[email protected]

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

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

2 May 2008

EXECUTIVE

The EXECUTIVE will meet at THE GUILDHALL, HIGH STREET, KINGSTON UPON THAMES on TUESDAY 13 MAY 2008 at 7:30 pm

Membership of the Executive will be determined at Annual Council on 7 May 2008

EMERGENCY EVACUATION ARRANGEMENTS

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

QUESTION TIME

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

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

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

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

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

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

APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

EXECUTIVE MEMBERS’ INFORMATION ROUND-UP

CHIEF EXECUTIVE’S and DIRECTORS’ UPDATES

MINUTES

Subject to amending the word ‘qualitative’ to read ‘quantitative’ in the preamble and resolution 2, of minute no. 156, Next Steps for the Community Action Partnership in Kingston, to approve as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on 8 April 2008.

1. DETERMINATION OF NUMBER AND SIZE OF EXECUTIVE Appendix A PORTFOLIOS

Under Part 3 of the Authority’s Constitution, it is for the Executive to determine the number and size of portfolios that each member will hold. The schedule of proposed portfolios will be circulated and the Leader of the Council RECOMMENDS that they be approved.

(Note: The reports on this agenda have been attributed to the 2007/08 portfolio designations)

2. REPORT OF THE OVERVIEW COMMISSION - SHELTERED Appendix B HOUSING REVIEW

3. LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (LIP) FUNDING APPLICATION Appendix C 2009 - 2010

4. APPROVING THE KINGSTON LOCAL AREA AGREEMENT Appendix D

5. WASTE MANAGEMENT Appendix E

6. ROSE OF KINGSTON THEATRE Appendix F

7. FILMING INCOME Appendix G

8. OPTIONS FOR OUTDOOR WIRELESS Appendix H

9. FISHPONDS OPEN SPACE, EWELL ROAD, SURBITON - GRANT Appendix I OF EASEMENT

10. MEMBERSHIP OF THE 2M GROUP Appendix J

11. REVIEW OF PENSION FUND INVESTMENT STRATEGY Appendix K

12. SOUTH LONDON WASTE PARTNERSHIP JOINT COMMITTEE

The Executive on 4 September 2007 agreed to the establishment of the South London Waste Partnership Joint Committee in partnership with the London Boroughs of Croydon, Merton and Sutton. The Joint Committee’s functions are to make arrangements for the disposal of waste, provide places for the deposit and disposal of waste and to advise participating Councils on the delivery and separation of waste.

Each authority has two places on the Joint Committee and may appoint one substitute for each of those Members. The Executive agreed that these appointees would all be Executive Members and appointed Councillors Derek Osbourne and Liz Green as the Joint Committee members and Councillors Ian Reid and Tricia Bamford respectively as substitutes.

The Executive is REQUESTED to confirm the appointment to these places for the 2008/09 Municipal Year.

13. URGENT ITEMS AUTHORISED BY THE CHAIR

14. EXCLUSION OF PRESS AND PUBLIC

The information in the exempt section of the agenda contains Annex 1 of the reports at Appendix F and Appendix K in the public section of the agenda. The information may be considered in private if the Executive agrees that, under Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public are excluded from the meeting on the grounds that it is likely that exempt information, as defined in paragraph 3 of Part I of Schedule 12A to the Act, would be disclosed. This paragraph cover details the financial and business details of individuals, businesses or the authority.

Rose of Kingston Theatre – Annex 1 to Appendix F

Review of Pension Fund Investment Strategy – Annex 1 to Appendix K

APPENDIX B Executive, 13 May 2008

REPORT OF THE OVERVIEW COMMISSION – SHELTERED HOUSING REVIEW

Report by the Sheltered Housing Review Working Group of the Overview Commission Executive Member for Housing and Adult Services

Purpose

To determine the actions to be taken on the proposals of the Sheltered Housing Review Working Group established by the Overview Commission.

The Lead Member of the Sheltered Housing Working Group, Councillor Frances Moseley, will give a presentation to the Executive.

The Executive is requested to:

1. Thank the Overview Commission Sheltered Housing Working Group for its hard work and dedication in producing a comprehensive review of Sheltered Housing.

2. Agree that the proposals contained in the report will be considered and taken into account in developing detailed proposals for the future of the Sheltered Housing.

Reason for action proposed

To receive the report of the Overview Commission on the Review of Sheltered Housing.

BACKGROUND

1. The Overview Commission set up the working group to look at Sheltered Housing in the context of the overall level of provision, the need for changes to respond to changing demand and options for funding improvements.

2. The members of the group were: Councillors Mick Amson, Rob Lee, Richard Hudson, David Edwards and Sheila Griffin, with Frances Moseley as Lead Member.

RECOMMENDATIONS APPROVED BY THE OVERVIEW COMMISSION

3. The Overview Commission considered the Working Group’s final report on the 31 March 2008. This report is attached at Annex 1. The Overview Commission resolved to recommend to the Executive:

A. That it consider the following conclusions of the Sheltered Housing Review in any future plans for sheltered housing in the Borough:

i. Sheltered housing should represent a lower proportion of the total housing stock than at present ii. The quality of all sheltered housing schemes should be raised to provide independent units and lift access to upper floors, wherever possible iii. One scheme should be sold and the capital receipts be allocated to Housing B2

iv. Two schemes should be upgraded and converted to general needs housing v. The options for the redevelopment of Water Square should be examined with a view to providing high quality sheltered housing and additional general housing and community facilities.

B. That all proceeds from the sale of Yew Tree House (which has now been publicly identified as the unit to be sold) be spent on the provision of Sheltered Housing specifically.

UPDATE SINCE OVERVIEW COMMISSION MEETING ON 31 MARCH 2008

4. The position of Yew Tree House was considered by the Executive on 8 April 2008 within a wider report on the disposal of Housing Revenue Account (HRA) properties. One of the objectives of this disposals report was to allow for the recycling of value in some assets to fund improvements elsewhere in the housing stock, for example in sheltered housing. The Executive agreed in principle to the disposal of Yew Tree House, with the final decision on the terms for disposal being brought back to the Executive following a market-testing exercise. Officers were authorised to begin discussions with residents about their re-housing options. The report records that, in line with the Overview Panel recommendation, the strong preference would be to reinvest the proceeds from the disposal of Yew Tree House into improvements in sheltered housing elsewhere, though this was subject to the position on the overall funding of the HRA capital programme.

Background Papers: Held by author of this report Stella Okoloba, tel. 8547 4623, email [email protected] As listed on Annex 1 – Report to the Overview Commission on 31 March 2008.

APPENDIX A

OVERVIEW COMMISSION

31 MARCH 2008

FINAL REPORT FROM SHELTERED HOUSING WORKING GROUP

SUMMARY

The Executive asked the Overview Commission to examine the level and type of provision of sheltered housing in the Borough, in order to deal with changes in demand and the need to remodel existing schemes to provide self contained high quality accommodation. A Working Group was formed and terms of reference agreed.

The Working Group met to consider the issues facing sheltered housing in the context of the Borough’s entire housing stock and made an interim report to the Commission on 15 January 2007. The potential options to tailor the sheltered housing stock to meet demand, upgrade units and release surplus stock for other use, including general housing, were outlined. A key constraint, however, being the lack of capital funding available to upgrade schemes.

The Working Group has continued with an in-depth look at the options, however, the general housing position has changed and the Working Group has had to take into account the capital shortfall in 2008/09 and the fact that resources to improve the condition of the whole of the Council’s housing will not be available for the foreseeable future. The Group’s recommendations are therefore designed to be progressed as part of the developing strategy on the overall housing stock. An appropriate communication plan will be developed to ensure that residents are consulted on any proposals.

The Working Group is asking the Executive to consider a set of conclusions when making future plans for sheltered housing in the Borough.

ACTION REQUIRED

The Commission is asked to consider the following conclusions of the Working Group and recommend the Executive to consider these in any future plans for sheltered housing in the Borough: i. Sheltered housing should represent a lower proportion of the total housing stock than at present ii. The quality of all sheltered housing schemes should be raised to provide independent units and lift access to upper floors, wherever possible iii. One scheme should be sold and the receipts go to Housing iv. Two schemes should be upgraded and converted to general needs housing v. The options for the redevelopment of Water Square should be examined with a view to providing high quality sheltered housing and additional general housing and community facilities.

BACKGROUND

1. On 29 August 2006, the Executive asked the Overview Commission to examine the level and type of provision of sheltered housing in the Borough, in order to deal with changes in demand and the need to remodel existing schemes to provide self- contained high quality accommodation.

2. In response to this request a Working Group was formed. The following Members were appointed to the Working Group: Councillors Frances Moseley (Lead Member), Mick Amson, David Edwards, Richard Hudson and Rob Lee. Councillor Richard Hudson left the Group to be replaced by Councillor Sheila Griffin. The Working Group’s initial terms of reference were agreed by the Overview Commission at its meeting of the 19 September 2006.

3. The Working Group met to consider the problems of sheltered housing in the context of the Borough’s entire housing stock and made an interim report to the Overview Commission on the 15 January 2007. This interim report put forward a number of ways in which the Working Group could achieve its aspirations for housing the elderly as part of RBK’s vision of providing an excellent quality of life for all the Borough’s residents.

SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS

4. The Working Group has looked at the problems of sheltered housing in the context of the whole housing stock. Since the report the Group presented in January 2007, which resulted in the Group not considering a stock transfer of all of the sheltered housing stock, the general housing position has changed: there is a capital shortfall in 2008/09 and the resources to improve the condition of the whole of the Council’s housing will not be available for the foreseeable future. The Council is therefore currently examining options as to how the overall investment needs of its housing stock can be met and stock transfer is one of the options being considered. The Working Group has assessed all the schemes and agreed specific recommendations to address the most urgent problems. These will now be progressed by the Housing Department as part of their developing strategy. An appropriate communication plan will be developed to ensure that residents are consulted on any proposals.

CONCLUSIONS FOR CONSIDERATION BY THE EXECUTIVE

5. Reduction in Sheltered Housing Sheltered housing should represent a lower proportion of the total housing stock than at present.

The Group’s earlier reports have covered the analysis work leading to the conclusion that our housing stock currently does not reflect the housing demand: sheltered housing is too high a proportion of our stock and there are insufficient family properties, with too many tenants in overcrowded or temporary accommodation. B5

6. Upgrading Sheltered Schemes The quality of all sheltered housing schemes should be raised to provide independent units and lift access to upper floors, wherever possible.

The Group agreed that tenants in sheltered housing should never have to share lavatories and over time all units should be independent, with their own bathrooms. Schemes should be purpose-built, rather than dispersed in general housing blocks, with lift access to upper floors and better disabled access.

7. Disposal One scheme should be sold and the receipts go to Housing.

The scheme identified for disposal fails to meet our quality criteria and, in addition, has structural problems. There are already a number of voids which are not being filled. The site is not large enough for a major redevelopment and does not fit well in the housing portfolio, so is an ideal candidate for generating capital. The capital generated would not be sufficient to fund the conversions identified, so should be allocated to Housing for other essential capital work. The scheme could either be disposed of on the open market or via an RSL, depending on the amount of capital that could be generated from such a disposal. There are some other general housing properties which could be considered for disposal; if sufficient capital were raised from other disposals, the group would like to see the money from the sheltered scheme earmarked for improvements to other sheltered schemes.

8. Conversion to General Housing Two schemes should be upgraded and converted to general needs housing.

To fund conversion of two sheltered schemes, we would need to work with a registered social landlord. Since stock transfer is now an option, it is recommended that this option is not pursued until the outcome of that process is known as we would see this work being undertaken by the new organisation as part of a general upgrade of the housing stock.

9. Redevelopment of Water Square The options for the redevelopment of Water Square should be examined with a view to providing high quality sheltered housing and additional general housing and community facilities.

Water Square is the fourth scheme in need of urgent action to bring it up to acceptable standards. The site is large and complex, including the sheltered scheme, bungalows and garages. Redevelopment could deliver a new purpose-built sheltered scheme into which current tenants could move, together with some general housing and amenity and community facilities. This will take time but we recommend that it is seriously investigated in future plans.

Acknowledgements

10. The Working Group wish to thank all the Housing Officers who contributed to the group’s work. The Recommendations are supported by both Members and Officers in the Working Group.

Author of Report Councillor Frances Moseley.

Background Papers held by Stella Okoloba, Democratic Support, tel 020 8547 4623, email:[email protected]

• Agenda & Minutes of Executive: 29 August 2006 • Agenda & Minutes of Overview Commission: 19 September 2006 • Agenda & Minutes of Overview Commission: 15 January 2008 • Agendas & Minutes of the Sheltered Housing Working Group APPENDIX C Executive, 13 May 2008

LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (LIP) FUNDING APPLICATION 2009 – 2010 Report by the Service Director (Planning and Transportation) Executive Member for Transport, Planning and Regeneration

Purpose

The purpose of this report is to seek the Executive‘s approval of the 2009 – 2010 Local Implementation Plan (LIP) Funding Application for the Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames, which incorporates the bids for the Neighbourhoods and Borough-wide.

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

The Executive is requested to:

1. approve the bids for the Neighbourhoods and Borough-wide for 2009 – 2010 as shown in Annex 2 (subject to recommended changes set out in Annex 1); and

2. delegate authority to the Service Director (Planning and Transportation) to make appropriate changes to the final LIP Funding Application document to enhance and realise its full potential to the benefit of the Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames.

Reason for action proposed To enable the LIP Funding Application document to be delivered to Transport for London (TfL) by 13 June 2008.

BACKGROUND

1. The Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames is required to deliver its Local Implementation Plans (LIP) Funding Application for the year 2009- 2010 to Transport for London (TfL) by 13 June 2008. The LIP Funding Application enables TfL to consider the Borough’s funding requirements in its Business Planning process. The submission will be a bid document with proposals and financial details set within the framework of the current LIP Annual Progress Report Guidance, the Mayor’s Transport Strategy (MTS), the Borough’s own approved LIP and the policies therein as shown in Annex 3. In September 2008, the Borough will submit another document that will cover such aspects as statutory targets review, programme delivery review and outcome monitoring of previously funded schemes.

FUNDING APPLICATION GUIDANCE

2. The approved LIP of the Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames has provided the policy and delivery justification for the application for funding and forms the basis on which TfL allocates funding of proposals. The funding proposals are primarily drawn from the proposals set out within the LIP which are identified as due for implementation in 2009 – 2010. Application for funding of proposals that do not currently appear in the approved LIP will in the first instance be discussed with TfL. It is anticipated that to be successful such applications will only fund feasibility studies. C2

3. The focus for this funding application is on developing comprehensive and integrated transportation proposals in the Borough, as outlined in the approved LIP. This will support the implementation of the Mayor’s Transport Strategy (MTS) and which TfL through its Business Planning process has prioritised for funding. This approach involves the provision of a safe and better street environment in the Town Centres as well as improving priority for pedestrians, cyclists and public transport over general traffic on the Borough’s roads. The bids will also enable this Authority to meet TfL’s most immediate priorities: improving the bus network; bringing assets such as bridges and the road network into a state of repair; introducing travel demand management measures; and reducing the number of people killed and injured on London’s roads.

4. An upper limit of £7m has been set by TfL for each Borough’s overall funding applications. This maximum excludes any proposal (a) valued at £1m or more and (b) Area Based Schemes (i.e. Town Centres, Streets-for-People and Station Access proposals), Bridge Strengthening and Assessment, and Local Safety Schemes, but includes London Bus Priority measures and Cycling (LCN+) proposals. Proposals which require traffic signals need to be highlighted in the bids so that they can be included in a provisional TfL signals programme. In programming and implementing schemes the Borough is urged to consider traffic disruption.

5. The emphasis in the LIP Funding Application should be the development of proposals, which achieve high quality in terms of design, materials and construction. TfL expect and require that proposals for which funds are allocated are implemented fully before the end of the financial year. It is therefore important that proposals are listed in priority order to inform TfL Programme managers of those proposals which Boroughs rank as being of highest importance for implementation in their LIPs. It is strongly recommended that the bid from this Authority is realistic in terms of what we are able to deliver on the ground or to begin to implement in the year(s) for which funding is required as stated in the approved LIP. This Authority is also expected to indicate all related sources of funding, including its own expenditure allocations contributing to the working programmes.

6. Any proposals which involve the removal or substantial modification of transport infrastructure or traffic measures previously installed using TfL funds need to be justified with an explanation in the current submission for funding. If modification or removal is not clear at the bidding stage and this is not subsequently approved by TfL, yet is carried out, TfL may withdraw scheme allocations, reject claims for scheme costs or reclaim funding in subsequent years.

7. The experience in the Borough shows that project costs, programmes and scope can often be heavily dependent upon third party approvals. Early attention to these has been shown to give better chances of successfully delivering a proposal on time and within budget. Therefore, officers will aim to carry out early consultation of third parties at the outset of the inception of the proposal.

TRANSPORT PROGRAMMES

8. The funding categories for 2009 – 2010 are as follows:

Routes and Corridors v Principal Roads Renewal. v Bus Stop Accessibility. v Local Bus Priority Measures. v Parallel Initiatives .

Places and Spaces v Bridges Strengthening. v Road Safety (including local safety schemes, 20 mph zones & education, training and publicity). v Area Based Schemes (Town Centres, Streets-for-People and Station Access).

Sustainability v Walking. v Cycling – LCN+ and Non-LCN+. v Freight. v Regeneration Area Schemes. v Environment. v Controlled Parking Zones. v Accessibility. v Travel Demand Management (including School Travel Plans, Work Place Travel Plans and Travel Awareness)

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

9. The Greater London Authority (GLA) Act 1999 does not recognise the partnerships such as SWELTRAC as transport authorities and so they cannot produce a LIP in the same way as individual London Authorities. Therefore, instead of SWELTRAC submitting an independent application for funding, London Borough of Richmond upon Thames, which is the lead Borough, will need to make the submission on behalf of SWELTRAC on the Baseline Submission Form.

10. The LIP Funding Application document to be submitted by June consists of: q Description of proposals in order of priority including all relevant information on the Baseline Submission Forms. q Supporting materials (e.g. maps, photographs, drawings etc.) q Updated School Travel Plan Strategy. q Business Case Summary Forms (for proposals equal to or greater than £2m). q Financial Summary Forms .

NEIGBOURHOOD COMMITTEE INPUT

11. In February 2008 review meetings were held with relevant Neighbourhood Committee members, prior to Neighbourhood Committee meetings in order to discuss the proposals for submission in more depth. At these meetings, scheme details were able to be discussed and explained by officers. This ‘additional’ stage was introduced following concerns expressed during last year’s 2008/9 bidding process, when members considered insufficient information had been made available. This has been supplemented by more detailed descriptions of proposals within the bid papers considered by the Committees and clearer reporting of officers comments on the changes proposed by the Neighbourhood Committees.

12. The four Neighbourhoods considered proposed bids for their areas in March 2008. These bids were based upon, and underpinned by, the approved LIP and in particular: RBK transport objectives, the Mayors objectives and cross-cutting goals, and the overall Borough transport policy statement. The bids were prepared with reference to TfL funding criteria.

13. A schedule of the bids considered and any changes proposed by the Neighbourhood Committees are set out in Annex 1 to this report, with relevant estimates and comments. In each case an officer recommendation is made whether to include the bid, or not. In considering these it is important to note the £7m limit on the Council’s 2009 - 2010 bids, and to be aware that TfL will not fund proposals that are not clearly linked to the Borough’s approved LIP and LIP Form 1’s (LIP Proposal Delivery Forms). A summary of the Neighbourhood Committees resolutions are set out in paragraphs 14 – 15 below. Further details can be found at Annexes 1A, 1B, 1C and 1D to this report.

14. Maldens and Coombe Neighbourhood Committee approved the bids with a number of amendments, particularly on cycling and bus schemes that included toucan crossings and side road entry treatments. The Committee chose not to support the cycling bid to introduce improvement for cyclists and pedestrians at Elm Road Railway Bridge and level crossing. In a number of cases officers further recommendation is to approve as originally listed. In all such cases it is either on strategic policy grounds, or where the schemes were approved by the Executive last year . Further details can be found at Annex 1A.

15. Surbiton, South of the Borough and Kingston Town Neighbourhood Committees resolved that all the bids be approved.

16. A considerable amount of discussion took place at the Neighbourhood Committees and a number of additional and/or alternate schemes were put forward. For the sake of consistency and clarity, and in accordance with previous practice, only those that have been minuted have been included in the schedule.

17. There are a number of bid categories that cannot be influenced by Neighbourhood considerations. The bids for principal road renewal and bridge strengthening and assessment have to be made on technical assessments as specified by TfL. In the case of principal road renewal, the prioritised scheme list has to be based on BVPI 96 criteria, which is obtained from the London-wide Ukpms condition survey and analysis (Annual Road 2000 DVI Surveys). In the case of the 2009 – 2010 proposals, it will be based on 2008 surveys. In addition to the above, bids will also be made for non- principal road maintenance, which will be based on BVPI 97a & b criteria from the Borough’s Ukpms surveys and street lighting. In the case of bridge strengthening, the list is based on technical assessment specified by TfL and London-wide priority.

NEW WALKING SCHEMES

18. Walking audits are continuously carried out to identify barriers to walking in the Borough and soon after the Neighbourhood Committee meetings in March 2008, two proposals were identified for inclusion in the 2009 – 2010 bids. The proposals are: (a) improving walking facilities in St James Road, Kingston and (b) improving the pedestrian link between Norbiton Station and Kingston Hospital. The Chairs of Kingston Town and Maldens & Coombe Neighbourhood Committees have been C5

consulted and they have agreed for the proposals to be included in the Borough’s bid to TfL.

BID SUMMARY

19. This Authority has developed comprehensive schemes/proposals with an estimated cost of £8.6million, inclusive of £1.6million for Bridge Strengthening and Assessment proposals and Local Safety Schemes. The summary of the bid per transport heading is set out in Table 1 below.

TABLE 1

2009 – 2010 LIP FUNDING APPLICATION SUMMARY (£k)

TRANSPORT HEADING BID

Principal Road Maintenance 715.00

Bridge Assessment & Strengthening 1058.00

Local Safety Schemes 560.00

20mph Zones 260.00

Education, Training & Publicity 73.00

Walking 1305.00

Cycling 3275.00

Bus Stop Accessibility 30.00

Local Bus Priority 485.00

School Travel Plans 483.00

Work Travel Plans 106.50

Travel Awareness 66.00

Freight 105.00

Other 60.00

Total 8581.50

Total (excluding Bridges and Local Safety Schemes) 6963.50

TIMESCALE

20. The Council is required to deliver its LIP Funding Application for the year 2009 - 2010 to Transport for London (TfL) by 13 th June 2008 with a further submission on targets, delivery review and outcome monitoring in September 2008. C6

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS

21. The broad transport headings are aimed at improving safety of facilities for walking, cycling and public transport as indicated in the Mayor’s Transport Strategy and they will have beneficial impact on the environment.

NETWORK IMPLICATIONS

22. Although this report has no direct implications on the RBK highway network, the focus of our proposed schemes and the success of the funding bid to TfL will be fundamental in the Borough’s ability to meet its Traffic Management Duties. Improvement schemes will need to demonstrate that they can contribute to the transport objectives of the Borough and the Mayor for London, that they take a balanced/equitable approach to all traffic types and that we can demonstrate adequate and sustained benefit.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

23. The Executive’s decision will have no implications on the revenue or capital resources of the Authority. Funding of any individual schemes will be paid in the form of a grant and will only become available to the Authority if the work is carried out within the financial year. The request for funding will be inclusive of any revenue expenditure

Background papers: held by Fred Amoasi (author of the report) – 020 8547 5962 E-mail: [email protected]

1. Mayor’s Transport Strategy – July 2001. 2. Draft Transport for London Business Plan – October 2001. 3. LIP Annual Progress Report Guidance 2009/10– 2010/11 – February 2008. 4. Approved LIP - March 2006.

ANNEX 1A

MALDENS & COOMBE NEIGHBOURHOOD BIDS FOR 2009 – 2010 Transport Proposals submitted to Changes proposed by Officer Comment Estimated Programme Committee Committee Cost (£k) Principal Road (1) A308 Kingston Vale No Comment Recommend: Approve 330 Renewal (Cedar Close to A3) Carriageway resurfacing Bridge (2) LoBEG Bridge Condition No Comment Recommend: Approve 600 Strengthening Investigation (BCI) Project (BCI is London-wide project. Only a proportion to be spent in the Borough) Local Safety (3) Coombe Lane West No Comment Recommend: Approve 50 Schemes Corridor Officers have been meeting with concerned residents on a regular basis over recent years. The concerns relate to speeding and safety issues. There have been numerous damage only collisions at various locations along the route as well as 26 recorded collisions over a 3 year period. The bid is to seek funding to continue these investigations and consult with residents and Ward Members and where appropriate implement any approved measures. (4) Fountain Roundabout No Comment Recommend: Approve 50 An analysis of recent years’ collisions has identified this area as one of concern to officers. Funding was approved in 2008/2009 to carry out a detailed study of the collisions and to analyse collisions, especially involving pedestrians and cyclists with a view to improving the geometry of the existing layout. Officers will be working with Ward Members when reviewing this information to identify any measures that may reduce the level of collisions. The bid is to seek funding to develop minor elements of the outcome of the study in 2009 – 2010 and submit further bid in 2010 – 2011 to implement the remaining aspects of the study. C8

MALDENS & COOMBE NEIGHBOURHOOD BIDS FOR 2009 – 2010 Transport Proposals submitted to Changes proposed by Officer Comment Estimated Programme Committee Committee Cost (£k) (5) Kingston Road – No Comment Recommend: Approve 10 Burlington Road An analysis of recent years’ collisions has identified this route as one of concern to officers. Funding was approved in 2008/2009 to carry out a detailed study of the collisions and to analyse them, specifically those involving pedestrians, motorcycles, cycles and right turners, whilst also looking at identifying clusters with specific problems. Officers will be working with Ward Members as part of the study to look at developing comprehensive traffic measures. The bid is to seek funding to implement minor elements that arise from the study to improve safety for pedestrians and cyclists. (6) Malden Road Corridor No Comment Recommend: Approve 100 (between Fountain Roundabout and boundary with London Borough of Sutton) An analysis of recent years’ collisions has identified this corridor as one of concern to officers. Funding was approved in 2008/2009 to carry out a detailed study to reduce collisions along the A2043 Malden Road corridor from Fountain roundabout to Worcester Park Station. Officers will be working with Ward Members as part of the study to develop appropriate traffic management measures at those locations highlighted by the study. The bid is to seek funding to implement elements of the outcome of the study to improve safety of pedestrians and cyclists. C9

MALDENS & COOMBE NEIGHBOURHOOD BIDS FOR 2009 – 2010 Transport Proposals submitted to Changes proposed by Officer Comment Estimated Programme Committee Committee Cost (£k) (7) Borough-wide powered- No Comment Recommend: Approve 50 2-wheeler safety improvements

Accidents involving powered- 2-wheelers (PTW) have increased in recent years, against the trend of reducing accidents in RBK. They are scattered at different locations with many and possibly diverse reasons for their occurrence. There is an in- depth study being undertaken at the moment using the 2008/09 funding allocation, which includes examination of every accident involving PTWs for the last three years and where possible referral to accident books and interviews with riders. The current bid will enable the outcome of the study to be considered by the Neighbourhoods and developed for future implementation. (8) Future Scheme No Comment Recommend: Approve 90 Development and Review (Borough-wide) This bid allows officers to carry out surveys and engage with residents and Councillors in areas where they have identified safety concerns. This will assist in planning and developing schemes well in advance for future LIP submissions. C10

MALDENS & COOMBE NEIGHBOURHOOD BIDS FOR 2009 – 2010 Transport Proposals submitted to Changes proposed by Officer Comment Estimated Programme Committee Committee Cost (£k)

20 mph Zones (9) Dickerage Road (The No Comment Recommend: Approve 25 Triangle to Mount Pleasant Road)

Safety and Speeding issues have been identified in a petition submitted by local residents. This scheme would look to introduce a 20mph speed limit on Dickerage Road from the roundabout at The Triangle up the railway bridge on Dickerage Road. It may require changes to existing traffic calming features to improve conditions outside the adventure playground area and it will also seek to improve pedestrian routes at the roundabout. The project will join up two existing 20mph schemes in Clarence Avenue and Mount Pleasant Road.

(10) Robin Hood Estate No Comment Recommend: Approve 80

Local residents have raised concerns over traffic speeds on Robin Hood Lane and Robin hood Way (TfL service road). The proposal would look at the introduction of a 20 mph speed limit throughout the area using signs and road markings. These would reinforce those areas which already have physical traffic calming measures. Further consultation on the introduction of further measures in other roads would be required. (11) Future Scheme No Comment Recommend: Approve 90 Development and Review (Borough-wide) This bid allows officers to carry out surveys and engage with residents and Councillors in areas where they have identified safety concerns. This will assist in planning and developing schemes well in advance for future LIP submissions. C11

MALDENS & COOMBE NEIGHBOURHOOD BIDS FOR 2009 – 2010 Transport Proposals submitted to Changes proposed by Officer Comment Estimated Programme Committee Committee Cost (£k) Education, (12) Secondary School Road No Comment Recommend: Approve 10 Training & Safety Student Council Publicity (Borough- To empower student reps to wide) play a major part in the way road safety messages are targeted. Appoint at least 2 new reps from each secondary school to support peer group road safety education and promotion in schools. Build on the foundations of the student council through a borough wide forum for road safety initiatives appealing to secondary school pupils (13) Young Drivers Safety No Comment Recommend: Approve 10

Increase road safety awareness and knowledge of this high risk group to reduce road safety casualties using promotional events and materials with various road safety messages. (14) Theatre in education No Comment Recommend: Approve 15

To raise awareness of all road safety issues as appropriate for the age of the group through touring of selected dramas (15) Reaching hard to reach Members supported Agree to the additional 2 increased groups proposal and felt that item for inclusion in the to 5 description should bid To raise awareness of all road include an awareness Recommend: Approve safety issues, in particular, campaign for foreign and include in the bid pedestrian skills, adult and nationals, for which an children's seat belts, PTW’s additional £2 – 3k to and drink-driving through be bid. engaging with existing

community groups and providers. Provide targeted road safety education and promotion via a range of events and materials. (16) Powered 2 wheelers No Comment Recommend: Approve 8 To increase awareness for specific issues to P2W users and other motorists on a local level, and publicise training opportunities that are available in the borough. C12

MALDENS & COOMBE NEIGHBOURHOOD BIDS FOR 2009 – 2010 Transport Proposals submitted to Changes proposed by Officer Comment Estimated Programme Committee Committee Cost (£k) (17) Over 60’s road safety No Comment Recommend: Approve 2

To increase driver knowledge and confidence. Provide regular driving advice courses and offer information at public events on changes in legislation and highway code (18) Occupational road risk No Comment Recommend: Approve 12

Provide employers with advice and guidance on ORR to encourage development of strategies and policies through employer seminars, individual meetings and regular ORR forums. (19) Drink / drug driving No Comment Recommend: Approve 5

To increase driver awareness of the issues surrounding drink/drug driving with an aim of decreasing the amount of drink/drug drivers. Engage with the local community, disseminate information and plan a strategy for anti drink/drug driving in the borough with Pubwatch.

(20) Public transport No Comment Recommend: Approve 2 passenger safety campaign

A high impact visual campaign to raise awareness of passenger safety on buses and pedestrians.

(21) Town centre and road No Comment Recommend: Approve 4 side pedestrian poster campaign .

