Wendy.Windmill@Rbk.Kingston.Gov.Uk

Home , Clear Channel UK

For enquiries on this agenda please contact: Wendy Windmill, 020 8547 5020 (Fax: 020 8547 5125) e.mail: [email protected]

This agenda is available on www.kingston.gov.uk/council/CommitteeMinutes

24 September 2007

EXECUTIVE

The EXECUTIVE will meet at THE GUILDHALL, HIGH STREET, KINGSTON UPON THAMES on TUESDAY 2 OCTOBER 2007 at 7:30 pm

Councillor Derek Osbourne (Chair) - Leader of the Council Councillor Patricia Bamford - Children and Young People's Services Councillor Rolson Davies - Health and Social Inclusion Councillor Simon James - Transport, Planning and Regeneration Councillor Ian Reid - Improvement and Performance Councillor Penny Shelton - Housing and Adult Services Councillor Liz Shard - Sustainability and Biodiversity

EMERGENCY EVACUATION ARRANGEMENTS

On hearing the alarm, which is a loud siren, please leave the building by the nearest available fire exit and assemble by the triangle at the front of the Guildhall. Anyone requiring assistance to evacuate the building should proceed to the refuge areas which are situated outside Committee Room 1 and the Mayor’s Parlour where they will be met by a member of the building management team and assisted from the building.

QUESTION TIME

From 7.30 pm, for up to thirty minutes, members of the public may put questions to the Executive and officers relating to the functions and responsibilities of the Executive. The questions may be sent in writing by e mail or fax before the meeting or handed in at the start of the meeting on the form provided. For enquiries please contact Wendy Windmill, 020 8547 5020 (Fax: 020 8547 5125) e.mail: [email protected]

The questions will be considered in the order of their receipt.

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

Contributions from members of the Authority and from members of the public can be made on items which appear on the Executive agenda. A place is reserved for members of the public wishing to address the Executive. When their contributions are completed, they shall retire to the public gallery.

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Members of the Executive are invited to identify any personal or prejudicial interests relevant to items on this agenda.

APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

EXECUTIVE MEMBERS’ INFORMATION ROUND-UP

CHIEF EXECUTIVE’S and DIRECTORS’ UPDATES

MINUTES

To approve as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on 4 September 2007.

1. THE BEST PLACE TO LIVE - SETTING CULTURAL POLICIES Appendix A AND PRIORITIES FOR KINGSTON

2. AFTER DARK STRATEGY Appendix B

3. STREET ADVERTISING Appendix C

4. GROVE CRESCENT CONSERVATION AREA - CHARACTER Appendix D APPRAISAL & MANAGEMENT STRATEGY PROGRAMME, AND BOUNDARY REVIEW

5. ROAD CASUALTIES - MEETING THE 2010 TARGETS Appendix E

6. HOGSMILL SEWAGE WORKS Appendix F

7. TENTH LONDON LOCAL AUTHORITIES BILL AND JOINT Appendix G LONDON LOCAL AUTHORITIES AND TRANSPORT FOR LONDON BILL

8. LOCAL GOVERNMENT FINANCE - FORMULA GRANT Appendix H CONSULTATION - RBK RESPONSE

9. CONTRACT STANDING ORDERS - SPECIAL EDUCATION Appendix I NEEDS

10. BUDGET MONITORING 2007/08 - MONTH 4 Appendix J

11. REFERENCES FROM OTHER BODIES Appendix K

12. URGENT ITEMS AUTHORISED BY THE CHAIR

13. EXCLUSION OF PRESS AND PUBLIC

The following matters may be considered in private if the Executive agrees that, under Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public are excluded from the meeting on the grounds that it is likely that exempt information, as defined in paragraph 3 of Part I of Schedule 12A to the Act, would be disclosed. This paragraph covers companies financial information.

Street Advertising

APPENDIX A Executive, 2 October 2007

THE BEST PLACE TO LIVE – SETTING CULTURAL POLICIES AND PRIORITIES FOR KINGSTON

Report by the Strategic Director for Learning and Children’s Services Leader of the Council

Purpose

To provide the Executive with an update on progress with drafting a new cultural strategy for Kingston

Action proposed by the Leader and Executive Member for Transport, Planning and Regeneration:

The Executive is requested to:

1. approve the draft strategy;

2. approve the process for further consultation on the strategy as set out in paragraphs 6 and 7. Reason for action proposed To agree the Council’s policy and priorities for cultural development from 2008 until 2012

BACKGROUND

1. In December 2001, The Best Place to Live 2002-2006: A Cultural Strategy for the Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames was published. This set out the agenda for the development of cultural facilities and opportunities in the borough. At Executive on 23 rd January 2007 the framework for developing a new strategy covering the period until 2012 was agreed. This included setting out eight themes for consideration and a process for consulting initially with key stakeholders prior to a full consultation on a draft strategy.

2. The eight themes agreed were

i. Kingston as a national and international cultural and visitor centre – (embedding culture in K+20; Kingston Theatre opening; harnessing the cultural impact of the Olympics and in particular the possibility of being a base for supporters of the Korean team; improvements to the conservation and promotion of Kingston’s heritage; exploiting the potential of the Muybridge collection internationally);

ii. Kingston as a centre for creative skills (the South London Innovation Centre for business incubation and creative industries; the skills impact of Rose of Kingston and the University/ performing arts and design courses)

iii. Improving participation in physical exercise (Olympics; Health -Obesity targets; Participation – Government targets; the development with stakeholders of policies for improving participation in individual sports such as tennis and football; development of school sports partnership; improving leisure opportunities for those with disabilities)

iv. Kingston as a centre for drama – (Rose of Kingston, International Youth Festival; complementary programming and developing the relationships between all Kingston’s theatres; supporting and promoting the development of excellence in both formal and informal learning)

v. Environment as a cultural issue - (Developing environmental awareness through a new Environment Centre; the Hogsmill corridor and the riverside as venues for walking and for sensitive development as sports hubs and for appreciation of local environment). Included in the broader environmental objections is the aspiration that the development of parks and open spaces as venues for social interaction, events and as centres of safe play and recreational activity

vi. Volunteering - (encouraging volunteering in cultural activities to support a healthy voluntary sector which in turn will help to foster the growth of professional and commercial cultural activity)

vii. Giving Kingston’s residents a sense of their local heritage and community identity (increase civic and community participation and an appreciation of the local built environment, increasing international recognition of Muybridge as a major influence on cultural history and an icon of Kingston’s creative spirit)

viii. Reading and literacy as the foundation of a cultured community - (Development of the Readers‘ Festival; reader development in libraries and through Bookstart, family literacy through extended school clusters)

STAKEHOLDER MEETINGS

3. During the spring and early summer a series of stakeholder meetings were held with key organisations to consult on the development of the strategy, using the eight themes as the basis of the consultation. The meetings were very productive in gaining the views of key organisations on the priorities for the next four years.

4. In open discussions in the meetings the themes were considered and some changes were suggested. Recurrent points made were:

• There was a consistent message across all the meetings that a top priority was to engage young people in cultural activity

• There should be a strong message about the enjoyment and excitement which is a feature of participation in cultural activity

• The importance of engendering a ‘sense of place’ was regarded as important in creating community awareness and social cohesion

• The role of culture in social inclusion and in celebrating diversity should be emphasised

KEY THEMES

5. From the stakeholders meetings the following key themes were established:

• A sense of place – there was support for the strategy to focus on engendering a clear understanding in residents of the borough as a place – its history and current strengths – in which they could be proud to live. This also applies to visitors where a sense of the heritage and quality of the ‘Kingston experience’ would support the local economy, encourage the location of creative industries and increase inward investment.

• Encouraging all residents, especially young people, to get involved (as participants and as volunteers) in cultural activities – sports; arts; reading; an interest in the history of their locality – and the need to be socially inclusive in encouraging participation.

• Finding ways to encourage and develop residents’ creativity in the performing arts and media based art forms , to improve the range and quality of festivals and other opportunities to perform, and to raise the standard of performance by ensuring high quality performances, training and mentoring opportunities.

• Improve literacy through promotion and support for the development of reading in children, young people, people with basic skills needs and in families to create a literate population confident in participating in cultural activities.

• Maximising the partnership opportunities presented by the 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games, the Cultural Olympiad and the Rose Theatre , and ensuring these opportunities are available to all sections of the community across the whole borough.

SCHEDULE

6. The following schedule for publishing the strategy is proposed:

• Draft strategy published on the Council website and the Young Livin Website October 2007.

• Consultation on the draft strategy will take place from October to November 2007 (with questionnaire appearing on Young Livin’ web site in November;

• Publication of interactive, web-based strategy – January 2008

CONSULTATION – YOUNG PEOPLE

7. A priority in the consultation phase will be to seek the views of young people, to ensure they participate fully in the development of the strategy. It is proposed to seek young people’s views through a variety of consultation methods and participation events:

• Questionnaire: Young Livin’ website and printed media . A questionnaire with a range of options will be used to gauge young people’s preferences for cultural activities (sports, arts music etc). This will be published on the Young Livin’

website and distributed using printed forms. Partnership will be sought with the local press.

• Focus Groups . Focus groups will be held on the key themes which affect young people, including:

a) Range of leisure activities both on offer currently and potential

b) What are the reasons why young people do not currently access leisure/ cultural activities and what would change this?

• Pride of Place Project

A proposed project which would be organised through Kingston Youth Council with School Councils and School clusters. This would involve young people in photographing examples of good and bad cultural opportunities/ facilities in their Neighbourhoods, and presenting their findings to Neighbourhood Committees and appropriate officers. This would be an ongoing project which would be phased across the Neighbourhoods.

AN ORGANIC STRATEGY

8. It is planned that there will be no printed publication of the strategy. It will be published and be available on the council internet site web as a pdf but also as web pages, with printed copies being available only in libraries. This is an economic method and will also allow regular updating of the strategy to reflect the rapidly changing cultural environment and priorities. It will be particularly useful in responding to the challenges of the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS

9. The cultural strategy will foster and promote sensitive use of the environment and in particular will promote the health benefits of alternatives to the car. As it will not be published as a printed document there will be no wastage.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

10. There are no direct financial implications of the strategy which is based on an enabling and facilitating role for the Council, which will work in partnership with providers.

Background papers : held by Scott Herbertson e-mail: [email protected]

1. The Best Place to Live: Cultural Strategy 2002-2006

2. Notes of stakeholder meetings

3. Best Value General User Survey

The Best Place to Live

A Cultural Strategy for Kingston 2008-2012

Consultation draft: October 2007

Introduction: What do we mean by culture?

1. Culture has been defined as “a whole way of life, a structure of feeling” (Cultural historian Raymond Williams). This gives a sense of culture as something you learn, perhaps without being really aware of it, yet it shapes your awareness of everything around you and how you react to things. There is a patchwork of rules which shape a society and which defines its culture. Popular music, especially modern rap and folk music, can be seen as an example of this definition where the lyrics and tempos of the music define the culture of place and community.

2. There is an alternative definition of culture, which is that culture is “contact with the best of what was thought and expressed” (Victorian essayist Matthew Arnold). This ‘high culture’ definition is used in literary and fine art studies and remains a popular definition. It is based on the belief that the study of particularly good artefacts of culture will make a refined and gentle human being. ‘High art’ such as classical music fits this definition.

3. This cultural strategy for the Royal Borough of Kingston aims to steer a middle ground between these two distinct definitions of culture. It is based on a view that participation in cultural activity (relating to heritage, literature, arts, and sports) is beneficial both to the individual and the community at large. An individual who takes part in cultural activity will learn social skills, be healthier and happier. To put it simply, taking part in or simply enjoying cultural activity should contribute to an enhanced quality of life for individuals and for the community at large. This strategy is aimed at getting more people to be involved in activities which are cultural and which contribute to the development of Kingston as a borough and as a community with shared values.

4. A Cultural Strategy, The Best Place to Live, was published in 2001and it set out a strategy for improving the infrastructure for cultural development and improving opportunities for local people to take part in cultural activity. There is strong evidence that this strategy has been successful but there are new challenges ahead.

5. This draft strategy is based on a series of meetings held with key cultural organisations in spring and summer 2007. Five key aims have been established for the strategy:

1. A sense of place; 2. Encouraging all residents, especially young people, to get involved (as participants and as volunteers) in cultural activities; 3. Finding ways to encourage and develop residents’ creativity in the performing arts and media based art forms ; 4. Improving literacy through promotion and support for the development of reading in children, young people, people with basic skills needs and in families ; 5. Maximising the partnership opportunities presented by the 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games, the Cultural Olympiad and the Rose Theatre , and ensuring these opportunities are available to all sections of the community across the whole borough.

Aim 1: A sense of place 6. Surveys have consistently shown that residents of the Borough regard Kingston as a very good place to live. In 2001 the first Cultural Strategy for Kingston had as its aim to make Kingston ‘The Best Place to Live’. In surveys of ‘quality of life’, cities and places with a clear cultural identity and which perform well in such surveys of the quality of life - such as Bath, Edinburgh and Brighton, for example - have established a strong ‘brand’ image of their locality. This is harder in a London borough, where residents have access to a wide range of cultural activities across London, and quick transport into the city centre.

7. Kingston nevertheless has some advantages compared to other parts of London. There is a clear understanding in residents of the borough as a place which derives in part from its rich heritage (from the ‘Royal’ coronation stone and charters through to the retention of important buildings such as the parish church and the market. It’s significant natural assets – the river location, the easy access to Richmond Park and Hampton Court, good walking routes and cycle routes. In addition more modern attractions such as Chessington World of Adventures, the shopping centre in Kingston, a vibrant nightlife (albeit one which is weighted towards young adults), the Rotunda and the Hook Centre provide a sense of what makes Kingston special, and a range of activities for both visitors and residents. For visitors a sense of the heritage and quality of the ‘Kingston experience’ supports the local economy, encourages the location of creative people and industries and increases inward investment.

8. There are some features of the borough which most residents would easily identify with:

• Excellent education. Through pre-school, primary, secondary, college, university and adult education, Kingston has a deserved reputation for excellent educational opportunity and achievement; • A community with a sense of pride of place. Kingston has retained much of its historical built architecture, its key buildings and monuments, has an excellent museum and has access to Richmond Park and Hampton Court. The River is a key feature, though underused; • A healthy area to live. The statistics show high participation in sports, good health of residents, and there is easy access to open spaces for recreation and exercise; • A safe place to live. While fear of crime is a major concern, statistics show Kingston to be one of the safest places to live.

9. Consultation and surveys have given an indication of what residents would like to see happen to improve their quality of life; to improve their ‘sense of place’. For example young people would like more affordable leisure opportunities, as would people with disabilities. Other themes which have been identified in surveys and consultation exercises are a perception of rising crime, environmental issues and a lack of leisure options, particularly for young people and others on low incomes. There is also a perception that an emphasis on retail and nightclubs in Kingston Town Centre could slant the view of the ‘Kingston experience’ for visitors and residents.

Key Priorities

10. Some key priorities are identified in this strategy which will give visitors a ‘sense of place’ when they visit Kingston and give residents a stronger ‘pride of place’ by 2012;

i. Ensure that infrastructure development such as the K+20 scheme promotes Kingston as a high quality environment for visitors and residents;

ii. Improve signage and guidance for visitors and residents to promote a better understanding of the borough’s history and value as a place to live and to visit; iii. Improve resident’s experiences and perceptions of the quality of life in Kingston. iv. Support a greater understanding of local history and heritage through educational programmes in extended schools, children’s centres and school clusters.

Key Performance Indicators

11. Quality of life is a subjective judgment and relies on perceptions rather than statistics. Residents’ perceptions of quality of life are measured through a national triennial survey carried out for the government by MORI. This survey does not reflect all aspects of the quality of life but does provide a benchmark against other parts of the country and gives an indication of trends in perceptions. For example the data for satisfaction with theatres/concert halls clearly relates to the delay in opening the Rose Theatre and it is anticipated this measure will show a marked improvement once the theatre is open. Another indicator used in the Comprehensive Performance Assessment of the council’s cultural services is whether a council has an accredited Museum. Kingston Museum is accredited to the highest standard under the scheme. The following table details the current performance of the borough against these measures and sets targets for 2009 and 2012 based on benchmarked data from similar outer London authorities.

Indicator 2003 2006 2009 2012 Resident satisfaction with sports and leisure 48% 51% 53% 55% Resident satisfaction with libraries 59% 65% 67% 69% Resident satisfaction with museums and galleries 32% 29% 31% 33% Resident satisfaction with theatres / concert halls 27% 19% 27% 30% Accredited Museum yes Yes yes yes

Aim 2 : Encouraging all residents, especially young people, to get involved (as participants and as volunteers) in cultural activities (Active Kingston)

12. The benefits of participation in sports and other forms of physical exercise and in the arts have long been recognised. The main benefits have been perceived in terms of physical health, for example in reducing obesity, or in the case of the arts in mental health and improving psychological and social ‘well being’. Recent evidence

suggests that the benefits of participation in cultural activity are broader than has previously been assumed.

Active Kingston – physical activity

13. For example, research has recently established that the social and mental health benefits of physical exercise are vitally important. The Institute of Youth Sport at Loughborough University carried out research into the impact increased participation in sport had on students. The impact in some cases was impressive. • Attendance went up. • Referrals (detentions) dropped. • Punctuality improved. • Many pupils showed signs of significant personal development. • Some become less disruptive. • Most seemed to grow in confidence. • Many formed more positive relationships with staff.

Participation in physical exercise amongst adults in Kingston is high relative to other London boroughs.

Table 2: Participation rates for adults (Kingston / South London figures derived from the National Ipsos Mori Active People Survey 2006)

Particpation (all adults)

60.00%

50.00% Zero days - 30 mins moderate participation (all adults)

40.00% 1 to 11 days - 30 mins moderate participation (all adults)

20 or more days - 30 mins 30.00% moderate participation (at least 5 times per week) (all adults) 20.00%

10.00%

0.00%

th n n n th to tto do ley ou u or m ondon L S Merton sw on S Kings Croy Bro Richmond nd nd a o W L

14. The above graph shows the comparison of the three participation rates by borough, the South London sub-region and also London as a comparison.

15. It can be seen that within London as a whole, 50% of those interviewed had not participated in any sport or physical exercise in the four weeks prior to the survey being undertaken. Compared with this south London has greater participation, with

the boroughs of Richmond, Wandsworth and Kingston having the highest participation rates.

16. Similarly amongst young people, participation in exercise has been rising in Kingston and now exceeds government targets.

17. In key government targets for schools of enabling children and young people aged 5- 16 to participate in at least two hours of Physical Education and school sport per week, Kingston made an impressive improvement from 69% children and young people participating in 2006 to 82% of children participating in 2007. This puts Kingston in a good position to hit the Government target of 85% by 2008.

18. There is still a considerable amount to do – 3,000 children still do not participate to this level, and this is more marked in children with disabilities. The national target is for 100% of children to participate in at least two hours of Physical Education and school sport per week by July 2009.

19. Participation in physical exercise is also encouraged through the Council’s Cycling Strategy and Good Going – a scheme which encourages cycling and walking for health, fitness and leisure as an alternative to travel by car. Kingston promotes walking and cycling for health through guided walks, walking and cycling to work and walking and cycling for leisure (for example through the improvement and maintenance of the Hogsmill walk).

20. For adults participation rates amongst people with disabilities, older people and black and ethnic minorities are still low although participation rates are generally high relative to other London boroughs. These issues are being addressed through the School Sports Partnership, Community Sports Activity Network (CSPAN) and Local Area Agreement Programmes and form a key element of the cultural strategy.

Active Kingston – taking part in Play

21. Kingston was one of the first areas in the country to publish a Play Strategy and nominate a Play Champion. The Strategy was published in 2004 and is implemented though the Play Forum, which is a sub-group of the Children and Young People’s Partnership.

22. As the strategy was in place, Kingston was one of the first authorities, in 2006 to successfully bid for its allocation from the Big Lottery funding for Play. Kingston received £270,000 towards improving play provision which will be used to improve Dickerage Adventure Playground and to establish a new Play area on King Georges Fields in 2008.

Active Kingston – halting the rise in obesity

23. Physical exercise is widely recognised as a way to control weight. However it is not enough in itself. A partnership between DC Leisure, the Primary Care Trust, Sport England and Kingston Council has been implementing a new scheme aimed at reducing obesity in young people MEND (Mind Exercise Nutrition Diet). This programme has been piloted amongst young people living in the Norbiton and Chessington areas. The scheme is being extended to the whole borough, bringing in other providers such as the YMCA and a pilot aimed at children with disability is planned.

Active Kingston – Active Living

24. A partnership between Kingston Council, Age Concern, the Primary Care Trust and leisure providers is offering a new programme supporting participation in physical exercise by those over 45 as a Local Area Agreement Stretch target. The project is one of the key elements of the Active Ageing Strategy and its associated action plan.

Active Kingston – Everyday Sport/ British Heart Foundation Award

25. Kingston Council was an early partner in Sport England’s Everyday Sport Initiative. This new scheme encouraged as many people as possible to take part in some form of exercise on a regular basis at work. In partnership with Kingston College exercise classes were set up at an affordable cost during lunchtimes and after work.

26. The first year of the scheme started with 5 different classes and it has now grown to 12 classes. This is a great opportunity for staff to exercise in or near their work place and help promote an active lifestyle.

27. Kingston also signed up to the Everest Challenge. This challenge was set up by Everyday Sport: the idea of the challenge is to get the workforce to take the stairs instead of the lift and climb the equivalent height of Mount Everest (a virtual reality mountain). Every time an employee climbed the stairs they were able to log on to the Council intranet and enter their score online and progress up the virtual mountain. These two initiatives were recognised by the British Heart Foundation and Kingston Council were highly recommended at the national Everyday Sport awards ceremony. Further initiatives are planned to bring other local employers into the scheme.

Active Kingston – taking part in the arts

28. Kingston recently completed a Local Area Agreement project to measure participation in the arts amongst young people. The project was run in partnership between the council’s arts office, voluntary sector organisations and the youth service. A target was set of 1,750 young people participating in arts activity in the borough and this was exceeded. A broad range of activity was measured – young people participating in the creation of a mural for the underpass at the Tolworth roundabout; work by local arts organisations such as Me We, Global Arts Kingston, the Tamil Institute of Culture and the Gujarati School; dance and drama through Kingston Youth Service. In addition a target focussing on the achievement of NVQ level qualifications in the arts by young people was successfully met by the introduction of accreditation for youth drama and other arts sessions run by Kingston Youth Service.

Active Kingston – barriers to participation

i Location

29. In consultations and surveys the local availability of cultural facilities has featured as a barrier to activity. For example in consultations prior to the opening of the Hook Centre families, older people and young people all identified the lack of ‘something for young people to do in the evenings’ as being a key local priority. The lack of local opportunities for cultural activity has been identified as a key issue/ barrier in

encouraging young people to participate in the local community and in preventing behavioural problems emerging.

30. In recent years new facilities such as the Hook Centre and Rotunda have extended the range of opportunities as has the increased availability of extended schools leisure facilities for community use (for example the new Multi User Games Areas at Holyfield School).

31. The availability of high quality sports/leisure facilities is measured through the Active Places database. This measures the percentage of the population which lives in reasonable travelling time from 3 quality assured sports facilities. Kingston scores well against this indicator, as all the leisure centres operated in partnership with DC leisure (Kingfisher, Tolworth Recreation Centre, Malden Centre and Kingsmeadow) have achieved Quest registration (the quality assessment measure for leisure centres). More than 61% of Kingston's residents live within a 20 minute walk of three sports centres, including one that reaches the quality standards. This is one of the best scores in London and places Kingston 34 th nationally.

32. The strategy seeks to increase the number of sports centres which meet the Quest standard, and the number of sports clubs which are working towards or have achieved Clubmark – the quality standard for sports clubs.

ii Pricing

33. Price is frequently mentioned as a barrier to participation, particularly amongst young people. The cost of taking part in leisure activities was raised by young people in both the ‘have your say’ days and the consultation on the Hook Centre. A pricing strategy for those leisure facilities and activities which are provided or supported by the council and its partners is therefore key to encouraging wide participation. A consultants report on pricing was commissioned in 2007 and a new pricing model for leisure activities will be implemented in 2008. There is a recognised need to ensure that pricing of venues for arts and sports activity maximises community participation. In addition the introduction of smart card technology in leisure centres, libraries and other leisure outlets should allow personalisation of pricing to limit the number of people who cannot afford to take part.

iii Equality of opportunity

34. Detailed analysis of the Ipsos Mori survey indicates that participation amongst adults from BME groups and people with disabilities is lower than for the population as a whole. Participation amongst looked after children is also an area of concern. There may be specific cultural reasons for this – for example Muslim women have found it difficult to find availability of female only swimming sessions with female only lifeguards, and specific physical requirements for people with disabilities may limit opportunities. This was a priority area in the previous strategy and good work has taken place particularly with young people with disabilities and with the Korean community (the largest ethnic minority in the borough). Equality impact assessments are carried out on all appropriate policies and procedures, and monitoring is embedded in all courses and activities to ensure they meet the needs of all residents. However there is still a difference in participation levels in some activities and the strategy seeks to address this disparity.

35. A project aimed at increasing participation and achievement in physical exercise by young people with disabilities has started and is the subject of a Local Area Agreement stretch target. A discount card (Reactivate) has also been agreed by all sports providers to encourage greater participation by looked after children.

Active Kingston - Volunteering

36. Volunteering in sports in Kingston stands at 4.2% in the 2006 survey. Although this is lower than the median for this national target, London in general scores low in this respect and Kingston’s performance is higher than the London average. The benefits of volunteering in supporting cultural activity are both personal (in health and well being) and to the community in developing citizenship and social cohesion. It is therefore a priority of the strategy to encourage more people to volunteer to support sports and arts organisations, and to build capacity in these organisations.

37. Volunteering features heavily as an objective in the planning for London 2012. The Active Kingston Team and its partners are working with other South London Authorities, with Kingston Voluntary Action and Kingston Volunteer Centre to develop projects and programmes to increase the number of Kingston residents who volunteer in sport. The Voluntary Sector Forum will be the main body for this activity.

Key Priorities

I. Key priorities aimed at increasing participation in cultural activities are to:

II. bring together key partners in providing more opportunities to participate in cultural activities and coordinating efforts to promote greater participation;

III. implement the play strategy, extending opportunities for safe play;

IV. develop programmes designed to increase physical activity to improve health and check the rise in obesity;

V. establish partnerships to support more integrated recruitment of volunteers into arts and sports community organisations;

VI. increase participation by reducing barriers such as the lack of appropriate local facilities, pricing and equalities issues;

VII. support the Council’s strategies for cycling and walking

Key projects

38. Key projects which will increase participation include to:

I. Establish a Community Sports Participation Activity Network to coordinate implementation of the strategy and sports plans;

II. Introduce a new adventure play area at King Georges Fields to provide a geographic balance of play opportunities in the borough;

III. Extend the MEND (mind, exercise, nutrition, diet) programme to the whole borough and pilot a programme for children with disabilities;

IV. Introduce a volunteering into sport scheme and facilitate volunteer schemes such as the Friends of the Rose Theatre and Friends of the Museum and Heritage Service;

V. Implement the LAA target projects for Active Living and participation in sport by children with disabilities

VI. Extend the Everyday Sport Scheme by supporting its adoption by local organisations and companies;

VII. Produce a pricing strategy that provides a simple pricing structure for leisure facility use which supports equality of access;

VIII. Review library and leisure provision to ensure appropriate modern facilities are accessible to all residents.

Key performance indicators

Indicator 2003 2006 2009 2012 Percentage of young people participating in N/A 69% 100% 100% physical exercise Percentage of people volunteering to N/A 4.2% 6% 8% support sports activity Percentage of adults participating in physical N/A 25% 30% 35% exercise Number of people aged over 45 N/A 17% 21.5% 26% undertaking 3 x 30minutes physical exercise per week LAA children with disabilities participating in N/A N/A 85% 100% physical exercise Numbers of Looked after Children using the N/A 160 450 626 by Reactivate card 2010 Percentage of trips by RBK residents N/A 5.4% 5.7% 6% undertaken by bicycle (2011) Resident satisfaction with sports and leisure 48% 51% 53% 55%

Aim 3 Finding ways to encourage and develop residents’ creativity in the performing arts and media based art forms, to improve the range and quality of festivals and other opportunities to perform, and to raise the standard of performance by ensuring high quality performances, training and mentoring opportunities

39. Residents of the borough should have the opportunity to be involved with the arts and be inspired by engaging in them. The transformative and life-enhancing potential of the arts, especially for young people is an important thread in the strategy. Kingston has a growing reputation as a centre for creative industries and the performing arts. This reputation rests on a number of key developments:

I. Academic excellence in schools, College and University in media and the arts – Kingston is now producing an annual cohort of talented arts and media graduates and this will be strengthened with the Masters in Fine Arts programme at Kingston University led by Sir Peter Hall; 10

II. Growing recognition of the importance of Eadweard Muybridge to the history of film and cinematography and an associated growth in new media and film related arts activity;

III. Increasingly high quality festivals with an arts element, including Think in Kingston, the Readers’ Festival, Kingston Carnival, the Korean Festival and programmes by Global Arts Kingston and Kingston Arts Council;

IV. A range of high quality smaller performing arts companies and initiatives such as MeWe, Flight Dance and other groups based at cornerHOUSE, and Green Theatre Company based at Barton Green Theatre plus a growing range of venues: Arthur Cotterell Theatre, new Kingston Grammar School theatre, All Saints’ Parish Church, Hook Recording Studios and the Ram Jam Club, for example;

V. A steady growth in creative industries and artists locating in the Borough – as evidenced by Kingston Contemporary Open and proposals for creative studios.

Key priorities

40. The challenge being faced in Kingston is how to continue to increase the range, quantity and quality of creative input without the prospect of a high level of additional resources. The experience of cultural or ‘festival’ towns such as Bath, Brighton, Galway and Edinburgh is that this has depended on the nurturing of creativity and sustaining a core of creative people committed to the cultural growth of the town. The social and economic benefits to these towns have been well documented and a strategy which seeks to build Kingston as a centre of creative talent will contribute to creating a sustainable economy and community.

