Public Document Pack
Cabinet Date: Tuesday, 8 September 2020 Time: 10.00 am Venue: Committee Rooms A&B, South Walks House, Dorchester, DT1 1EE Membership: (Quorum 3)
Cabinet membership and portfolio holder posts to be announced at Full Council on 3 September 2020.
Chief Executive: Matt Prosser, South Walks House, South Walks Road, Dorchester, Dorset DT1 1UZ (Sat Nav DT1 1EE)
For more information about this agenda please telephone Democratic Services on 01305 or Kate Critchel 01305 252234 - [email protected]
For easy access to the Council agendas and minutes download the free public app Mod.gov for use on your iPad, Android and Windows tablet. Once downloaded select Dorset Council. Due to the current coronavirus pandemic the Council has reviewed its approach to holding committee meetings. Members of the public are welcome to attend this meeting and listen to the debate either online by using the following link Web link to Dorset Council Cabinet Meeting to observe - 8 September 2020
Members of the public wishing to view the meeting from an iphone, ipad or android phone will need to download the free Microsoft Team App to sign in as a Guest, it is advised to do this at least 30 minutes prior to the start of the meeting.
Please note that public speaking has been suspended. However Public Participation will continue by written submission only. Please see detail set out below.
Dorset Council is committed to being open and transparent in the way it carries out its business whenever possible. A recording of the meeting will be available on the council’s website after the event. A G E N D A
Page No.
1 APOLOGIES
To receive any apologies for absence.
2 MINUTES 5 - 40
To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 28 July 2020.
3 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
To receive any declarations of interest.
4 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
To receive questions or statements on the business of the committee from town and parish councils and members of the public. Public speaking has been suspended for virtual committee meetings during the Covid-19 crisis and public participation will be dealt with through written submissions only.
Members of the public who live, work or represent an organisation within the Dorset Council area, may submit up to two questions or a statement of up to a maximum of 450 words. All submissions must be sent electronically to [email protected] by the deadline set out below. When submitting a question please indicate who the question is for and include your name, address and contact details. Questions and statements received in line with the council’s rules for public participation will be published as a supplement to the agenda.
Questions will be read out by an officer of the council and a response given by the appropriate Portfolio Holder or officer at the meeting. All questions, statements and responses will be published in full within the minutes of the meeting.
The deadline for submission of the full text of a question or statement is 8.30am on Thursday 3 September 2020.
5 QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS
To receive any questions from members in accordance with procedure rule 13.
6 FORWARD PLAN 41 - 50
To consider the Cabinet Forward Plan.
7 DORSET COUNCIL PROCUREMENT STRATEGY 2020 - 2022 51 - 80
To consider a report of the Portfolio Holder for Finance, Commercial and Assets.
8 DORSET COUNCIL PLAN: PERFORMANCE UPDATE 81 - 118
To consider a report of the Portfolio Holder for Corporate Development and Change.
9 DIGITAL PLATFORM 119 - 126
To consider a report of the Portfolio Holder for Corporate Development and Change.
10 EXTENSION TO LOW CARBON DORSET PROGRAMME 127 - 134
To consider a report of the Portfolio Holder for Highways, Travel and Environment.
11 SUB-NATIONAL PARTNERSHIPS 135 - 140
To consider a report of the Portfolio Holder for Highways, Travel and Environment.
12 REVISED LOCAL DEVELOPMENT SCHEME 141 - 154
To consider a report of the Portfolio Holder for Planning.
13 SCREENING REVIEW OF THE BOURNEMOUTH, DORSET AND 155 - 244 POOLE MINERALS STRATEGY 2014
To consider a report of the Portfolio Holder for Planning.
14 CAPITAL FUNDING REQUEST TO SUPPORT HOUSING 245 - 266 PROJECTS
To consider a report of the Portfolio Holder for Housing and Community Safety.
PANELS AND GROUPS To receive any minutes, recommendations or verbal updates from panels, groups and boards: 15 CLIMATE & ECOLOGICAL EMERGENCY EXECUTIVE ADVISORY PANEL UPDATE
To receive an update from the Portfolio Holder for Highways, Travel and Environment.
16 URGENT ITEMS
To consider any items of business which the Chairman has had prior notification and considers to be urgent pursuant to section 100B (4) b) of the Local Government Act 1972. The reason for the urgency shall be recorded in the minutes.
17 EXEMPT BUSINESS
To move the exclusion of the press and the public for the following item in view of the likely disclosure of exempt information within the meaning of paragraph 1 and 3 of schedule 12 A to the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended).
The public and the press will be asked to leave the meeting whilst the item of business is considered.
If Cabinet wish to discuss the details set out in the appendices of item 14 (Capital funding request to support housing projects), the MS Teams Live Event will end.
The committee will then meet in closed session to discuss the item.
CAPITAL FUNDING REQUEST TO SUPPORT HOUSING PROJECTS Exempt appendices Appendix 1 – Analysis of needs assessments Appendix 2 – Property purchase information and returns. Appendix 3 - Properties currently owned by Dorset Council Appendix 4 - Revenue savings from hostel development Public Document Pack Agenda Item 2
DORSET COUNCIL - CABINET
MINUTES OF MEETING HELD ON TUESDAY 28 JULY 2020
Present: Cllrs Spencer Flower (Chairman), Peter Wharf (Vice-Chairman), Tony Alford, Ray Bryan, Graham Carr-Jones, Tony Ferrari, Laura Miller, Andrew Parry, Gary Suttle and David Walsh
Also present: Cllr Jon Andrews, Cllr Dave Bolwell, Cllr Jean Dunseith, Cllr Mike Dyer, Cllr Beryl Ezzard, Cllr David Gray, Cllr Nick Ireland, Cllr Roland Tarr, Cllr David Taylor, Cllr David Tooke, Cllr John Worth, Cllr Pauline Batstone, Cllr Cherry Brooks, Cllr Simon Christopher, Cllr Kelvin Clayton, Cllr Susan Cocking, Cllr Barry Goringe, Cllr Matthew Hall, Cllr Brian Heatley, Cllr Ryan Hope, Cllr Carole Jones, Cllr Nocturin Lacey-Clarke, Cllr Mike Parkes, Cllr Val Pothecary, Cllr Molly Rennie, Cllr Jane Somper and Cllr Daryl Turner
Officers present (for all or part of the meeting): Aidan Dunn (Executive Director - Corporate Development S151), Jonathan Mair (Corporate Director - Legal & Democratic Service Monitoring Officer), John Sellgren (Executive Director, Place), Susan Dallison (Democratic Services Manager), Kate Critchel (Senior Democratic Services Officer), Alex Clothier (Enterprise Zone & Regeneration Manager), David Walsh (Service Manager for Growth and Economic Regeneration), Antony Littlechild (Community Energy Manager), Dugald Lockhart (Senior Project Manager), David McIntosh (Corporate Director (HR & OD)), Tony Meadows (Head of Commissioning), Karyn Punchard (Corporate Director of Place Services) and David Webb (Service Manager - Dorset Combined Youth Offending Service)
169. Minutes
The minutes of the meeting held on 30 June 2020 were confirmed as a correct record and would be signed by the Chairman in due course.
170. Declarations of Interest
No declarations of disclosable pecuniary interests were made at the meeting.
171. Public Participation
Ten questions and two statements was received from the public. These were from Sarah James (Chief Executive, the Arts Development Company), Julie-Ann Booker (Extinction Rebellion) Len Herbert, Michael Tunbridge, Bridget Joslin, Dave Warren, David Redgewell, Luke Wakeling, Paula Klaentschi and Jasmine O’Hare.
The questions (but not the preamble) were read out by John Sellgren (Executive Director for Place), Jonathan Mair (Corporate Director, Legal and Democratic
Page 5 Services) and David McIntosh (Corporate Director for HR & OD). A copy of the full questions, the responses and the statements are set out in Appendix 1 these minutes.
172. Questions from Members
There were four questions from members and these along with the responses are set out in Appendix 2 to these minutes.
173. Forward Plan
The Cabinet Forward Plan was received and it was noted that the following items would be added to the plan.
Climate and Ecological Emergency Action Plan Leisure Services Review Initial high level draft budget for 2021/22 and the MTFP for 2023 – 2026
174. Digital Infrastructure Projects to Accelerate Economic Recovery from the Impact of the Coronavirus Pandemic
In presenting the report the Portfolio Holder for Corporate Development advised that there was one minor amendment at page 25 of the papers. The following sentence “funded from Dorset Council transformation fund” should be in the box below within the table on the page. This amendment did not change the recommendation before members.
The report related to the acceleration of existing Government funded capital projects, to generate new activity within 18 months, to help create jobs and raise overall demand in the economy. Members were advised that the funding available was set out within the Covid Recovery Infrastructure Fund and this would be managed through Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEP). This did cause some concern due to past funding allocations from the LEP. It was important that LEP gave a fair deal to Dorset Council and it was hoped that the Dorset LEP would adopt a more strategic and whole county approach moving forward.
The business case was in rapid development for bringing multiple interventions together under one programme that would accelerate activity and close the digital connectivity gap, ensure continuing progress in Dorset in the next 18 months or so, before the next major full fibre government intervention programme began to be delivered during 2022 and beyond.
The report outlined progress to date, addressed high-level budget issues and sought to delegate decisions to enable the work to progress against very tight timescales. In proposing the recommendation, the Portfolio Holder proposed a minor amendment to recommendation (b) and this was accepted by Cabinet.
Decision
2 Page 6 (a) That the creation of a full business case to accelerate the deployment of full fibre and wireless / mobile connectivity predominately in the rural parts of the Dorset Council area, be supported;
(b) That the Dorset Council budgetary commitment of up to £1m capital (from the Ringfenced Superfast Broadband budget) and revenue implementation commitment of £285k (funded from the Dorset Council Transformation fund) to leverage in external capital and commercial investment of up to £8.9m, be agreed;
(c) That the commencement of the required public procurements be agreed;
(d) That authority be delegated to the portfolio holder for Corporate Development, in consultation with the Executive Director of Place, to submit a full business case, procure and award services and enter into the necessary grant agreements to deliver this programme of activity;
(d) That the unusually short timescales involved in developing these proposals, and the importance of responding and mobilising quickly to meet delivery deadlines to facilitate economic recovery from the impacts of the Coronavirus pandemic be noted.
Reason for the Decision
To enable the business case process to be submitted, complete due diligence and to facilitate the quickest possible deployment by March 2022.
175. Transport Infrastructure Investment Fund
The Portfolio Holder for Highways, Travel and the Environment reported on the Government’s newly created Transport Infrastructure Investment Fund. Incorporated into the fund wad a combination of already confirmed annual funds for Dorset Council, with the addition of a Pothole Fund, which included funds originally intended for the 2020/21 Challenge, now divided between authorities on the needs based formula. Dorset’s share of the £1.7billion funding was set out in detail within the report.
Members were further advised that future investment strategies against all highways assets would be the subject to review and discussion at future Highway Executive Advisory Panel meetings.
In response to questions, the Portfolio Holder confirmed that council engineers were working closely with the private landowner to resolve recent issues in respect of the landslip near the Old Castle Road at Weymouth.
Cabinet members welcomed the report and supported the recommendation.
Decision That the proposed spend allocation of the Transport Infrastructure Investment Fund be approved. Reason for the Decision
3 Page 7 That we can invest the Transport Infrastructure Investment Fund in accordance with Department for Transport (DfT) guidelines, to improve road condition, reducing the number of potholes, and to kick start the construction industry and wider economy. This is also intended to assist our recovery from the impacts of Covid 19 and flooding issues arising from the winter.
176. Approval of Youth Justice Plan 2020-21
The Portfolio Holder for Children, Education and Early Help advised members that under the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 there was a statutory requirement to publish an annual Youth Justice Plan which must provide specified information about the local provision of youth justice services. The Youth Justice Board provided guidance about what must be included within the plan and recommended a structure for the plan. Cabinet was advised that the People Scrutiny Committee had considered the Youth Justice Plan and endorsed its approval. A copy of their extract minutes had been published as a supplement to Cabinet’s agenda.
Recommendation to Full Council
That the Youth Justice Plan be approved.
Reason for Recommendation: Local authorities are required to publish an annual Youth Justice Plan, setting out how the statutory requirements for a multi-agency youth offending team are fulfilled locally. Dorset Combined Youth Offending Service is a partnership between Dorset Council and Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole Council, along with Dorset Police, NHS Dorset Clinical Commissioning Group and the National Probation Service Dorset. Approval for the Youth Justice Plan is also being sought from Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole Council. The Youth Justice Plan needs to be approved by the full Council.
177. Dorset Council Economic Growth Strategy
In presenting the strategy, the Portfolio Holder for Economic Growth and Skills advised that one of the council’s priorities for 2020-2024 was to ‘deliver sustainable economic growth, increasing productivity and the number of high- quality jobs in Dorset, creating great places to live, work and visit.’ The Portfolio Holder took the opportunity to thank all those involved in creating the Strategy. In particular he thanked members of the Executive Advisory Panel which had now completed its work. But he hoped that the group would be re-branded to allow cross-party working in order to agree a way forward in respect of delivery of the action plan.
The Strategy covered six foundation areas; digital, people and skills, business environment, innovation ideas, place and transport infrastructure.
Members were reminded that a prosperous and inclusive local economy was vital to achieving the strategic priorities of the Council. The Economic Growth Strategy
4 Page 8 set out how the Council would seek to deliver this priority and members looked forward to seeing the detailed action plan.
Decision
(a) That the draft Dorset Council Economic Growth Strategy be approved.
(b) That authority be delegated to the Portfolio Holder of Economic Development and Skills to make any further, minor amendments required following consideration by Cabinet.
Reason for the Decision
One of the priorities in the Dorset Council Plan 2020-2024 is to ‘deliver sustainable economic growth, increasing productivity and the number of high-quality jobs in Dorset, creating great places to live, work and visit.’ A prosperous and inclusive local economy is vital to achieving the strategic priorities of the Council. The Economic Growth Strategy explains how the Council will seek to deliver this priority and will be accompanied in due course by a detailed action plan.
178. Redundancy Multiplier
Cabinet considered a report on the Redundancy Multiplier. In the lead up to the formation of the new council, the Shadow Council resolved to harmonise the rate to (1.75 times). At that time it was expected that the convergence of services would have been completed by September 2020 upon which the multiplier would be reduced, ensuring that all employees affected by organisational change as a consequence of local government reorganisation were treated the same.
However due to COVID-19 and other factors there had been delays in progressing some convergence activity which could potentially lead to employees receiving less redundancy compensation if the existing level of multiplier was not extended beyond its current end date.
Decision
That the current 1.75 redundancy multiplier be extended until 31st March 2021, to ensure parity between those that have already been subject to organisational change and those due to be at risk of redundancy as Dorset Council moves through the remainder of the financial year.
Reason for Decision
This would reintroduce alignment with the additional protection arrangements and the review of terms and conditions. Consultation would take place before 31 March 2021 on the intention of reducing the multiplier thereafter.
179. Dorset Council Budget - Quarter 1 Financial Management Report
5 Page 9 The Portfolio Holder for Finance, Commercial and Assets presented the Council’s quarter 1 financial management report. Members were advised that the report set out the outturn position for 2019/20, an update on the financial impact of Covid-19 and other financial matters (to date) and sought approval for assumptions, methods and timing of the development of the 2021/22 budget and medium-term financial plan.
There had been a financial impact from Covid-19 on quarter 1 of the budget with loss of income and an increase in expenditure. Whilst the government had provided some funding to cover the financial gap, the balance of £43m was currently being funded by the Council’s reserves.
Actions were being taken to address the short-fall including ending property leases and rolling back the capital programme to address a smaller number of projects. A review of on-going Covid-19 costs and seeking ways to contain the current year’s operational and financial pressures was on-going.
The Portfolio Holder(s) for Adult Social Care and Health and Children, Education and Early Years set out the complex financial positions faced by the services as a result of the pandemic and the outcomes that the council wanted to achieve, the need to adjust to new ways of working and importance of the continuation of transforming services.
Decision (a) That the outturn position for 2019/20 and the impact this had on reserves be noted; (b) That the Senior Leadership Team’s forecast for Dorset Council’s position at the end of Quarter 1 be noted; (c) That the position on the capital programme be noted and the projects recommend by officers (as set out in Appendix 1 of the report) be approved; (d) That the key milestones lifted from the draft timetable for budget/Medium Term Financial Plan (MTFP) for 2021/22 be agreed (as set out in Appendix 2 of the report); (e) That the inherited and revised draft budget assumptions to allow development of the first iteration of the five-year MTFP be noted (as set out in Appendix 3 of the report);
Reason for the Decision
The Council has responsibilities to deliver against its 2019-20 Revenue Budget and 2019-20 Capital Programme and maintain adequate reserves. These recommendations and accompanying report demonstrate the Council’s performance in delivering against these responsibilities.
Cabinet need to understand the significant financial impact and consequences of the Council’s response to the Covid-19 pandemic.
6 Page 10 Understanding the financial position at the start of the planning process is key to adopting the most appropriate assumptions in the development of the MTFP. Agreeing an initial set of assumptions will allow officers to develop the first iteration of the MTFP and budget for 2021/22 for consideration and conduct sensitivity testing. Governance of the financial strategy will be critical as we build the next MTFP and agreeing key milestones for the work and member review/challenge are important at this stage to ensure maximum engagement.
180. Additional Procurement Forward Plan Report - over £500k (2020-21)
The Portfolio Holder for Finance, Commercial and Assets set out a report relating proposed contracts (detailed in the appendix to the report) which were in addition to those set out in the forward plan approved by Cabinet on 3 March 2020.
Decision
Cabinet agreed:-
(a) To start each of the procurement processes as listed in Appendix 1 to the report the report to Cabinet of 28 July 2020;
(b) That in each instance the further step of making any contract award be delegated to the relevant Cabinet portfolio holder, in consultation with the relevant Executive Director.
Reason for Decision
Cabinet is required to approve all key decisions with financial consequences of £500k or more. It is also good governance to provide Cabinet with a summary of all proposed procurements prior to them formally commencing.
181. Dorset Council - Community Infrastructure Levy Governance Arrangements
The Portfolio Holder for Planning outlined a report on the need for the Council to establish a clear Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Governance Structure to oversee the convergence of legacy council’s CIL receipts and collection, auditing and spending of this and future CIL monies.
He continued that the report proposed the key governance arrangements for the delivery of infrastructure through CIL to ensure CIL serves its purpose of contributing to the delivery of the infrastructure necessary to support development in Dorset.
Members were advised that Place Scrutiny Committee had considered the report on 23 July 2020 and an extract of those minutes had been circulated to cabinet as a supplement to the agenda papers. The Portfolio Holder confirmed that in response to comments from the committee Appendix A and the scoring for the
7 Page 11 category ‘Wider community benefits and implications’, in respect of foreseeable risks or negative impacts had been amended. The Chairman of the Place Scrutiny Committee welcomed the recommendation and highlighted that 10.5 and 10.6 of the report where it indicated the financial importance for Town and Parish Council to have neighbourhood plans. Decision . 1. That the following specific arrangements be agreed:-
(a) To spend CIL monies within the same geographical charging area from which they were levied, pre and post 31/8/19.
(b) The CIL infrastructure spending priorities pre 1/9/19, as laid out in appendix C.
(c) The mechanism for prioritisation and spend of CIL funded infrastructure pre and post 31/8/19, as set out in the amended appendix A.
2. That the Terms of Reference for Property Management Group (PMG), be amended, to enable it to scrutinise & prioritise infrastructure projects seeking funding from the Community Infrastructure Levy and provide recommendations to Capital Strategy and Asset Management Group (CSAMG) / the Executive Director of Place regarding which projects should receive such funding.
3. That authority be delegated to the Executive Director of Place in consultation with the Portfolio Holder Planning, the approval of the prioritisation, of CIL spend on behalf of the Council as reported to CSAMG.
Reason for Decision
i) To provide clarity, transparency and consistency in the allocation and spending of CIL receipts.
ii) To set out the relationship between the Council as charging authority and key stakeholders and infrastructure providers (internal and external).
iii) To ensure CIL receipts are spent on infrastructure required to support development, in accordance with the CIL Regulations 2010 specifically as amended in September 2019 (‘the CIL Regulations’).
iv) To ensure CIL serves its purpose of supporting the delivery of the infrastructure necessary to support the development in Dorset.
182. Draft Dorset Council Climate and Ecological Emergency Strategy for Public Consultation
In presenting the report the Portfolio Holder for Highways, Travel and Environment reminded Cabinet that in May 2019 Dorset Council declared a climate & ecological emergency. The Council established a councillor led Executive Advisory Panel (EAP) responsible for gathering information and working with officers to make
8 Page 12 recommendations to Dorset Council’s Cabinet on actions that would help mitigate against climate change.
The EAP has overseen the development of a draft Dorset Council Climate and Ecological Emergency Strategy ready for consultation with the public. The strategy was attached as Appendix A to the report a detailed costed delivery plan was also being developed. This would be brought to Cabinet in October 2020 prior to it going out to public consultation.
The strategy highlighted the importance of engaging with the wider public and key stakeholders and as part of the strategy development views had been sought from the public through a ‘call for ideas’. This received over 780 responses and 32 organisations or individuals where invited to present at one of two inquiry days sessions held by the Council.
In addition, young people were invited to share their views and a specific event was held for town and parish councils. The key themes identified through this engagement had been fed into the strategy and the more detailed responses would be further considered in the development of the delivery plan.
The Portfolio Holder took the opportunity to advise members of the work already being carried out, including highways space that had been put into cut and collate management. The land that had been brought into ecological improvement and park & recreational use. He also referred to the work of the Local Low Carbon project.
Public Consultation on the draft strategy and delivery plan would take place later this year. The final strategy and costed delivery plan would take account of the views of the public and interested parties and would be presented for consideration by members early next year.
Cabinet was informed that Place Scrutiny Committee had considered and supported the report at its meeting on 23 July 2020.(an extract minute from that meeting was circulated to members as a supplement to the agenda). In proposing the recommendation the Portfolio Holder also took the opportunity to thank officers and the EAP for their hard work in producing the draft strategy.
The Place Scrutiny Chairman agreed that this was an excellent strategy document and technical papers, but a delivery plan was now urgently required to move the strategy forward. In response to questions the Portfolio Holder confirmed that Place Scrutiny members would be invited to attend the EAP meeting to be part of the formation of the consultative document.
Members welcomed the strategy and supported the recommendations.
Decision
That the DRAFT Dorset Council climate and ecological emergency strategy be approved for consultation with the public following the development of a costed delivery plan.
9 Page 13 Reason for Decision
Dorset Council have declared a climate & ecological emergency and established a councillor led Executive Advisory Panel (EAP) responsible for gathering information and working with officers to make recommendations to Dorset Council’s Cabinet on actions that will help mitigate against climate change.
183. Climate & Ecological Emergency Executive Advisory Panel Update
There were no additional items to report.
184. Urgent items
There were no urgent items considered at the meeting.
185. Exempt Business
It was proposed by Councillor P Wharf seconded by Councillor T Ferrari
Decision
That the press and the public be excluded for the following item(s) in view of the likely disclosure of exempt information within the meaning of paragraph 3 of schedule 12 A to the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended).
The public Microsoft Teams Live Event ended
186. Defence Innovation Centre - Dorset Innovation Park
Cabinet considered a report in an Exempt Microsoft Teams meeting regarding the Defence Innovation Centre – Dorset Innovation Park.
Decision
That the recommendations set out in the exempt report of 28 July 2020 be approved.
Reason for Recommendation
One of the priorities in the Dorset Council Plan 2020-2024 is to ‘deliver sustainable economic growth, increasing productivity and the number of high-quality jobs in Dorset, creating great places to live, work and visit.’
Appendix 1 - Public Q&A's Appendix 2 Councillor Q&A's
Duration of meeting: 10.00 - 11.50 am
10 Page 14 Chairman
11 Page 15 This page is intentionally left blank
Page 16 Appendix
Public Questions – Cabinet 28 July 2020
Question 1 from Sarah James, Chief Executive, the Arts Development Company
Draft Dorset Council Economic Growth Strategy, agenda item 10:
Arts and Culture in Dorset is an essential component in supporting both economic growth and the development of higher paid, year round, skilled jobs and in attracting tourists to our county as well as an essential ingredient in what makes our towns and our county an attractive place to live, work, leisure and invest in. Dorset LEP’s Industrial strategy now includes the Creative and Culture as 1 of its 4 priority areas.
Why then is arts and culture not mentioned nor name checked in the draft Economic Growth Strategy as a key industry contributing to Dorset and one which needs supporting through the recovery plans?
Response from the Portfolio Holder of Economic Growth and Skills
I welcome the question from Sarah James and acknowledge that arts and culture do have a role to play in the future prosperity of Dorset and this will be acknowledged in the final strategy. The significance of arts and culture has been discussed during the development of the strategy, and they have a particular role to play in addressing crucial issues such as seasonality in the visitor economy, bringing vibrancy to our towns and making Dorset an attractive inward investment proposition. Arts and culture have been severely impacted by COVID-19 and we must seek to recover and increase resilience to future economic shocks. These issues will be detailed further in the action plan to accompany the strategy, and we look forward to collaborating with the Arts Development Company and other appropriate partners.
Question 2 from Julie-Ann Booker (on behalf of Extinction Rebellion, Dorset)
When will costs and timetable be available We welcome the release of this draft strategy and it’s clear that a lot of time and effort has gone into researching, preparing and writing it. And on first review, the threats we face from this climate and ecological emergency are clearly stated. Dorset Council openly state we only have 8-10 years at the current rate of carbon emissions to take action to avert this crisis and avoid the worst impacts. Page 1317 The first half of the document provides a well-researched, easy to understand and read analysis of the current scientific thinking. Indeed it could act as a ‘stand-alone’ document. A strategy should be a document that shapes the future. Setting out and describing a vision of the end goal and actions for reaching it. Unfortunately, the draft strategy’s second half sets out little more than a ‘wish list’ around a number of themes. Without any priorities, costs, targets or detailed action plans. Given how long it has been since Dorset Council declared an emergency this is indeed disappointing. The document has been honest on this point by saying (p.57) “This strategy is a start at setting out the general direction of travel that is required within the County”. This is not the ambitious statement that is needed to deal with a declared ‘emergency’. Question When will Dorset Council’s Climate and Ecological Strategy include a fully costed and timetabled action plan?
Response from the Portfolio Holder for Highways, Travel and Environment As included in the Next Steps section of the Climate Strategy, work is now taking place on a costed detailed Action Plan which will map out Dorset Council’s journey to being Carbon Neutral by 2040 against the Carbon Budgeting set out in the Strategy Document (p 22)
Our Action Plan will set out our objectives, specific detailed actions, who in Dorset Council will be responsible, timescales and performance measures. We will also include details of other key partners required to help deliver these actions, the scale of potential carbon savings and the associated co-benefits (health, economy, ecology and resilience).
The Action Plan will be completed and presented to Dorset Council Cabinet in Oct 2020.
Page 1418 Question 3 from Len Herbert
TELL THE TRUTH ABOUT THE CLIMATE & ECOLOGICAL EMERGENCY
I am pleased Dorset Council has released its Climate and Ecological Emergency draft strategy and I commend all involved on its scientific content about the facts of Climate Change. But only a minority in Dorset will read the document in full. When Extinction Rebellion presented to the Inquiry Day on 4th March, we provided 5 practical ideas for Dorset Council Tell the Truth.
Question:
So I ask Dorset Council that the next step is to communicate the climate and ecological emergency in a letter to all Dorset residents, businesses and institutions, telling the truth in a concise format about the crises facing us and the actions we must all take to avoid its worst implications.
Response from the Portfolio Holder for Highways, Travel and Environment The release of the draft strategy and public consultation will be comprehensively communicated by Dorset Council through a wide variety of channels incl. social media, web site and printed media.
The Climate Change Strategy forms the public facing document and is a summary of the full technical analysis, found in the accompanying technical papers, which can be accessed using the links in the Strategy. There are numerous images, diagrams and video links along with a glossary & index to make reading the document as easy as possible, but which unenviably adds to the length of the overall document.
The consultative questions will be clearly linked to the relevant sections of the strategy to make answering the questions as easy as possible. Each section of the public consultation documents will contain an executive summary of the subject area.
Question 4 from Michael Tunbridge
"I very much welcome the publication of Dorset Council’s Draft Climate and Ecological Emergency Strategy on the 15th July 2020. There was much to appreciate in this thorough and professionally produced document.
Page 1519 As a long-standing member of the Dorset Pension Fund I was very disappointed to find no commitment or statement of intent on fossil fuel divestment.
It may have been argued by the authors of the strategy that fossil fuel divestment does not relate directly to a narrow calculation of Dorset’s carbon footprint. However, fossil fuel divestment certainly does relates to a wider understanding of the Climate Emergency - an understanding demonstrated in the excellent, analytical first half of the Strategy. Maintaining investments in fossil fuel and carbon intensive industries is incompatible with the declaration of a climate emergency.
I appreciate that the chain of authority is complicated, in that it is the Dorset Pension Committee that is the administering authority for the Pension Fund. The committee also includes BCP members and union representation. Despite similar complexities, some councils have chosen to send a powerful message as part of their strategy.
I particularly commend to you the motion passed on 16th July 2020 by Conservative-led Shropshire Council (42 in favour : 1 abstention). This motion calls on Shropshire pension fund to ‘set a three year timescale for the reinvestment of funds currently invested in fossil fuel dependent assets’. This motion also recognises that fuel investments constitute part of the council’s carbon footprint and resolves that this element should form part of the regular reporting. https://shropshire.gov.uk/committee-services/mgAi.aspx?ID=14947 https://www.shropshirelive.com/news/2020/07/16/shropshire-council-makes- historic-decision-to-divest-pension-fund-from-fossil-fuels/
On 16th July 2020 Shropshire Council took the lead and called on Shropshire County Pension Fund to divest from fossil fuels within three years and resolved to include fossil fuel investments in their carbon footprint accounting. Will Dorset Council take similar steps?"
Response from Cllr Andy Canning, Chair Dorset County Pension Fund (read out by Cllr Peter Wharf)
As you recognise in your question the governance arrangements for the Dorset County Pension Fund are complex. While Dorset Council is the fund administrator the Pension Fund Committee is made up of members from BCP and a staff representative as well as Dorset Councillors.
We are conscious that both Dorset Council and BCP have declared a climate emergency and I can assure you that the Pension Fund Committee will take this fully into account when it makes investmentPage 1620 decisions.
The Pension Fund reviews its investment strategy every three years based on an independent actuarial analysis of our level of funding and any action that is required to meet any shortfall. This is followed by an independent evaluation of investment prospects leading to recommendations concerning the Fund’s Investment Strategy.
We will receive these recommendations in the next few weeks and they will be discussed and agreed at our next meeting on September 10th.
We have specifically requested that the independent evaluation includes an assessment of the merits of a Decarbonisation strategy versus a Fossil Fuel Free strategy.
To further complicate matters we are members of the Brunel Investment Partnership and are moving speedily to transfer all of our investments into their pooled funds.
The Brunel Partnership is committed to leading the way on sustainable investments. It is achieving this by: 1. A commitment that its mainstream funds are in line with the targets set in the Paris Climate Accord and, as a minimum, will reduce their carbon footprint by 7% a year 2. Launching a series of Sustainable Funds with low carbon footprint. The first of these (the Global Passive Low Carbon Fund) has a carbon footprint of around 50% compared to the MSCI World Index. Brunel will be launching three further Sustainable Funds in September – details of which will be presented to the Pension Fund Committee.
Question 5 from Bridget Joslin
I understand that it is possible to ask a question or make a statement before the meeting on July 23. I have read the document as best I can and applaud the work the committee has done on seeing a way forward.
My comment and question all in one is: are these targets ambitious enough? The Climate Change Commission’s report to government in July 2020 spoke of only 4 Page 1721 out of 21 targets being met to be carbon zero In 2050, a date which many people believe is at least 15 years too late. Of 31 milestones 14 have made no progress at all, 15 have been met partially and 2 have been fully met. By 2050 runaway climate change will be unstoppable. All your hard work as a Council will be wasted. I believe we must be much more ambitious and be prepared for our lives to change as they have had to do with the Covid crisis. I recognise central government is blocking the path but lobbying must continue much more forcefully to clear the way. We also have a duty to inform the public what we must expect in the years ahead.
Thank you for this opportunity for me to voice my grave concerns.
Response from the Portfolio Holder for Highways, Travel and Environment Dorset Council made it clear at the point at which it declared a climate and ecological emergency that its strategy to tackle this would be based upon informed and fully investigated actions against a realistic timetable that was achievable set against the financial pressures that are facing not just Dorset Council but all Local Authorities.
The Carbon Budgeting section of the Strategy shows the progress towards Carbon Neutrality will bring about significant reductions in Carbon emissions well in advance of the 2040 target.
Question 6 from Dave Warren
On Page 55, under The Waste section of the Climate and Ecological Emergency Strategy paper, is an Indirect Action to “Establish appropriate infrastructure to support circular economy as part of Joint Municipal Waste Management Strategy for Dorset 2008 – 33”. In Section 9 - Residual Waste, of the same 2008 -33 report there is a league table that ranks Energy from Waste Incineration (aka Direct EfW) as the Council’s No1 preferred option for the future management and treatment of residual waste (page 39 of 2008-33 report).
Even though it has been roundly criticized in two parliamentary debates this year with high profile MP’s like Priti Patel, Dr Therese Coffee and Sir Ian Boyd (Defra Chief Scientific Adviser), all openly criticising the impact it has on the environment, local recycling rates and the circular economy, Energy from Waste Incineration appears to be the Council’s No1 choice for treating Dorset’s residual waste. I was also surprised that while tacitly stating it will establish this infrastructure, the Climate and Ecological Emergency Strategy paper makes no direct reference to energy from waste. Please could the climate and environmental Advisory Panel publish their findings and recommendations concerning the environmental and ecological effects of EfW incineration? Page 1822 Because, if this is truly a forward looking document, it needs to advise on both current and potential future events that will impact the County’s ability to achieve its climate targets.
Response from the Portfolio Holder for Highways, Travel and Environment
As part of any future waste treatment solution a range of technologies and different solutions would be explored taking into account environmental and ecological impact assessments, not just EfW, the results of this research and any future waste treatment solution would be publicly available.
Question 7 from Dave Warren
To protect investors from misleading claims by Finance Houses, who claim that their products only contain environmentally friendly investments, The EU have recently passed a set of laws and regulations that list (by name), all environmentally sustainable economic activities. Along with nuclear and fossil fuel activities, The EU have excluded energy from waste incineration from it’s Green List, as they have established that it is neither a sustainable or an environmentally friendly activity. These laws and regulations come into effect next year, with “comply or explain” rules scheduled for June 21. One of the reasons The EU have given to justify its decision is that EfW activities act as an obstacle to the development of the circular economy, and as we know, The Joint Municipal Waste Management Strategy for Dorset 2008 – 33 and the Climate and Ecological Emergency Strategy paper, makes regular reference to the importance of moving to a circular economy.
I’m sure the Advisory Panel would agree with the EU’s Technical Expert Group’s findings, as there is a wealth of information available in the UK and across the rest of Europe that correlates the reduction in recycling rates with council areas that have contracts that commit them to supply specified levels of RDF to Energy from Waste Incinerator plants. Sadly, in some councils, recyclable materials end up being incinerated in order to avoid contractual penalty costs.
As this is a forward looking initiative, Dorset’s environmental strategy document should be bold and clear on its position regarding the environmental impact of energy from waste activities, and be used to provide other departments within the council with guidance when considering future planning applications to build energy from waste incinerators in Dorset. However, on speaking with one of the council’s planning officers, they didn’t believe that the findings of this Strategy document would be used to shape, influence or redefine Dorset’s planning process. If, like The EU, this document identifies EfW activities as unsustainable, environmentally unfriendly and detrimental to the circular economy, will the council revisit their position on the future use of EfW as a method to manage Dorset’s residual waste?
Page 1923 Response from the Portfolio Holder for Highways, Travel and Environment
The Joint Municipal Waste Strategy for Dorset was adopted in 2008 and revised in 2017. This was prior to the Green List being developed and prior to the Council declaring a Climate change emergency. The Joint Municipal Waste Strategy for Dorset sets out the strategic direction for Dorset's waste up to 2033, however it has already been updated and is due to be updated every 5 years, or if there’s any significant change. A significant change in the waste industry is the Government’s Waste and Resources Strategy for England, 2019, therefore any updated strategy (due in 2022) will take into account all of these local, national and international changes.
Question 8 from David Redgewell
To provide transport choices in Dorset buses are now funded by the Department for Transport. Covid 19 bus operator grant . We welcome the partnership on Transforming Transport funding of £79 million for sustainable transport in South East Dorset .
We are also unclear as to where the £300 000 rural bus grant is going to be used. The bus network needs improvements with investment required in evening and weekend services.
Key links need to be developed in the in the bus network map regarding service 6 Bridport to Yeovil bus station.
Dorchester South station to Brldport, Lyme Regis and Axminster station needs a 7 days a week bus service on routes X51 and X53 run by with a connection at Axminster for bus service 30 to Taunton and South West Railway services to London Waterloo and Exeter St Davids.
Lyme Regis to Exeter bus station is a key regional bus link service 7. Other important links are Weymouth, Blandford x12, Blandford Forum and Salisbury on services 20, Bournemouth, Poole to Swanage service 40 Poole to Weymouth X54 via Wareham
Poole to Blandford Forum X8 , Blandford Forum to Shaftesbury X3, X9 /and Blandford Forum to Yeovil bus station x10.
Bournemouth Poole links to Verwood but the map fails to show the importance of Ringwood in Hampshire as a key interchange with National Express Coaches to London via Southampton or the X3 Express bus service from Bournemouth to Salisbury. Page 2024 The plan does not look at the role of park and ride services in Weymouth, Nordon on the Swanage railway and Lyme Regis and ways of reducing private car usage in those towns centres.
The plan lack details of National Express Coaches services serving Bournemouth and Dorset. The plan shows no investment in transport interchange facilities yet new bus/railway station interchanges are planned by Network Rail at Weymouth and Dorchester South stations. Or bus Station s such as Bridport or swanage. Or with in western gateway transport plan.
It's not clear how the public transport part of the climate change strategy will be addressed with covid 19 .and whilst the strategy talks about walking cycling and active travel funding its not clear on public transport or school buses service s which may not be open to the fare paying passengers other School and college students due to social distancing.
How Dorset council is is going to ask the department for transport fund the public transport strategy?
Response from the Portfolio Holder for Highways, Travel and Environment
Public transport is a component of the response to the Climate and Ecological Emergency and will be reviewed as part of the Local Transport Plan and included in the Climate and Ecological Action Plan.
Question 9 from David Redgewell
The Department for Transport are now managing railway funding through direct management contracts until September and has suspended all railway franchises. The plan is not clear on railway investment projects such as upgrading the Weymouth town station to Upwey, Dorchester West, Maiden Newton, Thornford,Yetminster, Chetnole, Yeovil Pen Mill, Castle Cary, Bruton, Frome, Westbury to Bath Spa and Bristol Temple Meads station route. It is important that there is clear investment in this important railway line both at Weymouth Town station and Dorchester West where disabled access is required to the hospital from the Bristol bound platform improved access to Dorchester South station for disabled passengers and houly train service to Bristol and Exeter.
The Wessex railway partnership or Blackmore Vale Railway Partnership are not mentioned.
Investment is required in the Weymouth to Poole Bournemouth and London Waterloo route with the track doubled through Moreton on the electrified section. The Wareham to Swanage route needs a daily rail service and Page 2125 Wareham station should have proper disabled access with a lift, footbridge, disabled toilets and improvements in bus/rail integration.
Increasing the amount freight carried by rail should be a priority for the county to meet global emissions targets and investment is required in facilities at Weymouth, Wool and Hamworthy.
The Exeter St Davids, Exeter Central to Honition, Axminster, Chard Junction, Crewkerne, Yeovil Junction, Sherborne, Templecombe, Gillingham Tisbury, Wilton, Salisbury, Basingstoke, Woking and London Waterloo route need a double track section between Yeovil and Salisbury as well as modern hybrid trains as being developed by south west railway first group MTR .The route needs electrification
What bid is the council marking with the western gateway transport board to fund vital railway improvements and services in the plan.?
Response from the Portfolio Holder for Highways, Travel and Environment
“Thank you for the question. As yet there are no bidding opportunities via the Western Gateway Subnational Transport Body (STB) for rail improvements. What we are doing is preparing a rail strategy with our partners in the STB which will put us in the right position to make the best case for investment in Dorset and set it within the regional context – poor connectivity within Dorset is bad news for our neighbours as well as for us. We can then use this strategy as a basis for working with the Rail Industry and the Department for Transport to bring much needed investment in Dorset’s Railways.
In addition to the Western Gateway strategy, we are also working with Network Rail on their Continuous Modular Strategic Plan for Dorset which is addressing many of the issues you raise, such as the hourly service on the Heart of Wessex Line. It aims to ascertain what is achievable and what needs to be done to make aspirations deliverable. It is anticipated this work will be completed by the end of the year.
To respond on a couple of specifics in your lead in. I understand from Network Rail that they intend to start constructing disabled access to the North bound platform at Dorchester West later in the year. Also, using some Access for All
Page 2226 funding, Network Rail and South Western Railway will be providing step free access to each platform (though not between) at Dorchester South Station.
As regards Wareham Station, Dorset Council continue to work closely with train operating companies to provide a regular rail service between Swanage and Wareham.
Dorset Coast Forum in partnership with Dorset Council had a successful bid to the South Western Railway Customer and Communities Improvement Fund (SWR CCIF) which is being used as part of a package of improvements known as the Weymouth Station Gateway project More information can be found at www.dorsetcoasthaveyoursay.co.uk. A press release about the consultation will be going out in the next couple of weeks”
Question from Luke Wakeling
In these unprecedented times, many more people are working from home, and more than ever, we are all relying on a strong internet connection.
In Dorset Council’s largest conurbation (Chickerell, Portland & Weymouth) you are lucky to get a 50Mbps download speed. However, if I lived in Bournemouth, I could get Cable internet upto 350Mbps and in some areas Fibre internet upto 1000Mbps. (See attachments)
The Weymouth area receives internet speeds that are orders of magnitude slower than in the neighbouring authority. Our communities, already suffering from poverty and deprivation, are being left further behind every day.
Looking at Think Broadband’s stats by Council, Ultrafast (>100Mbps internet) is available to just 7.9% of Dorset Council’s residents- that ranks us 380 out of 419 councils - putting us in the bottom 10% of areas for ultrafast internet availability. Dorset Council’s area is suffering from digital poverty.
I know that DC is still working to get 24Mbps internet to some areas, however my questions pertain to the delivery of the next generation internet to our urban areas.
Questions What are you doing, and when will we see results, to bring the next generation of internet access (ie. greater than 100Mbps) to the residents of Dorset?
Page 2327 What do you say to the young people of Dorset who are looking for jobs and opportunities in technology, and think they need to leave our beautiful county to succeed?
Response from the Portfolio Holder for Corporate development and Change
Dorset Council recognises that universal provision of superfast broadband is critical to the future economic and social prosperity of the county of Dorset. The Superfast Dorset programme provides gap-funding state aid to build open access Superfast Broadband network in locations where the commercial market will not provide a solution. It has been working with BT / Openreach over the past 5 years and has delivered access to superfast broadband to over 84,000 premises in the county, and a host of related activity to ensure strategic benefits are realised. Access to superfast broadband in Dorset has grown from a pre- contract level of 77% to 96% superfast availability across the county. The starting level of coverage represented the hand off point of commercial deployment in Dorset, beyond which ‘gap funding’ with Council, central government and Dorset LEP funding programme was necessary to fast track further network expansion.
As Cllr Wakeling alludes to, the focus is moving on to building faster, gigabit networks. The starting point for this is low in Dorset, in common with many predominately rural counties. The national strategy was set out in July 2018 in the Future Telecoms Infrastructure Review. This concluded that the most effective way to deliver nationwide full fibre connectivity at pace is to promote competition and commercial investment where possible, and intervene where necessary. This is a long-term agenda nationally, and in Dorset. Many actions are particular to central government and relate to changes to the regulatory (OFCOM) and taxation regimes to encourage greater investment. Specifically in Dorset: We are working with suppliers big and small to o understand their commercial plans and see how we can support deployment through operating best practice in relation to street works o facilitate network designs and access to land Page 2428 o ensure that new build is provisioned with fibre. Our remaining contract with Openreach is now building exclusively full fibre in rural areas. Businesses and communities are able to access the Rural Gigabit voucher scheme, again subsidising connectivity at gigabit speeds. We are working with central government to understand the opportunity and likely impact of the gigabit ‘outside-in’ programme. It is too soon to know what the impact in Dorset of this £5b national programme will be, but it is clear that this intervention programme will be needed in large parts of Dorset where the market will not provide alone. The first outcomes from this intervention are expected from 2022 onwards. It is worth noting that this programme is being designed for those areas where commercial investment is not likely to occur. We are in discussion with Chris Loder MP who is working on behalf of all Dorset MPs to lobby on our behalf for improved connectivity.
Dorset Council recognises the importance of faster networks. On this month’s Cabinet agenda you will see items: Approving our Economic Growth Strategy which recognises digital infrastructure as a foundation for sustainable and inclusive economic growth Seeking our own and Dorset LEP investment in full fibre infrastructure.
Government’s ambition is to complete a national roll-out by 2025; this is recognised by industry as a really stretching target, by way of comparison the Future Telecoms Infrastructure Review gave a completion date of 2033.
If Cllr Wakeling would like more information or to delve deeper in relation to his own town or ward, Dugald Lockhart, the Lead officer on broadband and mobile infrastructure would be delighted to meet him to discuss further.
Page 2529 Statement from Paula Klaentschi
1. I would like to thank the DC team for getting this formative clear communication this far.
2. I ask that 2. Financial Implications identifies the potential rewards to DC by Generating Renewable Energy in contrast to the costs. That DC promote Dorset expert manufacturers/remanufacturers using Council Tax incentives to lead in new circular economy initiatives.
3. In 3. Climate implications add to Current/ Residual Risk the Inevitable Risk [what we have to prepare for] predicted rise in sea level, back flooding low ground and swamping Weymouth.
4. In 7. Background Papers add:
4.1 Energy. support the local economy to phase out all carbon fuels in energy generation. DC to stop directing RDF to EfW MSW Incineration and preventing new plants being built. Because incinerators emit more GHGs than a gas power station and crucially undermine the Circular Economy. Richard Drax wrote 07.07.20: “to the Secretary of State at DEFRA. I have pointed out that you have concerns about the whole issue of air pollution and the UK Government’s inadvertent proliferation of harmful emissions from EfW Incineration and the incorrect designation of this form of energy as being renewable. I have also highlighted your concerns that the Environment Agency should have the power to refuse permits on the grounds that a proposal is inconsistent with the declared Climate Emergency and that an Incineration Exit Strategy should become UK Government policy as soon as possible.”