A campaign to influence pedestrian behaviour across the Borough in accord with recent trends in RBK casualty data. C13

MALDENS & COOMBE NEIGHBOURHOOD BIDS FOR 2009 – 2010 Transport Proposals submitted to Changes proposed by Officer Comment Estimated Programme Committee Committee Cost (£k) Walking (22) Elm Path (The Cut) No Comment Recommend: Approve 30 Reports and complaints have been received over a number of years from ward members and residents, particularly parents with buggies and walking children to school about the difficulties faced at the steps at the start of Elm Path. It is a heavily used footpath and links to local schools but also through to New Malden railway station. Replacing the existing steps to provide a ramped access to the footpath at Elm Path/Kingston Road would improve access for people in wheelchairs and also access for buggies and prams.

(23) Hogsmill Walk Strategy Members supported Agree to the amendments 70 proposal and suggested to scheme description. increased to 90 Scheme 1 - Development of the bid should be Recommend: Approve accessible all-weather increased to £90k and and include in the bid pathways along Elmbridge the proposal should be Meadows, Long Meadows and amended to read as behind St. John’s Primary follows: Scheme 1 - School. Development of Scheme 2 - Reprinting of the accessible all-weather Hogsmill Valley Walk Leaflet pathways along Scheme 3 - Japanese Elmbridge Meadows, Knotweed Eradication Long Meadows and Programme behind St. John’s Primary School. Scheme 4 - Path Development Scheme 2 – Redrafting Works – Swan Public House to and reprinting of the Villiers Road. Hogsmill Valley Walk Leaflet in conjunction with the revising of the Hogsmill Valley Walk Strategy. Scheme 3 - Japanese Knotweed Eradication Programme Scheme 4 - Path Development Works – Swan Public House to Villiers Road including signage. Scheme 5 – improve signage along the whole of the route. (It should be indicated that the Hogsmill Walk, London Loop and Thames Down Link are all in the same area, so clear signage is particularly important). C14

MALDENS & COOMBE NEIGHBOURHOOD BIDS FOR 2009 – 2010 Transport Proposals submitted to Changes proposed by Officer Comment Estimated Programme Committee Committee Cost (£k) (24) Future Scheme No Comment Recommend: Approve 90 Development and Review (Borough-wide) This bid allows officers to carry out surveys and engage with residents and Councillors in areas where they have identified safety concerns. This will assist in planning and developing schemes well in advance for future LIP submissions. (25) Walking Audits & DDA No Comment Recommend: Approve 30 Accessibility Improvements (Borough-wide)

A structured approach in the continuing audits of walking conditions to and from schools, community facilities, public buildings such as libraries and leisure facilities, transport interchanges and local shopping areas. Joint ABS with LB Sutton & partnership with TfL Network Management (A3) Cycling LCN+ In relation to Cycling LCN+ proposals 26, 27 and 30 below, any reference to side road entry treatment to be removed. In relation to Cycling LCN+ proposals 28 and 29 below, any reference to toucan crossing to be removed. Link 121 - (A308 London Road/Kingston Hill/Kingston Vale) between its junction with Queen Elizabeth Road and A3 Robin Hood Way/Kingston bypass C15

MALDENS & COOMBE NEIGHBOURHOOD BIDS FOR 2009 – 2010 Transport Proposals submitted to Changes proposed by Officer Comment Estimated Programme Committee Committee Cost (£k) (26) Joint bid (Maldens & Members supported the All traffic management 300 Coombe & Kingston) proposal if it excluded options have been side road entry considered in the scheme Link 121 – A308 London Road treatment. Proposal being developed in / Kingston Hill between should be amended to 2008/09. Most of the Manorgate 5 arm roundabout read: potential conflicts and Warren Road Improvements to between motor vehicles

existing advisory cycle and cyclist and Improvements to existing lanes, and feasibility and pedestrians occur at advisory cycle lanes, and introduction of cycle junctions. Junction entry feasibility and introduction of tracks . treatment is the most cycle tracks and side-road appropriate way of entry treatments. reducing the speed of turning traffic and providing safer crossing point for these vulnerable road users. The proposal is part of LCN+ it accords with LIP Policy 20 and the MTS. Recommend: Approve as originally listed for inclusion in the bid. (27) Joint bid (Maldens & Members supported All traffic management 200 Coombe & Kingston) proposal if it excluded options have been side road entry considered in the scheme Link 121 – A308 Kingston Hill treatment. Proposal being developed in (Manorgate Road to Warren should be amended to 2008/09. Most of the Road) read: potential conflicts

Improvements to between motor vehicles Improvements to existing cycle existing cycle lanes, and cyclist and lanes, cycle track feasibility cycle track feasibility. pedestrians occur at and side road entry treatment. junctions. Junction entry

treatment is the most appropriate way of reducing the speed of turning traffic and providing safer crossing point for these vulnerable road users. The proposal is part of LCN+, it accords with LIP Policy 20 and the MTS. Recommend: Approve as originally listed for inclusion in the bid. C16

MALDENS & COOMBE NEIGHBOURHOOD BIDS FOR 2009 – 2010 Transport Proposals submitted to Changes proposed by Officer Comment Estimated Programme Committee Committee Cost (£k) (28) Link 121 – A308 Members supported All options for the type of 75 Kingston Hill Toucan by proposal if it excluded crossing to be provided entrance to Kingston toucan crossing. have been considered in University –Kingston Hill Proposal should be the study being Campus amended to read: undertaken in 2008/09. A Implement crossing to toucan crossing is likely to Implement toucan crossing to facilitate cycling, walking provide the best access facilitate cycling, walking and and bus trips to and solution and reduce any bus trips to and from the from the University potential highway safety University campus. campus. If necessary, hazard for pedestrians submit this bid under and cyclists attending the (Although not supported by the ‘Walking’ heading of the University campus. Other Neighbourhood the Executive bid. types of crossing will resolved that this should be require cyclists to

included in the 2008/09 Bid) dismount and such a scheme will not be funded by TfL LCN+. The LCN+ link along A308 is the strategic cycle route running between Kingston Town Centre and destinations towards Central London. As well as providing cycle facilities along the route, it important to provide safe and convenient route for cyclists to join/leave the route. The proposal, which complements Bus scheme 43 below, is in accordance with LIP policy 20 and the MTS. Executive Committee approved its inclusion in the 2008/09 bid and an initial allocation of £15k has been given. Recommend: Approve as originally listed for inclusion in the bid. C17

MALDENS & COOMBE NEIGHBOURHOOD BIDS FOR 2009 – 2010 Transport Proposals submitted to Changes proposed by Officer Comment Estimated Programme Committee Committee Cost (£k) (29) Link 121 – A308 Members supported All options for the type of 75 Kingston Hill Toucan proposal if it excluded crossing to be provided junction with Ladderstile toucan crossing. have been considered in Ride/Warren Road Proposal should be the study being amended to read: undertaken in 2008/09. A Implement toucan crossing to Implement crossing to toucan crossing is likely to facilitate cycling, walking and facilitate cycling, walking provide the best access bus trips to and from and bus trips to and solution and reduce any Richmond Park. from Richmond Park. If potential highway safety necessary, submit this hazard for pedestrians (Although not supported by the bid under ‘Walking’ and cyclists attending the Neighbourhood the Executive heading of the bid. University campus. Other resolved that this should be types of crossing will

included in the 2008/09 Bid) require cyclists to dismount and such a scheme will not be funded by TfL LCN+. The LCN+ link along A308 is the strategic cycle route running between Kingston Town Centre and destinations towards Central London. As well as providing cycle facilities along the route, it important to provide safe and convenient route for cyclists to join/leave the route. The proposal is in accordance with LIP policy 20 and the MTS. Executive Committee approved its inclusion in the 2008/09 bid and an initial allocation of £15k has been given. Recommend: Approve as originally listed for inclusion in the bid. C18

MALDENS & COOMBE NEIGHBOURHOOD BIDS FOR 2009 – 2010 Transport Proposals submitted to Changes proposed by Officer Comment Estimated Programme Committee Committee Cost (£k) (30) Joint bid (Maldens & Members supported All traffic management 100 Coombe & Kingston) proposal if it excluded options have been side road entry considered in the scheme Link 121 – Entire Link treatment. Proposal being developed in Improvements should be amended to 2008/09. Most of the

read: potential conflicts Overhaul 60% of cycle Overhaul 60% of cycle between motor vehicles direction signing, signing cycle direction signing, signing and cyclist and route spurs and side road cycle route spurs pedestrians occur at entry treatments. junctions. Junction entry treatment is the most appropriate way of reducing the speed of turning traffic and providing safer crossing point for these vulnerable road users. The proposal is part of LCN+ and it accords with LIP Policy 20 and the MTS. Recommend: Approve as originally listed for inclusion in the bid. Link 122 - Ham Parade to Worcester Park Station (via A307 Richmond Road, Kingston Town Centre, Berrylands Railway Station, South Lane & A2043 Malden Rd (31) Link 122 – A3 junction No Comment Recommend: Approve 20 with South Lane Subway

Implement improved cycle and pedestrian access/egress to subway in conjunction with TfL proposals to improve cycle routes along the A3 Kingston bypass (Feasibility & preliminary design funded in 2008/09). Link 124 Kingston Bridge to A3 Burlington Road junction via Kingston Town Centre, Fairfield South, Hawks Road, Bonner Hill Road, Hampden Road, A2043 Cambridge Road, Kingston Road and B282 Burlington Road. C19

MALDENS & COOMBE NEIGHBOURHOOD BIDS FOR 2009 – 2010 Transport Proposals submitted to Changes proposed by Officer Comment Estimated Programme Committee Committee Cost (£k) (32) Joint bid (Maldens & No Comment Recommend: Approve 250 Coombe & Kingston)

Link 124 – A2043 Cambridge Road / Kingston Road between King Henry’s Road & Elm Road

(33) Link 124 – Elm Road Members did not The 2008/09 25 Railway Bridge & Level support proposal and feasibility/preliminary Crossing felt that this proposal design has not been should be deleted and a started yet. It is intended Introduce improvements for report submitted to the that a report on options cyclists and pedestrians at Neighbourhood will be taken to the Railway Bridge/level crossing Committee explaining in Maldens & Coombe (Feasibility & preliminary more detail what is Neighbourhood design started in 2008/09). proposed. Committee later in the financial year. The proposal is part of LCN+ and it accords with LIP Policy 20 and the MTS. Recommend: Approve as originally listed for inclusion in the bid.

(34) Link 124 – Kingston No Comment Recommend: Approve 25 Road / Fountain Roundabout

Contribution towards improvements for all road users at existing roundabout (Feasibility & preliminary design started in 2008/09)

(35) Link 124 – Footpath Members supported Cycling could not be 50 along railway line between proposal if it excluded promoted without it being Kingston Road and Elm widening. Proposal widened as part of Road should be amended to improvement along the read: path. The proposal is part Widening of existing footpath Improving of existing of LCN+ and it accords to provide for cycling and footpath to provide for with LIP Policy 20 and the pedestrian movement. cycling and pedestrian MTS. movement. (Feasibility (Feasibility & preliminary Recommend: design started in 2008/09) & preliminary design started in 2008/09) Approve as originally listed for inclusion in the bid. C20

MALDENS & COOMBE NEIGHBOURHOOD BIDS FOR 2009 – 2010 Transport Proposals submitted to Changes proposed by Officer Comment Estimated Programme Committee Committee Cost (£k) (36) Link 124 – A2043 No Comment Recommend: Approve 75 Kingston Rd between Elm Road and Fountain Roundabout & B282 Burlington Road

Introduction of revised waiting and loading restrictions, including introduction of in-set parking bays at various locations to keep existing advisory cycle lanes clear of obstructive parking (Feasibility/preliminary design started in 2008/09) Cycling (Non (37) A2043 Malden Road Members supported Committee’s comments 50 LCN+) between Fountain proposal but expressed are noted. The white Roundabout and A3 Malden concern about the road lining on the A3 Malden junction marking. (Officer action: Road junction, for which forward Committee’s TfL is the Highway Introduction of cycle route to concern about the white Authority, is outside the connect with cycling and lining on this roundabout remit of this scheme. TfL walking improvements to TfL to consider as will be informed of introduced by TfL at the A3 part of their safety audit) Committee’s concern Malden Roundabout in during TfL/Borough liaison 2007/08 meeting. The proposal (Feasibility/preliminary design accords with LIP Policy 20 started in 2008/09). and the MTS. Recommend: Approve and include in the bid.

(38) Borough-wide - No Comment Recommend: Approve 30 Residential Cycle Parking

Design and introduce secure cycle parking secure residents cycle parking.

(39) Borough-wide - Cycle No Comment Recommend: Approve 120 Training

The Road Safety & Travel Awareness Unit offers a variety of training to suit cyclists of all ages and abilities in group or 1:1 sessions. C21

MALDENS & COOMBE NEIGHBOURHOOD BIDS FOR 2009 – 2010 Transport Proposals submitted to Changes proposed by Officer Comment Estimated Programme Committee Committee Cost (£k)

(40) Borough-wide - No Comment Recommend: Approve 20 Maintenance of non LCN+ routes

Maintenance will include:- - proposed additional cycle parking, carriageway surfacing, white line markings, cycle direction signing and coloured surfacing - civil engineering works at several existing signalised crossings. - additional waiting and loading restrictions to improve sight lines and keep cycle lanes clear of obstructive on-street parking - regular cleaning of traffic free corridors, to keep them looking attractive and non-threatening.

(41) Borough-wide - New & No Comment Recommend: Approve 100 improved facilities non LCN+ routes

Upgrading existing infrastructure and connection to LCN+ routes

Bus Stop (42) Borough-wide - Bus Members supported Committee’s concern has 30 Accessibility Stop Accessibility Remedial proposal but expressed been noted. Any proposal and completion works concern about removal that involved the removal of bus lay-bys. (Officer of bus lay-bys will be action: any proposal to reported to Committee as remove bus lay-bys to officers have always been be reported to the doing. Neighbourhood Recommend: Committee) Approve and include in the bid. In relation to Local Bus Priority Measures proposal 43 below, any reference to toucan crossing to be removed. C22

MALDENS & COOMBE NEIGHBOURHOOD BIDS FOR 2009 – 2010 Transport Proposals submitted to Changes proposed by Officer Comment Estimated Programme Committee Committee Cost (£k)

Local Bus (43) Kingston Hill (University Members supported All options for the type of 10 Priority interchange Study) proposal if it excluded crossing to be provided measures toucan crossing. have been considered in A new bus interchange is Proposal should be the study being proposed by TfL London amended to read: undertaken in 2008/09. A Buses at the Kingston Hill A new bus interchange toucan crossing is likely to campus to improve highway is proposed by TfL provide the best access links. Undertake feasibility London Buses at the solution and reduce any design for Toucan crossing at Kingston Hill campus to potential highway safety entrance to facilitate the bus improve highway links. hazard for pedestrians interchange and cycling, Undertake feasibility and cyclists attending the walking and bus trips to and design for a pedestrian University campus. The from the campus. crossing at entrance to proposal, which facilitate the bus complements LCN+ interchange and cycling, scheme 28 above, is in walking and bus trips to accordance with LIP and from the campus. policy 9 and the MTS. An initial allocation of £10k has been given. Recommend: Approve as originally listed for inclusion in the bid. (44) Joint bid (Maldens & No Comment Recommend: Approve 10 Coombe & Kingston)

A2043 Kingston Road / St John's Road

The original scheme proposal was for carriageway widening and inset parking bays into the footway to create a wider and longer right turn filter lane with amendments to signing and lining that does not impede the straight on movement,.

This scheme will be dropped as in October 2007 Committee resolved the scheme to improve this junction should comprise of two pedestrian refuges, adjustments to the layout of the right turning lane and waiting restrictions. This scheme to be implemented with funding in 2008-09.

The new scheme will be monitored and reviewed to identify any additional improvements C23

MALDENS & COOMBE NEIGHBOURHOOD BIDS FOR 2009 – 2010 Transport Proposals submitted to Changes proposed by Officer Comment Estimated Programme Committee Committee Cost (£k) School Travel (45) Malden Parochial Members supported Agree to the increase of 12 Plans Primary proposal and suggested the bid. increased the bid should be to 20 Recommend: Approval A review of the School Travel increased to £20k Plan has identified concerns and inclusion in the bid over parents/children crossing towards the school entrance it includes a request for a Zebra Crossing in the section of The Manor Drive by the school entrance. Funding to address issues and barriers to sustainable travel as identified by school communities through the School Travel Plan development and annual updating process. (46) The Study School, No Comment Recommend: Approve 5 (20mph o/s school) The School are currently developing a Travel Plan and have identified local improvements to pedestrian and cycle routes that would encourage parents not to drive. Funding to address issues and barriers to sustainable travel as identified by school communities through the School Travel Plan development and annual updating process. (47) (Borough-wide) School No Comment Recommend: Approve 25 Travel Plan Officer

(48) (Borough-wide) STP – No Comment Recommend: Approve 30 Monitoring and Updating

(49) (Borough-wide) STP – No Comment Recommend: Approve 10 School Travel Plan Network

(50) (Borough-wide) STP – No Comment Recommend: Approve 10 Survey & Consultation Support

(51) (Borough-wide) STP – No Comment Recommend: Approve 50 Small Grants Fund

(52) (Borough-wide) STP – No Comment Recommend: Approve 10 Student Council

(53) (Borough-wide) Theatre No Comment Recommend: Approve 7 in Education

(54) (Borough-wide) STP – No Comment Recommend: Approve 3 Supply staff C24

MALDENS & COOMBE NEIGHBOURHOOD BIDS FOR 2009 – 2010 Transport Proposals submitted to Changes proposed by Officer Comment Estimated Programme Committee Committee Cost (£k)

(55) (Borough-wide) STP – No Comment Recommend: Approve 2 Celebration Events

(56) (Borough-wide) STP - No Comment Recommend: Approve 1 Internal Promotional Materials

(57) (Borough-wide) STP – No Comment Recommend: Approve 30 Engineering & Design

(58) (Borough-wide) Walk to No Comment Recommend: Approve 30 School / Walk once a Week

Workplace (59) (Borough-wide) Dr Bike No Comment Recommend: Approve 1 Travel Plans Cycle Maintenance

Engage with local workplaces with or those interested in developing a travel plan to hold regular Dr Bike sessions and bike maintenance training courses at workplaces, including at least three Dr Bike sessions during Bike Week 2008.

(60) (Borough-wide) No Comment Recommend: Approve 2.5 Workplace Cycle Training

To provide and promote free group or 1:1 cycle training for employees at workplaces with or interested in developing a Travel Plan.

(61) (Borough-wide) Try No Comment Recommend: Approve 2 Cycling to Work

To run two “try cycling to work programme” schemes offering intensive support (including the loan of bikes and equipment) to 20+ employees of at least two organisations (also known as Cycle 50% Club). C25

MALDENS & COOMBE NEIGHBOURHOOD BIDS FOR 2009 – 2010 Transport Proposals submitted to Changes proposed by Officer Comment Estimated Programme Committee Committee Cost (£k) (62) (Borough-wide) No Comment Recommend: Approve 10 Workplace Travel Awareness Promotion

To provide Workplaces with or interested in developing a Travel Plan with promotional materials to improve travel awareness and encourage and enable employees to use sustainable travel modes, such as literature to promote sustainable travel, travel information leaflets and maps, online public transport, walking and cycling route planners. Also other promotional materials/incentives (e.g. pedometers, umbrellas, puncture repair kits etc) and promotional events (e.g. cycling seminars, commuter breakfasts etc).

(63) (Borough-wide) Car No Comment Recommend: Approve 10 Clubs

Expansion of network

(64) (Borough-wide) No Comment Recommend: Approve 10 Voluntary Residential Travel Plan Implementation

Travel (65) (Borough-wide) Bike No Comment Recommend: Approve 12 Awareness Week 2008

A range of events targeting mainly new cyclists to provide an opportunity and support to get them cycling.

(66) (Borough-wide) Euro No Comment Recommend: Approve 18 Mobility Week / In –Town- Without-My-Car-Day 2008

A range of events promoting all forms of sustainable transport and working with the UK co-ordinator to organise a car free event C26

MALDENS & COOMBE NEIGHBOURHOOD BIDS FOR 2009 – 2010 Transport Proposals submitted to Changes proposed by Officer Comment Estimated Programme Committee Committee Cost (£k)

(67) (Borough-wide) DIY No Comment Recommend: Approve 3 Planet Repairs – Travel Awareness Newsletters

Cost to print paper and distribute DIY Planet Repairs newsletters including funds for competitions and incentives.

(68) (Borough-wide) Smarter No Comment Recommend: Approve 5 Driving

An event to promote smarter driving to increase awareness of the fuel efficiency of different types of vehicles, to promote home working, flexible working and trip combining

(69) (Borough-wide) Bike No Comment Recommend: Approve 4 Maintenance Courses

To help run and promote bike maintenance for local residents, employees and businesses. To pay for cycle instructors to teach local cyclists how to make minor adjustments and repairs.

(70) (Borough-wide) DIY No Comment Recommend: Approve 9 Planet Repairs – Promotional material

To produce new collateral and materials for promotions to help with the change from good going branding to the new DIY Planet Repairs branding.

(71) (Borough-wide) Walking No Comment Recommend: Approve 6 Works

Aim to promote a walk to work week as in August 2006 - pilot event held with all the companies in Kingston Travel Plan Network C27

MALDENS & COOMBE NEIGHBOURHOOD BIDS FOR 2009 – 2010 Transport Proposals submitted to Changes proposed by Officer Comment Estimated Programme Committee Committee Cost (£k)

(72) (Borough-wide) Women No Comment Recommend: Approve 1 on Wheels

This funding will also help promote the Women on Wheels campaign by publicising the rides via a range of leaflets, posters and adverts.

(73) (Borough-wide) DIY No Comment Recommend: Approve 5 Planet Repairs – Branded Advertising Campaign

Media campaign to promote public transport as attractive alternatives to the car during the winter months.

Freight (74) Through Traffic in the No Comment Recommend: Approve 35 Painters Estate

MALDENS & COOMBE NEIGHBOURHOOD BIDS FOR 2009 – 2010 Transport Proposals submitted to Changes proposed by Officer Comment Estimated Programme Committee Committee Cost (£k)

Other (75) Investigation of No Comment Recommend: Approve 60 Selected Bus Route Construction Failures (Tudor Drive, Amberwood Rise, Garrison Lane, Gilders Road, Stokesby Road, South Lane)

To engage the services of a materials consultancy to undertake site investigation works to establish an accurate inventory of existing road construction, the likely deterioration rate and a suitable replacement specification. This will enable a strategy and funding requirements with regard to the long term maintenance and sustainability of these bus routes

C29

ANNEX 1B

SURBITON NEIGHBOURHOOD BIDS FOR 2009 – 2010

Transport Proposals Estimated Programme Cost (£k)

Principal Road (1) A243 Brighton Rd (Portsmouth Rd to railway bridge) 231 Renewal Carriageway resurfacing

(2) A240 Warren Drive North (A3 to Raeburn Avenue) 154

Carriageway resurfacing

Bridge (3) Cotterill Road Culvert 204 Strengthening

(4) Thornhill Road Culvert 254

(5) LoBEG Bridge Condition Investigation (BCI ) Project 600

(BCI is London-wide project. Only a proportion to be spent in the Borough)

Local Safety (6) Joint bid (South of the Borough & Surbiton) 50 Schemes Hook Road / Thornhill Road Junction (Vale Road North)

Funding was been allocated in 2008/2009 to carry out a detailed study of the collisions and to analyse collisions. The bid is to seek additional funds to develop measures to reduce the number of accidents at the Hook Road/Thornhill Road junction. Measures to be considered could include possible signalisation of junction and zebra crossing at Vale Road North.

(7) Kingsdowne Road/Ewell Road/Ditton Road 25

A study to look at both straight and turning traffic movement as well as collisions at the signalled junction. Pedestrian movement will also be considered. (8) Borough-wide powered-2-wheeler safety improvements 50

Accidents involving powered-2-wheelers (PTW) have increased in recent years, against the trend of reducing accidents in RBK. They are scattered at different locations with many and possibly diverse reasons for their occurrence. There is an in- depth study being undertaken at the moment using the 2008/09 funding allocation, which includes examination of every accident involving PTWs for the last three years and where possible referral to accident books and interviews with riders. The current bid will enable the outcome of the study to be considered by the Neighbourhoods and developed for future implementation. (9) Future Scheme Development and Review (Borough-wide) 90 This bid allows officers to carry out surveys and engage with residents and Councillors in areas where they have identified safety concerns. This will assist in planning and developing schemes well in advance for future LIP submissions. (10) Raeburn Avenue/Elgar Avenue junction 40

A bid to provide two raised tables in Raeburn Avenue either side of the junction with Elgar Avenue. One table will be located at the existing zebra crossing to the north of the junction. C30

SURBITON NEIGHBOURHOOD BIDS FOR 2009 – 2010

Transport Proposals Estimated Programme Cost (£k)

20 mph Zones (11) Park Road/Berrylands Road 25

Scheme involves the improvement of the junction layout as well as re-aligning kerb- lines to create priority for traffic on Berrylands Road.

(12) Warren Drive North 40

Scheme includes the introduction of a 20 mph limit through signing, road markings and physical traffic calming measures as well as provision of a pedestrian crossing facility in Warren Drive North. STP funding in 2008/09 will be used for initial scheme development/ consultation.

(13) Future Scheme Development and Review (Borough-wide) 90 This bid allows officers to carry out surveys and engage with residents and Councillors in areas where they have identified safety concerns. This will assist in planning and developing schemes well in advance for future LIP submissions.

Education, (14) Secondary School Road Safety Student Council 10 Training & Publicity To empower student reps to play a major part in the way road safety messages are (Borough- targeted. Appoint at least 2 new reps from each secondary school to support peer wide) group road safety education and promotion in schools. Build on the foundations of the student council through a borough wide forum for road safety initiatives appealing to secondary school pupils

(15) Young Drivers Safety 10

Increase road safety awareness and knowledge of this high risk group to reduce road safety casualties using promotional events and materials with various road safety messages.

(16) Theatre in education 15

To raise awareness of all road safety issues as appropriate for the age of the group through touring of selected dramas

(17) Reaching hard to reach groups 2

To raise awareness of all road safety issues, in particular, pedestrian skills, adult and children's seat belts, PTW’s and drink-driving through engaging with existing community groups and providers. Provide targeted road safety education and promotion via a range of events and materials.

(18) Powered 2 wheelers 8

To increase awareness for specific issues to P2W users and other motorists on a local level, and publicise training opportunities that are available in the borough.

(19) Over 60’s road safety 2

To increase driver knowledge and confidence. Provide regular driving advice courses and offer information at public events on changes in legislation and highway code

(20) Occupational road risk 12

Provide employers with advice and guidance on ORR to encourage development of strategies and policies through employer seminars, individual meetings and regular ORR forums. C31

SURBITON NEIGHBOURHOOD BIDS FOR 2009 – 2010

Transport Proposals Estimated Programme Cost (£k)

(21) Drink / drug driving 5

(22) Public transport passenger safety campaign 2

A high impact visual campaign to raise awareness of passenger safety on buses and pedestrians.

(23) Town centre and road side pedestrian poster campaign. 4

A campaign to influence pedestrian behaviour across the Borough in accord with recent trends in RBK casualty data.

Walking (24) Red Lion Road 50

Side road entry treatments, complementary waiting restrictions and zebra crossing outside Tolworth Hospital. Red Lion Road links the A3 Trunk Road to Tolworth District Centre. It incorporates a hospital, three schools and a business park, and is a bus route. It also links large residential areas with Tolworth District Centre.

(25) Hogsmill Walk Strategy 70

Scheme 1 - Development of accessible all -weather pathways along Elmbridge Meadows, Long Meadows and behind St. John’s Primary School. Scheme 2 - Reprinting of the Hogsmill Valley Walk Leaflet Scheme 3 - Japanese Knotweed Eradication Programme

Scheme 4 - Path Development Works – Swan Public House to Villiers Road.

(26) Surbiton Town Centre 150

Study on the improvement of pedestrian facilities including possible new crossings near the station, side road entry treatments, dropped kerbs and tactile paving crossing points. Some bus stops may be relocated and existing waiting restrictions reviewed. Details will become clearer once the initial strategy has been agreed.

(27) Joint bid (South of the Borough & Surbiton) 140 Tolworth District Centre

Develop and implement further walking improvements in Tolworth Broadway and its feeder routes in parallel with the larger area based scheme

(28) Walking Audits & DDA Accessibility Improvements (Borough-wide) 30

A structured approach in the continuing audits of walking conditions to and from schools, community facilities, public buildings such as libraries and leisure facilities, transport interchanges and local shopping areas. Joint ABS with LB Sutton & partnership with TfL Network Management (A3) (29) Future Scheme Development and Review (Borough-wide) 90 This bid allows officers to carry out surveys and engage with residents and Councillors in areas where they have identified safety concerns. This will assist in planning and developing schemes well in advance for future LIP submissions. C32

SURBITON NEIGHBOURHOOD BIDS FOR 2009 – 2010

Transport Proposals Estimated Programme Cost (£k)

Cycling LCN+ Link 122 Ham Parade to Worcester Park Station (via A307 Richmond Road, Kingston Town Centre, Berrylands Railway Station, South Lane & A2043 Malden Road

(30) Link 122 – Rose Walk to Hogsmill 50

Provision of daytime only / traffic free route between Berrylands Railway Station and Hogsmill Cycle Bridge via Hogsmill open space

(31) Joint bid (Kingston & Surbiton) 50 Link 122 – Lower Marsh Lane cycle and pedestrian path

Widening of existing unsegregated shared path, including segregation of users and access improvements at the western end.

Link 123 Ham Parade to A243 Hook Road/Bridge Road roundabout via Lower Ham Road, Kingston Town Centre, A307 Portsmouth Road, A243 Brighton Road/Upper Brighton Road/Hook Road)

(32) Link 123 – A243 Hook Road between Langley 5-arm roundabout and A3 100 Kingston bypass

Introduction of side-road entry treatments.

(33) Link 123 – A243 Brighton Road between A307Portsmouth Road & Victoria 20 Road

Review waiting & loading restrictions to improve ease of movement and safety of cyclists and pedestrians.

Link 126 between Surbiton Town Centre & Villiers Rd/Villiers Avenue/Lingfield Avenue via Victoria Road, Claremont Road, Maple Road, Beaufort Road, Lingfield Avenue

(34) Joint bid (Kingston & Surbiton) 50 Link 126 Surbiton Road jw Surbiton Hill Road/Maple Road/Beaufort Road

Introduction of cycling and pedestrian improvements to existing automatic signal controlled junction (Feasibility/preliminary design started in 2008/9)

(35) Joint bid (Kingston & Surbiton) 15 Link 126 – Beaufort Road / Lingfield Avenue / Cranes Park

Introduction of cycling and pedestrian improvements to existing automatic signal controlled junction (Feasibility/preliminary design started in 2008/9)

(36) Link 126 – Victoria Road (between Brighton Road and St Marks Hill) 200

Contribution towards Victoria Road Vehicle Restricted Area including LBPN and environmental improvements (Feasibility/preliminary design started in 2008/9)

Cycling (non (37) Joint bid (South of the Borough & Surbiton) 25 LCN+) Red Lion Road, Tolworth

Side road entry treatments, junction waiting restrictions and review of parking. C33

SURBITON NEIGHBOURHOOD BIDS FOR 2009 – 2010

Transport Proposals Estimated Programme Cost (£k)

(38) Borough-wide - Residential Cycle Parking 30

Design and introduce secure cycle parking secure residents cycle parking.

