Public Document Pack CORPORATE SERVICES Service Director Linda Fisher
GOVERNANCE AND COMMITTEE SERVICES TEAM PO Box 15, Town Hall, Rochdale, OL16 1AB DX22831 ROCHDALE Tel: (01706) 647474 Fax: (01706) 924705 Website: www.rochdale.gov.uk To: All Members of Rochdale Township Committee Enquiries to: Peter Thompson Extension: 4715 e-mail: [email protected] Date: Tuesday, 4 September 2012 Dear Councillor
ROCHDALE TOWNSHIP COMMITTEE
You are requested to attend the meeting of Rochdale Township Committee to be held in Committee Rooms 1 and 2 at Rochdale Town Hall on Wednesday, 12 September 2012 commencing at 6.15 pm.
The agenda and supporting papers are attached.
If you require advice on any agenda item involving a possible Declaration of Interest which could affect your right to speak and/or vote, please contact staff in the Governance and Committee Services Team at least 24 hours in advance of the meeting.
Yours Faithfully
Linda Fisher Service Director
Rochdale Township Committee Membership 2012/13: -
Councillor Iftikhar Ahmed Councillor Wera Hobhouse Councillor Shakil Ahmed Councillor Jean Hornby Councillor Farooq Ahmed Councillor Terry Linden Councillor Daalat Ali Councillor Ann Metcalfe Councillor Sultan Ali Councillor Dale Mulgrew Councillor Shefali Begum (Vice Chair) Councillor Andrew Neilson Councillor Philip Bethell Councillor Shaun O’Neill Councillor Cecile Biant (Chair) Councillor Hilary Rodgers Councillor Surinder Biant Councillor Billy Sheerin Councillor Karen Danczuk Councillor Pat Sullivan Councillor Peter Davison Councillor Shah Wazir Councillor Ian Duckworth Councillor Mohammed Zaman Councillor Richard Farnell Councillor James Gartside Councillor Jane Gartside
ROCHDALE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL
ROCHDALE TOWNSHIP COMMITTEE
Wednesday, 12 September 2012 at 6.15 pm
No's 1 & 2 Committee Rooms - Rochdale Town Hall
A G E N D A
Apologies for Absence 1. Declaration of Interests Members are requested to indicate at this stage, any items on the agenda in which they intend to declare an interest. Members are reminded that, in accordance with the Local Government Act 2000 and the Council’s Code of Conduct, they must declare the nature of any personal or prejudicial interest and, if the interest is prejudicial, withdraw from the meeting during consideration of the item. 2. Greater Manchester Police 3. Open Forum Half an hour has been set aside for members of the public to raise any issues relevant to the business of the Committee and the Township.
PRESENTATION 4. Consultation on Draft Core Strategy - Presentation 1 - 4 Service Director – Planning and Regulation Service
MINUTES 5. Minutes 5 - 14 To consider the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held 11 th July 2012. 6. Rochdale Township Planning Sub-Committee 15 - 21 To note the minutes of the meetings held 12 th June, 3 rd July and 31 st July 2012 7. Rochdale Township Action and Resources Committee 22 - 28 To note the minutes of the meetings held 26 th June and 26 th July 2012.
ITEMS FOR INFORMATION 8. Street Lighting PFI 29 - 34 9. Drake Street Improvements 35 - 37
10. Appointment of Local Authority (LA) School Governors 38 - 39 ITEMS FOR CONSULTATION 11. Rochdale Housing Strategy 40 - 85 ITEMS FOR EXECUTIVE DECISION 12. Rochdale Township Clean & Green Priority Group - Chairs Report 86 - 87 13. Rochdale Township Communities and Engagement Priority Group - 88 - 89 Chairs Report
Agenda Item 4
Subject: Consultation on the Draft Core Status: For information Strategy (presentation)
Report to : Rochdale Township Date: 12th September 2012
Report of: Service Director for Planning and Author Email: Regulation [email protected] Author: Wayne Poole Tel: 01706 924373 Comments from Section 151 Officer Statutory Officers: Monitoring Officer
Key Decision: No
Forward Plan General Exception Special Urgency
1. PURPOSE OF REPORT
1.1 To inform members of the consultation being undertaken on the Draft Core Strategy and to give opportunity to members and the public to find out more and comment on the proposals. This will include a presentation that will focus on the key issues relating to the township.
2. RECOMMENDATIONS
2.1 That the report and presentation be noted and that opportunity for questions to be given at the meeting.
Alternatives considered
3.1 The preparation of the Core Strategy is a statutory requirement and will guide the scale and broad location of development in the borough over the next 15 years. Consultation and engagement with stakeholders and the public is an important element of the preparation and is required through the regulations.
Consultation undertaken/proposed: 3.2 The Core Strategy has previously been subject to consultation with development interests, landowners, businesses, government agencies, infrastructure agencies and statutory undertakers, the public, council services, partner agencies and the LPSB throughout its preparation.
Background to the Draft Core Strategy 3.3 Members will be aware that the previously submitted Core Strategy was withdrawn following Cabinet and Full Council approval earlier this year. This withdrawal was as a result of concerns of the Inspector appointed to carry out the ‘Examination in Public
Page 1 (EiP) that there was a risk of the Core Strategy being found unsound following the EiP. The concerns mainly related to the release of land in the Green Belt south of Heywood for employment and residential development as part of a wider Economic Growth Corridor. 3.4 Although it was necessary to withdraw the previous Core Strategy, this mainly related to one issue and it is considered that much of the previous Core Strategy, including the Spatial Strategy, still represents the best approach for the borough over the next 15 years. The revised Draft Core Strategy therefore retains broadly the overall vision, objectives, spatial strategy and policy approaches set out in the previous Core Strategy. Details of these will be set out in the presentation. Key changes in the Draft Core Strategy 3.5 As noted above the main reason for the withdrawal of the previous Core Strategy was the proposed release of Green Belt land south of Heywood for development. The concerns of the Inspector related to the lack of evidence to show the need for the employment and housing development and therefore the exceptional circumstances necessary to release land from the Green Belt had not been demonstrated. 3.6 In light of this, and Counsel advice received when withdrawing the Core Strategy, the specific proposal to release land south of Heywood is not included in the revised Draft Core Strategy. Instead a policy (E4) is included which sets out a criteria based search for employment land if there is evidence of need later in the plan period and there is insufficient supply to deliver the amount and quality of employment land required. This policy also sets out a sequential approach to site selection. 3.7 The publication of the NPPF in March sets out national guidance on planning policy, including the production of local development plans. The revised Draft Core Strategy has taken account of this guidance and notably includes a new policy (SD1) which sets out how the delivery of sustainable development will be supported through the Core Strategy. Other changes have been made to ensure that the Draft Core Strategy and its policies are in accordance with the NPPF. This includes extending the period covered by the plan to 2028 to ensure that it will cover at least 15 years from adoption. Main issues relating to Rochdale 3.8 As noted above much of the overall strategy has remained the same. This includes the overall strategy of focusing a majority of the development in the south of the borough and the scale of employment and residential development. 3.9 The Draft Core Strategy still includes a vision and strategy for Rochdale along with the other Townships. The overall vision for Rochdale is that it will have a transformed and attractive town centre which is highly accessible to its residents and visitors due to Metrolink, and a new transport interchange; the development of Kingsway will be a huge success providing quality new jobs and new employment opportunities in the Town Centre, Castleton, Stakehill Business Park and South Rochdale will be available; the most deprived areas of the town will be regenerated with better housing, jobs, facilities and environment; new homes will be attracting new residents to the borough as well as matching the needs and aspirations of existing residents; and Rochdale station and the adjoining area will be regenerated as a new transport / mixed use hub providing an exciting gateway into the borough. In order to achieve this vision the priorities for Rochdale are to:
• Transform Rochdale town centre by focusing growth and major retail, leisure and office developments which will maintain and reinforce the centre as the main town centre; by delivering major new retail led development in the Rochdale town centre east area that is well integrated with the existing centre and surrounding area; by supporting major transport works and improvements to deliver a high quality public transport interchange; by promoting opportunities to improve and
Page 2 create distinctive local places through in the town centre through excellent design of buildings and the public realm, valuing heritage, identity, cultural assets, the River Roch and the natural environment; and by delivering the regeneration of the town centre and surrounding areas in line with the Town Centre Masterplan. • Deliver the Kingsway Business Park / town centre economic growth corridor by delivering new high quality employment development to provide wider job opportunities; by providing related development including a new local centre, hotel and leisure facilities; by developing new housing, including higher value housing, to serve the business park and wider area; by delivering new Metrolink stop and quality public realm; by creating a high quality gateway to the business park, including public art; and by enhancing Stanney Brook corridor as an important open space. • Deliver key regeneration areas by continuing the physical, social and economic regeneration East Central Rochdale; Falinge, Spotland and Sparth; Milkstone, Deeplish and Newbold; and Kirkholt; by delivering new quality homes within regeneration areas to widen housing choice and broaden the appeal of the area; by improving the quality of employment areas and access to jobs; and by ensuring the areas feel safer and have good access to a range of services and quality open space. • Deliver a high quality station gateway by Improving and modernising Rochdale train station; by delivering a Metrolink stop adjacent to the station; by delivering park and ride facilities to maximise use of this major transport hub; by promoting high quality, high density development that improves the local townscape and builds on the local character and heritage value of the area; and by improving access south of the station to provide better links to the surrounding residential areas and Oldham Road corridor (Policies T1,T2). • Regenerate Castleton and Sudden by developing the area at Trub for mixed use development including enhancement along the canal corridor and tourism opportunities linked to the East Lancs Railway extension; by redeveloping former Woolworths depot site for mixed used development; by extending East Lancs Railway to Castleton with new station providing commuter link and tourism opportunities along with the regeneration of the Corus sidings for appropriate uses; by ensuring that new development supports the regeneration of Castleton local centre; by redeveloping Royle Works site to provide new employment opportunities; and by supporting proposals for redevelopment along the Queensway / Canal corridor (Castleton). • Improve the Roch Valley and canal corridors by improving access to and within the Roch Valley and creating a Roch Valley Trail; by ensuring that new development in and adjacent to the river valley contributes to environmental regeneration and improved access; by improving key visitor gateways to the Roch Valley in Rochdale Town Centre, East Central Rochdale and at Springfield Park; by protecting and enhancing the flood risk management role of the river valley; by protecting and enhancing the biodiversity value of the river valley; and by regenerating key sites along the canal e.g. Kingsway, Canal Basin and Trub Farm. • Enhance the North Pennine gateway by improving access to key recreational areas, routes and facilities in the North Rochdale gateway; by promoting and facilitating landscape enhancement measures including appropriate new woodland planting and habitat improvement schemes; by improving connections between the Ashworth and Cheesden Valleys and the Roch Valley, Heywood; and by enhancing linkages between the North Rochdale Gateway and the wider South Pennines.
Page 3 • Improve Stakehill Business Park by improving the quality of employment premises within the Business Park; by promoting infrastructure and environmental improvements within and around the business park; and by promoting measures which improve the image and status of the business park as an employment location. 3.10 Although detailed reference to Stakehill Business Park is currently included in the strategy for Rochdale, changes to the township boundaries means that this will be included under the strategy for Middleton in the next version of the Core Strategy which will go out for consultation at the end of the year. Next steps 3.11 Comments made during the consultation will be considered and appropriate changes to produce the Publication Core Strategy. This document will, following committee approval, be consulted on for a further six weeks around November/December with comments sought on issues relating to soundness and legal compliance only. The Core Strategy, along with any proposed amendments, will then be submitted to the Secretary of State around March 2013. This will be followed by the Examination in Public around June 2013 and, providing the plan is found sound, adoption around September 2013. 4. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
4.1 None in relation to this report
5. LEGAL IMPLICATIONS
5.1 None in relation to this report
6. PERSONNEL IMPLICATIONS
6.1 None in relation to this report
7. CORPORATE AND TOWNSHIP PRIORITIES
7.1 See section on main issues relating to Rochdale above.
8. RISK ASSESSMENT IMPLICATIONS
8.1 There are no specific risk issues for members to consider arising from this report.
9. EQUALITIES IMPACTS
9.1 There are no (significant) workforce equality issues arising from this report.
9.2 There are no (significant) equality/community issues arising from this report.
Background Papers Docum ent Place of Inspection Draft Core Strategy (and supporting Website via www.rochdale.gov.uk/yourviews documents)
Page 4 Agenda Item 5 Public Document Pack
ROCHDALE TOWNSHIP COMMITTEE
MINUTES OF MEETING Wednesday, 11 July 2012
PRESENT: Councillor Cecile Biant (Chair); Councillors Farooq Ahmed, Iftikhar Ahmed, Shakil Ahmed, Daalat Ali, Sultan Ali, Begum, Surinder Biant, Danczuk, Davison, Duckworth, Farnell, Jane Gartside, Hobhouse, Hornby, Linden, Mulgrew, Neilson, O’Neill, Hilary Rodgers, Sheerin, Sullivan, Wazir and Zaman.
OFFICERS: P. Rowlinson (Service Director – Planning and Regulation), M. Robinson and G. Wood – Planning and Regulation Service), P. Maynard (Customers and Communities Service), D. Mack (Operational Service), A. Haque (Support for Learning Service), V. White, J. Rushton, J. Hodkinson, D. Lansley and P. Thompson (Corporate Services).
Also in Attendance: Sergeant McDiarmid (Greater Manchester Police), J. Taylor (Link4Life) and 30 members of the public.
Apologies for Absence: Councillors Bethell, James Gartside and Metcalfe.
DECLARATION OF INTERESTS 22 There were no declarations of interests.
GREATER MANCHESTER POLICE - UPDATE 23 Sergeant McDiarmid updated the Township Committee on activities and initiatives that were currently being pursued and prioritised by Greater Manchester Police in their Rochdale Township Division. The Township Committee was informed that the Police’s current priority tasks included metal theft, burglary, antisocial behaviour (especially in light of the impending school summer holidays) and drug related crime.
Sergeant McDiarmid stated that statistical evidence showed that the crime figures in respect of hate crime, domestic violence, burglaries, vehicle crime and drug related offences had fallen significantly in the area covered by Rochdale Township, compared with the same period in 2011. The current rate of solved crime for the Rochdale Township area was 28%.
Members of the Township Committee asked questions of Sergeant McDiarmid regarding crime and police initiatives in the Rochdale Township area, welcomed the fact that the overall crime figures in Rochdale was reduced however concerns were expressed at the levels of burglaries in Rochdale’s Kingsway area. Reference was made to a recent violent incident at Ashworth Street, Rochdale, with specific concern raised as to the length of time it took the emergency services to arrive at the scene, and Mr. Abdul Ghaffar, a relative of the victim was allowed to address the Committee and to raise his concerns directly to Greater Manchester Police, via Sergeant McDiarmid. DECIDED – That Greater Manchester Police’s update be noted and welcomed.
OPEN FORUM 24 The following matters were raised during the Open Forum session: -
(a) Springfield Park
Page 5 Mr. D. Logan informed the Township of the events, activities and initiatives that the Friends of Springfield Park were undertaking and requested that Springfield Park be given consideration at a future Township meeting when Section 106 (planning agreements) monies are to be allocated.
(b) Broad Lane Action Group In response to written questions submitted in advance of the meeting by Ms. T. Wilson of Broad Lane Action Group, the Service Director – Planning and Regulation clarified to the Township Committee that the numbers of brown field sites that were available to be developed for residential purposes in Rochdale was 40, as opposed to 80 in the Borough as a whole, and also clarified the acreage figures that were available, in hectares, as being 88 square hectares in Rochdale and 152 square hectares in the Borough as a whole. The Head of Townships confirmed the number of currently available school places in a two mile radius of the proposed Broad Lane development in Rochdale as being 116 primary school vacancies and 209 vacancies at secondary schools.
(c) Falinge Park Mr. J. Greenwood on behalf of Falinge Park’s Bowling Club addressed the Township Committee reporting upon the club’s events and activities. He added that the Bowling Club had over a number of years endured numerous acts of vandalism to their facilities, and their bowling greens wee frequently littered by young people on Friday and Saturday evenings. Mr. Greenwood requested that the Falinge Park Bowling Club be given consideration at a future Township meeting when Section 106 (planning agreements) monies are to be allocated.
(d) Broad Lane, Rochdale The Township Committee was addressed by Mr. J. Chadwick regarding the statutory requirements about publicising planning applications. The Service Director – Planning and Regulation clarified the Council’s statutory and discretionary arrangements for the publicity of planning applications which it was believed had been followed in this case. This involved notification of immediate neighbours of the receipt of the planning application by letter and the wider publicity by means of site and press notices. Residents who were not notified by letter were invited to submit written representations and all those submitting individual letters to Planning Services would be notified of the time and date at which these planning applications would be considered by the Township Planning Sub-Committee.
MINUTES 25 The Township Committee considered the minutes of the last meeting of the Committee held 23 rd May 2012. Further to minute no. 5(a) (Muriel Street), the Committee requested that the Service Director – Corporate Services submit a report on issues that were raised in a petition, presented to the Township Committee on 23 rd May 2012, to the Rochdale Township Action and Resources Committee.
Further to Minute no. 9 the Township Committee requested that the Service Director – Planning and Regulation submit a report to the next Township Committee meeting updating the Committee on the proposals for Metrolink to be brought to Rochdale. DECIDED – That – (1) subject to the inclusion of Councillor Linden as a member of the Rochdale Township Action and Resources Committee (Minute 20 (a)), the minutes of the meeting of Rochdale Township Committee held 23 rd May 2012; (2) the Service Director – Corporate Services submit a report to the Rochdale Township Action and Resources Committee regarding the parking
Page 6 problems at and around Muriel Street and Kings Road, Rochdale, as detailed in the petition submitted to the Township’s meeting on 23 rd May 2012; (3) the Service Director – Planning and Regulation be requested to submit a report to the next scheduled meeting of Rochdale Township Committee, on 12 th September 2012, updating the Committee on proposals to bring Metrolink to Rochdale.
PROPOSALS TO DEVELOP A CEMETERY IN PART OF DENEHURST PARK 26 The Township Committee considered a report of the Service Director – Operational Services which advised Members on progress made to date with regard to the proposal to develop a new cemetery site within the boundaries of Rochdale Township in part of Denehurst Park, Edenfield Road, Spotland.
Mr. Ghulam Shahzad addressed the Township, in favour of the proposal and urged that the issue be resolved as soon as possible, given the limited space available at the current cemetery site.
Members requested that consideration be given to the establishment of a ‘friends group’ to assist the Council in expediting this matter. DECIDED – That the report be noted. Eligible for call-in: no .
PARKING ENFORCEMENT - SIGNS AND LINE IMPROVEMENTS 27 The Township Committee considered a report of the Service Director – Corporate Services which sought to obtain approval for the upgrading of regulatory lining and signing, and which was also seeking Township funding for these improvements. The report recommended traffic signs and lines within the Township for improvement.
The Committee questioned why a request for funding for corporate responsibilities was being presented to the Township Committee and asked for clarification the financial implications contained in the report.
Members requested that consideration be given to introducing more ‘parent and child’ parking bays across the Township and that ‘zebra crossings’ be included as part of the Signs and Lines Improvement programme.
Alternatives considered: to not commit Township funds to the scheme as detailed in Appendix 1 of the submitted report. DECIDED – That (1) the Committee though mindful not to approve the report, agrees that it be referred to a future meeting of the Rochdale Township Action and Resources Committee for determination; (2) the report, of the Service Director – Corporate Services to be considered by the Rochdale Township Action and Resources Committee (referred to at (1) above), give due consideration to introducing more ‘parent and child’ car parking spaces in Rochdale Township and to including ‘zebra crossings’ in the programme. Eligible for Call-in: Yes.
