collate data. Jobcentre Plus continue to April 2006 suffer from uncertain contracting arrangements and job losses. Nick Pratt 3.9 Protect and In progress – Investment has been targeted towards our Key Parks; this This is a long term improve access to On track has consisted of general improvements to park furniture, programme which is limited public open spaces equipment and pathways. This has included work at by available funding. such as parks and Feltham, Waterman’s and Beaverfield Parks. This local nature reserve programme is dependent predominately on capital sites, including investment or through planning gain opportunities. This access for people limits the extent of work that can be done. with disabilities Andy Clements 3.10 Encourage In progress – As part of the planning process any new riverside and create new On track development along the designated route of the Thames Path

43 access to the will be required to incorporate a riverside walkway with Thames river bank public access to that walkway and surrounding network. and ensure that it is accessible to people with disabilities

CH/8542 4 Page MID YEAR REVIEW OF COMMUNITY PLAN TARGETS (MARCH 2006 – YEAR END 2005/06)

4. A THRIVING COMMUNITY

Who Objective Rating Commentary Risk update Stuart Harrison 4.1 Produce and deliver In Work is progressing on the first 4 documents within the Timetable could be delayed a Local Development progress – agreed Local Development Scheme. These are the either as a result of Framework for the on track Statement of Community Involvement, the Employment difficulties in retention and borough that is up to Topic DPD, the Brentford Area Action Plan and the recruitment of staff or date and responsive to Planning Obligations SPD. through difficulties people’s needs whilst progressing documents ensuring that all new The SCI has progressed through the pre submission through the committee development is draft consultation stage and will be going to full Council system. sustainable in January 2006 to agree submission to the Secretary of State.

44 The Employment Topic DPD and the Brentford Plan have progressed through the Issues and Options consultation stage and will be going to Executive to agree the Preferred Options Consultation document in December 2005.

The corporate Section 106 Group is working towards prioritising guidance needed within the document and assessing the existing justification and mechanisms used to establish levels of contributions. A consultation document will be produced for agreement after the local elections and the guidance adopted in January 2007.

Work has also begun on the Air Quality SPD with consultation expected in the Autumn and Adoption in early 2007. Lee Dawson 4.2 Continue to In Hounslow Town Centre - Work is progressing well on facilitate the progress – Phase 1 of the town centre scheme and is on regeneration of the on track programme to be completed and trading for Christmas CH/8542 1 Page Who Objective Rating Commentary Risk update three town centres at 2006. A planning application for Phase 2 of the Hounslow, Feltham and development will be made later this year. Brentford Feltham Town Centre – The main commercial element of the scheme will be completed and open for trading by October 2006. Most of the residential element has now been completed and sold, although further elements will continue to be developed during the course of 2006 and early 2007. The new Library and Community buildings will be opened in Summer 2006. Brentford Town Centre – Proposals are expected from the majority landowner in the area to enable pre- planning application discussion and consultation to take place before the end of 2006. These will be considered as part of the Brentford Area Action Plan. Stuart Harrison 4.3 Produce In The corporate Section 106 Group is working towards Potential major changes to Supplementary progress – prioritising guidance needed within the document and the legislation concerning

45 Planning Documents to on track assessing the existing justification and mechanisms used to planning obligations. ensure the proper establish levels of contributions. A consultation document planning of areas will be produced in September and the guidance adopted in Timetable could be delayed experience January 2007. either as a result of development pressure difficulties in retention and and addressing issues Work has also begun on the Air Quality SPD with recruitment of staff or that raise specific consultation expected in the Autumn and Adoption in early through difficulties planning concerns 2007. progressing documents through the committee system.

Stuart Harrison 4.4 Secure appropriate In Updated Government advice in the form of Circular benefits to the progress – 05/2005 "Planning Obligations" was published in July Jon Medlin community and on track 2005. In December the Government consultated on the promote schemes that proposal to introduce a planning gain supplement (PGS) contribute to area on the granting of planning permission. This aims to regeneration, especially introduce introduction of a “fair, efficient and when considering major mixed use transparent levy” upon the uplift in land value following developments across the grant of planning permission, and is not expected CH/8542 2 Page Who Objective Rating Commentary Risk update the borough before 2008.

The Area Monitoring Committees have decided upon their area priorities for available spend resulting from signed S106 agreements and regular reports are taken to the committees reporting progress on spend. In the financial year 2005/6 • 31 legal agreements including Unilateral Undertakings and Deeds of Variation were signed • Financial Contributions contained within Legal Agreements £1,982,500 • Benefits secured by category through S106 agreements based on monies

46 received in 2005/6: £2,866,539.10

A summary of progress during the year on all matters relating to S106 agreements is included within the Planning Policy Annual Monitoring Report that is required to be submitted to GOL by December 2006. A Supplementary Planning Document on Planning Obligations is being prepared and will be adopted by January 2007.

Carol Stiles 4.5 Produce an annual In Area committees continue to report progress regarding Long-term sickness may update from area progress - community priorities. West Area has been unable to affect ability to produce committees regarding on track produce an annual report, due to long-term sickness. annual reports. community priorities (ongoing) Barbara Perry 4.6 Improve the quality In Central Government has a target to bring all social Minimal risk as most of the of social housing progress - housing up to Decent Homes standard by 2010. In work has already been Yvonne Birch available in the borough on track Hounslow establishing an Arms Length Management undertaken. Organisation ,Hounslow Homes, gave the Council access to approximately £100M additional funding to bring homes up to standard by the end of March 2006. CH/8542 3 Page Who Objective Rating Commentary Risk update Hounslow Homes has set up a number of partnership agreements with contractors to enable it to achieve this and the target was met by end of March 2006. i.e over three years ahead of the Government target.

Registered Social Landlords (housing associations) also need to bring their homes up to the Decent Homes target by 2010.

(See Evidence section for success measures)

Barbara Perry 4.7 Improve the quality In Central Government has a target that at least 70% of • Main risk relates to and sustainability of progress - vulnerable households in the private sector live in lack of funding in Yvonne Birch private homes on track decent homes by 2010. public or private The Housing Act 2004 introduced new fitness sector to improve

47 definitions and gave LAs new powers to tackle poor quality or conditions in the private sector, although these powers sustainability, have not yet all been enacted . although some West London secured £XM from the London Housing Government monies Board to fund energy improvements in private sector have been allocated homes in 04/05 and 05/06 via the London Housing Board, these will not be sufficient to fund all the works required. Also likely to be difficult to fund level of staff ideally required to take full advantage of the new powers. • Staff will need to be trained in the new duties and powers and it is already difficult to recruit and CH/8542 4 Page Who Objective Rating Commentary Risk update retain staff in this area. Barbara Perry 4.8 Make improvements In The Council’s Homelessness Strategy 2003 to 2008 • Prevention of in services and progress - was agreed in 2003 and sets out objectives linked to homelessness is staff Yvonne Birch accommodation for on track prevention of homelessness, securing sufficient suitable intensive homeless households accommodation and providing effective support to those • Provision of who are homeless or at risk of losing their home. An temporary action plan accompanies the strategy. accommodation can be costly. Hounslow Council receives approximately 1700 to 1800 • Permanent homes for homelessness applications per annum and as at households in 31.9.05 there were 1311 homeless households in temporary temporary accommodation. (excluded those homeless accommodation to at home). move on to are in short supply. The Government introduced a requirement that from 1 48 April 2004 there should be no households with children in bed and breakfast accommodation for more than 6 weeks. More recently the Government has set a target of reducing by halve the number of homeless households living in temporary accommodation.

Barbara Perry 4.9 Work towards In Central Government gave responsibility for co- LB Hounslow has a relatively provision of needs led progress - ordinating the provision of housing related support for low current SP grant budget Yvonne Birch and quality housing on track vulnerable people to local authorities in April 2003 as due to the historic spend related support services part of the Supporting People programme. A number of pattern, central Government different funding streams for this support were pulled is due to agree a new basis together as Supporting People grant and passed to for distributing SP grant to local authority who now pay the service providers. Local individual local authorities authorities also needed to quantify and prioritise needs, which could benefit review existing services and commission new services Hounslow considerably within the available SP grant budget. All Service although as yet no proposed Reviews have been completed by the Government redistribution mechanism has target on 31.3.06. been accepted by central Government. CH/8542 5 Page Who Objective Rating Commentary Risk update

(See Evidence section for success measures) Stuart Harrison 4.10 Complete a In Although the total number of homes completed has • Housing schemes with minimum of 470 new progress - exceeded the target The London Plan and the low proposed affordable residential units per behind Borough’s UDP have a target of 50% affordable housing may be refused year of which an overall schedule housing, as shown below this is not yet being achieved, for that reason but may target of 50% is sought in part there are several reasons for this. be approved at appeal to be affordable • The proportion affordable housing in planning • Housing schemes with approvals is generally rising but this takes some high proportion of time to feed through to completions affordable housing may • Each site needs to be looked at on a site by site be refused for non basis and sometimes there are reasons why 50% housing reasons leading affordable may not be achievable e.g. the to appeals there by development might not be financially viable slowing approvals • The Council is keen to see larger units as • Developers may argue affordable housing not just small units and 50% not financially 49 therefore we often look at achieving 50% affordable viable on some housing in terms of habitable rooms rather than applications. dwellings (this is allowed for in the Council’s Supplementary Planning Guidance)

Abdu Rashid-Craig 4.11 Produce a study of In Progress: 1. Lack of resources to the West Area that will progress – Study signed off at West Area Committee July 05 carry forward significant provide a baseline on track actions (e.g. no profile and analysis of Final edit by sponsors (BAA/ Green Corridors) significant regeneration the demographic and approved, and agreement reached on procedure for funds for the area). socio-economic community involvement in progressing Action Plan Medium risk: while structure of the area; (September 05) regeneration funds are develop an action plan in short supply, some for the study area to funding (e.g. ESF co- direct the intervention Full study to be published on Web by end October finance) is coming on required to ensure a Study completed in Oct 05. Study was made fully stream, and the study better quality of life for available on intranet and internet in December 05. should influence the residents of the commissioning by public West Area Feltham Area Renewal (FAR) was appointed by the agencies in 2006 and Council to establish a network of strategic planning beyond. CH/8542 6 Page Who Objective Rating Commentary Risk update groups and an action plan to enable the implementation 2. Lack of momentum/ of the recommendations. Training and employment interest in community projects have commenced and meetings with key engagement. Low risk: stakeholders to address environmental issues, transport the study generated and traffic programmes and educational issues have significant interest in the taken place. two main consultation events held, both from LAA should provide further opportunities for FAR to aid community organisations regeneration in the West Area and commissioning agencies. There are a Study is accessible to groups and public agencies number of existing good seeking background information for funding or lobbying, practice projects (e.g. and is being drawn upon by existing projects in the Westmacott and area. Hanworth youth centre) generating live interest, and these need to be 50 replicated elsewhere in the area. Adrian Cooke 4.12 Progress In Baseline: • HLF do not approve development of the progress – bid – low risk as they Chiswick Heritage on track Chiswick House & Gardens Trust established March 05. have been very Regeneration Area Chiswick Heritage Working Party established Sept 05. supportive in principle, and engaged in the bid Progress: design • HLF delay approval l – Trust established chaired by Lord Hambro and £1.7m medium risk; could match funding secured for Chiswick House and delay start of major Grounds. works • Failure to recruit Heritage Lottery Fund bid submitted for £12m (grant project director – low request c. £8m) - significant increase on original risk to project as proposal. Further information supplied to HLF Oct 05. English Heritage and Stage 1 pass awarded Jan 06. Detailed Stage 2 bid for LBH can respectively £7.9m to be submitted by Jan 07, subject to planning provide project and site approval. management services direct to project. CH/8542 7 Page Who Objective Rating Commentary Risk update Chiswick Heritage Working Party of key stakeholders • Cost escalation due to from the area to coordinate development of strategic delays and unforeseen approach to the presentation, promotion, and – risk can be mitigated regeneration of historic Chiswick. ‘Chiswick Open Day’ with good project planned for September 06, bringing together sites and management & liaison groups in Chiswick. between relevant parties.

Sabine Malik 4.13 Work in In Significant progress made on a range of crosscutting On target to achieve majority partnership to develop progress – themes. Key achievements in 2005 have included of objectives within the Nick Pratt community cohesion on track business plan, future and inclusion through Community consultation, partnership working, securing progress of the rough riders social, economic and of additional funding, development of residents projects is dependent on environmental association, introduction of multi-use games area, gaining planning consent and regeneration of redevelopment of Southville centre securing additional funding Westmacott Drive

51 FAR have provided capacity building support to the resident’s association as well as information and liaison skills for partner agencies engaged in the programme. Advice and guidance has been provided for funding applications, money management advice and It training sessions to be held at the centre.

Regular community events and updates to West Area committee

CH/8542 8 Page MID YEAR REVIEW OF COMMUNITY PLAN TARGETS (MARCH 2006 – YEAR END 2005/06)

5. A GREENER COMMUNITY

Who Objective Rating Commentary Risk update Lucy Griffths 5.1 Reduce In Progress – About a half of all Carbon Dioxide (CO2) emissions come from buildings. Specific Rob Gibson Hounslow’s behind In the Energy White Paper, the Government acknowledged global government carbon dioxide schedule warming is a reality and, as part of the international effort to control this, policies and emissions from they set out the goal to cutting the UK's CO2 emissions - the main measures for energy use by contributor to global-warming by setting a National target to reduce CO2 achieving the 20% by the emissions by 20% by 2010. This has been reaffirmed on a London level 20% reduction in year 2010 with within The Mayor’s Energy Strategy and locally, Hounslow is working CO2 emissions the aim of towards the same target within the Community Plan. A simple way to are few. slowing down begin working towards this is to start with Council buildings. Monitoring of climate change. energy use is required to see where energy is wasted, the CO2 is produced and financial savings can be made.

52 A draft Energy policy has been put together with help from the Carbon Trust, to look at how Hounslow runs its own buildings. The Corporate Property department are also looking at appointing a person to look at energy issues.

It is the Council’s intention to draw together existing policies to formalise the councils view on climate change in terms of a strategy document. This work is within the Environmental Strategy team's business plan for this financial year.

Rob Gibson 5.2 Develop In Progress – Air quality assessment work undertaken by the London Borough of Review of and implement On track Hounslow has shown that levels of the air pollutant nitrogen dioxide are National Air an air quality greater than the health related level as required by Government. Having Quality Strategy action plan to declared air quality management areas the Council is now obliged to improve the air develop an action plan to help address this particular problem. The main Other pollutants quality of the sources of nitrogen dioxide in the Borough of Hounslow are emissions of concern in borough from road traffic and Heathrow airport. As the Council has no direct addition to NO2, control over the operation of Transport for London/Highways Agency i.e. PM10, PM2.5 roads or the airport operator, BAA, the plan relies heavily on developing partnerships to alleviate the problem. Other actions include improving the CH/8542 1 Page Who Objective Rating Commentary Risk update eco-efficiency of current and future developments and measures concerning local industry.

Nick Pratt 5.3 Improve In progress – This has proved a very positive programme; 6 friends groups have been No risks community on track established this year bring the number of friends groups to 25. A Friends identified involvement in of and Community Groups conference is to be held on the 12 July parks and open spaces by facilitating Friends groups and increasing volunteer programmes for targeted parks and open spaces

53 Natasha Epstein 5.4 Encourage In progress – A doorstepping campaign was completed last September to raise the residents to and hope to awareness of new plastic recycling banks and has helped to further meet the be back on increase the amount of material sent to recycling. As of the end of Government track for 2005/2006 the borough recycled and composted 19.1% of its rubbish. target of 25% of 2008. Although this is some way off the target the amount recycled has household continued to increase year on year despite increased waste arising. All waste recycling residents that requested a composter received one, totalling 1481 over by 2005 with the year. The garden waste collection service was extended to run schemes such through out the winter and included the collection of Christmas trees. A as providing a third waste action group has been formed based in the Heston area to home promote recycling and waste reduction on a local level. All schools in the composter to borough have recycling facilities and are supported by school visits from every our Community Recycling Officers. household that requests one Rob Gibson 5.5 To produce In progress – The timetable for air quality supplementary planning guidance is set out in supplementary on track Local Development Scheme (LDS) and was agreed by the Executive and Margaret Howe planning Government Office for London. The LDS sets out a 3 year timetable for document on the production andprogression of the Local Development Framework. air quality CH/8542 2 Page Who Objective Rating Commentary Risk update

Production is due to commence in April 2006 and is anticipated to take a year to produce with adoption expected April 2007

Its purpose is to provide an appropriate policy framework for dealing with the negative environmental impacts of poor air quality Lucy Griffiths 5.6 Implement In progress – Since the National Strategy for Sustainable Development - “Securing the Possible delays the local on track Future” was launched on 7th March 2005, the Government have launched in implementing Rob Gibson agenda 21 its new community action programme to enable communities to work the new strategy to together on improving their quality of life for future generations to come Community make Hounslow without compromising the environment. Action 2020 more Programme in sustainable. The action plan Community Action 2020 – “Together we can” was place of Local launched on 28th June 2005 and covers similar themed topics to Local Agenda 21 Agenda 21, such as saving energy; promoting fair-trade and local food; because of

54 choosing less polluting forms of transport; recycling and waste; creating Government cleaner, safer, greener and healthier neighbourhoods and protecting timescales. wildlife. Therefore it can be assumed that this plan will build on all the work achieved through Local Agenda 21 (LA21) and reinvigorate LA21 and community action on sustainable development. The idea is to try and mainstream sustainable development and contact a wider audience.

The aims of the plan: The plan has a major focus on working specifically with the voluntary and community sector. During 2005 the Government will work with stakeholders to improve support for communities on sustainable development. The programme includes the following: § Community resource bank – to improve community access to ideas, advice, toolkits and information, which can help community groups make a difference to sustainable development. § Volunteering - help to identify and promote opportunities for volunteering in community activities which deliver sustainable development. § Community participation - will promote ways in which communities can get involved in planning the future of their local area through

CH/8542 3 Page Who Objective Rating Commentary Risk update Sustainable Community Strategies and neighbourhood action plans. § Community workers - help ensure community workers are fully equipped to support their communities on sustainable development through new learning opportunities and better information about the tools available. § Community Mentors - work with a coalition of national organisations to identify community mentors who can help support community groups on sustainable development activities. § Engaging different communities - support specific projects that engage different communities on sustainable development. The lessons learnt will help other organisations at national, regional and local levels. § Access to funding - promote funding opportunities, which can help communities take action on sustainable development.

Rather than setting up individual projects and one-off schemes as previously carried out before as part of Local Agenda 21, it would be

55 expected that the action plan would help to embed sustainable development in to the everyday practices of community groups, however big or small. This would enable people and groups to carry out the work for themselves and make this a part of their daily lives.

Impact on Hounslow The Government has sought to strengthen its community leadership roles through LSP’s, LAA’s and the new reshaped Sustainable Community Strategies, which are all important mechanisms for strengthening the delivery of sustainable development at a local level.

Timescales DEFRA are leading on taking the work forward. At present, they are appointing a partnership made up of not-for-profit, voluntary and community organisations to help deliver a new England-wide community support programme on sustainable development. This partnership will manage the delivery of the programme to support community groups and which is funded to run from 1st April 2006 to 31st March 2009. Lucy Griffiths 5.7 Complete In progress – Progress on the Biodiversity action plan targets is going well. The

CH/8542 4 Page Who Objective Rating Commentary Risk update ten new on track Hounslow biodiversity Action Plan Partnership is working on completing biodiversity the targets. projects by 2006 through the work of the Hounslow Local Biodiversity Action Plan Partnership Lucy Griffiths 5.8 To promote In progress – Hounslow produced a Sustainable Design and Construction Guide for The securing of renewable on track developers as planning policy advice within the UDP in December 2003. funds for schools energy This is available on the Council website under the “planning publications and community technologies, pages” buildings is an including the onerous process Sunrise solar Mayors Draft SPG Sustainable Design and Construction Guide was with no hot water published in 2005. It is much more up to date and contains more details guarantee of 56 heating scheme and advice than our Hounslow planning policy advice. Therefore we can success. to privately also advise developers and householders to use this one as well. owned homes and promoting Link to draft guide: technologies www.london.gov.uk/mayor/planning/docs/Sustainable_Design_and_Conts such as solar truction.pdf panels and wind turbines to Hounslow has a Sustainable Design and Construction database, which schools and contains details of buildings within the borough to use as examples of community good practice. This is available to all planners and should be kept buildings across updated. the borough. The Government, DTI’s Low carbon buildings programme, launched in April 2006 will provide grants for microgeneration technologies for householders, community organisations, schools, the public sector and businesses.

Locally, solar panels have been installed at Gunnersbury school and planning application has been submitted for a wind turbine at Cranford Community College, subject to funding. CH/8542 5 Page Who Objective Rating Commentary Risk update Lucy Griffiths 5.9 To promote In progress – Energy Efficiency Advice Centre – Hounslow has a Service Level This targets and encourage on track Agreement with the North West London EEAC to provide bespoke energy replies on the energy advice to Hounslow residents. continuation of efficiency in the Councils homes through The EEAC manages the enquiry (including giving verbal advice, sending contract with the promotion of written information, referring to further sources of expert help and referring North West the Energy the client to grant schemes, such as Warm Front or EEC schemes) and London Energy Efficiency monitor outputs. Efficiency Advice Advice Centre Centre help line and home energy checks Barbara Perry and 5.10 To In progress – Need Start of Project was delayed due to procurement issues, Yvonne Birch implement the on track programme now due to complete by December 2006 and is on track West London to improve well over 2,000 properties in the Borough by then. Heatstreets 57 initiative across Further London Housing Borad monies have been obtained for a Hounslow to further West London project for 2006-2008. target low

income and vulnerable households and improve energy efficiency of their homes Nick Pratt 5.11 Develop a In progress – The Parks Strategy has been completed. This strategy forms part of an The capacity to parks and open on track ongoing series of working documents, which make up the various develop and space strategy individual service areas of Hounslow Public Open space provision. The complete this that is introduction of a hierarchy of parks has proved a positive contribution to work is limited by responsive to focusing resources to parks in a managed way. Hounslow achieved 3 the available the needs of the independently accredited Green Flag awards in 2005. resources. community

CH/8542 6 Page MID YEAR REVIEW OF COMMUNITY PLAN TARGETS (MARCH 2006)

6. A CREATIVE COMMUNITY

Who Objective Rating Commentary Risk update Nick Pratt 6.1 Develop a new Completed Building opened to the public on 24th April 2006. Site complications and library on Beavers delays have resulted in Anthony Way estate in 2004 The HUB; This project is now substantively complete and budget pressure against the is open and in use by the local community. Initial reaction original project budgets. (The work done on the has been very favourable. Final outturn figure are HUB stretched beyond being established. the original objective of External works to both hard and soft landscapes are just developing a new being completed with snagging lists is being worked library. It is now a through. community facility that includes the library and This project has suffered from delays and has resulted in access to Surestart funding pressures to the overall cost to the project, final 58 resources.) costs are being completed.

Nick Pratt 6.2 Increase use of Not Work to increase the use of libraries continues. However Libraries by all ages, completed due to funding problems the PSA targets set have not particularly those aged – now been met. 12-17 and those aged finished over 60 Harminder Jagdev 6.3 Increase the In progress A target of 1500 learners involved in Basic skills courses for Learners will withdraw during number of learners in – on track Adult and Community Education was set for the academic the summer term and more basic skills year 05 06. To date we have 1413 learners on programme and may be added particularly at are on track to meet the agreed target outreach locations and although we are so close to target, attainment of it cannot be finally confirmed until the final MIS out run in July 06. Harminder Jagdev 6.4 Improve In progress The overall proportion of pupils achieving 5 A*-Cs increased Funding is given schools under educational attainment – on track significantly in 2005, reaching 57.6% compared with 52.4% in EMAG to raise the at GCSE and 2004. Hounslow’s performance is now above the national achievement of Black specifically raise average for this measure and in the top 25% of London Caribbean and Somali pupils achievement of black authorities. and good practice is shared on CH/8542 1 Page Who Objective Rating Commentary Risk update pupils and children in HVEC. Support is provided to public care The percentage of pupils achieving at least 1 grade at A*-G Somali pupils through also increased in 2005. 97.1% of mentoring, after school pupils gained at least 1 pass, an improvement of 0.7% on last study/homework clubs and year’s results and, again, above the annual Somali Secondary national average. School Information day for pupils and parents. There is no Achievement of Black Pupils: risk to funding and support for The percentage of Black Caribbean Pupils achieving these groups. 5+A*-C in 2005 was 41%, missing the target set of 46%. However, this is the best result for this group compared GCSE attainment for Looked to 2004 (37%) and 2003 (34%). After Children is dependent on the individuals within the The percentage of ‘Other’ Black African Pupils achieving cohort in any particular year. 5+A*-C in 2005 was 42%, exceeding the target set of 40%. For example, in the current The ethnic categories under the broad category ‘Black African’ year, approximately 45% of

59 will include pupils from Somali, Nigerian and Ghanaian year 11 cohort have special backgrounds. Therefore this is not a helpful category. It would educational needs. In the last be appropriate to set a target for Somali pupils, as this group is two years, there has been an the largest in Hounslow under the Black African Category. improvement in attainment but this year’s results (based on Achievement of Looked After Children: predictions) will affect our In 2003/4 52% of Looked After Children sat at least 1 GCSE objective to progressively raise and achieved at least 1 grade educational achievement. A to G. In 2004/5 this figure improved to 67%.

Harminder Jagdev 6.5 Establish three In progress Two of the three children’s centres have been designated and There is a delay on the capital children’s centres – on Track are running well, offering a range of services that meet the project on the Beavers offering integrated core offer for children and families. Community School site. health education and These are located: Nevertheless there is funding social services for 0 – • In Heston West – Norwood Green Children’s Centre, to complete the programme, 5s managed by the National Day Nurseries Association. which has been carried over • In Hanworth – Crane Park Children’s Centre, managed from 2004-06 allocation. by Crane Park Primary School, in Partnership with It has been agreed that Places Hounslow Action for Youth. for Children will manage the CH/8542 2 Page Who Objective Rating Commentary Risk update childcare offered in the new The third children’s centre in Cranford is providing the build on the school site. This core offer and the majority of the childcare places will provide 26 extra childcare expected; however the children’s centre build on the places, on top of the current 10 Beavers Community School site has not been children’s centre places offered completed. at Places for Children Day • The partners in this centre are: Places for Nursery and the 10 children’s Children Day Nursery, Sure Start Hounslow and centre childcare places offered Beavers Community Primary School. by local childminders.

Harminder Jagdev 6.6 Create 300 new out Complete The total number of childcare places created in the period There is an on-going risk for of school and childcare 2004-06 was 750. childcare providers because places This is a very good outcome and we are proud of the many of them are threatened work that has been done by all our partners in ‘out of with excessively high rent school’ provision, Adult Education and at the National increases for the premises they Childminding Association for helping us achieve the occupy. We have pleaded with 60 target for creating places. a number of organisations, as well as the Council’s Corporate Property division, to keep the rents at an acceptable level. Despite this, some childcare provision has had to close. Harminder Jagedv 6.7 Reduce pupil In Enhanced targets for reducing absenteeism in schools were set The introduction of new absences from primary Progress – in 2003 as part of Hounslow’s round 1 Local Public Service mandatory codes of and secondary schools On Track Agreement (LPSA). There has been a sustained reduction in absence is likely to increase absences from both primary and secondary schools over the absence rates for all local course of the agreement. authorities by September 2006. Categories likely to In primary schools, absence rates have fallen from 6.42% in impact upon the figures the 2003/04 financial year to 5.63% in the 2005-06 financial include: holidays, not year. In the last year there has been a reduction of 0.15%. required to attend, study leave. In secondary schools, absence rates have fallen from 7.76% in the 2003/04 financial year to 6.8% in the 2005-06 financial In addition, there are certain year. There has been a reduction of 0.28% over the last year. factors outside of the Local

CH/8542 3 Page Who Objective Rating Commentary Risk update These improvements are the result of a challenging stance Authority’s control, such as adopted towards parents by schools and the local authority bouts of sickness, industrial regarding reasons for pupil absence. Schools are advised not to action by teaching staff, authorise frequent absences, holidays, late arrivals etc without severe weather conditions medical evidence or unless there are exceptional and possible acts of circumstances. This strategy has enabled us to exceed the PSA terrorism, which could targets for overall absence in both phases. The service is seeking to build on this success through re-negotiation of impact on absence rates, reward targets on absence within the Local Area Agreement. although this has not been the case in the recent past. Nick Pratt 6.8 Refurbish leisure In This scheme is now well advanced; the design The scheme is subject to provision in Heston by Progress – specification is agreed with the Construction Agreement housing market variance developing the Heston On Track near completion. Enabling land and Principle agreement due to link between the leisure complex are also well advanced. Negations on overage and enabling land valuation and viability tests continue as part of the detailed legal the cost of the development contract negotiations.