(39) Borough-wide - Cycle Training 120

The Road Safety & Travel Awareness Unit offers a variety of training to suit cyclists of all ages and abilities in group or 1:1 sessions.

(40) Borough-wide - Maintenance of non LCN+ routes 20

(41) Borough-wide - New & improved facilities non LCN+ routes 100

Bus Stop (42) Borough-wide - Bus Stop Accessibility Remedial and completion works 30 Accessibility Local Bus (43) Joint bid (Kingston and Surbiton) 100 Priority Measures Corridor improvements between Surbiton Station and Kingston Town centre

The creation of a 'Bus Expressway' between Kingston and Surbiton would enhance existing bus priority in Kingston Town Centre and improve bus rail interchange in Surbiton Town Centre. (Feasibility and preliminary design funded in 2008-09. This study will be developed and detailed proposals submitted for approval and implementation.)

To implement bus priority improvements such as sections of bus lane, vehicle restricted section, local widening and signal timing amendments where necessary.

(44) Victoria Road 150

Outline proposals for traffic management and environmental improvements such as a vehicle restricted area will be developed as part of an overall strategy for Surbiton Town Centre.

(Feasibility and preliminary design funded in 2008-09). This study will be developed and detailed proposals submitted for approval and implementation.) To implement resulting approved improvements once the initial strategy has been agreed.

(45) Ewell Road (Route 281 Bus Lane Review) 50

Design and introduce improvements to scheme (identified in ongoing monitoring study (Feasibility and preliminary design funded in 2008-09). C34

SURBITON NEIGHBOURHOOD BIDS FOR 2009 – 2010

Transport Proposals Estimated Programme Cost (£k) (46) Christ Church Primary School Travel 10 Plans Improvements in Manor Drive. Funding to address issues and barriers to sustainable travel as identified by school communities through the School Travel Plan development and annual updating process.' (47) (Borough-wide) School Travel Plan Officer 25

(48) (Borough-wide) STP – Monitoring and Updating 30

(49) (Borough-wide) STP – School Travel Plan Network 10

(50) (Borough-wide) STP – Survey & Consultation Support 10

(51) (Borough-wide) STP – Small Grants Fund 50

(52) (Borough-wide) STP – Student Council 10

(53) (Borough-wide) Theatre in Education 7

(54) (Borough-wide) STP – Supply staff 3

(55) (Borough-wide) STP – Celebration Events 2

(56) (Borough-wide) STP - Internal Promotional Materials 1

(57) (Borough-wide) STP – Engineering & Design 30

(58) (Borough-wide) Walk to School / Walk once a Week 30

Workplace (59) (Borough-wide) Dr Bike Cycle Maintenance 1 Travel Plans Engage with local workplaces with or those interested in developing a travel plan to hold regular Dr Bike sessions and bike maintenance training courses at workplaces, including at least three Dr Bike sessions during Bike Week 2008.

(60) (Borough-wide) Workplace Cycle Training 2.5

To provide and promote free group or 1:1 cycle training for employees at workplaces with or interested in developing a Travel Plan.

(61) (Borough-wide) Try Cycling to Work 2

SURBITON NEIGHBOURHOOD BIDS FOR 2009 – 2010

Transport Proposals Estimated Programme Cost (£k)

(62) (Borough-wide) Workplace Travel Awareness Promotion 10

(63) (Borough-wide) Car Clubs 10

Expansion of network

(64) (Borough-wide) Voluntary Residential Travel Plan Implementation 10

(65) Area Travel Plan – Surbiton 20

Work with businesses to seek ways to encourage joint working between businesses to encourage travel by more sustainable modes

Travel (66) (Borough-wide) Bike Week 2008 12 Awareness A range of events targeting mainly new cyclists to provide an opportunity and support to get them cycling.

(67) (Borough-wide) Euro Mobility Week / In –Town-Without-My-Car-Day 2008 18

A range of events promoting all forms of sustainable transport and working with the UK co-ordinator to organise a car free event

(68) (Borough-wide) DIY Planet Repairs – Travel Awareness Newsletters 3

Cost to print paper and distribute DIY Planet Repairs newsletters including funds for competitions and incentives.

(69) (Borough-wide) Smarter Driving 5

An event to promote smarter driving to increase awareness of the fuel efficiency of different types of vehicles, to promote home working, flexible working and trip combining

(70) (Borough-wide) Bike Maintenance Courses 4

To help run and promote bike maintenance for local residents, employees and businesses. To pay for cycle instructors to teach local cyclists how to make minor adjustments and repairs.

(71) (Borough-wide) DIY Planet Repairs – Promotional material 9

To produce new collateral and materials for promotions to help with the change from good going branding to the new DIY Planet Repairs branding. C36

SURBITON NEIGHBOURHOOD BIDS FOR 2009 – 2010

Transport Proposals Estimated Programme Cost (£k)

(72) (Borough-wide) Walking Works 6

Aim to promote a walk to work week as in August 2006 - pilot event held with all the companies in Kingston Travel Plan Network

(73) (Borough-wide) Women on Wheels 1

This funding will also help promote the Women on Wheels campaign by publicising the rides via a range of leaflets, posters and adverts.

(74) (Borough-wide) DIY Planet Repairs – Branded Advertising Campaign 5

Media campaign to promote public transport as attractive alternatives to the car during the winter months.

ANNEX 1C

SOUTH OF THE BOROUGH NEIGHBOURHOOD BIDS FOR 2009 – 2010

Transport Proposals Estimated Programme Cost (£k)

Bridge (1) LoBEG Bridge Condition Investigation (BCI ) Project 600 Strengthening (BCI is London-wide project. Only a proportion to be spent in the Borough)

Local Safety (2) Joint bid (South of the Borough & Surbiton) 50 Schemes Hook Road / Thornhill Road Junction (Vale Road North)

(3) Bridge Road 50

Develop measures along the whole length of Bridge Road to reduce accidents. Consider additional signal crossings outside Chessington North Station and at Parbury Rise. Also upgrade the existing crossing at Marston Avenue to allow use by cycles.

(4) Cox Lane 40

Develop measures to reduce the number of accidents in Cox Lane between Davies Road and Roebuck Road. Consider signalled crossing near the bus stops in Cox Lane. Possible relocation of bus stops and parking bans

(5) Moor Lane Study 10

Develop measures to reduce accidents in Moor Lane between its junction with Mount Road and the Borough boundary C37

SOUTH OF THE BOROUGH NEIGHBOURHOOD BIDS FOR 2009 – 2010

Transport Proposals Estimated Programme Cost (£k)

(6) Borough-wide powered-2-wheeler safety improvements 50

Accidents involving powered-2-wheelers (PTW) have increased in recent years, against the trend of reducing accidents in RBK. They are scattered at different locations with many and possibly diverse reasons for their occurrence. There is an in- depth study being undertaken at the moment using the 2008/09 funding allocation, which includes examination of every accident involving PTWs for the last three years and where possible referral to accident books and interviews with riders. The current bid will enable the outcome of the study to be considered by the Neighbourhoods and developed for future implementation. (7) Future Scheme Development and Review (Borough-wide) 90 This bid allows officers to carry out surveys and engage with residents and Councillors in areas where they have identified safety concerns. This will assist in planning and developing schemes well in advance for future LIP submissions.

20 mph Zones (8) Future Scheme Development and Review (Borough-wide) 90 This bid allows officers to carry out surveys and engage with residents and Councillors in areas where they have identified safety concerns. This will assist in planning and developing schemes well in advance for future LIP submissions.

Education, (9) Secondary School Road Safety Student Council 10 Training & Publicity To empower student reps to play a major part in the way road safety messages are (Borough- targeted. Appoint at least 2 new reps from each secondary school to support peer wide) group road safety education and promotion in schools. Build on the foundations of the student council through a borough wide forum for road safety initiatives appealing to secondary school pupils

(10) Young Drivers Safety 10

Increase road safety awareness and knowledge of this high risk group to reduce road safety casualties using promotional events and materials with various road safety messages.

(11) Theatre in education 15

To raise awareness of all road safety issues as appropriate for the age of the group through touring of selected dramas

(12) Reaching hard to reach groups 2

(13) Powered 2 wheelers 8

To increase awareness for specific issues to P2W users and other motorists on a local level, and publicise training opportunities that are available in the borough.

(14) Over 60’s road safety 2

To increase driver knowledge and confidence. Provide regular driving advice courses and offer information at public events on changes in legislation and highway code

(15) Occupational road risk 12

Provide employers with advice and guidance on ORR to encourage development of strategies and policies through employer seminars, individual meetings and regular ORR forums. C38

SOUTH OF THE BOROUGH NEIGHBOURHOOD BIDS FOR 2009 – 2010

Transport Proposals Estimated Programme Cost (£k)

(16) Drink / drug driving 5

(17) Public transport passenger safety campaign 2

A high impact visual campaign to raise awareness of passenger safety on buses and pedestrians.

(18) Town centre and road side pedestrian poster campaign. 4

A campaign to influence pedestrian behaviour across the Borough in accord with recent trends in RBK casualty data.

Walking (19) Hogsmill Walk Strategy 70

Scheme 4 - Path Development Works – Swan Public House to Villiers Road.

(20) Joint bid (South of the Borough & Surbiton) 140 Tolworth District Centre

Develop and implement further walking improvements in Tolworth Broadway and its feeder routes in parallel with the larger area based scheme

(21) Walking Audits & DDA Accessibility Improvements (Borough-wide) 30

A structured approach in the continuing audits of walking conditions to and from schools, community facilities, public buildings such as libraries and leisure facilities, transport interchanges and local shopping areas. Joint ABS with LB Sutton & partnership with TfL Network Management (A3) (22) Future Scheme Development and Review (Borough-wide) 90 This bid allows officers to carry out surveys and engage with residents and Councillors in areas where they have identified safety concerns. This will assist in planning and developing schemes well in advance for future LIP submissions.

Cycling LCN+ Link 123 Ham Parade to A243 Hook Road/Bridge Road roundabout via Lower Ham Road, Kingston Town Centre, A307 Portsmouth Road, A243 Brighton Road/Upper Brighton Road/Hook Road)

(23) Link 123 – Hook Parade 30

Feasibility, preliminary design and introduction of an east-west cycle link between Elm Road and Clayton Road across A243 Hook Road

(24) Link 123 – Fullers Way South / Hunters Road / Gosbury Hill / Elm Road 40

Introduction of side-road entry treatments. C39

SOUTH OF THE BOROUGH NEIGHBOURHOOD BIDS FOR 2009 – 2010

Transport Proposals Estimated Programme Cost (£k)

Cycling (non (25) Bridge Road junction with Marston Avenue and North Parade, Chessington 30 LCN+)

Conversion of existing pelican crossing to Toucan crossing to allow movement of cycles.

(26) Cox Lane 20

Improvements to the existing cycle lanes and linkage to the cycle route across Tolworth Court Farm

(27 Moor Lane 20

Improvements to the existing cycle lanes between Bridge Road and the Borough boundary

(28) Clayton Road, Chessington 50

Introduction of side-road entry treatments, review of parking arrangements and additional waiting restrictions.

(29) Joint bid (South of the Borough & Surbiton) 25 Red Lion Road, Tolworth

Side road entry treatments, junction waiting restrictions and review of parking.

(30) Borough-wide - Residential Cycle Parking 30

Design and introduce secure cycle parking secure residents cycle parking.

(31) Borough-wide - Cycle Training 120

The Road Safety & Travel Awareness Unit offers a variety of training to suit cyclists of all ages and abilities in group or 1:1 sessions.

(32) Borough-wide - Maintenance of non LCN+ routes 20

(33) Borough-wide - New & improved facilities non LCN+ routes 100

Bus Stop (34) Borough-wide - Bus Stop Accessibility Remedial and completion works 30 Accessibility C40

SOUTH OF THE BOROUGH NEIGHBOURHOOD BIDS FOR 2009 – 2010

Transport Proposals Estimated Programme Cost (£k)

School Travel (35) Chessington Community College (CCC) 5 Plans Complete existing scheme and make pedestrian improvements at station. Funding to address issues and barriers to sustainable travel as identified by school communities through the School Travel Plan development and annual updating process.

(36) Ellingham Primary School 65

Convert existing build-out into a formal crossing at Bridge Road/Parbury Rise junction. Funding to address issues and barriers to sustainable travel as identified by school communities through the School Travel Plan development and annual updating process.

(37) Lovelace Primary 40

Improvements in Clayton Road i.e. side entry treatments between Oaklands Close and Cricketers Close to assist pedestrians. 20 mph in Devon Way. Funding to address issues and barriers to sustainable travel as identified by school communities through the School Travel Plan development and annual updating process.

(38) St Mary’s Primary 10

Lighting improvements along Churchfields path. Funding to address issues and barriers to sustainable travel as identified by school communities through the School Travel Plan development and annual updating process.

(39) (Borough-wide) School Travel Plan Officer 25

(40) (Borough-wide) STP – Monitoring and Updating 30

(41) (Borough-wide) STP – School Travel Plan Network 10

(42) (Borough-wide) STP – Survey & Consultation Support 10

(43) (Borough-wide) STP – Small Grants Fund 50

(44) (Borough-wide) STP – Student Council 10

(45) (Borough-wide) Theatre in Education 7

(46) (Borough-wide) STP – Supply staff 3

(47) (Borough-wide) STP – Celebration Events 2

(48) (Borough-wide) STP - Internal Promotional Materials 1

(49) (Borough-wide) STP – Engineering & Design 30

(50) (Borough-wide) Walk to School / Walk once a Week 30 C41

SOUTH OF THE BOROUGH NEIGHBOURHOOD BIDS FOR 2009 – 2010

Transport Proposals Estimated Programme Cost (£k)

Workplace (51) (Borough-wide) Dr Bike Cycle Maintenance 1 Travel Plans Engage with local workplaces with or those interested in developing a travel plan to hold regular Dr Bike sessions and bike maintenance training courses at workplaces, including at least three Dr Bike sessions during Bike Week 2008.

(52) (Borough-wide) Workplace Cycle Training 2.5

To provide and promote free group or 1:1 cycle training for employees at workplaces with or interested in developing a Travel Plan.

(53) (Borough-wide) Try Cycling to Work 2

(54) (Borough-wide) Workplace Travel Awareness Promotion 10

(55) (Borough-wide) Car Clubs 10

Expansion of network

(56) (Borough-wide) Voluntary Residential Travel Plan Implementation 10

(57) Area Travel Plan – Chessington Industrial Estate 20

Work with businesses to seek ways to encourage joint working between businesses to encourage travel by more sustainable modes. To include hosting network forums/ seminar sessions, production of promotional events and literature aimed at businesses/employees and the implementation of specific areas wide measures and initiatives as identified in surveys (e.g. car share schemes).

Travel (58) (Borough-wide) Bike Week 2008 12 Awareness A range of events targeting mainly new cyclists to provide an opportunity and support to get them cycling.

(59) (Borough-wide) Euro Mobility Week / In –Town-Without-My-Car-Day 2008 18

A range of events promoting all forms of sustainable transport and working with the UK co-ordinator to organise a car free event

(60) (Borough-wide) DIY Planet Repairs – Travel Awareness Newsletters 3

Cost to print paper and distribute DIY Planet Repairs newsletters including funds for competitions and incentives. C42

SOUTH OF THE BOROUGH NEIGHBOURHOOD BIDS FOR 2009 – 2010

Transport Proposals Estimated Programme Cost (£k)

(61) (Borough-wide) Smarter Driving 5

An event to promote smarter driving to increase awareness of the fuel efficiency of different types of vehicles, to promote home working, flexible working and trip combining

(62) (Borough-wide) Bike Maintenance Courses 4

To help run and promote bike maintenance for local residents, employees and businesses. To pay for cycle instructors to teach local cyclists how to make minor adjustments and repairs.

(63) (Borough-wide) DIY Planet Repairs – Promotional material 9

To produce new collateral and materials for promotions to help with the change from good going branding to the new DIY Planet Repairs branding.

(64) (Borough-wide) Walking Works 6

Aim to promote a walk to work week as in August 2006 - pilot event held with all the companies in Kingston Travel Plan Network

(65) (Borough-wide) Women on Wheels 1

This funding will also help promote the Women on Wheels campaign by publicising the rides via a range of leaflets, posters and adverts.

(66) (Borough-wide) DIY Planet Repairs – Branded Advertising Campaign 5

Media campaign to promote public transport as attractive alternatives to the car during the winter months.

Other (67) Investigation of Selected Bus Route Construction Failures 60 (Tudor Drive, Amberwood Rise, Garrison Lane, Gilders Road, Stokesby Road, South Lane)

C43

ANNEX 1D

KINGSTON NEIGHBOURHOOD BIDS FOR 2009 – 2010

Transport Proposals Estimated Programme Cost (£k)

Bridge (1) LoBEG Bridge Condition Investigation (BCI ) Project 600 Strengthening (BCI is London-wide project. Only a proportion to be spent in the Borough)

Local Safety (2) High Street / Eden Street 20 Schemes In 2008 – 2009 funding was provided to introduce an extra low 10 mph speed limit in the area along with appropriate signing and bus friendly traffic calming. This bid is to seek additional funding for further design and investigation to enhance the chances necessary for moving towards a shared use space in the area.

(3) Borough-wide powered-2-wheeler safety improvements 50

Accidents involving powered-2-wheelers (PTW) have increased in recent years, against the trend of reducing accidents in RBK. They are scattered at different locations with many and possibly diverse reasons for their occurrence. There is an in- depth study being undertaken at the moment using the 2008/09 funding allocation, which includes examination of every accident involving PTWs for the last three years and where possible referral to accident books and interviews with riders. The current bid will enable the outcome of the study to be considered by the Neighbourhoods and developed for future implementation. (4) Future Scheme Development and Review (Borough-wide) 90 This bid allows officers to carry out surveys and engage with residents and Councillors in areas where they have identified safety concerns. This will assist in planning and developing schemes well in advance for future LIP submissions.

20 mph Zones (5) Future Scheme Development and Review (Borough-wide) 90 This bid allows officers to carry out surveys and engage with residents and Councillors in areas where they have identified safety concerns. This will assist in planning and developing schemes well in advance for future LIP submissions.

Education, (6) Secondary School Road Safety Student Council 10 Training & Publicity To empower student reps to play a major part in the way road safety messages are (Borough- targeted. Appoint at least 2 new reps from each secondary school to support peer wide) group road safety education and promotion in schools. Build on the foundations of the student council through a borough wide forum for road safety initiatives appealing to secondary school pupils

(7) Young Drivers Safety 10

Increase road safety awareness and knowledge of this high risk group to reduce road safety casualties using promotional events and materials with various road safety messages.

(8) Theatre in education 15

To raise awareness of all road safety issues as appropriate for the age of the group through touring of selected dramas

(9) Reaching hard to reach groups 2

KINGSTON NEIGHBOURHOOD BIDS FOR 2009 – 2010

Transport Proposals Estimated Programme Cost (£k)

(10) Powered 2 wheelers 8

To increase awareness for specific issues to P2W users and other motorists on a local level, and publicise training opportunities that are available in the borough.

(11) Over 60’s road safety 2

To increase driver knowledge and confidence. Provide regular driving advice courses and offer information at public events on changes in legislation and highway code

(12) Occupational road risk 12

Provide employers with advice and guidance on ORR to encourage development of strategies and policies through employer seminars, individual meetings and regular ORR forums.

(13) Drink / drug driving 5

(14) Public transport passenger safety campaign 2

A high impact visual campaign to raise awareness of passenger safety on buses and pedestrians.

(15) Town centre and road side pedestrian poster campaign. 4

A campaign to influence pedestrian behaviour across the Borough in accord with recent trends in RBK casualty data.

Walking (16) Hogsmill Walk Strategy 70

Scheme 4 - Path Development Works – Swan Public House to Villiers Road.

(17) Thameside Footpath and open space 25

1. Provide a riverside footway completing the link between the town centre’s commercial area and Canbury Gardens. 2. Rationalise the area used for car parking, and reduce its visual impact. 3. Introduce an appropriate landscaping scheme ,between the built-up urban riverside and the “soft” riverside recreation area of Canbury Gardens

(18) Eagle Wharf 250

1. Resurfacing using resin-bonded gravel. 2. A stage area suitable for outdoor performance, 3. Wooden decking to link adjacent pub garden and stage. 4. A soft landscaped area incorporating a tree lined walkway, informal seating and lighting C45

KINGSTON NEIGHBOURHOOD BIDS FOR 2009 – 2010

Transport Proposals Estimated Programme Cost (£k)

(19) Walking Audits & DDA Accessibility Improvements (Borough-wide) 30

A structured approach in the continuing audits of walking conditions to and from schools, community facilities, public buildings such as libraries and leisure facilities, transport interchanges and local shopping areas. Joint ABS with LB Sutton & partnership with TfL Network Management (A3) (20) Future Scheme Development and Review (Borough-wide) 90 This bid allows officers to carry out surveys and engage with residents and Councillors in areas where they have identified safety concerns. This will assist in planning and developing schemes well in advance for future LIP submissions.

Cycling LCN+ Link 121 (A308 London Road/Kingston Hill/Kingston Vale between its junction with Queen Elizabeth Road and A3 Robin Hood Way/Kingston bypass

(21) Link 121 – A308 London Road / Kingston Hill between Queen Elizabeth Road 300 and Manorgate 5-arm roundabout

Feasibility study and introduction of cycle tracks and cycle crossings to provide improved safety and comfort for cyclists

(22) Joint bid (Kingston & Maldens & Coombe) 200

Link 121 – A308 Kingston Hill between Manorgate 5 arm roundabout and Warren Road

Improvements to existing advisory cycle lanes, and feasibility and introduction of cycle tracks and side-road entry treatments

(23) Link 121 – A308 Kingston Hill junction with Park Road & Manorgate Road 50

Improvements to existing five-arm roundabout, also improve cycle route access to Norbiton Railway Station

(24) Joint bid (Kingston & Maldens & Coombe) 100

Link 121 – Entire Link Improvements

Overhaul 60% of cycle direction signing, signing cycle route spurs and side road entry treatments

Link 122 Ham Parade to Worcester Park Station (via A307 Richmond Road, Kingston Town Centre, Berrylands Railway Station, South Lane & A2043 Malden Road

(25) Link 122 – Wood Street (south side) between Dolphin Street and Fife Road 200 including automatic traffic signal controlled cycle crossing of Wood Street

Introduction direct cycle route between Kingston Bridge & Kingston Railway Station. (Scheme started in 2007/8) Phase 3

(26) Link 122 – Kingston T/C Cycle routes 5

Contribution towards staff time to address cycle route continuity issues as part of Eden Quarter redevelopment C46

KINGSTON NEIGHBOURHOOD BIDS FOR 2009 – 2010

Transport Proposals Estimated Programme Cost (£k)

(27) Link 122 – Springfield Rd (Blue Bridge) between Grange Road and Denmark 40 Road

Introduction of improvements to cycle and pedestrian access points, including environmental improvements (scheme design feasibility funded in 2008/9)

(28) Link 122 – A307 Richmond Road / Kings Road 25

Feasibility study to review existing automatic signal controlled junction and implement improvements for cyclists and pedestrians.

(29) Link 122 – A307 Richmond Road / Latchmere Road / Bank Lane 75

Introduction of Toucan crossing (Feasibility & preliminary design funded in 2008/9)

(30) Link 122 - A307 Richmond Rd / Tudor Drive / Dukes Ave 30

Implement introduction of diagonal cycle and pedestrian crossing points at existing automatic signal controlled junction (Feasibility & preliminary design funded in 2008/9).

(31) Joint bid (Kingston & Surbiton) 50 Link 122 – Lower Marsh Lane cycle and pedestrian path

Widening of existing unsegregated shared path, including segregation of users and access improvements at the western end.

Link 123 Ham Parade to A243 Hook Road/Bridge Road roundabout via Lower Ham Road, Kingston Town Centre, A307 Portsmouth Road, A243 Brighton Road/Upper Brighton Road/Hook Road)

(32) Link 123 – Skerne Road / Downhall Road / Wood Street 30

Improvements to existing automatic traffic signal controlled cycle crossings.

(33) Link 123 – Woodbines Ave between A307 Portsmouth Road and A240 25 Penrhyn Road

Link from LCN+ cycle route to Kingston University

(34) Joint bid (Kingston & Maldens & Coombe) 250

Link 124 – A2043 Cambridge Road / Kingston Road between King Henry’s Road & Elm Road

(35) Link 124 – Wheatfield Way to A2043 Cambridge Road (via Orchard Road) 75

Introduction of side road entry treatments and general cycle route improvements including existing Fire Gate road closure in Bonner Hill Road C47

KINGSTON NEIGHBOURHOOD BIDS FOR 2009 – 2010

Transport Proposals Estimated Programme Cost (£k)

(36) Link 124 – Wheatfield Way between Penrhyn Road and Orchard Road 80

Introduction of off-road cycle route and modifications to the existing Wheatfield Way/Orchard Road Pelican crossing (Feasibility & preliminary design started in 2008/9)

(37) Link 124 – A2043 Cambridge Road / Hampden Road / Gloucester Road 10

Feasibility study and preliminary design for the provision of crossings to assist cycle, pedestrian and bus movements through the junction

(38) Link 124 – A308 Horsefair / Wood Sreet between Kingston Bridge and 50 Kingston Railway Station

Feasibility, detailed design and introduction of improved access to Kingston Railway Station for cyclists along north side of Horsefair/Wood Street

(39) Link 124 – Wheatfield Way / Ladybooth Road / Fairfield Road 15

Design, introduction of improvements to approach routes to existing Toucan crossing.

Link 126 between Surbiton Town Centre & Villiers Rd/Villiers Avenue/Lingfield Avenue via Victoria Road, Claremont Road, Maple Road, Beaufort Road, Lingfield Avenue

(40) Joint bid (Kingston & Surbiton) 50 Link 126 Surbiton Road jw Surbiton Hill Road/Maple Road/Beaufort Road

Introduction of cycling and pedestrian improvements to existing automatic signal controlled junction (Feasibility/preliminary design started in 2008/9)

(41) Joint bid (Kingston & Surbiton) 15 Link 126 – Beaufort Road / Lingfield Avenue / Cranes Park

Introduction of cycling and pedestrian improvements to existing automatic signal controlled junction (Feasibility/preliminary design started in 2008/9)

(42) Link 126 – Victoria Road (between Brighton Road and St Marks Hill) 200

Contribution towards Victoria Road Vehicle Restricted Area including LBPN and environmental improvements (Feasibility/preliminary design started in 2008/9)

Cycling (non (43) Secure cycle parking in Kingston Town Centre 50 LCN+) Continue to develop and introduce three secure cycle parking centres as part of K+20 Area Action Plan and redevelopment of Kingston Town Centre.

(44) Borough-wide - Residential Cycle Parking 30

Design and introduce secure cycle parking secure residents cycle parking.

(45) Borough-wide - Cycle Training 120

The Road Safety & Travel Awareness Unit offers a variety of training to suit cyclists of all ages and abilities in group or 1:1 sessions. C48

KINGSTON NEIGHBOURHOOD BIDS FOR 2009 – 2010

Transport Proposals Estimated Programme Cost (£k)

(46) Borough-wide - Maintenance of non LCN+ routes 20

(47) Borough-wide - New & improved facilities non LCN+ routes 100

Bus Stop (48) Borough-wide - Bus Stop Accessibility Remedial and completion works 30 Accessibility Local Bus (49) Wood Street / Clarence Street (Bus Only Area) 125 Priority Measures Design road space re-allocation for benefit of pedestrians and bus movements. Investigate signal phasing change to enable easier northbound exit for buses from Wood Street at Horsefair junction. Amend kerb lines, signal timing, signing and lining. (Feasibility and preliminary design funded in 2008-09)

(50) A308 London Road / Albert Road / Cambridge Road 40

It was originally proposed to introduce new signals at the junction with Albert Road to be linked to the existing ones at Cambridge Road. This may not be cost-effective, and this proposal will be reviewed with funding in 2008-09 for feasibility and design of an alternative proposal at London Road / Cambridge Road.

To implement improvements to the layout and signals at London Rd / Cambridge Rd to achieve benefits to traffic flows in the area.

(51) Joint bid (Kingston & Maldens & Coombe) 10

A2043 Kingston Road / St John's Road

The new scheme will be monitored and reviewed to identify any additional improvements C49

KINGSTON NEIGHBOURHOOD BIDS FOR 2009 – 2010

Transport Proposals Estimated Programme Cost (£k)

(52) Joint bid (Kingston and Surbiton) 100

Corridor improvements between Surbiton Station and Kingston Town centre

To implement bus priority improvements such as sections of bus lane, vehicle restricted section, local widening and signal timing amendments where necessary.

School Travel (53) Alexandra Infants 25 Plans Brunswick Road entry treatment at both ends. Funding to address issues and barriers to sustainable travel as identified by school communities through the School Travel Plan development and annual updating process.

(54) King Athelstan 20

Improvements to Footpath No. 32 (Linking Portman Road, Avenue Road and Mill Street to Villiers Road). Funding to address issues and barriers to sustainable travel as identified by school communities through the School Travel Plan development and annual updating process.

(55) St Josephs 50

Cycle track along The Fairfield. Funding to address issues and barriers to sustainable travel as identified by school communities through the School Travel Plan development and annual updating process.

(56) The Mount 10

Tightening up of King Henry’s junction. Provision of pedestrian route to school via the rear entrance. Funding to address issues and barriers to sustainable travel as identified by school communities through the School Travel Plan development and annual updating process.

(57) Tiffin Girls 15

Drive / bus stop issues. Provision of dedicated new pedestrian access to link bus stop and school. Funding to address issues and barriers to sustainable travel as identified by school communities through the School Travel Plan development and annual updating process.

(58) (Borough-wide) School Travel Plan Officer 25

(59) (Borough-wide) STP – Monitoring and Updating 30

(60) (Borough-wide) STP – School Travel Plan Network 10

(61) (Borough-wide) STP – Survey & Consultation Support 10

(62) (Borough-wide) STP – Small Grants Fund 50 C50

KINGSTON NEIGHBOURHOOD BIDS FOR 2009 – 2010

Transport Proposals Estimated Programme Cost (£k)

(63) (Borough-wide) STP – Student Council 10

(64) (Borough-wide) Theatre in Education 7

(65) (Borough-wide) STP – Supply staff 3

(66) (Borough-wide) STP – Celebration Events 2

(67) (Borough-wide) STP - Internal Promotional Materials 1

(68) (Borough-wide) STP – Engineering & Design 30

(69) (Borough-wide) Walk to School / Walk once a Week 30

Workplace (70) Kingston Travel Plan Network 3 Travel Plans Administration and development of the Kingston Travel Plan Network (KTPN) to include the running of quarterly meetings and the implementation of joint initiatives identified by the KTPN. The existing membership will be maintained and hopefully increased. SWELTRAC Sub Regional Coordinator will continue to be invited to attend

(71) (Borough-wide) ‘Dr Bike’ Cycle Maintenance 1

Engage with local workplaces with or those interested in developing a travel plan to hold regular ‘Dr Bike’ sessions and bike maintenance training courses at workplaces, including at least three ‘Dr Bike’ sessions during Bike Week 2008.

(72) (Borough-wide) Workplace Cycle Training 2.5

To provide and promote free group or 1:1 cycle training for employees at workplaces with or interested in developing a Travel Plan.

