CABINET Tuesday, 4 April 2017 at 7.15 p.m. Council Chamber, Town Hall, High Road, Ilford, Essex IG1 1DD
TO: CABINET MEMBER: PORTFOLIO:
Councillor J. Athwal - Leader Councillor E. Norman - Children and Young People (and Deputy Leader) Councillor K. Rai - Finance and Support Services Councillor M. Santos - Health and Social Care Councillor S. Bain - Civic Pride Councillor J. Howard - Environment and Sustainability Councillor H. Coomb - Regeneration, Property and Planning Councillor F. Hussain - Housing Councillor B. Littlewood - Employment, Skills and Fairness
QUORUM: 3
MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO WISH TO SPEAK, PLEASE NOTE:-
1. If you wish to speak at a Service Committee, please contact the relevant Committee Support Officer no later than 5pm on the working day before the meeting. Dates of meetings and officer contact details are set on the front page of each Service Committee agenda, which have already been published. 2. If you do wish to speak at Cabinet on Tuesday 4th April 2017 on any matter, please advise the Committee Support Officers, Jon Simes/Carole Dungate: 0208 708 2163 / 2209 or Email: [email protected] or [email protected] by 5pm on Monday, 3rd April 2017.
In accordance with Standing Order 68, the public and press are permitted to report on this meeting using electronic media tools. However, oral commentary will not be permitted during proceedings.
The attendance of the above Members is requested at the above meeting The Agenda for the meeting is overleaf. All Agendas can be accessed at your local library or on the Internet at www.redbridge.gov.uk
Fiona Alderman, Assistant Director – Assurance, Town Hall, Ilford, Essex, IG1 1DD Cabinet – Tuesday, 4 April 2017
Order of Business
IN CERTAIN INSTANCES, AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE COUNCIL’S GOVERNANCE ARRANGEMENTS, A CABINET MEMBER MAY HAVE ALREADY TAKEN THE DECISION ON A REPORT FOLLOWING CONSIDERATION BY THE SERVICE COMMITTEE
Item Title Of Report Page No No 1. Apologies for Absence
To receive any apologies for absence
2. Declaration of Interest
All Members in attendance are reminded of the requirement to consider whether they have an interest in any matter on the agenda that needs to be disclosed and, if so, to declare an interest when the Cabinet reaches that item on the agenda.
3. Minutes of the Previous Meeting Held on 7th March 2017 1 - 13
4. Public Participation: Statements, Questions, Deputations and Petitions
To hear statements and questions from members of the public.
5. References and Comments from Committees
To be tabled at the Cabinet meeting
6. Forward Plan 14 - 45
7. Budgetary Control Report for January 2017 46 - 65
8. Annual Corporate Property Maintenance Programme 2017/18 66 - 72 (incorporating Access Initiative Programme)
9. Redbridge Community Safety Partnership Plan 2017 - 2021 73 - 100
10. 2017/2018 Highways and Transportation Major Works Programme and 101 - 134 Variations to the 2016/17 Programme
11. Crossrail (Elizabeth Line) Project Progress and Crossrail Urban Integration 135 - 147 Scheme Delivery (JOINT REPORT)
12. Delivering temporary accommodation at Loxford Hall and the former 148 - 159 Newbridge School (JOINT REPORT)
13. Approval to issue Stopping Up Orders to enable the delivery of the HRA 160 - 166 New Affordable Homes Programme Item Title Of Report Page No No 14. Youth Justice Plan 2016/17 and 2017/18 167 - 189
15. Continuation of the 4 Borough Emergency Duty Team Service 190 - 196
16. Use of Land at Aldborough Road North for New Special Free School 197 - 214
17. Any Other Items which the Chair Decides for the Reasons Stated are Urgent
18. Date of Next Meeting: 23rd May 2017
19. Motion to Exclude the Public:
The following motion will be moved where it is desired to discuss business containing exempt information in private:-
“That under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting for the following item(s) of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as described in the paragraph(s) indicated below of Part I of Schedule 12A to the Act.” Cabinet, Agenda Item 3 Tuesday, 7 March 2017
Minutes of the Cabinet
Tuesday, 7th March, 2017 (7.15 p.m. - 7.43 p.m.)
Present: Councillors J. Athwal (Chair), E. Norman (Vice-Chair), K. Rai, M. Santos, S. Bain, J. Howard, H. Coomb and B. Littlewood
Also in attendance: Councillors P. Canal and M. Javed
Public: 5
1. Apologies for Absence (CAB/01/070317)
Apologies for absence were received from Councillor F. Hussain.
2. Declaration of Interest (CAB/02/070317)
All Members in attendance were reminded of the requirement to consider whether they have an interest in any matter on the agenda that needed to be disclosed and, if so, to declare an interest when the Cabinet reached that item on the agenda.
3. Minutes of the Previous Meeting Held on 7th February 2017 (CAB/03/070317)
Resolved: That the Chair be authorised to sign the Minutes of the previous meeting held on 7th February 2017.
4. Public Participation: Statements, Questions, Deputations and Petitions (CAB/04/070317)
The following speaker addressed the meeting in respect of matters which were not the subject of reports on the agenda.
1. Mr A. Walker raised the following issues:
1. Would the Leader join a photo call in support of the Save King George Hospital Rally on 18th March? 2. Would the Leader permit Redbridge’s website to be used to publicise the rally? 3. Whilst welcoming BHRUT being out of special measures, this should not be used as justification for the closure of King George Hospital A&E which should remain open. 4. Would the Leader help to expedite a response to questions raised by myself at a previous meeting?
In response to 1. above, the Leader indicated that, subject to his diary commitments, he would be happy to attend and, as this was a matter on which all Groups were in agreement, asked Councillor Canal, Leader of the Conservative Group, who was in attendance, to join him at the photo call.
Page 1 Cabinet, Tuesday, 7 March 2017
In response to 2. above, the Leader advised, similarly, that as this was a non-partisan political matter, he was happy for the Council’s website to be used and would liaise with the Council’s communications section to facilitate this.
In respect of 3. above, the Cabinet Member for Health & Social Care advised that he concurred with both points made by Mr. Walker.
Finally, in respect of 4. above, the Cabinet Member for Health & Social Care advised that he would expedite a response to Mr. Walker.
(Councillor Canal spoke on this item)
(Full details of the specific matters raised, questions asked by the above speaker and responses given by the Leader and Cabinet Member are available on the online audio recording, in accordance with Standing Order 68)
5. References and Comments from Committees (CAB/05/070317)
Cabinet’s response was sought to comments made by the Council’s Relevant Committees following pre-consideration of Executive reports on the agenda, in accordance with the Council’s governance arrangements.
Comments made by any Relevant Committees, together with the response(s) of the relevant Cabinet Member, were included in a Supplementary Agenda tabled at the meeting, as set out in the Appendix to these Minutes.
Resolved: That (i) the comments made by the Strategy and Resources Service Committee and the Neighbourhoods Service Committee, as set out in the tabled Supplementary Agenda and appended to these Minutes, be noted; and
(ii) the responses to the comments, as set out in the Appendix, be agreed.
6. Forward Plan (CAB/06/070317)
Resolved: That the items shown in the Forward Plan for April to July 2017 be agreed.
7. Calendar of Meetings for the Municipal Year 2017/18 (CAB/07/070317)
The Leader, Councillor Athwal, introduced the report.
In accordance with Standing Order 37.1, Cabinet was required to recommend to Council a Calendar of Meetings for the forthcoming Municipal Year, commencing in May. The Calendar included all scheduled meetings of the Council, Cabinet, Committees and their subsidiary bodies and other Council-appointed bodies meeting on a regular basis.
The Calendar was based on revisions to the Council’s Committee structure, arising from the review of the Council’s governance arrangements, agreed by Council on 19th January 2017.
Page 2 Cabinet, Tuesday, 7 March 2017
In drafting the 2017/18 Calendar, Officers had sought to include an appropriate number of meetings for each body, as evenly spaced as possible, whilst recognising a number of important principles such as religious holidays and festivals, scheduling committees in order that they could undertake their respective functions, half-term and school holidays and the need for certain evenings to be kept free from Committee meetings so that Members could meet in their Groups, e.g. prior to Council meetings.
Consultation had also been undertaken specifically with the three Group Leaders, Mayor and the Council’s senior officer structure. Where appropriate, any views emanating from the consultation process had been taken on board.
The proposed Calendar of Meetings for the 2017/18 Municipal Year was attached as an Appendix to the report.
It was noted that, following pre-consideration of the report, the Strategy & Resources Service Committee, at its meeting on 28th February 2017, had agreed the recommendations in the report, subject to one amendment to the Calendar. The amendment and the response by the Leader, are set out in the Appendix to these Minutes (Minute No. CAB/05/070317 above refers).
A supplementary report of further proposed amendments to the Calendar was tabled at the meeting, as detailed in items 2 to 6 of the resolution below.
Resolved: That Council be recommended to approve the Calendar of Meetings for the Municipal Year 2017/18, as appended to the report, subject to the following amendments:
1. the Local Pension Board meeting shown for 25th May 2017 be moved to 30th May 2017; 2. the Council meeting on 20th July 2017 be moved to 22nd June 2017; 3. arising from 2 above, the Planning Committee currently shown for 22nd June 2017 be moved to 29th June 2017; 4. arising from 2 above, the Group meetings currently shown for 18th July 2017 be moved to 20th June 2017; 5. arising from 4 above, the Member Development date shown for Tuesday 20th June 2017 be moved to Monday 12th June 2017; and 6. additional meetings of the Health Scrutiny Committee be scheduled for 7th June and 29th November 2017.
8. Business Rate Discretionary Rate Relief 2016/17 (CAB/08/070317)
The Cabinet Member, Councillor Rai, introduced the report.
Charities and other community organisations could apply each year for Discretionary Relief from their Business Rates. Awards were made on the basis of qualifying criteria agreed by Members. For 2016/17, awards had been made based on the criteria agreed by Cabinet at its meetings on 10 January 2012 and 11 February 2014.
Page 3 Cabinet, Tuesday, 7 March 2017
It was necessary for Cabinet to approve the Discretionary Rate Relief scheme to allow the Head of Revenues, Benefits and Customer Services to make the necessary adjustments to the Council's Business Rate records.
Resolved: That (i) the award of relief be agreed in accordance with Appendices B, C & D to the report; and
(ii) the current Discretionary Relief scheme be continued in full until 31 March 2019.
9. Information Governance Strategy (CAB/09/070317)
The Cabinet Member, Councillor Rai, introduced the report.
In January 2016, the Chief Executive agreed to an external assessment of the Council’s Data Protection arrangements by the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO). This audit assessed three key areas of activity; (a) training, (b) information security and (c) responses to subject access requests. This audit process had now been completed, with a series of actions that the Council was now in the process of implementing.
As part of the ICO audit actions, the Council agreed to develop an Information Governance Strategy to implement a formal programme of work to ensure sustained monitoring and improvement of data protection compliance.
To achieve this, the Council had extended its Information Governance (IG) Framework to define and clarify its reporting lines for IG matters to ensure effective control and clarify responsibilities. The Council had also developed an IG strategy.
The IG Strategy, appended to the report, aligned the Council’s IG activity with the overall strategy of the Council for the next two years and built on the good practice already in place. It identified the key issues facing the Council and set out the objectives and deliverable actions in order to address them.
Resolved: That the Information Governance Strategy be agreed.
10. Internal Audit Strategy and Annual Audit Plan 2017/18 (CAB/10/070317)
The Cabinet Member, Councillor Rai, introduced the report.
The report set out the Internal Audit Strategy and proposed Annual Plan for 2017/18 which detailed how the Council would meet its statutory requirements for Internal Audit. The overall approach to delivering and monitoring the Internal Audit function, as set out in the report, complied with the Public Sector Internal Audit Standards (PSIAS) and the Council’s Internal Audit Charter which had been updated to reflect revisions to the PSIAS.
The report explained that the overall level of audit coverage had been developed by applying a risk based approach. The Audit Plan continued to focus upon areas of highest risk and the overall coverage was considered to be sufficient to provide Members, management and other external bodies with an independent assurance on the adequacy of the Council’s risk management, governance and internal control
Page 4 Cabinet, Tuesday, 7 March 2017
framework.
Resolved: That (i) the Internal Audit Charter be agreed; and
(ii) the overall shape of the 2017/18 Audit Plan be approved and the comments from the Audit Committee contained in the report in paragraph 3.4 be noted.
11. Review of the Council's Anti-Fraud and Corruption Strategy (CAB/11/070317)
The Cabinet Member, Councillor Rai, introduced the report.
The report advised Members of amendments that had been made to the Council’s Anti-Fraud and Corruption Strategy (AF&CS) following a review against the Code of Practice on Managing the Risk of Fraud and Corruption published by CIPFA (Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy).
The existing Anti-Fraud and Corruption Strategy and underlying principles were considered to remain relevant in fully reflecting the Council’s stance in combating fraud.
The key messages contained within the AF&CS remained that fraud would not be tolerated, prevention was better than cure and that where fraud was perpetrated the strongest possible actions of redress would be taken.
The AF&CS was set out in the Appendix to the submitted report.
Resolved: That the revised Anti-fraud and Corruption Strategy be approved.
12. The Award of Voluntary and Community Sector Grants 2017-2020 (CAB/12/070317)
The Cabinet Member, Councillor Littlewood, introduced the report.
Cabinet agreed in July 2016 a new Voluntary and Community Grants programme for 2017 to 2020 following a comprehensive review of the grants programme. The new Grants programme was advertised locally from September to November 2016 and received 15 applications from the voluntary and community sector. This was made up of nine applications for Strategic Partners Core funding, one application for Transition Funding and five applications for Strategic Partners Commissioned-Through-Grants Funding.
The report made recommendations for the award of voluntary sector grant funding to organisations that met the Council’s grant funding criteria. The details of organisations recommended for funding were set out in Appendix B.1 to B.3. Details of the organisations not recommended for funding were set out in Appendix C.1 and C.2.
Cabinet also agreed in July 2016 that the new Redbridge Projects Fund would be administered by the London Community Foundation from April 2017 onwards. The London Community Foundation already administered the Councils Small Grants
Page 5 Cabinet, Tuesday, 7 March 2017 programme and had been successful in levering in external funds to support voluntary and community sector projects in the borough.
Prior to the decommissioning of the Redbridge Projects Fund in 2019/2020, the Council would undertake a fundamental review of its relationship with the voluntary and community sector. It was proposed that the Review took place in Spring/Summer 2018 and would enable the Council and its partners to focus resources on achieving common objectives and improving the lives of local residents.
The budget available per annum for Strategic Partners grant funding for 2017/18 to 2019/20 was £0.458m while £0.206m would be made available to fund voluntary sector projects for 2017/18 and 2018/19. The elements that make up the grants programme were:
Funding stream 2017/18 £m 2018/19 2019/20 £m £m Strategic Partners Commissioned- 0.221 0.221 0.221 Through-Grants Strategic Partners Core funding 0.175 0.175 0.175 Transition Fund (for 2017/18 only) 0.010 0.000 0.000 Transformation Fund 0.032 0.042 0.042 Rental Subsidy 0.020 0.020 0.020 Sub-total 0.458 0.458 0.458 Redbridge Projects Fund 0.206 0.206 0.000 Total: 0.664 0.664 0.458
Resolved: That (i) Strategic Partners grant funding for 2017/18 to 2019/20 be awarded to the following organisations to deliver services Commissioned-Thorough-Grants:
Strategic Partners Commissioned-Through-Grants
Strategic Partners Commissioned-Through- Service Annual Grant Grants (£m) Redbridge Disability Support the implementation of Consortium (Comprising of policies that would improve the Redbridge Concern for 0.060 health and wellbeing of people Mental Health and living with disabilities Redbridge Forum) Develop a strategic approach to Redbridge Citizens Advice the provision of Information and 0.061 Bureau Advice Services in Redbridge Developing and supporting the Redbridge Council for Voluntary and Community 0.075 Voluntary Services Sector (including BAME sector) Promote a safer community and Victims Support Redbridge provide support to people 0.025 affected by crime Total recommended 0.221
Page 6 Cabinet, Tuesday, 7 March 2017
(ii) Strategic Partner Core funding be awarded to the following organisations to act as lead organisations for the Equality Characteristic Groups set out below:
Strategic Partners Core Funding
Strategic Partners Core Annual Grant Strategic Partner Role Funding (£m) Age: Issues affecting older 0.034 Age UK Redbridge people Redbridge Children and Age: Issues affecting 0.021 Young People’s Network younger people Redbridge Disability 0.037 Consortium (Comprising of Disability: Physical and Redbridge Concern for mental health Mental Health and Redbridge Forum) Disability: Supporting 0.011 Redbridge Carers Support people who provide unpaid Services care Redbridge Equalities and Race: National origin, colour, 0.022 Community Council ethnicity Race: Supporting new and 0.019 RAMFEL emerging communities Religion and Belief: 0.016 Redbridge Faith Forum supporting people of all faith and no faith Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and 0.015 Redbridge Rainbow transgender Total 0.175
(iii) £206,000 funding per year for 2017/18 and 2018/19 be awarded to the London Community Foundation to enable the organisation to administer the Redbridge Projects fund and the Small Grants Programme on behalf of the Council:
Redbridge Projects fund and the Redbridge Small Grants Programme
£ £ Name of Organisation Grant for 2017/2018 Grant for 2018/2019 London Community Foundation 0.206 0.206 Total 0.206 0.206
Page 7 Cabinet, Tuesday, 7 March 2017
(iv) Transition funding be awarded for 2017/2018 only to:
Forest Farm Peace Garden One year Transition Funding 0.010 for Environmental Sustainability
(v) it be agreed not to fund the following unsuccessful grant applications for reasons set out in Appendix C.1 and C.2 of the report:
Vision Redbridge Culture and Leisure for Developing and supporting the voluntary and community sector (including BAME sector). Redbridge Equalities and Community Council for support to new and emerging communities in Redbridge.
(Councillor Coomb declared a personal interest in this item as her sister was a trustee for Redbridge Council for Voluntary Services)
13. Emergency Planning Shared Service with Barking & Dagenham and Waltham Forest (CAB/13/070317)
The Cabinet Member, Councillor Bain, introduced the report.
Emergency Planning and Business Continuity Planning were statutory responsibilities for all Local Authorities under the Civil Contingencies Act 2004. A review of these areas of work was recently carried out in Redbridge to identify how savings could be achieved, while maintaining resilience. As part of appraising the range of future options, Redbridge approached Barking & Dagenham and Waltham Forest, who already delivered emergency planning through a shared service model, to assess the viability and added value of joining that arrangement.
The business case, set out in Appendix A to the report confirmed that the preferred option was to enter into a Tri-Borough shared Emergency Planning Service that includes Redbridge, Barking & Dagenham and Waltham Forest, with Barking & Dagenham as the lead Borough. Senior Officers from all three Boroughs had worked collaboratively to develop the business case. Barking & Dagenham and Waltham Forest Cabinets would individually consider the same business case at their respective meetings on 21st March 2017.
Resolved: That (i) it be agreed, in principle, to enter into a tri-borough shared Emergency Planning Service between Redbridge, Barking & Dagenham and Waltham Forest, subject to the successful negotiation of the final terms of the Inter-Authority Agreement between the parties, and authority be delegated to the Corporate Director of Place to agree and finalise the terms of the Inter-Authority Agreement and, thereafter, to enter into the Inter-Authority Agreement on behalf of the Council;
(ii) subject to (i) above, it be agreed that this Emergency Planning Shared Service be for a period of three years initially, commencing on 3rd April 2017 with the potential to extend for up to a further two years;
Page 8 Cabinet, Tuesday, 7 March 2017
(iii) subject to (i) above, it be agreed that Barking & Dagenham act as the lead Authority in the Tri-Borough Service;
(iv) subject to (i) above, it be agreed that Redbridge Emergency Planning Officers transfer to the employment of Barking & Dagenham under the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 (as amended); and
(v) subject to (i) above, it be agreed that this shared service be governed by a Tri- Borough Governance Board, comprising senior management representatives from all three Boroughs.
14. Redbridge Cycling Forum (CAB/14/070317)
The Cabinet Member, Councillor Howard, introduced the report.
Cabinet, at its meetings on 12th November 2013 and 8th April 2014, agreed to receive future reports regarding the Redbridge Cycling Forum biannually.
The report set out details of the Redbridge Cycling Forum meetings held on 10th October 2016 and 9th January 2017.
It was noted that, arising from their consideration of this item on 1st March 2017, the Neighbourhoods Service Committee agreed the recommendations in the report with the exception of recommendation 2.3 which the Committee requested be amended as set out in the Appendix to these Minutes, together with an additional recommendation 2.4, also set out in the Appendix, together with the responses from the Cabinet Member thereon. (Minute No. CAB/05/070317 above refers).
Resolved: That (i) the information contained in the report summarising the two meetings of the Redbridge Cycling Forum held on 10th October 2016 and 9th January 2017 be noted;
(ii) in future, reports not be submitted to Cabinet in respect of Redbridge Cycling Forum biannually;
(iii) it be agreed that the Cabinet Member for Environment and Sustainability receives biannual summaries of Redbridge Cycling Forum matters; and
(iv) it be noted that the Cabinet Member for Environment and Sustainability supports the request of the Neighbourhoods Service Committee to set up a cycling working group and this will be considered in the context of the Council’s revised governance arrangements.
15. Restructure of Property Services (CAB/15/070317)
The Cabinet Member, Councillor Coomb, introduced the report.
The Council was a substantial owner of property with a portfolio made up of operational buildings (offices, schools and libraries etc), housing, green spaces (parks, playing fields and farmland etc), depots and car parks valued at some £686m. The
Page 9 Cabinet, Tuesday, 7 March 2017
Council currently operated this estate through a variety of means including directly (through Civic Pride and Housing for instance) and indirectly such as the relationship with Vision Redbridge Culture and Leisure.
The efficient and effective operation of the Council’s operational assets and maximising the value of its investment portfolio had become increasingly important over the last five years as Council funding had reduced. Cabinet had previously approved the introduction of a Corporate Landlord model to centralise the management of much of the Council’s operational estate and all of its investment property excluding those properties managed by Vision and Housing.
With the Corporate Landlord model due to go live in April 2017, a review of the existing staffing structures had been undertaken to ensure that they were fit for purpose to take on new roles and responsibilities. This review had resulted in the development of a new staffing structure which was currently the subject of formal consultation. The proposals impacted on more than 10 posts and, in line with the Council’s Restructuring and Organisational Change Guidelines, Cabinet approval was required before they could be implemented.
The report briefly reviewed the background to the Corporate Landlord model, outlined the proposals which had been circulated to staff for consultation and sought approval for their implementation, subject to the outcome of the staff consultation.
It was noted that, arising from their consideration of this item on 1st March 2017, the Neighbourhoods Service Committee agreed the recommendation in the report, subject to the inclusion of additional wording at the end of the recommendation, as set out in bold in the Appendix to these Minutes, together with the response of the Cabinet Member. (Minute No. CAB/05/070317 above refers).
Resolved: That the restructuring of the Council’s property functions be agreed, in principle, in preparation for the launch of the Corporate Landlord model and authority be delegated to the Operational Director for Regeneration and Planning to finalise and implement the proposals in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Regeneration, Property and Planning.
16. Redbridge Local Children Safeguarding Board (LSCB) Annual Report 2015-16 (CAB/16/070317)
The Cabinet Member, Councillor Norman, introduced the report.
The report provided a summary of the Redbridge Local Safeguarding Children Board (LSCB) Annual Report 2015 – 2016.
There was a statutory requirement for the LSCB to publish an annual report on the effectiveness of child safeguarding and promoting the welfare of children in the local area, to be considered by, among others, the Leader of the Council. The report to Cabinet included that report as an Appendix.
Resolved: That (i) the report be noted; and
(ii) it be agreed to receive a copy of future LSCB Annual Reports.
Page 10 Cabinet, Tuesday, 7 March 2017
17. Any Other Items which the Chair Decides for the Reasons Stated are Urgent (CAB/17/070317)
None.
18. Date of Next Meeting: 4th April 2017 (CAB/18/070317)
Resolved: That it be noted that the next Cabinet meeting will be held on 4th April 2017.
Chair
Page 11 Appendix
CABINET AGENDA 7TH MARCH 2017 – COMMENTS FROM EXECUTIVE ADVISORY COMMITTEES
STRATEGY & RESOURCES SERVICE COMMITTEE – 28TH FEBRUARY 2017
Comment of Executive Advisory Committee Response from Cabinet/Executive
Item 7 – Calendar of Meetings for the Municipal Year Response from the Leader 2017/18
That the recommendation in the Cabinet report dated I support this change. 7th March 2017 be agreed, subject to the following amendment:
“the Local Pension Board meeting on 25th May 2017 be moved to 30th May 2017.” Page 1 Page Page 12 Page
NEIGHBOURHOODS SERVICE COMMITTEE – 1ST MARCH 2017
Comment of Executive Advisory Committee Response from Cabinet/Executive
Item 14 – Redbridge Cycling Forum Response from the Cabinet Member for Environment and Sustainability
That the recommendations in the Cabinet report dated 7th March 2017 be agreed, subject to:
(i) recommendation 2.3 being amended to read as The suggestion from the Service Committee in respect of follows: recommendation 2.3 is accepted.
“2.3 - agree that the Cabinet Member for Environment and Sustainability receives biannual summaries of Redbridge Cycling Forum matters.”
and (ii) an additional recommendation: “2.4 - we request that the Cabinet Member for I support the Service Committee’s request to set up a cycling Environment and Sustainability consider setting up working group and this will be considered in the context of the a cycling working group.” Council’s revised governance arrangements.
Item 15 – Restructure of Property Services Response from the Cabinet Member for Regeneration, Property and Planning
That the recommendation in the Cabinet report dated The recommendation is supported and it is considered that the 7th March 2017 be agreed, subject to the inclusion of proposed additional wording should be included. the additional wording in bold at the end of recommendation 2.1, which we refer to the Cabinet to consider:
“2.1 - Agree, in principle, to the restructuring of the Council’s property functions in preparation for the launch of the Corporate Landlord model and delegate authority to the Operational Director for Regeneration, Page 2 Page Page 13 Page Property and Planning to finalise and implement the proposals in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Regeneration, Property and Planning.” Agenda Item 6 LONDON BOROUGH OF REDBRIDGE NOTICE IN CONNECTION WITH KEY DECISIONS INTENDED TO BE TAKEN
Under the provisions of The Local Authorities (Executive Arrangements) (Meetings and Access to Information) (England) Regulations 2012, the Council is required to set out details in a document or documents of the 'key' decisions which will be taken at Redbridge Council at least 28 days before the decision is made.
Similarly, the Council is also required to give 28 days notice where it is known that a key executive item will be considered in a private meeting session, when it is likely that items will be considered in a private meeting session, the reason why and how members of the public can make representations in relation to the intention. In addition, five clear days before a private meeting session, a further notice must be published including any details received in response to the early notice of intent and a statement of the Council's response to any such representation.
The Forward Plan document attached meets the required 28 days notice period of all the ‘key’ decisions intended to be taken in public and in private meeting sessions, and by individual Members of the Council’s executive. The document also identifies other items, not involving Key Decisions that are due to be considered. Where it is known that an item will be considered in a private meeting session this is clearly shown on the Forward Plan and the reason given why it is being considered in private.
If the above timetable is impracticable, special urgency provisions are available, and a private meeting session can still go ahead in private if the executive has had agreement from the relevant Scrutiny Chair. Notice must be given setting out the reasons why a private meeting session is urgent and cannot reasonably be deferred.
A ‘’private meeting session’’ means a meeting or part of a meeting of a decision making body which is open to the public except to the extent that the public are excluded due to the confidential or exempt business to be transacted.
‘’Confidential information’’ means information provided to the Council by a Government Department on terms (however expressed) which forbid the disclosure of the information to the public or information the disclosure of which to the public is prohibited by or under any enactment of a court.
‘’Exempt information’’ comprises the descriptions of information specified in Paragraphs 1 - 7 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972 as follows: -
1. Information relating to any individual. 2. Information which is likely to reveal the identity of an individual. 3. Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information) 4. Information relating to any consultations or negotiations, or contemplated consultations or negotiations, in connection with any labour relations matter arising between the authority or a Minister of the Crown and employees of, or office holders under, the authority. 5. Information in respect of which a claim to legal professional privilege could be maintained in legal proceedings. 6. Information which reveals that the authority proposes:- (a) to give under any enactment a notice under or by virtue of which requirements are imposed on a person; or (b) to make an order or direction under any enactment. 7. Information relating to any action taken or to be taken in connection with the prevention, investigation or prosecution of crime.
If you wish to make any representations as to why the proposed private meeting should be held in public, please write to Tony Prescod, Head of Constitutional Services, Town Hall, High Road, Ilford, IG1 1DD or telephone number: 020 8708 2204 or email: [email protected] at least 7 days before the date the decision is due to be considered.
Page 14 CABINET
COUNCILLORS / PORTFOLIOS:
JAS ATHWAL (CHAIR / LEADER), ELAINE NORMAN (VICE-CHAIR / DEPUTY LEADER, CHILDREN & YOUNG PEOPLE), KAM RAI (FINANCE & SUPPORT SERVICES), MARK SANTOS (HEALTH & SOCIAL CARE), SHEILA BAIN (CIVIC PRIDE), JOHN HOWARD (ENVIRONMENT & SUSTAINABILITY), HELEN COOMB (REGENERATION, PROPERTY & PLANNING), FARAH HUSSAIN (HOUSING), AND BOB LITTLEWOOD (EMPLOYMENT, SKILLS & FAIRNESS)
Page 15 Page MAY 2017 TO AUGUST 2017 (AS AT 22.03.17)
FORWARD PLAN/NOTICE PURSUANT TO REGULATION 9 OF THE LOCAL AUTHORITIES (EXECUTIVE ARRANGEMENTS) (MEETINGS AND ACCESS TO INFORMATION) (ENGLAND) REGULATIONS 2012 IN ACCORDANCE WITH PROVISIONS OF THE “LOCAL AUTHORITIES (EXECUTIVE ARRANGEMENTS) (MEETINGS AND ACCESS TO INFORMATION) (ENGLAND) REGULATIONS 2012” WHERE AN EXEMPT/CONFIDENTIAL DECISION IS SHOWN DETAILS OF ANY REPRESENTATIONS MADE BY THE PUBLIC TO THE COUNCIL ABOUT WHY THE MATTER SHOULD BE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC WILL BE CONSIDERED AND A RESPONSE PROVIDED LEADER PORTFOLIO
Key: 1/ For Determination 2/ Recommendations Approved (subject to requisitioning process) 3/ Recommendations Approved 4/ Item Deferred 5/ Item Requisitioned
Decision to be Decision Maker / Main Consultees Status Background Key Paragraph(s) of Representations considered/contact Consideration By Information Decision Exemption/conf Decision maker / identiality Date Decision to be under Schedule Taken 12A of the Local Government Act 1972 as amended References and Cabinet Internal For Available from Yes Comments from 4 April 2017 Determination Tony Prescod, Committees Tel: 0208 708
Page 16 Page To receive references and 2204 comments from Relevant Committees (Strategy & Resources Service Committee, Children and Young People Service Committee, Health, Social Care and Civic Pride Service Committee, Neighbourhoods Service Committee, and Licensing Committee) and Audit Committee, Overview Committee and Regulatory Committee pursuant to the Terms of Reference of those Committees for response by the Cabinet/Executive. (Contact: Tony Prescod, Tel: 0208 708 2204) Forward Plan Cabinet Internal For Available from Yes 1. To agree the items 4 April 2017 Determination Tony Prescod, shown in the Cabinet Tel: 0208 708 Forward Plan/Work 2204 Programme, noting any items that will be the subject of executive decisions that are now covered by the prior- publicity requirements under the Local Authorities (Executive Arrangements) (Meetings and Access to Information) (England) Regulations 2012 to be dealt with in accordance Page 17 Page with those Regulations. 2. To agree any advisory work to be commissioned. (Contact: Tony Prescod, Tel: 0208 708 2204)
References and Cabinet Internal For Available from Yes Comments from 23 May 2017 Determination Tony Prescod, Committees Tel: 0208 708 To receive references and 2204 comments from Overview Committee, Governance & Assurance Committee, Licensing Committee and Regulatory Committee pursuant to the Terms of Reference of those Committees for response by the Cabinet/Executive. (Contact: Tony Prescod, Tel: 0208 708 2204) Forward Plan Cabinet Internal For Available from Yes 1. To agree the items 23 May 2017 Determination Tony Prescod, shown in the Cabinet Tel: 0208 708 Forward Plan/Work 2204 Programme, noting any items that will be the subject of executive decisions that are now covered by the prior- publicity requirements under the Local Authorities (Executive Arrangements) (Meetings and Access to Information) (England) Regulations 2012 to be dealt with in accordance Page 18 Page with those Regulations. 2. To agree any advisory work to be commissioned. (Contact: Tony Prescod, Tel: 0208 708 2204)
References and Cabinet Internal For Available from Yes Comments from 13 June 2017 Determination Tony Prescod, Committees Tel: 0208 708 To receive references and 2204 comments from Overview Committee, Governance & Assurance Committee, Licensing Committee and Regulatory Committee pursuant to the Terms of Reference of those Committees for response by the Cabinet/Executive. (Contact: Tony Prescod, Tel: 0208 708 2204) Forward Plan Cabinet Internal For Available from Yes 1. To agree the items 13 June 2017 Determination Tony Prescod, shown in the Cabinet Tel: 0208 708 Forward Plan/Work 2204 Programme, noting any items that will be the subject of executive decisions that are now covered by the prior- publicity requirements under the Local Authorities (Executive Arrangements) (Meetings and Access to Information) (England) Regulations 2012 to be dealt with in accordance Page 19 Page with those Regulations. 2. To agree any advisory work to be commissioned. (Contact: Tony Prescod, Tel: 0208 708 2204)
References and Cabinet Internal For Available from Yes Comments from 17 July 2017 Determination Tony Prescod, Committees Tel: 0208 708 To receive references and 2204 comments from Overview Committee, Governance & Assurance Committee, Licensing Committee and Regulatory Committee pursuant to the Terms of Reference of those Committees for response by the Cabinet/Executive. (Contact: Tony Prescod, Tel: 0208 708 2204) Forward Plan Cabinet Internal For Available from Yes 1. To agree the items 17 July 2017 Determination Tony Prescod, shown in the Cabinet Tel: 0208 708 Forward Plan/Work 2204 Programme, noting any items that will be the subject of executive decisions that are now covered by the prior- publicity requirements under the Local Authorities (Executive Arrangements) (Meetings and Access to Information) (England) Regulations 2012 to be dealt with in accordance Page 20 Page with those Regulations. 2. To agree any advisory work to be commissioned. (Contact: Tony Prescod, Tel: 0208 708 2204) CHILDREN AND YOUNG PEOPLE PORTFOLIO
Key: 1/ For Determination 2/ Recommendations Approved (subject to requisitioning process) 3/ Recommendations Approved 4/ Item Deferred 5/ Item Requisitioned
Decision to be Decision Maker / Main Consultees Status Background Key Paragraph(s) of Representations considered/contact Consideration By Information Decision Exemption/conf Decision maker / identiality Date Decision to be under Schedule Taken 12A of the Local Government Act 1972 as amended Exempt Delegated Key Cabinet Member for LBR Planning and For Available from Yes Exempt Decision - Parkhill Infant Children & Young Regeneration Determination Rupinder 3 and Junior Schools People Sandhu, Tel:
Page 21 Page Expansion: Acceptance 1 November 2016 0208 708 3061 of Second Stage Tender Acceptance of the second stage tender for the building works associated with the expansion of Parkhill Infant and Junior Schools. (Contact: Rupinder Sandhu, Tel: 0208 708 3061)
Annual Youth Justice Either the Leader, Police, Health, For Available from: Yes Plan 2016/17 Deputy Leader or Probation are statutory Determination Ruth Holmes, There is a statutory duty responsible Cabinet partners with joint Tel: 0208 708 to formulate, implement Member, as named, responsibility to 7890 and publish and Annual following the contribute to the Youth Justice Plan, which Service Committee Service. The draft plan sets out how Youth Justice meeting or by is being considered by Services in Redbridge will Cabinet / Executive these partners at the be provided and funded; Between 30 March Business Support and how the Youth Justice 2017 and 4 April Group meeting (a sub Service will be resourced 2017 group of the Redbridge and composed. It is Community Safety necessary for the Cabinet Partnership) on 9th to consider the Youth September 2016. Justice Plan 2016/17 and refer it to the full Council for approval prior to the final submission of the document to the Youth Justice Board for England and Wales. (Contact: Caroline Cutts, Tel: 0208 708 5034)
4-Borough Emergency Either the Leader, The London Boroughs For Available from Yes Duty Service Deputy Leader or of Waltham Forest, Determination Caroline Cutts, In September 2013, a responsible Cabinet Barking and Dagenham Tel: 0208 708 proposal was put to Member, as named, and Havering, LBR 5304 Page 22 Page Cabinet recommending a following the Legal, Finance, HR new four borough Service Committee Service Areas. Children’s Emergency meeting or by Duty Service across the Cabinet / Executive London Boroughs of Between 30 March Havering, Barking and 2017 and 4 April Dagenham, Waltham 2017 Forest and Redbridge. The service was to be managed by Redbridge Council on behalf of the four boroughs.
Cabinet agreed to the proposal and the new four borough service started on 1 May 2014 with a contract for 3 years. The agreement will finish in March 2017 and it is proposed that a new agreement is arranged for the four borough service to continue starting on 1 April 2017. (Contact: Caroline Cutts, Tel: 0208 708 5304) Use of surplus land at Either the Leader, Representation to be For Cabinet report Yes Aldborough Road North Deputy Leader or made to Governing Determination 12.04.16: for new special free- responsible Cabinet Body of William Torbitt Available on the school Member, as named, Primary School; Council's Cabinet at its meeting 12 following the Internal: LBR website or from April 2016 approved land Service Committee Departments Finance, Julie Aiken, Tel: at Aldborough Road North meeting or by Property, LBR Special 0208 708 3120 to be moved to non- Cabinet / Executive Schools; Neighbouring operational portfolio. Between 30 March boroughs Since then, in October, the 2017 and 4 April DfE published guidance 2017 Page 23 Page on an opportunity to bid for funding for special free school provision. An Expression of Interest was submitted by LBR, subject to a suitable site being identified to accommodate the proposed provision. The report seeks Member approval for use of surplus land at Aldborough Road as a potential site for a new special free-school by retracting the determination made by Cabinet in April 2016 in light of a suitable use being identified. (Contact: Colin Stewart, Tel: 0208 708 3378) Children's Services Either the Leader, Internal consultation For Available from Yes Capital and Building Deputy Leader or Determination Keith Mattacks, Maintenance Fund - responsible Cabinet Tel: 0208 708 Maintenance Member, as named, 3059 Programmes (Joint following the report with Overview Regeneration, Property Committee meeting & Planning Portfolio) or by To seek authority to spend Cabinet / Executive capital programme Between 8 June funding, as required by 2017 and 13 June Standing Order 125. 2017 (Contact: Keith Mattacks, Tel: 0208 708 3059) Page 24 Page FINANCE AND SUPPORT SERVICES PORTFOLIO
Key: 1/ For Determination 2/ Recommendations Approved (subject to requisitioning process) 3/ Recommendations Approved 4/ Item Deferred 5/ Item Requisitioned
Decision to be Decision Maker / Main Consultees Status Background Key Paragraph(s) of Representations considered/contact Consideration By Information Decision Exemption/conf Decision maker / identiality Date Decision to be under Schedule Taken 12A of the Local Government Act 1972 as amended Delegated Key Decision - Cabinet Member for Internal consultation For ICT Strategy Yes Award of a new Finance and Support Determination 2016-19 and Telephony Services report to
Page 25 Page Modernisation and Not before 1st July, Contracts Unified Communications 2016 Corporate Panel Contract on 23.03.16: The Council’s new ICT Available from Strategy (2016-19) defines Ian Slee, Tel: its strategic priorities to 0208 708 4001 support the delivery of the Council’s objectives.