SECTION 106 PLANNING AGREEMENTS (DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS) 28 The Service Director – Planning and Regulation presented details of work undertaken to identify the scale of income held by the Council from Section 106 Planning Agreements, or other planning applications in connection with planning permissions; the amount of Section 106 monies held at the end of the financial year
Page 7 2011/12; and suggested arrangements for greater engagement with Township Committees over the future allocations spending of monies.
The Service Director – Planning and Regulation informed the Committee that amounts of the funds identified within the submitted report had already been committed to schemes in the Township.
Members commented upon local schemes that might be eligible for funding from such monies, and as such were encouraged to notify the Service Director – Planning and Regulation thereon, so that he would be able to submit a report, including detailed recommendations for the allocation of these monies to the next scheduled meeting of the Township Committee on 12 th September 2012. DECIDED – That (1) the Service Director – Planning and Regulation be requested to submit a report to the next scheduled meeting of the Township Committee, on 12 th September 2012, detailing proposals for the allocation of funds from income received from the development at the junction of Fallowfield Drive and Shawclough Road, and which required evidence of spend during the 2012/2013 financial year; (2) members of the Township Committee be invited to identify their own priority areas for Section 106 funding and they notify the Service Director – Planning and Regulation thereon, in time for a report on this matter to be submitted to the Township Committee scheduled for 12th September 2012. Eligible for Call-in: No.
BOROUGH OF ROCHDALE (BRUNSWICK STREET, ROCHDALE) COMPULSORY PURCHASE ORDER 2012 29 The Township Committee considered a report of the Service Director – Planning and Regulation that sought approval to progress the Borough of Rochdale (Brunswick Street, Rochdale) Compulsory Purchase Order 2012 and recommended that the Township Committee gave due consideration to the associated implications of the Human Rights Act 1998.
The recommendations were presented as the proposed Order relates to a small area of land marked in red on a plan, circulated at the meeting, entitled “Borough of Rochdale (Brunswick Street, Rochdale) CPO 2012. The Order lands are on the periphery of land already in Council ownership. The Order Land is required to make the residential development of the wider site viable. The Service Director stated that sufficient weight of evidence has been provided to establish that the proposed development is in the public interest, complies with the Human Rights Act 1998 and is both viable and deliverable. It is therefore considered that a case can be made for the acquisition of the Order Lands by means of a CPO using powers provided by S.226 (a) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. The Township Committee was recommended to consider the implications of the Human Rights Act 1998 in order to ensure that the Council discharges its duty in relation to this legislation.
Alternatives considered: to not proceed with development would not be in line with the Council’s commitment to the provision of a new housing in the area and the retention of the site without the funding to treat and maintain it would not be in the public interest. Another alternative was to proceed with development and use the land at risk without seeking to address the ownership issue would be open to challenge and would not meet the requirements of funding agencies. DECIDED – That (1) the Committee authorises the Borough of Rochdale (Brunswick Street, Rochdale) Compulsory Purchase Order 2012 utilising the powers within S.226 (a) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990;
Page 8 (2) the Committee authorises the Service Director - Corporate Services to undertake the necessary legal procedures in connection with the Compulsory Purchase Order; (3) the Committee resolves that, on the advice of the Service Director – Corporate Services, detailed in the submitted report, there has not been a breach of the Human Rights Act 1998 in the compulsory acquisition of the land within the Order. Eligible for Call-in: Yes.
BOROUGH OF ROCHDALE (BELFIELD ROAD, ROCHDALE) COMPULSORY PURCHASE ORDER 2012 30 The Township Committee considered a report of the Service Director – Planning and Regulation that sought approval to progress the Borough of Rochdale (Belfield Road, Rochdale) Compulsory Purchase Order 2012 and recommended that the Township Committee gave due consideration to the associated implications of the Human Rights Act 1998.
The recommendations were presented as the proposed Order relates to small areas of land on the periphery of a larger site already in Council ownership. The Order Lands are identified as the site marked in red on plans circulated at thee meeting. The Order Land is required to make the residential development of the wider site viable and residential development is considered to be an appropriate use of this site which is currently vacant and semi-derelict. The Service Director reported that sufficient weight of evidence has been provided to establish that the proposed development is in the public interest, that it complies with the Human Rights Act 1998 and is both viable and deliverable. It was suggested that a case could be made for the acquisition of the land by means of a Compulsory Purchase Order using powers provided by S.226 (a) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 which allows the Authority to acquire land to facilitate development that is likely to contribute to the improvement of social or environmental well-being of the area. The Township Committee was also recommended to consider the implications of the Human Rights Act 1998 in order to ensure that the Council discharges its duty in relation to this legislation.
Alternatives considered: to not proceed with development - this would not be in line with the Council’s commitment to the provision of new housing in the area and the retention of the site without the funding to treat and maintain it would not be in the public interest. Another alternative considered was to proceed with development and use the land at risk without seeking to address the ownership issue. This would be open to challenge and would not meet the requirements of funding agencies. DECIDED – That (1) the Committee authorises the making of the Borough of Rochdale (Belfield Road, Rochdale) Compulsory Purchase Order 2012 utilising the powers within S.226 (a) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990; (2) the Committee authorises the Service Director - Corporate Services to undertake the necessary legal procedures in connection with the Compulsory Purchase Order; (3) the Committee resolves that, on the advice of the Service Director – Corporate Services, detailed in the submitted report, there has not been a breach of the Human Rights Act 1998 in the compulsory acquisition of the land within the Order. Eligible for Call-in: Yes
ROCHDALE TOWN CENTRE MOVEMENT FRAMEWORK
Page 9 31 The Service Director - Planning and Regulation updated the Township Committee on the progress of a movement plan setting out the future traffic arrangements for the town centre that had been developed in light of the major redevelopments occurring within the town centre, further to Minute no. 92 of the meeting of the Committee held 11 th January 2012.
The Service Director requested that Members of the Township Committee notify his office of any additional comments and observations that they may have on the Town Centre Movement Framework. DECIDED That the report be noted. Eligible for call-in: No.
ROCHDALE TOWN CENTRE HERITAGE - PROPOSED RIVER RE-OPENING 32The Township Committee received a report of the Service Director – Planning and Regulation, which sets out the case for and options for the re-opening of the River Roch through Rochdale town centre. The report also established motives as to why the authority should examine the wider heritage and leisure potential of the town centre to support the retail, Council and transport initiatives already underway or proposed.
The Township Committee was informed that the Cabinet, on 4 th July 2012, had authorised the further development of the proposals contained in the report, the submission of a planning application and a compulsory purchase order for the scheme. DECIDED – That the report be noted. Eligible for call-in: no.
BOROUGH OF ROCHDALE (THE BUTTS, THE ESPLANADE, ROCHDALE ) COMPULSORY PURCHASE ORDER 2012 33 The Township Committee considered a report of the Service Director – Planning and Regulation that sought approval to progress the Borough of Rochdale (The Butts, The Esplanade, Rochdale) Compulsory Purchase Order 2012 and recommended that the Township Committee gave due consideration to the associated implications of the Human Rights Act 1998.
The recommendations were presented as the proposed Order relates to areas of land that are required to facilitate the re-opening of the River Roch in Rochdale town centre. The re-opening project is widely supported and seen to have benefits in terms of the town centre’s image, environment and flood prevention. The Order lands are in no known ownership and are overtopped by an adopted highway. The proposed works will necessarily involve the closure of highways within the areas edged red, on plans circulated at the meeting, and unless clear title was acquired the project is open to procedural challenge and it may become difficult to make progress efficiently. Sufficient weight of evidence had been provided to establish that the proposed re- opening is in the public good and that it was likely to be viable and deliverable. It was therefore considered that a case can be made for the acquisition of the Order lands by means of a Compulsory Purchase Order using powers provided by S.226 (a) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, insofar as acquisition will facilitate development that will promote and improve the economic and environmental well- being of the area. The Township Committee was recommended to consider the implications of the Human Rights Act 1998 in order to ensure that the Council discharges its duty in relation to this legislation.
Alternatives considered: the Council has no obligation to re-open the River Roch and a commitment to do so has yet to be made. A decision to postpone a Compulsory
Page 10 Purchase Order could be made, but the longer lead-in times of the Compulsory Purchase Order process would inevitably mean that the project as a whole would be put at higher risk and could be subject to delays and delivered less efficiently. In the event that the Council decides not to proceed with the re-opening, the Compulsory Purchase Order process can be terminated. Consideration was also given to proceeding on the basis of taking out insurance to cover against the possibility of emerging owner(s) and challenge - however acquisition of the title through the Compulsory Purchase Order provided more certainty. DECIDED – That (1) the Committee authorises the Borough of Rochdale (The Butts, The Esplanade, Rochdale) Compulsory Purchase Order 2012 utilising the powers within S.226 (a) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990; (2) the Committee authorises the Service Director - Corporate Services to undertake the necessary legal procedures in connection with the Compulsory Purchase Order; (3) the Committee resolves that, on the advice of the Service Director – Corporate Services, detailed in the submitted report, there has not been a breach of the Human Rights Act 1998 in the compulsory acquisition of the land within the Order. Eligible for Call-in: Yes.
KIRKHOLT MASTERPLAN REVIEW 34 The Township Committee considered a report of the Service Director – Customers and Communities, the purpose of which was to update Members on the progress made on the new Kirkholt Masterplan, Approval for the next stages of the regeneration of the estate, had been granted by the Cabinet at its meeting on 4 th July 2012. DECIDED – That the report be noted. Eligible for call-in: no.
STREET SERVICES - MATCHED FUNDING 35 The Township Committee considered a report of the Service Director – Operational Services advising that the Cabinet at its meeting on 30 January 2012 had approved an allocation of £125,000 for investment funding within Operational Services from the Priority Investment Fund. Rochdale Township, on 23 rd May 2012, had approved match funding against additional Priority Investment Fund funding and had agreed to approve specific schemes. Details of indentified priority works were included at Appendix 1 of the submitted report.
The recommendations were presented as part of the consultation exercise on the Street Services Review, submitted within the Council’s last programme of efficiency measures, Members had expressed their concerns over the potential impact the proposal would have on the street scene across the Borough. Members were particularly concerned at the direct impact any reductions in front line provision in the area of street services would have at a Township level. There was a view that Townships would consider allocating money from their Township funds into this area if the Council matched this funding from within existing resources. The original proposal ‘PO4 - Review of Street Services’ was designed to assist Members in coming to a decision on how costs in delivering frontline services in Parks, Streets and Open Spaces may be reduced to realise significant financial savings within the Place theme. Any significant reduction in numbers of operatives will have a recognisable detrimental impact on the quality of the local environment and possibly customer satisfaction with the Council.
Alternatives considered: the service continues managing the street services function in order to mitigate the current reduction in frontline service delivery.
Page 11
The Township Committee was advised that the proposed Service provision, detailed at paragraph 3.5 of the submitted report, recommended the introduction of additional resources, comprising two designated vehicles and crew to be known as Cleaner/Greener Team Rochdale – to be used form July 2012 to March 2013, outlining also the type of work to be done. It was suggested that a minimum of £10,000 from funds be retained for specific one-off scheme as directed by the Township Committee. The submitted report, at paragraph 3.8 outlined a proposed procedure for dealing with service requests for the Cleaner/Greener Team. DECIDED – that (1) the Township Committee approves proposals to spend additional funding, detailed at paragraph 3.5 of the submitted report; (2) the Township Committee agrees the proposed procedure for dealing with Service requests for the Cleaner/Greener Team as detailed at paragraph 3.8 of the submitted report; (3) the Township Committee approves the identified priority areas of work, outlined at Appendix 1 of the submitted report. Eligible for Call-in: Yes.
APPOINTMENT OF CHARITABLE BODY TRUSTEES 36 The Township Committee considered a report of the Service Director- Corporate Services that sought appointments as nominative Trustees to Charitable Trusts; namely the Norman Barnes Fund, Rochdale United Charities and Rochdale Ancient Parish Educational Trust. DECIDED – That (1) Councillors Surinder Biant, O’Neill and Sheerin be appointed as nominative Trustees to the Norman Barnes Fund for a period of four years; (2) Councillors Danczuk and Jane Gartside be appointed as nominative Trustees to the Rochdale United Charities for a period of four years; (3) Councillor Cecile Biant be appointed as a nominative Trustee to the Rochdale Ancient Parish Educational Trust for a period of four years. Eligible for Call-in: No.
SCHOOL GOVERNING BODY VACANCIES - AUTHORITY GOVERNORS 37 The Township Committee considered a report of the Service Director - Support for Learning that sought appointments to a number of School Governing Body vacancies, at schools in Rochdale Township. DECIDED – That (1) Mrs. Saleem Malik and Mr. C. Entwistle be appointed to the Governing Body of Broadfield Community Primary School; (2) Mrs. Sameena Zahir be appointed to the Governing Body of Lowerplace Primary School; (3) Mrs. Rosemary Nunwick be appointed to the Governing Body of Marland Hill Community Primary School; (4) Mrs. Deborah Ball be appointed to the Governing Body of Sandbrook Community Primary School; (5) Mr. A. Ahmad be appointed to the Governing Body of Shawclough Community Primary School; (6) No appointments be made to the Governing Body vacancies at Caldershaw Primary School and St. Vincent’s RC Primary School. Eligible for Call-in: no.
EXCLUSION OF THE PRESS AND PUBLIC 38 DECIDED – That the public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the remaining items of business since it is likely, that in view of the nature of the business to be transacted or the nature of the proceedings, that if members of the public were present there would be disclosure to them
Page 12 of exempt information, namely information relating to the business or financial affairs of any person (including the authority holding that information).
PROPOSED RELEASE OF LAND - ANN STREET, MILKSTONE. 39 The Township Committee considered a report of the Service Director- Planning and Regulation that sought Members approval to release land to NHS Heywood, Middleton and Rochdale to enable the creation of a car park.
The recommendations were presented as the site was owned by the Council and had been vacant and derelict for some years. In the past consideration has been given to a variety of potential uses but there have been issues of cost and practicality. The currently proposed scheme goes some way to resolving current issues and provides an annual income stream without burdening the Council with capital costs. This was considered the best way forward at this time but a resolution to authorise the release of land is required. Car parking is an issue in the local area and difficulties have been exacerbated by recent developments: principally Metrolink and Nye Bevan House, which have both reduced the number of on-street spaces and increased competition. The Council has no budget to construct or maintain additional public car-parking and any public spaces that could be provided could only be funded by prudential borrowing on the basis that revenue could be accrued by pay and display. Other on- street and off-highway spaces in the area are free and it is unlikely that a pay and display facility would be well used.
Alternatives considered: to not proceed. The site has been vacant and derelict/un- maintained for some years. There is no budget for works to create or maintain any sort of free car parking area and the only means of easing current problems through the provision of parking is to look to the PCT to fund work. A further alternative that was considered was to sell the site for development. It is likely that the site could be marketed as a speculative acquisition. However in the current market it is possible, and perhaps likely, that the land would remain fallow and in the meantime an opportunity to reduce some of the local parking issues will be lost. Under the suggested terms of lease the Council will achieve parking, an annual rental as well as retaining a development asset in the longer term without capital or ongoing revenue cost. DECIDED – That (1) the Committee authorises the leasing of the site to NHS Heywood, Middleton and Rochdale for free car-parking in the evenings and at weekends; (2) The Committee authorises the Service Director - Corporate Services to make the appropriate arrangements to expedite this matter . Eligible for call-in: Yes.
PROPOSED RELEASE OF LAND TO FACILITATE DEVELOPMENT. PART SITE OF FORMER ST JOHN'S KITCHEN, ANN STREET, MILKSTONE 40 The Township Committee considered a report of the Service Director – Planning and Regulation, which sought approval to release land to the Asia restaurant to facilitate future development.
The recommendations were presented as the report relates to part of a Council- owned site that has been vacant and derelict for some years. In the past consideration has been given to a variety of potential uses but there have been issues of cost and practicality. The currently proposed scheme proposes use of most of the site as a 32 space car park for NHS – Heywood, Middleton and Rochdale and the release of a smaller area to facilitate the expansion of the Asia restaurant which adjoins the site to the south. The proposal to release land to the Asia restaurant has come about because of local consultation. Detailed design work subsequently carried
Page 13 out by the Planning and Regulation Service has served to show that the development needs of the Asia can be accommodated without compromising the viability of the NHS – Heywood, Middleton and Rochdale scheme and that a windfall capital receipt could be generated as a result.
Alternatives considered: To not proceed. There was no pressing reason to sell the identified land to the Asia restaurant, however to do so has the potential to maximise return and be seen to support local business regeneration whilst still achieving the underlying aim of reducing some of the local parking issues. Another alternative was to sell the whole site for development: it is likely that the site could be marketed as a speculative acquisition if the Committee took the view that the car-parking and part- release of the site was inappropriate. However in the current market it is possible, and perhaps likely, that the land would remain fallow. DECIDED – That (1) the Committee authorises the release of the land identified in the submitted report to the Asia restaurant to facilitate development, subject to the deal being concluded by 1 st October 2012; (2) if the release of the land (referred to in (1) above) is not concluded by 1st October 2012 the site in question can be leased to NHS – Heywood, Middleton and Rochdale; (3) the Committee authorises the Service Director - Corporate Services to make the appropriate arrangements to expedite this matter. (N.B Councillor Wazir required that his vote against the above decision to be recorded). Eligible for Call-in: Yes.
Page 14 Agenda Item 6 Public Document Pack
ROCHDALE TOWNSHIP PLANNING SUB COMMITTEE
MINUTES OF MEETING Tuesday, 12 June 2012
PRESENT: Councillor Begum (in the Chair); Councillors Iftikhar Ahmed, Burke, Wera Hobhouse, Neilson, O'Neill, Sheerin, Wazir and Zaman
OFFICERS: P Rowlinson (Service Director – Planning & Regulation Service), M Robinson & R Butler (Planning & Regulation Service) M Hardman & C Denyer (Corporate Services)
Also in Attendance: Councillor Farooq Ahmed , T Wood (Impact Partnership) and 11 members of the public
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE 1 There were no apologies for absence.
DECLARATION OF INTERESTS 2 Councillor Sheerin declared a personal and prejudicial interest in planning application D 55310- a single storey extension to 4 Carnforth Avenue, Castleton, Rochdale and left the room during consideration of this item.
SINGLE STOREY REAR EXTENSION TO DWELLING AT 4 CARNFORTH AVENUE, ROCHDALE 3 The Service Director for Planning and Regulation reported on planning application D55310 for a single storey extension at 4 Carnforth Avenue, Rochdale.
The Service Director advised that, since preparation of the submitted report, a letter of objection had been received from Councillor Hornby.
The Sub-Committee considered the views of Mrs Walker, 2 Carnforth Avenue, Rochdale, who addressed the Sub-Committee objecting to the application. DECIDED – That planning permission be approved subject to conditions as detailed within the submitted report.
CHANGE OF USE FROM WORKSHOP/STORAGE TO CATERING AND HOT FOOD TAKEAWAY (CLASS A5 USE) 4 The Service Director for Planning and Regulation reported on submitted planning application D55322 for the change of use of premises from workshop/storage to catering and hot food takeaway (class A5 use) at Unit A, 227 Spotland Road, Rochdale.
The Sub-Committee considered the views of the applicant who addressed the Committee in relation to the application. DECIDED – That planning permission be granted subject to conditions as detailed in the submitted report.
CHANGE OF USE TO HOT FOOD TAKEAWAY WITH DINING AREA 5 The Service Director for Planning and regulation reported on planning application D55405 for the change of use of the premises to hot food takeaway with dining area at 355-357, Yorkshire Street, Rochdale.
The Sub-Committee considered the views of the applicant Mr Javid Akhtar, who addressed the Sub-Committee in relation to the application.