41. The key priorities are to

I. Develop a reputation for excellence in a wide range of performing and media-related arts – dance, drama, music, visual arts, new media and interactive arts. Fostering the best and sharpest creative input to develop a creative ‘buzz’;

II. Develop and harness the creative outputs of the schools, College and University to retain creative skills and build a reputation as a location for creative companies and artistes;

III. To identify affordable spaces where this creative talent can work after completing formal education;

IV. Ensure that the public spaces and buildings of the area are places where art can thrive and proper. Ensuring that high quality public art is considered in all new developments – this means being bold and adventurous and working with the best practitioners; maximising the use of public/semi- public buildings and open spaces for cultural activities (is fully realised);

V. Fostering the sense that cultural activity is happening and is accessible to a wide range of people throughout the borough, developing arts marketing still further and taking advantage of new opportunities such as Rose of 11

Kingston, publicity opportunities in new developments and exploiting new media;

VI. Focus on young people, using the opportunities to give a new generation opportunities and the confidence to participate in a range of high quality arts and to become “ambassadors” for the arts;

VII. Be inclusive in defining culture – ensuring that cultural activities embraced by young people (eg music and animation) as well as the arts of the borough’s various communities are also cultivated as part of a balanced and sustainable cultural community life. As far as cultural diversity is concerned, a priority must be to continue to support the best artistic practice, whether this be high profile Korean arts, Kingston Carnival or Global Arts’ Sparkle and Bollywood & Beyond programmes.

Key projects

42. There are some key projects which will provide a catalyst to the plans to engage, involve and inspire residents and visitors – to make Kingston a centre for creative arts;

I. Rose of Kingston Theatre – the successful launch of the Rose theatre, and its integration into the community as a catalyst to cultural and educational development is key to the success of the cultural strategy;

II. Improvement of standards of achievement and attainment in the performing arts and media studies in schools, College and University;

III. Ensuring that public art and the use of open spaces and the built environment are sympathetic to cultural performances and that they are recognised elements of key plans such as K+20 and the Local Development Framework;

IV. Ensuring that the borough plays a significant role in the Go South Go Cultural Festival (the sub-regional cultural programme celebrating the Olympics) running from August 2008 – 2012, in particular using the opportunity to develop the proposed Kingston International Youth Festival in partnership with Rose of Kingston and to develop further Carnival arts and street arts, both areas that are priorities for external funding agencies and which can involve large numbers of people in imaginative arts experiences;

V. Helping to secure the continuing success of Kingston Green Fair and exploring ways of enabling it to become an even more significant part of a vibrant, innovative cultural programme;

VI. Establishing good links between the providers of culture – the theatres, cinemas and venues – and the prospective performers and audiences through good integration of educational outreach work;

VII. Integrating programming and marketing activities where beneficial to ensure that attractions, events and activities are effectively marketed to the whole population and to other areas. 12

Key Performance Indicators

Indicator 2003 2006 2009 2012 Footfall in Kingston Town centre 6am – To be 9pm established Footfall in Rose Theatre complex To be established Numbers employed in creative To be industries sector established Attainment in arts and media studies at To be school, college and University established Resident satisfaction with theatres / 27% 19% 27% 30% concert halls

Aim 4 Improve literacy through promotion and support for the development of reading in children, young people, people with basic skills needs and in families to create a literate population confident in participating in cultural activities .

Reading and Literacy

43. Language and Literacy are basic building blocks for cultural activity. They form the basis of our communication. Key to a community’s cultural ‘health’ is the level of literacy and key to this is education, both formal and informal.

44. Key components of Kingston’s support for literacy and language skills are

• The Bookstart programme, through which families, babies and young children are encouraged into reading and into membership of their local library; • Early years education; • School education; • Family literacy work through adult education; • Community library use; • Adult basic skills teaching; • Cultural events and activities such as “The Big Read” and Kingston’s renowned Readers’ Festival; • Venues for drama and performing arts.

45. The publication of ‘Every Child Matters’ gave a new impetus to partnership working for organisations delivering services to children and families. The extended schools agenda, and the establishment of children’s centres have put a greater emphasis on family support, family learning and school-community links.

Key Priorities

46. When key stakeholder organisations met in April 2007 at the new Hook Centre there was unanimity on some key priorities:

I. Schools. health visitors, library staff, voluntary organisations, family learning staff and early years workers will work closely together to encourage reading, and ways should be found to bring more school children into libraries;

II. There should be a strong focus on those children who have limited opportunities for reading and the ‘popular’ events and activities to attract them into reading. This approach should inform planning of events, festivals and activities;

III. The Hook Centre model of a multi functional building with an emphasis on family activities and a focus on children was praised and should be adopted as a model example of encouraging enjoyment of reading and language skills through a community space focussed on the needs of families.

Key projects

47. Key partnership projects will include

I. The extension of the Bookstart scheme to age 6;

II. Improving links between local schools and libraries in multifunctional settings which support children into reading;

III. Increased provision of family learning in conjunction with school clusters;

IV. Supporting the development of the Reader’s Festival and other events which encourage reading and literacy.

Key Performance Indicators

Indicator 2003 2006 2009 2012 Resident satisfaction with libraries 59% 65% 67% 69% Number of Stage 1 Bookstart packs delivered as N/A 91% 96% 99% % of new births % of pupils at Key Stage 1 achieving Level 2+ in N/A 88% 89% TBA reading Percentage of 4-12 year olds who start the 8% 12% 15% summer reading challenge

Aim 5 Maximising the partnership opportunities presented by the 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games, the Cultural Olympiad and the Rose Theatre, and ensuring these opportunities are available to all sections of the community across the whole borough.

48. The London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games will act as a catalyst to participation in sport but also as a focus for a broader spectrum of cultural activities leading up to the Games themselves and their legacy.

49. Coordination of activity in the Borough is through a small working group, and it is anticipated the new CSPAN will have a key role.

50. A primary impact of the Olympic and Paralympic Games will be to encourage broader participation in physical activity. In the run up to the announcement of Britain’s successful bid the first ‘Kingston Games were held in 2005. This was a very popular event which attracted 29 schools and 1,282 children and was featured heavily in London’s publicity preceding the bid announcement, especially as it emphasised the priority placed in the bid on sport for young people. It is proposed to build on this as a triennial festival of sport for the borough, with the culmination being competitions days at Kingsmeadow Stadium in May 2008 and May 2011.

51. In addition Kingston is a key partner in SOS (Special Olympics Surrey) which is a new organisation formed to encourage participation in sports by people with MLD (Mild or Moderate Learning Difficulties).

52. One of the other important features of the London bid was its emphasis on the role to be played by volunteers. It is clear that in order to be volunteers at the Games potential candidates need to have an established background and training in volunteering. In partnership with Kingston Voluntary Action, Kingston Sports Council, the CSPAN and the Kingston Volunteer Centre it is planned to recruit and train a new cohort of volunteers into sport.

53. London is anticipating a huge influx of visitors for the Games. While most visitors will base themselves in Central London or East London, Kingston is an attractive location with good transport routes via Waterloo. In addition Kingston is home to the biggest Korean community in Europe, and the New Malden area has the infrastructure in terms of shops, restaurants and other services to attract many visitors from South East Asia. The Korean Residents Society and the Korean Embassy are full partners in endeavours to make the most of these advantages in attracting tourist and business visitors from Korea before, during and after the games.

54. Accommodation is a key issue, as the Borough currently has insufficient hotel and registered Bed and Breakfast accommodation. In the April 2007 Hotel feasibility study Kingston rated 24 th of the London boroughs for hotel bedroom space (403) although the recent opening of the hotel at Chessington will improve this position. The Olympics provide an opportunity to develop proposals for funding to support training for those aspiring to register bed and breakfast accommodation to take advantage of the anticipated growth in visitor numbers.

55. From the closing ceremony of the Beijing 2008 Games, the UK will commence its "Cultural Olympiad", a developing, four-year period of cultural activity designed to celebrate the Olympic spirit throughout the UK.

56. The Cultural Olympiad will showcase British talent and innovation and will reflect the key themes of the London 2012 Games:

• Celebrating London and the whole of the UK welcoming the world;

• Inspiring and involving young people;

• Generating a positive legacy. 15

57. It will inspire people around the country to participate in a range of cultural activities, which will reflect and celebrate the diverse communities which make up London and the UK.

58. It is anticipated that funding for cultural activities will be channelled to those activities which contribute to the Cultural Olympiad, particularly youth events and cultural festivals based on the capital’s diverse communities. This presents Kingston with opportunities, particularly around the Korean Festival, which is the largest Korean celebration in London, Kingston Carnival, which is growing in reputation and size, and the proposed festival of International Youth Theatre.

59. It is also timely, in the context of the Cultural Olympiad, that the Rose Theatre will be opening in early 2008. The Rose Theatre can act as a ‘rallying point’ for performance based arts – both as the ‘high point’ of the Borough’s cultural achievement and as a key player in leading the growth (in terms of both quantity and quality) of performance art and the creative industries sector in the Borough. Its role in supporting both the development of youth theatre through an educational programme and as avenue for the creative communities to meet and develop ideas is pivotal to the success of this strategy.

Key priorities

60. The Olympic and Paralympic Games are not a single focus event. If Kingston is to maximise the benefits from the opportunities presented by the Games this will only be achievable by local organisations working in partnership.

61. Key partnership priorities are to;

I. Coordinate Kingston’s contribution to the Cultural Olympiad II. Maximise the number of Kingston residents who volunteer for the Olympic and Paralympic Games III. Use the Games as a catalyst to encourage greater participation, particularly amongst priority groups such as vulnerable young people, black and minority ethnic groups and people with disabilities IV. The staging of Kingston Games in 2008 and 2011 to encourage higher levels of participation and raise the quality of sports performance; V. Maximising visitor numbers prior to and during the Games to ensure the greatest economic and social benefits VI. Taking advantage of any opportunities for infrastructure improvement, both in the lead up to the Games and in legacy planning.

Key Projects

62. Projects in the lead up to the Olympics will develop as the priorities continually change and there is a need therefore to retain the flexibility to be opportunistic. Key projects already identified include:

I. Active support for SOS (Special Olympics Surrey) by a partnership of local organisations; II. Working with a range of partners towards an annual festival which supports the development of young people’s performance art skills; III. Supporting the development of the Korean festival, International Youth Festival and Kingston Carnival within the context of the Cultural Olympiad; IV. Working with partners to encourage an increased in high quality hotel and bed and breakfast accommodation in Kingston. V. Actively participate in South London planning for the Olympic and Paralympic Games through the South London Partnership and Go South Go to secure any infrastructure improvements and legacy benefits.

Key Performance Indicators

Indicator 2003 2005 2008 2011 Participants in 1,282 1,500 2,000 Kingston Games participants participants participants 29 schools 32 schools 35 schools Indicator 2003 2006 2009 2012 Participants in Benchmarks to ‘Volunteering into be devised Sport’ scheme Special Olympics Benchmarks to participation be devised Attendance at Korean Benchmarks to Festival and Kingston be devised Carnival Bedspace in Kingston 403 709 1000 hotels

APPENDIX B Executive, 2 October 2007

AFTER DARK STRATEGY

Report by the Service Director (Planning and Transportation) and Service Director (Environment and Sustainability) Executive Member for Transport, Planning and Regeneration

Purpose To consider the report of the After Dark Working Group and formally approve an After Dark Strategy and Implementation Plan aimed initially at Kingston Town Centre but with principles that could be adopted across the Neighbourhoods and to every corner of the Borough.

Action proposed by the Executive Member for Transport, Planning and Regeneration:

The Executive is requested to:

1. approve the After Dark Strategy

2. endorse the concept, aims and objectives of the After Dark Implementation Plan, and

3. note that:

(i) input to the After Dark Strategy from a wide range of partners, stakeholders and residents’ groups has provided an on-going opportunity for review of policies designed to reduce crime and anti-social behaviour in Kingston town centre; and

(ii) regular monitoring of both the After Dark Strategy and the associated Implementation Plan will continue this process, as will other activity currently taking place under the auspices of the Safer Kingston Partnership.

Reason for action proposed So that the After Dark Strategy can be implemented and identified actions initiated to promote and manage Kingston’s night time economy, providing a hospitable, welcoming, safe and secure town centre with good affordable transport links and a wider choice of venues and activities to cater for all ages and interests.

BACKGROUND

1. In 2004, the Executive established an After Dark Strategy Working Group to develop, in consultation with partners and stakeholders, an “After Dark Strategy” initially aimed and focussed on Kingston Town Centre.

2. Since its inception the Working Group membership has changed but it has remained representative of the Council’s political make up and Committee Portfolio holders, supported by key stakeholders and partners including the Police and Kingston First. As part of its considerations the Working Group has engaged in evidence gathering

from interested parties including residents, businesses, transport providers and educational bodies.

3. The After Dark Working Group has met on a regular basis and has considered a variety of issues such as Licensing, Planning, Transport, Crime and Anti -Social Behaviour. In addition night time town centre visits and tours have been undertaken so that Members and partners shared first hand the experience of the night time economy in Kingston.

4. The Council, on 17 July, having considered a motion put forward by Councillors Janet Bowen-Hitchings and Ian George referring to the recent fatal stabbing and high crime figures in Kingston town centre, resolved to carry out ‘a full review of its current policies, work with the police and resident groups and take any action necessary to address the unacceptable level of anti-social and criminal behaviour that is occurring in and around late night licensed premises in Kingston town centre”

5. Input to the After Dark Strategy from a wide range of partners, stakeholders and residents’ groups has provided an on-going opportunity for review of policies designed to reduce crime and anti-social behaviour in Kingston town centre. Regular monitoring of both the After Dark Strategy and the associated Implementation Plan will continue this process, as will other activity currently taking place under the auspices of the Safer Kingston Partnership

THE STRATEGY

6. The “After Dark Strategy” attached at Annex 1 is extremely positive and important for Kingston in attracting businesses, providing employment, leisure and tourism. The Town Centre provides a cultural and social outlet for residents and visitors. However, there are significant challenges arising from Kingston town centre being a “hub” for evening entertainment serving Southwest London and North East Surrey. Between 2000 – 2003, there was an expansion of bars, night clubs, restaurants and licensed premises with a publicised night time capacity of 15,500 persons.

7. The After Dark Strategy will help to guide and improve the management of the town centre at night to reduce associated adverse impacts. It brings together a vision and sets out ambitions supported by the Council, its partners and stakeholders to deliver a welcoming, safer, cleaner Kingston Town Centre as a destination of choice. The Strategy identifies the main challenges and brings together key aims supported by key actions which are essential to the successful management of the night time economy in Kingston Town Centre. It addresses issues related to licensing, planning, management, policing, and crime and anti social behaviour and late night transport in a holistic manner.

8. Fundamental to the success of the After Dark Strategy and its Implementation Plan will be close integration with Kingston Police’s 24/7 Strategy for Kingston Town Centre; the Crime, Drugs, Disorder and Anti-social behaviour Reduction Strategy; future Safer Kingston Partnership Plans; the Alcohol Strategy; the Kingston First Business Plan; the K +20 Area Action Plan; and Local Development Framework. It will be important to ensure that activities, programmes and investment undertaken by RBK are complementary to, and/or compatible with, those strategies/plans and, as such, the Implementation Plan will be a ‘living‘ document to meet changing needs and aspirations.

IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

9. As well as identifying the key challenges and aims the After Dark Strategy Working Group focussed on key actions that might address the identified issues and bring about a well managed night time economy in Kingston Town Centre.

10. An After Dark Strategy Implementation Plan has been prepared (Annex 2) which identifies agreed actions, planned activities and likely outcomes. The plan is not exhaustive and will be a ‘living’ document presented to allow for changing demands, needs and aspirations. The Implementation Plan identifies lead responsibility for key actions and the involvement by partners in supporting the aims. Essential to the success of the plan will be the management and securing of resources and funding both through the partners and from external sources.

TIMESCALE

11. The After Dark Strategy and Implementation Plan are active policies delivering immediately short term measures and programming medium and long term outcomes as appropriate. All timescales are contained within the Implementation Plan and will be regularly monitored and updated. A yearly review will inform on the progress of existing actions and any change in focus or direction to reflect changing demands or aims.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

12. The After Dark Strategy identifies nine key aims against which there are a substantial number of identified actions some of which will be contained within existing based budgets, whilst other funding will be through contributions or joint funding with partners and external agencies. Some actions will require detailed review before outcomes can be agreed and costed, part of the review will include addressing funding issues.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS

13. There is a wide range of positive environmental implications with varying degrees of impact depending on the outcomes of the associated actions. Overall the After Dark Strategy seeks to set aims and actions to improve the environment through cleaner and safer streets, addressing anti social behaviour, including noise, graffiti and litter. The adoption of the After Dark Strategy can only endorse the Council and its Partners’ environmental credentials.

Background Papers:

Author of this Report Gary Walsh

After Dark Working Group Background Papers held by Thayyiba Shaah 020 8547 5018, e- mail [email protected] ,

Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames

Annex 1

AFTER DARK STRATEGY

KINGSTON TOWN CENTRE

2007

Working in Partnership with Kingston Police, London Fire Service, Kingston Town Centre Management (Kingstonfirst), Safer Kingston Partnership, Transport for London, Kingston University, Thames Landscape Strategy, Pubwatch, Public Carriage Office, Theatre Trust, Civic Trust, Kingston Society, Transport Operators, Contractors and Developers.

AFTER DARK STRATEGY - KINGSTON TOWN CENTRE Vision and Aims

1. The aim, through partnership working, is to promote Kingston’s night time economy, as well as planning to minimise disorder, with the emphasis on ‘managing success’ as distinct from just focussing on problem solving. It wants to make Kingston a destination of first choice for evening entertainment for all age groups no matter the occasion, where shoppers want to stay longer and during the evenings with friends and family e.g. for a meal, where workers want to stay after work with colleagues and where people want to recommend Kingston for nights out and use it as a meeting place.

2. The ambition is to put in place the elements that will make Kingston town centre more hospitable and welcoming, safe and secure, easily accessible with good, affordable transport links home late at night, with a wider variety and choice of venues and activities on offer. The Strategy seeks to promote and expand the provision of non- alcohol-based entertainment and a diverse range of cultural experiences in the evening, including encouraging special events such as May Merrie and the river festival, as well as late night attractions which appeal to all age groups and interests and suit all pockets.

3. It seeks to create a smoother transition between the daytime and night time economy and to move away from its present focus on 18-25 year olds visiting pubs and clubs late into the night towards one that is oriented to a wider spread of age groups including families, young teenagers and older-age groups between 6:00pm – 10:30pm.

4. Recognising Kingston’s status as a metropolitan centre, the Strategy seeks a sustainable balance between protecting the amenities and quality of life of residents living in the town centre who contribute to the life and security of the town centre and promoting an attractive, vibrant but safe night life that appeals to a wide spectrum of borough residents and as well as other visitors to the borough.

5. It seeks, through working in partnership, to ensure that the right elements are in place to support the theatre to enhance the centre’s cultural appeal.

6. Initially it aims to focus on extending evening usage of the Market Place (including the Market House) and the Apple Market, including for ‘al fresco’use.

7. It will increase publicity about the improving availability of late night transport (including licensed safe private hire vehicles (more commonly known as minicabs) and the booking kiosks) and the opening hours of evening attractions, including shops.

8. It seeks, through partnership working, to address public concerns about anti-social behaviour associated with licensed premises and on the streets which have come to greater prominence with the easing of licensing restrictions, in particular the passage of the 2003 Licensing Act which came into force on 24 November 2005 and will, where considered appropriate, lobby Parliament to bring about changes to legislation so as to allow planning and licensing powers to operate in parallel.

9. The Strategy recognises that good management of the evening economy on its own is not enough – that whilst it may help those who presently use the town centre to feel safer, it is unlikely to attract those who are presently discouraged from using it through lack of attractions, fear of crime and anti-social behaviour. It aims to address the disproportionately negative perception that Kingston is unsafe to visit at night particularly for the older age groups and seeks to encourage them back into the town centre for leisure and enjoyment.

10. Fundamental to the success of the After Dark Strategy and its Implementation Plan will be close integration with Kingston Police’s 24/7 Strategy for Kingston Town Centre; the Crime, Drugs, Disorder and Anti-social behaviour Reduction Strategy; future Safer Kingston Partnership Plans; the Alcohol Strategy; the Kingston First Business Plan; the K +20 Area Action Plan; and Local Development Framework.. It will be important to ensure that activities, programmes and investment undertaken by RBK are complementary to, and/or compatible with, those strategies/plans and, as such, the Implementation Plan will be a ‘living ‘document to meet changing needs and aspirations.

Introduction

11. The Strategy is intended to focus initially on Kingston Town Centre. It is intended to complement other borough strategies that deal with crime, disorder and anti-social behaviour, including the Council’s 2005-08 Crime and Disorder Reduction Strategy, and would complement the Kingston Town Centre Area Action Plan and the Council’s Statement of Licensing Policy. It will help deliver one of the eight key objectives of the K+20 Area Action Plan, that is “To provide a clean, safe, friendly, well managed and well maintained town centre in the daytime and at night ” and assist in the implementation of Policy K21: Managing the Town Centre, a key element of which is the preparation, adoption and implementation of an After Dark Strategy. (Details of this and other relevant Strategies are included in Annex 2.) The Strategy also draws on the findings of the Visitor Management Plan 2004-2007, which recognises that there is a growing market in evening tourists and that Kingston Theatre, once open, will add another dimension to the night time economy, bringing in a completely different market segment and new visitors. The Strategy seeks to address a range of issues from anti-social behaviour and crime prevention to adequate late-night transport provision to support evening and night-time activities. The Strategy sets out the Council’s approach to the impact of the night time economy and looks ahead over the next three years. It reflects an integrated approach and has been developed with our major partners, including the Police and Kingston Town Centre Management.

Background

12. There has been a significant growth in the number of residents living in the town centre. 1800 homes have been built in the town centre in the last twenty years, with up to another 1,000 envisaged. There have also been some major capital investments in recent years in the leisure and entertainment industry in the town centre. These include: The Rotunda (Odeon, Megabowl, David Lloyd and restaurants); Oceana and The Works Night Clubs; Esporta and Holmes Place (now Virgin Leisure) Health and Fitness Centres. The Rose Theatre when open in 2007 will add to the cultural range of facilities in the town centre.

13. Kingston is a University town with around 20,000 university students, plus 3,600 full time and 9,000 part-time students attending Kingston College, so there is a ready source of visitors to support the evening economy. Across the town centre as a whole 2

there are around 700 employers providing 17,500 jobs in the town centre, including jobs in catering, bars and entertainments.

14. There are around 69 premises within the Town Centre that are licensed under the Licensing Act 2003 [i.e. off licences 7, Public Houses 21, Night Clubs 4, Registered Clubs 2, Restaurants 25 and Night Cafes 10]. Upwards of 10,000 people visit the town centre in the evenings to go to the three night clubs (which have capacity for 5,450 persons) and the other 25 or so clubs, pubs and bars (approximate capacity 6,000 persons). If the cinemas and other premises in the Rotunda (including the David Lloyd Leisure Centre and Megabowl) and the various health clubs are included, the capacity increases by a further 3,500-4,000. The Rose Theatre, when opened, will have capacity for 1,300 people.

15. The “After Dark Economy” is extremely positive and important for Kingston in attracting businesses, providing employment, leisure and tourism. It provides a cultural and social outlet for residents and visitors. However, there are significant challenges arising from Kingston town centre being a “hub” for evening entertainment in southwest London. Over the past few years, there has been an expansion of bars, night clubs, restaurants and licensed premises with a publicised night time capacity of 15,500 persons. The main challenges being:

§ reducing crime (and the fear of crime) and anti-social behaviour, particularly those incidents fuelled by alcohol misuse;

§ using Planning powers to create improved facilities and a broader diversity of uses, whilst at the same time easing the tensions that have arisen between those who live in the town centre and those who visit it;

§ maintaining retail diversity through the planning process and ensuring the balance of uses does not tip in favour of Class A3 (restaurants and cafes), A4 (drinking establishments) and A5 (hot food take-ways) uses;

§ addressing traffic and transport issues: getting people home safely at night, e.g. synchronising late buses, easy access to licensed minicab and taxi provision and car park opening hours with closing times of venues;

§ tackling environmental issues such as street washing, noise, vandalism, litter and graffiti;

§ promoting a partnership approach in which the licensees take on greater responsibilities for the actions and well-being of their customers; and

§ the need to ensure appropriate levels of funding are available to support new night-time initiatives.

16. The major challenge is to make Kingston Town Centre safe and clean with creatively designed public spaces, to significantly increase the focus on the ‘evening economy’ i.e. between 6:00 pm – 10:30/11:00 pm with a good balance of facilities for all age groups in order to create (a family atmosphere for a large part of the evening) and to disperse visitors quickly, quietly and safely when facilities close.

There are challenges in relation to evening tourism and visitor management. Visitors are influenced by the cleanliness of the streets, transport accessibility and quality of services and the range of cultural and entertainment provision. 3

Improving the perception of the town centre at night, i.e. crime and the fear of crime is important. Kingston is one of the safest London boroughs. On average there was less than one reported incident of Personal Robbery per day in the whole borough in both 2005/06 and 2006/07 (316 in 2005/06 and 281 in 2006/07 - Source: Metropolitan Police - http://www.met.police.uk/crimestatistics/2006/2005_06_yend.xls and http://www.met.police.uk/crimestatistics/2007/2006_07_yend.xls ) Kingston has always been a regional night-time venue, yet there has been a 17% drop in Violent Crime (Wounding and Common Assault) in Grove Ward which includes Kingston Town Centre between 2004/05 and 2006/07 (Source: BCS Comparison Data provided by Metropolitan Police Performance Directorate).

Kingston was the third lowest of the London boroughs for Violence against a person and Street Crime (Personal Robbery, Snatches and Pickpocketing) combined in both 2005/06 and 2006/07 (Source: Metropolitan Police - http://www.met.police.uk/crimestatistics/2006/2005_06_yend.xls and http://www.met.police.uk/crimestatistics/2007/2006_07_yend.xls - RBK’s position calculated by totalling the figures for Violence against a person, Personal Robbery, Snatches and Pickpocketing for every borough and sorting the data by borough )

(Note: The above data is comparative. However crime categories, counting rules, definitions etc can be changed by Government from time to time which means that caution will always need to be exercised when making future comparisons)

Periodic visits by the Police Territorial Support Group have helped address short-term public disorder issues. Local Police have developed a 24/7 strategy for Kingston Town Centre, including a more visible Police presence. Nevertheless, it is recognised that crime and fear of crime is still a concern for many residents and visitors and the challenge is to reduce this and enhance their quality of life.

There are many examples, nationally and locally, of public service initiatives put forward by the Police, cleansing, accident and emergency services and transport providers to meet the challenges of a successful evening and late night economy. Essentially, the Strategy aims to acknowledge and promote examples of good practice and develop local solutions to local issues, responding to changing circumstances as they occur and to develop a common understanding between the stakeholders over the approach to be adopted, including developing joint initiatives.

In response to the challenges set out above, the strategy brings together a number of aims supported by key actions which are vital to the successful management of the night-time economy in Kingston Town Centre.

Aim 1 - To bring both Public and Private Sector Partners and Stakeholders together and develop a consensual and responsive approach to the management of the night-time economy

The Strategy depends on a partnership approach that involves pooling the resources and responsibilities of all the different interest groups with a stake in the town centre in order to develop collective action and initiatives. This includes all the different night- time operators in the food/drinks and entertainment industry (e.g. cinemas, cafés, amusement arcades, nightclubs and, in due course, the theatre and, it is hoped, a full service hotel) , the Police, the emergency services, Kingston Town Centre Management, the Council’s environmental and Cleansing Services etc.

The Strategy needs to be flexible and responsive to changes (i.e. changes in market conditions and the dynamics of the evening and night-time economies of the town centres and how this centre is being used (or not used) and by whom, and the availability of resources).

Action Plan

§ To work with major partners and stakeholders and build on locally available information to target resources to greatest effect.

§ To work with the Civic Trust in promoting the provision of appropriate facilities and venues complementary to the Theatre.

§ Provide effective local leadership and commitment where responsibilities, priorities and linkages between the different partners are clear.

§ To build on the work of successful partnerships. For example, Kingston Town Centre Management serves on the Safer Kingston Partnership and their Business Plan focuses on the contribution that the wider business community can make to the feeling of safety and security when visiting Kingston Town Centre. It has achieved a number of notable successes to date, including the first BID in the UK, gaining “Park Mark status” for all nine car parks, securing the provision of more night buses, and as part of a partnership initiative, providing 3 minicab booking kiosks and contributing to the funding of ‘Black Cab marshals and the appointment of a part-time Night Time Manager and night-time street pastors.

§ Support the Kingston Police 24/7 Strategy for Kingston Town Centre and ensure that activities, programmes and investment undertaken by RBK are compatible with, and support that strategy .

§ Encourage the Magistrates Court to adopt Bench Statements appropriate to Town Centre crime.

§ To ensure, where possible, appropriate targets contained within Local Area Agreements take account of the challenges faced by Kingston Town Centre

§ Explore the scope for national funding of projects designed to reduce crime and fear of crime, improve public spaces through, e.g. the National Lottery, Local Area Agreements.

§ Working with Partners to reduce the fear of crime, e.g. promoting positive media messages, assessing the impact of improved street lighting, continuing to carry out regular public surveys of levels of fear of crime.

Aim 2 - To use planning powers to greater effect and to seek greater consistency between policies and decisions made under planning powers and those made under the Licensing Act so that they complement one another as far as is legally possible

Planning powers have a key role to play in creating well designed town and city centres. Whilst there is a clear distinction between the roles, responsibilities and powers of the Council in relation to its planning and licensing functions and approval or rejection under either does not imply or lead to a similar decision under the other, there is a recognition that there needs to be consistency as far as that is possible and the relevant procedures permit e.g. in any restrictive conditions placed by either planning or licensing on operating hours and the use of their outside areas. Planning Policies, Licensing Policies and the Local Implementation Plan (Transport) should as far as possible complement one another .

Action Plan

§ Appraise planning applications for new leisure uses relating to the night-time economy in terms of their nature, scale and location, their relationship to existing facilities and their likely impact, individually and cumulatively, on the character and function of the centre and residential uses and amenities (cross reference with the K+20 Area Action Plan, Policy K6).

§ Encourage, through the Kingston town centre Area Action Plan (K+20) and other Local Development Framework documents and policies, a diversity of evening leisure uses, including non-alcohol based uses throughout the town centre to attract a wide range of ages and social groups e.g. street cafes and retailers opening later, sports facilities.

§ Use S106 planning obligations more creatively to ensure that uses are appropriately controlled, through the use of measures, works or financial contributions (in accordance with ODPM Circular 5/2005 Planning Obligations or subsequent legislation) to mitigate the impact of new development including late night activities or through the provision of additional facilities. These can include ensuring that toilets (including e.g. mobile urinals), public transport infrastructure improvements (e.g. funding towards late night bus services, improved information and waiting environment for bus and rail passengers, safe car parks open at night) and public safety features (e.g. funding towards providing more uniformed personnel on the streets at night such as taxi marshals, Parking Attendants and town centre wardens, CCTV cameras, minicab kiosks and improved lighting) are incorporated in proposals or otherwise secured.

§ The Council will consider the use of planning obligations in the context of proposed developments involving evening/night time uses to secure commuted maintenance payments, fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the 6

proposal, which will be used towards the reasonable ongoing costs of securing a clean, safe, attractive and well managed night time environment. It will consider making specific provision for this in its LDF policies having regard to guidance set down in Circular 05/2005.