61 Harminder Jagdev 6.9 Improve In Enhanced targets were set for improving the achievement of The EAL PSA comes to an achievement of pupils Progress – pupils for whom English is an Additional Language as part of end in the summer. The for whom English is an on track Hounslow’s Round 1 PSA. Over the last 3 years there has been investment of additional Additional Language a consistent increase in the proportion of pupils at Key Stages resource into the service in 3 and 4 progressing through an entire EAL stage during the the form of pump priming course of an academic year. Performance has improved from grant has been a key factor 49.7% in 2003/04 to 52.8% in 2005/06. Year on year targets in securing improvements in have been consistently exceeded and, on this basis, there is a outcomes for pupils for strong likelihood of the final PSA target being met. whom English is an Additional Language. Pump priming funding from the PSA has enabled the service Without this additional to target more advanced EAL learners (Stage 2 and 3 pupils) in funding it will be difficult to mainstream classrooms. It has also enabled the service to sustain the level of disseminate resources and strategies through partnership and improvement that has been training, which has contributed to improvements in seen over the last few achievement. years. The continuing increase in the numbers of new arrivals into the borough also poses a risk. CH/8542 4 Page Who Objective Rating Commentary Risk update 6.10 Development of Completed The Hounslow Cultural Partnership has been established Hounslow’s Cultural with a core of partners representing a diverse range of Partnership to support cultural interests from sport, tourism and the performing the LSP arts. Nick Pratt 6.11 Increase Completed The West London Mela held at Gunnersbury Park participation in and continues to provide the highlight for community enjoyment of arts and participation attracting 60,000 people. Supported by the cultural events, with the Mayor the event is a celebration of the diverse emphasis on social communities of West London. This event also funds a inclusion and range of creative programmes throughout west London. community cohesion Heritage Lottery Fund funded the South Asian Community Archive, the project was to record the lives and contributions individuals people from South Asia have made to the Borough’s of Hounslow and Ealing. Nick Pratt 6.12 Promote arts, In Collaborative work is being developed though Hounslow 62 culture and creativity Progress – Cultural Partnership to establish a range of projects. as economic drivers on track Other initiatives such Asia Film Festival highlights the and tools of social opportunities for film production in Hounslow. inclusion Nick Pratt 6.13 Promote In Affordable workspace units are an essential part of development of Progress – providing the environment for creative industries. So creative industries by on track called incubator units have been provided at Redlees supporting creative Studios. Further opportunities are being explored to entrepreneurs, adapt other building for use. increasing affordable workspace for creative industries Nick Pratt 6.14 To build a new In progress Library to open in June 2006. library and community – on track resource in Feltham town Margaret Howe 6.15 Promote and In progress • Attending and presenting at the Youth Conference in support Hounslow – on track April 2005. schools to enhance • Consulting the Youth Conference on the issue of education for open space CH/8542 5 Page Who Objective Rating Commentary Risk update sustainable • Consulting the Youth Council on the Statement of development Community Involvement in August/September 2005 and Jan/March 2006. • Consulting and engaging with local schools for the Brentford Area Action Plan consultations in June/July 2005 and January/March 2006 • Consulting with the Youth Council on major site such as Key Site One

63

CH/8542 6 Page Consultation for the Community Plan

Date Activity Who Complete (Yes/No) LSP Consultation 14th September Themes and priorities for the Helen Wilson Plan 14th September Current Plans being used by Helen Wilson organisations - map 14th September Performance Management Helen Wilson 14th September Encourage members to discuss Helen Wilson themes and priorities with own organisations October Gather results Helen Wilson

64 November Collate results Helen Wilson January Draft Plan discussion Helen Wilson Area Committees – Propose that the Area Cttees are presented with profiles and options in October and then follow-up meetings for each area are held in November. The follow-up meetings should be advertised in HM. October Profiles Area Committee Co-ordinators (HW will help prepare profiles) October Options Area Committee Co-ordinators (HW will help prepare options) November Follow-up meetings Area Committee Co-ordinators November Collate results Area Committee Co-ordinators

1 January Draft Plan discussion Area Committee Co-ordinators Public Consultation - This should focus on vision, themes and priorities 4th September issue HM use for conference feedback Helen Wilson Yes – article finished (preparation for end of August) and flagging up forthcoming consultation 2nd October HM questionnaire to focus on Helen Wilson vision, themes and priorities October Internet and intranet – questions Helen Wilson on vision, themes and priorities (will be same as HM content) October Leaflet for public places – Helen Wilson libraries, community groups, 65 Council reception (will be same as HM content) November Collation of responses ?? Residents – Can use BMG focus groups for discussion. Will also pick up residents through Area Cttees and promoting work in public spaces (see above) September Organise dates, times and ?? venues September Prepare presentations, profiles ?? and discussion document (Use same framework as public consultation)

2 October/November Hold focus groups (2 per area) ?? November Collate results ?? Officers and other organisation staff October Internet and intranet – questions Helen Wilson on vision, themes and priorities (will be same as HM content) November Collate results ?? January Feedback – discussion on draft Helen Wilson plan, will use the internet and intranet VCS

66 September Organise dates, times and ?? venues September Prepare presentation and ?? and Helen Wilson options September Use VCS conference results to ?? help inform priorities for Community Plan October Further consultation ?? November Collate results ?? January Feedback – discussion on draft plan, use the internet and intranet

3 Councillors – We can use the member training session and provide regular updates. Suggested that this is facilitated externally. September and October Organise dates, times and ?? venues September Prepare presentation and ?? options October Member consultation ?? January Use member training again. ?? Feedback – discussion on draft plan Children and Young People – 67 Suggested that priorities and needs of group are identified at the Needs Assessment Group. The Youth Council should also provide a forum for discussion September Organise dates, times and Harminder Jagdev/ Liz venues Hassock September Prepare presentation and Liz Hassock/Helen Wilson options September/October Consultation groups Liz Hassock November Collate results ?? January Feedback and discussion on Harminder Jagdev/Liz Hassock draft plan

4 Older People – use the Older People’s Network September Organise dates, times and ?? venues September Prepare presentation and ?? and Helen Wilson options September/October Consultation groups ?? November Collate results ?? January Feedback and discussion on ?? draft plan Thematic Partnerhips September Organise dates, times and ?? venues. (Will need to clarify

68 which groups to consult with) September Prepare presentation and ?? and Helen Wilson options September/October Consultation at meetings ?? November Collate results ?? January Feedback and discussion on ?? draft plan. Will need to check that partnerships can deliver on strategic objectives selected.

5 Hounslow Community Plan 2007 – 2010

Framework and Content – a Discussion Paper

1. Why do we have a Community Plan?

Every local authority has the power to do anything which they consider is likely to achieve promotion or improvement of the economic, social and environmental well-being of their area (Local Government Act 2000, Part 1, Item 2).

Every local authority must prepare a strategy (referred to in the Local Government Act as ‘Community Strategy’) for promoting or improving the economic, social and environmental well-being of their area and contributing to the achievement of sustainable development in the United Kingdom (Local Government Act 2000, Part 1, Item 4).

2. Hounslow’s Community Plans

The Local Strategic Partnership (LSP) is responsible for delivering and monitoring the Community Plan. The Local Strategic Partnership brings together at a local level public, private, voluntary and community organisations. In Hounslow the following organisations are represented at a senior level on the Local Strategic Partnership: - London Borough of Hounslow - Hounslow Primary Care Trust - Hounslow Racial Equality Council - Hounslow Voluntary Sector Forum - West London Learning and Skills Council - London Fire Brigade, Hounslow - Metropolitan Police, Hounslow - West London Business

The Local Strategic Partnership is key to enabling discussions amongst major Hounslow organisations on issues that matter to local people such as crime, jobs, education, health and housing.

The existing Community Plan 2004 – 2007, is based around 6 themed areas and the 5 Area Profiles. The current themes are: - A Safer Community - A Healthier Community - An Accessible Community - A Thriving Community - A Greener Community - A Creative Community Each themed area contains a number of targets that Hounslow partners have agreed to deliver by 2007.

691 The 5 Area Profiles are for: - West Area - Heston and Cranford - Central Hounslow - Isleworth and Brentford - Chiswick Each Area agreed a number of priorities that are monitored on a regular basis.

Hounslow is now in the process of preparing its third Community Plan. This is an excellent opportunity to reflect upon the past 3-years, develop a solid vision for the future of Hounslow and discuss priorities for the borough from both the perspectives of local residents and the LSP partner organisations.

This is also an opportunity to update the format of the Plan to reflect how Hounslow has changed and new priorities for the borough. The following sections contain draft proposals for the plan and a list of possible objectives.

Initial consultation was carried out in June through the Resident’s Panel Survey and in July at the annual LSP Stakeholder Conference. In June the Local Strategic Partnership Members also discussed progress made over the last year and challenges for the future. The results have been used to establish initial suggestions. However there needs to be further discussion and clarification on how Hounslow partners could deliver on possible objectives.

4. Possible Framework for Community Plan 2007 – 2010

This section outlines a possible structure for the document.

1. Foreword

2. Introduction - What is a Community Plan - LSP outline and structure - Partnerships that link to the LSP - Governance arrangements - Performance management arrangements. It is suggested that the Local Area Agreement picks up all of the hard measurements needed to demonstrate progress of the Community Plan themes. The Area Profiles should have new, SMART targets that are reported on periodically and at the request of the Area Committees. The next Community Plan does not need extra indicators, and to do this would increase the burden of reporting. We could use the next Community Plan to map the progress of all key organisation’s plans. For example, there will be an annual self-assessment of the LAA against the Community Plan, providing a ‘Direction of Travel Statement’ for the work done. - Structure of the Community Plan

702 3. Background - What partners have achieved since 2004 - Demographics - Challenges for Hounslow - Consultation carried out - VCS support for the document

4. Vision - Vision for 2020 - Vision for 2010 - How did we arrive at our vision

5. Themes

Each theme should contain: - Background - Achievements so far - Challenges for the future - 3 High-level priorities/objectives - List of plans that support priorities/objectives

Each theme will be supported by a number of existing plans and plans that will be developed over the next year. It is not necessary to provide new measurements for the priorities/objectives, but it will be necessary to map where they will be measured.

6. Area Profiles

The Area Profiles currently contain a profile of the area, resident’s views and priorities for the area over the next 3 years. This structure should be retained.

The priorities for each area need to be more clearly defined and linked to the profile and residents’ views. Each priority needs to be linked to a SMART performance measurement in an already existing plan.

Area Committees should agree: - 5 focused priorities - How they will know when the priorities have been achieved (performance indicators) - How they would like performance on their priorities to be reported.

It is anticipated that this part of the document will be more substantial than that in the existing plan.

7. Appendices - Sustainability Appraisal - Equality Impact Assessment - Health Impact Assessment

713

5. Profile of Hounslow

To aid discussions we should provide data about Hounslow at both a borough-wide and area-wide level. This could include tables to show: - Population breakdown - Ethnicity - Community Safety - Health - Educational attainment - Economic breakdown, to include levels of poverty and unemployment - Environmental issues, to include levels of recycling, levels of renewable energy used We could also provide maps to show: - Environmental issues, to include air quality, noise pollution, parks and open spaces - Developments, to show what already exists and what is planned for the next 10 years (try to show breakdown of affordable housing) - Traffic, to show areas of road congestion, public transport

6. Hounslow Vision

Recent Developments

Hounslow’s main characterising features have essentially remained the same over the last ten years. Hounslow remains an international and national gateway to London, with Heathrow on the doorstep and major transport routes running through the borough. It boasts a high level of cultural diversity, and it is anticipated that by 2010 more than 50% of the Borough’s population will be from black and minority ethnic communities.

The local economy has had to come to terms with the decline in traditional manufacturing industries and the wider economy has now shifted to a mix of low and high-tech service industries. A large portion of the local economy depends on Heathrow and whilst the airport ensures high-levels of employment it also means that the borough suffers environmentally from traffic congestion and aircraft emissions.

Residents Panel Survey

The Resident’s Panel Survey showed that 60% of resident’s are satisfied with their neighbourhood as a place to live and most said they chose to live in the area because either they had always lived in the area/friends and family lived in the area, it was near to employment or there was affordable decent housing.

724 The LSP want to ensure that all residents are satisfied with the borough and their neighbourhoods as a place to live. Residents were asked in the survey to choose 3 adjectives to best describe how they would like their neighbourhood to look in 10 years time. The most frequently selected adjectives were safe, clean, green and caring.

A Vision

The most frequently selected adjectives will be used to compile a vision statement for Hounslow. All consultees will be asked to choose from the following: - Clean - Modern - Green - Safe - Accessible - Welcoming - Prosperous - Flourishing - Diverse - Cohesive - Vibrant - Sense of belonging - Healthy - Caring

The vision statement will enable partners and residents to all work towards a common goal.

7. Community Plan themes

4.1 The current Community Plan themes need to be reviewed: A Safer Community - A Healthier Community - An Accessible Community - A Thriving Community - A Greener Community - A Creative Community

The Resident’s Panel survey demonstrates that priority themes are Safer, Healthier and Greener. It is suggested that we remove the thriving theme and consider the following:

- A Safer and Stronger Community, to cover existing ‘safer’ issues and also community cohesion aspects, the RESPECT agenda and VCS objectives - A Healthier Community, to cover existing issues and include Older People objectives

735 - An Accessible Community, retain this theme to cover accessibility of services, transport issues, housing, infrastructure and planning - A Cleaner and Greener Community, this theme at present largely focuses on greener issues and should also include cleaner issues - A Creative Community, retain this theme but revise the content to be more focused on both cultural and leisure activities for both children and adults - An Economically Active and Skilled Community, a new theme to cover jobs, skills, levels of employment, business enterprise - A Children and Young People’s Community, a new theme to cover education, children’s services and participation - A Caring Community, could include children’s, adults and older people’s services, for those who need extra care and support, this would also be able to pick up on accessibility issues. A high proportion of the Resident’s Survey thought this theme should be included in the Community Plan, however it could also be picked up in the vision statement, and there are other suggested themes that would cover the issues raised here - An Older People’s Community, a new theme to cover older peoples services, participation and activities – this however could be picked up in the Healthier Community theme

It is suggested that we work with all of the above themes apart from ‘An Older People’s Community’ and ‘A Caring Community’.

The following section breaks down progress made so far against each theme, possible strategic objectives and current plans in place. The consultation process should focus on agreeing objectives. The measurement of each objective will be linked to existing plans and the Local Area Agreement and can be determined by those responsible for delivery.

The content below may need to be expanded on once a theme lead for each section has been agreed.

A Safer and Stronger Community

Background

The Community Safety Partnership (CSP) is working harder than ever to keep people safe in Hounslow. Hounslow has achieved the highest crime reduction over the past year in North-West London, making it one of the safest places to live and work. This has only been achieved by the work of all those in the Partnership and with the help and support of the community.

Hounslow partners have agreed that a vision for the borough is to: Work in partnership to make Hounslow a safer place to work, live and visit. And they aim to do this by:

746 Working towards the national outcome to reduce crime, reassuring the public, reducing the fear of crime and anti-social behaviour and reducing the harm caused by drugs.

This theme will also incorporate the cross-cutting objective of community cohesion, which is a key element of both the existing Community Plan 2004-07 and the Local Area Agreement 2006-09. We can use the next Community Plan as an opportunity to further embed and build respect in local communities and empower them to have a greater influence over the decision-making process and delivery of services.

Achievements since 2004

A 100% of targets set in 2004 are either complete or due to be finished by March 2007. Key achievements have been:

• A reduction in rates of youth offending of all young offenders • A reduction in the average number of offences committed by persistent young offenders • A reduction in domestic burglary • A reduction in the fears and community safety issues that dissuade people from using parks and open spaces by extending the Parks Watch Scheme across the borough • An increase in the reporting of homophobic crime incidents to the police • A reduction in the number of repeat victims of domestic violence as a proportion of reported total crimes • An increase in the reporting of race crime incidents to the police

Possible Objectives

• Increase Crime and Anti Social Behaviour diversion activities • Reducing domestic violence • Reducing burglaries • Reducing drug dealing • Stronger presence of police on the streets particularly in secluded locations of areas where high reports of drug/ alcohol problems are visible • Reassuring communities • Reducing graffiti and criminal damage • Ensure local people feel they live in an area where people from different backgrounds can get on well together • Support and enable local people to be part of the decision-making process • Ensure different groups of people based on age, gender and ethnicity respect and understand one another

757 • Support and encourage local people to feel they belong to a neighbourhood that they are proud of

Current Action Plans/Strategies in Place that link to this theme • Community Safety Strategy 2005-8 • Draft Anti-Social Behaviour Strategy 2006-8 • Change for Children Agenda – Children and Young People’s Plan • Police Sector Plans • Local Area Agreement 2006-09 • Corporate Equalities and Community Cohesion Plan • Meeting the Challenge – Hounslow’s working document on Community Cohesion

A Healthier Community

Background

Tackling inequalities in health remains one of the biggest challenges for the local health economy. In general terms, health inequalities can be divided into two broad categories:

• Inequity in access to health and social care services • Inequalities in health outcomes and the determinants of health

Key health inequalities include male life expectancy, female life expectancy, premature mortality, mental health of men and women from South Asian populations, sexual health and tuberculosis.

Hounslow partners have agreed that a vision for the borough is to: To improve the health of the local population and reduce the profound inequalities which exist between areas and groups. And they aim to do this by: Improving the quality of life and health of disadvantaged groups and communities living in Hounslow. And promoting well-being and independence for older people.

Achievements since 2004

84% of targets set in 2004 are either complete or due to be finished by March 2007. Key achievements have been: • Improvement to patient access through developing key centres such as Thelma Golding and Heston Health Centre • Development of a fully integrated Children’s Service by joined up delivery through the Children and Young People’s Strategic Partnership • Improved the number of adoptions of children in care to permanent families

768 • Development of an identifiable young people’s substance misuse service

Possible Objectives

• Reduce Child obesity • Encourage smoking cessation • Increase physical Activity • Encourage better nutrition and healthy eating standards • Recognise link between housing standards and health, both in relation to internal decoration and perception of environment outside of home. Also a need to provide affordable and quality housing • Reduce levels of teenage pregnancy • Need for whole life planning for people with disabilities • Issues around access for older people. What potential is there for outreach clinics – taking services to community used buildings / centres • Issues around the well-being of older people

Current Action Plans/Strategies in Place that link to this theme

• Local Health Delivery Plan (2005/08) • Community Plan 2004-2007 • Mental Health Commissioning Strategy • Hounslow Mental Health Promotion Strategy • Hounslow Older people’s Strategy • Hounslow Commissioning Strategy for Older People 2004-07 Because Seniors Matter – A Health and Well Being Strategy for Older People in Hounslow • Hounslow Sexual Health Strategy • Local Health Inequalities Strategy (Draft) • EHH Gay Men’s Project Business Plan • Public Health and Health Improvement Unit Joint Business Plan 2005/06 • Joint Tobacco Control Strategy (Draft) • Hounslow CHD Health Equity Audit (2004) • Local Area Agreement 2006-09

An Accessible Community

Background

To enable residents to fulfil their ambitions to successfully live and work in the borough, partners need to ensure there is access to high quality services and

779 amenities, good transport networks and affordable housing. This theme in the last Community Plan also included access to jobs and training, this will now be included in the new theme ‘An Economically Active and Skilled Community’.

We have discovered through the Resident’s Panel that 2 out of the top 3 areas for deterioration in the borough over the past two-years are traffic congestion and affordability of housing.

Achievements since 2004

100% of targets set for the Accessible Community theme (including access to jobs and training) in 2004 are in progress and due to be finished by March 2007. Key achievements have been:

• Promotion of sustainable transport modes including public transport, cycling and walking, and provide advice to employers to help them encourage their employees to use these modes for their journeys to work • Achieved significant increase in bus priority, pedestrian and cycling facilities throughout the borough • On going work to protect and improve access to public open spaces such as parks and local nature reserve sites, including access for people with disabilities • Ongoing work to encourage and create new access to the Thames river bank and ensure that it is accessible to people with disabilities • To continue to facilitate the regeneration of the three town centres at Hounslow, Feltham and Brentford • Continuing to improve the quality of social housing available in the borough

Possible Objectives

• Reduce traffic congestion (this should impact on air quality objectives) • Increase the levels of affordable, sustainable housing • Reduce the number of vehicles speeding • Increase the use of the internet and websites to access services • Encourage more people to use public transport

Current Action Plans/Strategies in Place that link to this theme

• Homeless Strategy 2003-2008 • Housing Departmental Business Plan • Local Implementation Plan (Transport) • Customer Services Strategy • Local Area Agreement 2006-09

1078

A Cleaner and Greener Community

Background

It is important that we continue to work to preserve and sustain the environment in which we live for people now and future generations. Issues that are important to our environment include waste management, air quality, street cleanliness and climate change. Hounslow is also challenged by the impact Heathrow has on local air quality, both as a result of aircraft emissions and traffic congestion.

Achievements since 2004

82% of targets set for the Greener Community theme in 2004 are in progress and due to be finished by March 2007. Key achievements have been: • Continued development and implementation of an air quality action plan to improve the air quality of the borough • To continue to promote renewable energy technologies, including the Sunrise solar hot water heating scheme to privately owned homes and promoting technologies such as solar panels and wind turbines to schools and community buildings across the borough • To continue to promote and encourage energy efficiency in homes through promotion of the Energy Efficiency Advice Centre help line and home energy checks

Possible Objectives

• To reduce pollution of the environment • To improve the condition of the streets • To improve air quality (this would link to the objective in Accessible Community – ‘To reduce Traffic Congestion’) • Support the Council to achieve sustainable development • Encourage the use of greener energy sources • Encourage and ensure all households are engaged in recycling • To reduce noise pollution

Current Action Plans/Strategies in Place that link to this theme • Air Quality Action Plan • Local Implementation Plan and its Strategic Environmental Assessment • Green Travel Plan • Hounslow’s Local Biodiversity Action Plan 2003 – 2008 • Hounslow’s Waste Management Strategy • Local Area Agreement 2006-09

7911

A Creative Community

Background

Access to cultural and leisure activities is important, it enables people of all ages a choice of ways to spend their time and celebrate their cultural heritage. Creative outlets are important for the education of people in the borough and ensure that our heritage, libraries, sport, parks, play, community education and the arts reflect the richness and diversity of Hounslow’s many communities.

Achievements since 2004

94% of targets set in 2004 are either complete or due to be finished by March 2007. Key achievements have been: • Developing a new library on Beavers estate in 2004 • Continuing to increase the number of learners in basic skills courses • Development of creative industries by supporting creative entrepreneurs, increasing affordable workspace for creative industries • Development of a new library and community resource in Feltham town

Possible Objectives

• Work to ensure that Hounslow and West London are involved in preparation for and delivery of the Olympics in 2012 • Continue to encourage cultural engagement and showcase different art forms, such as dance, music and film • Maintain and publicise our cultural heritage • Improve our parks and open spaces and the how they are used • Increase the participation of older people in cultural and leisure activities

Current Action Plans/Strategies in Place that link to this theme

• Hounslow’s Cultural Strategy • Adult and Community Education Three Year Plan • Local Area Agreement 2006-09 • Lifelong Learning, Leisure and Cultural Services Business Plan 2005-06 • Local Area Agreement 2006-09

1280

An Economically Active and Skilled Community

Background

There is an emerging Skills and Employment Strategy for Hounslow, that is aimed at improving skill levels and earning potential. At present we have relatively low levels of unemployment. A large number of jobs are within large firms based in the borough and directly link to the airport economy. There is a noticeable need to raise levels of qualifications and encourage small business to remain in the borough.

Achievements since 2004 Measurement of Economic Activity in the borough was not included in the Community Plan 2004 – 2007. The recently signed Local Area Agreement, 2006-2009, addresses this.

To ensure that we make it a priority for local people to be economically active the Community Plan for 2007-2010 will include key objectives for this theme.

Possible Objectives

• Support local people to move out of poverty • Improve the number of local people securing well-paid jobs • Improve the image of Hounslow to attract outside investment and development • Support local businesses to grow and develop • Improve skill-levels of local people in the borough

Current Action Plans/Strategies in Place that link to this theme

• West London Economic Development Strategy • LSC Strategic Area Review • Hounslow Adult and Community Education Plan • West London Business Plan • Hounslow Chamber of Commerce Business Plan • Hounslow Employment Land Study 2004 • Brentford Regeneration Framework 2003 • Local Area Agreement 2006-09

A Children and Young People’s Community

Background

Hounslow partners have agreed to work together to achieve a future in which young people are safe and free from crime, in good health, enjoying life and

8113 achieving well, are making a real contribution to the world they live in, and laying the foundations for an emotionally and economically secure and successful future.

Hounslow partners aim to improve a range of outcomes for young people aged 11-19 through the development and co-ordination of services.

In the Community Plan 2004-2007 services for children and young people were included in the ‘Creative Community’ theme.

Achievements since 2004

Key achievements have been: • Continued improvement in educational attainment at GCSE and specifically raise achievement of black pupils and children in public care • There are two new children’s centres offering integrated health education and social services for 0 – 5s • Creation of more than 300 new out of school and childcare places • Continuing to reduce pupil absences from primary and secondary schools

Possible Objectives

• Encourage children and young people to make healthy lifestyle choices • Ensure all children and young people attain high-levels of personal and educational achievement • Encourage more children and young people to participate in decision-making • More visible interaction with Youth, sustaining support for out reach youth work, increasing youth activities, consulting young people and ensuring they are represented at community meetings • Visible policing presence at school • Providing drug awareness to young people

Current Action Plans/Strategies in Place that link to this theme

• Lifelong Learning, Leisure and Cultural Services Business Plan 2005-06 • Sexual Health Strategy and Action Plan • Drug and Alcohol Action Team Plan • Hounslow Teenage Pregnancy Strategy and Action Plan 2005-06 • Local Preventative Strategy for Children at Risk of Social Exclusion 2003-06 • Hounslow Extended Schools Strategy • Connexions Transition Plan 2006-08 • Young People’s Service Plan

1482 • Fostering Service Business Plan • Youth Justice Plan 2005/06 • Community Safety Strategy 2005-08 • Hounslow Study Support Strategy • Playing for Success Development Plan • Education Development Plan • Education Business Partnership Development Plan • Inclusion Strategy • Behaviour Support Plan • Youth Service Development Plan 2005-06 • Young People’s Participation Strategy • 14-19 Strategy • 14-19 Post Area Inspection Action Plan • Skills Strategy • Local Area Agreement 2006-09

8. Community Plan Area Profiles

Each Area section will have: - Map of area - Profile information for each area - Resident’s views - 5 focused priorities - Performance Management Arrangements

8315 Agenda Item 5

Hounslow Local Strategic Partnership Away Day

29th June 2006

Brief Report of Outputs

Objectives: - To review the experience of the LSP over the last year - To set parameters for consultation on the next Community Plan - To develop and strengthen the relationships between members of the LSP Board

1. Review of Community Plan and LSP Performance over the past year

1.1 Individual Presentations

LSP Member Achievements Challenges Metropolitan Police - Reduction in crime - Who are our community? - Strong partnership, joint - Too many targets briefings - Coordination of partnership - Safer neighbourhoods working - Public expectation- how are we going to do all this? Racial Equality Council - Kept equality scheme on the - New national commission agenda and moved on racial being set up but REC not agenda involved until 2009 - 8,000 people served last year - Community cohesion a - REC functioning well in challenge in the light of Hounslow, compared to national issues/incidents surrounding boroughs - Health deficits, education - Carried out training, community consultation (quarterly) West London Business - Project –led first Economic - Creating right environment- Development Strategy right skills, low level of crime, - Drew up implementation plan- transport, etc.) strong partnership - Planning - The brand “All together - Heathrow different” - 100 businesses retained and over 100 jobs Fire Brigade - 1,000 hours community fire - Low profile of fire service (e.g. services current Community Plan) - 100 Home Fire Safety Checks - Lacking focus on education plus funding available for and awareness training - Arson cases: >1000/year - New appliance in Heston in - Accidental fires rising January 2007 - Injuries 140% up… PCT - Change in engagement with - Health inequalities local authority - Health economy is effectively - PCT and hospital stemming bankrupt to tune of £20m financial decline - Engaging with stakeholders, - Finalising strategy around partners primary care - Coping with change - Health Improvement agenda - How to link up with children (e.g. smoking cessation) and young people

84 LSP Member Achievements Challenges Learning and Skills Council - - Major national reorganisation, leading to introspection - Shortage of partnership directors - Managing dichotomy between local plans and national targets Council - Political change- opportunity - Customers (youth) failed to for fresh thinking/viewpoint engage, failed to have them participate - Don’t know enough about the population - Issues around community cohesion - Limited resources

The Voluntary Sector Forum was not represented.