Page 15
The Sub-Committee considered the views of a Ward Councillor, Councillor Farooq Ahmed, who addressed the Sub-Committee in relation to the application. DECIDED –That the Licensing and Regulatory Committee be advised that this Sub-Committee would be minded to grant planning permission.
PROPOSED FELLING OF ONE OAK TREE (T33) SUBJECT TO TPO NO. 016 - TO THE REAR (SOUTH EAST) OF 1191 MANCHESTER ROAD, ROCHDALE 6 The Service Director for Planning and Regulation introduced a report seeking authorisation for the felling of one Oak Tree (T33) subject To Tree Preservation Order 016 to the Rear (Southeast) Of 1191 Manchester Road, Rochdale. DECIDED - That authorisation to fell one Oak Tree (T33) subject to Tree Preservation Order 016 to the Rear (Southeast) of 1191 Manchester Road, Rochdale; be approved for the reasons as detailed within the submitted report.
PLANNING APPEALS 7 The Service Director - Planning and Regulation reported that the following planning appeal had been lodged; 11/D55018 - 1-3 Keepers Cottages, Keepers Drive: 1 Keepers Cottages- single storey rear conservatory and erection of front porch; and 3 Keepers Cottages- two storey side extension, single storey rear conservatory and erection of front porch. Installation of dormer extensions in existing detached garage including raising the existing ridge height. DECIDED – That the report be noted.
Page 16 Public Document Pack
ROCHDALE TOWNSHIP PLANNING SUB COMMITTEE
MINUTES OF MEETING Tuesday, 3 July 2012
PRESENT: Councillor Begum (in the Chair); Councillors Ahmed, Danczuk, Wera Hobhouse, Neilson, O'Neill, Sheerin, Wazir and Zaman.
OFFICERS: M. Robinson and M. Taylor (Planning & Regulation Service), S. Reay and M. Garraway (Corporate Services)
Also in Attendance: Councillor Linden.
DECLARATION OF INTERESTS 8 There were no declarations of interest.
TEMPORARY USE OF LAND FOR CITING OF MOBILE POLYCLINIC HEALTH FACILITY FOR A PERIOD OF 5 YEARS (RETROSPECTIVE) ON UNION STREET CAR PARK, UNION STREET, ROCHDALE 9 The Service Director for Planning and Regulation reported on submitted planning application D54966 for a temporary use of land for the citing of mobile polyclinic health facility for a period of 5 years (retrospective) on Union Street Car Park, Union Street, Rochdale.
The Planning Officer informed the Sub-Committee that additional letters of objection had been received along with petitions supporting the application following publication of the submitted report.
The Sub-Committee considered the views of Mr Mitchell-Turner who addressed the Sub-Committee objecting to the application.
The Sub-Committee considered the views of Mr Richardson, an agent for the applicant, who addressed the Sub-Committee in relation to the application.
The Sub-Committee considered the views of Councillor Linden who addressed the Sub-Committee.
In considering the application the Sub-Committee discussed the impact on vitality in the surrounding area, potential impact on local business, loss of car parking space and impact on care provision in the area. DECIDED – That planning permission be granted subject to conditions as detailed within the submitted report subject to an amendment to condition 1 in so that the permitted use shall cease 2 years from the date of this permission.
ERECTION OF A TWO STOREY SIDE AND TWO STOREY REAR EXTENSION TO 28 EDMUND STREET, ROCHDALE 10 The Service Director for Planning and Regulation Service reported on submitted planning application D55499 for the Erection of a two storey side and two storey rear extension to 28 Edmund Street, Rochdale.
The Planning Officer informed the Sub-Committee that English Heritage had responded to the consultation following the publication of the submitted report indicating no comments in relation to the application.
Page 17 The Sub-Committee considered the views of the applicant Mrs Akhtar in relation to the application. DECIDED – That planning permission be granted subject to suitable conditions to be determined by the Chief Planning Officer.
ERECTION OF A 1.8 METERS HIGH FENCING AROUND A CAR PARK INCORPORATING A 3 METER WIDE VEHICLE ACCESS GATE AND A 1 METER WIDE PEDESTRIAN ACCESS GATE AT HUTTON HOUSE, HENRY STREET, ROCHDALE 11 The Service Director for Planning and Regulation reported on submitted planning application D55506 for the erection of a 1.8 meters high fencing around a car park incorporating a 3 meter wide vehicle access gate and a 1 meter wide pedestrian access gate at Hutton House, Henry Street, Rochdale. DECIDED – That planning permission be granted subject to conditions as detailed within the submitted report.
PLANNING APPEALS 12 DECIDED – That planning appeals be noted.
Page 18 Public Document Pack
ROCHDALE TOWNSHIP PLANNING SUB COMMITTEE
MINUTES OF MEETING Tuesday, 31 July 2012
PRESENT: Councillor Begum (in the Chair); Councillors Iftikhar Ahmed, Neilson, O'Neill, Sheerin, Wazir and Zaman
OFFICERS: R Coley (Planning & Regulation Service); T Wood and C Denyer (Corporate Services)
Also in Attendance: Councillors Hornby and Duckworth and 13 members of the public.
Apologies for Absence: Councillor Karen Danczuk and Councillor Wera Hobhouse
DECLARATION OF INTERESTS 13 There were no declarations of interest.
APPLICATION FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AND IMPROVEMENTS TO SPORTS FACILITIES AT MAYFIELD SPORTS CENTRE, KESWICK STREET, ROCHDALE. 14 The Service Director - Planning and Regulation Service reported on submitted planning application D54897 for full planning application for the erection of 35 dwellings and improvements to sports facilities (comprising the re-grading of the land, the formation of 1 new pitch, improvements and extensions to an existing pitch, improvements to the car park, drainage, fencing and associated works) and outline application for residential development (all matters reserved) to north of access road at Mayfield Sports Centre, Keswick Street, Rochdale.
The Service Director - Planning and Regulation Service updated the Sub-Committee relating to additional comments objecting to the application, received following publication of the submitted report.
The Planning Officer further updated the Committee on several amendments to the recommendation within the submitted report.
The Sub-Committee considered the views of Mr Clark of Cover Drive, who addressed the Sub-Committee objecting to the application.
The Sub-Committee considered the views of Mr Pemberton of JASP Planning Consultancy, the agents for the applicant, who addressed the Sub-Committee in relation to the application.
The Sub-Committee considered the views Councillor Hornby, a Castleton Ward Member, who addressed the Sub-Committee objecting to the application. DECIDED – That the Licensing and Regulatory Committee be advised that this Sub-Committee would be minded to approve this application subject to amendments to the officer recommendation detailed in the submitted report as follows; (a) The deletion of Paragraph 1 (c); (b) The deletion of Condition 5; (c) The rewording of Conditions 8, 9, 12 and 15 either; a) for the work to be carried out in accordance with the submitted details (if those details are agreed prior to the Licensing and Regulatory Committee
Page 19 meeting on 23 August) or; b) to remove the requirement for details to be submitted prior to commencement and instead in accordance with a suitable timescale, in order that an immediate start on site can be made following the completion of a S106 agreement and should Licensing and Regulatory Committee Members be minded to grant consent for the application.
APPLICATION FOR A NEW PLANNING PERMISSION FOR THE ERECTION OF ONE SINGLE STOREY DWELLING ON LAND REAR OF, 586, BURY ROAD, ROCHDALE 15 The Service Director for Planning and Regulation reported on submitted planning application D55535 for a new planning permission to replace an extant planning permission (D51922) in order to extend the time limit for implementation for the erection of one single storey dwelling on land rear of 586, Bury Road, Rochdale. DECIDED – That the Licensing and Regulatory Committee be informed that this Sub-Committee would be minded to grant planning permission subject to the conditions as detailed in the submitted report.
APPLICATION FOR THE FELLING OF SYCAMORE TREE T33 SUBJECT TO TREE PRESERVATION ORDER TPO061 AT 2 SPRING BANK LANE, ROCHDALE 16 The Service Director for Planning and Regulation introduced a report seeking authorisation for the felling of Sycamore tree T33 subject to Tree Preservation Order TPO061 at 2 Spring Bank Lane, Rochdale. DECIDED - That authorisation to fell one Sycamore tree T33 subject to preservation order TPO061 at 2 Spring Bank Lane, Rochdale be approved for the reasons as detailed within the submitted report.
OUTLINE APPLICATION (MEANS OF ACCESS ONLY) FOR A MIXED DEVELOPMENT AT TRUB FARM, MANCHESTER ROAD, ROCHDALE 17 The Service Director for Planning and Regulation reported on submitted planning application D54610 for Outline application (means of access only) for a mixed development comprising any combination of the following:- Residential development - up to 199 dwellings, 70 bedroom residential elderly care home, Up to 55 private retirement flats, 1,250 sq.m. ground floor commercial floorspace (any combination of class A2 (financial and professional services), A3 (cafes/restaurants), B1(a)(offices) and childrens day nursery (d1)), 20,476 sq.m. of recreational open space at Trub Farm, Manchester Road, Rochdale.
The Service Director - Planning and Regulation Service updated the Sub-Committee relating to comments received following publication of the submitted report from Natural England who agreed with the conclusion as set out in the appraisal at Section 8 that the integrity of Rochdale Canal SAC will not be adversely affected.
The Sub-Committee considered the views of Mr Thomas of Smiths Bakers and Confectioners, Manchester Road, Rochdale, and of Ms Huxley on behalf of Castleton (EC) Residents' Association who both addressed the Sub-Committee objecting to the application.
The Sub-Committee considered the views of Mr Gee, of Roman Summer Associates Ltd, the agents for the applicant, who addressed the Sub-Committee in support of the application.
The Sub-Committee considered the views of Councillor Hornby, a Castleton Ward Member, who addressed the Sub-Committee objecting to the application.
Page 20 DECIDED – that consideration of the application be deferred to allow a further 24 day period of consultation on the proposals contained in the submitted report.
PLANNING APPEALS 18 The Service Director (Planning and Regulation) reported upon planning appeals that affect Rochdale Township.
The Sub-Committee was notified that the Planning Inspector had dismissed a planning appeal in respect of planning application D54461 for a retrospective application for roller shutters at 75 Yorkshire Street, Rochdale; planning application D54461 for the erection of two wind turbines at Sillinghurst Farm, Castle Hill Road, Rochdale; and enforcement notice EN0124 in respect of the erection of a steel post and concrete panel fence – The Klondike, Chichester Street, Rochdale. DECIDED – That the report be noted
Page 21 Public Document Pack Agenda Item 7
ROCHDALE TOWNSHIP ACTION AND RESOURCES COMMITTEE
MINUTES OF MEETING Tuesday, 26 June 2012
PRESENT: Councillor Surinder Biant (in the Chair); Councillors Ahmed, Ahmed, Farnell, Linden, Metcalfe, Rodgers, Sheerin and Sullivan
OFFICERS: T. Wood, S. Granville and M. Garraway (Corporate Services)
Also in Attendance: Councillors Cecile Biant and O’Neill; 2 Members of public.
Apologies for Absence: None
DECLARATION OF INTERESTS 1 There were no declarations of interest.
MINUTES 2 DECIDED – That the minutes of the meeting held on 28th February 2012 be agreed as a correct record.
SPOTLAND AND FALINGE AREA FORUM - 10TH MAY 2012 3 DECIDED – That the notes of the Spotland and Falinge held on 10 th May 2012 be noted.
NORDEN AREA FORUM - 14TH MARCH 2012 4 DECIDED – That the notes of the Norden Area Forum held on 14 th March 2012, be noted.
MILKSTONE AND DEEPLISH AREA FORUM - 26TH MARCH 2012 5 In considering the notes from the meeting of the Milkstone and Deeplish Area Forum held on 26 th March 2012, the Sub-Committee expressed appreciation for Officers involved in work undertaken at Boundary Street. DECIDED – That the notes of the Milkstone and Deeplish Area forum held on 26 th may 2012, be noted.
CASTLETON AREA FORUM - 15TH MAY 2012 6 DECIDED – That the notes of the Castleton Area Forum held on 15 th may 2012, be noted.
BAMFORD AND OAKENROD AREA FORUM - 21ST MAY 2012 7 DECIDED – That the notes of the Bamford & Oakenrod Area Forum held on 21 st May 2012, be noted.
BALDERSTONE AND KIRKHOLT AREA FORUM - 12TH JUNE 2012 8 DECIDED – That the notes of the Balderstone and Kirkholt Area Forum held on 12 th June 2012, be noted.
ROCHDALE TOWNSHIP FUNDS 2012/13 9 The Sub-Committee considered a report of the Service Director – Corporate Services which sought agreement on the allocation of the Rochdale Township Capital and Revenues Funds for 2012/13. Members were requested to note the Rochdale Township Funds terms and conditions and confirm delegation arrangements relating to funding decisions.
Page 22 The recommendations were presented as Rochdale Township Capital and Revenue Funds were to be allocated to projects/schemes that benefit the Township’s community, environment and realise the Township priorities whilst providing tools to monitor and review the use of the Rochdale Township Funds to ensure continued efficient and effective use of Township Funds.
A Member raised the allocation of matched funding for investment funding for Street Services from the Priority Investment Fund, as agreed the Township Committee held on 23 rd May 2012. The Chair of Rochdale Township Committee addressed the Sub – Committee informing Members that further to the decision of the Township Committee held on 23 rd May 2012, she had agreed in principle with the Service Director for Operational Services that the allocated money be used for the removal and treatment of weeds around the pathways of the Township.
Following a Members question, the Sub –Committee were informed that Township Capital Funds could be used for any capital project not just Highways improvements.
In response to a Member’s question the Head of Townships informing the Sub – Committee that unspent funds from 2011/12 had been reallocated into Township Funds for 2012/13. Members discussed the reduction to Members Funds for 2012/13 as compared to 2011/12.
In discussing the Township Funds terms and conditions Members expressed concern that the application process was overly complicated in light of the small amounts of Funds allocated to local groups.
No alternatives were considered. DECIDED – That (1) £20,250 of Township Funds be allocated to the Members Fund to increase the Base Budget to £47,250 allowing each Councillor to receive £1,750; (2) the Township Committee formally agrees the decision of the Chair, made in principle, that match funding for Street Services from the Priority Investment Fund be used for the removal and treatment of weeds around the pathways of the Township; (4) the terms and conditions for revenue and capital funding as outlined at Appendix 3 of the submitted report be noted; (5) the delegation arrangements for Rochdale Township Funds for 2012/13 as outlined in Appendix 4 of the submitted report be agreed. (6) the Communities and Engagement Group be requested to consider the process and procedures for community groups applying to Township Funds.
HIGHWAYS DEVOLVED REVENUE 10 The Sub-Committee considered the report of the Service Director – Corporate Services which informed the Sub-Committee of the current Highways Revenue Devolved budget and sought to obtain approval for scheme delivery, in line with Township priorities, for the allocation of £47,039 towards the upgrading of regulatory lining and signing.
The Highways Devolved Budget has been carried forward from previous years and in the 2012/13 financial year stands at £104,800. The money has been allocated based on the percentage of the Borough’s population within each Township. A list of potential schemes has been provided in the Appendix to the submitted report. The top priority in Highways would be to have an extra £104,800 allocated to upgrading
Page 23 regulatory lining and signing, in line with the Council’s new Parking Enforcement Policy.
The Sub-Committee questioned why a request for funding for Corporate responsibilities was being requested from Townships.
Members sought clarification as to status of outstanding projects from the Rochdale Township Capital Funds considered by the Sub-Committee in 2011/12. The Sub- Committee requested information be provided to Members at the next meeting of the Sub-Committee including dates of when projects were approved and previous allocation of Capital funds.
Alternatives and risks considered: the budget could remain un-allocated, however to carry the budget forward again would require an application to ELT which may be refused. The budget needs to be allocated to schemes this financial year and if it remains unallocated will go back into the Councils central budget. DECIDED – That (1) the £47,032 of Highways Devolved Budget be used towards the previously agreed list of costed Township Highways projects and be determined at the next meeting of the Sub-Committee; (2) the Head of Townships circulate the list of outstanding Township Highways projects to the Sub-Committee for information.
ROCHDALE TOWNSHIP PLAN - PROJECTS 11 The Sub-Committee considered a report of the Service Director – Corporate Services seeking Members agreement for funding to develop projects contained within, and essential to delivery of, the Rochdale Township Plan.
The Township Plan 2012/15 will continue to be developed as part of and within the timescale for the 2014/15 visioning work taking place. The Township Plan 2012/15 which has been approved by the Rochdale Township Members states how services should be influenced, shaped and delivered at a Township level to meet local needs. Members are presented the opportunity, along with local people, community organisations, area forums, third sector and partner organisations to continually review and revise the Township Plan 2012/15. Members will be invited to review the plan on a six-monthly basis.
Alternatives and risks considered: The Township Plan is an integral part of the Council’s policy framework and cannot be developed in isolation from the overall 2014/15 vision for the Council’s future service delivery. DECIDED - That (1) the report be noted; (2) the projects detailed in Appendix 1 of the submitted report be deferred for further development.
Page 24 ROCHDALE TOWNSHIP ACTION AND RESOURCES COMMITTEE
MINUTES OF MEETING Thursday, 26 July 2012
PRESENT: Councillor S. Biant (in the Chair); Councillors I. Ahmed, S. Ahmed, Farnell, Metcalfe, H. Rodgers, Sheerin and Sullivan
OFFICERS: T. Wood, J. Hodkinson, D. Lansley and M. Garraway (Corporate Services)
Also in Attendance: 4 Members of the Public
Apologies for Absence: Councillor Linden
DECLARATION OF INTERESTS 12 There were no declarations of interest.
MINUTES 13 DECIDED – That the minutes of the meeting held on the 26 th June 2012 be agreed as a correct record.
NORDEN AREA FORUM - 13TH JUNE 2012 14 In considering the notes of the Norden Area Forum, the Sub-Committee were given specific details of how funds would be spent by the Youth Service over the summer holidays. DECIDED – That the notes of the Norden Area Forum held on 13 th June 2012 be noted.
MILKSTONE AND DEEPLISH AREA FORUM - 18TH JUNE 2012 15 DECIDED – That the notes of the Milkstone and Deeplish Forum held on 18 th June 2012 be noted.
BRIMROD/MARLAND/SUDDEN AREA FORUM - 14TH JUNE 2012 16 In considering the notes of the Brimrod/Marland/Sudden Area Forum, the Sub-Committee expressed its gratitude to the Service Director – Planning and Regulation Service, for attending the forum and answering questions with regard to the development at High Birch. DECIDED – That the notes of the Brimrod/Marland/Sudden Area Forum held on 14 th June 2012 be noted.
KINGSWAY AREA FORUM - 31ST MAY 2012 17 DECIDED – That the notes of the Kingsway Area Forum held on 31 st May 2012 be noted.
CENTRAL ROCHDALE AREA FORUM - 31ST MAY 2012 18 DECIDED – That the notes of the Central Rochdale Area Forum held on 31 st May 2012 be noted.
TBA WORKING PARTY - 7TH FEBRUARY AND 12TH APRIL 2012 19 DECIDED – That the notes of the TBA Working Party held on 7 th February 2012 and 6 th April 2012 be noted.
ROCHDALE TOWNSHIP COMMUNITIES AND ENGAGEMENT PRIORITY GROUP - 9TH JULY 2012
Page 25 20 DECIDED – That the notes of the Rochdale Communities and Engagement Priority Group held on 9 th July 2012 be noted.
ROCHDALE TOWNSHIP FUNDS 2012/13 21 The Sub-Committee considered the report of the Service Director – Corporate Services which sought agreement on the allocation of Rochdale Township Funds to funding streams in 2012/13 and updated Members on revenue and capital expenditure, commitments and balances, as of July 2012. In relation to the Capital Fund, the Sub-Committee was asked to note that capital funds had to be committed or spent before the end of the financial year.