§ Impose planning conditions which seek to protect residential amenity and promote safety and security e.g. staggered opening/closing hours (to more closely align with transport capacity and policing), adequate waste management arrangements and anti graffiti treatment to vulnerable facades. Where appropriate, secure operating plans on premises to e.g. control the use of outside eating/drinking areas and minimise/prevent noise and disturbance from patrons arriving and leaving premises, especially in residential areas.

§ Support longer opening hours of shops and (subject to resources) public buildings like the library and Tourist Information Centre and support the expanded use of the Market House as part of encouraging evening activities throughout the town but particularly in the Market Place.

§ Ensure, including through improvements to the design and lighting of public spaces, that the town centre, including riverside is a more welcoming and safe environment at night and encourage activities that appeal to all age groups

§ Promote improved design and safety in the public and private realms, particularly points where they interact. Design out crime e.g. by avoiding the use of solid shutters covering shop fronts and by creating an improved pedestrian environment with a network of attractively designed and well lit public spaces and routes. Design for mixed use development but with effective separation of noise sensitive uses e.g. housing, using high standards of noise insulation etc and minimising nuisance by locating venues offering evening and night time entertainment close to transport hubs.

§ Vigorously pursue appropriate enforcement action to ensure compliance with planning conditions relating to the operation of premises

§ Ensure, so far as legally possible, that planning and licensing decisions where appropriate operate in tandem [for example in the hours of operation and the use of outside areas for smoking] and that as a consequence the licensing and planning conditions under which they operate are robust and effective.

Aim 3 - To promote the four objectives of the new licensing system: prevention of crime and disorder, public safety the prevention of public nuisance and the protection of children from harm The new system is designed to encourage greater consumer choice about how and where to spend their leisure time. Removing fixed closing times will prevent artificial peaks in demand for supporting infrastructure – such as transport home. These peaks can contribute to crime and disorder and act as a barrier to the development of a safe and thriving night-time economy. Although implementation of licensing law can only be part of the Councils holistic approach to control of nuisance and anti social behaviour, the permissions given to licensed premises will respond to relevant concerns by residents and responsible authorities by the application of conditions that are both stringent and appropriate and compliance will be enforced in conjunction with the aid of the police and other agencies.

Action Plan

§ Work with the night time business community, pub watch, Kingston Town Centre Management and other parties to better manage the Town Centre at night.

§ Keep the Statement of Licensing Policy under regular scrutiny and review it annually, even though there is only a statutory requirement to do this every 3 years.

§ Impose conditions on licensed premises where deemed appropriate and lawful (noting that this can only be done in response to applications where representations have been received).

§ To implement the agreed protocol with the Police to enforce licensing conditions, in particular to investigate allegations that conditions have been breached.

§ Continue to provide police support for youth discos (for under 17-year olds).

Aim 4 - To change attitudes to irresponsible drinking and reduce alcohol related crime and anti-social behaviour

Alcohol related crime and anti-social behaviour is perceived to be a problem in Kingston town centre, not only at weekends but also on some nights during the week. Anti-social behaviour and drinking in the streets can intimidate others and lead to disorder and public nuisance, which makes town centres less welcoming for others. The Council will work with local Police and partners in the Safer Kingston Partnership to tackle alcohol related crime and anti-social behaviour in the town centre.

Action Plan

§ Adopt a local Alcohol Strategy based on the principles of the new “National Alcohol Strategy”

§ Co-ordinate action between RBK (Trading Standards) and local Police to reduce under-age drinking in the town centre.

§ Encourage licensees, if appropriate by imposing conditions on licences (particularly of late night pubs), to behave more responsibly by providing plastic glasses and, where appropriate, plastic bottles and preventing customers leaving the premises with glasses and bottles.

§ Make use of powers available under the Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001, exclusions policy in civil law and the Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003.

§ Make better use of the CCTV coverage of the town centre and, as resources permit, extend coverage of monitoring to areas affected by the activities of the night time economy e.g. Kingston Hospital A & E.

Aim 5 - To encourage licensees to implement best practice

Businesses have a key role in preventing underage and binge drinking by trading lawfully so that their customers can enjoy a safe evening out in the town centre. This in turn can help attract a broader range of people. The findings of the British Crime Survey showed that a significantly high proportion of crime was linked to poorly managed licensed premises.

On 1 July 2007 the Health Act 2006 will also bring in to effect an outright ban on smoking in all enclosed or substantially enclosed public places [where the public are present] and all premises where people work. This will of course include all pubs, clubs and eating establishments. The effect of this will be that patrons wishing to smoke will be required to leave the premises whilst they do so and will congregate on the roadways outside of the premises or in open areas within the premises if this is permitted by licensing and/or planning conditions. This has the potential to increase noise and litter outside premises and the Council is unable to provide any exemptions from the law to prevent this happening.

Applications are likely to be received for planning permissions to erect shelters/canopies for smokers and for variations to licences under the Licensing Act 2003 where the existing conditions prevent them from using outside gardens. Such applications will have to be dealt with through due process having regard to the individual circumstances which, in the case of licences, will include the effect on residents.

Action Plan

§ Work with owners and operators of premises in the town centre to encourage an industry-led code of practice focussing on key areas that will have a big impact, developing clear protocols for seeking proof of age and effective end- of-evening dispersal policies and a voluntary end of irresponsible drink promotions. Encourage businesses to ensure that information on transport options i.e. bus stations, taxi ranks, minicab numbers and offices, is widely available as best practice

§ Impose more restrictive operating conditions on premises where there is evidence of problems.

§ Target premises known to have problems and help them to develop actions to trade more responsibly and reduce the burden on the majority of premises who meet their requirements.

§ Work with licensees to set up a responsible licensees’ accreditation scheme as part of the emerging Kingston Alcohol Strategy and encourage licensees to participate in it.

§ Ensure as far as possible that managers of “smoke free” legislation are aware of the legal requirement not to allow smoking in them and that they make their customers aware of the need to behave responsibly whilst smoking outside [e.g. by not causing noise or obstruction or leaving cigarette litter]. The Licensing Committee should consider whether there can and should be changes to the Council’s licensing policy having regard to the effect that smoking in outside areas may have on residents living in the vicinity. This will 9

be particularly relevant when considering variations to licences under the 2003 Act in order to permit the use of outside areas that are currently prevented from being used at times when premises are allowed to sell alcohol. Best Practice examples will be investigated.

Aim 6 - To ensure Kingston Town Centre is clean and attractive at night

Residents and visitors are entitled to expect a clean, safe, attractive and vibrant town centre. Part of the aim includes improving the tourist environment and encouraging a more “continental experience” of evening and late night cafés, restaurants and entertainments such as the Theatre.

Action Plan

§ Improve lighting, particularly in locations that are dark and uninviting, but heavily used.

§ Improve the visual environment at gateways into the town centre.

§ Improve visitor safety along the Riverside Walk, particularly those areas in close proximity to bars and night clubs. In this respect the Council will, in Spring 2007, be installing safety railings along the section of the Riverside Walk between Kingston Bridge and the Gazebo Public House.

§ To improve the quality of the Riverside Walk referred to above, the Council in association with Canadian and Portland, the owners of Bishop’s Palace House will implement an environmental enhancement scheme in Spring 2007, which involves improved lighting, surfacing, seating and planting.

§ Progress proposals to make other riverside areas within the town centre safer in the evenings and at night. Spaces such as Eagle Wharf (the public space next to the Ram Pubic House) and Thames Side are known ‘problem’ areas at night, and funding from Transport for London has been secured to improve the quality of these spaces and make them desirable places to visit. Creating places that attract a broad cross-section of visitors will improve surveillance and help to make these riverside spaces self-policing.

§ Provide clear signing of routes to and from the Theatre which link with the train station, buses and car parks and seek to make these routes both inviting and attractive. Suggested routes are: - Kingston station to Fife Rd/Clarence St/Church St/Market Pl/High St – Theatre - Drapers Car Park to Kingston Hall Rd/High St – Theatre - Fairfield Bus Station and Cattle Market car park to Clarence St/Church St/Market Pl/High St – Theatre - John Lewis bus stops, Wood St to Little Wood St/Church St/Market Pl/High St – Theatre - Brook St bus stops to Eden St/High St – Theatre - Turks Pier (and also Bentall’s car park), Wood St to Vicarage Rd/Riverside/Charter Quay Piazza/Wadbrook St - Theatre

§ Promote, and support Kingston Town Centre Management initiatives to clean private alleys off the main streets, including Castle Street and Eden Street, and the introduction of pavement washing on an appropriate basis. 10

§ Explore options for the provision of additional toilet facilities, including disabled facilities, in appropriate locations. This could be achieved through S106 legal obligations on the back of significant developments, or through the use of a LPSA reward grant. There may be other funding opportunities that could also be beneficial.

§ Encourage the Police to take enforcement action against perpetrators of street fouling. Offenders can be prosecuted under Section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986 and on the spot fines can be levied for disorderly behaviour under Section 1 of the Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001.

§ Review the street cleansing regime in the town centre and revise as appropriate when future contracts are renegotiated. This may include wet washing of streets in ‘hot spot’ areas before people arrive in the mornings, e.g. around transport interchanges, including bus stops in Eden Street.

§ Seeking the agreement of late night take-away premises (including trailers and kiosks) to provide bins outside their premises which are regularly emptied and cleansed at their expense and provide or pay for street washing outside their premises on a weekly basis.

§ Encourage businesses to better manage and reduce their commercial waste. Ensure that businesses package their waste in suitable containers.

Aim 7 - To provide more uniformed personnel on the streets at night

The need for high visibility policing was highlighted as one of the residents’ key priorities in connection with the Borough’s Crime and Disorder Reduction Strategy. People should expect to be able to walk through town centres safely, both in the day and at night, without fear of crime, disorder and anti-social behaviour. With premises around the borough seeking later licensing hours, police resources will be increasingly stretched.

The Kingston Safer Transport Team was launched at the end of June by Transport for London (TfL) and the Metropolitan Police Service. This consists of ring-fenced police teams of at least two Sergeants, one Constable and 18 Police Community Support Officers (PCSOs) dedicated to improving safety and security on the public transport network. The primary role of Safer Transport Teams is to provide visible reassurance and to focus on problem-solving, community liaison and crime prevention, all of which greatly impact on crime and disorder levels and public perception of safety. They currently concentrate on the weekday peak for disorder and anti-social behaviour between 15.00 and 18.00 and on the late evening peak between 22.00 and 00.00.

However, this is not considered to be just about uniformed Police, but a whole range of people who provide an extended presence on the street, including Police Community Support Officers ( PCSOs), Neighbourhood Wardens, civil enforcement officers, private security staff and door supervisors etc. Deploying a uniformed presence, especially in hotspot areas and at peak times after dark, including at transport interchanges, i.e. bus stops, stations and taxi ranks, minicab offices and where there is a high concentration of night-time premises, can help avoid trouble and 11

provide reassurance. The Council has a role to play in this through cleansing, licensing and support of young people. Communication systems, co-ordinated management between venues and CCTV controlled radio links increases effectiveness.

Action Plan

§ Participation in the Joint Transport Action Group set up to review the work of the Safer Transport Teams in South West London and to discuss priorities, activities and performance etc.

§ Encourage Partners to continue to support the funding of street pastors – (United Reform Church volunteers operating in 2 teams of 6 - 8 persons (depending on availability) on Fri and Sat nights 10:00pm – 4:00am) i.e. joint funding by the Police, KTCM, the Council and Pubwatch to meet the costs of a full-time co-ordinator and providing training and radios for the street pastors

§ Encourage Partners to continue to support police resources by the employment of evening wardens/ambassadors and taxi marshals.

Aim 8 - To further improve bus and rail services, increase the provision of night-time taxi, minicab and car parking facilities and provide enhanced passenger information to help people get home safely at night.

The challenge is to provide regular, safe and reliable transport at night, to disperse people in order to avoid groups congregating and causing anti-social behaviour. Later running buses, trains, taxis and minicabs play an important part in getting people home safely. Although transport crime rates are low, people (especially women, young people and minority ethnic communities) have personal security concerns when travelling after dark, particularly the waiting and walking parts of the journey.

There is a need to work with the Police and both the leisure (pub and club owners etc) and transport industries to ensure safe environments surrounding public transport, taxi ranks and car parks and ensure the wider availability of public transport, taxis and mincabs when and where required for getting people home at night. Kingston University can also play an important partnership role in helping to achieve this aim. It is an aspiration with the countdown replacement system that bus running times can also be provided at the rail station to provide a more comprehensive and joined up service.

Action Plan

§ To lobby for improved late night public transport through more train services after midnight, and later opening and staffing of the station ticketing hall, the extension of all night bus services by making a sound business case for such provision. It is acknowledged that it may be unrealistic to seek a 24-hour rail service in view of the need to undertake rail maintenance. However, through discussion with SW Trains, it may be possible to negotiate later rail services on busy nights, including the weekends.

§ To continue to impress upon the Mayor for London Kingston town centre’s importance as a metropolitan entertainment centre and to work with the Mayor to build on the success of existing initiatives, extending and improving the quality and availability of late night bus and rail transport to and from Kingston. 12

Late night buses over the borough boundary into Surrey e.g. to Epsom and Esher, are also needed as significant numbers of night time visitors to Kingston live there.

§ Encourage the increased availability of both black cab and minicab services, particularly at night club closing times by facilitating a taxi marshalling service, minicab kiosks and locations from which taxis and minicabs can be ordered and appropriate safe waiting places for taxis and minicabs.

§ Consider whether the availability and affordability of black cabs has an impact on the ability to meet the Strategy aims; how this is being addressed in other town centres offering late night entertainment; and the possibility of lobbying the Mayor for London (e.g. with other outer London boroughs) on better provision and reduced fares.

§ Work closely with the Police and the Public Carriage Office to consider and implement appropriate initiatives to reduce illegal minicab touting, including considering whether, and how, CCTV might effectively be used to clamp down on touts.

§ Seek the provision of adequate and safe car parking facilities for night time users.

§ Improve public transport connections and interchanges at the bus and train stations.

§ To set up a website or link to a website that informs people planning an evening out in Kingston town centre of things to do and how to get home safely by providing information on e.g. opening/closing times of venues, night time bus routes, the availability of minicab booking kiosks and how to pre-book journeys home, how to recognise licensed cabs and minicabs etc.

§ Utilise, publicise and extend the existing on-street Information Points to provide 24-hour information on the different available transport opportunities i.e. bus and rail stops, routing and timetable information, time of the last train; taxi and minicab pick up points and booking offices; car park location and opening hours; and public safety information.

§ To seek to persuade Kingston University, the Student Union (KUSU) and other Universities to expand their role in contributing to the provision of late night transport to meet the needs of an increasing number and diverse range of students using the town centre. Undertake research and analysis in other appropriate London boroughs and university towns with recent large increases in student numbers.

Aim 9 - To reduce noise at night

Complaints about noise nuisance late at night and the perception of noise nuisance as a problem have increased from residents living within and on the fringes of the town centre. Environmental Health and Licensing Act powers and controls may only be used to deal with noise from premises, whereas the Police are responsible for dealing with the noise and disorder that occurs generally in the street. One of the main sources of noise nuisance is people gathering at closing times in search of transport home. (Nuisance also arises from gatherings of people who do not wish to go home 13

at that time). The challenge for RBK and its Partners, therefore, has to be finding ways of reducing this.

Action Plan

§ It is a priority to improve the provision of late night transport and help people find the right transport home as quickly as possible, so that crowds do not congregate after night clubs close and cause noise disturbance.

§ Use uniformed and security staff to keep order in queues for those waiting for transport home, including keeping noise levels down, reporting any problems to the police and helping people find the right transport home. Night club, pub and bar employees are seen as having primary responsibility for this.

§ Continue to investigate complaints about noise from premises under Section 79 of the Environmental Protection Act and issue abatement notices where a statutory noise nuisance is judged to have occurred.

§ Tackle noise from licensed premises through the provisions of the Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003 and the Licensing Act 2003. This includes the power to issue a 24 hour closure order for any licensed premises causing a public nuisance.

Available Legislative Tools

There is a whole raft of legislative powers available to the Council to tackle anti-social behaviour, including the following:

1. The Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001 , which:

§ Enables local authorities to prohibit drinking in named areas where there has been a history of alcohol-fuelled anti-social behaviour through the creation of a Designated Public Place Order (DPPO) and to provide the police and CSOs with powers to enforce this restriction. Police powers currently include confiscating open cans and bottles of drinks. Under the Licensing Act 2003 , the police and CSOs can remove unopened alcoholic drinks from underage drinkers or people causing or likely to cause a public nuisance.

§ Allows Local Authority Trading Standards Officers to conduct test purchases at licensed premises, including supermarkets, based on intelligence of sales to persons under 18.

§ Gives the police the power to close noisy or rowdy establishments for up to 24 hours.

§ Imposes a duty on the owners and staff of licensed premises not to sell alcohol to persons under 18.

§ Enables the police to issue Fixed Penalty Notices (FPNs) for a range of alcohol-related offences of disorder. These include:

- disorderly behaviour while drunk in a pubic place;

- being drunk in the highway, buying or attempting to buy alcohol for consumption in a licensed premises by a person under 18; 14

- consumption of alcohol in a ‘no alcohol designated public place’;

- causing harassment, harm and distress;

- purchase alcohol on licensed premises for a person under 18;

- consumption of alcohol in a licensed premises by a person under 18;

- delivery of alcohol to persons under 18 or allowing such delivery.

2. Use of the Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003 (i.e. “Dispersal of Groups” powers) by police, working with the Council, to target action in problem areas, by issuing Dispersal Orders to help remove intimidation and anti-social behaviour from the streets. Dispersal Order can also be used to take juveniles home after 9pm.

3. Acceptable Behaviour Contracts (ABCs) that are voluntarily agreed between an individual and one or more local agencies, e.g. the police. These can be linked to Anti-Social Behaviour Orders (ASBOs) are civil remedies which are issued by the Courts. A breach is a criminal offence.

4. Individual Support Orders (ISOs) can be issued under the Criminal Justice Act 2003 for 10 - 17 year olds with ASBOs, together with Parenting Orders.

5. Powers are available in the Licensed Premises (Exclusion of Certain Persons) Act 1980 to issue Exclusion Orders to ban trouble-makers from pubs and clubs and/or entire town centres.

6. The Criminal Damage Act 1971 (England and Wales) makes vandalism and damage of town-centre property an arrestable offence, triable on indictment.

7. Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act (2004) and Use Classes Order (Amendment) (England) Order 2005 , which changes how premises are classified by use so that it is now possible to differentiate between restaurants, hot food take-aways, bars, pubs and night clubs in planning and licensing applications. This will enable tighter controls over the use of town centre premises.

8. Licensing Act 2003 , which gives the police extra powers to close disorderly premises and toughen the law on selling alcohol to minors.

§ Enhancement of the quality of the operating environment of Kingston Town Centre as a result of its creation as a Business Improvement District under the Local Government Act 2004.

9. Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Bill which will strengthen the Council’s powers to act on a range of local environmental quality issues such as litter and graffiti.

10. Revised Local Transport Plans that focus on improved access opportunities and services.

11. National Alcohol Strategy - ‘Safe, Sensible and Social’ (May 2007) which sets out a new cross-Government approach to tackling alcohol misuse.

ANNEX 2 Supporting Documents

The 2005-08 Crime and Disorder Reduction Strategy

This strategy is based on a comprehensive audit of crime, drug misuse, disorder and anti-social behaviour in the Borough and the views of residents and other groups and agencies. It, therefore, provides an authoritative base in support of the After Dark Strategy. The key findings of residents’ surveys and the most recent Crime, Drug Misuse and Anti-Social Behaviour audit have confirmed that anti-social behaviour, in various forms, remains a significant problem for many residents throughout the borough, particularly in Kingston Town Centre. The top four issues identified by residents, in priority order, were:

§ the need for higher visibility policing;

§ criminal damage: concerns about graffiti and vandalism (particularly to telephone boxes and bus stops);

§ anti-social behaviour;

§ alcohol abuse, in particular measures to address the late night binge drinking and under-age drinking.

The audit showed that 30% of all the Borough’s crimes take place in Kingston Town Centre, coinciding with the main centre for evening entertainment. The Strategy intends to target measures, including embracing those in other relevant plans and strategies, that will reduce crime and anti-social behaviour in the town centre, so that people feel more reassured about using it at night. This includes giving high priority to the integration of the After Dark Strategy.

Some of the proposed actions in the Strategy are equally relevant to the After Dark Strategy. These include:

§ high visibility policing;

§ street wardens and others who patrol the streets;

§ using powers available under the Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003;

§ continuing to target anti-social behaviour on a multi-agency basis;

§ investigating allegations of persistent noise nuisance problems from commercial premises and operating noise patrols on Saturday nights and Sunday mornings during the summer;

§ monitoring the impact of the new Licensing act provisions and promoting the ‘good management’ of licensed premises and a sensible drinking culture amongst customers;

§ appointment of a Waste Management Enforcement Officer whose role will increase Litter Enforcement;

§ building on the existing Anti-Graffiti Strategy;

§ reducing the incidence of anti-social behaviour on public transport;

§ raise awareness among young people of the negative effects on anti-social behaviour;

§ improving the quality of the local environment, e.g. at local rail and bus stations, improving street lighting, providing a “countdown” type service as part of the rollout of the replacement service but make it also available at Train stations;

§ reducing under age drinking in the borough through implementing new ‘Proof of Age’ identify cards, Test Purchasing operations;

§ reduce levels of alcohol related noise and nuisance, including use of legislative provisions such as Penalty Notices for Disorder and Designated Public Place Orders;

§ achieving the ‘Safer Shopping’ award;

§ seeking to maintain ‘Park Mark’ (Safer Parking Accreditation) for town centre car parks already accredited and helping other operators achieve accreditation;

§ work on a multi-agency basis to target locations where assaults occur most frequently;

§ identify means of enhancing joint working and liaison between the CCTV Control Centre and the business communities in street crime/violent crime ‘hot spots’; and

§ enhanced publicity campaigns.

‘How to Manage Town Centres’

Guidance provided by the ODPM on ‘How to Manage Town Centres’, has also been used as a framework in the preparation of the After Dark Strategy. The ODPM guidance explores current challenges associated with the town centres and the night economy (e.g. noise, litter, street fouling, getting home safely and drinking safely) and highlights the powers and tools available to address these challenges.

Kingston town centre Area Action Plan: draft Submission Version

The Area Action Plan provides valuable background information for the Strategy. Issues associated with the evening economy were identified at the outset of the AAP process as one of the town centre’s main weaknesses that needed to be addressed. The draft AAP was considered by the Council in April 2007 and approved for submission to the Secretary of State in May 2007. Issues associated with the night time economy and the need to broaden the range of attractions in the town centre, especially in the early evenings, to attract a wider spread of visitors and reduce anti-social behaviour have featured prominently throughout all the consultation stages. One of the eight key objectives of the draft Area Action Plan, is “To provide a clean, safe, friendly, well managed and well maintained town centre in the daytime and at night “. A key element of Policy K21: Managing the Town Centre, is the preparation, adoption and implementation of an After Dark Strategy. Policy K6: Provision of Facilities for Arts, Culture, Tourism, Entertainment, Leisure, Recreation, the Community, Faith and Voluntary Sectors and Hotel Accommodation also aims to address the issue.

Licensing Policy document (prepared by BEHO)

Full Council approved the Council’s Statement of Licensing Policy on 14 December 2004.

RBK Cultural Strategy 2002 - 2006

This refers to changing community perceptions in the borough. Surveys reveal that, whilst the centre of Kingston was once primarily associated with shopping, more recently it is being associated with a perceptively threatening ‘night life’ culture, dominated by young people using its bars and night clubs and fast food outlets. The Strategy suggests the addition of new cultural facilities, particularly the Theatre, new style street restaurants and cafés, late opening libraries and cinemas offer the prospect of a better mix of cultural facilities for a wider range of people of all generations whether they are living in or visiting the centre. This opens up the prospect of re-integrating the community and a growth of ‘community identity’. At the same time, the increase in numbers of visitors poses management challenges. The Strategy seeks to develop a strong cultural base and increase access to cultural activities. It also seeks to improve the range and quality of venues (e.g. a new Central Library and Learning Centre, greater use of streets and markets as venues for performance events/street entertainment). Working with partners like the Theatre Trust, Kingston University and the Asian Arts Forum, it seeks to raise the quality of events and activities by bringing more high calibre events to Kingston. Opportunities for more effective use of cafés and pubs for staging events are identified.

Visitor Management Plan 2004-2007

This identifies the key issues that need to be addressed to develop tourism and meet the needs and ever increasing expectations of tourists and sets out an Action Plan to develop and strengthen Kingston’s tourism infrastructure. It considers that the management of the night-time economy requires review to respond to its changing needs and points to the difficulties with the provision of late night transport. Surveys undertaken in 2003, including a visitor satisfaction survey, identified that 17% of visitors came to Kingston for eating, drinking and socialising (with 33% of total expenditure in Kingston spent on food and drink) and 17% stayed for over seven hours. Street cleanliness, lack of public toilets and overcrowding featured among the worst aspects. Also criticised were the run down appearance of Kingston Station, poor frequency of trains, poor signage and the need to extend car parking opening hours. The opportunities and challenges for developing the visitor economy resulting from the 2012 Olympic bid are highlighted, as are the threats of terrorism.

Mayor of London’s draft best practice guidance ‘Managing the Night Time Economy’, June 2006

Suggests, with case study examples, how LAs and the private/voluntary sectors can work in partnership to support the development of the evening economy in appropriate locations and improve the way they manage its impacts where there are concentrations of clubs, pubs, bars and restaurants.

Civic Trust good practice guidance ‘Night vision Town Centres for All’ October 2006

Based on research findings, it highlights some of the essential elements needed to provide variety, choice and greater accessibility in evening and late-night economies in order to make town centres more inclusive for all sections of the community and how to achieve a sustainable balance between them. Local Area Agreement

The Local Area Agreement includes a Stretch Target to reduce wounding and common assault in the town centre and surrounding Grove Ward to a figure not exceeding 2,528 in the three years ending 2008/09. It also includes a commitment to ensure that each year the borough-wide figure for wounding and common assault does not exceed the baseline set in 18

2004/5 at 2451 offences per year. If the target is achieved, Kingston would receive a reward grant.

Under this Local Area Agreement, the partnership has been given £25,000 per year in pump prime funding and this has been used to fund a Night-time Manager who works three nights per week. Her role is to liaise with the night-time businesses (i.e. licensed premises) and the police, to be the Council’s eyes and ears throughout the night. Part of her role is to oversee the minicab booking kiosk project intended to help people make their way home safely after enjoying a night out in Kingston.

ANNEX 3

Surface car parks open 24 hours include:

1. Ashdown Road (RBK Parking Services) 168 spaces (£1.00 charge after 6.30pm until 10.30pm Monday – Saturday and 5pm until10.30pmSunday). Free parking after 10.30pm until start of charging hours the next day.

2. Canbury Place: 107spaces (£1.00 charge after 6.30pm until 10.30pm Monday – Saturday and 5pm until 10.30pm Sunday). Free parking after 10.30pm until start of charging hours the next day.

3. Thameside: 32 spaces (£1.00 charge after 6.30pm until 10.30pm Monday – Saturday and 5pm until 10.30pm Sunday). Free parking after 10.30pm until start of charging hours the next day.

4. Sury Basin: 320 spaces (free of charge after 6.30pm Monday to Saturday, 5.30pm - Sunday).

5. Cattle Market: 113 spaces. (£1.00 charge after 6.30pm until 10.30pm Monday – Saturday and 5pm until 10.30pm Sunday). Free parking after 10.30pm until start of charging hours the next day. Closed midnight Sunday until 5pm Monday for Monday Market).

6. The Bittoms (Forecourt) : 72 spaces (£1.00 charge after 6.30pm until 10.30pm Monday – Saturday and 5pm until 10.30pm Sunday). Free parking after 10.30pm until start of charging hours the next day.

7. Ashdown Road 2 (Town and City Parking Ltd) 92 spaces – charges at all hours.

8. Bishops Hall: 70 spaces under building (£2 flat rate charge between 6.30pm - 6.30am).

9. Brook Street NCP: 100 spaces (available but not advertised after 6.30pm; £1.00 charge after 6.30pm).

10. Neville House: 30 spaces – available but not advertised. (£1.00 charge after 6.30pm until 10.30pm Monday – Saturday and 5pm until 10.30pm Sunday). Free parking after 10.30pm until start of charging hours the next day.

Total: 1104 spaces ( 320 free) Multi-Storey car parks open until midnight

1. Cattle Market: 475 spaces underground (£1.00 charge after 6.30pm until 10.30pm Monday – Saturday and 5pm until 10.30pm Sunday). Free parking after 10.30pm until start of charging hours the next day.

2. Drapers: 417 spaces (£1.00 charge after 6.30pm until 10.30pm Monday – Saturday and 5pm until 10.30pm Sunday). Free parking after 10.30pm until start of charging hours the next day.

3. Bentalls ‘A’: 585 spaces (free after 6pm Monday – Saturday and after 5pm Sunday).

Multi-Storey car parks open until 1 – 2am

1. Bentalls ‘A: 585 spaces (free after 6pm Monday – Saturday and after 5pm Sunday). Note: closes midnight Monday – Thursday and Sunday, but exit remains open until 1am. Exit closes at 2am Friday and Saturday only.

Total: 1472 spaces (585 Free)

Multi-Storey car parks open 24 hours

1. Fairfield NCP: 328 spaces (£1.50 between 7pm and 8am).

2. St James NCP: 376spaces. £5.00 overnight charge.

Total: 704spaces

Total All Night Spaces 1808

Total Space until Midnight 3208

Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames

Annex 2

AFTER DARK STRATEGY

KINGSTON TOWN CENTRE

IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2007

Working in Partnership with Kingston Police, London Fire Service, Kingston Town Centre Management (Kingstonfirst) Safer Kingston Partnership, Transport for London, Kingston University, Thames Landscape Strategy, Pubwatch, Public Carriage Office, Theatre Trust, Civic Trust, Kingston Society, Transport Operators, Contractors and Developers

Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames

AFTER DARK STRATEGY - KINGSTON TOWN CENTRE

IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

Fundamental to the success of the After Dark Strategy and this Implementation Plan will be close integration with Kingston Police’s 24/7 Strategy for Kingston Town Centre; the Crime, Drugs, Disorder and Anti-social behaviour Reduction Strategy; future Safer Kingston Partnership Plans; the emerging Alcohol Strategy; the Kingston First Business Plan; the K +20 Area Action Plan, and Local Development Framework.. It will be important to ensure that activities, programmes and investment undertaken by RBK are complementary to, and/or compatible with, those strategies/plans and as such the Implementation Plan will be a ‘living ‘document to meet changing needs and aspirations.