4.2 Waste is material, it is part of our diminishing resources. DC can incentivise the circular economy by its purchasing power. Dorset manufacturers need support to adapt to use only materials that can be readily reused or recycled. Today legacy landfill is being rewilded and turned into leisure and nature reserves. Landfill activity has moved to Incinerator with a green wash on the energy generated. DC can lead the way and control about what is fed into an incinerator so that nothing reusable is pushing GHGs into the air. Professor Ian Boyd, Defra Chief Scientist advises “If there is one way of quickly extinguishing the value in a material, it is to stick it in an incinerator and burn it. It may give you energy out at the end of the day, but some of those materials, even if they are plastics, with a little ingenuity, can be given more positive value. One thing that worries me is that we are taking these materials, we are putting them in incinerators, we are losing them for ever and we are creating carbon dioxide out of them, which is not a great thing. We could be long-term storing them until we have the innovative technologies to reuse them and turn them into something that is more positively valued.” Page 2630 Statement from Jasmine O’Hare
Raise the Roof is a partnership between The Arts Development Company, Wessex Community Assets, Common Ground and Bridport Town Council.
Working with experts such as Assemble and local farmers, we are developing practical ways of how we can utilise sustainable local materials such as timber and start re-growing hemp (as it used to be grown in the area), to be processed into hempcrete for local housing materials, as opposed to high carbon materials such as concrete.
The design and build of these will be done by the local artists, designers, architects and builders. We will also be opening up opportunities for the local communities to get involved, so that they can learn practical skills in terms of helping to inform and build their own environments and how we can all make positive changes locally.
We would welcome the opportunity to share our learning with Dorset Council, as we see this as a way forward to address the climate emergency, as well as helping the affordable housing agenda.
Page 2731 This page is intentionally left blank
Page 32 Appendix
Questions from Councillors for Cabinet 28 July 2020
Question from Cllr J Andrews
In Sherborne we have an up and coming problem in early years education with the possible loss of 16 jobs and the displacement of 72 nursery places. This will have an impact on not only the children but the ability of the parents to go to work. The knock on of which could be enormous for the local economy. Only somebody with an extremely large crystal ball could of seen this coming up in the lift and as a member of the EAP on Economy I know as a group we didn’t see it coming.
What impact on growth in Dorset does the cabinet see with possible closures estimated to be 25-30% in Early years(0-5) Provisions? Also can we Lobby the government education department for additional funding nationwide for Early years provision as this is one of the keys to regenerating our economy during this Covid 19 crisis?
Response from the Portfolio Children, Education and Early Help Draft
Within Children’s Services we have been working closely with all providers of Early Years Education across Dorset. This comprises child minders, early years setting which are commercial, community and governor run in schools. We have very positive relationships with the sector and maintain good communication.
Dorset Council hold a statutory duty to provide sufficiency of Early Years provision in Dorset as a whole but do not run this provision, in all but 3 instances. To inform our work we have surveyed providers in order to establish their long term viability and whether they need additional support at this difficult time following the Covid infection.
The council, working with schools forum, has a reserve fund available to help support providers who are in short term financial difficulty. At this time we do not anticipate significant numbers of closures but there is a need to support some providers. We will use funds available to make sure that we maintain our duty for sufficiency.
Page 2933 The specific provision in Sherborne highlighted is being financially supported by both the Council, Sherborne Town Council and the associated academy trust in order to ensure as far as possible it remains open and available to families in the Autumn term. The council is in ongoing discussion with the academy trust about securing long term sustainable provision in the town.
Clearly there is a longer term issue which presents itself around the funding for Early Years places, where these attract public funding. The rates of funding nationally are relatively low and we would like to see this at a higher level. Across the country the viability of many nursery providers is challenging at this time because of the recent covid issues. This has exacerbated the underlying low funding issue.
In Dorset we are well placed to respond to the needs of the system in the short term and are actively engaged with providers. We will seek additional funding for places from central government. We recognise the importance of the sector in terms of not only providing for early education but also in their economic impact in the local community as employers and providers of child care for working families. We are totally committed to ensuring sufficiency of provision in Dorset.
Page 3034 Question from Cllr P Kimber
The Dorset Echo put on the front page regarding a bypass around Wyke Regis to assist Portland Port, on last Saturday’s edition.
Does the Dorset Council have plans to build this, or is this part of any future plans this will be developed?
Proposed text for the response to Cllr Kimber’s question about whether we are developing a Wyke Regis bypass scheme:
Response from the Portfolio Holder for Highways, Travel and Environment
‘Funding for new strategic roads must be sought from Government either through the Road Investment Strategy (RIS) or the Major Road Network (MRN) fund. We understand there is no money available for a new road scheme here in the current RIS period 2020-2025. Government does not currently consider the A354 between Weymouth and Portland to be of significance because it did not accept our case for the route’s inclusion in the Major Road Network (MRN) in 2018. Dorset Council will be working with the local business communities to lobby Government for infrastructure improvements for Dorset. The next time this network will be reviewed will be 2024 and there are no guarantees it will be included then. Government is very clear that new road schemes must be high value for money and unlock significant numbers of jobs and housing to deliver economic growth.
As part of any bid to Government must demonstrate that we have done all we can to improve the current transport network before bidding for funds for new roads. So we will seek funding from the LEP and other appropriate government sources for a series of related highways improvements along the A354 Dorchester,Weymouth to Portland corridor.’
Page 3135 Question from Cllr N Ireland
It is noted that the Council does have reserves, some of which can be used as a short-term measure to balance the budget, but longer-term use of reserves is not sustainable. It is also noted that unless additional Government funding becomes available, the Council will have to manage this forecast overspend using its reserves, which consist of the General Fund reserve of £28m combined with other previously earmarked reserves, and that they are sufficient to enable the Council to continue to operate throughout 2020/21. Finally, it appears the overspend in 19/20 was met by from the general fund but some reserves have been rationalised and repurposed to put that back to £28m.
My concern is that not all reserves are designed to provide insurance or a required indemnity against shortfalls. Some are there for specific purposes to support policies and aspirations of this council and once spent elsewhere may be lost forever. Also, given the current projected deficit of £43.1m and a general reserve of £28m, it implies an additional raid on our reserves to the tune of at least £15m, assuming we are actually permitted to wipe out our general reserve completely.
The questions are therefore which specific reserves were taken to support 19/20 and the same for those we intend to use to support the projected overspend in 20/21, given that these must be known already from the assertion that they will enable us to be solvent for the rest of the financial year.
Response of the Portfolio Holder for Finance, Commercial and Assets
As you rightly identify reserves will not resolve the financial strain put on the Council by Covid-19. However they do provide us with the time to resolve the underlying issues. You are correct the forecast shortfall by year end is £43.1m although this has a high degree of uncertainty, how quickly will our income return, how long will our extra cost continue? We are already taking steps to reduce this figure, leaving Princes House and Allenview House being two examples, although the precise savings are still being worked through. We have a General Reserve of £28m, we anticipate a potentially significant contribution from this reserve.
Page 3236 The latest round of government grant gave us just under £3m. There is an income support scheme announced by Government but the details of which are not yet clear. Our estimate is that this could deliver a further £6m. At this point can I discuss a policy that I implemented under DCC, carried forward through the Shadow Authority and also at Dorset Council. Under each of these bodies, schools were allocated more money by their financing schemes than was supplied to us by Government. All of these Councils allocated money to support the schools’ income shortfall.
There were choices about how this was treated in accounting terms. Many Councils, across the country, allocated money and wrote off the debt at that point. Indeed that policy was recommended to me by various Councils along the way. Although administratively the tidiest option I chose not to follow that route. In the interest of financial prudence we allocated the money to the schools but we kept the charge open and increased our Allocated Reserves every year as the charges accumulated. The basis for my decision was that if the government ever retrospectively resolved this situation we would have a charge for them to settle. I must admit even I didn’t think this was a likely outcome and was occasionally tempted by the advice I received. However I didn’t and that is exactly the policy the Government selected. Effectively they have taken the accumulated shortfalls off of our books and left us with the Allocated Reserve which is now free for us to release into the General Reserve. A long story but it has made available a further £14.8m of reserves. We have also recategorised a number of other earmarked reserves. For example, DWP reserves £1.2m, treasury management £5.2m, insurance reserves £2.0m and collection fund risk reserves £5.2m.
We are therefore confident that, with some reduction of the gap from £43.1m, we will be able to manage the shortfall from our reserves and the current level of Government support and there is always the possibility of future Government assistance.
Page 3337 Question from Councillor B Heatley
Climate Change, Ecology and Economic Growth
Cabinet has before it today two papers
one on Economic Growth Strategy (Item 10), and a Climate and Ecological Emergency Strategy (Item 15).
We need to initiate the difficult conversation between them, rather than simply assert as the Growth paper does that they complement each other.
We have two aims, one which I will call preserving the planet so that it can continue to support human life and civilisation, the other economic growth, that is that the parts of our activities that fall within the definition of GDP should grow. Are they compatible?
Some say we can preserve the planet and continue to grow the economy as a whole. Others, including many environmentalists, say that we can only preserve the planet if the economy stops growing or even gets smaller.
As you'd expect, I'm amongst the Greens, I'm very sceptical that we can both preserve the planet and have overall economic growth, largely because the bigger the economy the bigger are the flows of material through it, and it is this physical flow of material which is threatening the ability of the planet to support us.
But I don't know this for sure, and equally it's impossible to know for sure that continued economic growth and preserving the planet is possible. Therefore I suggest we don't have to have this argument. We can agree instead that we can grow those parts of the economy that are sustainable and reduce those parts that are not. Much of the detail of the Economic Strategy presented here takes that approach. We can be agnostic about whether the overall economy grows or not. Are those of you attached to overall economic growth really arguing that we should increase the parts of the economy that damage the planet?
If we adopt as a compromise the agnostic approach, we would as a consequence simply banish the idea of overall economic growth from our economic policy. We can still aim to have an economic strategy, we simply don't commit ourselves to an economic growth strategy. And have a Cabinet member for the Economy and Skills.
Now Cllr Suttle is recommending you accept the Economic Growth Strategy today, while Cllr Bryan is recommending the Climate Change and Ecology Strategy should go out to public consultation. The Economic Growth Strategy paper makes no reference to there having been public consultation, although I
Page 3438 accept some business groups have been consulted. So I get to my question, why not repair the omission of public consultation on the Economic Growth Strategy and put both out for consultation together, and ask this question about our attitude to overall growth, in favour, against or agnostic, in that joint consultation?
Response from the Portfolio Holder for Economic Growth and Skills
Thank you for the questions Firstly the “are we arguing for economic growth that damages the planet” Economic growth has many facets and the future plan will take into account the environment as a priority in any planned actions. There are a number of areas in which the economy can be stimulated by investment in environmental projects, it is not a fact that economic growth has by definition a detrimental effect on the environment this occurs where there is failure to consider the future of this planet Dorset council is committed to ensuring that this does not happen. I urge you to consider the positives of economic growth, to use it as a way in which it can improve the environment whilst giving those who work and reside in Dorset improved wages and living conditions. Regarding consultation, we have consulted extensively over a considerable period, we have discussed the outcomes at length in our eap and it is time for action now, further delay cannot benefit those who need our help the most particularly in the context of the covid 19 pandemic and the impact that this has had on the economy. People’s income and livelihoods are under threat, it is imp0rtant that we agree the strategy today to enable us to have the tool to help and to put in place the much needed action plans.
Page 3539 This page is intentionally left blank
Page 40 DRAFT The Cabinet Forward Plan - September 2020 For the period 1 SEPTEMBER 2020 to 31 DECEMBER 2020 (Publication date – 8 SEPTEMBER 2020) Explanatory Note: This Forward Plan contains future items to be considered by the Cabinet and Council. It is published 28 days before the next meeting of the Committee. The plan includes items for the meeting including key decisions. Each item shows if it is ‘open’ to the public or to be considered in a private part of the meeting.
Definition of Key Decisions Page 41 Page Key decisions are defined in Dorset Council's Constitution as decisions of the Cabinet which are likely to - (a) to result in the relevant local authority incurring expenditure which is, or the making of savings which are, significant having regard to the relevant local authority’s budget for the service or function to which the decision relates (Thresholds - £500k); or (b) to be significant in terms of its effects on communities living or working in an area comprising two or more wards or electoral divisions in the area of the relevant local authority.” In determining the meaning of “significant” for these purposes the Council will have regard to any guidance issued by the Secretary of State in accordance with section 9Q of the Local Government Act 2000 Act. Officers will consult with lead members to determine significance and sensitivity.
Leader / Governance, Performance and Communications Agenda Item 6 Deputy Leader / Corporate Development and Change Finance, Commercial and Assets Housing and Community Safety Economic Growth and Skills Children, Education and Early Help Adult Social Care and Health Planning Highways, Travel and Environment Customer, Community and Regulatory Services Subject / Decision Decision Maker Decision Due Other Committee Portfolio Holder Officer Contact Date Date Major Highway Improvement Dorset Council - 6 Oct 2020 Portfolio Holder for Kate Tunks, Service Schemes - Dinah's Hollow, Melbury Cabinet Highways, Travel and Manager for Infrastructure Abbas Environment and Assets [email protected] Key Decision - Yes ov.uk Public Access - Part exempt Executive Director, Place (John Sellgren)
Dorset Workplace Dorset Council - 6 Oct 2020 Deputy Leader - Deborah Smart, Designate Cabinet Corporate Corporate Director – Digital Key Decision - Yes Development and & Change Public Access - Open Change deborah.smart@dorsetcoun
Page 42 Page cil.gov.uk Corporate Director of Human Resources & Organisational Development (David McIntosh) Dorset Council Climate and Dorset Council - 6 Oct 2020 Climate and Ecological Portfolio Holder for Antony Littlechild, Ecological Emergency Strategy Cabinet Emergency Executive Highways, Travel and Community Energy Delivery plan (Draft) Advisory Panel Environment Manager Before 6 Oct 2020 antony.littlechild@dorsetcou Key Decision - Yes ncil.gov.uk Public Access - Open Executive Director, Place (John Sellgren)
Asset Management Plan for Dorset Dorset Council - 6 Oct 2020 Portfolio Holder for Dave Thompson, Corporate Council 2020- 2023 Cabinet Finance, Commercial Director for Property & and Capital Strategy Assets Key Decision - Yes dave.thompson.dorsetcoun Public Access - Open [email protected] v.uk Executive Director, Place (John Sellgren) Subject / Decision Decision Maker Decision Due Other Committee Portfolio Holder Officer Contact Date Date Results of Public Consultation on Dorset Council - 6 Oct 2020 Dorset Council - Place and Portfolio Holder for Graham Duggan, Head of the proposed dog-related Public Cabinet Resources Overview Customer and Community & Public Spaces Protection Order Committee Community Services Protection 21 Sep 2020 graham.duggan@dorsetcou Key Decision - Yes ncil.gov.uk Public Access - Open Executive Director, Place (John Sellgren)
Initial, high-level, draft budget Dorset Council - 6 Oct 2020 Portfolio Holder for Jim McManus, Corporate information for 2021/22 and MTFP Cabinet Finance, Commercial Director - Finance and for 2023-2026 and Capital Strategy Commercial [email protected]. Key Decision - Yes uk Public Access - Open Executive Director, Corporate Development - Page 43 Page Section 151 Officer (Aidan Dunn) Leisure Services Review Dorset Council - 6 Oct 2020 Dorset Council - Place Portfolio Holder for Paul Rutter, Service Cabinet Scrutiny Committee Customer and Manager for Leisure Key Decision - Yes 10 Mar 2020 Community Services Services Public Access - Part exempt [email protected] ov.uk Executive Director, Place (John Sellgren) 'Planning for the Future' Dorset Council - 6 Oct 2020 Portfolio Holder for Hilary Jordan, Service consultation response Cabinet Planning Manager for Spatial Planning Key Decision - Yes hilary.jordan@dorsetcouncil Public Access - Open .gov.uk Executive Director, Place (John Sellgren) Approach to Value for Money Dorset Council - 6 Oct 2020 Dorset Council - Audit and Deputy Leader - Bridget Downton, Head of Cabinet Governance Committee Corporate Business Insight and Key Decision - No 10 Aug 2020 Development and Corporate Communications Public Access - Open Change Executive Director, Corporate Development - Subject / Decision Decision Maker Decision Due Other Committee Portfolio Holder Officer Contact Date Date Section 151 Officer (Aidan Dunn) Children's Services Provision Dorset Council - 6 Oct 2020 Portfolio Holder for Stuart Riddle, Senior Cabinet Children, Education, Manager Key Decision - Yes Skills and Early Help Stuart.Riddle@dorsetcounci Public Access - Open l.gov.uk Executive Director, People - Children (Theresa Leavy) Weymouth harbour and Esplanade Dorset Council - 6 Oct 2020 Portfolio Holder for Matthew Penny, Project flood and coastal erosion risk Cabinet Finance, Commercial Engineer management Strategy and Capital Strategy, matthew.penny@dorsetcou Portfolio Holder for ncil.gov.uk Key Decision - Yes Highways, Travel and Executive Director, Place Page 44 Page Public Access - Open Environment (John Sellgren)
Dorset Special Educational Needs Dorset Council - 6 Oct 2020 Portfolio Holder for Tom Smith, Commisioning and Disabilities Information, Cabinet Children, Education, & Marketing Development Advice and Support Service Skills and Early Help Manager (SENDIASS) [email protected] ov.uk, Deborah Gill, Senior Key Decision - Yes Education Psychologist Public Access - Open deborah.gill@dorsetcouncil. gov.uk Executive Director, People - Children (Theresa Leavy) Grants to the Voluntary and Dorset Council - 6 Oct 2020 Portfolio Holder for Laura Cornette, Corporate Community Sector Cabinet Customer and Policy & Performance Community Services Officer Key Decision - Yes Laura.cornette@dorsetcoun Public Access - Open cil.gov.uk Executive Director, Corporate Development - Section 151 Officer (Aidan Dunn) Subject / Decision Decision Maker Decision Due Other Committee Portfolio Holder Officer Contact Date Date Youth Justice Plan Dorset Council 15 Oct 2020 Dorset Council - Cabinet Portfolio Holder for David Webb, Service Dorset Council - People Children, Education, Manager - Dorset Key Decision - Yes Scrutiny Committee Skills and Early Help Combined Youth Offending Public Access - Open 28 Jul 2020 Service 20 Jul 2020 [email protected] v.uk Executive Director, People - Children (Theresa Leavy) Children and Young People and Dorset Council 15 Oct 2020 Dorset Council - Cabinet Portfolio Holder for Claire Shiels, Assistant Families' Plan 2020 - 2023 Dorset Council - People Children, Education, Director for Commissioning Scrutiny Committee Skills and Early Help and Partnerships Key Decision - Yes 6 Oct 2020 claire.shiels@dorsetcouncil. Public Access - Open 20 Jul 2020 gov.uk Executive Director, People - Children (Theresa Leavy) Page 45 Page Building Better Lives - Purbeck Dorset Council - 3 Nov 2020 Portfolio Holder for Rosie Dilke, Project Gateway: Design Brief Cabinet Housing and Manager Community Safety, [email protected] Key Decision - Yes Portfolio Holder for Executive Director, People - Public Access - Open Adult Social Care and Adults (Mathew Kendall) Health
Private Sector Housing Assistance Dorset Council - 3 Nov 2020 Portfolio Holder for Richard Conway, Service Policy Cabinet Housing and Manager for Housing Community Safety Standards Key Decision - Yes richard.conway@dorsetcou Public Access - Open ncil.gov.uk Executive Director, People - Adults (Mathew Kendall) Housing Allocations Policy Dorset Council - 3 Nov 2020 Portfolio Holder for Rebecca Kirk, Corporate Cabinet Housing and Director of Housing, Dorset Key Decision - Yes Community Safety Council Public Access - Open Rebecca.Kirk@dorsetcounc il.gov.uk Executive Director, People - Adults (Mathew Kendall) Subject / Decision Decision Maker Decision Due Other Committee Portfolio Holder Officer Contact Date Date Housing Standards Enforcement Dorset Council - 3 Nov 2020 Portfolio Holder for Rebecca Kirk, Corporate Policy and Statement of Principles Cabinet Housing and Director of Housing, Dorset for determining Financial Penalties Community Safety Council 2020-2025 Rebecca.Kirk@dorsetcounc il.gov.uk Key Decision - Yes Executive Director, People - Public Access - Open Adults (Mathew Kendall)
Dorset Council Budget - Quarterly Dorset Council - 3 Nov 2020 Portfolio Holder for Jim McManus, Corporate Performance Report - Q2 Cabinet Finance, Commercial Director - Finance and and Capital Strategy Commercial Key Decision - No [email protected].
Page 46 Page Public Access - Open uk Corporate Director, Legal and Democratic Services - Monitoring Officer (Jonathan Mair) Dorset Council Plan- Quarterly Dorset Council - 3 Nov 2020 Deputy Leader - Bridget Downton, Head of Performance Report Q2 Cabinet Corporate Business Insight and Development and Corporate Communications Key Decision - No Change Chief Executive (Matt Public Access - Open Prosser)
Annual Self Evaluation of Dorset Council - 3 Nov 2020 Portfolio Holder for Claire Shiels, Assistant Children's Services Cabinet Children, Education, Director for Commissioning Skills and Early Help and Partnerships Key Decision - Yes claire.shiels@dorsetcouncil. Public Access - Open gov.uk Executive Director, People - Children (Theresa Leavy) Annual Adoption Report- Aspire Dorset Council - 3 Nov 2020 Portfolio Holder for Sarah Jane Smedmor, Cabinet Children, Education, Corporate Director - Care & Key Decision - Yes Skills and Early Help Protection sarah- Public Access - Open jane.smedmor@dorsetcoun Subject / Decision Decision Maker Decision Due Other Committee Portfolio Holder Officer Contact Date Date cil.gov.uk Executive Director, People - Children (Theresa Leavy) Transformation Programme Annual Dorset Council - 3 Nov 2020 Deputy Leader - Deborah Smart, Designate Report Cabinet Corporate Corporate Director – Digital Development and & Change Key Decision - Yes Change deborah.smart@dorsetcoun Public Access - Open cil.gov.uk Executive Director, Corporate Development - Section 151 Officer (Aidan Dunn) Final version of the Statement of Dorset Council 10 Dec 2020 Dorset Council - Cabinet Portfolio Holder for John Newcombe, Service Gambling Licensing Policy Dorset Council - Licensing Customer and Manager, Licensing & Page 47 Page Committee Community Services Community Safety Key Decision - Yes 3 Nov 2020 john.newcombe@dorsetcou Public Access - Open 22 Oct 2020 ncil.gov.uk Executive Director, Place (John Sellgren) Final Version of the Statement of Dorset Council 10 Dec 2020 Dorset Council - Cabinet Portfolio Holder for John Newcombe, Service Licensing Policy Dorset Council - Licensing Customer and Manager, Licensing & Committee Community Services Community Safety Key Decision - Yes 3 Nov 2020 john.newcombe@dorsetcou Public Access - Open 22 Oct 2020 ncil.gov.uk Executive Director, Place (John Sellgren) Budget Strategy Report Dorset Council - 12 Jan 2021 Dorset Council – Scrutiny Portfolio Holder for Cabinet Committees Finance, Commercial Executive Director, Key Decision - Yes and Capital Strategy Corporate Development - Public Access - Open Section 151 Officer (Aidan Dunn)
Dorset Council Plan Quarterly Dorset Council - 12 Jan 2021 Dorset Council - Audit and Deputy Leader - Bridget Downton, Head of Performance Report - Q3 Cabinet Governance Committee Corporate Business Insight and 22 Feb 2021 Development and Corporate Communications, Subject / Decision Decision Maker Decision Due Other Committee Portfolio Holder Officer Contact Date Date Key Decision - No Change Rebecca Forrester, Public Access - Open Business Intelligence & Performance rebecca.forrester@dorsetco uncil.gov.uk Chief Executive (Matt Prosser) Page 48 Page Private/Exempt Items for Decision Each item in the plan above marked as ‘private’ will refer to one of the following paragraphs.
1. Information relating to any individual. 2. Information which is likely to reveal the identity of an individual. 3. Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information). 4. Information relating to any consultations or negotiations, or contemplated consultations or negotiations, in connection with any labour relations matter arising between the authority or a Minister of the Crown and employees of, or office holders under, the authority. 5. Information in respect of which a claim to legal professional privilege could be maintained in legal proceedings. 6. Information which reveals that the shadow council proposes:- (a) to give under any enactment a notice under or by virtue of which requirements are imposed on a person; or (b) to make an order or direction under any enactment. 7. Information relating to any action taken or to be taken in connection with the prevention, investigation or prosecution of crime. Page 49 Page
9 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 7
Cabinet 8 September 2020 Corporate Procurement Strategy
For Decision
Portfolio Holder: Cllr T Ferrari, Finance, Commerical and Assets
Local Councillor(s): All
Executive Director: Aidan Dunn, Executive Director of Corporate Development
Report Author: Dawn Adams Title: Service Manager Commercial & Procurement Tel: 01305 221271 Email: [email protected]
Report Status: Public
Recommendation:
It is recommended that the Council adopts a new Corporate Procurement Strategy (Appendix 1) that not only sets out principles in terms of the approach to procurement but also encompasses a corporate approach to social value to assist maximising the Dorset Pound through procurement outcomes such as: Economic; Social; and Environmental.
Reason for Recommendation:
A Corporate Procurement Strategy is the mechanism to ensure that procurement takes place in accordance with the Council’s strategic aims, that it is effective and delivers best value.
The Council is required under the Public Services (Social Value) Act 2012 to account for social value in its commissioning and procurement. The proposed Corporate Procurement Strategy provides key principles and actions to embed practical and effective commissioning that includes a corporate approach to applying Social Value and Corporate Social Responsibility within procurement.
Page 51 1. Executive Summary
As with all bodies in the public sector, Dorset Council is publicly accountable for how it manages its money.
It is estimated that 51%of the Council’s annual budget will be spent on buying external goods, services and works. Spend ranging from Stationery to ICT Infrastructure (Corporate); Speech Therapy to Residential Placements (People – Children); Adult Day Services to Residential Care (People – Adults); School Transport to Surface Dressing (Place); School Nursing to Drug and Alcohol Treatment Services (Public Health Dorset).
The effective procurement of these and other future requirements is crucial in the light of ever challenging budget reductions and the need to secure significant savings. This has been brought into even greater focus as the Council responds to the financial consequences of Covid-19. In this context, delivery of the Council’s ambitions requires resourcefulness and procurement can make a major contribution.
This Corporate Procurement Strategy sets out the Council’s approach to procurement activity to ensure that it is effective and represents best value to residents of the Council’s local authority area. It supports the focus of the Corporate Plan of Dorset Council to make Dorset a great place to live, work and visit, priorities being:
Economic Growth Unique Environment Suitable Housing Strong, healthy communities Staying safe and well
As with other local authorities, Dorset Council’s future looks set to be increasingly dependent to the success of its local economy therefore there is a need to understand the impact of spending decisions to the local tax base and ways to retain the “Dorset Pound” within that economy. For the purpose of this Strategy, the definition of “local” means the postcodes of the authority area of Dorset Council and shall apply equally to residents, service users and suppliers.
Through procurement activity the Council’s goal is to achieve long-term sustainable commercial success with the ambition to help deliver benefits to communities through specifying additional social value, encourage engagement with local suppliers and voluntary sector groups to maximise the Dorset Pound.
The Corporate Procurement Strategy sets out how to evaluate social value criteria within procurement activities, with the aim to maximise the social,
Page 52 environmental and economic impact of procurement; as procurement is so much more than purchasing of goods, services or works.
A paper titled “Maximising the Dorset Pound Through Social Value” and evaluation approach of social value was discussed by the Resources Scrutiny Committee on 26th November 2019 with a view of incorporating this into this Strategy.
2. Financial Implications
Value for Money Procurement is the process of acquiring goods, works and services from third parties. The process includes options appraisal (the ‘make or buy’ decisions) which is a key stage of major projects. The aim is to achieve best value for money.
In the HM Treasury publication Managing Public Money, value for money is defined as:
“It means the best mix of quality and effectiveness for the least outlay over the period of use of the goods, services or works bought. It is not about minimizing upfront prices”.
This means that procurement decisions need to take account, as appropriate, of quality and all the costs that will be incurred by the Council throughout the life of a contract period, or asset, not simply the initial price.
Optimum results are achieved by early market engagement before commencing procurement, to achieve good response from suppliers. Robust contract management, in accordance with the Council’s Contract Management Procedure Guide and Guide to Managing Contract Criticality, shall ensure what has been procured is being delivered to meet the initial requirements within the contracted terms and conditions.
Financial Savings The Councils medium term financial strategy predicts that there will be significant funding shortfall for at least the next five years as the Council responds to the Covid-19 crisis and the aftermath. The Council will need to make significant savings, in particular through its procurement and contract management activities. These savings will be achieved by taking a rigorous commercial approach to new procurements, as well as existing contracts.
Funding Service budgets will need to incorporate funding required for any individual procurement activity and carried out in accordance with the Council’s constitution and supported by this strategy.
Page 53 3. Climate implications
To be considered by the appropriate project team as part of the business case and rationale for any individual procurement activity. This should incorporate accounting social value which includes environmental implications, as set out in this strategy.
4. Other Implications
As BREXIT is worked through, the public sector procurement landscape may well change following the Government’s intention to publish a green paper in Summer/Autumn 2020 titled “Procurement Rules Reform”. The Council is a member of the Central Buying Consortium (CBC) and Government Cabinet Office has invited CBC members to input into these reforms.
It is the intention that the Council will explore any opportunities that arise as a result of any change to public sector procurement.
Other implications in terms of individual procurements, are to be considered by the appropriate project team as part of the business case and rationale for any procurement activity.
5. Risk Assessment
Having considered the risks associated with this decision, the level of risk has been identified as: Current Risk: LOW Residual Risk: LOW
6. Equalities Impact Assessment
To be carried out by the appropriate project team as part of the business case and rationale for any individual procurement activity.
7. Appendices
Appendix 1 – Corporate Procurement Strategy
8. Background Papers
None
Footnote: Issues relating to financial, legal, environmental, economic and equalities implications have been considered and any information relevant to the decision is included within the report.
Page 54 Corporate Procurement Strategy
The mechanism to ensure that procurement takes place in accordance with the Council’s strategic aims, that it is effective and delivers best value to residents
This Strategy shall underpin Dorset Council’s procurement activities as it moves through a programme of transformation and will be subject to review to ensure that it continues reflect the needs and aspirations of the Council.
August 2020 v9
Page 55 Contents
Page Introduction 3 What is Procurement? 4 Statement 4 Corporate Approach 5 The Commissioning Cycle 6 Fraud and Corruption Risks in Procurement 7 The Procurement Toolkit 8 Strategy Vision 9 Objective 1: People, Skills and Development 9 Objective 2: Strategic Sourcing 10 Objective 3: Contract Management 11 Objective 4: Partnership Working 12 Objective 5: Maximising the Dorset Pound 13 Objective 6: Climate and Ecological Emergency 14 Social Value 15 Applying Evaluation of Social Value within Procurement 16 Applying Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) within Procurement 16 Summary 19 Appendix A – Social Value Evaluation Questions 20 Appendix B – Corporate Social Responsibility Statements 23
Page 2 Page 56 Introduction
As with all bodies in the public sector, Dorset Council is publicly accountable for how it manages its budget.
It is estimated that 51% of the Council’s annual budget will be spent on buying external goods, services and works. Spend ranging from Stationery to ICT Infrastructure (Corporate); Speech Therapy to Residential Placements (People – Children); Adult Day Services to Residential Care (People – Adults); School Transport to Surface Dressing (Place); School Nursing to Drug and Alcohol Treatment Services (Public Health Dorset).
The effective procurement of these and other future requirements is crucial in the light of ever challenging budget reductions. In this context, delivery of the Council’s ambitions requires resourcefulness and procurement can make a major contribution.
This Corporate Procurement Strategy is the mechanism to ensure that procurement takes place in accordance with the Council’s strategic aims, is effective and delivers best value to residents of the Council’s local authority area. It supports the focus of the Corporate Plan of Dorset Council to make Dorset a great place to live, work and visit, priorities being:
Economic Growth Unique Environment Suitable Housing Strong, healthy communities Staying safe and well
As with other local authorities, Dorset Council’s future looks set to be increasingly dependent to the success of its local economy therefore there is a need to understand the impact of spending decisions to the local tax base and ways to retain the Dorset Pound within that economy. For the purpose of this Strategy, the definition of “Local” means the postcodes of the authority area of Dorset Council and shall apply equally to residents, service users and suppliers.
Through procurement activity the Council’s goal is to achieve long-term sustainable commercial success with the ambition to help deliver benefits to communities through specifying additional social value, engaging with local suppliers and voluntary sector groups to maximise the “Dorset Pound”. By the utilisation of social value criteria, the Council can also maximise the social, environmental and economic impact of procurement, as procurement is so much more than purchasing of goods, services or works.
Page 3 Page 57 What is ‘Procurement’?
Procurement is the process of acquiring goods, works and services from third parties. The process includes options appraisal (the ‘make or buy’ decisions) which is a key stage of major projects. The aim is to achieve best value for money.
In the HM Treasury publication Managing Public Money , value for money is defined as:
‘It means the best mix of quality and effectiveness for the least outlay over the period of use of the goods or services bought. It is not about minimizing upfront prices”
This means that procurement decisions need to take account, as appropriate, of quality and all the costs that will be incurred by the Council throughout the life of a contract period, or asset, not simply the initial price.
Optimum results are achieved by early market engagement before commencing procurement, to achieve good response from suppliers. Robust contract management, in accordance with the Contract Management Procedure Guide and Guide to Managing Contract Criticality, shall ensure what has been procured is being delivered to meet the initial requirements within the contracted terms and conditions.
Statement
Delivering value for money is key to what procurement activity does.
This Corporate Procurement Strategy, identifies and describes the Council’s procurement objectives under five key themes, with explained key actions to deliver the ambition
It applies to all procurement activity of Dorset Council.
It is recognised that the context in which the Council operates will continue to evolve, both locally and nationally. Therefore, this strategy will be updated and refreshed as necessary to ensure that it reflects the continued ambition to achieve innovative procurement and commercial activity.
This strategy is subordinate to the Council’s Constitution including Contract Procedure Rules and is complemented by the following corporate guides:
Contract Management Procedure Guide Guide to Managing Contract Criticality
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/managing-public-money
Page 4 Page 58 Corporate Approach
In delivering value means to ensure that commercial arrangements and contracts awarded by the Council provide great value for money, and that spend is used to deliver social value to residents and take opportunities for added value. The corporate approach is to provide a central team of procurement professionals within the Commercial and Procurement service, based on a Business Partner Model, that will support business areas* of the Council by:
Providing professional advice and insight on markets, suppliers and commercial options to support service delivery. Leading the development of plans for how the Council shall spend money on third party arrangements across the private, public and voluntary/community sectors. Ensuring that contracts are developed and awarded in accordance with Procurement Legislation and the Council’s own Contract Procedure Rules Providing advice, support and training to business areas in managing contracts effectively in line with this Corporate Procurement Strategy, and the Council’s Contract Management Procedure Guide and the Council’s Guide to Managing Contract Criticality. Driving Social Value and Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) through procurement activity to encourage the Council’s, and it’s supply chain, engages and spend with local suppliers and communities to maximise the “Dorset Pound”. Working with business areas to identify savings and capture opportunities through contract convergence and re-procured to drive value from contracts. Challenges and Opportunities
The following are several challenges and opportunities to the delivery of this corporate approach:
Managing market and cost pressures in an ongoing period of financial austerity for local government, whilst in some sectors facing increasing price and demand from the private sector that impacts the Council’s market influence. Delivering and building on successful partnerships, e.g., NHS Dorset Clinical Commissioning Group, and driving collaboration through procurement, both locally and regionally. Changes to legislation relevant to procurement. Maximising the use of technology to drive simpler and more cost-effective processes for buyers and suppliers. Ensuring that the Council has the necessary skills, capability and capacity to deliver its procurement priorities. Exploring innovative contracting commercial models and collaboration with others.
* Exception being Children Services who carry out their own tender activity and are not supported by the corporate Business Partner model by the corporate Commercial and Procurement function.
Page 5 Page 59 The Commissioning Cycle
As illustrated below, The Institute of Public Care (IPC) links within a commissioning cycle a series of commissioning activities that are grouped under four key performance management elements: Understand Plan Do Review
For the Council to have effective third-part arrangements in place, procurement activity has a role to play throughout the commissioning cycle; from Understand to Review.
Understand Plan
Review Do
Page 6 Page 60 Fraud and Corruption Risks in Procurement
Public procurement can be attractive to organised criminals. It is therefore important for the Council to consider risks of fraud and corruption when procuring and commissioning goods, works and services. Effective management of risk in this area is part of being a risk-aware council, that manages its resources efficiently to sure value for money outcomes. The Ministry of Housing and Local Communities (MHCLG) defines procurement fraud and corruption as:
“… any fraudulent or corrupt activity occurring within the entire procurement lifecycle, from decision to procure through to the conclusion of the contract and including all purchasing with a value below the level of a formal tender process. This will therefore include commissioning, contract management and purchasing, as well as the tendering process itself”.
The Council mitigates the risk of fraud and corruption in procurement by the use of various tools, such as:
E-tender System The Council has a centralised electronic tender system to manage the procurement process. This helps to guard against the risk of fraud and corruption by supporting transparency in the process. Tender opportunities are published through the system, independent tender openings are built into the system, and all communication with tenderers are conducted and tracked via the system, reducing the opportunities for direct contact between officers and tenderers.
Accord e-contract management system (e-CMS) The Council has a centralised contracts database to record details of all awarded contracts, such as: contract title; start and finished date; estimated total contract value; name of the organisation awarded the contract. An external view of the database is within the public domain therefore supporting transparency and freedom of information. Within its internal view, the database is used to record contract management reviews, key performance indicators.
Spend Dashboard Spend within the Council should be undertaken in line with the Council’s Contract Procedure Rules (CPRs). In some cases, spend is undertaken without a contract as below threshold to establish a contract. The Spend Dashboard provides visibility to the Council of this ‘un-assigned’ / ‘off contract spend’. This type of spend is unlikely to be an indicator of anything untoward, however the Spend Dashboard acts as a detection mechanism in terms of providing the ability to analyse spend not only for inappropriate activity but also looking for opportunities to make savings by consolidating spend.
Also, all procurement activity is required to follow the Council’s Procurement Toolkit, as discussed next.
https://www.local.gov.uk/review-risks-fraud-and-corruption-local-government-procurement
https://procontract.due-north.com/Register
https://dorsetcouncil.accordcontracts.com/admin/login
Page 7 Page 61 The Procurement Toolkit
The Council’s Procurement Toolkit sets out the routes that will be followed for all procurement undertaken by the Council in accordance with the Council’s Contract Procedure Rules. The following key procedures shall underpin effective and efficient procurement activity:
Business Case At an early stage, the main purpose of a business case is to establish the need for investment; to appraise the main options for service delivery; and to provide a recommendation or a way forward for further analysis. To include detailed explanations for each key stage in the business case development process.
Procurement Initiation Document (PID) This defines as concisely as possible all major aspects of the procurement and forms the basis for assessment of its overall success. Along with the Business Case it enables the governance structure responsible to make the decision to give the approval to proceed and commit resources to it. If a procurement does not appear viable or worthwhile it will not go ahead or will be referred to the Project Team for further information.
Procurement Sourcing Plan This provides the procurement routes available with a recommendation on the most appropriate and why. Details include the implementation plan; the contract management plan - and how these will be managed. Along with the PID, the sourcing plan enables the governance structure responsible to make the decision to give approval for the tender to be released (key approval being the Tender Evaluation Model).
Tender Evaluation Model This sets out how a tender will be evaluated in relation to the requirements and must contain the right criteria, scoring and weighting that ultimately secures the Most Economically Advantageous Tender (MEAT). Particularly important is the criteria split in relationship to Price and Quality. Price should attract at least 50% weighting unless there is a robust evidence not to do so. This model sits alongside the approval of the Procurement Sourcing Plan that secures the agreement to release the tender.
Recommendation to Award Report This outlines the key aspects on the outcome of the tender process. To provide enough detail to enable the Council to make the final approval to award the contract in line with the governance structure. Includes an explanation of how the winning offer demonstrates value for money and meets the essential aspects of the requirement. Also stating any impacts of not awarding, e.g. delay in service delivery, further procurement activity, etc.
Page 8 Page 62 Strategy Vision
This section describes the vision for the Council in terms of this Corporate Procurement Strategy.
The six objectives of the strategy provide the structure and framework from which the Council will plan and prioritise procurement activity. The objectives are summarised below and will be subject to review each year of the strategy. Each objective is as important as another in ensuring the delivery of procurement ambitions and to meet overall purpose.
OBJECTIVE 1: PEOPLE, SKILLS AND DEVELOPMENT
The Challenge To have a continued focus on people, skills and development. It is recognised that procurement has a wider role to play in the development of contract management and commercial skills across the Council.
To ensure that the professional skills and experience that the Council staff have are used in a wide variety of projects through providing innovative commercial support, to a growing range of projects that optimise the use of Councils assets, drive income and budget savings. Investing in, and supporting these activities, will continue to be part of the Council’s procurement strategy.
Key actions
To attract, develop and retain the very best procurement and commercial staff with the professional, personal and technical skills to deliver value for money through procurement activity. Encourage and embed coaching, high performance and positive behaviours. Maintain a development and retention programme, capturing professional, personal and technical skills for staff. Place the best people by encouraging internal career development at all levels as well as recruiting the best of external expertise where needed. Invest in opportunities to grow the right talent including apprenticeships. Continue and grow our commitment to a “learning culture” organisation, through adopting a “train the trainer” approach, and knowledge share groups. Develop and deliver a high-quality training offer, including skills in tendering, contract management and behaviours to enable improved Supplier Relationship Management (SRM). Ensure resources are effectively used, supported by effective planning of available resource against the required workload using the “Forward Look” within the Accord e- contract management system (e-CMS) and other available tools. Knowledgeable procurement people who add value across a range of activities and bring excellent commercial skills and understanding of services. This will enable the Councils to achieve the best commercial results and outcomes for residents.
Page 9 Page 63 OBJECTIVE 2: STRATEGIC SOURCING
The Challenge The Council’s staff and suppliers expects that high quality and efficient strategic sourcing is delivered. Simple and streamlined processes, delivered by experts with a strong focus on the supplier experience will be a core part of procurement processes.
The Council will continuously review procurement approach to ensure it responds to feedback from suppliers and others, to develop future approaches accordingly. This includes the eProcurement system that is used and optimising the statutory and legal boundaries of procurement legislation to deliver the best outcomes.
Underlying all procurement activities there needs to be a consistent culture of strong project management and programme governance. Securing the very best value from all procurement activities, and a robust, structured and well managed approach is vital. This will ensure that the Council is a using the resource and skills it has to deliver the very best return within decreased budgets.
Key actions
Strategic sourcing activity (the end-to-end sourcing process) to be simple, clear and efficient. To deliver a sourcing process that achieves successful outcomes and is a positive and effective experience for suppliers and staff. The procurement pipeline will be maintained using the “Forward Look” within Accord e- CMS and will be visible across colleagues in Finance, Legal and Business Operations. The delivery of all procurement projects to be robustly managed in a visible way and in line with agreed methodology as set out in the Council’s Procurement Toolkit Align strategic sourcing plans to the service outcomes to ensure a clear and robust programme of sourcing activity. Best practice is driven through the tools and best practice standards and these are reviewed regularly. Implement a consistent feedback process, with the results being used to make genuine and sustainable improvements to procurement processes. Provide consistent feedback to suppliers that are unsuccessful in securing Council business to allow them to develop for future opportunities. Ensure compliance to procurement legislation and the Council’s Contract Procedure Rules. Define and understand the internal cost of strategic sourcing to ensure the end-to-end sourcing process in the most efficient way. Define and understand all costs, such as transportation, that are not necessary directly procured as part of the core delivery. Explore commercial opportunities for all aspects of the strategic sourcing process. Maximise the use of intelligence around suppliers, market, service design and demand, through early market engagement and market development. Be ready to develop strategies for new areas of spend as business needs develop, transform and embed in the Council.
Page 10 Page 64 OBJECTIVE 3: CONTRACT MANAGEMENT
The Challenge Improving contract management continues to be a key deliverable for the Council. It is essential that a contract management framework to strategic and critical suppliers is applied in accordance with the Contract Management Procedure Guide and the Guide to Managing Critical Contracts. As suppliers delivering Council services evolve, the importance of managing relationships in a more complex environment will dramatically increase.
To drive the greatest benefits, there will be the need to continue to review tools, processes and skills, and look across all procurement to ensure the approach reflects the very best practice.
Key actions
To deliver efficiencies, savings and service quality improvements through a proactive and consistent approach to provider and contract management. This approach will also maximise commercial opportunities, reduce risk throughout the supply chain and support the delivery of best practice contract and supplier management. Maximise the use of a range of tools and techniques including e-procurement and supplier networks. The Accord e-CMS is the key source of information on the performance of suppliers. Efficiencies, improvements and savings to be delivered through contract and provider relationship management Contract spend to be transparent and reported through the Accord eCMS and Spend Analysis Dashboard Increase contract compliance management and the percentage of “Assigned Spend”. Procurement projects to be tracked through milestones throughout the lifecycle, with clear and consistent governance and documentation in accordance with the Procurement Toolkit. Increased focus on lessons learned to capture and apply these to other projects, with embedded peer review for key projects. Embed an improved approach to supply chain risk and business continuity planning across all strategic and critical suppliers in accordance with the Guide to Managing Contract Criticality and linked to corporate risk management. To continue to develop the Accord eCMS and implement improvements accordingly. Data and intelligence to be used to inform the thinking and decision making which will lead to improved outcomes on projects. Through contract management, the social value proposed as part of an accepted tender offer shall be measured to ensure that the benefits are indeed delivered within the life of the awarded contract
Page 11 Page 65 OBJECTIVE 4: PARTNERSHIP WORKING
The Challenge To further enhance, develop and promote partnership working, locally and nationally, with other contracting bodies such as other local authorities, NHS, Dorset Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG), and the third sector; including partnership working with suppliers and through membership of the Central Buying Consortium (CBC).
The Council’s work at an operational level with Dorset CCG, and others, will support the mutual aim to establish one health and social care system.
Key actions
Develop strong working relationships to ensure maximum benefit for the residents of the local authority area of the Council including price management. Develop jointly, where possible, procurement approaches to our joint supply market with the aim of increased market engagement and management in line with relevant legislative requirements. Including jointly produced service specifications and contracting approaches to increase economies of scale To achieve a growth in jointly procured arrangements as relationships build and develop, where strong collaborative approaches are delivered. Ongoing engagement with partners to share procurement plans in a timely manner to identify suitable opportunities for partnership approaches. Develop stronger links with other organisations (including business groups, LEP’s, Schools and Colleges, VCS and community groups) to deliver best practice procurement. Promote collaborative working relationships with key suppliers to maximise opportunities for both parties Active procurement influence, network, benchmarking at a national level through the Council’s management board membership of the Central Buying Consortium (CBC) and engagement with the procurement leads of the Local Government Authority (LGA). Review definition of “local” (default being the local authority area of Dorset Council) when procuring with others in order to take into consideration their geographical localities.