Members expressed concern that ward councillors may not be involved in the decision making process for small grants which is currently delegated to the Township Office, in consultation with the Chair and Vice-Chair.
Members discussed the merits of the Rochdale Township Capital Fund being split equally between all of the nine wards in the township.
Alternatives Considered: None DECIDED – That (1) allocations of funding streams for 2012/13, as detailed in paragraph 3.1 of the report be approved. (2) The commitments and balances of Rochdale Township Funds as at July 2012 be noted. (3) The projects as detailed in Appendix 3 of the report be developed by the Head of Townships in consultation with the Chair, Vice Chair and, the appropriate ward councillors. (4) The Rochdale Capital Fund 2012/13 be used for projects submitted by Members with the aim of apportioning funds as evenly as possibly between wards. (5) Any unallocated revenue funds be reallocated to the Township Fund before the year end to enable all Rochdale Township Funds to be committed or spent before the end of the 2012/13 financial year. (6) Delegated decisions on all funded projects be brought to future meetings of the Sub-Committee for information.
HIGHWAYS DEVOLVED REVENUE 22 The Sub-Committee considered the report of the Service Director – Corporate Services which sought approval of Highway Maintenance Schemes, upto a total of £47, 039, in line with township priorities, to be delivered from the Highways Revenue Devolved Budget.
In addition to those schemes listed within Appendix A of the report, the Sub- Committee was with provided with photographic evidence and addressed by Mr John Kay in relation to the state of disrepair of Meadow View in the Spotland and Falinge Ward.
Alternatives Considered: The Budget could remain unallocated, however to carry the budget forwards would require an application to the Executive Leadership Team, which may be refused. The budget needs to be allocated to schemes this financial year, otherwise remaining funds will be reabsorbed into the Council’s central budget. DECIDED – That the Highways Revenue Devolved Budget be spent on the schemes suggested schemes at: 1) Moorgate Avenue, Bamford – Carrigeway Surface Dressing - £22,000 (2) Judith Street, Healey - Carrigeway Surface Dressing - £7,000
Page 26 (3) the additional scheme at Meadow View, Spotland and Falinge – Carrigeway Surface Dressing - £16,000
SHAWFIELD AREA 20MPH SPEED LIMIT (NORDEN COMMUNITY PRIMARY SCHOOL) 23 The Service Director – Corporate Services presented a report advising Members of objections received in response to the published proposals to introduce a 20 mph speed limit in the Shawfield Area.
The Sub-Committee was considered the view of Mr. Nigel Morell, Chair of the Norden Area Forum, in support of the recommendations presented in the report.
In discussing the Order, Members noted the lengthy consultation process, through sub-groups of the Area Forum, which had achieved proposals which satisfied the majority of residents.
Alternatives Considered: An alternative scheme which proposed a Traffic Calming Order for a smaller area and featured traffic calming measures features was considered before this Sub-Committee on 27 th October 2011. DECIDED – That the proposed Traffic Regulation Order for the Shawfield Area, Rochdale be approved as detailed within the submitted report.
ST EDWARDS CHURCH OF ENGLAND PRIMARY SCHOOL - 20MPH SCHOOL ZONE 24 The Service Director – Corporate Services presented a report advising Members of objections received in response to the published proposals to introduce a 20 mph speed limit on the estate surrounding St Edward’s Primary School and to the traffic calming measures on Hanover Street and Durban Street, Castleton.
In considering the scheme, the Sub-Committee considered the views of Councillor Sheerin, as a ward councillor, who addressed the committee supporting the scheme on behalf of the three ward councillors.
The Sub-Committee noted that the two other primary schools within the Castleton ward both have similar schemes in place.
Alternatives Considered: None DECIDED – That the proposed Traffic Regulation Orders for St. Edward’s C of E Primary School, Rochdale and Hanover St/Durban St, Rochdale be approved as detailed within the submitted report.
BRIMROD AREA 20MPH ZONE 25 The Service Director – Corporate Services presented a report advising Members of objections received in response to the published proposals to introduce a 20 mph speed limit with traffic calming measures on the Brimrod estate, Rochdale.
Alternatives Considered: The scheme as originally proposed, only included the area surrounding Brimrod Community Primary School including part of Holborn St (between Manchester Rd and Finsbury St), Finsbury Street and Westminster Street. DECIDED – That the proposed Traffic Regulation Orders for the Brimrod Estate, Rochdale be approved as detailed within the submitted report.
BAMFORD ACADEMY, PROPOSED 20MPH SCHOOL ZONE
Page 27 26 The Service Director – Corporate Service introduced a report advising members of the outcome of consultation with the Bamford Area Forum in relation to the proposed 20mph zone at Bamford Academy, Rochdale and for permission to advertise the revised proposals.
Alternatives Considered: The original scheme, as heard before the Sub-Committee on 28 th February 2012, included provisions for traffic calming measures in the form of rounded top speed humps and waiting restrictions on Belgium Street. DECIDED – That the permission be granted to advertise the proposals as detailed in the submitted report.
Page 28 Agenda Item 8
Subject: Street Lighting Private Finance Status: For publication Initiative (PFI) Replacement Programme Update
Report to: Rochdale Township Committee Date: 12 th September 2012
Report of: Linda Fisher, Service Director – Email: [email protected] Corporate Services Telephone : 01706 924702
Portfolio Member: Cabinet Member for Highways - Councillor Jacqueline Beswick
Comments from Se ction 151 Officer x Statutory Officers: Monitoring Officer x
Key Decision: No
1. PURPOSE OF REPORT
1.1 The purpose of this report is to update Township on the progress of the Street Lighting PFI replacement programme.
2. RECOMMENDATIONS
2.1 That Township Committee notes the report
3. BACKGROUND
3.1 The Street Lighting PFI Contract was awarded to Community Lighting Partnership Rochdale Limited (CLP) in 2011 for a period of 25 years. The works are being undertaken by CLP’s operational sub-contractor - Eon Energy from their depot at Kingsway Business Park.
3.2 Within the first 5 years of the contract, CLP will replace approximately eighty percent of all existing lighting stock with new energy efficient street lighting, illuminated signs and bollards. This is known as the Core Investment Period (CIP).
3.3 Over the full 25 year term of the contract, CLP will maintain, repair and were necessary replace the lighting, illuminated signs and bollards in accordance with the Council’s specification.
4. STREET LIGHTING REPLACEMENT PROGRAMME
4.1 CLP provided a proposal which prioritises each ward dependent on following factors; the level of deprivation, the level of crime, the percentage of concrete columns and the quantity of substandard lights. It was considered that this approach was a good
Page 29
balance between addressing the risk of the ageing stock and providing better lighting to areas of the community where it is most needed.
4.2 The replacement programme is to be undertaken in two phases. The first phase is to address streets that have concrete columns; with the second phase addressing streets that have steel columns. It is considered that the concrete columns are in the poorest condition and therefore pose the greatest risk of failure.
4.3 The first phase will take approximately 30 months to complete which will be early 2014. The second phase will take a similar time, which will take the completion date to early 2016.
4.4 Work has already been undertaken in the wards of West Middleton, North Middleton, South Middleton and the Hollins Estate which forms part of the Hopwood Hall ward and work has now started in the wards of Smallbridge & Firgrove and Milkstone & Deeplish. The next wards will be Balderstone & Kirkholt and Spotland & Falinge which will be started in September and October.
4.5 The preferred locations for the new columns are between houses, between drives or on the house side of the drive. It is Eon’s aim to position columns in one of these locations, but in order to achieve required spacing and retain good uniformity; this may not always be possible. Columns are normally sited at the back of the footway to minimise obstruction and to reduce the risk of vehicle damage.
4.6 Below is an illustration of the progress to-date on the CIP
11 Dec Jan 12Jan 12Jun Apr 12Apr Oct 11Oct 12Oct Jul12 Ma Aug Sep Nov Sep Feb Mar
11 11 12 12 12 12 12
Ward Name y
West Middleton North Middleton South Middleton Smallbridge &
Firgrove Milkstone &
Deeplish Balderstone &
Kirkholt Spotland & Falinge Bamford Castleton Milnrow & Newhey Kingsway Central Rochdale East Middleton West Heywood Norden North Heywood Hopwood Hall Littleborough
Lakeside Healey Wardle & West
Littleborough
Page 30
4.7 As of July 2012 there was a total of 1,320 new energy efficient street lights installed and certified, improving the night time environment and reducing the Council’s carbon footprint.
4.8 A further 1,774 street lights have been installed and will be put forward to the Authority once energised, commissioned and all snagging items have been rectified.
5. CONSULTATION
5.1 Consultation meetings have been held with Ward Members and Townships prior to work commencing within each Ward. Dependent on availability of Members, this usually takes place two months before the works starting.
5.2 The meetings give the Councillors the opportunity to learn more about the benefits of the project, what impact the works will have on the residents and other road users and to give Councillors the opportunity to raise any questions they may have.
5.3 The last Ward to be consulted was Spotland and Falinge on 9 th August.
5.4 Three weeks prior to the works commencing on site, each resident receives a letter informing them of the works and providing them with contact details if they have any queries.
5.5 Following the letter drop, the column positions are marked on the pavement in white spray paint. It is not always possible to locate all of the underground services prior to the column being installed; therefore the column may need to be moved slightly to accommodate this.
5.6 E-on are responsible for resolving issues and resident queries relating to the replacement programme. Eon will consider the resident’s query and if possible resolve the issue. However it is acknowledged that it is not always possible to find a solution that is acceptable to all parties but in these instances a detailed explanation will be provided why it is not possible to achieve the desired outcome.
5.7 Eon receive approximately twenty customer enquires a month. Most of the queries are dealt with within a short timescale; however other may take longer due to the nature of the enquiry.
6. CUSTOMER SATISFACTION
6.1 CLP are contracted to post customer satisfaction surveys to all households that have new street lighting installed in their street. The surveys have a prepaid envelope attached which is addressed to the Street Lighting Client Team.
6.2 The Street Lighting Client Team records the responses and discusses the results with CLP in the monthly monitoring meetings. The results to-date have been very positive with all responses being either good or excellent, and a copy of the results are detailed at appendix A
7 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
7.1 There are no Financial Implications to consider arising from this report.
8. Legal Implications
8.1 There are no Legal Implications to consider arising from this report.
Page 31
9. Personnel Implications
9.1 There are no Personnel Implications to consider arising from this report.
10. Risk Assessment Implications
10.1 There are no specific risk issues to consider arising from this report
11. Equalities Impacts
11.1 Workforce Equality Impacts Assessment
There are no (significant) workforce equality issues arising from this report.
11.2 Equality/Community Impact Assessments
There are no (significant) equality/community issues arising from this report.
There are no background papers
Page 32
Appendix 1
Results from the Customer Satisfaction Survey
Qu1
180 Information provided within the 160 letter as to what works were 140 taking place was…. 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Excellent Good Adequate Poor
Qu2
How would you rate E.ON's 100 90 response in answering any 80 questions or issues you have 70 60 raised? 50 40 30 20 10 0 Excellent Good Adequate Poor
Qu3
The level of care and tidiness 180 and consideration taken by the 160 140 contractors and eon whilst on 120 site was…. 100 80 60 40 20 0 Excellent Good Adequate Poor
Qu4
Overall how would you rate the 160 completed work? 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Excellent Good Adequate Poor
Page 33
Qu5
Compared to the old lighting, 200 180 how would you rate the new 160 lighting level? 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Excellent Good Adequate Poor
Qu6
How do you rate the overall 160 140 effectiveness of the new 120 lighting scheme? 100 80 60 40 20 0 Excellent Good Adequate Poor
Chart Title
Do you consider the new 171.2 171 lighting scheme will reduce the 170.8 likelihood of crime? 170.6 170.4 170.2 170 169.8 169.6 169.4 No Yes
Chart Title
Do you consider that the new 300 lighting scheme will improve 250 the safety of the road? 200
150
100
50
0 No Yes
Page 34 Agenda Item 9
Subject: Drake Street Improvements Status: For Publication
Report to : Rochdale Township Committee Date: 12 th September 2012
Report of: Service Director – Planning & Author Regulation Services Email:[email protected]
Author: Nick Barton Tel: 01706 924847 Comments from Section 151 Officer Statutory Officers: Monitoring Officer
Key Decision: No
1. PURPOSE OF REPORT
1.1 To inform members of progress made in supporting the regeneration of Drake Street, complementing works being carried out as part of Metrolink 3b.
2. RECOMMENDATIONS
2.1 It is recommended that members note the progress made and make any comments to the Planning & Regulation Service.
3. MAIN TEXT
3.1 Drake Street is a key gateway into Rochdale Town Centre, which has suffered as a consequence of the migration of activity within the town centre northwards towards Yorkshire Street. Despite this the street retains a number of high quality independent shops and examples of architecture reflecting its Regency heritage and long history at the centre of the town’s commercial life.
3.2 Metrolink 3b will give new vitality to the street and provide improvements to the public realm, such as new high quality pavements and fingerposts and landscaping of Wet Rake Gardens and repair of its boundary walls. Coupled with the development of No.1 Riverside, the new Transport Interchange and the potential opening up of the River Roch in the Town Centre, this will give Drake Street a much higher profile within the town.
3.3 In 2010, £200,000 was allocated to Drake Street through the Priority Investment Fund, approximately £110,000 was used to provide hoardings to improve the appearance of problem buildings and gap sites, to create a short stay shoppers car park accessed from River Street and to clear 12 River Street. The remainder of the funding has been carried forward to carry out improvements associated with the completion of Metrolink.
Page 35 3.4 The Planning & Regulation Service have received a number of suggestions from traders, which alongside a number of ideas taken from examples of best practice, were turned into a public realm improvements proposals documents, which has been widely consulted on with traders.
3.5 This document included proposals to: • Provide signage boards at the bottom of Drake Street and in Wet Rake Gardens to provide useful information for shoppers and visitors; • Re-instate the traditional red telephone box by Wet Rake Gardens at the junction of Milnrow Road and Drake Street; • Introduce new seating and repair the railings in Wet Rake Gardens; • Re-instate a traditional street lamp by Wet Rake Gardens at the junction of Milnrow Road and Oldham Road; • Provide new high quality traditional street plates to increase the legibility of Drake Street as a historic shopping street; • Provide a ‘Blue Plaque’ for the Wellington Hotel (No.1 Drake Street; • Introduce trees to the small scale public square created by the closure of the Drake Street junction on to Fleece Street and other areas of Drake Street as appropriate; and • Introduce a small grants programme to help traders and landlords improve the appearance of premises along Drake Street through minor repairs and refurbishments such as wall cleaning and repainting, window replacement and signage improvement.
3.6 Traders have been very supportive of the proposals and are keen to see improvements taking place. Officers from the Planning & Regulation Service are working with Transport for Greater Manchester and their contractor MPT to develop a work programme, which can be managed alongside the Metrolink 3b programme. It is anticipated that the works outlined above will be completed by April 2013.
Alternatives considered
3.7 An alternative proposal to concentrate resources on the rear of premises backing onto the new Transport Interchange along Faulkner Street was considered, but it was considered that this would provide limited benefit to Drake Street businesses and Drake Street traders strongly opposed any diversion of resources away from the Drake Street frontage.
3.8 Improvements to Faulkner Street will be carried out as part of the Transport Interchange / Metrolink works, officers will liaise with project teams to ensure that appropriate boundary treatments are carried out.
Consultation proposed/undertaken
3.9 Further consultation will be carried out with Drake Street Traders and Transport for Greater Manchester, Town Centre Management, Rochdale Development Agency and Highways and Environmental Management to ensure that the project continues to meet traders aspirations and is consistent with agreed approaches to management of public realm across the town centre.
4. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
4.1 The capital costs of works identified within this report can be met from the remainder of the funds allocated to Drake Street within the Capital Programme (£89,300).
5. LEGAL IMPLICATIONS
5.1 There are no legal implications arising from this report.
Page 36
6. PERSONNEL IMPLICATIONS
6.1 There are no personnel implications arising from this report.
7. CORPORATE AND TOWNSHIP PRIORITIES
7.1 The Vision and Blueprint for Rochdale Council for 2014-15 identifies both supporting and creating local jobs and improving the quality of place in the borough as critical to delivering sustainable regeneration of the borough.
7.2 Rochdale Township identifies identifying pride and confidence within local areas as part of its Communities and Engagement priority, furthermore the project also contributes to the townships Clean and Green priority.
8. RISK ASSESSMENT IMPLICATIONS
8.1 All the issues raised and the recommendation(s) in this report involve risk considerations as set out below: a) Implementation of works is linked to the Metrolink 3b work programme, a risk of delay in implementation exists as a consequence. This will partially mitigated through close liaison with the Metrolink project team, but cannot be mitigated entirely. The works will be implemented as discrete work packages, mitigating costs associated with delays in continuous work programmes. b) The delivery of a small grants programme is identified as key to the success of the Drake Street Improvements and a significant proportion of available resources are allocated to this element. A risk that a lack of interest from traders and landlords could result in a failure to reach a critical mass of property improvements could result in the project not significantly improving the visual amenity of the street. This risk has been mitigated through early engagement with traders and landlords and identification of priority improvements.
9. EQUALITIES IMPACTS
9.1 Workforce Equality Impacts Assessment
There are no workforce equality issues arising from this report.
9.2 Equality/Community Impact Assessments
There are no equality/community issues arising from this report.
Background Papers Document Place of Inspection Planning and Regulation Service, Floor 1, DRAKE STREET: Proposed public realm Telegraph House, Baillie Street, Rochdale improvements
Page 37 Agenda Item 10
Subject: Appointment of Local Authority Status: For Publication (LA) School Governors Report to : Rochdale Township Committee Date: 12 th September 2012
Report of: Service Director - Support for Email: [email protected] Learning Author: Maria Matthews - Governor Tel: 925177 Support Manager Cabinet Member: Councillor D Martin - Portfolio Holder for Children, Schools & Families Comments from Section 151 Officer Statutory Officers: Monitoring Officer
Key Decision: No
1. PURPOSE OF REPORT 1.1 This report outlines the statutory changes which come into effect from 1 September 2012 to the appointment of local authority (LA) school governors.
2. RECOMMENDATIONS 2.1 That Township Committee notes the statutory changes to the appointment mechanism for Local Authority School Governors
MAIN TEXT INCLUDING ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED/CONSULTATION CARRIED OUT 3.1 Members are asked to note the statutory changes which come into effect from 1 st September 2012 to the appointment of local authority school governors.
3.2 The School Governance (Constitution) Regulations 2012 which come into effect from 1 st September 2012 require that: authority governors meet the eligibility criteria, if any, specified by the governing body; are nominated by the local authority and appointed by the governing body.
3.3 Prior to this; LA governors were appointed by each Township in accordance with the ‘Scheme of Delegation to Township Committees’ section R (School Governing Body Vacancies) which delegated the function of nominating appointees to School Governing Body vacancies in accordance with the agreed formula to the appropriate township committee.
3.4 The agreed formula was revised by Members following a decision of Council on 14 July 2000 which stated that ‘new reports dealing with Authority Governor vacancies will contain no reference to which political group should make the nomination to fill the vacancy and no reference to which political group made previous nominations’. Members agreed that Governors will be chosen on the basis of the contribution, which they can bring to the school in terms of skills and experience.
3.5 Whilst Members were previously asked to consider the nominations received from schools (where schools were able to offer a nomination), it remained with Township to make the appointment.
Page 38 3.6 Legislation however as outlined in 3.2 above now means that the LA are only able to make nomination for appointment and that the School Governing Body have the final decision on whether to make the appointment.
3.7 Whilst further procedural guidance is awaited, future LA Governor vacancy reports will: include, wherever possible, eligibility criteria from the School Governing Body; will request Members make nominations to each vacancy which will be referred to the School Governing Body and may where not agreed by the School Governing Body be referred back to Members for further consideration.