This report sets out the actions to progress this agenda by: • updating the existing telephony infrastructure; • replacing the Council’s ageing mobile phone estate with smartphones and associated technology; • introducing new facilities to enable the organisation to work in a more flexibly.
To ensure the Council obtains best value, the new facilities will be procured through a tender process, conducted via the Government’s Crown Commercial Services (CCS) procurement framework. (Contact: Keith Dawson, Tel: 0208 708 4100)
Delegated Key Decision - Cabinet Member for Internal For IT Strategy Yes Page 26 Page Desktop Computing Finance and Support Determination 2016-19 Contract Services Cabinet Report The modernisation of Not before 1st 8.3.16. Available desktop computing February, 2017 from Lee facilities is essential to Edwards, Tel: ensure key facilities 0208 708 4100 remain ‘fit for purpose’ and aligned to the evolving needs of the organisation. To ensure the Council obtains best value, a new corporate contract will be procured through a tender process, via the Government’s Crown Commercial Services (CCS) procurement framework. (Contact: Lee Edwards, Tel: 0208 708 4100) Budgetary Control Either the Leader, Service Committees For Available from Yes Report for January 2017 Deputy Leader or Determination Dave Fonseca, To note the latest responsible Cabinet Tel: 0208 708 Revenue and Capital Member, as named, 3438 budgetary position and following the the potential year-end Service Committee variation. Where meeting or by necessary, approve in-year Cabinet / Executive budget transfers. Between 27 March (Contact: Dave Fonseca, 2017 and 4 April Tel: 0208 708 3438) 2017
Corporate Capital Either the Leader, Internal consultation For Available from Yes Maintenance Deputy Leader or and Vision RCL Determination Diane Martin, Programme 2017-18 responsible Cabinet Tel: 0208 708 To seek authority to spend Member, as named, 3880 following the Page 27 Page capital programme funding, as required by Service Committee Standing Order 125. meeting or by (Contact: Diane Martin, Tel: Cabinet / Executive 0208 708 3880) Between 28 March 2017 and 4 April 2017
Provisional Outturn Either the Leader, Internal For General Ledger Yes 2016/17 Deputy Leader or Determination reports This report sets out the responsible Cabinet available from out-turn for the financial Member, as named, Owen Sparks, year 2015/16 and requests following the Tel: 0208 708 carry forward of revenue Overview 3013 and capital budgets to Committee meeting 2016/17 if appropriate. or by (Contact: Owen Sparks, Tel: Cabinet / Executive 0208 708 3013) Between 18 May 2017 and 23 May 2017 HEALTH AND SOCIAL CARE PORTFOLIO
Key: 1/ For Determination 2/ Recommendations Approved (subject to requisitioning process) 3/ Recommendations Approved 4/ Item Deferred 5/ Item Requisitioned
Decision to be Decision Maker / Main Consultees Status Background Key Paragraph(s) of Representations considered/contact Consideration By Information Decision Exemption/conf Decision maker / identiality Date Decision to be under Schedule Taken 12A of the Local Government Act 1972 as amended Independent Health Corporate Director Pan London Local For Available from Yes Control Advocacy of Strategy Authorities Determination John Turkson, Services Framework Not before 31st Tel: 0208 708
Page 28 Page The current pan London March, 2017 2381 NHS Complaints Advocacy Service Framework Agreement ends on 31/3/2017. The report informs Members about the process undertaken by Commissioners from across the participating London boroughs to select the successful provider to deliver an Independent Health Control Advocacy Services across the participating London Boroughs for four years from 1/4/2017. (Contact: John Turkson, Tel: 0208 708 2381) Exempt Delegated Key Operational Director Internal consultation, For Available from Yes Exempt Decision - Award of of Adult Social Consultation with key Determination Aminur 3 Contract for the Services stakeholders such as Choudhury, Tel: Provision of an Not before 1st April, providers and service 0208 708 5728 Occupational Therapy 2017 users. Service in the London Borough of Redbridge for the Period 1st July 2017 to 30th June 2020 The report summarises the tender and subsequent evaluation process undertaken to determine the award of the Contract for the Provision of an
Page 29 Page Occupational Therapy Service.
It seeks agreement to award the Contract to the Provider whose tender will have been evaluated as the most economically advantageous , and enable the Director of Public Health, Adult Care and Wellbeing, on behalf of the Authority, to enter into a Contract with the Provider. (Contact: Aminur Choudhury, Tel: 0208 708 5728)
Adopting a new Health Either the Leader, Health and Wellbeing For Available from Yes and Wellbeing Strategy Deputy Leader or Board and its members; Determination Vicky Hobart, for Redbridge 2017-21 responsible Cabinet 12 week public Tel: 0208 708 Under the Health and Member, as named, consultation and 5731 Social Care Act 2012, following the Voluntary sector and Health and Welling Boards Overview partners organisations are required to produce a Committee meeting – CCG, BHRUT, NELFT, joint Health and or by CVS Wellbeing Strategy. The Cabinet / Executive new draft strategy for Between 13 July 2017-21 sets out our 2017 and 17 July vision and priority 2017 ambitions for health and social care for Redbridge 2017-21. Following a period of consultation, it will need to be formally agreed and adopted by Cabinet. (Contact: Vicky Hobart, Tel: Page 30 Page 0208 708 5731) CIVIC PRIDE PORTFOLIO
Key: 1/ For Determination 2/ Recommendations Approved (subject to requisitioning process) 3/ Recommendations Approved 4/ Item Deferred 5/ Item Requisitioned
Decision to be Decision Maker / Main Consultees Status Background Key Paragraph(s) of Representations considered/contact Consideration By Information Decision Exemption/conf Decision maker / identiality Date Decision to be under Schedule Taken 12A of the Local Government Act 1972 as amended Redbridge Community Either the Leader, Redbridge Community For Available from Yes Safety Partnership Plan Deputy Leader or Safety Partnership Determination Melanie 2017 – 2021 responsible Cabinet Board members :- Roulston, Tel:
Page 31 Page Section 5 of the Crime and Member, as named, Probation service, 0208 708 5244 Disorder Act 1998, as following the London CRC, NELFT, amended by sections 97 Service Committee Fire Service, and 98 of the Police and meeting or by Metropolitan Police Reform Act 2002, requires Cabinet / Executive Service, Redbridge Community Safety Between 27 March CCG, Redbridge Partnerships to develop a 2017 and 4 April Equalities Council, Crime and Disorder 2017 Victim Support, Strategy. The Redbridge Redbridge CVS, Public Community Safety Heath, Children and Partnership Plan (2017 – Adult social services 2021) adheres to the requirements of the Act. The current Partnership Plan (known as the Safer Redbridge Strategy 2013 - 2017) concludes on 31st March 2017 – the Redbridge Community Safety Partnership Plan (2017 – 2021) will commence on 1st April 2017 The Cabinet is recommended to endorse and refer the Redbridge Community Safety Partnership Plan 2017 – 2021 to Council for approval. (Contact: Melanie Roulston, Tel: 0208 708 5244)
Delegated Key Decision - Corporate Director Internal For Available from Yes Vision Fees & Charges of Place Determination Chris Hartgrove, (Parks & Open Spaces) Not before 27th Tel: 0208 708 The decision presents March, 2017 2894)
Page 32 Page proposals for revised fees and charges to be adopted from 1st April 2017 in order to off-set inflationary pressure on operating costs. (Contact: Chris Hartgrove, Tel: 0208 708 2894)
Delegated Key Decision: Operational Metropolitan Police, For Available from Yes Public Spaces Protection Director, Civic Pride Redbridge REO Team, Determination Order for the wards of Not before 17th Ilford BID and Members Valentines, April, 2017 of the public via an on- Clementswood and line public consultation Loxford (26 October 2016 to 4 To introduce a Public January 2017) Spaces Protection Order in accordance with The Anti- Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 to address a range of antisocial behaviour issues within the wards of Valentines, Clementswood and Loxford.
If the decision is taken, it is intended that the PSPO will come into effect on 01/05/2017 and will last for a period of three years. It would then be an offence for anyone not to comply with the Order. (Contact: John Richards, Tel: 0208 708 5029) Page 33 Page ENVIRONMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY PORTFOLIO
Key: 1/ For Determination 2/ Recommendations Approved (subject to requisitioning process) 3/ Recommendations Approved 4/ Item Deferred 5/ Item Requisitioned
Decision to be Decision Maker / Main Consultees Status Background Key Paragraph(s) of Representations considered/contact Consideration By Information Decision Exemption/conf Decision maker / identiality Date Decision to be under Schedule Taken 12A of the Local Government Act 1972 as amended Exempt Delegated Key Cabinet Member for Internal consultation For Available from Yes Exempt Decision - Provision of Environment and with Service Areas Determination Stephanie 3 Framework Agreement Sustainability (Highways and Orrell, Tel: 0208
Page 34 Page for Arboricultural and Not before 17th Housing), Legal 708 5325 Horticultural Services March, 2017 Services, Procurement from 3rd May 2017 to & Cabinet Member. 2nd May 2021 To agree to a new 4 year Framework Agreement being awarded to successful contractors, effective from 3rd May 2017 to 2nd May 2021, for the provision of a Arboricultural and Horticultural Services, to ensure the service within the borough is continued beyond the current Framework Agreement which ends on 2nd May 2017. Estimated annual cost of £400k. (Contact: Stephanie Orrell, Tel: 0208 708 5325) Crossrail (Elizabeth Line) Either the Leader, Neighbourhoods For Urban Yes Project Progress and Deputy Leader or Service Committee. Determination Integration Crossrail Urban responsible Cabinet Station improvement Scheme reports Integration Scheme Member, as named, schemes and Urban for each station Delivery (Joint Report following the Integration schemes - Available from with Regeneration, Service Committee have been developed Glen Richards, Property & Planning meeting or by by Crossrail Ltd in Tel: 0208 708 Portfolio) Cabinet / Executive liaison with LB 3670 The report provides an Between 29 March Redbridge, Network overall update of the 2017 and 4 April Rail and Transport for programming and nature 2017 London. Local of works at the 4 stations consultations with in the Borough along the residents and Crossrail route and businesses regarding notifies Members of the Urban Integration progress with localised Schemes have been led by LB Redbridge.
Page 35 Page urban realm improvements in the vicinities of those stations. It also summarises progress in exploring improved pedestrian access on the south side of Ilford Station. Various approvals relating to spend, work programming and progressing these initiatives are sought by the report. (Contact: Glen Richards, Tel: 0208 708 3670)
2017/2018 Highways Either the Leader, Neighbourhoods For Available from Yes and Transportation Deputy Leader or Service Committee Determination Cliff Woolnoth, Major Works responsible Cabinet Tel: 0208 708 Programme Member, as named, 3570 The report will inform following the Cabinet of the Highways Service Committee and Transportation major meeting or by works Programme for Cabinet / Executive 2017/2018 following the Between 29 March Budget Approval by 2017 and 4 April Council. The report will 2017 also include any changes to the externally funded programme since last considered by Cabinet. (Contact: Cliff Woolnoth, Tel: 0208 708 3570)
Approval to issue Either the Leader, Neighbourhoods For Available from No Stopping Up Orders Deputy Leader or Service Committee and Determination Jane Abraham, under the Highways Act responsible Cabinet as part of the planning Tel: 0208 708 1980 to enable the Member, as named, application process. 4614 Page 36 Page development of new following the affordable homes on Service Committee council-owned sites meeting or by The Council is currently Cabinet / Executive developing 154 new Between 29 March affordable homes on nine 2017 and 4 April sites. To enable works to 2017 progress the approved schemes at Kielder Close and Old Mill Court, stopping up orders are required to change the existing configuration of the highway.
The power to make a stopping up order under the Highways Act 1980 or the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 requires Cabinet authority, which will be sought in this report. (Contact: Jane Abraham, Tel: 0208 708 4614)
School Travel Plan Either the Leader, Overview Committee For Cabinet report No Strategy (Sustainable Deputy Leader or Determination 12th April 2016: Modes of Travel responsible Cabinet Available on the Strategy) Update Member, as named, Council's The report outlines the following the website or from updated School Travel Overview Rogan Keown, Plan Strategy (Sustainable Committee meeting Tel: 0208 708 Modes of Travel Strategy) or by 3928 document for approval as Cabinet / Executive required by s508A Between 8 June Education Act 1996. 2017 and 13 June (Contact: Hulya Ataoglu, 2017 Page 37 Page Tel: 0208 708 3695)
Our Streets - A Strategy Either the Leader, Neighbourhoods For Available from Yes for Great Deputy Leader or Service Committee and Determination Russell Ward, Neighbourhoods responsible Cabinet internal consultation. Tel: 0208 708 To agree a Strategy to Member, as named, 5511 establish a new approach following the to Street Cleaning. Overview (Contact: Russell Ward, Tel: Committee meeting 0208 708 5511) or by Cabinet / Executive Between 13 July 2017 and 17 July 2017 REGENERATION, PROPERTY AND PLANNING PORTFOLIO
Key: 1/ For Determination 2/ Recommendations Approved (subject to requisitioning process) 3/ Recommendations Approved 4/ Item Deferred 5/ Item Requisitioned
Decision to be Decision Maker / Main Consultees Status Background Key Paragraph(s) of Representations considered/contact Consideration By Information Decision Exemption/conf Decision maker / identiality Date Decision to be under Schedule Taken 12A of the Local Government Act 1972 as amended Exempt Delegated Key Cabinet Member for Internal For Available from Yes Exempt Decision - Award of Regeneration, Determination Dyfig Walters, 3 Lynton House re-model Property and Tel: 0208 708
Page 38 Page works tender Planning 3960 Award of the re-modelling Not before 23rd & build works tender for March, 2017 Lynton House including the new Redbridge Contact Centre on the ground floor and extension via the Exor Gold Framework Agreement. (Contact: Dyfig Walters, Tel: 0208 708 3960)
Crossrail (Elizabeth Line) Either the Leader, Neighbourhoods For Urban Yes Project Progress and Deputy Leader or Service Committee. Determination Integration Crossrail Urban responsible Cabinet Station improvement Scheme reports Integration Scheme Member, as named, schemes and Urban for each station Delivery (Joint Report following the Integration schemes - Available from with Environment & Service Committee have been developed Glen Richards, Sustainability Portfolio) meeting or by by Crossrail Ltd in Tel: 0208 708 The report provides an Cabinet / Executive liaison with LB 3670 Between 29 March Redbridge, Network overall update of the 2017 and 4 April Rail and Transport for programming and nature 2017 London. Local of works at the 4 stations consultations with in the Borough along the residents and Crossrail route and businesses regarding notifies Members of the Urban Integration progress with localised Schemes have been led urban realm by LB Redbridge. improvements in the vicinities of those stations. It also summarises progress in exploring improved pedestrian access on the south side of Ilford Station. Various approvals relating to spend, work Page 39 Page programming and progressing these initiatives are sought by the report. (Contact: Glen Richards, Tel: 0208 708 3670)
Loxford Hall - Budget Either the Leader, Internal consultation: For Available from Yes Part exempt approval for conversion Deputy Leader or Housing Needs, Determination Jane Abraham, 3 to provide temporary responsible Cabinet Planning, Housing Tel: 0208 708 accommodation and the Member, as named, Responsive Repairs, 4614 appointment of a following the Ward Members, Local contractor (Joint report Service Committee residents and with Housing Portfolio) meeting or by Neighbourhood Service LBR owns the Loxford Hall Cabinet / Executive Committee. building which is currently Between 29 March let to the NHS as office 2017 and 4 April space. The NHS is 2017 vacating the building at the end of March to move to new premises. The report seeks approval for a budget allocation and appointment of a contractor to convert the building into 6 self- contained flats for temporary accommodation, subject to a satisfactory planning permission. The report also seeks an increased budget allocation of £0.4m for the provision of temporary structures on the former Newbridge School site. (Contact: Jane Abraham, Page 40 Page Tel: 0208 708 4614)
Delegated Key Decision - Operational Internal consultation For Council report Yes Acceptance of tender for Director, Determination 3/3/16 and ICT procurement in Regeneration & Cabinet report - relation to the Property 5/7/16: expansion of Ilford Not before 18th Available on the County High School April, 2017 Council's To approve the website or from acceptance of the tender Lisa Starr, Tel: for the supply and 0208 708 3674 installation of ICT equipment at Ilford County High School. (Contact: Matthew Essex, Tel: 0208 708 3674)
Towards Delivery of Either the Leader, Neighbourhoods For Available from Yes Part exempt Clements Road Housing Deputy Leader or Service Committee Determination Matthew Essex, 3 Development responsible Cabinet Tel: 0208 708 Procure a design team to Member, as named, 2748 develop and submit a following the detailed planning Overview application for 17/23 & Committee meeting 22/26 Clements Road to or by convert the existing office Cabinet / Executive buildings in residential Between 8 June accommodation. 2017 and 13 June Consider and approve the 2017 final business case for establishing DEVCO and, as part of this, approve funding and delivery strategy through DEVCO and commence procurement of a building contractor. (Contact: Matthew Essex, Page 41 Page Tel: 0208 708 2748)
Children's Services Either the Leader, Internal consultation For Available from Yes Capital and Building Deputy Leader or Determination Keith Mattacks, Maintenance Fund - responsible Cabinet Tel: 0208 708 Maintenance Member, as named, 3059 Programmes (Joint following the report with Children & Overview Young People Portfolio) Committee meeting To seek authority to spend or by capital programme Cabinet / Executive funding, as required by Between 8 June Standing Order 125. 2017 and 13 June (Contact: Keith Mattacks, 2017 Tel: 0208 708 3059) HOUSING PORTFOLIO
Key: 1/ For Determination 2/ Recommendations Approved (subject to requisitioning process) 3/ Recommendations Approved 4/ Item Deferred 5/ Item Requisitioned
Decision to be Decision Maker / Main Consultees Status Background Key Paragraph(s) of Representations considered/contact Consideration By Information Decision Exemption/conf Decision maker / identiality Date Decision to be under Schedule Taken 12A of the Local Government Act 1972 as amended Exempt Delegated Key Corporate Director Strategic Procurement, Withdrawn Available from Yes Exempt Decision - Award of of Place Internal Consultation, Grant Stoddard: 3 Contracts for Housing Not before 7th Leaseholders and Tel: 0208 708
Page 42 Page Capital Programme November, 2016 Residents - Statutory 8303 2016-17 Consultation. Appointment of contractors to carry out the following contracts likely to exceed £100, 000: Controlled Entry, Gardner Close Lifts, Sunset Court Lifts, Garages and Fire Protection Work Orchard. (Contact: Grant Stoddard: Tel: 0208 708 8303)
Loxford Hall - Budget Either the Leader, Internal consultation: For Available from Yes Part exempt approval for conversion Deputy Leader or Housing Needs, Determination Jane Abraham, 3 to provide temporary responsible Cabinet Planning, Housing Tel: 0208 708 accommodation and the Member, as named, Responsive Repairs, 4614 appointment of a following the Ward Members, Local contractor (Joint report Service Committee residents and with Regeneration, meeting or by Neighbourhood Service Property & Planning Cabinet / Executive Committee. Between 29 March Portfolio) 2017 and 4 April LBR owns the Loxford Hall 2017 building which is currently let to the NHS as office space. The NHS is vacating the building at the end of March to move to new premises. The report seeks approval for a budget allocation and appointment of a contractor to convert the building into 6 self- contained flats for temporary accommodation, subject to a satisfactory planning Page 43 Page permission. The report also seeks an increased budget allocation of £0.4m for the provision of temporary structures on the former Newbridge School site. (Contact: Jane Abraham, Tel: 0208 708 4614)
Exempt - Housing Either the Leader, Resident’s Housing For Available from Yes Exempt Capital Programme Deputy Leader or Panel, Corporate Determination Grant Stoddard, 3 2017-18 responsible Cabinet Contracts Panel, Tel: 0208 708 The report will detail the Member, as named, Internal Consultation 8303 proposed work to be following the and Resident Asset undertaken through the Overview Management Group Housing Capital Committee meeting Programme in 2017-18 or by and recommends the Cabinet / Executive award of three contracts Between 18 May under a Framework for the 2017 and 23 May delivery of this work. 2017 (Contact: Ola Akinfe, Tel: 0208 708 8305) Page 44 Page EMPLOYMENT, SKILLS AND FAIRNESS PORTFOLIO
Key: 1/ For Determination 2/ Recommendations Approved (subject to requisitioning process) 3/ Recommendations Approved 4/ Item Deferred 5/ Item Requisitioned
Decision to be Decision Maker / Main Consultees Status Background Key Paragraph(s) of Representations considered/contact Consideration By Information Decision Exemption/conf Decision maker / identiality Date Decision to be under Schedule Taken 12A of the Local Government Act 1972 as amended Page 45 Page Agenda Item 7 Cabinet Meeting Date Classification 04 April 2017 Public
From Cabinet Member for Finance & Support Services to the Cabinet
Relevant Service Committee Title Of Report All Service Committees Budgetary Control Report for January 2017
1. Executive Summary
1.1 This report sets out the Authority’s financial performance to 31 January 2017 and the forecast outturn for 2016/17.
2. Recommendations
The Cabinet is recommended to:-
2.1 Note the projected overspend of £5.249m on the General Fund revenue budget.
2.2 Note management action and freeze on non essential expenditure is being taken to ensure that all actions plans and alternative savings are implemented, and expenditure minimised as far as possible by 31 March.
2.3 Note the balanced financial position of the DSG budget.
2.4 Note the projected underspend of £0.681m on the HRA revenue budget.
2.5 Approve the capital programme slippage totalling £7.514m into future years and an underspend of £0.399m, as detailed in paragraph 13.5.
2.6 To approve the substitute (Blue) savings summarised by directorate in the table below and set out in detail at Appendix A.
Directorate 2016/17 £m People (3.013) Resources (0.444) Strategy (0.001) Transformation (0.808) Total (4.266)
2.7 These have been achieved largely through a combination of delaying non-essential expenditure, vacancy management and the use of one off resources. This includes the implementation of the Adults Action Plan.
THE DECISIONS PROPOSED IN THE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THIS REPORT MAY BE REQUISITIONED
Contact Point: Name: Councillor Rai Position: Cabinet Member for Finance and Support Services Telephone: 0208 708 2020 E-mail: [email protected]
Page 46 3. Background 3.1 Budgetary control reports are presented to Cabinet so that the Council’s revenue and capital programmes can be monitored. It is essential that frequent monitoring takes place in order for the Council’s financial resources to be properly controlled.
3.2 Performance is compared with the 2016/17 budget as agreed by Council at its meeting on 3 March 2016. The level of funding available to the Council will fall in subsequent years, so the level of spending envisaged in the current 2016/17 budget is not sustainable in future.
3.3 In accordance with Financial Regulation 127, an Action Plan will be produced by officers and presented to Cabinet where it appears that officers cannot prevent an overspend from occurring.
3.4 This report highlights the main risks and issues that are being addressed by Corporate Directors to maintain expenditure within the approved revenue budget and capital programme. It also provides a summary of progress in delivering savings carried forward from 2015/16 and those due to be delivered in 2016/17. Where these actions require the virement of budgets, these will be presented to Cabinet for approval in accordance with financial regulations.
4. Summary Position
4.1 The table below represents the forecast outturn position as at 31 January 2017.
Table 1: Summary
Current Period 9 Forecast Movement Forecast RAG Period 10 £m £m £m status over / over / (under) over / (under) (under) General Fund Revenue 4.043 5.249 1.206 Red Housing Revenue Account (0.432) (0.681) (0.249) Green Dedicated Schools Grant - - - Green Capital Programme (6.108) (7.514) (7.514 ) Green
4.2 Section 5 sets out the summary position for the General Fund and in section 14 for the capital programme. The increase in the adverse variance on the revenue budget is due to the additional pressures being identified in: Children and Young People £1.539m offset to some extent by a reduced overspend position in Health and Social Services Integration (£0.301m) and Strategy (£0.032m).
4.3 Year-end projected variances are classified as red or amber to enable Members to identify areas of greatest concern. The classification is based on the following: projected overspend in excess of £0.100m is shown as amber; projected overspend in excess of either £1m or 20% of the gross service area budget is shown as red.
4.4 The variance on Capital is due to slippage this has been classified as green. This means however, that some projects will not be delivered to plan, with the associated benefits delayed, whilst other projects will be able to contain delays within the lifecycle of the project and complete on schedule.
Page 47
5. Revenue
5.1 Table 2 below shows the summary outturn position. Further details are provided in sections 6 to 9.
Table 2: General Fund Summary
Full Year Budget Total Latest Period 9 Direction of Directorate Forecast Year Forecast Variance Travel Variance
£m £m £m £m £m People 93.326 98.608 5.281 4.043 1.238 Place 55.149 55.149 - - - Resources 16.073 16.073 - - - Strategy 3.865 3.834 (0.032) - (0.032) Directorate Net Budget 168.414 173.664 5.249 4.043 1.206 Corporate items 13.049 13.049 - - - Total General Fund 181.463 186.713 5.249 4.043 1.206
6. People
Children and Young People
6.1 Table 3 below sets out, in summary the position of the Children and Young People’s Service. As can be seen from the table the Service is currently forecasting a £4.539m overspend.
Table 3: Children and Young People – Revenue Budget
Full Year Budget Total Latest Period 9 Direction of Department Forecast Year Forecast Variance Travel Variance
£m £m £m £m £m Children & Families 30.525 35.216 4.691 3.168 1.5 23 Standards Achievement and Inclusion 5.009 4.858 (0.152) (0.168 ) (0.016 ) Department Net Budget 35.534 40.074 4.539 3.000 1.539
6.2 Children’s and Young People’s Department is currently forecasting an approximate overspend of £5.739m relating to loss of funding, salary and agency costs, specialist residential placements and previously agreed savings.
6.3 Initial mitigations of £1.200m as a result of using one off balances, funding streams and suspending revenue contributions to the building maintinence fund reduces the forecast overspend position to £4.539m.
6.4. There is a projected overspend of £1.077m as a result a funding adjustment following a review linked to Dedicated Schools Grant reforms. Following a detailed review it is projected that financial pressures arising from Care Packages, Leaving Care budgets, No recourse to Public Funds and placements has increased by a further £1.572m to £3.372m. This movement is largely due to:
Page 48 6.4.1. The leaving care element of this is £0.250m relating to the Barnardo’s contract. The budget for the contract was set at 2014/15 levels of activity.
6.4.2. There is a £0.300m movement on placements primarily as a result of a high cost secure accommodation placement and 7 new residential placements including three with a higher weekly rate than the average rate for the year to date. Overall the average weekly cost for placements has increased throughout the financial year.
6.4.3. There is a £0.200m movement for Fostering and Adoption after the forecast was reviewed and refined.
6.4.4. Previous allocation of 2016/17 growth has been moved from the placements budget and allocated to Leaving Care; resulting in a pressure of £0.720m.
6.5 Vacancies within the frontline social care teams are met through agency staff. The level of agency staff determines the current spending levels which are considerably in excess of the budget leading to a year end projected overspend of approximately £1.474m. Management action to recruit permanent social workers is continuing and has increased the level of recruitment success.
6.6 A shortfall on previously agreed savings results in a forecast overspend of £0.672m and is detailed at Appendix A.
6.7 The above budget pressures are partly offset by the financial benefit of the re- alignment of budgets in the Early Years which is projected to be approximately (£0.673m) by year end.
6.8 A number of de-minimums projected underspends across Children Services reduces the net position by approximately (£0.183m).
6.9 An Action Plan is being formulated by the Directorate to reduce the overspend position to address the ongoing implications. A detailed review of all placements and salary costs is currently being undertaken. Reflected in the forecast position are the results of managed vacancies and deferring expenditure. This has resulted in approximately £0.350m reduction in expenditure throughout the year.
6.10 Progress on the Council freeze on spend as advised by the Corporate Director of Resources may also lead to further mitigation of the pressures above.
6.11 The DSG is forecasting a balanced outturn position. The working budget for the DSG, after adjustments by the Department for Education (DfE) including carry forward DSG from 2015/16, is £229m. The DSG funds the Schools’ Delegated Budgets and other school related prescribed services managed by the Local Authority.
Health & Social Services Integration
6.12 Table 4 below sets out, in summary the position of the Health and Social Integration Services. The Service is currently forecasting a budget pressure of £0.742m against a net budget of £57.792m, subject to the assumptions contained in the report.
Page 49 Table 4: Health and Social Services - Revenue Budget
Full Year Budget Total Latest Period 9 Direction Department Forecast Year Forecast Variance of Travel Variance
£m £m £m £m £m Adult Social Services 57.792 58.534 0.742 1.043 (0.301 ) Public Health - - - - - Department Net Budget 57.792 58.534 0.742 1.043 (0.301)
6.13 The overall position is that the service is forecasting a budget pressure of £0.742m against a net controllable budget of £57.792m. This compares to a budget pressure of £1.043m at Period 9, which represents an improvement of £0.301m. This is mainly due an improvement in the HASS financial position of £0.300m arising largely from reduced forecast for Learning Disability Supported Living cost and agreement reached for funding of Community Equipment costs through Better Care Fund DFG resources.
6.14 The Action Plan was targeted to deliver £3.205m of savings when approved by Cabinet in October 2016. The latest forecast of savings against the Action Plan is £3.053m, which represents a shortfall of £0.152m on the original target. The position has, however, improved since Period 9 by £0.064m, due mainly to increased savings on Community Equipment.
6.15 The Action Plan will continue to be progressed over the remaining two months of the year and all efforts made to reduce the current level of overspend, though given the scale of the budget pressures and the limited number of months remaining, it is unlikely that the budget position will be brought back in line with budget at year end.
6.16 Allowing for the mainly one off impact of the Action Plan the underlying gross overspend position is £3.795m. A strategic review of the 2017/18 budget will be undertaken in the next two months by the directorate Management Team to ensure that the budget is soundly based and align likely budget resources to detailed budgets. A review will also be undertaken of client data and future information requirements, to ensure that information on which forecasts are being made and decisions actioned is as robust as possible.
Page 50 7. Place
7.1 Table 5 below sets out, in summary the position of the Place Directorate. As can be seen from the table the Directorate is currently forecasting a balanced outturn position.
Table 5: Place – Revenue Budget
Full Year Budget Total Latest Period 9 Direction Department Forecast Year Forecast Variance of Travel Variance
£m £m £m £m £m Civic Pride 29.554 28.814 (0.740) (0.690) (0.050) Director of Place 0.353 0.353 - - - Housing - General Fund 9.641 10.127 0.486 0.097 0.389 Leisure Client 11.981 11.981 - - - Regeneration & Property 3.620 3.874 0.254 0.593 (0.339) Directorate Net Budget 55.149 55.149 - - -
7.2 The Place Directorate is forecasting a balanced outturn position, however there are known pressures and risks of £1.180m. This has reduced by £0.104m from Period 9. These pressures are being managed in 2016/17 by service reserves and underspends across the service resulting in a balanced outturn position.
7.3 Civic Pride are reporting a forecast underspend at year end of £0.740m against the budget of £29.554m this is an increase of £0.050m compared to December resulting from additional income from parking and footway crossings. There has been no change to the previous reported position for the other services within this division.
7.4 The Housing General Fund is reporting a forecast overspend of £0.486m. This is an increase of £0.285m compared to December and is due to increases in the nightly charge rates that have been agreed for temporary accommodation. The additional £0.104m does not reflect any movement in the underlying variance but less call being required on one off resources as discussed above.
7.5 Pressures continue to exist throughout the Regeneration, Property & Planning department and particularly within Estates & Asset Management (lower than budgeted income from rents and charges), Corporate Landlord implementation and Planning & Building Control (higher than expected costs incurred in completing the Local Plan, costs of agency workers covering vacant posts and unachieved savings as a result of delays in delivery of the CAP programme).
7.6 The existing pressures are being mitigated in part through savings in staffing budgets as a result of longstanding vacancies. Beyond this, budgets are being tightly managed to further reduce spend and use is being made of reserves following a review of historically ring-fenced funds.
7.7 The direction of travel is positive and it is currently anticipated that the department will broadly balance with the exception of the costs of the Corporate Landlord programme.
7.8 Mitigations as a result of using one off resources reduces the forecast overspend for Temporary Accommodation and Regeneration & Property to a balanced outturn position. A comprehensive review of Temporary Accommodation is being undertaken by the Directorate to sustainably manage the ongoing service implications.
Page 51
8. Resources
8.1 Table 6 below sets out, in summary the position of the Resources Directorate. The Directorate is currently forecasting a balanced outturn position.
Table 6: Resources - Revenue Budget
Full Year Budget Total Latest Period 9 Direction Department Forecast Year Forecast Variance of Travel Variance £m £m £m £m £m Audit 0.656 0.656 - - - Finance 2.807 2.807 - - - Human Resources 2.040 2.040 - - - IT 2.562 2.562 - - - Legal & Constitutional Services 3.037 3.037 - - - Revenues & Benefits & Customer Services 4.970 4.970 - - - Directorate Net Budget 16.073 16.073 - - -
8.2 Housing Benefit budgets (£150m) are by nature highly volatile and are closely monitored on a four weekly basis. It should be noted that a reduction of 0.5% results in loss of subsidy in excess of £0.500m.
8.3 The January position on Housing Benefit (HB) budgets highlights an increasing pattern of overspend within this area, in particular relating to over payments on private tenants. This loss of HB Subsidy arises in the main for two reasons. Firstly, an initiative implemented by the Department for Work & Pensions (DWP) under the heading of “Real Time Information”, compares HB claims with details held by HMRC records to identify cases where HB may have been overpaid. This aims to ensure that benefit payments are based on the most up to date information and identifies fraud. We are obliged to investigate all such items, resulting in our identifying overpayments of HB with a consequent reduction in subsidy from the standard 100% to just 40%. Secondly, a loss of subsidy has arisen, impacting in 2016/17 only, from overpayments relating to an organised operation (Operation Rhino) of fraudulent claims identified by the Council.
8.4 At this stage although balanced year-end projection is being reported for the HB budget, has a pressure in the region of £0.350m is anticipated at year end, which will be met from specific one-off reserves set aside to cover such risks.
9. Strategy
9.1 The Directorate is currently forecasting an underspend of £0.032m. This comprises of a forecast underspend within salaries and the Healthwatch contract set against an underachievement of design income.
Page 52 Table 7: Strategy – Revenue Budget
Full Year Budget Total Latest Period 9 Direction Department Forecast Year Forecast Variance of Travel Variance
£m £m £m £m £m Communications 0.486 0.508 0.023 - 0.023 Corporate Director of Strategy 0.133 0.153 0.020 - 0.020 Strategy & Performance 2.348 2.274 (0.075) - (0.075) Transformation Team 0.469 0.469 - - - Chief Executive 0.430 0.430 - - - Directorate Net Budget 3.865 3.834 (0.032) - (0.032)
Savings Plans
Table 8: 2016/17 – Current Savings Position
Table 9: Current Savings Position month on month movement
Replacement Red Amber Green Savings Total Identified
£m % £m % £m % £m % £m % January (0.824) 5.0 (1.359) 8.3 (9.882) 60.5 (4.266) 26.1 (16.331) 100 December (4.966) 30.4 (1.409) 8.6 (9.956) 61.0 - - (16.331) 100 Movement (4.142) 25.4 (0.050) 0.3 (0.074) 0.5 4.266 - (4.266) -
Full details with commentary is provided at Appendix A.
Page 53 9.2 Budget savings have been incorporated within each Directorate’s base budget. To enable Members to quickly identify areas of greatest concern, savings are classified as follows:
• Red – savings which are having difficulty achieving delivery plan milestones or are otherwise an area of concern;
• Amber – savings which are yet to be delivered, but are on track;
• Green – savings that have been delivered and;
• Blue – where an approved saving has been substituted for an alternative with the substitute saving detailed (one off/ongoing) for approval.
9.3 As set out in Appendix A, as at the end of January, £0.824m (Children and Young People £0.672 and Health and Social Services Integration £0.152m) of savings are classified as ‘red’ and £1.359m are classified as ‘amber’ and £9.882m of savings have been identified as delivered. The remainder £4.266m of savings have been identified as ‘replacement savings’ . This is summarised in table 9 above, which also shows the movement since November.
9.4 ‘Replacement savings’ are one-off savings and are used to substitute those classified as ‘red’ savings’.
9.5 It is expected that the savings currently projected as ‘amber’ is likely to be delivered by the year-end. If not, the projected overspend is likely to increase accordingly.
9.6 The financial impact of the RED rated savings items are reflected in the relevant service forecasts.
10. Housing Revenue Account
10.1 The Housing Revenue Account is reporting a forecast underspend at year end of £0.681m against a balanced budget. This is an increase of £0.249m compared to the position reported in December. The previously reported underspend primarily relates to the external painting programme within repairs and maintenance which is a demand led budget.
10.2 Housing Management are forecasting an underspend of £1.252m a reduction of £0.298m compared to December. The movement is a result of Special services reviewing and realigning their budgets and reductions in the forecast utilities budgets.
11. Collection Fund - Council Tax and Business Rates
11.1 The amount of the 2016/17 Council Tax collected at the end of January was 92.87% against a target of 93.10%. The amount of Business Rates collected by the end of January was 90.81% compared to the target of 90.80%.
12. Central Contingency
12.1 A central contingency of £3.000m is held to meet the impact of potential in year pressures that could arise during 2016/17. At this stage, there is no call on the central contingency, however the forecast outturn revenue overspend of £5.249m is in excess of the £3.000m contingency.
Page 54 13. Capital
13.1 The original Capital Programme for 2016/17 approved in March 2016 was £94.913m. Net reductions to the budget within the year to-date that have been reported previously total £5.765m.
13.2 Two additional changes are reported during Period 10 totalling £0.062m. At Period 10, the revised budget is £89.210m with a forecast outturn of £81.297m. The summary position at Period 10 is set out in table 10 below and shows a total variance of £7.913m at year end with slippage totalling £7.514m. Full details of all changes for the period are given below.
Table 10: 2016/17 Capital Programme Summary - Forecast compared to Revised Budget
Budget Variance Breakdown Actual Latest (Slippage)/ (Underspend) Total Directorate Original Revised Spend Forecast Accelerated / overspend Forecast Budget Budget Spend Variance Variation £m £m £m £m £m £m £m People 0.621 1.088 0.532 0.638 (0.450) - (0.450) Place 67.295 60.341 57.442 55.711 (4.588) (0.042) (4.630) Resources 4.896 6.624 1.625 5.124 (1.500) - (1.500) Strategy - 1.394 0.000 0.918 (0.476) - (0.476) Total General Fund 72.812 69.447 59.599 62.391 (7.014) (0.042) (7.056) Place (HRA) 22.101 19.763 16.862 18.906 (0.500) (0.357) (0.857) Total Capital 94.913 89.210 76.461 81.297 (7.514) (0.399) (7.913) Programme
Further details can be found at Appendix B
Budget Revisions during the current period
13.3 Additional external grants totalling £0.062m have been secured from Transport for London during Period 10 which will increase the work being delivered on two Place projects. Table 10 above includes the increases within the revised budgets. Details are shown in Table 11 below.
Table 11: Budget Additions during the Period 10
Directorate 2016/17 £m Revised Budget at Period 9 89.148 Revisions in Period 10 Refurbishment of Bridges 0.050 Place Transport and Traffic Management 0.012 Total Revisions in Period 10 0.062 Revised Budget for 2016/17 89.210
13.4 It is recommended that the Capital Programme budget for Place is increased by £0.062m funded by the additional grant.
