Public Document Pack
ENVIRONMENT, PARKS & LEISURE Contact: Penelope Williams SCRUTINY PANEL Scrutiny Secretary Tuesday, 11 September 2007 at 7.45 pm Direct : 020-8379- 4098 Conference Room, Civic Centre, Silver Tel: 020-8379-1000 Street, Enfield, EN1 3XA Ext: 4098 Fax: 020-8379-3177 Textphone: 020 8379 4419 E-mail: [email protected] Council website: www.enfield.gov.uk
Councillors : Edward Smith (Chairman), Christopher Andrew, Chris Bond, Annette Dreblow, Norman Ford, George Savva, Terence Smith, Yasemin Brett and Geoffrey Robinson
Lead Support Officer: Mike Ahuja Support Officer: Matt Clack
AGENDA – PART 1
1. WELCOME AND APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
2. DECLARATION OF INTERESTS (Pages 1 - 2)
Members of the panel are asked to identify any personal or prejudicial interests relevant to items on the agenda. A definition of personal and prejudicial interests is attached for information.
3. LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK (Pages 3 - 10)
To receive a report briefing the panel on the Local Development Framework.
4. PLACE SHAPING (Pages 11 - 32)
To receive a report briefing the panel on the place shaping initiative.
5. STREET LIGHTING - PRIVATE FINANCE INITIATIVE - UPDATE (Pages 33 - 36)
To receive a report from Gary Barnes, Assistant Director Environment, Street Scene and Parks, updating the panel on progress being made on the private finance initiative street lighting programme.
6. WATER POLLUTION ON THE RIVER LEA (Pages 37 - 38)
To receive a briefing note informing the panel about the pollution control measures in place on the Enfield section of the River Lea.
7. ALLOTMENTS REVIEW - UPDATE AND SCOPE (Pages 39 - 40)
To receive an update on the work carried out by the allotments working group.
To approve the scope for the scrutiny panel review of the allotment service.
Update attached, scope to follow.
8. UPDATE FROM PARKING AND ENFORCEMENT PLAN WORKING GROUP (Pages 41 - 46)
To receive, as part of the Panel’s involvement in the Council’s Parking Enforcement Plan Review, a verbal update on progress being made by the Joint Special Projects and Environment, Parks & Leisure Scrutiny Working Group set up to participate into the review process.
The Panel is asked to note that the Joint Working Group held an initial meeting with the officers and consultant (Faber Maunsell) undertaking the review on Thursday 26 July 2007. A copy of the notes from this meeting have been attached, for information.
A further meeting of the Joint Working Group has been arranged for Monday 24 September 2007 in order to consider the initial findings from the Consultant’s review and draft report.
The Panel will receive a further update at its next meeting on the outcome of the Working Group’s meeting and progress with the review.
9. UPDATE ON LIBRARY STRATEGY AND BARNET VISIT (Pages 47 - 48)
To note that the Library strategy is not yet ready for consultation. Once it is ready, the scrutiny panel will consider holding a special meeting to discuss it.
Councillors Bond, Dreblow and Robinson visited Barnet libraries together with officers from Enfield Library Service, Matt Clack and Penelope Williams.
A visit to Enfield Libraries will be arranged in September.
A briefing note on the Barnet visit is attached for information.
10. FAIRTRADE (Pages 49 - 50)
To receive an update from Anna Loughlin on the work being carried out by the Fairtrade steering group.
11. WORK PROGRAMME 2007/8 (Pages 51 - 54)
To note progress and changes made to the Environment, Parks and Leisure Scrutiny Panel 2007/8 work programme which have not been covered elsewhere on the agenda.
Work programme grid and briefing attached.
12. MINUTES OF THE MEETING HELD ON 3 JULY 2007 (Pages 55 - 64)
1. Minutes of the meeting held on 3 July 2007
To receive and agree the minutes of the meeting held on 3 July 2007.
2. Matters arising
2.1 Update on alcohol control zones and police statistics.
2.2 Update on model aircraft and golf byelaws –
Following consultation, the proposed parks’ byelaws are being amended. The Council's legal team is changing the wording to the byelaws concerning golf and model aircraft. All other elements of the proposed byelaws are unchanged.
Once the re-wording of the above sections has been completed the whole consultation process will be conducted again. This means that the proposed byelaws will be advertised in a local newspaper and a copy held on deposit for public inspection. Letters of objection can be written and the council will consider each one on its merits.
Once the second consultation process has been completed the Council hope to have the byelaws in position to be enforced at the earliest opportunity.
13. SPECIFIC ITEMS TO BE REFERRED TO CABINET
To agree any items to be referred to Cabinet.
14. SPECIFIC ITEMS TO BE REFERRED TO OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE
To agree any items to be referred to Overview and Scrutiny Committee.
15. DATES OF FUTURE MEETINGS
To note the dates agreed for future meetings of the panel in 2007/8:-
Wednesday 5 December 2007 Wednesday 13 February 2008 Tuesday 1 April 2008
All meetings will begin at 7.45pm
Page 1 Agenda Item 2 DECLARING INTERESTS FLOWCHART - QUESTIONS TO ASK YOURSELF
What matters are being discussed at the meeting?
Do any relate to my interests whether You can participate already registered or not? NO in the meeting and vote YES Is a particular matter close to me?
Does it affect: me or my partner; NO my relatives or their partners; my friends or close associates; either me, my family or close associates: • job and business; • employers, firms you or they are a partner of and companies NO you or they are a Director of • or them to any position; • corporate bodies in which you or they have a shareholding of Personal interest more than £25,000 (nominal value); my entries in the register of interests
more than it would affect the majority of people in the ward affected by the decisi on, or in the authority’s area or constituency?
Declare your personal interest in the matter. You can YES remain in meeting, speak and vote unless the interest is also prejudicial; or NO You may have a If your interest arises solely from your membership of, personal interest or position of control or management on any other public body or body to which you were nominated by the authority e.g. Governing Body, ALMO, you only need declare your personal interest if and when you speak on the matter, again providing it is not prejudicial.
Does the matter effect your financial interests or You may have a YES relate to a licensing, planning or other regulatory prejudicial interest matter; and Would a member of the public (knowing the relevant facts) reasonably think that your personal interest was so significant that it would YES prejudice your judgement of public interest? Prejudicial interest
Do the public have speaking rights at the meeting?
YES NO You should declare the interest but can remain You should declare the interest and in the meeting to speak. Once you have withdraw from the meeting by leaving finished speaking (or the meeting decides you the room. You cannot speak or vote have finished - if earlier) you must withdraw from on the matter and must not seek to the meeting by leaving the room. improperly influence the decision.
Note: If in any doubt about a potential interest, members are asked to seek advice from DEC/JB/JK Democratic Services in advance of the meeting.
Page 2
This page is intentionally left blank Page 3 Agenda Item 3
MUNICIPAL YEAR 2007/2008 REPORT NO.
MEETING TITLE AND DATE: Environment Parks and Leisure Agenda – Part: 1 KD Num: N/A Scrutiny Panel 11 September 2007 Subject: Enfield’s Local Development Framework REPORT OF: Director of Environment, Street Scene and Parks
Wards: All
Contact officer and telephone number: Joanne Woodward ext 3881; Douglas McNab ext 3888 Email: [email protected] ; [email protected]
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Changes to the planning system introduced by the Planning and
Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 require Local Planning Authorities to
replace their development plans with a new style of plan called a Local
Development Framework (LDF) .
Enfield’s LDF will adopt a spatial approach to planning, providing a clear,
coherent and deliverable framework for the future development of the
borough. It will consist of a series of documents which can be added to
and amended as times and circumstances change. The LDF will underpin
the Place Shaping agenda for Enfield.
As requested by the Scrutiny Panel this report sets out the current
timetable for producing Enfield’s LDF, showing the progress made to date,
key milestones and the timing of public consultations.
2. RECOMMENDATIONS
The Panel note the progress made by the Council on the Local Development Framework and the important linkages to the Place Shaping agenda for Enfield.
Env07/105 - 1 - Page 4
3. BACKGROUND
3.1 Local planning authorities such as Enfield have long been required to draw up a development plan for their area to provide a framework for development and other use of land, development control and conservation.
3.2 Enfield’s current development plan is the Unitary Development Plan (UDP) which was adopted in 1994. Much has changed since then, including very extensive revision of national planning policy guidance by successive governments and the publication of the Mayor’s London Plan in February 2004.
3.3 Changes to the planning system introduced by the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 aim to speed up plan preparation, improve community involvement in planning, strengthen policy content and promote a greater focus on delivery. The Act requires Local Planning Authorities to replace their development plans with a new style of plan called a Local Development Framework (LDF) .
4. ENFIELD’S LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK
4.1 To meet the new Act’s requirements, Enfield’s new LDF, The Enfield Plan, will adopt a spatial approach to planning which goes beyond the use and regulation of land. It will not only replace the UDP but also give spatial expression to Enfield’s Community Strategy, other Council strategies, and to the development proposals of other key service providers in Enfield. It will need to provide a clear, coherent and deliverable framework for the future development of the borough. The LDF will underpin the Place Shaping agenda for Enfield.
4.2 Enfield’s Local Development Framework will not be a single document but a folder of documents: • Core Strategy and Proposals Map • Sites Schedule • Enfield Town Area Action Plan • North East Enfield Area Action Plan • Central Leeside Business Area Action Plan • North Circular Road Area Action Plan • North London Joint Waste Plan • Enfield Design Guide Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) • Development Standards Supplementary Planning Document
4.3 The Core Strategy will set out the vision for the future development of the Borough until 2017 and the core policies for delivering this vision.
4.4 The Proposals Map will identify: • Areas of the Borough to which area-specific core policies relate; • Sites to be safeguarded for particular land uses or activities;
Env07/105 - 2 - Page 5
• Area Action Plan boundaries; • Sites with significant unimplemented planning permissions; • Other sites where significant developments are programmed; • Other relevant area-specific designations.
4.5 The Sites Schedule will set out any land that has been allocated for specific types of development. The Enfield Design Guide SPD will reinforce the Council’s commitment to good design, promoting an urban and rural design framework to raise standards and inspire good design. The Development Standards SPD will set out standards to guide and control new development and land use change in Enfield.
4.6 Area Action Plans will be drawn up for North East Enfield , the Central Leeside Business Area , Enfield Town and the area around the North Circular Road in the southeast of the borough. These are areas where pressures for change or the need for conservation are concentrated and where land uses and activities are particularly complex. As such, these areas would benefit from more detailed scrutiny and the preparation of planning frameworks to resolve conflicting objectives, deliver planned growth, protect areas sensitive to change and stimulate regeneration.
4.7 The Council has agreed to work with the member boroughs of the North London Waste Authority to prepare a North London Joint Waste Plan . This will set out planning policies relating to waste disposal facilities and sites in North London.
4.8 The linkages between these documents are illustrated in Appendix A. Their production has 4 stages:
• Stage 1 - Preliminary work The Council will collect evidence, information, and survey material. It will consult key stakeholders about Issues and Options . It will then prepare and consult on a Preferred Options Report and Sustainability Appraisal Report. • Stage 2 - Preparing the Submission document In light of the responses received at Stage 1, the Council will prepare the Submission document and Final Sustainability Appraisal Report. These will be submitted to the Secretary of State at the same time as a final consultation period begins. • Stage 3 - Independent Examination Following the consultation period an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State will hold a public examination into the Submission document, the Final Sustainability Appraisal Report and a Statement of Conformity with the SCI. • Stage 4 – Adoption After the Independent Examination, the Inspector will produce a report that is binding upon the Council. It will give precise recommendations as to how the LDF document and Proposals Map must be changed.
Env07/105 - 3 - Page 6
The document is then formally adopted by the Council as part of the LDF.
4.9 The production of the two Supplementary Planning Documents (Enfield Design Guide and Development Standards) will follow a similar process to the above, except there is no requirement for an independent examination.