1.2. Overall, the following achievements, challenges and lessons were noted:

Achievements: • Development of the partnership itself • Delivery of the Local Area Agreement • Raising of the Health Improvement agenda • Maintained community cohesion • Together on “respect” agenda

Challenges: • Room for further development of partnership e.g. how our different targets link • Continuing to maintain confidence in community despite national/international issues • Individually and collectively under resource constraints in comparison to demand (Hounslow is not a Neighbourhood Renewal Borough) • Position of West London (vs attention on East London) and Hounslow within that

Lessons learnt: • We are good at coming together, but how can we consult better with residents? • Open and honest communication and sharing of information is important • What happens in the partnership should be seen as added value, not duplication • The value of sharing of our responsibilities in the partnership

2. Setting the parameters for consultation on the next Community Plan

2.1 LSP members mapped their answers to the following questions onto a matrix (agencies x CP themes):

What are you doing which will contribute to the CP themes? What is in the CP themes which you cannot do? What are you planning to do which you think is important, but which is not reflected by the current themes?

See next page for the matrix.

Code: Green: activities being done/planned contributing to plan; Red: activities not being done/planned but within plan; Black: activities outwith current Community Plan, but being done/planned

85 Safer Community Healthier Accessible Thriving Greener Creative New Theme Community Community Community Community Community The Council - Community Safety - Input to - Bus priority - Now planning - Committed to - New libraries “One stop” Partnership Thelma measures forward Beacon in 6 in Beaver and provision, - Drug and Crime Golding - Improvement - West Area years on Feltham information Audit - Children and schemes Study sustainability - 14 Children’s services - LAA Block- criminal Young people (S106) - Targets for - New Council Centres damage and graffiti plan - Access affordable policy needed - Education - Youth Offending - Older people’s Hounslow housing attainment Service resource - Sustainable - Activity - No major - D.O. teams centre transport Chiswick implementation - More resources for - Adoption of - More plan yet for graffiti service targets understanding sports strategy - Single emergency - LAA- tackle TB of needs of - West London number - Not enough existing response to - Involvement of young resources for business 2012- still up in people community the air strategies - Greater links between health

86 and active leisure- walking, cycling, swimming, sports, dance, etc. with measureable results Fire Service - HFSCs - R.R.O. - Education/awareness - Key Worker - Arson task force homes - L.I.F.E. - Reduce deaths/injuries on the road Learning Funding - Care to learn Transport - Train to gain - Office ACL Development of and Skills education/training at - “Care” training training - BAA “cove” recycling LLDD Council FYOI and in - Apprenticeships - Capel Manor specialism community (youth and at adult) Gunnersbury

Safer Community Healthier Accessible Thriving Greener Creative New Theme Community Community Community Community Community PCT - Tobacco - Quarterly Exhibition of art control strategy updates with in Bath Road - “Relaunching” planners re Health Centre family planning S106 services as opportunities sexual health - Exploring se of services Bath Road - Implementing Health Centre White Paper as a broader (Our health, community our care, our resource say) to bring care closer to people at home - Sexual health modernisation - Reviewing substance misuse 87 services - Health profiling - Linking meteorological forecasting to chronic conditions and hospital admissions - Linking LAA health targets explicitly to children’s agenda (just beginning) - Looking at options for managing our community health services

Safer Community Healthier Accessible Thriving Greener Creative New Theme Community Community Community Community Community Racial - Combating race/hate - Challenging - Challenging - Encouraging - Promoting Equality crime inequalities in service community cultural Council - Promoting good race health providers to be enterprise diversity relations and - Promoting more - Engage BME through events community cohesion health issues in accessible business to e.g. BHM etc. - Proactively community - Community relevant - More promoting race and - Bringing accessibility to agencies and engagement at equality (due to lack community and public financial bigger events of resources) health areas/buildings systems e.g. London providers mela, West together London events - Impact assessment of inequalities on various communities (e.g. refugees) Police - YUT Link health

88 - PYO/PPO joint agenda with working safer community - Stallholder groups - Criminal Damage Group (LAA) - Increase 3rd party reporting - DV Panel- lots of stuff - CSU stuff - CSU race/hate - ASBAGS - RTA - BCS crimes reduce (call for group) - Fear of crime - Terrorism (national priority) - Major incident planning - Reassurance - Communication Safer Community Healthier Accessible Thriving Greener Creative New Theme Community Community Community Community Community West - Listening to the - Working with - Researching Engaging Bringing together London concerns of business business in business business on C&M businesses Business on crime and safety key transport growth and CSR issues- across W - Linking with the “hot spots” to failure in sustainability London police to deliver lobby for Hounslow to agenda solutions solutions from create the right Govt., TFL., environment GMITG and safeguard - Analysing and create jobs business (LAA work) support for the - Supporting key West London developments tram/crossrail across the - Ensuring borough business contributes to the worklessness agenda 89

2.2 Reflection on the matrix:

ƒ Disconnect for the police between Government and local priorities ƒ Think about headings for the new plan? Need for clearer statement of policy ƒ ACL-who funds it? ƒ Hounslow wants to be a “Beacon Council” by 2010, but what does that really mean? ƒ Cross-cutting issues between the themes is where we are weakest ƒ Reducing road traffic accidents not being addressed. Performance Indicators look OK, but masks underlying issues ƒ Business should be involved in more of the themes- not just “Thriving Community” ƒ Why aren’t we doing all this? A question of roles/responsibilities in the plan? ƒ What is going to make Hounslow a good place to live/be? a. Transport in/out of the borough? b. What is the glue, the synergy c. If we achieve all we want to in the different themes, will that answer the question? d. Changing population- different characteristics, mobility e. What can we bring that is different/unique? ƒ A new priority (from Learning and Skills Council) re post-16 learning disabilities/difficulties: develop a local centre of excellence? ƒ The chart is not exhaustive- there may well be other activities which haven’t been done as they do not clearly sit in one member’s responsibility/remit

Further Thoughts

1. Both these exercises were fairly brief and cursory- a more detailed review will be needed to get a clearer picture of progress, and to get a better understanding of which activities are/are not covered (the last point above)

2. Two major issues seem to emerge from the discussion on the matrix:

a) The challenge of themes that cut across the current “silos” and of developing and promoting more crosscutting activities, where one activity might cause progress to be made in a number of areas (attention to these may also answer the challenge raised in the morning about where the added value of the LSP lies) b) The question of “What makes Hounslow a good place to be?

Both these issues could be included into the consultation exercise, together with other questions on issues within the current silos.

3. The issue of the partnership being so dependent on the strength, resources, and commitment of the individual members remains a challenge.

4. Levels of openness seemed high in the group, considering the fact that some members are new and the short period of the meeting. During the morning reports there seemed to be a general desire to see more partnership working, based on a recognition that the different agencies’ own interests often coincide in a common agenda, and that different agencies can contribute to each other’s agendas in different ways. All this can be built upon in future meetings to strengthen the partnership further.

5. There seemed to be a general concern about community consultation/participation: how it is managed, who is in the population and who should we be talking to, management of expectations, etc.

90 Agenda Item 6

LSP Stakeholder Conference Feedback

The afternoon workshops provided a solid basis of material that can be used to help develop the next Community Plan. Listed below are a number of issues that participants’ thought should be addressed in the next Community Plan.

A Safer Community

Issues to be addressed: • More visible interaction with Youth, sustaining support for out reach youth work, increasing youth activities, consulting young people and ensuring they are represented at community meetings • Increase Crime and Anti Social Behaviour diversion activities • Constructive activities and provision of safe neighbourhood places for young people (not just ½ nights per week) • Visible policing, presence at school • Reducing domestic violence • Reducing burglaries • Reducing visible drug dealing • Providing drug awareness to young people • Stronger presence of police on the streets particularly in secluded locations of areas where high reports of drug/ alcohol problems are visible • Reassuring communities • Reducing graffiti and criminal damage

A Healthier Community

Issues to be addressed: • Reduce Child obesity • Encourage smoking cessation • Increase physical Activity • Encourage better nutrition and healthy eating standards • Recognise link between housing standards and health, both in relation to internal decoration and perception of environment outside of home. Also a need to provide affordable and quality housing • Reduce levels of teenage pregnancy • Increase use of parks and open spaces • Need for whole life planning for people with disabilities • Need more coordination of developments and health services • Need to improve joint working in areas of priority, e.g. between police matching health deprived areas with areas that have high incidence of crime. Need greater engagement of PCT with community safety partnership • Issue around access for older people. What potential is there for outreach clinics – taking services to community used buildings / centres

911

An Accessible Community

Issues to be addressed: • Increase ways to access information • Opportunity to influence accessibility issues that impact on, for example new housing developments or use of public buildings • Encourage better use of the internet/websites • Engagement of young people in planning and decision making re accessibility • Transport Strategy to reflect all users and provide accessible and sustainable options • Positive awareness campaign for disability access issues • A key theme was enabling choice through access and ensuring that partners provide services and information that is appropriate for different audiences and participants

It was also suggested in this workshop that there is greater involvement of faith groups when discussing community issues.

A Thriving Community

Issues to be addressed: • To achieve greater understanding and clarity between partners about why people do not or cannot work we need to map their reasons • Develop programmes (based on existing good practice here and elsewhere) to enable people to move out of poverty • Create structures and opportunities for discussion with local communities to understand their views and ensure their participation • Improve number of Hounslow residents securing well-paid jobs • Housing that is sustainable, affordable and meets the needs of the community • Improve the image of the borough to encourage people to stay and work • An improved Hounslow image will encourage businesses to consider the area as a place for investment and development • Heathrow is not going away and economically we must make the most of it, whilst at the same time continue addressing the environmental impact

In this area of work it is important to recognise: • Poverty disproportionately affects certain groups/ communities; big developments can change the demography of an area but poor people get left behind.

922 A Greener Community

Environmental Concerns/Issues: • How do we manage open spaces in the borough? Green spaces are good for biodiversity, ecology and health. However they may also have implications for crime and safety. • Access to green spaces -could use East London ‘green grid’ to map use of open spaces. • Nature conservation areas. • Use of waterways and local rivers • Designing buildings to aid biodiversity • Other local authorities are taking the lead – e.g. Newcastle plan to be carbon neutral by 2050. • Air quality – poor due to traffic congestion and heavy goods vehicles • Transport – should try to cut car use, improve public transport and control traffic flow on major roads • There has been an increase of CO2 emissions within buildings – this should be mitigated through a planning system that incorporates energy neutral buildings. • Energy supplies are reducing • Threat of climate change – how can planning system help, can we look at sustainable construction

Suggested actions: • Cross-cutting green issues affect a number of the Community Plan themes – this should be made more explicit and the LSP should find ways to tackle environmental issues together • Maintain and support Council commitment to achieving beacon status in sustainable development in 6-years time • Other LSP organisations should have a dedicated environmental champion, this would encourage cross-organisational working and enable sectors to think ‘outside the box’ • Need staff to be trained to be environmentally aware • Environmental issues can often get lost when sustainability appraisals are being conducted. For example issues such as economics and affordable housing often take precedent. • We should use opportunities available to inform the Mayor and London Plan on environmental issues. • Need to look at examples of good practice. E.g. The Berkeley Group (which includes St George developers) have set up an internal forum to share knowledge on sustainability issues. Also look at good practice in Hounslow, e.g. Sky. Perhaps a good practice DVD could be produced. • Sustainable living needs should be taken into account when projects are being designed, prior to the planning stage • Increase awareness and education to enable individuals of all ages and all sectors of the community to know how they can help the environment and consequences of their actions. • Hold environmental forums for businesses and local authority officers to discuss issues

933 • Use community service hours to improve green spaces. • There is an opportunity using S106 monies to encourage developers to make sustainable buildings • Green travel plans should be required for all developments • Increase tree planting to help with improving atmosphere, reducing incidence of flooding and increasing wildlife biodiversity. • Find alternative fuel sources • Improve open space quality across the borough • Need sustainable water management policies • Could we look at sustainable food policies • Lobby to make more packaging recyclable • Improve homes to be more energy efficient • Preserve and enhance existing hedgerows • Create dual use pavements, for pedestrians and cyclists

A Creative Community

Issues arising: • How can this plan further empower the Community? The Community dimension is missing from 'Creative Community' • Young people need to be more involved in developing the plan. The plan must support the development of young people and promote healthy lifestyles • Does the plan meet the needs of young people, e.g. provision of counselling services for young people is a current gap? There need to be more facilities for young people • How does the plan take into account that London will be hosting Olympics within 4 years? We need to be proactive on this and have a clear vision of how the benefits can be harnessed • Diversity is the strength of the borough, we need cultural engagement, and could do this for example through showcasing film, dance, 'Asian Arts' etc • Need to find better ways to publicise cultural events in the borough. • A clear distinction should be made in the next plan between the theme of a Creative Community and the overall children and young people’s agenda, which needs a separate section dedicated to it. There was general consensus that we should retain the Creative Community theme in its own right but that it should encompass all age groups not just children & young people. • Need to recognise that creativity is not something that can be legislated for within a plan but develops and evolves organically

944 Agenda Item 7

Contact: Isabelle Granet Tel: 020 8583 2363 E-Mail: [email protected]

Executive (Public) - 4 April 2006

Brentford Health Impact Assessment

Report by: Councillor Felicity Barwood, Chair of Adults, Health and Social Care Scrutiny Panel

Summary

This report introduces the findings of the Health Impact Assessment ʊ commissioned by the Adults, Health and Social Care Scrutiny Panel ʊ carried out for the Brentford area undergoing developments.

On 3 January the Executive approved the ‘Brentford Plan’ preferred options, and the findings outlined in the attached reports seek to influence and add to the implementation of that plan.

1.0 RECOMMENDATION

1.1 To consider:

x The findings and recommendations of the Brentford Health Impact Assessment, and x The comments and suggested actions from Brentford Community Council (BCC), including the comments on the Brentford Area Action Plan and the Employment Development Plan.

1.2 To note: x The suggested actions for the Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

1.3 To provide a response to the Adults, Health and Social Care Scrutiny Panel within six weeks on both the recommendations in the HIA and the suggested actions from BCC.

2.0 INTRODUCTION & BACKGROUND

2.1 Since the introduction of the new planning policy, especially with regards to changes in application of section 1061, I, as chair have stressed the importance of involving health partners at an early stage of major housing developments.

1 “Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 allows a Local Planning Authority (LPA) to enter into a legally-binding agreement or planning obligation, with a land developer over a related issue. The obligation is sometimes termed as a 'Section 106 Agreement'.” – Source IDeA 95 2.2 The Panel has been aware of the pressures on public services as a result of recent developments, particularly in the Brentford area. Concerns over health and social care issues have been raised by the Panel and residents over the last two years.

2.3 Brentford residents have used the local media to voice their concerns about the impact and pace of the housing developments in their area. Members of BCC shared with us key issues for the Council to consider in October 2004. They attended our meeting on 9 February 2005 when they formally requested that we carry out an integrated health impact assessment.

2.4 As a result, we commissioned a collaborative Health Impact Assessment (HIA) involving local residents, community development workers, health agencies, other local agencies, council officers and elected members.

2.5 We are grateful to Hounslow PCT and the Public Health directorate in particular for undertaking this piece of work for us and would like to take this opportunity to thank our colleagues for their time and effort, especially Maggie McNab, Sharon Daye and Kathryn Goldwin.

3.0 FINDINGS

3.1 The HIA contains 14 recommendations. We fully support the findings and urge the local decision makers to consider this research to be the findings of the Panel and to implement the recommendations. See appendix A.

3.2 BCC submitted an extremely thorough response to the HIA. We thank them for bringing their concerns to our attention, and for submitting a detailed and thoughtful response. BCC makes 85 recommendations (headed Action) on HIA. Because it is all interlinked, we have also attached the BCC’s comments and observations on the Brentford Area Action Plan and the Employment Development Plan. Unsurprisingly we fully support all the recommended actions and through this report urge the Executive and the Council partners to implement them. We have taken note of the actions requested from the Overview and Scrutiny Committee. We have made a referral to the Council’s Project Coordination and Corporate Property directorate, and have taken the steps to support a wide distribution. See appendix B.

3.3 The recommendations are directed at the local authorities, local health agencies, elected councillors, the council’s partners, the metropolitan police, community and voluntary groups. We hope that this health impact assessment will be the starting point for discussion among the Council departments, our partners and local councillors on the way forward for health improvement and the role of the Council. We are therefore distributing this report widely in order to involve as many partners and key players as possible.

3.4 We are conscious that we are not starting from scratch. The recommended actions build on existing good practice and suggest ways to improve the area further. In fact, the Brentford plan adopted by the Executive on 3 January make the following references to health:

“Overall objectives-no additional pressure on social, economic and environmental infrastructure in the area, embrace the concept of healthy and sustainable living, new development should have a positive impact on air quality, promote new 962 developments that provide for health facilities and make good use of existing assets.

Sustainable living policy- New developments will need to address the health and well being of occupants and users of the development

Brentford Town Centre and Canalside-Health uses within the town centre would be supported, promotion of walking and cycling.

Potential for health uses mentioned in the following proposal sites. Alfa Laval Wallis House Brentford Diamond (Area west of Chiswick roundabout) Albany Riverside (Waterman’s +) Somerfield Land South of the High Street”2

3.5 We are also mindful that the Borough Planning Office already undertakes comprehensive consultation exercises. In particular, we would like to commend the department’s ‘Statement of Community Involvement’. However as the findings of the research show there is still work to be done. This is why we advise local decision makers to welcome the comments and issues raised by the local communities and implement the recommendations. We also would like to take this opportunity to thank Lesley Underwood and Jon Medlin for contributing to the HIA.

4.0 EQUALITY IMPACT ANALYSIS 4.1 This scrutiny exercise sought to promote consultation and involvement in the decision making process of all sections of the community. The HIA identifies issues pertinent to local communities.

Background Papers: 1. Brentford Area Development – Health Impact Assessment – Final report 2. Brentford Community Council – Health Impact Assessment – Response on Final report. 3. Brentford Area Development – Health Impact Assessment. Comments from the Borough Planning Officer This report has been or is due to be considered by: Executive public, and the Sustainable Development Committee This report is relevant to the following wards/areas: All wards, but Brentford, Turnham Green, Chiswick Riverside, Syon and Osterley and Spring Grove in particular.

2 Brentford Area Development – Health Impact Assessment. Comments from the Borough Planning Officer 973 APPENDIX A

Brentford Area Development

Health Impact Assessment

FINAL REPORT 2

Maggie McNab Assistant Director of Public Health

Hounslow March 2006 Primary Care Trust

98 i Contents

Page

Executive Summary ii

1. Introduction 1

2. Background 1

3. Methodology 8

4. Outcome of Consultation Process 8

5. Discussion and key themes 22

6. Recommendations 25

7. Conclusion 29

8. Next Steps 29

9. Appendices 31

10. Bibliography and References 35

99 Executive Summary

Brentford is an area towards the east of the London Borough of Hounslow (LBH). It lies on the western edge of London, north of the river Thames and to the east of Heathrow airport. It is currently undergoing a large programme of development guided by the existing Urban Development Plan (UDP).

There have been a number of plans for Brentford over recent years. The London Borough of Hounslow is currently developing a Brentford Area Action Plan (BAAP) to co-ordinate the activities, incorporate strategic planning guidance as set out in the Mayor’s strategy and review the parts of the UDP that relate specifically to the Brentford Area. It is due to be adopted in October 2007.

There are several key policies relating to the development, they include the Brentford Regeneration Area (policy IMP 3.1) that lists broad objectives for the area as: x To maintain and support existing businesses whilst creating new jobs and investment; x Implement environmental improvements, with special attention to the town centre, the Thames and canal side and conservation areas; x To reduce crime and increase community safety; x To improve the housing stock including affordable housing; x To provide a range of community, cultural and leisure facilities; and x To provide a high quality built environment.

In February 2005 the London Borough of Hounslow Scrutiny Committee decided to commission a Health Impact Assessment (HIA) of the overall development plans for Brentford. This followed concerns expressed by some of the local residents.

The Public Health Directorate of Hounslow Primary Care Trust (HPCT) agreed to lead the assessment. The initial process began in May 2005 and involved numerous processes that are detailed in the main report. These include reading through a range of local plans and policies, requesting additional local information, reviewing research from similar urban developments, interviewing key organisations and individuals (see Appendix 2), presenting to a Scrutiny meeting, facilitating a stakeholder consultation event, collating responses, analysing the findings, drafting an interim report in October 2005 for circulation and discussion. The process was completed in January 2006 with this report and recommendations being presented to the Scrutiny committee.

The whole exercise has been time consuming and costly. The direct costs to the PCT are calculated at approximately £10,000. This does not include any additional time spent by employees of the PCT, Local Authority or community

100 organisations who kindly gave information to inform the consultation. It is an estimate of the costs of the Public Health team expertise.

The HIA report is well placed to provide a formal and supportive contribution to the forthcoming Brentford Area Action Plan. Indeed some of the processes have been duplicated and many of the recommendations are mirrored in the preferred options of the BAAP and could help to strengthen the emerging Area Plan. It has shown that it would be beneficial to strengthen partnerships to utilise available mechanisms for maximising health gain in any future development.

The key findings A social model of health (see Appendix 1) was used to determine the impact on the health of the community. It is recognised that health is influenced by a broad range of factors, such as educational attainment, housing, employment, family background and is not just reliant on health services. The key findings include:

1. Communication A lack of adequate communication and overall co-ordination of the area developments

2. Co-ordination A range of different people complained that they are often not aware of what others are doing or planning for the area.

3. Capital development focus There is a perceived focus on capital development and less attention to the needs of the community. There is insufficient reference to the development of healthier communities in the Brentford Regeneration Area policy.

4. Planning and Vision There is a perceived lack of vision and insufficient long-term planning for the area. Some suggest concerns about the legacy that future generations will inherit. The use of the term “we are fast becoming the ‘Manhattan’ of west London” is entering into the local vocabulary.

5. Poverty Ground rentals for community organisations are rising and resulting in a loss of local voluntary and community group support

6. Funding Funding opportunities for additional health service developments and facilities have been missed.

7. Social inclusion There is much interest from local residents in ensuring good inclusion and involvement with those who live in local estates and the new arrivals to the area.

101 8. Employment There is keen interest in retaining a good mix of residential and employment sites, providing local employment opportunities and maximising options for working closer to home, thus reducing the need to travel out of area to work.

9. Air quality and pollution There is a high level of concern about current levels of pollution and management of traffic congestion. There is much interest in working to ensure the best use of mechanisms to protect people from hazards and dangers.

10. Housing There is a predominance of one and two-bedroom accommodation. There is a high level of interest in developments including a greater mix of housing size in order to enable growing families to remain in the locality.

11. Social Environment Any improvements to the social environment are generally seen as real opportunities for the local community to contribute to and benefit from the improvements. There is a widely felt anxiety about providing a poor environment for the next generation.

12. Crime and Community Safety There is a potential for an increase in theft, anti-social behaviour due to alcohol and road traffic accidents in vulnerable groups.

13. Community services and health facilities There are mixed feelings about current local facilities and keen anticipation that the new developments will support the overall improvement and expansion of health and social services, a better range of shops, social venues and support agencies. There are an increasing number of families with young children being supported by community and voluntary sector agencies due to low levels of formal community health care support. There is likely to be pressure on existing transportation systems, including public transport.

14. Individuals and community groups The evolving community of Brentford will be broad and have diverse strengths and needs. It is important to the positive development of the area to ensure that people are enabled to contribute to the growth of a supportive and welcoming environment.

Recommendations include:

1. Communication

102 A need to ensure good a high level of communication with residents, community groups, service providers, other local government departments and interested parties. The responsibility, accountability and mechanisms for this are important considerations

2. Co-ordination Greater consultation and interagency engagement with respect to the area development and the longer-term community needs.

3. Capital development focus Introduction of mechanisms to ensure a shift towards community development, inclusion and local capacity building rather than maintaining the focus on capital development. This should include formal policy inclusion to promote healthier environments. It is currently missing from the Brentford Regeneration Area broad objectives.

4. Planning and Vision Improved mechanisms for engaging with a broader local community about the plans and vision for the area, including residents to the north of the M4.

5. Poverty Consideration of community needs and affordable rental space to be included as a dimension in the overall planning of the area

6. Funding The Local Authority and Hounslow Primary Care Trust to ensure a full engagement in regular formal discussions about planning application and participation in section 106 contributions.

7. Social inclusion A shift towards greater community development, inclusion and local capacity building. A Review of current mechanisms to reduce the potential for new developments to become isolated or self-contained communities.

8. Employment Encouragement of greater support for a good variety of local jobs for local people

9. Air quality and pollution Greater support for traffic management schemes, green transport plans and public transport, improved reporting arrangements for the public to report pollution and noise concerns and encouragement of local retailers to reduce local journeys to shop.

10. Housing Greater development of larger unit accommodation to encourage local movement of residents rather than transient families

103 Ensure enforcement of policies and systems and utilisation of modern technology to reduce negative effects of pollution and noise

11. Social Environment Encouragement of systems for contributing to a sustainable and greener community environment within all new developments

12. Crime and Community Safety Support for more community policing and road traffic management schemes to assist the more vulnerable members of the community

13. Community services and health facilities Increased level of communication with planners and developers in order to plan, fund and provide for future services, shops and services Pre-emptive investment in capacity and facilities for primary care, community and hospital support with greater application and use of appropriate funding, namely section 106. Review the level of support needed from the statutory sector by community organisations engaged in voluntary, informal activities with maternal and child-care. Review existing transport and parking services in line with anticipated growth in population and need

14. Individuals and community groups Ensure planning to include appropriate services for the needs of the broader community including: infants, children, young people, adults, older people, and families. Encourage good community networks and affordable facilities for meetings and social events Ensure adequate assistance for voluntary sector and community organisations to continue to provide networks, support and advocacy for individuals and groups.

Further Discussion The above recommendations should be further supported by an agreement between agencies to work in closer partnership to: x Nominate lead agencies or departments x Identify specific mechanisms for achievement, x Undertake robust review and evaluation processes with set timescales and x Ensure formal evaluation and monitoring procedures.

104 1. Introduction

In February, the Hounslow Health and Social Care Scrutiny Panel commissioned a health impact assessment (HIA) on the Brentford Area Development. This followed concerns about the anticipated increase in population expressed by residents of the Brentford area1, particularly those involved in the Brentford Community Council.

Maggie McNab, Assistant Director of Public Health (Health Improvement), Hounslow Primary Care Trust (PCT), with initial assistance from Kathryn Goldin, Public Health Manager, Hounslow PCT/London Borough of Hounslow, embarked on a formal exercise to assess the level of health impacts.

The first scoping stage of the Brentford Health Impact Assessment (BHIA) took place over the months of May to September. It involved interviews with numerous stakeholders, desk research, and data analysis. The process was assisted by the use of a Rapid Interactive Tool, adapted from the GLA and Institute of Public Health Ireland.

The next stage developed the work further, invited wider stakeholder engagement including staging a public consultation event (see an expanded list of the stakeholder contacts and other contributors in Appendix 2) and added an overview of evidence gained from other HIAs undertaken on areas of urban development.

The final stage now draws conclusions from the whole exercise and makes recommendations for future action.

2. Background

Brentford is currently undergoing a large programme of development guided by the existing Urban Development Plan (UDP).

There have been a number of plans for Brentford over recent years. The London Borough of Hounslow is currently developing a Brentford Area Action Plan (BAAP) to co-ordinate the activities, incorporate strategic planning guidance as set out in the Mayor’s strategy and review the parts of the UDP that relate specifically to the Brentford Area. It is due to be adopted in October 2007.

1 For the purposes of this HIA, the area termed “Brentford” is co-terminous with the area identified within the Brentford Area Action Plan. See http://www.hounslow.gov.uk/home/a- z_services/b/brentfordanewplan.htm

105 1 There are several key policies relating to the development and available on the Council’s website www.hounslow.gov.uk. They include the Brentford Regeneration Area (policy IMP 3.1) that lists broad objectives for the area as: x To maintain and support existing businesses whilst creating new jobs and investment; x Implement environmental improvements, with special attention to the town centre, the Thames and canal side and conservation areas; x To reduce crime and increase community safety; x To improve the housing stock including affordable housing; x To provide a range of community, cultural and leisure facilities; and x To provide a high quality built environment.

2.1. Overview of Population Gain

Within the area defined for the Brentford Area development, see Brentford Plan review document at www.hounslow.gov.uk where this is shown as a map on page 6, the number of residential units completed is estimated to be over 1000 (Approx. 1,168 units) since 2001. This includes 743 units within the Town Centre (British Waterways site and Ferry Lane site) and 232 within the Eastern gateway (Former British Gas site).