Page 12 Page 66 OBJECTIVE 5: MAXIMISING THE DORSET POUND
The Challenge To deliver additional value for residents through the way the Council spends money on goods, works and service. Consideration to the use of procurement approaches, such as social value, to help to maximise the Dorset Pound so it goes further than just the delivery of core services. “If one Dorset £ is spent on delivery of services, can that same £ be used to also produce a wider benefit to the community of Dorset?”
The Council to embed a clear message about its intention to maximise the Dorset Pound through commissioning and procurement every time it communicates with the marketplace.
Key actions
Large contracts to be broken down into lots to encourage wider local supplier participation, where it has been identified that this will secure better value Apply Economic considerations to procurement and contracting activity that will: - Support the local economy by choosing, where possible, local suppliers close to the point of service delivery. - Support local businesses both directly and through activity encouraging sub- contracting opportunities with Tier 1 suppliers, with an emphasis on developing local supply chains in sectors that will deliver the biggest impact on economic growth, including employment and skills opportunities, over a longer term. - Make more use of early market engagement to capture views from a wide cross section of potential local suppliers and service users, to help identify co-design and create benefits from any subsequent contract and encourage new business to develop which addresses key challenges and fill gaps in local provision. Apply Social considerations to procurement and contracting activity that will: - Support local businesses to create new jobs and support existing jobs for residents - Support the creation of apprenticeships and the upskilling the Council’s residents and their pay. - Support the development of new forms of enterprises locally - Stimulate social innovation through institutions co-designing services with local communities and utilising social economy and social enterprise organisations in delivery.
Page 13 Page 67 OBJECTIVE 6: CLIMATE AND ECOLOGICAL EMERGENCY
The Challenge There is clear scientific evidence to show that climate change is happening and is due to human activity. This includes global warming and greater risk of flooding, droughts and heat wave. As a local authority, Dorset Council has a responsibility to play its part in helping tackle this growing danger and as such declared a Climate and Ecological Emergency in May 2019.
The Council to apply environmental considerations within procurement activities.
Key actions
Reduce the distance which goods and services travel to the Council’s point of delivery. Assist in stimulating technical innovation through encouraging the local market, and others, to develop new technologies which address both goods and services requirements and enable environmental advances. Support improve the local environment particularly where innovation processes are utilised in the design process and where creative individuals are procured to design, build and manage new facilities and infrastructure Encourage and influence local suppliers, and others, to improve their sustainability practice such as the use of: o low carbon production techniques; o recycled materials; o alternatives to single use plastics, etc.
Page 14 Page 68 Social Value
Through commissioning and procurement, the Council will consider the requirements of the Social Value Act to enable and support the delivery of economic, social and environmental benefits that will help meet the priorities and the ambitions of the Council’s Corporate Plan.
The Council will seek to use Social Value principles across all procurement of services, including those delivered directly, and of all contract values.
What is the Social Value Act? The full name of the act is the “Public Services (Social Value) Act 2012” and it was passed in February 2012 then became law on 31st January 2013. It applies to the procuring of services, or the purchase or hire of goods or carrying out works that is subject to The Public Contract Regulations 2015.
The Act states - “If a relevant authority proposes to procure or make arrangements for procuring the provision of services, or the provision of services together with the purchase or hire of goods or the carrying out of works … the authority must account how what is proposed to be procured might improve the economic, social and environmental well-being of the relevant areas and, in conducting the process of procurement, how it might act with a view of securing that improvement”
It also states the authority must “consider whether to undertake any consultations as to matters to be considered” under that process.
The Act asks public bodies to “account” for social value following recent amendment that replaced “consider”. To comply with the Act, the Council needs to show that it has thought about these issues and has thought about whether to consult on them. This to be evidenced by documenting the internal process that took place to come to a decision on these issues, or by evidencing that there have been discussions with the local provider market, service users, or community about them.
Proportionality
While the Council recognises the benefits of social value, it also acknowledges that measurement is one of the key areas of challenge both in terms of what and how to measure. The resources expended on measuring the impacts and value of services should be in proportion to the: total value; importance of the service; level of impact anticipated; and the types of impacts likely to be generated.
This is important for several reasons:
achieving maximum social value from a contract should not be materially reduced by diverting resources away from the frontline; both the Council and suppliers are working with straitened resources; if measurement requirements become complex or burdensome, it may favour larger scale suppliers (of any sector) that have the capacity to respond; measurement of social value needs to be meaningful, credible, and evaluated over the course of a contract.
Page 15 Page 69 Applying Evaluation of Social Value within Procurement
The Council shall seek measurable, verifiable social value outcomes across all procurement of services that:
are relevant to what is proposed to be procured and proportionate to the value and its importance can legitimately be included in the contract specification will contribute to the Council’s Corporate Plan
Suppliers will be required to propose, as part of their Tender offer, what contribution to social value they can provide to support the aimed outcomes. Depending on the procurement objective, the social value questions listed in Appendix A of this strategy are to be applied within evaluation criteria.
Where relevant and proportionate, to include social value in procurement that reflect a minimum of 5% weighting out of the overall 100% of evaluation and provides opportunities for suppliers to offer innovative approaches to deliver wider benefits.
Applying Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) within Procurement
Procurement will incorporate the following Council values, as part of CSR to encourage suppliers to align with these values. These will be shown as statements within procurement exercises, as listed in Appendix B of this strategy.
1. Mindful Employer The Council is a signatory to The Charter for Employers who are positive about mental health and as such it has made a commitment to improve to improve the working life of its staff. Aim: To encourage suppliers to also become a signatory to reflect the Council’s own commitment to staff wellbeing. Mindful Employer is an NHS initiative run by Workways, a service of Devon Partnership NHS Trust, and supports people with a mental health condition to find or remain in employment. It was originally developed by employers in Exeter and launched in 2004. Initially as a purely local initiative, it has since developed throughout the UK and has been launched abroad. Mindful Employer has been recommended as good practice by the UK government and other national organisations. For further details: http://www.mindfulemployer.net/about/
2. Dementia Friendly The Council is registered with Dementia Friends who provide best practice guidance to organisations, such as the Council, to work towards becoming dementia friendly. Aim: To encourage suppliers to also register to reflect the Council’s own commitment to dementia awareness. Dementia Friends is an Alzheimer’s Society Initiative and provides registered organisations access to resources / information aimed to help employees to understand dementia and how it may affect a person. Any type of organisation from large to small across the private, public and third sector can roll out Dementia Friends to their workforce. For further details: https://www.dementiafriends.org.uk/
Page 16 Page 70 3. Armed Forces Covenant The Council is a signatory to the Armed Forces Convent which is written and publicised voluntary pledge from organisations who wish to demonstrate their concrete support for the armed forces community. Aim: To encourage suppliers to also become a signatory to reflect the Council’s own commitment to support the forces through services, policy and projects. The Armed Forces Covenant is a promise from the nation to those who serve or who have served, and their families, which says we will do all we can to ensure they are treated fairly and not disadvantaged in their day-to-day lives. The Armed Forces Covenant relies on the people, communities, businesses of the UK to actively support it in order to make a difference. For further details: https://www.gov.uk/government/policies/armed-forces-covenant
4. Equality and Diversity All organisations have statutory obligations under the Equality Act 2010. The Act replaces previous anti-discrimination law, consolidating it into a single act, and recognises the following protected characteristics:
Age Disability Gender reassignment Marriage and civil partnership Pregnancy and maternity Race (includes ethnic or national origin, colour and nationality Religion and belief (including lack of belief) Sex Sexual orientation
The Council also has a Public Sector Equality Duty as part of the Equality Act 2010 which requires it to have due regard to the need to:
eliminate unlawful discrimination, harassment and victimisation and other conduct prohibited by the Act advance equality of opportunity between people who share a protected characteristic and people who do not foster good relations between people who share a protected characteristic and people who do not
The Council must consider the three parts of this duty when making decisions as employers and service suppliers, and must ensure the organisations it contracts, to deliver goods and services on its behalf, will support it in meeting the duty requirements. Aim: To ensure that suppliers either have an equality and diversity policy or that they commit to meet the requirements set out in the Council’s Dorset Equality Scheme. The Equality Act 2010 sets out the difference ways in which it is unlawful to treat someone, such as direct and indirect discrimination, harassment, victimisation. The Act prohibits unfair treatment in the workplace and when providing goods, facilities and services. The act also protects people from being treated less favourably because of certain characteristics; known as ‘protected characteristics’, promote good relations. For further details: https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/equality-act- 2010/what-equality-act
Page 17 Page 71 5. Apprenticeships The Council supports the Government’s ambition in English Apprenticeships: Our 20:20 Vision for apprenticeships to be an ‘attractive offer that young people and adults aspire to go into as a high quality and prestigious path to a successful career’. Aim: To encourage suppliers to also support this Government ambition, contribute to the development of the Dorset economy and to improving workforce skills. Apprenticeships (in England): vision for 2020 is the Government’s plan on how it will increase the quality and quantity of apprenticeships, achieving 3 million apprenticeships by 2020. For further details: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/apprenticeships-in-england-vision- for-2020
6. Environmental Management and Sustainability The Council recognises that successful commissioning and procurement is not simply about securing the lowest price but also about whole life considerations such as environmental management and sustainability. Aim: To encourage suppliers to define the sustainability considerations of their organisation and address such issues. Environmental management and sustainability are not simply about being “green” but involves minimising environmental impact through the supply chain as part of commissioning and procurement.
7. Fostering Friendly Employers As a Corporate Parent, the Council supports the recruitment and retention of foster carers by promoting fostering to its own employees and the employees of its suppliers. This is to help achieve better outcomes and life chances for children and young people in care. Aim: To encourage suppliers to support the Council in its commitment to recruit and retain of foster carers by promoting fostering among their employees and customers. In Dorset, the Council strives to provide the best service for children in care, foster carers and their families, and promote the wellbeing and development of each child and young person in care throughout his or her childhood. For further details: https://www.dorsetcouncil.gov.uk/children- families/childrens-social-care/fostering/fostering.aspx
Page 18 Page 72 Summary
The Corporate Procurement Strategy has set out the mechanism to ensure that procurement takes place in accordance with the Council’s strategic aims, that it is effective and delivers best value to the residents of the Council’s local authority area. The strategy sets out the Council vision under five objectives that will collectively aim to deliver robust and effective procurement that will contribute to achieving value for money, create opportunities for savings and maximising the Dorset Pound. It supports the focus of the Corporate Plan of Dorset Council to make Dorset a great place to live, work and visit, priorities being:
Economic Growth Unique Environment Suitable Housing Strong, healthy communities Staying safe and well
The Council recognises that the context in which it operates will evolve locally therefore this Strategy will need to be updated and refreshed, as necessary, to ensure that procurement activity continues to be efficient and effective.
This Strategy shall underpin Dorset Council’s procurement activities as it moves through a programme of transformation and will be subject to review to ensure that it continues reflect the needs and aspirations of the Council.
Page 19 Page 73 Appendix A - Social Value Evaluation Questions
Evaluation Scoring 5 - Excellent Comprehensive and detailed response that provides high levels of confidence that the required social value and delivery will be achieved. Demonstrates excellent understanding of social value. 3 - Good Response addresses key issues and is adequately developed. Provides good levels of confidence that the required social value and delivery will be achieved. Demonstrates good understanding of social value. 1 - Basic Response addresses a limited range and is basically developed. Provides only limited levels of confidence that the required social value and delivery will be achieved. Demonstrates only a basic understanding of social value. 0 - Unacceptable No response or response fails to address issues and is poorly developed. Provides little or no confidence that the required social value and delivery will be achieved. Demonstrates little or no understanding of social value. Questions Local Employment Outcomes: Increased number of employment and training opportunities for local people of Dorset, improving the employment opportunities for local people through training, apprenticeships and offering employment to local workforce. Outputs: - How many new jobs (full time equivalent) will your organisation create within Dorset? - How many apprenticeships will your organisation support within Dorset? - How many hours of voluntary work hours will your organisation provide to the community of Dorset? - How many people within Dorset will your organisation support back to work with Coaching, mentoring, CV writing, mock interviews, etc? - How many people within Dorset will your organisation support into employment who face challengers, e.g. ex-offenders, disabled, etc? - What % of your organisation’s staff live within Dorset or within 10 miles of Dorset? - What % of your organisation’s staff live within 30 miles of where the services are being delivered? - Any other measure
Buy Local Outcomes: Support the local economy by choosing suppliers close to the point of service delivery where possible, building the local economy by supporting local businesses and building your organisation’s supply chain locally. In particular, by opening up procurement opportunities to the local market. Outputs: - What % of your organisation’s spend will be suppliers located in Dorset?
Page 20 Page 74 - What % of your organisation’s spend will be with SMEs (less than 205 employees) located in Dorset? - What % of your total spend will be with the 3rd sector (Social Enterprises, Charities, etc) located in Dorset? - Any other measure
Partners in Communities Outcomes: Help to develop local communities – your organisation will need to evidence how it will provide both practical and financial support to the local community of Dorset. Outputs: - Paid voluntary time given for staff to do community work (hours, days, number of staff, etc) - How many schools will your organisation support through, becoming a governor, reading, mentoring, career advice, CV writing, etc - Hours of paid voluntary time given by staff - What is the value of donations raised / give to Charities? - What is the value of spend with Social Enterprises? - Number of disadvantage individuals supported - Number of community organisations supported - Number of community projects supported - Any other measure
Good Employer Outcomes: Staff development – your organisation will need to evidence how it will support staff development and welfare. Outputs: - How much does your organisation spend on training per employee? - Are flexible working hours provided? - Does your organisation have Investors in People accreditation (Gold/Silver/Bronze) or any other accreditation? - Staff turnover improvement target % - Does your organisation record and report on employee diversity? - Any other measure
Green and Sustainable Outcomes: Your organisation will need to evidence how it will protect the environment, minimise waste and energy consumption and use other resources efficiently. Outputs: - CO2 reduction target in % or in tonnes - Waste reduction target in % - Waste to landfill reduction % - Gas reduction % - % of renewable energy used - Water consumption reduction % - Number of individuals in fuel poverty assisted with energy efficiency measures - Environmental Management system (e.g. ISO14001) introduced and maintained - Implement a Carbon Management / Environmental Policy to reduce impact of CO2 - Single Use Plastic reduction %
Page 21 Page 75 - Any other measure
Ethical Procurement Outcomes: The highest ethical standards employed in all operations and within the supply chain. Outputs: - % of suppliers paid no later than the terms of the primary contract. http://www.promptpaymentcode.org.uk/ - % of invoices paid within 30 days (this is a legal requirement for public sector contracts) - % of spend on ethically sourced standards (e.g. Fairtrade) - % of suppliers audited on ethical practices - % weighting placed on social value when procuring - Any other measure
Page 22 Page 76 Appendix B - Corporate Social Responsibility Statements
Statements Mindful Employer The Council is a signatory to The Charter for Employers who are positive about mental health and as such it has made a commitment to improve the working life of its staff. For further details: http://www.mindfulemployer.net/about/ Please state whether your organisation is also a signatory to The Charter for Employers or can commit to be a signatory, if awarded the contract / framework agreement.
Select the appropriate statement: . Yes, our organisation is also a signatory to The Charter for Employers . Yes, our organisation can commit to be a signatory to The Charter for Employers if awarded the contract / framework agreement.
Dementia Friendly The Council is registered with Dementia Friends who provide best practice guidance to organisations, such as the Council, to work towards becoming dementia friendly. For further details: https://www.dementiafriends.org.uk/ Please state whether your organisation is also registered with Dementia Friends or can commit to be a registered, if awarded the contract / framework agreement.
Select the appropriate statement: . Yes, our organisation is also registered with Dementia Friends. . Yes, our organisation can commit to be registered, if awarded the contract / framework agreement.
Armed Forces Covenant The Council is a signatory to the Armed Forces Convent which is written and publicised voluntary pledge from organisations who wish to demonstrate their concrete support for the armed forces community. For further details: https://www.gov.uk/government/policies/armed-forces-covenant Please state whether your organisation is also a signatory to the Armed Forces Covenant or can commit to be a signatory, if awarded the contract / framework agreement.
Select the appropriate statement: . Yes, our organisation is also a signatory to Armed Forces Covenant . Yes, our organisation can commit to be a signatory to The Charter for Employers, if awarded the contract / framework agreement.
Equality and Diversity Does your organisation have a written equality and diversity policy that covers the following: . colour . nationality . ethic or national origin . religion and belief . sex and sexual orientation
Page 23 Page 77 . recruitment, selection, training, promotion, discipline and dismissal . victimisation, discrimination and harassment – making it clear that these are disciplinary offences Select the appropriate statement: . Is the answer is YES, submit (upload) a copy of your organisation’s Equality and Diversity Policy . If the answer is NO, as a response provide an explanation how your organisation meets the requirements of the Equality Act 2010. In the last three years has any contract with your organisation been terminated on grounds of failure to comply with either or both of the following: . legislation prohibiting discrimination, or . contract conditions relating to equality and diversity in the provision of goods, facilities or services? If the answer is YES, provide details which should include what steps your organisation has taken as a result. Select the appropriate statement: . Yes . No In the last three years has your organisation been the subject of a formal investigation by the Equality and Human Rights Commission or an equivalent body on grounds of alleged unlawful discrimination? If the answer is YES, provide details of the investigation and any consequent judgement, which should include what steps you have taken as a result of that investigation or finding.
Select the appropriate statement: . Yes . No
Apprenticeships The Council supports the Government’s ambition in English Apprenticeships: Our 20:20 Vision for apprenticeships to be an ‘attractive offer that young people and adults aspire to go into as a high quality and prestigious path to a successful career’. For further details: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/apprenticeships-in-england-vision-for-2020 Please state whether your organisation also supports Government’s ambition in English Apprenticeships or can commit to support Apprenticeships, if awarded the contract / framework agreement.
Select the appropriate statement: . Yes, our organisation also supports the Government’s ambition in English Apprenticeship: Our 20:20 Vision . Yes, our organisation can commit to support Apprenticeships, if awarded the contract / framework agreement.
Page 24 Page 78 Fostering Friendly Employers As a Corporate Parent, the Council supports the recruitment and retention of foster carers by promoting fostering to its own employees and employees of its suppliers. For further details: https://www.dorsetcouncil.gov.uk/children-families/childrens-social- care/fostering/fostering.aspx Please state whether your organisation also supports fostering. Select the appropriate statement: . Yes, our organisation also promotes and supports fostering . Yes, our organisation can commit to support the Council by promoting fostering among our employees and customers, if awarded the contract / framework agreement. Provide an explanation what steps your organisation takes to promote fostering.
Page 25 Page 79 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 8
Cabinet 8 September 2020 Dorset Council Plan: Performance Update
For Decision
Portfolio Holder: Cllr P Wharf, Corporate Development and Change
Local Councillor(s): All
Executive Director: Matt Prosser, Chief Executive
Report Author: Becky Forrester Title: Business Partner-Policy, Research and Performance Tel: 01305 224821 Email: [email protected]
Report Status: Public
Recommendation: That Cabinet: Note progress against the council plan priorities; and Make any suggested additions or amendments to the current measures that are used to monitor progress.
Reason for Recommendation: To ensure progress towards the council plan is measured and monitored.
1. Executive Summary: The first Dorset Council Plan was agreed by full council in February 2020. Shortly afterwards, cabinet agreed an outline performance framework in order to monitor progress against the Plan’s priorities. This report is the first performance report, showing data for April- June 2020 (where available). As with all other activity, both service delivery and data capture have been significantly affected by COVID-19, so headline commentary has been provided to complement the data.
2. Financial Implications: None in relation to this report
Page 81 3. Climate implications: Addressing the climate and ecological emergency is one of the council’s priorities. Measures and performance are shown below.
4. Other Implications
None.
5. Risk Assessment
Having considered the risks associated with this decision, the level of risk has been identified as: Current Risk: Low Residual Risk: Low
6. Equalities Impact Assessment: An EqIA of the council plan was conducted and agreed by cabinet on 28 January 2020.
7. Appendices: Appendix 1: Council Plan Performance Measures Appendix 2: Dorset Council Plan 2020-2024
8. Background Papers: Cabinet 28 January 2020, Council 18 February 2020, Cabinet 3 March 2020, Cabinet 30 June 2020, 28 July 2020
9. Background 9.1 On 3 March Cabinet agreed an outline performance framework in order to monitor progress against the Plan’s priorities, which are: Economic growth Unique environment Suitable housing Strong, healthy communities Staying safe and well The Plan is attached at appendix 2.
9.2 The framework is made up of indicators that: Relate directly to the five priorities (as opposed to performance in general) and are strategic/high level, rather than operational
Page 82 Contain a mix of measures – some of which are available monthly, some quarterly and some annually 9.3 This is the first report on performance against the council plan that has come to cabinet. It is still a work in progress and we’re still developing the detailed metrics, targets and red/amber/green rating. 9.4 Responding to the Climate Emergency is a whole authority responsibility. Cross cutting performance measures will be developed as part of the Climate and Ecological Emergency Strategy and accompanying delivery plan, and relevant measures will be included within the Council Plan’s performance monitoring framework in due course.
Page 83 10. Headlines
10.1 The Plan was agreed in February 2020 and is still only seven months old. As a result, the data from the performance framework in appendix 1 does not give a full story of the council’s progress towards its priorities. The COVID pandemic has also had a significant impact on the council’s activities. The headline commentary below has been provided by lead officers and is intended to give some qualitative, anecdotal evidence to supplement the data.
Economic growth
This reporting period has of course been dominated by the COVID-19 pandemic, which has had a significant impact on global and national economies. The forced closure of sectors and businesses has affected the visitor economy and retail sectors across Dorset particularly, and the full consequences of the pandemic in terms of employment and business closures are yet to be realised. Several reports have considered the implications of COVID-19 on Dorset (Oxford Economics, Policy Department and Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy [BEIS]). Whilst a high degree of uncertainty exists regarding both the depth of the crisis and pace of recovery, forecasts suggest that Dorset, like the rest of the UK, will suffer a severe recession in 2020. It is likely to be 2022 before economic performance returns to pre-COVID levels. Relative to the UK, Dorset has higher shares of employment, output and businesses across most high-exposure sectors, such as tourism. The high proportion of take up of the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme (the furlough scheme) and the Self-Employment Income Support Scheme across Dorset highlights the overall employment exposure of the area. Almost 50,000 people in the Dorset Council area have been furloughed, of which it is estimated some 75% are aged 25 years or younger. Of these it has been estimated that 40% (15,000) may not be able to return to their former employment due to redundancies and business closures. Town centres have suffered from lockdown restrictions and the lack of visitors to Dorset, until recent weeks when restrictions were eased and considerable effort put into reopening high streets safely. The benefits of a shortened summer season, albeit not operating at full capacity, remain to be seen, as does the impact on business resilience, viability and capacity to invest for the future. The relative diversity of the Dorset economy has proved resilient to previous recessions. This together with low population density, less reliance upon some of the hardest hit industries, and fewer financially fragile households are features which may make Dorset more resilient than elsewhere.
Page 84 Unique environment
The impact of the pandemic has been mixed in terms of Dorset’s environment. While carbon emissions and congestion reduced during the lockdown phase, the high numbers of visitors after lockdown was eased had significant consequences in terms of litter and pressure on local infrastructure. In terms of the performance measures in the council plan, rights of way have improved, largely through the help of volunteers and apprentices. In the second quarter, due to COVID, volunteers and many apprentices were stood down however, reducing outputs across the service. Rights of way and long-distance trails such as the South West Coast Path have seen significant increases in need and demand following the COVID pandemic. In response to the ecological and climate emergency, in some areas the council has reduced the frequency of verge cutting, as well as increasing the number of wildflowers / pollinators within the verge. The council has recently launched a litter free Dorset campaign “don’t be a tosser” with 70 eye catching roadside signs installed across Dorset to promote a litter free Dorset and increase reuse and recycling. Despite this effort, high numbers of visitors to Dorset following the easing of lockdown have had a significant impact on the environment, which has been covered in the local and national media. The three country parks of Moors Valley, Avon Heath and Durlston have been significantly affected due to COVID and have been closed for a substantial period of spring and summer. This has resulted in a large reduction in income for the first half of the year. The country parks are now open and visitor numbers and income are recovering, although activities remain curtailed due to COVID. The council is developing a strategy for climate and ecological emergency, building a long-term vision for how Dorset Council will help lead and deliver the change needed to safeguard our unique environment. The draft Climate and Ecological Strategy was agreed for consultation at the previous Cabinet meeting on 28 July and work continues to be led by the Executive Advisory Panel.
Page 85 Suitable housing
The pandemic has resulted in a 50%+ increase in homeless households. It has highlighted a lack of suitable temporary accommodation available and resulted in the council having to rely on bed and breakfast accommodation. At the end of July there were 335 homeless households in temporary accommodation of which 139 households were in bed and breakfast hotels. As a result, several projects are now being developed (subject to securing capital funding) that will bring forward properties for use as temporary and settled accommodation. This is linked to the grant funding opportunities that the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) has announced as part of its ‘Next Steps Accommodation’ Programme. The consultation for the new housing allocations policy has been completed and the responses are being evaluated. In total there were 766 responses, and most were supportive of the proposals. A specialist, external organisation involved in the process has cited Dorset as a model of good practice, particularly in terms of the consultation response and the methods the Council has used. The final policy will be presented to cabinet for approval in November. Planning is taking place to develop a new accommodation strategy that will pull together and determine all the accommodation needs for Dorset as well as the start of developing a new homelessness strategy.
Strong, healthy communities
Rates of COVID in Dorset have been relatively low. In general terms, the majority of people in Dorset experience healthy life expectancies and find Dorset a good place to live, feel safe and enjoy the natural environment. During the pandemic, we have seen a growth in neighbourliness, informal and formal volunteering and forged strong relationships with community groups through our Community Shield response and partnerships with town and parish councils and mutual aid groups. Isolated people were supported through regular phone calls and digital tools. Plans are in place to further develop our approach to food security, with strong partnerships with local food banks and opportunities to develop community fridges. We know that we have more to do to focus on reducing inequalities to reduce the gap in outcomes and address issues of racism and discrimination. We are focused on improving educational outcomes for children from more disadvantaged families, and developing plans to work more closely with communities in Weymouth and Portland. Following the completion of an equality impact assessment, we will be continuing to work with our communities and partners on recovery from the pandemic building on the strong relationships we have created.
Staying safe and well
Page 86 Ensuring that people remain safe and well has been the priority for the council and partners through the pandemic. We continue to support communities to recover from COVID-19 and the council will continue to work on local outbreak management to ensure that we understand how to respond quickly in the event of any increase in local infection rates. The council has adapted the way it works through the provision of more care for older people in their homes, providing a safe space in day centres to provide respite for carers, use of volunteers and technology to provide personalised responses to support independence and continue with child protection responses. We have worked closely with partners in the Police, NHS and voluntary and community sectors to build networks and support and run joint communications campaigns on how to keep safe and where to get help and support if required. This has included our COVID-19 helpline, pro-active calls to shielding residents, welfare checks, matching volunteers and a helpline for parents of children with additional needs. We have made changes to our ‘front door’ for children’s services, improving multi-agency safeguarding arrangements and to ensure that families receive the right support at the right time, seeing a reduction in children in need. The rate of children in care did increase during the pandemic, mainly as a result of limitations on work that could be done to support children to move home or on to independence, and we are starting to see this trend reverse now. We have worked closely with schools to ensure that there were open through the pandemic and to keep in touch with those who could not attend to keep them safe through the pandemic and are planning our work together to support children’s emotional wellbeing when they return to school. We have seen an increase in domestic abuse, mental health and substance use issues, and are working with partners to respond to this and to prepare for potential increases in demand for our services over the coming months.
Page 87 Appendix 1: Council plan draft performance monitoring framework 1. Economic Growth Supporting plans: Local Industrial Strategy; Economic Growth; Local Plan; Superfast Broadband programme; Local Transport Plan; Climate & Ecological Emergency Strategy Exec Director – John Sellgren. Portfolio Holders– Cllr Gary Suttle and Cllr Ray Bryan Reporting Measure Latest Data Rating Commentary Frequency 95.82% Dorset Council has an ongoing contract with Open Reach until (as at December 2021. This contract improves the network 30/06/20) % of properties with infrastructure across Dorset which allows more properties to access to super-fast Monthly Green access super-fast broadband. Dorset Council is promoting the 94.92% broadband Government’s Gigabit Broadband voucher scheme which as at allows Dorset’s residents to access gigabit capable 30/06/19 broadband. This national Government scheme is now being 4.45% topped up by a Dorset Council fund helping to reduce the cost Page 88 Page (as at 30/06/20) to residents even further. Communication campaigns are % of properties in receipt ongoing to help inform residents of superfast broadband Monthly Green of full-fibre technology 2.67% packages available to them, encouraging consumer choice. as at Digital Place team conducting ongoing supplier engagement to 30/06/19 encourage commercial delivery across Dorset 1.0% (2,020 of While the figures show only a slight decrease in the number of 208,734) apprenticeships compared to the same time period last year, 1st Aug-31st this is a continuation of a downward trend since 2017. Jan Historically apprenticeships have been more common in cumulative 2019/20 Dorset than nationally but while England and the South West Number of apprenticeship academic Red showed a small increase in apprenticeship opportunities opportunities offered quarters 1.1% offered in 2018/19, Dorset did not. The drop off corresponds (2,390 of with the introduction of the apprenticeship levy and changes to 208,740) the way apprenticeships are designed. As might be expected 1st Aug- COVID-19 has had a huge disruption to the apprenticeship 31st Jan supply chain. 2018/19 1. Economic Growth Supporting plans: Local Industrial Strategy; Economic Growth; Local Plan; Superfast Broadband programme; Local Transport Plan; Climate & Ecological Emergency Strategy Exec Director – John Sellgren. Portfolio Holders– Cllr Gary Suttle and Cllr Ray Bryan Reporting Measure Latest Data Rating Commentary Frequency 71.62 (1,495 / 208,740) Although business survival is good, we have fewer than Financial Business births per Annual average business births: 72 to every 10,000 residents aged year 10,000 population of (Financial Amber 16-64 compared with 97 in England 2019/20 working age year 19/20) This figure has remained static over the past year. Likely to 71.96 decline in short-term due to COVID Financial year 2018/19
Page 89 Page 157,000 Employment numbers via Slight increase in employment numbers, matched with below Annual Business Register and 153,000 national average unemployment rates. Trends likely to be (Financial Green Employment Service Financial reversed following impact of COVID-19 and cessation of policy year 19/20) (BRES) year interventions 2018/19 20,185 Business numbers (net) Annual 19,995 The slight increase in business numbers is more than likely to via the UK Business (Financial Green Financial be reversed following impact of COVID dataset year 19/20) year 2018/19 59.50% Qualifications data is taken from the Annual Population Survey % residents aged 16-64 Annual which is a residence-based labour market survey qualified to NVQ3 or (as at 57.30% Green encompassing population, economic activity and qualifications above 30/06/20) as at 30th data. As these are survey results applied to population data it June 2019 must be used with caution. Both the percentage of NVQ3 and % residents aged 16-64 NVQ4 qualifications have increased over the past year qualified to NVQ4 or Annual 36.40% Green following an upward trend since 2015. above 1. Economic Growth Supporting plans: Local Industrial Strategy; Economic Growth; Local Plan; Superfast Broadband programme; Local Transport Plan; Climate & Ecological Emergency Strategy Exec Director – John Sellgren. Portfolio Holders– Cllr Gary Suttle and Cllr Ray Bryan Reporting Measure Latest Data Rating Commentary Frequency Reducing travel by car will reduce carbon emissions and % households within 30 congestion. The development of new housing sites in locations minutes of Dorset's towns Annual (first with appropriate public transport links can assist in improving 77.84% N/A by public transport (rail time reported) this target. These are key objectives in Dorset’s emerging and bus) Local Plan, Local Transport Plan and its Carbon Reduction Plan Page 90 Page 2. Unique Environment Supporting plans: Local Transport Plan; Highways Verge Management and Street Cleansing Strategy; Climate & Ecological Emergency Strategy Exec Director – John Sellgren. Portfolio Holders – Cllr Ray Bryan and Cllr Tony Alford Reporting Measure Latest Data Rating Commentary Frequency Due to reporting lag times as a result of waste analysis, 406.89 these Q4 figures are awaiting formal validation. However, Quarterly Kilograms of residual Kg/hh the amount of residual waste produced is in line with household waste per (Financial Green targets and we continue to try to reduce the amount of quarters with 8 household week time lag) (as at residual waste per household by implementing waste 31/03/20) reduction initiatives such as Love Food Hate Waste and promoting reuse, recycling and composting. Due to reporting lag times as a result of waste analysis, 58.38% these Q4 figures are awaiting formal validation. However, % household waste sent for Quarterly the percentage of household waste sent for (Financial Green reuse/recycling/ 91 Page composting (as at reuse/recycling is in line with target. Dorset Council quarters) 31/03/20) continues to undertake promotional campaigns to increase the use of the Recycle for Dorset Service. COVID-19 related nil return. No activity since FQ4. It is Length of improved or new Quarterly non-essential work and progress limited due to staff (Financial N/A N/A rights of way or trail-ways availability, progression of funding bids and contractor quarters) availability. Number of improvements/ This is an increase on 19/20 Q4 figure of 773. This figure interventions made to our 900 relates to jobs completed on rights of way network, both rights of way network, trail- Quarterly Green (Q1 2020/21) reactively to complaints/defect reports and proactively in ways, long distance trails and terms of ongoing management by the Ranger teams coast paths Increase in highway verge now 684,732 subject to cut and collect/ non- Area has increased year on year since 2015 when this Annual SqMtrs Green intervention management in (Financial method of management was first introduced order to improve biodiversity year 2019/20) 2. Unique Environment Supporting plans: Local Transport Plan; Highways Verge Management and Street Cleansing Strategy; Climate & Ecological Emergency Strategy Exec Director – John Sellgren. Portfolio Holders – Cllr Ray Bryan and Cllr Tony Alford Reporting Measure Latest Data Rating Commentary Frequency % overall resident satisfaction with their local area as a place Annual to live First time 88% 88% satisfied with local areas as a place to live reported (residents’ survey carried out Oct – Nov 2019) Reduction in both Dorset Council and county-wide carbon emissions
The 92 Page amount of energy produced in Dorset from to be determined Performance measure currently under development renewable sources The amount of energy produced from council properties from renewable sources 3. Suitable Housing Supporting plans: Dorset Council Local Plan; Building Better Lives Programme; Asset Management Plan Exec Director – Vivienne Broadhurst. Portfolio Holder – Cllr Graham Carr-Jones Reporting Measure Latest Data Rating Commentary Frequency 21 acceptances Number of accepted* main (as at 30th June 2020) housing duties this month Figures have increased during first quarter due where the council has a Monthly (*where applicants are Amber to additional needs resulting in displacement accepted as eligible for duty to secure permanent from home during COVID-19. assistance, in priority need, accommodation unintentionally homeless and have a local connection) Households placed into bed and breakfast up to 30 June 2020 has increased in response to the government announcement of the ‘Everyone In’ 183 households Total number of households initiative which gave councils 48 hours to get all Page 93 Page (as at 30th June 2020) accommodated in bed and rough sleepers off the streets and into Monthly Red breakfast on the last day of accommodation. This also included households 61 households the month which were made homeless by family/friends as as at 30th June 2019 they either needed to self-isolate or were unable to continue with their current living arrangement i.e. sofa surfing. Number of pregnant women Taking a rolling average annually this would / families with children in 11 Monthly Green equate to a reduction of over 40% assuming the bed and breakfast (as at 30th June 2020) same rate of placements. exceeding a 6 week stay 17 affordable rent 50 shared ownership (quarter 1 2020/21)
Number of affordable Quarterly 5 social rent, 95 affordable Developments ceased due to COVID-19 (Financial Red homes delivered rent (5 of which are restrictions on site. quarters) acquisitions), 57 shared ownership and 4 low cost home ownership (quarter 4 2019/20) 3. Suitable Housing Supporting plans: Dorset Council Local Plan; Building Better Lives Programme; Asset Management Plan Exec Director – Vivienne Broadhurst. Portfolio Holder – Cllr Graham Carr-Jones Reporting Measure Latest Data Rating Commentary Frequency Purbeck plan examination still ongoing. Minerals Strategy likely no longer to need review on the planned timescale. Local plan currently on track but first consultation delayed as a result % Local Development Quarterly 33% (1 of 3) of COVID-19 impacts on work. Local Scheme milestones (Financial Amber development scheme to be reviewed by Cabinet, completed or on-track quarters) (as at 30/06/20) September 2020, and targets amended. Programme will also be affected by the proposed radical changes to the national planning system.
Measure(s) 94 Page to be added in Performance measure currently under relation to housing to be determined development standards 4. Strong & Healthy Communities Supporting plans: Our Dorset; Live Well Dorset Exec Directors – Vivienne Broadhurst and Theresa Leavy. Portfolio Holders – Cllr Laura Miller; Cllr Andrew Parry; and Cllr Tony Alford Reporting Measure Latest Data Rating Commentary Frequency Activity over May and June is likely to reflect wider changes to the economy and indication that young people will be adversely affected by changes in the UK employment market. This is likely to be a challenge for the Leaving Care 50.4% team in the short and medium term. We are (as at 30/06/20) % care leavers in education, working with our partners to seek out a range of Monthly Amber employment and training opportunities for our young people, including 53.0% apprenticeships and working closely with the as at 30/06/29 virtual school to ensure all children in care have
Page 95 Page offers for September. We await the details of national programmes such as ‘Kick Start’ and are putting in a bid with the DWP on a ‘youth hub’ to help support employment opportunities. Impact of COVID-19 Lockdown and Social Distancing caused cancellation of all Number of children and adults Quarterly programmes, so there is no performance data taking part in environmental (Financial N/A N/A for Q1 20/21. The service will look to re-instate engagement activity quarters) the programme when it is considered safe to do so, in line with Government guidance and required risk assessments. Number of participants, Quarterly Impact of COVID-19 Lockdown and Social including GP referrals, involved (Financial N/A N/A Distancing caused cancellation of all in health and green exercise quarters) programmes. As above/CPLAN-19. Financial year 2019/20: Area of ‘new’ space provided Areas in East Dorset, brought about via s106 and created for recreational Annual 19 hectares Green planning gain as Public Open Space (POS) and and ecological value to local (Financial year) Suitable Alternative Natural Green Space residents (SANGS). Impact of COVID-19 caused cancellation of all Number of volunteer programmes for FQ1 20/21. hours/opportunities created by Quarterly The service will look to re-instate the programme (Financial N/A N/A the Coast & Greenspace when it is considered safe to do so, in line with quarters) service Government guidance and required risk assessments. % of residents feeling safe when outside in their local area Annual First time during the day or at night 93% reported (residents’ survey carried out Oct – Nov 2019) % of residents feeling safe when outside in their local area Annual at night First time 77%
Page 96 Page reported (residents’ survey carried out Oct – Nov 2019) % overall resident satisfaction with their local area as a place Annual 88% satisfied with their local area as a place to to live First time 88% live. reported (residents’ survey carried out Oct – Nov 2019) % residents feeling they belong to their local community Annual First time 73% (residents’ survey carried out Oct reported – Nov 2019) % of residents who agree that their local area is a place where people from different ethnic Annual backgrounds get on well First time 53% together. reported (residents’ survey carried out Oct – Nov 2019) This is a measure to show the impact on attainment of disadvantaged pupils. It shows the percentage attainment gap between the children who are eligible for Free School Meals (FSM) % pupils achieving 9-5 in Annual against those that are not. A low percentage English and Maths (Free 22.5% Amber (2018/19) denotes good performance, as this represents a School Meal gap) small gap in attainment. Latest data from 2019 shows that an improvement by FSM pupils has seen the gap reduce from 24.5% which is better than national and other comparators. This measure shows the achievement gap for those achieving a good level of development in early learning goals, between children eligible for free school meals (a measure of disadvantage) % disadvantaged (FSM Gap) in Annual and those who are not. A low percentage 20.0% Achievement Across All Early (2018/19) Amber denotes good performance, as this represents a Learning 97 Page Goals small gap in attainment. From latest data from 2019 improvement by FSM pupils has seen the gap reduce from 22% to 20%. This is better than the South West and statistical neighbours, but not yet at national levels.