4.10 Progress to date on the LDF documents is summarized below: • Core Strategy: o Consultation on Issues and Options, April/May 2007 o Preparation of Preferred Options Report underway with public consultation in autumn/winter 2007 • Enfield Town Area Action Plan: o Consultation on Issues and Options, April/May 2007 o Preparation of Preferred Options Report underway with public consultation in autumn/winter 2007 • North Circular Road Area Action Plan: o Consultation on Issues and Options, July/August 2007 • North East Enfield Area Action Plan: o Preparation of Issues and Options underway with public consultation in Autumn 2007 • Central Leeside Area Action Plan o Preparation of Issues and Options underway with public consultation in Autumn 2007
4.11 Appendix B provides an overview of the timetable for preparing the LDF documents through to March 2010, showing the key milestones and public consultations. Please be aware that the time period from the submission of an LDF document to the Secretary of State, to the receipt of the Inspector’s report, accords with advice provided by the Planning Inspectorate and is therefore subject to change by the Planning Inspectorate and the Secretary of State.
4.12 The LDF also includes three ‘process’ documents. The first, the Local Development Scheme (LDS) sets out the Council’s three year programme for the production of Enfield’s LDF. It summarises the content of the LDF and the nature of each document to be produced and provides detailed information on milestones and timetabling. The second, the Statement of Community Involvement (SCI), specifies the Council’s approach for consulting the community during the preparation and revision of the LDF. Lastly, the Annual Monitoring Report is the main mechanism for monitoring the effectiveness of LDF policies and proposals and identifying necessary changes.
5. ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS CONSIDERED
Preparation of the LDF is a statutory requirement.
Env07/105 - 4 - Page 7
6. REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS
To inform the Environment, Parks and Leisure Scrutiny Panel of the progress made to date on the Local Development Framework, key milestones and dates of public consultations.
7. COMMENTS OF THE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE AND CORPORATE RESOURCES AND OTHER DEPARTMENTS
7.1 Financial Implications There are no new financial issues arising from the report.
7.2 Legal Implications
7.2.1 Part 2 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 imposes on local planning authorities a duty to prepare Local Development Documents (LDDs). Collectively the LDDs will form the Local Development Framework (LDF). Once adopted the LDF will be the formal policy framework against which planning decisions are taken.
7.2.2 In addition every local authority must prepare and maintain a Local Development Scheme (LDS) setting out what LDDs the Authority will prepare and their timetable for preparation.
7.2.3 In preparation of the LDF the Council should follow the guidance set out in Planning Policy Statement 12 and ensure that that due process is correctly followed in all elements of the development of the LDF in order that the LDF is found to be sound at the examination in public conducted by the Secretary of State .
8. PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS
Preparation of the LDF accords with Objectives (1f.i), (1f.ii), (1f.iii), (1f.iv) and (1f.v) of Aim 1 of Putting Enfield First - “A Cleaner, Greener Enfield” and Objectives (6a.ii), (6c.ii), (6e.ii) and (6e.v) of Aim 6 - “Economically and Successful and Socially Inclusive”. It will support all the main aims of Putting Enfield First.
9. COMMUNITY IMPLICATIONS
The Council’s approach to involving the community in the preparation of the LDF is set out in the Statement of Community Involvement adopted in 2006. The timetable for consultation on LDF documents is set out in the LDS.
Env07/105 - 5 - Page 8
10. PUTTING ENFIELD FIRST
See para 7 above.
Background Papers Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 Planning Policy Statement 12 “Local Development Frameworks” ODPM 2004 Creating Local Development Frameworks ODPM 2004 Enfield’s Local Development Scheme 2007-10 Enfield’s Statement of Community Involvement 2006
Env07/105 - 6 - Page 9
Appendix A: Relationships between Local Development Documents
CORE STRATEGY
SITES SCHEDULE PROPOSALS MAP
NORTH CIRCULAR ROAD ENFIELD WASTE AREA ACTION TOWN AREA PLAN ACTION PLAN
ENFIELD NORTH EAST DESIGN GUIDE ENFIELD AREA CENTRAL LEESIDE BUSINESS AREA ACTION PLAN ACTION PLAN
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Key ANNUAL Development Plan MONITORING Documents (DPD) REPORT
Supplementary Planning Documents (SPD) STATEMENT OF COMMUNITY Other documents within LDF INVOLVEMENT folder
Env07/105 - 7 -
Appendix B: Summary of the LDF Timetable January 2007–April 2010
Local Development 2 0 0 7 2 0 0 8 2 0 0 9 2 0 1 0 Document J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J
Local Development Scheme ◊ ◊ ◊ ◊
Core Strategy & ■ Proposals Map DPDs E E R A
■ Sites Schedule DPD E E R
North London Joint Waste ■ Plan DPD
North East Enfield Area ■ Action Plan DPD E E R A
Central Leeside Area ■ Action Plan DPD E E R Page 10 Enfield Town Area Action ■ Plan DPD E E R A
North Circular Area ■ Action Plan E E R A
Enfield Design Guide SPD A
Development Standards SPD A
Annual Monitoring Report
▲ ▲ ▲ Key ◊ Prepare/ Review LDS and submit to ODPM’s Government Office for London ▲ Prepare Annual Monitoring Report and submit to ODPM’s Government Office for London Preparation of Sustainability Appraisal Scoping Report. Stage 1 – LDD Production (Complete evidence gathering and consult with key stakeholders to formulate Issues and Options . Prepare Preferred Options and draft sustainability appraisal reports ) Public consultation Stage 2 – Prepare submission DPD and final sustainability appraisal report / final SPD ■ Submit DPD to SofS E Stage 3 – Examination (date subject to change by SofS) R Receive Inspector’s Report (date subject to change by SOS) A Stage 4- Adoption of LDD and entry into LDF
Env07/105 - 8 - Page 11 Agenda Item 4
MUNICIPAL YEAR 2007/2008 REPORT NO.
MEETING TITLE AND DATE: Environment Parks and Leisure Agenda – Part: 1 KD Num: N/A Scrutiny Panel 11 September 2007 Subject: Place Shaping in Enfield REPORT OF: Director of Environment, Street Scene and Parks
Wards: All
Contact officer and telephone number: Glyn Jones ext 3563 Email: [email protected]
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Council has embarked on an ambitious plan to embrace a Place Shaping agenda for Enfield recognising that whilst the proposed Place Shaping function is in Environment, Street Scene and Parks, it must be seen within the overall corporate framework of the Council.
As requested by the Scrutiny Panel this report sets out an overview of the current situation on Place Shaping in Enfield and the progress made to date, and is based upon a Report submitted to Cabinet on the 18th July 2007 which gave details of the current position and also recommended certain decisions on the immediate way forward for the Authority.
The Panel will be provided with a presentation at the meeting which will also set out the important relationship between the work on Place Shaping and the Council’s Local Development Framework (LDF), which is also the subject of a separate Report on the Agenda of this Meeting of the Panel.
2. RECOMMENDATIONS
The Panel note the progress made by the Council on Place Shaping in Enfield and the important linkages to the Council’s Local Development Framework.
Env07/101 - 1 - Page 12
3. BACKGROUND
3.1 The Council has, following the Cabinet decision of 12th July 2006 taken forward a Place Shaping agenda for Enfield.
3.2 Place Shaping is based on the interim and now final report on the future of Local Government by Sir Michael Lyons who describes Place Shaping as:
"the creative use of powers and influence to promote the general well- being of a community and its citizens ", and said that it included the following components:
• Building and shaping identity • Representing the community • Maintaining the cohesiveness of a community and supporting debate within it, ensuring smaller voices are heard • Working to make the local economy more successful while being sensitive to pressures on the environment • Helping to resolve disagreements • Understanding local needs and preferences and making sure that the right services are provided to local people.
3.3 The embracing of Place Shaping by the Authority has been a major force in changing perceptions of the Authority and evidencing its desire to influence the development and growth of its Borough. At a London level the Authority is regarded as having ‘upped its game’ in this area and is now a potent force in the North London, Lea Valley and London context. It is now over a year on from the report of July 2006 and a Report to Cabinet on the 18 th July 2007, attached as Appendix A, established a number of principles and agreements for the way forward to ensure Enfield stays at the forefront of Place Shaping.
3.4 The Panel will be provided with a presentation at the meeting which will also set out the important relationship between the work on Place Shaping and the Council’s Local Development Framework (LDF), which is also the subject of a separate Report on the Agenda of this Meeting of the Panel.
4. ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS CONSIDERED
None
5. REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS
To inform the Environment, Parks and Leisure Scrutiny Panel of current situation on Place Shaping in Enfield and the progress made to date.
Env07/101 - 2 - Page 13
6. COMMENTS OF THE DIRECTOR OF RESOURCES AND OTHER SERVICE GROUPS
6.1 Financial Implications See Section 9.1 of Appendix A.
6.2 Legal Implications See Section 9.1 of Appendix A.
6.3 HR Implications See Section 9.2 of Appendix A.
6.4 Property Implications See Section 9.3 of Appendix A.
7. PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS
7.1 Once the Council has agreed the implementation plan to take forward Place Shaping in Enfield, the Council’s performance management framework will be used to draw up a detailed Service Plan and Team Plans.
7.2 Individual staff will discuss and agree their targets and responsibilities as part of their annual appraisal process.
7.3 Regular reports will be presented to the Corporate Management Board, the Council’s Place Shaping Board and the Enfield Strategic Partnership, Economic Development Board.
8. COMMUNITY IMPLICATIONS
The Place Shaping agenda would have major community implications and therefore full consultation will be necessary. The requirements and needs of each of the four projects will be different and need to be considered individually. The overall aim of Place Shaping is to enhance and improve communities in each of the project areas.
9. PUTTING ENFIELD FIRST
Because of its Authority wide nature and comprehensive view of the Borough, Place Shaping will be relevant to all the aims of Putting Enfield First.
Background Papers None
Env07/101 - 3 - Page 14
Env07/101 - 4 - Page 15
APPENDIX A MUNICIPAL YEAR 2007/2008 REPORT NO.
Agenda – Part: 1 Item: KD 2208 MEETING TITLE AND DATE: Cabinet 18 th July 2007 Subject: Place Shaping in Enfield – Future way forward. REPORT OF: Director of Environment, Street Wards: ALL Scene and Parks Cabinet Member consulted: Cllrs Neville and Jackson
Contact officer and telephone number: John Pryor ext 3500 e-mail: [email protected]
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1.1 The Council has embarked on an ambitious plan to embrace the Place Shaping agenda for Enfield recognising that whilst the proposed Place Shaping function is in Environment, Street Scene & Parks, it must be seen within the overall corporate framework of the Council.
1.2 To this end, the Council commissioned Regenfirst to assist with:- developing its high level vision and objectives; preparing the Council’s Regeneration Strategy “ Shaping Enfield’s Communities ”; drawing up the Implementation Plan and advising on the appropriate organisational arrangements to deliver the Place Shaping agenda.
1.3 This report sets out an overview of the current situation on Place Shaping progress and recommends certain decisions on the immediate way forward for the Authority.
1.4 This report also sets out a proposal to create a new structure within Environment, Street Scene & Parks, which will ensure it is fit for purpose to take the Place Shaping agenda forward.
1.5 The report proposes the structural linkages at officer and Member level to progress Place Shaping.
1.6 The report propo ses the establishment of a revenue Place Shaping budget for the Authority – subject to further details of the spending requirement being provided.
Env07/101 - 5 - Page 16
2. RECOMMENDATIONS To agree:- 2.1 That Cabinet reaffirms in the context of this report its continued support for Place Shaping as a major priority of the Authority.
2.2 That Cabinet supports the establishment of a Place Shaping Division for the Authority located within Environment, Street Scene and Parks and notes that the detailed structure and its associated staffing and financial implications will be the subject of a separate report.
2.3 That Cabinet approves the broad remit for such a division detailed within the report.
2.4 That Cabinet approves the four proposed major Place Shaping projects located within area action plans of; • North Circular Road / New Southgate • Ponders End • Enfield Town Phase III • The Angel Rd. Area Central Leeside
2.5 That Cabinet accepts in principle the need for the production of Master Plans by the Authority for the four sites with the funding and including donations where appropriate and production of each to be subject to further individual consideration.
2.6 That Cabinet accepts, in principle, that where the Authority is a landowner within a proposed Place Shaping project site it will consider entering into joint venture agreements, development trusts or partnerships.