Aim No 1 To bring both Public and Private Sector Partners and Stakeholders together and develop a consensual and responsive approach to the management of the night-time economy

Agreed Action Lead Partners Planned Timescale Likely Financial Officer Activities Outcomes Implications 2007/08 1.1 To work with major partners Gary Walsh A ll Partners Actively support Annual Successful Contained and stakeholders and build on and monitor Review Implementation within locally available information to implementation of of After Dark defined target resources to greatest After Dark Strategy actions effect. Strategy 1.2 To work with the Civic Trust in Scott Civic Trust Establishment of Steering Successful first RBK promoting the provision of Herbertson Theatre Steering Group Group – season for £10,000 appropriate facilities and Trust commissioning of August theatre venues complementary to the KTCM audit pre and Pre Audit - Civic Trust Theatre. Police post Theatre Autumn Report £10,000 RBK launch 1.3 Provide effective local Gary WalshA All Partners To act as a main Ongoing Successful Contained leadership and commitment point of contact implementation within 1

Agreed Action Lead Partners Planned Timescale Likely Financial Officer Activities Outcomes Implications 2007/08 where responsibilities, linking partners of After Dark defined priorities and linkages between and issues Strategy actions the different partners are clear. 1.4 To build on the work of Gary Walsh All Partners Maintain and Ongoing Successful Contained successful partnerships. For monitor existing implementation within example, Kingston Town partnerships and of After Dark defined Centre Management serves encourage Strategy actions on the Safer Kingston greater Partnership and their Business partnership Plan focuses on the working and contribution that the wider community business community can make engagement to the feeling of safety and security when visiting Kingston Town Centre. It has achieved a number of notable successes to date, including the first BID in the UK, gaining “Park Mark status” for all nine car parks, securing the provision of more night buses, and as part of a partnership initiative, providing 3 minicab booking kiosks and contributing to the funding of ‘Black Cab marshals and the appointment of a part-time Night Time Manager and night-time street pastors. 1.5 Support the Kingston Police Marion All partners Contribute After Ongoing Complementary Financial 24/7 Strategy for Kingston Todd contributing Dark aims to links and impact

Agreed Action Lead Partners Planned Timescale Likely Financial Officer Activities Outcomes Implications 2007/08 Town Centre and ensure that to range of outcomes identified in activities, programmes and overarching strategies listed between After appropriate investment undertaken by Strategies Dark Strategy and Strategies RBK are compatible with, and listed other appropriate support that strategy. above strategies.

1.6 Encourage the Magistrates Marion Magistrates Meet with Ongoing Agreed protocol None Court to adopt Bench Todd Police Magistrates to and actions identified Statements appropriate to Safer establish understood by Town Centre Crime Kingston appropriate Partners Partnership action required to RBK adopt Bench Clear message to KTCM Statements those who commit relevant to Town crimes in the town Centre. centre. Share progress through the Safer Safer streets Kingston Partnership 1.7 To ensure where possible, Marion Safer Town Centre Funding until § Anticipated, £25K LAA appropriate targets contained Todd Kingston Night Time 31/3/09 along with pump within Local Area Agreements Partnership Manager to subject to LAA other priming grant take account of the challenges RBK remain in post assaults initiatives, to in 2006/07. faced by Kingston Town Kingston subject to stretch contribute to 2007/08 and Centre. Police funding. remaining on an additional 2008/09 KTCM target & this reduction of 47 Total £75k being woundings considered (ABH & GBH) LAA reward best use of and common grant £350 if pump priming assaults in target grant Grove Ward achieved.

Agreed Action Lead Partners Planned Timescale Likely Financial Officer Activities Outcomes Implications 2007/08 over and above expected performance by 31/3/09. § Reduced fear of crime § Enhanced liaison with all night-time operators § Enhanced

system in place for reporting breaches of conditions

1.8 Explore the scope for national Marion Safer SSCF funding On-going Reduced crime BBN - £8K funding of projects designed to Todd Kingston already allocated and fear of crime (BCU Fund) reduce crime and fear of Partnership for 2007/08 (can crime, improve public spaces only be used to through, e.g. the National support LAA Lottery, Local Area Outcomes); Agreements. Other Partnership funding being used to support BBN; Funding being sought from Pubs & Clubs for specific 4

Agreed Action Lead Partners Planned Timescale Likely Financial Officer Activities Outcomes Implications 2007/08 crime reduction initiatives e.g. Search arches/wands

1.9 Working with partners to Marion Kingston Further Town Ongoing Reduced crime Part of reduce the fear of crime, e.g. Todd University Centre Survey in and fear of crime University promoting positive media 2007/08 or early Curriculum messages, assessing the 2008/09 (Subject impact of improved street to student c. £700 p.a. lighting, continuing to carry out availability/course for use of regular public surveys of levels arrangements) Optical Mark of fear of crime Reader and Research time

Aim No 2 To use planning powers to greater effect and to seek greater consistency between policies and decisions made under planning powers and those made under the Licensing Act so that they complement one another as far as is legally possible

Agreed Action Lead Partners Planned Timescale Likely Financial Officer Activities Outcomes Implications 2007/08 2.1 Appraise planning Geoff Internal and Assessing Ongoing To ensure that Statutory applications for new leisure Hugall External applications applications requirement uses relating to the night-time Consultees when formally comply with to assess economy in terms of their submitted and relevant policy applications nature, scale and location, also through objectives with their relationship to existing negotiations at the aim of facilities and their likely pre-application making better impact, individually and stage. decisions and 5

Agreed Action Lead Partners Planned Timescale Likely Financial Officer Activities Outcomes Implications 2007/08 cumulatively, on the character high quality and function of the centre and developments residential uses and to the benefit amenities (cross reference of all. with the K+20 Area Action Plan, Policy K6) 2.2 Encourage, through the Pat Loxton Developers, • Opening of • 2007/08 • Wider Kingston Town Centre Area land and Theatre range of Action Plan (K+20) and other property 2007/08 evening Local Development owners, other • Adoption of leisure Framework documents and RBK depts, K+20 2008, uses (non- policies, a diversity of evening KTCM implementat alcohol leisure uses, including non- ion of K6, based)

alcohol based uses K13 • Wider throughout the town centre to • Work with • Ongoing range of attract a wide range of ages partners ages/sprea and social groups. e.g. street including d of visitors cafes and retailers opening pre-app.n attracted to later, sports facilities discussion the town to centre implement K6 & K13 2.3 Use S106 planning Pat Loxton Developers, • Work with • Ongoing Securing obligations more creatively to land & property identified additional ensure that uses are owners, partners on funds to apply appropriately controlled, tenants and town centre within town through the use of measures, other business proposals & centre to works or financial occupiers. ensure implement contributions (in accordance RBK depts & through imp.s resulting with ODPM Circular 5/2005 sections in negotiations from additional Planning Obligations or DES incl. DC & that development 6

Agreed Action Lead Partners Planned Timescale Likely Financial Officer Activities Outcomes Implications 2007/08 subsequent legislation) to Neighbourhood appropriate to mitigate the impact of new Services & measures reduce/mitigate development including late KTCM secured impact night activities or through the thru’ S106. provision of additional • Based on • 2007/08 facilities. These can include K+20 AAP, ensuring that toilets (including work up e.g. mobile urinals), public S106 transport infrastructure strategy for improvements (e.g. funding town centre towards late night bus + schedule services, improved of information and waiting appropriate environment for bus and rail town centre passengers, safe car parks infrastructur open at night) and public e. safety features (e.g. funding improvemen towards providing more ts relevant uniformed personnel on the to S106 streets at night such as taxi marshals, Parking Attendants and town centre wardens, CCTV cameras, minicab kiosks and improved lighting) are incorporated in proposals or otherwise secured 2.4 The Council will consider the Pat Loxton RBK depts Preparation of Adoption of use of planning obligations in including DES SPD on S106 SPD on S106 the context of proposed – DC, H&T and infrastructure planned for developments involving Neighbourhood contributions – March 2011 will evening/night time uses to Services planned for make S106

Agreed Action Lead Partners Planned Timescale Likely Financial Officer Activities Outcomes Implications 2007/08 secure commuted Sept. 2010 requirem ents maintenance payments, fairly clearer and and reasonably related in policy easier to scale and kind to the apply proposal, which will be used towards the reasonable ongoing costs of securing a clean, safe, attractive and well managed night time environment. It will consider making specific provision for this in its LDF policies having regard to guidance set down in Circular 05/2005 2.5 Impose planning conditions Geoff Internal and Assessing Ongoing To ensure that Statutory which seek to protect Hugall External applications applications requirement residential amenity and Consultees when formally comply with to assess promote safety and security submitted. relevant policy applications e.g. staggered objectives with and to opening/closing hours (to the aim of impose more closely align with making better conditions transport capacity and decisions to when policing), adequate waste the benefit of necessary. management arrangements all. and anti graffiti treatment to vulnerable facades. Where appropriate, secure operating plans on premises to e.g. control the use of outside eating/drinking areas and minimise/prevent noise and

Agreed Action Lead Partners Planned Timescale Likely Financial Officer Activities Outcomes Implications 2007/08 disturbance from patrons arriving and leaving premises, especially in residential areas 2.6 Support longer opening hours Graham KTCM Obtain 12 month trial Increased Operating of shops and (subject to McNally RBK agreement period with 6 evening costs and resources) public buildings Marion Mason from RBK to month review cultural funding to be like the library and Tourist Kingston use Market starting Sept activities. identified. Information Centre and Society House and 07 Contributions support the expanded use of Community Place. sought from the Market House as part of Groups KTCM to partners and encouraging evening activities manage external throughout the town but events & sources. i.e. particularly in the Market activities by grants Place community groups. 2.7 Ensure, including through Paul Stack KTCM Introduction of Ongoing Reduced fear Costs to be improvements to the design Police the Kingston of crime identified and lighting of public spaces, TFL Town Centre along with that the town centre, including Safer Kingston Street Lighting funding riverside is a more welcoming Partnership Master Plan source. and safe environment at night Thames and encourage activities that Landscape appeal to all age groups Strategy RBK’s Events Team Kingston Tourism Working Group 2.8a Promote improved design and Caroline H&T, DC, Preparation of Draft Public An improved Printing and safety in the public and Kearey Design Review Public Realm Realm Design and consultation private realms, particularly Panel and Design Guide Guide due coordinated costs of

Agreed Action Lead Partners Planned Timescale Likely Financial Officer Activities Outcomes Implications 2007/08 points where they interact. Design will address Autumn 2007 public realm document Design out crime e.g. by Champion these issues, for with safety and avoiding the use of solid Crime as well as consultation security as a shutters covering shop fronts Prevention more rigorous key driver and by creating an improved Design Advisor implementation pedestrian environment with a of the network of attractively Council’s designed and well lit public existing spaces and routes. Design for Shopfront’s mixed use development but Guidance with effective separation of noise sensitive uses e.g. 2.8b housing, using high standards Geoff Assessing Ongoing To ensure that Statutory of noise insulation etc and Hugall applications applications requirement minimising nuisance by when formally comply with to assess locating venues offering Internal and submitted and relevant policy applications evening and night time External also through objectives with entertainment close to Consultees negotiations at the aim of transport hubs pre-application making better stage. decisions and ensuring high quality developments to the benefit of all. 2.9 Vigorously pursue appropriate Anthony N/A Investigate all Continuous Breaches of N/A – within enforcement action to ensure Knight reported planning existing compliance with planning and breaches of control budget. licensing conditions relating to planning resolved the operation of premises. control.

Agreed Action Lead Partners Planned Timescale Likely Financial Officer Activities Outcomes Implications 2007/08 Bob Smart Police Respond to Ongoing Compliance An increased KTCM complaints with conditions level of and carry out and operating intervention intelligence led schedules will require inspections additional resources 2.10a Ensure, so far as legally Michael Environmental Consult EHO Ongoing More None possible, that planning and Scott Health on applications consistency; licensing decisions where and ensure robust and appropriate operate in tandem consistency of effective [for example in the hours of decision taking conditions 2.10b operation and the use of outside areas for smoking] Bob Smart None In response to Ongoing The legal None and that as a consequence applications provisions the licensing and planning and request make conditions under which they for variations judgement on operate are robust and and reviews this difficult to effective predict.

Aim No 3 To promote the four objectives of the new licensing system: prevention of crime and disorder, public safety the prevention of public nuisance and the protection of children from harm

Agreed Action Lead Partners Planned Timescale Likely Financial Officer Activities Outcomes Implications 2007/08 3.1 Work with the night time Graham Pubwatch Obtain Ongoing Contribute to To be identified business community, Pubwatch, McNally Mini Cabs Firms exclusion achieving of Kingston Town Centre Night time notices when LAA three Management and other parties businesses appropriate. year assault to better manage the Town Public Carriage Review the stretch target Centre at night. Office effectiveness for town 11

Agreed Action Lead Partners Planned Timescale Likely Financial Officer Activities Outcomes Implications 2007/08 Police of the Mini centre RBK Cab booking Kingston kiosk. Tourism Working Develop an Group enforcement strategy to deal with illegal taxi cabs touts. 3.2 Keep the Statement of Bob Smart None The Policy By February Changes to None Licensing Policy under regular will be 2008 Policy e.g. in scrutiny and review it annually, reviewed respect of even though there is only a smoking ban statutory requirement to do this effects. every 3 years 3.3 Impose conditions on licensed Bob Smart None Respond to Ongoing Compliance None premises where deemed applications with the appropriate and lawful (noting and requests licensing that this can only be done in for reviews objectives response to applications where and representations have been variations in received) accordance with statutory requirements 3.4 To implement the agreed Bob Smart Police To respond Ongoing Compliance None unless protocol with the Police to to complaints with resources are enforce licensing conditions, in and carry out conditions to be increased particular to investigate intelligence allegations that conditions have lead been breached inspections 3.5 Continue to provide police Iestyn RBK Licensing/ 4 discos per Quarterly Youth Extra police

Agreed Action Lead Partners Planned Timescale Likely Financial Officer Activities Outcomes Implications 2007/08 support for youth discos (for Prosser KTCM year (next one engagement. resourcing. under 17-year olds). / Works Sept) 1000+ Works obtain attendance profit.

Aim No 4 To change attitudes to irresponsible drinking and reduce alcohol related crime and anti-social behaviour

Agreed Action Lead Partners Planned Timescale Likely Financial Officer Activities Outcomes Implications 2007/08 4.1 Adopt a local Alcohol Steff Safer Kingston Completion of By end of Alcohol Strategy based on the Royston- Partnership updated Alcohol August 2007 Strategy in principles of the new Mitchell Kingston Drug & Strategy and place with National Alcohol Strategy Alcohol Action Action Plans sustainable Team arrangements in place. 4.2 Co-ordinate action between Ted Police & Trading Test purchasing of Ongoing Reduce the Broadly RBK (Trading Standards) Forsyth Standards targeted premises number of neutral. and local Police to reduce in order to reduce premises under-age drinking in the the number of regularly town centre. premises regularly selling alcohol selling alcohol to to under 18s under 18s.

4.3 Encourage licensees, if Iestyn RBK licensing Joint police. /RBK Ongoing Improvement Cost to the appropriate by imposing Prosser Police visits to venues. management venue conditions on licences KTCM Identify worst and reduction (particularly of late night offending venues. in violence pubs), to behave more Strong responsibly by providing encouragement. plastic glasses and, where appropriate, plastic bottles 13

Agreed Action Lead Partners Planned Timescale Likely Financial Officer Activities Outcomes Implications 2007/08 and preventing customers leaving the premises with glasses and bottles. 4.4 Make use of powers Iestyn RBK Licensing CJPA Ongoing Better None available under the Criminal Prosser Police enforcement managed identified Justice and Police Act 2001, KTCM Exclusions/ASBOs premises exclusions policy in civil law Reduced and the Anti-Social offended (to Behaviour Act 2003 be reviewed) 4.5 Make better use of the Martin Police, KTCM Preliminary Ongoing There is a CCTV coverage of the town Lazell Kingston discussions took current lack centre and, as resources Hospital place with of financial permit, extend coverage of Kingston Hospital resources to monitoring to areas affected to consider the add and by the activities of the night viability of a link maintain time economy e.g. Kingston between RBK cameras to Hospital A & E CCTV Control the existing Centre and CCTV Kingston Hospital. system for Current position Kingston to be reviewed. Town Centre.

Aim No 5 To encourage licensees to implement best practice

Agreed Action Lead Partners Planned Timescale Likely Financial Officer Activities Outcomes Implications 2007/08 5.1 Work with owners and Graham Pubwatch Best Bar None Ongoing Contribute to See 5.4 operators of premises in the McNally RBK may include many achieving of town centre to encourage an Police of these criteria LAA three year 14

Agreed Action Lead Partners Planned Timescale Likely Financial Officer Activities Outcomes Implications 2007/08 industry-led code of practice assault stretch focussing on key areas that See 5.4 separate target for town will have a big impact, project part of centre developing clear protocols Safer Kingston for seeking proof of age and Partnership effective end-of-evening dispersal policies and a voluntary end of irresponsible drink promotions. Encourage businesses to ensure that information on transport options i.e. bus stations, taxi ranks, minicab numbers and offices, is widely available as best practice. 5.2 Impose more restrictive Bob Smart Subject to Respond to Ongoing Not known None operating conditions on representations representations premises where there is from through reports to evidence of problems. responsible Sub Committees authorities [e.g. for decision police] and decisions of Licensing Sub Committees 5.3 Target premises known to Bob Smart Police Intelligence led Ongoing Compliance None have problems and help KTCM inspections with licensing them to develop actions to objectives trade more responsibly and reduce the burden on the majority of premises who

Agreed Action Lead Partners Planned Timescale Likely Financial Officer Activities Outcomes Implications 2007/08 meet their requirements 5.4 Work with licensees to set Charlotte KTCM Identify resources July 2007 Measured by: £8k Basic up a responsible licensees’ Fitzgerald Kingston Police Develop Command accreditation scheme as RBK assessment Aug/Sept 2007- • Number of Unit Funding part of the emerging Environmental scheme and test 07-24 Town Centre Kingston Alcohol Strategy Health Launch licensed KTCM - half- and encourage licensees to London Fire Operate Scheme premises day per participate in it Service Evaluate and Oct/Nov 2007- participating week Licensees Review 07-24 in the Pilot Best Bar scheme Use of None Scheme to July 2008 venues be established • Number of during 2007/08 premises Sponsorship meeting BBN Kingston minimum standards on first and second inspections

• Number of active members of PubWatch

• Evidence of crime reduction (if possible)

Agreed Action Lead Partners Planned Timescale Likely Financial Officer Activities Outcomes Implications 2007/08 • Positive publicity for Town Centre

• Increased customer confidence

5.5 Ensure as far as possible Bob Smart None Visit premises as Within 10 Not known Costs met that managers of “smoke far as possible to months from from specific free” legislation are aware of ensure start of Government the legal requirement not to compliance. legislation and allocation allow smoking in their in response to premises and that they Report to referrals. make their customers aware Licensing of the need to behave Committee and Licensing Change in None responsibly whilst smoking Council re: change Committee in policy outside [e.g. by not causing in policy. May and noise or obstruction or October 2007. leaving cigarette litter]. The Council before Licensing Committee should Feb 2008 consider whether there can and should be changes to the Council’s licensing policy having regard to the effect that smoking in outside areas may have on residents living in the vicinity. This will be particularly relevant when

Agreed Action Lead Partners Planned Timescale Likely Financial Officer Activities Outcomes Implications 2007/08 considering variations to licences under the 2003 Act in order to permit the use of outside areas that are currently prevented from being used at times when premises are allowed to sell alcohol. Best Practice examples will be investigated

Aim No 6 To ensure Kingston Town Centre is clean and attractive at night

Agreed Action Lead Partners Planned Timescale Likely Financial Officer Activities Outcomes Implications 2007/08 6.1 Improve lighting, Paul Stack KTCM Completion of Summer Reduced fear £25,000 particularly in locations that Police the Riverside 2007 of crime – Partnership are dark and uninviting, but lighting improved funding heavily used improvement riverside negotiated scheme lighting

6.2 Improve the visual Caroline H&T, Kingston Joint project Brief Overall £28,000 environment at gateways Kearey University, with University established strategy for already into the town centre Kingston and College to Summer 2007, gateways and allocated College, Design draw up brief detailed work specific (Hammersons) Champion for on College proposal for for improvements Roundabout to College improvements to the commence Roundabout to College Gateways Sept 2007 Roundabout 18

Agreed Action Lead Partners Planned Timescale Likely Financial Officer Activities Outcomes Implications 2007/08 focussing on College Roundabout 6.3 Improve visitor safety along Neville NPS Railings Summer 2007 Riverside Project the Riverside Walk, Rainford KTCM finished, Safety Project completed particularly those areas in Thames awaiting completed. within £100,000 close proximity to bars and Landscape permission for budget (with night clubs. In this respect Strategy barriers on additional the Council will, in Spring Police steps adjacent £10,000 2007, be installing safety to Kingston contingency. railings along the section of Bridge. the Riverside Walk between Kingston Bridge and the Gazebo Public House 6.4 To improve the quality of Andrew RBK together Scheme Works Enhanced The project, the Riverside Walk referred Lynch with Canadian & completion commenced in environment, costing to above, the Council in Portland May with more attractive £105,000 in association with Canadian Estates, Samuel completion to visitors and total has been and Portland, the owners of Smiths, KTCM expected in discouraging funded by the Bishop’s Palace House will and TfL August crime and anti named partners implement an social environmental behaviour. enhancement scheme in Spring 2007, which involves improved lighting, surfacing, seating and planting

6.5 Progress proposals to Andrew RBK together Finalise Implementation Enhanced The Eagle make other riverside areas Lynch with the various scheme design of Eagle Wharf environment, Wharf scheme within the town centre safer landowners, for Eagle Wharf scheme more attractive has been

Agreed Action Lead Partners Planned Timescale Likely Financial Officer Activities Outcomes Implications 2007/08 in the evenings and at Kingston and commence programmed to visitors and provisionally night. Spaces such as Society and implementation for end of 07/08 discouraging costed at circa Eagle Wharf (the public other amenity and progress crime and anti £280,000, paid space next to the Ram groups, TfL, DfL feasibility social for by TfL and Pubic House) and Thames and the police research for behaviour. RBK S106 Side are known ‘problem’ Thames Side. funds areas at night, and funding from Transport for London has been secured to improve the quality of these spaces and make them desirable places to visit. Creating places that attract a broad cross-section of visitors will improve surveillance and help to make these riverside spaces self-policing Paul Stack KTCM Neighbourhood Summer Improved Estimated cost 6.6 Provide clear signing of Theatre Trust Committee /Autumn 2007 public of signing routes to and from the London Buses approval in July for funding bid awareness of changes Theatre which link with the Kingston 2007 for signing Implementation Theatre £9,000 train station, buses and car Tourism package. of scheme parks and seek to make Working Group Executive scheduled to these routes both inviting funding to be coincide with and attractive. Suggested sought. Theatre routes are: Clear signing to opening - Kingston station to be in place prior timescale. Fife Rd/Clarence to Theatre St/Church St/Market opening. Pl/High St – Theatre

Agreed Action Lead Partners Planned Timescale Likely Financial Officer Activities Outcomes Implications 2007/08 - Drapers Car Park to Kingston Hall Rd/High St – Theatre - Fairfield Bus Station and Cattle Market car park to Clarence St/Church St/Market Pl/High St – Theatre - John Lewis bus stops, Wood St to Little Wood St/Church St/Market Pl/High St – Theatre - Brook St bus stops to Eden St/High St – Theatre Turks Pier (and also Bentall’s car park), Wood St to Vicarage Rd/Riverside/Charter Quay Piazza/Wadbrook St – Theatre

6.7 Promote, and support Neville KTCM Continue to Ongoing Cleaner Initially Funded Kingston Town Centre Rainford support KTCM environment by KTCM Management initiatives to BID initiative clean private alleys off the Assess future main streets, including opportunities of Castle Street and Eden including street Street, and the introduction washing as part

Agreed Action Lead Partners Planned Timescale Likely Financial Officer Activities Outcomes Implications 2007/08 of pavement washing on an of ongoing appropriate basis street cleaning contract. Regular bi- monthly Town Centre Environment Group meetings 6.8 Explore options for the Graham RBK Consider ‘Pop Scope and cost Cleaner To be identified provision of additional toilet McNally up’ toilets 2007 environment facilities, including disabled based on the facilities, in appropriate Westminster’s Identify funding locations. This could be model at two options achieved through S106 locations: 2007/08 legal obligations on the in front of All back of significant Saints Church developments, or through and near the the use of a LPSA reward Station grant. There may be other forecourt. funding opportunities that Consider if could also be beneficial S106 money under 'safety and transport headings' could part fund this. RBK to consider passing Bath Passage asset to KTCM 6.9 Encourage the Police to Marion Police Establish the Ongoing Cleaner

Agreed Action Lead Partners Planned Timescale Likely Financial Officer Activities Outcomes Implications 2007/08 take enforcement action Todd RBK extent of the environment against perpetrators of problem and street fouling. Offenders appropriate can be prosecuted under level of Section 5 of the Public enforcement Order Act 1986 and on the action spot fines can be levied for disorderly behaviour under Section 1 of the Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001 6.10 Review the street cleansing Neville Veolia, Review Specification Better & Within existing regime in the town centre Rainford Quadron, appropriateness and pricing enhanced cleansing and revise as appropriate KTCM of Contractor re currently being cleansing financial when future contracts are street cleansing reviewed. methods. envelopes. renegotiated. This may in the Market Long term include wet washing of Place and arrangements streets in ‘hot spot’ areas Thames may need to be before people arrive in the Riverside. part of re- mornings, e.g. around tendering of transport interchanges, cleansing including bus stops in Eden contract. Street 6.11 Seeking the agreement of Bob Smart Neighbourhood All take away Contact Cleaner None late night take-away Services premises within regarding bin environment premises (including trailers Highways the Town provision within and kiosks) to provide bins Environment Centre already 2 months of outside their premises and have a agreement which are regularly emptied Sustainability condition and cleansed at their requiring the expense and provide or pay collection of for street washing outside waste and

Agreed Action Lead Partners Planned Timescale Likely Financial Officer Activities Outcomes Implications 2007/08 their premises on a weekly cleaning of basis pavements.

6.12 Encourage businesses to John KTCM Engage with Part of ongoing Cleaner To be identified better manage and reduce Littleboy Trade Waste town centre Waste Strategy Environment their commercial waste. providers businesses to 2007/08 Ensure that businesses establish package their waste in demand. suitable containers. Bring trade waste operators together to agree working practices Implement enforcement regime as part of future Waste Strategy

Aim No 7 To provide more uniformed personnel on the streets at night

Agreed Action Lead Partners Planned Timescale Likely Financial Officer Activities Outcomes Implications 2007/08 7.1 Participation in the Joint Marion Safer Kingston Establish Ongoing Reduced fear of To be Transport Action Group set Todd Partnership agreed aims, crime identified up to review the work of Police priorities, Reduced each Safer Transport KTCM actions and victimisation Teams in South West RBK performance London and to discuss measures for 24

Agreed Action Lead Partners Planned Timescale Likely Financial Officer Activities Outcomes Implications 2007/08 priorities, activities and Kingston Town performance etc. Centre 7.2 Encourage Partners to Gillian Street Pastors, Continued On-going Reduced fear of Police BCU continue to support the Pennington Kingston Police, patrols on crime Partnership funding of street pastors Local Churches, Friday & Reduced Fund - £7K (United Reform Church KTCM Saturday nights victimisation in 2007/08 volunteers operating in 2 Pubwatch teams of 6 - 8 persons (Pubs and (depending on availability) Clubs) on Fri and Sat nights 10:00pm – 4:00am) i.e. joint funding by Police, KTCM, the Council and Pubwatch to meet the costs of a full time co-ordinator and providing training and radios for Street Pastors. 7.3a Encourage Partners to Marion Safer Kingston Meet with Winter 2007 Reduced fear of To be continue to support police Todd Partnership partners to crime identified resources by the Police review current Reduced Together employment of evening KTCM arrangements victimisation with 7.3b wardens/ambassadors Paul Public Carriage and agree contributing and taxi marshals Drummond Office resource partners. (see 8.5) implications and funding sources to maintain this initiative

Aim No 8 To further improve bus and rail services, increase the provision of night-time taxi , and minicab and car parking facilities and provide enhanced passenger information to help people get home safely at night

Agreed Action Lead Partners Planned Timescale Likely Financial Officer Activities Outcomes Implications 2007/08 8.1 To lobby for improved late John SWT Public On going Night 57 None direct to night public transport Martin Network Rail Transport introduced RBK. through more train services DfT Liaison 30/6/07. after midnight, and later TfL Meetings opening and staffing of the London Buses Night 71 station ticketing hall, the Kingston deferred by extension of all night bus Tourism London Buses. services by making a sound Working Group business case for such Longer booking provision. It is hall opening acknowledged that it may hours likely be unrealistic to seek a 24- after rebuilding hour rail service in view of of station the need to undertake rail 2008/09. maintenance. However, through discussion with SW Increased Trains, it may be possible Network Rail to negotiate later rail engineering services on busy nights, commitments including the weekends mean track availability likely to decrease for later rail services. 8.2 To continue to impress John Mayor of Public On going TfL services to None direct to upon the Mayor for London Martin London Transport Surrey RBK. Kingston town centre’s GLA Liaison upgraded importance as a TfL Meetings 30/6/07. Last metropolitan entertainment London Buses 406 is at 00:15 centre and to work with the SCC daily.