Furthermore, there are approximately 605 units in the pipeline in the BAAP area. This includes permissions for housing on the former Pilot Works site (Paragon) with a total of 221 key worker homes and 135 cluster flats incorporating 849 rooms for student accommodation, and the Thames Water site in the eastern gateway for 353 units. In addition to the figure of 605, there is potential for an additional 370 units in the town centre (Land South of the High Street) and 755 units in Wallis House (Great West Road) that have been approved and are both subject to legal agreement.

Application for development of 238 units on the Kew Bridge site has yet to be determined as the initial planning has been refused and is being appealed.

This is a rough estimate of 4,000 units (including the single rooms for students)

2.2. What is a Health Impact Assessment?

The purpose of any health impact assessment (HIA) is: x To assess the potential health impacts - positive and negative - of policies, programmes and projects on a defined population x To improve the quality of public policy decision-making, through evidence-based recommendations, to enhance predicted positive health impacts and minimise negative ones2.

2 Barnes, Ruth. 10 Minute Guide to Health Impact Assessment. ONLINE: http://www.ihia.org.uk/hiaguide.html

106 HIA is a practical process, procedure, method or tool that: x Identifies, using best evidence available, current or potential impacts on health, both short and long term x Uses a social model of health that recognises the contribution that employment, housing and other factors are important for health (see Appendix 1) x Facilitates public participation in decision making; x Facilitates cross-organisational working; x Increases the skills of those participating in the process; x Raises awareness and understanding of public health and places it on the agenda of other agencies and decision makers; x Provides a systematic and transparent appraisal process for formulating recommendations to inform decision makers

Specifically for the BHIA, the assessors sought to: x Determine the level of impacts that the physical developments within the area would have on the health and well-being of the population x Identify key recommendations for mitigating the negative impacts and realising any positive impacts

2.3. The Scope of the Brentford HIA

Due to limited time availability, it was agreed that an intermediate level HIA would provide a sufficient level of understanding of the impacts of the new developments upon the health of the Brentford community. At this level the HIA is not a comprehensive assessment of the health impacts, rather provides an indication of potential health gains and losses for the area. At this level, assessors: x Undertake a review of the available evidence and any similar HIAs opinions x Explore experiences and expectations of those concerned with, or affected by, the proposal x Produce and analyse some new information.

The preferred starting point for a health impact assessment is a proposal that has yet to be implemented. This way, any recommendations can be made at the planning stage to maximise health gain and prevent the implementation of more harmful elements. This has not been possible to do in this context. An area’s development is a continual process with various stages of development, stasis, and decline. Brentford has experienced a significant period of growth, particularly since 2001, and this report tries to look both retrospectively at this, as well as looking forward at the planned development.

This HIA uses an adaptation of the GLA HIA Screening Tool and the Public Health Ireland’s rapid Interactive Tool to structure the report and recommendations.

107 The Brentford area has been the subject of a number of studies over the past few years, including Brentford Regeneration Framework http://www.hounslow.gov.uk/brentford_regeneration_framework the Brentford Area Action Plan http://www.hounslow.gov.uk/baap-background- paper.pdf with current review shortly to be published and Brentford-A New Plan http://www.hounslow.gov.uk/brentfordanewplan . Collectively, these reports provide a comprehensive overview of the demographics, history and planned developments in the area. It was not felt that the Brentford HIA needed to re-state this background, but rather should provide a concise assessment of the potential impacts upon the area of the development.

2.4. HIAs on urban developments

Undertaking a HIA on an urban development is not a new process. There have now been a significant number of HIAs undertaken on urban town centre or housing re-developments. These range form Rapid Reviews through to comprehensive exercises involving major reviews of evidence and stakeholder involvement such as Kings Cross. It is important to learn from the findings of these and to establish if there is any transferability of estimation of impact.

The Transport and Health Study Groupi undertook a rapid review of academic evidence linking physical, social and economic change to health change. These findings are relevant to a housing development programme where there is going to be construction, traffic management, established communities mixing with new residents, and changing demographics. The diagram below shows how, in the short term, most impacts are likely to have a negative impact on health, whilst in the longer term the impact is likely to be positive for health. Health determinant Construction Completion - Short term – long term

Air pollution Ç È Road traffic injuries Ç È Physical activity È Ç Community severance Ç È Noise Ç È Access/mobility È Ç Inequalities Ç È Adapted from Transport and Health Study Group

Ç = increasing the health determinant, È = decreasing the health determinant

This demonstrates that there are likely to be long-term positive benefits for health with a major housing development. However, in the short term some impacts are more likely to be negative.

108 This means that planning applications should be considered on the basis of how they can minimise the negative impacts such as strict adherence to health and safety, promoting complaints help-lines, managing any decanting in phases with particular attention to the elderly and with regards to supporting those who are likely to be anxious about the programme.

2.5. Implications of Urban Development

Research evidence shows that the impact of an urban development can be both negative and positive. Paragraphs 2.6.1 – 2.6.5 provide a brief summary of areas of potential impact resulting from urban developments

2.5.1 Housing conditions

Housing can have a significant impact on health. People in social rented housing are more likely to die before they are 65 than those living in owner occupied housing. Also people living in rented housing are more likely to report poor health status than owner-occupiers. The reasons for this are complex. However, poor construction methods, the use of inferior materials and poor standards of renovation and repair create the conditions that lead to poor health.

Adults living in damp and mouldy dwellings are more likely to report more symptoms overall, including nausea and vomiting, blocked nose, breathlessness, backache, fainting, and bad nerves. Children living in damp and mouldy dwellings have a greater prevalence of respiratory symptoms and headaches and fever (Platt, Williamson). Several reviews have sought to establish whether housing refurbishment has a positive impact on health. Results can be tentative or impressionistic because of the difficulties of isolating and tracking behaviours accurately. Nonetheless a number of studies have successfully linked improvements in housing condition and the consumption of health services such as GP appointments, prescriptions, and indirect benefits such as self-care, decision making, preventative care and increased feelings of safety and reduced levels of criminal activity (Carr-Hill, Ambrose and Thompson, Blackman).

However, improvements to housing conditions may increase resistance to illness but may be insufficient to produce gain especially in areas of multiple disadvantage (Hopton and Hunt).

2.5.2 Social and economic impacts

The regeneration process can lead to higher costs in terms of rent, Council tax, utility bills, and insurance which can impact negatively on people’s income and their ability to live healthily which may undermine the substantial health gains and higher resident satisfaction levels arising from the regeneration process. Significant negative impacts arising from an increase in non-

109 substitutable household costs and / or an increase in benefit dependency that neither redresses poverty nor enables residents to take up work. This raises real concern about the long-term sustainability of health gain arising from improvements in the built environment (Ambrose and McDonald).

Self-reported health status is linked to housing tenure and socioeconomic status disadvantage in neighbourhoods creates a distinct ‘social milieu’ which is often characterised by social isolation. This can have a knock on effect in terms of a community’s ability to sustain basic community institutions and hence to provide informal methods of control (Wilson). Whilst mixed tenure in an area does not by itself bring people together the presence of home-owners in an area does help to reduce any stigma associated with living there (Atkinson). Pepper-potting of different tenures may make marketing more difficult but is more conducive to social interaction (Atkinson and Kintrea). Home owners can also make a contribution to transforming derived communities but change may be slow (Ellaway).

Cameron et al cite evidence, such as that from Huxley and Evans, that ‘urban initiatives intended to enhance quality of life or mental health need to promote security, increase leisure opportunities, foster ‘social capital’, and improve the image of the locality. Attention given to building up social capital has been presented as a possible springboard for positive action to reduce health inequalities.’

2.5.3 Environment and community safety

Open spaces are important to all age groups as a place for social interaction and pursuing leisure activity. There is a strong correlation between the availability of usable green space and social cohesion (Kweon). The use of green outdoor common spaces is a good measure of the strength of neighbourhood social ties and sense of community. Green open space is important in terms of the ability to take exercise and use walkable green space has been shown to lengthen life for older people (Takano, Nakamura and Watnabe).

The inaccessibility or perceived lack of safety of external play spaces leads to young children being stuck at home with more intra-family conflict and greater social isolation from friends (Halpern; Gifford). The provision of safe play areas can lead to improvements in children’s behaviour and improve attentiveness and concentration. The provision of specific safe play areas can increase the use of public space by the carers of young children Kawachi found strongest correlates of violent crime (robbery, homicide and assault) were interpersonal trust and the proportion of female-headed households. Violent crimes were consistently associated with relative deprivation (income inequality) and low social capital.

Burglary was associated with deprivation and low social capital. Areas with high crime rates tended to exhibit higher mortality rates from all causes

110 suggesting that crime and population health share the same social origins. “Crime is a mirror of the quality of the social environment”.

Designing out fear of crime is based on the notion that physical design can reduce fear through altering the social world. Studies examining changes to aspects of environmental design eg strengthening housing defences and altering street lighting have failed to come up with consistent findings. A qualitative study examining women’s fear of violent attack in Edinburgh and Helsinki (389 questionnaires in Edinburgh and 666 households in Helsinki from the Safety of Finns Survey) investigated whether it was possible to design out crime and in particular women’s’ fear of violence.3

2.5.4. Access to services

Public transport Housing tenure and access to a car are related to self-esteem and social organisation. This is partly related to the ability to avoid the inconvenience of public transport (McIntyre and Kearns). Although this was more true of men than of women – where car access was not a significant predictor of health. Also women were more likely to see access to public transport to be beneficial because it was cheaper and involved fewer personal responsibilities. Nonetheless, poorer people are likely to be exposed to threatening situations because of their greater reliance on public transport (Pantazis).

People with disabilities Improvement in accessibility can improve people’s mobility and promote their independence (Baba). Housing form, density, accessibility, entrance type and position, and control over the buffer zone between private and public domains can lead to improvements in mental health and depression - using the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (Welch). Typical problems are steps/ stairs, lack of a downstairs toilet, difficulties in using the bathroom and kitchen, and doorways that are too narrow (Oldman and Beresford). Whilst some of these problems have been dealt with by the extension of Part M of the Building Regulations to domestic property it is important that these are fully implemented in new build and that the same principles are applied to Refurbished buildings (Joseph Rowntree Foundation).

3 Koskela H and R., P. Revisiting fear and place: women's fear of attack and the built environment. Geoforum, 31 pp.269-280, 2000

111 3. Methodology

Interviews were carried out with a number of key stakeholders representing the community, voluntary sector, planning, primary care, public health, community safety, Brentford Football Club, environmental health, environmental policy, housing, education, childcare and early years, and primary care (see Appendix 2).

Two public consultation and communication events were held to ensure that the wider public had opportunities to engage in the process. Participation and consultation with community and voluntary groups was also achieved.

A number of subsidiary reports were commissioned to encapsulate the changes in demographics. Working with planning, a number of models were run to determine the level of planning contributions needed to compensate the health services for the increased population.

To supplement this a rapid review of published HIAs on large-scale urban developments, and of evidence on risks of health impact on interventions, such as Housing, was undertaken. This serves to provide an objectivity and validity to the findings from the stakeholder interviews.

The initial findings were collated into a report that was circulated to prompt and invite further comment. Additional material was then added to the first draft report. Finally conclusions were draw for analysis and key recommendations were made.

4. Outcome of the Consultation Process

Key issues raised in the consultation process mirror many that are found in national studies (see 2.2). They include social and economic factors, environmental issues, community facilities and health services, and some further points raised by individuals and community representatives.

4.1. Social and economic factors An additional middle class population may impact on the poorer members of the existing community, as it will highlight the comparative gap between groups.

4.1.1. Poverty Key issues raised: The development is likely to bring in more resources and funding and to create local jobs. As the whole area is improved there will be more money coming into the system, council taxes etc and more services being used and needed for the local population. This can provide opportunities for further regeneration of the area and improvements in facilities, e.g. additional youth facilities.

112 However, a rise in status in the area is likely to result in higher overall rentals and may affect ground rental. This was found in relation to refugees and asylum seekers, where relevant support organisations have recently moved out of the area to seek cheaper premises because of a rise in the cost of their rented accommodation. As the area is improved the effect on the eligibility to claim funding due to deprivation is likely to be reduced.

4.1.2. Funding Key issues raised: The developments provide a good opportunity to gain and utilise additional external funding sources to improve local services.

To date, there is no recorded cash contribution to the PCT for developments in the area. Using the model for calculating Section 106 contributions developed by the Healthy Urban Development Unit (HUDU), the population growth in Brentford will have significant impacts on the health services. For example, the overall population increase could potentially require: x 1.7 elective hospital beds x 7.8 non-elective hospital beds x 2.4 mental health beds x 2 additional GPs Using the HUDU formula demonstrates that Brentford has missed out on approximately £800,000 for developments that have already been built. An approximate amount of £1,000,000 would be needed for any development with an additional 2,000 residents.

As the area is improved the effect on the eligibility to claim funding due to deprivation is likely to be reduced.

4.1.3. Social Inclusion Key issues raised: The building and maintaining of sustainable communities was a continuous theme that was raised as an important issue. There is some optimism that the new development will support better inclusion as a new cohort of articulate residents works to integrate and establish itself into the community.

There is concern that the newer communities will further exclude existing, working-class communities. Residents want to encourage better inclusion and involvement with those who live in local estates and the new arrivals to the area. There are also fears that some of the new developments might develop as inclusive communities and not become very integrated with the existing communities of Brentford. An example was cited of leisure facilities in a new development being accessible only to new residents, and not available to the other residents in the nearby community.

It is thought that some of the new developments will attract largely working couples and older people. A reduction in available daytime social support for the older members of the new community developments by their neighbours

113 might be a possible area of concern when the working couples temporarily leave the home vicinity for the workplace.

Local churches are viewed as important centres of inclusion. They have well- developed roles in co-ordinating (Soul in Brentford) and offering community support. This includes a popular Open House Community Café and a number of support groups at St Paul’s Church and the Brentford Free Church. This provides a base for the Brentford Community Network (a forum for those who invest into the communities of Brentford) and voluntary Young Mums’ and Toddler groups (see section on Faith Groups above). However, there are real concerns about sustaining adequate funding for this informal function. Additional formal advice and family support will be a likely requirement from community nursing/health visiting teams that are already poorly resourced. There are also concerns about the capacity within the statutory sector to offer this professional support when needed.

A varied network of improved local shops is also favoured, to enable local people to gain a better sense of the value of the local community (and reduce the need to make journeys out of the area).

4.1.4. Employment Key issues raised: Residents are keen to retain a good mix of residential and employment sites. This includes keeping most local employment sites, especially those in close proximity to main roads, rather than reducing the current mix. This should mean that residents are enabled to work closer to home, where possible, reducing the absolute need to commute out to work and providing some level of local employment.

There is a high level of interest in encouraging a good level of local jobs for local people. There are concerns that the local employment opportunities may be rather limited and not varied enough to encourage the newer communities to work locally, so adding to the need to travel out of area to work.

4.2. Environmental Issues

4.2.1. Air quality and pollution Key issues raised: Any increase in population is likely to increase local traffic. Brentford is an Air Quality Management Area with section 106 serving as a mechanism for ensuring better services, e.g. Further improvements to public transport.

There are big concerns from residents and other stakeholders about any further increase in local traffic. Areas for more discussion, management and action include: x Volume of traffic x Traffic congestion x Air pollution

114 Concern is greatest about the High Street and the Great West Road, where there is already known congestion and high pollution caused by frequent traffic lights with a lot of traffic idling and then accelerating.

There are concerns about the pollution from the M4 elevated section that passes right across the whole of the development area. There is also some apprehension about possible future plans for introduction of a motorway toll system that may result in additional traffic use of the Great West Road.

There is anxiety about the relocation of a Thames Valley University campus where parts of the new building appear to be hanging over the motorway.

4.2.2. Housing Key issues raised: It is essential to ensure that any residential dwelling that is planned in close proximity to major transport routes is protected from both pollution and noise. We have a good opportunity to benefit from current awareness and modern technology. We can reduce negative effects by insisting on enforcement of policies and systems. This means ensuring that robust systems are put into place to protect the living space of any residents. For example, there is a need to ensure excellent ventilation, good sound proofing and best placement of living areas. This should include siting sitting, relaxing and sleeping areas so that they are located away from the source of the hazard and ensuring that the more functional areas such as kitchens and toilet areas face the main transport routes.

There are concerns about a need for better consideration of the effects of planning permission, and the use of regulations to support reduction in nuisance for residents living above mixed-use properties. In such buildings people might be living over shops, cafes, restaurants etc and be subjected to undue noise late into the evening. Issuing of licences for premises to serve alcohol is an area for debate where people living above restaurants and cafes can be adversely affected by excessive noise at unsociable hours.

High rise developments are thought to be out of character for the area and have documented health and social impacts. There is a high level of concern that new developments are far too high and a call for a 2-3 storey limit on the Brentford High Street and protection of river and waterside space. There are concerns about any waterside building developments. At the moment, with some recent exceptions, there is a relatively wide skyline to the north of the river facing south over Kew Gardens. High priority is given to retaining excellent local public access and thoroughfare and to any waterside developments being kept relatively low-rise and well back from the water edge so that the skyline, light, use and access is maximised.

The predominance of 1-2 bedroom accommodation and lack of larger residential dwellings is a general concern with residents requesting a greater number of larger sized properties to encourage growing families and families needing carers to remain in the locality.

115 The building of residential high rise accommodation and the short-term use and need for cranes for lifting is blamed for recent disturbance and interference with mobile telephones.

4.2.3. Social Environment and Open spaces Key issues raised: There is keen interest in improving access to green and open spaces with calls for preserving all existing green space and enthusiasm for ensuring they are built into future developments. The development of a village atmosphere in the town centre and the development to the south of the High Street are favoured. The view is that this would encourage people to get out into the community, socialise with one another and become more fit and healthy.

Many residents regard any improvements to the social environment as real opportunities for the local community to contribute to and benefit from the improvements. However, as many in the population feel poorly communicated with and that the future building development is still uncertain, the fear of the unknown remains a concern. There is enthusiasm for good planning and a widely felt anxiety about providing a poor environment for the next generation. . There is apprehension about new waterside and town developments and the possibility of attracting numbers of customers from outside the area for socialising, including aspects of antisocial behaviour and evening noise. There are also concerns about developments in close proximity to main roads and waterways with anxiety about safety, loss of light and leisure spaces.

The Great West Road already has a divisive impact on the local community as it breaks up the north and the south of Brentford. Residents to the north who are not included in the geographical area of the BAAP are keen to have a voice about the area developments. Many such residents feel they are being largely excluded from the current plans and consultations even though they are being hugely affected by the day-to-day growth of buildings, increasing traffic hazards, pollution and road safety etc. They are calling for better local facilities to encourage a reduction in their need to travel away from the home environment to shop and want to be included in the development of the area.

The football club provides a good social network and offers additional community facilities. However, it may attract rather a small cross-section of the community so there is also a call for a broader range of facilities to suit wider community needs.

4.2.4. Water Quality Key issues raised: There are no known issues about water provision for household consumption.

Reassurance has been given about concerns raised in relation to the adequacy of the existing systems for sewage and waste disposal and the

116 adequacy of flood management for dwellings being erected in close proximity to the river. However, residents report a strong smell of sewage in close proximity to the new flats at Brentford Canal.

4.2.5. Recycling and Waste Disposal Key issues raised: There is a keen interest in developing modern systems for waste disposal and maximising on recycling opportunities. This includes support for a local shop or depot for exchange or resale of larger household items.

4.2.6. Crime and Community Safety Key issues raised: The developments provide some advantages. There are opportunities to ensure additional elements of safety in the design of buildings and facilities.

However, the face of crime is likely to change in the area. With a more affluent population moving in, it is likely that the area will experience more theft of higher value goods that are left unattended during long working hours.

The issuing of licences for premises to serve alcohol is considered an area for due consideration. Any increase in licensed venues for socialising locally might increase the vulnerability to mugging when drunk (see also social environment).

Ensuring adequate street lighting is considered important to ensuring improvements in personal safety.

Any rise in the traffic adds to the safety hazards for vulnerable groups, such as older people and children.

4.2.7. Planning and Vision Key issues raised: There is a perceived low level of vision for the whole area and high anxiety about the speed of all the developments. A number of local residents engaged in detailed debate and provided informed opinions and additional information about this.

Some residents regard Brentford as a ‘Forgotten City’. There are pleas ‘not to make it even more ugly than it is at the moment’. The use of the phrase “we are becoming the ‘Manhattan’ of west London” is entering the local vocabulary.

There are particular concerns about areas where land has been purchased and planning outlines have been granted but delays in developing the sites are being experienced. The land south of the High Street was cited as a key example of this with much speculation about the final outcome of the area, with a possible development of a large cinema complex being much feared.

There is a perceived lack of communication about the rapid progress of the development of the area and some residents complaining about a lack of

117 information and consultation about new developments even when they are living in close proximity. The spate of high-rise buildings and huge rise in growth of advertisement hoardings along the edge of the M4 is not favoured.

There are concerns about how and whether planning regulations are being adequately supported and whether builders and developers are keeping strictly within these. Residents voiced concerns about a recent development in close proximity to the High Street that seemed as if it had extended further to the edge of the road than was illustrated on the outline plans.

There is a lack of population projection data with recent reports on housing acknowledging a lack of inclusion of the developments.

There is insufficient long-term planning with most additional properties to date being one and two bedroom units with very little family accommodation. It is feared that this might heighten the transient nature of the community, lead to overcrowding if people are unable to afford to move on, or support it to become a haven for the elderly.

There is a call for waterside developments to be kept relatively low-rise and well back from the water edge so that the skyline, light, use and access is maximised.

4.3. Health Services and Community Facilities Any significant increase in a local population will have an effect on a broad range of local services.

4.3.1. Health services Key issues raised: A ‘Mismatch of Priorities’ was a consistent theme throughout the discussions with planners and service providers. It was thought that the PCT and the council had prioritised the West and Central areas of the borough for service and estate investment. The Local Strategic Plan (LSP) has indicated the west area will be the focus of the forthcoming Local Area Agreement. Health and social outcomes are poorest in this area and members of the LSP have signed up to target investment here. However, large numbers of new residents in Brentford are providing extra pressure that is not being taken into account in service planning. With lags between population influx and increases to baseline budgets, there will be little money to provide a pre- emptive investment in the Brentford area in anticipation of a population increase.

The direct primary health care needs of the community include GPs, dentists, pharmacists, opticians and community nursing teams. The area currently has one purpose built Health Centre housing 4 GP practices (12 GPs) and a number of community health teams including health visiting (presently under under-resourced), school nursing (also currently under-resourced), district nursing, family planning, chiropody.

118 Health visiting and school nursing services are not able to offer a good level of support for young families in the area now. This situation will worsen as the population of young families widens.

The intended rise in the student population is likely to add to the need for local family planning and Genito-urinary services. Family planning is thought to have some capacity in the current system whilst the WMUHT is known to be struggling to provide appointments as needed at the moment. The rise in local hotel accommodation may also provide opportunities for increased sexual activity.

Other health providers include pharmacists (currently four) with a recently extended role to provide specific additional services for the NHS such as Nicotine Replacement Therapy and Stop Smoking advice and Emergency Contraception, two NHS dental practices and two opticians.

4.3.2. Social Services Key issues raised: The mental health (support to adapt to course work and academic stress, isolation, coping, new relationships etc) and disability needs of the increasing student population are raised as particular issues for consideration with regard to the capacity of local services.

It is thought likely that the local resident student population will register with a local GP and will seek support other from local services in Hounslow when the Faculty of Health and Human Sciences moves to the new Brentford location.

4.3.3. Transport Key issues raised: With regard to public transport, the area is served largely by a main line railway and London transport bus routes. Residents and employees working in the north of the area may also make use the London tube network where there is a frequent Piccadilly line service from Heathrow to London from Boston Manor or Northfields stations. There is limited additional transport potential links via water, namely the river Thames and the Grand Union canal.

There is concern that the current services will lack the capacity to cope with any large increase in demand that is likely with a big population increase

There is interest in plans for increasing local cycling routes. It is hoped that these could include incorporating special aspects for greater safer including a local pilot plan to give priority to cycling routes and cyclists. Currently, it is commonplace for cycle tracks to cross over main intersecting roads with no protection from other road users and inadequate warning signage.

There is interest in developing walking incentive schemes. Both these initiatives would encourage local people to become more active and maintain better levels of fitness.

119 4.3.4. Education Key issues raised: Secondary school places are thought to be adequate because of capacity within current provision. Primary school provision may need additional support and facility with the intended increase in the local population. Nursery provision is thought to be sufficient at present, with a wide range in quality. However, an influx of people with young families will increase the need for additional spaces. There have been a number of Section106 contributions from developers towards education to mitigate some of these effects.

4.3.5. Shopping and other service facilities Key issues raised: There is a need for a much larger range of shops and service facilities and greater support for small businesses. Access to fresh food, including fruit and vegetables is rather limited for the current population, with few local suppliers or greengrocers and two super- markets, one near the town centre and a second near Gillette corner, accessible by car. There is a small local weekly Farmers Market and a daily organic vegetable stall in Osterley Park, accessible by car.

4.3.6. Community Facilities (meeting spaces, community halls, etc) Key issues raised: Community facilities are generally considered to be rather poor. However, there seems to be a good range of available church space for meetings.

There is excellent community support being offered within centrally located church spaces including St Paul’s with a popular Open House Community Café and a number of support groups and the Brentford Free church providing a base for the Brentford Community Neighbourhood group and informal Young Mums’ and Toddler groups. There is a popular local Library and several Internet cafés

4.3.7. Leisure opportunities Key issues raised: There is a perceived lack of adequate leisure facilities. However, there are a number of established community programmes in a variety of local community venues and several local parks and leisure facilities. These include the Watermans community facility with a good track record of successful community engagement, drawing people into the centre for a wide range of activities and extensive programmes for a wide variety of local groups. There is also a vibrant local Football club with good community relationships and contributions. There is good access to local river and canal walkways. There are plans to extend the cycle routes. The area is a short distance from the Fountain Leisure Centre, Syon, Gunnersbury and Osterley parks. (See further detail in Appendix 4 in Community Facilities and Health Services - Leisure and the Lifestyle section on Physical Activity).

120 There are plans to include a leisure centre in the development for the south of the High Street

4.4. Population Groupings Key issues raised: A range of individuals and community groups can be affected differently by urban developments. This next section highlights key issues raised during the consultation.

4.4.1. Infants and Children Key issues raised: An increase in one and two-bedroom properties might have a significant impact on local maternity and child health services.

Brentford is currently thought to have sufficient childcare places, with a wide range in quality. However, with a likely influx of people with young families, more spaces will be necessary. Consideration of the impact of the adjacent Chiswick Park employment was thought to be particularly important as there will be an influx of about 17,000 employees which, although not immediately within the Brentford area, is likely to have a sizeable impact upon existing childcare places. This site will only have facilities for an addition of 70 children.

There are concerns about the adequacy of formal support for any growth in this population, especially as it is known that the existing services and resources are stretched and struggling to manage the current demand. General postnatal support for mothers and parents with young families is a key issue. They are largely supported by local voluntary community organisations with minimal support from trained professionals. See also following section on additional service support for young families from Faith Communities.

There is a poor level of shopping facility for this age group; people have to shop out of the area except for basic commodities that are available in a supermarket.

4.4.2. Young People Key issues raised: The area benefits from Safe, a Young Peoples health and regeneration project that has engaged with local groups and has a web-site for communicating and sharing information, including a popular electronic ‘soap story’. Earlier this year children from a local primary school indicated that they wanted more leisure facilities, better transport, greater consideration about safety and fewer run down buildings and noisy building works. This was endorsed by during this exercise, as more interviewees agreed that facilities and community venues were much needed for the area.

121 The local area secondary school is Brentford School for Girls. It caters for a range of pupils from a wide geographical area outside Brentford and does not benefit from a good level of parental involvement or interest in the local area. It is thought that a development consisting of smaller accommodation units is unlikely to attract families with teenage children or to impact significantly on the demand for additional secondary school places. Brentford Football Club offers a range of programmes for young people. It is involved with a 3-year positive Futures multi-sport social inclusion programme in partnership with CIP including the development of a pilot Football programme for 10-16year olds.

4.4.3. Students Key issues raised: The current student population is not significant. However, there are plans to move the TVU Faculty of Health and Human Sciences, from the Wolfson Institute in central Ealing to a purpose built education block at a new location opposite GSK known as the Paragon site on Boston Manor Road. This means that the student population is likely to grow significantly and a range of services will be needed. The number of students attending the Faculty for study each week is approximately 4000 supported by approximately 100 staff. The student profile is mixed with some young people joining after school and an increasing intake from mature students with families. This is likely to put an additional burden on primary health and social care services, especially GPs and have a possible impact on child care (see discussion on Children above). It is thought that there is some capacity in the existing Brentford Family Planning service. Existing GUM services are fully stretched at present. The current student Occupational Health support is managed from the St Mary’s Road site in Ealing. A large key-worker and student accommodation centre is planned on the site with 849 units. The key worker accommodation is already being advertised.