Forecast Outturn for the Year
13.5 The forecast outturn for the year at period 10 is £81.297m with a total net variance of £7.913m from the revised budget. The major variances identified during period 10 are shown in table 12 below:
Page 55
Table 12: Outturn Variances identified in Period 10
Directorate Outturn Variances in Period 10 2016/17 £m Health & Social Care Adult Social Services Systems Development (0.450) Place Children's & Young People’s Programme (4.336) Section 106 Highways Schemes (0.252) Corporate Building Maintenance (0.042) Resources IT Modernisation (1.500) Strategy Smart Programme (0.511) Customer Access Programme 0.035 Place - HRA Existing Social Housing Stock (0.357) New Developments on HRA Sites (0.500) Total Revisions in Period 10 (7.913)
13.6 Health & Social Care - The Adult Social Services Systems Development project is now subject to a longer implementation timescale than initially anticipated and will not take place during 2016/17. It is anticipated that £0.450m will be required during 2017/18.
13.7 Place – Additional variances reported during this period, total £4.630m, across a number of projects. Detail explanations are given below;
• Children’s and Young People programme are reporting additional variances totalling £4.336m across 7 projects;
• Two Expansion projects, at Ilford and Woodford County High schools, have not had works accelerated at the level anticipated previously and therefore 2016/17 budgets totalling £3.389m will now be required in 2017/18. The projects are still expected to be completed by July 2017.
• A final decision is required before work on the relocation of the Pupil Referral Unit can begin. The 2016/17 budget of £0.348m will be required in 2017/18 to allow this project to continue.
• Asbestos has been identified on the site of the Al-Noor Primary School which has delayed works totalling £0.366m being completed in the current year. These works will now be carried out in 2017/18 once the asbestos has been removed.
• Profiled spend on three other projects, Oaks High School, Hatton Special School and the Schools Roof & Maintenance Programme, have been amended slightly in line with anticipated delivery. This will re-profile £0.233m from 2016/17 into 2017/18.
• A number of Section 106 funded Highways schemes totalling £0.252m are now due to be delivered in 2017/18 following delays with consultation/approvals which has resulted in the majority of the schemes not progressing. It is suggested that these resources are carried forward into 2017/18 and made available to fund these capital schemes.
Page 56
• The Corporate Building Maintenance programme is forecast to underspend by £0.042m as a smaller number of projects have been identified during 2016/17 compared to plan.
13.8 Resources - There are a number of IT modernisation projects included within the capital programme. These include areas such as the Endpoint Computing Refresh, Data Centre Cloud Migration, Server and Storage and Telephone Modernisation. Following the IT Review some of these projects will not now be progressing in 2016/17. It is anticipated that there will be slippage of around £1.500m into 2017/18.
13.9 Strategy - The two Council-wide transformational projects, Smart Programme and Customer Access Programme are linked to the IT Modernisation programme and have also seen delivery deadlines adjusted in line with the requirements of the IT review. Work totalling £0.476m across the two projects will now be delivered during 2017/18.
13.10 Place HRA – Additional variances reported during this period, total £0.857m, across two programmes. Detail explanations are given below;
• There has been no call on the 2016/17 Contingency budget held to contain unplanned variations within the programme and therefore the budget of £0.357m can be removed from the programme at year end.
• The New Developments on HRA Sites programme has delayed the start on a number of sites due to various issues with site conditions, pre-development and detailed designs to meet specific requirements and delays with planning. It is estimated that £0.500m of expenditure on the programme will be re- profiled into 2017/18.
13.11 The actual spend across the whole programme up to period 10 is £76.461m, including commitments raised, and represents 94% of the total spend forecast at year end. During the period a number obsolete purchase orders totalling £7.751m have been removed from the system as part of the year-end processes. At period 10 commitments raised and outstanding total £22.745m. Some of these commitments are due to be incurred in future years and therefore will not be included within this year’s outturn.
14. Risk Analysis
14.1 Table 13 below sets out the risks that were identified in the 2016/17 budget report and sets out a current assessment of each.
Page 57 Table 13: Risks
Description Current Assessment Delivery of Savings The budget and Medium Term Financial Strategy reflects the savings as a result of a number of transformation, efficiency measures and service reductions, which in some cases have been calculated based on indicative plans. In order to maintain a balanced budget any under achievement of savings will be will require compensating saving. Income Uncertainties Collection performance for both Council Tax and Business Rates remain favourable. Adult Social Services Given the v olatile nature of the service drivers this remains a risk area. Children’s Services Uncertainties remain around volatility of new obligations, (non-schools) client numbers and placement costs. Inflation Any inflationary increases above assumptions in t he MTFS will result in a budget pressure. Capital Programme Further reviews of the programme may require virements between schemes to ensure priorities are delivered. Interest Rates Fluctuations in interest rates remain uncertain. Any changes to interest rates will impact on both borrowing and lending.
15. Conclusion
15.1 As highlighted in the report the authority is projecting an overspend of £5.249m and has significant pressures and risks that need to be carefully managed in order to minimise expenditure at the year-end. In addition the approved savings relating to 2016/17 will be carefully monitored to ensure that they are delivered both in this year and going forward.
15.2 There is an expectation that Corporate Directors manage expenditure within their Directorate service budgets and deliver all agreed savings or implement alternative savings proposals. This includes taking mitigating action, such as minimising expenditure, in order to manage any pressures that may materialise.
15.3 A spending freeze has been implemented for all non essential expenditure across the business. This includes a critical review of agency spend, freeze on recruitment, delay all other non-essential expenditure to help manage the forecast overspend of £5.249m.
16. Fairness Implications, including Equality and Diversity
16.1 Equality Impact Assessments are carried out to establish whether changes proposed to existing and/or new policies, services or decision outcomes are likely to have an impact, either negative or positive, on groups with ‘protected’ characteristic status as defined by the Equalities Act 2010.
16.2 This report sets out the financial performance of the Authority and does not propose any changes to approved policies, services or decision outcomes. Performance is reported in relation to the 2016/17 Budget, which was agreed by Council on 3 March 2016. All budget options that formed part of this budget were subject to an Equality Impact Screening Assessment and where appropriate a full Equality Impact Assessment.
Page 58 17. Financial Implications
17.1 The financial implications are set out in the main body of this report.
18. Legal Implications
18.1 The regular reporting of budgetary control represents good financial practice and accords with the Council’s Financial Standing Orders, especially Standing orders 128 and 129.
19. Background Papers
19.1 None.
Page 59 Appendix A
PERIOD 10 - DECEMBER 2016 2016/17 SAVINGS TRACKER Directorate Red Amber Green Replacement Total Savings identified
£m £m £m £m £m People (0.824) (1.254) (2.978) (3.013) (8.069)
Place - (0.075) (3.441) - (3.516)
Resources - - (3.416) (0.444) (3.860) Page 60 Page Strategy - (0.030) (0.047) (0.001) (0.078)
Directorate Savings (0.824) (1.359) (9.882) (3.458) (15.523)
Transformation - - - (0.808) (0.808)
Total Savings (0.824) (1.359) (9.882) (4.266) (16.331)
RAG Status as % of Savings Total 5.0% 8.3% 60.5% 26.1% Appendix A - Continued
2016/17 Savings Reference No: Service Area Description of Saving: RED AMBER GREEN REPLACEMENT SAVINGS Total 2016/17 IDENTIFIED
£m £m £m £m £m Children & Young People Previously Achieved and Reported - - (1.342) - (1.342) 14-15 CHS301 Children and Families and Standards, Service Transformation - Net Change In Previously Approved Saving (0.373) - - - (0.373) Achievement and Inclusion 15-16 CHS304 Children and Families and Standards, Cross Cluster Data Handling - - (0.050) (0.050) Achievement and Inclusion 15-16 CHS305 Education Inclusion Review and Re-alignment of Special Needs Transport (0.225) - - - (0.225)
16-17 RSS-BSA301 Transformation - Cross Cutting Technical and Core Business Support Review (0.074) (0.074) 16/17RSS-BSA302 Transformation - Cross Cutting Outbound and Incoming Post Review - (0.037) - - (0.037)
16/17TRA301 Transformation - Cross Cutting Customer Access Programme Transformation Initiative - (0.014) - - (0.014) Adult Social Care Adult Social Services Previously achieved and reported - - (1.268) - (1.268) 14-15 ASS301 Adult Social Services Social Care Funding From Health Services - - - (1.760) (1.760)
14-15 ASS303 Adult Social Services Service Delivery Review and Consolidation - - - (1.105) (1.105) Page 61 Page 14-15 ASS306 Adult Social Services Development of Mental Health Supported Living - (0.050) - (0.050) 16/17ASS301 Adult Social Services Community Meals - Remove Council Subsidy - (0.103) - (0.103)
16/17ASS302 Adult Social Services Recover Learning and Development Training Costs - - (0.197) - (0.197)
16/17ASS303 Adult Social Services Redesign of Systems and Use of Technology (0.152) - - (0.098) (0.250)
16/17ASS306 Adult Social Services Review Assessment of Need for Care Packages - (1.203) - - (1.203)
16/17RSS-BSA302 Transformation - Cross Cutting Outbound and Incoming Post Review - (0.018) - (0.018)
PEOPLE - Total Savings (0.824) (1.254) (2.978) (3.013) (8.069) Leisure Leisure Previously achieved and reported - - (0.383) (0.383) 15-16 LEI305 Leisure Review of Vision, Library, Culture, Heritage and Commercial Services - - (0.190) (0.190)
Civic Pride Civic Pride Previously Achieved and Reported - - (1.612) - (1.612)
14-15 CMS304 Civic Pride Increased Efficiencies and Income Generation - - (0.096) - (0.096)
14-15 PLN302 Civic Pride Reduction in Office Management Costs and Contingency Reserve - - (0.017) - (0.017)
14-15 PLN303 Civic Pride Inward Investment and Planning, Policy & Environment Revenue - - (0.049) - (0.049) Reductions 14-15 HOU301 Civic Pride Efficiency Savings - - (0.017) - (0.017) Appendix A - Continued
2016/17 Savings Reference No: Service Area Description of Saving: RED AMBER GREEN REPLACEMENT SAVINGS Total 2016/17 IDENTIFIED
£m £m £m £m £m 15-16 HCL302 Civic Pride Review of Members and Officers Parking Arrangements and the - - (0.133) - (0.133) Expansion of CCTV Enforcement
15-16 HCL305 Civic Pride New Roads and Street Works Act (NRSWA) 1991 - - (0.050) - (0.050)
15-16 HSG303 Civic Pride Efficiency Savings - - (0.017) - (0.017)
16/17COM302 Civic Pride Community Safety & Enforcement - Increase Income - - (0.050) - (0.050)
16/17COM303 Civic Pride Property Licensing Fee Recovery of Costs for Housing Enforcement - - (0.050) - (0.050)
16/17COM304 Civic Pride Efficiencies in the Home Improvement Team - - (0.025) - (0.025)
16/17RSS-BSA302 Transformation - Cross Cutting Outbound and Incoming Post Review - - (0.105) - (0.105)
16/17RSS-MKT301 Transformation - Cross Cutting Rationalisation of Marketing and Communications spend across the - - (0.006) - (0.006) Council by 30%
Page 62 Page 16/17TRA301 Transformation - Cross Cutting Customer Access Programme Transformation Initiative - - (0.125) - (0.125)
Housing Housing Previously Achieved and Reported - - (0.024) - (0.024) 15-16 HSG303 Housing Efficiency Savings - - (0.007) - (0.007)
Regeneration & Property Regeneration and Property Previously Achieved and Reported - - (0.080) (0.080) 14-15 PRO304 Regeneration and Property Reduction in Council Office Occupancy and Associated Costs - - (0.200) - (0.200)
15-16 HSG303 Regeneration and Property Efficiency Savings - - (0.028) - (0.028) Appendix A - Continued
2016/17 Savings Reference No: Service Area Description of Saving: RED AMBER GREEN REPLACEMENT SAVINGS Total 2016/17 IDENTIFIED
£m £m £m £m £m 16/17PLN301 Regeneration and Property Work Specifically for HRA Schemes - - (0.035) - (0.035)
16/17PLN302 Regeneration and Property Modernisation and Commercialisation of Planning Services - (0.075) - - (0.075)
16/17PLN303 Regeneration and Property Capitalisation of Salaries of Staff Working on Capital - - (0.050) - (0.050)
16/17RSS-BSA302 Transformation - Cross Cutting Outbound and Incoming Post Review - - (0.031) - (0.031)
16/17TRA301 Transformation - Cross Cutting Customer Access Programme Transformation Initiative - - (0.061) - (0.061)
PLACE - Total Savings - (0.075) (3.441) - (3.516) Audit Audit Previously Achieved and Reported - - (0.015) - (0.015) Finance
Page 63 Page Finance Previously Achieved and Reported - - (0.118) - (0.118) 16/17RSS-BSA302 Transformation - Cross Cutting Outbound and Incoming Post Review - - - (0.005) (0.005) 16/17RSS-BSA301 Transformation - Cross Cutting Technical and Core Business Support Review - - - - - HR HR Previously Achieved and Reported - - (0.043) - (0.043) 16/17RSS-BSA302 Transformation - Cross Cutting Outbound and Incoming Post Review - - - (0.013) (0.013)
IT IT Previously Achieved and Reported - - (0.127) - (0.127) 15-16 ICT301 IT ICT Software Review - - (0.030) - (0.030)
15-16 ICT302 IT Telecommunications Review - - - (0.100) (0.100)
16/17RSS-BSA302 Transformation - Cross Cutting Outbound and Incoming Post Review - - - (0.001) (0.001) Appendix A - Continued
2016/17 Savings Reference No: Service Area Description of Saving: RED AMBER GREEN REPLACEMENT SAVINGS Total 2016/17 IDENTIFIED
£m £m £m £m £m Legal Legal Previously Achieved and Reported - - (0.227) - (0.227)
16/17RSS-LCS301 Legal External Counsel and External Solicitor Spend Reduction - - - (0.050) (0.050)
16/17RSS-BSA302 Transformation - Cross Cutting Outbound and Incoming Post Review - - - (0.057) (0.057)
Revenue and Benefits and Customer Services Transformation - Cross Cutting Previously Achieved and Reported - - (0.025) - (0.025) 16/17RSS-BSA302 Transformation - Cross Cutting Outbound and Incoming Post Review - - - (0.118) (0.118)
16/17RSS-FIN301 Transformation - Cross Cutting Integrated Finance Service Provision - - - - - 16/17TRA301 Transformation - Cross Cutting Customer Access Programme Transformation Initiative - - - (0.100) (0.100)
Corporate Finance Previously Achieved and Reported - - (2.831) - (2.831) RESOURCES - Total Savings - - (3.416) (0.444) (3.860) Strategy & Performance
Page 64 Page Strategy & Performance Previously Achieved and Reported - - (0.045) - (0.045) 16/17RSS-MKT302 Strategy & Performance Income from Advertising, Sponsorship and Marketing Opportunities - (0.030) - - (0.030)
16/17RSS-BSA302 Transformation - Cross Cutting Outbound and Incoming Post Review - - - (0.001) (0.001)
16/17RSS-MKT301 Transformation - Cross Cutting Previously Achieved and Reported - (0.002) - (0.002) STRATEGY - Total Savings - (0.030) (0.047) (0.001) (0.078) 16/17LEA301 Transformation - Cross Cutting Customer Access - Telephone Rationalisation Project - - - (0.155) (0.155) 16/17LEA302 Transformation - Cross Cutting Customer Access - Face to Face Rationalisation Project - - - (0.153) (0.153)
16/17TRA304 Transformation - Cross Cutting Procurement and Contract re-negotiations - - - (0.500) (0.500)
TRANSFORMATION - Total Savings - - - (0.808) (0.808) OVERALL TOTAL OF ALL SAVINGS (0.824) (1.359) (9.882) (4.266) (16.331) APPENDIX B 2016/17 Capital Programme Revised Latest (Slippage) / (Underspend)/ Total Budget Forecast Accelerated Overspend Forecast Spend Variation Variation £m £m £m £m £m
Health & Social Care - Adult Social Service System Development 1.088 0.638 (0.450) - (0.450) Total Health & Social Care 1.088 0.638 (0.450) - (0.450)
Place (excluding HRA) - Mayfield School Design & Technology Block 0.075 0.075 - - - - Woodbridge High School 3.741 3.741 - - - - Ilford County High School 8.336 7.100 (1.236) - (1.236) - Woodford County High School 7.253 5.100 (2.153) - (2.153) - Gordon Infant School 1.900 1.900 - - - - South Park Primary School 0.750 0.750 - - - - Redbridge Primary School 1.549 1.549 - - - - Hatton School 0.571 0.400 (0.171) - (0.171) - Al-Noor Primary School 2.366 2.000 (0.366) - (0.366) - Other schemes (under a million) 6.529 6.119 (0.410) - (0.410) - Children & Young People 33.068 28.732 (4.336) - (4.336) - Community Access to Swimming Facilities 1.952 1.952 - - - - Health & Social Care 1.952 1.952 - - - - Renewing Ilford 0.340 0.340 - - - - 71 Ilford Hill 6.700 6.700 - - - - Facilities Management (Office Accomodation - Phase 1) 0.062 0.062 - - - - Corporate Building Maintenance & Improvement 1.484 1.442 - (0.042) (0.042) - Regeneration and Property 8.586 8.544 - (0.042) (0.042) - Temporary Accommodation 0.600 0.600 - - - - Hyleford Extra Care Housing 0.140 0.140 - - - - Housing 0.740 0.740 - - - - Major Resurfacing Borough Roads 2.507 2.507 - - - - Highways Preventative Maintenance 1.308 1.308 - - - - Crossrail (Highways) 2.594 2.594 - - - -Other Highways Capital 5.897 5.645 (0.252) - (0.252) - Vehicle Replacement Programme 2.190 2.190 - - - - Home Repairs Grant 0.100 0.100 - - - - Disabled Facilities Grants 1.399 1.399 - - - - Civic Pride 15.995 15.743 (0.252) - (0.252) Total Place 60.341 55.711 (4.588) (0.042) (4.630)
Resources - IT Strategy 2.401 0.901 (1.500) - (1.500) - Capitalised Revenue Expenditure 3.176 3.176 - - - - Customer Access Strategy 1.047 1.047 - - - Total Resources 6.624 5.124 (1.500) - (1.500)
Strategy - SMART Programme 0.711 0.200 (0.511) - (0.511) - Customer Access 0.683 0.718 0.035 - 0.035 Total Strategy 1.394 0.918 (0.476) - (0.476)
Total General Fund 69.447 62.391 (7.014) (0.042) (7.056)
Housing - HRA - Investment on Existing Stock 8.811 8.454 - (0.357) (0.357) - New Developments on HRA Sites 5.141 4.641 (0.500)- (0.500) - Purchase & Repair Programme 5.812 5.812 - - - Total 19.763 18.906 (0.500) (0.357) (0.857)
TOTAL CAPITAL PROGRAMME 89.210 81.297 (7.514) (0.399) (7.913)
Page 65 Cabinet Meeting Date Classification Agenda Item 8 4th April 2017 Public
From The Cabinet Member for Regeneration, Property and Planning to the Cabinet
Relevant Service Committee Title Of Report Neighbourhoods Service Committee – Annual Corporate Property Maintenance 29th March 2017 Programme 2017/18 (incorporating Access Initiative Programme)
1. Executive Summary
1.1 The Council is a substantial owner of property across the Borough with a portfolio valued at some £686m (excluding properties held within the Housing Revenue Account) encompassing everything from offices and schools, parks and playing fields, through to public conveniences and libraries.
1.2 The Council’s portfolio is maintained through the application of a series of revenue budgets for day to day or routine maintenance with larger items covered within a centralised capital programme. In approving the capital programme as part of the 2017/18 budget at the Full Council meeting in February 2017, members approved allocations for both the Capital Maintenance Programme (£1.000m) and Access Initiative Programme (£0.150m).
1.3 Under the Council’s governance arrangements, Cabinet approval is required for the schedule of schemes to be progressed using these allocations. This report presents the outline schemes, together with initial cost estimates, and seeks approval to apply the budget allocations as required by Financial Standing Orders 124.
2. Recommendations
The Cabinet is recommended to:-
2.1 approve the expenditure of £1.000m from the Corporate Capital Building Maintenance Programme on the outline schemes as listed in Appendix A, noting that the costs given are approximate.
2.2 authorise the Operational Director Regeneration and Property to proceed with the schemes identified for 2017/18 and in, consultation with the Cabinet Member for Regeneration, Property and Planning, to manage any variations in costs.
2.3 approve the reserve list of schemes listed in Appendix B and authorise the Operational Director Regeneration and Property, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Regeneration, Property and Planning, to substitute schemes from this list should funding become available.
2.4 authorise the Operational Director Regeneration and Property, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Regeneration, Property and Planning, to develop and implement a list of projects funded through the £0.150m allocated to the Access Initiative Programme.
THE DECISIONS PROPOSED IN THE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THIS REPORT MAY BE REQUISITIONED Page 66 Cabinet Member Contact Point Name: Cllr Helen Coomb Position: Cabinet Member for Regeneration, Property and Planning Telephone: 020 8708 2020 Email: [email protected]
Officer Contact Point Name: Diane Martin Position: Acting Head of Capital and Building Services Service: Place Telephone: 020 8708 3880 Email: [email protected]
Page 67 3. Background 3.1 The Council’s property portfolio has a value in excess of £686m (including properties leased to Vision-Redbridge Culture and Leisure). Central Government has encouraged Councils to treat these as a corporate resource and to ensure that the maintenance programmes are delivered to secure the value of these assets. Over the past 5 years the Council has invested £5m (Capital) in addressing a historic backlog alongside the revenue funded day to day maintenance programme.
3.2 Capital funding was approved as part of the annual budget-setting in February 2017 and is available for work to all Council owned buildings (including Vision Redbridge Culture & Leisure) with the exception of housing properties and schools (for which other arrangements apply) and, those let on Full Repairing Leases and any other building that the Council has no responsibility for capital maintenance
3.3 The total capital funding available for building maintenance in 2017/18 is £1.0m. This is the minimum amount required to address the maintenance backlog and ensure that the Council’s property asset base is in a condition to positively contribute to successful service delivery and the Council’s Corporate Aims and Objectives.
3.4 The schemes were drawn initially from the Asset Management Condition database and then subjected to qualification including:
Condition survey rating. Addresses a major Health & Safety need, risk of building closure or mandatory legal requirement. Part of a project which is a corporate priority, meets capital definition and addresses backlog maintenance. Appropriate use of resource given the suitability of the building for its current/proposed use, overall condition and current corporate objectives for the site/building.
3.5 The resulting programme of works will address some of the areas of greatest maintenance need across the Council’s property portfolio, in packages of work that ensure that the maintenance demand is addressed in a cost effective manner.
3.6 The proposed schemes, for consideration by Members, are summarised at Appendix A, including brief notes for each scheme. Officers have considered whether it would be possible or appropriate to tender the various works as one contract. However, this has been deemed inappropriate due the variation in the nature of the schemes, the specialism required and the timing requirements in each case. The projects will therefore be tendered and procured separately.
3.7 A reserve list (Appendix B) has been prepared of those schemes that scored slightly lower than those in Appendix A, but are still high priority. Should Health and Safety obligations require or if there is delay or cost savings to those schemes in Appendix A, it is proposed to substitute schemes from the reserve list.
3.8 Alongside the capital maintenance programme, the Council also undertakes capital works through the Access Initiative Programme which seeks to enhance Page 68 the physical accessibility of the Council’s buildings to address the requirements of the Disability Discrimination Act or respond to operational requirements in respect of access. This programme is valued at £0.150m in 2017/18. Recognising the relatively low value of the programme, the schedule of projects has historically been developed by officers. Continuing this arrangement, it is proposed that the Operation Director Regeneration and Property develop the 2017/18 schedule in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Regeneration, Property and Planning.
4. Options
4.1 Carrying out the proposed Corporate Capital Building Maintenance Programme will ensure the improved state of repair of a wide range of Council owned property and will contribute to the achievement of successful service delivery and the Council Corporate Aims and Objectives.
4.2 A reduced programme would have a detrimental effect on addressing the historic backlog and securing the value of the Council’s property assets
4.3 Failure to carry out these identified items of backlog maintenance could lead to the Council’s property assets not being in a fit condition to deliver services. This would have an adverse impact on service delivery and result in additional costs in providing services from alternative premises.
5. Fairness Implications, including Equality and Diversity
5.1 There are no negative Fairness Implications in this proposal. Equality Impact Assessments are carried out to consider negative or positive impacts on groups in respect of the major capital works. The works undertaken through the Access Initiative Programme are specifically intended to address the Council’s obligations under the Disability Discrimination Act.
5.2 Contracts will contain provisions for ensuring that contractors conduct their business in accordance with the Equalities Act 2010.
5.3 Effective management of Council premises contributes to ensuring that its services remain accessible to all members of the Community.
6. Financial Implications
6.1 This report recommends that Cabinet agree the outline schemes and estimates for the 2017/18 Corporate Building Maintenance Programme set out in appendix A and approve the expenditure of £1.150m in accordance with Standing Order 124.
6.2 The 2017/18 Capital Programme, approved on 23rd February 2017 at Council, agreed funding of £1.150m for the Corporate Capital Building Maintenance and Access Improvement Programmes. Of this funding £1.000m relates to the former and £0.150m the latter.
6.3 Financial Standing Order 124 states that formal Cabinet approval is required to spend against an agreed capital programme scheme and Cabinet need to be advised of any consequential expenditure or income before any expenditure is incurred. Appendix A lists the intended projects, with estimated cost of works, and a ‘B list’ which may be used as substitute in the event of projects from the ‘A’ list not being able to progress. Page 69 6.4 This programme will be funded by external borrowing and any cost variations will be managed from within the budget. Any additional running costs associated with the schemes would need to be contained within existing budgetary provisions.
6.5 Individual projects will be procured separately for operational reasons.
6.6 As with all significant capital schemes it is essential that effective and robust project management is in place and that the risks associated with the project and any mitigating actions are included in the appropriate risk register.
7. Legal Implications
7.1 As the officer report explains the Council has an extensive property portfolio and programmes of maintenance are necessary in order to maintain those buildings to an appropriate standard so that they can be used by officers of the council, and where appropriate by members of the public. Where the council owns buildings then it is responsible for maintaining those and in the case of properties that it leases there are commonly repairing obligations imposed by the landlord and such duties must be complied with. The Council has powers contained within section 111 of the Local Government Act 1972 and also through the general power of competence contained within section 2 of the Localism Act 2011.
7.2 The Council has already approved funding for the currently proposed programme when setting the coming annual budget at the meeting of Full Council in February and is available for work to all Council owned buildings (including Vision Redbridge Culture & Leisure) with the exception of housing properties and schools. Spending of the budget is permitted by Standing Order 124.
Page 70 Appendix A
Estimated Notes cost (works only) The roof is not in sound condition. Refurbishment works Lynton House Recovering of roof (phase 2) 80,000 are being undertaken so it is prudent to complete this work. It will also ensure a higher energy rating for the building. The law library is in a dilapidated condition and is Town Hall Demolition of law library & reinstatement 75,000 contributing to water ingress to floors below. of roof Boiler plant is 36 yrs old. One water heater has failed and Ley Street Depot Boiler replacement to building 7 (CATTO) 150,000 is beyond repair. Replacement is required to avoid building closure. System does not comply with current regulations. It is Ley Street Depot Hot and cold water services replacement 65,000 operationally preferable to carry out this work alongside to building 7 (CATTO) the boiler replacement to limit disruption to building Page 71 Page users. Windows are in a poor state of repair and are a Health & Mildmay House Replacement windows and doors 30,000 safety risk. Energy efficiency can be achieved through replacement. The boiler is obsolete and life expired. In the event of Lynton House Boiler replacement 300,000 failure it will not be possible to repair. Roof is in poor condition and has had a series of ongoing Community Care Advice Replacement of upside down flat roof 90,000 repairs over the last few years. It will also ensure a higher Centre and roof lights energy rating for the building. This provision would be used for replacement heating, Various premises Provision to meet urgent 55,000 roof works, pipework replacement following water repairs/replacement works arising from sampling failure. condition surveys Various premises Access Initiative Works 136,400 Works to meet DDA obligations and operational access requirements i.e. hearing loops, wheelchair access, flashing fire alarms, and contrast fittings Works total 1,046,400 Fees 103,600 TOTAL 1,150,000 Appendix B
Estimated Notes cost (works only) The boiler is obsolete and life expired. In the event of Town Hall Boiler replacement 350,000 failure it will not be possible to repair. Costs need to be balanced against the long term future of the asset. The lift is life expired and parts are obsolete. There have Broadway Chambers Lift replacement 120,000 been an increased number of breakdowns. Impact on Council Revenue via rents. There have been a number of problems over the years, Lynton House Replacement soil stacks 400,000 particularly with blockages to the drainage system & branches. Increased number of users could result in further regular blockages Communal areas are in a poor state of repair which could Page 72 Page Ilford Chambers Internal refurbishment to communal 55,000 impact on Council Revenue via rents. Consideration being areas (contribution) given to ability to undertake the works through the service charge regime which operates across the building. Agenda Item 9 Cabinet Meeting Date Classification 4th April 2017 Public
From The Cabinet Member for Civic Pride to the Cabinet
Relevant Service Committee – Title Of Report Health Social Care & Civic Pride Service Redbridge Community Safety Partnership Plan Committee – 27th March 2017 2017 - 2021
1. Executive Summary
1.1 Section 5 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, as amended by sections 97 and 98 of the Police and Reform Act 2002, requires Community Safety Partnerships to develop a Crime and Disorder Strategy. The Redbridge Community Safety Partnership Plan (2017 – 2021) adheres to the requirements of the Act.
1.2 The current Partnership Plan (known as the Safer Redbridge Strategy 2013 -2017) ends on 31st March 2017. The Redbridge Community Safety Partnership Plan (2017 – 2021) has been endorsed by all members of the Redbridge Community Safety Partnership Board and will replace this strategy.
2. Recommendation
The Cabinet is recommended to:-
2.1 Endorse and refer the Redbridge Community Safety Partnership Plan 2017 – 2021(attached at Appendix) to Council for approval.
THE DECISION PROPOSED IN THE RECOMMENDATION TO THIS REPORT MAY NOT BE REQUISITIONED IN ACCORDANCE WITH STANDING ORDER 54.1(r) AS IT IS A RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL
Cabinet Member Contact Point Name: Cllr. Sheila Bain Position: Cabinet Member for Civic Pride Telephone: 0208 708 2092 Email: [email protected]
Officer Contact Point Name: John Richards Position: Head of Civic Pride and Enforcement Service: Civic pride Telephone: 0208 708 5029 Email: [email protected]
Page 73 3. Background
3.1. Statutory obligations for the partnership plan
3.2. Section 5 and 6 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, requires that the responsible authorities, as set out in the Act and amended by the Police Reform Act 2002, formulate and implement:
A strategy for the reduction of crime and disorder in the area; and A strategy for combatting the misuse of drugs in the area.
3.3 In the formation of this strategy, the responsible authorities shall:
Carry out a review of the levels and patterns of crime and disorder in the area and the level and patterns of the misuse of drugs in the area; Have regard to this analysis and the views obtained from the responsible authorities as outlined on this analysis; Ensure the strategy includes the objectives to be achieved and performance targets for measuring the extent to which such objectives are achieved; and Sets out the actions that partners will use to achieve these objectives.
3.4 The responsible authorities as set out in section 5 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 and amended by the Police Reform Act 2002 include:
The local authority – The London Borough of Redbridge; The chief officer of police for the area; The police authority - The Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime; The fire authority; Public Health;
Acting in co-operation with:
The local probation board; and The Community Rehabilitation Company (CRC) with responsibility for that area.
3.5 Developing the Redbridge Community Safety Partnership plan
3.6 The Redbridge Community Safety Partnership Plan is produced by the Redbridge Community Safety Partnership (RCSP), membership of which includes a representative for each of the responsible authorities as established by statute, representatives for the probation service and the Community Rehabilitation Company. The RCSP also includes representatives of a number of local third sector organisations, who have been invited to sit on the Partnership to reflect the wider Redbridge civic society.
3.7 The aim of Partnership Plan is to provide a set of agreed priorities and actions that partners will focus on over the next 4 years to reduce crime, enviro- crime, anti-social behaviour and substance misuse.
Page 74 3.8 The Redbridge Community Safety Partnership Board has a statutory responsibility to oversee the analysis of the annual strategic assessment (data audit) and set appropriate Partnership priorities as a result. At its meeting on 18th January 2017, the three priorities proposed within the strategic assessment were agreed by all members of the Board and a strategic lead was assigned to each priority.
3.9 The Priorities for the Partnership Plan and Why?
The following criteria have been used to set the Partnership priorities in Redbridge for the period of this strategy:
3.10 Collective partnership impact: Areas of work where the Partnership is best placed to have the largest cooperative impact because of the amount of cross cutting, coordinated, partnership work involved.
3.11 Impact on victims: Some crimes have a more significant impact on a victim than others. For example, the differing impact of shoplifting or criminal damage compared to that of residential burglary or domestic violence are hugely contrasting for a victim. When setting priorities we sought to ensure that resources were allocated to problems that have a higher impact on victims, thus making the largest difference to peoples’ lives in the Borough.
3.12 Quality of life for local Residents: Whenever the public is asked about the improvements that would make the biggest difference to their quality of life they say “reducing crime”. Local surveys and national research have been used to ensure priorities are focused on problems that have the largest impact on residents’ general quality of life.
3.13 Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC); draft Police and Crime Plan 2017-2020 – A Safer City for All Londoners: Under the Police Reform and Social Responsibilities Act, a mutual duty exists between Police and Crime Commissioners (PCCs) and responsible authorities in Community Safety Partnerships (CSPs) to cooperate to reduce crime, disorder and reoffending. Under this reciprocal duty to cooperate between PCC’s and CSP’s, the Community Safety Partnership must have regard to the priorities established by the PCC in their police and crime plan.
The Mayoral priorities 2017 – 2021 are:- Neighbourhood Policing Keeping Children and Young People Safe* Tackling Violence against Women and Girls Standing together against Extremism, Hatred and Intolerance, and A better Criminal Justice Service
*Keeping Children and Young people safe includes reducing gang criminal exploitation of children and adults on a physical, sexual or financial basis, often via illegal drug markets. This is labelled ‘County Lines’
3.14 Separate strategies to support National agendas: This recognises that there are key national agendas with high local relevance and impact that need to have their own focus and strategy that are so comprehensive that
Page 75 they are best done outside of the priorities stated in this document. Locally there are two areas of work that fall into this category – those of Drug and Alcohol Misuse and Preventing Violent Extremism. A link to the National Drugs Strategy and the National Prevent Strategy can be found on the following links:
Home Office Drugs Strategy Home Office Prevent Strategy
3.15 Tackling crime and disorder priorities: Identified through detailed crime analysis in the ‘Redbridge Strategic Assessment’. In doing so, the Partnership will impact on the most important crime and disorder priorities, as identified by our Partnership data. Some findings from the analysis include:
There has been an overall 3.4% increase in reported crime in Redbridge in 2016 (20,032) compared to 2015 (19,381). This reflects the increase across London and Redbridge is ranked as having the 24th lowest amount of crime out of the 32 Metropolitan London Boroughs for the total number of offence by 1000 population during this period. The increase in crime is not uniform, with an increase in some offences that have particularly high impacts on victims and the wider community such as violence against the person (8.9% increase, 2015 - 5,866 & 2016 - 6399) and sexual offences (13.1% increase, 2015 - 451 & 2016 - 510). A significant proportion of each of these categories is linked to domestic abuse. A decrease in acquisitive crime such as burglary (-15.1% decrease, 2015 – 2326 & 2016 - 1974) and robbery (- 10.2% decrease, 2015 - 665 & 2016 - 597). Drug and alcohol related crime and anti-social behaviour is highlighted as a cross cutting theme throughout the document impacting a multitude of areas including: violence against women and girls; anti-social behaviour; street drinkers; violence with injury; Offender management (including gangs and ‘Integrated Offender Management’) is identified as another cross cutting theme, impacting upon a number of areas of crime.
3.16 The priorities for the Partnership Plan 2017 – 2021
3.17 The following priorities are proposed by the Redbridge Community Safety Partnership Board:
Priority A: Safeguarding Victims; including: Tackling Violence against Women and Girls (VAWG) Hate Crime Repeat Victims Priority B: Reducing Vulnerability to Offend; including: Gangs Reducing drug and alcohol related crime Integrated Offender management (IOM) Priority C: Civic Pride; including: Encouraging Civic Pride Enforcing Civic Pride
Page 76 3.18 Each priority will be addressed through prevention, partnership working and improved justice outcomes.
3.19 At this time specific borough targets have not been included in this strategy because local policing targets have yet to be agreed by the Metropolitan Police. While some Partnership targets have been submitted to the Mayors Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC) with regards to allocation of the Redbridge London Crime Prevention Fund, these targets are yet to be officially agreed and cannot at this time be included in the strategy.
4 Fairness Implications, including Equality and Diversity
4.1 The proposals in the report raise no specific equality issues.
5 Financial Implications
5.1 This report considers the Community Redbridge Community Safety Partnership Plan (2017-2021) and recommends that the Plan is referred to Council for approval.
5.2 Budgetary provision to support the Plan is made up of several strands of internal and external funding. The principle source of external funding is provided by the Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC) to support the priorities as set out in paragraph 3.17.
5.3 In terms of MOPAC funding, 2016/17 represented the last year of a three-year settlement in which Redbridge were awarded £0.502m. The next MOPAC funding phase is over a two-year period (2017/18 & 2018/19), but incorporates an overall reduction in available funding across the capital. For this period Redbridge has been awarded £0.816m, however MOPAC are allowing flexibility in the timing of how the funding is spent, as long as it is delivered within the whole two-year period.
5.4 In 2016/17 the Council received the following funding from the Home Office to support the Prevent agenda:
Extremism/Young Leader £0.065m Prevent Co-Ordinator £0.054m Schools Officer £0.050m £0.169m
Funding for 2017/18 has yet to be confirmed by the Home Office but is likely to be similar to 2016/17.
5.5 Internal funding to support the Plan is delivered through the Safer Communities Core Team (£0.165m) and the Youth Offending Targeted Prevention Service (2016/17 £1.140m, 2017/18 £0.9m). Further support is contained within the Civic Pride & Enforcement Service which includes the Redbridge Enforcement Team and CCTV.
Page 77 5.6 Opportunities to bid for external funding streams for specific areas may become available throughout the duration of the Plan and the success of any applications will be reflected in the budget monitoring process as necessary.
6 Legal Implications
6.1 Sections 5 and 6 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, as amended, require Local Community Safety Partnerships to formulate and adopt a strategy for the reduction of crime and disorder in the area; and a strategy for combatting the misuse of drugs in the area.
6.2 The relevant law is set out clearly within the main body of the Report, and requires no further explanation.
BACKGROUND PAPERS
Page 78 APPENDIX
Redbridge Community Safety Partnership Plan
2017-2021
Redbridge Crime, Disorder and Substance Misuse Strategy
Page 79
About this document
Section 5 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, as amended by sections 97 and 98 of the Police and Reform Act 2002, requires Community Safety Partnerships to develop a Crime and Disorder Strategy. The Redbridge Community Safety Partnership Plan adheres to the requirements of the Act.
The intention of this document is to outline the priorities and set a strategic direction to focus the multi-agency work, which will be undertaken to reduce crime, disorder and substance misuse in Redbridge.
In line with guidance issued on the roles and responsibilities of Police and Crime es due regard to priorities shown in the draft Police and Crime Plan for London 2017 -2021 - Safer City for priorities shown in the final plan (due to be published March 2017) will not be significantly different to those shown in the consultation document
Redbridge Community Safety Partnership Membership
The Redbridge Community Safety Partnership consists of the following voluntary and statutory organisations:
London Borough of Redbridge Redbridge Council for Voluntary Services Metropolitan Police Service Redbridge Magistrates' Court London Fire Brigade Public Health England Clinical Commissioning Group Victim Support Redbridge Equalities and Community Council National Probation Service London Community Rehabilitation Company
2 Page 80
Foreword
In 1998 the Crime and Disorder Act formally established the idea that crime reduction cannot be the responsibility of just one agency, such as the police, and should be tackled by a variety of agencies working together in partnership. To this end, since 1998 Redbridge has been working hard to establish and maintain a strong, effective and proactive Community Safety Partnership to tackle crime, disorder and substance misuse locally.