Agreed Action Lead Partners Planned Timescale Likely Financial Officer Activities Outcomes Implications 2007/08 Mayor to build on the Kingston success of existing Tourism No Surrey initiatives, extending and Working Group finding for bus improving the quality and services after availability of late night bus 18:30. and rail transport to and from Kingston. Late night buses over the borough boundary into Surrey e.g. to Epsom and Esher, are also needed as significant numbers of night time visitors to Kingston live there 8.3 Encourage the increased Graham Transport for TFL have Christmas Contribute to Cost of availability of both black McNally London. Public agreed to fund 2005 and achieving of Christmas 2007 cab and minicab services, Carriage Office. the Black taxi 2006 ongoing LAA three year particularly at night club RBK Black taxi cab Marshall assault stretch closing times by facilitating cab association. scheme for a target for town a taxi marshalling service, Private Hire year centre minicab kiosks and Companies KTCM have locations from which taxis funded the and minicabs can be three Mini Cab ordered and appropriate booking Kiosks safe waiting places for taxis and minicabs 8.4 Consider whether the Paul Public Carriage Meet with PCO Autumn 07 for May identify Could be availability and affordability Drummond Office (Robin and KTCM to first meeting need for significant of black cabs has an impact Gillis) discuss with PCO. statutory on the ability to meet the KTCM constraints Follow up changes or Strategy aims; how this is KUSU and agree way mtgs in winter subsidy source

Agreed Action Lead Partners Planned Timescale Likely Financial Officer Activities Outcomes Implications 2007/08 being addressed in other Pubwatch forward. town centres offering late Night Clubs Discuss night entertainment; and options with the possibility of lobbying users the Mayor for London (e.g. with other outer London boroughs) on better provision and reduced fares 8.5 Work closely with the Police Paul Police, Matter already Report for Decision on Potential for and the Public Carriage Drummond Public Carriage discussed Winter 2007 viability of significant Office to consider and Office extensively. CCTV enforcement implement appropriate Parking Need to enforcement. and initiatives to reduce illegal Manager establish May remove infrastructure minicab touting, including CCTV Manager without doubts illegal touting costs falling to considering whether, and KTCM legal and where used but RBK and how, CCTV might financial displace it Partners. effectively be used to clamp position and elsewhere. down on touts (see 7.3) any Awareness of consequences. potential of Summary alienating report required innocent public clarifying the who get caught position and collecting Partners views friends and for relatives. consideration CCTV used for by RBK intelligence Executive. gathering and successful conviction for touting by

Agreed Action Lead Partners Planned Timescale Likely Financial Officer Activities Outcomes Implications 2007/08 Police and PCO 8.6 Seek the provision of David Private sector Maintain Ongoing Improved Additional adequate and safe car Bardsley car park current status. access to safe operating costs parking facilities for night operators car parking recovered from time users Opening to facilities for charges. midnight or night time later at Cattle visitors Market, Drapers and Bentall Centre car parks.

24 hour opening with CCTV coverage at Canbury, Ashdown Road and Cattle Market surface car parks.

24 hour availability at Fairfields and St. James’s Road MSCPs. All sites above have been

Agreed Action Lead Partners Planned Timescale Likely Financial Officer Activities Outcomes Implications 2007/08 accredited under the “Park Mark” Safer Parking Scheme 8.7 Improve public transport John TfL Surbiton Autumn 2007. Bus stop closer TfL funded. connections and Martin London Buses interchange to station, with None direct to interchanges at the bus and SWT improvements. shelter RBK. train stations Network Rail Works to 2009 enable Oyster Prepay to be introduced on SWT services in 2009.

Kingston- 2008 Surbiton Bus Expressway Study 8.8 To set up a website or link Susanne KTCM SA to place End of July Visitors to the £300 to a website that informs Afra RBK Tourism Kingston Safer ‘07 town centre will people planning an evening Travel at Night know how to out in Kingston town centre card on Travel travel home of things to do and how to Awareness safely at the get home safely by pages end of a night providing information on e.g. opening/closing times SA to of venues, night time bus distribute routes, the availability of STAN cards to Mid July ‘07 minicab booking kiosks and local pubs

Agreed Action Lead Partners Planned Timescale Likely Financial Officer Activities Outcomes Implications 2007/08 how to pre-book journeys home, how to recognise licensed cabs and minicabs etc 8.9 Utilise, publicise and extend Susanne KTCM SA to produce End of August Visitors to the £500 the existing on-street Afra RBK Tourism posters related ‘07 town centre will Information Points to to Safer Travel know how to provide 24-hour at Night to be travel home information on the different displayed in safely at the available transport the town end of a night opportunities i.e. bus and centre notice rail stops, routing and boards / timetable information, time neighbourhood of the last train; taxi and poster boards minicab pick up points and booking offices; car park location and opening hours; and public safety information. 8.10 To seek to persuade Pat Loxton KU & their • Include in Approx. 1 year • Identification - Kingston University, the planning range of of possible Student Union (KUSU) and consultants, matters to be available other Universities to expand other discussed options and their role in contributing to universities e.g. with KU re. partnership the provision of late night Roehampton, St their arrangement transport to meet the needs Mary’s, emerging s of an increasing number TfL/London campus and diverse range of Buses, Kingston development. students using the town College proposals, centre. Undertake research accomm. and analysis in other strategy etc

Agreed Action Lead Partners Planned Timescale Likely Financial Officer Activities Outcomes Implications 2007/08 appropriate London • Contact other boroughs and university relevant towns with recent large universit.s re. increases in student their • May highlight numbers arrangement different s to bus approaches students and options into/out of to consider Kingston and pursue town centre at night. Ascertain if they have similar issues & how they are being addressed

Aim No 9 To reduce noise at night

Agreed Action Lead Partners Planned Timescale Likely Financial Officer Activities Outcomes Implications 2007/08 9.1 It is a priority to improve the Susanne KTCM SA to place End of July ‘07 Visitors are £300 provision of late night Afra Kingston able to find transport and help people Safer Travel the right find the right transport home at Night card Mid July ‘07 transport as quickly as possible, so on Travel quickly and that crowds do not Awareness easily. congregate after night clubs pages close and cause noise disturbance SA to distribute STAN cards to local pubs 9.2 Use uniformed and security Graham KTCM Fund Black Christmas 2005 Contribute to Cost of staff to keep order in queues McNally RBK & Police& Taxi Cab and 2006 achieving of Christmas 2007 for those waiting for businesses Marshalling ongoing LAA three transport home, including scheme at year assault keeping noise levels down, Xmas 07 stretch target reporting any problems to SIA door for town the police and helping supervisors centre people find the right at each transport home. Night club, Kiosk to be pub and bar employees are paid for by seen as having primary the Private responsibility for this. hire companies 9.3 Continue to investigate Bob Smart None Respond to Ongoing Abatement of None complaints about noise from complaints statutory premises under Section 79 nuisances

Agreed Action Lead Partners Planned Timescale Likely Financial Officer Activities Outcomes Implications 2007/08 of the Environmental Protection Act and issue abatement notices where a statutory noise nuisance is judged to have occurred 9.4 Tackle noise from licensed Bob Smart Police Respond to Ongoing Compliance None identified a premises through the RBK Licensing complaints, with licence provisions of the Licensing KTCM disorder, and conditions Act 2003. This includes the Pubwatch intelligence and reviews 9.4 power to issue a 24 hour swiftly of licences b closure order for any Iestyn licensed premises causing a Prosser public nuisance under the Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003.

APPENDIX C Executive, 2 October 2007

STREET ADVERTISING Report by the Service Director (Planning and Transportation) Executive Member for Transport, Planning and Regeneration

Purpose

To inform the Executive of the initial market research undertaken into the provision of street advertising and sponsorship, to propose a phased approach to the implementation of a street advertising initiative, and to seek approval for the procurement of an external consultant with appropriate specialist expertise to undertake the initial stage of the product and site evaluation to ensure that the benefits to the Council are maximised.

Action proposed by the Executive Member for Transport, Planning and Regeneration:

The Executive is requested to:

1. approve the staged procurement approach proposed in the report;

2. allocate resources from the “Invest to Save” fund to appoint an external consultant to carry out a product evaluation and a site and marketing strategy as a 1 st stage;

3. receive a further report detailing the results of the Stage 1 evaluation to inform the final procurement process.

Reason for action proposed

To quantify the potential benefits of, and commence the procurement process for, the provision of street based advertising.

BACKGROUND

1. Advertising has been a feature on the Boroughs streets for many years, whether it is on private property adjacent to the highway or on the highway itself. It is an accepted instrument for all kinds of commercial and retail businesses and manifests itself in a variety of ways. The Council has a number of current localised agreements that provide both financial and non-financial benefits.

2. In the summer of 2005 the Neighbourhood Chairs discussed the potential of expanding street advertising and sponsorship, with a view of increasing these benefits and requested that a market research exercise be carried out.

3. In November 2005 an advertisement for expressions of interest was place in the European Contract Journal. As a result of this, nine organisations made it known that they wished to be considered as possible partners for the provision of street advertising and sponsorship. These were:

• Clear Channel UK Limited • Community Partners Adbus Limited • High Street Media Limited • Immediate Solutions • J.C. Decaux UK Limited • Marketing Force Limited • Primesight • Streetbroadcast Limited • The Outdoor Media Consultancy (Non supplier)

4. In April 2006 a Memorandum of Information (MOI) was sent to these organisations. The MOI set out the Council’s partnering policies, aims and aspirations and asked them to provide standard contracting information (such as financial reports, references, etc.) and to complete a set of questions regarding their business practices, experience and attitudes to partnering.

5. The MOI responses were assessed by Strategic Services (Procurement), Communications and Information Services, Environmental Services and Financial Services. Although the MOI responses provided some very useful information, it proved difficult to determine the best and most appropriate way forward to procure street advertising. This situation was, in large part, due to a lack of knowledge and expertise of how this media business operated and, therefore, how best to realise the potential for the Council, with minimum risk.

6. In order to progress the Street Advertising initiative, a Member/Officer workshop was held in July 2007. The event was attended by representatives of the Executive and Neighbourhood Chairs, relevant senior officers and Kingston First. A Media Consultant was invited to the workshop to give a presentation and to answer questions. The event enabled a better understanding of the industry to be acquired, including product types, allowed the views and ideas of those present to be captured, and highlighted environmental and other constraints. The outcome was a better defined approach to the procurement of street advertising.

EXISTING AGREEMENTS

Further detail on these agreements is circulated as Exempt Information

7. The Council is currently party to the following agreements which are directly or indirectly concerned with street advertising:

Company Duration End Financial Non-financial Benefits Costs to Date Benefits Council JC Decaux 20 years 2011 None Provision of bus shelters in Rates & Kingston Town Centre. energy Community information. Adshel 10 years 2010 £X p.a None None Adshel/TfL 17 years 2013 None Provision of bus shelters outside None Kingston Town Centre Hotel Antionette 2 years 2008 £X p.a Improved planting maintenance None Medhna 1 year 2007 £X p.a. Improved planting maintenance None Restaurant

• JC Decaux – Kingston Town Centre – 20 years agreement commenced in September 1991. The Council received the provision of 35 Town Centre bus shelters and the use of 27 advertising units as “Council Information Panels” (CIP). In return JC Decaux is able to use 23 bus shelters and CIP installations to sell advertising space. The Council pays the majority of business rates and energy costs. There is a 20m exclusion zone for similar advertising around each unit and a “first option” within the limits of the Town Centre. At the end of the agreement the Bus Shelters and CIP’s remain the property of JC Decaux and will be removed.

JC Decaux recently approached the Council with a view to extending their contract for a further 10 years. As part of the initial discussions they made it known that they would consider providing the Council with an income of [£] per annum for the date of the agreement until the end of the extended term (this relates to approximately [£] per site). Legal Services have advised that the current agreement precludes the determination of an extension until the 18 th year of the agreement (2009). The Head of Strategic Services has also expressed his concern as to an extension due to current procurement policy. JC Decaux has been informed that no extension can be currently negotiated.

• Adshel – Boroughwide (excluding Kingston Town Centre – 10 years agreement, commenced in September 2000, for the provision of 19 “pedestal” units. 17 sites received advertisement consent. The Council received an income of [£] per annum for each site with a RPI inflation clause. Current income is [£] per annum per site ([£] in total). Adshel pay for the business rates and energy costs. At the end of the agreement the units will be removed by Adshel.

• Adshel – Boroughwide (excluding Kingston Town Centre and the A3) – 17 years agreement, commenced in March 1996, for the provision of bus shelters. 179 have been installed of which 64 carry advertising (one of the lowest proportions in London). All costs are met by Adshel and the Council received no income.

• Antionette Hotel – 2 year sponsorship, commenced in August 2006, of the College Road roundabout planting. The Council receives [£] per annum. In return the Antoinette Hotel has four sponsorship signs located on the roundabout.

• Medhna Restaurant – 1 year sponsorship, commenced in November 2006, of the Fountain Roundabout planting. The Council receives [£] per annum. In return the Medhna Restaurant has four sponsorship signs located on the roundabout.

KEY CONSIDERATIONS FROM WORKSHOP

8. There were three key messages that came out of the Street Advertising Workshop:

§ To achieve the maximum benefit from this initiative, an appropriate level of industry expertise will be needed;

§ The greater the effort put in to the identification of sites and securing the relevant consents and permissions in advance of seeking providers should significantly increase the rewards to the Council; and

§ Any procurement agreements must include sufficient flexibility in duration and ‘profit share’ to stimulate competition and maintain maximum levels of benefit.

9. It was suggested that success will depend upon:

§ Identifying the potential opportunities § The criteria used to select and develop opportunities § The ‘real’ income available from each opportunity § How the opportunities can be exploited § The ability of the selected partner to maximise the opportunity.

10. It was further advised that the Council should ensure that:

§ A broad spread of initiatives are explored to suit the Council’s own circumstances, both in terms of spatial characteristics and monetary and political objectives § Competition helps secure best value from each opportunity set § The Council’s interest are being actively managed and protected § The Council are in control

11. It was suggested that work areas that the Council might wish to consider include:

§ Optimisation of existing estate § Unauthorised sites § Development of new sites § Complementary initiatives.

12. A process was identified which could form a way forward:

Ø Identification of opportunity Ø Development of proposal (in consultation with Councillors/Neighbourhoods and mindful of industry need) Ø Handling of statutory processes (e.g. planning) Ø Present to market/procurement (Offering designed to generate optimal result. Competitive process) Ø Prepare and finalise Agreements (between Council and operator) Ø Ongoing management (as appropriate)

PRODUCT OPTIONS

13. The size of the established advertising media is measured and referred to as “sheets”. These are static and usually pre-printed and mounted within or pasted on permanent structures. Some installations use roller or prism technology to enable multiple adverts to be shown on a rotation basis, to maximise the available space, but these installations incur addition expense in maintenance costs. The most common established advertising structures and sizes are:

§ Billboards – these can be 24, 48 or 96 sheets. The most common being 48 sheet. These sites are located adjacent to, rather than on, the street and can be on purpose built structures or on buildings. Suitable sites are limited in number but they return the largest income, which in most cases can be 20+ times that of a street located 6 sheet. Prime sites need to fulfil the outreach

criteria of customer numbers required by the advertiser, and will have the greatest impact on the streetscene and surrounding area.

§ Pedestal – either single or double sided 6 sheet. Located within the footway or pedestrian area. Suitable for town centres, shopping parades and heavy footfall routes. Income is variable and will depend upon outreach numbers and the network of adjacent panels. Can be used as Community Information Panels.

§ Banners – usually mounted on lamp columns within close proximity of each other. Tend to be used for local promotions or area identification. Relatively inexpensive to produce but with limited income potential.

§ “Tower” – a circular, enclosed and roofed structure for multiple 6 sheet panels. More suited to town centre locations with income similar to double sided pedestals. Locations are limited due to size and the need to suit the streetscene. Can be used to accommodate other activities such as mini-cab stations and as Community Information Panels.

§ Wall Mounted – 6 sheet units fixed to building. A small version of the billboards. Sites will be specialised to suit locations that attain both outreach criteria and availability of suitable wall space.

14. Additional platforms for advertising do exist, other than the established ones listed above. These are known as “ambient” products or those of a temporary nature

§ Lamp Column Units – these are 6 sheets mounted in an integrated panel and street lighting column. This particular product is near to being considered as an “established” product and is well suited to primary traffic routes.

§ Street TV – a new technology with no proven track record. Is extremely dynamic with a variety of potential uses. Could be used for standard advertising campaigns, local businesses, Community Information and promotions. May also have a possible use as a variable message facility if located on primary traffic routes.

§ Temporary Billboards – similar to the permanent sites but erected in conjunction with hoardings during construction projects.

§ Building Shrouds – used during the construction of buildings in conjunction with scaffolding and health & safety requirements. Although not expected to generate any significant income for the Council, unless having a direct interest in the site, it can be promoted as a device to improve the aesthetics and reduce the impact of buildings under construction.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS

15. An important part of the promotion of increased street advertising is a consideration of the environmental impact that this will have on our streets. The Councils Policy Programme seeks to “Put the environment at the heart of everything we do”. Street advertising, by its very nature, will have an impact on the street scene and it is

important that this does not adversely affect the character and appearance of the surrounding area.

16. Street clutter, its effects both visually and on the free movement of pedestrian traffic, has recently become an important issue for the Council, especially with regard to the enforcement of “A” Boards. The Neighbourhood Committees have recently allocated funding to reduce street clutter and other opportunities have also been taken when improvement and maintenance schemes have been implemented. The Council should not be seen to be operating conflicting standards for the sole benefit of financial gain, so clearly a balanced approach will need to be taken, when and if street advertising facilities are provided, between their impact, improving the street scene and maximising income.

17. It is usual for the type of advertising products being considered to be illuminated during the hours of darkness. It will therefore be the case that any new advertising sites will consume additional energy. Until such time as the evaluation of acceptable sites has been completed and the necessary permissions obtained, it will not be possible to quantify the full environmental impact. However, there are a number of measures, e.g. new lamp technology, photocell switching, and green energy purchase, that will be included in the procurement process and evaluation that will enable this impact to be minimised.

NETWORK IMPLICATIONS

18. There will be no significant implications to the efficiency of traffic from these proposals.

PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS

19. The Control of Advertisements Regulations 1992 gives the Council control over a considerable range of advertisements whilst at the same time giving “deemed consent” for a range of other types of advertisements, which the Council cannot control. These are augmented by an area of Special Advertisement Control in the Borough that corresponds to the extent of the Green Belt in the Borough and where certain aspects of the deemed consent regime do not apply. The Regulations and Planning Policy Guidance Note (PPG) 19, Outdoor Advertisement Control, provide further advice on how to apply advertisement control and specifically advises that the Council is only able to exercise its control in relation to amenity and public (including highway) safety.

20. The Council’s policy for dealing with advertisements is set out in Policy BE17 of the Unitary Development Plan and advises as follows:

Advertisement proposals will be given consent where they do not adversely affect public safety, do not detract from the appearance of the host building, wider built environment or open landscape or otherwise adversely affect amenity. Careful attention will be paid to visual amenity in environmentally sensitive areas such as areas of special advertisement control, conservation areas, listed buildings and their setting, strategic and local areas of special character, open land, and residential areas, where advertisement hoardings will not normally be acceptable.

PROCUREMENT

21. There are a number of options available to the Council for procuring street advertising. Whatever choice is made there is a need to follow a robust procedure, which is in line with the Council’s procurement principles and policy. If the expected benefits are fully realised, the extent of their value will require European Competition rules to be applied.

22. There is also a need to consider the procurement route and implementation framework that will provide the best returns for the Council over the longer term rather than just achieving a “quick win”. A direct approach to a Media Owner, for the provision of a complete service, would be the easier option and would provide a reasonable return. However, this route contains the maximum risk for and initial investment required by the Media Owner. This will obviously adversely affect the level of income the Media Owner will be willing to commit to the Council. It is recognised that there will not be one solution for all circumstances, and that a variety of product types and possibly of operator will maximise income.

23. It has been advised by the Media Consultant that a threefold increase in income would be achieved if the Council minimised the risks for any Media Owner. This can be done by identifying the suitable sites, matching these with the appropriate products and gaining the necessary permissions. This package of known requirements can then be presented to the competitive tendering process.

24. This course of action will also enable the Council to better control the types and extent of street advertising and phase its implementation in a measured way to meet the financial objectives contained within Changing Kingston – Choosing Our Future.

PROPOSAL

25. As a result of the research and work undertaken to date, it is recommended that the following procurement route is approved:

Stage 1 – Identify the sites and match these with suitable products, thus developing practical proposals and marketing strategy in consultation with Members and other stakeholders.

Stage 2 – Complete the statutory procedures e.g. Planning

Stage 3 – Present designed proposals to the Market for the competitive process

Stage 4 – Prepare and finalise agreements between the Council and Media Owners

Stage 5 – Ongoing management and the development of further opportunities

26. It is necessary to decide whether the above tasks are best carried out within the existing staff resource and expertise or whether these are procured externally. One of the outcomes from the recent workshop was to highlight the importance of Stage 1. It is considered that currently, the Council does not have the necessary expertise or capacity ‘in house’ to undertake this work. It is therefore proposed to engage a consultant to undertake Stage 1, through the appropriate procurement process.

Such a brief would include a full Borough-wide survey of media potential/opportunity across all formats and the preparation of a subsequent report including recommendations, values, and what measures the Council would need to undertake to successfully go out to the market. Depending upon outcomes, this brief could be extended to cover work on a broader scale to include the consequent delivery of the recommendations. It is proposed that this element be subject to a separate and subsequent consideration. Consideration also needs to be given with regard to Neighbourhood involvement in the agreed process, and the allocation of the fee income arising out of street advertising.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

27. The anticipated costs of securing appropriate external advice to undertake stage 1 as set out above is approximately £15,000. It is considered that this cost should be met by the ‘Invest to Save’ budget.

28. The profile of income is very difficult to predict, given that it will depend upon the number and location of sites, and the type and numbers of product used. For purposes of giving a relative value in terms of the scale of the potential income generation, a figure of £300,000+ has been suggested from 2010 onwards.

29. It should also be recognised that this initiative should form part of the Council’s Asset Management Strategy.

Background papers : held by David White (author of report), 020 8547 5909; e-mail: [email protected]

1. Memorandum of Information. 2. Workshop Notes

APPENDIX D Executive. 2 October 2007

ADOPTION OF GROVE CRESCENT CONSERVATION AREA CHARACTER APPRAISAL AND MANAGEMENT STRATEGY PROGRAMME, AND BOUNDARY REVIEW Report by the Service Director (Planning and Transportation) Executive Member for Transport, Planning and Regeneration

Purpose On 20 th September 2007 the Kingston Town Neighbourhood Committee considered a report setting out the consultation exercise for the Grove Crescent Conservation Area Character Appraisal and Management Strategy Programme (Stage 1). This summarised the document together with the proposed boundary changes and provided the results of public consultation between 22 nd June and 23 rd July 2007. The revised boundary is recommended for formal adoption together with the character appraisal and management strategy programme. Action proposed by the Executive Member for Transport, Planning and Regeneration: The Executive is requested to:

1. Adopt the character appraisal, management strategy programme and amended boundary for the Grove Crescent Conservation Area as shown in Annex 1, Drwg. No. 07/034/M, to provide a material consideration for the purposes of Development Control and any other planning decisions, specifically in the application of UDP policies BE3 and BE4 or any successors;

2. Vary the designation of the Grove Crescent Conservation Area boundary to include the extension (as shown in Annex 1, Drwg. No. 07/034/M) and carry out the statutory procedures under Sections 69 and 70 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. 3. Agree that the owners and occupiers of properties and land adjacent to the amended conservation area be notified by letter of the new boundary; 4. Adopt and publish the Grove Crescent Conservation Area Appraisal on the Web site with amendments.

5. Agree that a summary leaflet be published containing a map of the revised boundary, buildings making a positive contribution and key aspects describing the ‘special character’ of the conservation area and be distributed to all owners/occupiers in the area; and 6. Note the Programme Strategy Grade 3-4 to be considered when the Stage 2 Management Strategies are programmed for all of the Borough’s 26 Conservation Areas.

Reason for action proposed To preserve the special architectural or historic interest, of the Grove Crescent Conservation Area and to allow the adopted document to be taken forward to develop a management strategy and proposals for the conservation area.

BACKGROUND

1. The Council is currently undertaking Conservation Area Character Appraisals and developing Management Strategies, for the Borough’s Conservation Areas. Having up-to date character appraisals and published management proposals is now the subject of a “Best Value Performance Indicator” (BV 219). The purpose of BV 219 is to monitor local authorities’ performance in relation to Sections 71 and 72 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 which requires proposals for the preservation and enhancement of each conservation area to be formulated and published, and to pay special attention to the desirability of preserving or enhancing an area’s character in all decision making. Government policy guidance, provided in ‘PPG15: Planning and the Historic Environment’ expresses the need for local authorities to assess the special interest, character and appearance of conservation areas, to assist in setting out planning policy and inform development control, which is then amplified in English Heritage guidance.

2. Kingston is aiming to produce a character appraisal and management strategy programme (Stage 1) for each of its 26 conservation areas. The character appraisal should assess and clearly define the special interest, character and appearance of the conservation area. The management strategy programme should identify a set of indicators to take forward the character appraisal, from which further decision making and priorities can be set. In particular the identification of positive and negative effects, problems and pressures, and opportunities for enhancement, together with a review of their boundaries, will help to lead to a grade for programming, on a scale of 1 (not important) – 5 (very important). These would help determine the urgency of moving forward the work of management strategies (Stage 2) for each conservation area, which would contain detailed policy guidance and proposals for their protection and enhancement. In each case the draft Appraisal and Management Proposals will be subject to public consultation before being finalised.

3. In response to some community concerns, a detailed appraisal of the character and appearance of the Grove Crescent Conservation Area, (Stage 1) has been carried out. This will need to be followed up with a subsequent second stage of work to provide a management strategy (Stage 2), which will set out policies to guide change and inform development proposals within the Grove Crescent Conservation Area.

THE ASSESSMENT FOR PUBLIC CONSULTATION

4. The full background to the assessment of the area is set out in the character appraisal – Circulated as a separate enclosure to Executive and Scrutiny Members only, and available at libraries and on the Council’s website at www.kingston.gov.uk/council_and_democracy/committeeminutes

Drawing No. 07/034/M (Annex 1) shows the proposed extension to the conservation area boundary upon which the public consultation has been undertaken.

Character Appraisal and Management Strategy Programme

5. The Grove Crescent Conservation Area Character Appraisal and Management Strategy Programme looks at the following:

• it provides an overview of the area’s history and development; • it defines the special architectural and historic interest of the Grove Crescent Conservation Area and clearly describes the special character and appearance that it is desirable to preserve or enhance; • it identifies buildings and other townscape elements that positively contribute to the area’s character and appearance; • it identifies elements and buildings that detract from the character and appearance of the area and any areas where an opportunity for enhancement exists; • it reviews the Conservation Area’s boundary and identifies small scale boundary changes, and • it identifies areas where pressure for change is having an adverse impact on the character and appearance of the Conservation Area as a result of permitted development and concludes that the Management Strategy, which will form part of the Stage 2, will allow the Council to take a more proactive role in helping to prevent further deterioration within the area.

6. The analysis of the ‘Built Heritage’ includes listed buildings, buildings of townscape merit, as well as buildings which are considered to positively contribute to the character and appearance of the Area and will be used to implement UDP Policy BE4 which seeks to resist the demolition of buildings that make a positive contribution to the character of the area. The ‘Townscape Analysis’, includes landmarks, focal points, views, trees and green spaces.

7. The Grove Crescent Conservation Area has been sub-divided into 3 character areas, which share a distinctive and definable character. The three character areas are shown on Map 07/034/M in Annex 1. The ‘special character’ of the Grove Crescent Conservation Area is summarised as:- An early residential suburb of Kingston Town Centre dating from the mid 19 th century, Grove Crescent Conservation Area went through at least three distinct waves of development before becoming a local centre with a church, public house, shops and a school. A fuller summary of the special interests is included in the draft published leaflet used as part of the public consultation.

8. The Management Strategy Programme concludes that although most of the buildings in the area make a positive contribution to the character there is evidence of some erosion to the character from the ill-effects of multi-occupation, and the loss of front boundary walls to provide off street parking. The townscape in some parts is, therefore, becoming bleak where it is dominated by cars. These issues will need to be addressed at Stage 2 when Management Proposals will be prepared in consultation with the community. There are a series of both conservation area and general planning mechanisms that can be used to proactively ensure the character of the area

is preserved and enhanced. The Council needs to generate such a Management Strategy for 25 of its 26 conservation areas and, therefore, the current objective is to identify the priority to be given to moving on to this next stage. The consultation has agreed that Grove Crescent should be given a medium to high grade of 3-4 (where 1 is low priority and 5 is high priority).

Proposed Changes to the Grove Crescent Area Boundary

9. It is proposed that the extension includes the whole of the Blue Bridge, together with the north bank of the Hogsmill River and the important avenue of trees along Springfield Road (north and south of the bridge). Currently only one quarter of the Blue Bridge is included within the boundary, which is clearly an anomaly. However, the bridge provides an important approach into the Conservation Area. For the whole structure to be included, would help respond to its historic and recreation value. An extended boundary to contain the entire bridge, together with the north bank of the Hogsmill River and the important avenue of trees along the whole of Springfield Road (north and south of the bridge), would also provide protection for the whole of this section of riverside environment and Springfield Road.

RESULTS OF PUBLIC CONSULTATION

10. The public consultation exercise in June 2007 included a letter and summary leaflet of the document and was sent to residents, local businesses and key stakeholders, including Ward Councillors and local amenity groups. Each letter included a response form and a reply paid envelope. Copies of the full documents were also placed on the Council’s web site and in Guildhall 2 and Kingston Library. Residents, Key Stakeholders and Ward Councillors were also invited to a surgery on 12 July at St John’s Church.

11. Feedback on whether there was agreement/disagreement with the detailed character appraisal; the Built Heritage Analysis and Townscape Analysis; the Management Strategy Programme including proposed alterations to the conservation area boundary has been fed into the document. The main stakeholder consultation responses and a summary of the individual comments are set out in the following paragraphs.

Organisations

12. The comments from the organisations consulted are summarised below.

The Kingston Town Neighbourhood Conservation Area Advisory Committee (CAAC): They support the appraisal and approve of the revised version. They note with pleasure the inclusion of the North bank of the Hogsmill between the two bridges, and state this may well be crucial to the future control of any future Knights Park Campus development.

They consider upgrading of the programming status to 3-4 (giving it a higher priority for moving on to Stage 2 than the lowest priority 1 of 5 originally identified) and the undertaking to press the consideration by Council of Article 4 Directions (removal of permitted development rights) and Section 215 Notices (enforcing works to untidy land and buildings) are major steps towards retrieving the environmental quality of Grove Crescent Conservation Area.

Response: - Agree that the programming status for the management strategy (Stage 2), which will set out detailed policy guidance and proposals for the protection and enhancement of the Conservation Area can be upgraded from 2 to 3-4, thus giving it a higher priority than originally identified. Clearly the use of Article 4 Directions and Section 215 Notices will be considered as part of the future Stage 2 Management Proposals.

Spring Grove Residents Association: They support the appraisal, and are pleased to see that many of their original suggestions have been incorporated in the final draft. However, No. 2 Grove Lane does not warrant a Building of Townscape Merit (BTM) status, whereas The Parish Hall in Grove Lane should be considered for BTM status.

Response: - Agree that the modern building adjacent to 2 Grove Lane (1 Beaufort Road) should not be classified as a Building of Townscape Merit. The Character Appraisal will be amended accordingly at paragraph 6.46 together with Plans 3 and 7. The Parish Hall, Grove Lane was built at the beginning of the 20 th century and makes a positive contribution. However, it is not considered to have sufficient architectural or historic interest to be added to the list of Buildings of Townscape Merit.

Mill Street Residents Association: They support the proposals, especially the extension to the conservation area to include the whole of the Blue Bridge and the Hogsmill River. They consider these areas are an important and historic link with the Fairfield Knights Park Conservation Area to the north.