Additional concerns include a need for transport improvements, especially as the Faculty has a partner site in Slough. There is also concern about the lack of parking spaces and the effect on parking for local residents. The current reported total allocation is 50, although the campus is a relatively easy walk from the tube and main line stations. There will be a need for additional shops with possible plans for a supermarket chain ‘local’ shop on the site being reported. There is a current lack of adequate exercise facilities (with the exception of walking to gain access to public transport). The planned time-frame for the opening of the new Faculty is 2007

4.4.4. Older People Key issues raised: It is thought that the older population in Brentford is likely to grow as people move to the new, smaller unit accommodation prior to or on retirement. Additional health and social support services will be needed for any additional population. Any significant increase in local traffic will affect the safety of this vulnerable group.

122 Local residents cited recent examples of good practice where pipe laying had been necessary and a good period of warning had been provided about the impact of the required roadwork for the local community. This practice should be further encouraged.

4.4.5. Families Key issues raised: The vast majority of the housing will be one and two bedroom houses. This indicates a possibility of greater numbers of working couples, couples starting families, people buying to rent and elderly people (subject to convenient access) and limited scope for expanding families within Brentford, unless future developments include some larger accommodation units. There is a high level of concern about the need for greater numbers of larger sized units to try to maintain a batter balance in this growing population and reduce the transient nature that will become usual if people are unable to find larger units available locally for expanding families Community nursing and health visiting support for young families is currently severely under-resourced. The increase in population is already being felt by the nursing teams and the local voluntary support organisations are apprehensive about further increases in demand (see Faith groups below)

4.4.6. Black and Minority Ethnic (BME) Communities Key issues raised: Brentford has an under representation of people from BME groups, however there are vibrant musical activities and other programmes being supported in local churches and Waterman’s. The Crime and Safety Unit report an increase in local race crime.

Brentford has an under representation of people from Asian communities. However, the church Mother and Baby group has recently noticed an increase attendance by South Asian women who have moved into the newer 1-2 bedroom developments rather than move into larger established family homes with the traditional support networks. There is an impression that some Asian residents also travel towards the Central Hounslow wards to gain additional available help and support through traditional facilities and networks. In relation to social activities the Watermans Art Centre is currently providing some facilities and a venue for Asian cultural events.

There are no known concerns in respect of local Irish communities and the numbers of local residents are not thought to be large.

4.4.7. Refugees and Asylum Seekers Key issues raised: There were a few Refugees and Asylum Seekers community groups housed in Brentford Market Place and Alexander House due to an availability of accommodation. However, some organisations have recently moved out of the area because of rents becoming unaffordable e.g. Refugees Welfare and Development has moved to Multi-cultural centre, Hounslow, and the Refugees Employment & Training Initiative to Hounslow also.

123 The mental health support needs of this client group were raised as a particular concern.

4.4.8. People with Disabilities Key issues raised: Good access to accommodation and services are important considerations. It is not known if these needs have been included or well considered in the planning of housing in this area. There are some concerns about those needing to use wheelchairs, and similar, and the adequacy of pavement space where developments are in close proximity to the street.

4.4.9. Mental Health Service Users The needs of Mental health service users are not thought to be of particular concern. There is thought to be a good level of local counselling provision. It was noted that formal day services for were mostly located in the centre and east of the borough.

4.4.10. People with Learning Difficulties (PWLD) There is group residential accommodation, people being supported to live independently and advocacy support currently available in Brentford. The Wallis House development, on the Great West Road, may provide additional opportunities as a resource centre is included in the plans. Any significant changes in the local environment have a strong effect on the independence, perceived safety and confidence of this group where it is recognised that some individuals find it especially difficult to manage change and unknown situations. At present Brentford is seen as small and relatively quiet and safe. Residents typically need personalised and friendly services and established routines.

4.4.11. Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual Communities Key issues raised: There are no known reported issues in respect of these groups. Hounslow has a well-established specialist team for gay and bisexual men.

4.4.12. River and Canal Dwellers Comments received have been mixed. Some river residents are quite positive and welcomed any overall improvement in the general locality and upgrade in facilities. However, there are reports of numbers of people being displaced and not given adequate alternative moorings or accommodation. This is regarded as rather a mobile community but concerns are expressed about a real loss of residential moorings and unsatisfactory alternative provision being offered to local residents.

4.4.13. Rough Sleepers There is a low level of concern about this group in relation to the development of the area. There are reports of occasional use of empty properties by individuals seeking shelter and warmth in winter and a level of concern about safety to others, especially children, when properties e.g. basement boiler rooms are unsealed

124 and can subsequently be more readily accessed. There is also a belief that empty buildings are afforded some benefit if they have ‘tenants’ as they are less likely to be vandalised. At a general level, it was perceived that local generic services in Hounslow might not be readily available to vulnerably housed people because of the difficulty in accessing services without a permanent address. News of a forthcoming Council count of rough sleepers might add useful data to this section.

4.4.14. Voluntary and Community Sector Any significant change in a population or area may have an impact on the capacity of existing community networks and support. There is an established Age Concern agency that provides support for older people and TASHA, an advice agency supporting the mental health needs and drug misusers. There are examples of activity by the churches to support young parents and older people (see Faith groups below). There is information from voluntary agencies finding increasing difficulty in securing local affordable rental accommodation that suggests that this sector needs to be supported to retain a local foothold in the community (see section on Refugees and Asylum Seekers above).

4.4.15. Faith Groups There is good active support for a range of different groups in the community via local churches. Examples cited included: x Supplementary support for young parents because the formal community health services are already under-capacity and x Luncheon clubs for the older population. x Young people’s clubs and activities x Rental space, including church space, for faith groups from other denominations There were concerns raised about the churches longer-term capacity for any further increase in their work, especially in respect of the work with young families, e.g. a weekly Young Mums group and Toddlers group. There are special concerns about developing and maintaining appropriate knowledge and skills for this work, ensuring adequate safety and security within the support work teams, including registering individual supporters/helpers and funding for CRB clearance, and also about encouraging minority community groups. (See section 4.1.1. above on Infants and Children)

125 5. Discussion and key themes

There is a high level of optimism and enthusiasm for the overall development of the area with a wide level of interest in the future investment in the area. In an area where there are significant housing developments, there will be a significant gain in population. This will affect the existing community, the social and physical environment, services and infrastructure. However, there is also a high level of anxiety about the speed of the developments and the level of local involvement in the decision-making processes. The following paragraphs outline some key themes from the assessment process.

5.1. Communication Despite numerous consultations and information being made available via the London Borough of Hounslow web site and other media there was a high level of expressed concern about a lack of communication.

An area of particular anxiety was a continued perceived lack of local involvement in discussing and assessing service needs, including shops and health and social facilities.

5.2. Co-ordination A range of different people complained that they are often not aware of what others are doing or planning for the area. There is a need for improvements in overall co-ordination for the area.

5.3. Capital development focus To date there has been a focus on capital development and less attention paid to the needs of the community. There are real fears about a loss of community, especially due to the speed of all the developments. The residents feel insufficiently engaged in the process.

5.4 Planning and Vision There is a perceived lack of vision and insufficient long-term planning for the area. There is fear about the legacy that future generations will inherit. Residents regard Brentford as a ‘Forgotten City’. There are pleas ‘not to make it even more ugly than it is at the moment’. The use of the term “we are fast becoming the ‘Manhattan’ of west London” is entering into the local vocabulary.

Local people value the assets of the location in close proximity to famous waterways. They call for waterside developments to be kept relatively low- rise and well back from the water edge so that the beauty, skylines, light, use and access is maximised.

There is much interest in stemming the escalation of high-rise developments that are thought to be out of character for the area, especially in the vicinity of the High Street and the waterways.

126 Residents to the north of the area feel they are being given enough voice about their adverse affects due to developments along the M4 corridor and the increase in local traffic.

There are concerns about how and whether planning regulations are being adequately supported and whether builders and developers are keeping strictly within these.

There is a lack of population projection data with recent reports on housing acknowledging a lack of inclusion of the developments.

5.5. Poverty Ground rentals for community organisations are rising and resulting in a loss of local voluntary and community group support

5.6. Funding Funding opportunities for developments that have been progressed to date appear to have been missed. Section 106 funding is now available to support the increasing need for future health facilities.

5.7. Social inclusion There is much interest from local residents in ensuring good inclusion and involvement with those who live in local estates and the new arrivals to the area.

5.8. Employment There is keen interest in retaining a good mix of residential and employment sites, providing local employment opportunities and maximising options for working closer to home, thus reducing the need to travel out of area to work.

5.9. Air quality and pollution There is a high level of concern about current levels of pollution and traffic management. There is much interest in working to ensure the best use of mechanisms to protect people from hazards and dangers.

5.10. Housing The predominance of one and two-bedroom accommodation is a key concern. There is a high level of interest in developments including a greater mix of housing size in order to enable growing families to remain in the locality. Some residential dwellings are planned in close proximity to major transport routes and will be affected by both pollution and noise. There is some development of mixed-use dwellings over restaurants, cafes and similar evening socialising venues. Further development of high-rise accommodation units in the central town area and waterside is not favoured by residents.

5.11. Social Environment Any improvements to the social environment are generally seen as real opportunities for the local community to contribute to and benefit from the

127 improvements. There is enthusiasm for good planning, encouraging good open and green spaces and maximising community safety.

There is a widely felt anxiety about providing a poor environment for the next generation. There are real concerns about the development plans for some key sites, where permission has been granted but no progress is evident and also about the fast rate at which other developments are growing. The Great West Road is already seen as a negative force for the local community as it breaks up the north and the south of Brentford. Residents to the north are keen to be included and have a voice about the area developments.

5.12. Crime and Community Safety The developments are likely to change the face of crime in the area. With a more affluent population moving in, it is likely that the area will experience more theft of higher value goods.

Any increase in licensed venues for socialising locally might increase the vulnerability to mugging when drunk (see social environment above).

Any rise in the traffic adds to the safety hazards for vulnerable groups, such as older people and children.

5.13. Community services and health facilities There is mixed feeling about current local facilities and keen anticipation that the new developments will support the overall improvement, expansion and access to services, and encourage a better range of shops, venues and support agencies.

There is also a high level of concern about how this will be enabled, in view of the perceived lack of vision and co-ordination for the area. There is a real need for greater use of available funding support mechanisms and pre- emptive investment in a range of health and community services for the growing population to avoid undue stress on current provision and future services.

Public transport is varied with a wide range of current options available for the community. This is an area for due consideration in view of the rise in local population, the needs of local workforce and also with regard to the mobility of a large body of students to the new University site at the cross-over with Boston Manor and the Great West roads.

5.14. Individuals and community groups The evolving community of Brentford will be broad and have diverse strengths and needs. It is important to the positive development of the area to ensure that people are enabled to contribute to the growth of a supportive and welcoming environment.

128 6. Recommendations

1. To Improve Communication The expressed concerns about a x Additional support mechanisms are Planning, Community Quarterly lack of adequate communication needed to improve communication and Development and and overall co-ordination need to involvement and to address local needs Regeneration be formally addressed. and concerns. Residents, key people and x Open public meetings located within the services often do not know what community. As above As above others are doing/planning. x Attending existing community groups when invited, e.g. Brentford Community As above As above Council

129 2. To Improve Co-ordination There is a need for x Improved formal mechanisms are Joint Health and LBH 6 Monthly improvements in overall co- needed to enable health, other provider Executive Directorates, ordination for the area. services and local authority to discuss including CIP, Hounslow and plan for a range of future health and Homes and other key other service needs. partners.

3. Capital development focus Greater emphasis is needed on x Greater consultation and interagency Planning, Community 3-6monthly the longer term needs of the engagement with respect to the area Development and community. To date there has development and the longer-term Regeneration and been a strong focus on capital community needs. Transport and development. Environmental Strategy

4. To improve the Strategic Planning and long-term vision x Improved mechanisms, eg open public Planning, Community Quarterly

26 for the area meetings for engaging with the Development and There is fear about the legacy community, including those who live to Regeneration that future generations will the north of the M4. inherit due to a perceived lack of x Improved mechanisms for providing Planning Quarterly vision and insufficient long-term regular updates on sites where planning planning for the area. has been grated but no progress has been forthcoming at the building stage. x The Planning function to favour and Planning and Ongoing encourage emphasis on increasing the Developers mix of units, ie 1, 2 and 3 bedroom units. x Low-rise developments to be encouraged at watersides to maintain Planning and Ongoing space and light and maximise use and Developers access. 130 x Careful use of planning and building Planning and Ongoing and at regulations to be maintained, including Developers with Quarterly communicating with local residents about inclusion of public at meetings (see activities and likely time-scales to open meetings (see recommendation minimise short-term nuisance. recommendation 1) 1)

5. Poverty Ground rentals for community x Consideration of community needs and Planning and Ongoing organisations are rising and affordable rental space to be included as Developers resulting in a loss of local a dimension in the overall planning of the voluntary and community group area support

6. Funding Planning obligations provide a x Hounslow PCT and LB Hounslow to Health and Planning Quarterly means of ensuring that ensure that they engage in regular formal developers contribute towards discussions about planning applications the infrastructure needed by a and participate in all current discussions development and services that on section 106 contributions. local authorities can justify as appropriate community benefits. This is applied for via section 106 and can include health facilities.

7. Social inclusion There is much interest from local x A shift towards greater community Planning, Community Ongoing

131 residents in ensuring good development, inclusion and local Development and inclusion and involvement with capacity building Regeneration and those who live in local estates x Review of current mechanisms to reduce Transport and and the new arrivals to the area. the potential for new developments to Environmental Strategy become isolated or self-contained (See recommendation 3) Ongoing communities. As above x Local groups, agencies and networks to As above supported by be given maximum support and Open public meetings as encouragement to reduce community suggested in Quarterly exclusion recommendation 1

8. To Encourage more Local Employment There is keen interest in x Encourage greater support for local jobs Planning and Economic Ongoing retaining a good mix of for local people. Development and residential and employment x Encourage good variety of work Business support sites, providing local opportunities. employment opportunities and maximising options for working closer to home

9. To Improve Air Quality and Reduce Pollution x Support for a reduction in local traffic use Planning, Transport and Ongoing with There is a need to reduce traffic by encouraging local retail shops in close Environmental Strategy quarterly review pollution and congestion issues, proximity to newer dwellings and Street Management especially in the High Street and x Encouragement of schemes for greater and Public Protection – on the Great West Road are a use of buses and other public transport. Environmental Pollution high concern. x Encouragement of green transport plans, cycling and walking Seek further clarification

132 x Greater encouragement of local home zones and schemes for car sharing re this - may not be a x Greater scrutiny of traffic management, local remit including a reduction in traffic lights Transport and x Improved reporting arrangements for the Environmental Strategy public to report pollution concerns for the and Street Management attention of LB Hounslow Environmental and Public Protection – Pollution department Environmental Pollution

10 Housing Some residential dwellings are planned in close proximity to x Ensure enforcement of policies and Planning, Housing, Ongoing with major transport routes and will systems and utilisation of modern Environmental Pollution quarterly review be affected by both pollution and technology to reduce negative effects of noise. pollution and noise x Encourage careful scrutiny for the Licensing Ongoing as above There is some development of issuing of licenses for alcohol for mixed-use dwellings over premises where residential housing is restaurants, cafes and similar situated immediately above or in close evening socialising venues. proximity to residential dwellings Any further development of high- x Consideration to be given to a more Planning Ongoing as above rise accommodation units is not inclusive formal process to discuss and favoured by the residents, influence local developments, including especially in the central town the siting of higher rise units and area and waterside. protection of historical and waterside There is a predominance of 1-2 areas. bedroom accommodation and x Encouragement of an increase in the Planning and Ongoing as above lack of larger residential for ratio of larger unit accommodation to Developers families. encourage less population transience. 133 11 To Improve the Social Environment There is keen interest in x Encouragement of systems for Planning, Transport and Ongoing with maintaining the local community contributing to a sustainable and greener Environmental Strategy quarterly review and improving the social community environment within all new environment. There is also developments (see also section on Air interest in developing modern Quality and Pollution above) systems for waste disposal, green transport schemes and encouraging recycling.

12 Crime and Community Safety The developments are likely to x Additional elements of safety in the Planning and Ongoing with change the face of crime in the design of buildings and facilities. Community Safety and regular review – area. The risks include more x Adequate Community Policing support Crime reduction to be agreed theft, opportunities for greater x Additional attention to needs of children As above with Police use of alcohol with a and older people with respect to Transport and vulnerability to mugging when additional traffic in the area Environmental Strategy drunk and traffic safety hazards x Careful scrutiny of the issue of licences for vulnerable groups, such as for alcohol in the area Licensing older people and children.

13 Community and Health Facilities The need for an increase in local x Increased level of communication with Planning and Ongoing with health, community support and planners and developers in order to plan, Developers review at 3-6 leisure services is likely in line fund and provide for future services monthly meetings with the rising population. x Pre-emptive investment in capacity and Health and Planning - see facilities for primary care, community and (see recommendation 6 recommendation 134 There is a real need for greater hospital support above) 6 use of available funding support x Greater application and use of As above mechanisms and pre-emptive appropriate funding, namely section 106. investment in a range of health x Review the level of support needed from Health and Children’s Six monthly and and community services for the the statutory sector by community Services ongoing growing population to avoid organisations engaged in voluntary, undue stress on current informal activities with maternal and provision and future services. child-care. x Explore possibility of a local children’s Children’s Services Seek advice Public transport is varied with a centre in supporting the co-ordination, wide range of current options monitoring and evaluation of services in available for the community. the area This is an area for due x Develop discussions with TVU in order to Planning, Health ASAP and then consideration in view of the rise fund and plan services for future student Community six monthly in local population. needs Development and Seek advice Regeneration (?) x Planning to work with the community and other agencies to encourage a good Planning and Ongoing range of shops and other community Developers facilities. x New developments to encourage open As above Ongoing access to the wider community rather than be closed to new residents Planning, Health x Review of existing services to include Community Ongoing capacity to support a much larger local Development and population Regeneration (?) x Increased road traffic and aspects of safety for vulnerable people such as Planning and Transport Ongoing young children and older people to be and Environmental

135 addressed Strategy x Green transport plans and car sharing schemes to be prioritised (see also As above Ongoing recommendations in above section on air quality) As above Ongoing x Plans for Parking need to be carefully considered and prioritised as an important element until green transport plans fully operational.

14 Individuals and community groups x Inclusion of facilities and services for the Planning, Developers, Ongoing The evolving community of needs of the broader community Health, Social Services, Brentford will be broad and have including: infants, children, young Police and other diverse strengths and needs. people, adults, older people and families Community services Ongoing It is important to the positive x Encouragement of good community Planning, Health development of the area to networks and affordable facilities for Community ensure that local people are meetings and social events Development and enabled to contribute to the Regeneration Ongoing growth of a supportive and x Adequate assistance for voluntary sector welcoming environment. and community organisations to continue As above to provide networks, support and advocacy for individuals and groups 136 7. Conclusion

A lot of these findings are similar to previous research evidence into the impact on urban developments on communities, see section 2.5.

These include the likelihood of long-term positive benefits for health with a major housing development. However, in the short term some impacts are more likely to be negative.

Other key transferable elements include: x Considering planning applications on the basis of how they can minimise the negative impacts such as strict adherence to health and safety, ensuring good communication with and for residents and other community agencies. x Being mindful of the effects of higher rental, overheads and insurance costs, which may undermine the substantial health gains and higher resident satisfaction levels arising from the regeneration process. x Giving attention to building up social capital that has been presented as a possible springboard for positive action to reduce health inequalities. x Improvements in accessibility can improve people’s mobility and promote their independence

Next Steps

Scrutiny Committee – For discussion and further action on 31st January 2005 Monitoring and evaluation

Further Information

HIA Process This is the second major HIA in Hounslow in the last twelve months (Local Health Delivery Plan).

The Local Authority and the Primary Care Trust are now seeking to agree a joint HIA Tool for use across both organisations. This process will be evaluated and a framework for progressing HIAs will be agreed.

137 35 Appendix 1

Key areas influencing health

Categories of Examples of specific influences (health influences on health determinants)

Biological factors Age, sex, genetic factors

Personal / family Family structure and functioning, primary / secondary circumstances and / adult education, occupation, unemployment, risk- lifestyle taking behaviour, diet, smoking, alcohol, substance misuse, recreation, means of transport (cycle / car ownership)

Social environment Culture, peer pressures, discrimination, social support (neighbourliness, social networks / isolation), community / cultural / spiritual participation

Physical Air, water, housing conditions, working conditions, environment noise, smell, view, public safety, civic design, shops (location / range / quality), communications (road / rail), land use, waste disposal, energy, local environmental features

Public Services Access to (location / disabled access / costs) and quality of primary / community / secondary health care, child care, social services, housing / leisure / employment / social security services; public transport, policing, other health –relevant public services, non-statutory agencies and services

Public Policy Economic / social /environmental / health trends, local and national priorities, policies, programmes, projects

138 Appendix 2

Interviewees, stakeholders, local commentators and supporters

A large number of people were consulted throughout the process. Discussions were conducted at a face-to-face level and via the telephone. Some information was confirmed or provided by email and further information was gathered via available documentation cited in the above report.

Grateful thanks to those listed below who have assisted the process and/or provided support and information for the report.

Names Department / Organisation Adrian Baxter Community Safety team Alan Carter Local resident Alan Weaver Scrutiny team, LB Hounslow Alison McIntosh West Middlesex University Hospital Trust Alison Mills Brentford School for Girls Andrew Dakers Brentford Recycling Action Group (BRAG), Hounslow Green Drinks Angela Wyatt Family Planning and Women’s Services, Hounslow PCT Annie Hargreaves Healthy Schools Co-ordinator, LBHounslow Anthea Cooke Independent Public Health Consultant Cllr Barbara Reid LB Hounslow Becky Powell Director of Speak out, Advocacy and support, PWLD Bill Pickard So Safe Young People’s Project Lead, Hounslow PCT Brenda Chanter Methodist Church/local resident Brian Burgess Brentford Football Club, Griffin Park C S Chanter Local resident Carole Furlong Specialist Consultant in Public Health, Hounslow PCT Cath Attlee Director of Commissioning & Modernisation, HPCT Chris Ali Public Health Development Officer, LB Hounslow Chris Boucher Out West, Hounslow Christina Woodland Disability Network, Hounslow Clive Casey Patient and Public Involvement Forum representative, WLMHT. Debby Price Faculty of Health & Human Sciences, Thames Valley University Dennis Browne Brentford Community Council Rev Derek Simpson St Paul’s Church, Brentford Eileen Gladwell Tenant Participating Officer, Hounslow Homes, Brentford Community Network Eileen Henderson Grand Union Community Development Cllr Felicity Barwood LB Hounslow Genny Fernandes Community Initiatives and Partnerships (CIP) Gerry McCarthy Principal Environmental Health Officer, LB Hounslow Cllr Genevieve Hibbs LB Hounslow Gillian Bernadt Strategic Planning Policy, LB Hounslow Hugh Mortimer Local resident Hugh Picton Grand Union Community Development Isabelle Granet Scrutiny team, LB Hounslow Jan Lennox Director of Watermans Arts Centre, Brentford

139 Janet Cree Chief Pharmacist, Hounslow PCT Janet Nazh Kelewele Alts Preject Jasbinder Rooprah Commissioning and Modernisation Directorate, HPCT Jason Sylvester Student Joan Matlock Visitor from Croydon John Foster Acting Chief Executive, Hounslow PCT John Murphy Ex Councillor, Hounslow Jon Medlin Strategic Planning Policy, LB Hounslow Julienne James Scrutiny Team, LB Hounslow Kate Mortimer Local resident Kirstie McLachlan SPMS Primary Care, Hounslow PCT Lena Engel Early Years, LB Hounslow Lesley Foote Local resident Lesley Underwood Strategic Principal Planning Officer, LB Hounslow Cllr Luke Kirton LB Hounslow, Brentford Community Network Mandy Smith Hounslow Youth Service Maria Cox-Freemanm Local resident Mark Rowlands Social Services, LB Hounslow Mark Stevenson Strategic Planning Policy, LB Hounslow Mary Dalton Commissioning Manager Hounslow PCT, Local resident Matt Harmer Local resident, Brentford Community Network Mel Collins Hounslow resident Cllr Michael Carman LB Hounslow Michael Fletcher Local resident Monica Robb Brentford Community Council Myra Savin Patient & Public Involvement, H PCT, Local resident Cllr Peta Vaught LB Hounslow Peter Banks Local resident Phil Doyle West Play Hounslow, Brentford Community Network Rob Gibson Head of Environmental Strategy, LB Hounslow Ros Scanlon Hammersmith Irish Centre Manager Sarah Lofthouse Youth & Family Worker Brentford Free Church, Brentford Community Network Sarah Ward Brentford Community Network, Soul in Brentford, Local resident Seema Kathuria Commissioning Manager, LB Hounslow Shaheen Saiyed Estates Management, Hounslow PCT Sharon Daye Acting Director of Public Health, Hounslow PCT Cllr Shivcharn Singh Gill LB Hounslow Simon Barrett Partnership Analyst, Community Safety LBH Simon Mitchell Ealing, Hammersmith & Hounslow Gay Men’s Project, LB Hounslow Steve Flynn West Play, Brentford Community Network Steve Hutchinson Hounslow Youth Services, Brentford Community Network Steve Offil Drawing Office, LB Hounslow Sue Harvey Nurse Lead for PWLD, Hounslow PCT Sue Hoad St. Paul’s Centre Sunita Sharma Scrutiny team, LB Hounslow Susan Underwood Health Improvement team, Hounslow PCT Theresa Rowe Joint Social Inclusion Manager, LBH Yvonne Birch Housing Policy & Performance Manager, LBH Yvonne Marine Local resident

140 Appendix 3

Public Health Approximate number of Person hours spent on the project

Name Title Approximate number of hours

Maggie McNab Assistant Director of Public Health, 250 Hounslow Primary Care Trust

Kathryn Goldin Public Health and Health 80 Improvement Manager, London Borough of Hounslow

Sharon Daye Acting Director of Public Health, 20 Hounslow Primary Care Trust

Susan Underwood 20

141

Bibliography i Transport & Health study group. Carrying out a health impact assessment of a transport policy. Guidance from the Transport & Health study group. 2000. Faculty of Public Health Medicine. available at http://www.fphm.org.uk/policy_and_consultations/General_Policy/PDF_files/HIA_Booklet_2000.pdf

Ambrose P. A drop in the ocean; the health gain from the Central Stepney SRB in the context of national health inequalities. 2000. London, The Health and Social Policy Research Centre, University of Brighton.

Atkinson, R. and Kintrea, K. Owner-occupation, social mix and neighbourhood impacts. Policy and Politics, 28 (1) pp.93-108, 2000

Audit Commission. Home Alone : The Role of Housing in Community Care. London : HMSO. 1998.

Baba K, Baba M et al. Research into the achievement and impact of Assistance Programme for Healthy Housing of Edogawa Ward. Annals of Japanese Public Health, 41 (5) pp.404-413, 1994

Barnes, R. Investigating the Links Between Health and Housing. Second Annual Report : 2000/2001. London : SBHA. 2001.

Blackman T, Harvey J et al. Neighbourhood renewal and health: evidence from a local case study. Health and Place, 7 (2) pp.93-104, 2001

Cameron,M., Edmans,T. et al Community Renewal and Mental Health. 2003 Kings Fund

Carr-Hill, R., Coyle, D. et al. Poor housing: poor health? unpublished report. 1993. Department of the Environment.

Cave, B., Curtis, S. et al. Health impact assessment for regeneration projects. Volume II: Selected evidence base. 2001. London, East London and the City Health Action Zone and Queen Mary, University of London . available at http://www.geog.qmul.ac.uk/health/guide.html

Dunn J R and Hayes M V. Social inequality, population health, and housing: a study of two Vancouver neighborhoods. Soc Sci Med, 53 pp.563-587, 2000

Ellaway A and Macintyre S. Does housing tenure predict health in the UK because it exposes people to different levels of housing related hazards in the home and its surroundings? Health and Place, 4 pp.141-150, 1998

Ellaway A, Macintrye S et al. Perceptions of place and health in socially contrasting neighbourhoods. Urban Studies, 38 (12) pp.2299-2316, 2001

Evans G W and Cohen S. "Environmental Stress" in Handbook of Environmental Psychology eds. Stokols D and I, Altman New York, Wiley. 1987: pp.571-610.

Halpern D. Mental Health and the Built Environment. More than Bricks and Mortar? Taylor and Francis. 1995.