(73) (Borough-wide) Try Cycling to Work 2

(74) (Borough-wide) Workplace Travel Awareness Promotion 10

(75) (Borough-wide) Car Clubs 10

Expansion of network

(76) (Borough-wide) Voluntary Residential Travel Plan Implementation 10 C51

KINGSTON NEIGHBOURHOOD BIDS FOR 2009 – 2010

Transport Proposals Estimated Programme Cost (£k)

(77) Workplace Travel Plan Promotion 8

To implement measures to raise awareness of travel planning amongst businesses in Kingston with the aim of encouraging the development of voluntary workplace travel plans. Could include; creating and distributing publicity materials to businesses, advertising the benefits of travel plans in local press and businesses publications and holding travel planning seminar(s) for businesses.

(78) Area Travel Plan – Kingston Town Centre 20

Travel (79) (Borough-wide) Bike Week 2008 12 Awareness A range of events targeting mainly new cyclists to provide an opportunity and support to get them cycling.

(80) (Borough-wide) Euro Mobility Week / In –Town-Without-My-Car-Day 2008 18

A range of events promoting all forms of sustainable transport and working with the UK co-ordinator to organise a car free event

(81) (Borough-wide) DIY Planet Repairs – Travel Awareness Newsletters 3

Cost to print paper and distribute DIY Planet Repairs newsletters including funds for competitions and incentives.

(82) (Borough-wide) Smarter Driving 5

An event to promote smarter driving to increase awareness of the fuel efficiency of different types of vehicles, to promote home working, flexible working and trip combining

(83) (Borough-wide) Bike Maintenance Courses 4

To help run and promote bike maintenance for local residents, employees and businesses. To pay for cycle instructors to teach local cyclists how to make minor adjustments and repairs.

(84) DIY Planet Repairs – Fresher’s Fayre 3

Production of collateral and promotion at Kingston University and Kingston College during Fresher's Fayre in September to educate students about their options for travelling to university / college.

(85) DIY Planet Repairs – Promotional material 9

To produce new collateral and materials for promotions to help with the change from good going branding to the new DIY Planet Repairs branding. C52

KINGSTON NEIGHBOURHOOD BIDS FOR 2009 – 2010

Transport Proposals Estimated Programme Cost (£k)

(86) (Borough-wide) Walking Works 6

Aim to promote a walk to work week as in August 2006 - pilot event held with all the companies in Kingston Travel Plan Network.

(87) (Borough-wide) Women on Wheels 1

This funding will also help promote the Women on Wheels campaign by publicising the rides via a range of leaflets, posters and adverts.

(89) (Borough-wide) DIY Planet Repairs – Branded Advertising Campaign 5

Media campaign to promote public transport as attractive alternatives to the car during the winter months.

Freight (90) Lorry intrusion: Albert Road, Kingston 60

Albert Road, Victoria Road and Church Road are roads within a 7.5 tonne lorry ban zone. Unfortunately, the close proximity to a Post office depot and the Council’s civic amenity sites mean that observance of the ban is poor. A scheme that revises the existing system of one way workings would enable the introduction of a width restriction that would remove this attractive short cut whilst still enabling access for essential deliveries is proposed.

(91) Kingston Town Centre Lorry Zones 10

Publicity campaign to increase public aware of zoning within the Town Centre. This is a follow up of the consultation with businesses in 2006 - 2007

Other (92) Investigation of Selected Bus Route Construction Failures 60 (Tudor Drive, Amberwood Rise, Garrison Lane, Gilders Road, Stokesby Road, South Lane)

ANNEX 2 2009 - 2010 LIP FUNDING APPLICATION - NEIGHBOURHOODS AND BOROUGH-WIDE BIDS (£k)

TRANSPORT HEADING LIP BID PROPOSALS BOROUGH – CROSS- KINGSTON MALDENS AND SOUTH OF THE SURBITON BID TOTAL BID WIDE BID NEIGHBOURHOOD TOWN BID COOMBE BID BOROUGH BID BID

Principal Road Maintenance (1) A308 Kingston Vale (Cedar Close to A3) 330 330 Carriageway resurfacing (2) A243 Brighton Rd (Portsmouth Rd to railway bridge) 231 231 Carriageway resurfacing (3) A240 Warren Drive North (A3 to Raeburn Avenue) 154 154 Carriageway resurfacing Sub-Total 0 0 0 330 0 385 715 Bridge Strengthening (4) Cotterill Road Culvert (strengthening) 204 204 (5) Thornhill Rd Culvert (strengthening) 254 254 (6) LoBEG Bridge Condition Investigation (BCI) Project 600 600 (Please note that BCI project is a London-wide project. Only a proportion of the £600k will be spent on Kingston’s assets. Sub-Total 600 0 0 0 0 458 1058 Local Safety Schemes (7) Coombe Lane West Corridor 50 50 Officers have been meeting with concerned residents on a regular basis over recent years. The concerns relate to speeding and safety issues. There have been numerous damage only collisions at various locations along the route as well as 26 recorded collisions over a 3 year period. The bid is to seek funding to continue these investigations and consult with residents and Ward Members and where appropriate implement any approved measures.

(8) Fountain Roundabout 50 50 An analysis of recent years’ collisions has identified this area as one of concern to officers. Funding was approved in 2008/2009 to carry out a detailed study of the collisions and to analyse collisions, especially involving pedestrians and cyclists with a view to improving the geometry of the existing layout. Officers will be working with Ward Members when reviewing this information to identify any measures that may reduce the level of collisions. The bid is to seek funding to develop minor elements of the outcome of the study in 2009 – 2010 and submit further bid in 2010 – 2011 to implement the remaining aspects of the study.

(9) Kingston Road – Burlington Road 10 10 An analysis of recent years’ collisions has identified this route as one of concern to officers. Funding was approved in 2008/2009 to carry out a detailed study of the collisions and to analyse them, specifically those involving pedestrians, motorcycles, cycles and right turners, whilst also looking at identifying clusters with specific problems. Officers will be working with Ward Members as part of the study to look at developing comprehensive traffic measures. The bid is to seek funding to implement minor elements that arise from the study to improve safety for pedestrians and cyclists.

(10) Malden Road Corridor (between Fountain Roundabout and 100 100 boundary with London Borough of Sutton) An analysis of recent years’ collisions has identified this corridor as one of concern to officers. Funding was approved in 2008/2009 to carry out a detailed study to reduce collisions along the A2043 Malden Road corridor from Fountain roundabout to Worcester Park Station. Officers will be working with Ward Members as part of the study to develop appropriate traffic management measures at those locations highlighted by the study. The bid is to seek funding to implement elements of the outcome of the study to improve safety of pedestrians and cyclists.

(11) Borough-wide powered-2-wheeler safety improvements 90 90 Accidents involving powered-2-wheelers (PTW) have increased in recent years, against the trend of reducing accidents in RBK. They are scattered at different locations with many and possibly diverse reasons for their occurrence. There is an in-depth study being undertaken at the moment using the 2008/09 funding allocation, which includes examination of every accident involving PTWs for the last three years and where possible referral to accident books and interviews with riders. The current bid will enable the outcome of the study to be considered by the Neighbourhoods and developed for future implementation.

(12) Future Scheme Development and Review (Borough-wide) 25 25 This bid allows officers to carry out surveys and engage with residents and Councillors in areas where they have identified safety concerns. This will assist in planning and developing schemes well in advance for future LIP Funding Application submissions.

(13) Joint bid (South of the Borough & Surbiton) 50 50 Hook Road (between Ash Tree Close and Verona Drive) Funding was been allocated in 2008/2009 to carry out a detailed study of the collisions and to analyse collisions. The bid is to seek additional funds to develop measures to reduce the number of accidents at the Hook Road/Thornhill Road junction. Measures to be considered could include possible signalisation of junction and zebra crossing at Vale Road North.

(14) Kingsdowne Road/Ewell Road/Ditton Road 25 25 A study to look at both straight and turning traffic movement as well as collisions at the signalled junction. Pedestrian movement will also be considered.

(15) Raeburn Avenue/Elgar Avenue junction 40 40 A bid to provide two raised tables in Raeburn Avenue either side of the junction with Elgar Avenue. One table will be located at the existing zebra crossing to the north of the junction. (16) Bridge Road 50 50 Develop measures along the whole length of Bridge Road to reduce accidents. Consider additional signal crossings outside Chessington North Station and at Parbury Rise. Also upgrade the existing crossing at Marston Avenue to allow use by cycles. (17) Cox Lane (between Davies Road and Roebuck Road) 40 40 Develop measures to reduce the number of accidents in Cox Lane between Davies Road and Roebuck Road. Consider signalled crossing near the bus stops in Cox Lane. Possible relocation of bus stops and parking bans

(18) Moor Lane Study 10 10 Develop measures to reduce accidents in Moor Lane between its junction with Mount Road and the Borough boundary

(19) High Street / Eden Street 20 20

In 2008 – 2009 funding was provided to introduce an extra low 10 mph speed limit in the area along with appropriate signing and bus friendly traffic calming. This bid is to seek additional funding for further design and investigation to enhance the chances necessary for moving towards a shared use space in the area. Sub-Total 115 50 20 210 100 65 560 20 mph Zones (20) Dickerage Road (The Triangle to Mount Pleasant Road) 25 25 Safety and Speeding issues have been identified in a petition submitted by local residents. This scheme would look to introduce a 20mph speed limit on Dickerage Road from the roundabout at The Triangle up the railway bridge on Dickerage Road. It may require changes to existing traffic calming features to improve conditions outside the adventure playground area and it will also seek to improve pedestrian routes at the roundabout. The project will join up two existing 20mph schemes in Clarence Avenue and Mount Pleasant Road.

(21) Robin Hood Estate 80 80 Local residents have raised concerns over traffic speeds on Robin Hood Lane and Robin hood Way (TfL service road). The proposal would look at the introduction of a 20 mph speed limit through out the area using signs and road markings. These would reinforce those areas which already have physical traffic calming measures. Further consultation on the introduction of further measures in other roads would be required.

(22) Future Scheme Development and Review (Borough-wide) 90 90 This bid allows officers to carry out surveys and engage with residents and Councillors in areas where they have identified safety concerns. This will assist in planning and developing schemes well in advance for future LIP Funding Application submissions.

(23) Park Road/Berrylands Road 25 25 Scheme involves the improvement of the junction layout as well as re-aligning kerb-lines to create priority for traffic on Berrylands Road.

(24) Warren Drive North 40 40 Scheme includes the introduction of a 20 mph limit through signing, road markings and physical traffic calming measures as well as provision of a pedestrian crossing facility in Warren Drive North. STP funding in 2008/09 will be used for initial scheme development/ consultation.

Sub-Total 90 0 0 105 0 65 260 Education, Training and Borough-wide Publicity

(25) Secondary School Road Safety Student Council 10 10 To empower student reps to play a major part in the way road safety messages are targeted. Appoint at least 2 new reps from each secondary school to support peer group road safety education and promotion in schools. Build on the foundations of the student council through a borough wide forum for road safety initiatives appealing to secondary school pupils

(26) Young Drivers Safety 10 10 Increase road safety awareness and knowledge of this high risk group to reduce road safety casualties using promotional events and materials with various road safety messages. (27) Theatre in education 15 15 To raise awareness of all road safety issues as appropriate for the age of the group through touring of selected dramas (28) Reaching hard to reach groups 5 5 To raise awareness of all road safety issues, in particular, pedestrian skills, adult and children's seat belts, PTW’s and drink-driving through engaging with existing community groups and providers. Provide targeted road safety education and promotion via a range of events and materials. Awareness campaign for foreign drivers

(29) Powered 2 wheelers 8 8 To increase awareness for specific issues to P2W users and other motorists on a local level, and publicise training opportunities that are available in the borough. (30) Over 60’s road safety 2 2 To increase driver knowledge and confidence. Provide regular driving advice courses and offer information at public events on changes in legislation and highway code (31) Occupational road risk 12 12 Provide employers with advice and guidance on ORR to encourage development of strategies and policies through employer seminars, individual meetings and regular ORR forums.

(32) Drink / drug driving 5 5 To increase driver awareness of the issues surrounding drink/drug driving with an aim of decreasing the amount of drink/drug drivers. Engage with the local community, disseminate information and plan a strategy for anti drink/drug driving in the borough with Pubwatch.

(33) Public transport passenger safety campaign 2 2 A high impact visual campaign to raise awareness of passenger safety on buses and pedestrians. (34) Town centre and road side pedestrian poster campaign. 4 4 A campaign to influence pedestrian behaviour across the Borough in accord with recent trends in RBK casualty data. Sub-Total 73 0 0 0 0 0 73

Walking (35) Elm Path (The Cut) 30 30 Reports and complaints have been received over a number of years from ward members and residents, particularly parents with buggies and walking children to school about the difficulties faced at the steps at the start of Elm Path. It is a heavily used footpath and links to local schools but also through to New Malden railway station. Replacing the existing steps to provide a ramped access to the footpath at Elm Path/Kingston Road would improve access for people in wheelchairs and also access for buggies and prams.

(36) Hogsmill Walk Strategy 90 90 Scheme 1 - Development of accessible all-weather pathways along Elmbridge Meadows, Long Meadows and behind St. John’s Primary School. Scheme 2 - Redrafting and reprinting of the Hogsmill Valley Walk Leaflet in conjunction with the revising of Hogsmill Valley Walk Strategy Scheme 3 - Japanese Knotweed Eradication Programme Scheme 4 - Path Development Works – Swan Public House to Villiers Road including signage. Scheme 5 - Improve signage along the whole of the route

(37) Future Scheme Development and Review (Borough-wide) 90 90

This bid allows officers to carry out surveys and engage with residents and Councillors in areas where they have identified safety concerns. This will assist in planning and developing schemes well in advance for future LIP Funding Application submissions.

(38) Walking Audits & DDA Accessibility Improvements (Borough-wide) 30 30 A structured approach in the continuing audits of walking conditions to and from schools, community facilities, public buildings such as libraries and leisure facilities, transport interchanges and local shopping areas. Provide walking audit for Area Based Schemes and Accessibility proposals.

(39) Red Lion Road 50 50 Side road entry treatments, complementary waiting restrictions and zebra crossing outside Tolworth Hospital. Red Lion Road links the A3 Trunk Road to Tolworth District Centre. It incorporates a hospital, three schools and a business park, and is a bus route. It also links large residential areas with Tolworth District Centre. (40) Surbiton Town Centre 150 150

(41) Joint bid (South of the Borough & Surbiton) 140 140

Tolworth District Centre

Develop and implement further walking improvements in Tolworth Broadway and its feeder routes in parallel with the larger area based scheme (42) St James Road, Kingston 250 250

Develop and implement walking inprovements in St James Road, Kingston 200 200 (43) Joint bid (Kingston and Maldens & Coombe)

Norbiton Station to Kingston Hospital Develop and implement walking improvements between Norbiton Station and Kingston Hospital (44) Thameside Footpath and open space 25 25 1. Provide a riverside footway completing the link between the town centre’s commercial area and Canbury Gardens. 2. Rationalise the area used for car parking and reduce its visual impact. 3. Introduce an appropriate landscaping scheme between the built-up urban riverside and the “soft” riverside recreation area of Canbury Gardens

(45) Eagle Wharf 250 250 1. Resurfacing using resin-bonded gravel. 2. A stage area suitable for outdoor performance, 3. Wooden decking to link adjacent pub garden and stage. 4. A soft landscaped area incorporating a tree lined walkway, informal seating and lighting

Sub-Total 120 430 525 30 0 200 1305 Cycling (Local & LCN+)

Link 121 - (A308 London Road/Kingston Hill/Kingston Vale) between its junction with Queen Elizabeth Road and A3 Robin Hood Way/Kingston bypass (46) Joint bid (Maldens & Coombe & Kingston) 300 300 Link 121 – A308 London Road / Kingston Hill between Manorgate 5 arm roundabout and Warren Road. Improvements to existing advisory cycle lanes, and feasibility and introduction of cycle tracks and side-road entry treatments. (47) Joint bid (Maldens & Coombe & Kingston) 200 200

Link 121 – A308 Kingston Hill (Manorgate Road to Warren Road). Improvements to existing advisory cycle lanes, feasibility and introduction of cycle tracks and side road entry treatments. (48) Link 121 – A308 Kingston Hill Toucan by entrance to Kingston 75 75 University –Kingston Hill Campus Implement toucan crossing to facilitate cycling, walking and bus trips to and from the University campus. (Although not supported by the Neighbourhood Executive resolved that this should be included in the 2008/09 Bid)

(49) Link 121 – A308 Kingston Hill Toucan junction with Ladderstile 75 75 Ride/Warren Road Implement toucan crossing to facilitate cycling, walking and bus trips to and from Richmond Park. (Although not supported by the Neighbourhood Executive resolved that this should be included in the 2008/09 Bid)

(50) Joint bid (Maldens & Coombe & Kingston) 100 100 Link 121 – Entire Link Improvements. Overhaul 60% of cycle direction signing, signing cycle route spurs and side road entry treatments.

300 300 (51) Link 121 – A308 London Road / Kingston Hill between Queen Elizabeth Road and Manorgate 5-arm roundabout

Feasibility study and introduction of cycle tracks and cycle crossings to provide improved safety and comfort for cyclists (52) Link 121 – A308 Kingston Hill junction with Park Road & Manorgate 50 50 Road

Improvements to existing five-arm roundabout and cycle route access to Norbiton Railway Station

Link 122 - Ham Parade to Worcester Park Station (via A307 Richmond Road, Kingston Town Centre, Berrylands Railway Station, South Lane & A2043 Malden Road (53) Link 122 – A3 junction with South Lane Subway 20 20

Implement improved cycle and pedestrian access/egress to subway in conjunction with TfL proposals to improve cycle routes along the A3 Kingston bypass (Feasibility & preliminary design funded in 2008/09). (54) Link 122 – Rose Walk to Hogsmill 50 50 Provision of daytime only / traffic free route between Berrylands Railway Station and Hogsmill Cycle Bridge via Hogsmill open space

(55) Link 122 – Wood Street (south side) between Dolphin Street and 200 200 Fife Road including automatic traffic signal controlled cycle crossing of Wood Street Introduction direct cycle route between Kingston Bridge & Kingston Railway Station. (Scheme started in 2007/8) Phase 3

(56) Link 122 – Kingston Town Centre Cycle routes 5 5 Contribution towards staff time to address cycle route continuity issues as part of Eden Quarter redevelopment (57) Link 122 – Springfield Rd (Blue Bridge) between Grange Road and 40 40 Denmark Road Introduction of improvements to cycle and pedestrian access points, including environmental improvements (scheme design feasibility funded in 2008/9)

(58) Link 122 – A307 Richmond Road / Kings Road 25 25 Feasibility study to review existing automatic signal controlled junction and implement improvements for cyclists and pedestrians.

(59) Link 122 – A307 Richmond Rd / Latchmere Rd / Bank Lane 75 75 Introduction of Toucan crossing (Feasibility & preliminary design funded in 2008/9) (60) Link 122 - A307 Richmond Rd / Tudor Drive / Dukes Ave 30 30 Implement introduction of diagonal cycle and pedestrian crossing points at existing automatic signal controlled junction (Feasibility & preliminary design funded in 2008/9). (61) Joint bid (Kingston & Surbiton) 50 50 Link 122 – Lower Marsh Lane cycle and pedestrian path Widening of existing unsegregated shared path, including segregation of users and access improvements at the western end.

Link 123 Ham Parade to A243 Hook Road/Bridge Road roundabout via Lower Ham Road, Kingston Town Centre, A307 Portsmouth Road, A243 Brighton Road/Upper Brighton Road/Hook Road) (62) Link 123 – A243 Hook Road between Langley 5-arm roundabout and 100 100 A3 Kingston bypass Introduction of side-road entry treatments. (63) Link 123 – A243 Brighton Road between A307Portsmouth Road & 20 20 Victoria Road Review waiting & loading restrictions to improve ease of movement and safety of cyclists and pedestrians. (64) Link 123 – Hook Parade 30 30

Feasibility, preliminary design and introduction of an east-west cycle link between Elm Road and Clayton Road across A243 Hook Road (65) Link 123 – Fullers Way South / Hunters Road / Gosbury Hill / Elm 40 40 Road Introduction of side-road entry treatments. (66) Link 123 – Skerne Road / Downhall Road / Wood Street 30 30 Improvements to existing automatic traffic signal controlled cycle crossings.

(67) Link 123 – Woodbines Ave between A307 Portsmouth Road and 25 25 A240 Penrhyn Road Link from LCN+ cycle route to Kingston University

Link 124 Kingston Bridge to A3 Burlington Road junction via Kingston Town Centre, Fairfield South, Hawks Road, Bonner Hill Road, Hampden Road, A2043 Cambridge Road, Kingston Road and B282 Burlington Road. (68) Joint bid (Maldens & Coombe & Kingston)Link 124 – A2043 250 250 Cambridge Road / Kingston Road between King Henry’s Road & Elm Road Introduction of revised waiting and loading restrictions, including introduction of in-set parking bays at various locations to keep existing advisory cycle lanes clear of obstructive parking (Feasibility/preliminary design started in 2008/09)

(69) Link 124 – Elm Road Railway Bridge & Level Crossing 25 25 Introduce improvements for cyclists and pedestrians at Railway Bridge/level crossing (Feasibility & preliminary design started in 2008/09).

(70) Link 124 – Kingston Road / Fountain Roundabout 25 25 Contribution towards improvements for all road users at existing roundabout (Feasibility & preliminary design started in 2008/09) (71) Link 124 – Footpath along railway line between Kingston Road and 50 50 Elm Road Widening of existing footpath to provide for cycling and pedestrian movement. (Feasibility & preliminary design started in 2008/09) (72) Link 124 – A2043 Kingston Rd between Elm Road and Fountain 75 75 Roundabout & B282 Burlington Road Introduction of revised waiting and loading restrictions, including introduction of in-set parking bays at various locations to keep existing advisory cycle lanes clear of obstructive parking (Feasibility/preliminary design started in 2008/09)

(73) Link 124 – Wheatfield Way to A2043 Cambridge Road (via Orchard 75 75 Road) Introduction of side road entry treatments and general cycle route improvements including existing 'Fire Gate' road closure in Bonner Hill Road

(74) Link 124 – Wheatfield Way between Penrhyn Road and Orchard 80 80 Road Introduction of off-road cycle route and modifications to the existing Wheatfield Way/Orchard Road pelican crossing (Feasibility & preliminary design started in 2008/9) (75) Link 124 – A2043 Cambridge Road / Hampden Road / Gloucester 10 10 Road Feasibility study and preliminary design for the provision of crossings to assist cycle, pedestrian and bus movements through the junction

(76) Link 124 – A308 Horsefair / Wood Sreet between Kingston Bridge 50 50 and Kingston Railway Station Feasibility, detailed design and introduction of improved access to Kingston Railway Station for cyclists along north side of Horsefair/Wood Street

(77) Link 124 – Wheatfield Way / Ladybooth Road / Fairfield Road 15 15

Design and implement improvements to approach routes to existing Toucan crossing. Link 126 between Surbiton Town Centre & Villiers Rd/Villiers Avenue/Lingfield Avenue via Victoria Road, Claremont Road, Maple Road, Beaufort Road, Lingfield Avenue (78) Joint bid (Kingston & Surbiton) 50 50 Link 126 Surbiton Road jw Surbiton Hill Road/Maple Road/Beaufort Road Introduction of cycling and pedestrian improvements to existing automatic signal controlled junction (Feasibility/preliminary design started in 2008/9)

(79) Joint bid (Kingston & Surbiton) 15 15 Link 126 – Beaufort Road / Lingfield Avenue / Cranes Park Introduction of cycling and pedestrian improvements to existing automatic signal controlled junction (Feasibility/preliminary design started in 2008/9)

(80) Link 126 – Victoria Road (between Brighton Road and St Marks Hill) 200 200

Contribution towards Victoria Road Vehicle Restricted Area including LBPN and environmental improvements (Feasibility/preliminary design started in 2008/9)

(81) A2043 Malden Road between Fountain Roundabout and A3 Malden 50 50 junction Introduction of cycle route to connect with cycling and walking improvements introduced by TfL at the A3 Malden Roundabout in 2007/08 (Feasibility/preliminary design started in 2008/09). (82) Joint bid (South of the Borough & Surbiton) 25 25

Red Lion Road, Tolworth

Side road entry treatments, junction waiting restrictions and review of parking (83) Bridge Road junction with Marston Avenue and North Parade, 30 30 Chessington Conversion of existing pelican crossing to Toucan crossing to allow movement of cycles. (84) Cox Lane 20 20 Improvements to the existing cycle lanes and linkage to the cycle route across Tolworth Court Farm (85) Moor Lane 20 20 Improvements to the existing cycle lanes between Bridge Road and the Borough boundary (86) Clayton Road, Chessington 50 50 Introduction of side-road entry treatments, review of parking arrangements and additional waiting restrictions. (87) Secure cycle parking in Kingston Town Centre 50 50

Continue to develop and introduce three secure cycle parking centres as part of K+20 (Area Action Plan and redevelopment of Kingston Town Centre). (88) Borough-wide - Residential Cycle Parking 30 30

Design and introduce secure cycle parking secure residents cycle parking. (89) Borough-wide - Cycle Training 120 120 The Road Safety & Travel Awareness Unit offers a variety of training to suit cyclists of all ages and abilities in group or 1:1 sessions. (90) Borough-wide - Maintenance of non LCN+ routes 20 20 Maintenance will include:- - proposed additional cycle parking, carriageway surfacing, white line markings, cycle direction signing and coloured surfacing - civil engineering works at several existing signalised crossings. - additional waiting and loading restrictions to improve sight lines and keep cycle lanes clear of obstructive on-street parking - regular cleaning of traffic free corridors, to keep them looking attractive and non-threatening.

(91) Borough-wide - New & improved facilities non LCN+ routes 100 100

Upgrading existing infrastructure and connection to LCN+ routes

Sub-Total 270 990 1060 395 190 370 3275 Bus Stop Accessibility (92) Borough-wide - Bus Stop Accessibility Remedial and completion 30 30 works Sub-Total 30 0 0 0 0 0 30 Local Bus Priority Measures (93) Kingston Hill (University interchange Study) 10 10 A new bus interchange is proposed by TfL London Buses at the Kingston Hill campus to improve highway links. Undertake feasibility design for Toucan crossing at entrance to facilitate the bus interchange and cycling, walking and bus trips to and from the campus.

(94) Joint bid (Maldens & Coombe & Kingston) 10 10 A2043 Kingston Road / St John's Road The original scheme proposal was for carriageway widening and inset parking bays into the footway to create a wider and longer right turn filter lane with amendments to signing and lining that does not impede the straight on movement.This scheme will be dropped as in October 2007 Committee resolved the scheme to improve this junction should comprise of two pedestrian refuges, adjustments to the layout of the right turning lane and waiting restrictions. This scheme to be implemented with funding in 2008- 09.The new scheme will be monitored and reviewed to identify any additional improvements.

(95) Joint bid (Kingston and Surbiton) 100 100 Corridor improvements between Surbiton Station and Kingston Town centre The creation of a 'Bus Expressway' between Kingston and Surbiton would enhance existing bus priority in Kingston Town Centre and improve bus rail interchange in Surbiton Town Centre. (Feasibility and preliminary design funded in 2008-09. This study will be developed and detailed proposals submitted for approval and implementation.)

To implement bus priority improvements such as sections of bus lane, vehicle restricted section, local widening and signal timing amendments where necessary. (96) Victoria Road 150 150 Outline proposals for traffic management and environmental improvements such as a vehicle restricted area will be developed as part of an overall strategy for Surbiton Town Centre.

(Feasibility and preliminary design funded in 2008-09). This study will be developed and detailed proposals submitted for approval and implementation). To implement resulting approved improvements once the initial strategy has been agreed.

(97) Ewell Road (Route 281 Bus Lane Review) 50 50 Design and introduce improvements to scheme identified in ongoing monitoring study (Feasibility and preliminary design funded in 2008-09).

(98) Wood Street / Clarence Street (Bus Only Area) 125 125

Design road space re-allocation for benefit of pedestrians and bus movements. Investigate signal phasing change to enable easier northbound exit for buses from Wood Street at Horsefair junction. Amend kerb lines, signal timing, signing and lining. (Feasibility and preliminary design funded in 2008-09)

(99) A308 London Road / Albert Road / Cambridge Road 40 40 It was originally proposed to introduce new signals at the junction with Albert Road to be linked to the existing ones at Cambridge Road. This may not be cost-effective, and this proposal will be reviewed with funding in 2008-09 for feasibility and design of an alternative proposal at London Road / Cambridge Road. To implement improvements to the layout and signals at London Rd / Cambridge Rd to achieve benefits to traffic flows in the area.

Sub-Total 0 110 165 10 0 200 485 Town Centres Sub-Total

Streets-for-People

Sub-Total School Travel Plans (STP)

(100) Malden Parochial Primary 20 20 A review of the School Travel Plan has identified concerns over parents/children crossing towards the school entrance it includes a request for a Zebra Crossing in the section of The Manor Drive by the school entrance. Funding to address issues and barriers to sustainable travel as identified by school communities through the School Travel Plan development and annual updating process.

(101) The Study School, (20mph o/s school) 5 5 The School is currently developing a Travel Plan and has identified local improvements to pedestrian and cycle routes that would encourage parents not to drive. Funding to address issues and barriers to sustainable travel as identified by school communities through the School Travel Plan development and annual updating process.

(102) Christ Church Primary 10 10 Improvements in Manor Drive. Funding to address issues and barriers to sustainable travel as identified by school communities through the School Travel Plan development and annual updating process.' (103) Chessington Community College (CCC) 5 5 Complete existing scheme and make pedestrian improvements at station. Funding to address issues and barriers to sustainable travel as identified by school communities through the School Travel Plan development and annual updating process.

(104) Ellingham Primary School 65 65 Convert existing build-out into a formal crossing at Bridge Road/Parbury Rise junction. Funding to address issues and barriers to sustainable travel as identified by school communities through the School Travel Plan development and annual updating process.

(105) Lovelace Primary 40 40 Improvements in Clayton Road i.e. side entry treatments between Oaklands Close and Cricketers Close to assist pedestrians. 20 mph in Devon Way. Funding to address issues and barriers to sustainable travel as identified by school communities through the School Travel Plan development and annual updating process.

(106) St Mary’s Primary 10 10 Lighting improvements along Churchfields path. Funding to address issues and barriers to sustainable travel as identified by school communities through the School Travel Plan development and annual updating process. (107) Alexandra Infants 25 25

Brunswick Road entry treatment at both ends. Funding to address issues and barriers to sustainable travel as identified by school communities through the School Travel Plan development and annual updating process.

(108) King Athelstan 20 20 Improvements to Footpath No. 32 (Linking Portman Road, Avenue Road and Mill Street to Villiers Road). Funding to address issues and barriers to sustainable travel as identified by school communities through the School Travel Plan development and annual updating process.

(109) St Josephs 50 50 Cycle track along The Fairfield. Funding to address issues and barriers to sustainable travel as identified by school communities through the School Travel Plan development and annual updating process.

(110) The Mount 10 10 Tightening up of King Henry’s junction. Provision of pedestrian route to school via the rear entrance. Funding to address issues and barriers to sustainable travel as identified by school communities through the School Travel Plan development and annual updating process.

(111) Tiffin Girls 15 15 Drive / bus stop issues. Provision of dedicated new pedestrian access to link bus stop and school. Funding to address issues and barriers to sustainable travel as identified by school communities through the School Travel Plan development and annual updating process.