2.7 That Cabinet will initially allocate in 2007/8 the sum of £872k of Local Authority Business Growth Incentive Scheme (LAGBI) monies towards the promotion of its Place Shaping agenda. The release of this funding will be subject to a further report that includes detailed budgets and future revenue commitments being considered.
2.8 That Cabinet accepts that Place Shaping is a whole Authority and Partners agenda and will expect it to be fully supported within the Authority and supported where necessary by our partners including the Local Strategic Partnership.
2.9 That Cabinet notes that it will be necessary to review all Council strategies and policies in major services such as Housing, Education, Parks and proposals for Health facilities to ensure that they align with the needs of the four major Place Shaping initiatives.
2.10 That consideration will be given to using alternative structures for the delivery of projects on behalf of the Authority.
2.11 That Cabinet notes that, in some cases, the buying of land to support the furthering of its Place Shaping aims might be appropriate, including the potential use of CPO powers. In the event of such a proposal, a detailed business cases, including a full assessment of risk, and legal and financial considerations would be submitted to Cabinet. .
Env07/101 - 6 - Page 17
3. BACKGROUND
3.1 The council has, following the Cabinet decision of 12 th July 2006 taken forward a Place Shaping agenda for Enfield.
3.2 Place Shaping is based on the interim and now final report on the future of Local Government by Sir Michael Lyons who describes Place Shaping as: "the creative use of powers and influence to promote the general well-being of a community and its citizens ", and said that it included the following components:
o Building and shaping identity
o Representing the community
o Maintaining the cohesiveness of a community and supporting debate within it, ensuring smaller voices are heard
o Working to make the local economy more successful while being sensitive to pressures on the environment
o Helping to resolve disagreements
o Understanding local needs and preferences and making sure that the right services are provided to local people.
3.3 The embracing of Place Shaping by the Authority has been a major force in changing perceptions of the Authority and evidencing its desire to influence the development and growth of its Borough.
At a London level the Authority is regarded as having ‘upped its game’ in this area and is now a potent force in the North London, Lea Valley and London context.
It is now a year on from the report of July 2006 and it is time to establish a number of principles and agreements for the way forward to ensure Enfield stays at the forefront of Place Shaping.
Following a recent presentation at the Emirates, referred to later in the report, and our issuing of “Enfield’s Choices”, one of the largest independent construction and development companies in London and the South East wrote to Enfield saying they now “ perceive Enfield to be a dynamic Borough which has the potential to deliver a wide range of future development sites. To this end, their consultants have been instructed to complete a strategic site searching exercise within the Borough which has established a number of potential future opportunities for residential/mixed-use, employment generating and waste development ”.
3.4 In terms of the Comprehensive Spending Review the Chancellor announced that one of the areas the review would be focusing on would be
Env07/101 - 7 - Page 18
'Strengthening local authority incentives and decision making powers to improve economic outcomes and tackle concentrations of deprivation' .
3.5 The London Councils Document just issued entitled 'The Future of Community Regeneration' states the following as the Role of Boroughs: -
"Boroughs have a significant role to play in community regeneration, as deliverers and commissioners of regeneration activities, coordinators of regeneration funding, and by working through their LSPs to understand the needs of their communities and to agree a local vision and priorities for regeneration. The role of boroughs has been recognised and strengthened by the Lyons review of local government, which argues that it should act as a 'place shaper'. This research found that London boroughs are playing an important role as coordinators of regeneration activities through their LSPs and LAAs."
3.6 It is clear that Central Government will increasingly link together the Local Development Framework, the Local Area Agreement and the Local Sustainable Community Strategy. It is also clear that how our Authority Place Shapes and links these matters to its relationship with its Strategic Partners will influence the new Comprehensive Area Assessments. Our position as 'first among equals' has also been reinforced.
3.7 Therefore linking Place Shaping in Enfield to ensure it tackles specific areas of deprivation or growing deprivation would increasingly ally the Authority to government grant schemes. All of our work and documentation/evidence should help to reinforce our grant applications. The Authority will need to link its forthcoming grant applications for Growth Area Funding, Community Infrastructure Funds and Local Enterprise Growth Initiatives to its Place Shaping activities particularly in regard to the four specific sites identified later within the report. As all these sites identify major opportunities for housing (GAF) and businesses (LEGI) the connections can be identified.
3.8 The process of Place Shaping is under pinned by the creation of the Planning led Local Development Framework (LDF).
3.9 In respect of the LDF, we now have the following: -
a) We have submitted to the Government Office for London 'The Enfield Plan - Local Development Scheme 2007-2010', which is a programme for producing the LDF.
b) “The Enfield Plan - Enfield's Choices” draft report circulated March 2007 which sets out the Core Strategy Issues and Options. This was agreed for consultation by the LDF Sub Committee on the 4th April and has been the subject of extensive discussion with the Cabinet Member for Environment and Street Scene.
c) We have an Area Action Plan for Enfield Town (at Issues and Options stage) and a North Circular Area Action Plan (also at Issues and Options Stage).
Env07/101 - 8 - Page 19
There are also North East Enfield AAP with a draft baseline reports. This means we are in a strong position in terms of preparing a planning framework for Place Shaping.
d) We have also already adopted the Statement of Community Involvement and approved the Scoping Report for the Sustainable Appraisal/Strategic Environmental Assessment of the LDF documents.
e) Allied to the LDF work are the new conservation area appraisals for our 16 conservation areas, the new Article 4 directions for those areas, the new Conservation Area Management Proposals, and the ongoing conservation area review.
f) It is important to note the position of all of these documents particularly the Area Action Plans when we consider the major priority Place Shaping projects since these will provide the detail necessary to deal with challenges to our proposals.
3.10 Lyons' recommendation in relation to housing is:
"The Government should ensure that local authorities have appropriate influence over housing issues in their place-shaping role and should consider whether to extend the duty to cooperate to housing associations and other social landlords ."
3.11 The Hills report (“ Ends and means: the future roles of social housing in England ” by Professor John Hills) was launched on 20 th February 2007 and recommended that new and regenerated social housing needs should be supported by other social resources, such as employment and educational opportunities. The report also recommends that local authorities ensure housing renewal or regeneration projects need to consider not only the quality of life for tenants, but ensure their communities are sustainable to protect the value of existing and new build stock.
The response report from the Joseph Rowntree Foundation believes a ‘core’ aim of the details for the future of social housing needs to revolve around which housing arrangements will help achieve social mobility and facilitate progress from poverty.
According to the Department for Communities and Local Government, Communities England “ will be a new delivery partner for local authorities; supporting them in strategic place-making and helping to create and shape prosperous and cohesive communities” as well as partnering the delivery of housing regeneration through the functions of English Partnership and the Housing Corporation.
3.12 Jon Rouse the outgoing Chief Executive of the Housing Corporation said recently after three years in his post “thinking ahead, I believe the most important challenge that we must get to grips with is ensuring that we both
Env07/101 - 9 - Page 20
build and transform neighbourhoods into truly mixed communities – economically and socially.”
Jon Rouse also drew attention to an issue which Place Shaping must address which are current distortions to the housing market being caused by buy-to- lets. He said “There are buy-to-lets in new mixed developments that are being rented back to local authorities and housing associations, creating the very concentrations of mono-tenure and single income housing that we have deliberately tried to prevent. In extreme cases, communities are being hollowed out by new empty properties. In our present circumstances of housing shortages and acute need, this practice is unacceptable. It also has real detrimental effects for existing households, undermining the potential to create a real sense of community or develop important social capital.”
3.13 In respect of Housing the Authority will need to review its Housing Strategy Policy to ensure that it is in line with its Place Shaping ambitions or is flexible enough to embrace them.
There is real concern about the way in which buy to lets are distorting the Housing Market and leading to a lack of overall managerial control on developments. Many Authorities are now seeking to control this lack through their Planning and Development powers. The Authority will need to consider how it can provide measures which will protect its proposals from the distortions caused by the buy to let market.
The Authority will need to review how it works in Sub Regional Housing partnerships and the effect of Housing Corporation Funding to ensure that these align with its Place Shaping ambitions. We need to review if the current nomination agreements entered into by the Authority sub regionally operate in the best interests of established balanced communities.
We will need to review our policies and way forward against the new powers proposed for the Mayor of London in both Planning and Housing to ensure they are sustainable.
The Authority will need to review how its Place Shaping ambitions could be furthered by the creation of Communities England which includes access to both Housing and Regeneration Funding.
Our Housing Strategy including our policy on shared ownership will be crucial to the success of Place Shaping where it involves the provision of Housing as it does in all four Place Shaping projects proposed. The draft Housing Asset Management Plan is developing an Investment and Sustainability Model to assist in identifying re-investment and sustainable priorities.
3.14 It is clear therefore that Cabinet by adopting the Place Shaping Agenda early in 2006 is now firmly in accordance with the national view of the role of Local Authorities and has a clear remit to take forward its agenda. Where the
Env07/101 - 10 - Page 21
concept has been placed before community groups such as in Ponders End it has met with general approval.
4. THE VISION FOR ENFIELD
4.1 The Council commissioned Regenfirst to work with them in taking forward the Place Shaping agenda in Enfield. Regenfirst have assisted in the creation of the Council’s high-level vision and objectives for the development of Enfield over the coming 15 years and also gathered information about the council’s organisational culture and capacity to deliver Place Shaping services in the future.
4.2 As part of their work, Regenfirst have prepared the Council’s Place Shaping vision, “ Shaping Enfield’s Future ” which incorporates the concept of the Triple Arc. The vision provides effective linkages with the Council’s other strategies and plans and is incorporated in the Enfield Strategic Partnership’s Sustainable Community Strategy, “Enfield’s Future”.
4.3 The vision has identified the following key challenges:-
• To create the conditions for modern economic growth; • To improve employment levels amongst Enfield’s poorest communities; • To improve the appeal of all parts of the Borough in order to attract and retain economically prosperous residents.
4.4 To deliver the Vision for Enfield, the Triple Arc identifies 3 key themes and 12 objectives. These are:-
• modernising the economy with 3 objectives; delivering enterprise, growing key sectors and managing sectors
• access to employment with 4 objectives; co-ordination, targeting and integration through partnership, increasing employment rates for key groups, pathways to work in growth sectors, and addressing travel to work issues
• sustainable communities with 5 objectives; creating distinctive residential areas, building balanced, cohesive and safe communities, supportive public services, connecting communities and an exemplary sustainable Borough.
4.5 We have from RegenFirst the first draft of a strategy for renewal to replace the “Sustainable Communities Strategy”, the existing regeneration strategy, together with a supporting evidence base. These two documents are currently being considered by the officers directly concerned in the Authority. These are then being discussed with RegenFirst prior to the document going out on wider consultation.
Env07/101 - 11 - Page 22
4.6 To deliver the strategy over the next 24 months, RegenFirst have prepared a detailed implementation plan and, following a review, made recommendations for organisational change which is also the subject of this report.
4.7 The Place Shaping plans will link in the work of the North London Strategic Alliance and the delivery of the Vision of the Upper Lee.
5. ORGANISATIONAL ARRANGEMENTS
5.1 Crucial to the success of these new arrangements will be the strategic leadership provided by the Director of Environment, Street Scene & Parks. This leadership must ensure effective collaboration within Environment, Street Scene & Parks and across the Council as well as representing Enfield’s strategic approach to Place Shaping to its partners.
5.2 Whilst the new division’s responsibility will be made up of teams to drive forward the Place Shaping agenda from Environment, Street Scene & Parks, this will be done within, and in co-operation with, the overall Council’s corporate framework. The new services suggested are:-
(a) Place Shaping – Strategy (b) Place Shaping – Major Project & Management (c) Place Shaping – Community Engagement
5.3 Taking each in turn:-
Place Shaping - Strategy
This service will bring together the key strategy areas which drive Place Shaping including the Local Development Framework and “Shaping Enfield’s Communities”. It will deal with access to Employment and Business development, as well as national, regional and sub-regional plans. The team will also be responsible for the Place Shaping input to other corporate strategies and plans, ie the Sustainable Community Strategy. Similarly it will be expected that staff working elsewhere in the Council will collaboratively work with this team to ensure Place Shaping is appropriately taken into account in all Council strategies and plans ie Asset Plan, Housing Strategy, Education Strategy, Customer Access and Community Cohesion.