A single percentage for reading, writing and The gap is: Reading maths (RWM) combined is not provided at Key 21% (16% in 2018), Stage 1 but free school meals pupils’ attainment Writing 22% (19% at Key Stage 1 has declined from 2018 to 2019, in 2018), Maths whilst all other students’ attainment has KS1 disadvantaged (FSM) 23% (17% in 2018). improved. As a result, the gap has increased, attainment gap for expected Annual Red and is now larger than all regional and national standard in reading, writing and (A single percentage comparators. Support for schools in this area maths for reading writing and comes from two areas, strengthening the maths (RWM) support mechanisms for students through the combined is not new Children's Services locality model and also provided at Key Stage through a clearer collaborative model of school 1) support. Despite an improvement from 23% in 2018 to 22% in 2019 by disadvantaged pupils, both disadvantaged pupils and all other pupils attain KS2 disadvantaged (FSM) below all comparators. Support for schools in attainment gap for expected Annual 22.0% Red this area comes from two areas, strengthening standard in reading, writing and (2018/19) the support mechanisms for students through maths the new Children's Services locality model and also through a clearer collaborative model of school support. Rolling two year data Healthy life expectancy at birth based on the period: male & female averages for 2016-2018:
2016-2018 is 67 (female) Healthy life expectancy data the baseline 67 (female) Green This is statistically significantly different from the
(from 98 Page Public Health England) data period. England average for females of 63.9 64 (male) The next data 64 (male) period will England average for males is 63.4 cover 2017- 2019. 5. Staying Safe and Well Supporting plans: Our Dorset; Building Better Lives Exec Directors – Vivienne Broadhurst and Theresa Leavy. Portfolio Holders – Cllr Laura Miller and Cllr Andrew Parry Reporting Latest Measure Rating Commentary Frequency Data Performance monitoring regarding our delays was suspended Delayed transfers from Monthly N/A N/A at the beginning of the Coronavirus pandemic and there are no care plans to restart this yet. Efforts to encourage home care and supported living over Permanent admissions per 408.91 residential placements are reflected in the improvement of this 100K population to adults’ Monthly (June Amber figure. COVID-19 impact in care homes has also contributed to residential homes 2020) the reduction of permanent admissions. Pending data from an external provider to complete this Reablement effectiveness Monthly N/A N/A measure for the first quarter of 2020/21. This will be updated for Q2. Procedures and processes to admit children into care have
Page 99 Page been strengthened and continue to improve. We are now starting to see timeliness of proceedings improve as the impact 71 of the pandemic on proceedings reduces, which has resulted in (Q1 a slight improvement in the number of children exiting the care 2020/21) of the local authority. The number of children coming into care Rates of children in care Quarterly Red has stabilised, with a decrease in the number of adolescents per 10,000 (65 Q1 coming into our care. There are currently 482 children in care. 2019/20) We are focused on improving our planning, supporting children to go home where possible and putting in place a team to support families with children on the edge of care and anticipate that this will lead to a reduction in the numbers of children in care over the next 12 months. 300.4 (Q1 Focused work is underway in localities to ensure all children 2020/21) Rate of children in need per with a child in need plan for longer than 12 months, then 9 Quarterly Amber 10,000 (315.50 months, then 6 months are reviewed. The aim is to ensure we Q1 are supporting the right children in the right services. 2019/20) Reduction in rate of 25.9% In comparison to the same quarter last year this is improving Quarterly (Q1 Amber children re-referrals (27.3% last year). The instability around COVID-19 during the 2020/21) 5. Staying Safe and Well Supporting plans: Our Dorset; Building Better Lives Exec Directors – Vivienne Broadhurst and Theresa Leavy. Portfolio Holders – Cllr Laura Miller and Cllr Andrew Parry Reporting Latest Measure Rating Commentary Frequency Data past 3 months is likely to have impacted on the re referral rate (27.3% with increased concerns for vulnerable families and a lack of Q1 other services. 2019/20) There has been an increase in the number of young people who are not in education, employment or training since the beginning of the pandemic. This is in part due to fact that there have been fewer opportunities for re-engagement activities and tracking has been more difficult as a result of COVID-19. To % 16 and 17 year olds not 3.49% address this we have worked with providers to adapt their offer Page 100 Page in education, employment Quarterly (Q1 Red through risk assessment and increase the virtual offer. We are or training 2020/21) also seeking to ensure that young people that are most at risk of becoming not in employment, education or training have confirmed offers for September and are supported to make good transitions through the summer and undertaking promotional activity about the range of different options, including apprenticeships that are available to young people. COVID-19 is likely to have increased the number of children subject to a child protection plan. Child protection conferences have continued through the pandemic with a move to online Rate of children with a child Monthly 43.4 Amber conferences, timeliness has improved, and multi-agency protection plan per 10,000 (June 2020) engagement has been strong. We are seeking feedback from families on their experiences to support how we do this in the future. % residents feel that they Annual belong to the area First time 73% reported (residents’ survey carried out Oct – Nov 2019) School readiness: % 71.5% children with ‘a good level Annual 2018/19 Dorset improved from 2018 and is now on a par with national (academic Amber of development’ at early and South West, 1% below National. year) years foundation stage (70.0% 5. Staying Safe and Well Supporting plans: Our Dorset; Building Better Lives Exec Directors – Vivienne Broadhurst and Theresa Leavy. Portfolio Holders – Cllr Laura Miller and Cllr Andrew Parry Reporting Latest Measure Rating Commentary Frequency Data 2017/18) Attainment dipped in 2019 but is still above the national level. Through the new locality model we will be working more % children achieving basics Annual 40.8% closely with school leaders to understand the successes and (9-5 in English and Maths) (academic Amber 2018/19 needs for development of schools, whilst also supporting at Key Stage 4 year) children through inclusion work and challenge support to schools. Dorset has improved but remains below all national? comparators. Maths is the main priority. Teaching quality % achieving expected Annual 61% remains the key to improving outcomes for Dorset children. To standard at KS2 at reading, (academic Red 2018/19 this end we are supporting schools with a challenge and writing and maths year) Page 101 Page support programme, seeking the right support for schools which need help. % respondents who speak positively of Dorset Council Annual First time 30% (residents’ survey carried out reported Oct – Nov 2019) 2.04% Jan 2020 school Figures are on the increase, particularly at primary (0.75%). At % pupils with one or more census Secondary the rate (4.52%) is below National. A new digital episodes of fixed period School Term Red process has been developed to allow schools to inform the exclusions 1.40% council when a child is missing out on education, and work to May 2019 act on this is being developed within localities. school census 0.06Jan The percentage of children permanently excluded has risen 2020 school slightly over the last year in Dorset. The most recent annual Rate of permanent census comparisons from 2018 (compared a year in arrears) show exclusions from schools (all School Term Amber Dorset to be broadly in line with statistical neighbours, regional schools) 0.04 and national figures. A new digital process has been Jan 2019 developed to allow schools to inform the council when a child 5. Staying Safe and Well Supporting plans: Our Dorset; Building Better Lives Exec Directors – Vivienne Broadhurst and Theresa Leavy. Portfolio Holders – Cllr Laura Miller and Cllr Andrew Parry Reporting Latest Measure Rating Commentary Frequency Data school is missing out on education, and work to act on this is being census developed within localities. 72.9% Jan 2020 The percentage of children with good attendance has risen school slightly over the last year in Dorset. The most recent annual census comparisons looking at overall absence, show Dorset slightly % children with good School Term Amber below statistical neighbours, regional and national figures. A attendance at school 72.7% new digital process has been developed to allow schools to May 2019 inform the council when a child is missing out on education, school and work to act on this is being developed within localities. Page 102 Page census Dorset Council’s Plan 2020 - 2024 Page 103 Page
Page 104 Page move topeople, ratherthanpeoplemoving tojobs’. online. We needtomaximisetechnologyso that ‘jobs to enablepeopletravel lessandaccessopportunities drive theroll outoffullfibre technologyand5GinDorset infrastructurethe transport –thatunderpinsit.We will our economicgrowth andthe infrastructure – particularly involve somedifficultconversations aboutthenature of We must all challengeourselves todomore andthiswill you, ourresidents andpartners. require ashared commitmentandongoingdialogue with will make asignificant changeinourapproach andwill strategy andactionplaniscurrently beingdeveloped. It foreseeable future. Aclimate andecologicalchange must informthecouncil’s decisionsand actionsforthe It isclearthattheclimateandecologicalemergency continueto facesomevery significantchallenges, locally,nationallyandglobally. government in2019simplifiedadministrative butwe structures,andwasabigstepforward, ofthecommunity. OurambitionistoThe reorganisationoflocal putDorset Councilattheheart from thepublic,private andvoluntary sectors. aconversationwithresidents,town andparishcouncils,businessesrepresentatives Itincorporates thepoliticalvisionofyournewcouncillors,andhasbeendeveloped following This istheDorset Council Plan,whichsetsoutourambitionsforthenextfouryears. Welcome • • • grow which: forservices Financial constraints remain,anddemand continuesto economic growth. suitable housing,theskillsagendaandsustainable stay for, sowewillalsofocusourenergies ondeveloping people tostay in Dorset, we must give them something to deprived areas ofthecounty. Ifwewantouryoung educational outcomesremain low, inmore particularly and wellbeing.Levels ofobesitycontinue to rise,and but alsotoimprove theiraspirations,education,health people, notonlytosafeguard theirfuture environment, We must work closelywithDorset’s children andyoung disabilities. vulnerableolderpeople andpeoplewith support keep children safe from riskof harm; and disabilities; childrensupport withspecial educationalneeds and Dorset - A great place to live, work &visit
Dorset agreat placetolive, work andvisit. you andyour communities,sowecan continuetomake Please keep theminformedaboutthe issuesthataffect your area andrespond toyour queriesand concerns. Council ward councillor–they are there torepresent or concerns,pleasemake contactwithyour localDorset In themeantime,ifyou have anyquestions, comments monitor howwe’re doing. communities todeliver ourshared ambitionsandto need toworktogetherwithresidents, and partners directorate plansasthey andservice develop. We will This isahigh-level willbedetailedin plan–delivery of ourcounty. forthebenefit better funding,andworkwithourpartners interests ofDorset,advocate nationallytheneedfor demands, pressures andrisks.We willchampionthe medium-term financialplanwhichsetsoutourbudget In response, thecouncilhasdeveloped afouryear
Leader of DorsetCouncil Cllr SpencerFlower,
2 Dorset Council’s Plan 2020 - 2024
3
Page 105 Page Dorset Council’s Plan 2020 - 2024 of ourresidents blackandminorityethnic. The populationispredominantly whiteBritish,with4.4% generally lowinDorset. Crimeis andessentialservices. housing, transport rural deprivation due to isolation and difficulty accessing (mainly Weymouth Butthere andPortland). isalsosome there are pockets ofdeprivation, mostlyinurbanareas The Dorsetruralidyllcanconcealhiddendeprivation: years. expected toseeamarginal declineover thenext25 among over 65s.Dorset’s workingagepopulationis expectancy. Thegreatest ofpopulationgrowth part is driven by peoplemoving intothecountyandlongerlife from thearea. Thepopulationcontinuestogrow slowly, number isincreasing. Younger peopleoftenmove away 7,000 peopleinDorsetlivingwithdementia,andthe and relatively rates.Currently lowbirth there are over retirement –ithasalarge populationofolderpeople, Dorset isanattractive place forpeopletosettleintheir (compared to18%inEnglandandWales). residents, 28%ofwhomare aged65andolder Dorset (Councilarea) hasapopulationof375,000 Population Understanding Dorset historic environment Natural, geologicaland around 10,000listedbuildings. England, awellpreserved pre-historic landscapeand in twentyofalltheprotected ancientmonumentsin Dorset alsohasarichhistoricenvironment, withone development. available landfordelivering housingandemployment special placebutalsopresent challengesintermsof These designationstogethermarkDorsetasa heath inEurope. Dorset hasoneofthelargest areas ofprotected lowland is protected asaSiteofSpecial ScientificInterest; and Outstanding NaturalBeautydesignation;7%ofDorset England. Over halfofDorsetiscovered by theArea of a UNESCONaturalWorld HeritageSite–theonlyonein 95 milesofcoastinDorsetandDevon are classifiedas Dorset’s natural environment isagreat asset. Dorset Councilarea have accesstofull-fibre broadband. broadband.access tosuperfast 3.1%ofpremises inthe 95.1% ofpremises intheDorsetCouncilarea have Dorset hasnomotorway butover 2,500miles ofroads. than tentimeshigherlowerendearningsinDorset. keyworkers. In2017,lowerendhousepriceswere more with affordability issuesformanyyoung people and Earnings are belowaverage andhousepricesare high including stone,sand/gravel andoil. industries. Thearea isrichinvaluable minerals, wage economywithtourismandagriculture significant But there isalsoacontinuingseasonal,lowskill, advanced engineeringandmanufacturingbusinesses. 143,000 jobs.Dorsethasanabove average numberof aroundeconomy isworth £7.1billonandprovides micro firmsand fewer than1%are large firms.Dorset’s Dorset. 20,000businessesare basedinDorset:86%are retail, educationandhospitalityare allbigemployers in economy hasaproductivity gap.Manufacturing, health, Employment inDorset ishighbut,like theUK,our Economy andinfrastructure
Page 106 Page Our priorities Strong, healthy residents and partners partners and residents communities to build and maintain strong communities lead fulfilling lives the best start and the best start We will work with where people get Staying safe and well residents to have a good We will work with all our
quality of life
providers, community land trusts and local C l
i
housing partners to deliver affordable,housing partners m We will work with registered housing a
t Cl
e ima A greatplace a t suitable and decent housing
Suitable housing e
to live,work
n a d n
d
Dorset - E E
& visit c c
o o
l l
o
o g
g
i i c
c growth, increasing productivity and the a We will deliver sustainable economic
a number of high quality jobs in Dorset, l
l E
Economic growth
creating great places to live, E m
m e
r
g
e e
n work and visit r c ge y ncy environment enhancing Dorset’s deliver sustainable development while protecting and We will help to environment Unique
4 Dorset Council’s Plan 2020 - 2024
5
Page 107 Page Dorset Council’s Plan 2020 - 2024
Dorset refers tothe newDorset Council Area thatcame intoeffect indicated. Poster 1April 2019,unless otherwise produced: Sept2019 Data underlying theinfographics isprovided by theResearch Team. For more information contact Economic growth picture –thecurrent The rate of creation of new businesses is below the national averageyears and has changedlittle in the lastfour Number of employees per business Dorset Dorset (per 10,000workingagepeople) Workforce aged 50+ 36% 72 New businesses
England Dorset England
28% 7.3 7.3 England 97 9.5
Value produced for every hour worked Dorset 95% Dorset Superfast broadbandSuperfast coverage This gives a productivity £1.7 billion Dorset gap of Average weeklyearnings £26.70 [email protected]. *Dorset LocalEnterprisePartnership Area (DLEP). £523 £523 £
GB £571 UK £33.70 £ UK
96%
people will retire Leaving 173,000jobstobefilled 150,000
*By 2029...
new jobscreated Of these jobs... Of these jobs... Require BTEC/ Require GCSE level orabove A-Level or 23,000 above 60% 80%
Page 108 Page • • • • • • How willwedo it? • • • • • What willwedo? highqualityjobsinDorset,creatinggreatplacesto live,workand visit. Wewilldeliversustainableeconomicgrowth, increasingproductivity andthenumberof Our priorities to raise career aspirations and improve skills Work with schools,colleges, universities and businesses care sector commercial aquaculture, opportunities, tourism and the engineering/manufacturing, agritech, maritime growthSupport in key sectors, including advanced Park, our designated Enterprise Zone Enable growth of good quality jobs at Dorset Innovation congestion Government and focussing on schemes to ease of journey times by working with providers, lobbying Improve and reliability public transport rail services, Strategy in 2020, and a new Local Plan by 2024 Adopt a Local Industrial Strategy and Economic Growth skills growthSupport in Dorset’s low carbon economy and mobility Enhance people’s aspirations and skills to improve social and digital connectivity Improve the provision and use of sustainable transport job creationin turn support the growth Support of new and existing businesses, and inward investment Promote Dorset as a place to do business and attract enable people to travel less and access opportunities online enable peopletotravel online lessandaccessopportunities Drive the roll out of fullfibre technology and 5Gin Dorsetto Economic growth • • • • • • • • • Who willwework with? • • • Digital infrastructure providers Town and parish councils Commerce networks, including Chambers of Business support Investors and developers Government departments Local business community Schools, colleges, and universities Dorset Local Nature Partnership Dorset Local Enterprise Partnership their carbon footprint businesses and otherorganisationsSupport to reduce creation and take-up of apprenticeships across Dorset own workforce, to improve and work with partners the Promote apprenticeships to develop the council’s goods and services skills development through council procurement of innovation Stimulate local business opportunities, and
6 Dorset Council’s Plan 2020 - 2024
7
Page 109 Page Dorset Council’s Plan 2020 - 2024 Dorset refers tothe newDorset Council area thatcame intoeffect indicated. 1April2019, unless otherwise Data underlying theinfographics isprovided by theResearch Team. For more information contact (natural assets, agriculture, forestry, fishing, energy, tourism) Unique environment picture –the current
2019 2011 Publicly available charging points in Dorset Nine outoften Dorset environmental economy 1 and supports up to and supports 15% ofthelocaleconomy decision tolive inDorset the environment wasan important factorintheir important **Living in Dorset ...is valued atupto Dorsetresidents said
61,000 jobs
30 *Renewable energy production in Dorset “effectively zero emission” by 2040 Native species livingin Dorset
All newcarsandvans shouldbe Car and van emissions Government targets: [email protected]. *Dorset LocalEnterprisePartnership Area (DLEP).**Dorset CountyCouncil. Birds Dragonflies 74% 53%
Butterflies 2011 1% Mammals
Reptiles 2016 5.5% 90% 93% 100% Current andpredicted ULEVs registered inDorset Areas ofOutstandingNatural Beauty(AONB) Ultra LowEmission Vehicles (ULEVs) covering 54%oftheDorsetCouncilarea **Amount of waste sent to landfill Dorset hasEngland’s onlynatural World HeritageSiteandtwo
2008 Natural status 70% reduction 1,100 2019 2018 23,000 2029
Page 110 Page • • • • • • • • • What willwedo? Our priorities renewable energy thedevelopmentSupport ofappropriately located environment tohelpkeep itcleanandsafe Build andcelebrate communityprideinour Protect Dorset’s naturalbiodiversity investment, tourism andaskilledworkforce Provide anenvironment thatattracts business ourpriorities support Capitalise on Dorset’s environmental unique assetsto and ecologicalchange communities torespondLead andsupport toclimate increase reuse andrecycling Promote behavioural change toreduce wasteand historic andculturalenvironments inwaysDeliver services that protect ournatural, greenspaces Improve and access toourcoast, countryside Unique environment andenhancingDorset’s environment. Wewillhelpto deliversustainabledevelopment whileprotecting • • • • • • • • How willwedoit? and improving air, land andwaterquality Protect ourenvironment from harmby monitoring projects theEnvironmentSupport onfloodprotection Agency improvements through agri-environment schemes and landmanagerstomake environmental local farmers,woodland owners,forestersSupport we own Responsibly managethespaces, buildingsandland Deliver ourpollinatorsaction plan cleansing strategy Deliver ahighways verge managementandstreet environment Actively respond toproposals thatimpactonthe parish councilsandGovernment townand particularly working withourpartners, Develop aclimate and ecological emergency strategy • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Who willweworkwith? Significant landowners organisations Voluntary, communityandsocialenterprise Town andparishcouncils Dorset andWiltshire Fire andRescueService Dorset Police Government departments Highways England Historic England Environment Agency Marine ManagementOrganisation Natural England National Trust Dorset Wildlife Trust Jurassic CoastTrust Dorset Local Nature Partnership Areas ofOutstanding Natural Beautypartnerships
8 Dorset Council’s Plan 2020 - 2024
9
Page 111 Page Dorset Council’s Plan 2020 - 2024 Dorset refers tothe newDorset Council area that came intoeffect indicated. 1April 2019,unless otherwise Data underlying theinfographics isprovided by theResearch Team. For more information contact picture –thecurrent Suitable housing social rented housingisforone-bedroom homes 7,000 properties over thenext6years We willseeanincrease ofaround More thanhalf 1 bed 57% 176,000 Properties in Dorset Bedroom demand 2017 2 bed 25% of thedemandfor
3 bed 14% Dorset hadapproximately 35-40rough sleepersin November 2018,adecrease on theprevious year 4 bed Dorset 4%
150%
Between 2010-2017
increase Rough sleepers
England This makes it 169% 65+ year olds
more than earnings average Housing supplyneedstoreflect this Population change 2019 - 2029 x10 Average property prices are...
increase to jointheproperty market 20% very hardforfirsttimebuyers [email protected]. Dorset increase Working agepopulation 3% more than There are earnings average decrease x8 265 homelesshouseholdsinDorset Homeless households England
Greatest demandforsocialrented housing is in Detached houses £398,000 average West Dorset,Weymouth price type ofproperty inDorset Property types Area demand House are themostcommon
£162,000 average price and Portland
Flat
Page 112 Page • • • • • • • How willwedoit? • • • • • • • What willwedo? to deliveraffordable,suitableanddecenthousing. partners Wewillworkwithregisteredhousingproviders, communitylandtrustsandlocalhousing Our priorities Suitable housing Homes Dorset ( assistance with energy efficiency from Healthy Increase the number receiving ofhouseholds developments inlinewiththeLocalPlan Maximise the amount ofaffordable housingonnew Reduce homelessness social rented housing shared homes,key ownership, starter worker housing, Increase thenumber ofnew homesofalltenures e.g. company HomesDorset Develop abusinessplanforouremerging housing Provide homesby 2024 inline withlandsupplytarget (www.dorsetcouncil.gov.uk/building-better-lives) provide qualityhousingandcare forlocalpeople Deliver the Building BetterLives programme thatwill anewDorsetAdopt CouncilLocalPlanby 2024 the housingsector Promote energy efficiency and green initiatives within appropriate legislation Raise standards ofprivately rented homes,using peopletoaccessthe rightaccommodation Support long-termemptypropertiesBring backintouse creation ofmore socialrented housing affordable andsustainablehousing,includingthe Maximise the useofcouncilassets todevelop Implement a new single Dorset Council housing register www.healthyhomesdorset.org.uk) • • • • • • • • • • Who willweworkwith? Community Land TrustsCommunity Armed Forces Dorset Police England Homes NHS partners builders House Private landlords organisations Voluntary, communityandsocialenterprise Town andparishcouncils Registered housing providers
10 Dorset Council’s Plan 2020 - 2024
11
Page 113 Page Dorset Council’s Plan 2020 - 2024 Dorset refers tothe newDorset Council area that came intoeffect indicated. 1April 2019,unless otherwise Data underlying theinfographics isprovided by theResearch Team. For more information contact Strong, picture healthy –thecurrent communities long-term health conditions and disabilities 85+ year olds in Dorset 65+ year olds with Dorset Over thenext
10 years Over thenext 31% ten years increase 20%
increase 12% (workingage) households Workless households 12,900 households
England Dorset 10 outof11deprived areas are in Dorset Dorsethasfew deprived areas innationalterms, but…deprivation areas isconcentratedincertain years old
80 81 76 77 78 79 82 83 84 85
Dorset’s residents enjoy long life expectancy Life expectancy Deprived areas
[email protected]. England 66% Weymouth &Portland Regular physical activity (adults)
years old 84 80 76 77 78 79 81 82 85 83
England Dorset
group orperson (eg a particular (eg aparticular 17% Personal targeted for abuse) Environmental 7,900 2019 (eg graffiti) Anti-social behaviour in Dorset 65+ year olds with dementia 10%
Dorset 71% Dorset
10,200 2029 73% Nuisance neighbours) (eg noisy
Page 114 Page • • • • • • • What willwedo? Our priorities Strong, healthy communities digital linksbetweencommunities Keep and Dorset connected, withbettertransport narrowing thegapfor themostvulnerable Improve outcomesforchildren, andfocuson greatest challenges Provide to communitieswiththe additional support reduce differences betweenareas Aim toincrease people’s healthy life expectancyand activelyparticipate intheircommunity peopletofeelEnable asense ofbelongingandto and active communities tobeconnected, inclusive, safeSupport environmental wellbeingofthearea Work to improve theeconomic, social,culturaland • • • • • • How willwedoit? • • • • • ( weight, quitsmokingandreduce theiralcoholintake LiveWell Dorsettobemore active, maintainhealthy Increase by thenumber supported ofpeople Help ensure foodavailable to buyandeatissafe people andadults Improve forchildren, mentalhealthsupport young entitled to Help peopletoclaimandreceive benefitsthey are social isolation community activitiestoconnectpeopleandtackle Provide aninclusive andaccessible directory of think isimportant and communitiestoidentifydeliver whatthey Work collaboratively withtown andparishcouncils skills reduce loneliness andenablepeopletolearnnew volunteeringEncourage to help buildcommunities, themintheirwork and support enterprise sectorisbetterplaced toprovide aservice Recognise whenthevoluntary, community andsocial parks andcountryside Provide andmaintain access torightsofway, country schemes andcommunitytransport integrated busservices Provide safe and useablecycle ways andfootpaths, scammers Protect peoplefrom harm from rogue tradersand www.livewelldorset.co.uk communities where people get the best start andleadfulfillinglives. communitieswherepeoplegetthebeststart to buildandmaintainstrong Wewillworkwithresidentsandpartners )
• • • • • • • • • • • • Residents • Who willweworkwith? Active Dorset England Sport and Poole Council ChristchurchOther councilsincludingBournemouth, providers andothertransport Bus companies for WorkDepartment andPensions organisations Voluntary, communityandsocialenterprise Dorset andWiltshire Fire andRescueService NHS partners Town andparishcouncils Dorset Police partners andsporting Cultural providers Schools, colleges, universities andothertraining 12 Dorset Council’s Plan 2020 - 2024
13
Page 115 Page Dorset Council’s Plan 2020 - 2024 Dorset refers tothe newDorset Council area that came intoeffect indicated. 1April 2019,unless otherwise Data underlying theinfographics isprovided by theResearch Team. For more information contact picture Staying safeandwell–thecurrent adult safeguarding andmore informedreporting This reflects anincreased culturalawareness of Adult safeguarding concerns full-time socialcare People whoworkin People workingin Dorset the supplychain Children in care care inDorset children in 470
2016/17 2,263
Social care services 3,000 8,250
2017/18 2,656 This is worth to the local economy
£330 million This increase willputpressure ontheseservices
are 65+years old More than Dorset Services for older people Services Child protection rate 1in4people [email protected]. *Dorset LocalEnterprisePartnership Area (DLEP).
44 45 England Dorset
per 10,000children per 10,000children Technical/professional
social care jobs Over thenext health and 25 years 20,000 47% *Social care jobs over the next 10 years
increase
71% Dorset development atearlyyears foundation People aged65+livinginacare home stage, justundertheEnglandaverage ofchildren achieved a Level of development 3,100 2019 Caring/personal Care homes service jobs service 4,600
3,700 2029 good level of
Page 116 Page • • • • • • • • How willwedo it? • • • • • • What willwedo? Our priorities Staying safeandwell Design services with people,not for them Design services children and young people Improve the way we work to deliver better outcomes for independence explore innovative ways to improve quality of life and Use technology –and help others to use it - to opportunity Provide at the earliest information, advice and support Develop youthservices support children and young people Increase the types of care placements available for children with complex communication and learning needs Provide more specialist education within Dorset for Provide good quality social care services them from being exploited Work to protect children and vulnerable adults and prevent social enterprise organisations capacity in voluntary,Build and support community and early helpas needs arise Focus on getting it right firsttime, proactively providing possible, provide high quality care independently in their own homes and, when this isn’t older people and disabled people to live Support they’re capable of Ensure our children achieve the best educational results best they can be communities thrive, and families are to be the supported Make Dorset the best place to be a child; where • • • • Prisons • • • Regulators • • • • • • Who willwework with? • • • agoodqualityoflife. Wewillworkwithallourresidentsto have Dorset Police Town and parishcouncils Local Enterprise Partnership providersService Housing associations Dorset and Wiltshire Fire and RescueService Residents and communities organisations Voluntary, community and social enterprise Police, probation and youth offending Schools, colleges anduniversities NHS partners ( work together through the ‘Our Dorset’ partnership Improve how social care, education and healthservices at a local leveldeliver services Target our resources in theareas of greatest need and vulnerable adults Raise public awareness of exploitation of children and ourdorset.nhs.uk) 14 Dorset Council’s Plan 2020 - 2024 Dorset Council’s values, behaviours and principles
As we have come together to create a new organisation, we have defined our principles and values for our journey ahead. This is the focus of our transformation plan which will support us to achieve the council’s priorities by 2024.
Our values Our principles
We are an advocate for Dorset on a local, national and global stage Employer Customer of choice focused We work together with our communities and our partners to make things happen
We put people first and design services around their needs now and in future
Page 117 Page We are open, accessible and accountable
We use time and money wisely
We value people and build on their strengths
Our behaviours Sustainable Effective organisation and modern
Our equality objectives
• Fostering good relations with and within the community • Developing and supporting a diverse workforce • Developing, commissioning and delivering inclusive and responsive services Dorset Council is committed to: A skilled and confident workforce which will be well trained, supported and enabled to take decisions and operate efficiently within a clear accountability structure. The behaviours, attitudes and approaches we take are key to our success.
15 Date published March 2020 Page 118 Page
dorsetcouncil.gov.uk dorsetcounciluk
@dorsetcounciluk @dorsetcounciluk Agenda Item 9
Cabinet 8 September 2020 Digital Platform
For Decision
Portfolio Holder: Cllr P Wharf, Corporate Development and Change
Local Councillor(s): All
Executive Director: Aidan Dunn, Executive Director, Corporate Development
Report Author: Lisa Trickey Title: Service Manager – Digital Strategy and Design Tel: 01305 228598 Email: [email protected]
Report Status: Public
Recommendation:
That Cabinet is asked to consider the content of this report in respect of establishing a contract for the provision of a digital platform and that Cabinet agree:
1. To complete a procurement process. 2. A further step of making any contract award should be delegated to the Portfolio Holder for Corporate Development and Change in consultation with the Executive Director for Corporate Development.
Reason for Recommendation:
Implementation of a digital platform is a key enabler for the customer workstream in the transformation programme and will support contract convergence and application rationalisation work releasing savings.
1. Executive Summary
In order to deliver transformation a digital platform is a core component to enable our evolving customer access strategy. It will help Dorset council to join up its
Page 119 understanding of customers, consistently measure service performance, and provide a customer account for people to request and receive updates on council services.
In addition, the platform will play a key role in streamlining legacy software contracts providing an opportunity to explore further savings, reduce vendor lock in and provide better value for money.
Initial procurement work has established that a suitable supplier can be sought via the Crown Commercial Services (CCS) G-Cloud 11 framework which will allow the Council to enter into a contract for an initial 1 year period, with provision to extend up to 2 years; subject to satisfactory performance and it meeting the Council’s future needs.
This decision is being brought to Cabinet as a key decision as the total contract value is a maximum of £540,000 over a potential 3 year term.
2. Financial Implications
The licensing cost of the platform will be funded from existing ICT budgets as acquisition of the new platform will enable existing legacy products to be switched off.
Transformation funds of £450k have been identified to fund the implementation of the platform on an ‘invest to save’ basis. Cautious estimates indicate the potential of a minimum saving of £310k per annum, equating to £930k over 3 years.
3. Climate implications
A digital platform can have a positive impact on the climate where people are using online services rather than traveling to an office for a face to face service and it removes the need for paper. The solution is software as service preventing any additional impact on the council data centre carbon footprint.
4. Other Implications
None.
5. Risk Assessment
Having considered the risks associated with this decision using the Council's approved risk management methodology, it is the officer's opinion that there are no High risks that need to be reported.
Page 120 6. Equalities Impact Assessment
An equalities impact assessment is not required as the council are not directly changing any service offering or interface with the public or employees.
As services are moved onto the platform consideration will be made in each case for the development of an individual equalities impact assessment.
7. Appendices
Appendix A – Digital Platform Requirements Appendix B – Platform candidate processes/systems
8. Background Papers
MHCLG Local Digital Declaration: https://localdigital.gov.uk/wp- content/uploads/2019/05/Local-Digital-Declaration-July-2018.pdf
9. Background
9.1 Digital platforms are particularly important in the modern world as they allow organisations to change and adapt and enable the Council to deliver on the commitments made in the digital declaration. 9.2 A digital platform could fundamentally change the way Dorset Council captures, stores and uses customer data across its services, supporting delivery of our evolving customer access strategy and underpinning our transformation. To align with this, it will be known as ‘our customer platform’ rather than ‘digital platform’. 9.3 Implementing a platform is not a project; it is a commitment to work in a different way on an ongoing basis. Transformational organisations commit to working in this way to drive out benefit, cost and improve customer experience. 9.4 Instead of business areas continuing to purchase line of business applications, portals, and apps, the platform will be adopted first, and alternatives only procured if it is not deemed suitable, this will enable us to rationalise our application portfolio and join up our understanding of our customers across the council to provide a better customer experience. 9.5 The implementation of a digital platform has been identified as fundamental to the Council’s digital transformation, and has the support of the Senior Leadership Team and the Transformation Board.
Page 121 10. Sourcing approach
10.1 This is not about looking for a product, but instead a toolset to improve our integration approach and enable development of capabilities that can be re-used across the Council to provide a consistent, personalised, and good customer experience. Looking for an open system that will future proof the Council, be scalable and flexible to support its smart place vision. 10.2 Selection of a platform has been based on the requirements in Appendix A, developed through early work on the customer workstream, talking to other organisations and understanding the marketplace over the last couple of years. 10.3 The Government Crown Commercial Services digital marketplace, G- Cloud Framework 11 has been used to search for suppliers, evaluate cost and functionality available. This initial search has established a preferred supplier that is able to meet the technical requirements of the platform. 10.4 The preferred supplier works with an established marketplace leader ‘Liferay’ which is based on ‘open standards’ to provide the benefit of low code capability through the development of ‘cubes’. Cubes are specific bits of functionality or a service that another customer has developed, for example: Case management Website search Active directory integrator Order new bins and boxes View my council tax account Book a site inspection 10.6 The concept is any customer can create a cube which other customers can then access and use. This keeps cost down, provides pace, and removes duplication. Anything developed on the Liferay platform whilst under contract would be joint intellectual property to enable sharing with others in the spirit of the digital declaration. 10.7 All development is published on Github (a publically accessible software development platform) as part of commitment to open source. If the Council later chose to end the contract, it can still licence to use Liferay and continue to use everything that had been created and re-used. The Council would own its own development.
Page 122 11. Implementation approach
11.1 The proposal is to award a one-year contract with the ability to extend the contract for up to an additional two years in line with the G-Cloud framework terms and conditions. 11.2 In the first 6-9 months the Council would start to build knowledge and understanding of the platform to develop plans to migrate and divest from existing products such as the website content management system, customer relationship management application, and deliver the customer account. 11.3 Existing cubes would be deployed, and new cubes created with the migration of our e-forms tested. Exploration would take place of the potential applications that could be accommodated in the platform as part of the contract convergence work led by the Service Manager Commercial and Procurement and technical convergence work led by the Head of ICT, building on the items listed in Appendix B. 11.4 Work would take place with the customer transformation workstream as it develops, to shift those services that are not yet online automating them as much as possible and improving those that are already online to make them as easy as possible to maximise use and reduce cost of service provision. 11.5 There is the need to prioritise and resource the work effectively establishing a team to work on the platform using a mix of existing and fixed term resource to provide the capacity and give some momentum and pace to the work. 11.6 Government Service Standards will be fully embraced and embedded doing the user research, thinking end to end services, and adopting agile development approaches. 12. Cost Benefit
12.1 The licensing cost of the platform will be funded from existing ICT budgets as acquisition of the new platform will enable existing legacy products to be switched off. The total contract value would be up to £540k over a 3 year term.
12.2 There will be a need for additional capacity whilst we develop our skills and knowledge to use the platform effective and enable product transition. Transformation funds of £450k have been set aside to enable the recruitment of a small team on a fixed term basis.
Page 123 12.3 In order to deliver digital transformation a platform is a core component. In addition, it will play a key role in streamlining legacy software contracts providing an opportunity to explore further savings, reduce vendor lock in and provide better value for money. 12.4 The savings to be delivered by the platform are more difficult to determine, the platform is a piece of technology architecture that is largely enabling rather than delivering benefit. The types of benefit that can be anticipated are:
● Efficiency savings through reduction in failure demand, removal of manuals tasks and rekeying data, reduction in paper ● Helps to drive take up of online services reducing the cost of delivery ● Increased customer satisfaction through personalisation and well designed, accessible services ● Ability to generate greater income ● Enables targeting of messages to cohorts of customers, data targeted campaigns ● Enables reporting across all customers, improving understanding, prediction – managing resource etc. ● Allows iterative incremental changes and improvements to be implemented quickly and cheaply. 12.5 Cautious estimates indicate the potential of a minimum saving of £310k per annum, equating to £930k over 3 years. This has been validated against other local authorities who have published savings from similar projects, confidence of this figure and the cashable element will increase once an enabling customer delivery model has been approved. 12.6 Over time this may be supplemented by savings in service budgets from migrating and switching off some of the legacy systems as contracts expire.
Footnote: Issues relating to financial, legal, environmental, economic and equalities implications have been considered and any information relevant to the decision is included within the report.
Page 124 Appendix A – Platform requirements
1. Can easily and quickly build automated end to end services providing an integrated experience regardless of channel used (online, face to face, telephony, social media, web chat) 2. Enable a single view of the transactions and interactions a customer has with the Council 3. The platform must enable personalisation of web content and services to be provided to customers 4. Customers must be able to access the platform using a single account (businesses, people, visitors) with the ability to transact without a customer record or account for certain items, or use their own online accounts e.g. facebook login, google 5. Capabilities to manage customer contact, case management, website content, workflow and electronic forms 6. Work with the Councils chosen components which deliver common cross organisation capability: including but not limited to e-Payments, Booking Engines, Notification Tools and GIS maps 7. Have an open architecture, enabling the council to send messages to and receive messages from line of business applications and Internet of Things devices 8. Adhere to GDS design standards, ensuring look and feel is consistent and flexible enough to support services that are commercial in nature or use different URLs & microsites 9. Provide reporting and analytics capabilities 10. Enable re-use and sharing with other Councils 11. Must be accessible - minimum of AA WCAG guidelines and compliant with the technology code of practice 12. Enable partners, providers, and voluntary/third sector users external to the Council working with us to deliver the services we are responsible for to the community at no extra cost 13. Conform to required GDPR legislation and facilitate FOI requests 14. Be device agnostic, mobile responsive, and the most commonly supported browsers. 15. Suppliers must be actively investing / upgrading in the platform roadmap and able to provide a history of this 16. The data stored within the system must remain the Council's property and be removable / transferrable by the Council without having to pay for the privilege 17. The platform must be supplier agnostic to enable support to be provided by different providers 18. The supplier should provide evidence of market leading characteristics and capabilities demonstrating innovation
Page 125 Appendix B – Platform candidate processes/systems
New requests
Parish Councillor register of interest Permit requests – country parks, water sports etc. Avon Heath, appointment booking, online payments Vexatious customers Planning transformation Electoral roll annual canvas EHCP case management S2P hub processes Car Parking convergence Highways and property claim process Licensing convergence Pool car booking Social work academy Waste permit application
Contract expiry opportunities
The Council’s contracts database has been reviewed and identified the potential opportunities for the digital platform rather than re-procure.
Page 126 Agenda Item 10
Cabinet 8 September 2020 Extension to Low Carbon Dorset programme
For Decision
Portfolio Holder: Cllr R Bryan, Highways, Travel and Environment
Local Councillor(s): County Wide
Executive Director: John Sellgren, Executive Director of Place
Report Author: Antony Littlechild Title: Low Carbon Dorset Extension Tel: 01305 224802 Email: [email protected]
Report Status: Public
Recommendation: To approve an extension of the Low Carbon Dorset programme using European Regional Development Funding, pending contract.
Reason for Recommendation:
1. Executive Summary
Low Carbon Dorset is externally funded by the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) and was launched in April 2018 to run until March 2021. The programme provides support to Dorset based Business, Community and Public Sector organisations to identify and deliver energy efficiency and renewable energy projects to reduce their carbon footprint. Support is provided in the form of free technical advice to help identify opportunities and a grant fund providing 40% of the costs of any eligible project.
Dorset Council is the accountable body for the programme and has a contract with the Ministry of Communities Housing and Local Government (MHCLG) to deliver the programme outcomes within a total budget of £6.44million. Delivery of the programme is overseen by an internal programme board.
The programme has been highly successful, and nearly fully subscribed. Over 350 organisations have been supported to deliver over 85 low carbon projects
Page 127 across Dorset, Bournemouth and Poole worth £5.4 million. This will result in 3.15 million of match funding from beneficiaries, 111 businesses supported, 3 new low carbon products developed, 3.4 MW of new renewable energy capacity, 55 houses with improved energy efficiency, 267,713 kWhr/yr energy saved in public buildings, 3,824 Tonnes carbon emission reduced /yr in Dorset.
Further ERDF funding became available in July 2019 and Dorset Council applied for an additional £5.86 million to extend the project to 2023 and expand its delivery. This was a two-stage application process which is now reaching completion and it is anticipated that the application will be successful, and a contract will be received shortly for signature by Dorset Council.
This paper updates the cabinet on the Low Carbon Dorset programme and its potential extension and seek approval to sign any forth coming contract.
2. Financial Implications
There is no additional direct cost to Dorset Council as the accountable body responsible for delivery of the extended Low Carbon Dorset programme. However, there is a potential financial risk if delivery of the extension where unsuccessful.
The total budget for the extension is £11.72 million. This is broken down as £132k Overheads £1.17m Delivery costs (Staff, Consultancy, Travel, Communications and marketing) £10.41m Grant programme
The European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) will provide 50% of all project costs (£5.859 million). The remaining 50% match funding will be provided in two ways – i) A small proportion of indirect match funding from Dorset Council to provide 50% of overheads (office accommodation, legal, etc..). This is equivalent to £66,062. This is effectively match in kind. ii) Direct Match funding provided by grant beneficiaries. This will provide 50% match funding for the grant programme (£5.859m) and 50% match funding for the project delivery costs (£585k)
The financial model for the programme relies on the successful delivery of the grant programme to generate match funding to cover the project delivery costs. Grants are provided for 40% of a beneficiary’s project only when it has been successfully completed, fully paid for and the required evidence provided. Dorset Council can use this evidence to claim 50% of the project costs from the ERDF MHCLG. The 10% difference covers the match funding for project delivery.
Page 128 Potential Financial Risk
If no grants were allocated but delivery costs still accrued by Dorset Council, only 50% of these costs could be recouped directly from the ERDF. If the project ran its full course and accrued delivery costs with no grant income, the maximum theoretical financial exposure to Dorset Council could be up to £585k.
This risk is however, mitigated through the following:- i) The grant spend is closely monitored to ensure match is generated to cover delivery costs. If no grants were being taken up then the programme would be stopped, limiting any financial liability. ii) The current phase of the programme will end with surplus match in the region of £100k, this will cover the delivery costs for at least 6 months, even in the event of no further grant applications. iii) Demand of the programme is very high. The current programme is fully allocated, and we already have an immediate pipeline of over £500k of projects and a number of significant scale projects in the pipeline (est £6 million) for the next 6-12 months providing the extension is approved. iv) Not all of the grant budget needs to be allocated to cover the full costs of programme delivery. To generate the match funds required only £5.85 million of an available £10.41 million grant budget would need to be allocated.
These active management steps will minimise any risk. The actual financial risk would therefore be low.
3. Climate implications
The expansion of the Low Carbon Dorset programme directly supports the delivery of Dorset Council’s Climate and Ecological emergency strategy and is identified within the strategy as a key action, helping to deliver in three of the 8 action areas - buildings, economy and renewable energy.
The specific purpose of the Low Carbon Dorset programme is to support organisations to reduce their carbon footprint through the installation of energy efficiency measures and renewable energy technologies such as solar panel. As well as support a small number of businesses develop a new low carbon product.
The extended programme will enable a significant increase in technical support available and expand the low carbon grant fund to enable support of over £18million of low carbon projects in Dorset, reducing Dorset’s carbon footprint by at least 7,204 tonnes of CO2e per year, by June 2023.
Page 129 Although this is a small impact on Dorset’s overall carbon footprint, a key role of the Low Carbon Dorset programme is to promote best practice and encourage replication which can have a much wider impact and reach across Dorset county.
4. Risk Assessment
Having considered the risks associated with this report, the level of risk has been identified as:
Current Risk: Medium
Residual Risk: Low
As noted above there is a financial risk associated with delivery failure, but based on past experience and future pipeline of projects the risk of failing to deliver the project is low.
The largest risk associated with the programme is a reputational risk associated with the failure to accept the £5.3 million external funding available to support action on Dorset’s Climate and Ecological emergency.
5. Equalities Impact Assessment
The funding application required an EqIA assessment to be undertaken as part of the submission to MHCLG and is a key requirement of the ERDF funding.
This will be updated and reviewed once final approval for the extended programme has been received and before the extended programme delivery starts.
6. Appendices
a) There are no appendices to this report
7. Background Papers
Details of the programme and case studies of projects supported can be found on the programme website - www.lowcarbondorset.org.uk
Further details of the support available to organisations through the programme can be found in the programme’s information packs: - Business Information Pack
Page 130 - Community Information Pack - Public-sector Information Pack
8. Low Carbon Dorset programme overview
The current Low Carbon Dorset programme is funded through the European Regional Development fund, it launched in April 2018 and is due to complete in March 2021. The programme provides free technical and grant support to Dorset based Business (SMEs), Community and Public organisations to reduce their carbon emissions and costs through energy efficiency and renewable-energy measures. And in turn supports the development of Dorset’s low-carbon economy and increases uptake of low-carbon technologies.
The programme is delivered by Dorset Council’s Sustainability Team and Dorset AONB Team. A dedicated programme team ensure compliance, timely delivery, overall programme management and administration of grant fund, communications & engagement activities. A technical team provide on-site diagnostics and technical support to beneficiaries to bring forward projects. The programme specifically provides :-
Free on-site technical support – diagnostic review of the beneficiary’s organisation to identify all low-carbon and cost saving opportunities. Provision of diagnostics report – recommends measures and grant support opportunities Low Carbon Dorset grant programme – 40% funding towards eligible projects Communication and engagement activities – to encourage uptake and promote good practice to Dorset organisations through targeted marketing campaigns, workshops & events, online resources and demonstrative case-studies.
To date the programme has been very successful and highly regarded by organisations across Dorset. Over 350 organisations have applied since April 2018, many receiving in-depth technical guidance and support. Of these, 85 have so far been awarded a grant to deliver their low carbon project. These projects have ranged in scale from simple energy efficiency projects such as insulation or LEDs to more complex projects involving a range of measures from Solar PV and heat pumps through to a zero-carbon community-lead energy system for a new housing development. Case studies are being developed for supported projects and are available on the programme website: https://www.lowcarbondorset.org.uk/case-studies/.
Page 131 The programme has nearly been allocated. On average 3 expressions of interest continue to be received each week and a pipeline of future projects is already developing to be supported pending an extension. Over £500k of projects are due to apply for a grant imminently and an additional £ 6-7million worth of future projects have already been identified for future support in the next 12-18 months.
Programme extension
An additional £5.86 million of ERDF funding is being sought to extend the programme to 2023. This will add £11.7million to the total programme budget (50% ERDF , 50% match from beneficiaries) and provide funding to expand the programme and technical teams and the Low Carbon Dorset grant fund. An additional £10.41million of low carbon projects will be supported through the extended grant fund, significantly increasing targets already reached. By 2023, the combined programme will provide detailed support or grants to 220 small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs), and grant fund projects worth over £15.8million. This support will lead to: - Development of 8 new low carbon products - Installation of 7.9 MW renewable energy - Improvement in energy performance of 66 houses - Reduction in energy use in public sector by 1.7 million kWhr per year - Reductions in Dorset’s carbon footprint by at least 7,204 tonnes of CO2e per year
The extension will be a seamless addition to the current programme and will follow the same successful delivery model. The programme will continue to support SMEs as its core activity but will also provide greater support for the public-sector including housing associations, town and parish councils, and projects led by community organisations. Additional resource will allow for a more targeted approach with these groups.
Dorset Council has itself received technical support and grant funding from the programme to introduce passive technology to maintain the controlled environment in the Dorset History Centre. This project involved replacing the former large air conditioning system and significantly reduced costs and carbon emissions. Another project is currently being developed to provide electric tools and solar panels for the Council’s Countryside and grounds teams.
The extension project will significantly increase the provision of support and grant funding which must be utilised by March 2023. Dorset Council must ensure it maximises this opportunity for free support and 40% grant towards the capital cost of low carbon projects. To date this has been limited partly by difficulty meeting grant criteria, but largely by lack of available match funding for low carbon capital projects.
Page 132 In addition, support will be further strengthened to organisations wishing to develop new low carbon products or approaches, supporting growth in Dorset’s low carbon economy. It is envisaged that a partnership approach will be developed to deliver this part of the programme involving academic and research organisations.
One of the largest opportunities of the programme in terms of helping to tackle Dorset’s Climate Emergency is in replication beyond the programme. A key focus of the extended project will be to promote best practice and share case studies that others can follow. A targeted proactive approach will be taken in key areas such as industrial estates and leisure services to encourage organisations to follow the lead of others in their area or sector.
An external evaluator (ASH Futures working with Regen) has been commissioned to provide insight into the programme’s current strengths and opportunities to maximise delivery of the extension. As well as looking forward beyond 2023 at how the programme can be developed to enable the Council to continue to support Dorset organisations to respond to the climate and ecological emergency.
Page 133 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 11
Cabinet 8 September 2020 Sub-national Partnerships
For Decision
Portfolio Holder: Cllr R Bryan, Highways, Travel and Environment
Local Councillor(s): All Dorset Councillors
Executive Director: John Sellgren, Executive Director of Place
Report Author: Kate Tunks Title: Service Manager for Infrastructure & Assets Tel: 01305 228534 Email: [email protected]
Report Status: Public
Recommendations: 1) Cabinet approves the continuation of Dorset Council’s membership of the Western Gateway Sub-National Transport Body; 2) Cabinet approves the submission of an expression of interest from Dorset Council with BCP Council to join the Western Gateway Powerhouse and that negotiation of the detailed terms be delegated to the Executive Director of Place.
Reasons for Recommendations: For Cabinet to take a strategic view of the current and future sub-national partnerships Dorset Council should be engaged with to ensure that these are in line with its vision, plan and priorities. To secure the opportunity of future Government infrastructure funding for Dorset.
1. Executive Summary
Dorset Council is part of several sub-regional and sub-national partnerships for different purposes involving different directorates and service areas. Many of the partnerships cover different geographical areas. Recently, a new sub-national partnership has begun to form and is asking Dorset Council to be part of them. This report sets out the main sub-national partnership the Council is part of for infrastructure, and another that it could have a future interest in, enabling Cabinet to take a strategic view. Cabinet is asked to note that the current intention for
Page 135 Dorset Council is to express an interest in membership of the evolving Western Gateway Powerhouse given its strong synergy with the Western Gateway Sub- national Transport Body (STB). BCP Council has already agreed to join this partnership and if this Council also joins, the Dorset area is then best placed to benefit from future government infrastructure funding.
2. Financial Implications
None of the partnerships request revenue funding from the Council currently. There is a future expectation that capital funding will be required from the Council to the Western Gateway STB as match funding towards future Government funded schemes, should there be any for Dorset.
3. Climate implications
The work of the Western Gateway STB is focussed on delivering a sustainable transport system that will deliver economic growth whilst reducing carbon emissions from transport.
4. Other Implications
The creation of an active travel network across the region will improve physical activity and sustainability.
5. Risk Assessment
Having considered the risks associated with this decision, the level of risk has been identified as: Current Risk: Medium Residual Risk: Medium
6. Equalities Impact Assessment
This is a report about the partnerships the Council is involved with or would consider being involved with in future. The Council would want to ensure any partnership it is involved with supports an approach that champions equality and diversity.
7. Appendices
None
8. Background Papers
None
Page 136 9. Transport Partnerships
9.1 Local authorities across England have responded to the Government’s request for greater strategic thinking about transport investment by forming Sub-national Transport Bodies (STBs). STBs were identified, with accompanying legislation, within the Cities and Local Government Devolution Act 2016. The Act enables existing individual authorities to formally join in a partnership to produce a Strategic Transport Plan and represent its members in discussions with Government on the delivery of strategic transport infrastructure. STB’s now cover the United Kingdom (excluding London) as outlined in Figure 1 below.
Figure 1: Sub-National Transport Bodies in England
9.2 In response to the climate change emergency and the COVID19 crisis, STBs collectively strive to create a sustainable transport system that is user focussed. Together they not only want reduced congestion on our roads and better public transport, improved walking and cycling choices, but believe in improving the lives of people and businesses, rebalancing the UK economy and turning the regions outside of London into exciting places to grow and thrive for generations to come.
9.3 The framework and broad geographies for STB’s were defined by Government, although the decision on the precise geographical coverage of each STB was given to local partners. The crucial point with STBs is that they are now the main conduit for significant infrastructure funding rather than through Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs). They also provide a direct forum for discussing prioritised investment with
Page 137 Government as well as Highways England and Network Rail amongst other key stakeholders.
9.4 Dorset Council is a member of the Western Gateway STB (see fig. 1 above) which is formed by an alliance of nine local authorities with a commitment to work together to drive innovation, maximise economic growth and improve industrial productivity by strengthening travel connections to local, national and international markets.