(112) (Borough-wide) School Travel Plan Officer 25 25 (113) (Borough-wide) STP – Monitoring and Updating 30 30 (114) (Borough-wide) STP – School Travel Plan Network 10 10 (115) (Borough-wide) STP – Survey & Consultation Support 10 10 (116) (Borough-wide) STP – Small Grants Fund 50 50 (117) (Borough-wide) STP – Student Council 10 10 (118) (Borough-wide) STP - Theatre in Education 7 7 (119) (Borough-wide) STP – Supply staff 3 3 (120) (Borough-wide) STP – Celebration Events 2 2 (121) (Borough-wide) STP - Internal Promotional Materials 1 1 (122) (Borough-wide) STP – Engineering & Design 30 30 (123) (Borough-wide) Walk to School / Walk once a Week 30 30 Sub-Total 208 0 120 25 120 10 483 Workplace Travel Plan (124) (Borough-wide) Dr Bike Cycle Maintenance 1 1 Engage with local workplaces with or those interested in developing a travel plan to hold regular Dr Bike sessions and bike maintenance training courses at workplaces, including at least three Dr Bike sessions during Bike Week 2008. (125) (Borough-wide) Workplace Cycle Training 2.5 2.5 To provide and promote free group or 1:1 cycle training for employees at workplaces as well as those interested in developing a Travel Plan.

(126) (Borough-wide) Try Cycling to Work 2 2 To run two “try cycling to work programme” schemes offering intensive support (including the loan of bikes and equipment) to 20+ employees of at least two organisations (also known as Cycle 50% Club).

(127) (Borough-wide) Workplace Travel Awareness Promotion 10 10 To introduce Workplace Travel Awareness to all employers. Provide support to those interested in developing a Travel Plan with promotional materials to improve travel awareness and encourage and enable employees to use sustainable travel modes, such as literature to promote sustainable travel, travel information leaflets and maps, online public transport, walking and cycling route planners. Also other promotional materials/incentives (e.g. pedometers, umbrellas, puncture repair kits etc) and promotional events (e.g. cycling seminars, commuter breakfasts etc).

(128) (Borough-wide) Car Clubs 10 10 Expansion of network (129) (Borough-wide) Voluntary Residential Travel Plan Implementation 10 10

(130) Area Travel Plan – Surbiton 20 20

Work with businesses in Surbiton to seek ways to encourage joint working between businesses to encourage travel by more sustainable modes (131) Area Travel Plan – Chessington Industrial Estate 20 20

Work with businesses in Chessington to seek ways to encourage joint working between businesses to encourage travel by more sustainable modes. To include hosting network forums/ seminar sessions, production of promotional events and literature aimed at businesses/employees and the implementation of specific areas wide measures and initiatives as identified in surveys (e.g. car share schemes). (132) Kingston Travel Plan Network 3 3 Administration and development of the Kingston Travel Plan Network (KTPN) to include the running of quarterly meetings and the implementation of joint initiatives identified by the KTPN. The existing membership will be maintained and hopefully increased. SWELTRAC Sub Regional Coordinator will continue to be invited to attend (133) Workplace Travel Plan Promotion 8 8

To further develop and promote involvement in an Area wide Travel Plan covering Kingston Town Centre including hosting network forums/ seminar sessions, production of promotional events/ literature and the implementation of specific areas wide measures and initiatives e.g. car share schemes). Working in partnership with SWELTRAC, TfL and Kingston Town Centre Management. Sub-Total 35.5 0 31 0 20 20 106.5 Travel Awareness (135) (Borough-wide) Bike Week 2008 12 12 A range of events targeting mainly new cyclists to provide an opportunity and support to get them cycling.

(136) (Borough-wide) Euro Mobility Week / In –Town-Without-My-Car- 18 18 Day 2008 A range of events promoting all forms of sustainable transport and working with the UK co-ordinator to organise a car free event (137) (Borough-wide) DIY Planet Repairs – Travel Awareness 3 3 Newsletters Cost to print paper and distribute DIY Planet Repairs newsletters including funds for competitions and incentives. (138) (Borough-wide) Smarter Driving 5 5 An event to promote smarter driving to increase awareness of the fuel efficiency of different types of vehicles, to promote home working, flexible working and trip combining (139) (Borough-wide) Bike Maintenance Courses 4 4 To help run and promote bike maintenance for local residents, employees and businesses. To pay for cycle instructors to teach local cyclists how to make minor adjustments and repairs.

(140) (Borough-wide) DIY Planet Repairs – Fresher's Fayre 3 3 Production of collateral and promotion at Kingston University and Kingston College during Fresher's Fayre in September to educate students about their options for travelling to university / college.

(140) (Borough-wide) DIY Planet Repairs – Promotional material 9 9 To produce new collateral and materials for promotions to help with the change from good going branding to the new DIY Planet Repairs branding.

(141) (Borough-wide) Walking Works 6 6 Aim to promote a walk to work week as in August 2006 - pilot event held with all the companies in Kingston Travel Plan Network (142) (Borough-wide) Women on Wheels 1 1 This funding will also help promote the Women on Wheels campaign by publicising the rides via a range of leaflets, posters and adverts. (143) (Borough-wide) DIY Planet Repairs – Branded Advertising 5 5 Campaign Media campaign to promote public transport as attractive alternatives to the car during the winter months. Sub-Total 66 0 0 0 0 0 66 Freight (144) Through Traffic in the Painters Estate 35 35

During recent consultations with local residents on the effectiveness of 20mph schemes the problem high levels of through traffic in Painters Estate and onto the Sunray Estate was identified. The bid would allow officers and ward members to identify the extent of the problem and to investigate the problem. A series of surveys would be carried out with a view to quantifying the level of the problems, the vehicles involved and designing a comprehensive and appropriate Traffic Management scheme for consideration by the Neighbourhood Committee. (145) Lorry intrusion: Albert Road, Kingston 60 60 Albert Road, Victoria Road and Church Road are roads within a 7.5 tonne lorry ban zone. Unfortunately, the close proximity to a Post office depot and the Council’s civic amenity sites mean that observance of the ban is poor. A scheme that revises the existing system of one way workings would enable the introduction of a width restriction that would remove this attractive short cut whilst still enabling access for essential deliveries is proposed.

(146) Kingston Town Centre Lorry Zones 10 10 Publicity campaign to increase public aware of zoning within the Town Centre. This is a follow up of the consultation with businesses in 2006 - 2007

Sub-Total 0 0 70 35 0 0 105 Regeneration Area Schemes

Sub-Total Local Area Accessibility

Sub-Total Parallel Initiatives

Sub-Total Other

(147) Investigation of Selected Bus Route Construction Failures

(Tudor Drive, Amberwood Rise, Garrison Lane, Gilders Road, Stokesby 60 60 Road, South Lane) To engage the services of a materials consultancy to undertake site investigation works to establish an accurate inventory of existing road construction, the likely deterioration rate and a suitable replacement specification. This will enable a strategy and funding requirements with regard to the long term maintenance and sustainability of these bus routes Sub-Total 0 60 0 0 0 0 60 GRAND TOTAL 1607.5 1640 1991 1140 430 1773 8581.5 C70

ANNEX 3

EXTRACT FROM THE APPROVED LIP SETTING OUT THE POLICY FRAMEWORK WHICH UNDERPINS THE PROPOSALS BEING PUT FORWARD FOR FUNDING

Policy 1 In line with the London wide approach in the Mayor's Transport Strategy (MTS) the Council will pursue demand restraint policies.

Policy 2 The UDP directs larger scale trip attractors (shops, offices, leisure, community facilities etc.) to Kingston and the district centres, which include most of the sites with high Public Transport Accessibility Level (PTAL) ratings, and which allow multi-purpose trips. Higher density residential developments are similarly encouraged in high accessibility areas. (UDP Policy H6 includes a cross- reference to the London Plan Parking and Density Matrix.) Mixed-use developments are normally encouraged in town centres and on Proposal Sites, e.g. UDP policies STR21, DC2, para 15.5 and specific site policies.

Policy 3 Given that new road building is neither desirable nor practical, and the desire to reduce traffic levels, the central objective will be modal shift. In 2001 53% of all trips by Borough residents were made by car, van or taxi and 47% by other means. The Council propose to bring the car share down to 50% by 2006 and 45% by 2011 so that 55% of trips will be made by other means in 2011. That will permit a slight decrease in absolute levels of car use in the Borough’s town centres (down 5% by 2011) and in the Borough as a whole (down 3% by 2011).

Policy 4 The Council will ensure that parking and loading arrangements meet the reasonable needs of business. Policy 5 On the great majority of the Borough’s roads the Council will promote and prioritise the interests of users following a hierarchy of: • Pedestrians including disabled people using electrically powered mobility vehicles. • Cyclists • Public and Community Transport Vehicles, Blue Badge Vehicles and Taxis • Freight Vehicles and Powered Two Wheelers (PTWs) • Private Cars Policy 6 In line with requirements of the Traffic Management Act the Council has appointed a Traffic Manager, who will co-ordinate the Council’s efforts to minimise congestion and improve the Kingston Town Traffic Response Plan. The Council also plans to extend its contingency planning, as part of its Network Management Duty, to ensure that accidents or other incidents that have a severe impact on traffic flows are managed so as to cause the least disruption. The duty came into force in January 2005 and plans will be prepared for the strategic road network in the Borough, which covers all the principal roads and key bus routes.

Policy 7 Integration between bus and train, and with each of the other means of transport, is an underlying policy to be considered within all public transport proposals. The Council will also continue working with public transport operators to reduce crime and the fear of crime at stations, stops and on vehicles, using CCTV etc.

Policy 8 The Council strongly support the Airtrack rail scheme which has a benefit cost ratio of 2.7 and would allow anyone in South London who can access the rail network to reach Heathrow by rail with at most one interchange.

Policy 9 The Council propose much greater bus priority on strategically important bus routes. It will also ensure that any other proposals affecting the roads used by buses, especially on the main corridors, avoid any significant adverse impact on buses. C71

Policy 10 The Council will work with London Buses, rail operators and local organisations like Kingston Town Centre Management to maximise the awareness and use of public transport. Free travel on buses for children under 16 will be publicised and should support efforts to increase travel to school by non-car modes.

Policy 11 The Council has systematically sought the establishment of K prefix services linked to the main shopping, work and health destinations of residents. It will continue to do so as a means of bringing all residents within 400 metres of a bus stop and, where necessary, will consider pump priming of services while they become established.

Policy 12 The Council will also continue its programme of bus stop accessibility works intended to allow low floor buses to operate effectively.

Policy 13 The Council feels that some further transfer of cross-border bus services from Surrey operators to TfL in the next five years would be the best means to improve service frequency and fare affordability, and will continue to press for such improvement.

Policy 14 We will continue to improve the ease of physical access for disabled travellers, pedestrians, cyclists and bus passengers through modifications to the Borough’s roads and footways around railway stations.

Policy 15 The Council will lobby in pursuit of more frequent and reliable rail services, better staffing levels at overburdened ticket offices and other aspects of security and information for existing and potential rail passengers.

Policy 16 Community transport makes a vital contribution to improving social inclusion and the Council wants to increase its capacity to identify and satisfy demand.

Policy 17 The Council is determined to achieve, as a minimum, a 50% reduction by 2010 in the numbers killed or seriously injured (KSI) compared to the 1994-98 average.

Policy 18 More than any other measure within the control of local authorities, 20 mph zones deliver casualty reduction. They have many other benefits as well so the Council is exploring how it could most effectively meet MTS proposal 4G.Pr9 and move to the position where residential roads and shopping streets have 20 mph speed limits unless there is a justification for a higher limit.

Policy 19 As its contribution to the London wide target of raising cycle use 80% between 2001 and 2011 RBK aims to raise its 3% modal share in 2001 to 6% in 2011. To ensure that this growth does not lead to more cyclist casualties the Road Safety Plan targets at least a halving of the casualty rate per mile by 2010.

Policy 20 The Council will, therefore, continue enhancing the network of LCN+ and other on and off- street cycling routes and providing more facilities to promote cycle use. The whole road network bar the A3 should be safe for use by cyclists. Facilities include RBK provided on-street secure cycle parking for general public use serving existing businesses, shops, stations, libraries etc. A steady increase in off-street cycle parking provision will be achieved through the application of minimum standards to new developments. To encourage cycling to rail stations the Council will seek more cycle parking within stations and supports reallocation of space in station car parks for use by cyclists.

Policy 21 The policy is to comprehensively improve pedestrian facilities on the highway so that almost the whole road network can safely be used. Only the A3, which operates much like an urban motorway, is not suitable for this approach and instead requires subways or bridges to allow pedestrians to cross in safety. Programmes of footway improvements, new crossing facilities and revisions to pedestrian phases at signalled junctions are planned. By 2006 all the pedestrian C72 crossings except zebras will have facilities for both disabled people and those with mobility impairment. All zebra crossings already have dropped kerbs and tactile paving. In addition pedestrianisation will be pursued and all other highway maintenance and improvement work will be designed to include enhancements for pedestrians (and cyclists) if any opportunity exists.

Policy 22 The Council view responsible use of PTWs as a contribution to more efficient use of road space and to car traffic reduction. RBK plans to improve PTW parking provision on-street and in Council controlled off-street car parks. To encourage appropriate provision at other locations we intend that minimum standards should apply to new developments.

Policy 23 The Council will employ Asset Management Plans to determine the extent and timing of maintenance requirements during the period of the LIP. Each Plan will have four sections: • Inventory • Condition shortfall • Programme to eliminate shortfall • Planned maintenance to ensure assets remain at the required standard

Policy 24 Where the need for a major scheme on a road carrying structure is identified the Council’s policy is to include improvements for pedestrians, cyclists and, if appropriate buses as was successfully achieved on Kingston Bridge.

Policy 25 The Council will play its full part in ensuring that the condition of all ‘A’ Roads and Busy Bus Routes are brought to a serviceable standard by 2010

Policy 26 To help avoid congestion locally and beyond the Borough, the Council will notify TfL of planned maintenance work on the strategic road network. This will enable TfL to ensure no simultaneous works are planned on, for instance, a parallel diversionary route in another Borough .

Policy 28 The Council will ensure that, during all types of highway maintenance, contractors and council officers use the latest techniques to reduce contamination of watercourses and soil and to manage and maintain the network in a manner that favours fauna and flora e.g. green corridors along road verges.

Policy 29 The Council’s parking policies must contribute to mode switching objectives. On and off- street parking policies are designed to make commuter parking less easy or attractive than was the case in the past.

Policy 30 The Council will systematically assess the street network and remove redundant signs etc. It will rationalise policies on the extent of signing required and make shared use of posts and columns whenever practical.

APPENDIX D Executive, 13 May 2008

APPROVING THE KINGSTON LOCAL AREA AGREEMENT Report of the Chief Executive Leader of the Council and Executive Member for Improvement and Performance

Purpose

This report updates the Executive on the stage reached in preparing our new Local Area Agreement 2008/09 to 2010/11. In accordance with a Government direction all councils must approve and submit to Government by 30 May a draft Local Area Agreement (LAA), which will then be considered and signed off by Government in June. A current position statement on the progress of negotiating our LAA targets is attached (ANNEX 1). This makes evident that, for a number of reasons, the negotiating process has not progressed as planned, and much further work is still required in order to agree LAA targets.

Action proposed

The Executive is requested to:

1. agree that, in order to permit negotiations to continue up until the 30 May deadline, authority be delegated to the Chief Executive, in consultation with the Leader of the Council, to approve a final version of the draft LAA for submission to Government;

2. agree that, in the event that guidance to inform target-setting continues to be incomplete by the 30 May deadline, the Leader of the Council should write to the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government to express the Council's concerns about the LAA negotiating process; and

3. note the related activity to develop the new Kingston Community Plan.

Reason for action proposed To comply with Government direction that all local authorities submit a draft LAA by 30 th May 2008.

BACKGROUND

1. The current Local Area Agreement (LAA) came to an end on 31 March. New style LAAs will come into effect for all local authorities on 1 st April 2008 and have a three year lifespan 2008/09 to 2010/11. Although the process of developing the new LAAs has proved slower and more difficult than planned, the LAA concept, if it can be made to work, still represents a very positive and welcome development. It does respond to representations that we and others have made over a number of years to allow local areas more freedom to set a shared local agenda and it promises a more mature and equal relationship between central Government and local areas.

2. The purpose of this report is to provide the Executive with an update on the negotiations and to request that authority be delegated to the Chief Executive, in consultation with the Leader of the Council, to approve a final version of the draft LAA for submission to Government, so that negotiations can continue up until the 30 May deadline.

3. We are also working with partners on updating the Kingston Community Plan for the period to 2020. This will be known as the Kingston Sustainable Community Strategy (SCS). We have used this process to generate our new LAA – the new SCS will set the longer-term vision and the LAA will serve as a three-year delivery plan. So, although LAAs are being prioritised as part of the Government’s agenda, the SCS is more significant in setting our shared local agenda. We are currently consulting on the content of this new Strategy.

WORK UNDERTAKEN TO DATE

4. Since the last report to the Executive in March, work has continued with partners on determining the ‘up to 35’ priorities for Kingston selected from the National Indicator set of 198. These cover the key areas of importance for Kingston including closing the gap in education outcomes; improving health and wellbeing; making Kingston safer; sustaining and enhancing our economic growth and protecting our environment. We are also proposing a local indicator to reduce our Ecological Footprint.

5. Formal feedback from the Government Office for London (GOL) on our initial selection of indicators was very positive, with a good alignment between the identification of priorities selected by us and GOL. GOL have however commented that they consider that an area like Kingston requires far fewer than 35 indicators in its LAA. This reflects a ‘deficit’ perspective where only areas of underperformance are highlighted in the LAA. However, we with our partners have taken a different view, wishing the LAA to reflect a broad basket of local area priorities including some where we are already high-performing. This approach also enables us to spread the risk and include some very challenging areas (such as decent homes) where we will face a daunting task to hit targets and earn reward grant. This broader approach has been understood and accepted by GOL.

PROGRESS ON AGREEING TARGETS

6. At this stage we had hoped to be able to provide Executive with sufficient information to approve a draft LAA to submit to Government. However, the process has not proceeded in accordance with the Government’s original timetable.

7. Although Government issued a direction to all councils to require them to submit approved draft LAAs by the end of May, the guidance required to inform the preparation of targets is only slowly becoming available. Final definitions of the new national indicators (NIs) were only released on 1 April. Target briefs for individual NIs did not start to appear until mid-April and at the time of finalising this report several are still awaited. The guidance on how LAA reward will be calculated, which is fairly critical for setting the rules of the game, is still not available, even though originally promised by February 2008.

8. In the circumstances the Government Office accept that there are bound to be gaps in our submission at this stage and that there will be a number of loose ends to be resolved when the LAA is refreshed around December 2008.

9. Nevertheless, despite the difficulties, we will want to seek to reach agreement on as many targets as possible by the 30 May deadline. Clarity about the targets agreed is essential in order to facilitate action planning and to maximise attainment in the first year. So the lack of negotiated targets is not merely a technical issue.

10. Annex 1 sets out the current position reached on negotiation of LAA targets. It lists all the indicators identified for possible inclusion and shows the current status of each. Overall, there are still 33 indicators under consideration, excluding the two local indicators. Draft targets for 10 of these have been submitted to GOL but are still subject to negotiation. Target-setting is underway for 15 others, leaving eight where further guidance or baseline data is required before target setting can proceed. An update on the position will be available at the meeting.

11. In order to permit negotiations to continue up until the 30 May deadline, the Executive is asked to agree that authority be delegated to the Chief Executive, in consultation with the Leader of the Council, to approve a final version of the draft LAA for submission to Government.

PREPARING OUR NEW COMMUNITY PLAN

12. We are also taking this opportunity to review our Community Plan. The current Community Plan runs from 2004 to 2009. Government terminology has changed and Community Plans will now be known as Sustainable Community Strategies (SCS). The SCS will set the long term vision and ambition for Kingston to 2020. The LAA will serve as the delivery plan for the first three years of the SCS (i.e. 2008/09 to 2010/11).

13. We have appointed MVA Consultancy to undertake the planned consultation activity reported at the last meeting to help develop the new SCS. This will have three main parts-

• General Publicity via a Leaflet together with an on-line survey;

• Residents’ Focus Groups or Workshop to test out issues and priorities in greater depth with small group(s) of residents; and

• Consultation events involving community / functional groups to cover wide range of stakeholders including harder to reach groups (e.g. younger people, BME groups, disabled and older people’s forum, inter-faith forum).

14. As previously reported there is a further relationship between the SCS and our emerging Local Development Framework (LDF) and we are looking for opportunities when consulting on the SCS to combine sharing key messages from the LDF.

TIMETABLE

15. The Executive is asked to note the timetable below which sets out a timeframe for finalising the LAA and the SCS.

Activity Timescale / Current Position Negotiations on LAA targets with Government Continuing up to 30 May Consultation on Kingston’s updated Sustainable April through to June/July Community Strategy 2008 LAA formal submission to Government 30 May 2008 LAA signed off by Ministers June 2008 Executive sign off SCS July 2008 Publication of new Kingston joint SCS and LAA September 2008

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

16. We should very soon have guidance from Government on LAA reward – this may affect some of the targets we negotiate with Government to deliver the National Indicators.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS

17. A key theme of the LAA is protecting and making the most of our environment and both the LAA and SCS will include a number of priorities that reflect the Council’s wider agenda on environmental issues.

18. We have included a local target in the LAA of ‘Reducing our Ecological Footprint’.

Background Papers Held by Chris Field (Author of the Report) tel 020 8547 5010 Email: chris@field:rbk.kingston.gov.uk 1. Initial draft of LAA submitted to Government 19 th December 2. Report to Executive on 4 December 2007 3. Report to Executive on 11 March 2008 D5

ANNEX 1 KINGSTON LAA IMPROVEMENT TARGETS 2008/09 – 2010/11 – CURRENT STATE OF PLAY

Indicator Draft target Draft target Further guidance / Other submitted to GOL being baseline data for negotiation finalised required before target setting can proceed NI 4 % of people who feel they can influence Proposed by GOL but decisions in their locality we are not including NI 5 Overall / general satisfaction with local area NI 7 Environment for a thriving third sector NI 20 – Assault with Injury crime rate NI 24 Satisfaction with the way the police and local council dealt with anti-social behaviour NI 36 Protection against terrorist attack NI 39 Rate of hospital admissions per Not for LAA but will 100,000 for alcohol related harm cover in Community Plan (SCS) NI 40 Number of drug users recorded as being in effective treatment NI 41 Perceptions of drunk or rowdy Proposed by GOL but behaviour as a problem we are not including NI 51 Effectiveness of child & adolescent mental health (CAMHs) services NI 56 Obesity in primary school age children in Year 6 NI 57 Children and young people’s participation in high-quality PE and sport NI 63 Stability of placements of looked after children: length of placement

Indicator Draft target Draft target Further guidance / Other submitted to GOL being baseline data for negotiation finalised required before target setting can proceed NI 81 Inequality gap in the achievement of a Not pursuing – opted for Level 3 qualification by the age of 19 NI 82 below NI 82 Inequality gap in the achievement of a Level 2 qualification by the age of 19 NI 102 Achievement gap between pupils eligible for free school meals and their peers achieving the expected level at Key Stages 2 & 4 NI 106 Young people from low income Not pursuing – opted for backgrounds progressing to higher education NI 82 above NI111 First time entrants to the Youth Justice System aged 10-17 NI 112 Under 18 conception rate Analysing methodology set by Government to determine whether indicator is appropriate for Kingston NI 113 Prevalence of Chlamydia in under 25 year olds NI 118 Take up of formal childcare by low- income working families NI 121 Mortality rate from all circulatory diseases at ages under 75 NI 123 Stopping smoking NI 124 People with a long-term condition Not for LAA but will supported to be independent and in control of cover in Community their condition Plan (SCS) D7

Indicator Draft target Draft target Further guidance / Other submitted to GOL being baseline data for negotiation finalised required before target setting can proceed NI 130 Social Care clients receiving Self Directed support per 100,000 population NI 135 Carers receiving needs assessment or review and a specific carer’s service, or advice & information NI 141 Percentage of vulnerable people achieving independent living NI 144 Offenders under probation supervision in employment at the end of their order or licence NI 146 Adults with learning disabilities in employment NI 149 Adults in contact with secondary Not for LAA but will mental health services in settled cover in Community accommodation Plan (SCS) NI 152 working age people on out of work benefits NI 153 working age people claiming out of Not pursuing – opted for work benefits in the worst performing NI 152 above as this will neighbourhoods cover wider area NI 154 Net additional homes provided

NI 155 Number of affordable homes delivered (gross) NI 158 % non decent council homes NI 172 Percentage of small businesses in an area showing employment growth D8

Indicator Draft target Draft target Further guidance / Other submitted to GOL being baseline data for negotiation finalised required before target setting can proceed NI 173 Flows on to incapacity benefits from employment NI 177 Local bus and light rail passenger Not being pursued journeys originating in the authority area because in London TfL collate data but this is not broken down to local authority level NI 186 Per capita reduction in CO2 emissions in the LA area NI 188 Planning to adapt to climate change Not pursuing – opted for NI 186 above. NI 191 Residual household waste per household NI 192 Percentage of household waste sent for reuse, recycling NI 197 Improved local biodiversity – proportion of local sites where positive conservation management has been or is being implemented NI 198 Children travelling to school – mode of transport usually used TOTAL 10 15 8

ADDITIONAL LOCAL TARGETS Reducing our Ecological footprint Workplace travel planning

APPENDIX E Executive, 13 May 2008

WASTE MANAGEMENT Report by the S ervice Director (Environment & Sustainability) Executive Member for Environment & Sustainability

Purpose

To seek approval of the Fifth Waste Strategy Implementation Plan and consequent actions relating to waste management services.

Action proposed by the Executive Member for Environment & Sustainability The Executive is requested to:

1. approve the proposal to review the Council’s Waste Strategy in 2009/10 and note that this will be subject to a separate report to the Executive in early 2009.

2. note the review of the Fourth Waste Strategy Implementation Plan and the Council’s current waste position.

3. approve the Fifth Waste Strategy Implementation Plan (Annex 1).

4. approve the banking of 10,576 permits for use in future years in order to address the Council’s 2008/09 LATS position.

Reason for action proposed To ensure that the Council continues to implement the most appropriate actions in addressing both short term and medium term issues with regard to waste management and to ensure that a key objective of the Council’s policy programme is delivered.

BACKGROUND

1. The Executive adopted its Municipal Waste Strategy in August 2004. The purpose of the Waste Strategy is to set out the framework and criteria in which all planning, procurement and operational decisions will be made to reduce waste and meet waste targets over a long timescale. During the preparation of the Strategy Members, officers and other stakeholders recognised the need to set out how the Strategy would be implemented. Comments made as part of the consultation on the draft Strategy also emphasised the need to focus on simple, measurable short-term actions and relate these to the targets and long-term framework set out in the Waste Strategy. It was also felt to be important that the Council was seen to continually review progress in implementing the Waste Strategy.

2. The Waste Strategy therefore proposed “that the Council will publish an annual review of its “waste position” and set out its plans for the following year”. The Executive subsequently agreed that in order to deliver this proposal a Waste Strategy Implementation Plan and “waste position” would be published in July each year. This E2

would ensure that the Council continues to have a clear picture of both its progress in delivering the Waste Strategy and plans for the future. This also ensures that the Council’s approach to improvement is intrinsic to the delivery of the Waste Strategy Implementation Plan.

3. The Executive adopted the First Waste Strategy Implementation Plan in December 2004. This built on the Council’s Policy Programme and provided a clear focus for action in 2004/05. The Executive adopted the Second Waste Strategy Implementation Plan in July 2005; this provided the outline for work in 2005/06. The Executive adopted the Third Waste Strategy Implementation Plan in June 2006; this provided the outline for work in 2006/07. The Fourth Waste Strategy Implementation Plan, which provided the outline for work in 2007/08, was adopted by Executive in June 2007.

4. Following the progress of the last four years this report presents a review of the Fourth Waste Strategy Implementation Plan, a view of the Council’s current waste position and sets out the proposed Fifth Waste Strategy Implementation Plan. This 5 th Plan is being brought to Executive earlier than in previous years because of the significant work required in 2008/09 to mobilise the new waste management contracts.

5. The focus on Waste Management from Government and others has continued unabated in 2007/08. DEFRA have carried out a review of their Waste Strategy and the new Waste Strategy was published in May 2007. It is only by remaining focussed on both the long term strategy and short term actions that the Council can be confident it will meet the significant challenges that it faces. The Waste Strategy Implementation Plan is therefore an important piece of work that addresses these challenges.

REVIEW OF COUNCIL’S WASTE STRATEGY

6. The Council’s Waste Strategy adopted in 2004 recommended it be substantially reviewed and updated in 2008/09. However, due to the mobilisation and implementation of the new waste management contracts during 2008/09, it is now recommended that the Waste Strategy be reviewed in 2009/10. This will ensure that the new Strategy reflects new waste collection contracts and as importantly the new contracts commencing in September 2008 under the auspices of South London Waste Partnership.

7. It should be noted that South London Waste Partnership is considering the development of a Joint Waste Strategy to cover the requirements of the four partner Boroughs in procuring the second phase of waste treatment required to meet 2020 targets. It is possible that the South London Waste Partnership Strategy may negate the need for a separate RBK Strategy. Consideration will be given to this during 2008/09 and proposals regarding the Council’s Waste Strategy are likely to be the subject of a separate report to Executive in early 2009.

REVIEW OF THE FOURTH WASTE STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION PLAN AND THE COUNCIL’S WASTE POSITION AT 31 MARCH 2008

8. The Fourth Waste Strategy Implementation Plan has largely been successfully delivered. Of particular note are the following:

a) The successful procurement of all new waste management contracts for commencement in September 2008, save completion of the procurement of the E3

waste treatment contracts by South London Waste Partnership scheduled to be awarded in July 2008.

b) The introduction of a resident permit system along with the introduction of a new lay out at the Household Recycling and Reuse Centre.

c) 1,252 houses participating in the cardboard collection trial throughout the Borough.

d) Orange bag collection service for dry recyclables increased from 2,000 to 6,000 flats, with the introduction of food waste also collected.

e) High participation in recycling services provided to residents in the Berrylands Refuse and Recycling Trial and the publication of two newsletters.

f) Kingston Community Furniture won the Best Green Project at the Kingston Green Guardian Awards.

g) 177 residents undertook composting training held at allotments, with each resident receiving a compost bin.

h) The Positive Environment Kingston mentoring scheme, in partnership with Go Green Project, a southlondon.biz initiative offering free one to one practical support to organisations/businesses to assist them with implementation of environmental actions.

9. Work remains to be completed on the following strands of work, and this will now be picked up and absorbed within the Fifth Waste Strategy Implementation Plan;

1. Development and adoption of a waste enforcement strategy; and

2. Kingston Waste Partnership Programme’s ‘Space for Waste’ Project.

10. The key out turn measures regarding Waste Management and their comparison to 2006/07 were as follows (it should be noted that given the date of writing this report no audit of the figures presented has been completed and these figures are subject to audit by both the Audit Commission and Environment Agency and may possibly be changed as a result of audit):

a) 424 kilogrammes of household waste were collected per head of population, a decrease from 446 kilogrammes in 2006/07;

b) Waste arisings (measured as Municipal Solid Waste or MSW) down by 10.8% compared to a reduction of 2.5% in 2006/07;

c) Waste recycled was 18.8% (18.3% in 2006/07) of the household waste collected;

d) Waste composted was 6.6% (5.5% in 2006/07) of the household waste collected; and

e) The combined recycling and composting rate was 25.4 (23.8% in 2006/07, published as 24% by DEFRA etc based on official returns) and likely to be published as 25% for 2007/08 by DEFRA based on official returns.