The recent Planning White Paper, “Planning for a Sustainable Future” signals a new commitment from Government to improve the way the planning system works and positions planning as central to the place-shaping role of local authorities. The pamphlet that has been circulated, sets out some key messages for local authorities on the changes proposed for Local Development Frameworks, emphasises the importance of taking a strategic approach to planning.
Bringing about a “Whole Council” response/approach to Place Shaping will also be instrumental in reinforcing the Whole Council approach to spatial
Env07/101 - 12 - Page 23
planning that is needed to produce a “sound” Core Strategy (etc.) that will get past the Examination in Public inspectors.
Place Shaping – Major Projects & Implementation
This service will be responsible for all matters relating to major Place Shaping projects in the Borough including major development schemes, design and conservation, master planning and briefs. This team will manage the Place Shaping project teams including cross council liaison for the delivery of major projects.
The service will also be responsible for Place Shaping programme management, project management and investment, funding and procurement. They will be responsible for actively pursuing external grants opportunities and acting as a focal point for applications for Central Government and EU grants. They will be the Council’s intelligence unit in respect of grant applications and support work elsewhere in the council on grant applications.
It will also be responsible for ensuring that, through the development programme, Enfield’s communities aspirations are met as expressed through the ongoing consultation arrangements working closely with the Enfield Strategic Partnership.
Place Shaping – Community Engagement
In any Place Shaping exercise it will be imperative to engage with the local community and ensure they are involved from the earliest stage in the concept for their area. The Place Shaping – Community Engagement Service will ensure the co-ordination of community engagement across all Council Departments including ensuring the full engagement of the Voluntary Sector in any proposals. It will be responsible for ensuring the conducting of public consultation exercises and public exhibitions of proposals. It will act as a focal point for local groups and community representatives in debating Place Shaping proposals with the Authority. They will develop an in depth knowledge of the major Place Shaping area communities and act to articulate their views within the Council’s considerations.
5.4 It should be noted that the detailed staffing and financial implications associated with the creation of this structure have not been evaluated and will be the subject of a further report.
5.5 In respect of developing the projects as specific financial proposals which can ‘start on site’ there is the complex stage of detailed negotiations with developers, financiers, landowners, constructors and other parties which establishes the legal and financial structure under which the projects take shape.
For the Authority this requires a mix of skills, which cover our Regeneration, Property and Planning activities. This stage needs to be led by parties or persons who have a range of these skills and expert negotiating skills this will
Env07/101 - 13 - Page 24
be particularly important if the Authority is involved in a joint venture agreement or other such activity.
To this end Members may wish to consider the alternative structures for the delivery of projects including, for example, establishing an arms length company or other such body, which could conduct their negotiations on behalf of the Authority whilst the overall responsibility for policy, strategy and direction remain with the Authority. There are several examples of where Local Authorities have established such arrangements and they can be reviewed to see if they represent an appropriate option.
One example is Plymouth City Council where they are establishing a City Development Company. This company is funded by English Partnerships, private finance and the Council. The Board has five private sector members. The company does not own any of the physical assets. Another example is Creative Sheffield which is more established than Plymouth.
5.6 Notwithstanding the proposed new Place Shaping activity in Environment, Street Scene & Parks, the key to success of Place Shaping will be the extent to which the Council corporately embraces a more collaborative way of working and is prepared to share information with colleagues across professional and structural boundaries.
To this end, it is proposed that a number of “link officers” be identified who will form an officer board across the Council who will be responsible for co- ordinating their Department’s input to the Place Shaping agenda and, in turn, incorporate Place Shaping into their work. Link officers will need to be identified in Health and Adult Social Care, Performance, Partnership and Policy, Education, Children’s services and Leisure and Finance and Corporate Resources. Working arrangements will need to be agreed including expectations regarding the time they can commit to this work.
5.7 The Authority has established a Place Shaping Board, which includes four Cabinet Members and acts as the body, which considers the Place Shaping Agenda. They are broken into the following three categories:-
o Major Place Shaping projects which will need identified Project Teams to take forward.
o Special Projects proceeding within the Authority which will need to be monitored by the Place Shaping Board.
o Projects/matters which the Members need to be aware of.
5.8 Of these it is recommended that four projects, listed below, have a direct relationship to appropriate Area Action Plans within the Local Development Framework and are the initial major projects for Place Shaping. They also link with the Children’s Area Partnership as each project links to a CPA area.
o North Circular Road / New Southgate
Env07/101 - 14 - Page 25
o Ponders End o Enfield Town Phase III o The Angel Rd. Area, Central Leeside
5.9 On the 16 th May 2007 the Borough made a presentation to developers and organisations concerned with opportunities for industrial, retail and housing development in London under the umbrella of North London Ltd. The detailed brochure produced for the meeting has been provided to Cabinet members for information.
The presentation was seen as very successful and the feedback from external bodies including North London Ltd has been very positive. It is proposed to build on this with high level visits to the Borough being arranged including one by leading figures in the LDA and GLA. All of this work is aimed at raising the profile of Enfield throughout London as an area where high quality development can take place.
5.10 Each of the four projects which were part of the presentation on the 15 th May require considerable staff resources and finance to be taken forward particularly in a way in which they keep pace with the market. It is only by keeping pace that we can ensure the Place Shaping aims of the Authority are not overtaken by events.
It is therefore imperative that the Authority’s Place Shaping objectives for the four project proposed areas are defined and clarified at the earliest opportunity whilst staying in line with the development of the Area Action Plans within the Local Development Framework.
5.11 It is considered imperative that we must ensure the production of Planning Briefs and most importantly Master Plans for each of these areas to ensure that developments, which are brought forward to the Authority, are in accordance with our objectives and desires for the Place Shaping of the area.
The terms master plan, area action plan, planning brief and development brief, are often used interchangeably. As a result there is a general confusion over what they actually mean, and they have come to mean different things to different people. In practice, the important characteristics of the site or the main aim of a site-specific brief often determines what the document is called e.g. it may be called a design brief if the principle focus is on what design principles should be applied on a particular site. A set of definitions has been set out in Appendix A.
Each of the project areas proposed is uniquely different and presents different challenges therefore each of the Master Plans will be very different. The Authority can, of course on major developments, insist through the planning process that the developer produces a Master Plan for planning approval by the Authority. Alternatively the Authority can lead the process by producing its own Master Plan for the area although it would obviously have to do so at its own cost or with whole or part funding by way of donations to the Authority.
Env07/101 - 15 - Page 26
The Authority will need to take a view whether it favours providing its own Master Plan for the four project areas or wishes to rely on the planning process. The broad order of cost for the production of Master Plans for the four Place Shaping project areas is
£000 New Southgate 500 Ponders End 500 Enfield Town Phase III 500 The Angel Rd Area Central Leeside 2,000
Therefore the total cost of the four areas is considered to be in the order of £3.5m. In certain circumstances a number of developers and landowners may be prepared to make donations towards the production of the Master Plans and Government Grant Aid is also available to contribute towards these costs. Counsel’s advice has been received which has confirmed the legal right of the Authority to accept donations towards the production of Master Plans. However, Counsel also advised that, in order to avoid any potential suggestions of bias in the production of a Master Plan, it was incumbent on the Authority to maintain a clear and transparent decision making process, including full disclosure of any such donations.
5.12 In certain of the areas proposed the Authority is a landowner in its own right and could form a joint venture company or other vehicle to take the proposals forward.
5.13 In certain circumstances it may be appropriate for the Authority to buy land or properties as they become available to secure its Place Shaping objectives. This could also include, if appropriate, use of the authority compulsory purchase powers. However, the Council would have to take care to ensure that any such proposal whether CPO or not, was underpinned by a strong business case that included a full legal and financial analysis of the proposal and a clear and detailed assessment of risk.
6. THE FUTURE
6.1 This is a very bold and challenging agenda for the Authority. It will constitute a whole new way of working which will have to ensure that the Place Shaping Board, both at officer and Member level, effectively acts as the “gatekeeper “ for all development considerations in the Borough as to how they will affect the “look” of the Borough over the next ten to fifteen years.
6.2 It will have to ensure that all aspects of any proposed developments are considered such as Borough infrastructure to support such development, long term sustainability, community cohesion and the prevention of the exacerbation of deprivation in parts of the Borough.
Env07/101 - 16 - Page 27
6.3 Place Shaping in Enfield will be an ambitious undertaking but will be based on the realities of the future facing the Authority. The creation of the new function within Environment, Street Scene & Parks will be a proactive and not a reactive stance to the future and will ensure a strategy for a prosperous, sustainable future for Enfield. It will require new skills within our services and the adoption of a new pro-active culture to direct and shape the future of the Borough.
7. ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS CONSIDERED
7.1 The alternative to the creation of the new Place Shaping structure would have been to maintain the status quo and worked within the existing organisational arrangements.
7.2 This was considered but it was concluded this would not have provided the necessary focus needed to take the Place Shaping agenda forward nor provided the change in style of working which must be more collaborative within Environment, Street Scene & Parks and across the Council as well as with partners to make this new strategic approach a success.
8. REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS
8.1 The proposed creation of a new Place Shaping division is to ensure the Council has a fit for purpose structure to take forward the Place Shaping agenda.
9. COMMENTS OF THE DIRECTOR OF RESOURCES AND OTHER SERVICE GROUPS
9.1 Financial Implications 9.1.1 In entering into the new and innovative programme of Place Shaping, the Council must give due consideration to its governance and decision making arrangements. Appropriate governance arrangements will be established by the Monitoring Officer in line with the Council’s procedural rules.
9.1.2 There are proposals within this report that are likely to lead to significant financial implications for the Council, including a proposed new management structure within ESSP. This will need to be progressed in line with normal restructure procedures including the formal decision making process. At the present time, no information is available as to the additional costs (if any) which would arise, hence a full costing of the proposal will be necessary together with identification of funding.
9.1.3 LABGI is an incentive scheme that aims to encourage Local Authorities to increase business growth in their areas. Grant monies are not ring fenced. The one off grant to Enfield of £872k is held as an earmarked reserve and the report seeks confirmation of the allocation of this reserve specifically for future
Env07/101 - 17 - Page 28
expenditure on Place Shaping. It is likely that expenditure against this allocation will include the cost of consultants, and specialist legal, financial and planning advise. However, detailed proposals for spend against this one off sum will be subject to normal financial regulations including the submission of further reports with financial implications before any commitment to spend is made. Spend against the allocation will be carefully monitored.
9.1.4 The Place Shaping agenda will involve a series of initiatives and developments with potentially very significant financial implications for the Council, both in revenue and capital terms. It is critically important that the details of any proposals, once known, are carefully evaluated in order to determine their immediate and longer-term impact on the Council’s finances. The financial aspects of many of these proposals are likely to be complex, particularly as they will involve a number of internal and external stakeholders. As an example, the creation of arms length company would require detailed analysis and expert financial and legal advice. There are currently no detailed estimates for the likely expenditure involved in any of the potential Place Shaping projects. Full financial appraisal of specific proposals will be required and authority to spend must at that time only be given in the light of this information and identification of appropriate funding.
9.1.5 Any decision by the Council to purchase additional land in order to further the Place Shaping objectives would require detailed consideration. This could only be considered in the context of a robust business case that assessed not only the financial and legal implications of such a course of action, but also the associated risks.
9.2 Legal Implications
The planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 introduced a two-tiered plan system, made up of Regional Spatial Strategies and Local Development Frameworks (LDF). These LDF determines how the planning system will help to shape the community. The LDF for the authority was submitted to the Secretary of State in 2005
The council has various powers and abilities under the well being powers Local Government Act 2000 and section 111 of the Local Government Act 1972 to assist in the Place Shaping agenda for the council.
Section 106 Town and Country Planning Act 1990 agreements provides the council with a broad ability to regulate the use of land subject to planning permission. Section 33 of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1982, can also be relied upon by the council to negotiate agreements with prospective developers and landowners. The use of these powers require careful consideration in what is acceptable in planning terms and must take place by a consideration of the planning application against the published local regional or national planning polices. Any restrictions or imposition on development and any control of occupancy as stated under para 3.13 has to have regards to these circumstances. Measures put into place by this
Env07/101 - 18 - Page 29
authority to consider how it can provide measures which will protect its proposals from the distortions caused by the buy to let market is a legitimate and material planning consideration.