9.5 The Western Gateway STB is currently forming a Strategic Transport Plan (for both the short and long term) to consider all modes of transport within the context of strategic travel. Considering connectivity at a sub-national level enables local authorities to consider the role and function of the complete travel corridor instead of only focusing on local issues within their administrative boundary. It also recognises the collective impact of schemes and their mutual benefit across a wider area regardless of where the improvement is physically located. For example routes north-south from the south coast ports to the M4 corridor.
9.6 The investment priorities may include a variety of improvements including passenger transport schemes; strategic cycle schemes, highway capacity schemes; urban traffic management schemes; green travel infrastructure or integrated ticketing solutions – all with an overarching need to decarbonise the transport network in line with the government's emerging Transport Decarbonisation Plan.
9.7 BCP Council is also a member of the Western Gateway STB and as with many economic and land use arrangements it is crucial for the County area that both BCP and Dorset Councils are aligned as close partners. Our relevant Portfolio Holders both currently sit on the WGSTB Board with senior officer support.
9.8 Members of the Western Gateway STB are committed to working together and providing a single voice to Government on strategic transport investment and prioritisation. This makes working with the Department for Transport (DfT), Highways England and Network Rail much more streamlined and results in fewer, but much more coordinated and powerful conversations while removing the risk of competing local priorities.
9.9 The long term Strategic Transport Plan (to be adopted in March 2023) will have an extended timeframe to 2050 and will provide long-term certainty for the stakeholders the plan represents. It will be used to inform future Government investment decisions post 2025.
9.10 The STB is not about taking decisions and responsibilities away from local communities, instead it focuses on strengthening delivery by
Page 138 demonstrating strategic leadership and working collaboratively for material advantage for the Western Gateway area.
9.11 This month the Western Gateway STB Board has agreed to commence its consultation on its emerging Strategic Transport Plan with a vision: “To enable sustainable economic growth by identifying a long-term investment programme designed to deliver a well-connected, reliable and resilient strategic transport system; that supports the nation to recover from the impacts of the Coronavirus pandemic; influences the carbon reduction agenda; closes productivity gaps and makes the Western Gateway area more competitive, while respecting its world class natural and built environments”.
10. The Western Gateway Powerhouse
10.1 Significantly, the Local Authority members of the WGSTB are all members of the emerging Western Gateway Powerhouse other than Dorset Council and BCP Council. This partnership is still forming. Its draft prospectus suggests that its geography covers a similar geography as the Western Gateway STB with the addition of South Wales.
10.2 Launched in November 2019 https://www.gov.uk/government/news/cross- borderwestern-gateway-will-form-new-powerhouse-in-uk-economy the Western Gateway Powerhouse states it is a “partnership to, adding value to existing governance and business structures, focussing on the areas where scale and collaboration can achieve inclusive and sustainable growth for our people and the wider UK economy. Covering the cross-border gateway from Swindon to Swansea and Weston super mare to Tewkesbury – we are the UK’s newest powerhouse. We already outperform UK average output (excluding London) but our ambition is to become a green dynamo for the future economy”.
10.3 It has three ambitions: - Accelerate agglomeration benefits and modal shift through sustainable inter/intra region connectivity Drive export and investment led growth, marketing its clean growth expertise to the world Catalyse cross-sectoral innovation in its distinctive high-tech sectors, universities and R&D assets.
10.4 The Western Gateway Powerhouse is now inviting Dorset Council and BCP Council to confirm our position. Dorset Council Cabinet is being asked to show its intent to join the Western Gateway Powerhouse and a decision has already been made for BCP Council to join subject to confirmation of Dorset Council’s formal position.
Page 139 10.5 In future there may be a move to unite and reduce the number of existing sub-national partnerships. Both the Western Gateway Powerhouse and the Great South West partnerships have areas of focus that are important to Dorset Council.
11. Conclusion
11.1 Sub-national Transport Bodies are the conduit through which Government funding shall flow for major transport investment into the future. Dorset Council is currently a partner in the Western Gateway STB. Strategic Transport Plans based on an evidence base are forming ready for consultation. The emerging priority themes are linked to improving sustainable transport within the Dorset area as well as two further connectivity corridors set to directly influence strategic travel in both east- west and north-south directions while seeking to better connect Dorset and BCP ports and airports. STBs either side of the Western Gateway STB do not include outcomes for Dorset, assuming these will be addressed by the Western Gateway STB.
11.2 A wider grouping of the Western Gateway members plus South Wales called the Western Gateway Powerhouse has recently formed and there is strong potential for both BCP and Dorset Councils to now join. In future there may be a move to unite and reduce the number of sub-national groups.
11.3 The Chancellor of Exchequer recently announced in the March budget speech government support for an economic review of the Western Gateway Powerhouse area and Highways England through its Route Investment Strategy, has confirmed the need for a strategic transport study between the M4 and Dorset Coast. It is therefore important for both Dorset and BCP Council to draw on these benefits by being members of both the Western Gateway STB and the Western Gateway Powerhouse in order to strengthen its relative position in seeking out strategic investment linked to both economic and infrastructure improvements.
Footnote: Issues relating to financial, legal, environmental, economic and equalities implications have been considered and any information relevant to the decision is included within the report.
Page 140 Agenda Item 12
Cabinet 8 September 2020 Revision to Local Development Scheme
For Decision
Portfolio Holder: Cllr D Walsh, Planning
Local Councillor(s): All wards
Executive Director: John Sellgren, Executive Director of Place
Report Author: Hilary Jordan Title: Service Manager for Spatial Planning Tel: 01305 252303 Email: [email protected]
Report Status: Public
Recommendation: That the revised Local Development Scheme, attached as Appendix to this report, be agreed for publication.
Reason for Recommendation: To ensure that the council has an up to date Local Development Scheme published online, so that the local community, developers and stakeholders are aware of the programme for local plan preparation.
1. Executive Summary
The Local Development Scheme is the published programme for the preparation of local plans. All local planning authorities need to maintain an up to date local development scheme so that those who are interested in or affected by future local plans know when they are due to be prepared and when they will have opportunities for involvement.
Dorset Council adopted its first Local Development Scheme in June 2019 and a number of updates need to be made. The Waste Plan and Minerals Sites Plan have both been adopted. As covered in a separate report to the same Cabinet meeting, the review of the Minerals Strategy suggests that a full replacement
Page 141 document does not need to be prepared at this stage, contrary to what was set out in the 2019 Local Development Scheme.
The Dorset Council Local Plan programme remains on track for submission in March 2022 and adoption in April 2023, but the initial consultation will be delayed by a small amount of time in order to allow for the completion of some of the necessary evidence base, work on which has been delayed by the coronavirus pandemic.
These amendments, together with updates to the information on neighbourhood plans and supplementary planning documents, have been made to the attached revised Local Development Scheme.
Members will be aware that the Government has recently published a consultation paper outlining radical changes to the national planning system. This will affect the preparation of the Dorset Council Local Plan significantly, and if the proposals are brought in, the work programme will need to be revised once more.
2. Financial Implications
There is funding in reserves to cover the costs of preparing the plans outlined in the revised Local Development Scheme, and this funding will be kept under review to ensure that the most efficient use is made of it.
3. Climate implications
Local plans have a role in minimising and mitigating against climate change, in particular through influencing the location of development so that it minimises the need to travel, but also through other means such as setting out the council’s policies for renewable energy development and for development at risk of flooding and coastal change. There are no direct implications of the Local Development Scheme, which is the programme for local plan preparation, other than the fact that the speed of plan preparation will influence how quickly new policies will take effect.
4. Other Implications
Local plans have key implications for sustainability as they set out a framework for sustainable development across the plan area. They also influence and can help to deliver the aims of other services and council priorities, for example by allocating land for new facilities, enabling affordable housing provision, and encouraging healthy living environments that are accessible by walking or cycling. There are no direct implications of the Local Development Scheme other
Page 142 than the fact that the speed of plan preparation will influence how quickly new policies will take effect.
5. Risk Assessment
Having considered the risks associated with this decision, the level of risk has been identified as: Current Risk: Medium Residual Risk: Medium
6. Equalities Impact Assessment
There are no equalities impacts arising from this report or the local development scheme. Equalities impact assessments will be undertaken on the local plans during their preparation.
7. Appendices
Appendix 1 – Revised Local Development Scheme (September 2020)
8. Background Papers
The Local Development Scheme for Dorset, June 2019
9. Revision to Local Development Scheme
9.1 Dorset Council’s first Local Development Scheme was adopted by Cabinet in June 2019. It included the programme to adoption of five development plan documents: the Purbeck Local Plan; the Dorset Council Local Plan; the Bournemouth, Christchurch, Poole and Dorset Waste Plan; the Bournemouth, Christchurch, Poole and Dorset Minerals Sites Plan; and a revised Bournemouth, Christchurch, Poole and Dorset Minerals Strategy to replace the 2014 Minerals Strategy. It also included details of adopted and emerging neighbourhood plans and priorities for the preparation of supplementary planning documents.
9. 2 Since the adoption of that Local Development Scheme several parts of its contents need to be updated. The main changes are in relation to the minerals and waste plans. The Waste Plan and Minerals Sites Plan are now both adopted and so the programmes for their completion no longer need to be included. As covered within a separate report to this Cabinet, it is no longer recommended that a replacement Minerals Strategy be prepared at this stage, as the review of the policies of the existing Strategy
Page 143 suggests that these continue to be fit for purpose. It is not currently proposed that the Local Development Scheme includes a programme for this work, but the situation will be kept under review and it will be programmed in future versions of the Local Development Scheme.
9.3 The examination of the Purbeck Local Plan has taken considerably longer than anticipated. The plan was submitted for examination in January 2019 and examination hearings took place in summer and autumn 2019. Consultation on the main modifications is now likely to take place from August through to October 2020, and it is likely that adoption will be in early 2021.
9.4 The Dorset Council Local Plan is still on track for submission in March 2022 and adoption in April 2023. The options consultation was originally due to take place from September or October 2020, but this revised Local Development Scheme proposes that this consultation starts in November 2020, and is for a longer period in order to allow for the fact that this would include the Christmas break. This change will allow additional time for the completion of key areas of evidence work that have been delayed by the inability to undertake site visits during the coronavirus lockdown – in particular the green belt assessment which is being undertaken jointly with BCP Council to inform both local plans. This is not a significant delay and is not expected to affect the overall programme, though it should be borne in mind that further coronavirus lockdowns could affect the programme through the restrictions to both site visits and consultation.
9.5 Programmes for the preparation of supplementary planning documents do not need to be included in a Local Development Scheme, but the 2019 LDS does identify three priorities for supplementary planning documents, all of which relate to mitigating the impacts of development on protected nature conservation sites. One of these, the revised Dorset Heathlands Planning Framework SPD, has now been completed and this is reflected in the revised document.
9.6 Finally, the section on neighbourhood plans has been updated to reflect the additional neighbourhood plans that have been made since the publication of the 2019 Local Development Scheme.
Footnote: Issues relating to financial, legal, environmental, economic and equalities implications have been considered and any information relevant to the decision is included within the report.
Page 144 THE LOCAL DEVELOPMENT SCHEME FOR DORSET
www.dorsetcouncil.gov.uk
September 2020
Page 145 CONTENTS Introduction...... 1 Local Plans ...... 2 Minerals and Waste Plans...... 3 Neighbourhood Plans...... 5 Community Infrastructure Levy...... 6 Supplementary Planning Documents and Guidance ...... 7 Statement of Community Involvement ...... 8 Key Programme Milestones ...... 9
Contents Page Page 146 INTRODUCTION
This is the Local Development Scheme (LDS) for Dorset Council, setting out a programme for the preparation of new planning policy documents. The main focus is the production of a new local plan for Dorset, but minerals and waste policies have also been considered. Predicted timescales / dates for consultation periods are given in square brackets [], however these may be subject to change and will be updated regularly. The Government published a consultation document in August 2020 on the future of the planning system. This proposes significant changes to the approach to local plan preparation, and to the Community Infrastructure Levy and section 106 planning agreements. Once these proposals are finalised then they will be taken into account in future amendments to this Local Development Scheme.
Page | 1 Page 147 LOCAL PLANS
The main Development Plan Document (DPD) to be produced will be the Dorset Council Local Plan. This will replace the current local plans adopted by the Borough and District Councils that existed prior to April 2019. Minerals and waste policies are contained in separate DPDs. Existing and proposed minerals and waste plans are listed here and are discussed in the next section. EXISTING LOCAL PLANS AND REVIEWS PROPOSED LOCAL PLANS Existing Local Plans Purbeck Local Plan (2018 – 2034) Whilst work is being progressed on a new local The Purbeck Local Plan will set out planning policies plan for Dorset, existing adopted DPDs will and propose allocations to meet the needs of the continue to apply to the areas they covered whole of the former Purbeck District area. The plan was previously. submitted for examination in January 2019. The examination process is nearing completion but has Existing local plans are: taken longer than anticipated, and adoption is now due . Christchurch and East Dorset Local Plan to be in early 2021. Part 1: Core Strategy (2014) Upon adoption, the Purbeck Local Plan (2018 – 2034) . East Dorset Local Plan (2002): Saved will replace the Purbeck Local Plan Part 1, but the policies only Swanage Local Plan, which runs until 2027, will . North Dorset Local Plan Part 1 (2016) continue to apply to Swanage. . North Dorset District-Wide Local Plan (2003): Saved policies only Dorset Council Local Plan . Purbeck Local Plan Part 1 (2012) . Swanage Local Plan (2017) The Dorset Council Local Plan will set out planning . West Dorset, Weymouth and Portland policies and propose allocations to meet the needs of Local Plan (2015) the whole of the Dorset Council area. It will look ahead until at least 2038 in order to ensure provision for Existing local plans can be viewed online here – growth for 15 years on adoption. The key stages and likely timescales are: https://www.dorsetcouncil.gov.uk/planning- . Sustainability Appraisal Scoping Report: [July buildings-land/planning-policy/adopted-local- 2019] plans.aspx . Options Consultation: [January 2021] . Publication: [September 2021] . Submission: [March 2022] Borough / District Local Plan Reviews . Examination: [Summer 2022] The local plan reviews for: East Dorset; North . Adoption: [Spring 2023] Dorset; and West Dorset and Weymouth & It is intended that the Dorset Council Local Plan will Portland, will no longer be taken forward. The replace all existing local plans in the Dorset Council work undertaken on these reviews will feed into area upon adoption. the new Dorset Council Local Plan. The Dorset-wide Gypsy, Traveller and Travelling Showpeople Site Allocations Joint Development Plan Document (DPD), which has been in preparation, will no longer be taken forward. Any policies relating to, and allocations needed for, Gypsies, Travellers and Travelling Showpeople in the Dorset Council area will be made in the Dorset Council Local Plan.
Page | 2 Page 148 MINERALS AND WASTE PLANS
Adopted minerals and waste local plans cover the geographical area administered by Dorset Council and Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole (BCP) Council. Prior to 1st April 2019 this area was administered by Dorset County Council and the unitary authorities of Bournemouth and Poole. It is intended that future minerals and waste plans will continue to apply to the same geographical area. A new Mineral Sites Plan and a new Waste Plan were adopted by Dorset Council and Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole Council in 2019. These replaced the ‘saved’ policies of the minerals and waste plans that previously existed, with the exception of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Minerals Strategy, which remains part of the development plan. EXISTING MINERALS AND WASTE PLANS PROPOSED MINERALS AND WASTE PLANS The Bournemouth, Christchurch, Poole and Existing minerals and waste plans are: Dorset Minerals Strategy Review . Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole The Minerals Strategy is now more than five years Minerals Strategy (2014) old and the effectiveness and appropriateness of . Bournemouth, Christchurch, Poole and its policies have therefore been reviewed during Dorset Mineral Sites Plan (2019) 2019-20. As a result, it has been concluded that a . Bournemouth, Christchurch, Poole and full review is not necessary at this stage, Dorset Waste Plan particularly bearing in mind that an up to date Existing minerals and waste plans can be viewed minerals sites plan has been recently adopted. online here – This decision will be kept under review and the https://www.dorsetcouncil.gov.uk/planning- programme for any replacement plan will be set buildings-land/planning-policy/adopted-local- out in future revisions of this Local Development plans.aspx Scheme.
Page | 3 Page 149 NEIGHBOURHOOD PLANS
When neighbourhood plans are ‘made’ they form part of the statutory development plan. By July 2020, 21 neighbourhood plans in the Dorset Council area had been made and several others were in production. Up- to-date information on neighbourhood plans can be viewed here – https://www.dorsetcouncil.gov.uk/planning-buildings-land/planning-policy/neighbourhood-plans-in- dorset.aspx
EXISTING NEIGHBOURHOOD PLANS PROPOSED NEIGHBOURHOOD PLANS
The following neighbourhood plans These neighbourhood plans have gone through examination have been made: with a recommendation that, subject to modification, they should proceed to referendum: . Askerswell . Bere Regis . Portland . Bridport Area These neighbourhood plans are at examination: . Bourton . Broadwindsor . Blandford + (including Bryanston and Blandford St . Buckland Newton Mary) . Cerne Valley . Wareham Town . Fontmell Magna . Milton Abbas . Gillingham . Shaftesbury . Hazelbury Bryan The following neighbourhood areas have been designated . Holwell and in most cases neighbourhood plans are in preparation: . Loders . Lytchett Matravers . Arne . Milborne St Andrew . Alderholt . Motcombe . Beaminster . Piddle Valley . Charmouth . Pimperne . Chesil Bank . Shillingstone . Chetnole and Stockwood . Sturminster Newton . Chickerell . Sutton Poyntz . Corscombe, Halstock and District . Upper Marshwood Vale . Iwerne Minster . Leigh . Longburton (Cam Vale) . Maiden Newton and Frome Vauchurch . Melbury Abbas and Cann . Okeford Fitzpaine . Puddletown . Stinsford . Sturminster Marshall . West Lulworth . Wool Parish . Yetminster and Ryme Intrinsica
Page | 4 Page 150 COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE LEVY
The Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) provides a mechanism for collecting financial contributions from developers towards the provision of infrastructure to support development. On 1st April 2019, Dorset Council became the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Charging Authority and began administering the charging schedules adopted by the former district and borough councils. Charging schedules have been adopted for all the former district and borough councils, except North Dorset, where CIL is not charged. Links to the relevant charging schedules are available here - https://www.dorsetcouncil.gov.uk/planning-buildings-land/planning/community-infrastructure- levy/community-infrastructure-levy.aspx The CIL charging schedule for the former Purbeck District Council area is being reviewed alongside the review of the Purbeck Local Plan. It is at examination stage but the hearings have yet to be scheduled. The Government amended the CIL Regulations in 2019. These changes are intended to complement the assessment of viability in the National Planning Policy Framework and aim to make the system of developer contributions more transparent and accountable. Key changes include measures to ensure that consultation on preparing charging schedules is proportionate; and operational reforms, which aim to provide a more transparent approach to reporting on the use of developer contributions to fund infrastructure. The Council is now required to prepare and publish an ‘Infrastructure Funding Statement’ by 31st December 2020.
The Government requires that local plans should set out the contributions expected from development and that the viability of all relevant policies including the cost implications of CIL and S106 should be taken into account at plan making stage. Development of the proposed Dorset Council Local Plan will require the review of evidence relating to infrastructure needs and viability and presents an opportunity to prepare a single replacement CIL charging schedule for the new plan area.
Page | 5 Page 151 SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENTS AND GUIDANCE
Adopted Supplementary Planning Documents (SPDs) and Guidance (SPGs) will continue to apply to the areas they covered prior to April 2019. SPDs relating to internationally important wildlife sites will be the priority for review. The Dorset Heathlands Planning Framework has been updated: the new version was adopted in 2020 and runs to 2026. Other priorities include: Nitrogen Reduction in Poole Harbour The Poole Harbour Recreation Planning Framework 2019 – 2034 These three SPDs also relate to areas within Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole and any reviews will be carried out jointly with BCP Council.
Page | 6 Page 152 STATEMENT OF COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT
A single Statement of Community Involvement (SCI) for the Dorset Council area, which also relates to minerals and waste policy, has been adopted. This sets out how Dorset Council will involve the community in the preparation and review of planning policy documents and in making planning decisions. The Statement of Community Involvement is available online at: https://www.dorsetcouncil.gov.uk/planning-buildings-land/planning-policy/dorset-council-local- plan/evidence/adopted-dorset-council-statement-of-community-involvement-28-jan-2020.pdf
Page | 7 Page 153 KEY PROGRAMME MILESTONES
The following table outlines the key programme milestones for the production of Development Plan Documents. All timescales are indicative and may be subject to change.
Development Plan Document 2019 2019 2020 2020 2020 2020 2021 2021 2021 2021 2022 2022 2022 2022 2023 2023 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q2 Q2 Purbeck Local Plan (2018 – 2034) Su A Dorset Council Local Plan Sc Pr Pu Su A Key: Sc Sustainability Appraisal Scoping Consultation Pr Plan Preparation Pu Pre-submission Publication Su Submission and Examination A Adoption
Page | 8 Page 154 Agenda Item 13
Cabinet 8 September 2020 Screening Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Minerals Strategy 2014
For Decision
Portfolio Holder: Cllr D Walsh, Planning
Local Councillor(s): All Wards
Executive Director: John Sellgren, Executive Director of Place
Report Author: Trevor Badley Title: Lead Project Officer (Minerals & Waste) Tel: 01305 224675 Email: [email protected]
Report Status: Public
Recommendation: That:
i) it be noted that following Screening of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Minerals Strategy 2014 for Review, a full or partial Review of the Minerals Strategy will not be undertaken this year. Officers will continue monitoring the Minerals Strategy 2014 and it will be screened again in 2021. ii) the Dorset Council Local Development Scheme is updated accordingly to reflect these actions. iii) the 2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Minerals Strategy 2014 , attached as an Appendix to this report, is made publicly available.
Reason for Recommendation: Paragraph 33 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2019 requires that a local plan should be reviewed after five years to consider whether a formal full or partial Plan Review is required. To ensure that Dorset Council
Page 155 complies with this requirement, the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Minerals Strategy 2014 was screened to assess whether a full or partial Review was required. It was found that a Review did not need to be initiated this year. The Dorset Council Local Development Scheme needs to be updated to reflect this, and planning guidance requires that the report of the screening exercise is made publicly available.
1. Executive Summary
The Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Minerals Strategy 2014 (MS) was adopted more than five years ago, and as required by the National Planning Policy Framework 2019 it has been assessed to determine whether a formal full (the whole document) or partial (only selected policies) Review is required. Each policy was assessed based on use over the period 2014-2018, and was given a RAG (Red, Amber, Green) score with Red identifying issues that might need to be addressed; Amber identifying issues for further consideration and Green no issues identified. Of the 47 policies the majority were scored Green. Some were scored Red or Amber. A number of external factors were identified which are likely to have an impact on the market for minerals and the ongoing use and implementation of the Minerals Strategy. Particularly relevant is the adoption of the Mineral Sites Plan 2019 at the end of 2019. The Mineral Sites Plan 2019 will complement the Minerals Strategy, and contribute to delivering the mineral strategies. It is considered that these two Plans need time to be implemented together, without making any changes to the MS. Actions are proposed to improve the effectiveness of the current MS policies in the meantime, and they will be assessed again in 2021. All policies will continue to be monitored. It is considered that although the Minerals Strategy is over five years old, the most appropriate action is to continue monitoring its policies, and to repeat the assessment in 2021. Guidance on the application of the policies, which could include preparation of Supplementary Planning Documents, will be prepared as appropriate. The Dorset Council Local Development Scheme will be updated to reflect this approach.
2. Financial Implications
There are no financial implications resulting from not undertaking a Review of the Minerals Strategy this year. The Review, when undertaken, will have financial implications but there is funding in reserves to cover these costs.
3. Climate implications
The Minerals Strategy has a role in mitigating against the effects of climate change, in particular through influencing the way in which minerals sites are developed, worked and restored. However, a minerals plan has limited influence over the location of development as a means of mitigating climate influences, as minerals have to worked where they are found. The Minerals Strategy currently includes a policy specifically addressing the mitigation of climate impacts. It is intended to issue guidance to officers to increase the
Page 156 application of this policy and recognise that the importance of ensuring the issue of climate change is appropriately addressed in minerals applications. When the Minerals Strategy is reviewed this will provide the opportunity to update and strengthen climate impact mitigation.
4. Other Implications
There are no direct implications of not initiating a Review of the Minerals Strategy in 2020. Updating the Minerals Strategy would provide opportunities to review and where appropriate improve its provisions, however it is considered that the Minerals Strategy is functioning adequately at present and no urgent changes are needed.
5. Risk Assessment
Having considered the risks associated with this decision, the level of risk has been identified as: Current Risk: Medium Residual Risk: Medium
6. Equalities Impact Assessment
Equalities impacts were taken into consideration when the Minerals Strategy was first prepared. Impacts due to mineral working are more likely to affect rural communities, as mineral working is more likely to be located in rural areas. However, minerals must be worked where they are found. The Minerals Strategy contains protective measures to mitigate environmental and amenity impacts. Since no change is proposed to the Minerals Strategy, it is accepted that no Equalities Impact Assessment is required. When a formal Review or partial Review is undertaken, it will include an Equalities Impact Assessment.
7. Appendices
Appendix 1 - 2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Minerals Strategy 2014
8. Background Papers
The Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Minerals Strategy 2014 The Bournemouth, Christchurch, Dorset and Poole Mineral Sites Plan 2019
9. Background to the Report
Page 157 9.1 Paragraph 33 of the National Planning Policy Framework 20191 requires that policies in local plans should be reviewed at least once every five years to assess whether they need updating, and should then be updated as necessary. Undertaking a formal Review is not always necessary, but if a decision is taken to not carry out a Review, this should be justified and recorded. As the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Minerals Strategy was adopted in 2014 it needed to either be reviewed, or justification provided that a Review was not considered necessary at this time.
9.2 It was decided that rather than initiating a formal Review, the Minerals Strategy should be screened to assess whether a full or partial Review was required. Depending on the outcome of the screening, a Review could be undertaken now or, if indications were that Review was not necessary or appropriate at the current time the Strategy could be assessed again in the future. This allows the Mineral Planning Authority to take into consideration the other issues that could affect the timing of beginning a Review of the strategy.
9.3 A recent update to online Planning Practice Guidance suggests that if a local planning authority decides not to update their policies, they should publish their reasoning2, therefore the report of the Screening exercise would be publicised whatever the outcome. The Dorset Council Local Development Scheme should be amended to reflect the outcome of the screening.
10. Screening of the Policies
10.1 All 47 policies of the Minerals Strategy have been screened, using monitoring data collected over the review period of 2014-2018. The frequency of use and relevance of each policy were reviewed to determine its effectiveness, and each policy was given a RAG (Red, Amber or Green) Monitoring Status to indicate how it has performed against the relevant monitoring indicator(s) for that policy. Monitoring indicators are set out in Chapter 17 of the MS within a Monitoring Framework.
10.2 The RAG Monitoring Status is shown below. Policies scored as 'Green' are considered to be functioning and being applied as intended, and no issues were identified. If some issues are identified, but these do not appear significant, the policy is scored 'Amber'. If significant issues were identified the policy is scored 'Red'. An Amber or Red does not mean that the policy, or the whole Minerals Strategy, must be reviewed but it does flag up where further consideration and attention are needed.
1 National Planning Policy Framework, February 2019: Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government 2 Paragraph: 070 Reference ID: 61-070-20190315 Revision date:15 03 2019 https://www.gov.uk/guidance/plan- making#plan-reviews
Page 158 Monitoring shows no issues Green
Monitoring shows some issues - further consideration required Amber
Monitoring shows issues - further consideration required and these Red may need to be addressed
10.3 Of the 47 policies screened, one was classified as 'Red - issues may need to be addressed' and one was classified as 'Red/Amber', also indicating issues that may need to be addressed. Ten were classified as 'Amber - further consideration required'. One of these is no longer relevant now that Dorset Council has become a unitary authority. The rest were 'Green - no issues'.
10.4 Policies DM1 to DM11 Development Management policies: The development management policies DM1 to DM11, used to determine planning applications, are considered to be working well. Policies DM1 and DM2 scored Amber, not being used as frequently as they could have been, but it is accepted that this was due to officers familiarising themselves with the policies of the Minerals Strategy following its adoption.
10.3 Policy CC1 Preparation of Climate Change Assessments: This policy scored red, due to a relatively low level of use. It seeks to ensure developers of mineral sites minimise production of CO2 and maximise resilience to climate change impacts through the design of the development and restoration of mineral sites.
10.4 When the Minerals Strategy is reviewed the opportunity will be taken to strengthen climate change mitigation requirements. However it is considered that the current policy is adequate and appropriate at present. Further guidance will be provided to users of the policy, stressing the importance of this policy. The policy will continue to be monitored over the next year, and will be assessed again in 2021.
10.7 Policy IS1 Industrial sand: Some of the aggregate produced in Dorset has a relatively high silica content and can be used for purposes other than construction, such as industrial, leisure or agricultural uses. However the silica is not pure enough for high end industrial uses such as glass making, which would justify a separate silica sand landbank. This policy has not been used, and was scored Amber. The overall topic of availability of sand for non-aggregate use needs to be carefully considered when the Minerals Strategy undergoes formal Review. The policy will continue to be monitored over the next year, and will be assessed again in 2021.
10.8 Policies SG1 to SG3 Mineral Safeguarding: Each of these policies were assessed as Amber largely due to inconsistencies in their use and application. Policy SG2 is no longer needed, now that Dorset Council is a unitary authority.
Page 159 This is another policy area where the Minerals Strategy would benefit from the provision of guidance to users in the short term, and more detailed assessment and amendments in the longer term, when the strategy is formally reviewed. In addition to preparation of guidance to officers using this policy, consideration will be given to the preparation of a Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) on Mineral Safeguarding, as referred to in the Minerals Strategy but not yet prepared. Policies SG1 and SG3 will continue to be monitored over the next year, and will be assessed again in 2021.
10.9 Policy RS1 Restoration, Aftercare and Afteruse of Minerals Development: This policy scored Amber, partly due to potential inconsistencies in its application and the fact that the Minerals Strategy referred to the preparation of another SPD, this time on mineral site restoration. Once again guidance on the application of the policy will be prepared for users, and consideration will be given to the preparation of an SPD to explain the application of this policy. The policy will continue to be monitored over the next year, and will be assessed again in 2021.
11. Conclusions 11.1 While issues have been identified with the implementation and use of some of the policies during the 5-year review period 2014-2018, the Minerals Strategy is considered to remain effective. The policies where there is a greatest lack of clarity regarding their use are Policies CC1 (climate change), IS1 (industrial sand), RS1 (restoration, aftercare and after use) and safeguarding (SG1 and SG3). 11.2 Each of these along with the other policies scoring Amber have been separately considered, and although some action is needed in certain cases it is considered that no urgent Review of the overall Minerals Strategy, or any of the component policies, is required in the short term. The key actions are to provide further guidance to development management officers using the Minerals Strategy, and to validation teams and planning officers from the local planning Area Teams, on the operation of these policies; and to bring forward the preparation of one and possibly two Supplementary Planning Documents - on mineral safeguarding and possibly site restoration. 11.3 The Mineral Sites Plan 2019 (MSP) is intended to complement the Minerals Strategy and to contribute to delivering the strategies set out in it. As the MSP was only adopted at the end of 2019, it, it is considered that the two plans should have at least one year of working together before considering making changes to the MS (as the older of the two). This is considered a strong reason not to move to an early review of the MS. 11.4 In addition it is recognised that there are a number of current uncertainties nationally and internationally which could impact on future demand and supply for minerals: The Government is driving forward development to boost the housing market and enable the necessary infrastructure to support this.
Page 160 The publication of the recent Planning White Paper and the changes to the planning system this proposes are significant, and difficult to predict. Given the ongoing, and increasing, priority given to construction projects and house building, the need for minerals may increase. Offsetting this are Britain’s exit from the European Union, and the uncertainty surrounding the ramifications of this. The far-reaching impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and the effects of this on the market are also difficult to predict, certainly in terms of mineral planning. 11.5 Given the recent adoption of the Mineral Sites Plan 2019 together with the current high level of uncertainty in mineral planning terms, it is considered appropriate to continue monitoring of all policies, and undertake another assessment in 2021. The Dorset Council Local Development Scheme will be amended accordingly to reflect this approach.
Footnote: Issues relating to financial, legal, environmental, economic and equalities implications have been considered and any information relevant to the decision is included within the report.
Page 161 This page is intentionally left blank Appendix 1
2020 Review of the
Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Minerals Strategy 2014
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 163 2014 Page 1 of 81 Contents 1. Introduction ...... 4 Structure of this review...... 5 2. Effectiveness of the Minerals Strategy 2014 Policies...... 6 Policy SS1 - Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development ...... 7 Policy SS2 - Identification of Sites in the Mineral Sites Plan...... 8 Policy CC1 - Preparation of Climate Change Assessments...... 9 Policy RE1 – Production of Recycled Aggregates ...... 10 Policy AS1 - Provision of Sand and Gravel ...... 12 Policy AS2 - Landbank Provision ...... 14 Policy AS3 - Crushed Rock...... 15 Policy AS4 - Wharves and Depots...... 16 Policy AS5 - Borrow Pits...... 18 Policy BC1 - Provision of Ball Clay...... 19 Policy BC2 - Ball Clay Transportation...... 21 Policy BC3 - Extraction of Sand and Gravel in association with Ball Clay within the AONB ...... 22 Policy PK1 - Provision of Purbeck Stone ...... 23 Policy PK2 - Considerations for Purbeck Stone Quarries ...... 24 Policy PK3 - Service Areas ...... 26 Policy PK4 - Crushing of Purbeck Stone at Dimension Stone Quarries ...... 26 Policy PK5 - Importation of Stone from Outside Purbeck...... 28 Policy PD1 - Underground Mining and High Wall Extraction of Portland Stone Policy...... 29 Policy PD2 - Surface Quarrying of Portland Stone ...... 30 Policy PD3 - Relinquishment of Permission ...... 31 Policy PD4 - Minimising Impacts of Existing Permissions on Portland...... 32 Policy PD5 - Restoration of Sites on Portland ...... 34 Policy BS1 - Building Stone Quarries ...... 35 Policy HY1 - Proposals for Exploration and Appraisal ...... 36 Policy HY2 - Proposals for Production Facilities and Ancillary Development ...... 37 Policy HY3 - Transportation of Hydrocarbons...... 38 Policy HY4 -Decommissioning and Restoration of Production Facilities and Ancillary Development...... 39 Policy HY5 - Underground Gas Storage & Carbon Storage...... 40 Policy IS1 - Industrial Sand...... 41 Policy SG1 - Mineral Safeguarding Area ...... 42 Policy SG2 - Mineral Consultation Area ...... 44 Policy SG3 - Safeguarding of mineral sites and facilities ...... 45
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 164 2014 Page 2 of 81 Policy RS1 - Restoration, Aftercare and Afteruse of Minerals Development...... 46 Policy RS2 - Retention of Plant, Machinery and other Ancillary Development ...... 48 Policy RS3 - Local Liaison Groups ...... 49 Development Management Policies DM1 to DM11 ...... 50 Policy DM1 - Key Criteria for Sustainable Minerals Development...... 51 Policy DM2 - Managing Impacts on Amenity ...... 53 Policy DM3 - Managing the Impact on Surface Water and Ground Water Resources ...... 55 Policy DM4 - Protection and Enhancement of Landscape Character and the Countryside ...... 56 Policy DM5 - Biodiversity and Geological Interest...... 58 Policy DM6 - Dorset and East Devon Coast World Heritage Site ...... 60 Policy DM7 - The Historic Environment ...... 61 Policy DM8 - Transport and Minerals Development ...... 62 Policy DM9 - Extraction and restoration within airfield safeguarding areas ...... 63 Policy DM10 - Planning Obligations ...... 64 Policy DM11 - Review of Old Mineral Planning Permissions ...... 65 Policy MON1 - Plan, Monitor and Manage ...... 66 Table 1 - Summary of Monitoring Status ...... 67 3. National Planning Policy Framework Assessment ...... 69 Table 2 - National Planning Policy Framework Focussed Review ...... 69 4. Issues Identified ...... 74 5. Conclusions...... 80
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 165 2014 Page 3 of 81 1. Introduction 1.1. The Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Minerals Strategy 20141 (MS) was adopted in May 2014. It covers the (former) administrative areas of Dorset County Council, Bournemouth Borough Council and the Borough of Poole. Since Local Government Reorganisation (LGR) on 1 April 2019, the MS covers the unitary authorities of Dorset Council (DCl) and BCP Council (BCP). The MS covers the period from adoption in 2014 to 2028. 1.2. The MS is intended to ensure that a reliable and timely supply of minerals is maintained, whilst protecting the environment and our communities. It contains strategic policies that establish the amounts of the various minerals to be supplied, and the spatial locations from which these minerals will come. It also contains policies covering safeguarding of minerals and restoration of mineral sites, along with development management policies to enable minerals decision-making, and policies covering minerals safeguarding and site restoration. 1.3. The MS does not include local policies and does not allocate any specific sites for mineral development. These are set out in the Bournemouth, Christchurch, Poole and Dorset Mineral Sites Plan 2019 (MSP). The MSP is intended to complement the MS and to allocate the sites to deliver the strategies for different minerals. Since the MSP was only adopted at the end of 2019 the MPA consider that a period of time is required to allow the Plans to work together, during which both Plans will be monitored. 1.4. The implementation of the MS has been assessed and recorded through Monitoring Reports on an annual basis from 2014 to 2018. The National Planning Policy Framework 2019 (NPPF) requires that local plans should be reviewed to assess whether they require updating at least once every five years2. A recent update to Planning Practice Guidance suggests that if a local planning authority decides not to update their policies, they should publish the reasons3 for this decision. This Guidance4 also notes that policies age at different rates according to local circumstances and a plan does not become out-of-date automatically after 5 years. The review process is a method to ensure that a plan and the policies within remains effective 1.5. Having been adopted over five years ago, the MS has been reviewed to assess whether it is still delivering the Vision (as set out in Chapter 4) of land use for minerals development in Dorset and BCP and whether the policies remain effective and appropriate in supporting and delivering this vision. The review period covered by this report is the five years since adoption, 2014-2018. Monitoring has been ongoing since the end of 2018, and further review of the MS is expected to be carried out. 1.6. The purpose of this report is therefore to provide a high level review of the effectiveness of the policies of the MS, review and consider whether national policy may have an impact on the delivery of the MS and summarise what further actions are recommended.
1 Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Minerals Strategy 2014 https://www.dorsetcouncil.gov.uk/planning-buildings-land/planning-policy/dorset-county-council/minerals-planning- policy/minerals-strategy.aspx 2 National Planning Policy Framework paragraph 33 (February 2019 - Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government) https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/810197/NPPF_Feb_2019 _revised.pdf 3 Paragraph: 070 Reference ID: 61-070-20190315 Revision date:15 03 2019 https://www.gov.uk/guidance/plan-making#plan- reviews 4 Paragraph: 064 Reference ID: 61-064-20190315 Revision date: 15 03 2019
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 166 2014 Page 4 of 81 Structure of this review 1.7. This review has a number of sections:
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 167 2014 Page 5 of 81 Effectiveness of the Minerals Strategy 2014 Policies - each of the 47 policies of the Minerals Strategy have been reviewed, based on the monitoring reports and additional focussed assessment, in order to provide information on how effective and relevant the policies are. Commentary and a monitoring RAG (Red, Amber and Green) status is provided for each policy. National Planning Policy Framework Assessment- a focussed review to assess compliance with the National Planning Policy Framework. Issues Identified– explores the policies that have been found to have an ‘Amber’ or 'Red' Review status and what action is considered necessary in these cases. Conclusions – outlines a summary of the findings and a proposed way forward in relation to the need for an update of the Minerals Strategy.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 168 2014 Page 6 of 81 2. Effectiveness of the Minerals Strategy 2014 Policies 2.1. This section reviews each of the 47 policies contained within the MS, considering the monitoring indicators and targets for each policy. Frequency of use and relevance over the period 2014-2018 are reviewed, based on an assessment of use for each policy. 2.2. In the 5 year review period 2014 to 2018, the Mineral Planning Authorities issued 103 decisions, which have been assessed for policy effectiveness. A RAG (Red, Amber and Green) Monitoring status is provided for each policy and is determined as follows:
Monitoring shows no issues Green
Monitoring shows some issues - further consideration required Amber
Monitoring shows issues - further consideration required and these may need to be Red addressed
2.3. Policies scored as 'Green' are considered to be functioning and being applied as intended, and no issues were identified. If some issues are identified, but these do not appear significant, the policy is scored 'Amber'. If significant issues were identified the policy is score 'Red'. An Amber or Red does not mean that the policy, or the whole MS, must be reviewed but it does flag up to the MPA where further consideration and attention are needed. 2.4. A summary table of all the RAG Monitoring statuses of all the policies is set out at the end of the policy assessments. 2.5. The 'Issues Requiring Further Consideration' section provides further analysis of each policy scoring Amber or Red, with the response of the MPA to each one.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 169 2014 Page 7 of 81 Policy SS1 - Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development Policy Wording
When considering development proposals the Mineral Planning Authority will take a positive approach that reflects the presumption in favour of sustainable development contained in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). It will always work proactively with applicants jointly to find solutions which mean that proposals can be approved wherever possible, and to secure development that improves the economic, social and environmental conditions in the area. Planning applications that accord with the policies in this Local Plan (and, where relevant, with polices in Neighbourhood Plans) will be approved without delay, unless material considerations indicate otherwise. Where there are no policies relevant to the application or relevant policies are out of date at the time of making the decision then the Mineral Planning Authority will grant permission unless material considerations indicate otherwise – taking into account whether: any adverse impacts of granting permission would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in the NPPF taken as a whole; or specific policies in that Framework indicate that development should be restricted
Key Monitoring Indicator: Number of applications refused. Target: All permissions consistent with this policy reflecting the presumption in favour of sustainable development. Monitoring trigger/threshold for review: Any approval not consistent with this policy and not reflecting sustainable development. Use since adoption: This policy has been specifically referred to in decision notices 21 times out of 104 applications during the 2014-2018 review period, but the aims of the policy have been more widely applied.
Commentary and RAG Score Green
This policy is a general one that the Mineral Planning Authority were required to include in the MS when it was prepared. It is intended to ensure that the Mineral Planning Authority (MPA) takes a positive approach to development that improves economic, social and environmental conditions in the area, reflecting the presumption in favour of sustainable development. Assessment of refusals of permission show that no applications have been recommended for refusal on the basis of not reflecting sustainable development. There have been two refusals to date – Woodsford (contrary to DM2, DM4 and DM7 - refused against officer recommendation) and Canford Magna Golf Club (DM2 - also refused against officer recommendation). These are political decisions over which the Minerals Strategy 2014 has no influence. Although this is a relatively low proportion, the MPA is satisfied that there is no need for a decision to refer specifically to this policy, and the policy is functioning satisfactorily. The MPA is satisfied that the policy is fit for purpose and being used appropriately and no change is considered necessary.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 170 2014 Page 8 of 81 Policy SS2 - Identification of Sites in the Mineral Sites Plan Policy Wording
The Mineral Planning Authority will use the Mineral Sites Plan as the vehicle for the identification of specific sites wherever possible, having regard to the policies in the Minerals Strategy, the site selection criteria and the presumption in favour of sustainable development as set out in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). Specific sites will be where viable mineral resources are known to exist, where landowners are supportive of mineral development and where any planning applications made are likely to be acceptable in planning terms. Permission will be granted for unallocated (windfall) sites where it can be demonstrated that there is a need that cannot be met within allocated sites and where development would not prejudice the delivery of allocated sites.
Monitoring Indicator: Permission granted for a non-allocated site. Target: All permissions consistent with this policy with permissions being for sites within the MSP wherever possible. Monitoring trigger/threshold for review: Any approval not consistent with this policy. Use since adoption: This policy has been used a number of times since adoption of the Minerals Strategy, including three new sites; fourteen extensions to site/extension to time. In some cases the sites were under consideration through the local plan process, in others the sites were completely new.
Commentary and RAG Score Green
This policy is intended to establish the Mineral Sites Plan 2019 (MSP - when prepared, it was not adopted until some 5 years after adoption of the Minerals Strategy 2014), as the primary identifier of new sites (including extensions) for minerals development. This policy is not intended to make the MSP the sole vehicle for the identification and approval of future mineral sites. The MS does acknowledge (e.g. paragraphs 5.16 and 5.17) that for some minerals it may not be possible for the MSP to identify adequate sites to meet demand over the Plan period. It also states that sites that come forward which are not allocated through the MSP will need to comply with relevant policies in the MS, and this will provide a sound basis for assessment. Assessment of new sites or extensions to existing sites show that they are a combination of allocated sites and non- allocated sites. The MPA do not consider it unduly restrictive or negative, and given the delay in adopting the MSP, it has been difficult to properly assess this policy. Now the Mineral Sites Plan 2019 is adopted and in use, this policy will be properly assessed in coming years. The MPA is satisfied that the policy is fit for purpose and being used appropriately and no change is considered necessary.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 171 2014 Page 9 of 81 Policy CC1 - Preparation of Climate Change Assessments Policy Wording
Proposals for mineral developments and aggregates recycling operations should be supported by an assessment of how climate change mitigation and adaptation measures have been incorporated in the design and operation of the proposed development and considered in its location. This assessment will include demonstrating that the proposals are energy, material, and water efficient. It must also demonstrate how emissions generated from traffic will be minimised.
Monitoring Indicator: Applications accepted without a comprehensive Climate Change Assessment Applications where mitigation is incorporated into the scheme Conditions requiring mitigation measures Target: All applications to be supported by a climate change assessment or a statement to confirm that an assessment is not needed. Monitoring trigger/threshold for review: Any approval not consistent with this policy Should applications not include climate change mitigation measures, where these are appropriate, discussions will be undertaken with Development Management officers to consider the reasons why and any potential issues this raises with the implementation of policy Use since adoption: A climate change assessment was provided and assessed for the 39 Wytch Farm applications determined in 2017, although the policy was not specifically referred to in the decision notices. The policy was referred to in a further three application reports, but this is a relatively small proportion of the 104 applications dealt with since adoption.