This is a time when we need strong partnerships, as budgets get tighter, partnerships often crumble as we retreat to silo working, but I believe that as we shrink together that now more than ever we have to work smarter and use every resource possible taking partnerships to their extreme. 2016 has been an exceptionally good performance year for crime reduction with 661 fewer victims in Redbridge than the previous year - 90%
We, the Redbridge Community Safety Partnership, are committed to responding to the clear message from residents and businesses that lowering crime is paramount to making Redbridge a good place to live, work and visit, and are confident that the priorities in this Plan reflect this. We want people to enjoy our borough without experiencing crime or anti-social behaviour. We also want to ensure that victims of crime are supported and that services and interventions are available to help steer people away from committing crime in the first place. However, when these approaches are not effective we will use our detection and enforcement powers to catch offenders and bring them to justice.
We have achieved many good results in recent years, demonstrating a consistent commitment to tackling crime and anti-social behaviour in a way that balances enforcement with prevention and diversion. Partners have not only put financial resources into projects and initiatives to tackle identified problems, they have also contributed by participating and working in partnership as part of various problem solving forums and casework panels.
An example of a partnership operation I was particularly proud of recently was an enforcement operation (Operation Parish) to tackle the drug dealing in Ilford town centre, specifically around Ilford BR station. This was a multi agency operation involving police (Metropolitan and British Transport police) and council officers over a protracted period of time to reduce drug dealing antisocial behaviour and violence within the town centre. Twenty two subjects were arrested and charged with conspiracy to supply drugs. Most of these are on remand until their court trial in May 2017. This has significantly improved the immediate area outside the BR Station and surrounding roads, with a significant decrease in reported antisocial behaviour and drug dealing. Redbridge council officers supported the police and in cleaning up the area, researching civil injunctions and providing a visible reassurance to the public and local community.
We will continue this important work and ensure that our strategies take into account important future developments in Redbridge such as Crossrail. Despite significant achievements, a number of challenges still remain. We accept these challenges and are determined to build on our successes and work even more closely with our diverse community to make Redbridge even safer. As we shrink together we must seize every opportunity to use what is available to us as our Redbridge Communities will expect nothing less.
Mandy Beacher
Detective Chief Superintendent and Redbridge Police Borough Commander
ExecutiveChair of Redbridge Summary Community Safety Partnership
3 Page 81
Contents
Introduction Page 5
About Redbridge Page 7
Establishing the Priorities for 2017 - 2021 Page 9
Our Priorities for 2017 - 2021 Page 10
Priority A Safeguarding Victims Page 11
Priority B Reducing Vulnerability to Offend Page 13
Priority C Civic Pride Page 16
Further Information and Contact Details Page 22
4 Page 82
Introduction
This Partnership Plan identifies three key priorities that all statutory and voluntary organisations within the partnership agree to focus their resources on, working collaboratively to maximise the effect we can have as a collective body. The priorities established in 2017 for this four year strategy will be reviewed annually to ensure that they continue to address the most pressing crime and disorder issues in the Borough. Should priorities be changed this document will be updated to reflect them.
The Redbridge Community Safety Partnership Plan has had to take into account the draft Police and Crime Plan for London 2017 - 2021 A Safer City for All Londoners which, at time of writing, is in the consultation phase. It is anticipated that the priorities shown in the draft plan will, broadly speaking, remain the same for the final plan due to be published in March 2017. The priorities in the draft plan are:
Neighbourhood Policing Keeping Children and Young People safe Tackling Violence against Women and Girls Standing together against Extremism, Hatred and Intolerance, and A better Criminal Justice Service
This plan has been written, and priorities set, during a period of major change and financial constraints within the world of community safety within the public, voluntary and charitable sectors. Redbridge Council has reduced its expenditure by over £123m since 2011 and has further savings budgeted in the next few years starting with £14.8m in 2017/18. Similarly the Metropolitan Police have delivered nearly £600m savings over the last four years and have a plan to deliver a further £800m savings by 2020. Furthermore, the Metropolitan Police are also considering moving from the structure of thirty two policing boroughs, each with its own borough commander, leadership team and other specialist teams, to fewer larger Basic Command Units. These Units will have smaller number of borough commanders and more specialised teams. Redbridge is to be a part of a pilot project for a larger Basic Command Unit which will include Barking and Dagenham and Havering.
Another change that is reflected in the priorities of this plan is the impact the planned reduction in the London Crime Prevention Fund (LCPF) will have on the work that can be delivered by the Redbridge Community Safety Partnership. This is funding provided by MOPAC to enable boroughs to provide and commission local services to prevent and tackle crime and is directly linked to many of the projects committed in this document. MOPAC plan to maintain the overall size of LCPF funding at the current level at around £72 million from 2017 to 2021. However, from 2018/19 onwards, boroughs will take approximately a one third cut in funding to enable MOPAC to commission regional projects. In Redbridge the proposal means that funding drops from £502k per year to £313k per year in 2018/19 and beyond.
5 Page 83
Over the four year period of this plan the Redbridge Community Safety Partnership will also have to continue to keep abreast of, and pay due regard to, other changes to organisations, structures, funding streams and legislation, that will impact upon the work carried out by the partnership to achieve the priorities outlined in this strategy.
The substantial changes identified in this introduction provide some context regarding the challenges to the capacity of the agencies involved in reducing crime, anti-social behaviour and substance misuse. These challenges highlight why an agreed four year partnership plan is so critical to ensure strategic buy in and clarity of direction to maximise the collective impact of all of the partnerships resources.
About Redbridge
Redbridge is an outer north east London Borough, with a culturally rich, well-educated community. Despite having many green affluent areas that people choose to move to, there are also areas of deprivation where our residents are struggling to make ends meet with the rising cost of living. Balancing targeted service delivery and providing facilities which address the needs of the range of socio-economic levels and for the specific needs of the different communities is both a challenge and an opportunity to embrace diversity in the Borough.
Our People The population has grown by nearly 50,000 people since 2001 and is predicted to continue to grow at a faster rate than the rest of London. Population projections suggest growth to 316,800 by 2018 and 401,600 by 2037.
Redbridge has a diverse population, with a wide variety of religions. The 2011 Census showed that Redbridge was the 4th most diverse community in England and Wales with the third highest proportion of under 16s in London. This diversity has been embraced locally. The 2014 Life in Redbridge Survey showed that 58% of respondents felt that Redbridge is a place where people from different backgrounds get on well together. Between 2010 and 2013 levels of crime have fallen by 8.6% and current figures suggest that it continues to reduce.
Local Facilities Redbridge boasts one of the best living environments in London with 40% of the Borough comprised of open spaces (many have been awarded Green flag Status) which provide a wealth of outdoor leisure opportunities. It enjoys an enviable reputation for its excellent transport connectivity; 16 minutes from the city, which will be further enhanced through
In addition there is a growing evening economy including a theatre, two cinemas, a wide range of restaurants, night time venues and bars. We are working hard to develop this further benefitting from Business Improvement District status in two locations that has enabled businesses to manage and invest in their local trading environment. In addition there is a host of attractive parks, historic buildings, busy town centres and well-established businesses.
6 Page 84
Housing A growing number of young professionals are choosing to join the property ladder in East London. In contrast to neighbouring boroughs, Redbridge is becoming more than a stepping stone in housing because the local amenities, cheaper housing, education and diverse community make it attractive for families to choose to live here.
The 2011 Census showed that 64% of households owned their homes, a decrease from 75% in 2001. The median house price in Redbridge of £275,000 was £46,000 lower than for London; however this is still not affordable for many of our residents. As home ownership decreased, private renting increased from 15% of households in 2001 to 23% in 2011 and Redbridge had the second lowest proportion of households in London living in social rented accommodation at 11%.
Education and Employment There are high levels of educational attainment in Redbridge. The 2011 Census showed that 34% of the population aged 16 and over were qualified to degree level, compared to 27% in England & Wales. In 2013 over 70% of pupils achieved 5 or more GCSE grades A*-C (including English and Maths), the sixth highest in London. Our employment rate of 67% is lower than the London average of 70%, while our unemployment rate of 8% reflects the London average (March 2014).
The changes over the last decade have provided opportunities and challenges for Redbridge. We have responded to these and will continue to do so. We are Ambitious for Redbridge, so we will utilise regeneration, provide adequate housing and ensure we intervene early where necessary to support our communities to gain a fair and good quality of life.
7 Page 85
Establishing the Priorities for 2016/17
The following criteria have been used to set the Partnership priorities in Redbridge for the period of this strategy:
a) Collective partnership impact: Areas of work where the Partnership is best placed to have the largest cooperative impact because of the amount of cross cutting, coordinated, partnership work involved.
b) Impact on victims: Some crimes have a more significant impact on a victim than others. For example, the differing impact of shoplifting or criminal damage compared to that of residential burglary or domestic violence are hugely contrasting for a victim. When setting priorities we sought to ensure that resources were allocated to problems that have a higher impact on victims, thus making the largest Borough.
c) Quality of life for local Residents: Whenever the public are asked about what improvements would make the biggest difference to their quality of life they say
priorities are focused on problems that have the large quality of life.
d) Tackling crime and disorder priorities: Identified through detailed crime analysis
the most important crime and disorder priorities, as identified by our Partnership data from agencies such as, the London Ambulance Service, Metropolitan Police Service, local Health data from Accident and Emergency Departments and drug treatment facilities, London Fire Brigade, London Probation and Redbridge Council data in relation to antisocial behaviour, graffiti, fly-tipping etc.
e) for Policing and Crime (MOPAC); draft Police and Crime Plan 2017-2020 A Safer City for All Londoners: Under the Police Reform and Social Responsibilities Act, a mutual duty exists between Police and Crime Commissioners (PCCs) and responsible authorities in Community Safety Partnerships (CSPs) to cooperate to reduce crime, disorder and reoffending. Under this reciprocal duty to cooperate between PCC regard to the priorities established by the PCC in their police and crime plan.
f) Separate strategies to support National agendas: This recognises that there are key national agendas with high local relevance and impact that need to have their own focus and strategy that are so comprehensive that they are best done outside of the priorities stated in this document. Locally there are two areas of work that fall into this category those of Drug and Alcohol Misuse and Preventing Violent Extremism. A link to the National Drugs Strategy and the National Prevent Strategy can be found on the following links: Home Office Drugs Strategy Home Office Prevent Strategy
8 Page 86
Our Priorities for 2017 - 2021
Using the criteria outlined above, the Redbridge Community Safety Partnership has agreed to support the following three priorities of the 2017- 2021 partnership plan:
Priority A: Safeguarding Victims, including:
. Tackling Violence against Women and Girls (VAWG) . Hate crime . Repeat victims
Priority B: Reducing Vulnerability to Offend, including:
. Gangs . Reducing drug and alcohol related crime . Integrated Offender Management (IOM)
Priority C: Civic Pride
. Encouraging Civic Pride . Enforcing Civic Pride
Each of the priority is of equal importance and each will be addressed through prevention, partnership working and improved justice outcomes.
Targets:
It should be noted that, at this stage specific borough targets have not been included in this strategy because local policing targets have yet to be agreed by the Metropolitan Police. While some targets have been submitted to MOPAC with regards to allocation of the Redbridge LCPF, these targets are yet to be officially agreed and cannot at this time be included in this strategy.
The work carried out by the Community Safety Partnership in addressing the three priority areas listed are detailed in the remainder of this strategy and will contribute towards the ts and priorities.
9 Page 87
Priority A: Safeguarding Victims
In Redbridge we are committed to improving services to all victims, especially those that are particularly vulnerable and in need of help. Victims of hate crime, domestic violence, anti- social behaviour and sexual violence make up the majority of repeat and vulnerable victims in Redbridge.
Violence against Women and Girls (VAWG), hate crime, and repeat victims of antisocial behaviour are a particular priority within this section because they are vastly under reported crimes (based on national research), are often targeted towards particularly vulnerable and isolated people, contribute to health problems, and have a huge impact on wider quality of life.
Partnership working is essential to support these vulnerable people. It can be supported by:
Catching and convicting offenders requiring criminal justice organisations to work effectively together; Responding to low level problems requiring effective, joined up, working between statutory and voluntary sector partners; Increase reporting to ensure vulnerable people have access to the support services they need to confront, and recover/move on from, the issues and crimes that they have been a victim/survivor of;
Tackling Violence against Women and Girls (VAWG)
In Redbridge Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC) 1.
The MOPAC strategy covers the following forms of violence against women and girls: domestic violence and abuse, female genital mutilation (FGM), forced marriage, based violence, prostitution and trafficking, sexual violence including rape, sexual exploitation, sexual harassment, stalking and faith-based abuse
Domestic abuse is one of the forms of violence and or harassment which disproportionately affects women and is included within the umbrella term of Violence against Women and Girls . There is a wide range of research and analysis that illustrates the prevalence and impact of domestic abuse in the UK. It has been reported that two women per week in the UK are murdered by a current or former partner, 1 in 4 women in the UK experience some form of domestic violence in their lifetime, and domestic abuse has the highest repeat victimisation level of any crime2. In Redbridge there is an incident of domestic abuse reported to the Police every three hours.
Our aim is to ensure that the Council, police and other agencies have the right services in place to protect VAWG victims. This partnership plan also recognises that new technology and social media continues to be misused to exploit and target the vulnerable. Bullying, stalking, harassment, and threatening behaviour which occurs online is just as unacceptable
1 https://www.london.gov.uk/sites/default/files/vawg_strategy.pdf 2 http://refuge.org.uk/get-help-now/what-is-domestic-violence/domestic-violence-the-facts/
10 Page 88
as when it occurs offline. This plan is clear that these are crimes, and should be treated as such.
Education must also play a role in discouraging violent and abusive behaviour. Our work with schools and places of learning is the vehicle where we are helping to educate young people about damaging behaviours within relationships. We are determined to see a Borough where domestic abuse and violence against women and girls is completely unacceptable, where people speak out, and where no victim is exploited, traumatised or coerced into damaging sexual behaviour or criminal activity.
Redbridge has a significant on-street prostitution problem; both the Government and the Mayor of London recognise that prostitution is a form of Violence against Women and Girls. Women involved in prostitution are often among the most vulnerable in society and should be offered increased information on improving their safety, while also provided with support to exit prostitution safely. We have developed a comprehensive Prostitution Strategy, which adopts this approach, along with making changes to the environment and undertaking enforcement operations which focus on targeting kerb crawlers. We are committed to supporting the women involved in prostitution as well as working hard to reduce the impact it has on those living in areas where prostitution is evident.
This Partnership Plan will use the existing Redbridge VAWG strategy to further define work required to improve the Boroughs response. The VAWG strategies overarching aim is to shape and direct work that will make referral pathways clearer and easier to navigate for victims and front line practitioners. The strategy will also develop a delivery plan which will detail how we intend to raise awareness amongst our residents about the services available to address VAWG. A conscious aim of the strategy is to mainstream VAWG awareness and delivery across all aspects of the council. This means forging new partnerships and embedding awareness and screening tools throughout all aspects of partnership.
How we will tackle Violence against Women and Girls
Our objectives to address VAWG are based on our vision that no resident should live in fear of violence. There are four areas of work supporting this broad strategic aim3: -
Prevention activities which include: Integrating our VAWG objectives into a range of service plans and strategies; Developing clear assessment and referral pathways Embedding the work to address FGM across all aspects of Health and Social Care; Community engagement and education Consolidating links with substance abuse treatment services so we have the right interventions and screening tools; and Mainstreaming our response to VAWG throughout universal services.
Provision of support services, including: Continuing to commission an integrated holistic service to all survivors; Providing an appropriate needs based prostitution outreach service; Ensuring a client-centered approach to supporting survivors;
3 Full details shown in the Redbridge VAWG strategy 2015 - 2018
11 Page 89
Promoting/raising awareness of access to national and local helplines and services and making sure these are accessible; Ensuring that services are accessible by everyone
Partnership working which includes: Better support available for victims and their families from statutory, voluntary and community sectors working together; Continuing to fund Domestic Homicide Reviews; Utilising the published arrangements for working with partners in health, care and the criminal justice sectors; Maintaining the Domestic Violence Case Panel - Multi-Agency Risk Assessment Conference (MARAC); Maintaining the VAWG multi-agency strategy and delivery groups to identify and manage improvements to local service provision;
Justice outcomes and risk reduction, including: Improved criminal justice experience and outcomes for victims including an increase in the rate of convictions; Increased access to rehabilitative interventions among offenders; and Undertaking regular multi agency enforcement operations to tackle prostitution issues
Promoting the use of national legislation which criminalises forced marriage in the Anti- Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014
We will know that we have been successful by;
A reduction in repeat referrals to the MARAC; A reduction in the number of recorded incidents of Violence with Injury (Domestic); An increase in the number of referrals to our integrated VAWG service Having the analytical capacity to publish local information on the VAWG hotspots and use this information to inform future commissioning and partnership working; Having in place a partnership performance framework that quantifies and benchmarks the partnerships activities; Providing perpetrators of domestic and gender violence with programmes that help them to understand their behaviour, provide alternative behaviour, and ensure that perpetrators are held accountable; Reducing the re-offending rate of domestic abuse and sexual violence perpetrators who are subject to MAPPA or IOM arrangements ; and An increase in law enforcemen
Tackling Hate Crime and repeat victimisation
There are a number of Redbridge residents who experience low-level Hate Crime and/or Anti-Social Behaviour, who are consistently targeted and harassed over a significant period
12 Page 90
of time. Hate crimes are taken to mean any crime or incident where the perpetra hostility or prejudice against an identifiable group of people is a factor in determining who is victimised4. Additionally there are those who feel let down by the response they get from statutory agencies when they report incidents, as well as those victims who fall into these categories who we have not yet identified but whose quality of life are seriously affected by being targeted in this way. It is important not to underestimate the harm and distress experienced by repeat and vulnerable victims and services are prioritised accordingly.
How we will tackle hate crime and repeat victimisation:
Maintain the multi- and address repeat victimisation in particularly complex cases of antisocial behaviour and hate crime. We will monitor the process to ensure that cases are being dealt with effectively and efficiently this will impact on victim satisfaction and quality of life as well as ensuring that offenders are tackled successfully and brought to justice. Maintain the multi- victims especially amongst vulnerable older adults. Produce a refreshed Hate Crime action plan to include recommendations from the recent Redbridge Hate Crime summit5 Increase awareness of the services available to victims when they report increasing public outreach and media campaigns including posters, leaflets (including easy -read versions) and press coverage; Improve referral pathways and ensure that all front line staff know what services are available; Encourage reporting from communities who may not be willing to report to the Police or other statutory organisations; Reduce incidents happening in the first place by changing attitudes and beliefs, working with young people in schools to raise awareness of acceptable behaviour; Exploit all available funding opportunities to expand current service provision; Examine the reasons behind cases being dropped by the Criminal Justice System to increase successful prosecutions; Take a firm stance as a Partnership to support vulnerable and repeat victims making every effort to ensure perpetrators are brought to justice;
We will know that we have been successful by:
An increase in the number of reported hate crime/incidents; Increasing the number of organisations/Council departments which make referrals to the Redbridge Victim Panel; A reduction of repeat referrals for the Redbridge Victims Panel; Successful prosecutions of the perpetrators; The number of Redbridge Victims panel cases closed with positive outcomes The increased use of new powers6 to hold perpetrators to account;
4 Hostility and prejudice may be based upon, Race, Religion, Sexual orientation, Disability, Gender Identity or Age. 5 An event held on Dec16th and chaired by MP Wes Streeting. 6 Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014
13 Page 91
Priority B: Reducing Vulnerability to Offend
Statistics on offending give compelling insight into the need to both prevent individuals offending that first time, and providing effective management if they do offend.
Key facts regarding offending: In 2011 across England and Wales over 75% of proven offences were committed by offenders with a previous reprimand, warning, caution or conviction Between one third and one half of all acquisitive crime, such as theft and burglary, is committed by cocaine and heroin users. 31% of all offenders sentenced had directly related drug misuse Nationally 40% of violent crime, 78% of assaults and 88% of criminal damage offences are committed while the offender is under the influence of alcohol Alcohol-related harm costs the United Kingdom £21 billion annually The average age of a first time offender entering the criminal justice system is 16 for boys and 15 for girls
In Redbridge we believe that there are three critical areas to prioritise, if we are to reduce vulnerability to offend, these are:
1. Reduction in gang activity 2. Reduction in drug and alcohol related offending 3. Improvements in Integrated Offending Management
Within each of these strands there runs critical work around prevention (to stop people offending in the first place), support, enforcement and monitoring.
Reduction in Gang Activity
Historically the definition of what a gang is, emphasised street activity, tagging and defending turf and the significant use of violence meant that Redbridge had not been regarded as a gang borough by either the Office for Crime and Policing (MOPAC) nor the Metropolitan Police.
However, there is now national recognition that there has been a proliferation of gang related offending from inner city areas out into areas where gang members are not so well known and are under less scrutiny from enforcement. This proliferation of gang influence has been labelled the effect and its critical features typically include gang members criminally exploiting children and adults on a physical, sexual or financial basis, professionals as a concern for the borough. Redbridge has a significant number of residential care homes and looked after children placed here from other boroughs. A significant number of matrix7 gang nominals are housed in Redbridge
7 The official police list that names London’s 3,200 gang members and classifies them from most to least violent.
14 Page 92
A report produced by the Institute of Community Safety following a Locality Review of gangs in Redbridge8, which was commissioned by the Redbridge Community Safety Partnership, included the following findings:
Redbridge has several named gangs and other unnamed/unknown gangs operating from within the borough, both external gangs from inner London boroughs or local, family based crime groups; A significant number of local children and young people were travelling outside of the Borough, working for gangs on county lines; Evidence of a cohort of Class A drug users within the Borough, with evidence of local drugs markets (as there are across London); The problem has intensified as the housing market and benefit reform has pushed people out of inner London boroughs, and made boroughs like Redbridge a cheaper option for placing vulnerable families, children and adults from inner boroughs; The rise and spread of unregulated semi-independent care homes is at the centre of the influx of young gang nominals and the increase and use of these homes has made it easier for gang members to settle into the borough The borough has good transport links and is close to a number of drug markets- Essex, Kent, Suffolk (and the internal markets), and gang members are not monitored to anywhere near the same degree as they would be in an inner London borough
How we will make a difference?
Develop a partnership strategy to tackle gangs, exploitation, vulnerability and violence. Establishing clear ownership, governance, accountability and information sharing protocols; Create a problem profile that understands and explains the current position around gangs, exploitation, violence and vulnerability will be commissioned9; Investigate the benefits of establishing a single panel for those vulnerable young people (potentially combining MASE, CSE, MISPERS and Deter Young Offenders work); Improve information sharing between partners on gang activity; A range of interventions will be scoped and commissioned to support young people in exiting gang involvement; Training sessions for front line officers across the Partnership to ensure early identification of risk, preventative measures available as well as referral pathways into both support and enforcement services; and We will review the current admissions process and determine whether the provision of information on pupils requiring admission to schools could be improved. In order to make the difference we will use MOPAC funding (2017 2019) to employ a link officer.
We will know that we have been successful by:
Improved data sharing and knowledge of gang nominals on the gangs matrix;
8 Funded by the Home Office in December 2016, and is a restricted document 9 At the time of writing, a bid has been submitted to the DCLG for funding to commission the problem profile.
15 Page 93
Ensuring appropriate multi-agency groups manage interventions for both known gang members and those they are looking to exploit; Having a comprehensive gang problem profile; and Increasing early identification of people at risk of gang exploitation and offending.
Reducing drug and alcohol related crime and anti-social behavior
Drug and alcohol related crime and anti-social behaviour can encompass a wide variety of offences. Within this priority we are defining it as alcohol related violence and antisocial behaviour (such as noise related incidents).
Violent crime has a very significant impact on its victims, and often the wider community, so must be a focus of the partnership. Local analysis of crime and antisocial behaviour data demonstrates that significant amounts of violent crime occur late in the evening and is often grouped around town centres (such as Ilford, Gants Hill, Seven Kings) that house the pub/club related evening economy in Redbridge. Alcohol consumption also coincides with reports of rowdy/inconsiderate behaviour, noise nuisance and other types of anti-social increase at weekends and peak late in the evening.
All adults who are arrested and taken into in custody may be subject to drug testing if the custody staff have reason to believe they are either intoxicated or that their offence is linked to Class A drug use. The aim being to ensure those who are offending will be encouraged to access drug treatment and therefore reduce their offending behaviour.
We need to act to reduce drug and alcohol related crime and anti-social behaviour and its negative effects on the residents of the Borough. The impact of these crimes on Redbridge residents cannot be underestimated, and a great deal of distress is caused by drug and alcohol related incidents both in and/or outside pubs, off licences and private residences.
Partnership working is essential to drive forward work towards reducing drug and alcohol related crime and anti-social behaviour. Catching and convicting offenders requires all partner agencies to work together. The Council, Police, Probation, Youth Offending Services, drug and alcohol services and voluntary agencies all work together to ensure those who offend because of their drug or alcohol dependence are encouraged to seek treatment. However if they do not comply, or treatment is not appropriate, robust enforcement procedures must be in place.
How we will make a difference:
Ensuring both statutory and voluntary agencies who engage with victims of crime and anti-social behaviour offer appropriate services; Continuing to commission integrated drug and alcohol support services; Using licensing legislation to ensure public houses, late night refreshment establishments and off-licences retail responsibly and comply with any restrictions placed on their license; Continuing to provide drug outreach services in the borough. This will be targeted in problem locations/at vulnerable people known to have drug problems;
16 Page 94
Ensuring appropriate and effective use of the Drug Intervention Program (DIP), (which aims to get adult drug-misusing offenders out of crime and into treatment10). Engaging in multi-agency work to engage and tackle problematic street drinking and the crime and disorder that it generate, including the introduction of a Public Space Protection Order (PSPO) and around the sale of high alcohol by volume (ABV) drinks; Placing appropriate conditions on, or withdraw the licenses of, licensed premises if one or more of the four licensing objectives are undermined - the prevention of crime and disorder; public safety; the prevention of public nuisance; and the protection of children from harm. Maintaining the Cumulative Impact Zones within South Ilford and South Woodford; Ensuring applicants for licences provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate they will not cause or contribute to public nuisance to residents. This includes issues pertaining to noise from the arrival and dispersal of patrons and entertainment noise such as music
We know we will be successful by:
Increase in the take up of both drug and alcohol rehabilitation orders The introduction of a Public Space Protection Order (PSPO) in Ilford Town Centre to include a ban on street drinking and other antisocial behaviour Increased licensing compliance checks by the Redbridge enforcement team officers Increased use of licensing powers to ensure problem premises adhere to conditions placed on their licence Fewer incidences of drug and alcohol related antisocial behaviour at problem locations
Integrated Offender Management
In recent years many schemes have been introduced to reduce the likelihood of known criminals re-offending. Schemes such as Deter Young Offenders (DYO), Multi-Agency Assessment Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA), Drug Intervention Programme (DIP) for adults and Fusion (for young people) have, since their introduction, proved to be (IOM) approach, to target more offenders in the community (both youths and adults under statutory and non-statutory supervision). IOM seeks to bring together the management of repeat offenders into a more coherent structure.
The Integrated Offender Management approach aims to: Develop and extend joint identification and assessment of offenders; Establish joint offender management; Implement information sharing frameworks for offenders in the community who present the highest risk of re-offending; Maximise opportunities for partnership working, bringing a range of services together to achieve more effective and efficient outcomes; and
10 The scheme works on the premise that access to treatment is more cost effective and more effective than putting drug-misusing offenders through the criminal justice system repeatedly without tackling their drug or alcohol problem.
17 Page 95
Ensure relevant partners supervise, enforce, resettle and rehabilitate offenders in a more joined-up way. Reduce the number of young offenders entering the criminal justice system altogether, with the related benefits that flow from this.
The multi-agency Integrated Offender Management approach builds on and expands current offender-focused programmes such as Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements and the Drugs Intervention / Fusion Programmes. Under the Integrated Offender Management process these programmes will continue to be crucial to the delivery of sustained reductions in re-offending. Integrated Offender Management will address any potential overlaps between existing programmes and identify and resolve any gaps in provision. Integrated Offender Management will also help to align the work of local criminal justice agencies and their partners more effectively, managing risk and simplifying and strengthening the governance arrangements and management process for identified offenders.
The Community Safety Partnership is committed to the continuing support for victims of crime, however we also need to focus on the small number of individuals who are committing a significant percentage of crime committed within the borough.
Ensuring individual offenders receive the appropriate interventions will have a significant impact on the levels of crime committed within the borough, particularly serious acquisitive crime. The development and improvement of our offender management processes will contribute to the effective reductions in Burglary and Drug and Alcohol Crime and Anti- Social Behaviour. Targeting offenders in this way will complement the crime reduction initiatives outlined within those priorities
How we will make a difference:
Identifying, risk assessing and streaming offenders into cohorts to ensure effective management: Identifying and prioritising support for young people from the most chaotic backgrounds who otherwise do not receive sufficient education , training and employment; Working in partnership as par initiative to provide the families with the most entrenched problems additional parenting and other support to reduce crime and anti-social behaviour; Managing the transition between young and adult offender services; Ensuring women involved in the criminal justice system; Using robust enforcement methods for those offenders unwilling to engage with the scheme; Increased provision of drug and alcohol treatment orders; Increased access to drug and alcohol treatment through the Arrest Referral Process; Improving the provision of effective mental health support to young offenders via the local Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS); and Improving cross border working to target offenders who offend in Redbridge but who live elsewhere.
18 Page 96
'Building on the high quality provision young offenders receive in our Youth Offending Service which has been ranked amongst the best in London and the UK'
We know we will have been successful by:
Ensuring the appropriate offenders are identified and taken on to the scheme Evidence of movement between cohorts-a growing green cohort and offenders removed from the scheme as they stop offending Reduction in re-referrals onto the scheme, evidencing sustained reduction in offending Successful engagement of those on the cohort who are released from custody, especially those who are drug and/or alcohol dependent. Reduction in serious acquisitive crime Increase in take up of both Drug and Alcohol rehabilitation orders.
Priority C: Civic Pride
Civic Pride is the positive feeling generated by people about the town or city in which they live, due to the responsibilities that they accept as citizens living there and the outcome produced from their contributions towards the production and maintenance of such spaces. Evidence has shown that when communities take pride in their environment crime and disorder is reduced (broken windows theory) and people feel safer. The intention of this strand is to improve the public realm to make a Redbridge a safe and pleasant place to live, work and visit. In Redbridge we believe there are two critical strands to this work: encouraging civic pride; and enforcing civic pride.
Encouraging Civic Pride
Engendering Civic Pride in Redbridge requires a partnership approach and cannot be done through enforcement alone. Citizens need to be encouraged to take more social responsibility and pride in their locality. This requires clear communication and gentle encouragement, as well as firm and robust enforcement for those who refuse to change their habits and continue to negatively impact on the look and feel of their local communities.
Redbridge has an increasingly diverse population, with a wide variety of communities. With large population growth come a variety of issues and challenges. One of the challenges local services must overcome is the engagement and marketing of services to new residents, who are often unaware of local services, particularly when they are transient individuals drawn to the relatively cheap rental prices in the local private rented sector.
How we will make a difference:
Developing a Civic Pride Citizen Charter and Civic Pride values, to provide guidance on what Civic Pride should look like in Redbridge and encourage model behaviour amongst Redbridge communities;
19 Page 97
Developing a Civic Pride communications and engagement plan to encourage residents to take greater pride in their environment; Work with local communities (both those that are well established and those newer communities) to develop an agreement so each un responsibilities; As a partnership, working with the voluntary, community and faith sectors to build pride, respect and cohesion across the Borough; As a partnership, working with the community to tackle the fear of crime by building resilient communities where people look out for each other, whilst also supporting and protecting those at most risk; and Promoting and protecting our green and public open spaces.
We will know that we have been successful by: The introduction of a civic pride citizenship charter The introduction of robust Civic Pride communications and engagement plan; Measuring the number of schools engaged to generate civic pride within young people; Increasing the number of community interventions (alley gates, litter picks etc.); Measurable change in behaviour of residents including a reduction in fly tipping
Enforcing Civic Pride
Where residents do not take pride in their environment and community, and do not change their behaviour through encouragement, enforcement will hold offenders to account. It will make those responsible for environmental crime11 and antisocial behaviour to change their detrimental approach to their locality through tough enforcement action.
Priorities for enforcement action are:
Fly-tipping is prolific and increasing in Redbridge, particularly south of the A12. Enforcement action must be swift; priority will be given to gathering evidence that will lead to the prosecution and substantial fine12 for offenders. Unregulated commercial waste will be targeted to ensure that businesses are held to account where they do not have due regard for their environment. This links closely to fly tipping. Fly-posting is found in locations across the borough but most prevalent in Ilford, the removal of which costs the Council approximately £50k per annum. Untidy Front Gardens/Untidy Land frustrates local communities who want their immediate locality to have a clean and positive look and feel. Anti- s quality of life. It is a broad term encompassing any type of behaviour that causes those who witness it distress or negatively impacts on their quality of life. Noise nuisance has a huge impact on communities in Redbridge, as well as other London boroughs, where so many people live within such close proximity of each
11 Environmental crime is an illegal act that directly harms the environment. 12 Currently £400 Fixed Penalty Notice or unlimited through the Courts.
20 Page 98
other. The Council has a statutory duty to act when noise breeches acceptable levels to safeguard its residents. Illegal highway obstructions are dangerous and can cause serious injuries or death. Those responsible, whether they are individuals or businesses, will be fined. Licensing non-compliance can lead to violent disorder, underage alcohol consumption and noise nuisance at very antisocial hours. Enforcement compliance visits, as well as responding swiftly to complaints, taking appropriate remedial actions are critical to Redbridge growing a positive night time economy.
How we will make a difference:
Take swift action against fly tipping, gathering the evidence in order to issue £400 Fines to the offenders Hold businesses to account for unregulated waste In partnership (primarily between the council and police) apprehend and prosecute those fly-posting In partnership, and with the community, encourage pride with gardens and community spaces Respond to incidents of antisocial behaviour (including noise nuisance) and take appropriate action against offenders. We will support repeat and vulnerable victims of antisocial behaviour through the Redbridge Victims Panel we will undertake licensing enforcement compliance visits, as well as responding swiftly to complaints.
We will know that we have been successful by:
Increasing the number of fly tipping prosecutions and Fixed Penalty Notices issued A reduction in reported fly-tips A reduction in fly posting Reduced reports of antisocial behaviour and calls to noise nuisance Reduced incidents of disorder in and around licensed premises Increased community satisfaction with their local environment Confidence in the police and Council and satisfaction with services provided
21 Page 99
Further Information and Contact Details
Further copies of this Strategy can be obtained, on request, from the Community Safety Service within the Council. If you would like the information in this document translated into a different language, provided in large print or spoken word recording, please contact the Community Safety Service.
Tel No: 020 8708 5244 E-mail: [email protected] Post: Safer Communities Partnership Team London Borough of Redbridge Lynton House 255 259 High Rd Ilford IG1 1NY
The Partnership is committed to ongoing improvement in the services that we deliver. We would welcome any feedback, suggestions or proposals from individuals or organisations.
22 Page 100 Agenda Item 10 Cabinet Meeting Date Classification 4th April 2017 Public From The Cabinet Member for for Environment and Sustainability to the Cabinet
Relevant Service Committee Title Of Report Neighbourhoods Service Committee - 2017/18 Highways and Transportation Major Works 29th March 2017 Programme and Variations to the 2016/17 Programme
1. Executive Summary
1.1 This report seeks approval to spend the Council’s Highways Capital Programme with the funds allocated from this Authority’s budgets and external sources and agree the Major Works programme for 2017/18. The report includes references to related revenue expenditure on major highways works and also advises Members of changes in the previously agreed programme for 2016/17.
1.2 The report informs Members of the Major Works programme which is also summarised in Appendix A. Appendices B and C outline the detailed Highways Maintenance programme (including Street Lighting) and Traffic Management schemes respectively.
2. Recommendations
The Cabinet is recommended to:-
2.1 Approve the 2017/18 Redbridge funded Capital and relevant Revenue programmes as set out in Sections 4 to 9 of the report and Appendix A (section 1) as follows :-
Budget heading 2.1.1 Major Resurfacing Borough Roads £2.500m 2.1.2 Preventative Maintenance £1.300m 2.1.3 Street lighting renewal £0.330m 2.1.4 Borough wide LED replacement £2.000m 2.1.5 Traffic Management Programme £0.300m 2.1.6 Minor works for people with impaired mobility £0.055m 2.1.7 Drainage renewal £0.050m 2.1.8 Flooding Strategy £0.518m 2.1.9 Parking Strategy £0.100m Total £7.153m
2.2 Approve the proposed works funded by Section 106 funding amounting to £0.256m as detailed in section 10 and Appendix A (section 1.10).
2.3 Approve the use of the existing Term Street light Contractor (Skanska) to carry out the LED replacement project as described in section 4.5.5-10 of the report.
2.4 Approve the 2017/18 Capital and Revenue external works programme funded by
Page 101 Transport for London (TfL) in accordance with the programme set out in Section 11 & 12 and Appendix A (Section 2) as follows:-
Budget heading
2.4.1 Corridors / Neighbourhoods £1.430m 2.4.2 Accident Remediation-Local Safety Schemes £0.489m 2.4.3 Supporting Measures £0.433m 2.4.4 Principal Roads resurfacing £0.574m 2.4.5 Local Priority £0.100m 2.4.6 Air Quality £0.020m 2.4.7 Design £0.051m 2.4.8 Ilford Garden Low Emission Neighbourhood £0.400m 2.4.9 Crossrail Complimentary Measures *£1.825m Total £5.322m
* Crossrail-TfL grant of £1.825m supplemented by £0. 418m Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) making a total of £2.243m for this project in 2017/18
2.5 Note the new bids for funding in section 12.5-12.8
2.6 Note the amendment shown in paragraph 13 to the 2016/17 Highways Major Works Programme
2.7 Agree to delegate approval of changes within each funded programme and development of future bids to the Operational Director Civic Pride, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Environment and Sustainability.
THE DECISIONS PROPOSED IN THE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THIS REPORT MAY BE REQUISITIONED
Cabinet Member Contact Point Name: Cllr. John Howard Position: Cabinet Member for Environment and Sustainability Telephone: 020 3289 0565 Email: [email protected]
Officer Contact Point Name: Cliff Woolnoth Position: Head of Engineering Service: Civic Pride Telephone: 0208 708 3570 Email: [email protected]
Page 102 3 Background
3.1 The Capital budget for the Directorate of Place was approved at the Council Meeting on 23rd February 2017. External funds are also received from Transport for London (TfL) and those allocated for 2017/18 were reported to Cabinet on 18th October 2016.
3.2 The report advises Cabinet of the:- Redbridge, TfL and other funded programmes for 2017/18, Amendments to the 2016/17 funded programme.
3.3 This report outlines the proposals for the allocation of these funds and seeks approval to progress the Works Programme in 2017/18. The report also includes reference to related revenue expenditure on major highways works.
3.4 Members received a similar report last April which approved nearly £12m of expenditure on the same range of Highways and Transportation projects. This programme, apart from some slippage of work that was dependant on third parties, has been delivered in full which includes the ongoing major works associated with Crossrail. This achievement, which is repeated year on, is recognised by external funders such has TfL which regularly provides additional funding during the year in the knowledge that Redbridge is a Borough that can deliver and able to spend the funds allocated to it.
COUNCIL FUNDING
4 Highways Maintenance
4.1 Members have in the past been reminded of the need to maintain the Authority’s footways and carriageways in a reasonable state of repair in order to meet the Council’s statutory obligations and ensure the safety of those that use them, preserve the structural integrity of the network and minimise the number of public liability claims against the Council. Failure to properly maintain what is the Council’s single biggest asset will result in significant costs in future years as more and more of the network will require expensive reconstruction rather than timely resurfacing.