If the council decided to depart from its existing housing strategy, as stated in para 3.13, there must be appropriate and robust reasons given as to why such a departure could be justifiable.
Circumstances in which the council may refuse permission on the grounds of prematurity are addressed in Planning Policy Guidance Note, which are relatively narrow and should be considered. If the council is at its advanced stages towards the adoption of the AAP it can only then consider refusal of planning on the basis of prematurity. It should be noted that the onus is clearly on the council to demonstrate how a grant of permission would prejudice the outcome of the AAP and, in the absence of the AAP reaching the stage of preferred options, argue that allowing the proposed development on these sites will prejudice the outcome of the AAP.
The council wishes to lead on Master Plans at is own costs or with the whole or part funding donations. The council cannot raise money, whether by means of rates, precepts or borrowing, or lend money or solicit donations as stipulated under s111 of the Local Government Act 1972 and the Local Government Act 2000. However, the council may subject to various procedural requirements such as soundness accept a donation that has no conditions attached in terms of when it would be paid or the circumstances in which it would be paid under the above acts. The council needs to ensure that there is no appearance of bias, it is reasonable to accept the donation without impacting on its ability to make transparent and lawful decisions at a later stage and that there is meticulous audit trial of any discussions, meetings or decisions to accept such donations.
The council has the power under Part 2 of the Local Government Act 1972 to purchase land for the purpose of the benefit, improvement or development of their area. The council also has a power to compulsorily purchase land using a Compulsory Purchase Order having followed the provisions set out in the Town and County Planning Act 1990 (as amended by the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004). Any acquisition of property must be in accordance with the Council Constitution Property Procedure Rules and obtain certification from the Assistant Director of FC&R that the acquisition price and other terms are fair and reasonable and are the best that can be achieved in the market.
Para 5 refers to organisation arrangement. Any deletion or creation of posts must be in accordance with the Council’s constitution (Employment Procedure rules) and in consultation with the trade Unions and Human Resources. The Council has wide powers under the Local Government Act 1972 to appoint such officers as it thinks fit for the proper discharge of its functions.
Para 50.4 makes reference to Joint Venture Companies (JVC) and Arms Length Company. The council has the powers to enter in JVC and is likely to
Env07/101 - 19 - Page 30
provide the Council with greater power to steer proposed development than to rely solely on its powers as a local planning authority. Part V of the Local Government Housing Act 1989 allows for local authorities to control companies and to ensure so far as practicable that company compiles with Local Authorities (Companies) Order 1995.
9.3 HR Implications The report indicates that a restructuring exercise may need to take place within Environment, Street Scene and Parks. Staff and trade unions will need to be consulted on any restructuring proposals, and normal Council policies and procedures will be followed.
9.4 Property Implications
Outside of its housing and education portfolios, The London Borough of Enfield is not a major landowner in many of the areas identified for Place Shaping, although it does hold some strategic sites that could be critical to developments. The principal role of the Property Services department is to provide an intelligent client function either through internal or external service provision to advise the authority of key development and site assembly opportunities, and current market knowledge.
In an ongoing role, the Property Services department will be responsible for the long-term asset management of any of the authorities holdings, and again the department must ensure that there is sufficient infrastructure to meet the ever-changing needs of the developing communities.
10. PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS
10.1.1 Once the Council has agreed the implementation plan to take forward Place Shaping in Enfield, the Council’s performance management framework will be used to draw up a detailed Service Plan and Team Plans.
10.1.2 Individual staff will discuss and agree their targets and responsibilities as part of their annual appraisal process.
10.1.3 Regular reports will be presented to the Corporate Management Board, the Council’s Place Shaping Board and the Enfield Strategic Partnership, Economic Development Board.
11. COMMUNITY IMPLICATIONS The Place Shaping agenda would have major community implications and therefore full consultation will be necessary. The requirements and needs of each of the four projects will be different and need to be considered individually. The overall aim of Place Shaping is to enhance and improve communities in each of the project areas.
12. PUTTING ENFIELD FIRST
Env07/101 - 20 - Page 31
Because of its Authority wide nature and comprehensive view of the Borough, Place Shaping will be relevant to all the aims of Putting Enfield First.
Background Papers
None
Env07/101 - 21 - Page 32
APPENDIX A
Area Action Plan – Area action plans (AAP) are defined in national planning guidance and are used to provide the planning framework for areas where significant change or conservation is needed. AAPs are prepared as Development Plan Documents (DPD) as part of the Local Development Framework (LDF) and are subject to independent examination. They include planning policy for an area and in statutory terms, once adopted as part of LDF, carry significant weight in decision- making. A key feature of AAPs is their focus on implementation. They should deliver planned growth areas, stimulate regeneration, protect areas particularly sensitive to change, resolve conflicting objectives in areas subject to development pressures, or focus the delivery of area based regeneration initiatives. AAPs should identify the distribution of uses and their inter-relationships, including specific site allocations, and set the timetable for the implementation of the proposals. Further guidance, such as the layout of uses within these allocations and design requirements etc, may be provided in the area action plan or in more Supplementary Planning Documents (SPD) in the form of a master plan or planning brief.
Master Plan – This is a general term used to describe a variety of proposals and interventions. As defined by the Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment (CABE), a master plan sets out proposals for buildings, spaces, transport and land use in 3D and matches these proposals to a delivery strategy. Such master plans should be supported by financial, economic, and social policy documents and a delivery mechanism. They provide a framework within which designers and developers can bring forward more detailed proposals. They are not statutory documents although Local Authorities can commission them. A master plan can be prepared and adopted as a SPD and as part of the LDF, however as it would not undergo the same independent scrutiny as DPDs it would therefore have less weight in decision-making.
Planning Brief – This can indicate the broad principles which should be followed in development and can include issue such as linkages to surrounding areas, uses, type of buildings/spaces and density of development. It informs developers and other interested parties of the constraints and opportunities presented by a specific site or relatively limited area, and the type of development expected or encouraged by planning policies. It will outline the policy framework that proposed schemes should adhere to. What should set this apart from a development brief is its focus on planning issues and on the policy framework. A site-specific planning brief can be prepared and adopted as a SPD and adopted as part of a LDF.
Development Brief – There can be some areas of overlap between a planning brief and a development brief, however they should focus on separate issues. The main purpose of the development brief is to provide a framework, from a landowner’s perspective, for the legal and financial aspects of development e.g. it may include a commercial assessment of the value of the site. They are often used to promote development or attract a development partner.
Env07/101 - 22 - Page 33 Agenda Item 5 Environment, Parks and Leisure Scrutiny Panel 11 September 2007
Street Lighting PFI Update – August 2007
The Street Lighting PFI contract is now in its16 th month. The contract management costs still remain higher than anticipated, however the level of the monthly contract payment adjustment is presently offsetting these costs. The majority of the financial adjustment is related to the non-routine maintenance faults. Extensive discussions have been held between David Webster Limited (DWL) and the London Borough of Enfield and officers are of the opinion that DWL now have a better understanding of the actions required to improve contract performance and therefore insure the level of financial adjustment is kept to a minimum. The measures DWL have recently taken indicate an increase in their performance in the immediate future.
It was previously reported that DWL were in discussion with EDF Energy with the objective of seeking consent to undertake repairs on their Network for those faults that involve the transfer of an existing service. I can report that DWL have been successful in their negotiations and are presently in the final stages of becoming an accredited contractor capable of undertaking such repairs under EDF’s directive. It is hoped that DWL will commence work on EDF’s network during the later part of September. This should see a considerable improvement to rectification periods previously not achieved in the Borough prior to entering the PFI Contract. However, it is worth recording that this agreement does not extend to faults, which remain the under the sole control of EDF. Unfortunately neither DWL nor LBE have any control over such works, and EDF continue to exceed their charter in dealing with these faults, as they have done historically. DWL are monitoring EDF’s performance, and are regularly writing to OFGEM (the industry regulator) informing them of EDF’s poor performance, although this has not resulted in any recordable improvement.
The Core Investment Programme (CIP) April milestone was achieved in July excluding approximately 354 lighting columns which were subject to relief due to a number of technical queries with the Authority that have since been addressed. It is anticipated that DWL will again have difficulties in achieving the October milestone, however the early indication is that DWL are on target to achieve the April 08 milestone. This is supported by their progress over the last six months.
The CIP consists of five stages involving the design, approval, consultation, implementation and certification. Each stage is dependant on the earlier phase being completed, in order for the street to progress to completion. It is felt that DWL are now proactively managing this process, which is demonstrated by their regular co-ordination meetings with the Authority, EDF and the Design Consult. Many of the difficulties associated with the CIP have now been learnt, and to mitigate these affects DWL have recently appointed an additional design consult who has been charged with delivering three months of approved designs. By increasing the number of available designs greater flexibility during the earlier stages of the CIP process will be achieved.
Page 34 Environment, Parks and Leisure Scrutiny Panel 11 September 2007
With the majority of the first year CIP now completed and the commencement of the second year programme primarily taking place in the east of Borough, Council Officers are presently experiencing fewer complaints, which has greatly been assisted by further amendments to the consultation process.
Core Investment Programme
April 30 th Milestone
Columns 1632 Signs and Bollards 452
Certified Quantities
Number of columns certified = 1417 (number of columns replaced) Number of signs and bollards = 74
CIP at 10/08/2007
• October milestone for removed lighting columns is 3263
• 3993 designs have been submitted to the Council with 3585 approved for installation, which equates to 3061 removed columns.
• 1906 submissions have been made to the IC as of 10/08/2007, presently 1619 have been certified.
Routine and Reactive Maintenance
Percentage of columns in light (July ) = 98.89% The average for the last four months = 99.06% Contractual target is = 99%
DWL for the second consecutive month have avoided adjustment on this target by maintaining at least 99% of the Boroughs street lighting furniture in operation. The on going routine maintenance programme along with the progression of the CIP have assisted DWL in meeting this performance target.
There are no other maintenance issues of note at present.
Consultation Process
The consultation process was last amended on 4 th June, where the two-stage consultation process was simplified to one letter, the amended consultation process has seen a decrease in the amount of queries and complaints that cannot be satisfied by either a letter or telephone call. This is demonstrated by fewer site visits being undertaken where it has been necessary for a DWL representative to attend site and personally address the residents concerns. Page 35 Environment, Parks and Leisure Scrutiny Panel 11 September 2007
Total number of received letters & site visits; April – July 2007
Month Total number of letters Total number of site received in the month visits required in the month April 07 25 13 May 07 35 12 4th June 07 onwards 51 5 July 07 35 6
The increase in letters in the last two months is to be expected as the volume of streets being upgraded continues to escalate, this will continue until the core investment programme peaks towards the end of year four of the five year programme.
The majority of queries and complaints relate to the position of the column in relation to their property and/or the cost the resident will bear in resiting the column should they be successful in applying for a vehicle crossover in the future.
Page 36
This page is intentionally left blank Page 37 Agenda Item 6
MEETING TITLE AND DATE: Environment, Parks & Leisure Scrutiny Panel- 11 th Sept 2007 BRIEF TOPIC: Pollution Monitoring in the River Lea
Contact officer and telephone number: Matt Clack (ext:4884) E mail: [email protected] 28 August 2007
1. BACKGROUND:
At the Panels’ work programme planning event in May, support officers were asked to provide a briefing paper “setting out the current situation (on Water Pollution in the River Lea)… following concern that the pollution monitoring stations along the Enfield stretch of the river had been removed and that there was the possibility of pollution from the industry remaining along the river banks as well as redundant industrial sites”.
Relevant officers were contacted and background research was completed, with details outlined below.