Hopton J and Hunt S. The health effects of improvements to housing: a longitudinal study. Housing Studies, 11 pp.271-286, 1996

Hunt S. "Damp and mouldy housing: a holistic approach" in Unhealthy Housing: Research, Remedies and Reform eds. Burridge R and Ormandy D New York, Spon Press. 1993: pp.67-93

Kawachi I, Kennedy B P et al. Crime, social disorganisation and relative deprivation. Social Science and Medicine, 48 pp.719-731, 1999

Kweon B S, Sullivan W C et al. Green common spaces and the social integration of inner city adults. Environment and Behavior, 30 (6) pp.832-858, 1998

142

Macintyre S, Ellaway A et al. Place effects on health: how can we conceptualise, operationalise and measure them? Social Science and Medicine, 55 pp.125-139, 2002

Macintyre S, Hiscock R et al. "Housing, tenure and health inequalities: a three dimensional perspective on people, homes and neighbourhoods" in Understanding Health Inequalities ed. Graham H Buckingham, Open University. 2000.

Molyneux, P and Carroll, C. Health and Housing : Making the Case – Design. Health and Housing : London. 1998.

Molyneux, P and Palmer, J.A Partnership Approach to Housing and Health: Measuring the Impact. Health and Housing : London. 2000.

Oldman, C and Beresford, B Homes Unfit for Children. York : Joseph Rowntree Foundation. 1998.

Pantazis C and Gordon D. "Poverty and Crime" in Breadline Britain in the 1990s eds. Gordon D and Pantazis C Aldershot, Avebury. 1997.

Pantazis C. Fear of crime, vulnerability and poverty. British Journal of Criminology, 40 (414-436), 2000

Platt S D, Martin CJ et al. Damp housing, mould growth, and symptomatic health state. BMJ, 298 (1673-1678), 1989

Pretlove S E C, Critchley R et al. The Nottingham energy, health and housing study: reducing relative humidity, dust mites and asthma. Building Serv Eng Res Technol, 23 (1) pp.43-55, 2002

Takano, Nakamura and Watanabe. Urban residential environments and senior citizens' longevity in megacity areas: the importance of walkable green spaces. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 2002; 56:913- 913

Thomson H, Petticrew M et al. Housing improvement and health gain: a summary and systematic review. Occasional Paper No. 5. 2002. MRC Social and Public Health Sciences Unit.

Wells N. At home with nature. Effects of 'Greenness' on children's cognitive functioning. Environment and Behavior, 32 (6) pp.775-795, 2001

Williamson I J, Martin C J et al. Damp housing and asthma: a case-control study. Thorax, 52 pp.229-234, 1997

Wilson W J. When Work Disappears: The World of the New Urban Poor. New York, Alfred A Knopf. 1996.

Further Resources:

Greater London Authority. 2001. Health Impact Assessment: A Screening Tool for the GLA. Online. Accessed February 2005. Available on URL: http://www.phel.gov.uk/hiadocs/london_strategic_level_screening_tool.pdf

Ison, Erica. 2002. Rapid Appraisal Tool For Health Impact Assessment: A task-based approach. Online. Accessed February 2005. Available on URL: http://www.phel.gov.uk/hiadocs/rapidappraisal%20tool_full_document.pdf

143 APPENDIX B

Denis M Browne 15 The Butts Brentford Brentford Middlesex Community Council TW8 8BJ Founded in 1989 Tel: 020 8560-7548

Lesley Underwood, General calls Borough Planning Department, Tel: 020 8568-1283 Civic Centre Lampton Road. Hounslow TW3 4DN BCC 317 dmb 07. 03. 06. Dear Lesley,

Health Impact Assessment final Report. Response from Brentford Community Council.

The Planning Consultative Committee of the Brentford Community Council adopted document BCC 316 as their response to the final Report submitted to the Council’s Scrutiny Committee. Additionally to focus future action they also adopted an Executive Summary (BCC 314) and a paper on the main focus of our comments (BCC 315). I enclose copies of all three papers.

Please will read these papers in conjunction with the Community Council’s comments on the Brentford Area Action Plan (BCC305). Taken together they demonstrate that Brentford is undergoing rapid expansion without the services and the infra structure needed to sustain the community.

I would be grateful if you can include these papers in the responses to your plans for Brentford and if you would ask Ms McNab to put them to the council’s Scrutiny Committee

Yours sincerely

Denis Browne. Chairman, Planning Consultative Committee Brentford Community Council

Copy to Maggie McNab by email. Enclosures: BCC 314,315 and 316

144 Brentford Community Council BCC316 Health Impact Assessment

Response on Final Report from Brentford Community Council

Executive Summary – Key Findings

11. Social environment 12. Crime and community safety

Lack of social activity, particularly for young people; should include more access for development/access to leisure activities and youth/sports club in relation to crime reduction and health impact.

Action: L.A. to work with CIP and Police and PCT to develop further leisure and sports facilities (non identified at present.)

13. Community services and health facilities

Need to emphasise the statement “there are an increasing number of families with young children being supported by community and voluntary sectors agencies due to low levels of formal community health care support”, and ask that this be addressed through health services or other supporting agencies.

Action: Need for L.A. PCT and voluntary & community organisations to co-ordinate appropriate level of support required

Agree with recommendation in 9. Air Quality & Pollution that greater support is given to green transport, improved reporting arrangements for public to report pollution and noise and encouragement for local retailers to reduce local journeys to shops.

Action: L.A. to support green transport, increasing quality of air, reporting noise and liaise with local retailers on shop journey times.

Overview of Population Gain

2.1 There is cause for concern in the ‘actual’ increase in population growth. Need to have robust data on developments which have increased population from 2001-2006 to equate actual growth and predicted growth. An age pyramid /population statistics need to be included. Also, to ensure all developments are included in this data (preferably earlier than later, i.e. at planning application stage.) Note that Alfa Laval proposal is not currently in this calculation.

Action: PCT/LA to provide ‘real & actual’ projections for population growth and include in planning development data.

145 The Scope of Brentford Health Impact Assessment (HIA)

2.3 Note that the HIA is not comprehensive assessment of health impact, but provides an indication of potential health gains and losses for the area. What about other environmental impacts etc?

Action: PCT/LA to investigate consequential indication of environmental impacts and health gains/losses

HIAs on urban developments

2.4 Need further clarification on the physical activity – what does it mean?

Note short term developments are likely to have negative impact – what are these or are they just as indicated in the table?

Note the reference to planning applications ensuring they minimise negative impacts in relation to elderly, health and safety and support help lines for local residents to report nuisances etc.

Action: LA to evidenced physical activity and negatives of short term developments.

Action: LA planners to show how they will minimise negative impacts in regard to elderly, health & safety and support lines for reporting nuisances arising.

2.5 Implications for Urban Developments Housing Conditions

Agreed with content. Would add that adherence to minimum standard of sound proofing is necessary to alleviate significant impacts on health (particularly mental distress). (Apparently addressed by Office of Deputy Prime Minister.) Note. Ferry Quays has lack of good soundproofing. As this is a prestigious private development, need to ensure both social and private is protected.)

Action: LA to request ‘internal’ soundproofing levels to be identified in future planning applications to ensure adequate protection for health (particularly mental, i.e. stress.)

Social isolation should be avoided at all costs. It has repercussations on health and metal wellbeing. It also stops communities interacting. A need for strong social capital needs to be addressed.

Action: LA planners need to ensure that developments are designed with strong social capital to avoid social isolation.

February 2006 146 2 2.5.3 Environment and community safety

Emphasis need for open spaces, particularly river areas. Green public space and play areas are needed too; particularly for young families and children to avoid being stuck at home. These embraced both social and health related activities.

Action: LA and CIP to increase green space and open areas (particularly riverside), including play areas around where young families are housed.

2.5.4. Access to services

Late night travel needs to improve. Along with safety for drivers and pedestrians.

Action: Discussion to take place with local transport providers and LA, & TfL on increasing late night transport provision and safety for drivers and pedestrians.

People with disabilities

Need for wider doors for wheelchairs and pavements improved. Drop in panels for cars and buses need improving too. Any road/pavement works repairs need to be put back to same standard (or even improved.)

Trains are unsuitable at Brentford station for people with physical disabilities and wheelchairs. The gap between train and platform too wide. Problem solving needed to amend this.

Provision of public lavatories is necessary (with baby changing facilities), either through private or public developments (or both.)

Action: LA to negotiate on physical and other disabilities with local Disability Groups, L.A. Social Services & PCT.

Action: Outcomes of above to be taken into account, together with SW Rail on station support, bus providers and LA highways section.

4, Outcome of the consultation process

4.1.4 Poverty

Additional youth facilities are embraced. (see previous comments above.)

Voluntary sectors are leaving the area due to increase in rent. Need to address this by encouraging stay with S106 or appropriate resource.

February 2006 147 3 Action: Youth services to be addressed by local Youth service, CIP, LA Education & PCT Safe Project. Action: LA to meet with local voluntary sector organisations to discuss support for remaining in area through S106 or other resources.

4.1.2 Funding

Refer to Denis Browne’s document re population growth. What will be the primary and acute pressures, apart from GP increase (is that the correct increase required?)

What is the basis on which additional service are calculated? 4000 units could equate to approximately 6000 patients, which would probably mean 3 additional GPs.

Particularly in areas of physiotherapy, counselling, community mental health, district and practice nurses, health visitors, maternity, carers and social services, and associated health care, e.g. dentists etc.? Need to be reviewed in the light of new White Papers on local services (Our Health, Our Care, Our Say Jan 06.)

Note it is stated 2.4. mental health beds – where will these be located and what type of service will they provide?

What expectation may be required from voluntary organisations to support these pressures?

Action: PCT & LA to provide population growth data for present and future health provision of all services (acute, primary and community) and address how needs of the new increased population will be addressed.

Action: LA and PCTs to meet with voluntary and community organisations to discuss expectations on community and voluntary organisations when above pressures are identified.

Note the missing out already of approximately £800K from S106 funding. Need to ensure this does not happen again.S106 should be available for all developments and the community should be asked to comment on its proposed use.

Action: LA and PCT to develop partnership to ensure S106 and any other funding streams are identified. Local community groups/residents to be alerted to amount and then involved in the allocation of this funding.

February 2006 148 4 4.1.3 Social inclusion

Noted many residential developments have leisure facilities that are for residents only. Can these be open to public? We do not want to create two tier leisure facilities.

Action: LA/CIP to identify and encourage with developers use of private leisure facilities for public use.

As noted above in 4.1.2 there is a real need to address pressures on primary care services/social services, particularly in light of the potential of older resident population and the need for daytime and night support.

Action: As in 4.1.2 with a particular focus on older residents for social services and PCT. Need for LA/PCT to discuss unmet needs with LA Social Services/PCT on 24/7 support.

4.2.1. Air Quality

Point for concern is the continuing development at Heathrow; particularly the impact of the termination of alternation over the borough, runway 3 terminal 5 and increasing night flights and increased traffic impact.

Action: LA to liaise with HACAN, Friends of Earth, Green Party and local MP/ MEP/Councillors to lobby and mitigate the effect of T5, R3 and PCT with health and environmental impact on increasing night flights and proposed termination of alternation. (Using the research done to date on some of these areas is done by Imperial College UoL.)

Noise and pollution resulting from A4/M4 in terms of repairs (generally carried out at night.) Note the toll proposal, which would cause more idling traffic.

Action: TfL and LA to investigate, evidenced and report on increased traffic and A4/M4 repairs necessitates by increase of airport traffic and other local developments.

Housing developments, as in the Thames Valley university and social housing ‘hanging over the M4’ are to be avoided as they may cause a health blight (non opening windows and noise.)

Action: LA to ensure developers do not include ‘over hangs’ on the M4 and discourage non opening windows and locations near A4 without adequate protection.

4.2.2. Housing

Ensure good quality living areas, with adequate ventilation and sleeping areas away from main roads.

February 2006 149 5 Action: As above

Ensure that bars and restaurants are not put in places which would disturb residents sleep and relaxation. Alcohol licences should be curbed for major residential areas to reduce excessive noise at unsocial hours. Also has effect on mugging and violence behaviour. (see 4.2.6.)

Action: LA to issuing late night licensing agreements to be carefully monitored and only approved in appropriate non residential areas.

High rise developments are not to be encouraged due to social isolation, imposing lack of character on area and the documented health and social impacts. Noted Denis Browne’s 2nd draft paper.

Action: LA to ensure compliance in that all proposed planning developments are in character for the area they are to be located.

Agree that larger residential dwellings are created for enhanced family life.

Action: LA to encourage and support development of family size residential.

Need to clarify what is meant by ‘encourage growing families and families needing carers to remain in locality.’

Action: LA/PCT to identify and give clarification on comments regarding ‘encouragement of growing families and families needing carers to remain locally.’

4.2.3. Social Environment and Open spaces

Strongly agree that the green open development and village atmosphere for the town centre are favoured, particularly for south of high street. Encourages people to get out to socialise and enhance fitness and health.

Action: LA & CIP to support green open development and village type atmosphere for town centre (particularly south of high street.)

Need to feel that we are ‘listened to’ regarding the future developments (as many are still unsure of what is happening and fear the unknown.) Need good planning and buildings to avoid poor environment for future. Do not want a historical repeat of past consultations and developments – which were carried out despite residents objectives on health and environment.

February 2006 150 6 Action: LA to co-ordinate and communicate on current and future developments with the local community through TW8.website, hm magazine and posters in local retailers.

Action: LA feedback to be given on any consultations or developments, in time of adequate community responses to be considered. LA to show ‘real’ evidence of having taken residents views on board and listened to.

Action: LA and developers to have a code of good practice for erection of good quality building, which enhance the environment

Agree need to involve all Brentford, not just central. These developments impact on all residents, even outside the Brentford area.

Action: LA need to co-ordinate all residents views; not just those in BAP, as large developments have impact not only locally, but outside area too.

4.2.4. Water Quality

Even though it is stated that reassurance about adequate existing drains and sewerage, there is often drains smells and strong sewerage smells, particularly from canal.

Action: LA and Thames Water to investigate odours emitting from canal and any other areas where developments are located.

Street lighting should be adequate and attractive for personal and community safety, particularly with regard to social nuisances.

Action: LA to ensure street lighting is adequate and appropriate for area, particularly with regard to preventing social nuisances and crime.

Traffic increases, particularly speeding traffic in residential areas, should be addressed by soft rubber humps, not the hard type now used.

Action: LA Highways to use of soft rubber humps (not hard type now used) to prevent traffic speeding in residential areas.

Graffiti should also be addressed. All building should have anti graffiti paint applied and a condition from residential agents that graffiti is removed quickly.

Action: Anti graffiti paint to be applied to all new building areas and agreements contracted from residential agents that any graffiti or unsightly debris or ano be removed quickly.

4.2.7 Planning and Vision

February 2006 151 7 The perceived low level of vision for the area and the already poor building design, coupled with the speed of the developments is a major concern. Need to see Brentford as a major star in the growth of West London and not just an adjunct of the Great West Road. We do not wish to see an isolating type of complex/maze of ‘internalised’ buildings , particularly the cinema type complexes, as at Acton and Feltham. Action: LA to deter and refuse planning applications, where developers proposed labyrinth complexes of ‘internalised estate type’ building or public leisure amenities, including cinema and entertainment.

Waterman’s should be enhance and improved to engage and provide for all the local community, as its client engagement is often focused outside the immediate area,

Action: LA and Art Council and any other parties involved in the funding of Watermans should request that resources go into the redesigning and enhancement of the building, both internally and externally. Provision of a new restaurant/cafe franchise should be sought. A new programme, considering the requirements of all borough residents, but particularly local based residents should be created and then well publicised and supported.

Advertising hoardings are objectionable, unattractive and unnecessary and should be prohibited. They are giving Brentford a blighted community and the light pollution from the illluminated A4 and Ealing Road major hoardings caused residents to have their homes flooded with light continually for 24 hours per day, 7 days per weeks.

Action: LA, Advertising Standard Authority and Environmental agency should work together to reject the erection of the illuminated and massive advertising hoarding, particularly located in the area of the A4/M4 corridors and surrounding area, in view of the 24/7 light pollution, blight on the area and safety of pedestrians and motorists when inclement weather blows the structure off. Ensure in all future developments during building construction.

Employment is important and as much local employment is considered a major requirement, both environmentally and to stop Brentford becoming a dormitory town; we also need to look at the wider context.

Action: LA and Office of Pension & Works to create and encourage incentives for local employment sites (particularly for skills of local residents) and discourage becoming a dormitory town.

February 2006 152 8 4.3.1. Health Services

Need more information about the plans being conducted in light of the new developments with regard to health needs and what funding is being anticipated or what cannot be provided, particularly with the already under resorting of the area in particular services. Information on investment from the Primary Care Trust needs to be understood and taken into account, especially with regard to S106 applications. Will there be a dependency upon using S106 funding, or will PCT be able to fund revenue costs?

Action: PCT & LA to provide population growth data for present and future health provision of all services (acute, primary and community) and address how needs of the new increased population will be addressed.

Action: LA and PCTs to meet with voluntary and community organisations to discuss expectations on community and voluntary organisations when above pressures are identified.

Action: LA & PCT {Note the missing out already of approximately £800K from S106 funding. Need to ensure this does not happen again.S106 should be available for all developments and the community should be asked to comment on its proposed use.

Action: LA and PCT to develop partnership to ensure S106 and any other funding streams are identified, including revenue costs. Local community groups/residents to be alerted to amount and then involved in the allocation of this funding.

School nursing and health visitors need to have further support (understand there is a recruitment issue.)

Action: PCT and Education to provide information on the provision (or lack) of school nurses and health visitors and how this is to be met from current or future funding.

Regarding sexual health services in the new university campus. Is there going to be in house services, or will services have to come from existing arrangements?

Action: PCT to ascertain any additional pressures that may come from the new TVU campus for sexual health services.

4.3.2. Social Services

February 2006 153 9 Regarding mental health services, particularly counselling in the new university campus. Is there going to be in house services, or will services have to come from existing arrangements?

Action: PCT to ascertain any additional pressures that may come from the new TVU campus for mental health services, (particularly counselling service.)

Need urgent confirmation on whether the 4,000 student population will be registering with local GPs? If so, the latter, what provision is being made?

Action: PCT to confirm whether the 4K+ student population at the new TVU campus will use local GP services in Brentford. And if so, what provision is being made to address this?

4.3.3 Transport

Trains are unsuitable at Brentford station for people with physical disabilities and wheelchairs. The gap between train and platform too wide. Problem solving needed to amend this. (also noted 2.5.4)

Action: LA to negotiate on physical and other disabilities with local Disability Groups, L.A. Social Services & PCT.

Action: Outcomes of above to be taken into account, together with SW Rail on station support, bus providers and LA highways section.

Include in walking incentive scheme, cycling too. Improve cycle tracks and encourage cyclists to use them, not the pavements.

Action: LA & PCT to encourage and set up walking incentive schemes, together with cycling lanes that cyclists actually use.

4.3.5. Shopping and other facilities

Fresh fruit and vegetables and range of shops needs to reflect needs of community. Shops should not be replicated for the sake of filling them. We do not need 2 or 3 of everything, but a variety. Residents should be asked what shops they need and want.

Action: Support and resource the Farmers Market and its relocation to high street.

Action: LA to encourage and attract a range of retail stores (preferably no replication), note, not chains and stops that encourage vast influx of transport and out of area use.

4.3.7 Leisure opportunities

February 2006 154 10 Increase leisure facilities for all. Clarify what are the ‘established community programmes’ noted in this section?

Action: LA/CIP/Developers to increase agreed leisure facilities across residency needs.

Action: LA/CIP identify what are the ‘established community ’ noted in this section?

4.4.1 Infants and Children

What will be the significant impact that families with children will have if they are in small units? This needs to be clarified in terms of health, education and community.

Action: LA/PCT to clarify what significant impacts on families with young children having to live in small units in terms of health, education and community support and how they are going to address these.

What provision for child care is being developed in line with the population growth?

Action: LA/PCT to look at provision for child care developed in line with increased population growth.

Regarding postnatal and mothers and parents with young families –need to clarify what is required to avoid having lack of support from trained professionals.

Action: PCT to identify and address what outcomes from having lack of support from trained professionals will have and what remedy is being sought.

Also clarify what the problem is on the poor level of shopping facilities for these groups of residents? Note again, needs and wants of community for shopping.

Action: As in 4.3.5. LA to encourage development and ask families with young children what retail facilities they need; then negotiate with retail agents to support this.

4.4.2. Young People

Agree that more opportunities for young people to work, study, live and have more leisure facilities are taken into account; this also includes better transport provision and community venues.

February 2006 155 11 Action: CIP, LA youth and education services and Connextions to look at needs of young people in respect of above and research with an needs assessment what is required.

4.4.3 Students

With the student population growing daily to 4000 and 100 staff at the TVU campus, need to address the burden on health, transport and social care, along with child care (as probably there will be mature students with children.) Current lack of exercise facilities needs addressing as it does generally.

Action: LA negotiates with TVU on needs of student population for health, transport and social care, together with child care and leisures and exercise facilities.

4.4.4. Older People

The growing older generation of Brentford will need to have additional support and safety measures need to be taken in view of the increase in traffic, both cars and public transport.

Action: LA to negotiate with local, L.A. Social Services, PCT local community support groups, e.g. Helped the Age, Disability Groups to identify what additional support needs and safety measures are in respect of increase traffic, cars and public transport.

Action: Outcomes of above to be taken into account, together with SW Rail on station support, bus providers and LA highways section.

Action: Further encourage good practice, such as previous notification to the community of inconveniences of road works etc.

4.4.5 Families

Community nursing and health visitors for young families needs to be raised as a urgent must do review and plans for increasing this in view of new larger housing developments (it is already under resourced) , particularly with the increased pressure that will be required from community and voluntary sector.

Action: LA/PCT to look at provision for child care developed in line with increased population growth.

February 2006 156 12 Action: PCT to identify and address what outcomes from having lack of support from trained professionals will have and what remedy is being sought.

4.4.7 Refugees and Asylum Seekers

Clarification required on the mental health support needs of this client group?

Action: PCT and WLMHT to provide information on needs of mental health provision of Refugees and Asylum Seekers locally.

4.4.8 People with Disabilities

Action: L.A. to ensure developments have high quality elevators and quality maintenance. Note the impact on high rise accommodation for people with disabilities needing lifts (often out of action and unusable due to social abuse!)

4.4.9 Mental Health Users

Support of voluntary organisations is thought to be good, but needs in the local acute trust (Lakeside) is not so. Apparently only just coping with current populations’ needs. What provision will be made for future?

Action: PCT and WLMHT to identify future population needs for mental health users, both acute (at Lakeside) and in the community and identify what resources are available to support this and support of local voluntary organisations.

4.4.12. River and Canal Dwellers

To retain local jobs and the historic river industry of Brentford, more moorings are needed for canal dwellers.

Action: LA and Thames Waterways to retain and encourage employment at and for river and canal dwellers and provide additional moorings.

4.4.13 Rough Sleepers

Note that review is being carried out by Local Authority on rough sleeps across borough. Need to note if any impact on Brentford?

February 2006 157 13 Action: LA to provide evidence from local review for rough sleepers and subsequent, if any, impact on Brentford local area.

4.4.14 Voluntary and Community Sector

Ensure that S106 provision is given where appropriate to support this thriving and much needed and regarded sector in Brentford (to support initiatives as described above.)

Action: LA & PCT to ensure S106 funding is used to support local voluntary and community organisations, (identified as back up to essential health and social services.)

5. Discussion and key themes

5.1 Communication need to improve in the community. Many residents never discovered what is happening what needs to be done and there is no overall co-ordination, particularly from the local authority on stakeholders events and other consultations.

Action: LA need to have improved communication –notice boards, use of shops and pubs etc. for stakeholder events and community consultations; particularly in view of new proposals and developments. (See previous notes on communications.)

5.2 Co-ordination of Services

Action: As above, but a real need for LA planners, social services, health, transport and associated local service providers to create a united platform and understand what exactly is happening on a regular basis to feed back to residents.

Action: Service providers as above, need to focus on capital development needs to be re-focused on community, to ensure engagement and understanding. This will allay fears and mis-information and give community a voice for response.

5.5. Poverty

Local voluntary organisations that support vulnerable community need to have reduced ground rents to encourage to stay.

Action: LA and PCT to support local voluntary organisations to support vulnerable community by reducing grounds rent.

February 2006 158 14 5.9 Air quality and pollution

Health concerns about level of pollutions. What is the local authority doing to address these?

Action: Feedback from LA. Environmental Services on how they are addressing air quality and pollution and how they are mitigating further impacts.

Action: LA to encourage developers to have ‘green’ buildings to protect environmental and further outputs.

5.13 Community services and health facilities

Need a greater use of funding mechanisms which is available to address pre- emptive investment in range of community and health services with regard to current and future provision.

Action: LA, PCT and other service providers to identify greater use of funding mechanisms to address pre-emptive investment in community and health services.

6. Recommendations

6.1. More cohesive co-ordination between planners and a support mechanism is encouraged to address the needs of the community.

Action: Need to identify who in the LA planning section will be responsible for this communication/co-ordination?

6.6 Funding

Hounslow PCT and local authority must ensure they engaged in regular dialogue on planning applications and section 106 contributions to ensure that the applications are made and then when granted, there is agreement on best use of funding, particularly in terms of revenue cost.

Action: Greater collaboration between LA and PCT to ensure S106 there is best use of funding, particularly in terms of revenue cost.

6.13 Community and health facilities

In line with the apparent increase in health services, community support and leisure, a need again, for available funding to support cohesively and in a co- ordination manner the needs of the growing population.

Action: LA to identify available and predicted funding stream to support increases in health partnerships, community support and leisures for now and the future populations.

February 2006 159 15 Action: Agreement on a children’s centre and the development of a discussion platform on which to address the future needs of the TVU students and staff in regard to health, transport and community services and their contribution in terms of funding and resourcing required from the Local Authority, PCT and other local service providers.

Overview and Scrutiny Panel

Regular reports from Overview and Scrutiny panel on what decisions they are taking and what support to the community they are able to give.

Action: Welcome the use of a joint HIA tools to be used in future across both PCT and local authorities organisations. The future evaluation and outcome of this HIA should be available to the community from the Local Authority’s Overview & Scrutiny Panel.

Action: Noted that there should be a co-ordination approach to the leisure and retail sector in terms of getting private letting agents to be aware of over duplication and poor retail and leisure facilities sites. Should be addressed through LA and CIP.

Brentford Community Council February 2006

February 2006 160 16 Executive Summary – Key Findings ref: BCC 314

11. Social environment 12. Crime and community safety

Action: L.A. to work with CIP and Police and PCT to develop further leisure and sports facilities (non identified at present.)

13. Community services and health facilities

Action: Need for L.A. PCT and voluntary & community organisations to co- ordinate appropriate level of support required.

Action: L.A. to support green transport, increasing quality of air, reporting noise and liaise with local retailers on shop journey times.

Overview of Population Gain

Action: PCT/LA to provide ‘real & actual’ projections for population growth and include in planning development data.

The Scope of Brentford Health Impact Assessment (HIA)

Action: PCT/LA to investigate consequential indication of environmental impacts and health gains/losses

HIAs on urban developments

Action: LA to evidenced physical activity and negatives of short term developments.

Action: LA planners to show how they will minimise negative impacts in regard to elderly, health & safety and support lines for reporting nuisances arising.

2.5 Implications for Urban Developments Housing Conditions

Action: LA to request ‘internal’ soundproofing levels to be identified in future planning applications to ensure adequate protection for health (particularly mental, i.e. stress.)

Action: LA planners need to ensure that developments are designed with strong social capital to avoid social isolation.

2.5.3 Environment and community safety

Action: LA and CIP to increase green space and open areas (particularly riverside), including play areas around where young families are housed.

2.5.4. Access to services

161 Action: Discussion to take place with local transport providers and LA, & TfL on increasing late night transport provision and safety for drivers and pedestrians.

People with disabilities

Action: LA to negotiate on physical and other disabilities with local Disability Groups, L.A. Social Services & PCT.

Action: Outcomes of above to be taken into account, together with SW Rail on station support, bus providers and LA highways section.

4, Outcome of the consultation process

4.1.4 Poverty

Action: Youth services to be addressed by local Youth service, CIP, LA Education & PCT Safe Project.

Action: LA to meet with local voluntary sector organisations to discuss support for remaining in area through S106 or other resources.

4.1.2 Funding

Action: PCT & LA to provide population growth data for present and future health provision of all services (acute, primary and community) and address how needs of the new increased population will be addressed.

Action: LA and PCTs to meet with voluntary and community organisations to discuss expectations on community and voluntary organisations when above pressures are identified.

Action: LA and PCT to develop partnership to ensure S106 and any other funding streams are identified. Local community groups/residents to be alerted to amount and then involved in the allocation of this funding.