4.2 The categories of Capital maintenance work are as follows: -
Structural Maintenance. Major resurfacing works identified from a condition survey programme involving the replacement/overlaying of the wearing course to footways and carriageways on Borough roads.
Preventative Maintenance. A planned programme of large area patching/surfacing and reactive work.
4.3 Borough Roads - Major Resurfacing £2.500m
4.3.1 The total capital allocation for Borough Roads is £2.500m. This maintains the increased funding introduced in previous years which will have a positive impact on the maintenance of the Borough road network.
4.3.2 The allocation is spent on resurfacing the footways and carriageways on the local
Page 103 network. The work is prioritised based on detailed surveys that have been carried out to ascertain the structural condition of the Borough roads in order to determine the most cost effective treatment.
4.3.3 There are a number of key drivers identified in the Highway Asset Management Strategy (HAMS) for improving the way programmes of planned highway maintenance schemes are developed. By providing a prioritisation model based on Value Engineering principles which take into account the Council’s policy priorities, sustainability, network priority, location, accident reduction, transport links and importance to the community, it enables the effective allocation of the limited budgets for this work.
4.3.4 The initial list of roads and footways to be considered for treatment has been obtained from the structural condition survey reports from the Highway Asset Management System. This provided the structural road condition indices or initial average score. The Value Engineering process has been applied to this initial list and weightings applied in order to develop the programme.
4.3.5 Appendix A (section 1.1a & b) shows the 2017/18 planned programme of carriageways and footways in need of major maintenance. The roads planned for the next 5 year programme are shown in Appendix B1. Detailed estimates are currently being prepared and the schemes will be progressed until the funds have been fully spent. The roads are subject to clearance by the Utility Companies which may result in changes during the course of the year, but any of the roads not progressed this year will be evaluated once again next year.
4.3.6 It is recommended that the £2.5m funding available for carriageway and footway maintenance be split equally i.e. £1.250m allocated each to carriageway and footway maintenance respectively subject to paragraph 4.3.5 above.
4.4 Borough Roads – Preventative Maintenance £1.300m
4.4.1 This work includes appropriate reactive works and large area patching of carriageways and footways, where full resurfacing is not warranted. It is made up of £1.3m from capital. The same Value Engineering principles will be applied to these schemes. It is proposed that £0.128m of this funding be used to supplement the carriageway resurfacing programme described in 4.3 above.
4.5 Street Lighting £0.330m
The £0.300m capital and £0.030m revenue allocated this year will enable the continuation of the Lamp column/Lantern replacement programme.
Lamp Column Replacement
4.5.1 There are approximately 21,000 street lighting columns in the borough. The life of a street lighting column is approximately 35 years. In the mid 1990’s nearly 2/3rds of the boroughs’ ageing lighting columns were replaced as part of a major £10million investment scheme which was mainly in the East and South of the borough. Since then the focus has been on replacing the oldest columns in the remaining third with the annual Capital funding when available.
4.5.2 These older columns require replacement because they have exceeded their design
Page 104 life and could become structurally unstable. They are mainly in the North West of the Borough, they number approximately 2,350 and incorporate old style lanterns which are not energy efficient and do not meet current lighting standards.The oldest columns, and those in the poorest condition, are in Monkhams Ward and the capital funding concentrates on the roads in this area and the replacement columns will incorporate new LED lanterns. There is a regular structural testing programme in place to ensure that those columns which are in a poor condition, meet health and safety requirements. Any that fail that test are replaced immediately
4.5.3 Appendix A (section 1.3) shows the 2017/18 planned list of roads identified for street lighting replacement with the £0.330m budget available for this work. The schemes will incorporate the most up to date energy saving technology and will make use of new LED Lanterns which provide a more cost effective solution and whole life cost, reducing energy consumption and maintenance through longer life expectancy.
4.5.4 The roads on the 5 year programme are shown in Appendix B2 which has been developed through the HAMS. Detailed estimates are currently being prepared and the schemes will be progressed until the funds have been fully spent. The roads are subject to clearance by the Utility Companies, which may result in changes during the course of the year. Any of the schemes not carried out this year will be a priority for future years.
Borough wide LED replacement programme £2.000m
4.5.5 The move to LED Street lighting has been gathering pace over the last five years with the technology improving rapidly and costs falling to the point where the price and product now make LED Street lighting a viable “spend to save” option.
4.5.6 A successful £4.4m bid was made under the budget process to fund the replacement of approximately 17,500 conventional lanterns with LED units .The project will commence in 2017/18 and take about 30 months to complete. The initiative should result in the following savings over the next 20 years £17.5m energy savings £1.5m in maintenance savings
4.5.7 £2 million has been allocated for 2017/18.
4.5.8 A number of procurement options have been considered and it is proposed to use the incumbent Street lighting Term Contractor (Skanska) to deliver the project. Procurement officers have confirmed it is within the scope of the current contract with the Council.
4.5.9 The benefits of using Skanska are:-
The rates in the contacts are competitive. The major element of the cost of the project is the supply of the LED units (c£3.600m) which will not vary much between contractors as the cost of these are fixed by the suppliers. The competitive element is the installation cost and Skanska’s is considerably cheaper compared with rates of another London wide contract available to the Council. No procurement period, contract is in place could be implemented quickly Reliable known national contractor who is carrying out similar work for other Councils Minimum supervision required
Page 105 Under the present contract, the contractor is paid a monthly lump sum to undertake all maintenance works which is not only on the street lighting network but on all other signs (illuminated and non- illuminated .This works out at about £0.010m per month, Under the terms of the contract the Contractor would still be entitled to the full monthly cost but officers have negotiated with them to refund the anticipated cost of lamp replacement (that become faulty) if we continued to use traditional units. This would amount to £0.013m pa that would be reimbursed. Only one contractor working on street lighting network Staff resource/cost/time in carrying out tender process with other options and would require external assistance to prepare tender documents for the supply of the units which will add to time/cost and delay energy savings by about 12-18 months
4.5.10 In view of the above it is recommended that Skanska be appointed to carry out this work.
5 Traffic Management £0.300m
5.1 This budget covers accident remedial schemes, projects arising from studies, petitions etc. and minor improvements agreed under delegated authority. The budget for this work is £0.300m
5.2 The schemes have been categorised as follows: Schemes identified from the prioritised Traffic Management List. Minor Works agreed under the delegated authority process.
5.3 In previous years Cabinet has received a list of all schemes that have been generated by Officer reports, petitions, etc. and prioritised in accordance with the agreed criteria and those with an accident/Speed/volume problems were given an ‘A' rating. Schemes that had other traffic related issues such as speeds and volumes were given a ‘B’ rating and other environmental schemes a ‘C’ classification. With the funding available, only ‘A’ rated schemes are progressed using the Traffic Management budget.
5.4 The full priority list has been reviewed this year using the latest accident data available. Appendices A (1.5) and C (table a) shows ‘A1’ rated scheme proposed for 2017/18 works programme which will be funded from the Council’s capital budget and the TfL allocation for accident remedial work (see 11.3 below). Appendix C (table b) shows the A1 schemes on the reserve list which are to be investigated.
5.5 Budget Split for 2017/18
It is suggested that the budget be split as follows:
Works Allocation for designed schemes £0.225 Minor Works £0.075 Total £0.300m
5.6 There is the possibility that a scheme will be designed in one year but because of the budget process it cannot be implemented until the following year. However the project would be ‘on the shelf’ ready to be constructed as soon as funding became available. Furthermore these pre-approved schemes would also be readily available
Page 106 for immediate commencement should other funding sources (e.g. TfL/CIL) become available during the financial year, which is sometimes the case.
5.7 All schemes are subject to detailed design, estimate, consultation and subsequent delegated approval. It is known from experience that some schemes can be delayed or even rejected by this process. Also the named schemes in Appendix C will exceed the allocated budget but as many schemes as possible will be progressed until the budget is fully utilised. Any remaining schemes will be carried forward to next year but will be re-evaluated when the priority list is reviewed.
6 Minor Works for people with Impaired Mobility £0.055m
6.1 This budget of £0.055m will enable small schemes to be introduced to assist those with impaired mobility. It will be used to pursue requests for the installation of dropped kerbs, disabled parking bays and other minor improvements to make the highway more user friendly to people whose mobility is impaired.
7 Drainage Renewal £0.050m
7.1 The highways drainage network is an important asset that needs to be maintained to a high standard to limit highway flooding. This is of particular importance with global warming and recent levels of rainfall.
7.2 The budget will go towards funding a programme of renewing highways sewers that have collapsed or become blocked or damaged by tree roots and renewing highways gullies and gully connections that are similarly affected. The programme is prioritised to reduce the risk of consequent flooding to adjacent properties and carriageway and footway flooding near schools, bus stops and shopping areas.
8 Woodford Flood Alleviation Scheme £0.518m
8.1 Following severe property flooding in areas adjacent to the Roding in 2000, the Environment Agency (EA), assisted by Redbridge and Thames Water, developed a draft strategy for reducing future flood risk in the area. During the flood event approximately 250 properties were flooded.
8.2 Partnership funding for scheme feasibility was made available jointly by the Environment Agency and Redbridge. The initial estimate for the scheme was £3m and Redbridge agreed to contribute up to £0.6m. The first phase of the scheme commenced in 2012, obtaining detailed understanding of the issues involved through advanced modelling and other engineering techniques.
8.3 The feasibility study identified that works already carried out to the river bank and surface water sewer outfalls/flap valves, together with embankment works completed in Ray Park have significantly reduced the risk of flooding in the Woodford area and detailed modelling has shown that the 250 properties flooded in the 2000 flood event would not be affected following a repeat of similar storm conditions. The reduction in properties at risk has resulted in the Environment Agency not being able to justify the funding required to implement the major works as originally envisaged in the Roding Strategy. The cost of these works (£0.082m) was met from the £0.600m set for the original Woodford Flood Alleviation Scheme
Page 107 leaving a surplus of £0.518m.
8.4 Redbridge is, however, progressing work to better understand any residual flooding risk that might remain as a result of surface water run-off from the local area and to identify measures that can be taken to minimise any future risk. Any works arising from these studies would be met from grant funding provided by DEFRA.
8.5 The Environment Agency is continuing to explore the “Shonks Mill” Flood Storage Area” that was identified by the Roding Strategy for reducing flood risk from the River Roding in the event of storms in excess of that of October 2000. This scheme will be of significant benefit to Redbridge as it plans to reduce river flows through Redbridge by retaining river water and flooding fields north of the M25. The EA is currently carrying out investigations /feasibility work which should be completed this Year. An important element of the approval process is partnership funding and as Redbridge would be a major beneficiary the EA will be looking for contributions from this Council. It is therefore suggested that the current surplus of £0.518m in the capital programme allocated for the Woodford Flood Alleviation Scheme be earmarked for this project subject to the outcome of the EA investigations. Cabinet will receive further reports on the progress of this project as soon as more information is available from the Environment Agency.
9 Parking Strategy £0.100m
9.1 Current revenue funding supports the delivery of the work programme with a budget allocation of £0.100m for this financial year. This includes the costs for Traffic Management Orders (TMOs), consultation documentation, signage, markings and surveys. Details of the Year 2 action plan will be reported to your June meeting.
10 SECTION 106 FUNDING 2017/18 £0.256m
10.1 The Council has other substantial sums of Section 106 money earmarked for Highways and Transport projects. This funding can be used to supplement the Council capital programmes and the TfL funded LIP Corridors /Neighbourhoods projects referred to in the sections above. Other elements of Section106 funding have specific purposes that form part of the actual agreement or are limited to areas close to the development itself
10.2 The proposed expenditure on the work funded by section 106 monies amounting £0.256m is summarised in Appendix A (1.10).
TRANSPORT for LONDON FUNDING (TfL)
11 2017/18 Programme
11.1 The TfL grant allocations for 2017/18 which satisfy the Mayor of London objectives was reported in detail at Cabinet on 18th October 2016 meeting and the following sections summarise the work programme. (TfL permit the Borough discretion to increase or decrease the amount in the Corridors and Neighbourhoods and Supporting Measures programme packages by up to 20% provided that the overall value of these programmes does not exceed the total allocation).The TfL funded programme is summarised in Appendix A section 2.
Page 108 11.2 Corridors and Neighbourhoods £1.430m
11.2.1 Radial Corridor 1: High Road A118, A118 Ilford £0.290m Hill, Goodmayes Road B177 and Green Lane A1083. This Corridor scheme includes the High Road from Ilford through to Chadwell Heath, A1083 Green Lane and the B177 Goodmayes Road - an area that will benefit from Crossrail in 2019. The town centres along this Corridor have been identified separately in the assessment and works to them are not included in this package of works. The package will be in year seven of a seven-year funding arrangement which totals £2.135m. The final year of the programme will focus on the A118 Ilford Hill from the Borough Boundary with Newham to Chapel Road in support of the Low Emission Neighbourhood project. Public realm improvements will include:-
Removal of street clutter, General highway improvements to lighting including introduction of LED lighting, Improvements to pedestrian access, crossings, junctions, bus and cycling facilities and will also complement the resurfacing of the carriageway being funded from the Principal Road maintenance allocation (in 2018/19).
11.2.2 Orbital Corridor 2, A123/A1400/A104 /A121 £0.300m
This Corridor includes Ilford Lane; Cranbrook Road (south of Gants Hill); Beehive Lane; Woodford Avenue; Chigwell Road; George Lane; High Road Woodford Green; Woodford Green and High Road (Epping). A separate loop runs from Charlie Brown’s roundabout along Chigwell Road and Broadmead Road to High Road Woodford Green. The town centres along this Corridor have been identified separately in the assessment and works to them are not included in this package of works. The package will be in year seven of a seven-year funding arrangement which totals £2.389m and the package will improve the environment in the pedestrian walkway under George Lane bridge between Eastwood Close and Eastwood Close Car Park.
11.2.3 Radial Corridor 3 Redbridge Lane East/ £0.300m Longwood Gdns/ Forest Rd
This corridor comprises Redbridge Lane East, Longwood Gardens and Forest Road, but Fairlop Road, Fremantle Road and the High Street link to Fullwell Cross will also be reviewed. The town centres along this Corridor have been identified separately in the assessment and works to them are not included in this package of works. The package will be in year five of a five-year funding arrangement which totals £1.205m.
The funding will be used to investigate and deliver a toucan crossing on Forest Road adjacent to the eastern fishing lake entrance to Fairlop Waters.
11.2.4 Orbital Corridor 5 – Chadwell Heath Lane £0.100m
This corridor comprises Chadwell Heath Lane from Barley Lane to High Road Chadwell Heath, Wangey Road and that part of Mayfield Road within the Borough. It complements and links to the Chadwell Heath Neighbourhood package, completed in 2013.The package will be year three of a three-year funding arrangement which
Page 109 totals £0.155m.
Works will include studies for improvements to pedestrian facilities along the route, de-cluttering the street scene and improvements to the local shopping parades.
11.2.5 Radial Corridor 4 – A123 (Gants Hill to Hainault) £0.090m
This Corridor comprises Cranbrook Road from Gants Hill northwards , High Street Barkingside and Fencepiece Road (to the Borough border with Essex).The package will be year one of a multi-year funding arrangement, the total to be confirmed when the next LIP Spending Plan is agreed by Cabinet.
The funding will be used for improvements to pedestrian access, crossings, junctions, bus and cycling facilities.
11.2.6 Newbury Park Neighbourhood – District centre £0.090m and station approaches
This Neighbourhood comprises the district centre at the junction of Ley Street / Horns Road with Eastern Avenue and the walking and cycle approaches to the nearby Underground station. The package will be year one of a multi-year funding arrangement, the total to be confirmed when the next Spending Plan is agreed by Cabinet next year.
The funding will be used for improvements to pedestrian access, crossings, junctions, bus and cycling facilities.
11.2.7 Neighbourhood - River Roding / A406 North £0.025m Circular Road Bridge
This Neighbourhood scheme comprises a proposed walking and cycle route between the Wanstead Park Road / York Road junction and the City of London Cemetery. The link includes a new bridge over the River Roding and a new route across Ilford Golf Course adjacent to the railway line. The route would provide Ilford resident’s access to the Roding Valley Way, a parkland area of outstanding beauty and connection to local and sub-regional walking / cycling links across London. The Roding Valley Way cycle route connects the Borough border with Essex, to the River Thames and to strategic cycle links to Stratford, Whipps Cross and Barking).The package will be year one of a multi-year funding arrangement, the total to be confirmed when the next LIP Spending Plan is agreed by Cabinet.
The funding will be used to develop schemes for the approaches to the proposed River Roding bridge in support of an external bid for that major scheme.
11.2.8 Green Corridor 1 – Hainault Greenway £0.200m
This Corridor comprises a walking and cycle route across the north of the Borough from High Road Woodford Green, Snakes Lane (West & East), Uplands Road, Roding Lane North, through Claybury park, Tomswood Hill, Forest Road and into Hainault Forest Country Park. The package will be year one of a multi-year funding
Page 110 arrangement, the total to be confirmed when the next LIP Spending Plan is agreed by Cabinet.
The new route will connect Woodford and Hainault with London Cycle Network Route 11, the recently completed Roding Valley Way, and the Redbridge Greenway and create a cycle link to the council leisure amenities along Forest Road.
The funding will be used to deliver new on and off road cycle infrastructure.
11.2.9 Green Corridor 2 – Roding Valley Way £0.035m
This Corridor comprises the walking and cycle route that follows the River Roding through the west of the Borough and links up with cycle routes in Newham and Barking and Dagenham to provide a cross London leisure link from the Borough border with Essex to the River Thames.
The package will be year two of a two-year funding arrangement which totals £0.135m. The funding has been used in part as match funding for an external grant. This project completes the major elements of the Roding Valley Way after 20 years of incremental construction intended to address the severance caused by the South Woodford to Barking Relief Road (now part of the A406 North Circular Road).
The funding will be used to re-sign the completed Roding Valley Way through the Borough and other minor enabling works.
11.3 Accident Remediation Schemes £0.489m
This budget covers schemes which have been identified as a high priority and have the greatest potential for accident reduction. Projects planned for implementation during 2017/18, are indicated in Appendix A (2.2).
11.4 Supporting Measures £0.433m
The Supporting Measures demonstrate the importance of these initiatives and strengthens our position to qualify for further external funding and is intended to allow Boroughs to link investment for schools, hospitals and businesses with capital LIP programmes to maximise their impact.
The Supporting Measures demonstrate the importance of these initiatives and strengthens our position to qualify for further external funding and is intended to allow Boroughs to link investment for schools, hospitals and businesses with capital LIP programmes to maximise their impact.
Several of the spending areas outlined below are geared towards encouraging and facilitating travel by active or sustainable means. Where appropriate, aspirations to improve road safety and reduce accidents, complementing the accident remedial schemes budget cited above, form an important theme within these packages. Cycling training, for example, features strongly amongst these. 11.4.1 School Travel Plans £0.185m
This allocation will be used to provide revenue for the Smarter Travel Team, implementation of a range of School Travel Plan soft measures and initiatives including Learn to Ride cycle training, the WoW Walk to School Scheme, Small Grant
Page 111 Scheme for Schools, Walk to School Week, bike week, cycle / scooter instructor courses for school staff, Inter-borough Bike Polo tournament and school travel plan review workshops.
The previous “Road Safety in the vicinity of Schools” intervention strategy delivered measures to improve road safety around primary schools. This initiative is considered to be largely complete and the funding previously ring fenced for these works is included within the Corridors and Neighbourhoods programmes. Schools within 0.5 miles of a Corridor or Neighbourhood can put forward local schemes for consideration from the available funding streams.
The move away from provision of physical measures adjacent to schools will be monitored through the review of each School Travel Plan. Where there is an urgent need for physical intervention this will be considered under the separate budget now identified under Local Priority (see paragraph 11.6) or the issue will otherwise be referred to the Accident Remediation or the (Council funded) Traffic Management and Accessibility budgets for action.
11.4.2 Travel Awareness £0.109m
The allocation will be used to provide awareness campaigns and initiatives for nurseries, schools and the community to try to encourage greener, safer and more active travel, such as walking and cycling activities. A range of soft measures and initiatives includes Bike Week, promotional events at local festivals, cycle training and cycling initiatives to support cycle training in schools and the community, an external Active Travel Support resource to work in housing estates as well as the small grant for schools and potential further support for the ‘Recycles’ bike recycling partnership currently underway with the Salvation Army, in Ilford. We are considering trialling initiatives such as cycle hire in parks and exercise on referral in partnership with Vision, as well as regular cycling sessions for local residents, a cycle hire scheme, an active travel community grant scheme and an expansion of the car club scheme in Redbridge. Physical measures at or near schools are included in this budget to provide a safety net for safe routes to schools type works that were not previously identified as priorities and delivered under the Local Safety Schemes, 20 mph Zones and School Travel Plans.
11.4.3 Education, Training and Publicity £0.129m
This revenue funding will continue the cycle training for primary and secondary schools as well as for adults who live or work in the borough, including supportive initiatives such as Dr Bike, bike maintenance sessions, instructor ‘bike the commute/school run’ rides, led rides, cycle engagement afternoons for parents/pupils and ‘Bike It You Can Too’ courses. A bid for a Safe Drive, Stay Alive partnership with the emergency services is being made. This event is targeting secondary school sixth formers.
11.4.4 Work Travel Plans £0.010m
This funding will be spent on initiatives such as the LBR Carshare scheme and the Guaranteed Ride Home Scheme to encourage greener, safer and more active travel at the London Borough of Redbridge and the funding of grants to selected external organisations, such as King George Hospital, to support them with initiatives to try to
Page 112 encourage more sustainable travel.
11.5 Principal Road Maintenance £0.574m
11.5.1 The level of future funding awarded to any London Borough is influenced by the outcome of a condition survey and audit of all Boroughs’ Principal Roads and the Transport for London Roads Network. Principal roads are Borough roads but of strategic importance to London’s traffic .They are all the ‘A’ roads (apart from A12, A406 and A1400 which are the responsibility of TfL). TFL have notified LBR that the funding allocation for this programme in 2017/18 has been increased by £0.043m compared to their initial notification and so additional works can be carried out during the year.
11.5.2 Based upon condition surveys, the roads below are put forward for carriageway resurfacing and associated footway and kerb works where necessary. A reserve scheme has also been put forward, as requested by TfL in the event of in-year deterioration of the local network to allow the Borough to compete for reserved funding or underspend from other Boroughs.
Priority 1 (£0.574m) A118 High Road Goodmayes (Eastwood Road through junction with Barley Lane approximately 100m east of junction). Priority 2 (reserve £0.106m)) A114 Centre Road
11.6 Local Priority £0.100m
11.6.1 TfL have awarded each borough £0.100m to address local issues that are not adequately covered by existing LIP funding streams but accord with the Council’s local LIP priorities. Schemes are intended to address strategic issues prioritised on an evidence base and are subject to monitoring by TfL.
11.6.2 The budget will continue to fund monitored parts of the capital programme that are not suited to a Corridor or Neighbourhood approach. The works are to include:- Accessibility-Borough wide improvements for mobility £0.030m restricted measures. Borough-wide strategic network improvements-Bus stop £0.070m accessibility, cycle network, new cycle map and walking enhancements and sustainable transport initiatives (includes some soft measures).
11.7 Air Quality £0.020m
It is proposed to address air quality issues identified using the Borough’s air quality map which indicates air pollutant concentrations locally. The package will be in year five of a five-year funding arrangement which totals £0.085m.
Road traffic is the main source of particulate matter and oxides of Nitrogen which are the pollutants of most concern for effects on human health. This modest funding allocation keeps the Borough’s options open to secure larger external funds arising from the Mayor of London’s stated intention in his Transport Strategy to address poor air quality in London.
Page 113 11.8 Design of Future Works £0.051m
In order to facilitate the continuity of design, consultation and bidding processes associated with multiyear projects an element of revenue funding has been set aside to support officer time spent on projects that will be delivered in future years.
12 Non LIP Funding/ Bids
12.1 Officers will continue to pursue other non-LIP funding sources from external sources and bidding arrangements for these targeted funding streams are generally over a short period of time making notice of specific bids to Cabinet impractical. In order to take advantage of these funding opportunities officers are seeking Cabinet approval to develop bids, sometimes with third party involvement, to secure the investment in the Borough. The Cabinet Member for Environment and Sustainability will be briefed as details of bids become available.
Mayor’s Air Quality Fund
12.2 Following the initial Mayor of London’s Air Quality Fund (bids were made by Community Safety to deliver green walls in local schools over the last four years) a second round was made available for Boroughs to bid for in 2015 and the Borough has successfully secured funding for a new major scheme:-
12.3 Low Emission Neighbourhood: Ilford Garden £0.400m Junction Full details of the scheme were reported to the October Cabinet meeting where Members were advised that the proposal is intended to transform the A406 North Circular Road / A118 Romford Road junction by introduction of extensive planting on the wide hard landscaped lozenge area under the highway flyover structures to create a green gateway to Ilford. The location (the A406/A118 junction) suffers the worst pollution in Redbridge and is a Mayoral air quality focus area and key investment interchange target area.
The scheme will improve walking and cycling access across this junction from both Redbridge and Newham, involves extensive landscaping on the expanse of redundant land under the junction, public art and feature lighting on the main highway structure to create a high quality public space on this border between Redbridge and Newham.
The three year funding will be used to deliver the works including carriageway realignment, footway widening, landscaping and feature lighting. The transformed junction will provide a safe and accessible route to Ilford town centre, its upgraded Crossrail station, bus services and the nearby high quality green open space alongside the River Roding, for residents and businesses.
12.4 Crossrail Complimentary Measures £2.243m
The progress on Complementary Measures funding awarded to the Borough is outlined in a separate report on this agenda. In summary, the following Crossrail Complementary Measures funds are expected over four years from 2015/16 to 2018/19 including CIL and s106.
Page 114 Total Total Spend 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 £ m Other LIP - - 0.640 - - 0.640 CCM+CIL+S106 0.185 0.912 2.594 2.243 1.522 7.456 Grand Total 0.185 0.912 3.234 2.243 1.522 8.096
The budget for 2017/18 has been reduced by £0.100m compared to the approved budget as a result of reduced grant allocation and will be managed by revising the scope of works.
Current bids At the time of writing a number of bids for external funding had been made or are imminent and the results are still awaited. These bids are described in the following section.
12.5 Quietway Network
The Quietway network supersedes the previous Greenway and London Cycle Network programmes and complements the Cycle Super Highway network (blue lanes on major arterial roads). The new Quietway network is intended to form a London-wide grid of safe and direct back street routes that will encourage novices to cycle more. The Quietway network connects Outer London into the Central London Cycle Grid.
A Quietway within the Borough (Barkingside to Wanstead Flats, part of a route that runs through to Central London) has been delivered within the first tranche of pan- London routes. The link to this between Forest Drive in LB Newham and Aldersbrook Road involves use of some third party land which may lead to this element overrunning into 2017/18 The longer term ambition is to extend this route to Hainault.
The Borough will continue to seek funding under this programme or any new cycle infrastructure programme that replaces it, in line with the Mayor of London’s emerging priorities.
12.6 New River Roding Bridge
The Cycle Super Highway 2 (Aldgate to Ilford) links has now been terminated in Stratford [LB Newham] so will not reach Redbridge. However a proposed new footway cycleway bridge over the River Roding was a Mayoral priority in April 2016 and the following two options have been investigated by TfL for future implementation. The northern option between York Road and Ilford Golf Course would link Ilford town centre to the Roding Valley Way and Manor Park via a proposed link adjacent to and through the City of London Cemetery The southern option between Lavender Place, Loxford and Millais Avenue [LB Newham] opens up the possibility of a Quietway link across the south of the Borough from Newham towards Romford and Dagenham,
Both these options are being looked at and the funding described in 11.2.8 above will be used to develop schemes for the approaches to the proposed River Roding bridge in support of an external bid for that major scheme.
Page 115 12.7 Bus Stop Accessibility
This funding stream has been used to ensure bus stops across Redbridge become fully accessible to achieve TfL targets over the last few years and came to an end in March 2017). The Borough will however continue to seek funding under this programme or any new bus infrastructure programme that replaces it, in line with the Mayor of London’s emerging priorities.
12.8 Mayor’s Cycling Vision Funding in 2017/18 Borough Cycling Programme
The Borough will continue to seek funding under this programme or any new cycle infrastructure programme that replaces it, in line with the Mayor of London’s emerging priorities.
13. Update 2016/17 Works Programme
13.1 An opportunity arose late during the previous financial year to secure some TfL underspend (from other Boroughs’ LIP funding) and the Borough was allocated additional funding. Cabinet is being asked to note the following amendments as follows
13.2 Bus Stop Accessibility £0.012m
This supports improvements to the accessibility of bus stops to ensure that they can be used by people having limited mobility e.g. the elderly, people with disabilities, people pushing buggies etc. The target is for 95% of bus stops across London to become accessible by the end of the 21016 / 17 financial year. The original Borough allocation of £0.700m has been supplemented by a further £0.012m for works in Billet Road.
13.3 Quietway £0.096m
To assist the ongoing implementation of Quietway Cycle Route 6, cycle infrastructure between Wanstead Flats and Barkingside.
The original Borough allocation was supplemented but a further £0.096m of capital funding to advance the scheme making a revised total fund of £0.830m for 2016 / 2017
13.4 Education, Training and Publicity £0.005m
A further £0.005m revenue support has been provided for road safety training programmes
14 Scheme delivery-budget allocation
14.1 The outline programme and scheme descriptions for both the Council and the externally funded programme are detailed in Appendix B. Many of the projects are subject to detailed design, estimate, and consultation. It is known from experience that some schemes can be delayed or even rejected following these processes and timeframes can also be affected by Utility works.
Page 116 14.2 As many of these named schemes as possible will be progressed in priority order until the individual budgets are fully utilised. If for any reason a specific project cannot be progressed then the next on the priority list will be substituted and any remaining schemes will be carried forward to next year but will be re-evaluated when the appropriate priority lists are reviewed.
14.3 Furthermore during the course of the year other minor projects not specifically named within this report may need to be progressed. To facilitate this, Cabinet is being asked to delegate approval of any minor changes within each funded programme to the Operational Director Civic Pride in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Environment and Sustainability. This will help to expedite the programme and ensure full expenditure of the allocated funds without formal referral to Cabinet for prior approval. Cabinet will be updated as regularly as possible of any such changes during the course of the year.
15 Fairness Implications, including Equality and Diversity
15.1 The proposal reflects all three of Redbridge Council’s public sector equalities duties under the Equalities Act 2010. They take into account the range of needs of people from all parts of the community.
15.2 The three equalities duties outlined in the Equalities Act are represented by the three questions:-
Does it contribute to the elimination of discrimination? How will this project promote equality of opportunity? How does it foster good relations between people who share 'protected characteristics' and those that do not? These are addressed below.
15.3 Does the proposal contribute to the elimination of discrimination? The proposal is to ensure that there is sufficient budget provision and allocated in a way that ensures :- the adequate and safe maintenance of the public highway infrastructure, enhancement and improvement of the street scene, promotion of road safety and the implementation road safety engineering projects and the promotion and development of sustainable transport initiatives.
The proposal will benefit all sections of the Redbridge community, particularly the more vulnerable i.e. cyclists, pedestrians , those with disabilities, the elderly, parents with wheeled baby conveyances etc.
15.4 How will this project promote equality of opportunity? By ensuring that no one is disadvantaged by being unable to exercise their right to use the public Highway in a relatively safe and unimpeded manner.
15.5 How does it foster good relations between people who share 'protected characteristics' and those that do not? The proposal is relatively neutral in respect of this duty.
Page 117 16 Financial Implications
16.1 On the 23th February 2017 the Council approved the 6 year Capital Programme which included the Highways Major Works Programme for 2017/18 totalling £12.436m. This report seeks approval to spend against that programme, as detailed in Appendix B and C, and for adjustments to be made to the current programme in line with funding changes recently announced. The table below summaries the 2017/18 current and revised programme.
Project Capital Revenue Total £m £m £m Redbridge Funded Projects 7.123 0.030 7.153 TFL Funded Projects (includes CIL 5.313 0.484 5.797 funding) Current Programme 2017/18 12.436 0.514 12.950 Adjustments Crossrail reduction (0.100) (0.100) Principal Roads addition 0.043 0.043 Net Adjustment Required (0.057) (0.057) Revised 2017/18 Budget 12.379 0.514 12.893
Funded by Capital Revenue Total £m £m £m Council Resources 7.123 0.030 7.153 CIL 0.418 0.000 0.418 TFL Grants 4.838 0.484 5.322 Total 12.379 0.514 12.893
16.2 Financial Standing Order 124 states that formal Cabinet approval is required to spend against an agreed capital programme scheme costing in excess of £1.000m. This report requests that approval.
16.3 Another report elsewhere on this April agenda is requesting approval to spend on the 2017/18 Crossrail Public Realm scheme, which is funded by TfL and the Community Infrastructure Levy.
16.4 TfL have amended the funding allocation on two projects within the 2017/18 Capital Programme reducing overall funding by a net £0.057m. Approval is sought to amend the programme in line with available funding.
16.5 Additional external funding has been secured from TfL on three other projects within 2016/17 Programme totalling £0.113m. Approval is sought to increase the budgets in line with funding.
16.6 The report also comments on a number of additional bids for external funds which if successful will be reported to Cabinet for approval to increase spend on the Highways Capital Programme.
16.7 The ongoing revenue costs of the schemes included in this report will be met from existing directorate’s revenue budgets.
Page 118 17 Legal Implications
17.1 The Council has various duties and powers contained primarily within the Highways Act 1980 for Highways within the borough. This report is consistent with the ongoing planning and delivery maintenance and renewal of such facilities for safe use by the public.
17.2 Any amendments of approved budgets will need to be in compliance with the requirements of Standing Order 125.
17.3 With regards to the LED project, if this replacement provision fits within the terms of the existing Framework contract then it would be possible to proceed without a competitive exercise.
BACKGROUND PAPERS
Council meeting on 23rd February 2017 Cabinet on 18th October 2016.
Page 119 Highways Major Works 2017/2018 APPENDIX A
Planned Project Expenditure Ward Comment 2017/18
1 REDBRIDGE FUNDING
1.1 Major Resurfacing of Borough Carriageways and Footways Note: The lists below contain the Borough Carriageway and Footway schemes to be implemented in 2017/18 selected from the latest 5 year plan shown in appendix C1 of this report. Selection has also taken in to account other works that may be planned in the vicinity and the co-ordination of footway works or preparatory works that may have to be carried out in advance. Detailed designs and estimates are to be finalised but the available budget is not sufficient to complete the programme. If for any reason one scheme cannot be progressed another road will be selected from the reserve list until the funds are fully spent. Works will be subject to Utility clearance and other factors that could affect the undertaking of works in the roads listed. Projects not progressed this year will be re-evaluated next year.
(a) Borough Carriageways £m 1 Grove Park 0.336 Snaresbrook Carriageway Resurfacing 2 Clinton Crescent 0.181 Hainault Carriageway Resurfacing 3 New North Road (Part) 0.184 Fairlop/Hainault Carriageway Resurfacing 4 Southdown Crescent 0.114 Aldborough Carriageway Resurfacing 5 South Park Road 0.420 Clementswood Carriageway Resurfacing 6 Station Road 0.143 Aldborough Carriageway Resurfacing Carriageway £1.378 * *supplemented by £0.128m from 1.2 below
(b) Borough Footways £m 1 Chiltern Way Whitehall Rd to end Monkhams Fway Resurfacing/Re-Paving of loop £0.188 2 Clayhall Ave Berkley Ave to Clayhall Fway Resurfacing/Re-Paving £0.407 Mossford Ln 3 Kestral Close Marylon Rd to end £0.058 Hainault Fway Resurfacing/Re-Paving 4 Tudor Crescent Aragon Drive to Fairlop Fway Resurfacing/Re-Paving £0.597 Fencepiece Rd Footway £1.250
Footway/Carriageway Sub-Total £2.628
1.2 Preventative Maintenance £m Budget is £1.3m but £0.128m allocated to Carriageway resurfacing programme Various large area maintenance and Borough wide reactive work £1.172 Preventative Maintenance Sub-Total £1.172
Page 120 Highways Major Works 2017/2018 APPENDIX A
Planned Project Expenditure Ward Comment 2017/18
1.3 Lighting Replacement 2017/18
The lists below contain the Borough Street Lighting Replacement schemes to be implemented in 2017/18selected from the latest 5 year prioritised plan shown in appendix C2 of this report. The available budget may not be sufficient to complete the Street Lighting Programme. If for any reason one scheme cannot be progressed the next in the priority list will be selected and the schemes will be progressed until the funds are fully spent. Projects not progressed this year will be re-evaluated next year. Planned Programme £m 1 Kings Avenue £0.058 Monkhams Lamp Column Replacement
2 Beresford Drive £0.013 Monkhams Lamp Column Replacement
3 Princes Avenue £0.032 Monkhams Lamp Column Replacement
4 Worcester Crescent £0.054 Monkhams Lamp Column Replacement
5 Malvern Drive £0.024 Monkhams Lamp Column Replacement
6 Hutton Close £0.005 Monkhams Lamp Column Replacement
7 Park Avenue £0.016 Monkhams Lamp Column Replacement
8 The Green £0.011 Monkhams Lamp Column Replacement
9 Barclay Oval £0.013 Monkhams Lamp Column Replacement
10 Snakes Lane West £0.010 Monkhams Lamp Column Replacement
11 Carlina Gardens £0.013 Monkhams Lamp Column Replacement
12 Colwall Gardens £0.014 Monkhams Lamp Column Replacement
13 St Anthony's Avenue £0.022 Bridge Lamp Column Replacement
14 Prospect Road £0.045 Bridge Lamp Column Replacement
Lighting Sub-Total £0.330
1.4 LED Borough wide replacement £m LED street Lantern replacement £2.000 Borough wide LED Sub -Total £2.000
Page 121 Highways Major Works 2017/2018 APPENDIX A
Planned Project Expenditure Ward Comment 2017/18
1.5 Traffic Management
The estimated costs are only indicative as investigation and final designs have not been completed .The available budget may not be sufficient to complete the Traffic Management Scheme programme. If for any reason one scheme cannot be progressed the next in the priority list will be selected and the schemes will be progressed until the funds are fully spent. Projects not progressed this year will be re-evaluated next year. Implementation 2017/18 £m 1 Longbridge Rd/Goodmayes Lane jct £0.175 Goodmayes Junction improvement Mayfield 2 Design work £0.050
Minor works £0.075 Borough Wide Small scale works, new signs, markings, bollards,etc Traffic Management Sub-Total £0.300
1.6 Minor Works for people with Impaired Mobility £0.055 Borough wide local access improvements Minor Works/Impaired Mobility Sub-Total £0.055
1.7 Drainage Renewal £m £0.050 Borough wide Renewal of highways sewers /Gullies that have become blocked or collapsed Drainage Sub-Total £0.050
1.8 Parking Management £m £0.100 Borough wide parking management programme Parking Sub-Total £0.100
1.9 Flooding Strategy £m Woodford Flood alleviation £0.518 Wards adj. River Roding Flooding Sub-total £0.518
Page 122 Highways Major Works 2017/2018 APPENDIX A
Planned Project Expenditure Ward Comment 2017/18 OTHER FUNDING 1.10 SECTION 106 FUNDING The list below contains s106 contributions that still require Cabinet spending approval or where the purposes for which the money will be used have changed. In some cases, approval has already been given to spend part of the contributions. Note: Flexibility to use Section 106 contributions varies depending of the wording of the agreements. Some are ring fenced to a specific purpose, others are less prescriptive but need to be spent in the vicinity of the development or to mitigate a problem arising from the development whilst some can be spent on transport improvements anywhere in the Borough. Development S.106 paid £m 1 Queen Mary College S. Woodford £0.007 Church End Orbital Corridor 2 work 2 Queen Mary college S.Woodford £0.012 Church End Orbital Corridor 2 work 3 11a Baxter road £0.002 Loxford Parking Zone 4 Barnardos Phase 3 £0.099 Aldborough Junction Improvement Civic Way 5 Barnardos Head Office £0.030 " Horns Road Crossing 6 519 Green Lane £0.002 Goodmayes Travel Monitoring 7 33-39 High St Wanstead £0.004 Snaresbrook Public Transport Improvements 8 Gants Hill/Clarence Ave £0.020 Cranbrook Parking measures 9 Former Odeon Gants hill £0.022 Transport Improvements 10 Oaks Ln Salvation Army £0.010 Aldborough Footpath Improvements 11 Oaks Ln Salvation Army £0.034 " Transport Improvements 12 Cycle Compound Town Hall £0.002 Clementswood Cycle compound Town hall 13 418-420 Cranbrook Rd £0.004 Aldborough Jct Improvement Civic Way 14 519 Green Lane £0.008 Goodmayes Transport Improvements Section 106 Sub-total £0.256
1.11 COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING (CIL) £m 1 Allocated to crossrail £0.418 CIL Sub-total £0.418
REDBRIDGE FUNDING 2017/18 £m 1.1 Major Resurfacing £2.628 1.2 Preventative Maintenance £1.172 1.3 Lighting Replacement £0.330 1.4 LED borough wide replacement £2.000 1.5 Traffic Management £0.300 1.6 Minor Works/ Impaired Mobility £0.055 1.7 Drainage £0.050 1.8 Parking Management £0.100 1.9 Flooding Strategy £0.518 Sub Total £7.153 Other funding 1.10 Section 106 £0.256 1.11 CIL £0.418 Sub Total £0.674 Total £7.827
Page 123 Highways Major Works 2017/2018 APPENDIX A
Planned Project Expenditure Ward Comment 2017/18
2 TRANSPORT for LONDON FUNDING
2.1 Corridors/Neighbourhoods £m 1 Radial Corridor 1 A118 High Road £0.290 Loxford Highway and Footway improvements between Town centres on A118 High 2 Radial Corridor 3 Longwood £0.300 Various ImprovementsRoad to assist Gardens to Forest pedestrians and cyclists Road along Longwood Gdns. Review of zebra crossing facility at Barkingside High St, Fullwell Cross 3 Orbital Corridor 2 Woodford area £0.300 Various General Improvements to Lighting, footways, crossings, junctions, bus facilities on approaches to South Woodford, High Rd, Woodford Green, Epping New Rd and Cranbrook Rd 4 Orbital Corridor 5 Chadwell Heath £0.100 Chadwell Ped. Facilties,Decluttering Lane 5 Green Corridor 1 Woodford to £0.200 Various Cycle Improvements Hainault
6 Green Corridor 2 Roding Valley Way £0.035 Various Cycle Improvements
7 Radial Corridor 4 A123 (Gants Hill to £0.090 Various Highway and Footway Hainault) improvements 8 Newbury Park District Centre £0.090 Various streetscape improvements 9 River Roding Bridge Bridge under A406 £0.025 Valentines streetscape improvements
Corridors/Neighbourhoods Sub-Total £1.430
Page 124 Highways Major Works 2017/2018 APPENDIX A
Planned Project Expenditure Ward Comment 2017/18
2.2 Accident Remediation - Local Safety Schemes The available budget may not be sufficient to complete the Local Safety Scheme programme. If for any reason one scheme cannot be progressed the next in the priority list will be selected and the schemes will be progressed until the funds are fully spent. Projects not progressed this year will be re-evaluated next year. £m 1 Overton Drive (Wanstead) £0.089 Wanstead Accident remedial 2 Tomswood Hill £0.130 Fairlop Accident remedial 3 Clayhall Avenue (continuation from 16/17) £0.220 Fullwell Accident remedial 4 Traffic signal Improvements £0.050 Borough wide Local Safety Schemes Sub-Total £0.489
2.3 Supporting Measures £m 1 School Travel Plans £0.185 2 Travel Awareness £0.109 3 Education, Training and Publicity £0.129 4 Work Travel Plans £0.010 Smarter Travel Sub-Total £0.433 Borough wide
2.4 Local Priority £m 1 Accessibility £0.030 2 Borough-wide strategic network imp. £0.070 Local Priority Sub-Total £0.100 Borough wide
2.5 Principal Roads The available budget is insufficient to complete the Principal Road Maintenance programme. If for any reason one scheme cannot be progressed the next in the priority list will be selected and the schemes will be progressed until the funds are fully spent. Projects not progressed this year will be re-evaluated next year.