Alternatives considered 3.8 There are no alternative methods of filling Authority Governor Vacancies within the current Township Committees scheme of delegation and legislative provision.
4. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS 4.1 There are no financial implications for members to consider arising from this report.
5. LEGAL IMPLICATIONS 5.1 The School Governance (Constitution) Regulations 2012 for authority governor appointments effective from 1 st September 2012
6. PERSONNEL IMPLICATIONS 6.1 There are no specific personnel implications for members to consider arising from this report.
7. CORPORATE PRIORITIES This report contributes to and supports the Local Authority’s role in school improvement through the development of effective governing bodies to promote high standards in all schools.
8. RISK ASSESSMENT IMPLICATIONS 8.1 There are no specific risk issues for members to consider arising from this report.
9. EQUALITIES IMPACTS 9.1 Workforce Equality Impacts Assessment There are no workforce equality issues arising from this report.
9.2 Equality/Community Impact Assessments There are no significant equality/community issues arising from this report.
There are no background papers
Page 39 Agenda Item 11
Title: Rochdale Housing Strategy Status: For Publication
Report to: Date: Heywood Township Committee 10 th September 2012 Pennine Township Committee 11 th September 2012 Rochdale Township Committee 12 th September 2012 Middleton Township Committee 13 th September 2012 Report of: Service Director of Customers an Email: [email protected] Communities Tel: 01706 924042 Cabinet Member: Councillor Terry Linden, Portfolio Holder for Regulatory Services & Housing
Comments from Section 151 Officer √ Statutory Officers: Monitoring Officer √
Key Decision: Yes
Forward Plan √ General Exception Special Urgency
1. PURPOSE OF REPORT
1.1 This report seeks the views of Township Committee on the draft Rochdale Housing Strategy.
2. RECOMMENDATIONS
2.1 Committee is requested to provide comments on the draft Rochdale Housing Strategy and delivery plan (please see appendix 1).
3. Introduction
3.1 Rochdale’s previous housing strategy “Delivering Change” covered the period 2006-10. Work began last year on the development of a new housing strategy for the borough
3.2 A joint housing strategy with Oldham Council has recently been completed and includes issues of joint interest and areas where the two Authorities can work together to address problems and issues that are present in both boroughs.
3.3 The Rochdale strategy is a short, concise document which set out the specific challenges and priorities for the borough. The strategy document is not as detailed as previous strategies as the main focus will be on the achievement of the actions set out in the accompanying delivery plan.
Page 40 3.4 The Housing Strategy document includes an introduction, followed by sections on our vision, national, sub regional and local policy relating to housing, the key findings of the Rochdale Strategic Housing Market Assessment 2010 and our priority aims
3.5 There are five housing priority aims in the Rochdale Housing Strategy brief details of which are provided below:
(i) Supporting development which meets economic needs
We want to encourage a choice of homes that meets needs and aspirations of our existing residents and help attract new residents into the borough. We want to develop high quality new homes in locations where people want to live and that support economic growth.
(ii) Making the best use of existing homes
We are committed to making the best use of all existing homes available across the borough , to support our objectives to connect people to an improved housing offer and to achieve the right quantity of housing. We recognise that there is the potential within the existing housing stock in the borough to help meet local housing need.
(iii) Addressing fuel poverty and improving energy efficiency and insulation
Whilst there has been significant investment across the borough over the last 3 years to improve the energy efficiency of homes, there are still residents who cannot afford to heat their homes to a healthy level. With continually rising energy bills and reduced household incomes, the problem is unfortunately getting worse. By improving the energy efficiency of homes, both existing and new, we will help to ‘fuel poverty proof’ homes and contribute to the reduction of carbon emissions at the same time.
(iv) Preventing homelessness
The Council and its partners have been successful in recent years in homeless prevention and reducing the number of priority households in temporary accommodation. However, the current housing market, welfare benefit reform and cuts in funding continue to increase pressure on homelessness. We want to continue to support local people who are most at risk of homelessness and help people to live independently.
(v) Improving neighbourhoods
Attractive neighbourhoods which are well designed and managed and support integrated communities offer greater opportunities both for individuals and for wider economic prosperity. Such places are more likely to be successful and attractive to new residents. We want neighbourhoods to be safe, attractive places to live. Residents want the local environment to be good quality and well maintained, and free from the fear of crime.
Alternatives considered
3.6 It is a statutory requirement for Councils to have a Housing Strategy under the Local Government Act 2003 therefore alternative options to producing a strategy document have not been considered. The Housing Strategy should set out objectives, targets and policies on how the authority intends to manage and deliver its strategic housing role and provides an overarching framework against which the authority considers and formulates other policies on more specific housing issues.
Page 41
Consultation proposed/undertaken
3.7 The consultation process for the housing strategy will involve discussions with the Local Public Service Board, Councillors, Rochdale Strategic Housing Partnership, Township Committees, Overview and Scrutiny Committee, registered providers and various community and equality groups.
4. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
4.1 There are no specific financial implications relating to the housing strategy document.
5. LEGAL IMPLICATIONS
5.1 There are no legal implications.
6. PERSONNEL IMPLICATIONS
6.1 There are no personnel implications. 7. CORPORATE IMPLICATIONS 7.1 Our approach to Strategic Housing is fundamental to achieving the objectives within Rochdale’s Community Strategy. In particular, the objectives of keeping and attracting skilled and high income families to the borough by improving skills to access jobs, Promoting and enabling healthy lifestyles and achieving good health and well being, encouraging people to take personal responsibility for their neighbourhoods and developing our communities to make them more resilient and cohesive and maximising the relationship with Manchester City Region. Rochdale’s Corporate Plan will support delivery of these priorities and having an effective approach to housing is a core element of the Council’s ambitions. It is essential therefore that we have a local housing strategy which demonstrates how we will address these priorities.
8. RISK ASSESSMENT IMPLICATIONS
8.1 There are no specific risk issues for Township Committee to consider arising from this report
9. EQUALITIES IMPACTS
9.1 Workforce Equality Impacts Assessment There are no significant workforce equality issues arising from this report
9.2 Equality/Community Impact Assessments A draft version of the equality impact assessment is attached at appendix 2.
Background Papers Document Place of Inspection Rochdale Housing Strategy 2012-15 Customers and Communities, Floor 4, Municipal Offices, Smith Street, Rochdale
Page 42 Space to Grow
Rochdale’s Housing Strategy 2012-2015 (DRAFT)
Forward
I am very pleased to introduce the Rochdale Housing Strategy 2012 -15 which sets out our shared aims and objectives for improving the quality, quantity and accessibility of housing in the borough.
Since our last strategy was published in 2006 significant progress has been made in addressing the key housing issues and problems which exist in the borough. Many of the achievements that have been made are mentioned in this document and include the delivery of a £76m Housing, Market Improvement Programme, the development of 457 new affordable homes in the borough over the last three years, and preventing 1444 households from becoming homeless through advice or assistance since 2006/7.
On 26 th March 2012 Rochdale Council transferred its 13,700 properties to Rochdale Boroughwide Housing who are the first tenant and employee co-owned mutual housing provider. The transfer follows a ballot amongst tenants in December 2011 when three quarters of the 9,000 people who voted said ‘yes’ to the transfer. The transfer will ensure a £169 million improvement programme for homes and estates in the first five years which is more than would have been possible if the houses had stayed with the council. RBH have also secured funding totalling £2.1 million through the 2011-15 Affordable Home Programme which will enable the development of 100 new homes for rent including the first new build extra care housing scheme in the borough.In putting this strategy together we have worked closely with our partners and residents to highlight and prioritise the housing issues which we need to tackle. This, together with robust evidence, enables us to be confident that these are the most important strategic housing objectives which will benefit our community.
This Strategy has been prepared following a series of Government announcements on major changes to national housing policy and significant reductions in the availability of resources to deliver key projects. Whilst these changes and funding reductions present significant challenges ahead, we look forward to responding to them in a positive and innovative way.
As the council is no longer a provider of housing we will be concentrating our efforts and resources on setting out the strategic direction for the growth, renewal and improvement of appropriate housing in the borough. This document is a key element in putting forward our strategic vision for housing.
This Strategy has been developed in close consultation with a wide range of partners and I extend my thanks to them for their valuable contribution. I look forward to further working with them and the residents of the borough to deliver the objectives targets set out in this strategy. Councillor Terry Linden Cabinet Member for Regulatory Services & Housing
Page 43 Our Vision
Rochdale is the birth place of the co-operative movement and in line with the principles of this movement our strategic vision for housing involves working in co-operation with partners, developers and residents to support the creation of balanced and sustainable communities. We wish to see the development of a mix of property types and tenures which will meet the housing needs of current and future generations and support economic growth, regeneration and health and wellbeing across the borough. We will strive to provide the opportunities for everyone to be able to reach their potential regardless of where they live.
Page 44
Introduction
Purpose of the strategy
Rochdale’s housing strategy sits in the framework provided by the Oldham and Rochdale Joint Housing Strategy 2012-2015. This Housing Strategy sets out the housing issues and challenges in the Rochdale Borough and details the objectives and priorities that are most appropriate for our townships. It will enable us to deliver a high-quality, balanced and diverse housing supply that meets the needs and aspirations of the borough’s current and future residents and supports our Sustainable Community Strategy’s vision for creating high quality places where people choose to be. We are seeking to develop our approach to partnership working, and we see this Strategy as offering a catalyst for change in this regard. Crucially, we need to establish housing priorities for Rochdale Borough which supports economic growth and set out a framework for targeted delivery. The key objectives and priorities of the joint housing strategy between Oldham and Rochdale form the foundation of this strategy. These are; • Achieving the right Quantity of housing • Continuing to raise the Quality of the housing stock • Connecting People to an improved housing offer
These key objectives will be delivered through five key priorities which are;
1. Supporting development which meets economic needs 2. Making best use of existing homes 3. Addressing fuel poverty and improving energy efficiency and insulation 4. Preventing homelessness and supporting communities 5. Improving neighbourhoods
Policy Context
This section explains the context of this strategy, how it supports national and sub regional targets and policies and how it will both deliver new developments and support and complement current work within the Borough.
Where appropriate links are provided to other websites where additional information can be found
National Housing Context
The Coalition Government has, since coming to power in June 2010, made significant policy changes and developed a number of initiatives to generate new housing development and delegate greater responsibilities to councils and communities, – A brief summary of the policy changes and key initiatives is set out below:
Page 45 National Housing Strategy - In November 2011, the Government launched its new Housing Strategy: ‘Laying the Foundations’, which sets out the approach to address the housing shortage. The Strategy aims to tackle the housing shortage, boost the economy, create jobs and help people on to the housing ladder. For further information on the National Housing Strategy please click on the link below.
Laying the Foundations: A Housing Strategy for England - Housing - Department for Communities and Local Government
Localism Act - The Localism Act sets out the Government’s plans to shift power from central government back into the hands of individuals, communities and councils. In terms of housing, this includes greater flexibility around how social housing is allocated, changes that allow homeless families to be housed in the Private Rented Sector and the introduction of fixed term tenancies.
The Localism Act - Local government - Department for Communities and Local Government
Affordable Rent - Registered Providers can now let new tenancies at a higher rent of up to 80% of the open market rent, known as ‘Affordable Rents’, The additional rental income raised through affordable rented accommodation will be used to help fund the development of new affordable homes.
Affordable Rent | Homes and Communities Agency (HCA)
Welfare Reform - The government has introduced through the Welfare Reform Act 2012 a range of changes designed to reform welfare in order to improve work incentives, simplify the benefits system and tackle administrative complexity. The changes which commenced in May 2012 will take until 2017 to implement and will present a significant challenge to landlords, their tenants and local authorities responsible for meeting housing needs in an area.
Welfare Reform Act 2012 — UK Parliament
The Green Deal - The Green Deal, due to be launched in autumn 2012, intends to reduce carbon emissions costs by improving the energy efficiency of properties. It provides a means for home owners and landlords to secure upfront energy efficiency measures which will be paid for by future savings through energy bills.
http://www.decc.gov.uk/assets/decc/legislation/energybill/1010-green-deal-summary- proposals.pdf
Sub Regional Housing Context
Rochdale Borough is part of Greater Manchester, and our economy is strongly linked to that of the Manchester City-Region. Rochdale Borough has an important role to play in providing suitable market housing for existing and new economically-active households. Housing should be provided for a range of income groups and include both open market and intermediate tenure dwellings. Such an approach will help to maintain long-term community sustainability, complement the City-Region development programme and enhance the quality of life for local residents.
Page 46 Greater Manchester is aiming to be one of Europe’s premier city regions, to bring prosperity to all. We are an intregral part of Greater Manchester and we wish to ensure that:
• The borough visibly benefits from Greater Manchester investment in housing and other areas such as transportation, marketing and economic development. • Rochdale is seen as an asset to the city region, contributing socially, economically and environmentally. • Rochdale has a strong influence in the Greater Manchester governance structures.
At Greater Manchester level, a range of funding and strategy measures specific to housing are either in place or are being developed. These include –
• Delivering the objectives and priorities in the Greater Manchester Strategy and the Greater Manchester Housing Strategy 2010
New Economy : Greater Manchester Strategy Planning & Housing Commission : Commissions : AGMA Policy and Research Unit
• Delivering the objectives identified in the Greater Manchester Local Investment Plan. This document sets the direction for the delivery of key aspects of the ‘Creating Quality Places’ strategic priority of the Greater Manchester Strategy
New Local Investment Plan for Greater Manchester : Latest News : AGMA Policy and Research Unit
• Overseeing and prioritising funding programmes, including the Affordable Homes Programme and bids to address empty homes
• Delivering the GM Domestic Retrofit programme to improve the energy efficiency of homes
• Developing proposals and measures to facilitate the ambition set out in the draft Greater Manchester Strategy of delivering of 9,200 homes per annum across the Greater Manchester Sub Region by 2015.
In addition to the above measures, a Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) became operational in April 2011 and is responsible for a range of initiatives to ensure the economic growth of Greater Manchester. This includes co-ordinating –
• Bids for Regional Growth Fund to deliver investment and jobs with the Private Sector • Growing Places Fund to ensure new jobs and housing through loans
New Economy : Local Enterprise Partnership
Greater Manchester City Deal
Page 47 The City Deal for Greater Manchester was announced by government in March 2012 . The deal document sets out a range of bespoke agreements between the government and Greater Manchester Combined Authority which are geared towards accelerating growth, boosting skills and encouraging local decision-making and increased self-sufficiency.
The City Deal provides a package of housing related measures which includes the establishment of a Housing Investment Board to use national funding, local investment and public land assets to boost housing development and greater flexibility to recycle house-building receipts into future developments on a ‘build now, pay later’ basis.
City Deal Announcement : GMCA : AGMA Policy and Research Unit
Local – Our approach
Rochdale Borough forms part of the Greater Manchester conurbation and is located within the Manchester city region. The borough’s four townships (Heywood, Middleton, Pennines and Rochdale) each have their own distinctive character and identity. The recent development of the Kingsway Business Park, one of the largest in the UK, is helping to diversify the Borough’s economic base and improve the performance of the local economy. Future housing development needs to help support economic growth by providing homes for economically active households. Rochdale Borough can be described as a self-contained housing market in terms of the movement of households but has strong economic linkages especially with Greater Manchester but also with the wider North West region and Yorkshire and Humber. Rochdale Borough has distinctive housing market areas with very different housing issues. A key objective of this housing strategy is to address the issues facing particular localities within the Borough. We will also ensure that we are delivering on the Rochdale’s Community Strategy 2011-21 and the priorities it sets out:
• People -we will promote healthy, safe and happy lives through prevention and personalisation of care, growing self esteem, confidence and responsibility • Place -we will create high quality places where people choose to be. • Prosperity -we will grow enterprise, ambition and the skills to succeed
The Community Strategy recognises that the principles and values of Sustainable Development must underpin all action that takes place in the borough. http://www.rochdale.gov.uk/pdf/2012-01-11-LSP-Community-Strategy-v1.pdf
Rochdale borough has a range of other additional policies and projects underway that will compliment and augment the work in this Strategy and accompanying action plan;
Page 48 Local Development Framework and other Planning Strategies,
The Local Development Framework (LDF) is the collection of documents that make up the spatial framework to guide development in the borough. The Core Strategy is the leading document of the LDF and it sets out the strategic framework for growth and development in the borough up to 2026, The annual housing target in the submitted draft Core Strategy is a net gain of 400 homes per annum with the south of the borough being a focus for new housing development due to its accessibility and regeneration opportunities.
Rochdale Borough Renaissance Masterplan
This is the borough’s physical plan for major public capital investment contains details of the significant capital investment planned, particularly in and around Rochdale town centre over the next five years
Rochdale Economic Development Strategy (REDS)
This Strategy sets out the ambition and priorities for transforming the local economy in line with local, sub-regional and national economic development strategies.
The strategy has four key aims:
• Increasing productivity • Raising skills levels and reducing worklessness • Improving infrastructure and attracting investment • Improving quality of life and the attractiveness of the Borough
http://www.rochdale.gov.uk/pdf/REDS%20Reduced%20File%20Size.pdf
Rochdale Strategic Housing Market Assessment
This strategy is informed by a robust evidence base supporting the case for housing as a priority for Rochdale. In particular, our 2010 Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) undertaken by ARC4, a housing and regeneration consultancy, is a major piece of evidence providing essential information in terms of our housing market. It includes detailed information regarding local needs and demand across the borough, all of which enables the Council and its partners to consider and respond to housing issues and how they impact on other areas such as health, education and the economy. The evidence produced through the SHMA will also help shape future planning and housing policies for the borough.
The key findings of the SHMA in respect of the boroughs housing market were as follows:
• Rochdale Borough can be described as a self-contained housing market. That said, there are strong migration and travel to work linkages with Greater Manchester (Manchester in particular), particularly amongst households in Middleton and Heywood.
Page 49 • Outside of Greater Manchester the study identified migration and travel to work linkages with the wider North West region and Yorkshire and Humberside. • Median prices across Rochdale Borough increased from £42,000 in Q1 2000 and peaked in Q4 2007 at £115,000, an increase of 174%. However, the median price across Rochdale is consistently lower than those for Greater Manchester and the North West. Following their peak, median prices have fallen by around 10% and by Q3 2009 they were £104,500. • Lower Quartile house prices are usually associated with entry-level property types and are therefore a useful indicator of affordability. Across Rochdale Borough lower quartile prices vary between £75,000 in Middleton and £89,000 in the Pennine Townships. Although Rochdale is the most affordable borough in Greater Manchester, house prices are still out of many people’s reach. • Housing demand is the quantity of housing that households are willing and able to buy or rent. An analysis of demand relative to supply of open-market housing indicates that across Rochdale Borough, demand for open market accommodation exceeds supply, particularly for owner occupied dwellings, with a sufficient range of private rented dwellings across the borough. • demand exceeds supply for detached and semi-detached dwellings in particular, followed by flats and bungalows • there is a degree of demand for flats/apartments evidenced in the analysis, particularly from newly-forming households • analysis shows sufficient supply of terraced houses relative to demand in all townships with the exception of Middleton • regarding property size, the strongest demand is for properties with four or more bedrooms. There is also strong demand for one bedroom properties but this reflects a relatively small number of people looking for a limited number of properties; demand exceeds supply for two bedroom properties in all townships with the exception of Heywood; and demand exceeds supply for three bedroom properties in all townships with the exception of the Pennines Township. Overall, demand for open market accommodation, including higher value housing, exceeds supply. The evidence from the SHMA indicates there is a need to maintain the delivery of a variety of dwelling types and sizes to reflect the range of demand for open market dwellings.