2. POLLUTION MONITORING:
• The Environment Agency hold responsibility for maintaining and improving
the quality of fresh, marine, surface and underground water in England and Wales. They set River Quality Objectives (RQOs), which regulate the condition of over 40,000 kilometres of river length. The River Lea is included in this. • Thames Water hold no responsibilities for monitoring the water quality of rivers in any area of the country. • The Environment Agency regularly monitor water quality at several points along the River Lea, including: Lacey Close (Edmonton), The Angel (Edmonton), Deephams Sewage Treatment Works, Salmons Brook junction into the Lea, Chingford Lea diversion, and Lea Bridge Weir. • The Environment Agency also carry out monthly spot sampling and also biological sampling. Over the range of sampling undertaken they monitor for typical pollutants such as suspended solids, ammonia, Biochemical Oxygen Demand and several chemicals. • The Central Leaside Area Action Plan forms part of the Enfield Local
BRIEFING PAPER BRIEFING Development Framework (LDF) and the Haringey LDF. This includes a Sustainable Appraisal (to promote sustainable development) which is central to the reformed planning system and considers the “systematic identification and evaluation of the environmental impacts of a strategic action”.
- 1 - Page 38
3. RIVER QUALITY OBJECTIVES (RQOs):
• The Environment Agency states that “RQOs reflect the present and future needs of the nation and, through consultation, the wishes of local communities. They are based on chemical quality, and the Government believes that they represent the best available reference point to establish progress in maintaining and improving river quality”. • The RQO targets are applied by giving each stretch of river a target class for water quality from our river ecosystem classification: RE1: very good quality (suitable for all fish species) RE2: good quality (suitable for all fish species) RE3: fairly good quality (suitable for high-class coarse fisheries) RE4: fair quality (suitable for course fisheries) RE5: poor quality (likely to limit fish populations) • Unfortunately the Environemnt Agency’s website does not include information on a borough-by-borough basis. A Scoping Report compiled by Scott Wilson consultants on the Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Central Leaside Area Action Plan noted that the Rivers Lee and Lea meet its individual target of RE2 (good quality, suitable for all fish species).
More Information: http://www.environment- agency.gov.uk/subjects/waterquality/252005/252477/?version=1&lang=_e
4. REFERENCES:
• River Quality Targets http://maps.environment- agency.gov.uk/wiyby/wiybyController?topic=riverquality&ep=query&lang=_e&wind owdiameter=396&x=535410.0&y=197810.0&scale=4&layerGroups=1&location=E nfield,%20Enfield • Sustainability Appraisal / Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Central Leaside Area Action Plan (London Boroughs of Enfield & Haringey, Consultant’s Scoping Report) http://www.enfield.gov.uk/856/Central%20Leeside%20AAP%20SA%20Scoping% 20Report.pdf
- 2 - Page 39 Agenda Item 7
Allotments Review – Update for Environment, Parks and Leisure Scrutiny Panel Meeting - 11 September 2007.
Working Group members : Councillors Andrew (Chairman), Bond, Dreblow, Ford, Savva and Brett
1. Working Group Meeting
1.1 The working group met on Monday 23 July 2007 and received an initial briefing from John Pryor (Director of Environment, Street Scene and Parks) and Leila Biscoe (Parks Business and Development Manager).
1.2 There had been several problems on allotments over the past few years including racial tensions, illegal structures, fires and disputes between allotment holders. The service administering allotment lettings had also suffered from staff absences and there had been delays in issuing invoices as a result of an incompatibility between computer systems.
1.3 The service had recognised the problems and had recently appointed Graham Deal (a man with considerable allotment experience who had also been Chairman of Enfield Allotment Association) to carry out a 2- year review.
2. Visit to Houndsfield and Barrowell Green Allotment Sites
2.1 Following on from the briefing, members took part in a Saturday morning visit to two allotment sites; Houndsfield where there had been significant problems and Barrowell Green, a model of good practice. Members toured the allotment sites with John Pryor (Director Environment, Street Scene and Parks), Leila Biscoe and Graham Deal and met some of the users.
2.2 They found that the majority of allotment plots were well cared for and well used but that there were issues surrounding the fencing of individual plots, some lack of clarity about which plots were un let; multiple use of allotments, debate about the policy of charging for old wooden sheds, flying illegal flags and the need for new water tanks.
3. Next Steps
3.1 The working group agreed to work with officers in Environment, Street Scene and Parks on their review.
3.2 A draft scope for the scrutiny review has been produced and is attached for the panel’s approval. .
Page 40
3. Date of Next Meeting
The next meeting has been organised for Tuesday 16 October 2007 at 7.30pm
Penelope Williams 29 August 2007 Page 41 Agenda Item 8
JOINT SPECIAL PROJECTS AND ENVIRONMENT, PARKS AND LEISURE SCRUTINY PANELS – PARKING BRIEF COMMISSION WORKSHOP
26 JULY 2007
Councillors: Martin Prescott (Chairman) Chris Bond E. Smith T. Smith
LBE Officers: Gary Barnes (Assistant Director (Environment Contracts) Mario Lecordier (Traffic & Transportation) Ranjith Chandrasena (Traffic & Transportation) Alison Trew (Corporate Scrutiny) Natalie Cole (Democratic Services)
Faber Maunsell: Mark Artis Chris Durban
Also Attending: Chris Rash (Enfield Business & Rate Payers Association (EBRA)) Robert Taylor (Federation of Enfield’s Community Associations (FECA))
1. APOLOGIES
NOTED apologies for absence were received from Councillors Charalambous, Stafford and Mike Rant (Faber Maunsell Consultants) . Apologies for lateness were received from Councillor E. Smith.
2. FABER MAUNSELL PRESENTATION
NOTED that the London Borough of Enfield had provided Faber Maunsell consultants with a project brief for the Enfield Parking Enforcement Plan Review in March 2007.
Mr Durban gave a Powerpoint presentation detailing to review the 74 priorities as a result of the existing Parking Enforcement Plan (PEP) and research to address the differing needs of the residential, commercial and business districts in Enfield.
The purpose of the presentation was to agree on prioritising the recommendations.
Copies of the brief and the presentation slides could be obtained from the Committee Secretary on 020 8379 4088.
3. POINTS OF DISCUSSION
1 Page 42
NOTED the following comments from members of the Workshop in response to the presentation:
1. 15-minutes free parking
1.1 In response to questions, Mr Durban explained that proposals could include15- minutes free parking bays to be created in Town Centres. This could also extend to residential roads, where there were Controlled Parking Zones (CPZ) rather than requiring people to use visitors’ permits for short stays. Concerns were expressed that shoppers would park in residential areas if displaying visitors’ permits were no longer a requirement.
1.2 Members expressed concerns that 15-minutes free parking would be difficult to police if tickets were not displayed to show the length of time a vehicle had been parked. Officers informed members that the pay and display machines in Enfield could issue tickets for 15-minutes of free parking.
1.3 A scheme to allow residents to park when they returned from work was suggested as a preferred option to 15-minutes free parking in residential roads. Residents who brought commercial vehicles home could use night permits. Non-permitted vehicles could be clamped or fined for not displaying the relevant permit.
1.4 Potters Bar operated a 1-hour free parking scheme; consultants were advised to consider similar schemes.
2. Crossovers
Where residents turned their front gardens into driveways the pavement became a ‘crossover’ and so a parking space in front of that house was lost. It was suggested that, where there were crossovers, residents of those properties would have to purchase yearly permits for one parking space – as only they would be able to use the driveway and the space in front of the driveway. This would be fair to those residents who were not able to create crossovers for their own properties.
3. Commuter Parking
3.1 Members commented that residents would never support commuter parking in residential roads, as the presentation suggested.
3.2 There were no commuters parking facilities near Southgate Tube station. There should be dedicated car parks near the Borough’s tube and train stations encourage people to use public transport rather than their own cars.
2 Page 43
3.3 Mr Durban advised that any commuter parking schemes should be trialed before being agreed.
3.4 In real terms the cost of private car transport had decreased in recent years, whereas, over the same period, the cost of public transport had risen dramatically.
4. Parking Spaces
4.1. Creating additional car parking spaces should be a priority. The Council currently had “unwanted” restrictions on car parking, particularly in shopping areas.
4.2 Residents of Cockfosters, Winchmore Hill and Southgate felt that more space in these areas could be used for car parking
5. Shopping Centres
5.1 Enfield contained many small town centres and concerns were expressed regarding the lack of flexible parking in those areas – custom was being lost to supermarkets where there was available parking. Faber Maunsell would assess the impact of included 15-minutes free parking in shopping areas but members commented that shoppers needed more free time to make their purchases.
5.2 Consideration should be given to allowing shoppers discounts on parking when they spend money in local shops. Some supermarkets currently operated similar schemes.
5.3 Provision of parking for employees of local businesses should be considered.
5.4 There needed to be clear distinction between the parking enforcement needs of the different shopping areas in the Borough.
6. School Markings
6.1 Members commented that Parking Attendants rarely enforced school areas; more regular enforcement was required. In response, Mr Barnes explained that with over 100 schools in the Borough it would be expensive to patrol them all.
6.2 CCTV cameras could be used to monitor and enforce parking restrictions, a scheme which had been successful in preventing parking in bus stopping areas.
6.3 Members wanted the main objective of the new Parking Enforcement Plan schemes to be concerned with safety and not revenue generation. The Borough’s CCTV SMART car did not operate to move cars out of dangerous parking spots but issued tickets instead.
3 Page 44
7. Controlled Parking Zones/Parking Permits
7.1 The presentation suggested that new CPZ’s would limit permits to certain vehicles. Concerns were expressed that white vans were often in residential areas during the evenings. Mr Durban explained that the operational hours of a CPZ’s could be extended to allow residents to park when they returned home from work.
7.2 Limiting parking bays to certain commercial vehicles during the day would disadvantage mobile businesses such as plumbers.
7.3 The map in the presentation displaying CPZ’s in Enfield should also show where shopping centres had car parking areas and parking spaces for taxis.
7.4 Comments from EBRA included: whilst the provision for disabled parking bays was good in the Borough there were certain areas (including Cecil Road and Church Street) where vehicles were parked on yellow lines by cars displaying blue disabled badges all day long. There was a general consensus of members that if a blue badge permit holder seemed to be abusing the blue-badge systems (for example exceeding the 3-hour time limit, or blocking service roads) they should be given a parking enforcement ticket. Those who were correctly utilising the badges would be able to defend their cases and could apply to have any tickets received cancelled.
7.5 The presentation included maps showing CPZs and the 800-metre radius they covered. Members of the Stakeholder Group highlighted that some of these areas would cross borough boundaries and would be difficult to enforce.
7.6 Comments from FERRA included that Morton Way (north of Arnos Park) had not been identified in the maps. This was used for commuter parking and needed to be included.
7.7 The Council's Parking Enforcement Plan must be shaped on grounds of safety and by the reasonable needs of all road users before any consideration whatsoever is given to generating income.
8. Recommendations of the members of the workshop in response to the presentation
8.1 Members felt that a borough-wide investigation should be conducted to see which unused areas of land could be used for car parking.
8.2 Councillors and key members of the community and resident groups should be consulted where parking was a major concern before the consultants finalised their proposals. Mr Barnes advised that this would not be within the timescales and budget
4 Page 45
of the review. The scope had asked the consultants to look at priorities in terms of policies and was not an operational review.
8.3 If the consultants did not observe or consult with the community members expressed concerns that the final report might not be considered credible and could be opposed.
8.4 The review should be extended to include greater consideration of greener and urban areas. Mr Barnes noted the comment but emphasised that the budget was not available to extend the review.
8.5 Clarification was needed on which roads were recommended by Faber Maunsell to contain 15-minutes free parking bays.
8.6 Safety should be the main objective for all local schemes detailed in the final report.
8.7 Prior to consulting on Faber Maunsell’s final report, the Joint Scrutiny Commission should agree an acceptable percentage of those consulted who must support the proposals before accepting the final report at the end of the summer 2007.
AGREED
(i) Members requests that officers approached Councillor Neville to consider extending the scope of the review to enable a borough-wide investigation should be conducted to see which unused areas of land could be used for car parking.
(ii) The consultants’ draft report would be circulated on 27 August 2007 and Stakeholder Group would reconvene in September to discuss the first draft. The Stakeholder Group would adhere to the timetable for finishing the review. The agreed draft would then be widely circulated for consultation. A final report will be expected two months later.