£m 1 A118 High Rd- Eastwood Rd - Barley Ln £0.574 Seven kings Carriageway Resurfacing Principal Road Maintenance Sub-Total £0.574
2.6 Air Quality £m Air monitoring £0.020 Air Quality Sub-Total £0.020
2.7 Design £m Design work £0.051 Design Sub-Total £0.051
Page 125 Highways Major Works 2017/2018 APPENDIX A
Planned Project Expenditure Ward Comment 2017/18 2.8 Low Emission Neighbourhood (LEN) £m Ilford Garden Junction £0.400 Loxford LEN Sub-Total £0.400
2.9 Crossrail Complementary Measures £m Goodmayes £0.465 Seven Kings Urban Realm Improvements Goodmayes Seven kings £0.660 Seven kings Urban Realm Improvements
Ilford £0.700 Valentines Urban Realm Improvements Clementswood Crossrail Sub-Total £1.825
TRANSPORT for LONDON FUNDING 2017/18 £m 2.1 Corridors/Neighbourhoods £1.430 2.2 Accident Remediation £0.489 2.3 Supporting Measures £0.433 2.4 Local Priority £0.100 2.5 Principal Road Maintenance £0.574 2.6 Air Quality £0.020 2.7 Design £0.051 2.8 Low Emission Neighbourhood £0.400 2.9 Crossrail Complementary Measures £1.825 Total £5.322
HIGHWAYS MAJOR WORKS FUNDING 2017/18 £m 1 LBR Funding £7.827 incl S.106n & CIL funding 2 TfL Funding £5.322 GRAND TOTAL £13.149
Page 126 Major Resurfacing 2017-2022-Carriageways APPENDIX B 1
Carriageway Resurfacing Street Ward Cost £
Planned Programme for 2017/18 Grove Park Snaresbrook 336,000 Clinton Crescent Hainault 181,000 New North Road (Part) Fairlop/Hainault 184,000 Southdown Crescent Aldborough 114,000 South Park Road Clementswood 420,000 Station Road Aldborough 143,000
* 1,378,000 *£128,000 supplemented from preventative maintenance budget Reserve Roads for 2017/2018 Bede Road Chadwell Blythswood Road Seven Kings Brian Road Chadwell Devonshire Road Newbury Mayesbrook Road Goodmayes Shepherds Close Chadwell Staines Road (Part) Loxford/Clementswood/Mayfield Thorold Road Newbury Vernon Road Goodmayes Wanstead Place Snaresbrook Wellwood Road Sevenkings Westernville Gardens Newbury Windsor Road Clementswood
Outline Programme for 2018/2022 ABERDOUR RD Goodmayes AGNES AVE Loxford ANNE WAY:ARAGON DRIVE TO TUDOR CRESCENT Fairlop APPLEGARTH DR Aldborough ARGYLE RD (Part) Valentines ASHBOURNE AVE:CRANBOURNE AVE TO CADOGAN GDNS Roding ASHBURTON AVE Mayfield AUCKLAND RD Valentines/Newbury BALFOUR RD Valentines/Newbury BARRINGTON CL:HURSTLEIGH GDNS TO END BY NO.10 Fullwell BAWDSEY AVE Aldborough BEEHIVE LANE Nth & Sth Barkingside/Cranbrook BELMONT RD Clementswood BERKELEY AVE:CLAYHALL AVE TO FULLWELL AVE Fullwell BISHOPS AVE Chadwell BORROWDALE CL:WIDECOMBE GDNS TO END Clayhall BRACKLEY SQ GLASTONBURY AVE TO END BY NO.147 C/WIS Bridge BRANCASTER RD Newbury BRENDON GDNS Aldborough BRINKWORTH RD:CLAYBURY BRDWAY TO MARLBOROUGH DR Clayhall BROOK RD Monkhams
Page 127 Major Resurfacing- Carriageways 2017-2022
Carriageway Resurfacing Street Ward Cost £ BRUNSWICK GARDENS:HANOVER GDNS TO COLVIN GDNS Fairlop BURTON RD ALEXANDRA RD TO HERMON HILL Roding BUSH RD DURHAM AVE TO BUCKHURST WAY Bridge CADOGAN GNDS:ASHBOURNE AVE TO CHIGWELL RD Roding CASTLEVIEW GARDENS Cranbrook CATERHAM AVE:CLAYHALL AVE TO FULLWELL AVE Fullwell CHADACRE AVE:MARLANDS RD TO HERENT DR Clayhall CHADVILLE GDNS Chadwell CHADWELL AVE Seven Kings CHERRY TREE RISE HILLSIDE AVE TO BUCKHURST WAY Bridge CHEVIOT WAY Aldborough CHICHESTER GDNS Cranbrook CHILTERN RD Aldborough CHILTERN WAY WHITEHALL RD TO END OF LOOP C/WISE Monkhams CHURCH RD Newbury CLARISSA RD Chadwell COBBETTS AVE:RODING LN SOUTH TO END Clayhall COLLEGE GNDS:HIGHCLIFFE GDNS TO RIDGEWAY GDNS Clayhall COVENTRY RD Valentines COVERT ROAD Hainault COWLEY RD Cranbrook CRANBROOK RISE Cranbrook CRANLEY RD Newbury CROMER RD:HIGH RD W/G (SLIP RD) TO END Monkhams DALKEITH RD Clementswood DE VERE GDNS Valentines DELLOW CLOSE Newbury DURHAM AVE BARNES COURT TO BUSH RD Bridge EASTERNVILLE GDNS Newbury ELLESMERE GNDS:A12 EASTERN AVE TO REDBRIDGE LN EAS Clayhall EMERSON RD Cranbrook EMPRESS AVE Valentines EXETER GDNS Cranbrook FAIRMEAD GNDS:FERNHALL DR TO FALMOUTH GDNS Clayhall FALMOUTH GNDS:REDBRIDGE LN EAST TO RODING LN SOUTH Clayhall FOSTERS CL LATCHETT RD TO END Roding FOWEY AVE:MIGHELL AVE TO FALMOUTH GDNS Clayhall FRANCIS RD Clementswood GLASTONBURY AVE SNAKES LN TO BRACKLEY SQ Bridge GLENDALE AVE Chadwell GRANGEWAY GNDS:REDBRIDGE LN EAST TO COLLEGE GDNS Clayhall GRANVILLE RD Valentines GREENSTEAD GNDS DANBURY WAY TO GREENSTEAD AVE Bridge GREENSTEAD GNDS SPUR FROM NO.35 TO S/O NO.7 Bridge HAINAULT RD Aldborough HANNARDS WAY Hainault HARROW RD Loxford/Clementswood HAVELOCK ST Clementswood HAVERING GDNS Chadwell HEATHERWOOD CL Wanstead
Page 128 Major Resurfacing- Carriageways 2017-2022
Carriageway Resurfacing Street Ward Cost £ HICKMAN RD Chadwell HIGHLANDS GDNS Cranbrook HOMEFIELD AVE Aldborough HORNS ROAD Aldborough JOYDON DR Chadwell KENILWORTH GDNS Goodmayes KESWICK GNDS:A1400 WOODFORD AVE TO END Clayhall LANCING RD Newbury LEAMINGTON GDNS Goodmayes LEYSWOOD DR Aldborough MADRAS RD Loxford MANNIN RD Seven Kings MAYFAIR AVE Valentines MAYFIELD RD Goodmayes MELDRUM RD Goodmayes MENDIP RD Aldborough MERIDEN CL:MOSSFORD LN TO END Fullwell MERRIVALE AVE:PEAKETON AVE TO FALMOUTH GDNS Clayhall MIGHELL AVE:COBBETTS AVE TO FALMOUTH GDNS Clayhall MORLAND RD Valentines NONSUCH CLOSE:TUDOR CRESCENT TO END Fairlop NORTHDOWN GDNS Aldborough OAKLANDS PARK AVE Clementswood OAKS LN Aldborough OXFORD RD Loxford PARK AVE Valentines PEREGRINE ROAD Hainault PERRYMANS FARM RD Aldborough RIPLEY RD mayfield ROCHFORD AVE Chadwell RODING LN SOUTH:SPUR FROM FALMOUTH GDNS TO END N/B Clayhall RODING LN STH:RED LN EAST TO WOODFORD BRIDGE RD Clayhall SHERWOOD RD Aldborough ST.MARYS AVE Wanstead STANLEY RD Churchend STONELEIGH RD:CLAYBURY BRDWAY TO CHADACRE AVE Clayhall STRADBROKE GR:CLAYBURY BRDWAY TO HERENT DR Clayhall STRADBROKE GR:HERENT DR TO ABBOTSWOOD GDNS Clayhall TANNERS LANE Alborough/Fairlop THE ALBANY SUNSET AVE TO END Monkhams THE BROADWAY:SNAKES LA WEST TO KINGS AVE Monkhams TORQUAY GNDS:BRAINTREE AVE TO FALMOUTH GDNS Clayhall VAUGHAN GDNS Cranbrook VISTA DR:RODING LN SOUTH TO FALMOUTH GDNS Clayhall WARLEY RD:CAERNARVON DR TO RAVENSBOURNE GDNS Fullwell WARREN RD Aldborough WELLS GDNS Cranbrook WENSLEYDALE AVE:SPUR-THE GLADE TO END BY NO.151 Fullwell WHITES AVE Aldborough WIDECOMBE GNDS:KESWICK GDNS TO WOODFORD BRIDGE RD Clayhall
Page 129 Major Resurfacing- Carriageways 2017-2022
Carriageway Resurfacing Street Ward Cost £ WINDERMERE GNDS:A12 EASTERN AVE TO REDBRIDGE LN EA Clayhall
Notes: 1 The above list for 2017/18 represents the highest ranked discrete sections of carriageway in need of major maintenance as determined by United Kingdom Pavement Management System (UKPMS) condition survey data & Value Engineering (VE) assessment. Detailed scheme designs are to be determined, but the estimated costs are indicative of typical works. Works will be progressed in relative priority order and complimentary works co-ordinated where practicable. Works will be also be subject to Utility proposals and other factors that may affect the suitability of undertaking works in the streets listed
2 The outline list of roads for the 4 year period 2018-2022 is an indicactive prgramme of work based on current assessments. This will be reviewed taking into account most up to date condition information and may be subject to change.
Page 130 Major Resurfacing 2017-2022-Footways APPENDIX B1
Footway Resurfacing
Street Ward Cost £ Planned Programme for 2017/18 CHILTERN WAY: WHITEHALL RD TO END OF LOOP C/WISE Monkhams 188,000 CLAYHALL AVENUE: Berkley Avenue to Mossford Lane Clayhall 407,000 KESTREL CLOSE: MARLYON RD TO END BY NO.22 Hainault 58,000 TUDOR CRESCENT: ARAGON DRIVE TO FENCEPIECE RD Fairlop 597,000
1,250,000
Outline Programme for 2018-2022 BELGRAVE RD: NORTHBROOK RD TO STANHOPE GDNS V'tines/Crnbrck BELGRAVE RD: STANHOPE GDNS TO END Cranbrook BUSH RD: DURHAM AVE TO BUCKHURST WAY Bridge DURHAM AVE: PROSPECT RD TO BARNES COURT Bridge GARDNER CL: END BY NO.68-84 E/B TO END BY NO.107-110 Wanstead GARDNER CL: KINGFISHER AVE TO TEE JCT Wanstead GLENWOOD GDNS: WOODFD AVE TO QUEENBORO' GDNS Barkingside GROSVENOR ROAD Clementswood GROVE PARK Snaresbrook HERTFORD RD: BROOK RD TO SUFFOLK RD Newbury LANSDOWNE RD: CAMBRIDGE RD TO MEADS LN Seven Kings MONTFORT GARDENS Fairlop NEW NORTH ROAD (Part) Hainault PERCY RD: MEADS LN TO BARLEY LN Seven Kings RODING LANE SOUTH (Part) Clayhall ST.ANTHONYS AVE: ST.BARNABAS RD TO BRDMEAD RD Bridge ST.MARGARET'S RD: ALDERSBROOK RD TO WANSTEAD PK AVE Wanstead WOODLANDS AVENUE Wanstead
Notes: 1 The above list for 2017/18 represents the highest ranked discrete sections of footway in need of major maintenance as determined by United Kingdom Pavement Management System (UKPMS) condition survey data & Value Engineering (VE) assessment. Detailed scheme designs are to be determined, but the estimated costs are indicative of typical works. Works will be progressed in relative priority order and complimentary works co-ordinated where practicable. Works will be also be subject to Utility proposals and other factors that may affect the suitability of undertaking works in the streets listed
2 The outline list of road for the 4 year period 2018-2022 is an indicactive prgramme of work based on current assessment. This will be reviewed taking into account most up to date condition information and may be subject to change.
Page 131 Street Lighting Replacement 2017-2022 APPENDIX B2
Street Lighting Replacement Programme Street Ward No of 2017-18 Columns Cost £ Planned Programme for 2017/18 Kings Avenue MONK 36 £57,600 Beresford Drive MONK 8 £12,800 Princes Avenue MONK 20 £32,000 Worcester Crescent MONK 34 £54,400 Malvern Drive MONK 15 £24,000 Hutton Close MONK 3 £4,800 Park Avenue MONK 10 £16,000 The Green MONK 7 £11,200 Barclay Oval MONK 8 £12,800 Snakes Lane West MONK 6 £10,000 Carlina Gardens MONK 8 £12,800 Colwall Gardens MONK 9 £14,400 St Anthony's Avenue BRID 14 £22,400 Prospect Road BRID 28 £44,800
TOTAL £330,000 Outline Programme for 2018/2022 Milkwell Gardens BRID 3 Claremont Grove BRID 4 Diana Close RODI 4 Latchett Road RODI 8 Crescent Road RODI 15 Goldhaze Close BRID 8 Waverley Road RODI 11 Spring Gardens BRID 7 Wansford Road RODI 17 Grenville Gardens RODI 13 Fosters Close RODI 4 Navestock Crescent RODI 31 Waverley Close RODI 2 Cortland Close RODI 5 Pintail Road BRID 8 Roxwell Way BRID 5 Springfield Gardens BRID 8 Underwood Road BRID 18 Fyfield Road BRID 11 Finchingfield Avenue BRID 21 Davinia Close BRID 4 Rayleigh Road BRID 14 Hookstone Way BRID 11 Rayleigh Road BRID 14 Theydon Grove BRID 11 Maldon Walk BRID 6 Debden Close BRID 7 Cairns Avenue BRID 11 Owen Gardens BRID 12 Morgan Way BRID 10 Deacon Way BRID 6 Sands Way BRID 8
Page 132 Street Lighting Replacement 2017-2022 APPENDIX B2
Kinnaird Way BRID 7 Elmslie Close BRID 7 Manor Road BRID 15 Nyssa Close BRID 5 Chaplemount Road BRID 14 Gwynne Park Avenue BRID 32 Long Green HAIN 13 Stevens Way HAIN 4 The Acorns HAIN 6 The Friars HAIN 4 Fairview Road HAIN 11 Fairview Close HAIN 5 Fairview Drive HAIN 12 Rowland Crescent HAIN 10 Arrowsmith Close HAIN 3 Holt Close HAIN 3 Holt Way HAIN 6 Fletcher Road HAIN 6 Tine Road HAIN 14 Bearing Way HAIN 8 Fawn Road HAIN 4 Brocket Way HAIN 41 Burrow Road HAIN 31 Crossbow Road HAIN 9 Martinsfield Close HAIN 3 Tunstall Avenue HAIN 10 Bearing Close HAIN 3 Harbourer Close HAIN 4 Agister Road HAIN 7 Verderers Road HAIN 10 Arrowsmith Road HAIN 31 Hursley Road HAIN 18 Tufter Road HAIN 5 Manford Cross HAIN 13 Boar Close HAIN 16 Hunstman Road HAIN 32 Harbourer Road HAIN 12 Regarder Road HAIN 5 Baywood Square HAIN 14 Lakeland Close HAIN 10 Latchford Place HAIN 8 Marlyon Road HAIN 20
Notes: 1 The above lists represent the highest ranked roads in need of street lighting replacement as determined by Value Engineering (VE) assessment and structural testing through the HAMP. Detailed scheme designs are to be determined following site specific investigation taking in to account lighting levels and road characteristics, but the estimated costs are indicative of typical works and allow for an annual RPI increase. The schemes will use new technology such as LED Lighting and energy efficient lanterns. Works will be progressed in relative priority order and complimentary works co-ordinated where practicable. Works will also be subject to Utility proposals and other factors that may affect the suitability of undertaking works in the roads listed
Page 133 TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT/ACCIDENT REMEDIAL SCHEME PRIORITISATION APPENDIX C
2017/18 Works Programme-Table a
Funding Estimated No Location Project Status Ward Source Cost 1 Clayhall Avenue Traffic Calming Accident remediation TfL £129,000 Clay/full 2 Tomswood Hill Traffic Calming Accident remediation TfL £130,000 Fairlop 3 Ilford Lane Zebra Crossings Accident remediation TfL £91,000 Clem/Lox 4 Overton Drive Traffic Calming Accident remediation TfL £89,000 Wanstead 5 Borough Wide Contribution to Traffic Include in 2016/17 Accident TfL £50,000 B/W Signal improvements Remedial Works programme 6 Longbridge Junction Safety Works LBR Traffic Management LBR £175,000 Mayfield Road/Goodmayes 7 Study/DesignLane Works Not Assigned To Be Designed LBR £50,000 B/W
8 Minor Works Various minor Schemes Include in 2016/17 Accident LBR £75,000 B/W Remedial Works 2017/18 Reserve List- Table b programme 1 Headley Drive Traffic Calming Possible Study TBA B/Side
2 Beehive Lane Traffic Calming Possible Study TBA Cranbrook 3 Ashurst Drive Traffic Calming Possible Study TBA Bside/Ald
4 Ashgrove Road Traffic Calming Possible Study TBA Gmayes 5 Fullwell Avenue Traffic Calming Possible Study TBA Clay/Full
Page 134 Agenda Item 11 Cabinet Meeting Date Classification 4th April 2017 Public From The Cabinet Member for Environment and Sustainability and Cabinet Member for Regeneration, Property and Planning to the Cabinet
Relevant Service Committee Title Of Report Neighbourhoods Service Committee –29th Crossrail (Elizabeth Line) Project Progress and March 2017 Crossrail Urban Integration Scheme Delivery
1. Executive Summary
1.1 This report provides an update regarding general progress of the Crossrail (Elizabeth Line) project within the Borough and refers to rail sector works in various stages of progress at Ilford, Seven Kings, Goodmayes and Chadwell Heath stations and at Ilford depot.
1.2 It also outlines progress concerning the design, funding and implementation of urban realm improvements being pursued for the core areas outside Ilford, Seven Kings and Goodmayes Stations, and for enhancement work in Station Road car park at Chadwell Heath. It seeks Cabinet approval, where required, of expenditure of Crossrail Complementary Measures funding and Community Infrastructure Levy funding for 2017/18 to enable these works to be taken forward.
1.3 A feasibility Study has been jointly commissioned with Rail for London (RfL) to determine the viability of a southern entrance to Ilford Station from Ilford Hill across private land safeguarded through S106 Agreement for this purpose. If the new southern entrance is proved feasible and viable, grant funding of £1.115m will be sought from the GLA Ilford Town Housing Zone via an Intervention Agreement, towards the delivery of this new entrance. Further funding may also be required.
2. Recommendations
The Cabinet is recommended to:-
2.1 Note the information contained in this report regarding timing of works on Elizabeth Line station premises in the Borough and at Ilford Depot by Crossrail Ltd and the progress being made regarding progression of urban realm enhancements around each of the Elizabeth Line stations in the Borough;
2.2 Reduce the 2017/18 Capital Programme budget by £0.100m in line with Transport for London’s recent announcement on the level of Crossrail Complementary Measures funding towards such improvements in the Ilford Station area;
2.3 Approve expenditure in 2017/18, of £1.825m from Crossrail Complementary Measures and £0.418m of Community Infrastructure Levy receipts towards design, consultation, preparatory works and
Page 135 implementation of Urban Integration Study streetscape works around all the Borough’s Elizabeth Line stations;
2.4 Delegate to the Operational Director, Civic Pride, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Environment and Sustainability, authority to allocate the 2017/18 expenditure outlined in paragraphs 3.30 to 3.46 of the report for urban realm integration works around the Borough’s Elizabeth Line stations and make any minor changes, in accordance with the stations priority order previously agreed by Cabinet;
2.5 Note the position regarding a potential new permanent entrance at Ilford Station accessed from Ilford Hill; and
2.6 Agree to receive a future report detailing progress on Elizabeth Line matters in Spring 2018.
THE DECISIONS PROPOSED IN THE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THIS REPORT MAY BE REQUISITIONED
Contact Point Name: Cllr. John Howard Position: Cabinet Member for Environment and Sustainability Telephone: 020 3289 0565 Email: [email protected]
Name: Cllr. Helen Coomb Position: Cabinet Member for Regeneration, Property and Planning Telephone: 020 8708 9072 Email: [email protected]
Officer Contact Point Name: Glen Richards Position: Head of Transportation Telephone: 020 8708 3670 Email: [email protected]
Name: Sharon Strutt Position: Strategic Head of Delivery Telephone: 020 8708 2143 Email: [email protected]
Page 136 3. Background Overview 3.1 Elizabeth Line services will be fully operational in the Borough by 2019, linking Ilford, Seven Kings, Goodmayes and Chadwell Heath step-free stations via a new tunnel west of Stratford under central London towards Whitechapel, the West End, Paddington, Heathrow Airport and Reading. In the opposite direction, some trains will diverge at Whitechapel via Canary Wharf towards Abbey Wood, with the remainder serving stations in LB Redbridge and on to Shenfield. 3.2 In February 2016, the Mayor of London announced that Crossrail will be named the Elizabeth Line in recognition of Her Majesty’s long and historic reign. When fully operational, it will appear on future rail network maps as a purple line and its stations will acquire initially TfL Rail Network roundel and exterior totem style signage which will change later to Elizabeth Line. The name “Crossrail” will continue to be used during the construction phase before the services start. 3.3 The Crossrail project is now over 80% complete, and there is a huge amount of work underway to complete the central London stations and fit out the physical infrastructure with the systems required to turn it into an operational railway. The north-east branch of the Elizabeth Line has already been taken over by TfL Rail in advance of Elizabeth Line services, and TfL has started on some improvements besides those being delivered as part of the Crossrail project. 3.4 65 new trains are being constructed for Elizabeth Line services, each comprising 9 walk-through carriages equipped with air conditioning, wifi and 4G, offering additional overall capacity though with less seating. 1,500 passengers will be accommodated per train, 450 of whom will have seats, and the trains will consume 30% less energy than the existing rolling stock on the TfL Rail Shenfield line. Four dedicated wheelchair spaces will be provided in the middle carriage of each train with easy access to the doorways. Ten multi-user spaces will be distributed throughout each train that can be used for bicycles as well as pushchairs, large luggage and wheelchairs (additional to the four dedicated wheelchair spaces in the middle carriage).
3.5 The trains are being constructed in Derby by Bombardier and the first arrived in Ilford Yard in December 2016 ready for further tests. The trains, initially in 7-carriage formation, will be introduced on the Liverpool Street to Shenfield TfL Rail route from May 2017. 3.6 Previous reports to Cabinet in each of the last three years outlined the basis of the Crossrail project, the Urban Integration Study masterplans led by Crossrail Ltd (CRL) recommending streetscape improvements in the vicinities of the stations themselves and the emergence of a Crossrail Complementary Measures (CCM) funding pot from Transport for London from which Boroughs could bid for investment to pay for such improvements in defined “core areas”. 3.7 Agreed recommendations from those reports enabled CCM funding awarded to the Borough to be supplemented by Section 106 planning contributions and Community Infrastructure Levy receipts to finance the development and implementation of these urban realm upgrades over several years. More details are provided within paragraphs 3.30 to 3.46 of this report. 3.8 These upgrades are set in context first in paragraphs 3.9 to 3.29 below which summarises the position regarding works being undertaken on CRL’s behalf by Network Rail and its contractors to the railway premises themselves. Good working relationships continue at officer level with CRL and TfL Rail, and contacts have been
Page 137 developed with MTR Corporation (Crossrail) Limited, who operate the current Shenfield Line metro services for TfL. Stations and Ilford Depot Improvement Works and Tunnelling and Construction Academy update 3.9 Close liaison by officers has continued with CRL and Network Rail regarding the scope of their upgrading works on station premises and Ilford Depot Yard, the timing of their Schedule 7 planning applications to the Borough to implement such changes, the timing of site works and implications for surrounding highways and the environment. The broad extent of Ilford Station main building works was presented by CRL to the Council’s External Scrutiny Panel on 11th January 2017. 3.10 At the time of writing this report, the following information summarises the main improvements being progressed at the four stations and Ilford Depot. Affected Ward Members have been forwarded previous Crossrail progress bulletins to keep local residents abreast of developments affecting stations in their vicinity, and will continue to be updated as appropriate. Ilford
Platforms and York Mews entrance
3.11 Work has continued for piling in connection with new overhead gantry structures, some new track and new overhead cables, at the west end of the station. This has enabled the extension of the platforms at this end of the station to accommodate the new trains. As expected, the bay platform (platform 5) was decommissioned in May 2016 to provide space for these extensions. Other work will include new lighting columns, communications equipment, CCTV and passenger information points, toilet refurbishment and signage improvements.
3.12 The station entrance in York Mews, off York Road, previously an alley-way open only during Monday to Friday peak hours, was re-opened by the Leader of Council in September 2016. It uses the neighbouring railway building to create a new ticket hall, with new lighting, CCTV and improved gateline facilities. It is open and staffed at all times that trains are running and represents a significant local access improvement to station users from the Valentines Ward side of the station. These works have been delivered by RfL (Rail for London – part of TfL) alongside the Crossrail project. 3.13 A permanent new ramped pedestrian and cycle connection is planned from the Shenfield-bound platform 4 from the York Mews station building. This work is also to be carried out by RfL.
3.14 LB Redbridge is working with RfL in an initial study of a possible future entrance on the south side to improve the operation of the station and facilitate access from Ilford Hill. The ambition is to establish a permanent entrance that may have a role to play when the main Cranbrook Road entrance is reconstructed.
Main station building and frontage
3.15 CRL has concluded surveys to assess the condition and capacity of the existing “slab” and substructure at the Cranbrook Road main entrance plus the ground conditions associated with the installation of new lifts. Following further discussion with officers, good progress has been made with CRL’s revised plans for a completely remodelled main building and Cranbrook Road frontage.
Page 138 3.16 In the opinion of your officers, the scope of the main station building rebuild now being progressed by CRL represents significant improvements for station users compared to CRL’s original proposals. The station design now going forward will deliver improved visual presence of the main station entrance and enhance the principal public transport gateway into Ilford Town Centre. The new station building and eventual full Elizabeth Line train services should help to catalyse the future regeneration outlined in the “Ilford Town Centre – The Way Forward” report to Cabinet in September 2015. Passengers will benefit from uncluttered access to more ticket barrier gates than currently exist, from easier movement upon the main footbridge behind those barriers arising from an increase in its usable width, and from the provision of lifts to all platforms from that footbridge.
3.17 CRL’s Schedule 7 application to the Council detailing the architectural elements of the work was approved in December 2016. A briefing for Council Members by CRL on 28th November 2016 had preceded this. Following this approval, further detailed design will now take place and the contract for the construction of the station will be advertised and let. Work is expected to get underway in early 2018 and take around 18 months to complete. In addition to railway land to the north of the station platforms and the station forecourt itself, CRL still needs to secure sufficient space for a site compound, works access, temporary welfare and office accommodation.
3.18 It is clear, however, that once work begins on the main station building, it will not be possible for public access to the station from Cranbrook Road to be maintained until the completion of that project. During that eighteen month period, CRL will be opening up a temporary ticket office and temporary gateline on Platform 1 (the southernmost platform) to enable passengers to enter the station here from Ilford Hill via a screened-off walkway through the Network Rail car park to supplement the York Mews access.
3.19 Passenger security during these temporary arrangements will be addressed with improved lighting and CCTV surveillance of this walkway. Also, bearing in mind that Platform 1 is currently used principally by fast non-stopping trains, for safety reasons a temporary mid-platform fence will be installed along it from the temporary ticket office towards the existing footbridge at the western end of the station, which gives access to Platforms 2, 3 and 4, the latter two of which are used by most services calling at Ilford. The construction methodology adopted by the contractor eventually appointed by Network Rail may result in some modifications to the arrangements outlined above.
Depot and Yard
3.20 Ilford Yard will be the site for the stabling of Elizabeth Line trains from 2017. To enable the parking of the new Elizabeth Line trains in early 2017 the depot has required significant modification to a number of buildings and the tracks. The depot is currently used by both Greater Anglia and Bombardier Transportation UK and has remained operational while site works have progressed. The main work began on site in January 2014 by CRL’s appointed contractor, VolkerFitzpatrick, and will be complete in Spring 2017 in advance of the first trains coming into service in May 2017. Works on site have included the construction of a replacement paint shop and new logistics and stores building. Works have also been carried out on the interior and exterior of a number of existing buildings, including the roof of workshop A (the large building in the middle of the site).
Page 139 3.21 A successful five month blockade from September to December 2016 enabled several key activities, including demolition of two large buildings and piling of new foundations. Significant works continue up to spring 2017 to complete the Elizabeth Line sidings and operations building.
3.22 CRL issues regular newsletters to the local community and have held drop-in sessions twice a year. The blockade from September to December 2016 was most disruptive, and hotel stays were offered to a number of local residents disturbed by noise coming from the site. The site is registered with the Considerate Constructors Scheme and has performed well under their scoring system. VolkerFitzpatrick works closely with local schools, for example with the Engineering Club at nearby Christchurch School, and with voluntary groups such as the Salvation Army at the Redbridge Cold Weather Centre.
The Tunnelling and Underground Construction Academy (TUCA)
3.23 The Tunnelling and Underground Construction Academy (TUCA) is located at Aldersbrook Sidings near Ilford town centre, on the border of the London Boroughs of Newham and Redbridge. TUCA has ensured that the Crossrail project has had the skills needed for its construction and will be retained after project completion as a specialist training centre for other tunnelling projects thereby acting as a legacy to the UK construction industry. CRL’s state-of-the art training facility and Europe’s only specialist soft-ground tunnelling training facility, TUCA provides training for the key skills required to work in tunnel excavation, underground construction and infrastructure.
3.24 CRL advise that, since opening in September 2011, over 15,000 people have been trained here and that TUCA is expected to become a sector-led centre of excellence, delivering world-class skills and sustainable career opportunities for the Elizabeth Line and for future infrastructure projects. In 2015/16, the team at TUCA trained more than 4,500 people – a 45% increase on the previous year - across three key strands: pre-employment, workforce development and apprenticeships.
3.25 The volume of tunnelling and underground construction work taking place in London over the next decade is unprecedented with the Thames Tideway Tunnel, National Grid and EDF electricity cable tunnels all requiring significant numbers of skilled people. In the longer term, tunnelling skills will be required for the Crossrail 2 and High Speed 2 rail projects. The Academy will eventually operate as an independent organisation and will become a long-term provider of underground construction skills for other major infrastructure projects. The Academy also acts as the London centre for the National Skills Academy for Railway Engineering (NSARE).
Seven Kings
3.26 Repairs and refurbishment of the station exterior are underway to secure the building envelope and improve its appearance. Inside the main station building, the ticket hall is being reconfigured, including removal of third party retail, to accommodate a new gateline to optimise passenger flows with additional ticket gates, and new ticket machines and internal finishes will be provided throughout. Improved signage and lighting will be installed.
3.27 Between June 2016 and June 2017, the installation of step-free access facilities to all platforms is being progressed by TfL. A new footbridge and three lifts will be provided to the west of the main station canopy over Platforms 2 and 3 and will be
Page 140 accessed via an extended raised walkway which will be put in place above the embankment to the south of Platform 1 (the southernmost platform). This facility was lobbied for strongly by the Borough, local Ward Members and the Transport for All group and will be much-welcomed.
Goodmayes
3.28 Works continue to extend the platforms, provide three new lifts, repair and paint the footbridge and improve the public address system, lighting, CCTV and customer information systems. The current temporary ticket office will remain operational until completion of these works.
Chadwell Heath
3.29 The platforms are being extended at Chadwell Heath to cater for the longer trains. Repairs and refurbishment of the station exterior are underway to secure the building envelope and improve its appearance. Inside the main station building the ticket hall is being reconfigured, including removal of third party retail, to accommodate a new gateline to optimise passenger flows, and new internal finishes will be provided throughout. Lifts were provided at this station in 2012 as part of the “Access for All” scheme, separate from the Crossrail project.
Station Urban Integration Scheme Delivery Matters
3.30 The scope of the urban realm improvement schemes (UISs) planned for the streetscapes around each of the Borough’s four Elizabeth Line stations have been described in previous Cabinet reports and are not repeated here, but paragraphs 3.33 to 3.46 summarise progress at each location. It will be recalled that the UISs are being developed and implemented using funding from three main sources (TfL’s Crossrail Complementary Measures (CCM) pot, Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) and Section 106 funding contributions met from LB Redbridge resources), supplemented by separate TfL funding through the Local Implementation Plan mechanism.
3.31 The CCM funding is only permitted by TfL to be spent within “core areas” in close proximity of station entrances, as defined by CRL in each UIS. Cabinet has previously agreed that its CIL and Section 106 contributions would be spent in delivering UISs with Ilford as first priority, followed in order by Goodmayes, Seven Kings and Chadwell Heath.
3.32 Ensuing paragraphs provide a brief update concerning the works around each station, alluding where necessary to the relevant funding streams. As far as CCM funds are concerned, reference was made to allocation of £1.925m from this pot over the Borough’s four UISs in 2017/18 in an October 2016 Cabinet report outlining the Annual Spending Submission to Transport for London for 2017/18. The recommendations in this report seek the required approvals for CIL and CCM expenditure in 2017/18.
Ilford
3.33 Scheme design aspects for the Ilford Station area UIS following earlier public consultation were covered in the April 2016 Cabinet report. Activity over the last twelve months has concentrated on delivering substantial enhancements to York Road and York Mews in connection with the reopening and refurbishment by CRL of
Page 141 the York Mews station entrance. Improvements have included footway, lighting and CCTV upgrades, raised side road entry treatments and new taxi rank facilities in Belgrave Road. Completion of part of the enhancements in York Place was delayed to tie in with completion of new residential building construction in order to avoid abortive works. The full benefit of concluding the installation of York Road/ York Mews area UIS works will be realised during the period beginning in 2018 when the northern station entrance here will see greater usage when the main Cranbrook Road station entrance is temporarily closed.
3.34 It has been necessary in the last six months to consider revisions to the scope and detail of remaining elements of the Ilford UIS. This has arisen for several reasons: (i) Reduction by TfL for financial reasons of their overall CCM contribution for this station. The Borough has been required to “value engineer” downwards the scheme design to reflect a 10% CCM reduction accordingly imposed by TfL covering the amounts previously identified over 2017/18 and 2018/19; (ii) The need to review effective coordination and integration with the separate future Ilford Town Centre Public Realm enhancements, now that extensive detailed design work has been progressed on this latter project; (iii) Completion of the review of alternative southbound bus stop arrangements in Cranbrook Road, given that for safety reasons, the existing stop outside Bodgers will need to be removed; and (iv) Analysis of future taxi bay requirements for the Ilford Station and Town Centre areas. These factors are outlined respectively in more detail in paragraph 3.38 below.