They feel an Article 4 Direction (removal of permitted development rights) would help to prevent unsympathetic replacement of windows and the painting of external brick walls in the area, as there are no measures to prevent this if not linked to a larger planning application.

Response: - The use of Article 4 Directions will be considered as part of the future Stage 2 Management Proposals.

Knights Park Residents Association: They support the proposals, including the extension of the conservation area to include the whole of the Blue Bridge and link it to the Fairfield/Knight’s Park conservation area. However, they wish to see Tree Preservation Orders (TPOs) placed on the Elm trees on the approach to the Blue Bridge.

Response: - If the conservation area was extended these trees would be protected by virtue of being within the boundary. Nevertheless, further investigation will be carried out via the tree officers to see if these trees can have TPO status.

Thames Water: No Comment

Kingston Town Neighbourhood Committee

The Kingston Town Neighbourhood Committee has noted the results of the public consultation on the Grove Crescent Conservation Area Character Appraisal and Management Strategy Programme and the amended boundary as shown on Drwg. No. 07/034/M (Annex 1).

Owners and Occupiers within the Proposed Conservation Area

13. In reply to the 375 letters (enclosing questionnaires) sent out to properties and businesses within the conservation area, only 18 questionnaires were returned by the 23 July 2007 closing date. Of these replies, only 2 people disagreed with the summary statement in the leaflet which outlined the ‘special character’ of the Grove Crescent Conservation Area. Similarly only 2 people disagreed with the Building Character Analysis. In relation to the detailed Character Appraisal and Townscape Analysis only 1 person disagreed with any of these aspects, whilst 2 people disagreed with the Management Strategy Programme.

14. Regarding the proposed boundary changes, all 18 respondents agreed with the changes proposed.

15. Individual comments received are summarised as follows:

• The student pressure is the greatest threat to the character and appearance of the conservation area. It is not only the loss of front gardens and walls but the neglect of buildings, the accumulation of rubbish and a lack of community from a transient population. As the University is embarking on a programme of further expansion the Council should consider restricting anymore houses in multiple occupation (HMOs) before it is too late. Response: - A single household containing no more than 6 people does not require planning permission. Above this number a planning application will be required and the Council will need to make a decision on the merits of each case. • Continuous problems with the police at certain rented properties in Portland Road. Response: - This is not a conservation area matter. • Strongly agree with the Blue Bridge / Springfield Road extension to the conservation area. Response:- Agree • Need to emphasise the importance of retaining the avenue of trees along Springfield Road north of the “Blue Bridge”. Consider putting TPOs on the Avenue of Elms on the approach to the Blue Bridge. Response: - Further investigation to be carried out to see if these trees can have TPO status. • Consider the use of Article 4 Directions to control unsympathetic alterations such as UPVC windows. Response: - Article 4 Directions will be considered as part of the future Stage 2 Management Proposals.

• Plant more trees in the area. Response: - The appraisal identifies areas where strategic planting would be of benefit. • Owner considers the 1980s house at 8 Denmark Road does make a positive contribution and is not a neutral building. Response: - This house was constructed after 1978 and has no particular architectural or historic interest to justify its inclusion as making a positive contribution. • Introduce more restrictive parking controls. Response: - The Grove Zone is already within the CPZ. No other requests have been received to extend the existing hours. • Control Graffiti in the area. Response: - Graffiti Officers will react as soon as they become aware of the problem. • Help to maintain the local shops in Bloomfield Road. Since the loss of the post office they struggle to survive. Response: - There are no conservation area controls or mechanisms to address this problem, although other planning policies will be considered at the Stage 2 Management Proposals Stage. • A reference to the ugly external staircase at the side of 9 Fassett Road and does it have planning permission? Response: - The staircase has been in position for many years and has permitted development rights. • Support for traffic calming measures, but the road humps are set too high, compared to the ramps in Fassett Road. Response: - All traffic calming measures are constructed within the guidance set by the Department of Transport. • Preserve the school of architecture adjacent to the Hogsmill which is a very fine example of 20 th century architecture. Therefore, include this building within the conservation area. Response: - The Kingston University Knights Park Centre is a relatively modern building which has a different scale and character compared to this conservation area. Therefore, it would be inappropriate to include this building within the boundary. • Noise and nuisance from music, DIY and trade builders on Sundays. Response: - This is not a conservation issue and would be dealt with by Environmental Health Officers.

REVIEW OF THE CHARACTER APPRAISAL, MANAGEMENT STRATEGY PROGRAMME AND PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE CONSERVATION AREA BOUNDARY

16. Public consultation has shown strong support for the character appraisal, including the Building Character Analysis, Townscape Analysis and proposed extension to the Conservation Area boundary, from owners, occupiers and businesses within the area and local amenity bodies and organisations.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

17. Publication costs of providing the leaflet, questionnaire and document.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS

18. The Character Appraisal and Management Strategy Programme support the preservation and enhancement of the historic environment and accord with sustainable construction guidance.

CONCLUSION

19. The results of public consultation on the Grove Crescent Conservation Area support both the Character Appraisal and Management Strategy Programme, including the proposed changes to the boundary. Therefore, it is recommended that the document be adopted and the conservation area boundary be extended as shown.

Background Papers held by Tony Hall, author of the report 020 8547 4652 e-mail: [email protected] 1. Report entitled “Grove Crescent Conservation Area Character Appraisal (Stage 1)” June 2007. 2. Kingston Town Neighbourhood Committee report 20 September 2007. 3. Consultation letter, leaflet and responses. Annexe 1. Drwg. 07/034/M

I IU

PQ QS

PP helter idinurgh2gourt IP

eix i2yeh

PW I2to2QP

QV PQ SP wsvv2ii QI QU V PS QP QV QP qexqi2yeh

fw2VFTRm QI

pespsivh2G2uxsqr2eu QR QI

gyle2th RH

U QS gyxiesyx2eie UFRm

rogsmill2lk uxsqr92eu

Q pf

I QR

gvyi VFPm qree2erre ly

SP RS ere QU

frdwell2rouse RR eiver I

Q U hy2gentre UFWm I pespsivh

eir SQ P

riory rogsmill2iver

pespsivh2vegi gourt I2to2V V QU

fenhmrk QU il SS rouse 2u2t qexqi2yeh SS qree2erre SS S22T

IP SW TT I

fedels SR

eston rouse VFUm I2to2R w U ford2 il u2t RU gollege2lk SV eston hool TH reron2gourt eir

rovinil I2to2T II22IP gourt rouse

TU r U2to2IH

R VFSm U2to2IP to

I h SV

vodge i elhm

W x SP w e I uingston2 niversity W pf t2tmes9 IU u unights2rk2gentre tnley2iker gourt qllery IQ2to2IV 2 eir 2 R IP RT egr2rous PH

IS y

I2to2T q

T U2to2IP e

e y T h V

pf V hixweu2yeh IT vf PR WFWm wshhvi2wsvv

i uingston 2 V 2 niversity

ton2nd g IW

ixrx2yeh il2u2t h uingsuritonyterin QS qyi fw2WFRVm xursery i VFTm

I res ghur RR

WFUm IH

gigix fw2IHFIPm

urvey2rouse 5I i orks

fivvi i2yeh t2tohn9s gf e

IT rimry2hool f gf I Q g d h PQ SI fw2WFVIm QS RS

II PS WFIm VFWm yvexh2yeh P y

vexh22 VFVm VFVm PS yeh

PH P PV q S P P

own2rouse U

QR I2to2V QV

y RP I

q QP oerts2vodge y ii

IW QP 2 gigix 2g W h

qrove i QH

rouse V e PQ PI

fw2WFVImg W i y gresent

I2to2QW

x W I 2 rouse IV P 2 rugh2rerlnd h P v 5 R

WFWm uingston2 niversity II PS i IT

sxqpsivh2yeh

p IV

IP qrove2gourt q PT

ower x fivvi i2yeh V fuilding s

fvyywpsivh2yeh IH I IU

PH I IS IP I2to2IT II

PH h IP

rolmwood2rouse II e pringfield2gourt IQ

IS y evpih2yeh

IP IR evpih22yeh y

PT 22 f

I r i S

vf P

v h T

irge v v

i IS s i PV QH p

w PQ

i IR PV gf y 2

t2tohn9s2ghurh 2 y osts yeh eh v y

sxqpsivh f

fivvi i2yeh e

h wpsivh2y IV fw2IHFSHm y

I fvy PW

HFPm uingston2 niversity I2to2S I T2to2IQ qyi2vexi S S

U II PW I

IQ IS t2tohn9s

TQ IP

IR gourt

R T V

Q I

ixrx2yeh 5 rll PR p

IQ f

IP e UQ

P I

i Q US

UU y

vethworth rouse 2

S 2

UW P

I 2 y U

P e

e II pei2yeh I P

QW xsgryvyx2wi

m IT

W PH2to2QP

RQ gyi2e U

fie py2yeh

IS QR V

U qixie2yeh hougls W

W RU W gourt

y I2to2T IQ

RV QQ2to2QU QI or IH rotel e 2 y ks PI

RP entoinette ©2grown2gopyrightF2ell2rights2reservedF2oyl2forough2of2uingston2upon2hmesF2fu2viene2xo2E2IHHHIWPVS2PHHTFeh exxi2I qyi2gigix2gyxiesyx2eie2 gyx vesyx2vex issxq yyih2iixsyx gyxiesyx2eie y2gyxiesyx2eie hiretorte2of2invironmentl2erviesD greegi2eie2X2IF2qyi2gigix2 quildhll2PD2uingston2upon2hmesD PF2sxq2qyi2iei222QF2qyi2vexi2y r urrey2uI2Ii F 2hteX e qF2PHHU 2efXgywwsii 2leX IGPDSHH 2hwg2xoX HUGHQRGw

APPENDIXE Executive,2October2007

ROADCASUALTIES–MEETINGTHE2010TARGETS ReportbytheServiceDirector(Environment&Sustainability) AndExecutiveMemberforTransportation,PlanningandRegeneration

Purpose Thisreportsetsoutthecurrentpositionregardingroadcasualtystatisticsandinparticular, poweredtwowheeler(P2W)casualtiesintheBorough.Thereportproposesastrategyfor adoptionthataimstoreducethesecasualtiesinordertoseektomeettheCouncil’s2010 LocalImplementationPlantargets. ActionproposedbytheExecutiveMemberforTransportation,Planningand Regeneration: TheExecutiveisrequestedto: 1. notetheriseinroadcasualtiesandtheworkrequiredtomeettheCouncil’s2010 LocalImplementationPlantargets;and 2. approvetheproposedStrategytoreduceroadcasualtiesintheBorough; Reasonforactionproposed Toenhancethedeliveryofthestatutoryrequirementtoprovideroadsafetyeducation, trainingandpublicity BACKGROUND 1. Thereisastatutoryobligationforlocalauthoritiestoprovideroadsafetyeducation. Themainmeasureinassessinglocalauthorityperformanceonroadsafetyissues iscasualtyfigures,andchangestothesefiguresovertime. 2. TargetsweresetacrossLondonbytheMayorofLondonin2000.Thesetargets soughttoreduceallroadcasualtiesby40%bytheyear2010comparedtothe 1994-1998average.InJanuary2006,thesetargetswerestretchedfurthertoa 50%reductionfromthe1994-98average. 3. Kingstonhasatrackrecordofsignificantachievementinreducingroadcasualties andsuccessfullypromotingroadsafetyinrecentyears.TheCouncilcontinuesto produceawardwinningworkinthisfield.InJuly2007theRoadSafetyandTravel AwarenessUnitwasawardedtheLaurieBunnAwardforRoadSafetybythe LondonAccidentPreventionCouncilforsuccessinengagingwiththeparticularly hardtoreachgroupofsecondaryschoolstudents.Thispioneeringprojectis intendedtoreducethecasualtiesamongallsecondaryschoolpupilsandin particular11–16yearoldswhoareknowntobeahighriskgroup.Thescheme beganinSeptember2006anditisthoughtthatthesuccessintermsofcasualty reductionwillbeseeninthe2007statistics.

E2 RECENTPERFORMANCE 4. KingstonCouncil’scurrentroadsafetyeducationplanwasadoptedinMarch2006 aspartoftheCouncil’sLocalImplementationPlan(LIP)(itsTransportStrategy), andtakesaholisticviewofthesubjectarea.TheLIPusedcasualtydatato determinepriorityareasofwork.Recentpriorityareashaveincludedchildrenand youngdrivers. 5. ThedatasetoutatAnnex1showstherecentcasualtyfiguresandhowKingstonis progressingtowardsthe2010targets.Despiteaconsistentdecreaseincasualties whowereeitherkilledorseriouslyinjured(KSI’s)from1998to2005,2006sawa riseinKSI’sacrossallclassesofroaduser.Mostnotableincreasesoccurredinthe categoriesofpoweredtwowheelersandchildren. 6. Casualtiessufferingslightinjuriescontinuetodecrease.Thisstatisticgivesthe overallcasualtyfiguresanoverstatedlevelofperformance,astheslightinjuries accountforover75%ofallcasualties.Theperformanceonslightinjuriesmasksthe severityofthesituationwithregardtothosecasualtieswhoarekilledorseriously injured. 7. TherehasbeenanincreaseinpoweredtwowheelercasualtiesacrosstheU.K.and thisisreflectedintheCouncil’sstatistics.Thismustnowbecomeapriorityareafor thisCouncil. 8. Theriseinpoweredtwowheelercasualtieshasnotspecificallybeenofanyage grouporofanyexperienceboundary.Tohighlightthis,therehasbeena125% increasefrom4casualtiesupto9from2005to2006,inridersofvehiclesover 500cc. 9. Policynumber22oftheLIPcommentsontheprovisionthatKingstonCouncilwill makeforpoweredtwowheelersintermsofsecureandsafeparking.Thereislittle mentionofworksthatwilltakethesafetyofridersintoconsideration,otherthanthe trialofsharedusebuslanes.HoweveritisthedutyofRBKofficerstoconsiderall roaduserswhendesigningandimplementingschemes.Therandomlocationof incidentssuggestthatthereisnospecificengineeringfaultonRBKhighways. 10. TherehasbeenanincreaseinchildKSI’sin2006upby200%from2005which doesnotreflectthenationalpicture.However,Kingstonhasbeenverysuccessfulin termsofthetrendofreductioninchildroadcasualties,anditshouldbenotedthat theincreaseisfrom3in2005to9in2006. 11. Nearlyhalf(4)ofthechildKSI’swerepassengers,anditisthoughtthattheoverall riseisa‘spike’ratherthanatrend.Themeasuresthatarecurrentlyinplacehave provedsuccessfuloveraperiodoftimeincasualtyreductionforthisgroup. RECENTWORKUNDERTAKEN 12. Overthelast9months,KingstonCouncilhasbeendirectlypromotingroadsafetyto poweredtwowheelerridersintheBorough.KingstonwasoneofsevenLondon Boroughstolaunchthe“RightgearCampaign”.Thiswasaimedatriderstoraise awarenessontheimportanceofwearingthecorrectsafetygearwhichcouldreduce thelevelofinjury.Thecampaignwasdeliveredvia:

E3 a) Aconceptofsitting-duckstoportraythevulnerabilityofriderstoboth themselvesandtootherroadusers b) Nakedriderimages,withasloganof‘youmayaswellbeinyourbirthdaysuit’to highlightthemessagethatwithoutprotectiveclothing,ridersmayaswellnot haveanyclotheson c) RadioadvertsonKISSandMagicFM d) RestroompostersintheBorough’snightclubsandpublichouseswhich targetedbothridersanddriversusingthesittingduckandnakedriderimages e) Beermatsinpublichouses f) Awebsitewheresafetyinformationanddiscountsforprotectiveclothingcould befoundandcompetitionstowinsafetygear g) Bikeguideswithinformationforridersbeingdistributedatmotorcycleparksin theBoroughbyapromotionalscooterandtrailerpromoting‘Rightgear’ h) Localpressreleases i) TheRightgearpostersarescheduledfortowncentrenoticeboardsthisAutumn. 13. BikesafeandScootersafe,aTransportforLondoninitiativeinconjunctionwiththe MetropolitanPoliceisscheduledtodelivertrainingtoBoroughemployeesand residentsinSeptemberandOctober2007andinMarch2008. 14. Thecross-boroughworkinggroupwhichproducedtheRightgearcampaignhave receivedfundingfromTfLtocontinuethepromotionoftheinitiative. PROPOSAL 15. WhileKingstondoeswellintermsofcasualtyreductionwhencomparedtoother Londonboroughs,therecentriseinKSI’shighlightstherequirementtoworkto continuetoreducethenumberofKSIsperannum. 16. ItisappropriatethattheCouncilhasastrategythataddressesthetwoareasof particularconcern,namelythosecategoriesofchildrenandpoweredtwowheeler riderswherethenumberofKSIsareincreasingandmeanitisunlikelythatthe Council’s2010targetscanbeattained. 17. AproposedstrategyisattachedatAnnex2anditisrecommendedthatthe Executiveapprovethisstrategy. ENVIRONMENTALIMPLICATIONS 18. ByimplementingRoadSafetyEducation,TrainingandPublicity,someofthe CouncilsKeyObjectivesarefulfilled.TheseincludeKeyObjective5reducing congestionandvehicularpollution. FINANCIALIMPLICATIONS 19. RoadSafetyreceivesfundingfromTransportforLondonforspecificschemes.This fundingisallocatedviaabiddingsystembasedonprojectsdeemedofimportance byTfL.TheCouncilalsohasarevenuebudgetof£23,500in2007/08.These moniesarespentonschemesdesignedtoaffectpeoplesbehaviouronRBK highways,andisthusdeterminedbythecasualtydata.Theproposalscontainedin thisreportcanbefundedfromtheseexistingfunds. Backgroundpapers :heldbySamMerison,RoadSafetyEducationOfficer(authorof report),02085475312;e-mail:[email protected],gov.uk E4 Annex1 RoyalBoroughofKingstonuponThames NumbersofPersonalInjuryCasualtiesfromRoadTrafficCollisions OriginalandNewReductionTargetsadoptedbytheMayorforLondon(Jan.2006) (includes2001–2006ActualsandAverages) NewRBKTargets Typeof Baseline RBK2001Actuals RBK2002Actuals RBK2003Actuals RBK2004Actuals RBK2005Actuals RBK2006Actuals OriginalRBKTargets for2010 Casualty for2010

(KSI= Average No. sof Reduction No. sof Reduction No. sof Reduction No. sof Reduction No. sof Reduction No. sof Reduction No. sof Reduction No. sof Reduction killedor 1994- casualties below casualties below casualties below casualties below casualties below casualties below casualties below casualties below seriously 1998 baseline baseline baseline baseline baseline baseline baseline baseline injured)

AllKSI 124 94 24% 87 30% 85 31% 64 48% 63 49% 77 38% 74 40% 62 50% Pedestrian 32 25 22% 25 22% 25 22% 16 50% 17 47% 21 34% 19 40% 16 50% KSI Cyclist 14 9 36% 10 29% 8 43% 10 29% 7 50% 10 29% 8 40% 7 50% KSI P2WKSI 22 17 23% 12 45% 19 14% 16 27% 12 45% 22 --- 13 40% 13 40% ChildKSI 13 10 23% 17 +31% 10 23% 7 46% 3 77% 9 31% 7 50% 5 60% Slight 678 479 29% 462 32% 440 35% 397 41% 405 40% 323 52% 610 10% 509 25% Casualties

E5 Annex2 STRATEGYTOTACKLEPOWEREDTWOWHEELERANDCHILDCASUALTIES Objective1:ToreduceKSI’sforpoweredtwowheelerusers. Objective2:ToreducetheKSI’sforchildren. Activities Thefollowingactivitieswillbeundertakentosecureobjective1 2007/08 a) ThepromotionandprovisionofBikesafeintheBoroughopentoresidentsand businesses. b) ThepromotionandprovisionofScootersafetargetedspecificallyatthe16– 21agebracketbutalsoopentoresidentsandbusinessesintheBorough. c) Totargetroaduserswithsharetheroadmessagesviatheroadsideposter boards. d) EducationofthedangersthatfacePTWuserstootherroadusersatexisting events. e) TocontinuetopromotetheRightgearcampaignandmakeitsreachfurther, especiallyatthebeginningofthesummer. f) Tomonitorthecasualtiesandseethatanythemesthatariseareaddressed. 2008/09 g) ThecontinuedpromotionandprovisionofBikesafe/ScooterSafeLondoninthe Boroughopentoresidentsandbusinesses. h) Totargetroaduserswithsharetheroadmessagesviatheroadsideposter boards. i) EducationofthedangersthatfacePTWuserstootherroadusersatexisting events. j) TorunanannualpubliceventforBoroughresidentstohighlightsharethe roadcampaign,andotherdangersthatfaceusers,suchas‘bornagain’riders andthechangesintechnology. k) TocontinuetopromotetheRightgearcampaignandmakeitsreachfurther, especiallyatthebeginningofthesummer. l) Tomonitorthecasualtiesandseethatanythemesthatariseareaddressed.

E6 2009/10 m)ThepromotionandprovisionofBikesafe/ScooterSafeLondonintheBorough opentoresidentsandbusinesses. n) Totargetroaduserswithsharetheroadmessagesviatheroadsideposter boards. o) EducationofthedangersthatfacePTWuserstootherroadusersatexisting events. p) TorunanannualpubliceventforBoroughresidentstohighlightsharethe roadcampaign,andotherdangersthatfaceusers,suchas‘bornagain’riders andthechangesintechnology. q) Tomonitorthecasualtiesandseethatanythemesthatariseareaddressed. ObjectiveOneBestValuePerformanceIndicator Type Baseline 2004 2005 2006 2007 2010 actual actual actual target target P2W 22 16 12 22 16 13 KSI Activities Thefollowingactivitieswillbeundertakentosecureobjective2 2007/08/09/10 a) ThecontinuedpromotionoftheChildrensTrafficClub,aTfLfundedinitiative thatisofferedfreeofchargetoparentsandcarersofchildrenaged3-5. b) ThecontinuationofthesuccessfulJuniorRoadSafetyOfficerschemeasa wayofensuringconstantroadsafetyinallprimaryschoolsanddelivering educationandtrainingtoallKeyStage1and2. c) Tosupporttheimplementationofmeasuresforschoolsthatpromotesroad safetyandsustainabletransportwithrelevantroadsafetyeducationand training. d) Tocontinuetodelivercycletrainingandinparticulartopromoteparticipation inBikeabilityLevel3advancedtrainingandmeetthefollowingtargetsof childrentrained: SchoolYear 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 Target 250 250 400 e) Toseekfurthercoverageandpublicityofin-carsafetyandhaveatleast2 promotionaleventseveryyeartoinformparentsofthis.

E7 f) ThegrowthoftheSecondaryStudentCounciltoengagewiththehardto reach11-16yearoldagebracket • Empowermentofthisagegrouptodelivermessagesintheirlanguage totheirpeers • Achievebetterunderstandingoftheirconcernsandwhatbehaviour makestheirsafetyonthehighwayaconcern • Tosetupachannelofregularcommunicationforthisagegroupabout roadsafetyandwhyitisimportanttothem. Thisgroupwillshapehowinformationisdistributedandwillbesustainedasa permanentfixtureforyearstocome.Assafetyissueschange,thegroupwill bebestplacedtoalterthestrategyfortheirpeers.

APPENDIX F Executive, 2 October 2007

ODOURS FROM THE HOGSMILL SEWAGE WORKS Report by the Borough Environmental Health Officer Leader of the Council and the Executive Member for Environment and Sustainability:

1. Purpose 2. To give an interim update on the action taken regarding odours from the Hogsmill Sewage Treatment Works.

Action proposed by the Leader of the Council

The Executive is requested to:

1. note the interim report; and

2. agree that Officers continue to seek to ensure that Thames Water undertake effective measures to reduce the odours from the sewage works within a reasonable time scale.

Reason for action proposed To seek to ensure that all reasonably practicable steps are taken by Thames Water to reduce the incidents of odour emission that affects residents. 3.

BACKGROUND

1. On 28 November 2006, a petition from residents regarding odours from the Hogsmill STW was presented to Council. Subsequently there was a report to Executive on 23 January where it was agreed to

• set up a liaison group between the Council and residents to examine the issues raised and consider action and • have a further report on proposals by Thames Water and comments of the Council’s consultant and the outcome of the liaison group’s discussions.

ACTION TAKEN 2. Since the January meeting a liaison group of three residents, The Leader of the Council, the Executive Member for Environment and Sustainability and officers has met twice.

3. On 27 April the Council received from Thames Water a copy of an odour assessment report from its consultants, Odournet. This report identified a number of options that could be considered by Thames Water to reduce odour emissions and a covering letter from Thames Water indicating their proposals in response. Copies of all documents have been provided to residents’ representatives.

4. The Council has commissioned a study by its own consultants, ADAS, which reported in June 2007. This report confirmed the findings of the Odournet report

but also indicated other areas where revised practices and new plant/equipment could improve the situation. A copy of the report was also provided to resident’s representatives.

5. On 11 September a meeting took place between the Council and Thames Water to discuss proposals and the way forward. The meeting was attended by the Executive Member, consultants, resident’s representative and officers from both sides.

CURRENT POSITION

6. It is clear from the consultant’s reports that whilst the complete eradication of odours under all circumstances is not possible, significant improvements can be brought about by changes to working practices and by the installation of new plant and equipment. Thames Water have been advised that, based on the consultant’s reports, the Council is now of the opinion that all practicable steps are not being undertaken on an ongoing basis to reduce odours.

7. As the various stages of sewage treatment are interrelated and funding is still being resolved between Thames Water and OFWAT, it is not possible at the moment for officers to say with certainty what the final programme of works will be and when it will be implemented. It was reported by Thames Water that one item of the proposed works may, for example, cost in the region of £1 to £2 million and could take in the region of 12 to 18months to install. Other works can be carried out more immediately.

8. OFWAT, who are the regulators of the water industry, have indicated that they are satisfied with the schedule of works set out in the letter 20th April [from Thames water] in so far as it relates to odour reduction works. However, following the meeting the Council has written to Thames Water requesting further details of precisely what is going to happen and the time frame within which that will take place.

9. One issue that has arisen from the meetings with resident’s representatives is the need for an improved complaint recording process and mechanism whereby residents can be informed of programmed works that will unavoidably cause odours. For example, over recent weeks there has been an increased level of odours due to clear up operations following the recent heavy rain and the need to clean out pumps. To this end the Council communication unit is liaising with Thames Water and a dedicated complaint line and link through the Council’s website is being set up.

CONCLUSION

10. The action outlined in this report has made clear to Thames Water the high level of concern of the Council and residents over odours and there appears to be a desire and intention by Thames Water to carry out works. To ensure that this remains so the Council will continue to monitor progress by Thames Water and, should this not prove satisfactory, further consideration will need to be taken as regards any appropriate action by the Council.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS

11. This report relates to means by which odours affecting residents may be reduced.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS - NONE

Background papers:- held by author of the report::- Bob Smart, Borough Environmental Health Officer 020 8547 5530. E-mail [email protected] Letter from Thames Water dated 21 April 2007.

APPENDIX G Executive, 2 October 2007

TENTH LONDON LOCAL AUTHORITIES BILL AND JOINT LONDON LOCAL AUTHORITIES AND TRANSPORT FOR LONDON BILL

Report by the Head of Legal Services Leader of the Council

Purpose

This report sets out a list of matters to appear in the proposed Tenth London Local Authorities Bill and Joint London Local Authorities and Transport for London Bill and seeks to recommend to the Council that this Authority approves the inclusion in the Bills of these matters. Under the Authority’s procedures, it is for the Council to make such decisions as promoting legislation which will affect the residents of the Borough. The opportunity is also taken to up-date the Executive on the Ninth London Local Authorities Bill which has since become the London Local Authorities Act, 2007.

Action proposed by the Leader of the Council:

The Executive is asked to: recommend the Council to approve the inclusion in the bill or bills being promoted by Westminster City Council or, as the case may be in a bill or bills to be promoted jointly by Westminster City Council and any other person as appropriate , of provisions effecting all or some of the following purposes as set out in Annex 1 to this report

Reason for action proposed

To recommend that certain matters be included in the Tenth London Local Authorities Bill and Joint London Local Authorities and Transport for London Bill.

BACKGROUND

1. Arising out of consultation by London Councils with London Authorities, Westminster City Council has agreed to promote a Tenth London Local Authorities Bill and Joint London Local Authorities and Transport for London Bill. In the past, it has been the practice for Westminster City Council to act as lead authority promoting London Local Authorities Bills on behalf of other London Authorities.

PROCEDURE FOR PARLIAMENTARY PRIVATE BILLS

2. The parliamentary standing orders governing private bills require the authorities promoting a Bill to pass a resolution in favour by a majority in full Council, both before and after any Bill has been deposited. They are required to advertise the

time and place of the meetings to consider promoting the Bill in a newspaper circulating in their area, giving 30 days’ clear notice. A composite advertisement, giving details for the meetings for each participating authority, was published in the Evening Standard on 10 August 2007. The first Council meetings to consider participation took place in September.

3. The recommendation encompasses the formal resolution which each participating authority will need to have passed by an absolute majority of its full Council. The provisions in the resolution form a very “long list” of proposals received from all Authorities. The London Councils will be consulting further on these provisions and this means that some will inevitably be dropped, either because sufficient consensus could not be reached between boroughs, or because the proposal is otherwise inappropriate for the private bill procedure (for example, either the House authorities may not accept the provisions or the Government may not accept it as part of a Bill). It may also be that some boroughs may not wish to proceed with all the proposals. In that case, it may be possible at a later stage to make the particular proposal ‘adoptive’ in that it would only apply to Authorities who actively adopt the proposal after the Bills have become law.

4. Authorities will have the opportunity to discuss a second resolution after the Bills have been deposited with Parliament in November 2007. At that stage, the proposals will be in statutory form and the Council will need, at its second meeting, to consider the ‘fine detail’ of the draft Bills.

5. The nature of the private bill procedures is such that very many initial ideas may have to be dropped. Experience with the previous Bills indicates that proposals may have to be dropped during the passage of the Bills through Parliament. Sometimes this is unavoidable, because the presence of ‘controversial’ clauses may cause the Bill to be substantially delayed, or even prevent its enactment.

6. At this time no decisions have been made. These proposals for the Bills (set out in the Annex) are purely ideas that are being consulted on and will almost certainly be whittled down before the Bills are deposited in Parliament in November. At present, the Government Office for London oppose chewing gum levies and have expressed concern and are likely to oppose the proposals on the plastic bag levy/ban; pigeon control areas; amending both sex establishment and street trading legislation and food premises to be subject to inspections by the Council under the Food Safety Act 1990. London Councils have concerns with some of the TfL proposals which include use of mobile phones and driving; advanced stopping areas at traffic lights for cycles and negotiations are continuing between the London Councils and TfL on the latter’s proposals.