11. The 66,105.5 tonnes of household waste produced in 2007/08 was a decrease of 3.2% in the total household waste compared to 2006/07. This reduction in household waste is a significant achievement for the Borough, considering the 5.1% increase in 2006/07. The success of the Berrylands Refuse and Recycling Trial has contributed to this reduction with 91% participating in the green box recycling service, which is well above the Borough-wide rate of 44% that was monitored over a two week period (9 October 2006 – 20 October 2006). The service changes to be implemented during 2008/09 will ensure that Kingston’s continues to improve its performance.

12. Household waste has five key constituent elements; household refuse collection, waste brought to the Household Recycling and Reuse Centre by the public, street sweepings and total material recycled and composted. Figures are shown in Table 1 below.

Table 1 – Analysis of household waste produced

Waste Stream 2006/07 2007/08 Tonnes Tonnes Waste brought to the Household Recycling 7,718.5 7,363.4 and Reuse Centre by the public Household waste collected 41,366.4 38,693.8 Street Sweepings 2,642.3 2,627.0 Total Reused, Recycled and Composted 16,249.4 16,783.3 Other 304.6 638.0 Total Household Waste 68,281.1 66,120.8 Total Municipal Waste 75,727.2 67560.2

Note: “Other” is made up of Asbestos and RBK Council’s own waste. Total Municipal Waste is made up of Total Household Waste, RBK Parks and Highways Waste and Rubble.

13. The slowing of the rate of growth of Household Recycling and Reuse Centre waste is encouraging and reflects the layout changes to the site and the introduction of the resident permit system from 1 November 2007. These changes were introduced as a result of the 30% increase in Household Recycling and Reuse Centre waste from 2005/06 to 2006/07. It is very encouraging that the permit system has only been in effect for five months and the Household Recycling and Reuse Centre waste was reduced by 4.6%.

14. The increase in ‘Other’ waste is concerning and will be addressed by a review of the collection and disposal of waste from Council Services and Buildings. The objective of this review will be to establish a ‘producer pays’ principle within the Council Services and Buildings and to encourage the use of recycling and composting services.

FIFTH WASTE STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

15. The proposed Fifth Waste Strategy Implementation Plan is attached at Annex 1 to this report. It is worth emphasising the importance of one single comprehensive action plan covering all activity and ensuring a holistic approach; this has proven to be invaluable in previous years.

16. The Implementation Plan (as in the previous four) addresses five key objectives these are in line with those set out in Section Six of the Council’s Waste Strategy. However Objective Two has been revised to reflect DEFRA’s position with regard to setting local recycling and composting rates for local authorities and Objective Five has also been amended to reflect the mobilisation and implementation of the procured new waste management contracts.

17. The objectives are:

a) Objective One: Reduce the amount of biodegradable municipal waste (BMW) to landfill and comply with the annual BMW allowances to landfill under the Landfill Allowance Trading Scheme (LATS).

b) Objective Two: Securing 40% recycling and composting rate by March 2010 and securing future targets, yet to be set by DEFRA. This will require residents to understand and support the service changes being made from September 2008. [Note previously amended and now updated to set the target for 2010]

c) Objective Three: Development and delivery of a comprehensive waste awareness and waste minimisation programme encompassing a wide ranging communication strategy engaging with all of Kingston’s residents.

d) Objective Four: Seeking strong community based partnerships to help deliver elements of the recycling and composting infrastructure, these partnerships to be with community based organisations, environmental groups or other third parties.

e) Objective Five: Robust mobilisation and implementation of the Council’s new waste management contracts from June 2008. [Note previously amended and now updated to focus on implementation of procured contracts]

19. There are 23 projects in this 5 th Waste Strategy Implementation Plan to achieve the objectives set out in the Waste Strategy. In addressing each objective, brief commentary is set out for each project. This is followed by the targets, the key performance indicators and the activities related to the objective. This style is consistent with the Council’s Policy Programme and broadly line with that used in the Community Plan. The main waste projects will also be cross-referenced in the Council’s Environmental Awareness Strategy and supporting Communication Plan.

20. The Executive Member for Environment & Sustainability has two key / prioritised projects within this 5 th Waste Strategy Implementation Plan. These are the successful mobilisation and implementation of the waste management contracts from June 2008 and the continued and enhanced delivery of a waste minimisation programme.

21. The new Recycling and Refuse Collection Contract starts from 1 June 2008. The Contract will be a fully integrated domestic refuse and recycling collection service and will incorporate: household refuse collection, domestic bulk bin services (largely for flats), special refuse collection (bulky waste), door to door recycling for both households and flats, servicing of public recycling bring sites and recycling bring sites at schools, and the cleansing of bring sites. The Council will work with the Contractor to implement service changes throughout the Borough to ensure Kingston’s Waste Objectives are achieved.

22. As part of the South London Waste Partnership the following Contracts have been procured and start from 1 September 2008:

• Contract 1: Viridor Waste Management Limited has been awarded a 14 year contract for the transport, transfer and disposal of waste to landfill. • Contract 2: Environmental Waste Controls have been awarded a 14 year contract to manage the Household Reuse and Recycling Centre at Villiers Road. • Contract 3: The contract for Treatment (Composting, Materials Recycling Facility and Additional Treatment) is to be awarded in July 2008.

23. In 2007/08 Kingston recycled and composted 25.4% of its waste, which is an increase from the 23.8% achieved in 2006/07 (DEFRA reported the 2006/07 rate as 24% and are likely to report the 2007/08 figure as 25%). By introducing a step change in the service provisions residents will be able to recycle more of their waste in future years. The contracts starting in 2008/09 will allow for this step change.

24. To achieve the considerable waste reduction and diversion of waste from landfill to avoid LATS penalties, it is important that residents support the changes being introduced from September 2008. Therefore, an important project strand for 2008/09 is a high quality customer communication plan to ensure residents understand the reasons for the service changes and how to use the enhanced services.

LANDFILL ALLOWANCE TRADING SCHEME (LATS)

25. The Government introduced LATS on 1 April 2005. Consequently the year being reviewed is the second in which the Council has had a LATS target. In 2005/06 under LATS the Council was permitted to send 45,327 tonnes of Biodegradable Municipal Waste (BMW) to landfill. The Council actually sent 41,973 tonnes to landfill, 3,354 tonnes less than it was permitted to. The surplus 3,354 permits were “banked” as a surplus to carry forward under the LATS scheme.

26. In 2006/07 Kingston’s LATS reconciliation by the Environment Agency showed that 40,984 tonnes of BMW was sent to landfill. The Council’s allowance was 46,364 tonnes, which included the 3,354 tonnes banked from 2005/06. This is a positive position for Kingston with 5,380 tonnes “banked” to help achieve future targets.

27. In 2007/08 Kingston produced 67,560 tonnes of municipal solid waste, including recyclables and materials for composting. 11,215 tonnes of BMW produced was diverted from landfill through recycling (paper, cardboard, wood, textiles) and composting (green waste). The Council sent 34,726 tonnes of BMW to landfill, 10,576 tonnes less than its BMW allowance of 45,302, including the 2007/08 allowance of 39,922 tonnes and 5,380 tonnes “banked” from previous years

28. It is recommended that 10,576 permits be “banked” for use in future years. (NB Figures are subject to final audit by the Environment Agency with results due in September 2008. These figures are produced by the Council and may be changed by the Environment Agency).

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

29. The improvements delivered via the Fourth Waste Strategy Implementation Plan were funded from the DEFRA Waste Efficiency and Performance Grant (WPEG) and a E7

WRAP grant for Estates Food Waste Collection Trial. The successful trials for Berrylands and Estates Recycling/Food Waste Collections have been consolidated into the new Recycling and Refuse Collection Contract and funding provision has been made in the Environmental and Sustainability Budget 2008/09 for borough wide roll out.

30. DEFRA have announced that there will be no further direct funding for London Boroughs via the WPEG. In 2007/08 the grant available to RBK was £359,200. In future, an equivalent aggregate fund will be made available via the London Waste and Recycling Board to support projects on a competitive bidding process. Therefore, all projects identified with the Fifth Waste Strategy Implementation Plan will be funded from the provision made in the 2008/09 Environmental and Sustainability revenue Budget, which has been increased by £1,350,000 to cater for all contractual and service costs relating to waste management. Furthermore £3,066,000 has been allocated in the Capital programme for the capital costs relating to the new contracts.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS

31. The proposals set out in this report and within the attached Waste Strategy Implementation Plan are intrinsically environmental in their nature. The services are specifically designed to improve the rates of recycling and composting and ensure more waste is diverted from landfill.

32. There are no environmental implications over and above those that the related Waste Strategy and Fifth Waste Strategy Implementation Plan already identify.

Authors of the Report: Rob Dickson, Service Director (Environment & Sustainability) 020 8547 4705 [email protected] and Mandy Scharer, Waste Officer, Environment & Sustainability 020 8547 5864 [email protected]

Background Papers: Held by Mandy Scharer, Waste Officer, Environment & Sustainability 020 8547 5864 [email protected]

1. Executive Report 20 June 2006 Appendix D 2. Minutes from Executive meeting 20 June 2006 3. Third Waste Strategy Implementation Plan April 2006 – March 2009 4. Fourth Waste Strategy Implementation Plan April 2007 – March 2010 5. Waste Strategy 2007, the Government’s Waste Strategy

Annex 1

5th WASTE STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

April 2008 – March 2011

Published May 2008

INTRODUCTION

1. This is the Council’s 5th Waste Strategy Implementation Plan since it adopted its Waste Strategy in August 2004. In the period from August 2004 to March 2008 the focus has been on incremental service improvement along with the procurement of new waste management contracts, which are required in June and September 2008.

2. A number of improvements have been made to services in that period. Notably:

a) The introduction of glass to the green box recycling service;

b) Enhancements to existing recycling bring sites, introduction of new sites and the introduction of cardboard facilities to bring sites;

c) Introduction of 120 street recycling bins throughout the Borough;

d) Introduction of over thirty public recycling facilities at schools in the Borough; and

e) Introduction of recycling for 1,800 flats with an “orange bag” door-step service and paper and cardboard bins for other blocks of flats.

3. In preparing for the replacement of existing waste management contracts in 2008 the focus has been on the creation of the South London Waste Partnership, with the neighbouring London Boroughs of Croydon, Merton and Sutton, through which future waste treatment and disposal contracts are procured. Work has also been undertaken, particularly in 2006, to realign service provision for the recycling and refuse collection service in order to make the introduction of the new services more straight forward. A number of trials have also been undertaken to provide data and experience in advance of specifying the new contracts. Changes and improvements in this context include:

a) A complete review of all Recycling and Refuse Rounds to, generally, provide a specific collection day in each neighbourhood, which has enabled most residents to have Recycling and Refuse collections carried out on the same day;

b) The cessation of back alley refuse collections;

c) The introduction of new trial refuse and recycling service for 2,400 households in the Berrylands area;

d) The extension of the existing orange bag recycling scheme to a further 4,200 flats, with the inclusion of organic waste collection.

4. The new Recycling and Refuse Collection Contract starts from 1 June 2008. The Contract will be a fully integrated domestic refuse and recycling collection service and will incorporate: household refuse collection, domestic bulk bin services (largely for flats), special refuse collection (bulky waste), door to door recycling for both households and flats, servicing of public recycling bring sites and recycling bring sites at schools, and the cleansing of bring sites. The Council will work with the Contractor to implement service changes throughout the Borough to ensure Kingston’s Waste Objectives are achieved.

5. As part of the South London Waste Partnership (SLWP) the following Contracts have been procured and start from 1 September 2008: E10

6. 2008/09 will be a critical year with regard to the mobilisation and implementation of these new waste management contracts.

7. In 2007/08 Kingston recycled and composted 25.4% of its waste, which is an increase from the 23.8% achieved in 2006/07 (DEFRA reported the 2006/07 rate as 24% and are likely to report the 2007/08 figure as 25%). By introducing a step change in the service provisions residents will be able to recycle more of their waste in future years. The contracts starting in 2008/09 will allow for this step change.

8. To achieve the considerable waste reduction and diversion of waste from landfill to avoid LATS penalties, it is important that residents support the changes being introduced from September 2008. Therefore, an important project strand for 2008/09 is a high quality customer communication plan to ensure residents understand the reasons for the service changes and how to use the enhanced services.

BACKGROUND

9. The Executive approved the Council’s Waste Strategy in August 2004. The strategy sets out the framework and criteria in which all planning, procurement and operational decisions will be made to reduce waste and meet waste targets over a long time scale (the strategy covers the period to 2020). Consequently the Council produces an annual Waste Strategy Implementation Plan setting out in detail the activities and measures to be undertaken over a 2-3 year period to achieve the objectives of the Waste Strategy. The Executive approved The 1 st Waste Strategy Implementation Plan in November 2004.

10. In July 2005 the Executive approved the 2 nd Waste Strategy Implementation Plan 2005- 2008. Developing that Plan allowed the Council to clearly set out the activities it was undertaking, the activities it was planning and the timescales for the development of future planning and decision making. Crucially the 2 nd Implementation Plan linked those three areas to performance in order that the effectiveness of the activities could be judged against progress in meeting the Council’s waste targets.

11. In June 2006 the Executive approved the 3 rd Waste Strategy Implementation Plan 2006- 2009. As in the 2 nd Waste Strategy Implementation Plan, the 5 key objectives of the Waste Strategy were addressed by clearly setting out activities to be undertaken.

12. The 4th Waste Strategy Implementation Plan was approved by Executive in June 2007 and incorporated all waste management activities both current and planned until March 2010. A summary of the work done in delivering the 4th Implementation Plan and developments since the adoption of that plan is set out in the next section. The plan emphasised the procurement of new contracts for 2008.

E11

13. The 5 th Waste Strategy Implementation Plan incorporates all waste management activities both current and planned until March 2011. Following the success of developing a project management framework in 2005, this has been developed and is being applied to every activity covered by the plan. Each activity will be linked to a clearly defined project plan detailing:

a) A clear set of targets, outcomes and objectives;

b) Budget assessment;

c) Identified stakeholders and roles;

d) Reporting schedule - timetable of key events and milestones for progressing and reporting;

e) Monitoring and evaluation mechanisms;

f) Risk assessment; and

g) How each project will report back progress to Members.

14. The focus on Waste Management from Government and the community has continued unabated in 2007/08. Traditionally, there has been a heavy reliance on landfills to dispose of waste. The Government’s Landfill Allowance Trading Scheme, that sets tough targets for the diversion of Biodegradable Municipal Waste (BMW) from landfill, allied to the Government announcing in its March 2007 Budget that the Landfill Tax currently set at £32 per tonne is to increase by £8 each year (not £3 per year as previously indicated) until 2010 makes landfill an increasing expensive and unattractive waste management solution. Local Authorities can not continue to rely on landfill as a primary means of waste disposal.

REVIEW OF COUNCIL’S WASTE STRATEGY

15. The Council’s Waste Strategy adopted in 2004 recommended that it be substantially reviewed and updated in 2008/09. However, due to the mobilisation and implementation of the new waste management contracts during 2008/09, it is now recommended that the Waste Strategy be reviewed in 2009/10. This will ensure that the new Strategy reflects new waste collection contracts and as importantly the new contracts commencing in September 2008 under the auspices of South London Waste Partnership.

16. It should be noted that SLWP is considering the development of a Joint Waste Strategy to cover the requirements of the four partner Boroughs in procuring the second phase of waste treatment required to meet 2020 targets. It is possible that the SLWP Strategy may negate the need for a separate RBK Strategy. Consideration will be given to this during 2008/09.

OBJECTIVES OF THE 5th WASTE STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

17. The Council developed five key objectives within the Waste Strategy through which it planned to meet its waste targets and put Kingston on a path towards substantially

E12

reducing waste sent to landfill and increasing recycling and composting out to 2020. This 5 th Plan sets out in detail the key projects and activities to achieve these five objectives. The objectives are:

Objective One: Reduce the amount of biodegradable municipal waste (BMW) to landfill and comply with the annual BMW allowances to landfill under the Landfill Allowance Trading Scheme (LATS).

Objective Two: Securing 40% recycling and composting rate by March 2010 and securing future targets, yet to be set by DEFRA. This will require residents to understand and support the service changes being made from September 2008. [Note previously amended and now updated to set the target for 2010]

Objective Three: Development and delivery of a comprehensive waste awareness and waste minimisation programme encompassing a wide ranging communication strategy engaging with all of Kingston’s residents.

Objective Four: Seeking strong community based partnerships to help deliver elements of the recycling and composting infrastructure, these partnerships to be with community based organisations, environmental groups or other third parties.

Objective Five: Robust mobilisation and implementation of the Council’s new waste management contracts from June 2008. [Note previously amended and now updated to focus on implementation of procured contracts]

KINGSTON’S WASTE POSITION

18. In 2007/08 Kingston produced 67,560.2 tonnes of municipal solid waste (MSW). 49,601.3 tonnes (73.4%) of this waste was sent to landfill, putting increasing pressure on landfill capacity and the environment. Increasing landfill costs and legislation are both drivers in making the Council rethink the way we manage our waste.

19. Chart 1 shows the annual tonnage of total MSW since April 2005. During 2005/06 there was a reduction largely due to Civic Amenity site waste (approximately 13,000 tonnes) being correctly recorded as “Inert waste” (rubble) along with waste from the delivery of Parks and Highways services being correctly allocated to inert and composting waste streams. Changes to the layout of the Civic Amenity Site also improved diversion of waste from landfill. During 2006/07 a reporting error with recording inert waste tonnages was identified and as a result a significant decrease occurred in 2007/08.

20. The 66,105.5 tonnes of household waste produced in 2007/08 was a decrease of 3.2% in the total household waste compared to 2006/07. The success of the Berrylands Refuse and Recycling Trial has contributed to this reduction with 91% participating in the green box recycling service, which is well above the Borough-wide rate of 44% that was monitored over a two week period (9 October 2006 – 20 October 2006). This reduction in household waste is significant achievement for the Borough and the service changes to be implemented during 2008/09 will ensure that Kingston’s continues to improve its performance.

E13

21. Household waste has five key constituent elements; household refuse collection, waste brought to the Household Recycling and Reuse Centre by the public, street sweepings and total material recycled and composted. Figures are shown in Table 1 below.

Table 1 – Analysis of household waste produced

Other 304.6 638.0 Total Household Waste 68,281.1 66,120.8 Total Municipal Waste 75,727.2 67,560.2

Note: “Other” is made up of Asbestos and RBK Council’s own waste. Total Municipal Waste is made up of Total Household Waste, RBK Parks and Highways Waste and Rubble.

22. The slowing of the rate of growth of Household Recycling and Reuse Centre waste is encouraging and reflects the layout changes to the site and the introduction of the resident permit system from 1 November 2007. These changes were introduced as a result of the 30% increase in Household Recycling and Reuse Centre waste from 2005/06 to 2006/07. It is very encouraging that the permit system has only been in effect for five months and the Household Recycling and Reuse Centre waste was reduced by 4.6%.

23. The increase in ‘Other’ waste is concerning and will be addressed by a review of the collection and disposal of waste from Council Services and Buildings. The objective of this review will be to establish a ‘producer pays’ principal within the Council Services and Buildings and to encourage the use of recycling and composting services.

24. The pressures on continually reducing the amount of municipal waste sent to landfill are increasing. Forecasting the amounts of MSW the Council is likely to be sending to Landfill is, however, complex. The forecast growth rate the Council has used is based on household waste arising and population growth for the Borough.

25. Chart 1 below sets out the MSW produced since 2005/06 and the forecast of MSW to be produced to 2010. The forecast is based on a growth rate of approximately 0.60%.

E14

Chart 1 – Total Municipal Solid Waste 2005/06 – 2007/08 and Forecast to 2009/10

80000 78000 76000 74000 72000 Total MSW 70000 Tonnes 68000 66000 64000 62000

06 07 08 st) / / / a 2005 2006 2007 (forec

2008/09 (forecast)2009/10 Year

Note: Predicted waste arisings for 2008/09 – 2009/10 is based on approximately 0.60% waste growth annually, in line with South London Waste Partnership waste growth rate.

26. As with all other services managed by the Council performance is measured by the Audit Commission through Best Value Performance Indicators (BVPIs). The performance against the key BVPIs relating to Waste Management in 2006/07 and 2007/08 are set out in Table 2 below. These figures are monitored by Officers on a monthly basis and during the course of 2007/08 were reported on a quarterly basis to the Waste Management Member Officer Group.

27. Reforms lead by the Department of Communities and Local Government will see the existing BVPIs replaced in favor of three waste indicators that form part of a new set of 198 National Indicators (NIs) covering all local authority services. The change seeks to make councils less dependent on centrally-set targets, with priorities now set in Local Area Agreements between central and local government. The new NIs will take affect from 1 April 2009 and will be used to monitor waste and recycling services - one for residual household waste per household, one for household waste reused, recycled and composted, and a third looking at the amount of municipal waste landfilled.

Table 2 – Kingston’s Best Value Performance Indicators for Waste Management comparison of 2006/07 to 2007/08

BVPI Indicator 2006/07 2007/08 82ai Percentage of household waste recycled 18.3% 18.8% 82bi Percentage of household waste composted 5.5% 6.6% 82di Percentage of household waste sent to landfill 76.2% 74.6% 84 Number of kilograms of household waste collected per 446kg 424kg head of the population

E15

Note: The Audit Commission defines Municipal waste as all waste produced in the Borough the Council is responsible for collecting and disposing of. Household waste is defined as including all waste produced in the Borough less inert waste (rubble), green and soil waste from parks, and fly-tipped waste.

28. The performance in 2007/08 showed a negligible decrease in the amount of waste recycled, however an increase in the amount of waste composted and a reduction in the amount of waste sent to landfill. The reduction in the amount of waste recycled can be attributed to the resident permit system implemented at the Household Recycling and Reuse Centre as a reduction in recyclable materials deposited at the Centre occurred.

29. The increased in composting can be attributed to the a wet summer in 2007/08 resulting in more garden waste collected and the collection of food waste from 8,400 properties involved in the Berrylands Recycling and Refuse Trial and the orange bag collection service.

REVIEW OF THE 4th WASTE STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

30. The 4th Waste Strategy Implementation Plan has largely been successfully delivered. Of particular note are the following:

a) High participation in recycling services provided to residents in the Berrylands Refuse and Recycling Trial and the publication of two newsletters;

b) The successful procurement of all new waste management contracts for commencement in September 2008, save completion of the procurement of the waste treatment contracts by South London Waste Partnership scheduled to be awarded in July 2008.

c) The introduction of a resident permit system along with the introduction of a new lay out at the Household Recycling and Reuse Centre;

d) 1,252 houses participating in the cardboard collection trial throughout the Borough;

e) Orange bag collection service for dry recyclables increased from 2,000 to 6,000 flats, with the introduction of food waste also collected;

f) Kingston Community Furniture won the Best Green Project at the Kingston Green Guardian Awards;

g) 177 residents undertook composting training held at allotments, with each resident receiving a compost bin; and

31. Work remains to be completed on the following strands of work, and this will now be picked up and absorbed within the 5th Waste Strategy Implementation Plan:

E16

1. Development and adoption of a waste enforcement strategy; and

2. Kingston Waste Partnership Programme’s ‘Space for Waste’ Project.

32. Progress has also been made concerning the following areas of work that will run in parallel to the activities set out in this 5th Waste Strategy Implementation Plan. These are key pieces of work for the Environmental Services Directorate and go beyond the scope of the 5th Waste Strategy Implementation Plan:

a) Guidance on how recycling and waste management issues can be built into future service plans across the Council is being developed;

b) The first two phases of the Directorate re-alignment to address the aims set out in Changing Kingston – Choosing our Future (the Council’s Medium Term Plan to 2011 were completed in March 2008. The new Customer Contact Centre was launched in March 2008, and the new contract management staff structure was implemented from 1 st April. These new structures integrate all customer facing and contract monitoring systems for waste management.

THE 5TH WASTE STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

Introduction

33. This 5th Waste Strategy Implementation Plan draws together in one document the work being undertaken in five distinct teams / departments and three Council Plans and Strategies. These are:

a) Waste Management Team – responsible for overseeing the implementation of the waste strategy, integration of new operations into the framework set by the strategy monitoring of performance and progress to meeting targets and for the delivery and review of the Waste Strategy Implementation Plan. Also responsible for the Strategic Management of all Waste Management Contracts.

b) Street Scene Team – responsible for managing the operational delivery of all waste management services on a day to day basis. Also responsible for day to day liaison with the contractors and public regarding delivery of the services.

c) Business Support – The Finance & Accounts Team deliver a comprehensive service of technical and financial advice, budget setting & monitoring, accounting and payments in regard to waste management services, contracts and projects.

d) Customer First Contact Centre – The Contact Centre is responsible for ensuring that all residents have access to environmental services information and receive a quick and efficient service from knowledgeable advisors. Advisors deal with all environmental services resident enquiries via telephone, email, letter, fax and face to face.

e) Strategic Services – responsible for overseeing delivery of the Contractors Charter and ensuring this is reflected in Waste Management Services. Also responsible for managing the procurement of new services including market analysis, creating partnership, and the appointment of contractors to deliver services.

E17

f) Destination Kingston 2011 – sets out Kingston's ambitions for 2011 and tells the story of Kingston's history as a place as well as what the Council are seeking to achieve for the future. It paints a picture of what Kingston will be like in 2011, rather than just setting out a strategic direction.

g) The Waste Strategy – sets out the framework and criteria in which all planning, procurement and operational decisions will be made to reduce waste and meet waste targets.

h) The Council’s Performance Plan – sets out the Council’s commitment, strategic aims and key objectives. It also reviews performance against previous targets and helps the Council to manage performance and improvement planning on an ongoing basis. The Plan contains targets relating to Waste Management.

i) The Community Plan – sets out a wider vision of what the many organisations responsible for key services in the Borough and the residents are trying to achieve for the Royal Borough of Kingston. Published in July 2004 it includes proposals for Waste Management in the Borough.

34. The approach to improvement, which is being developed across the Council and is clearly set out in the Council’s Policy programme, has been built into this Implementation Plan. That approach requires a clear sense of direction, well communicated and with a focus on what matters most. The process of setting clear targets, reviewing progress and performance in seeking to meet them and renewing the targets and related performance indicators on a regular basis has proven to be reliable and robust. In delivering this Implementation Plan, quarterly assessments of progress will be made. This provides an effective process to secure and report on up- to-date data from contractors, ensure delivery of activities, and monitor performance.

35. There are 23 projects in this 5th Waste Strategy Implementation Plan to achieve the objectives set out in the Waste Strategy. In addressing each objective, brief commentary is set out for each project. This is followed by the targets, the key performance indicators and the activities related to the objective. This style is consistent with the Council’s Policy Programme and broadly line with that used in the Community Plan. The main waste projects will also be cross-referenced in the Council’s Environmental Awareness Strategy and supporting Communication Plan.

36. The Executive Member for Environment & Sustainability has two key / prioritised projects within this 5 th Waste Strategy Implementation Plan. These are the successful mobilisation and implementation of the waste management contracts from June 2008 and the continued and enhanced delivery of a waste minimisation programme.

Objective 1: Reduce the amount of biodegradable municipal waste (BMW) to landfill and comply with the annual BMW allowances to landfill under LATS.

Commentary

37. From April 2005 the Government introduced a Landfill Allowance Trading Scheme (LATS) to regulate the amount of biodegradable municipal waste (BMW) each authority is allowed to send to landfill. Biodegradable waste is waste that is capable of

E18

undergoing anaerobic or aerobic decomposition, such as food and garden waste, and paper and paperboard. When this waste breaks down it produces greenhouse gases such as methane that contribute towards global warming and climate change.

38. Each authority in England has been given an annual (decreasing) “landfill allowance” for biodegradable waste. The penalty incurred on a Local Authority for not complying with its BMW allowances is £150 per additional tonne of BMW. Not meeting Kingston’s allowance could be very costly to the Council and its residents and this is on top of the increasing Landfill Tax.

39. LATS completed its first year of operation in March 2006. In 2005/06 Kingston’s LATS reconciliation by the Environment Agency showed that 41,973 tonnes of BMW was sent to landfill, which was 3,354 tonnes less than it’s 2005/06 BMW allowance of 45,327 tonnes. This was a positive position for Kingston with 3,354 tonnes “banked” to help achieve future targets.

40. In 2006/07 Kingston’s LATS reconciliation by the Environment Agency showed that 40,984 tonnes of BMW was sent to landfill. The Council’s allowance was 46,364 tonnes, which included the 3,354 tonnes banked from 2005/06. The 5,380 tonnes were “banked” to help achieve future targets.

41. In 2007/08 Kingston produced 67,560 tonnes of municipal solid waste, including recyclables and materials for composting. 11,215 tonnes of BMW produced was diverted from landfill through recycling (paper, cardboard, wood, textiles) and composting (green waste). The Council sent 34,726 tonnes of BMW to landfill, 10,576 tonnes less than its BMW allowance of 45,302, including the 2007/08 allowance of 39,922 tonnes and 5,380 tonnes “banked” from previous years.

42. It is recommended that 10,576 permits be “banked” for use in future years. (NB Figures are subject to final audit by the Environment Agency with results due in September 2008. These figures are produced by the Council and may be changed by the Environment Agency).

43. Chart 3 shows the forecast annual tonnage of BMW to be produced in Kingston against the amount allowed to be sent to landfill out to 2020.

E19

Chart 3 – Expected Biodegradable Municipal Waste (BMW) arisings vs BMW Allowances to landfill of Kingston 2005/06 – 2019/20

50000 45000 40000 35000 30000 Actual BMW to Landfill 25000 Expected BMW

Tonnes 20000 BMW Allowance 15000 10000 5000 0 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 20010/11 Year

Note: Expected BMW arisings is based on a South London Waste Partnership annual growth rate.

44. Chart 3 clearly shows that Kingston will need to firstly reduce the amount of BMW it produces, and reduce the amount it sends to landfill to comply with its Landfill Allowances.

45. The “Activities” section below outlines a series of activities to be undertaken by the Council to help encourage residents reduce the amount of waste they produce, and comply with the LATS Allowances over the next 2-3 years and up until the first target year in 2010. The activities outlined below focus on encouraging more composting of kitchen and green waste at home and operational mobilisation of the new waste collections contracts for houses and flats.

46. From September 2008 the Council will have procured infrastructure to treat biodegradable waste in order to divert more from going to landfill and comply with LATS. Information on waste procurement is set out in Objective 5 of this plan.

Targets and Key Performance Indicators

Objective One Targets Year 1a) Comply with the 2008/09 LATS Allowance of 46,638 tonnes, 2008/09 which includes 2008/09 Allowance 36,062 tonnes + ‘Banked’ Allowances 10,576 tonnes (provisional).