3.35 The “value engineering” element involved identifying overall CCM savings of £0.176m, comprising £0.100m in 2017/18 and £0.076m in 2018/19. In liaison and agreement with CRL and TfL, this has been achieved by not progressing carriageway and environmental improvements in York Place and the full length of Heron Mews, reducing the scope of the enhancements previously planned for Station Road and for the Cranbrook Road footways between the main station entrance and York Road. Additionally, alterations to the High Road/ Ilford Hill/ Chapel Road junction originally envisaged as part of the Crossrail urban integration scheme have been withdrawn for the time being and will be reviewed in future in the context of the Ilford Town Centre public realm scheme and potential Ilford Western Gyratory proposals.
3.36 In order to strengthen the visual linkage between the key Ilford Town Centre gateways of the main station entrance and the western end of High Road, the opportunity is being taken to pursue installation of a coordinated footway palette between the Ilford Crossrail urban integration and town centre public realm schemes. Following discussion with TfL and CRL, it is intended to standardise upon a multimix granite palette using blocks of a 600mm x 300mm size (rather than the 800mm x 200mm originally proposed) for both this link, outside the station and the Cranbrook Road entrance to The Exchange. The floor strip lighting features previously intended to be installed just around the station entrance and The Exchange would still be incorporated.
3.37 It is not possible to retain the existing southbound bus stop outside Bodgers in its present position once the UIS is implemented because of the likelihood of queuing
Page 142 buses serving this stop obstructing the relocated and widened pelican crossing outside the station posing a safety hazard. It is important, however, for bus/rail interchange reasons to accommodate this stop in an alternative position close to the pelican crossing, and so following discussion with TfL and the Metropolitan Police, it will be relocated to the position currently occupied by the loading layby facility close to the existing flower stall. To meet TfL’s requirements, the layby will be removed so that buses serving this repositioned stop would not be delayed by having to make their way back into the main traffic stream. Alternative arrangements will be made in Balfour Road to replace the loss of the loading facilities in Cranbrook Road.
3.38 Discussions between the Borough, TfL and London Taxi Drivers Association representatives have taken place over the last fifteen months reviewing the arrangements for taxi rank provision in central Ilford. The future Ilford Town Centre public realm redesign, the need to respond to changes brought about by the emergence of Elizabeth Line services, and the need to consider interim taxi rank facilities during periods of UIS and Town Centre public realm reconstruction in the next two to three years have been the main catalyst for this review. As a consequence of these changes and pressures, the current over-provision of taxi bays will be reduced, and, at the time of writing this report, a new combined loading and taxi bay facility is proposed to be provided very close to the main station entrance, using a proposed northbound layby which would replace the existing facility located alongside the pelican crossing outside the station. Additionally, as mentioned earlier, new taxi rank facilities have already been provided in Belgrave Road and a facility will be retained in Balfour Road. The use of these taxi bays will be monitored, but it is hoped they will prove to be a valuable facility for rail passengers and shoppers accessing the town centre.
3.39 As matters currently stand, future phasing of Ilford Station area UIS construction and spend is expected as follows:
2017/18 - £0.418m CIL + £0.700m CCM =Total £1.118m 2018/19 - £0.180m CIL + £0.882m CCM = Total £1.062m
Further changes between these financial years (but not exceeding the overall financial envelope described) and to the expected elements of work cited below for 2017/18 may yet be necessary should CRL’s proposed timeline for their own works upon the main station building differ from that outlined in paragraph 3.17 of this report.
3.40 Taking into account the “value engineering” changes described above, works currently planned for 2017/18 involve:
Renewing both sides of the Cranbrook Road footway between Balfour Road and York Road with standard stone paving palette, as used in York Road, instead of the light grey granite paving previously proposed; Modifications to the straight section of Station Road between Cranbrook Road and the rear of the Primark store including narrowing of the carriageway and alterations to waiting and loading restrictions;
Page 143 Footway improvements to the section of Cranbrook Road on both sides between Station Road and High Road, starting in summer 2017.
Seven Kings
3.41 The main proposed features of the Seven Kings Station area UIS were described in the March 2015 Crossrail Cabinet report. Following local public consultation and further liaison with Ward Members, CRL and TfL during the course of 2016 on the scheme details, implementation of the streetscape enhancements on a phased basis began late in December 2016 (commencing with footway works in the High Road near Chester Road) and will extend through to 2018/19, mirroring the availability of CCM funding.
3.42 For 2017/18 and 2018/19, CCM funding of £0.660m and £0.460m respectively will be spent on the improvements, subject to TfL confirming the availability of those full CCM amounts. Regular on-site liaison will be maintained with local traders to ensure access to business premises during the course of the works.
Goodmayes
3.43 The main proposed features of the Goodmayes Station area UIS were similarly described in the March 2015 Crossrail Cabinet report. Following local public consultation and further liaison with Ward Members, CRL and TfL during the course of 2016 on the scheme details, implementation of the streetscape enhancements on a phased basis began late in December 2016 (commencing with footway works at the southern end of Goodmayes Road) and will continue through the 2017/18 financial year.
3.44 £0.465m of CCM funding from TfL will be spent on the improvements in 2017/18. Regular on-site liaison will be maintained with local traders to ensure access to business premises during the course of the works.
Chadwell Heath
3.45 The LB Redbridge element of this UIS concerns improvements to the Station Road car park. The outline design was completed and planning permission (0074/16) was granted on 29 March 2016. Following consideration of final cost estimates, the initial scale of proposed improvements has had to be reduced to meet the £0.147m worth of Crossrail Complementary Measures funding available. Site works will commence as soon as TfL Rail’s contractor engaged upon station improvement works vacates shortly the section of the car park it currently occupies.
3.46 Following public consultation by the London Borough of Barking and Dagenham regarding their proposed improvements for Station Road, works commenced in September 2016. These works are due to be completed by the end of the 2016/ 2017 financial year.
Ilford Station Southern Access
3.47 The desire for a southern entrance is to ease demand from the main Cranbrook Road entrance, cater for the new demand being generated by housing development in the east of Ilford Town and better interchange with bus services.
Page 144 3.48 LB Redbridge, working with RfL, have jointly commissioned a feasibility study to test the viability of this new entrance. The route from Ilford Hill to the Station is on private land, safeguarded for this purpose as part of the S106 Agreement for the development at 51/69 Ilford Hill.
3.49 The study will shortlist 2 options and the report will be used by the Council to access £1.115m GLA Housing Zone grant funding to deliver the entrance. Further funding may be required over and above the Housing Zone grant funding and a further report will be brought to Cabinet when a delivery approach has been identified with relevant stakeholders.
4. Options
4.1 The Council could choose not to spend any of the remaining Community Infrastructure Levy funding it has previously earmarked to contribute towards the Urban Integration Scheme improvements around Ilford Station but this would likely prompt objections from TfL and CRL and result in further reduction from TfL of the amount of Crossrail Complementary Measures funding it is making available. As explained in the report, streetscape enhancements of £0.176m have already had to be taken out of the Ilford Station area Urban Integration Scheme to meet TfL’s requirements. Any further reductions would undermine seriously the quality and extent of the highway improvements badly needed at this key gateway to Ilford Town Centre. This option is not therefore recommended.
5. Fairness Implications, including Equality and Diversity
5.1 Physical and sustainable accessibility improvements to stations, platforms and carriage stock by the rail sector will have a positive impact by making public transport more accessible to everyone, and will be especially beneficial to people who experience visual and mobility impairments, and parents with buggies. The new lifts to be installed at Ilford, Seven Kings and Goodmayes stations will be of particular value and the packages of enhancements to the public highway environments around the stations and their entrances being led and introduced by the Council will complement the investment being made by the rail industry.
5.2 The combination of “railside” and public highway enhancements at and around Elizabeth Line stations respectively will ensure that nobody is disadvantaged in accessing public transport and will bring about significant improvements in pedestrian comfort and safety in these congested areas. All sections of the diverse Redbridge community will benefit from easier access to and between sustainable modes of transportation, various security and surveillance features being introduced or enhanced and better pedestrian comfort levels in the congested areas surrounding the Borough’s Elizabeth Line Stations will help to minimise conflicts between different groups of street and station users.
6. Financial Implications
6.1 The report updates members on the progress of the Crossrail schemes. It also seeks approval for the Council’s related expenditure on the public realm in 2017/18 totalling £2.243m.
6.2 Members are being asked to approve a budget reduction of £0.100m from the Crossrail project which was approved as part of the 2017/18 Capital Programme on
Page 145 23rd February by Council as a result of reduced funding from Transport for London (TfL) mentioned in the recommendation 2.2 of this report. The table below outlines the revised budgets.
Year Approved Reduction Revised Budget £m Budget £m £m 2017/18 2.343 (0.100) 2.243 Funded by TFL Grant 1.925 (0.100) 1.825 CIL 0.418 0.418 Total Funding 2.343 (0.100) 2.243
6.3 The capital programme includes a budget of £1.089m in 2018/19 for this project based on an in-principle allocation from TfL at the time of its inclusion. Confirmation of the grant funding for 2018/19 is expected later in this year. Any further budget adjustments will be made during the 2018/19 budget setting process.
6.4 The reports states grant funding will be sought from the GLA Ilford Town Housing Zone, subject to the feasibility of the new southern entrance to Ilford Station. Any additional funds secured will be reported to Cabinet for approval. The ongoing revenue costs of these schemes will be contained within the existing directorate’s revenue budgets. The costs of the programme of works quoted in this report are inclusive of fees.
7. Legal Implications
7.1 A ‘section 106 agreement’ is a legal agreement made pursuant to section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 entered into between a local planning authority and persons interested in land which imposes planning obligations. Planning obligations are used by local planning authorities to mitigate the negative impacts of a development and make it acceptable in planning terms. Examples of planning obligations include the payment of financial contributions, works requirements and restrictions on the use of the development. In the past, Section 106 agreements have played an important role as the traditional method by which local planning authorities have funded infrastructure requirements within their areas. Thus Section 106 funding can be used in the locality of the development to ensure positive impact to include on major projects such as this.
7.2 CIL is a more recent tax on development, the purpose of which is to fund infrastructure. The Council introduced CIL on 01 January 2012. CIL is levied on new buildings and extensions to buildings according to their floor area. In this way money is raised from development to help the Council pay for schools, leisure centres, aged care accommodation, roads and other facilities to ensure the borough grows sustainably. CIL replaces the section 106 “tariff” which has previously been used for this purpose apart from in certain restricted developments. Accordingly it too can be used on a project such as this.
7.3 The legislative basis for CIL is provided in the Planning Act 2008, with the first Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations (the Regulations) made in 2010. The CIL Regulations require local authorities to allocate at least 15% of levy receipts to be spent on priorities agreed following consultation with the local community in areas where development is taking place. This way local people are given a stake in
Page 146 development enabling tangible improvements to their neighbourhoods to be delivered.
7.4 The type of projects listed that can be funded in this way include the provision, improvement, replacement, operation or maintenance of infrastructure and anything else that addresses the demands that development places on an area. Examples of potential projects include improvements to local parks i.e. footpaths, playground equipment and extended opening hours. The funding can thus be used on the Crossrail project.
7.5 In 2014 Transport for London (TfL) identified, in its current Business Plan, a funding budget of £28.5m to be spent against a line-wide series of station improvement schemes over four financial years (2015/16 -2018/19). This funding stream has been established as the TfL Crossrail Complementary Measures (CCM) programme within Transport for London’s Surface Strategy and Planning Directorate. It will be managed by the Borough Projects and Programmes team and allocated to London local authorities for works around the Crossrail stations. This funding forms part of a wider investment package for reinstatement and urban realm works around the stations.
7.6 Any expenditure on feasibility studies and subsequent construction works by the Council will need to be procured in compliance with the Council’s Contract Standing Orders and Public Contracts Regulations 2015.
BACKGROUND PAPERS
None
Page 147 Agenda Item 12
Cabinet Meeting Date Classification 4th April 2017 Public
From Cabinet Member for Housing and Cabinet Member for Regeneration, Property and Planning to the Cabinet
Relevant Service Committee Title Of Report Neighbourhoods Service Committee - Delivering temporary accommodation at Loxford 29th March 2017 Hall and the former Newbridge School
1. Executive Summary
1.1 There are currently more than 2,200 homeless households living in temporary accommodation until they are able to move to permanent homes they can afford. As a result, there is a pressing need to increase the supply of suitable accommodation to meet this need. Over the last three years, the Council has been seeking more cost effective ways to provide suitable accommodation for these households including the use of temporary structures, repurposing existing accommodation and purchasing new properties.
1.2 This report updates on two existing schemes and seeks approval of the application of funds from the existing capital programmes to deliver 96 self-contained units largely providing family accommodation. The direct provision of Council owned and managed accommodation will reduce the use of bed and breakfast or private rented accommodation and provide a consequential saving within the relevant general fund budgets.
1.3 The first scheme proposes that Loxford Hall, an existing Council owned property, be appropriated for the provision of General Fund housing activities and converted to provide six self-contained apartments. Loxford Hall is a council-owned building currently used as a health clinic that is due to become vacant by the end of March 2017. The estimated works costs will be met from the existing capital allocation for providing temporary accommodation. In order to progress the scheme, the report also seeks approval to appoint a contractor.
1.4 The second scheme proposes the use of temporary buildings to provide temporary accommodation on the former Newbridge School site as a meantime use. This scheme was reported to Cabinet in September 2016 and was allocated £4.240m + contingency within the capital programme to deliver up to 100 units of hostel style accommodation. Since appointing a contractor in November 2016, the Council has been reviewing the specification for the units. Through this review it has become apparent that the Council is able to deliver 90 units of self-contained accommodation at an additional cost of £0.400m + contingency (£5.104m in total).
Page 148 1.5 Self-contained units are considered a much more appropriate model of temporary accommodation for homeless households, especially families, given the length of time that they spend in them waiting for permanent housing. As a result, this report seeks approval to increase the budget for the works to enable the enhancement of the specification.
2. Recommendations
The Cabinet is recommended to:-
2.1 Note the proposed conversion of Loxford Hall to six self-contained apartments to be used as temporary accommodation;
2.2 Agree to an allocation of £0.800m for the conversion of Loxford Hall from the approved 2017/18 budget of £10.500m to meet the costs of the project;
2.3 Delegate to the Corporate Director of Place, in consultation with the Corporate Director of Resources, the Cabinet Member for Housing, and the Cabinet Member for Regeneration, Property and Planning, authority to approve a contractor and the agreed contract sum for the conversion of Loxford Hall for temporary accommodation;
2.4 Approve appropriation of Loxford Hall to the Housing portfolio for General Fund housing purposes;
2.5 Agree to an increase in budget allocation of £0.400m for the provision of temporary structures on the former Newbridge School site from the previously approved 2017/18 budget of £10.500m to meet the costs of the project
THE DECISIONS PROPOSED IN THE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THIS REPORT MAY BE REQUISITIONED
Page 149 Member Contact Points Name: Councillor Farah Hussain Position: Cabinet Member for Housing Telephone: 0208 708 9085 Email: [email protected]
Name: Councillor Helen Coomb Position: Cabinet Member for Regeneration, Property and Planning Telephone: 0208 708 9085 Email: [email protected]
Officer Contact Point Name: Sharon Strutt Position: Strategic Head of Delivery, Planning and Regeneration Telephone: 0208 7082143 Email: [email protected]
Page 150 3 Background
3.1 The Council owned Loxford Hall, a locally listed building at Loxford Lane, Ilford (a site plan and photo are attached at Appendix A), is currently used as a clinic by Redbridge Children and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS). As a result of a planned move to new premises in Chadwell Heath, CAMHS will be vacating the property at the end of March 2017 at which point it will be handed back to the Council.
3.2 In July 2015, Cabinet received a report advising that Loxford Hall was considered to be surplus to requirement for both Children’s Services and NELFHT (North East London Foundation Health Trust) and recommending its appropriation to the Housing portfolio once it was vacated, subject to the development of a satisfactory business case.
3.3 There are currently some 2,200 homeless households living in temporary accommodation where the Council has a duty to house them in suitable long term accommodation. These households are generally living in bed and breakfast or private rented accommodation which presents a significant cost to the Council and places existing budgets under severe pressure. (The average payment to a landlord for a two bed is £0.015m per annum.) The provision of directly owned and managed temporary accommodation is a significantly more cost-effective option for the Council and in September 2016 Cabinet approved the recommendations within a report setting out a strategy for the acquisition and development of temporary accommodation and allocating part of the approved capital budget to proposed schemes.
3.4 Initial assessments have highlighted that Loxford Hall has the potential to be converted to provide six self-contained apartments for temporary accommodation. The building will be extended in keeping with its existing character and all of the units will meet the London Plan space standards. The works are estimated to cost in the region of £0.800m to complete and a professional team is working to submit a planning application in April 2017.
3.5 The delivery of these apartments will enable six more families to remain within the borough in self-contained rather than shared hostel-style accommodation. This is increasingly becoming the Council’s preferred style of temporary accommodation because of the length of time that families tend to reside within it.
3.6 In September 2016, Cabinet received a report seeking approval to purchase second-hand temporary structures and allocated a budget of £4.240m + contingency to deliver up to 100 units of hostel-style accommodation. In November 2016, the Council appointed a contractor to supply and install these units as a meantime use on the former Newbridge School site.
Page 151 3.7 Since appointing a contractor, the Council has been reviewed and enhanced the specification to create self-contained flats, which provide more appropriate accommodation for homeless households who may have to live in temporary accommodation for many years while waiting for a permanent home (a site plan, elevation drawing and unit layout are attached at Appendix B). In total, the scheme will be able to provide 90 self-contained flats for an additional cost of £0.400m + contingency.
4 Programme delivery
4.1 The illustrative timetable for delivery of the Loxford Hall project is set out below:
Date Activity End Jan 2017 Appointment of an architect End Feb 2017 Completion of concept designs and feasibility assessment Mar 2017 Consideration of concept designs, initial consultation, pre- application advice End Apr 2017 Submission of a planning application May 2017 Commence procurement of contractor to carry out conversion End June 2017 Achieve planning consent End June 2017 Appoint contractor Aug 2017 Start on site June 2018 Practical completion
5 Options
5.1 The options that have been considered for the Loxford Hall are set out below:
Option Advantages Disadvantages . . Conversion to self- Meets need for TA Provides only 6 family- . contained Relieves cost pressures on sized units. Shared temporary TA budget accommodation would accommodation . Income generation after create more units cost recovery . Well designed, high quality design will add value to the Council’s asset . Flexibility to change tenure e.g. from Temporary to permanent affordable housing
Page 152 . . Conversion to self- Meets need for permanent Limited impact on financial contained affordable housing pressures caused by TA . . permanent Generates rental income Would require building to affordable housing . Well designed, high quality be appropriated to the design will add value to the HRA Council’s asset
. . Conversion to Greater number of units Doesn’t meet current TA shared hostel-style and households requirements because of accommodation accommodated shared facilities . Relieves cost pressures on . Poorer quality living TA budget environment for long stays . Income generation after . Adds less value to the asset cost recovery . Less flexibility for future use . Likely to be more housing management issues due to shared facilities . Additional security costs
. Alternative use Doesn’t reduce TA cost within the General pressures . Fund Prevents an increase in TA supply
. . Disposal on the Property valued at £0.815m Doesn’t reduce TA cost open market for its existing use pressures . Receive a capital receipt . Prevents an increase in TA supply
5.2 Conversion of Loxford Hall to self-contained temporary accommodation is the preferred option. This is supported by the cost model outlined below.
5.3 This report seeks the appropriation of Loxford Hall to the Housing portfolio for the provision of self-contained temporary accommodation to contribute towards alleviating the financial pressures created by the lack of available, affordable provision within the private sector.
6 Budget provision
6.1 The following approved budget is available for the provision of Temporary Accommodation:
Page 153 Year 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 Total £m £m £ m £ m
Carried forward 6.500 6.500
Approved 2016/17 to 2020/21 Capital Programme 4.000 3.000 3.000 10.000
Total 10.500 3.000 3.000 16.500
6.2 Budget approval of £0.800m is sought for the conversion of Loxford Hall to temporary accommodation in 2017/18.
6.3 The provision of an additional six units of directly-managed temporary accommodation is a more cost effective option than placing homeless households in B&B or nightly let accommodation. The scheme is expected to generate an annual net surplus and will effectively have repaid the original investment within 21years. In addition, the Council will avoid the net cost of households in alternative accommodation of £0.019m per year. Annual finance costs will amount to £0.052m per annum.
6.4 Based on its existing use, Loxford Hall has been valued at £0.815m. If the building is converted to residential, the value of the asset will increase.
6.5 In addition, an additional budget allocation of £0.400mis being sought for the provision of temporary structures on the former Newbridge School site to enable the provision of self-contained accommodation in place of hostel-style accommodation with shared kitchens. This brings the total cost of the project to £5.104m over two years, including 10% contingency, which equates to £56,711 per unit.
Page 154
2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 Total
Purchase of pre-owned 90 0.760 3.480 0 0 4.240 temporary structures at the former Newbridge School site
Additional allocation 0 0.400 0 0 0.400
Contingency (10% of total 0.076 0.388 0 0 0.464 budget)
Total 0.836 4.268 0 0 5.104
7 Fairness Implications, including Equality and Diversity
7.1 The Council has a pressing need for social housing in Redbridge to meet a wide range of housing need, which is reflected in the fairness Commission report of November 2015. Delivery of the temporary accommodation programme will directly support vulnerable and low income families, including groups with protected characteristics as defined by the Equality Act 2010.
8 Financial Implications
8.1 The cost of the Loxford Hall scheme is estimated to be £0.800m. The approved capital programme for 2017/18 to 2019/20 is £16.5m, as outlined in paragraph 6.1, and this scheme can be funded from within the programme.
8.2 It is estimated that the scheme will generate £0.065m in income per annum based on the rent for six properties after allowing for voids and bad debt. Ongoing costs are estimated to be £0.026m p.a. for repairs and a contingency.
8.3 This scheme will pay for itself within 21 years based on the income and expenditure outlined above and before taking account of cost avoidance. The cost of financing is in addition and estimated to be £0.052m per annum.
8.4 The scheme will also contribute to savings in the homeless budget by providing six additional units for temporary accommodation. Cost avoidance is estimated to be £0.019m p.a. This is based on the average cost of keeping a family in nightly let accommodation. The cost is the difference between the payment to the landlord
Page 155 and the amount the council receives in income based on temporary accommodation housing benefit subsidy.
8.5 The additional cost of the Newbridge scheme can be funded from within the approved capital budget. The proposal to add additional funding to the Newbury scheme will enable 90 units of self-contained accommodation to be completed rather than up to100 units of shared accommodation. The total cost of £5.104m can be funded from within the approved capital programme.
8.6 The original report to cabinet outlining the scheme showed a favourable financial position. This has been updated to reflect the changes. It is estimated that the scheme will pay for itself in 11 years. Cost avoidance is estimated to be £0.28m per year.
8.7 Two further projects are already committed and after including Loxford Hall and Newbridge this leaves £8.845m uncommitted budget for future projects.
9 Legal implications
9.1 The Council owns the freehold interest of the Loxford Hall site. The site is subject to a number of rights in favour of adjoining landowners which primarily relate to the right for adjoining landowners to connect to, and lay maintain and repair, service media at the site details of which can be given to officers or contractors as appropriate.
9.2 As Loxford Hall is no longer required for the purposes for which it is currently held approval has been sought for the appropriation of the Loxford Hall site from its current portfolio of land to the Housing portfolio for General Fund housing purposes. Power for the Council to appropriate land is contained within Section 122 of the Local Government Act 1972. Section 122 provides that a Council may appropriate for any purpose for which the Council are authorised by this or any other enactment to acquire land by agreement any land which belongs to the Council that is no longer required for the purpose for which it is held immediately before the appropriation.
9.3 The value of the proposed works at Loxford Hall is below the threshold at which the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 will apply to the procurement of the contract. However, the contract for the works will need to be procured in accordance with the appropriate Contract Standing Orders and the principles of achieving best value for the Council.
BACKGROUND PAPERS:
Cabinet report 8 December 2015: Temporary Structures Procurement Cabinet report 6 September 2016: Acquisition and Development of sites and premises for temporary accommodation
Page 156 Appendix A
Page 157 Appendix B Proposed site layout
Proposed elevation treatment
Page 158 Layout of a family-sized unit
Page 159 Agenda Item 13
Cabinet Meeting Date Classification 4 April 2017 Public
From The Cabinet Member for Environment and Sustainability to the Cabinet
Relevant Service Committee Title Of Report Neighbourhoods Service Committee - Approval to issue stopping up orders to enable the 29th March 2017 delivery of the HRA New Affordable Homes Programme
1. Executive Summary
1.1 Over the past three years, the Council has sought to increase the supply of affordable housing through developments funded through the Housing Revenue Account. The first two rounds of this programme have delivered 38 new homes with the third round anticipated to deliver a further 154 new homes.
1.2 The final two schemes within the third round of the programme, which are expected to deliver 36 new homes at Kielder Close and Old Mill Court, in Hainault and Roding wards respectively were granted planning consent by Regulatory Committee on 30 November 2016 and 16 February 2017 respectively. The delivery of both of these schemes require changes to existing rights of way and the adopted public highway which can only be implemented through the granting of stopping up orders.
1.3 The power to make a stopping up order under section 247 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, or alternatively under the Highways Act 1980, is not delegated to officers in the current Scheme of Delegation and therefore requires Cabinet authority which is sought within this report.
2. Recommendation
The Cabinet is recommended to:-
2.1 Approve the issuing of stopping up orders at Kielder Close and Old Mill Court to enable the development of 36 new affordable homes and delegate authority to the Corporate Director of Place to take any further action as required to deliver the highways element of the schemes within the HRA New Affordable Homes Programme.
THE DECISION PROPOSED IN THE RECOMMENDATION TO THIS REPORT MAY BE REQUISITIONED
Page 160 Member Contact Points
Name: Councillor John Howard Position: Cabinet Member for Environment and Sustainability Telephone: 0208 3289 0565 Email: [email protected]
Officer Contact Point Name: Sharon Strutt Position: Strategic Head of Delivery, Planning and Regeneration Telephone: 0208 708 2143 Email: [email protected]
Page 161 3. Background
3.1 Given the limited supply of affordable housing in Redbridge and the high level of housing need, the Council embarked on a new-build affordable homes programme on a number of sites held in the Housing Revenue Account (HRA) that were identified as having potential for housing development. The first two rounds of this programme have delivered 38 new homes with the third round anticipated to deliver a further 154 new homes.
3.2 In November 2016, Cabinet received a report seeking approval to the allocation of £65.850m for the delivery programme, scheduled for £10.953m spend in 2016/17, £28.537m spend in 2017/18, £19.198m spend in 2018/19 and £7.162m spend in 2019/20. In addition the report sought authority to approve Willmott Partnership Homes as the build contractor for Phase 3B of the HRA New Affordable Homes Capital Programme which includes the Kielder Close and Old Mill Court developments.
3.3 Two schemes within the third round of the programme, which are expected to deliver 10 new homes at Kielder Close and 26 new homes Old Mill Court respectively were granted planning consent by Regulatory Committee on 30 November 2016 and 16 February 2017 respectively. The delivery of both of these schemes require changes to existing rights of way and the adopted public highway which can only be implemented through the granting of stopping up orders.
3.4 The power to make a stopping up order under section 247 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, or alternatively under the Highways Act 1980, is not delegated to officers in the current Scheme of Delegation and therefore requires Cabinet approval.
4. Proposal
4.1 Kielder Close
The footpath at Kielder Close was adopted in 1988 to improve pedestrian access between New North Road and Manford Way for disabled people as shown in Appendix A and is a public footpath.
The proposal is to redirect this pedestrian traffic along the front of the site on the Kielder Close footpath.
A stopping up order is required to remove the current right of way.
4.2 Old Mill Court
The current entrance to the Old Mill estate is adopted public highway.
Page 162 The proposed scheme requires the entrance to the estate to be moved from its existing position to create a larger development area and enable the construction of Block A, as shown in Appendix B.
A stopping up order is required to cease the use of this public highway. Although the new vehicular access to the site will be built to adoptable standards, it is not proposed that it will be adopted.
5. Programme delivery
5.1 The illustrative timetable for delivery is set out below:
Scheme Start on site Completion Kielder Close June 2017 June 2018 Old Mill Court June 2017 February 2019
5.2. Any delays in issuing stopping up orders may affect the delivery timetable.
5.3 At Kielder Close, it is proposed that the day centre is demolished ahead of the stopping up order being issued, but construction could not proceed.
5.4 At Old Mill Court, it is proposed that construction of Block B (rear of the site) can commence ahead of the stopping up order on the existing access, but the construction of Block A (front of the site) will require the creation of a new entrance road.
6 Options
6.1 The options that have been considered are set out below:
Option Advantages Disadvantages Do nothing None The developments cannot go ahead
Progress with Development can proceed and None stopping up orders new affordable homes can be built
7 Fairness Implications, including Equality and Diversity
7.1 The Council has a pressing need for social housing in Redbridge to meet a wide range of housing need, which is reflected in the fairness Commission report of November 2015. Delivery of the new affordable homes to meet identified local housing need will directly support vulnerable and low income families, including groups with protected characteristics as defined by the Equality Act 2010.
Page 163 8 Financial Implications
8.1 There is a one off cost of advertising the stopping order estimated to be in the region of £500 per scheme if they are advertised together and this will be charged against the project.
8.2 The budgets have already been agreed for these two schemes and included in the HRA New Affordable Homes capital programme. The budget for Old Mill Court is £7.513m and the budget for Kielder Close is £4.132m.
9 Legal implications
9.1 The Council as Highway Authority has the power to stop up a highway pursuant to various sections of the Highway Act 1980 and the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (‘TCPA’) as relevant according to the particular circumstances. The proposed closure is to facilitate the development of sites for which the Council has resolved to grant planning permission. As such the power contained in section 247 of the TCPA is considered appropriate. In view of the fact that the exercise of these powers is not delegated to Officers, the approval of Cabinet is required in accordance with the Council’s Constitution.
9.2 Section 247(2A) allows a London Borough to make an order authorising the stopping-up or diversion of any highway in their area if it is satisfied that it is necessary to do so in order to enable development to be carried out in accordance with planning permission.
9.3 The procedure requires the publication of notices in the newspaper and the display of notices on site together with providing copies of notices to any statutory undertakers. 28 days after the publication of the first notice, there is an objection period of 14 days and if there are no objections, or any made have been withdrawn, the Council can confirm the order at the end of this period thereby bringing it into legal effect.
9.4 In the case of any unresolved objections, the Council is required to notify the Mayor of London who may determine that a local inquiry should be held. Section 252(5A) however provides that the Mayor of London has a discretion whether to hold an Inquiry as he considers necessary, if the objections are not made by a local authority statutory undertaker or transport undertaker and may remit the order to the Council for confirmation.
Page 164 Appendix A Kielder Close Page 165 Page
The stopping up order is required to remove the pedestrian right of way shown by the black dots. Pedestrians will still be able to get from New North Road to Manford Road via the pavement along Kielder Close. Appendix B
Old Mill Court Page 166 Page
The stopping up order is required to enable the entrance road into the estate to be moved to create sufficient space for Block A. Agenda Item 14
Cabinet Meeting Date Classification 4th April 2017 Public From The Cabinet Member for Children and Young People to the Cabinet Relevant Committee: Title Of Report Children and Young People Service Youth Justice Plan 2016/17 and 2017/18 Committee - 30th March 2017
1. Executive Summary
1.1 Under section 40 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 the London Borough of Redbridge has a statutory duty to formulate, implement and publish an Annual Youth Justice Plan which sets out how Youth Justice Services in the London Borough of Redbridge will be provided and funded; and how the Youth Offending Service (in Redbridge called the Youth Offending and Targeted Prevention Service) will be resourced and composed. The plan is also submitted annually to the Youth Justice Board for England and Wales (YJB).
1.2 The Youth Justice Plan 2016/17 and 2017/8 cover four key elements as prescribed in guidance:
Structure and Governance Partnership Arrangements Resourcing & Risks to future delivery
2. Recommendation
The Cabinet is recommended to
2.1 Note the Youth Justice Plan 2016/17 and agree the proposed priorites for 2017/18 prior to the finalised plan being referred to full Council for approval.
THE DECISION PROPOSED IN THE RECOMMENDATION TO THIS REPORT MAY NOT BE REQUISITIONED IN ACCORDANCE WITH STANDING ORDER 54.1(r) AS IT IS A RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL
Contact Point Name: Cllr. Norman Position: Cabinet Member for Children and Young People Telephone: 020 8708 9722 Email: [email protected]
Officer Contact Point Name: Ruth Holmes Position: Head of Youth Offending & Targeted Prevention Service Service: Children & Families Telephone: 0208 708 7890 Email: [email protected]
Page 167 3. Background
3.1 The Youth Offending and Targeted Prevention Service (YOTPS) is the statutory Youth Offending Team of the London Borough of Redbridge arising from section 39 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998. The Redbridge Youth Offending Team was first formed in 1999.
3.2 The YOTPS works with young people aged 10 – 18, who have received either a youth caution (previously a reprimand or final warning) from the police or have had a court appearance in a Magistrate’s Court or Crown Court. The YOTPS also aims to prevent offending by children and young people. As a result it ensures that vulnerable young people at risk of involvement in criminal activity are provided with support to ensure that their anti-social behaviour does not become more entrenched. The overall aim of the Youth Offending and Targeted Prevention Service is both to prevent young people from offending and to reduce re-offending.
3.3 The YOTPS is a multi–agency service made up of statutory partners from the police, probation, health and the local authority’s Children Services (covering education, social care and connexions). The service provides pre-sentence reports to courts to advise magistrates and judges on sentencing options. The service also provides bail packages for young offenders; supervises young offenders subject to community based penalties; supervises young offenders who have been sentenced to custody on their release into the community and a triage service for young people who have admitted committing low gravity offences.
3.4 The Inter-departmental Circular on Establishing Youth Offending Teams (22/12/1998 paragraphs 34 - 41) sets out the requirement for each Youth Offending Team to have its own Steering Group for Youth Justice. The Steering Group for Youth Justice is now more commonly referred to as a Management Board.
4. Structure and Governance
4.1 Since 2009 governance arrangements for Youth Justice in Redbridge have been shared between the Children's Trust Partnership Board (CTPB) and the Redbridge Safer Communities Partnership Board (RSCPB) which is the statutory Community Safety Partnership (sections 5-7 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998). The Business Support Group, a sub-group of the RSCPB, acts as the Management Board for local youth justice arrangements on behalf of both Partnership Boards.
5. The Youth Justice Plan
5.1 The Youth Justice Plan for 2016/17 was written in line with the guidance issued by the Youth Justice Board. In September 2016 the Plan was agreed, subject to Cabinet consideration and Council approval, by the Business Support Group of
Page 168 the Redbridge Safer Communities Partnership Board and in November 2016 the Children’s Trust Partnership Board.
5.2 The Annual Youth Justice Plan sets out how youth justice services across Redbridge are structured and identifies key actions to address identified service improvements and the risks to service delivery.
5.3 The Youth Justice Plan is part of the Council’s Budget and Policy Framework and final approval of it therefore rests with full Council.
6. Partnership arrangements
6.1 The Youth Justice Plan 2016/17 highlighted that effective partnership arrangements are in place in the YOTPS. In addition, the YOTPS is appropriately represented on strategic groups that respond to the operational needs of young offenders such as the Local Safeguarding Children’s Board, the Deter Young Offender (DYO) an operational management board for high risk and prolific young offenders; the Diversion through Sport Panel which uses sport as a tool for diverting young people from involvement in crime and anti-social behaviour; and the Early Intervention Panel which seeks to intervene early in the lives of young people before crime or anti-social behaviour becomes ingrained.
6.2 The Youth Justice Plan sets out the resource provided by each of the statutory partners:
- Metropolitan Police: provides two Police Constables; - Probation/National Offender Management Service: provides one Probation Officer; - The Connexions Service: provides one Connexions Personal Adviser; - Health-Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service: provides one Clinical Nurse Specialist; - Health-Clinical Commissioning Group: provides one nurse who offers a regular health clinic within the YOTPS; - Children’s Services – Education: provides one Educational Liaison Officer; & - Children’s Services – Children and Families: provides the balance of managers, case managers, support staff and volunteers.
6.3 Arising from its partnership with the Courts, the Youth Offending and Targeted Prevention Service also has shared access to a small satellite office located in the Barkingside Magistrates Court complex, which enables it to provide services to the local Youth Court.
7. Performance (to date) in 2016/17 7.1 As of February 2017, the most up to date performance data relates to Quarter Three (Q3) data, that is, from 01.04.16 to 31.12.16 inclusive (Appendix B).
Page 169 Key Performance Indicators are collated and reported on a quarterly basis to the Management Board of the YOTPS; the Local Safeguarding Children Board and Senior Managers within the Directorate of People. There are eight measures regularly reported on: Rate of proven re-offending by young people in the youth justice system; Young people receiving a conviction in court who are sentenced to custody; Ethnic composition of young people receiving a service; Engagement by young people who offend in suitable education, training and employment; First time entrants to the youth justice system (aged 10-17 years old); Out of court disposals; Looked After children on statutory programmes; & Gang affected young people. 7.2 Overall performance remains very strong, for example, the low levels of first time entrants of young people aged 10-17 into the youth justice system and young people receiving a conviction in court who are sentenced to custody compared to national, London and statistical neighbours rates. 7.3 The main comparative weakness (against national; London and statistical neighbours rates) relates to the level of re-offending of young people convicted of offences. This is partially explained by the relatively low rate of conviction of Redbridge young people, leaving those convicted a smaller cohort with more complicated issues. 7.4 The indicator which shows the most marked movement in the wrong direction is a local indicator tracking the number and proportion of young people who are known to be ‘gang affected'. This number and percentage has increased consistently in the last two years due to the numbers of ‘transfers in’ (that is Looked After Children) placed in Redbridge on court orders from other areas) and better intelligence related to the gangs matrix. 7.5 Gang Affected young people (2013- 2016) actual number and proportion of the numbers on live orders. Year Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Average 2013-2014 7.7% (14/181) 7.3% (12/165) 7.9% (13/164) 7.5% (12/160) 7.6% 2014-2015 8.2% (13/159) 7.4% (11/148) 12.4% (18/145) 14.6% (22/151) 10.6% 2015-2016 18.4% (26/141) 19.7% (31/157) 18.8% (27/144) 24.0% (35/146) 20.2% 2016-17 21.8% (31/142) 24.2% (36/149) 33.1% (41/124)
How local partnerships can work more effectively in relation to gang affected young people (and adults) will be a priority in the full Youth Justice Plan 2017/18, which has to be submitted to the Youth Justice Board by 30th September 2017.
8 Priorities 2016/17 and modifications for 2017/18
Page 170 8.1 The Annual Strategic Youth Justice Plan 2016/17 identified the following priorities that were endorsed by the Management Board:
Improving resettlement outcomes; The voice of young offenders; Reducing the number of young people entering the youth justice systemby; Reducing the number of bed nights spent in custody; Preventing vulnerable young people from re-offending; Improving the support to victims of crime;
8.2 Modification in priorities for 2017/18 It is proposed that there will be some modifications to priorities in the Youth Justice Plan 2017/18 due to: New priorities of the overarching local Partnerships, including the Redbridge Community Safety Partnership with the new Redbridge Crime, Disorder and Substance Misuse Strategy for 2017-2021 and development of the Children and Young People’s Plan for 2017/18 with work being undertaken on priorities from February to April 2017 and taking into account the Council’s wider Corporate Strategy: & Performance data (available to date – see Appendix B) 8.3 Partnership Priorities (2017 and beyond) The three priorities included in the Redbridge Community Safety Partnership Plan are: Safeguarding Victims, including: Tackling Violence against Women and Girls (VAWG), Hate crime and Repeat victims. Reducing Vulnerability to Offend, including: Gangs, Reducing drug and alcohol related crime and Integrated Offender Management. Civic Pride, including: Encouraging Civic Pride Enforcing Civic Pride The three priorities in the Children and Young People’s Plan are: Enable children and young people to be safe and promote their health and well-being. Enable children and young people to make good progress in Education. Tackle problems early and focus actions to ensure that children have the best start in life and a successful transition into adult life 8.4 Local Youth Justice priorities 2017/18 In the light of modified partnership priorities and recent performance, the following priorities will be included in the plan for 2017/18
Improving the service to gang affected young people, including information sharing with partners about these individuals; Improving the support to the victims of crime, which includes many young people who offend;
Page 171 Improving the service provided to young people in the youth justice system in relation to their emotional health ; Improving the screening, assessment and intervention to young people in relation speech language and communication needs.