7. London Councils take the view that a Council does not formally become part of the Bills until it has passed the Second Resolution in the New Year. At that point, it would be possible for a borough to ‘opt out’ of any particular provision it did not like.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

8. The promotion of a Tenth London Local Authorities Bill will require each supporting borough to contribute to the Bill’s promotion. In the past, this has been estimated at £12,000 per borough if all 33 support the promotion, but this figure is spread across a number of years and will depend upon the length of actual time taken to promote the Bill. These contributions are in addition to any annual contribution levied on boroughs to fund the functions of the London Councils Joint Committee.

9. It is estimated that the cost of promoting a Tenth London Local Authorities Bill would be £200,000 - £300,000 (which amounts to £6,060 - £9,090 per borough). For a separate London Local Authorities and Transport for London Bill being promoted, the estimated cost of this Bill is £150,000 to £200,000 (£4,545 to £6,060 per borough). Note that this does not take into account the contribution that TfL would make. Although Parliamentary fees make up a proportion of this sum, the total cost will depend on a number of factors including, the number of proposals contained in the Bill, how contentious they are, and how long the process lasts.

10. It is hoped that the extensive consultation work undertaken by London Councils in advance of deposit will reduce the costs payable to Parliamentary Agents, compared with those in the past, because the Bill to be deposited after consultation should not include any of the obviously contentious provisions which inevitably hold up the promotion of a Private Bill.

NINTH LONDON LOCAL AUTHORITIES BILL

11. By way of an update the above Bill eventually became the London Local Authorities Act 2007. Most of this Act came into force on 19 th September 2007, although there are a few provisions which will need to be brought into force by resolution of the Council to define the Appointed Day. Two of these which are of interest are Section 73 which allows Councils to charge telecommunications companies for using underground pipes provided by the Council and Section 75 which makes it compulsory for mail forwarding businesses to register with their local Council.

12. Annex 2 ‘A rough guide to the London Local Authorities Act 2007’ published by London Councils explains some of the more important provisions of the Act. In particular Section 5 provides for a prohibition on the display of portable advertisements within a designated area unless they have express or deemed consent. Such advertisements include “A” Boards and attract a maximum penalty of £2500.The areas which the Council can designate include not only streets and ways to which the public have access, but also public off street car parks and Council recreation grounds and open spaces. The Council can only designate in the interests of amenity and public safety.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS

13. There are a number of environmental implications arising from the current list of proposals in the Bills. These include a local levy administered by the Council on the provision of disposable shopping bags; a prohibition on the sale of shopping bags; charging of electric vehicles on the highway; enabling the Council to better control the feeding of wild birds; controlling the placing of household waste in street litter bins and making further provision for the control of the placing of items on the highway and provisions to enable action to be taken against persons who interfere with gates placed under road traffic legislation.

Background Papers : held by John Newnham [author of report], 020 8547 4631 Email: [email protected]

1. Report to London Councils Leaders’ Committee, 10 July 2007, item 7 - Tenth London Local Authorities Bill.

ANNEX 1

PROVISIONS TO BE INCLUDED IN THE BILL

(a) to make provision about

the decriminalisation of offences relating to public health, highways and road traffic and making contravention of the relevant legislation, subject to a civil penalty charge regime;

the introduction of a local levy, administered by London borough councils, on the provision of disposable shopping bags or to introduce a prohibition on the provision of disposable shopping bags;

the introduction of a local levy administered by the London borough councils on the sale of chewing gum;

an extension of the type of premises in respect of which a street litter control notice can be issued under the Environmental Protection Act 1990 to include a wider range of non-domestic premises;

to enable councils to better control the feeding of wild birds;

to enable borough councils to make changes for the use of urinals;

to make further provision about the control of the placing of items on the highway;

altering London borough councils’ powers to fix signs and apparatus to buildings;

amending London borough councils’ powers to charge for the provision of amenities on highways under Park VIIA of the Highways Act 1980;

controlling the placing of household waste in street litter bins;

to enable London borough councils to recover costs incurred by them in rectifying damage caused by them when removing unlawful advertisements;

to enable London borough councils, as local housing authorities, to take enforcement action and recover costs in cases where there has been a failure to comply with a duty imposed in relation to the management of houses in multiple occupation under regulations made under Section 234 of the Housing Act 2004;

imposing a requirement in respect of food premises which are subject to inspection by London borough councils under the Food Safety Act 1990 to display copies of inspection notices or summaries thereof on the premises;

to impose a new licensing regime for social clubs;

to alter the requirements relating to the service of documents under the City of Westminster Act 1996, which deals with sex establishments;

to enable London borough councils to exert better control over the licensing of premises which, but for the Licensing Act 2003 would be required to be licensed as sex encounter establishments;

to enable London borough councils to delegate their functions under existing street trading legislation and enable other bodies to manage street markets;

to alter the street trading legislation in the City of Westminster so as to enable Westminster City Council, without a court order, to dispose of articles seized under the Act;

to make further alterations to street trading legislation in London;

to control the distribution of free refreshments on the highway and in other public open places;

to enable the highway authority to recover traffic management and street cleansing costs incurred as a result of public events and to have the power to close or manage traffic for certain special events;

to enable the highway authority to provide charging points for electric vehicles in the highway;

to enable local planning authorities to require that a deposit is provided prior to commencement of development, to be offset against costs arising from making good damage to the highway caused by the construction of the development;

to enable action to be taken against persons who interfere with gates placed in pursuance of powers under road traffic legislation;

to enable councils to better control pedicabs;

to enable councils to serve penalty notices by post where there has been a parking contravention, and where service was prevented by the vehicle driving away;

to allow decriminalised enforcement in respect of advanced stopping areas for cyclists at traffic lights;

to allow decriminalised enforcement in respect of the use of mobile phones whilst driving;

to enable London borough councils to vary fixed penalty levels for cycling on the footway;

to enable the better control of the depositing of builders’ skips on the highway;

to provide for a decriminalised regime of enforcement in relation to the driving of abnormal vehicles on the highway.

(b) to enact any additional, supplemental and consequential provisions that may appear to be necessary or convenient.

A rough guide to the London Local Authorities Act 2007

Introduction One role of London Councils is to help promote private legislation on behalf of the boroughs. The latest example of this - the 9th London Local Authorities Bill - received Royal Assent in July, and is now the LLA Act 2007. Like previous LLA Acts, London Councils played a leading role in steering the provisions through parliament to gain new powers to help London boroughs tackle a range of nuisances that adversely affect the local environment, and the quality of life of their residents. This rough guide explains some of the most important provisions in the new Act. Further details are available on the London Councils website at www.londoncouncils.gov.uk/LLAAct. All provisions come into force on 19 September 2007, except where stated, and are only applicable to London.

Advertising and ﬂy posting The Act:

• allows councils to ban the display of many types of portable advertisements within a designated area, on grounds of public safety or amenity. Anyone contravening the ban can be ﬁned up to £2,500

• sets higher fines for repeat offenders. Third offences of fly posting or ‘shroud advertisement’ offences (which involve adverts hung from buildings or scaffolding) will attract fines of up to £20,000, instead of a current maximum of £2,500

• enables councils to force owners or occupiers to take action to stop people persistently posting up unauthorised adverts on their buildings. Councils will also have the power to carry out any necessary work, and to recoup their costs from the owner or occupier (these provisions will only come into force once a Code of Practice has been developed and agreed by London Councils, likely to be by June 2008)

• allows council ofﬁcers to seize items where they suspect a ﬂy posting offence has been committed

Waste and litter The Act:

• allows councils to set standard regulations for householders and businesses about rubbish collection, including where to place bins and what to put into different recycling containers. Councils will be able to impose a penalty charge on those who fail to comply (enforcement cannot begin until the level of penalty charges has been agreed, likely to be by June 2008) • enables councils to serve a penalty charge notice on a vehicle owner when a littering offence has been committed by somebody inside the vehicle (for example, by throwing rubbish out into the road). Buses, coaches, taxis and private hire vehicles are exempt (enforcement cannot begin until the level of penalty charges has been agreed, likely to be by June 2008) • allows councils to require proof that anyone wanting to dump rubbish at a civic amenity site lives in the borough, or an adjoining council area, and to refuse access to anyone from outside the area

Abandoned vehicles The Act:

• amends previous legislation so that in some circumstances councils will no longer have to give notice to occupiers that they intend to remove abandoned vehicles from their land, saving time and money • tightens existing legislation so that anyone wishing to reclaim a vehicle that has been removed by the council will need to produce evidence that he or she has paid the ﬁxed penalty for the offence, and has the necessary insurance, tax and MOT certiﬁcate (if the owner does not have the documents he or she can pay a bond to take away the vehicle, which will be repaid when the documents are produced. Enforcement cannot begin until the level of the bond has been agreed, likely to be by June 2008)

Other environmental provisions The Act:

• allows a council (or two or more councils acting together) to apply to the Secretary of State to designate an area of land as an enforcement action zone, where higher fines can be imposed for a number of environmental crimes including littering, graffiti, noise nuisance and fly posting. This will help councils clean up sensitive areas, such as tourist attractions • enables a council to serve notice on owners and occupiers to clear vegetation where its growth has an adverse effect on the amenity of an area

Licensing The Act: • introduces in London a new class of establishment, known as hostess bars, which will be subject to licensing as sex establishments. The deﬁnition replaces the old ‘near beer’ premises, which were subject to less strict licensing requirements. (This provision comes into force in Westminster on 19 September 2007, but the starting date for all other boroughs depends on the resolution of each council)

Street trading The Act: • tightens existing legislation with new deﬁnitions of what constitutes street trading and closes a potential loophole which could have enabled some trading on bridges over the Thames • gives councils more powers over the granting, suspension or revoking of temporary licences • allows council ofﬁcers to seize perishable items (previously excluded from the list of what could be seized) from unlawful street traders • extends the time period within which proceedings have to be instituted in the case of unlawful trading of motor vehicles

Penalty charges and ﬁxed penalties The Act:

• adds two forms of offence for which councils can impose penalty charges (use and placement of waste bins and littering from a vehicle), and paves the way for more in the future by setting out general procedures relating to penalty charges, including the setting of fees, implementation, payments and appeals • extends the period within which the recipient of a ﬁxed penalty notice must pay from 14 to 28 days (the deadline for discounts for quick payment remains at 14 days) Other measures The Act:

• tightens existing legislation controlling the sale of sex videos to also cover their display • allows council ofﬁcers powers of entry (by force if necessary), search and seizure of goods from premises being used for temporary sleeping accommodation where enforcement notices have already been breached • prohibits soliciting people to sex establishments and certain other premises • allows councils to charge telecommunication companies for using underground pipes provided by the council (the date of implementation depends on the resolution of each borough) • allows burial authorities to disturb human remains that have been there for at least 75 years in order to deepen graves to allow more burials. The remains will have to be buried again in the same grave • makes it compulsory for mail forwarding businesses to register with their local council, and to keep records of their clients. The penalty for contravention is a ﬁne up to £5,000. Councils can use their existing powers of entry, inspection and seizure for enforcement purposes (the date of implementation depends on the resolution of each borough)

Work on the 10th London Local Authorities Bill is currently underway and should start its parliamentary passage in November 2007. Visit www.londoncouncils.gov.uk for more information.

London Councils is committed to ﬁghting for more resources for London and getting the best possible deal for London’s 33 councils. We develop policy, lobby government and others, and run a range of services designed to make life better for Londoners.

For more information contact Ceri Edwards, Director of Communications and Public Affairs Tel: 020 7934 9750 email: [email protected] www.londoncouncils.gov.uk © Copyright London Councils August 2007 Cartoons by Royston Robertson

London Councils supports environmentally-friendly products. This leaﬂet is printed on NAPM accredited paper that uses 75% recycled ﬁbre, manufactured in the UK at mills with ISO 14001 accreditation.

APPENDIX H Executive 2 October 2007

Local Government Finance – Formula Grant Consultation – RBK Response Report by the Strategic Director of Finance Leader of the Council

Purpose

The Government published its consultation paper for the distribution of Formula Grant for the three financial years 2008/09 to 2010/11 on 17 July 2007. This report summarises the key points and suggests a proposed response from RBK.

Action proposed by the Leader of the Council The Executive is requested to:

1. note the position; and

2. authorise the Strategic Director of Finance to respond formally on the Council’s behalf, as set out in paragraphs 10 to 14 below and Annex 1.

Reason for action proposed To respond to the Government’s proposals by the closing date of 10 October 2007.

BACKGROUND

1. The 2007/08 Local Government Finance (LGF) Settlement was the second and final year of the first “multi year” settlement and two year formula “freeze”. The Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) has carried out a limited review of some elements of the current formulae, in order to inform the system which will be used for the LGF settlements for the next three financial years (ie 2008/09 and 2010/11).

2. DCLG published a consultation paper on 17 July 2007, “Local Government Finance – Formula Grant Distribution”. In the paper, DCLG presents a number of options for change to elements of the grant distribution system, together with illustrations of the potential effects of these changes on individual local authorities, obtained by modelling their impact on the 2007/08 settlement.

3. The closing date for responses to the consultation paper is 10 October 2007, after which Ministers will determine how the grant for 2008/09 will be distributed.

4. The consultation paper indicates that:

§ the methodology adopted for 2008/09 will be applied for three years;

§ the model finally adopted may include changes which are not identified as options in the consultation paper;

§ the review is “mainly looking to update and fine tune the existing system”.

PROPOSED RBK RESPONSE

5. The DCLG has issued a “Response Form” which seeks views on a number of proposed changes. A copy of this form is attached at Annex 1, incorporating suggested RBK responses to each question.

6. However, the proposals consulted upon do nothing to address some of the issues raised by RBK in its response to the previous (2005) consultation, which preceded the introduction of the current formula. It is therefore suggested that the “Response Form” be accompanied by a letter from the Strategic Director of Finance (on behalf of the Council) which raises these matters again. The matters are those discussed in paragraphs 10 to 14 below.

7. London Councils has also prepared a response on behalf of London Boroughs. Many of the issues which are pertinent to RBK are common to most, if not all, the London Boroughs. Consequently, in these areas, RBK’s response will be similar to that of London Councils. However, there are areas, particularly the issue of “area cost adjustment”, where the impact of possible changes would be to move grant between London Boroughs. In these cases, London Councils does not make a specific response.

FORMULA CHANGES

8. The current formula, introduced in 2006/07, does not contain any measure of “assessed need to spend”. Instead, it contains, for each main “service block”, a “relative needs formula” for each authority.

9. Many of the changes proposed in the consultation are relatively minor and are technical in nature. They are not discussed in detail in this report. The proposals which are of particular significance for RBK are outlined in the following paragraphs.

10. Children’s and Younger Adults Personal Social Services

The formula introduced in 2006/07 would have resulted in further significant losses of grant for many authorities (including RBK) had these two elements not been separately damped. The consultation paper proposes no changes to the formula, despite concerns raised by these authorities that they are not technically robust. However, it proposes the reduction or removal of the “sub block damping”. These proposals would cause a substantial reduction in RBK’s grant if implemented, although the initial impact would be reduced to an extent by the “overall grant floor” – see para 13 below. It is therefore suggested that RBK opposes these changes strongly.

11. Environmental, Protective and Cultural Services (EPCS)

The proposed change in this sub block is to fund the extension to the national concessionary fares scheme through formula grant. The paper exemplifies the allocation of £200 million nationally to pay for the scheme. RBK and London generally seem to gain above average increases in grant from all three options, but it is less clear what the new scheme’s impact will be in cost terms, as this depends on the extent to which concessionary travel in London is taken up by non-residents. Local authorities generally believe the use of specific grant to meet the additional costs of the extended scheme would be fairer.

12. Area Cost Adjustment (ACA)

RBK, with Hounslow, Richmond and Hillingdon, submitted a proposal to the Settlement Working Group which proposed a review of the ACA within London, creating a “West Outer London ACA area” which would address the significant costs faced by the four boroughs. This proposal has not been exemplified or included in the Consultation Paper. RBK’s response proposes the revision of the ACA with a “West Outer London” adjustment.

13. Grant Floors

In the current distribution system, floors are used to provide some year on year stability by ensuring that each authority receives a minimum increase in grant. In recent years, for Councils which provide Education and Social Services, the floor has been between 2% and 4%. The consultation paper exemplifies options for setting the floor at a lower level (0%, 1% and 2%) and also considers whether the floor should be reduced over the three year settlement period. The changes made in the previous review mean that RBK has been protected by the grant floor and received the minimum increase in grant in each of the last two years. The larger charges exemplified in this consultation would mean that without the floor, RBK’s grant would reduce significantly. Reductions in grant would mean that RBK could be required either to reduce expenditure on services, or increase further the council tax burden on our residents. As council tax already meets 69% of RBK’s net expenditure, compared with the London average of 42%, this is not acceptable. The response therefore argues strongly for the retention of the grant floor.

14. Council Tax Base – Student Exemptions

The consultation paper recognises that student exemptions have an impact on the taxbase, particularly in areas such as RBK which have a significant student population. The impact of this change is not exemplified in the Consultation Paper, as DCLG does not have the data. However, the proposal to collect data in May each year is likely to produce a more robust calculation of the impact of student exemptions on the taxbase and is supported.

CONCLUSION

15. The reduction in grant support in recent years has had a significant impact on RBK, increasing to 69% the proportion of our spending met from the council tax. The proposals in the consultation paper are likely to worsen this position, so it is important that RBK continues to take all opportunities to argue its case.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS

16. There are no direct environmental implications arising from this report.

TIMESCALES

17. The closing date for responses to the consultation is 10 October 2007.

18. The Government is likely to announce the outcome of the consultation and the three year settlement for 2008/09 to 2010/11 in late November or early December 2007.

Background papers : held by Jeremy Randall (author of report), 020 8547 5572; e-mail: [email protected]

1. Formula Grant Distribution – Consultation Paper published by DCLG.

2. Letter from Robert Davies (DCLG) to Chief Executives of all local authorities (dated 17 July 2007).

3. Briefing papers from London Councils.

LOCAL GOVERNMENT FINANCE FORMULA GRANT DISTRIBUTION: CONSULTATION PAPER July 2007

Response Form

The Government would like your views on which of the options presented in the Local Government Finance Formula Grant Distribution consultation paper should go to updating and modifying the grant distribution system. This paper was published on the 17 July 2007, and can be found at the following address http://www.local.communities.gov.uk/finance/0809/sumcon/index.htm

For convenience, this preformatted response form sets out all the questions in the main consultation document. Please click on relevant check boxes to activate the ‘X’. Space is available after each question if you wish to include any additional comments to support your choice. We also welcome any alternative proposals, and these can be made in the section available at the end.

All responses, whether using this preformatted response form, or otherwise, should reach us by 5pm on 10th October 2007.

We particularly welcome responses submitted electronically. Please send response by e-mail to [email protected]

If you are not able to respond by e-mail, please send your response to:

Nikki Hinde Formula Grant Review Team Communities & Local Government Zone 5/J2 Eland House Bressenden Place London SW1E 5DU

Alternatively, your response may be faxed to 020 7944 2963.

Confidentiality

All information in responses, including personal information, may be subject to publication or disclosure under freedom of information legislation. If a correspondent requests confidentiality, this cannot be guaranteed and will only be possible if considered appropriate under legislation. Any such request should explain why confidentiality is necessary in the box below. An automatic confidentiality disclaimer generated by your IT system will not be considered as such a request unless you specifically include a request, with an explanation, in your e-mail.

I would like my response to remain confidential (please tick)

Please say why

FORMULA GRANT DISTRIBUTION CONSULTATION RESPONSE

Name Tracie Evans

Position Strategic Director of Finance

Organisation Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames (RBK)

Address Guildhall, Kingston upon Thames, Surrey KT1 1EU

E-mail [email protected]

CHAPTER 2: Formula Grant And Local Government Restructuring In A Three- Year Settlement

Q1 Do you agree with the fallback mechanism described for calculating settlements in restructured areas during the 3 year settlement?

Yes No

Any further comments: RBK agrees that during a three year period the restructuring of a small number of Councils should not affect the grant of authorities which are not restructured.

CHAPTER 3: Children’s and Adult’ Personal Social Services

Personal Social Services Formula Damping

Q2 Should the specific formula floor continue for Children’s PSS?

Yes No

Any further comments: RBK strongly opposes the proposal to remove or reduce the formula floor in Children's Personal Social Services (PSS). The Council raised concerns about the robustness of this formula in 2005. These concerns have not been addressed in the 2007 review. The most significant technical concerns with the Children's Personal Social Services formula are:

- The inability of the model to distinguish between local choices and efficiencies and genuine local and regional cost pressures. There are strong reasons to believe that Kingston, in common with all London authorities, faces legitimate additional costs compared to elsewhere which have been removed from the analysis. For example, urban authorities will undoubtedly be more attractive to certain groups such as new arrivals from overseas and the homeless. These effects have not been sufficiently studied for systematic bias before being discarded. - There is a wide range of costs between authorities. At the local authority level the authority with the highest unit costs per child was more than 22 times that of the lowest. This is not replicated in the results of the formula. - Evidence provided by the researchers that urban authorities are under funded by the formula has been ignored. - The attribution of data where the postcode crosses a local authority boundary. London has twice the proportion of split postcodes compared to the rest of the country, and a higher proportion of small postcodes which means that the model may not work for London. - The use of average unit costs for each type of service removes not only variation due to local authority variability, but also differences due to variation in need. It is difficult to quantify this precisely, but work commissioned by London Councils has concluded that the use of national average data woul give high cost areas a smaller share of funding for Children's Personal Social Services even if these high costs were due to factors other than policy and practice. This means that the formula is underfunding authorities with genuinely high unit costs due to levels of need. - There are inadequacies with the foster care adjustment. Authorities facing difficulties attracing foster carers inevitably incur increasing costs due to providing care to children awaiting foster placements and this is not reflected in the formula. The department's response that these costs will be reflected in the main part of the formula does not necessarily mean that the authorities affected will be funded for this pressure as this may have been removed by the exclusion of the 'between local authority effects' and the other concerns with the formula identified above. It is essential that urgent work is undertaken to address these concerns and to derive formulae that are robust enough to allocate resources for such an important local authority service area.

Q3 If yes to Q2, how quickly should the formula floor be phased out?

The concerns raised in the above are sufficient to warrant the continuation of the Children's Personal Social Services sub-block damping. Until these concerns are resolved it is imperative that the formula floor continues to reflect the growing cost and demand pressures being faced in this service area in Kingston. In addition, the floor is essential to prevent the turbulence that would be created by its removal and which does not reflect the changing needs of children's social services in Kingston. Indeed, the separate floor for

the Children's Personal Social Services sub-block was introduced in 2006/07 due to the importance the Government placed on the predictability and stability of these services. As the turbulence created by the children's social services formula still exists, the removal of the sub-block damping cannot be justified as stability and predictability are still an important part of the system.

Q4 Should the specific formula floor continue for Younger Adults’ PSS?

Yes No

Any further comments: Again, RBK opposes strongly the proposals to remove or adjust the specific formula floor for Younger Adults' PSS. As with the Children's formula, in 2005 we raised concerns about the robustness of this formula which have not been addressed by the 2007 review. The most significant technical concerns with the Younger Adults' Personal Social Services formula are: - As with the Children's Personal Social Services formula, the inability of the model to distinguish between local choices and efficiencies and genuine local and regional cost pressures. There are strong reasons to believe that London authorities face legitimate additional costs compared to elsewhere which have been removed from the analysis. For example, urban authorities will undoubtedly be more attractive to certain groups such as new arrivals from overseas and the homeless. We are concerned that these effects have not been sufficiently studied for systematic bias before being discarded. - The sample used to derive the formula. At first sight, the sample appears to be large containing over 26,000 clients in 800 wards based in 18 local authorities. However, sample size alone is not sufficient to ensure reliable and valid results. In particular, this sample was effectively reduced by the fact that certain variables were evenly distributed across some authorities. This was the case for certain ethnicity variables in the modelling where the variable was flat between wards in every authority apart from one local authority in the sample. This effectively meant that the analysis to find a within authority effect on this variable was based on one authority. As between local authority effects were removed from the model this could have led to a situation where only a small weight was attached to a variable or it was removed from the model completely. - The particularly high weighting given to disability living allowance (DLA) remains an area of concern. London authorities have particularly low levels of take-up of this benefit which, in fact, has a low level of take-up generally. According to the Charity ReThink, take up of this benefit is particularly low for those with mental illness. London has a particularly high incidence of mental illness and a large proportion of the clients receiving social services due to mental health problems. This suggests that there may be a regional bias in the take-up of this particular benefit which bears no relationship to clients receiving social services in those regions. It is our view that due to extremely low levels of take-up across the country and the regional bias this indicator is unable to identify need fully, and therefore a much lower weight should be given to it. Additionally, DLA is geared

towards a very physical definition of disability, and is aimed at the chronically ill or those with acquired disability. It does not therefore reflect the needs of people with mental health problems, those disabled from birth and those with learning disabilities. It is imperative that work is carried out to address these concerns and derive a formula which is technically robust to allocate resources for such a vital service area.

Q5 If yes to Q4, how quickly should the formula floor be phased out?

Under no circumstances should the formula floor for the Younger Adults' Personal Social Services formula be removed or phased out as the turbulence created by this formula does not reflect the increasing demands for younger adults' personal social services in Kingston. The outcome of the Younger Adults' Personal Social Services formula, in particular, is totally counterintuitive as the un-damped effect of this model leads to huge grant losses in London, despite evidence of growing or greater need. London's share of the Younger Adults' Personal Social Services Relative Needs formula, excluding the Area Cost Adjustment is 15.5%. This compares to a share of the younger adults population of 16% and despite London having a large proportion of adults with mental health and substance misuse problems and the highest rate of clients in residential care. This and the other weaknesses identified above are sufficient to question the validity of the formula for distributing general grant. The separate floor for the Younger Adults' Personal Social Services sub- block was introduced in 2006/07 due to the importance the Government placed on the predictability and stability of these services. The turbulence created by the introduction of this new formula was considered by the Government to be sufficient to warrant this protection. The exemplifications in the consultation paper, and those published subsequently, clearly demonstrate that the turbulence still exists. As stability and predictability are a key element of the local government finance system the removal of the Younger Adults' Personal Social Services damping is not justified. In addition, London Councils' has highlighted the impact of the removal or reduction of the separate sub-block damping on non-social services authorities. In particular, the impact on the Greater London Authority of removing the personal social services sub-block damping is a loss of £43 million in un-damped grant. RBK agrees that it is totally unacceptable for the changes to have this magnitude of effect on authorities that do not provide social services. Due to these technical shortcomings and evidence of growing or greater need in London, it is imperative that urgent work is undertaken to address these concerns and to derive formulae that are robust enough to allocate resources for such important local authority service areas. The concerns raised in this response are sufficient to warrant the continuation of the Younger Adults' Personal Social Services sub-block damping. We also feel that the Government should undertake a review of the formula during the next three year formula freeze to rectify serious inadequacies in the distribution of funding for social services.

Social Services for Older People

Q6 Which option do you prefer for the Low Income Adjustment -

SSE1 SSE2

Any further comments: RBK does not support either of the options to revise the low income adjustment, as the statistical evidence is not sufficiently strong.

CHAPTER 4 - Police

Q7 Do you agree the resource base should be updated (POL1)?

Yes No

Any further comments: RBK supports the views put forward by the Metropolitan Police Authority and London Councils in respect of this option.

Q8 Do you agree that the Additional Rule 2 grants should be rolled into principal formula Police Grant (POL2)?

Yes No

Any further comments: RBK supports the views put forward by the Metropolitan Police Authority and London Councils in respect of this option.

Q9 Do you agree that the Crime Fighting Fund should be rolled into principal formula Police Grant (POL3)?

Yes No

Any further comments:

RBK supports the views put forward by the Metropolitan Police Authority and London Councils in respect of this option.

CHAPTER 5 – Fire and Rescue

Q10 Do you agree that the expenditure base used to determine the coefficients should be updated (FIR1)?

Yes No

Any further comments: RBK supports the views put forward by the LFEPA and London Councils in respect of this option.

CHAPTER 6 – Highways Maintenance

Q11 Do you agree that the expenditure base used to determine the coefficients should be updated (HM1)?

Yes No

Any further comments: The updating of expenditure data appears to produce unreliable results.

CHAPTER 7 – Environmental, Protective and Cultural Services

Concessionary Fares

Q12 If the money is to be added to Formula Grant, which option for distribution do you prefer -

EPCS1 EPCS2 EPCS3

Any further comments: There is general agreement within local government that the funding for the national bus concession from April 2008 should be distributed through specific grant. RBK supports this view because it is impossible at this stage to predict how the national concession will affect passenger and operator behaviour and, therefore, the cost of the scheme and how the costs will fall between local authorities. Under multi-year settlements it is much more difficult, coupled with the Government's desire not to do so, for Central Government to alter the distribution of funding during the multi-year period if emerging data suggests that demand and costs are significantly different to funding. RBK is extremely concerned about any proposal that allocates resources for the national bus concession on indicators based on residents of a local authority because, unlike the current concessionary fares scheme, the extension to the scheme is for out of area travel. Therefore, costs arising from the scheme will not be related to the characteristics of the resident population, such as benefit claimants, unless these indicators are a proxy for attractiveness of an area to visitors, whereas the inclusion of data in the options such as density, day and overnight visitors and net in-commuters are clear attempts to assess the attractiveness of an area to visitors from outside of the local authority boundary.

Q13 Do you have any other suggestions for distributing the funding via Formula Grant?

Yes (please specify below) No

If yes, please specify: As mentioned above, RBK is opposed to funding the extension to the concessionary scheme through formula grant because it is impossible at this stage to predict how the national concession will affect passenger and operator behaviour and, therefore, the cost of the scheme and how the costs will fall between local authorities. This means that it is not possible at this stage to derive a formula that will accurately target funding for this scheme to local authorities for the three-year perod. Funding the scheme through specific grant would give the Government greater flexibility to alter the distribution of funding during the multi-year period if the costs of the scheme are different to the pattern of distribution. It would also avoid the pitfall of authorities not responsible for concessionary fares gaining or losing funding as a result of the scheme.

CHAPTER 8 – Capital Finance

Q14 Do you agree with the proposal to freeze the shares of SCE(R) for years prior to 2007-08 to the level used in the 2007-08 Settlement; and that in future, the

shares of SCE(R) will not be recalculated to the current year shares in every Settlement?

Yes No

Any further comments: This approach appears sensible, provided that it does not have a significant impact on grant distribution.

CHAPTER 9 – Area Cost Adjustment

Q15 Do you agree with the proposal to update the weights given to the rates cost adjustment (ACA1)?

Yes No

Any further comments: RBK remains concerned that there is no rates cost adjustment within the personal social services formulae, despite the fact that these services clearly require access to buildings.