5 Page 46
This page is intentionally left blank Page 47 Agenda Item 9
MEETING TITLE AND DATE: Environment, Parks & Leisure Scrutiny Panel 11 th September 2007
BRIEF TOPIC: Libraries Site Visit to Barnet- 19 th July 2007
Contact officer and telephone number: Matt Clack (ext:4884) E mail: [email protected] 31 August 2007
1. BACKGROUND:
As part of the Panel’s review of the new Libraries Strategy, it was agreed that the Panel should visit other local authorities that have also recently completed policy reviews.
In July the London Borough of Barnet’s Cabinet agreed to a new Libraries Strategy which (among other initiatives) involved a two-tier system of libraries, which will be known as Leading Libraries and Local Libraries. Whilst no closures were recommended, it was felt that the location of local libraries would need consideration. Modern design was also noted, as they felt that libraries needed to compete with high street stores and other local attractions.
Due to the comparative nature of the boroughs and the timeliness of their review, it was felt that a visit should focus on two libraries in Barnet th (Chipping Barnet and Hendon). This took place on the 19 July.
Copies of the Barnet Libraries Strategy are available upon request, and can be found at:
http://committeepapers.barnet.gov.uk/democracy/reports/reportdetail.asp?R
eportID=5782
2. BARNET MODEL
• Barnet has 16 libraries and no central library • Whilst they have discussed co-location with other services this has not yet been implemented. The concept of sharing sites is popular for a variety of reasons, and in Barnet the sort of services considered included the PCT, Children’s Centres and schools. They had not discussed Post Offices (an idea raised at the Scrutiny consultation event in March), but felt nothing
BRIEFING PAPER BRIEFING would be immediately ruled out. Some of the libraries do hold ‘first stop shop’ information points, and Hendon library hosts a popular café
- 1 - Page 48
2. BARNET MODEL (Cont.)
• Barnet have also implemented a Friend of the Libraries scheme, which now
includes one volunteer teaching housebound residents to use computers
• Barnet libraries now have a new Management System, allowing better stock
movement. Focusing on social equality and partnership working led to the
Libraries Service receiving a Beacon Award in 2003/04 (for more information
visit http://www.beacons.idea.gov.uk/idk/tio/82981 )
• The Libraries Service has formed strong ties to Barnet College- including a
Learn Direct community centre in Hendon library
• The 6 Leading Libraries will utilise self-service equipment (RFID), which will allow staff to perform a ‘meet and greet’ role. The Libraries service are working with Customer Services to see what other initiatives could be used and to develop the changing role staff will offer in Leading and Local libraries • The RFID is not the only investment in technologies at Barnet libraries, with the computers and IT equipment becoming a central part of the services offered. The focus here is on reference and education, though it was clearly an attraction for young people • Several of the library sites offered flexible floor space, with shelves on wheels to provide greater access and building use. Recent activities included hosting reading group meetings, Adult Social Services providing services for older infirm people, an Equality Leaders Project for Youth and the recent playstation competition (which attracted young people who would not normally have attended a library). Whilst multi-use has improved the number of residents using libraries, it can impact on quiet periods in smaller libraries. There was a clear need for intelligent programming to ensure groups did not affect others’ use of the libraries • Several libraries have specialist language sections, with the languages being selected by the demand for books • The Home Libraries service is “well developed”, and includes a regular newsletter and reading group
3. OU TCOMES OF SITE VISITS
Members were very grateful to the staff from Barnet Libraries who took the time to welcome the group and guide us round the two libraries.
It was felt that the next step should now be to visit comparable libraries in Enfield, to allow a level of comparison and to understand the local issues that are being addressed by the department’s review. Enfield’s libraries offer much of the services described above, so it is key that members are aware of the aspects that are currently operating well, against those which should remain a focus of the Libraries Strategy review.
- 2 - Page 49 Agenda Item 10
MEETING TITLE AND DATE: Environment, Parks & Leisure Scrutiny Panel 11 September 2007
BRIEF TOPIC: Fairtrade Steering Group- Milestone Monitoring
Contact officer and telephone number: Anna Loughlin (ext:4789) E mail: [email protected] 28 August 2007
1. ACTIVITY SINCE LAST UPDATE:
th The last meeting took place on the 7 August with councillors, officers and
representatives from several voluntary & faith groups in attendance. A Rotary Group received a presentation on Fairtrade, which was well received and generated considerable debate. A group of Steering Group members met with the store manager of a local Sainsburys (during their ‘Sourcing with Integrity’ month) and had a very positive discussion around how they can assist the local campaign.
Objective Progress Notes
Objective 1 - Local council On Target -Difficulties in supplying FT passes a resolution coffee at meetings is being addressed -Formal motion will need to be agreed by Full Council Objective 2 - At least 2 FT Complete 59 Retail Outlets and 19 products are available in 38 retail Catering outlets now stock 2 outlets and 19 catering outlets FT Products Objective 3 - FT products are Ongoing -All 6 Co-Op supermarkets are used by a number of local work now serving FT tea & coffee to places and community their staff organisations -Enfield Disability Action (EDA), the Greek & Greek Cypriot Community of Enfield, Café 311 and Enfield Voluntary Action (EVA) all use FT products at their meetings Objective 4 - Attract media Ongoing An article has been drafted coverage and popular support for and will be included in the next BRIEFING PAPER BRIEFING the campaign edition of Watch This Space Objective 5 - A local Fairtrade Complete steering group is convened
- 1 - Page 50
This page is intentionally left blank ENVIRONMENT PARKS AND LEISURE SCRUTINY PANEL WORK PROGRAMME 2007/2008
WORK Lead Member, 3July 07 11 Sept 07 5 Dec 07 13 Feb 08 1 April 08 Support Officer & Panel Department Lead Annual Work Programme Mike Ahuja Agree work Review year’s programme work and scopes programme Annual Report and Mike Ahuja Report Consideration of Work Programme for 2007/8 Major Reviews and Working Groups Waste Minimisation E Smith/C Andrew Briefing and G Robinson/A Revised Scope Dreblow Matt Clack Library Strategy Mike Ahuja Report back Peter Lewis on Barnet visit Update on Page 51 strategy Parking (Joint working Alison Trew Progress Update group with Special Gary Barnes Update from E Smith/T Smith/ Projects Scrutiny Panel) C Bond Working group Allotments Mike Ahuja Scope to be Penelope Williams agreed Chris Andrew Annette Dreblow Norman Ford/Chris Bond/Y Brett/G Savva Other possibilities Local Development Stephen Tapper Briefing George Sims Framework/Place Shaping Agenda Item11 Glyn Jones
North London Waste John Pryor
Footway Options Stephen Skinner Report
Water Pollution in the Martin Keay Briefing River Lea Sustainability Stephen Tapper Briefing
29 August 2007 1 WORK - Lead Member 3July 07 11 Sept 07 5 Dec 07 13 Feb 08 1 April 08 Support Officer & Panel Department Lead Abandoned Vehicles Mike Ahuja Brief Report Update from Bob Griffiths Housing
Cycle Paths Matt Clack Liam Mulrooney
Monitoring Reports Alcohol Control Zones Bob Griffiths Report
Parks and Open Spaces Report
PFI Street Lighting Gary Barnes Report on progress Fairtrade Accreditation Matt Clack/ Anna Update and Update on Update Draft Update Louglin Action Plan Progress Submission to Fairtrade Foundation
Page 52
29 August 2007 2 Page 53
Environment, Parks and Leisure Scrutiny Panel 11 September 2007
Update on work programme items not covered elsewhere on the agenda
1. Major Reviews and Working Groups
1.1 Waste Minimisation
Last year the panel set up a working group to look into this issue. The review included a waste audit and an internal staff survey. This year they will look at what is being done by the council to educate schoolchildren to use less, incentives for local businesses to reduce waste and barriers to residents in flats and housing estates recycling more.
A meeting of the working group is being arranged where the revised scope for the review will be considered.
Working Group Membership: Councillors Edward Smith, Chris Bond, Annette Dreblow and Chris Andrew.
2. Monitoring Issues
2.1 Parks and Open Spaces – 5 December 2007 A report will be presented to the December meeting of the panel including details of the proposed expenditure on parks over the current municipal year.
2.5 Update on Holmesdale Tunnel Works (2005/06 work programme) The Holmesdale Tunnel Refurbishment Works are nearing completion approximately 2 months ahead of schedule. On Monday 3 September, Tom Harris MP the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Transport will officially open the refurbished Holmesdale Tunnel. The eastbound on slip and the westbound off slip on junction 25 will be opened for vehicle traffic from 10am on Monday 3 September 2007.
3. Other Issues
3.1 North London Waste – a meeting (17 July 2007) involving Edward Smith, Chris Bond and Mike Ahuja was held where the key issues were discussed with John Pryor. A briefing will be provided for the next meeting.
3.2 Sustainability – a report will be provided for the December meeting of the panel.
3.3 Cycle Paths – Matt Clack is carrying out some initial research; mapping the current routes of the existing cycle paths in the borough; finding out plans for the development of new routes including details of proposed investment.
1 Page 54
This page is intentionally left blank Page 55 Agenda Item 12
ENVIRONMENT, PARKS & LEISURE SCRUTINY PANEL - 3.7.2007
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE ENVIRONMENT, PARKS & LEISURE SCRUTINY PANEL HELD ON TUESDAY, 3 JULY 2007
COUNCILLORS
PRESENT Edward Smith (Chairman), Christopher Andrew, Chris Bond (Vice Chairman), Annette Dreblow, Norman Ford, George Savva MBE, Terence Smith, Yasemin Brett and Geoffrey Robinson
OFFICERS: Mike Ahuja (Head of Corporate Scrutiny Services), Matt Clack (Corporate Scrutiny Services), Bob Griffiths (Acting Assistant Director Environmental Protection and Regulation), Stephen Skinner (Acting Head of Highway Services), John Pryor (Director of Environment, Street Scene and Parks), John Grimes and Trevor King (Operation Managers Highway Services) and Penelope Williams (Secretary)
Also Attending: Councillor Neville (Cabinet Member for Environment and Street Scene), Councillor Cole and 8 members of the public
131 WELCOME AND APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
The chairman welcomed everyone to the meeting.
Apologies for absence were received from Phil Webb, Support Officer.
132 DECLARATION OF INTERESTS
There were no declarations of interest.
133 WORK PROGRAMME 2007/8
The panel received:-
1. A report on the work carried out on the issues identified by the panel at their work programme planning session (17 May 2007) for the work programme.
2. A draft work programme grid.
AGREED
1. that the panel would carry out the following reviews as part of its work programme for 2007/8:-
- 125 - Page 56
ENVIRONMENT, PARKS & LEISURE SCRUTINY PANEL - 3.7.2007
1.1 Waste Minimisation
The panel would continue the working group set up, last year, to look into the issue of waste minimisation. This year they would concentrate on the areas of waste education in schools, recycling collections from flats and trade waste.
Membership: Councillors Robinson, Edward Smith, Annette Dreblow and Chris Andrew
1.2 Library Strategy
The panel would have an input into the library strategy which was currently being developed by the Library Service. The strategy was due to be ready for consultation in the next few months.
As part of the review a member visit to Barnet Libraries had been arranged for Thursday 19 July 2007. Another visit was due to be arranged to Tower Hamlets.
Members were asked to contact Penelope Williams if they wished to attend.
1.3 Joint Parking and Enforcement Plan Review
This review was being carried out by a joint working group with the Special Projects Scrutiny Panel in conjunction with the review commissioned by Environment, Street Scene and Parks. The Special Projects Scrutiny Panel would coordinate the support arrangements for this review.
The panel had asked that this review be extended to include traffic flow.
Councillor Neville (Cabinet Member for Environment and Street Scene) advised that this was not possible as there was no budget allocated. However, he was committed to his manifesto pledge, to keep Enfield traffic moving, and it was possible that a bid to employ a consultant to carry out some work on traffic flows could be included in next year’s budget.
Membership: Councillors Edward Smith. Terry Smith and Chris Bond.
1.4 Allotments
NOTED that
1. Councillor Andrew had had a brief meeting with officers to discuss initial research into the issue of allotments.
2. The parks and open spaces service was intending to carry out their own review into the allotment service. For this purpose they were planning to appoint an officer on a 2 year fixed term contract. The officer would carry out and implement the recommendations from
- 126 - Page 57
ENVIRONMENT, PARKS & LEISURE SCRUTINY PANEL - 3.7.2007
the review, negotiate agreements with allotment holders as well as resolving some of the complex issues which had arisen among the plot holders.