4.1.3 Social inclusion

Action: LA/CIP to identify and encourage with developers use of private leisure facilities for public use.

As noted above in 4.1.2 there is a real need to address pressures on primary care services/social services, particularly in light of the potential of older resident population and the need for daytime and night support.

Action: As in 4.1.2 with a particular focus on older residents for social services and PCT. Need for LA/PCT to discuss unmet needs with LA Social Services/PCT on 24/7 support.

4.2.1. Air Quality

162 Action: LA to liaise with HACAN, Friends of Earth, Green Party and local MP/ MEP/Councillors to lobby and mitigate the effect of T5, R3 and PCT with health and environmental impact on increasing night flights and proposed termination of alternation. (Using the research done to date on some of these areas is done by Imperial College UoL.)

Action: TfL and LA to investigate, evidenced and report on increased traffic and A4/M4 repairs necessitates by increase of airport traffic and other local developments.

Action: LA to ensure developers do not include ‘over hangs’ on the M4 and discourage non opening windows and locations near A4 without adequate protection.

4.2.2. Housing

Action: As above

Ensure that bars and restaurants are not put in places which would disturb residents sleep and relaxation. Alcohol licences should be curbed for major residential areas to reduce excessive noise at unsocial hours. Also has effect on mugging and violence behaviour. (see 4.2.6.)

Action: LA to issuing late night licensing agreements to be carefully monitored and only approved in appropriate non residential areas.

Action: LA to ensure compliance in that all proposed planning developments are in character for the area they are to be located.

Action: LA to encourage and support development of family size residential.

Action: LA/PCT to identify and give clarification on comments regarding ‘encouragement of growing families and families needing carers to remain locally.’

4.2.3. Social Environment and Open spaces

Action: LA & CIP to support green open development and village type atmosphere for town centre (particularly south of high street.)

Action: LA to co-ordinate and communicate on current and future developments with the local community through TW8.website, hm magazine and posters in local retailers.

Action: LA feedback to be given on any consultations or developments, in time of adequate community responses to be considered. LA to show ‘real’ evidence of having taken residents views on board and listened to.

Action: LA and developers to have a code of good practice for erection of good quality building, which enhance the environment.

Action: LA need to co-ordinate all residents views; not just those in BAP, as large developments have impact not only locally, but outside area too.

163 4.2.4. Water Quality & Other Social Environmental Effects

Action: LA and Thames Water to investigate odours emitting from canal and any other areas where developments are located.

Action: LA to ensure street lighting is adequate and appropriate for area, particularly with regard to preventing social nuisances and crime.

Action: LA Highways to use of soft rubber humps (not hard type now used) to prevent traffic speeding in residential areas.

Action: Anti graffiti paint to be applied to all new building areas and agreements contracted from residential agents that any graffiti or unsightly debris or ano be removed quickly.

4.2.7 Planning and Vision

Action: LA to deter and refuse planning applications, where developers proposed labyrinth complexes of ‘internalised estate type’ building or public leisure amenities, including cinema and entertainment.

Action: LA and Art Council and any other parties involved in the funding of Watermans should request that resources go into the redesigning and enhancement of the building, both internally and externally. Provision of a new restaurant/cafe franchise should be sought. A new programme, considering the requirements of all borough residents, but particularly local based residents should be created and then well publicised and supported.

Action: LA, Advertising Standard Authority and Environmental agency should work together to reject the erection of the illuminated and massive advertising hoarding, particularly located in the area of the A4/M4 corridors and surrounding area, in view of the 24/7 light pollution, blight on the area and safety of pedestrians and motorists when inclement weather blows the structure off. Ensure in all future developments during building construction.

Action: LA and Office of Pension & Works to create and encourage incentives for local employment sites (particularly for skills of local residents) and discourage becoming a dormitory town.

4.3.1. Health Services

Action: PCT & LA to provide population growth data for present and future health provision of all services (acute, primary and community) and address how needs of the new increased population will be addressed.

Action: LA and PCTs to meet with voluntary and community organisations to discuss expectations on community and voluntary organisations when above pressures are identified.

164 Action: Note the missing out already of approximately £800K from S106 funding.LA & PCT to ensure this does not happen again.S106 should be available for all developments and the community should be asked to comment on its proposed use. {Note the missing out already of approximately £800K from S106 funding.)

Action: LA and PCT to develop partnership to ensure S106 and any other funding streams are identified, including revenue costs. Local community groups/residents to be alerted to amount and then involved in the allocation of this funding.

Action: PCT and Education to provide information on the provision (or lack) of school nurses and health visitors and how this is to be met from current or future funding.

Action: PCT to ascertain any additional pressures that may come from the new TVU campus for sexual health services.

4.3.2. Social Services

Action: PCT to ascertain any additional pressures that may come from the new TVU campus for mental health services, (particularly counselling service.)

Action: PCT to confirm whether the 4K+ student population at the new TVU campus will use local GP services in Brentford. And if so, what provision is being made to address this?

4.3.3 Transport

Action: LA to negotiate on physical and other disabilities with local Disability Groups, L.A. Social Services & PCT.

Action: Outcomes of above to be taken into account, together with SW Rail on station support, bus providers and LA highways section.

Action: LA & PCT to encourage and set up walking incentive schemes, together with cycling lanes that cyclists actually use.

4.3.5. Shopping and other facilities

Action: Support and resource the Farmers Market and its relocation to high street.

Action: LA to encourage and attract a range of retail stores (preferably no replication), note, not chains and stops that encourage vast influx of transport and out of area use.

4.3.7 Leisure opportunities

Action: LA/CIP/Developers to increase agreed leisure facilities across residency needs.

Action: LA/CIP identify what are the ‘established community ’ noted in this section?

165 4.4.1 Infants and Children

Action: LA/PCT to clarify what significant impacts on families with young children having to live in small units in terms of health, education and community support and how they are going to address these.

Action: LA/PCT to look at provision for child care developed in line with increased population growth.

Action: PCT to identify and address what outcomes from having lack of support from trained professionals will have and what remedy is being sought.

Action: As in 4.3.5. LA to encourage development and ask families with young children what retail facilities they need; then negotiate with retail agents to support this.

4.4.2. Young People

Action: CIP, LA youth and education services and Connextions to look at needs of young people in respect of above and research with an needs assessment what is required.

4.4.3 Students

Action: LA to negotiate with TVU on needs of student population for health, transport and social care, together with child care and leisures and exercise facilities.

4.4.4. Older People

Action: LA to negotiate with local, L.A. Social Services, PCT local community support groups, e.g. Helped the Age, Disability Groups to identify what additional support needs and safety measures are in respect of increase traffic, cars and public transport.

Action: Outcomes of above to be taken into account, together with SW Rail on station support, bus providers and LA highways section.

Action: Further encourage good practice, such as previous notification to the community of inconveniences of road works etc.

4.4.5 Families

Action: LA/PCT to look at provision for child care developed in line with increased population growth.

Action: PCT to identify and address what outcomes from having lack of support from trained professionals will have and what remedy is being sought.

4.7 Refugees and Asylum Seekers

166 Action: PCT and WLMHT to provide information on needs of mental health provision of Refugees and Asylum Seekers locally.

4.4.8 People with Disabilities

Action: L.A. to ensure developments have high quality elevators and quality maintenance. Note the impact on high rise accommodation for people with disabilities needing lifts (often out of action and unusable due to social abuse.)

4.4.9 Mental Health Users

Action: PCT and WLMHT to identify future population needs for mental health users, both acute (at Lakeside) and in the community and identify what resources are available to support this and support of local voluntary organisations.

4.4.12. River and Canal Dwellers

Action: LA and Thames Waterways to retain and encourage employment at and for river and canal dwellers and provide additional moorings.

4.4.13 Rough Sleepers

Action: LA to provide evidence from local review for rough sleepers and subsequent, if any, impact on Brentford local area.

4.4.14 Voluntary and Community Sector

Action: LA & PCT to ensure S106 funding and other funding streams is used to support local voluntary and community organisations, (identified as back up to essential health and social services.)

5. Discussion and key themes

Action: LA need to have improved communication –notice boards, use of shops and pubs etc. for stakeholder events and community consultations; particularly in view of new proposals and developments. (See previous notes on communications.)

5.2 Co-ordination of Services

Action: As above, but a real need for LA planners, social services, health, transport and associated local service providers to create a united platform and understand what exactly is happening on a regular basis to feed back to residents.

Action: Service providers as above, need to focus on capital development needs to be re-focused on community, to ensure engagement and understanding. This will allay fears and mis-information and give community a voice for response.

5.5. Poverty

167 Action: LA and PCT to support local voluntary organisations to support vulnerable community by reducing grounds rent.

5.9 Air quality and pollution

Action: Feedback from LA. Environmental Services on how they are addressing air quality and pollution and how they are mitigating further impacts.

Action: LA to encourage developers to have ‘green’ buildings to protect environmental and further outputs.

5.13 Community services and health facilities

Action: LA, PCT and other service providers to identify greater use of funding mechanisms to address pre-emptive investment in community and health services.

6. Recommendations

Action: Need to identify who in the LA planning section will be responsible for this a more cohesive communication/co-ordination between planners?

6.6 Funding

Action: Greater collaboration between LA and PCT to ensure S106 there is best use of funding, particularly in terms of revenue cost.

6.13 Community and health facilities

Action: LA to identify available and predicted funding stream to support increases in health partnerships, community support and leisures for now and the future populations.

Action: Agreement on a children’s centre required, together with the development of a discussion platform on which to address the future needs of the TVU students and staff in regard to health, transport and community services. Including their contribution in terms of funding and resourcing required from the Local Authority, PCT and other local service providers.

Overview and Scrutiny Panel

Action: Welcome the use of a joint HIA tools to be used in future across both PCT and local authorities organisations. The future evaluation and outcome of this HIA should be available to the community from the Local Authority’s Overview & Scrutiny Panel.

Action: Noted that there should be a co-ordination approach to the leisure and retail sector in terms of getting private letting agents to be aware of over duplication and poor retail and leisure facilities sites. Should be addressed through LA and CIP.

168 Brentford Health Impact Assessment. Ref: BCC 315

Main focus on health & social care

The Scope of Brentford Health Impact Assessment (HIA)

Action: PCT/LA to investigate consequential indication of environmental impacts and health gains/losses People with disabilities Action: LA to negotiate on physical and other disabilities with local Disability Groups, L.A. Social Services & PCT.

Action: Outcomes of above to be taken into account, together with SW Rail on station support, bus providers and LA highways section. 4.1.2 Funding Action: PCT & LA to urgently provide population growth data for present v. future health provision of all services (acute, primary and community) and address how needs of the new increased population will be addressed.

Action: LA and PCTs to meet with voluntary and community organisations to discuss expectations on community and voluntary organisations when above pressures are identified.

Action: LA and PCT to develop partnership to ensure S106 and any other funding streams are identified. Local community groups/residents to be alerted to amount and then involved in the allocation of this funding. 4.1.3 Social inclusion Action: LA/CIP to identify and encourage with developers use of private leisure facilities for public use.

As noted above in 4.1.2 there is a real need to address pressures on primary care services/social services, particularly in light of the potential of older resident population and the need for daytime and night support.

Action: As in 4.1.2 with a particular focus on older residents for social services and PCT. Need for LA/PCT to discuss unmet needs with LA Social Services/PCT on 24/7 support. 4.2.1. Air Quality Action: LA to liaise with HACAN, Friends of Earth, Green Party and local MP/ MEP/Councillors to lobby and mitigate the effect of T5, R3 and PCT with health and environmental impact on increasing night flights and proposed termination of alternation. (Using the research done to date on some of these areas is done by Imperial College UoL.)

Action: TfL and LA to investigate, evidenced and report on increased traffic and A4/M4 repairs necessitates by increase of airport traffic and other local developments.

Action: LA to ensure developers do not include ‘over hangs’ on the M4 and discourage non opening windows and locations near A4 without adequate protection. 4.3.1. Health Services

169 Action: PCT & LA to provide robust population growth data for present and future health provision of all services (acute, primary and community) and address how the health & social care needs of the new increased population will be addressed.

Action: LA and PCTs to meet with voluntary and community organisations to discuss expectations on community and voluntary organisations when above pressures are identified.

Action: Note the missing out already of approximately £800K from S106 funding.LA & PCT to ensure this does not happen again.S106 should be available for all developments and the community should be asked to comment on its proposed use. {Note the missing out already of approximately £800K from S106 funding.)

Action: LA and PCT to develop partnership to ensure S106 and any other funding streams are identified, including revenue costs. Local community groups/residents to be alerted to amount and then involved in the allocation of this funding.

Action: PCT and Education to provide information on the provision (or lack) of school nurses and health visitors and how this is to be met from current or future funding.

Action: PCT to ascertain any additional pressures that may come from the new TVU campus for sexual health services. 4.3.2. Social Services Action: PCT to ascertain any additional pressures that may come from the new TVU campus for mental health services, (particularly counselling service.)

Action: PCT to confirm whether the 4K+ student population at the new TVU campus will use local GP services in Brentford. And if so, what provision is being made to address this? 4.3.7 Leisure opportunities Action: LA/CIP/Developers to increase agreed leisure facilities across residency needs.

Action: LA/CIP identify what are the ‘established community ’ noted in this section? 4.4.1 Infants and Children Action: LA/PCT to clarify what significant impacts on families with young children having to live in small units in terms of health, education and community support and how they are going to address these.

Action: LA/PCT to look at provision for child care developed in line with increased population growth.

Action: PCT to identify and address what outcomes from having lack of support from trained professionals will have and what remedy is being sought.

Action: As in 4.3.5. LA to encourage development and ask families with young children what retail facilities they need; then negotiate with retail agents to support this.

170 4.4.3 Students Action: LA to negotiate with TVU on needs of student population for health, transport and social care, together with child care and leisures and exercise facilities. 4.4.4. Older People Action: LA to negotiate with local, L.A. Social Services, PCT local community support groups, e.g. Helped the Age, Disability Groups to identify what additional support needs and safety measures are in respect of increase traffic, cars and public transport.

Action: Outcomes of above to be taken into account, together with SW Rail on station support, bus providers and LA highways section.

Action: Further encourage good practice, such as previous notification to the community of inconveniences of road works etc. 4.4.5 Families Action: LA/PCT to look at provision for child care developed in line with increased population growth.

Action: PCT to identify and address what outcomes from having lack of support from trained professionals will have and what remedy is being sought. 4.4.8 People with Disabilities Action: L.A. to ensure developments have high quality elevators and quality maintenance. Note the impact on high rise accommodation for people with disabilities needing lifts (often out of action and unusable due to social abuse.) 4.4.9 Mental Health Users Action: PCT and WLMHT to identify future population needs for mental health users, both acute (at Lakeside) and in the community and identify what resources are available to support this and support of local voluntary organisations. 4.4.14 Voluntary and Community Sector Action: LA & PCT to ensure S106 funding and other funding streams is used to support local voluntary and community organisations, (identified as back up to essential health and social services.) 6.6 Funding Action: Greater collaboration between LA and PCT to ensure S106 there is best use of funding, particularly in terms of revenue cost. 6.13 Community and health facilities Action: LA to identify available and predicted funding stream to support increases in health partnerships, community support and leisures for now and the future populations.

171 Denis M Browne 15 The Butts Brentford Brentford Middlesex Community Council TW8 8BJ Founded in 1989 Tel: 020 8560-7548

General calls Tel: 020 8568-1283 Lesley Underwood, Borough Planning Department, Civic Centre, BCC 311 dmb Lampton Road Hounslow TW3 4DN. 07. 03. 06.

Dear Lesley,

Brentford Action Area Plan: Consultations. Response by The Brentford Community Council.

I am enclosing a copy of your completed questionnaire and our comments (Ref:BCC 305), which were adopted last week by the Planning Consultative Committee of the Brentford Community Council as the views we would like you to record as our collective response.

You will note that our paper (BCC 305) considers the Sustainability Appraisal and concludes that the major issues in Brentford arise directly from the large (120%) and continued expansion of the community proposed for the period since the last census (2001) until the end of the plan period (2021).

It is our view that this large and rapid change will place considerable strains on every aspect of our community life from the social, health and leisure services to all aspects of the physical infra-structure.

We urge the Council to examine this impact and to ensure that the necessary site reservations, capital investments, revenue consequences, recruitment and training programmes as well as all the necessary constraints are in place before further increases in our already expanded population are agreed.

We are further concerned that the changing scale and physical character of Brentford is being proposed piecemeal without an Urban Design or traffic context.

We consider that the traffic plans should be updated and that the Urban Design studies should be in place before further development is carried out.

Turning to your questionnaire we have found that few of the questions could be answered “agree” or “disagree”. In nearly every case the qualifications (set out in BCC 305) are the response. The only box given where qualifications are important is “agree, subject to changes below”. In many cases these changes are so fundamental that the word “agree” is inappropriate. 172 The BCC appreciates the huge task you have undertaken. While many of the sites shown on your plan are committed, some, like Commerce Road, Gillette, Alfa Laval and the Diamond and even the South Side of the High Street, may not yet be fully defined.

We hope you will take full account of the views we have expressed on these sites, where there may be an opportunity to better relate the development of individual sites to the Action Area as a whole and to the needs of residents.

Yours sincerely

Denis Browne Chairman, Planning Consultative Committee Brentford Community Council.

Enc: Questionnaire for the BCC Paper: BCC 305, setting out views of the BCC.

173 The Brentford Plan. Ref: BCC 305 Consultation Response. March 2006

1. The Brentford Community Council.

The BCC Planning Consultative Committee set up a sub group to consider the BAAP, which has been adopted by Hounslow Council for consultation. The sub-group produced three drafts the last of which was discussed in detail and approved by the Planning Consultative Committee of the Brentford Community Council on March 2nd 2006.

2. BAAP Boundary.

The BAAP excludes the residential part of Brentford north of the A4. As the plan will be the basis of the investment, infra-structure improvements and the management of community services

We consider that the plan has to include all of Brentford.

3. Basic Data.

The document should be used for all planning decisions affecting Brentford.

The basic data should be given both for the BAAP and the whole of Brentford.

4. BAAP area Population at 2001 Census.

Para 4.3.3 shows that the population of BAAP area was 9,431 at the 20001 census. The population of the residential area outside the BAAP is not given.

5. Estimate of BAAP 2006 Population

To update the data from 2001 to 2006 it would be helpful to record the construction programme in these five years.

Our figures suggest this is about 2,000 units which equates to about 4,800 residents, nearly all in the BAAP.

On this basis the population of the BAAP area has grown to about 14,000 today. An increase of 50.9%.

174 6. BAAP Plan Period Population. (Assumed to be 2006/2021).

The forward planning is for a time span of 15 years. The likely further growth of population in this period could result from:

1. Any changes in use of existing buildings 2. Any new development for which planning consent has been already been granted or resolved by the Council 3. A % of other sites where options are not precise.

1. Existing Buildings: For want of information on past trends (1) is assumed to be zero.

2. New Development for which planning permission has already been granted:

South Side of High St. (350) Thames Water (350) Wallis House (750) T.V.Univ housing (250) TV. Univ students (950) Small schemes say (50)

Totals 1,750 units x 2.4 =4,200 residents + 950 students TOTAL 5,150 residents + students.

3. Other sites likely to developed and occupied in the plan period

Assuming the “Mixed Developments” shown as preferred options in the BAAP “Preferred Proposals Sites” Plan are occupied by 2021 the population could rise further. Sites include:

M.1. Alfa Laval Approx 500 M3 Kew Bridge 250 M5 Albany Riverside 200 M6 Town Meadow 100 M7 Somerfield 200 BE 10 Commerce Road 1000 Total 2,250

If half were built by 2021= 1,125 units x 2.4 = 2,700 extra residents.

175 7. Predicted Population in 2021

Population today: 14,000 Given Planning Consent: 5,150 Possible additions: 2,700

Total 21,850

This represents a further increase of 56% in the plan period on top of the Increase of 51% in the period 2001/6.

The possible population in 2021 is estimated at 21,850 compared with 9,431 at the 2001 census. An increase of 12,419, more than doubling the population.

This equates to a population increase of 120% in twenty years.

8. The Holistic View.

So the questions are: what is the capacity of Brentford? what services does a population of this size require?

9. The issues which arise are listed in the UDP. They include:

Environment/Sustainability/Urban Design Health/Education and Employment (Housing)/Sewerage Community and Leisure Shopping The expansion of Heathrow Roads/ Parking/Public Transport.

10. Infrastructure.

It appears to local people that the present infrastructure was only just adequate for the 2001 population, and that it is under strain in 2006.

A further increase of over 5 0% could be unsustainable without substantial additional investment.

11. Sustainability Appraisal.

Para 1.2 of the Sustainability Appraisal summarises the preferred options, but does not relate them to the effect they could have on the Brentford environment:

176 The issues include:

Over-development, Congestion Housing in polluted areas. Excessive development of non-family housing or Inadequate provision for education and health services

These and other basic problems should be examined before any further major development is agreed.

12. Sustainable Development. The definition of sustainability in the planning of Brentford is taken as defined in para 4.2.3/14

13. Housing Needs./ Age and Gender Distribution.

Para 4.3.4 Does not enable a judgement to be made as to whether the housing developments in the pipe line meet the long term needs of the Brentford community. It is thought that, although there is an immediate demand for 1 and 2 bedroom flats, the long term demand will include far more family units than are being provided and that land will not be available to correct the fault, nor provide the infra structure to bring up families.

If Brentford is to have a sustainable residential population the right mix and infrastructure must be planned for now even if this means refusing consent tor housing developments with small units which meet the immediate demand.

This issue is even more critical for affordable housing (which is planned to be up to 50% of all provision)

Couples who have children when living in small affordable units may be forced to bring them up in over-crowded conditions leading to stress and social problems in the future.

14. Health.

The Health Impact Assessment (January 2006) shows that the health of Brentford depends on the quality of the area. The HIP does not quantify the Increased health services, which will be required. However, it appears that little change has taken place in the recent past to improve and Increase health services. We estimate (that the predicted population of the Brentford Action Area will have risen from by 120% between the 2001 census and 2021. (see para 7 above).

177 Brentford and the rest of Hounslow is about to be defined as an AQMA. (Para 4.10.1)

It is not clear what proposals are being ut forward to reduce pollution and/or to increase medical funding.

Clearly the substantial population increases forecast require space and capital and revenue investment .

No substantial scheme should be built without allocating space and 106 monies to provide for additional facilities.

15. Crime.

The relatively low crime rate in Brentford is welcomed.

Among measures to keep crime low we suggest that future plans ensure that affordable housing should be built to standards which allow families to be brought up without over-crowding.

16. Housing.

We welcome the clear statement (para 4.6.8) that the lack of affordable family housing is a key concern.

However, we do not see any evidence in the BAAP preferred options which show how the need for land for health, education, leisure, retail and cultural services required by the increasing population (para 4.6.10) is to be met in the BAAP.

17. Social Inclusiveness and Accessibility.

We welcome recognition that Brentford/Islleworth has the highest number of Community Groups. The Brentford Community Council Is one. It has been continuously active since 1989.

We do not see any proposals in the BAAP to improve cohesion. We regret the closing of Brentford Baths, the lack of support for the Brentford Market,the imprecise nature of plans to keep an expanded Brentford Football Club in Brentford. We also do not see any plans to reduce the areas of open space deficiency (see Map 5 BAAP Snapshot 2004).

178 18. Noise.

The 2004 Snapshot (map 6) shows that the southern part of Brentford is affected by the 2001 57 and 60 noise contours relating to Heathrow.

The plan should also show noise levels generated by the M4/A4 corridor and by the proposed Heathrow third runway.

We note that noise problems have been exacerbated in high density housing built with poor sound insulation. Already the council have granted consent for the first air-conditioned residential tower (Wallis House) recognising that noise and pollution reach unacceptable levels within buildings.

However, the real remedy is to reduce the noise sources. For example by reducing aircraft noise, especially at night and by screening the sides of the elevated M4. About 500 new homes are proposed in the high noise contours within the BAAP. This could be substantially reduced if lower densities prevailed in the housing schemes on the South side of the High Street and at Commerce Road.

19. Transport.

We believe that the employment prospects for the Great West Road (Golden Mile) were compromised by poor public transport (see Snapshot Map 10: PTAL levels are “poor” or “very poor”.

The economic prosperity of Brentford depends on improvements to public transport. This policy must mean that bus services should be increased by more than the increase in population.

The local bus service is garaged at Commerce Road. The priority for that site should be the doubling of the garage capacity.

The proposals for cycling routes are not acceptable. Cycle routes need to be continuous, safely separated from other traffic and where possible designed in an attractive environment (see below) A sustainable community cycles to work as much as possible. (45% of all Copenhagen commuters cycle daily to work).

Major plans are needed to encourage walking and cycling within an attractive environment. A former proposal to line all the major routes with trees has not been implemented.

Plans to amend the road network set out in the MRA (Martin Vorhees and Associates) report were adopted some years ago. These should

179 now be reviewed. The first objective should be to reduce the need for car journeys. For example by ensuring that Brentford Town Centre has a local catchment area. Other measures might include coach parking for Brentford Football club fixtures.

20. Bio-Diversity, Flora and Fauna.

The report identifies areas of special interest including the green chain along the Brent canal. This is welcomed and particular regard should be paid to preserving and enhancing the habitat on the Grand Union canal including the development site off Commerce Road.

However, the policy omits the green chains along the Waterloo/Hounslow railway line running east/west through the BAAP. These green chains should include adjacent isolated back land sites Including the land locked site at the back of Hamilton Road.

We propose that all sites which are to be protected from development to retain bio-diversity should be marked as protected sites on the BAAP proposals map.

21. Heritage.

Brentford has been an established community since pre-Roman days. It retains little known reminders of prehistoric, Roman, Mediaeval, Georgian and 19th century activities both in the street pattern, the canal and in listed buildings.

This tradition makes Brentford unique. It should form a basis for future planning. One example is in Brentford Town Centre, where the rejected English Heritage proposals for redevelopment were based on the historic pattern of development.

Town development, where historic street patterns are respected retain a special character even when the development consists entirely of new buildings.

We would like to see the Master Plan for Brentford Town centre revised to respect its own history. (See paras 38 and 39 below).

22 Open Spaces.

180 Significant parts of Brentford are “open space deficiency areas” (See Brentford snapshot Map 5: Public Open Space Deficiency) These mark areas where housing is too far from a park. Housing densities are rising. This will increase the problem.

To improve life quality more homes should be built with gardens,, (private and/or communal) densities should be kept down and more homes should be large enough for family life.

Any new development with open space deficiency areas should include provision for additional private and/or public open space.

With an increasing population there is an increasing demand for leisure. Measures within the plan period should include:

Increasing night bus services Increasing the opening hours and service diversity of libraries. tree planting on major streets. completing the Thames-side walk from Kew Bridge to Syon.

23. Sport.

The plan lacks adequate provision for sport of all kinds.

As land for playing fields is limited there should be increased use of flood lit all weather pitches. An additional Indoor sports centre Increased swimming facilities Boat houses on the Thames and the canal.

24. Sustainable Employment.

In contradiction to the Sustainability Appraisal we do not believe that there is sufficient capacity to accommodate the anticipated growth in jobs, because the Appraisal does not allow for the housing growth referred to in paras 5,6 and 7 above. Nor does it allow for the loss of Employment generating floor space resulting from the change of use if such development were to proceed.

While there are high vacancy levels in certain offices in the area, these are mainlt large out-of-date on long covenants with inflexible accomodation. Our members’ experience is that small scale offices (up to 2,000 sq ft) in modern flexible buildings with air conditioning and Adequate data services are actually in short supply.

181 We would resist any changes of use proposed on the basis of lack of demand, where the existing buildings are of an undesirable size or construction.

In addition the Employment Development Plan shows that in Brentford 40% of residents work locally.

We consider that this percentage should be kept as high as possible to reduce commuter traffic and reinforce the sustainability of this community.

A substantial part of the BAAP land is designated for Employment uses. These include the sites behind Gillette, Transport Avenue, Commerce Road as well as the sites designated in the UDP proposals map along the Great West Road. (see also paras 26 and 29 below).

We see this as an opportunity to develop a business park where employment and training could be located together.

25. Brentford Town Centre.

With the population more than doubling in the 2001/2021 period more shopping facilities are required and we agree they should primarily be located in the town centre.

However, we also support the retention of Albany Parade and the corner shops, which have survived to support the town centre.

We consider that Albany Parade, other short parades of shops and corner shops should be protected. Further corner shops should be included in new developments where they do not compete with existing local shops.

We note that para 4.18.12 states that the town centre “constantly struggles to meet the definition of a town centre” Even in 2021 Brentford will have less than 10% of the borough population.