Q16 Do you agree with the proposal to update the weights given to the labour cost adjustment (ACA2)?

Yes No

Any further comments: We do not believe that the decision to reduce labour cost weights is based upon evidence. In particular, the lack of information on contractors' costs means the decision to reduce labour cost weights is based upon judgement rather than data.

Q17 Do you agree that we should revise the geography of the ACA?

Yes No

Any further comments:

See question 19 below.

Q18 Which option for revising the geography of the ACA do you prefer?

ACA3 ACA4

Any further comments: See question 19 below.

Q19 Do you have any other proposals for revising the geography of the ACA?

Yes (please specify below) No

If yes, please specify: We believe that a more fundamental revision of the geography of London's ACA should be implemented. In particular we believe that the recommendation of Paper SWG-07-26 for a new discrete grouping of West Outer London Boroughs of Hillingdon, Hounslow, Richmond upon Thames and the Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames should be created. Paper SWG-07-26, which was discussed at the meeting on 18 May 2007, demonstrates how these particular boroughs face significant increased costs above those recognised in their ACA factors. These costs are partly associated with Heathrow Airport. Since they are not reflected in the current ACA weights these 4 boroughs face significant costs not allowed for within the formula grant system. Such costs have a knock on effect of creating budgetary problems for all 4 boroughs. Creating a new West Outer London ACA group for Hillingdon, Hounslow, Richmond and Kingston corrects this injustice, thus significantly improving the fit of the ACA differentials to the underlying wage evidence.

CHAPTER 10 - Taking account of Relative Needs and Resources

Q20 Do you think there should be further judgemental change in the extent to which the system takes account of needs or resource?

Yes No

Any further comments:

Changes which are not based on clear evidence but which can substantially alter grant distribution have no place in a fair and equitable distribution system.

Q21 If yes, what change would you suggest?

CHAPTER 11 – Tapering Grant Floors Down

Q22 Do you support the approach of reducing the levels of grant floors over the 3 years of the settlement?

Yes No

Any further comments: RBK fully supports the principle of using grant floors in the calculation of general grant. Increased stability and predictability in grant funding is a welcome part of the system and the grant floor is a vital element that protects authorities from unreasonable changes in grant. We do not accept that grant floors should be tapered. Rather, the level of the floor should reflect the cost and demand pressures faced by local authorities to ensure the stability and continuity of services without undue pressure being placed upon council taxpayers. Damping is also essential to protect authorities from the unintended consequences of the local government finance system such as altering the tax base splits. As some of the exemplifications in the consultation paper demonstrate, the effect of a change to the system for upper tier authorities can have a substantial impact on authorities that should not be affected by the change. An example of this is the impact of reducing the personal social services sub-block damping on the GLA. This is due to the way the system works and one that could lead to serious consequences for services and council tax if authorities were not protected from the effects of such quirks in the system. It is essential that authorities are protected from these undesirable effects.

Q23 Do you have other suggestions on the way in which the grant floors system should be operated?

Yes (please specify below) No

If yes, please specify here The level of the floor should reflect the cost and demand pressures faced by all local authorities.

CHAPTER 12 – 100% Quarterly Scans of Benefits Data

Q24 Do you agree that the DLA indicator is based on a three-year average using quarterly rather than annual data (DATA1)?

Yes No

Any further comments: The most up to date data should be used provided it is technically robust.

Q25 Do you agree that we use quarterly data on income support and claimants of pension credit (DATA2)?

Yes No

Any further comments: The most up to date data should be used provided it is technically robust.

CHAPTER 13 – Attractiveness of an Area to Day Visitors

Q26 Do you agree that we should replace the day visitors indicator with a population-weighted indicator that takes into account the attractiveness of an area to day visitors (DATA3)?

Yes No

Any further comments:

RBK has concerns that the proposal to replace the current day visitor indicator with a "measure of attractiveness" based on the English Leisure Visits survey. The concerns include: - The approach ignores the cost to local authorities of different types of visitor. For example, visitors linked to late night entertainment, drinking and shopping are given the same weight in terms of their propensity to increase costs as visitors walking in the countryside. Therefore, consideration within this approach needs to be given to costs to local authorities of different types of visitor. - There are large gaps in the data which excludes groups of visitors for large scale events. In addition, the approach does not address the impact of attractions that have a regional, national or international draw such as flagship stores and other attractions. - The data does not adequately reflect trips made by business visitors which are likely to be sizeable in number in city centres and may also include a leisure trip. - The approach includes internal trips made by residents within the local authority. - The data excludes both leisure and business trips to airports and major rail/coach stations even though proximity to a large international airport or mainline station (such as Heathrow, Euston and Victoria Coach Station) in an authority is a significant driver of visitors and, consequently, costs. - The 50 miles cut-off may be less relevant to London and does not take into consideration transport links which are better to maor urban centres such as London. In view of these concerns, the existing measure should be retained until a more technically robust alternative can be identified.

Q27 Do you agree that we should remove the day visitors indicator from the Highways Maintenance formula (DATA4)?

Yes No

Any further comments: Day visitors are a contributor to highway maintenance costs. Until a more technically robust alternative can be identified, the present indicator should be retained.

CHAPTER 14 – Student Exemptions and the Council Tax Base

Q28 Do you agree that we use student exemption numbers from 31 May 2007 to adjust the starting position of the taxbase projections (DATA5)?

Yes No

Any further comments: RBK supports the proposal to adjust the startig position of taxbase projections using student exemptions. The number of student exemptions at 31 May 2007 is more likely to reflect the pattern of student exempt properties whereas the September 2007 figure is likely to underestimate considerably the number of these exemptions given that it is so close to start of the academic year.

Q29 Do you agree that we use the average of student exemption numbers from 31 May 2007 and mid-September 2007 to adjust the starting position of the taxbase projections (DATA6)?

Yes No

Any further comments: Despite efforts by local authorities to encourage students to register for the council tax exemption, taking an average of May and September 2007 is likely to seriously underestimate the true level of student exemptions in local authorities. The May data is more likely to reflect the patterns of exemptions across the whole of the financial year.

OTHER COMMENTS

Q30 Do you have any other comments or alternative proposals?

The Council is concerned that, as in 2005, the Consultation Paper proposes the introduction of proposals which are not technically robust, but which produce large shifts of grant between Councils. Given that the Government's previously stated aims for a grant system includes fairness, transparency, predictability and stability, it is appropriate to carry out further work to identify more robust options.

Thank you for completing this response form.

APPENDIX I Executive, 2 October 2007

CONTRACT STANDING ORDERS - SPECIAL EDUCATION NEEDS Report by the Director of Learning and Children’s Services Executive Member for Children and Young People’s Services

Purpose The Director of Learning & Children’s Services is seeking a revision to the Council’s new Contract Standing Orders (CSO) in respect of SEN Placements. This revision mirrors that already agreed for Community Service Children’s placements and applies to joint placements.

Placements are made in specialist independent or non-maintained (day and residential) schools when there is no available or appropriate local provision for pupils with the most complex and severe special educational needs. Specialist places are scarce and in some cases there will be only 1 school which can meet the pupil’s difficulties.

The Council must adhere to a statutory timescale for reaching decisions about provision.

Action proposed by the Executive Member for Children and Young People’s Services:

The Executive is requested to:

1. endorse the proposed changes as set out in this report; and

2. refer the revised Contract Standing Orders to Council for approval and inclusion in the Council's Constitution.

Reason for action proposed To ensure the Local Authority can expedite individual SEN pupil placement and minimise risk of any loss of statutory entitlement for any individual pupil.

BACKGROUND

1. Specialist placements in independent/non-maintained schools for pupils with complex and severe needs are only used when the pupil’s needs cannot be met in Kingston or other Local Authority provision. 2. The Council’s duties under Education Act 1996 Section 324 (3) are to identify needs, to specify the special educational provision to be made meeting those needs and to make the provision available. There is an 18-week statutory timescale, which allows a maximum of 4-weeks for decisions on provision. 3. Where parents make representation for an independent or non-maintained school, Education Act 1996 Section 9 imposes a general duty to have regard to the parent’s wishes, so far as that is compatible with the avoidance of unreasonable public expenditure. Where the parents/carers of a pupil who is already placed in such provision move into Kingston and a change of school is not appropriate for educational reasons, the Council must continue the place. Parents have a right of appeal to the independent SEN & Disability Tribunal.

I 2

PLACEMENT PROCESS 4. Decisions about placements are taken by the Statutory Assessment Advisory Group (SAAG). The core purpose of SAAG is to consider the evidence/advice following a statutory assessment or annual review of a Statement and determine the provision and school which offer an appropriate match to the pupil’s needs as well as an efficient use of the Council’s resources. 5. SAAG identifies the type of school and any relevant schools. In most cases, there will only be a very small number of schools which offer an appropriate match in terms of the provision offered and the pupil’s difficulties. All placements are kept under review. PROPOSED AMENDMENT 6. It is proposed to extend the exemption for social care services in CSO1 to include SEN Placements made in specialist independent or non-maintained sector schools. This amendment has been endorsed by the Head of Strategic Services. GROUNDS FOR REVISION OF CONTRACT STANDING ORDERS 7. The Council has a duty to reach its decisions on appropriate provision within a 4 week period at the end of the 14 week multi professional assessment period. The time scale is an Audit Commission Performance indicator (ACPI43a/b). 8. Where parents make representation for an independent or non-maintained school, statutory duty means the Council does not have discretion to invite tenders from a range of schools but must comply with the parent’s preferred school, so far as that is compatible with the avoidance of unreasonable public expenditure. 9. Where the school has been identified by SAAG, it is highly likely that there will be only 1 school which can offer a match in terms of the provision to meet the pupil’s difficulties. In some cases pupils are placed on a waiting list because there are no available places in any school which can offer a match. 10. In some cases several Local Authorities may be competing for a place. The Invitations to tender are unlikely to receive any response from schools in this specialist sector. In the event that a placement is offered, a rapid response is needed to avoid an offer being withdrawn. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS 11. Each pupil requires more than 2 years provision to be planned and the receiving school will anticipate the placements to be for the duration of the school's age range (e.g. for behaviour this is usually until age 16, however autism and severe learning difficulties continue until age 19). Placements are therefore envisaged to be for at least 3 years. Individual placements are likely to exceed £20k per annum; the total cost per pupil will therefore exceed £50k. 12. Checks are made on whether the school uses the national contract for fees. Information from regional working is used on an ongoing basis to assess previous fees/charges, particularly annual rises greater than inflation. 13. The DCSF has recently inspected Kingston’s statutory assessment process and reported that placements made demonstrated good value. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS 14. There are no specific environmental implications.

Background Papers held by Julie Ely, Head of Assessment and Support for Learning Service (author of the report) (Tel. 020 8547 5269), Email: [email protected]

APPENDIX J Executive, 2 October 2007

BUDGET MONITORING 2007/08 – MONTH 4 Report by the Strategic Director of Finance Leader of the Council

Purpose This report details the budget monitoring position at month 4 (31 July 2007). It indicates that there is a potential net overspending on General Fund services of £0.239 million. The main area of concern is the Community Care budget, where potential overspendings of £0.650 million have been identified. These are offset by a number of smaller underspendings and additional income. Additionally, in setting the 2007/08 budget, the Council approved the continuation of restraint on recruitment and other spending to continue to prepare for the financial challenges facing the Council in 2008/09 and beyond and to facilitate some of the budget reductions needed to implement the Medium Term Plan “Changing Kingston – Choosing our Future”. This restraint will reduce further the identified pressures, but the impact has yet to be fully quantified.

Action proposed by the Leader of the Council The Executive is requested to:

1. note the position;

2. approve the transfer of £0.5 million from the National Insurance Reserve (as this is no longer required) to the Invest to Save Reserve;

3. note the additional income of £327,992 in respect of the Local Authorities Business Growth Incentive scheme for 2006, and approve the transfer of these monies to the Invest to Save reserve;

4. endorse the action being taken by the Corporate Development Team in paragraphs 19 to 21 below to ensure that the budget is not overspent.

Reason for action proposed To ensure that the Council’s expenditure remains within the approved budget.

BACKGROUND 1. The Council approved the budget for 2007/08 at its meeting on 28 February 2007. In doing so, it took account of continuing pressure on some demand and needs-led budgets and increased the budget in those areas for 2007/08 budget accordingly. It also included some of the savings which had been achieved during 2006/07 through restraint on recruitment and non-staff expenditure to reduce the Council’s budget. To prepare for the financial challenges identified in the medium term plan – Changing Kingston – Choosing our Future and to facilitate some of the budget reductions which will be required in 2008/09 and beyond, the Council approved the continuation of restraint on recruitment and non-staff expenditure to deliver in-year budget savings during 2007/08.

2. On 10 July 2007, the Executive considered an initial summary of the position for 2007/08, informed by the financial/budget risk analysis which formed part of the medium term plan “Changing Kingston – Choosing our Future” (Annex 9.4). This work concentrated on large income and expenditure budgets, those which are demand-led and also those areas where the outturn for 2006/07 had indicated that there could be significant budget pressures in 2007/08. The risk analysis continues to be used as part of the process for carrying out detailed budget monitoring.

3. The initial analysis (10 July 2007) reported pressures totalling approximately £0.450 million, offset in part by additional income of £0.2 million.

LATEST POSITION 4. The position at month 4 is that a potential overspending of £0.239 million has been identified. This is summarised at Annex 1. The main variations are detailed in Annex 2 and explained in the following paragraphs.

5. Community Services

(i) Community Care Services a) Domiciliary Care – this budget is expected to overspend by £97,000. This consists of sustained growth in demand for Direct Payments (administered by KCIL), offset by higher than budgeted income from Home Care charges (reflecting income collected during 2006/07). Demand is driven by the legal requirement to meet the assessed needs of service users. There is a high level of turnover in this service and therefore spending patterns can change significantly in a relatively short space of time.

b) Residential Care – overall this budget is anticipated to overspend by £390,000. This is largely as a result of projected overspending on the Learning disabilities external placements budget. In addition, projected overspending on the Older People’s external placements budget is currently offset by projected underspending on the Physical Disabilities external placements budget. Demand is driven by the legal requirement to meet the assessed needs of service users. These budgets are volatile and demand-led and officers continue to monitor the position closely.

c) Day Care – this budget is currently expected to overspend by £167,000 due to pressures on staffing budgets and delays in securing budgeted savings.

(ii) Other

There are a number of small variations (individually less than £50,000) which offset this overspending by £118,000. 6. Learning and Children’s Services

(i) Children’s Services and Safeguarding

a) Safeguarding – an overspending of £66,000 is anticipated due to the need to cover vacant posts which are currently being filled, by using agency staff.

b) Berradene – the budget was set assuming a full year’s saving. The home could not be closed until 30 June, which has led to a consequential overspending of £95,000.

(ii) Strategic Management and Resources

a) Strategic Management – as a result of vacancies, some of which will not be filled, an underspending of £97,000 is anticipated.

b) SEN Home to School Transport – following a successful joint procurement of taxi provision with three neighbouring boroughs, a net underspending of £179,000 has been achieved.

7. Environmental Services

There are significant changes happening in Environmental Services as the plans and savings set out in Changing Kingston – Choosing our Future are implemented. These include the setting up of the Contact Centre with appropriate back office support, the review of contract management including monitoring, inspection and enforcement and the realignment of the remainder of the back office. The implementation of these changes will achieve savings of £650,000 in 2008/09. However, in order to do so, some upfront investment is required. As far as possible, it is intended to fund these initial costs from within existing budgets. The Directorate has put in place a regime of planned restraint both in terms of expenditure and recruitment. The impact of this, together with the early realisation of planned savings, will fund the required investment subject to there being no significant unforeseen variations in income streams and demand-led budgets.

(i) Contact Centre Project The medium term service and financial plan for 2007/08 to 2010/11 included an estimated saving of £650,000 in 2008/09 from a review and reorganisation process to establish the Directorate multi media Contact Centre by early 2008. This process will create a larger front office, a smaller back office and review contract management arrangements throughout the Directorate. In addition to the residual cost of the Business Process Review, there will be transitional costs associated with the setting up of the new contact centre arrangements whilst maintaining the existing service. These include early appointment of key staff, the continued employment of temporary staff during the transition period, training programmes and a contribution towards the cost of additional Human Resources support. The associated accommodation and equipment costs are provided for in the approved capital programme. After allowing for cost savings in Directorate Management and Support and Business Support, the estimated net cost of this investment in 2007/08 is £157,000. This remaining cost will be met from targeted expenditure restraint and the use of additional income and planned underspends.

(ii) Off Street Parking The final outturn position of Off Street Parking in 2006/07 showed fee income exceeding the budget target due in part to higher than anticipated returns from evening charging which was introduced in September 2006. Detailed monitoring at month 4 shows that this trend has continued into 2007/08. The

situation is also assisted by a one-off balancing payment of £68,000 in respect of the Seven Kings car park income share.

(iii) Highways and Transportation – Employees The employees’ budget for Highways and Transportation is partly financed by recharges to capital projects, many of which are funded by Transport for London (TfL). The emphasis of the TfL funding and the type of project they will fund has been changing, particularly in the area of traffic management. The net effect of this has been to create a budget pressure of £60,000 on the employees’ budget for Highways and Transportation after allowing for recruitment restraint and the increased charges to capital in respect of walking, cycling and buses. A zero based budget review is currently being undertaken which will provide supporting data for the realignment of the back office. (iv) Waste Management

There are a number of cost pressures related to waste management which will need to be contained within the overall budget in 2007/08. The medium term service and financial plan for 2007/08 to 2010/11 removed £200,000 from the 2007/08 budget to reflect lower waste growth. However, there are likely to be some additional costs including the following: § procurement costs for the new refuse and recycling collection contracts; § RBK share of the South London Waste Partnership costs; § delivery of projects within the 4th Waste Strategy Implementation Plan; § changes to the contractual arrangements for markets cleansing and refuse disposal. It is intended to use the 2007/08 DEFRA grant to offset some of these costs and, in addition, unused grant from 2006/07 has been carried forward for this purpose. At month 4, it is still anticipated that the budget for Waste Management will balance by the year end.

8. Central Services Interest and Capital Financing – due to continued strong cash flow and high interest rates, together with the impact of rephasing the profiles of capital expenditure in the light of the 2006/07 outturn position, a net underspending of £200,000 is forecast on this budget. 9. Neighbourhood Committees The Neighbourhood Committees all received detailed budget monitoring reports at their meetings in September 2007. In view of the provisions of the Neighbourhood Budgeting Code of Practice (in which the Neighbourhoods are required to contain their own overspends and are permitted to carry forward underspendings), a net variation of zero is reported here. 10. Schools Budget The ring-fenced Schools Budget is currently projecting an overspending of £0.261 million. The main pressures are in respect of SEN budgets (£212,000). It is intended to identify savings to meet this overspending within the Schools Budget. Should this not prove possible within 2007/08, the deficit will be carried forward to 2008/09 and be a “first call” on next year’s Schools Budget.

11. Housing Revenue Account An overspend of £131,000 is currently projected. This reflects lower than budgeted rental income as a result of higher than anticipated right to buy sales. Details of the HRA are shown in Annex 3. 12. Other Matters a) National Insurance aggregation The Council has for a number of years been in discussion with HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) regarding the requirement to aggregate for National Insurance purposes earnings for staff who have multiple employments. HMRC issued an assessment for unpaid contributions, against which officers in Financial Services and Legal Services lodged an appeal. To protect the Council’s position, an earmarked reserve, containing sufficient monies to meet the Council’s maximum liability (including interest and penalties) was set up in the Council’s accounts. In July 2007, following significant work by officers with HMRC, the HMRC confirmed that it would withdraw the assessment and that in its view RBK is “aggregating earnings correctly”. As a result of this outcome, the National Insurance Reserve, £0.5 million is not required for this purpose. The Strategic Director of Finance recommends that it is appropriate to transfer this sum to the Invest to Save Reserve, which will be used to facilitate one-off expenditure necessary to reduce the Council’s underlying expenditure, as it implements future phases of the medium term service and financial plan, “Changing Kingston – Choosing our Future”. b) Local Authorities Business Growth Incentive Scheme (LABGI) On 6 September 2007, the Council was notified by the Department for Communities and Local Government that additional payments would be made in respect of year 2 of the scheme, following the outcome of a judicial review brought by Corby and Slough Borough Councils. RBK will receive an additional £327,992 from the LABGI scheme for 2006, in September 2007. This represents a proportion of the additional business rate income arising from a growth in rateable value in 2006. As previously reported, the scheme is complex, volatile and unpredictable. The additional payment for 2006 is General Fund income. It is suggested that this be transferred to the Invest to Save Reserve, to meet some of the one-off costs which will be required as RBK implements the future phases of its medium term service and financial plan, Changing Kingston – Choosing our Future. INCOME 13. It is now considered best practice under the Use of Resources Assessment to report the position in respect of the Council’s income to the Executive. This is addressed in the following paragraphs: 14. General Fund - major income budgets form part of the budget risk analysis determining the appropriate level of reserves. Variations in respect of these income budgets are reported above, in accordance with previous practice. 15. Housing Rents and Service Charges - the position on rent income is reported above as part of the Housing Revenue Account monitoring process. 16. Council Tax – the collectable debt for 2007/08 is £86 million. As at 31 July 2007, 39.2% had been collected, compared with 38.6% in the same period last year. Collection of previous years’ arrears has also improved. As at 31 July 2007, the proportion of these collected was 10.9% compared with 6.1% in the same period last year.

17. National Non Domestic Rates – the collectable debt for 2007/08 is £71.5 million. As at 31 July 2007, 43.6% had been collected, compared with 43.0% in the same period last year. Collection of previous years’ arrears has also improved. As at 31 July 2007, the proportion of these collected is 9.5%, compared with 5.1% in the same period last year. 18. These improved collection rates are reflected in the Council’s cash flow, which in turn helps to drive up the income from investment of cash balances (see paragraph 8 above). SUMMARY 19. The above items indicate that there is a potential net overspending of £0.239 million. In the context of the Council’s overall expenditure (£350 million gross, £109 million net) this is not a large variation. 20. It is not unusual for an overspending to be reported at this stage of the financial year. The position will continue to be monitored closely by Directors. Tight financial control is being exercised with all budgets being managed by “cost centre managers” (budget holders). All expenditure is properly scrutinised. The nature of many of the authority’s budgets is that it is early in the year for any underspending trends (eg due to vacancies) to be identified. 21. Additionally, in setting the budget for 2007/08, the Council approved the continuation of restraint on recruitment and non-staff expenditure to provide flexibility in delivering some of the budget reductions needed to implement the medium term plan “Changing Kingston – Choosing our Future”. This restraint will reduce expenditure and offset the potential overspending. TIMESCALES 22. It is good practice for the Executive to receive regular and timely updates on the Council’s actual expenditure against budget. This is the latest of those reports for 2007/08. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS 23. There are no direct environmental implications arising from this report. Those arising from Waste Management have been addressed in various reports to the Executive on that subject.

Background papers : held by Jeremy Randall (author of report), 020 8547 5572; e-mail: [email protected]

1. Medium Term Plan – “Changing Kingston – Choosing our Future”. 2. Report to Executive 12 June 2007 – Appendix E. 3. Report to Executive 10 July 2007 – Appendix J. 4. Correspondence between the Head of Legal Services and HM Revenue and Customs on National Insurance aggregation 5. email from the Department for Communities and Local Government on 6 September 2007, regarding additional payments for 2006 under the LABGI scheme.

J7 ANNEX 1

BUDGET MONITORING 2007/08 - TO MONTH 4 (31 JULY 2007)

(A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (A + B) (D - C) Approved Latest Committee/Service Area Original Supplementary Approved Forecast Estimate Estimates Estimate Outturn Variation 2007/08 & Virements 2007/08 2007/08 £ooo £ooo £ooo £ooo £ooo

Total - Neighbourhoods 6,890 52 6,942 6,942 0

Learning and Children's Services 35,956 0 35,956 35,921 -35

Community Services 47,570 0 47,570 48,087 517

Environmental Services 26,410 0 26,410 26,387 -23

Central Services -7,807 0 -7,807 -8,027 -220

TOTAL 109,019 52 109,071 109,310 239 add: Supplementary Estimates (allocated in col. B) Neighbourhood underspendings from 2006/07 carried forward to be spent in 2007/08 (Executive 12 June 2007, min.18) 52

Total approved budget 109,071

Executive - 2 Oct 2007 Audit Committee - 27 Sept 2007

J8 ANNEX 2

BUDGET MONITORING 2007/08 TO 31 JULY 2007 ( MONTH 4 )

LIST OF MAJOR VARIATIONS

MONTH 4

£ooo £ooo

1 Learning & Children's Services Children's Services & Safeguarding - Safeguarding 66 - Berradene 95 SEN Home to School Transport -179 Strategic Management -97 Other Minor Variations (net) 80 -35

2 Community Services Community Care - purchasing costs -19 - domiciliary care 97 - residential care 390 - day care 167 Other Minor Variations (net) -118 517

3 Environmental Services Contact Centre project 157 Off street parking income -160 Highways & Transportation - reduced charge capital and TfL schemes. 60 Other Minor Variations (net) -80 -23

4 Central Services Interest & capital financing -200 Other Minor Variations (net) -20 -220

5 Neighbourhoods Minor Variations (net) 0

239

Executive - 2 Oct 2007 Audit Committee - 27 Sept 2007

J9 ANNEX 3

HOUSING REVENUE ACCOUNT BUDGET MONITORING 2007/08

Budget Projected Variation 2007/08 Outturn 2007/08 £ £ £ EXPENDITURE

Employees 6,360,000 6,358,000 -2,000 Premises Running Expenses 1,150,000 1,159,000 9,000 Repairs & Maintenance 3,280,000 3,282,000 2,000

Transport 200,000 203,000 3,000 Supplies & Services 1,400,000 1,402,000 2,000 Bad Debt Provision 200,000 200,000 0 Recharges to/from other accounts 1,680,000 1,680,000 0 HRA Subsidy Payment 5,860,000 5,860,000 0 Capital Financing 4,850,000 4,857,000 7,000

TOTAL EXPENDITURE 24,980,000 25,001,000 21,000

INCOME Rents, less Voids 21,360,000 21,249,000 -111,000 Service Charges 3,430,000 3,430,000 0 Other 120,000 121,000 1,000 Interest 70,000 70,000 0

TOTAL INCOME 24,980,000 24,870,000 -110,000

Net deficit 0 131,000 131,000

Executive - 2 Oct 2007 Audit Committee - 27 Sept 2007

APPENDIX K Executive, 2 October 2007

REFERENCES FROM OTHER BODIES

1. SPECIAL GRANTS PROGRAMME 2007/08 – ENVIRONMENTAL GRANTS Scrutiny Panel – 11 September 2007

The call in by Councillor Howard Jones was to examine the process by which applications and awards are proposed, processed and decided, including the priorities and appropriateness of the system in the current financial climate Members of the Panel noted that, since the Grants and Awards Panel had been abolished earlier in the year, there had not been the opportunity for cross-party discussion of the proposed grants. The processes now in place to enable these decisions to be taken were questioned. The Panel questioned the Executive Member on

• whether the current arrangements gave the Executive Member access to the same range and depth of information as the previous system • what proactive steps had been taken to ensure that the bids received enabled strategic goals to be achieved. • whether consideration had been given to dividing the grants budget between different areas so as to target funding as needed across the voluntary sector The process was explored in some detail, the criteria for grants and the considerable efforts made by officers to promote grants and reach all groups was explained. The specific targeting of environmental groups was a new initiative. The Panel has accepted the Executive’s decisions on these grants but has asked that the Executive take account of the scope for more targeting of the non Strategic grant funding to groups and projects which contribute to achieving strategic goals and the desirability of including greater opportunities for the involvement of consultation with elected Members in the arrangements for grant awards

2. DISPOSAL OF SURPLUS PROPERTIES Reference from Scrutiny Panel – 11 September 2007

The call-in by Councillors Patrick Codd, David Edwards and Ken Smith was to determine whether the panel agreed with the recommendation to either sell or make available on long term leases a number of the Council’s property assets because they are surplus to requirements and whether the Borough Valuer should be given the responsibility of disposal without further reference to elected Councillors. The financial considerations that the sale or other disposals would enable the Council to invest in future service delivery were also included in the call-in. The Panel has reserved the right of further scrutiny of any of the disposals which are further considered by the Executive as being outside the delegated powers of the Borough Valuer and has therefore not referred the decision back to the Executive. Members of the Panel were reassured by the explanations given on • the consideration given to whether any of these properties could contribute to service needs - departments were given the opportunity to express interest

• the ways in which the Council’s position would be protected against loss of profit in the event that these properties were sold on. It has asked the Executive to take into account the following when considering the disposal of properties. that the potential of properties is looked at as flexibly and imaginatively as possible and a range of approaches, such as land ‘swaps’, considered to get maximum value, that in considering options for disposal by sale or lease, the opportunities for different arrangements - an example is the agreement on the John Lewis site – are explored. It has also asked the Overview Commission to carry out an in depth examination of the Statement of Practice on the Disposal of Land ,which has not been reviewed since 1996, and the overall approach to disposal/release of value.

3. ELY COURT SITE – DESIGNATION AS OPEN SPACE Scrutiny Panel – 18 September 2007

Community Call In of the Executive decision on 10 July 2007 Representatives of the residents supporting the call in addressed the Panel on their concerns on the development of the former Ely Court site. Whilst the site has been vacant over the last six years this has added to the green space available on the estate, which residents feel is much needed in an area which is already at a high density and which the development will increase. The Panel heard the reasons for the Executive’s decision not to designate the area as green space. There was cross party agreement on the urgent demand for more and larger units of accommodation which the development would provide. The needs of the families in overcrowded conditions, on the Cambridge Estate and elsewhere, who could be moved into these units were familiar to all Members from their constituency work. Whilst noting the genuine concerns of the residents about the quality of life on the Estate the Panel has agreed to reject the call in and uphold the decision of the Executive. However the concerns voiced by residents’ representatives on the amount of green space on the estate, available for all residents, and the condition of some areas need to be pursued. There is a lack of clarity about any overall plan for the estate and how this might be realised. The Panel has requested the Executive to request officers to review the provision of Green and Recreational space – including the former Surrey Sports Centre – and provide a full master plan of the Estate without delay.

4. DISPOSAL OF FORMER PUBLIC TOILET SITE TOLWORTH CLOSE (Surbiton Neighbourhood Committee 14 June) The Surbiton Neighbourhood Committee has declared the public toilets at Tolworth Close, surplus to its requirements. They have been closed for 6 years due to vandalism and anti-social behaviour. There is a toilet in Tolworth Library which is accessible to members of the public. The Borough Valuer has received approaches from a number of interested parties The Neighbourhood Committee has REQUESTED the Executive to declare the site at Tolworth Close, Surbiton, surplus to requirements and request the Borough Valuer to pursue the expressions of interest received and/or market the site on the open market.