AGREED that
1. A working group would be set up to review the allotment service.
2. Membership would consist of Councillors Andrew, Dreblow, and Ford and members of the Labour group (names to be confirmed).
3. The working group would work with officers in the Parks and Open Spaces Service.
4. A meeting to discuss the scope of the review would be arranged with John Pryor and the Parks’ Business and Development Manager.
5. A scope for the review would be produced by the working group and referred back to the next meeting for the panel’s agreement.
2. the panel would also receive reports and do further work on the following issues:-
2.1 Fairtrade Accreditation
NOTED
1. A Fairtrade steering group had been set up following the panel’s Fairtrade review to bring about Fairtrade accreditation. The next meeting of the Steering Group was arranged for 10 July.
2. Of the five goals required to achieve accreditation, the target for local shops stocking 2 Fairtrade products had been achieved. Work now needed to be completed to ensure the Council stocked Fairtrade tea and coffee, and that sufficient publicity was generated.
3. The steering group also needed more representatives from charitable organisations.
AGREED that
1. Anna Loughlin, the officer leading on the steering group would be invited to attend and report back to the next meeting of the panel.
2. The panel would receive regular updates on the progress being made towards accreditation.
2.2 North London Waste
- 127 - Page 58
ENVIRONMENT, PARKS & LEISURE SCRUTINY PANEL - 3.7.2007
NOTED that
1. An initial briefing meeting had been arranged for the Chairman and Vice Chairman of the panel with John Pryor.
2. A larger public meeting on the issues surrounding North London Waste might be arranged at a later date.
2.3 Sustainability
AGREED that a briefing on the key issues would be provided for the next meeting. Action: Matt Clack
2.4 Abandoned Vehicles on Council Housing Estates
The panel received a briefing note on the problem of abandoned vehicles on housing estates.
NOTED that
1. Bob Griffiths (Acting Assistant Director Environmental Protection and Regulation) reported that:-
• Abandoned vehicles could be removed but often vehicles that seem to be abandoned are untaxed, uninsured vehicles with off road notification which are being stored on estates and are not abandoned.
• It would be relatively easy to add removal of these vehicles to the existing contract for the removal of abandoned vehicles on the public highway.
• Under housing tenancy agreements, tenants can be asked to remove such vehicles but it is up to Housing Services to enforce these.
2. Councillor Neville advised that he had written to Councillor Matthew Laban (Cabinet member for Housing) and Ann Pennell (Director of Performance, Partnership and Policy) to ask them to resolve the issues.
3. Residents reported that they knew of several instances of vehicles including burnt out cars being left on estates for long periods of time and of the same problem vehicles being moved around estates.
AGREED that the panel would ask officers in housing to report back to the February meeting of the panel on the progress being made in solving the problem of abandoned vehicles on council housing estates.
2.5 Cycle Paths
- 128 - Page 59
ENVIRONMENT, PARKS & LEISURE SCRUTINY PANEL - 3.7.2007
Matt Clack had held an initial meeting and carried out some research on this topic.
AGREED that Matt Clack would provide some further information to a future meeting.
134 FOOTWAY PLANNED MAINTANANCE PROGRAMME
The panel received a report from Stephen Skinner (Head of Highway Services) reviewing the different materials for use in Enfield’s planned highway maintenance programme on footways.
1. The Report
Stephen Skinner highlighted the following from his report
• The planned work currently being carried out on the footways was in accordance with the policy agreed by Cabinet in 2003.
• The policy was to introduce artificial stone paving slabs with vehicle protection on all borough roads and shopping areas. Bituminous surfacing, which was in the past used on 43% of footways, would only be used in future in areas of very light foot traffic such as Cockfosters Road up to the M25.
• A budget of £4.9 million has been allocated to the footway renewal programme for 2007/8.
• The key issues were to create an attractive and good quality surface balancing costs with sustainability.
• They use paving slabs of different sizes according to circumstances. Smaller slabs are easier to lay for health and safety reasons and are less easily damaged by vehicles. Thicker slabs are more expensive but last longer. Enfield uses 63m slabs laid on a concrete base in vulnerable areas.
• Block tegular paving was used successfully on awkward corners.
• Asphalt paving is effective in areas of low transport and looks good except where it has been scarred by utility trenches. Kerbs are generally made up of recycled granite.
• Fibre reinforced paving slabs are a newer but slightly more expensive option. Even if they snap they still hold together.
• Paving slabs are more vulnerable than asphalt surfacing to being damaged by vehicles driving over the footway. Broken paving has to
- 129 - Page 60
ENVIRONMENT, PARKS & LEISURE SCRUTINY PANEL - 3.7.2007
be replaced as it leads to tripping and can lead to insurance claims against the authority.
• Damage from vehicles over-running the footway is a problem that can be addressed by placing a strip of stronger material along the edge of the pavement but this can then seem to encourage parking on the pavement. Options to discourage parking include bollards but these add to street clutter.
• Highway services have also adopted a whole area approach so that when capital works are carried out, the overall street scene should be improved.
Stephen Skinner thanked John Grimes and Trevor King (operation managers in Highway Services) for their help in producing the report.
2. Questions/Issues raised in response to the report
2.1 When utility companies dig up a footway they have to reinstate the area damaged and to create a neat edge but are not obliged to skim the whole area.
2.2 A new crossover will be paved according to the new specification planned for that street unless it is an extension to an existing crossover.
2.3 Since the 2003 change in policy there has been greater resident satisfaction with the footways and street scene in general. The current policy is expensive but it is aesthetically attractive.
2.4 Westminster has very high kerbs that discourage driving on the pavement but few vehicle crossovers. Councillor Neville said that they would like to use higher kerbs in Enfield but it was not always possible for technical reasons. High kerbs can also cause damage to car doors.
2.5 Councillor Neville asserted that all areas of the borough were treated fairly. Roads in the east such as Albany Park Avenue had been done recently as well as roads in the west of the borough.
2.6 Due to lack of investment in the past, there was a large amount of work to be done, and it was not possible to do it all at once.
2.7 Any new bollards being installed were the more attractive black iron rather than concrete. A visually impaired resident suggested that they should be painted white rather than black as black was very difficult to see in the dark. He also complained about the black iron bells placed on some corners. (Post meeting note from Highway Services – black iron bollards are used in new scheme work, but concrete bollards are still used as part of reactive works.)
- 130 - Page 61
ENVIRONMENT, PARKS & LEISURE SCRUTINY PANEL - 3.7.2007
2.8 Councillor Brett asked if anything was being done to prevent front gardens being paved over for parking especially in view of the recent wet weather and the problems with water run off.
Councillor Neville responded that the Council has requirements in its footway crossing application process to prevent water from paved front gardens from draining onto the highway but provided they met certain criteria relating to the size of the front garden nothing could be done to prevent them.
There were real concerns about the growing number of these particularly as they restricted on street parking and they would be considered as part of the parking review.
2.9 Much damage to paving was caused by the roots of existing street trees and of trees grown on rootstocks. To prevent this, new trees, of the more highway friendly and climate resistant variety, were grown in root boxes. Single rooted trees were better as the roots tended to grow straighter and cause less damage.
2.10 Members felt that there should be more publicity about the fact that it was illegal to park on the footway. Many people were not sure of the rules.
2.11 The policy in neighbouring boroughs; Redbridge used mainly 400x400mm squares and replaced asphalt with asphalt; Barnet replaced like with like and did not use 400x400mm squares but used 50mm thick paving.
AGREED that the panel note the report; they agreed with the approach that each footway scheme should be assessed individually and adapted to the differing situations in different areas within the parameters set by the policy.
135 ALCOHOL CONTROL ZONES
The panel received a report from Bob Griffiths, Acting Assistant Director Environmental Health and Protection, updating them on the effectiveness of the borough’s alcohol control zones.
1. The Report
Bob Griffiths highlighted the following:-
• Limited information was available from the Police as they do not keep records of alcohol related offences committed within the zones.
• Anecdotal evidence suggested that the zones were a useful police tool which could be used to move on people who were drinking alcohol with the zones.
- 131 - Page 62
ENVIRONMENT, PARKS & LEISURE SCRUTINY PANEL - 3.7.2007
• There was some evidence to suggest that there had been a limited reduction in the alcohol related crime within the zones.
2. Questions/Comments raised in response to the report
2.1 Discussions with the police had indicated that they found it a useful discretionary tool.
2.2 It was suggested that some Police Community Support Officers were not aware that it could be used.
2.3 The police linked all fixed penalty notices together so that it was not possible to see which were related to alcohol in the zones.
AGREED that John Pryor and Bob Griffiths would speak to the police to find out why they did not keep statistics on the number of fixed penalty notices issues, prosecutions and cautions administered in respect of alcohol control zones. They would report back to the next meeting.
136 FAIRTRADE ACCREDITATION
The panel received and noted the update report from Anna Loughlin, Programmes and Performance Review Officer and lead officer for the Fairtrade steering group.
137 REVIEW INTO WASTE MINIMISATION
The panel received a briefing note and revised scope from Matt Clack, Support Officer, updating them on the work that had been carried out so far and on the work to be completed on the waste minimisation review.
1. Briefing Note
Matt Clack reported that:-
1. The waste minimisation review had been divided into 4 sections.
2. The section on civic centre waste minimisation had been completed but a report on the outcomes from this had still to be agreed by working group members.
3. Areas still to be covered included minimising trade waste, recycling in flats and estates and education provided in schools.
4. He had given a recycling presentation, the slides of which were attached to the briefing note, as part of a sustainability day at Southgate School.
- 132 - Page 63
ENVIRONMENT, PARKS & LEISURE SCRUTINY PANEL - 3.7.2007
2. Questions/Comments made in response
2.1 Members felt that it was important to get children involved in recycling at an early age and that this needed to be done through headteachers.
2.2 A member of the public offered to lend officers a Local Government Association DVD on waste minimisation.
2.3 Many blocks of flats did not have the space to accommodate recycling but planning were now encouraging house builders to include facilities for waste recycling.
2.4 Councillor Neville suggested that the working group seek information from boroughs with high numbers of flats as to how they dealt with the problem.
2.5 In a recent recycling consultation exercise only 8 flat dwellers had responded.
AGREED that
1. Nicky Fiedler (Business Quality Manager Environmental Health and Regulation) would be asked to present some information to the working group on the recycling education programmes currently being delivered by the authority.
2. Terry Ransome (Acting Head of Waste Services) would be asked to attend a meeting of the working group to talk about trade waste and work being done to collect recycling waste from flats.
3. Matt Clack would revise the scope and take it back to a working group meeting for approval. Action: Matt Clack
138 MINUTES OF THE MEETING HELD ON 25 APRIL 2007
The panel received the minutes of the panel meeting held on 25 April 2007.
NOTED that
1. Mike Ahuja, Lead Support Officer asked that any information requested by individual councillors should be sent to the scrutiny secretary, who could then ensure that information was copied to all members of the panel and the panel support officers.
2. Mr Bushell, a member of the public raised a query relating to some golf and model aircraft byelaws.
- 133 - Page 64
ENVIRONMENT, PARKS & LEISURE SCRUTINY PANEL - 3.7.2007
3. Members were reminded that the scrutiny panel could not deal with individual issues from members of the public. There were other channels for these issues.
AGREED that
1. The minutes of the meeting held on 25 April 2007were agreed as a correct record.
2. A detailed briefing note on the byelaw issue should be brought back to the next meeting.
139 SPECIFIC ITEMS TO BE REFERRED TO CABINET
There were no specific items referred to Cabinet.
140 SPECIFIC ITEMS TO BE REFERRED TO OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE
There were no specific items referred to Overview and Scrutiny Committee.
141 DATES FOR FUTURE MEETINGS
The panel noted the dates agreed for future meetings as follows:-
Tuesday 11 September 2007 Wednesday 5 December 2007 Wednesday 13 February 2008 Tuesday 1 April 2008
All meetings will start at 7.45pm.
- 134 -