1b) Increased amounts of biodegradable municipal waste diverted 2008/09 onwards from landfill

1c) New waste treatment facilities in operation (see Objective 5) September 2008 onwards

E20

Objective One Key Performance Indicators (All figures in Tonnes)

Key performance indicator 2006/07 2007/08 20008/09 2009/10 (actual) (actual) (target) (target) Tonnes of BMW waste* sent to 40,984 34,726 36,062 31,430 landfill (LATS) (Contributing to BVPI 82d)

Tonnes of household waste 3,760 4,358 5,584 9,434 composted via: 1. CA site and kerbside collection (Contributing to BVPI 82a)

2. Home composting Approx. 432 Approx. 456 Approx. 480 Approx. (Contributing to BVPI 82b) 504

3. Total waste composted Approx. Approx. Approx. Approx. 4,192 4,814 6,064 9,938

% of the total tonnage of 76.03% 74.6% 68.5% 57.8% household waste landfilled (Contributing to BVPI 82d)

*Assumes 68% of total waste sent to landfill is BMW as per standard EA & DEFRA calculation. BVPI – Best Value Performance Indicator

47. Approximately 3,800 Borough residents have home compost bins capable of composting 200kgs of BMW a year. Assuming a 60% participation rate (as recommended by the Mayor of London), Borough residents composted approximately 456 tonnes of BMW in 2006/07. The Council expects a gradual increase in home composting with the implementation of the composting activities outlined below.

Activities

48. The following activities will be undertaken to secure Objective 1:

2008/09

a) Implementation of the Waste & Resources Action Programme (WRAP) Home Composting Project. Residents will be able to purchase discounted compost bins and receive free advice on composting

b) Continued successful delivery of the London CRN Allotment Composting Programme to establish relationship between Kingston Allotment Association and Association of Master Composters.

c) Successful mobilisation of the new Recycling and Refuse Collection Contract from June to September 2008. This will include maintaining the existing contract service

E21

standards, whilst developing the service changes to be implemented from 1 September 2008 and educating residents on the changes to occur. As part of this mobilisation road shows on the service changes will be conducted throughout the Borough.

d) Implementation of the new service changes for houses and converted flats from September to December 2008. This will include all suitable properties to be provided with weekly collection of dry recyclables, kitchen and green waste and a fortnightly collection of landfill waste from a wheelie bin.

e) Implementation pf service changes to recycling collections for private flats from September 2008 to September 2009, which will include a Borough-wide audit and consultation with residents. It is expected that the method of collection for flats implemented will be bespoke.

f) Implementation of service changes to recycling collections for Council Housing flats from September 2008 to September 2009, which will include a Borough-wide audit and consultation with residents. It is expected that the method of collection for flats implemented will be bespoke.

2009/10 – 2010/11

a) Procurement of new waste management infrastructure as part of the South London Waste Partnership to treat biodegradable waste in order to divert more from going to landfill and comply with LATS;

b) Increased participation in the food waste collection service provided under the new Recycling and Refuse Collection Contract; and

c) Continue promoting home and allotment composting.

Objective Two : Securing 40% recycling and composting rate by March 2010 and securing future targets, yet to be set by DEFRA. This will require residents to understand and support the service changes being made from September 2008. [Note previously amended and now updated to set the target for 2010]

Commentary

49. In December 2004, DEFRA capped statutory 2005/06 and 2006/07 recycling and composting targets for Kingston from 36% to 30% (many authorities’ targets were similarly capped. The capping reflected the introduction of LATS and the change in priorities by DEFRA). In 2006/07, Kingston performed well in regards to recycling and composting and achieved 24%, just falling short of DEFRA’s 25% national target; the capped DEFRA target of 30% was not met.

50. For 2007/08, DEFRA decided to set targets for all Local Authorities equal to the level of their targets in 2005/06 (except for those Local Authorities with a target of 18% in 2005/06 who would be required to raise their performance to 20%). Therefore, the Council’s DEFRA recycling and composting target for 2007/08 is 30%. The Council

E22

was aware that this target would have been difficult to achieve with the current contractual positions and set its own target of 27%.

51. In 2007/08, Kingston achieved 25.4% and whilst this was a significant improvement on 2006/07, the above targets were not met. This emphasises the need for a step change in service provision from 2008/09.

52. In the absence DEFRA targets beyond 2008/09, the Council has planned its own targets by 2010. With the introduction of new waste management contracts from June 2008, it is has expected that Kingston’s performance will increase considerably from 2008/09 onwards.

53. Chart 3 below shows actual tonnages arising from total recycling and composting since April 2000 in Kingston and targets to 2010.

Chart 4 – Kingston Recycling & Composting Tonnages 2002/03 – 2007/08 and targets to 2009/10

45 40 35 30 25 Total Composted 20 Total Recycled

Rate(%) 15 10 5 0

4 0 4/05 5/06 6/07 0 00 00 target) target) 2002/03 2003/ 2 2 20 2007/08 ( ( /09 08 09/10 20 20 Year

54. Chart 4 shows Kingston’s recycling and composting performance plateaued between 2002/03 – 2004/05. However performance increased by about 6% from 18% in 2004/05 to 24% in 2005/06. This increase is the result of introducing the new services mentioned above, promotion of existing recycling and composting services, and improvements in waste data management.

55. The recycling and composting rate from 2006/07 to 2007/08 showed an increase from 23.8% to 25.4% respectively. Reasons for this include:

i) The success of the Berrylands Recycling and Refuse Trial in limiting the amount of landfill waste each household can present for collection.

E23

ii) The Dano Drum was expected to be fully operational in early 2007, however due to operational faults throughout the 2007/08, limited waste was treated. Therefore, waste that could have been treated, had the facility been fully operational, and recycled / composted was sent directly to landfill.

56. The “Activities” section below outlines more specifically what the Council will do over the next 2-3 years to improve its recycling and composting performance.

Targets and Key Performance Indicators

Objective 2 Targets Year 2a) Recycle and compost 30% of household waste 2008/09

2b) Recycle and compost 40% of household waste 2009/10

Key Performance Indicators

Key performance 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 indicator (actual (actual) target target performance) Kilogrammes of household 446kgs 426kgs 430kgs 430kgs waste collected per head of population (BVPI 84) % of household waste 23.8% 25.4% 30% 40% recycled or composted (BVPI 82a) % of resident population in 85.7% 91.6% 95.6% 99.8% the Borough served by kerbside collection of one recyclable (BVPI 91a) BVPI – Best Value Performance Indicator

57. Recycling and Composting targets beyond 2009/10 will be reflected in any forward planning of waste services and joint waste procurement with Sutton, Merton and Croydon Boroughs. It is not possible yet for the Council to decide on key performance targets for the “percentage of the total tonnage of household waste used to recover other energy sources”. These targets will be established once the Council decides on preferred waste treatment options. More detail on waste treatment options are set out in Objective 5.

Activities

58. The following activities will be undertaken to secure Objective 2.

2008/09 a) Development of a Waste Management Guidance for Development Control for use on all stages of development to increase the provision of recycling facilities.

b) Implementation of service changes to recycling collections for private flats from September 2008 to September 2009, which will include a Borough-wide audit and

E24

consultation with residents. It is expected that the method of collection for flats implemented will be bespoke.

c) Implementation of service changes to recycling collections for Council Housing flats from September 2008 to September 2009, which will include a Borough-wide audit and consultation with residents. It is expected that the method of collection for flats implemented will be bespoke.

2009/10 – 2010/2011 a) Continued improvements in other recycling and composting services including on- street recycle litter bins, bring sites, green garden waste collection service, Household Recycling and Reuse Centre facilities and home composting activities/advice;

b) Increased participation in the new recycling services provided under the Recycling and Refuse Collection Contract; and

c) Identify recycling services for flats above business establishments.

Commentary

59. Waste has a significant environmental impact, but for some people it is an ‘out of sight out of mind’ issue; once they have put their rubbish in the bin it is forgotten. The changes and improvements the Council is seeking during 2008/09 will not take place unless every resident understands the reasons for changing their current behaviour. Increased awareness of waste minimisation and waste services, and an appropriate enforcement policy are essential to reducing waste and expanding the use of recycling and composting services.

60. As the Council strives to encourage waste reduction, achieve its statutory targets, and divert more waste away from landfill, it is vital that every single resident takes part in reducing, reusing, recycling and composting their waste. One of the best ways to increase recycling is to provide more information to raise residents’ awareness.

61. The introduction of the new waste services is an ideal time to get people thinking about how much waste the produce. The waste minimisation message will run along side the information about the new service.

62. This message will be integrated into the waste communications over the next year in the areas below:

a) Reduce, reuse, recycle - There is a need to educate residents in the importance of waste reduction as well as the promotion of recycling and reuse. This is challenging as it requires in some cases a significant change in lifestyle. Tools such as ShopSmart, Mail Preference service and the Recycle Now campaign will be used to educate residents.

E25

b) Composting - Diverting biodegradable waste from landfill is one of the biggest challenges faced by the council. Promoting composting will help meet that challenge; it is the most environmentally sound way of dealing with garden waste and vegetable peelings.

c) Real Nappies - The potential savings of waste sent to landfill by using real nappies instead of disposables is considerable. Raising awareness of the benefits and ease of use is one factor to reducing overall waste sent to landfill.

63. It is also important that they are integrated in the road shows for the new recycling and refuse collection service.

64. An Environmental Awareness Strategy and supporting Communications Plan was developed in 2006. These documents provide the framework for the Council to inform, educate, and raise the awareness across the Community with regard to the environment and sustainable development, of which waste is a key element.

Targets

Objective 3 Targets Year 3a) Implementing the waste awareness activities identified in 2008/09 the Environmental Awareness Strategy and onwards Communications Plan.

3b) Increased awareness on the importance of waste 2008/09 minimisation, recycling and composting; and increased onwards awareness of the recycling and composting services available to residents.

3c) Introduction of waste enforcement policy to reduce waste 2008/09 and encourage more re-use, recycling and composting onwards

Key Performance Indictors

65. Key Performance Indicators for this Objective will be developed as part of the Communication Plan mentioned above.

Activities:

66. The following activities will be undertaken to secure Objective 3.

2008/09

a) Maintaining the accuracy of the Council’s website relating to refuse and recycling, in particular information will be needed on the implementation of the waste management contracts and collection changes in 2008/09.

E26

b) Development of a Street Scene Strategy for the Street Cleansing Services provided by Veolia Environmental Services and Quadron and the creation of a Waste Enforcement Strategy.

Note: The list of activities above may be added to throughout the year as opportunities for awareness raising and waste minimisation promotion occur as a result of other activities.

2009/10 – 2010/11

a) Consultation process for review of the Council’s Waste Strategy.

Commentary 67. Whilst the Council can provide core waste service infrastructure, there are elements of the service that lend themselves to joint delivery with other partners. Such partners are usually community based, environmentally focused and able to reach out to a range of sectors not easily contacted by the Council.

68. During 2007/08 the Kingston Community Furniture worked in partnership with the Council in collecting reusable furniture from households. This was the first year the service was provided to residents with a total of 21 tonnes of material collected that would have previously gone to landfill. At the Kingston Green Guardian Awards, Kingston Community Furniture won Best Green Project for its efforts in diverting waste from landfill.

69. These organisations are crucial in helping the Council create change in public attitudes towards litter and waste, and influencing public and business behaviour. Additionally, the range of benefits gained by such partnerships is wider than those provided by the core service notably social benefits including employment and training. Achieving Kingston’s waste targets will be dependent on a partnership approach to build an informed community provided with the necessary incentives, programmes and waste collection services.

Targets

Targets Year 4a) Increased amounts of re-useable waste material 2008/09 onwards diverted from landfill to those in need 4b) Increased awareness of community-led services 2008/09 onwards promoting waste minimisation and education, and recycling and composting

Activities

70. The following activities will be undertaken to secure Objective 4.

E27

2008/09

a) Defining a scheme which facilitates voluntary groups recycling and receiving recycling credits.

b) Procurement of Market Cleansing Contract with the aim of increasing recycling within the Kingston’s Ancient Market.

c) Research into development of alternatives to Kingston and Merton Real Nappy Network. – Note, this has not been identified as a project, however some work is still required following a review completed earlier this year.

d) Promoting existing community based organisations, environmental groups or other third parties, for example via the Council’s website.

e) Supporting community based organisations, environmental groups or other third parties in reducing the use of plastic shopping bags.

71. The list of activities above may be added to throughout the year as opportunities for awareness raising and waste minimisation promotion occur as a result of other activities.

Objective Five: Robust mobilisation and implementation of the Council’s new waste management contracts from June 2008. [Note: previously amended and now updated to focus on implementation of procured contracts]

72. The concept of the “Waste Hierarchy” model shown below demonstrates that a landfill dominated waste management system is the least favourable option for disposing of waste:

Waste Prevention

Re-use

Recycle/Compost

Energy recovery

Disposal

73. European Union, National and Local policies and objectives are also required to be met, therefore the Council must look to the use of alternate collection and treatment options for its waste.

74. The introduction of the new contracts in June and September 2008 will only be successful if residents understand the service changes, therefore the Council must

E28

ensure that the mobilisation and implementation of these contracts, including the communication material to residents is robust.

Activities

75. The following activities will be undertaken to secure Objective 5.

2008/09

a) Review the collection and disposal of waste from Council Services and Buildings.

b) Initial mobilisation of the new Refuse and Recycling Collection Contract from the Award by Executive on 11 March 2008 to the contract starting on 1 June 2008 to ensure a smooth transition between the outgoing and incoming Contractor.

c) Procurement of wheelie bins and recycling containers required for the implementation of the service changes under the new Recycling and Refuse Collection Contract.

d) Procurement of a new Clinical Waste Contract.

e) Mobilisation of Contract 1 (Transfer and Disposal) company Viridor Waste Management, to ensure a smooth transition between the outgoing and incoming Contractor.

f) Mobilisation of Contract 2 (Household Reuse and Recycling Centres) Environmental Waste Controls to ensure minimal disruption to residents and that the changes are understood.

g) Mobilisation of Contract 3 (Composting, Materials Recycling Facility, and Additional Treatment) to ensure a smooth transition between the outgoing and incoming Contractor. [Note: Contract/s to be Awarded in July 2008]

h) Review of Street Cleansing Schedule to improve efficiency of this service to residents in the light of recycling and refuse service changes.

i) Development of key performance indicators for Veolia Street Cleansing Contract. This will provide a basis for improvement for Veolia.

2009/10 – 2010/2011

a) Procurement of new waste management infrastructure as part of the South London Waste Partnership to treat biodegradable waste in order to divert more from going to landfill and comply with LATS.

b) Increased participation in the new recycling services provided under the Recycling and Recycling Collection Contract.

APPENDIX F Executive 13 MAY 2008

ROSE OF KINGSTON THEATRE Report by the Chief Executive, Strategic Director of Finance and Head of Legal Services Leader of the Council

Purpose This report sets out details of the estimated final costs of the fitting out works on the Rose of Kingston Theatre which are now complete. The costs of the various contracts, particularly the general building fit out package, are at final account stage and claims from contractors are being settled. A forecast of the final costs is included in the report. An increase in the funding of the Kingston Theatre Limited Liability Partnership (KTLLP) of £350,000 will be required to enable it to meet the estimated final costs of the fitting out of the Theatre. The Government has announced that RBK will receive £664,000 in respect of the final year of the Local Authorities Business Growth Incentive scheme (LABGI). In view of the importance of the Rose Theatre to the local day and night time economy and the delivery of the After Dark Strategy, it is proposed that part of the LABGI receipt be used to fund the additional costs of the Theatre fitting out, and that the balance be used to create an earmarked Town Centres Strategies Reserve which will then be available to meet economic development activity as required.

KTLLP’s existing capitalisation is £5.2 million, of which the Council’s share is 95% and Kingston University’s share is 5%. To preserve the existing structure, the University should be approached with a view to it agreeing to meet 5% of the additional capitalisation, a sum of £17,500.

The report also proposes the renaming of Drapers’ car park to assist people attending the Rose of Kingston theatre to identify it as the nearest car park.

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

1. approve the increase in capitalised funding of the Kingston Theatre Limited Liability Partnership totalling £350,000;

2. instruct officers to approach Kingston University with a request for it to agree to meet 5% of the additional capitalisation so as to preserve the existing share structure of KTLLP;

3. instruct officers to make the necessary arrangements to increase the Council’s capital contribution to KTLLP by up to £350,000 (subject to any agreement by the University to meet 5% of this sum);

4. approve the financing of the Council’s additional contribution from the Local Authorities Business Growth Incentive (LABGI) scheme monies which will be received in the 2008/09 financial year;

5. approve the allocation of the balance of the LABGI monies to a ‘Town Centres Strategies Reserve’ as detailed in paragraphs 15 to 20 of this report; and F 2

6. approve the re-naming of Drapers’ Car Par to ‘The Rose Car Park’, and instruct officers to make the necessary arrangements to implement this.

Reasons for action proposed 1. To enable the Kingston Theatre Limited Liability Partnership to meet its contractual commitments in respect of the fitting out contracts. 2. To provide that the LABGI receipt of £664,000 be used for the promotion of economic development in town centres. 3. To enable visitors to the theatre find their way to the car park more easily.

BACKGROUND

1. At its meeting on 20 June 2006, the Executive approved the setting up of the Kingston Theatre Limited Liability Partnership (KTLLP) to provide capital funds for a fully fitted- out theatre. The costs to be shared 95% RBK and 5% the University plus a £250,000 lease premium from the University. KTLLP was incorporated on 30 August 2006 and has since awarded various contracts for the fitting-out of the theatre. The works have been carried out and formal completion took place on 4 January 2008. The theatre is now fully operational.

2. On 31 July 2007, the Executive received a further report on the forecast costs of completing the fitting-out project and approved a capitalisation increase of £250,000 in the KTLLP Budget.

CURRENT POSITION

3. The total capital budget for “fitting-out” the Theatre is £6.81 million, of which £5.25 million is in the form of contributions by RBK and Kingston University to KTLLP. This is to pay for basic fitting out works. This latter figure now includes the additional sum of £0.25 million agreed by RBK and the University in July/August 2007 to cover the reported increase in costs at that time. The balance of £1.56 million, being paid for directly by the Council, is for stage lighting, sound, furniture and fittings, which will be leased to Kingston Theatre Trust, which operates the Theatre.

4. The fitting-out works have been let as a series of contract packages. There are twelve contracts in all, of which eight relate to the fitting-out works being undertaken by KTLLP. As at 28 April 2008, the forecast final spend is £5.6 million. This includes a provision for contractor claims that will arise from a five week delay in completing contract works due to unavoidable design and scheduling changes. Before settlement, claims are being rigorously examined by KTLLP’s managing consultants and will only be certified as payable if valid – i.e. they are costs of delays which were not the fault of the contractor. The forecast final cost of £5.6 million is approximately £350,000 more than available in the KTLLP bank account. This assessment takes into account all work completed under the fitting-out contracts plus outstanding contract claims and variations to work authorised by KTLLP’s managing consultants and the cost of additional requirements from Licensing and Building Control. A summary of the additional cost of £350,000 is attached at Annex 1, which is set out in the exempt section of the agenda because it contains commercially sensitive information.

CONTRACT CONTROL

5. All contracts are based on a set of detailed drawings, specifications and bills of quantities. The complexity of the project and the variety of contracts in place (see paragraph 4 above) has contributed to the number of variations required. F 3

Approximately 300 changes and variations have been made to the main building contract. Gentle Associates are responsible for overall site supervision, co-ordination of contractors and scheduling of works. They certify work done and issue variation orders and have the appropriate presence on site to do this. They, along with the Project Manager, attend the fortnightly meetings of the KTLLP Board and Theatre Steering Group. The Directors of the KTLLP Board represent the Client (RBK and University) and have responsibility for delivery of the project. At all times strong emphasis has been placed on the need to maintain costs within the funds available.

6. The large number of variation orders resulted in some re-sequencing of work, and some extension of time taken to carry out the works which was not envisaged when contracts were let. An extension of time for one contractor to deal with variations, led in some cases to delays for other contractors, which in turn leads to claims for those contractors’ fixed costs. Additionally, to achieve the completion date and enable the opening season to proceed as planned and advertised, significant amounts of evening and weekend working were required, leading to further increases in costs. The total impact of these elements of additional cost is estimated at £157,000.

7. A further significant increase in costs of £133,000 was due to Fire Protection, Licensing and Building Control requirements. Although plans and specifications were supplied and commented on before works commenced, several visits from Licensing and Building Control during the course of works resulted in additional requirements and hence additional costs.

8. The forecast final cost of the project is £7.15 million, which is approximately £638,000 above the original approved sum. This must be considered alongside the size and complexity of the Project. The original budget sum included no contingency and approximately £300,000 of cost reductions were made at the start of contract works in order to bring plans into line with the budgeted amount provided. This included removal of items from the electrical specification and the equipment, lighting and sound infrastructure was confined to the main auditorium. Proposals for the Studio and Gallery were reduced to the very basic with a requirement to find equipment from other venues when required for public performance. Savings were also made in the General Building package and the Architectural steelwork/stairs package.

IMPLICATIONS FOR KINGSTON THEATRE LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERHIP

9. The three main building contractors have submitted final accounts in mid/late April. The current funding position of KTLLP means that it would not be able to settle these accounts (even allowing for retention monies). The timescale for meeting these contractual commitments is the middle/end of May, before penalties for late payment are incurred.

10. To enable KTLLP to meet its contractual obligations, a capital contribution of up to £350,000 will be required.

11. KTLLP’s directors have brought the matter to the Council’s attention. KTLLP Members’ Agreement provides that the Members (the Council and the University) may agree to make additional contributions to their respective capital accounts, in proportion to their respective profit share ratios (95:5) to assist or support the working capital requirements of KTLLP. F 4

TIMESCALES 12. To enable KTLLP to meet its contractual commitments, approval for additional contributions to KTLLP is required before the end of May 2008.

13. In the event that this is not achieved, the legal position is that as the principal shareholder, the Council will need to make a working capital loan (on commercial terms) to KTLLP to prevent it becoming insolvent. This would become repayable once the additional contributions are agreed and paid.

COSTS TO THE COUNCIL

14. The Strategic Director of Finance advises that it would be appropriate to meet the Council’s share of the increased cost, £332,500, by using part of the Local Authorities Business Growth Incentive scheme (LABGI) distribution for 2007/08 (see below). This would mean that there will be no ongoing costs to the Council in respect of this transaction.

LOCAL AUTHORITIES BUSINESS GROWTH INCENTIVE SCHEME (LABGI)

15. On 2 April 2008 the Government announced details of provisional allocations to Councils in respect of growth in rateable value for the final year of the scheme (2007/08), and adjustments for the first two years of the scheme (2005/06 and 2006/07). The provisional allocation for RBK is £664,189.

16. The allocations are subject to confirmation by an order being laid before Parliament – this is anticipated to take place in June 2008.

17. The Rose Theatre is of great importance in delivering the objectives of the Council’s After Dark Strategy. In particular it has been seen as a practical step in changing the expectations and experience of Kingston after dark. It is also encourages further growth in the day time economy by increasing the range of attractions available during the day. It is already bearing fruit in terms of the range of cafes and restaurants which have been drawn into that part of the Town Centre, and a number of others intend to occupy premises which are currently vacant.

18. As well as the social benefits and the impact on town centre environment, both day and night, there is strong evidence of a growing impact of the Rose on the local business community. Increasing numbers are coming forward to sign up to the various corporate schemes on offer by the Rose Development team. The list of business supporters already includes 20 or more local companies including some of the Borough's most significant employers. Pledges of financial support have come from the full range of large retailers, restaurants, legal practices, accounting firms and banks. Many of these companies are pleased to report a growth in their business from Theatre audiences over the successful opening 4 months. 3,500 people per week have attended both matinees and evening performances.

19. The Government and representatives of business ratepayers nationally have encouraged councils to follow strategies to encourage business growth, and LABGI receipts to a degree reflect the success of the Council in this regard. It is also appropriate to use LABGI monies for economic development activity where possible to continue the process of stimulating business growth further. The Theatre is a central part of our strategy to achieve positive change in the expectation and experience of Kingston after dark and during the day, as it will help diversify what is on offer, thereby F 5

improving residents' and visitors' experience of the town centre, and its economic strength in the future. Consequently, it is appropriate for us to consider applying resources which come to RBK through LABGI to help achieve this outcome.

20. It is therefore proposed that part of the LABGI receipt be used to meet the additional; costs of the fitting out of the Theatre. To ensure that the balance of the LABGI funding remains available to continue the progress already achieved, it is also proposed that the balance of the LABGI monies be used to create an earmarked ‘Town Centres Strategies Reserve’ which will be available to fund appropriate expenditure in respect of the Council’s economic development activity.

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS

21. As has been previously reported to the Executive, the Council does have the necessary legal powers to make any further investment. In considering any further investment regard must also be had to the implied fiduciary duty to council tax payers. In the context of making the further investment contemplated by this report, the consequences of not making the investment must be weighed against the investment that has already been made in order to complete the fitting out of the theatre. The proposed further investment represents a 6.7% increase in the capitalisation of KTLLP.

RBK BOARD MEMBER ON THE KINGSTON THEATRE LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP

22. On 20 June 2006, the Executive decided that the Council’s representative Board Member on KTLLP would be the Strategic Director of Finance (at the time, Mr Tony Knights). On his retirement, to ensure continuity and retention of detailed background knowledge of the project, whilst the fitting out project was completed, Mr. Knights was retained to oversee the fitting out of the theatre on behalf of the Council, including monitoring and making payments to contractors, together with administration and submission of financial returns (to HM Revenue & Customs) for KTLLP.

23. Now that the fitting out is complete, it is intended that Mr Knights’ appointment will cease at 30 June 2008, and in accordance with the Executive resolution in June 2006, that the incumbent Strategic Director of Finance, Tracie Evans, will be the Council’s authorised representative Board member on KTLLP with effect from 1 July 2008.

RENAMING OF DRAPERS’ CAR PARK

24. The Council’s adopted Kingston Town Centre Parking Strategy (Executive decision February 2005) seeks to develop an information and marketing strategy for its car parks. This is to achieve better use of the ‘interceptor’ car parks, making it easier for car borne visitors and residents to find the nearest and most convenient car park to relevant trip attractors, to reduce unnecessary cross town journeys, and to increase patronage of under used town centre car parks.

25. Part of this strategy (Recommendation 2) involves the renaming of car parks to make their location clearer. It is noted within the Strategy that names such as Bittoms, Drapers, Cattle Market and Seven Kings do not clearly correspond with either the relevant approach road/corridor or the trip attractors nearest the car park.

26. It is therefore proposed that Drapers car park is renamed the Rose car park. This would be in accordance with the principle set out within the Council’s Parking Strategy of naming car parks on the basis of relevant roads or trip attractors, and is also F 6

consistent with other measures that are being introduced to enable visitors to find their way around Kingston to the theatre more easily, and to allow a safe and easy passage from car park to theatre.

27. The cost to the Council of renaming the car park would be approximately £5,000, which involves changes to signage, ticketing, and printed matter. This can be found within existing car parking revenue budgets.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS

28. The theatre is already making a significant contribution to improving the quality of the “after dark” experience in Kingston Town Centre and providing associated social and economic benefits.

Background papers : held by Jeremy Randall (author of report) 020 8547 5572; e-mail: jeremy.randall:@rbk.kingston.gov.uk

1. Executive report – 31 July 2007 – Appendix A 2. Executive report 8 February 2005 – Appendix F

APPENDIX G Executive, 13 May 2008

FILMING INCOME Report by the Head of Strategic Services Leader of the Council

Purpose

This report informs the Executive on filming activity within the Royal Borough during the financial year April 2007 – March 2008.

It sets out details of the total income accrued to the Council up to 31 March 2008 and identifies the proportion attributable to filming activity which took place on Council-owned housing estates. The Executive is asked to determine how the residual income should be allocated.

Action proposed by the Leader of the Council

The Executive is requested to:

1. note the total income of £35,662.65 was collected by the Council during 2007/08 as a result of the Borough’s filming policy;

2. agree that £5,500 of this income be credited to the Kingston Town Neighbourhood Committee and £500 be credited to the Maldens & Coombe Neighbourhood Committee requesting both Committees that it be spent on projects to benefit the housing estates where the filming took place;

3. agree that the balance of £25,797.65 be allocated for art and cultural events throughout the Borough;

4. note that £3,865 has been reimbursed to the Parking Account in accordance with Council’s legal obligation to account separately for street-based parking income; and

5. agree that in future years the balance of income after crediting Neighbourhood Committees where filming has taken place on the Council’s housing estates, and reimbursing the Parking Account, be allocated to art and cultural events throughout the Borough.

Reason for action proposed To allocate filming income generated during 2007/08 in accordance with the Council’s Filming Policy and agree allocation of funding for future years.

BACKGROUND

1. A report on filming activity within the Royal Borough was considered by the Executive on 28 June 2005. The report proposed that RBK’s future filming activities be corporately managed ‘in-house’ by the Communications Unit and that a ‘Film Office’ be created to undertake these activities.

2. The Executive resolved that a new Filming Policy and ‘Guide to Filming in RBK’ be adopted together with a suggested tariff of filming charges as set out in the Guide. The Executive also resolved that the income raised from filming would be held centrally except where it has been generated from filming on Council-owned housing estates. That income to be credited to the appropriate Neighbourhood Committee’s

budget for projects to benefit the housing estate where the filming took place. The residual income, after any charges (Parking Account), to be determined by the Executive. The Executive last year allocated the income received in 2006/07 to art and cultural events, and details of the projects funded are set out below.

Project Amount Think in Kingston: £5,250 Heydinger exhibition £2,500 Carnival: £3,000 River Celebrations: £1,000 Harvest Fayre: £1,000 Creative Services pilot £2,000 New Malden Arts Festival: £1,000 British Museum Korean outreach projects £500 Readers' Festival £5,000 Green Fair 07 / Martha Tilston concert £300 What I Heard About Iraq (play at ACT) £500 Bollywood Sparkles at Rose £1,000 Sakoba Dance Theatre schools’ workshops and £500 performance Street Arts workshops £500 MeWe – Equiano’s Cup £1,000 Total £25,050

THE RBK FILMING POLICY

3. The Filming Policy has now been in place since 1 August 2005 and is operating successfully. The creation of the Film Office arrangement has improved efficiency and service delivery both for the Council and film-makers by:

- providing a one-stop service to film-makers; - offering an online presence for filming information; - delivering an open and fair applications process; - creating transparency in the charges levied by the Council for filming; - providing film-makers with ‘licences to film’ in the Borough; - centralising arrangements for the invoicing and payment of filming charges; - formalising the re- distribution of funds.

4. The Council has set a tariff of charges for film-making that covers costs for services such as:

- site visits and access - parking fees (including suspension of Pay & Display and resident parking bays, parking meters and unit bases); - location fees for filming on Council-owned property, including parts of Kingston town centre, housing estates, parks and open spaces.

The Council also charges film-makers an administration fee of 15% above any costs incurred to cover officer time spent processing application forms, issuing licences and providing advice. The tariff of filming charges applies equally to all film-makers wishing to locate their production in the Royal Borough with the exception of student film-makers or charitable organisations, where the Council reserves the right to G3

waive these charges. All invoicing for filming charges in the Royal Borough is undertaken centrally by the Communications Unit (Strategic Services) who manage the Council’s filming service.

INCOME GENERATED 2007/08

5. During the financial year 2007/08 the Council received 103 applications for Filming of which 91 resulted in filming taking place. The total income generated by filming on Council property was £35,662.65 compared to £31,603.89 (2006/07) and £18,547.06 (2005/06). Of this £3,865 must be reimbursed to the Parking Account in accordance with Council’s legal obligation to account separately for street-based parking income.

6. Of the £35,662.65 net filming income generated during the financial year 2007/08, £6,000 was received from filming on Council-owned housing estates in the following Neighbourhoods:

Kingston Town Neighbourhood £5,500 Cambridge Road Estate Maldens & Coombe Neighbourhood £500 Sheephouse Way Surbiton Neighbourhood £Nil South of the Borough Neighbourhood £Nil

In accordance with the Executive’s decisions, it is proposed that the above sums be credited to the appropriate Neighbourhood Committee budget with a request that it be spent on projects to benefit the housing estate where the filming took place.