Commentary and RAG Score Red
Chapter 6 of the Minerals Strategy covers the impacts of climate change and the importance of minimising these impacts in relation to mineral production, where possible. This policy seeks to require proposals for minerals development to demonstrate that the wider issue of climate change has been addressed in each case. However, indications are that this policy is not being consistently applied.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 172 2014 Page 10 of 81 Policy RE1 – Production of Recycled Aggregates Policy Wording
Production of recycled aggregates, including high grade washed recycled aggregate, will be facilitated through permitting long term or permanent facilities at locations which: a. are near to the source of material to be recycled and in locations favourable to the production of recycled aggregates (for example industrial locations, existing active quarries or waste sites, urban fringe and brownfield sites); or b. replace temporary aggregate recycling permissions where the need for permanent retention can be demonstrated and where it can be shown that the temporary facility has operated without causing adverse environmental impacts and where long-term or permanent operation would not impede or conflict with restoration of any other use of the site. Where it is considered that permanent or long term facilities for aggregates recycling may be inappropriate, temporary facilities will be permitted or renewed at suitable locations, including existing quarries and appropriate waste management sites, provided that any negative impacts can be avoided or mitigated to an acceptable level. In cases where a recycling facility is permitted for operation within an existing quarry, the life of the permission will normally be restricted to the life of the quarry operation
Monitoring Indicator: Number of applications for recycled aggregate facilities approved or refused Amount of recycled aggregate produced, as a percentage of overall aggregate production/sales Target: Increase the production of recycled aggregate, in order to reduce the need for primary aggregate Improved collection of recycling figures Monitoring trigger/threshold for review: If no applications for new recycling operations emerge this policy will need reviewing. The MPA may need to be proactive and identify specific sites Use since adoption: Applied to one Minerals application in the plan period and to four Waste applications.
Commentary and RAG Score Green
The Minerals Strategy recognises the benefits of encouraging and facilitating the production of recycled aggregate, and this policy is intended to encourage and promote this through permitting permanent or long-term temporary facilities. There has been one minerals application involving recycled aggregates since adoption - this was for permanent permission for an existing site; however, a temporary extension was granted, rather than permanency. Although no applications for new sites have been dealt with, as the table below shows recycled aggregate production is rising annually. The policy has been applied in four waste development applications.
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
Recycled aggregate sales (tonnes) 322,324 327,178 346,157 365,800 394,928
As % of total aggregate sales 13.2 15 17 19 21.4
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 173 2014 Page 11 of 81 The policy is drafted positively, and encourages development (subject to criteria) to facilitate and increase recycled aggregate production. Although there have been to date no applications for new recycling operations, the MPA is satisfied that the policy is functioning adequately and does not at this time require review. Recycled aggregate production steadily increased. The MPA is satisfied that the policy is fit for purpose and being used appropriately and no change is considered necessary.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 174 2014 Page 12 of 81 Policy AS1 - Provision of Sand and Gravel Policy Wording
An adequate and steady supply of locally extracted sand and gravel will be provided by maintaining a landbank of permitted sand and gravel reserves equivalent to at least 7 years' worth of supply over the period to 2028, based on the current agreed local annual supply requirement for Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole This will be achieved from: i. remaining reserves at existing permitted sites; ii. new sand and gravel sites, including extensions to existing permitted sites, as identified in the Mineral Sites Plan; iii. new sites not identified in the Mineral Sites Plan, provided: a. monitoring indicates that the sites identified in ii. above are unlikely to meet Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole's landbank requirements; or b. the proposed development is for the prior extraction of aggregate in advance of non-minerals development; or c. the development is part of a proposal for another beneficial use; or d. the development is for a specific local requirement. Future sites required to contribute to meeting this supply will be located within the resource blocks identified on the Policies Map. Sites will only be considered where it has been demonstrated that possible effects (including those related to hydrology, displacement of recreation, species, proximity, land management and restoration) that might arise from the development would not adversely affect the integrity of the Dorset Heaths SAC, Dorset Heathlands SPA and Dorset Heathland Ramsar site either alone or in combination with other plans or projects.
Monitoring Indicator: Total quantity of sand and gravel as permitted reserves Total quantity of sand and gravel identified within the MSP Actual sales/production of sand and gravel annually Target: To identify sufficient sites within the MSP to deliver production at a level of 9.36 million tonnes (average of 1.58 million tonnes of sand and gravel per annum) Monitoring trigger/threshold for review: If it becomes clear that it will not be possible to meet the level of provision at an acceptable environmental cost, from within the resource areas, this policy will need revising If the level of sales consistently exceeds the level of provision further sites may be needed and/or the reliance on the criteria and policies in the Minerals Strategy Use since adoption: During the review period 2014-2018 the policy has been used/referenced nine times, with nine permissions issued.
Cont'd over…
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 175 2014 Page 13 of 81 Commentary and RAG Score Green
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
Total quantity of sand and gravel as 15,214,238 13,827,020 13,547,949 12,607,012 14,116,308 permitted reserves (tonnes)
Total quantity of sand and gravel identified within the Mineral Sites Plan Approximately 17 million tonnes 2019
Actual sales/production of sand and 1,733,361 2,287,042 1,666,722 1,265,731 1,193,918 gravel annually (tonnes)
Landbank – years 9.68 8.92 8.97 8.52 9.87
This policy seeks to ensure an adequate and steady supply of local land-won sand and gravel. The results of the monitoring are set out in the table above. The level of reserves fell steadily to 2017, but increased in 2018. However, as sales have continued to decline as well, the sand and gravel landbank has remained above the required 7 years. The issue of identifying sufficient sites in the MSP to maintain supply is addressed in the recently adopted Mineral Sites Plan 2019, and this was demonstrated through Policy MS-1 to the satisfaction of the Inspector examining the Plan. The MSP also includes another policy, MS-2, permitting unallocated sites in certain situations. The target of 1.58 mtpa for provision as set out above varies annually, and is established through the annual Local Aggregates Assessment. The level of provision identified and allocated through the MSP far exceeds this target. During the preparation of the MSP, a number of sand and gravel sites proposed for inclusion in the MSP were applied for and approved, contributing to maintaining supply. The MPA are satisfied that policy AS1 of the Minerals Strategy 2014 encourages the ongoing supply of aggregate particularly in conjunction with policies MS-1 and MS-2 of the Mineral Sites Plan 2019. The policy is fit for purpose and being used appropriately and no change is considered necessary.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 176 2014 Page 14 of 81 Policy AS2 - Landbank Provision Policy Wording
The Mineral Planning Authorities will maintain a separate landbank for both Poole Formation and River Terrace aggregate equivalent to at least 7 years' supply in each case.
Monitoring Indicator: Level of permitted reserves of each material and current landbank figure Target: Maintenance of a 7 year landbank through mineral permissions Monitoring trigger/threshold for review: If it is clear that applications are not being granted then the size of the landbank will fall and the policy may need revising Use since adoption: This aims of this policy are being applied without the policy being specifically referenced.
Commentary and RAG Score Green
This policy recognises that two different types of aggregate, Poole Formation and River Terrace, are extracted in Dorset/BCP and is intended to ensure that separate landbanks of both these types of aggregate are maintained.
It ensures that the MS is in compliance with policy guidance5 which states that 'where there is a distinct market for a specific type or quality of aggregate (such as high specification rock, or sand used for concrete or sand for asphalt), a separate landbank calculation based on provision to that market may be justified for that material or those materials'.
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
Poole Formation reserves (tonnes) 7,735,422 7,105,020 7,562,949 6,676,012 8,250,808
Poole Formation landbank 7.37 6.90 7.56 6.81 8.78
River Terrace reserves (tonnes) 7,463,000 6,722,000 5,985,000 5,931,000 5,066,831
River Terrace landbank 14.35 12.93 11.97 11.86 10.34
A Landbank of at least 7 years for River Terrace has been maintained in the past 5 years. Levels for Poole Formation have fluctuated more, on two occasions falling to below 7 years, but have risen in 2018 to well above 7 years. The MSP allocates both River Terrace and Poole Formation aggregate sites, and monitoring of that Plan along with the MS will indicate how effective this policy is when supported by the policies of the MSP. Time is required to see how effectively the MS and the MSP work together. The MPA is satisfied that this policy is delivering as needed and do not consider that any further action is needed at this time. It is noted that if no new permissions are issued then reserves will fall, but the MPA has no control on the submission of new applications. Landbanks will continue to be monitored through this policy.
5 National Planning Practice Guidance: Paragraph: 085 Reference ID: 27-085-20140306 Revision date: 06 03 2014
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 177 2014 Page 15 of 81 Policy AS3 - Crushed Rock Policy Wording
New sites for the processing and production of crushed rock will only be permitted within the Plan period in exceptional circumstances including but not limited to: a. where development would enable a sustainable supply of minerals close to the market; b. where an existing more sensitive site will be relinquished
Monitoring Indicator: Whether or not any new sites for crushed rock are permitted Actual sales/production of crushed rock annually Target: No permissions granted for the processing and production of crushed rock Monitoring trigger/threshold for review: Landbank of less than 10 years Use since adoption: This Policy has not been used/referenced.
Commentary and RAG Score Green
This policy implicitly acknowledges the potentially significant impacts of crushed rock quarries, along with the fact that new crushed rock quarries may be required in order to maintain production of this type of aggregate. It focusses on avoiding impacts from further surface quarrying for crushed rock, but it does include allowance for the development of new crushed rock quarries in exceptional circumstances.
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
Sales of crushed 278,395 239,517 197,873 219,703 198,738 rock (tonnes)
Estimated 19.63 mt 19 mt 12.2 mt 12.19 mt 12 mt crushed rock landbank (million tonnes and 89.23 years 82 years c. 53 years c. 55 years c. 57 years years)
No permissions for new or extended crushed rock sites have been granted in the last 5 years, but due to historic permissions the landbank remains far in excess of 10 years. The Mineral Sites Plan 2019 includes an allocation for an extension to the existing Swanworth Quarry, in Purbeck. The MPA considered that, taking into account existing policy and material considerations, this allocation was justified as it maintained a supply of crushed rock outside of Portland and in close proximity to the Bournemouth & Poole conurbation.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 178 2014 Page 16 of 81 Policy AS4 - Wharves and Depots Policy Wording
The Mineral Planning Authority will permit new mineral handling rail depots and wharves, and the expansion and/or modernisation of existing sites, where the need for the facility can be demonstrated.
Monitoring Indicator: Permissions for other forms of development at existing rail depots and wharves which would prevent or prejudice the current use - application of safeguarding policy New rail depots and aggregate wharves Expansion and /or modernisation of existing sites Target: Establishment of new wharf or depot sites No net loss of land at existing wharves and depots No net decreases in percentage share transported by rail/water Monitoring trigger/threshold for review: If new information identified the need for a wharf or depot there may be the need to review the policy and consider more proactive policy guidance and the identification of site specific allocations Use since adoption: This Policy has not been used/referenced.
Commentary and RAG Score Green
This policy seeks to provide for the development of new aggregate wharves or rail depots, or improvements to current facilities, provided the need for the proposal can be demonstrated. It addresses sustainability and sustainable transport issues, and also supports the reduction of CO2 in minerals transport.
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
83,000 % share transported by rail None None None (tonnes) None (4.1%)
% share transported by water (i.e. marine dredged, 92,982 87,268 82,750 71,400 56,227 imported to Poole) as % of total amount of (tonnes) (tonnes) (tonnes) (tonnes) (tonnes) aggregate sold/consumed in Dorset (3.8%) (4%) (4%) (3.6%) (3%)
83,000 % share transported by rail (i.e. imported to 0 tonnes 0 tonnes 0 tonnes 0 tonnes Hamworthy, Poole) as % of total amount of crushed tonnes 0% 0% 0% 0% rock sold/consumed in Dorset 36%
There has been no use of this policy since adoption, including no permissions which potentially impact on the operation of the CEMEX wharf or Hamworthy rail depot no other wharf/depot sites currently in regular use in Dorset Council or BCP Council no applications or permissions for new sites, or expansion/modernisation of current sites
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 179 2014 Page 17 of 81 existing safeguarding policy has not been triggered, and both sites are safeguarded under new policy MS8 in the Minerals Sites Plan. The percentage share transported by water increased from 2014 to 2016, but then decreased again to just below the 2014 position. The Hamworthy depot was not used from 2013 -2016; was used in 2017, but not in 2018. Improvement/maintenance to the rail infrastructure is awaited, and when this is complete imports are likely to start again. This policy has not been used, and is not achieving two of its targets. However, development of new wharf/depot sites, or expansion of current facilities, is market driven. The MPA is satisfied that the existing sites are appropriately safeguarded, the policy is positively worded and seeks to facilitate appropriate development. The MPA is satisfied that the policy is fit for purpose and being used appropriately and no change is considered necessary.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 180 2014 Page 18 of 81 Policy AS5 - Borrow Pits Policy Wording
Proposals for borrow pits associated with construction projects will be permitted provided that all of the following apply: a. the site lies on or in close proximity to the project so that material can be conveyed to its point of use with minimal use of public highways and without undue interference with footpaths and bridleways; b. the material extracted will only be used in connection with the project; c. it can be demonstrated that supply of the mineral from the borrow pit would have less environmental impact than if the mineral were supplied from an existing source; d. the borrow pit can be restored without the use of imported material, other than that generated on the adjoining construction scheme; and e. the use of the borrow pit is limited to the life of the project.
Monitoring Indicator: Number of permissions for Borrow Pits Target: Ensure proposals have minimum detrimental impact All permissions consistent with all the criteria in this policy Monitoring trigger/threshold for review: Any approval not consistent with this policy Use since adoption: This policy has not been used or referenced.
Commentary and RAG Score Green
This policy recognises the importance of borrow pits in appropriate situations/locations, and their ability to provide more sustainable access to a source of aggregates, minimising transport impacts. It facilitates their development provided certain conditions are met. There have been no applications for borrow pits, and this policy has not been used. Development of borrow pits is market driven, or need driven. The MPA is satisfied that the policy is positively worded and facilitates appropriate development where needed. The policy is fit for purpose and being used appropriately and no change is considered necessary.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 181 2014 Page 19 of 81 Policy BC1 - Provision of Ball Clay Policy Wording
The Mineral Planning Authority will aim to ensure an adequate and steady supply of all grades of ball clay through the provision of up to 2.5 million tonnes of reserves over the plan period from within the Ball Clay Consultation Area. The sensitive environment of the ball clay bearing areas should be recognised and permission will be granted for the extraction of ball clay where all of the following specific criteria are met: a. The scale, nature, location and duration of the proposal would not have a significant impact on the landscape character and quality of the AONB. b. Where sites are situated within the AONB, the scale and method of working should be appropriate in scale and specifically tailored to reduce harm. c. Where it has been demonstrated that possible effects (including those related to hydrology, displacement of recreation, species, proximity, land management and restoration) that might arise from the development would not adversely affect the integrity of the Dorset Heaths SAC, Dorset Heathlands SPA and Dorset Heathland Ramsar site either alone or in combination with other plans or projects, unless in exceptional circumstances the provisions of Article 6(4) of the Habitats Directive are met. d. A detailed restoration and aftercare scheme demonstrates how the enhancement of landscape, nature conservation habitats and geodiversity interest will be achieved, as appropriate. Where there are sites allocated in the Mineral Sites Plan and applications are for additional sites, the need for a particular grade of clay should be demonstrated.
Monitoring Indicator: Tonnage of material identified within the MSP Total quantity of ball clay as permitted reserves Actual sales/production of ball clay annually Target: To maintain an adequate supply of all grades of ball clay Monitoring trigger/threshold for review: If it is clear that permitted reserves are unlikely to be sufficient to maintain an adequate and steady supply then the policy may need to be reviewed Use since adoption: There have been five relevant applications during the review period 2014-2018, and the policy was used in each case.
Commentary and RAG Score Green
This policy recognises the importance of ball clay, and maintaining supply. As a criteria based policy, it facilitates applications for new development when this can be justified. The policy recognises the extremely sensitive environments, particularly in terms of landscape and nature conservation, in which ball clay is found and seeks to ensure the protection of the environment as far as possible while providing for the ongoing supply of ball clay. This is policy is difficult to monitor effectively, primarily because the only company producing ball clay in Dorset decline to provide detailed and regular figures on sales or reserves. There are currently no accurate and recent figures on annual sales and reserves. Sales in 2016 were approximately 150,000 tonnes and 187,037 tonnes in 2017, significantly less than the figure of 250,000 tpa identified in the Minerals Strategy 2014. The recent permission at
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 182 2014 Page 20 of 81 Trigon Hill Extension provided approximately 1,200,000 tonnes. Existing reserves will last longer at lower rates of extraction. The MSP, for much of its preparation stage, included the Trigon Hill Extension site only as a proposed allocation; permission for this site was sought and granted around the time the MSP was undergoing Examination. The adopted plan does not allocate any ball clay sites. Part of the reason for this is that other sites put forward by the operating company Imerys for consideration were sensitive sites and the MPA were not willing to include them as potential allocations unless further assessment information was supplied. Policy BC1 commits to the supply of an adequate and steady supply of ball clay. In addition to existing reserves, including the recent Trigon Hill Extension permission, this policy is a criteria-based policy with a commitment to grant permission for new sites provided the criteria as set out are met. The MPA is satisfied that the policy is positively worded and seeks to facilitate appropriate development. To date, the policy has been delivering an adequate and steady supply of ball clay. The MPA is satisfied that the policy is fit for purpose and being used appropriately and no change is considered necessary.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 183 2014 Page 21 of 81 Policy BC2 - Ball Clay Transportation Policy Wording
Where the Mineral Planning Authority has identified unacceptable adverse impacts arising from road borne transportation of ball clay, operators will be expected to use alternative means of transport for the movement of ball clay to and from Furzebrook and for the onward distribution of ball clay from Furzebrook where practical.
Monitoring Indicator: The extent to which any alternative means of transport to and from Furzebrook are utilised Target: Consideration of alternatives to the bulk transportation of minerals by road in applications Applications including an increase in transportation to be accompanied by a statement of sustainable transport options Monitoring trigger/threshold for review: Any approval not consistent with this policy Use since adoption: This policy has not been used since adoption.
Commentary and RAG Score Green
This policy encourages alternative (to road) means of transport for ball clay, promoting sustainability and sustainable transport. This policy has not been used since adoption. Consultation responses from the Highways authority have not identified any unacceptable adverse impacts, therefore this policy has not been applied. It remains available for use. The MPA is satisfied that the policy is fit for purpose and being used appropriately and no change is considered necessary.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 184 2014 Page 22 of 81 Policy BC3 - Extraction of Sand and Gravel in association with Ball Clay within the AONB Policy Wording
Extraction of sand and gravel in association with ball clay workings within the Dorset AONB will be permitted where it can be demonstrated that: a. the material is derived from the overburden and interburden; b. the operation is of a reasonable scale; c. any adverse visual and landscape impacts are avoided or capable of mitigation to the satisfaction of the Mineral Planning Authority; d. restoration of the site would not be compromised, maintaining and enhancing the area's landscape character and ecology; e. the road network can safely accommodate the additional vehicle movements without significant environmental or amenity impact; and f. any adverse impacts on the ecology, amenity and recreational areas are capable of mitigation to the satisfaction of the Mineral Planning Authority.
Monitoring Indicator: Number of permissions and allocations within the MSP for the extraction of sand and gravel in association with ball clay working within the AONB which are not consistent with the policy Target: All permissions consistent with this policy Monitoring trigger/threshold for review: Any approval for large scale or major extraction of sand and gravel, in association with ball clay, within the AONB would be contrary to this policy. The need for policy review may be necessary Use since adoption: There have been four applications for ball clay within the AONB, with three of the four decisions referencing the policy. All relevant applications have addressed the policy criteria.
Commentary and RAG Score Green
It is acknowledged that sand and gravel is found alongside ball clay - either above, below or between the clay seams extracted. In some cases it is necessary to remove the sand and gravel to access the clay, and in such cases it can be appropriate to sell the aggregate, thereby minimising the need to extract elsewhere given that the aggregate had to be removed to access the ball clay. However there is national policy against aggregate production within Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, where ball clay is found and worked. This policy seeks to simultaneously protect the AONB from excessive aggregate extraction, while allowing the sale of some level of aggregate, to be agreed for each application. There are no allocations within the MSP for sites for the extraction of sand/gravel in association with ball clay. As noted earlier, the MSP contains no ball clay allocations as the only allocation under consideration received permission before the Plan was adopted. All the ball clay applications within the AONB, in which the policy was referenced 3 times out of 4, were for variation of condition to extend working or restoration time. There were no new applications, seeking permission to quarry aggregate in the AONB - in each case, the principle of working had already been established but the policy was referenced in 75% of relevant cases. The case in which it was not used, it was arguably not relevant The policy remains available for use, and the MPA is satisfied that the policy is fit for purpose and being used appropriately and no change is considered necessary.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 185 2014 Page 23 of 81 Policy PK1 - Provision of Purbeck Stone Policy Wording
The Mineral Planning Authority will maintain an adequate and steady supply of the full range of Purbeck Stone beds for building and roofing purposes during the plan period. Provision will be made for an average of at least 20,000 tonnes per annum of saleable Purbeck Stone, excluding Purbeck Marble and Burr.
Monitoring Indicator: Level of output of Purbeck Stone Target: Sites identified in the MSP to meet requirement of 102,000 tonnes (an average of 20,000 tonnes per annum, tpa) Monitoring trigger/threshold for review: Significant increase in output may require a policy review Use since adoption: There have been eleven Purbeck Stone applications. No refusals. Relevant to ten applications. Used/referenced in seven applications. Policy listed for three applications. Whilst the policy was referred to directly in only 7 of the 10 relevant applications, it is considered that the requirements of the policy are being applied.
Commentary and RAG Score Green
This policy seeks to ensure the continued provision of Purbeck Stone, across the full range of beds of stone, during the life of the MS. This will be achieved through allocating enough sites in the MSP to ensure continuing supply. The MSP has allocated 5 sites, 2 of which are wider areas within which individual quarries will be developed subject to permission. These 5 sites are estimated to comprise in excess of 900,000 tonnes of Purbeck Stone, though not all this will be saleable stone. It is difficult to know annual production with accuracy - for the 5 years of monitoring, only in one year (2017) have nearly all companies returned sales/production figures, and for this year production was approximately 25,000 tonnes. The MPA is satisfied that the MSP has allocated an adequate amount of Purbeck Stone for development during the Plan period, and as discussed in Policy PK2 (below) there are additional options for Purbeck Stone provision allowed for in the Plan. No further action is required at this time.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 186 2014 Page 24 of 81 Policy PK2 - Considerations for Purbeck Stone Quarries Policy Wording
Provision for Purbeck Stone will be made by: i. identifying suitable sites within the Mineral Sites Plan; ii. permitting applications for non-allocated sites within the Area of Search, as shown on the Policies Map, if they are needed to meet a shortfall in supply that cannot be met through existing permitted or allocated sites; and iii. permitting applications for non-allocated sites outside of the Area of Search if it can be demonstrated that there is a need for a specific bed of stone that cannot be met by (i) and (ii), or that they would offer a net environmental, economic or social benefit compared with similar development within the Area of Search. Proposals for Purbeck Stone quarries must meet all of the following criteria: a. their scale, extent and location are such that adverse impacts upon the environment and amenity can be avoided, minimised or adequately mitigated to the satisfaction of the Mineral Planning Authority; b. they are accompanied by details of anticipated overburden and evidence of how this will be accommodated within the landform so as not to have a significant impact on the landscape character and quality of the Dorset AONB; c. there will not be an unacceptable cumulative impact on the landscape character or amenity having regard to activities within the proposed site and other sites within the area; d. existing characteristic landscape features, such as stone walls, are retained in situ unless the stone is incapable of being viably worked without disturbance to such features. Where disturbance is unavoidable proposals must include measures to minimise disturbance and/or mitigate the impact to an acceptable degree; e. there would not be unacceptable impacts on the highway network or amenity arising from transporting stone from the quarry to the service area; and f. in the case of applications for non-allocated sites, they would not prevent or constrain the delivery of an existing permitted or allocated site, having regard to the potential for cumulative impacts to occur.
Monitoring Indicator: Grant of permission from outside the Area of Search Target: Permitted sites consistent with the policy criteria Monitoring trigger/threshold for review: If sites are being permitted or allocated from outside the Area of Search, consideration may need to be given to whether the identified area remains appropriate – e.g. new evidence that may require a revision to the identified area or an exception to the policy is unlikely to be repeated? Use since adoption: Applications for extensions to area of extraction have fulfilled the criterion as required by the policy; applications for extensions to the life of the site / ancillary operations have made no change to the original extraction permitted.
Commentary and RAG Score Green
This policy is intended to establish the means by which new Purbeck Stone sites are identified for development. New sites would preferentially be identified and allocated through the MSP. If however there is a shortfall in supply from existing reserves and the allocated sites, the Minerals Strategy 2014 identifies an Area of Search within which
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 187 2014 Page 25 of 81 sites may be permitted. Finally, in some cases sites may be permitted outside the Area of Search provided certain criteria are met. The policy then sets out specific criteria that proposals for Purbeck Stone development must meet. The policy has been used a number of times, so far for existing sites involving site extensions or extensions of time. In one case, a part of a proposed extension to an existing quarry was outside the Purbeck Stone Area of Search, but the proposal was permitted. It is expected that at this time officers were still familiarising themselves with what were then relatively new policies, and this was possibly an oversight. This is the only case in which Policy PK2 was not fully complied with. The MPA is satisfied that the policy is fit for purpose and is being used appropriately. No change is considered necessary.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 188 2014 Page 26 of 81 Policy PK3 - Service Areas Policy Wording
Proposals including the processing of Purbeck Stone will only be permitted if any sawing equipment is located within a building to minimise adverse impact on amenity. Improvements to existing service areas, including the establishment of appropriate buffers between service areas and residential properties, will be sought wherever the opportunity arises. Proposals for new service areas which would have an adverse impact on landscape or amenity will only be permitted if they are a replacement for an existing service area and they would result in a net reduction in adverse impacts.
Monitoring Indicator: Number of conditions linked to site improvements Net change in the number of service areas Target: No net increase in number of service areas Monitoring trigger/threshold for review: Approval for any additional service area Advances in technology Use since adoption: There have been three applications relating to service areas, and the policy was used in all three.
Commentary and RAG Score Green
This policy recognises that the Purbeck Stone industry requires service areas with buildings and equipment to process the extracted stone. It seeks to minimise impacts, including visual and amenity impacts, from the presence and operation of these service areas. It also seeks, where possible, to achieve improvements to existing service areas. There have been three cases where this policy was relevant, and it has been used in each case. Conditions imposed have included managing stockpiling, not allowing importation, maintenance of vegetation screening, noise control - these are less related to site improvements than to site management, but do still seek to control overall site appearance, and reduce potential for visual/amenity impact. There has been no net increase in service areas. The policy remains available for use if proposals regarding service areas are received, and provides the ability to control such proposals. The MPA is satisfied that the policy is fit for purpose and being used appropriately and no change is considered necessary.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 189 2014 Page 27 of 81 Policy PK4 - Crushing of Purbeck Stone at Dimension Stone Quarries Policy Wording
The Mineral Planning Authority will seek to restrict the crushing of stone at dimension stone quarries in Purbeck to a level which is small in scale, temporary and ancillary to the extraction and working of dimension stone quarried from the site, where the material is required for use within a quarry or service area. In all cases such activities should: a. ensure there will be no adverse impact upon features, people or activities sensitive to disturbance from it; b. only use stone which is not required for the restoration of the quarry site to an appropriate landform; and c. be limited to stone extracted from Purbeck Stone quarries. Permission will only be granted on a temporary basis for the crushing of surplus Purbeck Stone in addition to use within a quarry or service area where it can be demonstrated that there is an identified local need, it would not generate unacceptable impacts on the highway network and subject to a and b above.
Monitoring Indicator: Conditions attached to permissions restricting crushing activity Target: Crushing only in line with exceptional circumstances outlined Monitoring trigger/threshold for review: Any approval not consistent with this policy Any unexpected need for crushed rock could highlight a need for review Use since adoption: This policy has been used six times in eight relevant applications. In two cases a condition restricting crushing has been imposed, but the wrong policy (PK3) quoted.
Commentary and RAG Score Amber
This policy seeks to restrict the crushing of waste Purbeck Stone, for both amenity reasons and to maximise the availability of stone for restoration purposes. It has been used for all relevant applications. This principle of this policy appears to be applied consistently in relevant cases, although it is noted that in two applications a condition restricting crushing has been included, but the policy quoted is PK3 instead of PK4. On this basis the policy itself is not being consistently applied, and this appears to be an error in report drafting rather than a problem with the principle/approach of the policy. This issue will be brought to the attention of officers, however this policy has been scored Amber. The MPA is satisfied that the policy is fit for purpose and being used appropriately and no change is considered necessary.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 190 2014 Page 28 of 81 Policy PK5 - Importation of Stone from Outside Purbeck Policy Wording
The Mineral Planning Authority will only permit the processing and storage and resale of stone arising from outside Purbeck Stone quarries where it can be demonstrated that this is necessary to maintain employment and/or masonry skills and where this would be no more than a minor activity of a scale which does not undermine the viability of the Purbeck Stone or generate unacceptable impacts upon amenity or the highway network.
Monitoring Indicator: Number of permissions for the processing, storage and resale of imported stone and total tonnage permitted Target: No permissions contrary to policy for storage and resale of imported stone Importation of stone for processing should be in keeping with current levels Monitoring trigger/threshold for review: Any approval not consistent with this policy A significant rise in the amount of imported stone permitted Use since adoption: There have been six decisions involving a requirement to limit or prohibit the importation of stone to Purbeck stone quarries. Two of these included a condition prohibiting the importation of stone, but quoted incorrect policy numbers.
Commentary and RAG Score Amber
This policy seeks to strike a balance between allowing some importation of stone from outside Purbeck, to maintain quarry activity/operation; and ensuring that imports of stone do not undermine the Purbeck Stone industry or cause unacceptable impacts locally. This principle of this policy appears to be applied consistently in relevant cases, although it is noted that in two applications a condition prohibiting stone imports has been included, but incorrect policy numbers are used. The policy itself is not being consistently applied, and this appears to be an error in report drafting rather than a problem with the principle/approach of the policy. This issue will be brought to the attention of officers, however this policy has been scored Amber. The MPA is satisfied that the policy is being used appropriately, apart from being misquoted in some cases, and is considered fit for purpose. No changes are considered necessary.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 191 2014 Page 29 of 81 Policy PD1 - Underground Mining and High Wall Extraction of Portland Stone Policy Policy Wording
Proposals for underground mining and high wall extraction of Portland dimension stone, on the Isle of Portland, will be permitted where they meet all of the following criteria: a. the mine is designed to ensure the long term stability of overlying land; b. any adverse impacts from the creation of a mine entrance can be avoided or mitigated to the satisfaction of the Mineral Planning Authority; c. significant environmental gains will be provided, which will generally be achieved through agreement to relinquish permission for surface quarrying of at least an equivalent amount of stone in Areas Sensitive to Surface Quarrying, as identified on the Policies Map; d. material used for backfilling is sourced from within the proposed mine, wherever possible; and e. suitable and safe proposals are made for the closure and sealing of the mine or an identified beneficial afteruse is identified; and surface areas are restored for a beneficial afteruse.
Monitoring Indicator: Number of underground/high wall mines permitted Quantity of reserves permitted for surface quarrying relinquished Target: All permissions consistent with this policy Relinquishment of areas most sensitive surface quarrying Improved restoration schemes Monitoring trigger/threshold for review: Any approval not consistent with this policy Use since adoption: Six relevant permissions have been issued, using this policy. Whilst the policy was referred to directly in only 5 of the 7 relevant applications, it is considered that the requirements of the policy are being applied.
Commentary and RAG Score Green
This positively-worded policy is intended to facilitate and deliver the MPA's policy to encourage Portland Stone operators to move to underground mining, and to relinquish surface quarrying permissions. Three new Portland Stone mines have been permitted during 2014-2018, and an existing permission had some of its originally imposed conditions amended. For each of the new mines permitted, there have either been specific areas of permitted surface quarrying relinquished or there have been other significant environmental gains achieved. The policy does not require quarrying relinquishments. For the amendments to an existing mining permission, originally issued before the MS was produced and outside of the composite 1950s permission, the operators had undertaken various improvements at other sites they controlled - including review of an existing s.106 agreement. It is difficult to quantify the volume of stone relinquished in each case, given factors such as the age of the existing permissions, the lack of conditions, uncertainty as to the likely depth of quarrying in each case and the fact that housing has in some cases been built over areas permitted for quarrying. It is generally the case that the areas proposed for mining include the areas that would otherwise have been quarried, and may extend beyond these. It seems clearly understood that this policy requires environmental gains, and relinquishment of surface quarrying permission deliver this. The MPA is satisfied that the policy is fit for purpose and being used appropriately and no change is considered necessary.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 192 2014 Page 30 of 81 Policy PD2 - Surface Quarrying of Portland Stone Policy Wording
The Mineral Planning Authority will only grant permission for surface quarrying of Portland Stone on the Isle of Portland if: a. significant environmental gains which deliver a net environmental benefit will be provided, which will generally be achieved through the agreement to relinquish permission for surface quarrying for at least an equivalent amount of stone in Areas Sensitive to Surface Quarrying, as identified on the Policies Map; and b. environmentally acceptable surface quarrying techniques will be employed.
Monitoring Indicator: Number of refusals issued and permissions granted for new quarries on Portland Quantity of reserves relinquished Target: No permission for surface extraction unless environmental improvements would be achieved Monitoring trigger/threshold for review: Any approval for the opencast extraction of Portland Stone where there are no environmental improvements secured Use since adoption: Not used.
Commentary and RAG Score Green
This policy establishes a presumption against future surface quarrying on Portland, unless certain criteria are met which could justify permission. There have been no applications for surface quarrying, and therefore no permissions for have been granted or refused. The MPA are satisfied that the policy does continue to support the stance against future surface quarrying, and no change is necessary.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 193 2014 Page 31 of 81 Policy PD3 - Relinquishment of Permission Policy Wording
The relinquishment of planning permission for surface extraction or extraction of stone from the cherty series will be sought when opportunities arise within the Areas Sensitive to Surface Quarrying, namely those areas identified on the Policies Map, and in other areas where significant environmental improvements would result.
Monitoring Indicator: Extent of areas where planning permission is relinquished from within and outside of areas identified as preferred for relinquishment Mechanisms through which this is secured Target: Reduce surface quarrying and extraction from the cherty series from those areas identified as sensitive Monitoring trigger/threshold for review: Any approval not consistent with this policy Use since adoption: There have been four relevant applications, and this policy has been used in each case. Whilst not directly referred to for each relevant application, the policy has been applied where necessary, and S. 106 agreements have been secured for all except one small extension.
Commentary and RAG Score Green
This policy seeks to secure the relinquishment of surface quarrying permissions, in areas identified as sensitive to surface quarrying and in other areas where significant benefits would be realised. Four new mining permissions have been issued during the 2014 to 2018 period. In three of these, permission for surface quarrying on land designated as 'Areas Sensitive to Surface Quarrying' was relinquished, along with other permitted land. The exact amount has not been specified in each case, but the policy has been appropriately used. The fourth case was a small extension of the Bowers link mine, which achieved the relinquishment of surface quarrying at Coombefield Quarry. It was considered by the case officer that this was a significant gain, and no further relinquishment was required for a relatively small extension. The cases involving relinquishment all used s.106 agreements relating to the relinquishment of permission. The MPA is satisfied that the policy is being used successfully, with case officers applying their professional judgement where appropriate. No change is considered necessary at this stage.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 194 2014 Page 32 of 81 Policy PD4 - Minimising Impacts of Existing Permissions on Portland Policy Wording
The Mineral Planning Authority will through the Review of Old Mineral Planning Permissions and through voluntary agreements seek to: a. secure more environmentally acceptable ways of working; b. establish appropriate stand-offs between quarry operations and adjacent residential dwellings (and other sensitive locations and developments); c. ensure that quarries are operated in a way which minimises adverse impacts arising from dust, noise and blasting vibration upon the amenity of people in residential areas or upon other uses sensitive to such impacts; d. secure the protection of the Isle of Portland Site of Special Scientific Interest, the Isle of Portland Local Geological or Geomorphological Site, Sites of Nature Conservation Interest, BAP Priority Habitats and the habitats of protected species; e. ensure that the Dorset and East Devon Coast World Heritage Site and its setting is safeguarded; f. secure the protection of scheduled monuments and their settings, and other important undesignated archaeological remains including evidence of former quarrying; g. secure the protection of Easton, Weston and the Grove Conservation Areas, Listed Buildings and historic landscapes (heritage assets); h. protect and/or enhance the landscape and minimise the visual impact of quarrying on Portland.
Monitoring Indicator: Number and nature of conditions imposed through the Review of Old Mineral Planning Permissions (ROMP) process originating from the application of this policy, that will bring about environmental improvements Target: ROMP applications determined in accordance with this policy Monitoring trigger/threshold for review: ROMP determined without securing the improvements set out Use since adoption: Although there has been no ROMP determination for Portland Stone sites during the review period 2014-2018, there have been eight decisions where this policy has been used/referenced. The policy has been directly applied to six applications, and criteria addressed by the application of DM policies in a further two – although none of these applications were for a ROMP. It is likely case officers are considering the policy title without making the connection to its intended ROMP application use
Commentary and RAG Score Green
This policy seeks to minimise the environmental impacts of existing, historic, minerals permissions on Portland and is intended to be achieved through the ongoing ROMP (Review of Old Mineral Planning Permissions) and through voluntary agreements. PD4 provides a strategic basis on which negotiations relating to the ROMP can be based. The policy has been applied and/or referenced within the planning assessment for eight permissions during the 5 year review period. However, no permission has been issued during this time as a result of determination of the ROMP. In some cases, s.106 agreements minimising the impacts of existing permissions have been achieved. In other cases, the policy appears to have been used or referenced without being linked to a ROMP or an agreement.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 195 2014 Page 33 of 81 Given that the policy is primarily intended to be implemented through a ROMP determination, it has yet to be fully used. Although planning agreements have been achieved, it appears that the policy may be being quoted in the context of achieving environmental benefits without the use of ROMP or planning agreement. It appears that further clarification on the appropriate use of this policy may be needed, but it does remain available for its primary purpose and the MPA do not consider changes to the policy itself are required.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 196 2014 Page 34 of 81 Policy PD5 - Restoration of Sites on Portland Policy Wording
Schemes for the restoration of mineral sites on Portland should achieve the following: a. reinstatement of areas of the Isle of Portland SSSI to a favourable condition; b. safeguarding, enhancement and where necessary reinstatement of significant ecological and geological interests; c. creation or reinstatement of limestone grassland habitats in localities that link up or buffer areas of existing significant ecological interests; d. preservation of any industrial archaeological features or landscapes that show evidence of traditional methods of quarrying; e. reinstatement of typical Portland landscape features, such as field patterns and stone walls, where appropriate; f. reinstatement and where appropriate enhancement of public rights of way; g. reinstatement of agricultural land and facilitation of agricultural afteruse where appropriate. Proposals for the afteruse of sites will be expected to contribute to the aims of the Portland Quarries Nature Park where relevant.
Monitoring Indicator: Number of restoration schemes secured that address the issues covered by this policy Target: All schemes consistent with this policy in terms of achieving a positive outcome from the restoration of former workings Monitoring trigger/threshold for review: If it appears that restoration schemes are not achieving the criteria set out it may become necessary to prepare an SPD dealing specifically with restoration of existing sites on Portland Use since adoption: Restoration has tended to be broadly referred to, without direct reference to the policy. A mixed use of Policies PD5 and RS1 has also been demonstrated. However, the criteria set out in the policy are being addressed.
Commentary and RAG Score Green
This policy seeks to provide specific guidance regarding the restoration of quarries on Portland, particularly for use with the ROMP process or in the case of agreements negotiated. However, other than for the applications at Independent Quarry and Broadcroft Quarry and Landfill, restoration has relied on RS1 rather than PD5. There is some mixed used of this specific Portland restoration policy, and Policy RS1: Restoration, Aftercare and Afteruse of Minerals Development. The MPA considers that the principle of the policy and its intended use remain sound, and the next step is to provide DM officers with further advice on the use of the policy, before considering whether a review of the policy is required. The MPA is satisfied that the policy is fit for purpose and being used appropriately and no change is considered necessary.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 197 2014 Page 35 of 81 Policy BS1 - Building Stone Quarries Policy Wording
Proposals for small-scale building stone quarries, other than Portland and Purbeck Stone, will be permitted, where they meet all of the following criteria: a. the stone is of a type historically used for building in the local area and is to be used to maintain the fabric or character of individual buildings or settlements in the local area, or a significant historic building elsewhere; b. the proposal would be of a type, scale and output appropriate to the market identified in (a) above; and c. the proposal would not individually or cumulatively with any other sites result in a level of mineral activity, or traffic generation, which would have an unacceptable effect on landscape, the environment or local amenity.
Monitoring Indicator: Number of sites identified in the MSP and/or new permissions for building stone quarries or extensions to existing quarries Target: No specific target production/sales figure, monitor to assess future need Identify specific sites in the MSP as appropriate Monitoring trigger/threshold for review: Any approval not consistent with this policy Use since adoption: There have been 9 relevant applications during the review period, including a new sites, and the policy has been applied in each case
Commentary and RAG Score Green
This policy is intended to support the extraction of further reserves of building stone, for both maintaining existing structures and building new ones. It does not seek to direct working to specific areas, but as a criteria based policy supports development provided certain criteria are met. The Mineral Sites Plan 2019 has allocated three extensions to existing sites. The MPA is satisfied that the policy is fit for purpose and being used appropriately and no change is considered necessary.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 198 2014 Page 36 of 81 Policy HY1 - Proposals for Exploration and Appraisal Policy Wording
Proposals for exploration and appraisal of onshore oil and gas will be permitted where they meet all of the following criteria: a. well sites and associated facilities are sited in the least sensitive location from which the target reservoir can be accessed; b. it has been demonstrated that possible effects that might arise from the development would not adversely affect the integrity of any SAC, SPA or Ramsar site either alone or in combination with other plans or projects; c. any adverse impacts can be avoided or mitigated to the satisfaction of the Mineral Planning Authority, with safeguards to protect environmental and amenity interests put in place as necessary; d. it can be demonstrated that there would be no adverse impact on the underlying integrity of the geological structure; e. an indication of the extent of the reservoir and the extent of the area of search within the reservoir is provided to the Mineral Planning Authority; f. exploration and appraisal operations are for an agreed, temporary length of time; and g. well sites and associated facilities are restored at the earliest practicable opportunity if oil and gas is not found in economically viable volumes, or they are developed within a time frame agreed.
Monitoring Indicator: Number of permissions granted in accordance with the policy Target: All permissions consistent with policy Monitoring trigger/threshold for review: Any approval not consistent with policy Use since adoption: This policy has not been used during the 5 year plan review period, as there were no relevant applications. Applications determined were for ancillary development or, as in the case of the 39 Wytch Farm applications in 2017, extension to the life of the site.
Commentary and RAG Score Green
The Minerals Strategy supports all three phases of oil and gas development - exploration, appraisal and production - and this policy is intended to both facilitate and control proposals for exploration and appraisal. No relevant applications were received during the review period, but the MPA consider that the policy is appropriate and fit for purpose and no action is proposed at this time. The policy remains available for use.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 199 2014 Page 37 of 81 Policy HY2 - Proposals for Production Facilities and Ancillary Development Policy Wording
Proposals for hydrocarbon production well sites and facilities, and other related ancillary development, will be permitted where they meet all of the following criteria: a. a full appraisal programme for the oil and gas field has been completed to the satisfaction of the Mineral Planning Authority; b. a framework for the full development of the field is submitted for approval by the Mineral Planning Authority; c. facilities required for hydrocarbon production sit within the agreed development framework, are justified in terms of their number and extent, and are progressively installed wherever possible; d. extraction, processing, dispatch and transport facilities are sited, designed and operated to minimise environmental and amenity impacts and provide proportionate environmental enhancements; e. any adverse impacts, both individual and cumulative, can be avoided or mitigated to the satisfaction of the Mineral Planning Authority; f. it has been demonstrated that possible effects that might arise from the development would not adversely affect the integrity of any SAC, SPA or Ramsar site either alone or in combination with other plans or projects; g. it can be demonstrated that there would be no adverse impact on the underlying integrity of the geological structure; h. existing facilities are used for the development of any additional fields discovered unless the applicant satisfies the Mineral Planning Authority that this would not be feasible and any adverse impacts can be mitigated; i. where a proposal uses existing production facilities, the integrity of the existing infrastructure can be demonstrated, having regard to local environmental factors.
Monitoring Indicator: Number of permissions granted in accordance with the policy Facilities permitted that sit within an agreed overall framework Target: All permissions consistent with policy All frameworks agreed Monitoring trigger/threshold for review: Any approval not consistent with this policy Use since adoption: The policy has been used in all 41 relevant applications. 39 of the 41 relevant permissions during the assessment period were for an extension of time on the original permission, and included a framework for development. The others were carried out within the context of the existing framework. All applications used this policy.
Commentary and RAG Score Green
This policy seeks to manage and control the production phase of oil and gas development, ensuring development is considered on a comprehensive basis through the use of a development framework. The MPA is satisfied that the policy is fit for purpose and being used appropriately and no change is considered necessary.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 200 2014 Page 38 of 81 Policy HY3 - Transportation of Hydrocarbons Policy Wording
Developments for hydrocarbons production will be required to use pipelines. Where it can be demonstrated that this is not feasible, economically and/or environmentally, rail or road transport will be considered. Where road transportation is the only feasible option, it should be demonstrated that this would not give rise to unacceptable impacts on the environment or highway safety.
Monitoring Indicator: Number of developments permitted that use pipelines for the transportation of hydrocarbons Target: All developments use pipelines Monitoring trigger/threshold for review: It may be necessary to review this policy if the percentage of developments not using pipelines is significant Use since adoption: There have been 13 relevant applications regarding this policy, and it has been used in all cases.
Commentary and RAG Score Green
This policy requires the use of pipelines to transport hydrocarbons, for efficiency and to minimise environmental impacts. It has been used in all 13 relevant applications, and it is noted that the only place a pipeline is not used is at the wellsite at Kimmeridge where is in not feasible to remove the oil by pipeline. The policy allows for this. The MPA is satisfied that the policy is fit for purpose and being used appropriately and no change is considered necessary.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 201 2014 Page 39 of 81 Policy HY4 - Decommissioning and Restoration of Production Facilities and Ancillary Development Policy Wording
The Mineral Planning Authority will require: a. restoration of production well sites and ancillary facilities at the earliest practicable opportunity when they are no longer required as part of the production operation, in accordance with the agreed framework for development of the oilfield; and b. the submission of a strategy detailing decommissioning and restoration of the site to be agreed prior to the commencement of decommissioning. This should include proposed mitigation where necessary to address identified impacts of decommissioning.
Monitoring Indicator: Conditions attached to permissions for production sites requiring the submission of a decommissioning strategy and restoration scheme Target: Well sites and facilities are restored promptly Decommissioning and restoration is in accordance with a strategy agreed by the MPA Monitoring trigger/threshold for review: Permission granted with no requirement for the submission of a decommissioning/restoration strategy Use since adoption: There have been 41 relevant applications regarding this policy, and it has been used in all of them.
Commentary and RAG Score Green
This policy seeks to ensure that decommissioning and restoration of oil and gas sites and facilities is done in a pre- arranged and systematic way, and this is established at the stage of planning permission. This policy has been used in all relevant applications, including the 39 applications for extension of the end-date of the permission. The MPA is satisfied that the policy is fit for purpose and is being used appropriately. No change is considered necessary.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 202 2014 Page 40 of 81 Policy HY5 - Underground Gas Storage & Carbon Storage Policy Wording
Proposals for underground gas storage in suitable geological structures will be permitted where the Mineral Planning Authority is satisfied that all of the following have been achieved: a. the proposed site has been selected so that adverse impacts on the environment and residential amenity are not significant and in any case are kept to the minimum practicable; b. associated surface development is the minimum required and is appropriately located; c. the capacity and integrity of the geological structure has been proven suitable; and d. where possible, positive environmental enhancements (associated with the development) are demonstrated.