The town centre has to be sustainable. It should NOT include services which require a catchment area extending outside Brentford nor should it include leisure facilities which are only fashionable for limited periods. It would be desirable for the shops to include a wide range of small units as well as modest supermarkets and for parking to be limited.

To increase the diversity of the centre it should include a greater variety of pubs cafes and restaurants to provide activity during the evening. This would improve employment opportunities and increase the attraction of the centre as a location for new offices and himes.

182 We recommend that a variety of small scale A2 and A3 uses be encouraged. j These changes might require: a new plan to be drawn for both sides of the High Street (including the sites M7 and M8 on the proposals map which respected our heritage (see para 21 above) and which could be implemented in phases as Brentford grows.

(See paras 38 and 39 below).

It is also important to improve connections between bus services to the town centre. It is noted that the 65 bus route does not connect to the town centre.

The link to the railway station should also be improved by widening the pavements along Half Acre and Boston Manor Road and by tree planting to form an avenue.

Limited housing should be incorporated in the new town centre including accessible flats for the elderly and disabled. However, it is important to keep the new buildings LOW to respect the character of the High Street and the dominance of the Magistrates Court and St Lawrence’s Church.

26. Education. Para 4.19.1 sets out objectives to increase educational opportunities which could improve the life style of residents. Life long learning and retraining are critical to equip residents to meet new job opportunities.

It is noted that all major developments have contributed 106 monies for education. However, no new sites have been allocated for additional educational buildings.

We should help families to be brought up in Brentford. This requires that additional land is allocated for education, further education andfor life long learning during the plan period.

One proposal was that the Gillette building, which will soon be vacated could be used to establish high tech training linked to the adjacent Industrial buildings for their mutual benefit.

27. Urban Design/ High Buildings.

183 Brentford has a predominantly residential scale. Urgent slum clearance programmes exceptionally led to the construction of the high rise flats on the Haverfield estate some thirty years ago. Since then the Council has been besieged by planning applications (including Wallis House, Chiswick Roundabout, Trico, Thames Water) using the Haverfield scale as a precedent.

While it is accepted that there is a place, however limited, for a group of high rise buildings within Brentford, it is not desirable for each applicant to put forward proposals without the context of an urban design policy. Developers should have clear Urban Design guidance from the outset.

We urge the Council to make clear in the BAAP report that no further applications over 5/7 residential storeys in height will be approverd until an urban design policy for the area has been adopted.

THE BRENTFORD PLAN: Preferred Proposal Sites 2006.

28. Plan Presentation.

It would help those with impaired eye sight if the part of the map M5/BE2 could be presented to a larger scale.

It would also help if the key to BAAP Proposals and Designated Areas map could be printed to a larger scale.

29. Site BE1. Gillette.

We support the Council’s wish to retain this site in manufacturing/ employment uses.

The Gillette building is listed. The present skyline must be preserved.

We have also asked the Council to ensure that a master plan for the industrial sites is prepared before any major redevelopment proposals are considered. The Master Plan should focus on employment and education uses. This could allow either further secondary school and/or tertiary education to be included (in or near the Gillette building), if appropriate, to enhance local skill levels.

30. Wallis House.

The Council agreed (November 2005) to grant consent to a mixed use Development, which accords with the BAAP recommendations.

184 The BCC had reservations about the density of this application. In mixed development schemes the non- residential floor space should be deducted from the equivalent site area. The residential density should then be calculated on the net site area.

It is not acceptable for the site area in mixed development schemes to be counted twice in density calculations.

The BCC still has reservations about the lack of family housing in this scheme. Although the final scheme was an improvement over earlier proposals it must be emphasised that family housing, including affordable family housing should be an important element in mixed development schemes.

The BCC had reservations about the tower as it not only increases the scale of Brentford development, but it could also act as a precedent for other similar projects which will be harder to reject.

We consider that high rise development (over 5/7 residential storeys) may be appropriate in Brentford, but only in specific locations which are designated in the local plan after an Urban Design study has been completed.

31 M1. Alfa Laval/Baltic Centre.

We broadly support the mix of uses proposed. We expect this scheme to be revised to complement the proposals for the adjacent Wallis House site.

Although proposals for a designed cluster of high buildings related to the Wallis House tower may emerge from an Urban Design study for the whole of Brentford we would only support high buildings on this site in the context of such a study.

32. BE3. Lucozade.

The BCC supported the approved application, which meets the description on the BAAP plan.

33. MD01. Brentford Diamond Site.

The Council has effectively retained the Brentford Football Club in Brentford. The BCC supported this judgement and the BAAP proposals for a replacement stadium to be relocated on this site within the plan period.

185 We note this is a site with exceptionally good access by public transport and we would resist any plans which increased local congestion.

This site must be included in the proposed Urban Design study to evaluate the appropriate character and scale of the mixed development proposed at the outset.

34. M3. Kew Bridge Site.

The Council rejected the proposed mixed development of this site (rising from 3 to 10 storeys) and defended their view at appeal in 2005.

The BCC and the Amenity Societies of all the surrounding areas took the same stand, believing that the scale and character proposed were inappropriate to a highly protected site (3 Conservation Areas/ Grade 1 listed buildings/World Heritage buffer zone) and that river use (boat house/jetty replacement) was wrongly excluded.

The decision on this appeal is expected in March.

35. M4. Thames Water Site.

The BCC asked the Council to reject this high rise application, which has yet to be implemented. In the event that a fresh application is made the BCC urge the Council to promote a lower development which will have a lesser impact on Watermans Park, the river and Kew Gardens (now a World Heritage site).

36. M5. Albany Riverside.

The BCC objects to any proposal which would prejudice the future of the Arts Centre. We consider that the existing building should be improved to make it more accessible, more effective and to link it more closely to the river.

We support the redevelopment of the sites between Smiths steps and Ferry Lane for mixed housing at modest densities with a high proportion of family houses for all incomes. A river side walk should be included.

37. RR1. Ferry Wharf.

We support the Ferry Wharf objectives. Further building should be low, and should not exceed those orignally proposed in the Ferry Quays master plan. A summer Ferry service should be re-instated linking to Kew Gardens, where proposals to clear the river-side car park have been put forward.

186 38. M6. Town Meadow.

The BCC has supported the application to conserve Town Meadow. This site might be used as a farmer’s market.

39. M7. Somerfield.

As demonstrated in the English Heritage study of Brentford town centre the north side of the High Street is an essential part of the town centre re-development. The Somerfield site and the present Police building should be included in a phased scheme for this part of the town centre.

40. Land South of the High Street.

The present scheme for this site should be replaced by a new town centre study for a phased development, which can grow with the rising Brentford population.

Somerfields and the north side of the High Street should be included in the master plan. The historic street pattern, recognised in the English Heritage study should be the basis for the new plan.

Brentford needs a modest district centre with its own character, which relies primarily on a local catchment area and some “niche” shops, rather than dominant supermarkets and high street chains. Parking should be limited so as not to generate additional traffic.

Any scheme should maintain the scale of the High Street allowing the Magistrates Court and St Lawrence’s Church to remain the dominant buildings. It should include dense, low rise housing, particularly for those who need to be close to the town centre facilities.

There should be many views of the water from the High Street and from within the site. The Marina, the water edges and the boat repair facilities should be retained.

Existing river-related activities and industries should be retained and Incorporated into the proposals.

41. BE2.Commerce Road.

The Council has rejected an application for a mixed development scheme, rising to 15 storeys, which includes replacement employment floor space, parking and non-family residential above. An inquiry will be held next July where the Council will be supported by the BCC and other amenity societies.

187 Commerce Road is a preferred Industrial Location. No development which prejudices this priority is acceptable.

Commerce Road is also the site of our bus depot. We have asked that the bus fleet be doubled within the plan period to deal with the transfer of local trips to public transport, and the ongoing needs of the increasing population.

Commerce Road also has potential for canal activities, including residential and visitor moorings with full facilities, boat repairs and freight and retains one of the last covered docks in London.

Only after all these priorities have been met should any further “mix” of development be considered.

If housing is considered, the first priority should be for family housing and especially for affordable family housing.

Shops should NOT be included as the site is in walking distance of the town centre.

42. Summary.

The Brentford Community Council supports Hounslow’s initiative in prepararing the BAAP. To be effective the plan must look in depth at all aspects of the community development to ensure that all changes proposed in Brentford improve the quality of life for the community.

We consider that this document does not set out the necessary infra- structure nor the urban design context. These need to be estabilished before the massive increase in population now proposed is Implemented.

Adopted by the Brentford Community Council March 2006.

188 Denis M Browne 15 The Butts Brentford Brentford Middlesex Community Council TW8 8BJ Founded in 1989 Tel: 020 8560-7548

Lesley Underwood, General calls Borough Planning Department, Tel: 020 8568-1283 Civic Centre Lampton Road Hounslow TW3 4DN BCC 313 dmb 07. 03. 06. Dear Lesley,

Employment Development Plan Sustainability Appraisal: Comments by the Brentford Community Council.

I am enclosing a copy of our document BCC 312, which was adopted by the Planning Consultative Committee of the Brentford Community Council on March 2nd 2006. I would be grateful if you would take this document as our formal reply. We have not used your questionnaire.

You will note that Employment in a Brentford context is also discussed in our paper BCC 305, particularly in paragraph 24.

Yours sincerely

Denis Browne,

Chairman, Planning Consultative Committee, Brentford Community Council.

Enc: BCC 312.

189 Employment Development Plan Document, BCC312 Sustainability Appraisal, Preferred Options, Brentford Community Council response.

Views adopted by the Planning Consultative Committee of the Brentford Community Council on March 2nd 2006.

6.2.1 Preferred Option 1: The Council in planning the future of employment land will work to providing for sustainable employment growth including a range of job opportunities for the Borough’s residents.

We support this aim but note that it is not compatible with Option 3

6.2.6 Preferred Option 2: The Council will facilitate a role for Hounslow as an employment centre at both a strategic and local level encouraging diversity and providing for a variety of different sized businesses and sectors.

We support this aim, but recommend positive preference for local, as opposed to strategic, businesses.

6.2.7 Preferred Option 3: The borough should seek to achieve an appropriate balance in supply and demand of offices, encouraging the efficient use of land whilst meeting demand.

We consider this Option to be unworkable in practice. More useful would be objective criteria for establishing whether lack of demand and inappropriate location favour change of use.

Improvements to the quality of existing offices will also be sought through renewal in appropriate locations.

We support this aim but we are concerned that the Appraisal makes no reference to urban design or the quality of building design.

6.2.9 Preferred Option 4: There is a sufficient supply of offices in the borough, with capacity to allow new office development (including intensification/expansion) in some locations and the loss of offices in other locations. There is also a need to protect offices in appropriate locations.

We concur with this view, but recommend that preference be given to closely associated uses when considering change of use.

6.2.13 Preferred Option 5a: The intensification and expansion of offices should be in the most sustainable locations including town centres and sites that are strategically important. This includes Chiswick Business Park and subject to being made sustainable, Bedfont Lakes and strategically important offices on the

190 Great West Road. Intensification/expansion is also appropriate in other locations subject to its scale.

We support this aim but we are concerned at the lack of an overall urban design policy for the Great West Road area .

6.2.15 Preferred Option 5b: New development should be directed to the most sustainable locations including town centres and sites that are strategically important. This includes Chiswick Business Park and subject to being made sustainable, Bedfont Lakes and strategically important offices on the Great West Road. New development is also appropriate in other locations subject to its scale.

Scale is also very important in the Great West Road area.

6.2.17 Preferred Option 5c: A general presumption to retain offices in town centres and key office locations is appropriate given the importance of these locations for employment. The release of offices in these locations would be restricted and subject to criteria including an assessment of demand and alternative supply for offices over a reasonable period of time and the level of employment provided by the proposed use.

We support this.

6.2.18 Outside of town centres and key office locations, release will be acceptable subject to an assessment of demand and alternative supply, accessibility to the site, and effects existing offices are having on the surrounding area. Previous use as office does not imply office block scale for other uses

We support this

6.2.20. Release may allow for training opportunities

See paragraph 24 in the BCC response to the Brentford Action Area Plan.

6.2.22 Preferred Option 5d: Offices in the most sustainable locations should be protected. Other sites identified as strategically important (Key Office Locations identified including Chiswick Business Park, Bedfont Lakes Business Park and 2 clusters of offices on the Great West Road), and offices serving a local employment function in suburban areas, subject to being accessible by sustainable modes of transport, should also be protected.

We recommend objective criteria be set for sustainable transport access.

191 6.2.26 Preferred Option 6: An appropriate balance should be sought in the supply and demand of industrial land. There is an appropriate amount of industrial land at the current time but this may change over time. There is a need to monitor supply and the need for retaining sites. Where appropriate, release will be considered but this will be restricted.

We consider this Option to be unworkable in practice. More useful would be objective criteria for establishing whether lack of demand and inappropriate location favour change of use.

Where an alternative employment use is proposed, not only the number but also the type of jobs should be retained.

6.2.28 Preferred Option 7: New development should be allowed on existing industrial land including intensification and expansion. New sites should only be developed where there are no alternative sites and there is a demonstrated need. There is capacity for release of sites where there are negative effects due to a site’s characteristics that cannot be overcome or an assessment against demand and supply demonstrates that release is appropriate. There is a general presumption to protect all existing industrial sites, recognising some sites as strategically and locally important through designations.

We support this but recommend that other uses be predominantly for employment.

6.2.30 Preferred Option 8b: Intensification and expansion should be allowed on all industrial sites

We support this aim but we are concerned that the Appraisal makes no reference to urban design or the quality of building design.

6.2.31 Preferred Option 9a: Hotel development and other types of visitor accommodation should be directed to town centres in the first instance. Hotel development is also appropriate on the A4 corridor close to Heathrow Airport where it serves the airport, has good public transport links, and there is a demonstrated need.

We support this aim but we are concerned that the Appraisal makes no reference to urban design or the quality of building design.

6.2.34 Preferred Option 9b: A mix of uses is appropriate on employment sites, whilst ensuring that jobs/ employment floorspace is retained on the site. This is subject to a range of factors including employment demand and supply including the number of jobs and/or floorspace, the types of uses, and effects.

We accept that higher value uses such as private housing can “subsidize” desirable uses such as affordable housing or employment, and that uses having activity at different times of day can make more effective use of land.

192 We approve of mixed uses on larger sites, if there is enough space to mitigate the problems caused by mixed neighbours.

On smaller sites, it may be better urban design to have all of one site in one use and all of an adjacent site in a different use rather than have both uses on both sites.

The density of such a proposal must consider all uses together, using objective criteria such as plot ratio. Densities should not double count site areas.

The design of such a proposal must be appropriate to the most sensitive of the uses involved.

193 Contact: Michael Jordan, Director of Planning Tel: 020 8583 5325 E-Mail: [email protected]

Executive – 18 July 2006

BRENTFORD HEALTH IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Report by: Councillor Thompson

Summary This report responds formally to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee on the findings of the Brentford Health Impact Assessment (BHIA) which was commissioned by the Adults, Health and Social Care Scrutiny Panel during the last administration.

An initial response to BHIA was made by the former Executive at its meeting on 4th April 2006. This report expands on that response.

RECOMMENDATION

That the Executive welcomes the work undertaken to assess the health impacts of development in Brentford and the useful contribution it makes to the development of our future plans for the Brentford area

That the Executive agrees to debate the issues arising from the BHIA with the Council’s partners in the local strategic partnership, and especially the PCT, and to examine the means of improving the future co-ordination of service planning.

That the Executive notes that the BHIA will be the subject of further detailed analysis, alongside the many other community responses received to the Brentford Area Action Plan Preferred Options. A report commenting on these consultation responses and making proposals for the final, submission version of the Brentford Area Action Plan will be brought to the Executive and Borough Council at the end of the year in line with the Council’s Local Development Scheme.

194 BACKGROUND

In February 2005, the Adults, Health and Social Care Scrutiny Panel commissioned the BHIA following concerns expressed by some local residents. The Public Health Directorate of Hounslow’s PCT led on this work and its final report was published in March 2006. Councillor Felicity Barwood, the Panel’s Chair, presented the report to the Executive at its meeting on 4th April 2006. The Executive was asked to consider the BHIP’s findings and the related comments of the Brentford Community Council and to provide a response to the Panel within six weeks.

In giving an initial response to the report on behalf of the Executive, Councillor John Chatt said:

Firstly, let me say that I welcome the work which has been undertaken to assess the health impacts of developments in Brentford and I thank all those who have taken part. Whether or not one agrees with all of the recommendations, there is obviously a lot of useful information in the report which will need to be carefully assessed as we develop our future plans for the Brentford area.

I understand the wish of the Health and Social Care Scrutiny Panel to have an Executive response “within 6 weeks” as is normally required. However, in this instance the Panel appears to be overlooking several factors which make this both a practical impossibility and actually undesirable.

• Firstly, there is the little matter of the Local Elections. It will be a new Executive, in a new Administration, which will need to respond to the panel. Whoever leads on this issue in the new Executive (and I know it will not be me!) will want the time and space to consider these matters properly before responding.

• Secondly, many of the issues raised in Maggie McNab’s report are matters not only for the Council to consider, but are matters for our partners too, not least the PCT. If it is the case that there is a “lack of….overall co- ordination of the area”, as claimed, then this is a matter which all of our LSP partners will need to respond to and not just the Council alone. This suggests a little more time will be required before a fully joined-up response is given.

• Thirdly, an immediate, formal response from the Executive would cut across and undermine the process we have carefully set in place on the Brentford Area Action Plan (BAAP). As we will see later on in tonight’s agenda, we are planning to spend the remainder of this year assessing all of the consultation responses we have received on the BAAP and drafting our detailed policies and proposals for the area. We expect to be in a position to bring the final, “submission” version of the Plan to Borough Council by December. In my view it would be quite wrong to decide to fully support the Health Impact Assessment’s recommendations, and those of the Brentford Community Council, at this stage. No doubt we will want

195 to endorse much of what has been said in time. But we should bear in mind that Community Council’s submission is 1 of over 240 responses that we have had back on the BAAP and we must be given the time to consider ALL of this material before we reach our final conclusions.

I would therefore propose that:

• We note the HIA as a very useful contribution to the debate about Bretford’s future and instruct our officers to analyse it fully in preparing the next stage of the Brentford Area Action Plan.

• We ask for the HIA to be circulated to all of our LSP partners and ask the new administration and the LSP to consider how it wishes to address the action points and issues of co-ordination that have been raised.

• We consider the matter again and satisfy ourselves on the health impacts of our new policies when we are asked to finally adopt the BAAP in the autumn”.

This approach was endorsed by the Executive.

PLANS FOR ENGAGEMENT WITH OUR LOCAL STRATEGIC PARTNERS

The Overview & Scrutiny Committee recommended that the implications of the Brent Health Impact Assessment should be discussed amongst members of the Local Strategic Partnership. At a subsequent meeting between the Chair of Overview & Scrutiny, the Executive Member for Environment & Planning, the Head of Scrutiny, the Assistant Chief Executive Corporate Policy & Regeneration and the Director of Planning it was agreed that the study should be raised with LSP members at their Away Day on 29th June 2006.

This was duly done and the LSP has agreed that it will be considering the implications of the specific study in Brentford in terms of the overall issues relating to development and infrastructure needs effecting health, education, leisure, community facilities, transport and requirements to seek sustainable development as part of the process of renewing the Community Plan for the period 2007 – 2010.

The Community Plan for which the LSP has oversight and responsibility, is the over-arching vision and strategy signed up to by all partners, including the Council, relating to their joint work in improving the quality of life and future for the borough and as such informs and sets the context for the Local Development Framework.

LSP partners also noted the need to ensure that there is a timely sharing of information and consultation in relation to their work in the borough so as to improve joint working and positive outcomes.

196

DEVELOPMENT OF OUR BRENTFORD AREA ACTION PLAN

Work on the development of the Brentford Area Action Plan is proceeding to schedule and the timetable of events is as follows:

29th June- Update report to Isleworth and Brentford Monitoring Committee. June/July - Contact service providers (internally and externally), land owners and other organisations who are key to the delivery of the BAAP to feedback on consultation reponses. September/October-Hold workshop to discuss urban design framework with a representative group from the Community and urban design advisers. Prepare policies and proposals for the BAAP. December- Report to Executive and Borough Council and submit document to the Secretary of State. Spring/Summer 2007- Examination in Public Early 2008 -Adoption

Since the election, the Brentford Community Council has written urging urgent formal acceptance by the Council of the BHIA and seeking “confirmation that the contents and recommendations will be used as a reference point in all planning applications” which are to be decided in the area in future, It has also been suggested by the Community Council that formal status for the BHIA is important to the Council’s and the wider community’s case at the current Commerce Road inquiry.

For essentially the same reasons as expressed by Councillor Chatt in May, it is not considered appropriate for the Executive to formally accept and adopt the recommendations of the BHIA at this stage. The BHIA expresses sentiments which are well understood and contains much information which is material to the planning decisions which will need to be taken in future. However, formal adoption at this point would prejudge decisions which the Executive will need to take later in the year when it has digested all of the consultation responses it has received.

In the meantime, the data collected as part of the BHIA process will continue to be a material consideration for officers and Members in assessing individual development proposals received by the Council. The Council’s case at the Commerce Road inquiry, and that of community groups, will not be weakened by this approach.

COMMENTS OF DIRECTOR OF LEGAL

The Director of Legal has been consulted in the preparation of this report.

COMMENTS OF DIRECTOR OF FINANCE

The Director of Finance has been consulted in the preparation of this report.

197 Agenda Item 10

Hounslow Local Strategic Partnership – 14th September 2006

“Invest to Save” (as a potential option for delivery of LAA employment objectives, and related issues)

Report by Head of Economic Development & Business Support

Summary

This paper summarises the requirements for delivering the employment objectives of Hounslow’s Local Area Agreement and maximising reward grant. It suggests a partnership bid to the Treasury/Cabinet Office for “Invest to Save” funds as one option to be explored. It identifies the matching financial contributions needed to access this fund and the necessity for a back-up option should a bid be unsuccessful or impractical. It also identifies the engagement of JobCentre Plus as a key element in any successful local employment strategy.

1. Recommendations

1.1. Approve the Council’s effort to identify funds for a bid to the Treasury’s “Invest to Save” budget (ISB) to deliver Local Area Agreement (LAA) Employment outcomes;

1.2. Authorize the Chair of the LSP to sign off the ISB bid should it be feasible;

1.3. Consider inviting the District Manager of JobCentre Plus, or her nominee, onto the Hounslow LSP Board to support delivery of local employment targets.

2. Local Area Agreement employment targets and activities

2.1. The specific employment targets of the LAA (from Ist April 2006 to 31st March 2009) are:

2.1.1. 130 people on incapacity benefit helped into sustained work of 16 hours a week or more for 13 consecutive weeks;

2.1.2. 150 people from other disadvantaged groups helped into sustained work of 16 hours a week or more for 13 consecutive weeks.

2.1.3. 130 lone parents assisted into sustained work of 16 hours a week or more for 13 consecutive weeks. While the first two are aspirational, this last outcome is a “key target”, with reward grant of £660,000 payable on successful delivery.

S/Development/LAA/Invest and Save/ LSP 14-09 1981 12/09/2006

2.2. The activities specified in LAA are:

2.2.1. Establishing MIS and confirming data, tendering, ongoing monitoring, contract & project management; and

2.2.2. A “brand new” (sic) outreach project including job brokerage and targeted in work support.

2.2.3. “Job-brokerage” is the term used for activity similar to that of a commercial employment agency, matching suitable clients with job-vacancies, but aimed at getting unemployed people into work. This is done by, on the one hand, offering basic competency tests, job-search, CV’s, presentation and interview skills training etc., and, on the other, by establishing relationships with employers to understand their vacancy requirements.

3. Resource requirements:

3.1 The cost of job-brokerage activity within the LAA submission was estimated at £350,000 over the three-year delivery period. It was suggested in the submission that this might come from reward grant received in relation to delivery of Hounslow’s Public Sector Agreement (PSA) employment targets in 2006, and/or from Section 106 (planning gain) funds

3.2 In the event, only around £70,000 in current S.106 receipts is available for LAA support (subject to agreement of the Council’s Executive), and predicting the quantity and likely arrival date of additional funds is virtually impossible.

3.3 Estimated receipts for PSA reward grant overall have already been factored into the Council’s budget for 2006-07 and are not available for LAA support.

4. Invest to Save:

4.1. “Invest to Save” (ISB) is a government funded grant programme designed to create efficiencies in public services and long term savings to the exchequer, through innovative ways of working.

4.2. The current round of ISB is specifically targeted at Local Authority/Voluntary sector partnerships delivering LAA targets. The operating model must be a partnership not a contractor/client relationship.

4.3. Local Strategic Partnerships (LSP’s) must approve bids before they are submitted, and only one bid per local authority area may go forward. The submission deadline is 27th October 2006.

S/Development/LAA/Invest and Save/ LSP 14-09 1992 12/09/2006 4.4. Grants may be for up to £800,000 spread over 3 years, from April 1st 2007. The Local Authority must provide 25% of that funding. Unlike European Union programmes, matching provision for ISB grant cannot be “in-kind”.

4.5. Successful bids will demonstrate how the outcomes will continue to be delivered after the end of the grant funding.

4.6. ISB criteria also suggest individual projects be run by dedicated project managers according to an accepted project management model, such as PRINCE2.

5. Alternative delivery models:

5.1. As originally envisaged in the LAA bid, the Council would fund a competitively tendered job-brokerage programme to deliver the key employment targets, costing up to £350,000.

5.2. However, a successful ISB bid could provide the bulk of funding required to deliver the LAA employment targets, and would reduce the Council’s financial exposure.

5.3. Since ISB operates for a year beyond the LAA period, it also requires a significant element of innovation, and a full scale structured project management infrastructure, therefore the gross cost would exceed that of a straight job-brokerage contract.

5.4. Clearly this would have to be worked up in detail, but an indicative total project cost of £480,000 would require a Council contribution of £40,000 a year for 3 years; i.e. a total of £120,000 as opposed to a likely input of £300,000 or more for a tendered contract.

5.5. Obviously if such a bid were put forward, there would have to be a fall back position in the event that it were unsuccessful.

6. LAA Reward Grant:

6.1. Full achievements of the LAA key employment outcomes will release £660,000 of reward grant for the block in 2009-10. A proportion of this money may be used to re-invest in similar activities. This is a reasonable expectation from LSP partners, and could be factored into an ISB bid as to sustain the core activity beyond the life of the grant.

S/Development/LAA/Invest and Save/ LSP 14-09 2003 12/09/2006

7. Risk Analysis:

Risk Level Comments and mitigation ISB Grant not awarded High Always a risk in competitive bidding. Engage experienced bid-writer; ensure plenty of informed officer input; ensure thorough consultation with stakeholders. Have fall-back position (tendered contract). Failure to agree detailed Low Open discussion from outset; terms of partnership engagement of LBH legal team at early stages Failure to recruit Medium Ensure salary competitive and competent project selection process rigorous manager Failure to deliver Medium PSA, involving the same partners, minimum Reward Grant has delivered well in excess of 60% earning outcomes minimum RG outcomes; Ensure bid well designed and costed. Ensure Management Information Systems and early warning systems in place from outset; Ensure all necessary project management structures and processes in place and maintained.

8. Involvement of JobCentre Plus

8.1 One of the inherent weaknesses in Hounslow’s earlier PSA job- brokerage programme was an inablility to engage fully with JobCentre Plus (JCP) at a strategic level to develop new and effective ways of working in partnership. Relationships with local Jobcentres were more or less “business as usual”, subject to the various upheavals caused by JCP’s reorganization. However, at a planning level, and the level at which resource and policy decisions could be made, there was virtually no relationship, and no concrete commitment to the PSA delivery or, effectively, to the LAA outcomes that have now been agreed.

8.2 One effective way of securing the commitment of the principal Government agency concerned with local employment would be to have the JCP District Office directly represented on the LSP Board.

8.3 Unlike the majority of other LSP’s, JCP is not on the Board, in spite of this having been suggested by the previous District Manager and recommended by this office.

9. Conclusions:

S/Development/LAA/Invest and Save/ LSP 14-09 2014 12/09/2006

9.1. To deliver the LAA employment outcomes will require investment of money that has yet to be identified.

9.2. Successful delivery of the LAA employment outcome will earn up to £660,000 in Reward Grant, a reasonable proportion of which could be invested into future employment development work. 9.3. A successful bid to the Treasury’s “Invest to Save” fund for a project that would deliver the relevant outcomes would reduce the amount of direct contribution required from other public sector sources and add value through innovation and sustained activity beyond the life of the LAA.

9.4. High level engagement from JCP is crucial to successful delivery of Hounslow’s employment outcomes.

AbduRashid Craig

020 8583 2210

S/Development/LAA/Invest and Save/ LSP 14-09 2025 12/09/2006