Housing need was one of the main issues considered by the SHMA. Housing need is defined as - ‘the quantity of housing required for households who are unable to access suitable housing without financial assistance’ .- The annual affordable housing need is calculated by considering: • households currently in housing which is unsuitable for their use and who are unable to afford to buy or rent in the market (backlog need) • new households forming who cannot afford to buy or rent in the market • existing households expected to fall into need • the supply of affordable housing through social renting and intermediate tenure stock.
Page 50 Overall, there is an annual net requirement of 128 affordable dwellings across the Borough. The shortfall is 44 two bedroom and 84 three or more bedroom dwellings for the general population. This figure is an annual measure of the supply needs for affordable housing required to address the current imbalance in the housing market across Rochdale Borough (2010/11 to 2014/15). The SHMA identified key issues from the research findings which need to be considered by the Council in the formulation of future housing and planning policy. These issues are identified below: • Managing demographic change will become an increasingly important issue for the Council. The projected increase in people aged 60 and over in borough will mean delivering an increasing range of services to older people and providing a wider range of choice in housing options for them will become more important over the next few decades. • Across the borough around 880 (9.2%) of black, asian and minority ethnic (BAME) households are in some form of housing need which compares with 6.0% for the overall population. The housing aspirations of BAME households are a key housing-market driver and strongest preferences are for larger houses. • The economy of the Borough is strongly linked to that of the Manchester City- Region and Rochdale Borough has an important role to play in providing suitable market housing for existing and new economically-active households. Housing should be provided for a range of income groups and include both open market and intermediate tenure dwellings. Such an approach will help to maintain long-term community sustainability, complement the City-Region development programme and enhance the quality of life for local residents. • There is a need to provide support and accommodation for people with additional needs including socially excluded adults (as identified in PSA16*), older people and people at risk of domestic violence. • There is a need to facilitate a diverse range of affordable housing through supporting the delivery of intermediate tenure dwellings. • Reducing the significant number of vacant dwellings in the borough and improving the quality of existing dwellings through better energy efficiency and modernisation
Priorities and Strategic Objectives
This strategy is split into five priorities. Each priority contains a set of goals which is then broken down into actions which are included a delivery plan.
Priority 1: Supporting development which meets economic needs
Our recent achievements
• The building of over 1,000 new homes across the borough in the last three years of which 457 were affordable homes • Obtaining £5.5 M through the Governments Kickstart Initiative to fund the development of the 153 new homes.
Page 51 • As a result of an increase in housing supply the borough has benefitted from additional funding through New Homes Bonus allocations totalling £334,699 in 2011/12 and £942,355 in 2012/13
Our goals
Make Rochdale a borough of choice. Maximise inward investment. Increase the number homes built across the borough year on year Increase the number of higher value homes Wider choice – offer of homes for all Increase the number of family sized homes and affordable homes.
* Public Service Agreements 16 covers Four client groups: care leavers, adult offenders under probation supervision, adults in contact with secondary mental health services and adults with moderate to severe learning disabilities
Make Rochdale a borough of choice
Increasing the supply and range of housing in the borough is key to supporting economic growth and development, creating mixed communities and enhancing regeneration and place making. Our local economy will only thrive if people who work either in the borough, inother parts of Greater Manchester or neighbouring areas can find the right housing within the Rochdale MBC area which is in reach of their jobs. Sustainable, cohesive communities will only develop if there are jobs, good education services, good public health and leisure, sport and cultural activities within easy reach of their homes .
Maximise inward investment.
Facilitating and encouraging an increase private sector investment in housing is vital if we are to widen housing choice and meet the needs of both existing and future residents. Increasing the supply of housing will support our efforts to unlock private sector growth in the economy.
Nonetheless, achieving housing growth and meeting the target in the boroughs Core Strategy of 400 additional homes per annum will remain a challenging task as we move out of recession.
Wider Housing Choice
Ensuring the right housing is on offer in the right location is critical to retaining existing residents and attracting new economically active people into the borough which will underpin economic growth. The 2010 Rochdale SHMA recognises that to attract and retain people from higher socioeconomic groups, who are important to our future success and economic growth, we need to provide a wider choice of high quality homes, including high value housing, in desirable areas.
In line with the conclusions of MIER and policy C3 in Rochdale’s draft Core Strategy we need to provide a more balanced housing offer in terms of tenure, type and size.
We have identified a significant number of ready to go residential sites which we will look to develop through partnership arrangement with developers. These sites will be
Page 52 utilised the to meet the demand for open market accommodation which exists across the borough.
We also wish to promote and support self build initiatives in the borough and we will explore opportunities such as the recently announced national self build scheme that will assist small builders, developers, charitable organisations and community groups to get their projects off the ground.
Increase the number of High Value Homes
Rochdale Council considers that provision of a more diverse housing offer including an expanded choice of larger and higher value dwellings is a key to achieving an attractive and sustainable borough. At present we don’t’ have enough higher value housing in the borough, with only 1.01 % of homes in Council Tax Bands G and H compared to the regional average of 2.1% and a national average of 4.1%.The provision of High Value Housing could increase the wealth profile of the Borough by retaining existing, and attracting new, higher income earning households to underpin the local economy
The Rochdale SHMA 2010 identified an unmet demand for High Value Housing in the borough arising from the high number of managers and highly skilled people working in different sectors in the borough. A significant proportion of this workforce currently commutes to work in the borough from other parts of Greater Manchester. Evidence suggests that this is due in part to the lack of suitable housing and other facilities within the borough. A number of factors are important in the choice of locations sought by high earners, including good quality schools and community facilities.
The strategy links into our work on improving skills and raising educational standards amongst our residents in order to attract business investment in the borough and to lift the number of high valued added jobs that local people can access.
We aim to address the perceived shortfall by putting in place a clear action plan aimed at creating the conditions for investment in High Value Housing.
Increase the number of family sized homes and affordable homes.
Affordable housing is defined as either social and affordable rented or intermediate housing which is provided and made available to eligible households who cannot afford to meet their needs through the market
The boroughwide Strategic Housing Market Assessment carried out in 2010 suggests around 130 new affordable homes are required each year. We will be supporting an increase in the number of new affordable homes developed in the borough which are offered on shared ownership or discounted sale terms and aimed at young, economically active households including first time buyers to help them onto the housing ladder. The focus on this group will support the retention of skilled workers, help to reduce the risk of importing deprivation into the borough as well as attracting residents who cannot access this good quality affordable housing elsewhere. It is likely that the provision of new affordable/social rent accommodation will be targeted at infill sites within existing RBH estates and in those areas of the borough where there is a severe lack of this type of accommodation. It is hoped that
Page 53 the target of 130 affordable homes per annum set out in the SHMA can be achieved through the new Homes and Communities Affordable Homes programme 2011-15, planning gain and the bringing back into use of vacant properties.
The largest demand across the borough in terms of both affordable and market housing is for family sized homes and we will be working with our partner housing associations and private developers to meet this demand and to offer a wider tenure choice. The changes being introduced by the Welfare Act 2012 may have detrimental impact on the provision of larger affordable family homes in the borough the Council will therefore be monitoring the situation in respect of this type of accommodation
We will achieve our priority one goals by:
• Working in partnership with land owners, developers and registered providers to bring forward a supply of good quality housing sites. • Working with developers to increase the number of new homes built across the borough and to facilitate the delivery larger, higher value properties in appropriate locations. (link to Higher Value Housing Strategy and target) • Wider marketing and promotion of the benefits of the borough as a place to live linked to excellent transport connectivity, good schools, access to attractive countryside and the availability of good investment and employment opportunities • Assisting first time buyers to access the housing market through the introduction of a boroughwide Local Authority Mortgage Scheme • Working with Registered Providers to build over 200 new affordable homes over the next three years • Exploring alternative options for delivering new developments across the borough, including using Council land to support housing provision and local employment
Priority 2: Making best use of existing homes
Our recent achievements
• Bringing 528 empty homes back into use over last three years • Completing 11,701 jobs through the Handyperson Scheme and 352 major disabled adaptations.
Our goals:
Reduce levels of overcrowding and under occupation. Bringing Empty homes back into use. Improving provision in the private rented sector Offer support and advice to older people and those with disabilities
Rochdale Council is committed to making the best use of all existing homes available across the borough, to support our objectives to connect people to an improved housing offer and to achieve the right quantity of housing.
Page 54 We recognise that there is the potential within our existing housing stock to help meet local housing need and the focus for the future is to target those properties which offer the greatest potential for offering an increased housing offer for local people.
Reduce levels of overcrowding and under occupation
Better management of under-occupied properties, ie, by facilitating people to move to more appropriately sized accommodation will enable social landlords across the borough to make better use of their existing stock and help more overcrowded households obtain housing which meets their needs. Through partnership working with Registered Providers the council will seek to encourage tenants who are under- occupying social rented housing to downsize and this will free up properties for larger households that are currently overcrowded.
Downsizing can also benefit occupiers by providing them with a home that is more suitable for their needs, alleviating the problems associated with under-occupancy such as difficulty maintaining a larger home or affording higher fuel costs. Additionally, changes in Housing Benefits rules from April 2013, will result in a reduction in working-age tenants’ entilement to rent rebate for those tenants who are living in accommodation that is larger than they need. We are working to reduce the level of under occupancy in the Social housing sector through targeted work with under-occupying households, offering a range of downsizing incentives. Through partnership working with Registered Providers the council is committed to supporting the building of more affordable larger family homes which will help annual shortfall of 84 three or more bedroom dwellings for the general population as identified by the Rochdale SHMA. 2010, This provision will help to reduce the level of overcrowding in the borough.
Tackling Empty Homes
Long-term empty properties are a wasted resource, especially as there is overall demand for all types of housing in the borough. Houses that are left unoccupied can quickly fall into disrepair becoming blight on neighbourhoods by encouraging anti- social behaviour, attracting vandalism and petty criminals and reducing market values in the local area. Bringing empty properties back into use can benefit the individual owner, potential occupiers, businesses and the wider community. In addition, the introduction of the New Homes Bonus and the extra funding it can bring into the borough provides another incentive to bring empty properties back into use.
The task of tackling empty homes has recently been given a boost by the approval of the three community funding bids we submitted to DCLG. As a result of these successful bids an additional £689,000 of private and public funding will be levered into the Borough to tackle 35 long term empty homes.
Improving provision in the Private Rented Sector
The private rented sector continues to increase in Rochdale due to a number of factors including the lack of affordable homes to buy, an increased demand for a flexible tenure that is easy to access and a previously thriving ‘buy to let’ market which had arisen as a result of the ‘housing boom’ over recent years.
Page 55 Although the private rented sector has many advantages such as flexibility and ease of access, it contains many vulnerable households and has the least security of tenure and some of the poorest housing conditions. We want to see a healthy private rented sector with good quality properties and management standards supported through existing accreditation schemes. In order to meet the objectives of raising the quality of existing housing and connecting people to an improved housing offer it is recognised that the private rented sector in particular will need to be considered as a key partner in this process. Pressure on the availability of social rented sector homes and the impact of the economic downturn means that supporting people to consider all available housing options is essential.
Offer support and advice to older people and those with disabilities Addressing the accommodation requirements of older people is going to become a major strategic challenge for Rochdale Borough. Over the next few decades, the number of residents aged 60 or over is expected to increase by over one third, from 43,000 in 2010 to 58,700 by 2031. The number of people aged 75 and over is expected to increase by 9,000. The majority of older people want to stay in their own homes with help and support when needed and the vast majority are owner occupiers. Particularly noted is the need for help with repair/maintenance; with help needed for dealing with general repairs, bigger home improvements, improving energy efficiency and improving safety and security. Stairlifts and downstairs toilets are specific requirements identified by around one-fifth of older people. Resources for aids and adaptations remains tight, particularly for households in the private sector. Alternative sources of funding, such as equity loans, are a potential option to finance remedial measures required by older person households. The housing needs study identified interest in new forms of older persons’ accommodation, for instance extra care schemes, as well as traditional sheltered housing and open market provision. We are currently working with partner housing associations to explore opportunities to widen accommodation housing choices for older people. The provision of a wider range of older persons’ accommodation has also the potential to free-up larger family accommodation. Registered Providers working partnership with the Council offer a wide selection of housing, depending on individual needs, for disabled people. This ranges from making properties accessible with or without aids and adaptations to providing accommodation with extra support provision to enable some disabled people to live in the community. The council commissions supported accommodation that enable people with severe physical and or learning difficulties to live in their own home.
We will achieve our priority 2 goals by:
• The introduction of a new boroughwide empty homes strategy and action plan during 2012 • Bringing 100 empty homes back into use per annum • Reducing the costs of supported accommodation and making best use of our adapted and older people’s housing • Increasing use of Equity Loans to fund improvements and adaptations. • Increasing Extra care provision and reducing the use of residential care. across the borough.
Page 56 • Supporting owners to bring their empty properties back into use, through innovative ways of working and complimenting these where appropriate with enforcement powers • Improve existing housing information and advice for older and disabled people. • Monitoring impact of welfare reform on demand for different property types and working with registered provider partners to mitigate impacts and make best use of housing stock
Priority 3: Addressing fuel poverty and improving energy efficiency and insulation
Our recent achievements
• Tackling fuel poverty by investment £8.27 M in 16,104 energy efficiency measures to 5,347 households across the borough.
Our Goals
To improve the energy efficiency of homes across the borough To promote Green Deal To support those at risk of fuel poverty
Definition of Fuel Poverty
Fuel Poverty – the inability to afford sufficient warmth for health and comfort is a serious and debilitating form of deprivation and has been a concern for successive Governments. Fuel costs may crowd out other essential spending such as food and clothing.
The most widely accepted definition of fuel poverty is where a household needs to spend 10% or more on its income to meet fuel costs to ensure that the home is heated to an adequate standard. In England there are over 5 million households in fuel poverty.
There are three main factors leading to fuel poverty:
Energy Efficiency – The lack of efficient heating and effective insulation is a contributing factor to fuel poverty as it increases the cost of heating a home. The installation of cavity wall and loft insulation can save up to £255 per year in energy costs.
Energy Prices – Energy prices have risen considerably in recent years- from 2007 to 2010 the average electricity bill rose by 14% and the average gas bill by 27%.
Household Income – Living on a low income is one of the factors driving fuel poverty. In 2009, the lowest income decile spent almost 8% of their income on fuel; the highest income decile spent only 3.4%
Improving Energy Efficiency of homes across the borough
Page 57 Improving energy efficiency of homes through the installation of measures such as loft and cavity wall insulation helps to reduce fuel bills. It also helps the wider community, with concerns about climate change, by reducing the consumption of natural and non-renewable resources, reducing pollution, improving the air quality and reducing carbon emissions. Whilst the Green agenda is a national priority we have a responsibility to support this agenda at a local level.
As part of our work on revitalising the boroughs housing market, we are focusing new housing developments in locations which are well served by existing facilities and services and can be accessed by residents on foot or using public transport rather than the private car. All new housing developed in the borough should be sustainable in terms of energy demand, energy efficiency, use of materials, method of construction, consumption and disposal of water, and quality of design. New housing should also seek to maximise the use of renewable energy technologies where appropriate. We are also exploring with partners the opportunities for retro fitting existing housing stock with renewable energy.
The benefits of an energy efficient home which people can afford to warm are:
§ Improved health;
§ Increased disposable income;
§ Social inclusion;
§ Reduced costs to health services;
§ Reduced pollution
§ Increase educational performance of young people
Promoting Green Deal
AGMA is currently working on developing a Greater Manchester wide Green Deal scheme which is due to be launched in October 2012. A significant amount of work on developing models which will deliver a Greater Manchester scheme.
The proposed GM Green Deal supports our aspirations in the Rochdale Green Action Plan to increase energy efficiencies of homes and businesses in the borough and reduce carbon emissions. It is our intention to part of the GM Green Deal scheme and we will seek to promote the scheme in Rochdale through this housing strategy.
Supporting those at risk of fuel poverty
With rising fuel bills and the prospect of another cold winter, older and vulnerable people are at risk. Nationally 5.4 million households are living in fuel poverty. Almost half of those living in fuel poverty are aged over 60.
Each year around 20,000 more people aged 65 or over die in winter months than in other months. Last winter there were an estimated 25,400 excess winter deaths.
Page 58 Cold weather exacerbates coronary and respiratory illnesses, illnesses associated with older people. For every winter-related death there will be dozens of people suffering illness and hardship. Choice between eating and heating, isolation and depression are all factors.
To provide support to residents who are at the risk of fuel poverty we will work with our partners to establish the extent, location and nature of fuel poverty in Rochdale and the contributing factors which influence levels of fuel poverty and the root causes of fuel poverty as these may differ from national trends. It is acknowledged that pinpointing fuel poverty households within small geographic areas is a complex task.
We will achieve our priority 3 goals by:
• Insulate 75% of all lofts and cavity walls • Educate residents on the benefits of behaviour change. • Delivery the Greater Manchester Housing Retrofit strategy and forthcoming action plan to reduce domestic carbon emissions • Raise awareness among the health sector of the impacts of fuel poverty and how to help them • Work with Registered Provider’s to develop and deliver their own affordable warmth strategies • Encourage residents to take up the ‘Green Deal’ • Develop and improve the referral system for the most vulnerable residents in fuel poverty
Priority 4: Preventing homelessness and supporting communities
Our recent achievements
• Preventing 241 households from becoming homeless through the Mortgage Rescue Scheme • Preventing 1,444 households from potentially becoming homeless through the provision of advice and assistance
Our goals
Maintain reduced levels of homelessness through prevention and the use of temporary accommodation Reducing dependency. Minimise the impact of Welfare Reform To provide housing related support services which meet the needs of the borough
Maintain reduced levels of homelessness through prevention and the use of temporary accommodation
Homelessness Prevention
Since the Homelessness Act 2002 central government has increasingly encouraged local authorities to become more proactive in tackling homelessness. One of the fundamental reasons for authorities to produce homelessness strategies was to set out proposals for homelessness prevention. The Department of Communities and Local Government define prevention as ‘activities that enable a household to remain
Page 59 in their current home where appropriate, or that provide options to enable a planned and timely move to help sustain independent living’.
Last year (2011/12) over 1147 households were prevented from having to make a homelessness application due to the Council adopting a variety of prevention methods. This compares to 202 who were accepted as statutorily homeless. Over half of those prevented from becoming homeless were provided with financial assistance to move into private sector accommodation. Other methods of prevention include helping to resolve housing benefit problems, family mediation and reinstatement of illegally evicted occupants. Prevention remains one of the keys focuses of the Council’s Housing Options service.
Homelessness Presentations
On average, each year over 3,000 households approach the Council Homelessness service and are offered practical advice and support from the Housing Options Team. The vast majority of these households are assisted via bespoke housing advice and are empowered to achieve both short term and long term solutions that will prevent them from becoming homeless.
Rochdale Housing Options Team Initial Homelessness Homeless Accepted Homeless Presentations Prevention Applications homeless Decisions applications (non (priority) priority) 2006- 4594 404 1479 566 689 7 2007- 3961 781 525 278 187 8 2008- 3984 1256 161 96 28 09 2009- 3080 927 187 76 133 10 2010- 3300 1444 266 157 72 11 2011- 3076 1147 554 202 135 12
Use of temporary accommodation
The Council has a duty to provide certain homeless households with temporary housing, whilst it attempts to help them to resolve their housing difficulties. The Council has access to supported accommodation that can provide a temporary solution to immediate housing needs and has well established partnership arrangements with a number of private sector landlords that can provide quick access to housing. Over the past 6 years this has developed into a very effective arrangement. This has resulted in reduction in use of temporary accommodation and a reduction in numbers of households that need to access temporary accommodation. It remains a key priority for the Council within this Strategy to ensure that we minimise the use of temporary accommodation the future
Page 60
Reducing dependency
Housing Options
Rochdale Council aims to ensure that all residents have access to affordable housing that enables a good quality of life. Our Housing Options Service aims to prevent people becoming homeless by providing advice and assistance to help people find a solution to their housing problem. Housing assessments are carried out in partnership with people in housing need or threatened with homelessness. This enables the adviser to help people find a suitable and sustainable housing option. The introduction of the following preventative mechanisms; mediation, rent deposit scheme, home visits and pathways to specialist services and voluntary sector support has ensured that the level of both homeless presentations and acceptances has declined since 2006.