Monitoring Indicator: Permissions granted and refused for underground gas storage Target: All permissions consistent with this policy Monitoring trigger/threshold for review: Any approval not consistent with this policy If it is deemed unlikely that any further applications will be received for underground gas storage it may be appropriate to delete this policy Use since adoption: There have been no relevant applications in the plan period.
Commentary and RAG Score Green
The Minerals Strategy recognises that the geology of Dorset, particularly in the Portland/Weymouth area, is suitable for the creation of caverns for gas storage. A permission has been issued in the past. This policy is intended to be used for future applications for development, to provide a framework to assess and control such development. The MPA is satisfied that the policy is fit for purpose and no change is considered necessary. The policy remains available for use should any applications be received in the future.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 203 2014 Page 41 of 81 Policy IS1 - Industrial Sand Policy Wording
The Mineral Planning Authority will ensure that an appropriate contribution is made to the national requirement for silica sand for industrial uses. This will be achieved within the Bedrock Sand Resource Block through existing production sites, extensions to such sites and/or at new sites, provided that: a. a need for the mineral (industrial silica sand) which cannot be met through the existing landbank at each relevant site can be demonstrated; and b. any adverse impacts associated with extraction, processing or transportation can be avoided or satisfactorily mitigated. Sites will only be considered where it has been demonstrated that possible effects (including those related to hydrology, displacement of recreation, species, proximity, land management and restoration) that might arise from the development would not adversely affect the integrity of the Dorset Heaths SAC, Dorset Heathlands SPA and Dorset Heathland Ramsar site either alone or in combination with other plans or projects.
Monitoring Indicator: Total quantity of industrial sand as permitted reserves Total quantity of industrial sand identified within the MSP Actual sales/production of industrial sand annually Target: Maintenance of a 10 year landbank through mineral permissions, particularly extensions Monitoring trigger/threshold for review: If it is clear that the identified need is unlikely to be delivered then the size of the landbank will fall and the policy may need revising Use since adoption: No applications relating specifically to industrial sand were made in the review period 2014- 2018.
Commentary and RAG Score Amber
The Minerals Strategy acknowledges that some of the sand found in Dorset has a relatively high silica content and is used for both aggregate and non-aggregate purposes. The non-aggregate use may be either industrial in nature e.g. facing for brick moulds or more recreational/leisure oriented e.g. sand for equestrian uses or even agricultural e.g. bedding sand for cattle. The purity of the silica in Dorset is not great enough for high-end uses such as glass manufacture so none of the sites producing sand for non-aggregate use are restricted to non-aggregate uses only. Sand from some individual sites is sold for different uses as required. There have been no applications for sand quarries to be used solely for non-aggregate or industrial sand use during the review period. No 'industrial sand' sites are allocated through the Mineral Sites Plan 2019, although some sites expected to produce Poole Formation sand, which has a relatively high silica content giving potential for non- aggregate use as well as aggregate use, have been allocated. The policy has not been used and given the issues associated with use of Poole Formation sand for non-aggregate purposes, doubts are cast on its usefulness and relevance. This is the reason it has been scored Amber. However, it remains available for use, and the MPA will continue to monitor it.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 204 2014 Page 42 of 81 Policy SG1 - Mineral Safeguarding Area Policy Wording
The Mineral Planning Authority will resist proposals for non-mineral development within the Mineral Safeguarding Area, as shown on the Policies Map, unless it can be demonstrated that the sterilisation of proven mineral resources will not occur as a result of the development, and that the development would not pose a serious hindrance to future mineral development in the vicinity. Where this cannot be demonstrated, and where there is a clear and demonstrable need for the non-minerals development, prior extraction will be sought where practicable and where it would not leave the site incapable of non-mineral use.
Monitoring Indicator: Number of applications refused/objections made on safeguarding ground or approved with prior extraction Target: No sterilisation of economically important mineral resources Monitoring trigger/threshold for review: Any sterilisation of economically important mineral resources Safeguarding areas are vital to the delivery of the Minerals Strategy in order to prevent development that may prejudice future mineral working Use since adoption: The MPA has responded to many consultations resulting from the application of this policy over the review period. For various reasons, it is not clear exactly how many responses were made, how successful these were at avoiding sterilisation, what decision was ultimately made by the local planning authority, or how many applications there have been involving mineral safeguarding. Despite being extensively used, at present the policy cannot be accurately reported on.
Commentary and RAG Score Amber Red
This policy is intended to make the Minerals Strategy compliant with the National Planning Policy Framework in terms of mineral safeguarding, through designating a Mineral Safeguarding Area (MSA) within which the MPA will resist unnecessary mineral sterilisation, and where appropriate seek prior extraction of mineral in advance of non- mineral development. Prior to 1 April 2019 the Dorset Districts/Boroughs, and now the Area Teams within Dorset Council, consult the MPA if proposals for non-minerals development within the Mineral Safeguarding Area are received unless they can be screened out following application of the relevant criteria set out in the Minerals Strategy 2014. The MPA does not need to be consulted on all application for non-mineral development within the MSA - the MS sets out criteria to screen out cases where consultation is not considered necessary (e.g. development within an urban area, or within the curtilage of an existing property). The former district/borough councils - now Area Teams - making up Dorset Council have consulted and continue to consult the MPA on applications affecting safeguarded minerals sites. However, the relevance of the consultations to mineral safeguarding varies across the Dorset Council (or the former Dorset County Council) area. The outcome of planning applications involving safeguarded mineral on which the MPA has commented are generally beyond the control of the MPA, as the local planning authority (whether a district, or latterly an Area Team of Dorset Council) that consulted the MPA will determine the applications. When the MPA was a separate planning authority, as Dorset County Council, if it felt particularly strongly about any given case of sterilisation, and/or felt it had been inappropriately consulted, it could seek to have the application called in, or challenge the decision, but strong justification was required for such action. Now that the MPA and the local planning authority are comprised within Dorset Council, this is not possible.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 205 2014 Page 43 of 81 In addition it is generally the case that decisions made by the former local planning authorities, now Area Teams of Dorset Council, are only infrequently reported back to the MPA and if the MPA wanted to know the outcome of its comments it would have to follow up almost every application on which it commented. The MPA consider that the requirements of the policy are not currently being applied by the local planning authority in the most appropriate or effective manner. The MPA also acknowledges that its follow-through on relevant consultations/comments made has been inconsistent and needs to improve. It does use the policy to resist sterilisation, but has not been consistent in recording how this is done and whether the comments have successfully influenced the outcome of the application, making monitoring difficult. The policy has therefore been graded Amber/Red, needing attention.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 206 2014 Page 44 of 81 Policy SG2 - Mineral Consultation Area Policy Wording
A Minerals Consultation Area is defined within Dorset County Council only. It has the same boundaries as the Minerals Safeguarding Area. District and Borough Councils will consult the County Council as Mineral Planning Authority on proposals for non-minerals development within the designated Mineral Consultation Area, as shown on the Policies Map. The Mineral Planning Authority will resist inappropriate development within the Mineral Consultation Area.
Monitoring Indicator: Number of consultations undertaken Number of developments without prior extraction minerals resources Target: District/Borough Councils to consult Dorset County Council over all proposals within or partly within MCA No sterilisation of economically important mineral resources Monitoring trigger/threshold for review: Any sterilisation of economically important mineral resources Use since adoption: Prior to 1 April 2019 the MPA was consulted by Districts/Boroughs as required by this policy, but for the reasons set out above for Policy SG1 it is difficult to know how consistently the policy was applied. Since 1 April 2019 the policy has become irrelevant, as Dorset Council is now a Unitary Authority and there are no Districts/Boroughs to consult Dorset County Council as Mineral Planning Authority any longer. The separate Area Teams now consult the MPA in cases where non-mineral development is proposed within the Mineral Safeguarding Area.
Commentary and RAG Score Pre - 1 April 2019: Amber Post - 1 April 2019: not needed
This policy was originally designed to ensure that Districts/Boroughs consulted Dorset County Council the MPA when they received planning applications for non-mineral development within the Mineral Safeguarding Area which had the potential to impact on safeguarded minerals. Following Local Government Reorganisation (LGR) the policy became irrelevant as Districts/Boroughs ceased to exist. It is difficult to assess the effectiveness and use of the policy during the pre-LGR period. To do so would require access to all applications received by Districts/Boroughs, to determine whether the policy was applied in all relevant cases. The MPA is satisfied that the policy was in use, and if it was noted that Districts/Boroughs were not consulting the MPA in all relevant cases, then the MPA could have drawn their attention to this policy. Since Local Government Reorganisation the policy has become irrelevant and would be removed in any review of the Minerals Strategy 2014.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 207 2014 Page 45 of 81 Policy SG3 - Safeguarding of mineral sites and facilities Policy Wording
The Mineral Planning Authority will resist development that could prejudice the use of safeguarded operational and/or permitted mineral sites (including quarries, mines, associated plant and infrastructure and facilities) unless: a. an alternative new site or facility within an acceptable distance can be provided, which is at least as appropriate for the use as the safeguarded location (and there would be no break in operations); or b. it can be demonstrated by the applicant that there is no longer a need for a facility of this nature in the area; or c. it can be demonstrated that the site is unused or dormant and is unlikely to come back into use.
Monitoring Indicator: Number of applications having an adverse effect on safeguarded mineral sites or facilities Target: No negative impacts on existing minerals operations Monitoring trigger/threshold for review: District/Borough Councils not consulting the County Council over relevant proposals Use since adoption: This policy has supported the efforts of the MPA to protect minerals interests, during the review period.
Commentary and RAG Score Amber
This policy is intended to provide protection to existing mineral sites and infrastructure in the event that non- mineral development is proposed on or near to existing permitted sites. The MPA would resist such development, on the grounds that it could limit or threaten the ongoing provision of minerals. The policy would be applied if non-mineral development allocations were proposed near existing mineral operations during the preparation of a plan. It would also be used if the MPA were aware of an application for non- mineral development in the vicinity of a minerals operation. The MPA have never applied or specifically used the policy, but it remains to support the general approach to safeguarding of sites and facilities. This policy has been awarded an Amber score, recognising issues with its use to date, but the MPA consider that no urgent change is needed.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 208 2014 Page 46 of 81 Policy RS1 - Restoration, Aftercare and Afteruse of Minerals Development Policy Wording
Proposals for minerals development will be permitted where they demonstrate a high quality and appropriate restoration scheme which will enable an appropriate after-use and the long-term maintenance and enhancement of the environment. They will be required to have regard to the Landscape Management Guidelines and, where possible, contribute to the targets of the Dorset Biodiversity Strategy. Proposals must demonstrate that: Restoration a. where possible the restoration scheme incorporates phased restoration of the site that will minimise the period of operations to protect settlements and residential amenity and to minimise the duration of landscape and environmental impacts; b. measures will be taken to ensure that soil quality will be adequately protected and maintained throughout the life of the development and, in particular, during stripping, storage and management of soils, subsoils and overburden arisings as a result of site operations; c. there is an available supply of appropriate materials to be used for restoration purposes, as required to implement the proposed restoration scheme; d. where inert waste is to be used in restoration the constituent parts capable of use in the production of high quality washed recycled aggregates have, as far as reasonably possible, already been removed; e. the restoration scheme will maximise the potential of the site for the successful adoption of the proposed after-use and where necessary offer flexibility for a range of potential after-uses; f. restoration will be undertaken at the earliest opportunity and the amount of time expected to be required for restoration of the site will be indicated; g. where appropriate, geological exposures will be retained; h. for sites within the Green Belt, all minerals-related and other uses will have ceased by the time the extraction has been completed and the site will be restored in a manner appropriate to its original inclusion in the Green Belt designation; i. financial provision is, in exceptional circumstances, made for the proposed restoration; Aftercare j. the aftercare scheme incorporates an aftercare period of at least five years; where appropriate, voluntary longer periods for certain uses will be sought through agreement; After-use k. where the proposed after-use is agriculture, provision is made for retention or replacement of soils and any necessary drainage, access, hedges and fences; l. where the proposed after-use includes habitat creation, it should contribute to the delivery of the Dorset Biodiversity Strategy objectives where appropriate; m. the after-use will be compatible with the wider context of the site, in terms of the character of the surrounding landscape and historic environment (informed by the Dorset Landscape Character Assessment and Historic Landscape Character Assessment) and existing land uses in the area, having considered the relative potential benefits of alternative after-uses in local or national terms; n. the green infrastructure network will, where possible, be strengthened and improved; o. where opportunities arise, the after-use provides benefits to the local and wider community which may include enhancement of biodiversity and geodiversity interests, linking of site restoration to other green infrastructure initiatives, enhanced landscape character, improved public access, employment, tourism or provision of climate change mitigation measures.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 209 2014 Page 47 of 81 Monitoring Indicator: The completion of a Restoration Supplementary Planning Document Area of land achieving habitat creation and/or delivering objectives of Biodiversity Action Plan (where information is available) % of minerals development planning applications compliant with the requirements of the policy Target: 100% of applications/permissions consistent with this policy A Supplementary Planning Document on restoration to be completed in order to provide detailed guidance on restoration Monitoring trigger/threshold for review: Any approval not consistent with this policy Use since adoption: This policy has been used/references approximately 80 times during the review period.
Commentary and RAG Score Amber
This policy is intended to address the two aspects of restoration covered in the Minerals Strategy 2014 - the strategic approach to restoration adopted by the Strategy along with the provision of specific guidance and control over the three elements of site restoration - restoration, aftercare and after use. This policy has been given an Amber score on the basis that it is not being implemented necessarily as explicitly as the indicators/targets suggest, and nor has an SPD on site restoration been produced. However the MPA are satisfied that it is being applied and performing appropriately. The preparation of an SPD to support the policy will help in clarifying the MPA's intended approach to using and implementing the policy.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 210 2014 Page 48 of 81 Policy RS2 - Retention of Plant, Machinery and other Ancillary Development Policy Wording
Permission for the retention of plant, machinery and any other ancillary development associated with any mineral development/operation will not extend beyond the life of the development with which it is associated, or any earlier date that may be set, except where it can be demonstrated that: a. there is an identified need for the continued use of the plant, machinery or ancillary development at that site or any extension to it; b. any adverse impacts associated with retaining the plant, machinery or ancillary development can be avoided or mitigated to an acceptable level; and c. retention of the plant, machinery or ancillary development does not affect restoration of the wider site.
Monitoring Indicator: Permissions granted or refused for the retention of plant and machinery Target: 100% of applications/permissions consistent with this policy Monitoring trigger/threshold for review: Any application not consistent with this policy Use since adoption: This policy has been used a number of times, but does not appear to be applied consistently.
Commentary and RAG Score Amber
This policy is intended to ensure that in cases where the development of a quarry or mine has incorporated other uses, e.g. aggregate recycling, which require the location of specific machinery on site. In some cases it may be appropriate to retain such machinery/plant on site when the mineral extraction is finished, in others the machinery should be removed. Policy RS2 sets out the basis for assessing whether such machinery should remain on site or be removed. This policy has been used appropriately in the majority of relevant cases, but apparently has not been used consistently in all cases. In some cases a conditional requirement has been attached to a permission requiring the removal of machinery etc., but Policy RS2 has not been quoted. Case officers may consider that it is not necessary in all cases to specifically quote the policy. Since it has apparently not been used in all relevant cases, an Amber score has been awarded.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 211 2014 Page 49 of 81 Policy RS3 - Local Liaison Groups Policy Wording
The Mineral Planning Authority will encourage the establishment of local liaison groups to run for the lifetime of any minerals extraction site or aggregates recycling operation.
Monitoring Indicator: Number/proportion of consents where a local liaison group has been established Target: All new minerals extraction permissions to have considered and where appropriate establish local liaison groups Monitoring trigger/threshold for review: If a significant proportion of new mineral sites do not have a local liaison group, discussions will be necessary with Development Management and possibly the minerals industry to establish why Use since adoption: This policy has not been used.
Commentary and RAG Score Green
The MPA support the establishment of local liaison groups for the lifetime of any permitted site, and this policy provides the basis for this stance. The MPA consider that the policy is relevant and appropriate, and even though it has not been specifically quoted there is no proposal to change it.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 212 2014 Page 50 of 81 Development Management Policies DM1 to DM11 Paragraph 16.1 of the Minerals Strategy 2014 notes "planning permission is required for minerals development and the main principles upon which decisions on planning applications will be based are set out in this section. Policies DM1 to DM11 are intended to manage the operational impacts associated with all types of minerals development". These policies are intended to address issues such as sustainability, amenity, the water environment, landscape, geological/ecological impact, transport, heritage, airfield safeguarding and planning agreements. The MPA consider that these policies have a range of roles, including acting as a checklist for developers (alongside Dorset Council's Minerals and Waste Validation Checklist) , to ensure their applications are addressing all the relevant issues; also as a checklist for development management officers, to assist in ensuring that the relevant issues have been considered in the determination of an application. Part of the determination of any application will be to identify what the relevant constraints and potential impacts are, and therefore what policies will apply. This is determined through the assessment of the application to identify constraints, and consultation. The MPA are satisfied that relevant constraints will be identified, and consultees will show where further information or assessment is required, to establish levels of impact and mitigation required to offset this impact. It is expected that development management officers will have the necessary information, backed up by policy, in order to determine the applications. The process of screening applications for potential constraints, and consultation of applications both internally and externally means that consultees such as the Dorset Council Natural Environment Team along with statutory and non-statutory consultees such as Historic England, Highways England, Environment Agency, Natural England, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty Teams, Wildlife Trust among others will provide relevant and appropriate expert advice. If in the opinion of any of the consultees further assessment is required, this comment will be made and it is expected that the DM case officer determining the application will ensure that all the necessary assessments are carried out. It may be that in some cases further assessment is not required. Subject to the information and advice received the MPA will ensure that, should the proposal be permitted, appropriate conditions will be applied to ensure biodiversity/geodiversity is appropriately protected. In some cases the various DM policies are referred to in the case officer's report, but not specifically included in the decision notice. The MPA is satisfied that provided any given policy is referenced this indicates that it has been considered and applied in the process of determining the application. It is noted that the frequency of use of the policies generally increases over the course of the review period 2014-2018, as officers become more familiar with the policies of the MS.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 213 2014 Page 51 of 81 Policy DM1 - Key Criteria for Sustainable Minerals Development Policy Wording
Proposals for minerals development should support the delivery of social, economic and environmental benefits whilst any adverse impacts should be avoided or mitigated to an acceptable level. In order to achieve this, all proposals for minerals development must demonstrate that all the following criteria have been addressed satisfactorily: a. minimisation of impacts which could increase the effects of climate change; b. protection and, where appropriate, enhancement of local amenity; c. protection and, where possible, enhancement of biodiversity and geodiversity, including nationally and internationally designated sites; d. protection and, where appropriate, enhancement of heritage assets; e. protection and, where appropriate, enhancement of landscape, including the avoidance and/or mitigation of visual and landscape impacts through sensitive design, screening or other means; f. preparation of a scheme of working that will keep production of mineral waste to a minimum, while ensuring availability of an adequate amount of material for timely restoration of workings; g. protection of soil resources throughout the life of the development and, where significant development of agricultural land is demonstrated to be necessary and there is a choice of location, giving preference to the development of poorer quality land over higher quality or best and most versatile land; h. efficient use of water resources on the site; i. avoidance or mitigation of, or compensation for, adverse impacts on the water environment and flood risk; j. avoidance of cumulative impacts resulting from minerals or other development, whether current or proposed; k. use of sustainable transport; and l. restoration, aftercare and after-use proposals and compliance with the strategy for restoration.
Monitoring Indicator: % of minerals development planning applications compliant with the requirements of the policy Target: 100% of applications/permissions consistent with this policy in order to deliver the key objectives of the Plan Monitoring trigger/threshold for review: Any approval not consistent with this policy Use since adoption: This policy has been used in 97% of applications since adoption.
Commentary and RAG Score Amber
This policy is intended to ensure that minerals development is sustainable, through identifying a series of sustainability-related criteria that planning applications must address. As with Policy RS1, this policy provides a checklist of issues that applicants can use in preparing their applications, and development management officers can use in assessing applications or negotiating with applicants
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 214 2014 Page 52 of 81 This policy has been used in 96% of the total number of applications determined during the review period, 2014- 2018. Given that the target use is 100%, the policy has been given an Amber score, and guidance will be given to development management officers. However the general trend has been an increase in use since adoption, year on year with the policy being used less in the earlier years of the plan’s adoption but usage increasing. The MPA considers that the policy is effective and no change is considered necessary, but guidance will be provided to officers.
Policy DM1
100
95
90
85
80
75
70 % of use 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 215 2014 Page 53 of 81 Policy DM2 - Managing Impacts on Amenity Policy Wording
Proposals for minerals development in Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole will only be permitted where the proposals demonstrate that, for the life-cycle of the proposed development, any potential adverse impacts associated with the following considerations are avoided and/or adequately mitigated to an acceptable level: a. noise levels; b. dust levels; c. air emissions; d. lighting; e. visual and landscape impacts, f. vibration levels, g. site related traffic impacts; and h. stability of the land at and around the site, both above and below ground level. Proposals for mineral development should be accompanied, where appropriate, by an assessment of the above impacts of the proposal. Where a need for mitigation is identified by the assessment and / or through consultation with key stakeholders, mitigation measures should be defined and submitted as part of the development proposal. The assessment, together with any required mitigation, must consider impacts over the entire life-cycle of the proposed development. The fact that impacts of mineral extraction, including those resulting from HGVs and other traffic servicing the proposed development, may extend for considerable distances beyond the boundaries of the proposed development site must be taken into consideration and appropriately mitigated.
Monitoring Indicator: % of minerals development planning applications compliant with the requirements of the policy Target: 100% of applications/permissions consistent with this policy Monitoring trigger/threshold for review: Any approval not consistent with this policy through failing to meet the criteria This policy will apply when the development falls below the EIA threshold Use since adoption: This policy has been used in 97% of relevant applications determined in the 2014-2018 review period. Two applications were refused, partially on the basis of not being compliant with DM2.
Commentary and RAG Score Amber
This policy is intended to ensure that in addition to being sustainable, minerals development has minimal impacts on amenity. This policy identifies a series of amenity-related criteria that planning applications must address. this policy also provides a checklist of issues that applicants can use in preparing their applications, and development management officers can use in assessing applications or negotiating with applicants. Again it is not intended that every criterion must be specifically addressed, but if development management officers refer to the policy in their decisions, or their reasoning behind their decisions, it is assumed that they are satisfied that the policy has been applied appropriately and the proposal is compliant with the requirements of the policy. This policy has been used in 97% of the total number of applications determined during the review period, 2014- 2018. Given that the target use is 100%, the policy has been given an Amber score, and guidance will be given to
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 216 2014 Page 54 of 81 development management officers. It is noted that the lowest use was in 2014, when the MS was just adopted, and this has significantly increased every year since. The MPA considers that the policy is effective and no change is considered necessary, but guidance will be provided to officers.
Policy DM2
100
95
90
85
80
75
70 % of use 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 217 2014 Page 55 of 81 Policy DM3 - Managing the Impact on Surface Water and Ground Water Resources Policy Wording
Proposals for minerals development which would have an impact on water resources, including aquifers, will only be permitted where it can be demonstrated that the local water environment would be protected and where appropriate enhanced. Provision should be made to ensure the protection and maintenance of the: a. quality; b. direction and rate of flow; and c. volume of flow of ground water, water courses and all other surface water. Rivers, open watercourses, wetlands and ponds which have a significant ecological value, together with the land alongside these features, should be protected. Development should aim to prevent deterioration and where appropriate enhance the quality of aquatic ecosystems and associated wetlands. Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) will be required for minerals development proposals in areas at risk of flooding or likely to contribute to flooding elsewhere, relative to the nature and scale of the development, and must take into account cumulative effects with other existing or proposed development. Where a risk of flooding is identified through FRA, proposals must include measures to ensure the avoidance and / or mitigation of that risk. Development proposals will also be required to include provisions for the efficient use of water resources on site and the use of Sustainable Drainage Systems (SUDS).
Monitoring Indicator: Number of proposals including a Flood Risk Assessment and/or incorporating Sustainable Urban Development System % of minerals development planning applications compliant with the requirements of the policy Target: 100% applications/permissions consistent with this policy in order to protect and enhance the water environment Monitoring trigger/threshold for review: Any approval not consistent with this policy Use since adoption: All relevant applications have used this policy.
Commentary and RAG Score Green
This policy is intended to provide the basis for ensuring protection of the water environment, both ground and surface water, and addressing/minimising flood risk. The Environment Agency (EA) and Dorset Council's Flood Risk Management Team (FRMT) also have responsibilities in these areas. The process of screening applications for potential constraints, and consultation of applications both internally and externally means that the FRMT will provide biodiversity advice/input, as will the EA. If in the opinion of any of the consultees further assessment is required, it is expected that the DM case officer will ensure that all the necessary assessments are carried out. It may be that in some cases further assessment is not required. Subject to the information and advice received the MPA will ensure that, should the proposal be permitted, appropriate conditions will be applied to ensure water environment is appropriately protected. The MPA is satisfied that this policy is adequate to ensure that all necessary assessments will be undertaken and water environment impacts/potential impacts will be identified and where necessary can be protected. The policy allows the MPA to ensure that significant harm will be either avoided or mitigated. The MPA is satisfied that the policy is fit for purpose and being used appropriately and no change is considered necessary.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 218 2014 Page 56 of 81 Policy DM4 - Protection and Enhancement of Landscape Character and the Countryside Policy Wording
Minerals development will only be permitted when the proposals include provisions to protect and/or enhance the quality, character and amenity value of the countryside and landscape. Development will be expected to ensure the protection of the following designations of national importance, together with their settings, in accordance with the relevant statutory requirements: a. the New Forest National Park; b. the Cranborne Chase and West Wiltshire Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty; and c. the Dorset Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. The importance of non-statutory designations, such as the West Dorset Heritage Coast and the Purbeck Heritage Coast, must also be taken into consideration. Each proposal for minerals development should be accompanied by an objective assessment of any impacts upon the local landscape character and its setting (including historic landscape character) having regard to the status and significance of any heritage assets affected. The assessment should be informed by the Dorset Landscape Character Assessment as a minimum. Where the proposed development is situated within or in proximity to an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty or the New Forest National Park, the relevant Management Plan and Landscape Character Assessment must also be taken into consideration. Development which affects the landscape will only be permitted if it can be demonstrated that any adverse impacts can be: i. avoided; or ii. where an adverse impact cannot be avoided, the impact will be adequately mitigated; or iii. where adverse impacts cannot be avoided or adequately mitigated, compensatory environmental enhancements will be made to offset the residual landscape and visual impacts.
Monitoring Indicator: Number of proposals including an assessment of the adverse impacts upon landscape character % of minerals development planning applications compliant with the requirements of the policy Target: • 100% applications/permissions consistent with this policy Monitoring trigger/threshold for review: • Any approval not consistent with this policy Use since adoption: The Policy has been applied to all applications where landscape is considered to be a potential constraint. One application was refused, partially on the basis of non-compliance with DM4
Commentary and RAG Score Green
This policy is intended to minimise impacts of minerals development on landscape and the countryside, and in cases where there are impacts to ensure these are properly mitigated or where mitigation is not possible to ensure compensatory enhancements are made. The process of screening applications for potential constraints, and consultation of applications both internally and externally means that the Dorset Council Natural Environment Team will provide biodiversity advice/input. Natural
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 219 2014 Page 57 of 81 England and where appropriate the AONB Teams and others will also provide input. If in the opinion of any of the consultees further assessment is required, this comment will be made and it is expected that the DM case officer will ensure that all the necessary assessments are carried out. It may be that in some cases assessment is not required. Subject to the information and advice received the MPA will ensure that, should the proposal be permitted, appropriate conditions will be applied to ensure landscape/countryside is appropriately protected. The MPA is satisfied that this policy is adequate to ensure that all necessary assessments will be undertaken and impacts/potential impacts on landscape/countryside interests will be identified and where necessary can be mitigated against. The policy allows the MPA to ensure that significant harm will be either avoided or mitigated. Where neither of these are possible compensation can be required if the proposal is to go ahead. The MPA is satisfied that in the relevant cases where landscape has been a constraint and the policy has been referenced, landscape issues/impacts have been appropriately addressed and where necessary appropriate mitigation has been provided. The policy is fit for purpose and being used appropriately and no change is considered necessary.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 220 2014 Page 58 of 81 Policy DM5 - Biodiversity and Geological Interest Policy Wording
Proposals for minerals development must not adversely affect the integrity of European or Ramsar or other internationally designated sites either alone or in combination with other plans and projects, unless the tests set out under Article 6(4) of the Habitats Directive are met. Proposals for minerals development which do not adversely affect the integrity of European or Ramsar sites or other internationally designated sites will only be permitted where adverse impacts on biodiversity and/or geodiversity will be: i. avoided; or ii. where an adverse impact cannot be avoided, the impact will be adequately mitigated; or iii. where adverse impacts cannot be avoided or adequately mitigated, compensation will result in the maintenance or enhancement of biodiversity/geodiversity. Where possible, proposals should enhance biodiversity and geological interest. Proposals for minerals development must be accompanied by an objective assessment of the potential effects of the development on features of biodiversity and/or geological interest, taking into account cumulative impacts with other development and the potential impacts of climate change. In addition, the assessment must have particular regard to the need to protect, maintain and / or enhance sites and species of international and national importance, in accordance with the relevant statutory requirements. It should also consider the potential for existing habitats on the site to be restored to higher quality habitats, during and after mineral working. The assessment must also demonstrate how the proposal intends to address the need to maintain and/or enhance features of local and regional importance including Sites of Nature Conservation Interest. The proposals should seek to achieve this wherever possible and consistent with viable development.
Monitoring Indicator: • Number of proposals including an assessment of the biodiversity and geodiversity interest • Number of applications where biodiversity benefits are identified • % of minerals development planning applications compliant with the requirements of the policy Target: • 100% applications/permissions consistent with this policy in order to protect, maintain and/or enhance site and species of international and national importance Monitoring trigger/threshold for review: • Any approval not consistent with this policy Use since adoption: The Policy has been applied to all applications where biodiversity/geodiversity is considered to be a potential constraint.
Commentary and RAG Score Green
This policy is intended to protect biodiversity and geodiversity, including impacts on the integrity of sites on international importance. The MPA provides advice to developers on whether any proposal requires an assessment of impacts on biodiversity, and the level of detail any such assessment will have to cover. The process of screening applications for potential constraints, and consultation of applications both internally and externally means that the Dorset Council Natural Environment Team will provide biodiversity advice/input. Natural England and others will also provide input. If in the opinion of any of the consultees further assessment is required, this comment will be made and it is expected that the DM case officer will ensure that all the necessary assessments
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 221 2014 Page 59 of 81 are carried out. It may be that in some cases further assessment is not required. Subject to the information and advice received the MPA will ensure that, should the proposal be permitted, appropriate conditions will be applied to ensure biodiversity/geodiversity is appropriately protected. The MPA is satisfied that this policy is adequate to ensure that all necessary assessments will be undertaken and biodiversity and geodiversity impacts/potential impacts will be identified and where necessary can be protected. The policy allows the MPA to ensure that significant harm will be either avoided or mitigated. Where neither of these are possible compensation can be required if the proposal is to go ahead. The MPA is satisfied that the policy is fit for purpose and being used appropriately and no change is considered necessary.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 222 2014 Page 60 of 81 Policy DM6 - Dorset and East Devon Coast World Heritage Site Policy Wording
Minerals development will not be permitted within the boundaries of the World Heritage Site within Dorset. Proposals for minerals development outside of the boundary of the World Heritage Site but which could affect the Site must be able to demonstrate that there will not be any impacts on the Outstanding Universal Value or integrity of the Site. In the case of proposals which could affect the Site’s setting, permission will only be granted if any adverse impacts can be mitigated to the satisfaction of the Mineral Planning Authority and on condition that such impacts would not affect the Site’s Outstanding Universal Value or integrity.
Monitoring Indicator: • Number of relevant proposals with assessment of impact on and mitigation for the World Heritage Site and its setting Target: • All permissions consistent with this policy Monitoring trigger/threshold for review: • Any approval not consistent with this policy Use since adoption: This policy has been used twice since adoption
Commentary and RAG Score Green
This policy is intended to protect the Dorset and East Devon World Heritage Site (within Dorset), its setting and its Outstanding Universal Value. It has been used twice, in relevant proposals with potential to affect the World Heritage Site. The policy allows the MPA to ensure that the World Heritage Site and its setting will not be damaged or compromised. The MPA is satisfied that the policy is being used appropriately and no change is considered necessary.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 223 2014 Page 61 of 81 Policy DM7 - The Historic Environment Policy Wording
Proposals for minerals development in Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole will only be permitted where it can be demonstrated through an authoritative process of assessment and evaluation that heritage assets and their settings will be conserved in a manner appropriate to their significance. Adverse impacts should be avoided or mitigated to an acceptable level. Where the presence of historic assets of national significance is proven, either through designation or a process of assessment, their preservation in situ will be required. Any other historic assets should be preserved in situ if possible, or otherwise by record.
Monitoring Indicator: Number of proposals including an assessment of the historic environment and/or archaeological evaluation % of minerals development planning applications compliant with the requirements of the policy Target: • 100% applications/permissions consistent with this policy Monitoring trigger/threshold for review: • Any approval not consistent with this policy Use since adoption: This policy has been used 64 times during the 2014-2018 assessment period. The Policy has been applied to all applications where heritage/historic environment is considered to be a potential constraint.
Commentary and RAG Score Green
This policy is intended to protect the historic environment, in conformity with national policy. The process of screening applications for potential constraints, and consultation of applications both internally and externally means that the Dorset Council Natural Environment Team will provide heritage/historic environment advice. Historic England will also provide input. If in the opinion of any of the consultees further assessment is required, this comment will be made and it is expected that the DM case officer will ensure that all the necessary assessments are carried out. It may be that in some cases further assessment is not required. Subject to the information and advice received the MPA will ensure that, should the proposal be permitted, appropriate conditions will be applied to ensure that heritage and the historic environment is appropriately protected. The MPA is satisfied that this policy is adequate to ensure that all necessary heritage/historic environment assessments will be undertaken, and impacts/potential impacts will be identified and where necessary can be appropriately mitigated. The policy allows the MPA to ensure that significant harm will be either avoided or mitigated. Where neither of these are possible the heritage assets will be recorded if the proposal is to go ahead. The MPA is satisfied that the policy is fit for purpose and being used appropriately and no change is considered necessary.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 224 2014 Page 62 of 81 Policy DM8 - Transport and Minerals Development Policy Wording
Minerals development which could have an adverse impact as a consequence of the traffic generated by it will only be permitted where it is demonstrated, through a Transport Assessment that: a. a safe access to the proposed site will be provided; b. there will be no adverse impact on the Strategic, Primary and/or Local road network: c. developers will provide the funding for any highway and transport network improvements necessary to mitigate or compensate any adverse impact on the safety, capacity and use of a highway, railway, cycleway or public right of way and that these improvements will be delivered in a timely manner; and d. the proposal, where possible, has direct access or suitable links with the Dorset strategic highway network or primary route network. Sustainable transportation should be used where possible and practical, including through minimising distance travelled by road and maximising the use of transport means such as rail, water, pipelines or conveyor belts to transport minerals where practicable and environmentally acceptable. Mineral site transport plans should be established.
Monitoring Indicator: • % of proposals facilitating sustainable transport in compliance with the policy • Number of applications accompanied by a Transport Assessment • Number of applications containing sustainable transport assessment Target: • 100% of applications/permissions consistent with this policy Monitoring trigger/threshold for review: • Any approval not consistent with this policy Use since adoption: The Policy has been applied to all applications where transport is considered to be a potential constraint.
Commentary and RAG Score Green
This policy is intended to minimise environmental impacts of transportation associated with mineral extraction and processing, and to promote the use of the most sustainable means of transport possible. Any proposal where traffic generated could lead to adverse impacts will be required to submit a Transport Assessment to assess impacts and demonstrate that they can be successfully mitigated. The process of screening applications for potential constraints, and consultation of applications both internally and externally means that the Dorset Council Transport Development Management Team and in some cases Highways England will provide advice/input on transport impacts and mitigation. If further assessment is considered necessary and has not been supplied, it is expected that the DM case officer will ensure that all the necessary assessments are carried out. It may be that in some cases assessment is not required. Subject to the information and advice received the MPA will ensure that, should the proposal be permitted, appropriate conditions will be applied to ensure that transport related impacts are mitigated to appropriate extent. The MPA is satisfied that in the relevant cases where transport has been a constraint this policy is adequate to ensure that all necessary assessments will be undertaken and impacts/potential impacts will be identified and where necessary can be mitigated. The MPA is satisfied that the policy is fit for purpose and being used appropriately and no change is considered necessary.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 225 2014 Page 63 of 81 Policy DM9 - Extraction and restoration within airfield safeguarding areas Policy Wording
Proposals for minerals development partly or completely within the following Airfield Safeguarding Areas will only be permitted when the applicant can demonstrate that the proposed extraction, restoration and afteruse will not give rise to new or increased hazards to aviation: a. Bournemouth Airport b. Yeovilton Aerodrome
Monitoring Indicator: • % of minerals development planning applications compliant with the requirements of the policy Target: • 100% applications/permissions consistent with this policy Monitoring trigger/threshold for review: • Any approval not consistent with this policy Use since adoption: There have been three relevant applications during the review period 2014-2018 and this policy was used in each case, with the information requested by Bournemouth Airport being provided.
Commentary and RAG Score Green
This policy is intended to ensure there is no risk to aircraft through light spill, tall construction plant and birdstrike caused by mineral activity. It is relevant to both mineral working and afteruse. Proposals within the designated Airfield Safeguarding Area require consultation with the airfield operator. There have been three applications during the review period involving this policy, and in all cases the necessary assessment was carried out and a Birdstrike Management Plan prepared, and covered in the conditions attached to the permission. The MPA is satisfied that the policy is fit for purpose and being used appropriately and no change is considered necessary.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 226 2014 Page 64 of 81 Policy DM10 - Planning Obligations Policy Wording
In cases where: a. restrictions upon, or measures required to mitigate the impacts of, the winning or working or handling of minerals and the recycling of aggregates are essential for proper planning; and b. such measures lie outside the normal scope of conditions which could be attached to the planning permission, the Mineral Planning Authority will seek to establish planning obligations with the developer and landowner through unilateral undertakings or legal agreements.
Monitoring Indicator: • Number of relevant permissions issued which include legal agreement Target: • All permissions which require or qualify for a legal agreement to have one Monitoring trigger/threshold for review: • Any qualifying proposed development permitted without the benefit of a legal agreement Use since adoption: There have been seven relevant applications during the review period, all of which have involved the use of legal agreements.
Commentary and RAG Score Green
This policy provides the basis of, and support, for the use of policy obligations where these are considered necessary. All relevant permissions have included the use of a Section 106 Agreement. The MPA is satisfied that the policy is available for use as and when required, and strengthens the MPA position in negotiations with applicants. The MPA is satisfied that the policy is fit for purpose and being used appropriately and no change is considered necessary.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 227 2014 Page 65 of 81 Policy DM11 - Review of Old Mineral Planning Permissions Policy Wording
The Mineral Planning Authority will, through the determination of applications made under the Review of Old Mineral Planning Permissions legislation, seek to achieve up to date and relevant working and restoration standards achievable by the imposition of appropriate planning conditions and, where necessary, through voluntary agreements and planning obligations.
Monitoring Indicator: • Number of times policy used in ROMP decisions Target: • All relevant applications/permissions consistent with this policy through the achievement of optimum working and restoration standards Monitoring trigger/threshold for review: • Any approval not consistent with this policy Use since adoption: There has only been one Review of Mineral Permissions application determined in the plan period, and this referenced the policy.
Commentary and RAG Score Green
This policy supports the process of reviewing old mineral planning permissions, as required by the Environment Act 1995, in order to bring old minerals permissions up to modern environmental standards by attaching new planning conditions. This gives the MPA the opportunity to ensure as far as possible that conditions attached to mineral planning permissions remain up-to-date and relevant, without significantly infringing existing working rights. It has been used once during the review period. The MPA is satisfied that the policy is available for use as and when required, and is fit for purpose and being used appropriately. No change is considered necessary.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 228 2014 Page 66 of 81 Policy MON1 - Plan, Monitor and Manage Policy Wording
The Mineral Planning Authority will work with local authorities in and around Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole, the minerals and waste industry, regulatory authorities, landowners, local communities, environmental bodies, the Aggregates Working Party and Government departments to plan, monitor and manage minerals development. To achieve this the Mineral Planning Authority will seek a commitment from the minerals industry to supply annual production figures for minerals and recycled aggregates.
Monitoring Indicator: • Number of applications including conditions related to the supply of production figures on a regular basis Target: • All relevant applications/permissions consistent with this policy Monitoring trigger/threshold for review: • Any approval not consistent with this policy Use since adoption: Monitoring has been ongoing since the MS was adopted.
Commentary and RAG Score Green
This policy is intended to ensure that the MPA monitors the ongoing use and application of the policies in the MS, testing their relevance and effectiveness. The MPA has carried out ongoing monitoring of the MS and its implementation, recording the results in the Annual Monitoring Reports and the Local Aggregates Assessments that are produced annually.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 229 2014 Page 67 of 81 Table 1 - Summary of Monitoring Status
Policy Number and Title RAG Status
1. Policy SS1 - Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development Green
2. Policy SS2 - Identification of Sites in the Mineral Sites Plan Green
3. Policy CC1 - Preparation of Climate Change Assessments Red
4. Policy RE1 – Production of Recycled Aggregates Green
5. Policy AS1 - Provision of Sand and Gravel Green
6. Policy AS2 - Landbank Provision Green
7. Policy AS3 - Crushed Rock Green
8. Policy AS4 - Wharves and Depots Green
9. Policy AS5 - Borrow Pits Green
10. Policy BC1 - Provision of Ball Clay Green
11. Policy BC2 - Ball Clay Transportation Green
Policy BC3 - Extraction of Sand and Gravel in association with Ball Clay within the 12. Green AONB
13. Policy PK1 - Provision of Purbeck Stone Green
14. Policy PK2 - Considerations for Purbeck Stone Quarries Green
15. Policy PK3 - Service Areas Green
16. Policy PK4 - Crushing of Purbeck Stone at Dimension Stone Quarries Amber
17. Policy PK5 - Importation of Stone from Outside Purbeck Amber
18. Policy PD1 - Underground Mining and High Wall Extraction of Portland Stone Policy Green
19. Policy PD2 - Surface Quarrying of Portland Stone Green
20. Policy PD3 - Relinquishment of Permission Green
21. Policy PD4 - Minimising Impacts of Existing Permissions on Portland Green
22. Policy PD5 - Restoration of Sites on Portland Green
23. Policy BS1 - Building Stone Quarries Green
24. Policy HY1 - Proposals for Exploration and Appraisal Green
25. Policy HY2 - Proposals for Production Facilities and Ancillary Development Green
26. Policy HY3 - Transportation of Hydrocarbons Green
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 230 2014 Page 68 of 81 Policy Number and Title RAG Status
Policy HY4 - Decommissioning and Restoration of Production Facilities and 27. Green Ancillary Development
28. Policy HY5 - Underground Gas Storage & Carbon Storage Green
29. Policy IS1 - Industrial Sand Amber
30. Policy SG1 - Mineral Safeguarding Area Amber Red
Pre LGR: Post LGR: 31. Policy SG2 - Mineral Consultation Area Amber Not needed
32. Policy SG3 - Safeguarding of mineral sites and facilities Amber
33. Policy RS1 - Restoration, Aftercare and Afteruse of Minerals Development Amber
34. Policy RS2 - Retention of Plant, Machinery and other Ancillary Development Amber
35. Policy RS3 - Local Liaison Groups Green
36. Policy DM1 - Key Criteria for Sustainable Minerals Development Amber
37. Policy DM2 - Managing Impacts on Amenity Amber
38. Policy DM3 - Managing the Impact on Surface Water and Ground Water Resources Green
Policy DM4 - Protection and Enhancement of Landscape Character and the 39. Green Countryside
40. Policy DM5 - Biodiversity and Geological Interest Green
41. Policy DM6 - Dorset and East Devon Coast World Heritage Site Green
42. Policy DM7 - The Historic Environment Green
43. Policy DM8 - Transport and Minerals Development Green
44. Policy DM9 - Extraction and restoration within airfield safeguarding areas Green
45. Policy DM10 - Planning Obligations Green
46. Policy DM11 - Review of Old Mineral Planning Permissions Green
47. Policy MON1 - Plan, Monitor and Manage Green
2.6. Table 1 shows that the majority of policies are considered to be working effectively and do not require any review at this stage. Some policies - CC1; Pk4; PK5; SG1, 2 &3; RS1 & 2; DM1 & 2 - are not working as effectively as they should and will require further consideration.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 231 2014 Page 69 of 81 3. National Planning Policy Framework Assessment 2.7. Since the preparation of the Minerals Strategy 2014 was based on the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) 2012, a brief review of the MS has been undertaken comparing it with more recent versions of the NPPF. This is set out below. Key: New plan-making requirement of the NPPF 2019 not contained within the previous 2012 version Revised plan-making requirement of the NPPF, containing some changes from the 2012 version Requirement of the NPPF which has not changed from the 2012 version in relation to plan-making
Table 2 - National Planning Policy Framework Focussed Review
NPPF Paragraph NPPF Requirement Assessment results Reference
General Requirements Yes - the MS is based on delivery of Contribute to the achievement of sustainable sustainable 1. NPPF Para 8, 9, 16 development. development, and policies such as SS1 and DM1 ensure this. Apply the presumption in favour of sustainable Yes - policy SS1 2. NPPF Para 11 development. achieves this. Yes - the vision and objectives focus on the Provide a positive vision for the future; a framework for sustainable supply of 3. addressing housing (minerals) needs and other economic, NPPF Para 15 minerals and social and environmental priorities. protection of the environment and communities. Plans should be: Aspirational and deliverable Yes, the MS achieves 4. Contain clear and unambiguous policies NPPF Para 16 these. Accessible through the use of digital tools Serve a clear purpose avoiding duplication Plan Content Yes, each mineral type has strategic policies Include strategic policies to address priorities for the setting out how much development and use of land. They should set out an 5. NPPF Para 17, 20 mineral will be overall strategy for the pattern, scale and quality of supplied and spatially development. where it will come from. Essentially all policies 6. Outline which policies are ‘strategic’ policies NPPF Para 21 are strategic, as the MS does not have any
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 232 2014 Page 70 of 81 NPPF Paragraph NPPF Requirement Assessment results Reference
policies focussed on local issues such as delivery of sites. Strategic policies should look ahead over a minimum 15- 7. NPPF Para 22 Yes this is the case. year period from adoption. Yes there is a key Indicate broad locations for development on a key diagram and a policies diagram, and land use designations and allocations on a map showing land use 8. NPPF Para 23 policies map. designations. The MS does not make any allocations. Strategic policies should provide a clear strategy for bringing sufficient land forward, and at a sufficient rate, 9. NPPF Para 23 Yes they do. to address objectively assessed needs over the plan period. This is achieved through the Mineral Sites Plan 2019, Include non-strategic policies to set out more detailed adopted at the end of 10. NPPF Para 18, 28 policies for specific areas. 2019 and intended to support the MS and deliver the mineral strategies. Transport
Development should only be prevented on highways grounds if there would be an unacceptable impact on 11. NPPF Para 109 Yes. highway safety, or the residual cumulative impacts on the road network would be severe.