7. The Executive is asked to agree that the remaining £25,797.65 be allocated to art and cultural events throughout the Borough.

CONCLUSION

8. The arrangements for Filming continue to be a success. Over £85,000 of income has been generated over the past three years. The corporate arrangements for invoicing and collecting filming income, with the Communications Unit managing the Council’s filming service has led to the Council dealing more efficiently with film- makers. The online application service has resulted in less speculative enquiries, with a bigger percentage of take-up – 90% in 2007/8.

9. The funding for art and cultural events in the Borough has benefitted many projects over the last three years. Consequently, it is proposed that in future years the balance of income after crediting Neighbourhood Committees where filming has taken place on housing estates, and reimbursing the Parking Account, automatically be allocated for funding art and culture events.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS

10. There are no environmental implications emanating from this report. In undertaking any filming activity within the Borough it is a condition of the contractual arrangements that film-makers adhere to the Council’s Environmental Policies.

Background papers: held by Gerry Sevenoaks (author of the report), 020 8547 5175; email: [email protected] 1. Report to Executive 4 July 2006 2. Report to Executive 17 April 2007 APPENDIX H Executive, 13 May 2008

OPTIONS FOR OUTDOOR WIRELESS Report by the Head of Strategic Services Executive Member for Transport, Planning and Regeneration

Purpose This report informs the Executive about the potential for outdoor wireless networks (Wifi) in the Borough and looks at options for future development. Outdoor wireless networks can widen access to technology and deliver a seamless and secure wireless service for all potential users of the service; including learners, residents, businesses and Council staff making the Borough a good place to do business. Wireless networks can also provide access to the Internet for those in disadvantaged areas who do not have any access. Outdoor wireless networks can also offer the Council opportunities for generating revenue by providing access to wireless networks via the Council’s highway infrastructure and street furniture. Action proposed by the Executive Member for Transport, Planning and Regeneration. The Executive is asked to: 1. authorise officers to undertake a procurement process for outdoor wireless networks, to determine opportunities for generating revenue by providing access to Council highway infrastructure and street furniture;

2. authorise officers to work with RBK’s partners to review options for providing access to wireless networks in disadvantaged parts of the Borough; and

3. report to the Executive on the outcome of the procurement process. Reasons for action proposed: To exploit the potential benefits of outdoor wireless networks for residents, visitors and businesses. In particular, the opportunities for generating revenue by providing access to Council highway infrastructure and street furniture. BACKGROUND 1. Wireless networks are most commonly used by portable devices such as laptops, personal digital assistants (PDA’s), mobile phones and some games consoles. The wireless network provides a connection to the Internet. There are a number of different types of wireless network available. This report focuses on outdoor Wifi networks. 2. The Council already has two outdoor Wifi networks. In the Cambridge Road Estate, KVA have implemented a Wifi network in partnership with the Council. This network has given residents wider access to eLearning and other services available online. The Council also has a network of 10 Information Points spread throughout the Borough. These give the public free access to the Internet. 3. A number of councils including Norwich, Westminster, Waltham Forest and Milton Keynes have already implemented public Wifi networks. These Wifi networks are generally limited to town centres/business areas. There are also examples of Wifi networks in areas of deprivation to address the digital divide by broadening access to H2

the Internet. Some of these local authorities are generating income through the use of highway infrastructure and street furniture for wireless networks. 4. The Council has been approached by a number of private sector companies who are looking to exploit the potential of wireless networks in the Borough. BENEFITS OF WIRELESS 5. Public Access: Giving the public the opportunity to connect to the Internet at convenient locations throughout the Borough. This will give broader access to the wealth of information and services available on the Internet. 6. Social Inclusion : Outdoor wireless networks can broaden access to the Internet if installed in disadvantaged areas. The experience of the KVA wireless project shows how Wifi can give the public access to eLearning. 7. Business Friendly : Wireless networks make it easier for people, especially businesses, to access information via the Internet. This could boost Kingston's reputation as a technology enabled Borough. 8. Service Improvements : Whilst out of the office, mobile staff can use wireless networks for direct access to applications like CRM on the Council network. This means service requests can be allocated to the appropriate member of staff in real time. Jobs can be sent directly to contractors and status updates sent back to the Contact Centre. This means that tasks are completed quicker and our customers are kept informed of progress. 9. Working with the public: When visiting clients, staff can use wireless technology to access directly applications and can give immediate feedback on entitlements and services available. 10. Financial Benefits: A public private wireless network could provide the Council with opportunities for generating revenue by giving access to highway infrastructure and street furniture. Depending on the commercial agreement, the Council might also be able to benefit from preferential rates for using the network. However, there would need to be a business case for officers using a wifi network with limited coverage when the mobile phone network already has good coverage across most of the Borough. WIMAX

11. An emerging wireless technology is WiMax. This has significantly bigger range than Wifi. However, it is not supported by many devices at the moment but it is likely to become mainstream within the next couple of years. 12. This summer, OFCOM will run an auction for a range of WiMax spectrum which will give private sector companies rights to deploy wireless WiMax networks. Whilst Wifi will be the standard wireless technology for the next couple of years, this will be superseded by WiMax and developments by the mobile phone companies. BUSINESS MODELS FOR DEPLOYMENT OF OUTDOOR WIRELESS

13. There are two main models which have been used by local authorities for the deployment of wireless networks; • Council owned and managed network: In this model, RBK would fund the implementation of its own wireless network and take on responsibility for ongoing management. A variant of this would be for the Council to establish a partnership organisation with responsibility for implementing and running the wireless network at arms length from the Authority. H3

• Public Private Partnership: In this model the Council enters into a commercial relationship with a private sector partner to deliver the wireless network. The private sector partner is responsible for implementing the network and support. They recoup their investment by charging for use of the wireless network 14. The first option and its variants are high risk for the Council. Before proceeding, the Council would need to be convinced about the business case for such approach, risks involved and the likely ongoing support/maintenance costs. Given that private sector partners can provide this service, the Council should consider if it is the role of a local authority to implement public wireless networks. 15. Promoting digital inclusion can give obvious benefits for both the public and the Council. For the public they will have access to technology they otherwise couldn’t afford. They can also have access to new access channels which are more convenient and also much cheaper for the Council to deliver. However it is unlikely that any private sector partner would be interested in implementing wireless networks in areas of deprivation. 16. The wireless network deployed by Kingston Voluntary Action in the Cambridge Road Estate has shown how the voluntary sector can work with the Council to broaden access to online learning by using wireless networks. The Council is now in a position to explore the extension of this principle to cover other services across the Borough. 17. It is proposed that the Council investigates further the potential of a public private partnership for wireless networks. This is the approach adopted by other London Boroughs. The potential benefits for the Council is a payment for the use of Council assets (buildings and street furniture) where the transmitters are located. The Council might also benefit from discounted rates for the use of the wireless networks. NEXT STEPS 18. A full procurement will be undertaken inviting suppliers to submit business proposals. Following an evaluation the outcome would be reported to the Executive. 19. Further work will be undertaken with RBK’s partners (including KVA) to examine options for the deployment of more wireless networks in disadvantaged areas of the Borough to promote social inclusion and broaden access to the Internet. EQUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT 20. As explained above, wireless networks will widen access to technology. They can also help to tackle the digital divide by giving disadvantaged groups’ access to the Internet and the associated information and channels of communication. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS 21. Other local authorities have demonstrated that the use of mobile working and flexible working can significantly reduce staff travel to and from the office as a result of wireless networks ability to facilitate online access to information and applications. 22. Officers will monitor compliance with the Council’s Environmental Policy, specifically as it relates to the use of recycling/reuse of materials, the efficient use of energy, the reduction of waste, and the sustainable use of resources and staff environmental awareness.

Author of the Report: Gerry Sevenoaks Head of Strategic Services (020 8547 5175) email [email protected] Background Papers: None APPENDIX I Executive, 13 May 2008

FISHPONDS OPEN SPACE, EWELL ROAD, SURBITON – GRANT OF EASEMENT Report by the Borough Valuer Leader of the Council

Purpose

To consider the grant of an easement to Thames Water Utilities Ltd to allow the existing system of ponds within Fishponds Open Space to be used in connection with a scheme to alleviate flooding problems experienced in the vicinity of Browns Road and King Charles Crescent, Surbiton.

Action proposed by the Leader of the Council

The Executive is requested to:

1. approve the grant of an easement to Thames Water Utilities in respect of Fishponds Open Space on the terms outlined in the report; and

2. subject to there being no objections following publication of statutory Notices concerning the Council’s intention to grant an easement, authorise officers to complete the matter.

Reason for action proposed To assist in alleviating flooding problems experienced by residents in the vicinity of Browns Road and King Charles Crescent, Surbiton by means of a Sustainable Urban Drainage System, and to secure improvements to the system of ponds within Fishponds Open Space.

BACKGROUND

1. Thames Water Utilities Ltd (‘Thames Water’) wishes to use the existing ponds within Fishponds Open Space, Ewell Road, Surbiton (‘Fishponds’) to alleviate flooding problems experienced in the vicinity of Browns Road and King Charles Crescent, Surbiton. Thames Water is aware that a number of properties are currently at risk from internal and external flooding at times of heavy rainfall and seeks to use the ponds to address this problem.

2. Thames Water identified two other ways in which this problem might be dealt with ie. either enlarging the existing surface water sewer in adjacent public highways or constructing a substantial underground storage tank within Fishponds. However, in view of difficulties of construction, disruption to residents, impact on the existing outfall into the Hogsmill River and high cost associated with those options, Thames Water would prefer to use the ponds within Fishponds and in a way that would achieve a Sustainable Urban Drainage System and secure improvements to Fishponds.

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS

3. Although Thames Water has statutory powers to construct new public sewers, those powers do not extend to the use ponds in the way proposed. Consequently, I - 2

the agreement of the Council, as landowner, is required, by way of the grant of an easement.

4. The Council would also need to advertise its intention to grant an easement affecting this area of public open space and to consider any representations or objections that might be received. This would be in order to comply with the requirements of the Local Government Act, 1972.

CURRENT POSITION

5. The proposed scheme would involve Thames Water raising some sections of bank around some of the ponds and modifying existing weirs to allow additional water storage, for which planning permission was granted on 11 September 2006.

6. Discussions have taken place with Thames Water and the terms on which the grant of an easement can be recommended are summarised at Annex 1. These terms include a short-term arrangement prescribing the way in which the works would be undertaken by Thames Water’s contractor, and provide for the changed long term monitoring and maintenance requirements for the ponds that would be necessary, including a continuing commitment to by Thames Water to share the costs of such requirements. Quadron have been consulted on these terms and consider them to be reasonable and appropriate.

7. A report from independent engineering and environmental consultants has been obtained , at Thames Water’s cost, which concludes that Thames Water’s design for the proposed works are generally well founded and that they would not be inappropriate for Fishponds.

8. At its meeting on 13 March 2008, the Surbiton Neighbourhood Committee considered Thames Water’s proposals and resolved that:

(i) the use of the ponds within Fishponds Open Space for flood alleviation purposes on the basis set out in the report be agreed; and

(ii) the Executive be informed of the following matters to take into account when considering the grant of an appropriate easement to Thames Water Utilities Ltd:

• That the wording of any agreement be sufficiently robust to make it clear that the Council ‘will’ require any remediation works to be carried out. • The surrounding environment. Consideration should be given to the protection of the bank edges around the ponds to ensure that they are maintained and remain fully accessible and usable by visitors to the park. The final design of the scheme should consider the use of thick shrubs and planting to prevent children accessing the channels. • A Member of the Committee wished it to be noted that he did not feel that sufficient evidence had been presented to prove that the least cost option would be the best in environmental terms.

9. The first two matters raised by the Neighbourhood Committee can be dealt with in further discussion with Thames Water on detailed aspects of the proposed I - 3

scheme. As for the third matter, Thames Water has prepared a ‘Cost / Benefit’ Analysis’, which is shown at Annex 2.

TIMESCALE

10. Thames Water estimates the works should be completed within 3 months, but would need to start no later than September 2008 if funding for the scheme is to be assured.

PUBLIC CONSULTATION

11. In connection with the planning permission referred to at paragraph 5 above, 268 neighbour consultation letters were sent out by the Council and site and press notices were posted. No responses were received.

12. In May 2006 Thames Water sent a letter outlining the details of the proposed scheme to about 300 residents in the locality. On 7 June 2006, Thames Water held a ‘drop in session’ at the former Red Cross Centre in King Charles Road, in order to provide more details on the proposals and to answer questions. The session was attended by 14 customers, including 2 Councillors. The reaction to the scheme ranged from neutral to very positive and there were no objections.

13. Thames Water proposes sending a further letter to local residents to inform them of the current position. Local residents will also be informed, and Notices posted, of the closure of the ponds prior to work commencing

FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS

14. The grant of an easement permitting the works would be subject to the capital receipt to the Council referred to in the terms summarised at Annex 1. Any increased cost of maintaining the ponds would be met by Thames Water, as also referred to in the terms summarised at Annex 1.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS

15. Any environmental implications are addressed by conditions attached to the planning permission dated 11 September 2006 (as referred to in paragraph 5 above), and the terms summarised at Annex 1. Environmental improvements would also be undertaken, at Thames Water’s cost.

CONCLUSION

16. The grant of an easement to Thames Water would assist in dealing with the problem of flooding experienced by residents in the vicinity of Browns Road and King Charles Crescent, and in a way that would be environmentally sensitive, use and enhance existing water features, encourage wild-life habitat and add to the vegetation, aesthetic and biodiversity value of the park. In so doing, it would be regarded as a Sustainable Urban Drainage System, which the Council commends as solutions to drainage problems. . 17. The terms (at Annex 1) on which it is recommended that such agreement be made would also ensure that a formal and robust long-term monitoring and maintenance regime would be put in place that recognises a continuing I - 4

responsibility by Thames Water without any undue financial or legal implications for the Council. They would also secure improvements for the ponds and the park, which the Council might otherwise find it difficult to undertake.

18. For these reasons, it is considered that agreement to OPTION 3 identified and proposed by Thames Water can be recommended.

Background papers: held by John Mitchell (author of report), Principal Valuer – 020 8547 5680, e-mail: [email protected]

1. Borough Valuer’s file, including correspondence with Thames Water 2. Report to Surbiton Neighbourhood Committee 13 March 2008 3. Report by the Director of Environmental Services to the Development Control Committee 30 August 2006 4. Report dated October 2007 from Peter Brett Associates

I - 5

Annex 1

FISHPONDS OPEN SPACE, EWELL ROAD, SURBITON

BASIS FOR AGREEMENT WITH THAMES WATER RE. FLOOD ALLEVIATION WORKS

Grant of Permanent Easement

1. Thames Water will be allowed to use the system of ponds for alleviating the problem of flooding experienced by residents in Browns Road and King Charles Crescent, Surbiton.

2. Thames Water will:

(a) pay the Council the sum of £7,500; (b) undertake all works at its own cost; (c) before carrying out any works, prepare and agree with the Council a Schedule of condition recording the condition of the park; (d) carry out all works only in accordance with plans and details to be agreed with the Council and in accordance with all Health and Safety and other relevant requirements; (e) carry out all reinstatement works as the Council shall require; (f) following completion of the works:

(i) inspect the ponds periodically to ensure they are functioning correctly; (ii) notify the Council if they are not so performing and of the reason why; (iii) notify the Council as to what remediation works are necessary, when the Council may require Thames Water to carry out such works, or ensure the ponds are not used for attenuating flood water until appropriate works have been carried out;

(g) contribute to the additional cost to be incurred by the Council in maintaining the ponds in a condition suitable for attenuating flood water.

3. The Council will;

(a) subject to payment of the contribution mentioned at 2.(g) above, maintain the ponds in a condition suitable to attenuate flood water; (b) notify Thames Water should the Council become aware that the ponds are not dealing with flood water properly, and require Thames Water either to carry out suitable works or ensure the ponds are not used for attenuating flood water until appropriate works have been carried out; (c) consult Thames Water when it intends to carry out works to the ponds which may affect the function of attenuating flood water;

4. If, following completion of the works, damage is caused to the park as a result of the ponds being used for attenuating flood water, the Council may require Thames Water either to reinstate such damage, or ensure the ponds are not used for attenuating flood water until appropriate works have been carried out.

5. Thames Water will pay the Council’s reasonable legal and associated costs.

I - 6

Grant of Temporary Licence During Construction Period

1. The Licence will be for a period of 12 weeks, or such longer period as may be necessary.

2. The Licence will permit Thames Water and its contractor on Mondays to Fridays (between the hours of 8.00 and 17.00), to enter the park, with or without vehicles, for the purpose of carrying out the all work, but only that part of the park as is shown cross hatched on plan number EM 4712/3 (‘the Plan’) is to be used for the storage of materials and/or as a site compound.

3. Thames Water will:

(a) pay to the Council a fee of £150 per week and any outgoings associated with such use; (b) enter the park with vehicles only at letters A and B on the Plan; (c) within the park, gain access to the ponds and associated areas over such routes as the Council shall prescribe; (d) make its own arrangements for the supply of water, electricity, telephone and any other services required in connection with the works; (e) ensure that:

(i) all works are carried out in a proper manner, properly supervised and in accordance with all appropriate regulations, codes of practice and other requirements; (ii) the area shown cross hatched on the Plan is:

A. enclosed with suitable fencing; B. except for the storage of diesel, not used to store anything which could be regarded as a hazard ort a source of danger; C. kept clean and tidy; D. left properly secure at all times;

(iii) all appropriate measures are taken to:

A. safeguard members of the public using the park; B. notify the owners and occupiers of Fishponds House within the park before starting any works and take account of such representations as they may make; C. where reasonably practicable, minimise the effects of the works on those owners and occupiers;

(f) reinstate any damage caused to Fishponds House; (g) before starting any works, agree such traffic management scheme as the Council may require; (h) comply with all statutory and other relevant requirements, such measures as the Council may require concerning the integrity, cleanliness and safety of the public highways, and any other terms as the Council, acting reasonably, may impose; (i) indemnify the Council against Thames Water’s or it contractor’s use of the park;

Day Hospital

Red Cross 30.3m

WAR Centre 10 18 W 5

ICK 9 30

GRO

4 2

24 12 11 1 B 2 1 o 18

8 t ) AD Newent Housetre 19 O 32 N (Day Cen KI WN'S R NG CHA

BRO 3

6 49

23 LB

RLES C 3 7 7

3 9 M

AD AY

O RESC BE 31a BROW N'S R RR

ENT

45 PLAY

136

31b 18

6 CE

10 48

7 47

c 61 13 3

1 3 67

8 7

0 77 C 6 Garage

28.3m 140 24

KING CH 1

Fishponds Cottage A El Sub Sta RL

ROA Pond U D AVEN POND 1 POND 3 26.4m

1 4 3

Pond

Fishponds E Kingfisher Fishponds 18 Court D 7

Pond POND 4

POND 2 Pond

1 9 9

o20to 1 ery Surg

Brunswick Lodge

o16to 1

201

Park View es harl 22.7m King C entre School C Cottage

D ROAD LLYFIEL HO

22.4m gion

25.9m tish Le b Bri Clu D A O R Contractors D IEL F 83

Compound Y LL 22 O

A H 71 7

E 8

Shelter 59

WELL 22.8m

72 206 BI

RCH 15 to R t I 1 ur NG OAD Co n TO

8 43 Clifto 58 RN

O AD

OAD

4 NSFIELD R 6 Shelter 29 O AC OSE BE 1

IRIS CL 23.3m

34 P 5 o El Su

li 13 c Depar e T b 15 23.1m St

24 a r 22 3 an tment sp 23.6 m ort

25 GORDON

1 1 TCB 2

1 4

12a ROAD 9 2

23.5m

Proposed Works By Thames Water Utilities - FISHPONDS, EWELL ROAD, SURBITON J. F.Barlow, FRICS IRRV Borough Valuer Plan No: Scale: Drawn: Date: File Ref: Guildhall, Kingston upon Thames EM4712/3 1/2000 VR 18.2.08 1/M/28 Surrey KT1 1EU 3 I - 8

Annex 2

FISHPONDS – COST / BENEFIT ANALYSIS PREPARED BY THAMES WATER

Project 1J3F Browns Road Surbiton

Cost / benefit & environmental impact assessment

Summary The following is a simple objective assessment of the cost and benefits of two options to reduce the risk of flooding at properties at Browns Road and St Charles Crescent in Surbiton.

To justify funding of this project a simple cost benefit has been completed. A detailed comparison of the environmental impact of each option has not previously been undertaken because it was clear to those involved in the project that the impact of option 3 is significantly better than option 2. Also the cost benefit of option 3 is 50% that of option 2. Option 2 cannot not be supported by Thames Water’s current business plan.

Options and cost benefit ( 2006 values )

Option 1

Construction of new gravity sewer between Browns Road and watercourse to rear of Alexandra Avenue. This option has been discounted because it is extremely unlikely that the Environment Agency will agree to modify the discharge consent.

Option 2

Construction of new gravity sewer and 350 m3 attenuation tank plus pumped return in Fishponds open space. Capital cost £ 1,800 k, Annual operational cost £ 5 k, Net present value £ 1,733 k. Cost per property £ 300 k which is above Thames Water’s business plan control.

Option 3

Construction of outfall pipe to Fishponds Open Space, oil interceptor, modification to ponds, raising banks of ponds, upsizing pipework between ponds. Capital cost £ 877 k, Annual operational cost £ 10 k, Net present value £ 929 k. Cost per property £ 146 k which is high compared with the business plan target.

Environmental impacts The following is an extract from the project implementation approval report: “In addition to being the best value solution, the preferred option has greater environmental benefits than the alternative: the scope of work is less than alternative resulting in the use of fewer materials and less waste; the natural fall/gravity is used to transfer flows rather than the use of pumping; the solution will provide an additional source of water to the fishponds; modification to the ponds to accept additional flow will include environmental enhancements in the form of planting” I - 9

An objective assessment of the environmental impact of option 2 & 3 has been estimated and summarised in the following table

Environmental impact Option 2 Option 3 Excavated volume requiring disposal via landfill or 2050 T 640 T recycling Use of new construction materials 1020 T 390 T Heavy goods vehicle movements 155 55 Fuel used during construction 69,000 l 10,000 l Annual power consumption by pumps to return 117 kwH **0 stored water CO 2 impact of annual power consumption 0.05 T **0 Disturbance to grassland in open space 6800 m 2 3200 m 2 Noise, dust, vibration adjacent to homes 140 days 20 days Road closure resulting in traffic diversion 15 days 10 days Closure of areas within Fishponds Park 168 days 84 days Reduce risk of property flooding **6 nr **6 nr Reduce risk of highway flooding **1 location **1 location Fresh water supply to Fishponds No **Yes Water quality improvement to ponds No **Yes Dredging of ponds No **Yes Additional planting to ponds No **Yes Disturbance to pond wildlife **No Acceptable Disturbance to habitat of protected species Slow Worms None

Negative environmental impact Smaller negative or no positive environmental impact **Positive environmental impact

Note: the figures above are estimated values base on the scope of work involved. Although they are not precise values they help to illustrate the difference between the two options.

Conclusion The cost benefit of option 3 is significantly better than option 2 Option 2 fails to satisfy TW business plan controls and will not be funded in the current 5 year asset management planning period 2005-2010. The environmental impact of option 3 is significantly better than the impact of option 2 in all but three categories. It is clear that Option 3 is far more sustainable than option 2.

ACW 14:3:2008

Appendix J Executive, 13 May 2008

MEMBERSHIP OF THE 2M GROUP Report by the Head of Democratic Services and Partnership Leader of the Council and Executive Members for Environment & Sustainability and Transport, Planning & Regeneration

Purpose To consider joining the 2M Group, which is a representative body for those local authorities concerned at the environmental impact of Heathrow Airport and its expansion. Action proposed by the Leader of the Council and Executive Members for Environment & Sustainability and Transport, Planning & Regeneration: The Executive is requested to: agree to the Council joining the 2M Group of local authorities and confirm that the Leader of the Council (or his nominated Deputy) will represent the Council on the Group. Reason for action proposed To enable the Council to benefit from membership of this representative body.

BACKGROUND

1. The Council has been approached about the possibility of joining the 2M Group, which is a representative body for those local authorities concerned at the environmental impact of Heathrow expansion on their communities. The Group was established in December 2006 and took its name from the 2 million residents of the 12 local authorities who were the original members. Since then the Group has grown from 12 to 19 members who, between them, have a combined population of around 4 million. The current membership comprises the London Boroughs of Brent, Camden, Ealing, Greenwich, Hammersmith and Fulham, Harrow, Hillingdon, Hounslow, Islington, Kensington and Chelsea, Lambeth, Lewisham, Merton, Richmond, Southwark and Wandsworth together with the Boroughs of Slough, Spelthorne, the Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead and South Bucks District Council.

2. The purpose of the Group is to act as a common voice for local authorities concerned at the environmental impact of Heathrow. Membership is open to local authorities whose residents are affected by airport activities. The Group is not a decision-making body but it aims to work co-operatively to develop a strategic approach to airport issues across the membership.

3. More specifically, its Terms of Reference are as follows:

o To provide a forum for considering cross-Borough responses to airport proposals affecting the quality of life of residents in the membership area.

o To act as a vehicle for exchanging information between members and promoting a coherent and consistent message from all members.

o To act as a vehicle for raising the profile of the authorities’ aviation and environmental campaigns.

o To act as a vehicle for encouraging greater public engagement in the Boroughs’ campaigns

o To develop a strategic approach to airport and aviation issues which addresses the concerns of the members.

o To publicise the collective views of the Boroughs through a variety of means including media activity, briefings, parliamentary lobbying and local campaigns.

o To consider the merits of all options for challenging unwelcome proposals including litigation but to delegate all decisions on support for legal action to individual members.

o To maintain an informal approach which allows individual members to express their own viewpoint when this differs from the consensus.

4. In the past, the Borough has not suffered overmuch from aircraft noise generated by Heathrow and, therefore, has not been particularly active in campaigning on that issue, although through its membership of the Local Authority Aircraft Noise Council (LAANC) the Council keeps abreast of Heathrow aircraft noise issues. Given the current proposals for expansion and, in particular, a third runway, and the significant environmental implications resulting, it now seems timely to join the 2M Group. Kingston’s inclusion would also mean that all the London Boroughs in the South West sector were involved.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

5. There are no particular financial implications arising from membership. There is no subscription fee and most of the work of the Group is carried out on-line.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS

6. The purpose of the 2M Group is to help member authorities raise awareness about and address the very significant environmental issues arising from airport expansion.

Background Papers Held by Andrew Bessant (author of report) on 020 8547 4628 1. Constitution of the 2M Group APPENDIX K Executive, 13 May 2008

REVIEW OF PENSION FUND INVESTMENT STRATEGY (Reference from the Pension Fund Panel meetings - 26 February and 7 April 2008)

Purpose

To consider the recommendation of the Pension Fund Panel at its meetings on 26 February and 7 April 2008 to adopt a revised investment strategy and to select new fund managers through an OJEU tender process

Action requested by the Pension Fund Panel

The Executive is requested to:

1. approve the recommendation from the Pension Fund investment panel to adopt the revised Pension Fund investment strategy set out in Annex 1, set out in the exempt section of the agenda, subject to further review of the business case for delivering strategy through a UK equity mandate;

2. approve the process to select appropriate fund managers through the OJEU process that will deliver the long term investment strategy based on the asset allocation model set out in Annex 1;

3. delegate responsibility for managing the OJEU tender process and short listing of suitable fund managers to the Strategic Director of Finance;

4. authorise the Pension Fund Panel to appoint the appropriate fund managers selected through the OJEU process and

5. authorise the Pension Fund Panel to periodically review and, if required, amend the fund benchmarks to optimise the risk budget, subject to further reports to the Executive.

Action proposed by the Leader of the Council

As the above recommendations of the Pension Fund Panel.

Reason for action proposed To implement the recommendations of the pension fund investment review to restructure the pension fund management arrangements to meet fund objectives.

BACKGROUND

1. The Pension Fund Panel has reviewed the fund management and investment arrangements for the Pension Fund in accordance with its practice to review arrangements every three years. The Panel has been advised by Mercers, the Panel’s Investment Consultants. The review process included setting an action plan and governance framework for reviewing the pension fund objectives; understanding the fund liabilities and determining and allocating a risk budget suitable for the structure for K2

the fund. The final stages to be completed are the selection of appropriate investment managers to deliver the revised investment strategy and revision of the Statement of Investment Principles.

2. At a special meeting of the Pension Fund Panel on 1 May 2007, the Panel considered the performance of its active global equity Pension Fund Manager and agreed to recommend the Executive to terminate the contract with that Fund Manager, and to waive Contract Standing Orders in order to allow the transfer of all the holdings to UBS Global Asset Management, its passive UK Equity Fund Manager, until the review of the Pension Fund arrangements had been completed. This was agreed by the Executive on 15 May 2007.

3. At its meeting on 10 July 2007, Executive agreed the Pensions Fund Panel’s recommendation to appoint Mercers as investment consultants to the Pension Fund Panel. Mercers’ brief included advising on an appropriate investment strategy for the fund.

4. The Pension Fund Panel has undertaken the review over the course of five meetings of the Pension Fund Panel and at a training seminar. The starting point was an analysis of the Fund liabilities identified in the 2007 actuarial valuation. This set out the expectation of the 100% funding objective being achieved within 18 years if the optimum investment strategy is achieved (from the 70% funding level as at 31 March 2007, which is an improvement on the 2004 valuation of a 64% funding level.)

5. Through modelling of alterative investment strategies, it was established that the current investment strategy was not efficient or effective and that a more active investment management strategy should be adopted to optimise investment risk and return. This new strategy requires a restructuring from one passive manager (UBS Global Asset Management) to a four manager structure. It is also proposed that a fifth alternative investment manager will be considered at a later stage to provide further diversification and to maximise return. The revised investment strategy is set out in Annex 1, ‘Investment strategy and manager structure review - Summary of recommendations made by the Pension Fund Investment Panel’, 7 April 2008. Further work needs to be done to clarify the benefits of a separate UK equity mandate and benchmark. It is recommended to commence the OJEU process on the global and bond mandates in the first instance.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS AND RISK

6. To deliver the fund objective of 100% funding requires the adoption of an active and diversified strategy. Employing more than one fund manager will result in increased cost of fund managers’ fees, custodial charges and fund accounting. It is expected however, that the move to an active investment strategy will result in a higher net return to the Pension Fund. The Investment Strategy is based on a risk budget model which makes the most efficient use of risk and return. The investment strategy will be monitored annually to ensure that the fully funded objective is on target.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS - None.

Background papers held by the author of the report, Iain Millar, Assistant Director (Treasury Services), tel: 020 8547 5620 e-mail: [email protected] :

E1 Agendas of Pension Fund Investment Panel Meetings from 1 May 2007 to 7 April 2008. 2. Minutes of Pension Fund Investment Panel Meetings from 1 May 2007 to 7 April 2008. E3 Mercer Reports to Pension Fund Investment Panel: ‘Initial thinking on investment Arrangements’, 18 November 2007. ‘Moving forward with investment strategy’, 18 November 2007. ‘Investment strategy initial review’, 11 February 2008. ‘Investment strategy considerations’, 26 February 2008. ‘Investment strategy and manager structure review –Summary of recommendations made by the Pension Fund Investment Panel’, 7 April 2008.