We believe that extending our housing options approach to tackle worklessness and promote social and economic mobility is to key reducing dependency and to help people to establish networks and personal strategies that will help support them in the community.
Addressing worklessness through learning, skills and employment sits at the centre of our approach. We aim to provide integrated housing and employment advice to provide a holistic package of support for people accessing the service with a clear progression pathway into training, volunteering, employment and settled accommodation
Minimising the impact of Welfare Reform and other housing market factors
People’s changing housing needs, pressure on the housing market and welfare benefit reform, will continue to be major influences on homelessness in Rochdale. To respond to this the Council needs to continue to ensure the investment in Homelessness and Housing Options services is maintained in the longer term.
To do this, it is important that we continue to focus on homeless prevention generally. This will involve continuing to work with our partners and the voluntary sector to develop and make use of existing and innovative initiatives, coupling this where appropriate with access to support services to prevent people from being at risk of social exclusion.
To both inform and support this approach, we will need to carry out regular independent reviews of the services we provide to ensure we continue in conjunction with our partners, to prevent and relieve homelessness. These reviews will consider the impact of issues such as the downturn in the economy, a reduction in the availability of public funding and changes to Government Policy such as the reform of Welfare Benefits, have on homelessness and how services should be developed and shaped to respond to this
To provide housing related support services which meet the needs of the borough
Page 61
Recent consultations with stakeholders on prevention services identified current and future housing related support priorities. These fit in with the recently developed Adult Services Blueprint document which sets out how the Council sees the Adult Care and Support service operating in three years time.
The new priorities for housing related support services cover the following client groups:
People who are socially excluded – this includes people who are homeless, have complex needs, are victims of domestic violence, teenage parents, vulnerable young people, offenders and people with substance misuse problems
Older People with Support Needs
People with physical disabilities or sensory impairment
People Mental Health Problems
People with Learning Disabilities
The new housing related support services that were commissioned following the consultation process commenced on the 1 st April 2012 and will be in place for the next 2 years. We will continue to monitor and review these services and feed the outcomes into any future review of our strategic priorities
We will achieve our priority 4 goals by:
• Continuing to deliver an enhanced housing options service • Wherever possible, empowering people to remain in their home or to achieve their own housing solution. • Developing a common access point for supported accommodation and floating support services • Prioritising the use of supported accommodation for those that need additional support to live independently • Increasing the role of the private sector in preventing homelessness • Working with partners to provide effective communication and information on Welfare Reform • Working across AGMA to identify opportunities to deliver consistent services, create efficiencies and drive up standards.
Priority 5: Improving neighbourhoods
Our recent achievements
• Through the Housing Market Renewal Programme the Council acquired 16 properties and demolished 90 properties in 2010/11 to make way for new homes. In addition 215 private sector homes benefited from improvements.
Page 62 Our goals
All neighbourhoods offer a range of housing choice, services are joined up to provide management and support. Working together with RP partners and developers so that existing residents want to stay. All neighbourhoods are welcoming, safe, clean and green. Reinforce HMR Legacy in creating sustainable neighbourhoods. Improving housing condition of Black Asian and Minority Ethnic Households
Neighbourhoods offering choice
Improving the quality of neighbourhoods is crucial to minimise the impact which broader issues such as socio-economic decline can have upon the long-term sustainability of an area. Through our SHMA research we have identified marked inequalities between areas with a number of neighbourhoods showing signs of housing stress and low demand alongside indicators of wider socio-economic deprivation.
Just as good quality housing brings a range of individual and environmental benefits, safe and attractive neighbourhoods contribute significantly to the quality of well being and opportunities of individual and families and provide the critical foundation for sustainable communities. Conversely, low demand for housing, high level of crime and anti social behaviour and socio-economic deprivation which disproportionately affects some communities not only negatively impact on individual and families but, if unaddressed, call into question whether a neighbourhood can be sustained in the longer term.
Good quality places need to be planned and include a number of key elements:
- A mix of housing to meet needs and support ambition - Appropriate infrastructure – including physical, social and green infrastructure - Accessible, inclusive, interesting neighbourhood designs that support green lifestyles - Well-managed, safe and secure, public realm - High quality, sustainable housing design - Access to facilities and services
Working partnership with Registered Providers
Rochdale council have a strong relationship with registered provider partners and seek to target a range of different action towards addressing the particular needs of disadvantaged communities in all neighbourhoods of the borough. We want to work in partnership with registered providers in the production of their neighbourhood action plans and ensure that they are aligned to this housing strategy and other key Council strategies. We will strive to develop neighborhood plans through productive partnerships, innovative ways of working and proven best practice to address issues in a given area. A well developed neighbourhood plan can benefit all residents in the neighbourhood, including private residents and owner occupiers. An insightful plan also benefits the larger community and the town as a whole.
All neighbourhoods are safe, clean and green.
Page 63 Ensuring Rochdale is a clean, green and safe borough is fundamental to improving quality of life. Research shows that the quality of people’s surroundings substantially impacts upon levels of crime and disorder and how safe they feel.
We are committed to ensuring that all our neighbourhoods are safe, clean and green. Through this Housing Strategy we work closely with residents, schools, landlords, businesses community groups and the police, to continue to improve our local environment, by tackling issues such as littering, fly-tipping and graffiti and by reducing crime and anti-social behaviour.
Our Clean, Green and Safe priority reflects our commitment to a sustainable community through minimising waste, increasing recycling and reducing energy use and CO2 emissions. This way we can preserve the environment for future generations.
Reinforce HMR Legacy in creating sustainable neighbourhoods Housing Market Renewal Programme
The Oldham Rochdale HMR Pathfinder was set up in 2004 to tackle long-standing problems which caused neighbourhoods across both boroughs to become less popular places to live.
To do this the pathfinder worked with public and private partners, including Oldham and Rochdale Councils, housing associations, developers, the Homes & Communities Agency, the police and the voluntary sector.
Over the 8 years the HMR programme was operational Rochdale received £76 million in investment. The funding provided through the programme was focussed on delivering initiatives in four priority neighbourhoods in the Rochdale borough which were East Central Rochdale, Langley, Inner Rochdale and Kirkholt.
The legacy that the HMR programme takes forward is that there are clear Masterplans for each of the target areas and development is progressing on 3 sites. The majority of the sites are in the ownership of the Council or its partners and are ready for development as the market improves. This legacy of sites will provide development opportunities for at least the next 10 years creating neighbourhoods where people will want to live.
Improving housing conditions of Black Asian and Minority Ethnic households
Rochdale is a multi-racial, cultural and multi-faith borough, with long established BME communities. Rochdale currently has a BME population of 18.3% which is projected to increase over 20% by 2021.
The housing disadvantage experienced by these groups has been recognised by the Council and successive BME Housing Strategies aimed at tackling these housing problems have delivered some significant improvements to BME communities living in the borough.
Page 64 However, the BME communities continue to face a number of problems including overcrowded, poor quality homes; low incomes; racial harassment and disrespect across the borough.
The current housing type in existing locations will no longer be suitable to meet future needs and aspirations. We also need to plan ahead to address a number of social and economic factors in order to ensure the successful integration of all communities and the building of sustainable neighbourhoods.
Gypsies and Travellers
Rochdale Borough has a well established, long standing traveller community, some of whom are settled in the wider community.
The council acknowledges the traveller community as a minority community with unique needs. Whilst we do not have a statutory duty to provide a residential travellers’ site, we took a decision in the early 1990s to refurbish the existing site into a residential site with 27 plots and amenity block.
We will achieve our priority 5 goals by:
• Improving links to neighbourhood working with the Townships • Delivering more joined up services to provide management and support and avoid duplication • Encourage and support RPs to develop Neighbourhood action plans for their area of operation in the borough. • Deliver activity to address worklessness in social-rented housing • Provision of homes to address the problems of overcrowding and poor housing amongst the boroughs BME communities. • Maintain existing provision for gypsies and travellers and keep under review future housing requirements for this group
How We Will Measure Our Success
We will monitor and report progress in a number of ways to ensure that the targets in the delivery plan linked to this strategy are successfully delivered on time and to the highest standards. We will create a Monitoring Steering Group which will meet on a regular basis to review progress on the achievement of strategy targets. We will also present a quarterly progress report to the Council’s Overview and Scrutiny on the achievement of objectives and targets in the Housing Strategy.
Page 65
Page 66
ROCHDALE HOUSING STRATEGY – DELIVERY PLAN Appendix 1
Priority 1 Supporting development which meets economic needs
Action Lead Quarter 1 12/13 milestones Quarter 2 12/13 Quarter 3 12/1 3 Quarter 4 12/13 Outputs Outcome Organisations milestones milestones milestones 2012/2013 2012/2015
Working in partnership with land owners and Rochdale Identification of target sites Relaunch of Approximately Achievement of 3 developers to bring forward a supply of good Council, for new housing Developers Forum 400 new homes year target for quality housing sites Private developments completed across delivery of new Developers Finalise programme the borough homes, ie400 for development of properties Council Owned sites identified for new Maximised income build housing raised through new schemes homes bones through supporting Liaise with planning increase in new staff on the strategy development and its targets Working with developers to increase the Rochdale Potential sites identified for Talk to planning staff 5 new high value New Executive number of new homes built across the Council, delivery of high value homes regarding homes completed housing built to borough and to facilitate the delivery larger, Private achievement of this retain existing higher value properties in appropriate Developers, Marketing commences on action residents and locations. (link to Higher Value Housing RDA joint Council/Keepmoat attract new Plan and targets) Scheme at Dean Street residents into the
Page 67 Rochdale borough.
Wider marketing of the benefits of the Rochdale Establishment of Rochdale Host event Develop Finalise borough Ensure key borough as a place to live Council, Strategic Housing showcasing marketing promotional partners are Private Partnership achievements of the literature for use material for use involved in the Developers housing partners with new homes by developers on positive promotion RHI with Councillors sales stategy. all new build of the borough as a RDA schemes place to live and work.
Assisting first time buyers to access the Rochdale Development of a Local Approval obtained At least 2 first At least 4 first time A minimum of 6 30-40 first time housing market Council, Authority Mortgage Scheme for commencement time buyers buyers supported into first time buyers buyers assisted Private (LAMS) of Local Authority supported into home ownership supported into into home Developers Mortgage Scheme home ownership through Rochdale home ownership ownership through Banks through Rochdale LAMS. through Rochdale Rochdale’s Local LAMS. LAMS Authority Mortgage Embed LAMs into the Scheme EP property strategy with reference to marrying it with enforce sales.
Exploring and implementing alternative Rochdale Development Completion of New homes options for delivering new developments Council, commences on joint first sales on developed on across the borough Private Council/Wimpey Dean Street Council owned Developers Taylor Scheme at development sites through RHI Harley Lane, alternative funding RDA Rochdale. Discussion with models Registered private investors Provider Partners Selection of partner for rent to sale Homes and for Furrows Park site schemes Communities in Middleton Agency Banks Establishment of Strategic Housing Partnership sub group to consider non grant funded development options
Working with Registered Providers and Rochdale 13 new affordable homes Commencement of Commencement Commencement of 60 new affordable Over 200 new private developers to build new affordable Council, completed by Regenda at new affordable of new affordable new affordable homes completed home delivered housing Registered Kitchen Street, Rochdale. housing scheme by housing scheme housing scheme by at 4 sites across through 2011-15 Provider Partners RBH at Longridge by Regenda at Riverside on Wood the borough Affordable Homes RHI 15 new affordable homes Drive, Heywood Belfield Road, Street, Middleton?? Programme RDA completed by Guinness Rochdale Northern Counties at 30 new affordable Completion of Completion of first Newbold, Rochdale homes completed by affordable housing new build extra Rochdale scheme by RBH at care scheme in the Commencement of new Boroughwide Waithlands Road, borough affordable housing scheme Housing on Kirkholt Rochdale Page 68 by RBH at Waithlands Road, Estate, Rochdale Rochdale Completion of right to Commencement of buy acquisitions by right to buy RBH acquisitions by RBH Completion of new affordable housing scheme by RBH at Longridge Drive, Heywood
Keeping up to date Housing Market Rochdale Council Commencement of joint Baseline Report Completion of Agreed basket of Facilitate Intelligence Information Oldham Council housing market intelligence produced through report of private indicators of continuation of ARC4 project with Oldham Council Joint housing market rented sector monitor Housing Market intelligence project . Intelligence work Establishment of upon completion of quarterly HMI joint project with Oldham Council
Priority 2 Making best use of existing homes
Action Lead Quarter 1 12/13 Quarter 2 12/13 Quarter 3 12/13 Quarter 4 12/13 Outputs Outcome Organisations milestones milestones milestones milestones 2012/2013 2012/2015
The introduction of a new boroughwide e mpty Rochdale Council, Acquire one empty Completion of Empty Commencement 2 empty properties 100 empty homes All tenants and homes strategy and action plan to include RHI property Homes Strategy of Township brought back into use brought back into residents benefit empt5y residential, commercial and retail Registered driven priority list. through HCA grant use from the improved properties and derelict land Provider Partners Explore potential monies use of Rochdale’s Review and alter as option of charging Implementation of 2 empty housing stock and needed the councils 100% Council Tax empty homes The identification of properties a reduction in approach to Enforced on long term empty grant funding from 12 empty properties brought back into empty properties sale and local rates homes HCA. Work for inclusion in the use through HCA (all sectors) and collection on empty commences on 2 future grant grant monies derelict land. properties. Commence properties through programme submission of Clusters grant Revised Empty Council Tax quarterly empty and 2 properties Property Strategy income increased property reports to through including a new and debt reduced Township Groundwork Trust decision-making Committees mechanism Reduced number Coordinated and of problematic Reviewing of all streamlined empty properties processes to tackle collection process empty properties for private sector Reduce debts property-based owed to Council
Page 69 monies owed to the Council Supporting owners to bring their empty Rochdale Council 2 enforced sales cases 2 enforced sales 2 enforced sales 2 enforced sales 8 enforced sales Reduced properties back into use, through innovative RHI taken to court cases taken to court cases taken to cases taken to court cases taken to neighbourhood ways of working and complimenting these Registered court court disruption, less where appropriate with enforcement powers Providers 2 enforced sales 2 enforced sales resources required cases taken to 2 enforced sales cases taken to 6 enforced sales from Police, PCSO auction cases taken to auction cases taken to and Fire & Rescue auction auction Service
Adoption of a tool kit to offer owners alternative methods of bringing properties back in to use.
Submission of funding bids to attract Rochdale Council, Assist Voluntary Sector Implementation of Development of Implementation of Increase leverage 57 properties additional resources into borough to bring RHI partners to submit bids HCA and DCLG Approved voluntary sector of private sector bought back into empty homes back into use Homes and for 3rd round of Empty funded schemes Investors List for empty homes funding funding use by end of 3 Communities Homes Funding enforced sales ( subject to approval) year Agency Programme and acquisition of implementation empty properties programme Submit funding bid for Empty Homes Cluster Approved Investor Funding list established. Increasing use of Equity Loans to fund Rochdale Council, Prepare portfolio of Transfer of loan Presentation of first 4 Working with AGMA-wide equity improvements and adaptations. Oldham Council, loans to transfer to portfolio to AGMA equity loan applicants Oldham and loans scheme Manchester AGMA scheme scheme to new scheme Manchester established. Council Councils on development of a Adopted procedure Greater for residents Manchester seeking assistance Equity Loans through equity Scheme release
4 new equity loans granted Working with Registered Providers to ensure Rochdale Commence extension of Establish a task and Introduction of Monitoring impact Making more more effective use of current housing stock Council,Registered common allocations finish group to look Tenancy Strategy of affordable rent effective use of Provider Partners policy at the more effective conversions existing stock by disposal of RP across the addressing under Commence consultation empty homes . borough occupation Rochdale Council, on boroughwide tenancy Registered strategy Improved housing Provider Partners circumstances for those residents who are classed as severely overcrowded in social rented stock.
Increasing Extra care provision and reducing Rochdale Council, Working with Start on site with Completion of Development of the use of residential care across the Registered partners registered first sheltered review of potential first new extra care borough. Providers providers to identify housing sheltered housing scheme in viable sheltered conversion to conversion Littleborough
Page 70 housing conversion create extra care options to create options to create provision extra care extra care housing housing provision
Priority 3 Addressing Fuel Poverty and improving energy efficiency and insulation
Action Lead Quarter 1 12/13 Quarter 2 12/13 Quarter 3 12/13 Quarter 4 12/13 Outputs Outcome Organisations milestones milestones Milestones milestones 2012/2013 2012/2015
Insulate 75% of all lofts and cavity walls Rochdale 500 energy efficiency 500 energy 500 energy 500 energy efficiency 2,000 energy Better insulted through Keep Me Toasty campaign Council, measures installed efficiency measures efficiency measures installed efficiency private sector installed measures measures homes leading to installed installed into personal savings Rochdale for householders, households for and permanent year. reductions in carbon and co2 Reductions in outputs CO2 production and Carbon usage
Educate residents on the benefits of Rochdale Council Work with GM Developing Launch “ training 100 households Permanent behaviour change. Registered Energy Advice unit informal course “ in pilot areas confirmed reductions in Provider Partners (reformed) to behavioural behaviour carbon and co2 develop behaviour change training change, saving outputs change programme course fuel
Implement other elements of behaviour change programme
Delivery the Greater Manchester Housing Rochdale Council Engage with AGMA Implement Active campaign Increased public Retrofit strategy and forthcoming action Registered partners to develop Rochdale and strategy to awareness of plan to reduce domestic carbon emissions Provider Partners strategy and long term element of tackle retrofit energy efficiency AGMA implementation plan AGMA-wide plan issues in issues leading to in consultation Rochdale’s increased numbers with GM Energy existing housing of retrofitted Advice Unit stock efficiency measures Raise awareness among the health Rochdale Council Assess number/ Develop Health Sector Green Deal Health Sector sector of the impacts of fuel poverty and clusters of awareness engaged in Green information in promotion of how to help them vulnerable residents campaign for Deal proposals. Doctors’ waiting AGMA Green Deal in fuel poverty Rochdale’s health rooms and other proposals. care health facilities professionals
Work with Registered Provider’s to develop Rochdale Council Promote Green Deal Registered Registered Providers 7 Registered Registered and deliver their own affordable warmth Registered Go Early monies to Provider partners offered status within Providers involved Providers included strategiesPage 71 Provider Partners enhance CESP engaged with Green Deal in Green Deal in AGMA wide programmes AGMA Green proposals. proposals. partnership. Deal proposals. Enhanced outputs AGMA wide for RP insulation advertising/ Local implementation schemes promotional of advertising/ (numbers not yet strategy promotional strategy. available) presented for adoption
Adoption of Go Early schemes Encourage residents to take up the ‘Green Rochdale Council Prepare strategy Implement Awareness Local awareness Deal’ Registered for dealing with awareness campaign strategy leading to and take up of Provider Partners most vulnerable based on AGMA deal 100 public Green Deal offer. residents in fuel enquiries poverty in light of AGMA Green Deal proposals.