Making effective use of land
Promote an effective use of land in meeting the need for homes and other uses, while safeguarding and improving Yes, in terms of 12. NPPF Para 117 the environment and ensuring safe and healthy living minerals. conditions.
Set out a clear strategy for accommodating objectively Yes the MS does this, 13. assessed needs, in a way that makes as much use as NPPF Para 117 in terms of mineral possible of previously-developed or ‘brownfield’ land. supply.
Climate change, flooding and coastal change
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 233 2014 Page 71 of 81 NPPF Paragraph NPPF Requirement Assessment results Reference
Yes, the MS does Take a proactive approach to mitigating and adapting to include a policy that climate change, taking into account the long-term proactively seeks to 14. implications for flood risk, coastal change, water supply, NPPF Para 149 mitigate climate biodiversity and landscapes, and the risk of overheating change and addresses from rising temperature. these issues.
Yes, there is a policy Strategic policies should manage flood risk from all addressing flood risk 15. NPPF Para 156 sources. resulting from mineral developments.
The MS does address this issue, in the Avoiding inappropriate development in vulnerable areas context on mineral 16. and not exacerbating the impacts of physical changes to NPPF Para 167 planning which does the coast. permit some development within floodplains.
Natural environment
Contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by protecting and enhancing valued These points are landscapes, sites of biodiversity or geological value and generally addressed, 17. NPPF Para 170 soils, recognising the intrinsic character and beauty of the though the latter ones countryside, and the wider benefits from natural capital to a lesser extent. and ecosystem services.
Plans should: distinguish between the hierarchy of international, national and locally designated sites, take a These points are strategic approach to maintaining and enhancing generally addressed, 18. NPPF Para 171 networks of habitats and green infrastructure, and plan though the latter ones for the enhancement of natural capital at a catchment or to a lesser extent. landscape scale across local authority boundaries.
Conserve the special character and importance of 19. NPPF Para 173 These are referenced. Heritage Coast areas. Identify, map and safeguard components of local wildlife- These are addressed in rich habitats and wider ecological networks, promote the the context particularly 20. conservation, restoration and enhancement of priority NPPF Para 174 of mineral site habitats, ecological networks and the protection and restoration. recovery of priority species, and identify and pursue
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 234 2014 Page 72 of 81 NPPF Paragraph NPPF Requirement Assessment results Reference
opportunities for securing measurable net gains for biodiversity.
Sustain and contribute towards compliance with relevant limit values or national objectives for pollutants, taking Air quality is addressed 21. into account the presence of Air Quality Management NPPF Para 181 through the MS. Areas and Clean Air Zones, and the cumulative impacts from individual sites in local areas.
This is addressed Ensure that new development can be integrated through minimising 22. effectively with existing businesses and community NPPF Para 182 impacts of new facilities. minerals development.
Minerals
Provide for the extraction of mineral resources of local 23. NPPF Para 204 Yes and national importance.
Take account of the contribution that substitute or secondary and recycled materials and minerals waste 24. NPPF Para 204 Yes would make to the supply of materials, before considering extraction of primary materials.
Safeguard mineral resources by defining Mineral 25. NPPF Para 204 Yes Safeguarding Areas.
Encourage the prior extraction of minerals, where 26. practical and environmentally feasible, if it is necessary NPPF Para 204 Yes for non-mineral development to take place.
Safeguard existing, planned and potential sites for: the bulk transport, handling and processing of minerals, the 27. manufacture of concrete and concrete products and the NPPF Para 204 Yes handling, processing and distribution of substitute, recycled and secondary aggregate material.
Set out criteria or requirements to ensure that permitted and proposed operations do not have unacceptable 28. NPPF Para 204 Yes adverse impacts on the natural and historic environment or human health
Recognise that some noisy short-term activities, which 29. may otherwise be regarded as unacceptable, are NPPF Para 204 Yes unavoidable to facilitate minerals extraction
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 235 2014 Page 73 of 81 NPPF Paragraph NPPF Requirement Assessment results Reference
Ensure that worked land is reclaimed at the earliest opportunity, taking account of aviation safety, and that 30. NPPF Para 204 Yes high-quality restoration and aftercare of mineral sites takes place.
2.8. Other NPPF revisions include (but are not limited to): uses of land and developing green and brown field land; greater emphasis on design of development; more guidance on the change of use of land in the Green Belt; more guidance on flood risk; consideration of undeveloped coasts and public access to the coast; more guidance on designated landscapes; consideration of ground conditions and impacts of air quality on natural environment; and greater emphasis on energy security. 2.9. While the amendments to the NPPF do have an impact on the MS, the MPA do not consider that they require an urgent review of the MS. 2.10. The 25 Year Environment Plan (Feb 2018) is also relevant, setting out Government action to help the natural world regain and retain good health. It aims to deliver cleaner air and water in our cities and rural landscapes, protect threatened species and provide richer wildlife habitats. It calls for an approach to agriculture, forestry, land use and fishing that puts the environment first. 2.11.The MPA are satisfied that the MS, particularly Policy DM5, is aligned with the protection principles of the Environment Plan and seeks to protect and enhance the natural environment but this will at some point need strengthening to ensure minerals development is aligned with national policy objectives and explicitly seeking to increase natural capital as part of development.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 236 2014 Page 74 of 81 4. Issues Identified 2.13.Following assessment, the following polices were identified as requiring further consideration:
Policy CC1 - Preparation of Climate Change Assessments Red
2.14. Assessment shows that this policy is not being consistently applied - in fact, a relatively low level of use has been demonstrated and this is the reason the policy has been scored Red. In addition, given the growing importance of climate change and the declaration of a Climate Emergency by Dorset Council, there is a case for a fuller review of this policy to ensure it is in line with current views on climate issues. 2.15. There may be some confusion as to its use, with case officers applying their own assessment, instead of requiring the submission of a climate change assessment by the applicant. Indications are that the use and application of the policy has improved over the five years since the MS was adopted. 2.16. The MPA acknowledge that this policy is not being consistently used and applied, but consider that it is available and serves the purpose of requiring developers to address the issues of CO2 emissions and how these could be limited. It also requires a demonstration that mitigation and adaptation measures have been incorporated into a proposal. 2.17.The MPA will issue guidance to officers on the intended use of the policy, and the importance of ensuring that the issue of climate change is appropriately addressed in an application. It is expected that this will significantly increase the application of this policy. The MS will be assessed again in 2021 to consider whether the use and application of this policy has improved. This will enable any implications of the Dorset Climate and Ecological Emergency Strategy for the Minerals Strategy to be considered.
Policy PK4 - Crushing of Purbeck Stone at Dimension Stone Quarries Amber
Policy PK5 - Importation of Stone from Outside Purbeck Amber
2.18. The issue associated with these two policies appears to be a simple misquoting of the policy number in the drafting of the report. Apart from these errors the policies appear to be being used as intended. Officers will be reminded to check the numbers of policies referred to in reports.
Policy IS1 - Industrial Sand Amber
2.19. As described in section 2, it is impossible to identify a specific permitted reserve of sand solely for non- aggregate or industrial use, as an individual quarry may produce both aggregate and non-aggregate sand. It is also difficult to distinguish between non-aggregate sand used for industrial purposes e.g. foundry sand of for brick-facings), and sand used for other non-aggregate (e.g. recreational or sports) purposes. It makes it difficult to identify a realistic landbank for 'industrial' sand. It is generally the case that specific quarries producing sand which is or can be used for non-aggregate purposes have adequate permitted reserves to continue producing sand that could go for either use. 2.20. It might be more appropriate to rely on policies AS1 and AS2 to maintain the Poole Formation and other types of sand landbank, and to draw from this as required for aggregate and non-aggregate use rather than to have a specific non-aggregate landbank. However, these issues really need to be explored with the wider involvement of producers and users of the non-aggregate sand and this is best done through a more formal review of the policy. 2.21. Given what has been described, namely that the policy has never been used and existing quarries meet current demand, the MPA do not consider that this needs to be carried out urgently. The policy will continue to be monitored for another year and the situation will be reviewed in 2021. At this stage of a more formal Review of the MS, the purpose, use and application of this policy will be considered.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 237 2014 Page 75 of 81 Policy SG1 - Mineral Safeguarding Area Amber Red
2.22. Having reviewed the application of this policy, and from experiences during the review period, the MPA has the following observations: The MPA takes a pragmatic view when responding to a mineral safeguarding consultation, seeking to achieve some level of prior extraction or re-use on site - it does not expect to achieve prior extraction or re-use of all mineral. However, even with this approach, prior extraction is not necessarily easy to achieve. It is often the case that the developer has to find an operator willing to take the mineral, otherwise they need to arrange for the separate removal of mineral. In addition, a separate/temporary permission is generally required to allow a quarry/processing plant to receive/handle the mineral, potentially resulting in delays. The intention is normally to remove some proportion of mineral, leaving an undisturbed surface above the winter water-table to allow built development to proceed with minimal delay. If the water table is high, it may not be possible to achieve any prior extraction without compromising site drainage. An alternative to prior extraction is to identify and set aside in separate stockpiles any aggregate that is excavated during digging of foundations for roads, buildings etc. The excavated aggregate can then be re-used onsite instead of imported aggregate, subject to the quality being acceptable. Machine operators may need separate training to identify the relevant deposits of aggregate as they work. The MPA has not consistently been consulted (by Districts, prior to April 2019, and development management Area Teams after that) on relevant applications within the MSA which could or would sterilise minerals. Conversely, it has often been consulted in cases where the criteria established through the Minerals Strategy should have screened out the need for consultation. The recently adopted Mineral Sites Plan 2019 provides more detail on criteria to screen out the need to consult the MPA. Given the numbers of consultations, the MPA does not (currently) routinely follow up on all comments made objecting to potential sterilisation. The Districts (formerly) and the currently the Area Teams does not routinely report back on decisions made following comments/objections on mineral safeguarding grounds. This makes it difficult to properly monitor the application of the policy. The MPA does not have access to geological expertise unless specifically procured. When an application involving potential sterilisation is supported by a geological assessment claiming that prior extraction or reuse on site is not possible, it can be difficult to assess the quality/accuracy of the assessment, and/or to refute it. The Minerals Strategy 2014 safeguards a number of types of building stone across west and north Dorset and in many cases where the MPA is consulted over proposals for built development, e.g. housing, on the safeguarded building stone. Given the relatively low level of demand for most of these stones and the priority given to housing development, in many cases (apart from the higher profile Purbeck Stone and Portland Stone) when a consultation is received safeguarding requirements are waived in response. Dorset has a relatively wide range of minerals of differing types and uses. It is possible that the range of minerals safeguarded needs to be re-assessed and only the higher-value/important minerals retain their safeguarded status. The recently adopted Mineral Sites Plan 2019 develops the mineral safeguarding policy, and will be applied along with the Minerals Strategy 2014 and the provisions of the two plans together reviewed and assessed. However, this is currently progressing as the Mineral Sites Plan 2019 was only adopted at the end of 2019. 2.23. The MPA need to determine whether the policy is actually not fit for purpose and a review is required; or whether changes to its application and use are what is required. Actions/options are considered to be: 2.24. To formally review the policy, and make changes to it and to supporting text to make it more effective. This would involve considering issues such as:
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 238 2014 Page 76 of 81 a. Is the policy too generalised, and given the range of minerals in Dorset are a range of more specific safeguarding policies for different mineral types required? b. Does the policy seek to safeguard too many mineral types, or too large an area? Does its application need to be refined? c. Do the criteria screening out applications that do not need to be consulted on changed/amended? 2.25. To keep the policy as it is, but make changes to the way it is used and applied, to make it more effective and applied more appropriately, and then re-assess the policy and its use/application again to see if it has improved. As part of this approach, the following actions would be taken: a. The Area Teams would be provided with better advice on screening applications and applying the policy. b. Developers should have improved advice/guidance on the way safeguarding policy is used in the Dorset Council/BCP Council areas. This could include the preparation of supplementary guidance on mineral safeguarding Dorset, reviewing the range of minerals and how each is safeguarded. c. The MPA would be more selective in the applications it responded to, but would monitor those responses to see how the safeguarding response/advice was received/used. 2.26. Given that the Mineral Sites Plan 2019 with its mineral safeguarding content has only recently been adopted, the MPA consider it appropriate to continue to monitor both Plans for at least another year, to assess how effectively the Plans work together. It is considered it would be premature to move immediately to a review of the Minerals Strategy 2014 safeguarding policy. 2.27. It is proposed that no change in the policy is initiated in the short term, but the MPA will take steps to improve how Policy SG1 is used and applied, including: a. Preparing updated and improved advice for Area Teams' planning officers and validation staff on the application of the policy - this could include briefing sessions on the application of the policy b. Reviewing and revising the GIS information on which the policy is based, and ensuring that is made available c. Preparing supplementary guidance on safeguarding in Dorset Council/BCP Council for the information of developers, landowners and the general public. d. Being more selective in the consultations it responds to, but following those through to their ultimate determination. 2.28. The MPA do currently consider that the policy has the potential to work effectively and be fit for purpose provided. The steps set out above are expected to improve the effectiveness of the policy.
Policy SG2 - Mineral Consultation Area Pre LGR: Amber Post LGR: Not needed
2.29. As noted in section 2, post LGR this policy is not required, and will be deleted when a full or partial review of the MS is undertaken.
Policy SG3 - Safeguarding of mineral sites and facilities Amber
2.30. As noted in section 2, there are issues with the application of this policy. There have been cases where through consultation the MPA became aware of non-mineral development allocations proposed through a local plan that would potentially impact on minerals interests. Through discussion with the local planning authority the MPA made them aware of the presence of the minerals operation, to ensure an acceptable distance remained. 2.31. Similarly, the MPA objects to planning applications where non-mineral development is proposed within the vicinity of a mineral operation. A good example of this is on Portland, where mineral operations are located
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 239 2014 Page 77 of 81 in close proximity to non-mineral development. The MPA has noted that local planning authorities have generally respected the comments and advice provided. 2.32. The problems come in cases: a. where the MPA is not aware of non-mineral development proposals 'in the vicinity of' minerals operations, and is not consulted, and so development that could lead to future problems may be permitted, and b. as with the Policy SG1, the MPA does not routinely follow up on comments made, and is not always aware of cases where advice may not be accepted, or decisions overturned on appeal. 2.33. The MPA has recognised the issue identified in a) above and has addressed this through Policy MS8 of the Mineral Sites Plan 2019, which establishes a 250m buffer around permitted and allocated mineral sites within which local planning Area Teams are required to consult the MPA if non-mineral development is proposed within or adjacent to these buffers. This is intended to pick up more of the cases of encroachment of non- mineral development, some of which might previously been missed. 2.34. The suggestions made for improvements to implementation of Policy SG1, particularly improved monitoring of applications where comments are supplied to be aware of final outcomes, are relevant for improvements to SG3 as well. SG3 provides a policy basis for safeguarding minerals sites and infrastructure, but its implementation and action has not been as effective as it could be. The application of Policy MS8 of the MSP along with SG3 is expected to improve its effectiveness. Time is needed to properly monitor the action of these policies (SG3 and MS8) together, to assess their effectiveness together. 2.35. The MPA will monitor over the course of the next year, and review the situation in 2021. No urgent review is considered necessary.
Policy RS1 - Restoration, Aftercare and Afteruse of Minerals Development Amber
2.36. The restoration strategy established through the MS is based on the landscape types of Dorset. These are distinct types of landscape across the county that are relatively uniform in character, sharing broadly similar combinations of geology, topography, drainage patterns, vegetation, historical land use and settlement pattern. Specific land management guidelines relevant to each landscape type have been prepared and provide a broad framework for managing change. The guidelines establish specific principles for mineral site restoration within each landscape type, which are appropriate to that landscape type. They provide practical and locally relevant advice to developers, landowners, local authorities and the general public as to what will be expected through restoration of the land following mineral working. As a result, the restoration process is intended to ensure that the finished site will integrate easily into the landscape in which it sits. 2.37. Background Paper 16 to the Minerals Strategy 2014 set out all the landscape types along with the relevant land management guidelines for each landscape type, to be applied during site restoration. Paragraph 15.7 of the Minerals Strategy 2014 noted "The Landscape Management Guidelines are available as Background Paper 16: Restoration. Further and more detailed guidance on restoration will be provided through a subsequent Supplementary Planning Document, should this prove necessary." (emphasis added) 2.38. The intention was to produce a Restoration Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) if it appeared to the MPA that this was needed - if, for example, applicants were finding difficulty in interpreting the approach to restoration as set out in the policy. In reality, there have been no queries about the application of the policy and no indication of difficulties in applicants understanding the approach. The MPA has therefore to date not considered it necessary to prepare a Restoration SPD. However, this policy has been scored Amber for not achieving its targets. 2.39. Regarding guidance and control of the restoration process, it is noted that the policy has been consistently applied during determination of relevant applications. What is not clear is whether in each case the specific guidelines for the relevant landscape type(s) have been reviewed, and specifically applied to develop a restoration approach which is appropriate to the local landscape and ecological setting, and complies with the restoration strategy.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 240 2014 Page 78 of 81 2.40. Policy RS1 contains 15 criteria, covering the various aspects of restoration, aftercare and after use. They provide a checklist for development management officers when assessing a proposal for restoration. They also provide a policy basis for negotiations with applicants. It is unlikely that every single criterion will be specifically addressed in every application, and it is difficult to assess this for every proposal received during the assessment period. It is assumed that DM officers have utilised the criteria as needed, in their determination of any given application, and for the purposes of this assessment the reference to 'applications/permissions consistent with this policy' in one of the targets above is taken to mean confirmation that the policy has been considered and applied. 2.41. What appears to happen more commonly is a more general approach to addressing restoration/aftercare/afteruse in planning applications. Many planning applications proposing mineral extraction include a form of restoration that is (generally) consistent with the local ecological and landscape context; the Dorset Council Natural Environment Team (NET) are routinely consulted and provide comments and advice on whether the approach is relevant and appropriate to the site, as do other consultees such as Natural England, Historic England, Highways England, the Environment Agency and so on. 2.42. Subject to their views the permission issued generally includes a condition requiring restoration of the site in accordance with a specific restoration scheme, to be submitted within a set period of time. The NET will again provide comments on the proposed restoration scheme and subject to their input, the restoration scheme will be approved. Other consultees, such as Natural England, the Environment Agency, Historic England and Highways England and others may also provide comments on proposed restoration. In this way an appropriate restoration scheme comes forward for approval and implementation. The detail of Policy RS1 is available if required, or if there is a dispute over the need for/approach to restoration. 2.43. Although Policy RS1, including all its criteria, may not be explicitly addressed in all cases the MPA are satisfied that site restoration is being properly addressed and given the input of the Natural Environment Team and other expert consultees appropriate restoration, aftercare and after use proposals are being approved for implementation. 2.44. The preparation of a Restoration SPD, although not considered a priority, would be helpful in clarifying the approach to restoration set out in the Minerals Strategy 2014 and would make it easier for applicants to identify and apply the relevant management guidelines for any proposed minerals development. The MPA will therefore aim to prepare a Restoration SPD in support of Policy RS1. No urgent review is considered necessary.
Policy RS2 - Retention of Plant, Machinery and other Ancillary Development Amber
2.45. The MPA are satisfied that this policy has been used appropriately in the majority of relevant cases, but apparently has not been used consistently in all cases. In some cases a conditional requirement has been attached to a permission requiring the removal of machinery etc., but Policy RS2 has not been quoted. Case officers may consider that it is not necessary in all cases to specifically quote the policy. Since it has apparently not been used in all relevant cases, an Amber score has been awarded. 2.46. The MPA consider that the policy is relevant and appropriate, and does not need a change. It remains available for use. Guidance will be provided to officers, reminding them that the policy is available for use. The MPA is satisfied that the policy is fit for purpose and being used appropriately and no change is considered necessary. The policy will continue to be monitored, and will be assessed again in 2021. No urgent review is considered necessary.
Policy DM1 - Key Criteria for Sustainable Minerals Development Amber
2.47. As with Policy RS1, this policy provides a checklist of issues that applicants can use in preparing their applications, and development management officers can use in assessing applications or negotiating with applicants. It is not intended that every criterion must be specifically addressed, but if development management officers refer to the policy in their decisions, or their reasoning behind their decisions, it is
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 241 2014 Page 79 of 81 assumed that they are satisfied that the policy has been applied appropriately and the proposal is compliant with the requirements of the policy. Similarly, if a policy is not referred to in any given application, it may be the case that the development management officer considers that it is not relevant. 2.48. This policy has been used in 96% of the total number of applications determined during the review period, 2014-2018. Given that the target use is 100%, the policy has been given an Amber score, and guidance will be given to development management officers. However the general trend has been an increase in use since adoption, year on year with the policy being used less in the earlier years of the plan’s adoption but usage increasing. 2.49. The MPA considers that the policy is effective and no change is considered necessary. The policy will continue to be monitored, and will be assessed again in 2021. No urgent review is considered necessary.
Policy DM2 - Managing Impacts on Amenity Amber
2.50. As with Policy DM1, this policy also provides a checklist of issues that applicants can use in preparing their applications, and development management officers can use in assessing applications or negotiating with applicants. Again it is not intended that every criterion must be specifically addressed, but if development management officers refer to the policy in their decisions, or their reasoning behind their decisions, it is assumed that they are satisfied that the policy has been applied appropriately and the proposal is compliant with the requirements of the policy. 2.51. This policy has been used in 97% of the total number of applications determined during the review period, 2014-2018. Given that the target use is 100%, the policy has been given an Amber score. It is noted that the lowest use was in 2014, when the MS was just adopted, and this has significantly increased since. 2.52. The MPA considers that the policy is effective and no change is considered necessary. The policy will continue to be monitored, and will be assessed again in 2021. No urgent review is considered necessary.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 242 2014 Page 80 of 81 5. Conclusions 2.53. This assessment has identified that while issues have been identified with the implementation and use of some of the policies during the 5-year period during the review period to date, the MS is considered to remain effective. 2.54. The policies where there is a greatest lack of clarity regarding their use are Policies CC1 (climate change), IS1 (industrial sand) and safeguarding (SG1 and SG3). 2.55. Each of these along with the other policies scoring Amber have been separately considered, and although some action is needed in certain cases the MPA is satisfied that no urgent Review of the overall MS, or any of the component policies, is required in the short term. The key actions are to provide further guidance to development management officers, and to validation teams and planning officers from the local planning Area Teams, on the operation of these policies; and to bring forward the preparation of one and possibly two Supplementary Planning Documents - on mineral safeguarding firstly, and possible site restoration as well. 2.56. The Mineral Sites Plan 2019 is meant to complement the MS and to contribute to delivering the strategies set out. As the MSP was only adopted at the end of 2019, the MPA want the two plans to have at least one year of working together before making changes to the MS (as the older of the two). This is considered a strong reason not to move to an early review of the MS. 2.57.In addition it is recognised that there are a number of current uncertainties which will have an impact on future supply and capacity requirements of minerals: The Government is driving forward development to boost the housing market and enable the necessary infrastructure to support this. The publication of the recent White Paper and the changes to the planning system this proposes are significant, and difficult to predict. Given the ongoing, and increasing, priority given to construction projects and house building, the need for minerals may increase. Offsetting this are Britain’s exit from the European Union, and the uncertainty surrounding the ramifications of this. The far-reaching impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and the effects of this are also difficult to predict, certainly in terms of mineral planning. 2.58. Given the recent adoption of the Mineral Sites Plan 2019 together with the current high level of uncertainty in mineral planning terms, the MPA is satisfied that the most appropriate approach is to continue monitoring of all policies of the Minerals Strategy, and to undertake another assessment in 2021. The Local Development Scheme will be amended accordingly to reflect this.
2020 Review of the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole MineralsPage Strategy 243 2014 Page 81 of 81 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 14
Cabinet 8 September 2020 Capital funding request to support housing projects
For Decision
Portfolio Holder: Cllr G Carr-Jones, Housing and Community Safety
Local Councillor(s):
Executive Director: Vivienne Broadhurst, Executive Director People - Adults
Report Author: Rebecca Kirk Title: Corporate Director – Housing Tel: 01929 557208 Email: [email protected]
Report Status: Public report. Exempt/Confidential Appendices
Recommendation:
1 Cabinet approve the allocation of £3.13m in the 20/21 capital programme and a further £1.65m in the 21/22 capital programme for the purchase and refurbishment of accommodation to support homeless and rough sleeper households.
2. Delegate authority to the Corporate Director of Housing, in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Housing and Community Safety and the Section 151 Officer, the ability to purchase 1-bedroom properties for use as temporary accommodation.
3. Delegate authority to the Corporate Director for Property and Assets, in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Housing and Community Safety, the Section 151 Officer, and Corporate Director of Housing the ability to purchase properties for use as hostel accommodation.
Page 245 Reason for Recommendation:
Dorset Council has a statutory duty under the Housing Act 1996 as amended by the Homelessness Reduction Act 2018 to provide a number of principle duties to those threatened with or who are homeless, including providing emergency and temporary accommodation. By increasing the number of properties owned and managed by the Council there will be a reduction of the Council’s use of Bed and Breakfast (B&B) accommodation, a direct revenue saving to the Council and an opportunity to generate income – whilst also providing a better service to our residents who find themselves homeless.
1. Executive Summary
Prior to the Covid-19 Pandemic Dorset Council had been advised by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) that its use of B&B placements for temporary accommodation (TA) are disproportionately high in comparison to other local authorities. The Council has a statutory duty to provide emergency and temporary accommodation and is overly reliant on B&B placements due to the lack of property under its ownership and control. Registered Housing providers (RP’s) do not provide TA, their business model relies on “long term lets” and they are not legally required to provide TA. The void is met in some way through the private sector rental scheme, although despite many years of effort there is simply not enough accommodation meet the need.
As a result of the Covid-19 pandemic and the government requirement to accommodate rough sleepers additional grant funding from MHCLG has been made available to provide long term accommodation solutions and ease the pressure on B&B. This report explains the current revenue costs to the Council in providing TA to homeless households and seeks approval to create a capital fund to purchase suitable properties for use as TA and make a direct revenue saving to the Council. The purchase of properties will also generate income for the Council. The report also describes the current MHCLG bidding process open to local authorities and outlines the bids made by the Council to MHCLG for capital and revenue funding to support the increase in TA. These bids have been co- produced with a wide range of partners including Homes England, Dorset Health Care, Public Health, Homelessness support charities and RP’s. The Council has asked for £1.2m of grant funding and if the bid to MHCLG is successful the capital contribution from the Council for some of these projects would be reduced. MHCLG will only provide the grant funding if the Council also contribute capital funding.
The report asks for a total of £4.78m capital funding over 2 years (£3.58m if all grant funding obtained). This investment will result in an annual revenue saving in 2021/22 of £458k but also generate (after costs) an annual income of £71k from the new property portfolio. Revenue savings for 22/23 would be £643k as the refurbishment of the hostel will provide additional beds.
Page 246 2. Financial Implications
2.1 Section 8 below outlines statutory duties placed on the Council in having to provide TA to homeless households. Due to a shortage of suitable accommodation for use as TA, the Council is dependent on B&B accommodation. The government made it clear that the use of B&B for TA should be an option of last resort and have structured the housing benefit system of payments to reflect this. A person placed in B&B can claim £125 per week. The typical B&B cost for a single person is £350 week (£50 per night), the Council has to pay the difference of £225 per person per week, and cannot claim this back, resulting in a significant revenue implication for the Council.
2.2 The Covid-19 pandemic has doubled the numbers of households in B&B, with an average of 10 households per week still presenting to the council, and being accepted as homeless. As soon as one household is moved into alternative non-B&B accommodation another household is filling the vacancy. As the economic impact of the pandemic start to be realised and people lose their homes through rent or mortgage arrears and job losses this number will continue to increase. As of the 7th August 2020 the Council had 139 households in B&B accommodation, 127 of whom are single people. Revenue and Benefit colleagues estimate that the B&B spend for 20/21 will be £1.1m however, based on the figures outlined above, the current cost to the Council is £31,200 per week or £1.6m per year.
2.3 The direct revenue cost to the Council for 19/20 of covering the housing benefit shortfall was £805,175. There are additional costs incurred by a household during their stay at a B&B such as breakfast, heating and lighting. These costs can be recovered and households are invoiced by the Council. However, the financial circumstances of many homeless people means the reality is very few can afford to pay back the difference and ultimately the Council bears the cost of the debt. The B&B Bad Debt provision for 19/20 was £353k. Approximately 50% of this type of housing debt remains unpaid after a year, currently the total amount outstanding for this type of debt is £182k.
2.4 Dorset Council has submitted a bid to The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) who have launched their Next Steps Accommodation Programme (NSAP). This programme makes available some financial resources to support local authorities to ensure that as few individuals as possible return to the streets following time spent in emergency accommodation. The programme provides funding for longer- term move on accommodation, including capital for acquisitions, refurbishments and new build, and an attached long-term revenue stream to ensure people are supported in their new tenancies. The success of the bid relies on a capital contribution from the Council.
Page 247 If successful MHCLG will give the Council a grant to gap fund the purchase of some accommodation or contribute to the refurbishment costs. There are strict conditions regarding the bid criteria but if successful the capital contribution from the Council for 2020/2021 would be reduced by £1.2m. More detail about the scheme is covered in section 9 below.
2.5 Regardless of whether the Council is successful in securing some or all of the grant requested, capital investment is needed. To increase the amount of TA and reduce the dependence on B&B and make a saving to the revenue budget a number of options have been pulled together that require capital funding. These options will provide 60 – 80 bed spaces. More detail about each project can be found in section 9 below. The table below lists the projects and the capital cost of investment to bring forward for TA as well as the number of beds.
Capital MHCLG Bed Annual revenue Year for Project title investment grant space saving delivery required requested created Bridport £100k £100k 10 -12 £117k 2020/2021
Purchase of 20 x 1 £2.45m £808k 20 min £236k 2020/2021 bedroom flats and up to 40 houses if (plus £71k surplus couples income) or single families Portland YHA – Phase £576k £275k 9 £105k 2020/2021 1 Portland YHA – Phase £1.65m N/A 23 £290k 2021/2022 2 Total 2020/2021 £3.13m £1.2m Total 2021/2022 £1.65m
MHCLG have indicated that work needed for projects identified for 2021/2022 can be bid for as part of their continuous market engagement phase, but are focusing on supporting projects that will deliver housing in this financial year, hence N/A against Portland YHA phase 2 element.
2.6 If Cabinet approve the capital investment, then the 2020/21 funding will be drawn down from the £15M ‘unallocated capital funding’ agreed by Cabinet when setting the budget in February 2020. The Capital contribution required in 2021/22 will be incorporated in the 2021/22 budget.
Page 248 2.7 As well as owning a number of assets that will increase in value, the purchase of 20 properties will generate income for the Council. Detailed modelling has been undertaken for the 30 year lifecycle income and costs for the properties. Once all costs have been taken into account for the maintenance, letting and management (including any void periods) there would be a surplus of £71K per year. Properties owned by the Council and used as TA are exempt from the right to buy legislation.
3 Climate implications
There are no significant climate change implications arising from this report. However, according to the MHCLG houses account for 14% of the UK’s carbon emissions. The council will not purchase properties with an EPC rating (a review of a property’s energy efficiency) of E or lower. .
4 Other Implications
The purchase of properties by the Council for the use of temporary accommodation ensures the Council can have the right type of accommodation to meet safeguarding needs. It can also ensure a small number of properties would be suitably adapted to accommodate a disabled household, something the Council is severely lacking.
5 Risk Assessment
The Council currently has the following risk flagged as high in the risk register 247 - Temporary Accommodation is insufficient to meet community need. This risk has been in the register for the past 12 months and has recently been reviewed and remains high. The purchase of properties will contribute to the reduction of the risk.
Current Risk: High Residual Risk: Medium if report recommendations approved.
There are some other risks not on the register that are associated with the purchase of property these are;
Rental income does not cover the cost of managing and maintaining the property Current risk: Medium Mitigation Actions: Acquire properties at values which result in gross rental yields in excess of 4.5% / 5.0%. Acquire properties requiring no or only limited improvements initially and no major works over the short to medium term. Residual Risk: Low
Page 249 6 Equalities Impact Assessment
An equalities impact assessment is not required at the moment but specific assessments will be carried out for each of the hostel accommodation bought forward to ensure it meets the needs of everyone.
7 Appendices (exempt from publication)
Appendix 1 – Analysis of needs assessments Appendix 2 – Property purchase information and returns. Appendix 3 - Properties currently owned by Dorset Council Appendix 4 - Revenue savings from hostel development
8 Background
8.1 Dorset Council has a statutory duty under the Housing Act 1996 as amended by the Homelessness Reduction Act 2018 to provide a number of principle duties to those threatened with or who are homeless that include:
providing free advisory services assessing an applicant's case and agree a personalised housing plan make enquiries about an individual’s circumstances take reasonable steps to prevent homelessness provide interim accommodation if there is nowhere for the individual or household to stay take reasonable steps to secure accommodation (under prevention or relief duty) secure ongoing accommodation (main housing duty).
The duties owed to an applicant will depend upon their particular circumstances and when the person applied as homeless. However, if the Council determines a prevention or relief duty, it falls to the Council to secure emergency temporary accommodation and support the household into secure ongoing accommodation either in the social or private rented sector. The provision of temporary accommodation is not one that falls to registered housing providers but is the sole responsibility of the Council.
8.1 On the 26th March Dorset Council along with all other local authorities in England were e-mailed by Dame Louise Casey with the heading “Everyone In” asking housing teams to focus on getting every rough sleeper an offer of somewhere they could stay safely by the weekend of the 29th March. At the same time and over the following few days and weeks the Council saw an unprecedented increase in homeless persons who came to the Council for help and support.
Page 250 There were many reasons for this increased demand but mainly it was single people who were being asked to leave shared accommodation, and with the private sector housing market closed down and social landlords’ not advertising properties to rent there was no accommodation for people to move into. At the height of the restrictions the council had 156 households in B&B accommodation of which 147 were single people. This has decreased as restrictions were lifted but the number in B&B accommodation remains high and as of 3rd August 2020 there were 132 households in B&B. Despite efforts to move people into other temporary accommodation there are still households presenting as homeless that the Council has a legal duty to support, during the 2 week period 17th to 28th August 2020 a further 25 people needed temporary accommodation.
8.3 Before the Covid-19 pandemic Dorset Council had a disproportionately high amount of households accommodated in B&B due to the lack of suitable temporary accommodation. For the 6 month period (Aug 19 – Jan 20) the average number of households in B&B accommodation was 75, and, on average 42 households exceeded a 6 week stay.
8.4 The Council has undertaken a number of initiatives to work with the private rented sector to increase the amount of general needs and temporary accommodation available, but with a competitive private rented sector most landlords are not interested in offering their property to the Council. Others have flagged difficulty in obtaining insurance if they let their property to the Council for use by homeless families. Therefore, the Council has had to resort to using expensive B&B accommodation.
8.5 The Council already owns a number of houses and hostels (see appendix 3) but is primarily dependent on arrangements with the private sector to secure other accommodation options. The table below provides a breakdown of those in TA at the end of July 2020 and the type of accommodation used.
Type of Accommodation Families Singles
Leased Accommodation 57 20 (privately owned and managed by us) Bed & Breakfast 12 127 Self-contained mobile homes 12 11 Shared Hostels 1 14 Air B&B 1 5 Other accommodation 52 13 Total 137 198
Page 251 8.6 There are a significant number of households already on the housing waiting lists (5,900 June 2020) and the turnover of social housing is relatively low, as is the provision of new additional affordable housing. As a result, new households presenting themselves to the Council as homeless, or about to become homeless i.e. those who have an immediate and urgent need, have little chance of securing accommodation in this manner, or a very long wait in temporary accommodation for a suitable property.
8.7 As outlined above the Council has a statutory duty to support these households with emergency / temporary accommodation and as such, the Council relies heavily on identifying rented accommodation in the private sector. Registered Housing providers (RP’s) are not obliged to offer the Council accommodation for use as TA, however to support the Council in increasing the provision of TA a small number of properties have been directly leased to the Council. However, for every property leased to the Council this is one less property for social rent.
8.8 MHCLG have advised the Council that it is on the list of 20 local authorities outside of London with the highest numbers of placements under the coronavirus response. As such Dorset has been receiving enhanced support from the MHCLG and Homes England. The MHCLG homelessness data collection system, H-CLIC shows that Dorset Council’s B&B placements are disproportionately high and this includes families in B&B over the six week statutory limit. H-CLIC data is available online.
8.9 Any household provided with TA by the Council will not be offered a traditional tenancy but is leased the property or room under a licence. The individual / household will be expected to join the Council housing register and actively bid for properties. Accommodation Officers and Resettlement Officers will continue to support the householder in not only bidding for socially rented properties but will help support a search and move into the private rented sector. To prevent overstaying in TA those not actively engaging in the search for long term settled accommodation will after the appropriate warnings have their housing duty discharged and have their licence agreement for the property terminated. Clearly the Council does not want to make someone homeless but equally need to manage the stay in TA so the warnings should act as an incentive to move on.
9 MHCLG Next Steps Accommodation Programme (NSAP)
9.1 On 24th May, MHCLG announced £161m would be made available in 2020/21 for 3,300 homes for rough sleepers in the next 12 months. Following this, on 24 June, it was further announced that a fund of £105m to enable local authorities to best support the nearly 15,000 people placed into emergency accommodation during the Covid-19 pandemic would be available.
Page 252 On the 18th July 2020 the NSAP guidance was released outlining the process of bidding for both for these funds, giving 5 weeks for a bid to written and submitted by the 20th August deadline.
9. 2 Dorset Council has been working with colleagues from MHCLG and Homes England to co-produce a bid based on current and future need. In addition a wide variety of partners from Public Health, Dorset Health Care, Homelessness support charities including Julian House, Lantern Trust, Bus Shelter and Shelter, Probation Services, Registered Housing Providers and REACH drug and alcohol support services have all contributed to the production of the bid.
9.3 Shortly after the issue of the guidance it became clear that there were some strict criteria and rules attached to the funding. For example, the government are aware there are a high number of single homeless people therefore bids could only be for projects to provide accommodation of single person units. Family accommodation cannot be considered as part of this bidding round. Bids that will provide accommodation by 31 March 2021 will only be considered. Projects that could start this year and be completed mid-way into 2021 will not be considered. Only local authorities can make a bid. Joint projects with RP’s where the RP is asking for funding will be considered but the Council must submit the bid on behalf of the RP.
9.4 Council’s such as Dorset Council that are a non-stock holding authority or are not a registered housing provider could not submit a bid. Therefore the Council has applied to become a registered housing provider to make it eligible for the grant funding. MHCLG have indicated that there will be a ‘continuous market engagement phase’ where Councils can bid for grant funding to deliver projects that will start this year but would be completed beyond the 31 March 2021 deadline.
9.5 In preparing for the bid a full needs assessment of the homeless households Dorset is supporting was undertaken. This involved completing a questionnaire with every single person currently in B&B accommodation asking a wide range of questions ranging from health and wellbeing through to their background and understanding why they were homeless. From this information it was possible to group people into a high, medium and low need categories. The information collected from these assessments has helped inform the strategy of what type of accommodation is needed and where as well as what level of support would be required at the property. Appendix 1 provides some of the findings from the needs assessments. The needs assessments also determined the locations for the property purchases as well as information from the housing register.
Page 253 9.6 The bid to MHCLG has asked for capital and revenue funding to support the following projects listed below. There are other projects that have been included in the bid that do not need capital funding from the Council. As stated above it is not possible to ask for 100% capital grant but the Council has asked for the maximum it is able. If all or some aspects of the MHCLG are not successful there is still a need to create the additional bed space hence the request for the full capital funding amount. The table in section 2 details the level of grant requested for each project and if successful will reduce the amount of capital investment from the Council. As part of the work to meet future need the Council will be applying for further grant funding as part of the continuous market engagement opportunities that if successful would reduce further the capital investment required by the Council.
9.6 Because MHCLG have raised concerns about high numbers of homeless households in B&B accommodation in Dorset they have provided support to officers in preparing the bid and have indicated there is backing in MHCLG for the projects identified in Dorset. However, the success of the bid depends on the Council also investing capital funding into the projects. If capital funding is not approved by the Council the MHCLG bids cannot progress.
9.7 The projects listed below are those that have been included in the bid to MHCLG along with the estimated capital funding required to deliver them. There are also projects identified for the next financial year that would be included in the next bidding round but some funding would be required this year to purchase the property.
Bridport
9.6 The Council has been working for some time with Magna who own a property in Bridport that was used as a refuge with Magna staff accommodation above it. Magna will lease the property to the Council, and the site then converted to provide 10-12 self-contained units for single people. The Council has already earmarked capital funding of £130k but a further £100k is needed to complete the works. The full £100k has been requested as part of the bid. The accommodation will provide a mixture of supported lettings and move on accommodation where support is steadily reduced to then enable a move into the private sector housing market. Future plans include purchasing the freehold from Magna Housing to further reduce pressure on the revenue account and increase income. MHCLG have given positive feedback about supporting this scheme.
Page 254 Purchase of street properties
9.7 The government are keen to support bids where existing accommodation can be purchased for use by local authorities for either TA or wider supported housing options. However the criteria will not give the full 100% grant towards the purchase of a property but will gap fund some of the cost of purchase. The needs assessment has highlighted the urgent need for 1 bedroom units across the whole of Dorset. A mix of locations across the county for properties has been identified based on the needs assessments. It is proposed to purchase 20 x 1 bedroom flats and houses that would be used to support high, medium and low needs households. Those allocated to those with high needs will have additional support provided through a series of projects funded from existing commissioned services. These services are funded from revenue as well as additional support that will be bid for, such as housing first. To purchase 20 units £2.45m capital investment will be required. The Council has asked MHCLG for £807,810 to support this project, which is about £40k per unit.
Appendix 2 provides a detailed breakdown of the average property prices in Dorset, where it is proposed to purchase the units the projected rental income as well as the costs associated with managing the properties. Financial modelling indicates that there would be an annual surplus of £71k after the cost of management, voids and maintenance is taken into account. Capital growth of the asset has not been included in any of the estimates.
Portland YHA
9.8 The Council own the leasehold rights to Portland YHA and the YHA have made it known they wish to sell the property, it is on the market for £350k. The Council have entered into an arrangement to lease the YHA at Portland for 6 months at cost of £32 per night per room. To comply with Covid-19 social distancing the current layout restricts numbers to 6 people. However this is still a cheaper option than B&B and because it is classed as a hostel the LHA for each room is £114pw so there is still a shortfall to be met by the Council. The project is split into 2 phases. Phase 1 would be initial purchase securing the property for future use and some works to increase the sleeping capacity from 6 to 9 beds. The total project cost including purchase and refurbishment would be £576k, with a £275k grant applied for. Indications are MHCLG are supportive of this bid. As owner of the property the Council can set the rent levels which would be £144pw and not have to make up the current shortfall. In addition guests would be asked to pay a service charge for lighting, heating and cleaning.
Phase 2 would be the conversion of the property into a 20 – 25 room hostel with en-suite bedrooms, with associated support to those at risk of rough sleeping and returning to the streets.
Page 255 As it will take several months to complete the necessary planning and design work this project could not be delivered by the MHCLG 31 March 2021 deadline. Therefore further capital funding will be sought in the next phase. It is estimated it would cost £1.65m to undertake the conversion and the Council could ask for £500k towards the cost, but there is no guarantee this will be forthcoming. Appendix 4 shows the estimated costs and savings from this project.
10 Homes Dorset
10.1 Homes Dorset Ltd was established by WDDC as a Local Authority Trading Company (LATC) and incorporated as a Private Limited Company on 28th June 2018 with the aim of increasing the supply of housing. As a result of Local Government Reorganisation in April 2019, Dorset Council has obtained 100% ownership of the housing company. It was considered if Homes Dorset would be able to play a role in supporting these bids or bring forward housing schemes.
10.2 When the company was created, WDDC purchased £200k of shares in two separate transactions: £50k in December 2018 and £150k in March 2019 with the remaining £3.8m moved from WDDC to the DC accounts. However, following a finance review of all the Dorset Council reserves the funding that was previously earmarked for Homes Dorset is no longer earmarked. That is to say, the new Council is not bound by the predecessor Council’s decision to invest in Homes Dorset and that any proposal to invest funds into the company will need approval by Dorset Council.
10.3 In early 2020, the two Directors of Homes Dorset Cllr Graham Carr-Jones and the Executive Director for Place along with the Corporate Director for Housing (with external consultancy support from Stephen Blake Consultancy Ltd) began exploring different options of how the Council could best use the company to help address housing issues across the Dorset Council area. This culminated in a half day workshop, held in March 2020, with various members and officers of the Council to gather their input. The workshop considered the current housing issues across the area, what the Council and other providers (Housing associations, developers, etc.) are doing and as a result, which housing issues were not being adequately addressed. It also considered if the Council actually needed a housing company.
10.4 The workshop concluded one of the key housing issues not currently being adequately addressed is the availability of suitable housing which can be used on as emergency / temporary accommodation by people presenting themselves as homeless to the Council. It was suggested that the company could use the remaining £3.8m to purchase street properties for use as TA.
Page 256 Debt funding would be provided as a loan and Homes Dorset Ltd would be required to pay interest payments (and potentially capital repayments) on this loan.
10.5 Further exploration of the need for a housing company has determined that at this stage the purchase and management of properties can be undertaken by the Council now it become a RP. If the council were not a RP it would not legally be allowed to own and rent properties and would need a housing company to undertake this function.
10.6 When a Council’s own housing stock reaches above a certain level (200 houses) it will be necessary for it to create a whole separate finance system called a Housing Revenue Account (HRA) that records expenditure and income on running a council’s own housing stock and closely related services or facilities, which are provided primarily for the benefit of the council’s own tenants. HRA’s are governed by a wide amount of legislation and can be time consuming to administer. This is where having a housing company can be an advantage as it would be possible to register it as an RP and move the stock to the company should Dorset Council not wish to have a HRA.
10.7 It is therefore proposed for the time being to leave Homes Dorset as a dormant company whilst ensuring the necessary governance is maintained ready for it to be used as and when necessary.
Page 257 This page is intentionally left blank By virtue of paragraph(s) 1, 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972.
Document is Restricted
Page 259 This page is intentionally left blank