Develop with GM Energy Advice unit Rochdale focussed awareness programme Develop and improve the referral system for Rochdale Council Complete Warm Homes Investigate Position 50 residents helped 50 residents Strategy to the most vulnerable residents in fuel poverty Registered Promotion Scheme. possibility of using statement/options out of fuel poverty helped out of fuel maximise the Provider Partners Go Early monies to presentation to (subject to successful poverty number of GM Energy Advice develop new Executive bid for funding vulnerable unit scheme for most Leadership Team residents helped vulnerable/most in out of fuel poverty. need Implement possible Go Early scheme
Deliver Toasty Scheme in conjunction with Rochdale Council Review Toasty 2,000 energy Maximised number ESTAC and British Gas ESTAC scheme in light of efficiency of residents British Gas AGMA Green measures benefiting from Deal proposals installed into improved insulation Rochdale measures households for year. (see earlier entry)
Revised Toasty Strategy in light of Green Deal proposals and interim proposals AGMA Green Deal Policy/Strategy Rochdale Council Green Deal AGMA Green Deal Formal approval Commencement Maximise residents Registered workshop AGMA workshop process for AGMA of AGMA Green take up of Provider Partners Green Deal proposal Deal full/subsidised
Page 72 Policy/Strategy energy efficiency AGMA Green Deal measures. launch planned March 2013. Positioning of AGMA/Rochdale Council in relation to Green Deal
Priority 4 Preventing Homelessness and Supporting Communities
Action Lead Quarter 1 12/13 Quarter 2 12/13 Quarter 3 12/13 Quarter 4 12/13 Outputs Outcome Organisations milestones milestones milestones milestones 2012/2013 2012/2015
Continuing to deliver an enhanced housing Rochdale Pilot new Assessment Meet with Evaluate Enable Maximise options service Council, Tool Registered Assessment Tool households to prevention RHI Providers to develop sustain opportunities Registered new Pre eviction independence Provider Partners Protocol. Pilot new Pre- and prevention. AGMA Agree Pathways eviction protocol.
Meet with Economic Affairs Unit to establish pathways to training and vocational opportunities.
Developing a common access point for Rochdale council Regular meeting with Evaluate More joined up Prioritise specialist supported accommodation and floating CAIAS CAIAS to develop more pathways and re- single point of services for those support services 3rd Sector partners effective working model if access for most in need relations necessary service users
Make better use of supported Rochdale Council Introduce new Housing Review access to Flexible use of Reduce temporary accommodation 3rd Sector options Assessment tool supported accommodation accommodation Partners accommodation to respond to costs to the LA CAIAS services. changing needs
Increasing the role of the private sector in Rochdale council Review current provision Provide options for Seek members Making best use Provide a range of preventing homelessness Bond Board and partnership Local Lettings support for Local of the Private good housing AGMA arrangements inc SLAs Agency for the Lettings Agency. sector and options choices. RHI Borough partnership arrangements Page 73
Working with partners to provide effective Rochdale Council Support and evaluate Develop pro-active Take a lead role Develop a pro- communication and information on Welfare All 3 rd sector LHAT approach to in informing and active approach to Reform partners engaging with those responding to the extending RPs Identify households most most at risk through effects of welfare Prevention RHI at risk as a result of direct contact, and reform upon AGMA welfare change use of local media. those vulnerable And local champions to homelessness.
Reduce Rough Sleeping and prevent those Rochdale Council Role out No Second Establish pathways Develop Reduce the risk An effective at risk from sleeping rough. AGMA Night Out across the to preventative and emergency of people Complex Needs 3rd Sector partners Borough reactive services. accommodation sleeping rough Panel AGMA for people at risk Engage with voluntary of sleeping rough and community based sector to develop local networks
Identify future resources to meet needs
Embed Reconnection protocol.
Priority 5 Improving Neighbourhoods
Action Lead Quarter 1 12/13 Quarter 2 12/13 Quarter 3 12/13 Quarter 4 12/13 Outputs Outcome Organisations milestones milestones milestones milestones 2012/2013 2012/2015
Improving links to neighbourhood working Rochdale Coordinate Co-ordinated Joint working and with the Townships Council, Township action Township and RP more effective use Registered plans with action plans of resources Provider Partners propsed RP neighbourhood action plans
Delivering more joined up services to Develop Ensure Review plans in Complimentary Joint working and provide management and support and avoid neighbourhood complimentary readiness for new investment plans more effective use duplication management plans investment plans financial year based on of resources for key social areas Townships and neighbourhood RPs needs
Encourage and support RPs to develop Rochdale Launch of Rochdale Engage Registered Develop Empty property Registered Neighbourhood action plans for their area of Council, Strategic Housing Providers in Empty Registered initiative Providers continue operation in the borough. Registered Partnership Group Property Strategy Provider area investment Plans to invest in areas Provider Partners review. based plans to from Registered leading to invest in empty Providers expanded housing properties and choice. Page 74 derelict land.
Deliver activity to address worklessness in Rochdale Instigation of Launch of action social-rented housing Council, worklessness plan Registered action group for Provider Partners RP’s
Audit of existing action and development of action plan Improvements to physical environment Rochdale Introduction of Quarterly meeting of Priority Lists from Improvement is through Empty Property Strategy – includes Council, Township driven Township Chairs to each Township visual appeal of empty residential, commercial and retail Registered prioritisation of report progress and built environment premises and derelict land back into use. Provider Partners case work receive direction RHI (subject to Township Cabinet approval) involvement in decision making process
Page 75 Appendix 2
Rochdale MBC
DRAFT Equality Impact Analysis Rochdale Housing Strategy
Page 76
Page 77 Equality Impact Proforma
1. State which function you are assessing and identify who should be involved in the equality impact analysis
Policy/Service Area Selec ted “Space to Grow” Rochdale’s Housing Strategy 2012-2015, Customers and Communities
What function, policy, procedure or practice is being assessed?
Rochdale’s Housing Strategy 2012-2015 will enable us to deliver a high-quality, balanced and diverse housing supply that meets the needs and aspirations of Rochdale’s current and future residents and supports our Sustainable Community Strategy’s vision for creating high quality places where people choose to be.
At the core of what we are doing are 3 key objectives:
• Achieving the right Quantity of housing • Continuing to raise the Quality of the existing housing stock • Connecting People to an improved housing offer
Who is responsible for it ? Council or Other Organisation/Partnership?
Rochdale MBC
What are the aims and objectives of the function, policy, procedure or practice ?
The Housing Strategy covers all types of housing in the Borough, whether it is rented from a housing association or private landlord or whether it is owned and lived in by the householder or family. It considers current and future provision of affordable housing in the Borough; the effects of homelessness in the Borough; the need for new housing and type of housing and supported accommodation to enable people to live independently in their own homes for longer. The strategy highlights the key priorities relating to these issues and set out how, the Council and its partners will work together to address these issues within current and future available resources.
It sets a strategic framework which guides the Council and stakeholders towards partnership working to tackle issues and problems and deliver the housing required in the Borough to meet need.
The key objectives and priorities of the strategy are; • Achieving the right Quantity of housing • Continuing to raise the Quality of the existing housing stock • Connecting People to an improved housing offer
These key objectives will be delivered through five key priorities which are;
1. Supporting development which meets economic needs 2. Making best use of existing homes 3. Addressing fuel poverty and improving energy efficiency and insulation 4. Preventing homelessness and supporting communities Page. 78 5. Improving neighbourhoods
Who are the key stakeholders?
Residents of Rochdale Registered Providers Private Landlords Developers Homes and Communities Agency Elected Members Heywood Middleton and Rochdale NHS Trust Rochdale CVS Rochdale Housing Initiative Rochdale Development Agency
Lead Officer for this analysis (i.e. se rvice manager who will co -ordinate the EIA)
Abdul Jabbar, Lead Policy Officer and Graham Pilling, Housing Provision Manager
Others consulted and involved in the a nalysis (i.e. colleagues/peer s/key internal and external stakeholders)
We intend to consult a wide range of stakeholders including the following;
Elected members Townships LPSB Registered Providers RHI BAME groups Developers Forum Rochdale Strategic Housing Partnership Heywood Middleton and Rochdale NHS Trust RDA Children Centres Groups for disabled people Rochdale Registrars’ Service The Carers Resource Centre Rochdale Youth Parliament Mind LGBT Group Rochdale CVS
2. Identify the scope of the equality impact assessment
Please provide a summary of:
§ What is to be included in this impact assessment/what issues will you consider? i.e. are all aspects of the policy/service to be covered or is it confined to a limited area? Please explain. This is likely to reflect the relevance to equality of different aspects.
Page. 79 § Does this service/policy have link to other service areas, or other Equality Impact Assessments?
All aspects of the strategy are to be considered.
Rochdale’s Housing Strategy for 2012-15, sets out what we will do to deliver the right mix of housing and housing related services for our communities to live in and enjoy a good quality of life. It outlines what the main housing issues are for Rochdale, and how the Council and its partners propose to tackle these.
The key objectives and priorities of the joint housing strategy between Oldham and Rochdale form the foundation of this strategy. These are; • Achieving the right Quantity of housing • Continuing to raise the Quality of the existing housing stock • Connecting People to an improved housing offer
These key objectives will be delivered through five key priorities which are;
Ø Supporting development which meets economic needs Ø Making best use of existing homes Ø Addressing fuel poverty and improving energy efficiency and insulation Ø Preventing homelessness and supporting communities Ø Improving neighbourhoods
Through these objectives and priorities we seek to: • Address the housing needs of people with physical disabilities • Tackle and prevent homelessness. • Ensure Vulnerable People have access to suitable housing and support • Create safe and secure homes and neighbourhoods • Provide and sustain employment and training opportunities through housing projects • Support wider plans to create sustainable communities through Housing and Regeneration initiatives • Provide a mix of housing tenures, types and sizes in order to create mixed and balanced communities. • Address housing needs of BAME communities including those of Gypsies and Travellers We are also seeking to develop our approach to partnership working, and we see this Strategy as offering a catalyst for change in this regard. Crucially, we need to establish housing priorities for Rochdale Borough which supports economic growth and set out a framework for targeted delivery.
Other related policies Sustainable Community Strategy Greater Manchester Growth Plan Rochdale Green Action Plan Rochdale Economic Development Strategy Local Development Framework and other Planning Strategies Financial Inclusion Policy Rochdale Borough Renaissance Master Plan
Page. 80 3.State the data that you have considered for this assessment and any gaps in data identified. What action will be taken to close any data gaps?
Strategic Housing Market Assessment 2010 2011 Census ONS Population Forecasts Annual Equalities Listening Events A study of the housing and related needs of the Black and Minority Ethnic (BME) Community in Rochdale
4. Assess the impact the policy/service has on equality will reference to different groups or communities. To do this, consider the questions on page 5 of the guidance, which relate to unequal outcomes or disadvantage; access barriers; unmet needs; encouraging participation; fostering good relations. The Equality Impact Assessment Checklist may also be helpful at this stage.
Race Equality
Housing research has confirmed that some BAME groups live in some of worst housing in the borough and are economically disadvantaged. The goals and priorities of the strategy will have an overall positive effect on BAME households in the borough
Housing is a key element of neighbourhoods of choice which will support economic growth in the borough. Economic growth will benefit all residents, with potentially more benefit to those already disadvantaged.
Disabled People The Housing Strategy objectives highlight the need to “Ensure Vulnerable People have access to suitable housing and support” and “address the housing needs of people with physical disabilities”
Affordable housing sites are being developed with some properties to wheelchair standard and/or Lifetime Homes standard.
Care rs The Housing Strategy and strategic housing services are designed to be accessible by all interested groups. We will seek to consult this group to ensure that there is no adverse impact on this group.
Gender
The Housing Strategy and strategic housing services, are designed to be accessible by all interested groups. We will consult people of different gender and ensure that there is no Page. 81 adverse impact on this group.
Older and Younger People
Further research into housing needs of Older People are being considered which will help to identify specialist housing like Extra Care housing. We will consult this group and ensure that there no adverse impact on this older people.
People who are Socio -Economically Disadvantaged The goals and priorities of the strategy will have an overall positive effect on socio- economically disadvantaged households and individuals in the borough. Disadvantaged groups are more likely overall to be in poorer quality housing; improving housing through our three key objectives and priorities will have an overall benefit. This strategy will have positive impact on this group.
Religion or Belief
The Housing Strategy and strategic housing services, are designed to be accessible by all interested groups. We will consult people from different religions and beliefs and ensure that there no adverse impact on this group
Sexual Orientation The Housing Strategy and the Strategic Housing Team, are designed to be accessible by all interested groups. We will seek consult this group to ensure that there is no adverse impact on this group.
Gender Reassignment
The Housing Strategy and Strategic Housing Team, are designed to be accessible by all interested groups. We will consult people of different gender and ensure that there is no adverse impact on this group.
Pregnant Women or Those on Maternity Leave The Housing Strategy and Strategic Housing Team, are designed to be accessible by all interested groups. We will seek consult pregnant women or those on maternity leave to ensure that there is no adverse impact on this group.
Marriage or Civil Partnership The Housing Strategy and Strategic Housing Team, are designed to be accessible by all interested groups. We will seek consult this group to ensure that there is no adverse impact on this group.
Page. 82 5. Conclusions and Recommendations
What are the main conclusions from this a nalysis ?
Conclusions and recommendations to be written following the end of the consultation
What are your recommendations ?
Equality objectives and targets to address the unequal impact/unmet needs/barriers/low participation
Suggested actions to meet those targets
6. Consult your stakeholders on the main findings and conclusions of the equality impact analysis and ask for their comments. State your consultation and inclusion methodology.
The Consultation and Inclusion Methodology Used
7. Produce an impact analysis action plan for 2012/13. Details of this should be included in your service delivery plan.
8. Equality impact analysis sign off
Name Position Date
Page. 83 Equality Impact Assessment Action Plan 2012/13
Action Outcome Target Date For Resource Implications Lead Officer Completion
Page 84
.
Page 85
Agenda Item 12
Subject: Rochdale Township Clean & Green Status: For Publication Priority Group – Chairs Report
Report to : Rochdale Township Date: 12 th September 2012
Report of: Service Director Corporate Services – Author Email: Linda Fisher [email protected] [email protected] Author: Cllr. Cecile Biant / Stephen Granville Tel: 01706 924908 Comments from Section 151 Officer Statutory Officers: Monitoring Officer Key Decision: Yes / No
1. PURPOSE OF REPORT
1.1 The purpose of this report is to inform members of progress of the Clean and Green Priority Group in making recommendations around development of projects, monitoring progress, and agreeing allocation of the £20k Township Funds committed to this priority.
2. RECOMMENDATIONS
2.1 Members are asked to note the information contained within the report.
3. MAIN TEXT INCLUDING ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED/ CONSULTATION CARRIED OUT
3.1 In May 2012 Rochdale Township Committee appointed a Clean and Green Priority Group based on one member per ward, plus the Chair.
3.2 The role of the group is to advise on development of projects, recommend funding where appropriate, and monitor progress against delivery of the Township Plan.
3.3 The first meeting of the Priority Group took place on 2 July.
3.4 The Group considered how the additional Township funding allocated to Environmental Management Street Services may be used to deliver elements of the Clean & Green Priority.
3.5 The meeting recommended the adoption of an additional Priority of Regeneration and Economic Prosperity to be considered for inclusion in the Township Plan. 3.6 The first meeting agreed to support the development of proposals for following projects:
Page 86
Project Cost guidelines Community Maintenance of Land and Green £1,800 Space x 3 sites Development of a New Allotment Site £3,000 Community Payback clean-ups (in addition to £2,700 similar Communities & Engagement schemes) Public Consultation Event No budget set Total £7,500
3.7 Alternatives considered Dealing with Clean & Green issues solely within Action & Resources Committee meetings – the full agendas of these meetings would not allow time for effective consideration of the options.
3.8 Consultation proposed/undertaken Rochdale Township Committee agreed in May 2012 that this group should be convened to ensure delivery on the Rochdale Township Plan
4. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
4.1 £20,000 of Township Funds have been allocated to the Rochdale Township Communities & Engagement Group. There are no other financial implications.
5. LEGAL IMPLICATIONS
5.1 There are no legal implications arising from this report.
6. PERSONNEL IMPLICATIONS
6.1 There are no personnel implications arising from this report.
7. CORPORATE AND TOWNSHIP PRIORITIES
7.1 The report addresses the priorities identified in the Rochdale Township Plan and details the projects and schemes agreed to ensure delivery against those priorities.
7.2 The Vision and Blueprint for Rochdale Council 2014/15 retains Township Committees and will devolve a range of services to Township direction, managed through annual Township Plans which are reviewed on a quarterly basis.
8. RISK ASSESSMENT IMPLICATIONS
8.1 There are no specific risk issues for Members to consider arising from this report.
9. EQUALITIES IMPACTS
9.1 Workforce Equality Impacts Assessment
There are no (significant) workforce equality issues arising from this report.
9.2 Equality/Community Impact Assessments There are no (significant) equality/community issues arising from this report.
Page 87 Agenda Item 13
Subject: Rochdale Township Communities & Status: For Publication Engagement Priority Group – Chairs Report
Report to : Rochdale Township Committee Date: 12 th September 2012
Report of: Service Director Corporate Services – Author Email: Linda Fisher [email protected] [email protected] Author: Cllr. Shefali Begum/Valery White Tel: 01706 924858 Comments from Section 151 Officer Statutory Officers: Monitoring Officer
Key Decision: Yes / No
1. PURPOSE OF REPORT
1.1 The purpose of this report is to inform members of progress of the Communities and Engagement Priority Group in making recommendations around development of projects, monitoring progress, and agreeing allocation of the £20k Township Funds committed to this priority.
2. RECOMMENDATIONS
2.1 Members are asked to note the information contained within the report.
3. MAIN TEXT INCLUDING ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED/ CONSULTATION CARRIED OUT
3.1 In May 2012 Rochdale Township Committee appointed a Communities & Engagement Priority Group based on one member per ward, plus the Chair.
3.2 The role of the group is to advise on development of projects, recommend funding where appropriate, and monitor progress against delivery of the Township Plan.
3.3 The first meeting of the group took place on 9 th July and agreed to support the following projects:
Project Funds Agreed Community Payback, one scheme per ward £2,700 Inter-Generational Activities Projects x 3 £1,500 Develop projects to utilise school facilities and £1,500 reduce ASB Develop ‘Meet the Neighbours’ projects x 3 £4,500 Young People’s Consultation Event £1,000 Schools Cohesion Project – Shawclough, £1,000 Falinge Park, Matthew Moss and St. Cuthbert’s Community Mediation – Work with Officers to £ 500 increase the number of Community Mediators, and to increase the opportunities Page 88 for them to get involved in Township events Total £12,700
3.2 Alternatives considered
No alternatives have been considered.
3.3 Consultation proposed/undertaken
Rochdale Township Committee agreed in May 2012 that this group should be convened to ensure delivery on the Rochdale Township Plan
4. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
4.1 £20,000 of Township Funds have been allocated to the Rochdale Township Communities & Engagement Group. There are no other financial implications.
5. LEGAL IMPLICATIONS
5.1 There are no legal implications arising from this report.
6. PERSONNEL IMPLICATIONS
6.1 There are no personnel implications arising from this report.
7. CORPORATE AND TOWNSHIP PRIORITIES
7.1 The report addresses the priorities identified in the Rochdale Township Plan and details the projects and schemes agreed to ensure delivery against those priorities.
7.2 The Vision and Blueprint for Rochdale Council 2014/15 retains Township Committees and will devolve a range of services to Township direction, managed through annual Township Plans which are reviewed on a quarterly basis.
8. RISK ASSESSMENT IMPLICATIONS
8.1 There are no specific risk issues for Members to consider arising from this report.
9. EQUALITIES IMPACTS
9.1 Workforce Equality Impacts Assessment
There are no (significant) workforce equality issues arising from this report.
9.2 Equality/Community Impact Assessments
There are no (significant) equality/community issues arising from this repor t.
Page 89