8.5 Some of these priorities might be achieved in 2017/18 by developing ‘shared services’ with neighbouring boroughs to achieve economies of scale and increased efficiency where possible.
9 Resources
9.1 All statutory partners are expected to make contributions to support the YOTPS either in cash or in kind. The contributions ‘in kind’ are converted into a cash value and summarised in the Annual Youth Justice Plan each year in a ‘Resources’ table. This also gives comparative information for the financial contributions made by partners in previous years.
9.2 The Resources table (page 8 in appendix A) is submitted to the Youth Justice Board each year and the information contained in it represents the most accurate information available at that point in time.
9.3 The Local Authority makes by far the largest contribution to the Youth Justice Partnership (in 2016/17 £1.140m); followed by Youth Justice Board Grants (£0.309m and £0.053m); Police (£0.104m); Health (£0.069m) and Probation (£0.049m).
9.4 Financial contributions from the Council and Partners agencies are not yet confirmed for 2017/18. However, it is highly likely that the grants available from the Youth Justice Board will be further reduced for 2017/18. Also, it has been indicated that the £0.005m contribution to running costs from probation will be withdrawn in 2017/18, but has not yet been confirmed.
9.5 In line with overall cuts in Council funding, there will a cut in the Local Authority’s contribution in 2017/18.
10 Risks to future delivery (2016/17)
10.1 The Youth Justice Plan includes an action plan which seeks to address the risks identified to future delivery and to improve service delivery against the agreed priorities for 2016/17.
10.2 The two principal risks outlined in the 2016/17 Plan are identified as:
Financial Pressures. These are a combination of reduced funding and extra costs incurred by the Local Authority, particularly in relation to Youth Detention Accommodation for 16 and 17 Year olds in Youth Offender Institutions. Changes to the new national assessment tool (AssetPlus) and the impact of this on service delivery.
10.3 Actions, which are set out in the Youth Justice Plan, have been identified to minimise these risks with progress reported to the Council’s Management
Page 172 Board, the Children’s Trust Partnership Board and the Business Support Group of the Redbridge Safer Communities Partnership Board.
10.4 Risk to future delivery (2017/18)
Following extensive planning, the new national assessment tool (AssetPlus) was successfully integrated into the work of the Youth Offending & Targeted Prevention Service in 2016, so does not feature in the 2017/18 plan.
The principal risk remains financial pressures.
o Financial Pressures. These are a combination of reduced funding and extra costs incurred by the Local Authority, particularly in relation to Youth Detention Accommodation for 16 and 17 Year olds in Youth Offender Institutions.
10.5 In relation to Youth Detention Accommodation ( bed night costs borne by the Local Authority for court ordered remand of young people prior to conviction and sentencing), the Youth Justice Board grant for 2016/17 is £0.053m against expenditure to 31.01.17 of £0.111.)
11. Fairness Implications, including Equality and Diversity
11.1 The Youth Justice Plan, 2016/17 and 2017/18 do not contain actions that will have adverse impacts on groups people with protected characteristics. Accordingly, it is not necessary to produce an Equalities Impact Assessment.
12. Finance Implications
12.1 The level of financial contribution from the Youth Justice Board is not usually available before late April each year. However, a further cut in the level of funding in 2016/17 (£0.309m & £0.053m) is expected for 2017/18, plus a cut of £0.005m in funding from probation.
12.2 The Local Authority’s contribution to the youth justice partnership in 2016/17 will amount to approximately £1.140m. In line with planned cuts across the Local Authority there will be a reduction in funding to £0.913m for 2017/18.
13. Legal Implications
13.01Section 40 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 provides that “It shall be the duty of each local authority, after consultation with the [defined] relevant persons and bodies, to formulate and implement for each year a plan (a “youth justice plan”) setting out:-
- how youth justice services in their area are to be provided and funded; and - how the youth offending team or teams established by them (whether alone or jointly with one or more other local authorities) are to be composed and funded, how they are to operate, and what functions they are to carry out.”
Page 173 13.2 Section 37 of the Act requires that the Council, in carrying out its functions, must have regard to the principal aim of the youth justice system, which is to prevent offending by children and young persons.
13.3 The Plan forms part of the Council’s Policy Framework and must therefore be presented to full Council for approval.
Page 174 APPENDIX A Redbridge Youth Justice Strategic Plan 2016/17 This plan has been drawn up to comply with the requirement under the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 for each local authority to formulate, implement and publish an Annual Youth Justice Plan. As required it covers the following areas: Introduction / review of previous year and plan; Structure and Governance; Partnership Arrangements; Resourcing & Risks to future delivery.
1. Introduction
Review of last year’s plan, including a summary of achievements and changes
The main focus of Youth Justice Partnership continues to be to obtain positive outcomes for Redbridge young people, who are involved in crime and/or anti-social behaviour or who are at risk of such involvement, their families and the local community.
Page 175 Page The pressures on public spending continued throughout 2015/16 creating challenges for all partner agencies. However, high standards of performance were maintained alongside the delivery of cost efficiencies and savings by effective targeted delivery of the services provided by Redbridge’s Youth Offending and Targeted Prevention Service and its partners. Summary of achievements / Review of 2015/16: The number and rate of young people entering the youth justice system for the first time reduced again during 2015/16 (from 91 to 79 individuals and 322 to 303 per 100,000 10-17 year olds) The number and rate of young people sentenced to custody increased slightly during 2015/16 [from 11 to 12 sentences (involving 12 individuals) and 0.37 to 0.38 per 1,000 10-17 year olds)], but remains low; There was overall a small reduction in the number of bed nights spent by Redbridge young people in custody (both sentenced and on remand) from 2,601 nights to 2,514 nights, a drop of 3.3% from 2014/15 to 2015/16; and from 4,038 to 2,514 from 2013/14 to 2015/16 a drop of 37.7% in the 2 years. The percentage of young people receiving 25 hours per week of education, training or employment (applicable to young people aged 16 or younger) and 16 hours per week of education, training or employment (applicable to over 16 year olds) at the end of their orders was increased to 86.1% from 80.4% the previous year; The Families Together / Troubled Families (FT / TF) programme became increasingly aligned with the work of the Youth Justice Partnership during 2015/16. In Phase 2 of the TF programme 180 Payment by Results claims have been made, with an external spot check confirming no inappropriate claims had been made. During 2015/16 the Youth Offending and Targeted Prevention Service continued to participate in the Youth Justice Board’s pilot resettlement programme. The programme is delivered through a cross borough consortium called the North East London Resettlement Consortium (NELRC) which is made up of six boroughs. The pilot started in July 2014 and is due to last for 3 years dependent upon annually reviewed performance.
2. Structures and Governance Outcome: Integrated strategic planning and working with clear performance oversight to ensure effective delivery of youth justice services.
The Inter-departmental Circular on Establishing Youth Offending Teams (22/12/1998 paragraphs 34 - 41) sets out the requirement for the Youth Offending Team / Service to have its own Steering Group / Management Board. Governance arrangements for Youth Justice in Redbridge since 2009 have been shared between the Children’s Trust Partnership Board and the Redbridge Safer Communities Partnership Board, which is the statutory Community Safety Partnership (set up under sections 5-7 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998). After the Annual Strategic Youth Justice Plan has been considered by the YOT Management Boards, it is then taken to Redbridge’s Cabinet then full Council meetings for final approval. Background: In 2016/17 the responsibility for Youth Justice continues to be shared between the Children's Trust Partnership Board (CTPB) and the Redbridge Safer Communities Partnership Board with the Business Support Group acting as the management board for the ‘Youth Offending Team’. Youth Offending performance is considered as part of a standing performance item on the CTPB agenda; and on the Business Support Group agenda (quarterly). Structurally, within the local authority the Youth Offending Team is positioned within Children’s Services. The Head of Youth Offending and Targeted Prevention Service (YOTPS) is a member of the Community Safety Partnership and regularly attends the Business Support Group meetings. She is the ‘named YOT manager’ and responsible for the Youth Offending and Targeted Prevention Service which incorporates the ‘Youth Offending Team’. As part of the ongoing ‘Transformation’ process taking place in Redbridge during 2015/16, the ‘Services to Young People’ part of Children’s Services ceased to exist in December 2015. At that point direct management arrangements for the Youth Offending and Targeted Prevention Service were transferred to the Operational Director, Children and Families and now sit alongside Children’s Social Care functions in the Local Authority. Responsibilities of the Business Support Group acting as the Management Board for the Youth Offending Team: Has strategic oversight for the delivery of the principal aim of reducing offending and reoffending; Adopts joint reporting lines to both the Redbridge Safer Communities Partnership Board and the Children’s Trust Partnership Board;
Page 176 Page Is jointly governed by the Redbridge Safer Communities Partnership Board and the Children’s Trust Partnership Board and so provides accountability and representation of Youth Justice issues within the Local Authority area; Provides strategic oversight, challenge and direction to the Youth Offending and Targeted Prevention Service and the broader local Youth Justice partnership; Ensures the effective strategic delivery of Youth Justice services for children and young people; Ensures that children and young people involved in the Youth Justice system have access to universal and specialist services delivered by partners and key agencies; Ensures the local authority discharges its duties under the Children Act 1989, in (Schedule 2, paragraph 7) and Children Act 2004 to: o discourage children and young people in the area from committing offences; o take reasonable steps designed to reduce the need to bring criminal proceedings against children and young people in the area; and o avoid the need for local children to be placed in secure accommodation. Ensures that Youth Justice Performance Improvement and Action Plans are prepared and implemented, as appropriate; Considers and acts upon feedback from the Youth Justice Board (YJB) and the Ministry of Justice (MoJ); Provides financial oversight by reviewing financial statements on a three monthly basis; Oversees the Annual Youth Justice Strategic Plan; Receives quarterly monitoring reports from the Head of Youth Offending and Targeted Prevention Service in order to identify any deficiencies in achieving on key Performance Indicators and agrees actions to overcome them. The nationally recognised key Youth Justice Performance indicators are: o Rate of proven reoffending by young offenders; o Young people within the Youth Justice System receiving a conviction in court who are sentenced to custody; o First time entrants to the Youth Justice System aged 10 – 17; Adopts a strategic overview and monitors the progress of the targets within the Crime and Disorder Strategy and the Children and Young People’s Plan in relation to youth offending and youth anti-social behaviour issues, with reference to: o Working with young offenders to contain and reduce their offending. o Working with young people to prevent them becoming involved in offending and anti-social behaviour. o Ensuring that youth crime prevention issues are reflected in locally agreed strategies and other relevant strategies.
3. Partnership arrangements
Outcome: Effective partnership arrangements are in place between YOTPS statutory partners and other local partners that have a stake in delivering local youth justice services, and these arrangements generate effective outcomes for children and young people who offend or are at risk of offending.
The Youth Justice Strategic Plan sets out effective partnership arrangements across the local partnership area and should directly align with other key local strategic plans. The Youth Offending and Targeted Prevention Service is a multi-agency partnership hosted by Redbridge’s Children’s Services. The YOTP service benefits from the strategic oversight of both the Children’s Trust Partnership Board and the Redbridge Safer Communities Partnership Board. The extent of effective partnership working is also reflected in the good range of membership of the Deter Young Offender (DYO) operational management board, the Diversion through Sport Meeting, the Troubled Families Executive Board and the Early Intervention Panel (EIP). The effectiveness of youth justice engagement at these meetings is also reflected in the records of these meetings. The following statutory partners provide seconded / attached staff and access to relevant information systems as part of the YOTPS partnership, which has its main office base in Station Road Centre, Barkingside. Page 177 Page
Partner Staff Integral part of YOTPS / Outreach Facility Information System
Police (Metropolitan Police Service) Two Police Constables Integral part of YOTPS Access and input to (PNC) Police National Computer and other police information systems.
Probation / National Offender One Probation officer Integral part of YOTPS Access and input to Probation Management information system via National Probation Service (NPS). The local (CRC) Community Rehabilitation Company in London (from February 2015) is run by a consortium called MTCnovo (with an 80 /20 split (CRC /NPS) of low risk and high risk work.
Connexions One Personal Adviser Integral part of YOTPS Access and input to the Connexions data base IYSS. (The Connexions service became directly managed by London Borough of Redbridge as of 1st April 2015.)
Health – Child and Adolescent Mental One staff member at Clinical Nurse Integral part of YOTPS Access and input to Health data base Health Service (CAMHS) Specialist grade (Rio) system. Health – Physical health One nurse providing a regular clinic Outreach facility (frequency fortnightly) Access and input to Health data base within YOTPS offices (Rio) system.
Health – Speech Language and One Speech and Language Therapist Integral part of YOTPS Access and input to Health data base Communication Needs – second year of a seconded to YOTPS 3 days per week (Rio) system. pilot scheme funded by Public Health
Children’s Services (Educational Liaison) One Education Officer Integral part of YOTPS Access to Education Welfare database IDEAR
Housing Advice Centre None seconded Outreach facility (frequency on demand) Access to Housing data base (web-based)
Children’s Social Care – Children and None seconded Not applicable Access (read only) to Children’s Social Families Care data base (Protocol).
Youth Service / Positive Activities None seconded Not applicable Access to Youth Service data base integrated with Connexions data base IYSS.
MASH – Multi Agency Safeguarding Hub Three members of staff are nominated as Integral part of the work of YOTPS YOTPS staff members check the YOTPS the first point of contact for information database (CareWorks) in relation to
Page 178 Page sharing (backed up by other staff MASH safeguarding referrals. members)
Families Together / Troubled Families The part-time interim Service Manager Facilitates close working with the YOTPS YOTPS data is extracted from its for Families Together / Troubled Families databases (CareWorks and Parenting) is also an operational manager in the particularly in relation to Triage+ and YOTPS and the YOTPS Head of Service is Family Intervention Programme (FIP) / also responsible for FT / TF Parenting activity as a contribution to Families Together / Troubled Families (Payment by Results) claims.
There is a small YOTPS office within the Barkingside Magistrates’ Court complex in Redbridge, which facilitates the YOTPS service provided to the local Youth Court. From October 2011, Barkingside Youth Court (previously Redbridge Youth Court) took over from the 3 separate courts covering 3 neighbouring London Boroughs in Barking and Dagenham, Havering and Redbridge. More recently, Romford Youth Court (previously Havering Youth Court) is being used for youth trials and Barkingside Youth Court is dealing with remands and some trials across the three boroughs. There is a court cover rota with the 2 neighbouring boroughs covering court duty from Wednesday to Friday with Redbridge covering Monday to Tuesday each week.
In line with statutory guidance the Redbridge YOTPS is a multi-agency partnership which includes, but also extends beyond, the direct delivery of youth justice services and functions effectively in both of the two key sectors within which it operates: 1. Criminal Justice Services; Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnership / Redbridge Safer Communities Partnership (RCSP) - Redbridge CSP Strategic Assessment and 2. Children’s Services: Children and Young Person’s Plan 2016/17. Safer Redbridge Strategy 2013-16 (annual refresh dated 12th April 2016 with a new strategy due in Winter 2016) Crime Disorder Reduction Partnership priorities The annual refresh process agreed at Cabinet confirmed Crime Disorder Reduction Partnership (CDRP) priorities for 2016/17 are: 1. Residential Burglary; 2. Drug and Alcohol related Crime and Anti-Social Behaviour; 3. Vulnerable Victims (including Violence against Women and Girls and Prostitution); and 4. Integrated offender management**. **The element of this action plan most relevant to youth justice is priority 4 - the integrated offender management model.
Children and Young People Plan 2015 - 18 (annual refresh Spring 2016) The Children’s Trust Partnership Board is aware of its role in preventing youth crime and reoffending and this is embedded within the local Children and Young People Plan. Current Priorities of the CYPP (2016/17) are to: 1. Enable children and young people to be safe and promote their health and well-being. 2. Enable children and young people to make good progress in education. 3. Tackle problems early and focus interventions to ensure children have the best start in life and successful transitions to adulthood.
Page 179 Page Current CYPP Action Plan (2016/17) - All three priorities are relevant to youth justice.
Local Priorities for 2016 / 17 - The priorities set out above have been translated into some more localised actions by the Youth Justice Partnership / Business Support Group in its role as the YOT Management Board: North East London Resettlement Consortium: The YOTPS to continue to participate in the local resettlement consortium. Now a six borough partnership NELRC is one of 4 national resettlement pilot areas. The pilot with the Youth Justice Board started in July 2014 and is due to last for 3 years dependent upon performance (reviewed annually). To develop through the use of screening for Speech, Language and Communication Needs (SLCN) by the Speech Therapist (SALT) improved engagement of young people who are educated other than at school (EOTAS); placed in custody on remand or sentenced; identified as suitable referrals for the Deter Young Offender (DYO) scheme; or given an intensive support and surveillance (ISS) option by the court; To analyse the data from the Triage+ and Parenting Support interventions (First Time Entrants,, Reoffending and Custody (remand and custody)); Disproportionality across all Youth Justice orders (at key stages in the youth justice journey); and ETE (Education Training and Employment) to identify where resources need to be targeted;
To ensure that young people’s views are taken into account in direct individual work to maximise engagement. Including the use of reports from Viewpoint via the use of the Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Probation the (anonymous) e-Survey; plus ‘what do you think?’ and ‘learning styles’ questionnaires and survey monitor feedback;
To reduce the number of young people entering the youth justice system by: . Further developing the Triage service. The core of the service is the existing Triage (Police) service, but the YOTPS are targeting at an earlier stage the most vulnerable young people via the Triage (Schools) and Triage (CLA and CiN) Children Looked After and Children in Need strands of Triage. . Identifying those families whose young people are most likely to enter the youth justice system and offering them Parenting Interventions, including input from the (FIP) Family Intervention Programme, Families Together (FT) / Troubled Families (TF) and referral to Family Group Conferencing (FGC). The latter Family Group Conferencing has been made possible by funding via the Resettlement Consortium (first bullet point above) in 2016-17; To reduce the number of bed nights spent in custody (both sentenced and on remand) by Redbridge young people by: . Providing the youth and crown courts with good quality pre-sentence reports recommending appropriate sentencing options, giving the courts confidence in the Youth Offending and Targeted Prevention Service’s ability to effectively manage young offenders in the community; . Ensuring that the courts retain confidence in the ability of the YOTPS to supervise the range of programmes available throughout Youth Rehabilitation Orders, including Intensive Supervision and Surveillance (the most rigorous non-custodial intervention available for young offenders) and developing other effective interventions. Prevent vulnerable young people from reoffending by: . Evaluating the effectiveness of the Youth Offending and Targeted Prevention Service activities (including Tight Rope; and Anger Replacement Therapy (ART) and iCON trauma counselling made available via North East London Resettlement Consortium) in order to ensure that they are reducing reoffending with a view to repeating and expanding the most successful initiatives; . Using the combined resources associated with Children’s Services to maximise the chance of reducing reoffending, including full participation in local Missing Children and Child Sexual Exploitation Panels; . Strengthening advice and support given to young people who offend who have health issues by providing a regular health session at the Youth Offending and Targeted Prevention offices in partnership with colleagues from Health; Page 180 Page . Enhancing services to Deter Young Offenders, which is aimed at those young offenders who are assessed as being most at risk of reoffending and placing the public at risk from their behaviour, by, amongst other things, speeding their passage through the criminal justice system; working with partners to deliver the Integrated Resettlement Support (IRS) scheme; and tracking each young offender at a monthly, multi-agency, DYO management meeting . Enhancing services to young people with known or suspected gang affiliations / associations by setting up of a local gang task and finish group to improve information sharing and facilitate gang exit using the London Gangs Exit service - a Pan-London gang exit scheme funded by MOPAC (Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime);.
Improve the service provided to the victims of crimes committed by Redbridge young people (which includes many young people who go on to offend themselves): . Increase the capacity to follow up the local offer to victims, including Restorative Justice based interventions. . Ensure that all Referral Order Panel Volunteers and staff members who service Referral Order Panels (acting as case managers) undertake training in Restorative Justice (RJ) techniques. Families Together / Troubled Families Troubled Families is a national programme funded by the Department of Communities and Local Government (DCLG). As part of the Phase 2 of this programme (now known locally as ‘Families Together’) Redbridge is committed to ‘turn around’ at least 1,990 Troubled Families over the 5 year life of the programme. The Troubled Families programme priorities are relevant to key partners including Health, Children’s Social Care, Adult Services, Mental Health, Probation, Youth Offending and Targeted Prevention Service, Community Safety, Policing, Social Housing provision and Education. Additionally, third sector organisations can play a crucial role in this work. Early and effective intervention is seen as the key to success. The criteria for the Phase 2 programme is based on a cluster of six headline problems. A combination of any two of the criteria listed below will suffice to establish a family’s eligibility to enter the Phase 2 Troubled Families Programme: . Parents and children/young people involved in crime or antisocial behaviour; . Children/young people who are not attending school regularly; . Children/young people who need help, are identified as in need or are subject to a Child Protection Plan; . Adults out of work or at risk of financial exclusion or young people at risk of worklessness; . Families affected by domestic violence and abuse; and . Parents and children/young people with a range of health problems. Delivery of the work The core Families Together / Troubled Families team consists of seven Families Together key workers, three Families Together Employment Advisers (equivalent to 2 full time posts) seconded from the Job Centre Plus, one part-time Work Redbridge adviser, a Senior Practitioner (who manages these other practitioners), a data and finance manager, a data assistant and an Interim Service manager (who is also an Operations Managers within the Youth Offending and Targeted Prevention Service). For the phase 2 Troubled Families Programme the existing Families Together key workers will work in partnership with professionals in agencies who already have a relationship with the family rather than providing direct interventions to all the identified families. Professionals already known to the families are based in a number of agencies including Children’s Social Care, Probation, Children's Centres and Early Intervention and they work with the identified key workers to support the process of turning the family around. The strategy of closer partnership working is needed in order to support the additional volume of case work that will be needed to turn around the ‘Phase 2’ families. The threshold model used by the Families Together key worker service outlines the various levels of intervention that will be offered to families entering the programme: ‘Tier 1’ Family Interventions: delivered by partner organisations named as the lead professional who can come from agencies including. schools, Children’s Centres, Early Intervention, Youth Offending and Targeted Prevention Service, Community Rehabilitation Companies (CRCs) (Probation), National Probation Service (NPS), Page 181 Page Housing, the Youth Service for an assessment known as a Child Assessment Framework (CAF) assessment or Specialist Support; ‘Tier 2’ Family Intervention: delivered by the key workers within the Families Together / Troubled Families core team itself; ‘Tier 3’ Family Intervention: delivered by the Family Intervention Programme (FIP) working intensively with small caseloads (7-8 max) of identified families using the assertive key worker role to ‘grip’ the family and to ‘galvanise’ all agencies.
4. Resourcing
Outcome: Efficient deployment of resources to deliver effective youth justice services to prevent offending and reoffending.
Agency Total 2016/17 Change Comments Total Total 2014/15 Staffing Costs and from 2015/16 (£) other delegated 2015/16 to (£) costs combined (£) 2016/17 (£) Police 104,176 Nil No change in total in this ‘in kind’ contribution from 2015/16, which relates to two ‘attached’ police 104,176 104,176 officers. A higher value could have been assigned (for example £66k per officer used in Community Safety), but has not been changed to avoid giving the impression of a changed input. Probation 44,338 Plus 5,000 The main component is an ‘in kind’ contribution of one ‘seconded’ Probation Officer from NPS. The 39,338 40,846 full year estimated cost of a Probation Officer is £49,173. Currently there is one ‘agency’ secondee 4 days per week, so actual costs are estimated at £39,338 in the year. A one off payment of £5,000 is due to be paid to all London YOTs from the NPS. It is a contribution towards the administrative costs of the Partnership and part of a national standardisation process. The current NPS position is that this payment will not be repeated in 2017/18. Health 68,814 Nil The CaMHS agreement is for the secondment on one Clinical Nurse Specialist full time. In practice 68,814 68,814 there has been no secondee since August 2015 when an agency member of staff (working 4 days a week) left. No change in principle for several years, but recruitment and retention difficulties have meant the actual contribution does fall short of planned input. Separately, there is a school nurse who runs a regular health ‘drop in’ and a cash contribution (£10,000) towards running costs. Local Authority 1,299,200 Less 90,000 The reduction of £90,000 relates to the loss of 2 posts. 1,389,200 1,295,673 A further £160,000 has been earmarked for possible redundancy costs connected to planned savings of £320,000 in 2017/18. Other 14,753 Less 32,143 No longer any Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC) substance misuse or Connexions 46,896 46,896 funding. Families Together / Troubled Families is only ‘other’ funding remaining in 2016/17. YJB- Effective 309,407 Less 70,986 There has been an18.7% cut in YJB notified grant from 2015/16 to 2016/17. In practice the YJB 380,393 411,681 grant for 2015/16 was £340, 164, instead of £380,393, that is, a 10.6% in-year cut notified on Practice 05.11.15. YJB Restorative Nil Less 2,000 No separate ring fenced grant in 2016/17. 2,000 6,755 Justice Sub Total 1,840,688 Less 190,129 This subtotal excludes the new responsibilities transferred to local YOTs since December 2013 2,030,817 1,974,841 Page 182 Page YJB unpaid work Nil Less 7,973 Responsibility for unpaid work transferred from Probation to local YOTs as of 01.01.15. For 2016/17 7,973 3,771 (Qtr4only) there was no separate ring fenced grant paid for this activity. YJB - Youth 53,566 Less 23,805 This is the YJB contribution for bed night costs minus a nominal saving on transport costs. 77,371 71,459 Detention [It excludes CLA related grant of 24,404 (reduced from 32,703 in 2015/16) to cover LAC social work costs and travel for 16 and 17 year olds placed in YOIs not previously Children Looked After.] Accommodation Total 1,894,254 Less 2,116,161 2,050,071 221,907 The Youth Justice Strategic Plan should provide an overview of how the YOTPS Management Board and wider partnership will ensure that the YOTPS has sufficient resources and infrastructure that are appropriately deployed to deliver youth justice services in its area in line with the requirements of the National Standards for Youth Justice Services. The budget for YOTPS (now including LASPO 2012 related funding for Youth Remand Accommodation and an unpaid work grant (an activity provided by Probation until 1st January 2015) comes to a total of £1,894,254 for the financial year 2016/17. Breakdown of contributions Projected and actual spending does oscillate during the year and adjustments are made at the mid- point and end of each financial year. The main funding sources of the Youth Offending and Targeted Prevention Service are: London Borough of Redbridge: as the Local Authority (including some element of the statutory ‘Education’ contribution and funding of the Family Intervention Programme (FIP); Partner Agencies: provide a small amount as cash £10, 000 from Health and £5,000 from National Probation Service; and the vast majority as ‘in kind’ funding in the form of seconded / attached staff members – such as Metropolitan Police; National Probation Service; Health [including a Child and Adolescents Mental Health Service (CaMHS) contribution based on central government grant funding via the Local Authority and Public Health funding for the Speech, Language and Communication Needs pilot; and Central Government: through grants from the Youth Justice Board made up of: Youth Justice Board ‘Effective Practice’ Grant Funding - £309,407 An ‘Effective Practice’ grant of £309,407 has been indicated (subject to meeting various terms and conditions) for 2016/17. This represents a £70,986 (18.7%) reduction from the original grant for financial year 2015 /16. However, an in-year cut of 10.6% was notified on 05.11.16 and the actual grant paid in 2015/16 was £340,164, not the original £380,393 included in last year’s plan. Page 183 Page Youth Justice Board ‘Unpaid work’ Grant Funding 2016/17 - Nil As part of wider criminal justice reforms, responsibility for delivering ‘unpaid work’ forming part of the sentence of young offenders aged 16 and 17 transferred from Probation (National Offender Management Service) to the local YOTs on 1st January 2015. This was not anticipated or included in the 2014/15 strategic plan. A grant of £3,771 was made available for the last quarter of the financial year 2014/15. The full year unpaid work grant for 2015/16 was £7,973. No separate grant is being made in 2016/17 to cover this duty / responsibility. Youth Justice Board ‘Restorative Justice’ Maintenance Grant Funding - Nil The YJB made a grant payment of £2,000 in 2015 /16 to encourage the use of Restorative Justice, but no equivalent grant has been made available for 2016/17. Youth Justice Board ‘Youth Detention Accommodation Grant Funding 2016/17 - £53,566 The grant for 2016/17 for bed night costs (net of a nominal deduction for saved transport costs) was reduced by £23,805 to £53,566 from the previous year (£77,371). {Actual expenditure on bed night costs in the year 2015/16 was £174,783, that is £97,412 more than last year’s grant and £121,217 more than this year’s grant for bed night costs. {See section 5 below Risks to Future Delivery} Workload: In line with national trends in terms of statutory court orders, there has been a significant decrease in the numbers of offences taken to court leading to convictions - 424 to 281, that is 143 less offences, which is a 33.7% reduction and disposals - 303 to 227, that is 76 less disposals, which is a 25.1% reduction from 2014/15 to 2015/16. This is against a local background of gradually increasing numbers of young people aged 10-17 year olds living in Redbridge. During the same time ‘Out of Court disposals’ have increased with the numbers of Youth Cautions and Youth Conditional Cautions having risen to 77 in 2015/16 - a rise of 40 (or 108%) from the previous year 2014/15. Early Intervention ‘Triage’ referrals were also up by 23 (13.9%) to188 in 2015/16 compared with 165 in 2014/15. Of these 188 Triage referrals in 2015/16, 172 (91.4%) came from the Police, with the rest from schools and social care. Efforts continue to be made through Triage to try to identify those families with the most complex problems, early, so they can be offered support sooner rather than later and avoid court appearances. Total number of offences Total number of disposals Total number of first time entrants to the Total number of Triage Local population of youth justice / PNC rate per 100,000 (previously prevention and young people aged 10 - population of 10-17 year olds YISP) referrals 17 years old
2015/16 281 227 79 286 188 30,391 (2014)
Previous year 424 303 90 290 Jan- Dec 2014 165 29.945
Change year on year Minus 143 Minus 76 Minus 11 Minus 4 Plus 23 Plus 446
Percentage change Minus 33.7% Minus 25.1% Minus 12.2% Minus 0.014% Plus 13.9% Plus 1.49%
2014/15 424 303 90 290 Jan –Dec 2014 165 29.945 (2013) (-26.7%)
Previous year 432 320 101 395* Jan –Dec 2013 195 29,850 (2012) updated from 406
Change year on year Minus 8 Minus 17 Minus 11 Minus 30 Plus 95
Page 184 Page Percentage change Minus 1.9% Minus 5.3% Minus 0.10% (-27.6% ) Minus 15% Plus 0.3%
2013/14 432 320 101 406* later updated 195 29,850 (2012) to 395 (see above)
Previous year 401 283 89 453* updated from 107 29,849 (2011) 474
Change year on year Plus 31 Plus 37 12 Minus 78 88 Plus 1
Percentage change year on Plus 7.7% Plus 13.1% Plus 13.5% Minus 16.5% Plus 82% 2012/13 401 283 89 474* (later updated 107 29,849 (2011) to 453) Previous year 2011/12 569 423 102 654 111 27,712 (2010) Change year on year Minus 168 Minus 140 Minus 13 Minus 180 Minus 4 Plus 2,137 Percentage change year on Minus 29.5% Minus 33.1% Minus Minus 27.5% Minus 3.6% Plus 7.7% year 12.75% 5. Risks to future delivery Outcome: The YOTPS has the capacity and capability to deliver effective youth justice services. The Youth Justice Strategic Plan should identify risks to future delivery and set out the YOTPS partnership’s plans to address these risks. Examples of these risks and responses may include: proposed budget reductions and plans to address any reductions, to ensure the continued delivery of effective local youth justice services; difficulty recruiting and retaining qualified/experienced staff, and plans to address this, to ensure the YOTPS has sufficient capacity and capability to deliver. Significant risks for 2016/17 Reduction in funding - Transformation within London Borough of Redbridge Further significant cuts in Local Authority funding are a possibility this financial year and already planned for 2017/18. This follows an overall reduction in management posts across the council of a third in 2015/16. Locally for the YOTPS, this meant the reduction of one YOTPS operations manager post and one senior practitioner post, plus the disbanding of ‘Services for Young People’ (with a transfer to Children and Families) and the loss of the responsible Chief Officer (Assistant Director) post. Reduction in funding – Youth Justice Board grant reductions (Effective Practice; Unpaid Work; Restorative Justice and Youth Detention Accommodation) Youth Justice Board grant funding continued to fall for 2016/17. Specifically, the Effective Practice grant has been reduced from an initial £380,393 (to £340,164 from 05.11.15) for 2015/16 to £309,407 for 2016/17. There is no separate grant funding for Unpaid Work or Restorative Justice in 2016/17 - a drop of £7,973 and £2,000 respectively from 2015/16. Also the bed night costs element of the Youth Detention Accommodation grant fell from £77,371 for 2015/16 to £53,566 for 2016/17. Financial pressure from Youth Detention Accommodation bed night costs – The Youth Justice Board transferred financial responsibility to Local Authorities under Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders (LASPO) Act 2012 changing ‘remand to custody’ arrangements for young people up to the age of 18: The most significant financial risk in 2016/17 continues to be Youth Detention Accommodation costs. Since 3rd December 2013 with the enactment of the Legal Aid, Sentencing Page 185 Page and Punishment of Offender (LASPO) Act 2012 the Local Authority has had to fully fund the bed night costs of vulnerable young people placed in Secure Children’s Homes and Secure Training Centres. (Previously they were responsible for one third of the cost.) In addition to this, the advent of LASPO meant that all 16 and 17 year olds made subject to Youth Detention Accommodation (YDA) became Children Looked After from 3rd December 2013 with the Local Authority liable for their full bed night costs and the provision of CLA service to them, whilst they are remanded. More detailed information on YDA Financial arrangements: The Youth Justice Board’s funding allocation to Redbridge for 2016/17 in relation to Youth Detention Accommodation bed night costs is £53,566. This is net of a secure transport adjustment (down from £77,371 in 2015/16). Separate to this sum, there is an element of the YDA grant to make a contribution towards Social Work costs and related travel costs for 16 and 17 year old remanded to youth detention accommodation, who prior to 3rd December 2013 did not acquire Children Looked After status. The grant for this activity was £32,703 in 2015/16 is reduced to £24,404 for 2016/17. Increased Expenditure in 2015/16 Overall, the number of bed nights (for remand and sentence combined) Redbridge Young People spent in custody fell in 2015/16 from 2,601 to 2,514 (3.3%). However, costs to the Local Authority increased steeply, because remand bed nights increased from 427 in 2015/16 to 897 in 2016/17 (a rise of 110.1%). At the same time sentenced bed nights declined from 2,174 in 2014/15 to 1,617 in 2016/17. Central government still fully funds sentenced bed nights. Actual bed night costs in 2015/16 were £174,783, exceeding the grant by £97,412. Bed night costs for the first quarter of 2016/17 amount to £32,391. If similar levels of bed night costs continue throughout the year, a full year projection is £129,276, which exceeds the grant by £75,710. AssetPlus reform AssetPlus is a national assessment tool to assist Youth Justice case managers to carry out their job and smooth the transfer of cases between geographical areas. The introduction of AssetPlus has been difficult. After extensive planning and training for staff, the transition took place in Redbridge in April 2016. Case managers and managers overseeing AssetPlus are experiencing the tool as cumbersome and repetitive. Some modifications will have to be made to the tool to make it more manageable going forward. Separately, there are outstanding technical issues with Connectivity since AssetPlus was introduced. Connectivity (when it is working) provides a swift and efficient electronic method of sending detailed encrypted assessments to the secure estate to accompany the young person at the point of entry. Unfortunately, this method of sending documentation via the Youth Justice Board Placements Team has not been functioning since April 2016. Risk Action Success Criteria Owner Deadline Reduction in funding / Financial pressure – Work closely with the Courts and colleagues across Children’s Achieve the custody target rate YOTPS Head of 31.03.17 Youth Detention Accommodation Services to develop early intervention / alternatives to custody in of at least <1.00 (per 1,000 of 10- Service order to reduce youth detention accommodation remands into 17 population) The cost incurred in relation to Youth custody. Detention Accommodation is not kept Closely monitor actual and estimated costs and report this back to Achieve a lower number of YDA within the YJB allocation of net £53, 566 Senior Managers with a view to keeping costs to a minimum and, if bed nights than in 2015/16c (see above) necessary, making an budget outlook bid. Reduction in funding / Financial pressure - Make sure that unpaid work recommendations are kept to a Costs of unpaid work are kept YOTPS Head of 31.03.17 Unpaid Work minimum in pre-sentence reports and included only where other below expenditure in 2015/16 Service and all options are inappropriate. managers Closely monitor actual and estimated costs of spot purchasing unpaid work packages from Barking and Dagenham and consider other options as they arise. Reduction in funding / Financial pressure – Maximise the use of RJ trained staff to provide training to new All YOTPS staff and Volunteers YOTPS Head of 31.03.17 Restorative Justice volunteers and staff members. are RJ trained and use RJ Service and techniques effectively Referral Order Lead manager Explore possible cross service and cross boundary options to keep costs to a minimum in maintaining an RJ trained workforce AssetPlus – assessment tool continues to Work with Youth Justice Board; CareWorks and other CareWorks The AssetPlus system is YOTPS Head of 31.03.17 be cumbersome and not fit for purpose and users to develop a more user friendly version of AssetPlus: introduced via CareWorks and Service and all technical issues with Connectivity are not staff members are able to use Managers resolved Where possible working practice changes are identified and the new assessment framework implemented to improve efficiency appropriately with minimal Page 186 Page disruption to the service provided APPENDIX B 1. Rate of Proven Re-offending by Young People in the Youth Justice System The most recent data is for a cohort worked with two years ago. All rates show an increase compared to the previous year. Following production of case level data by the YJB, further work will be done to analyse the cohort and establish the targeted use of the Live Reoffending Tracker. Frequency rate (the average number of re-offences per offender in cohort) Redbridge London Statistical England Rate Offences Cohort Neighbours Jan 2013 - Dec 2013 1.06 1.26 1.12 1.18 Jan 2014 - Dec 2014 1.27 229 180 1.34 1.28 1.23 Change +19.8% +6.3% +14.3% +4.2% Binary rate (proportion of offenders who reoffended) Redbridge London Statistical England Rate Offenders Cohort Neighbours Jan 2013 - Dec 2013 42.7% 43.0% 40.7% 37.8% Jan 2014 - Dec 2014 43.9% 79 180 43.0% 42.4% 37.8% Change +1.2PP +0.0PP +1.7PP +0.0PP *PP percentage points Reoffences per reoffender Redbridge London Statistical England Rate Reoffences Reoffenders Neighbours Jan 2013 - Dec 2013 2.49 2.93 2.76 3.12 Jan 2014 - Dec 2014 2.90 229 79 3.11 3.03 3.25 Change +16.5% +6.1% +9.8% +4.2% For 2016-17 our statistical neighbours are the following areas: Bexley, Croydon, Ealing, Enfield, Harrow, Medway, Merton, Sutton and Slough. 2. Young People Receiving a Conviction in Court Who Are Sentenced to Custody * The number of 10-17 year olds living in Redbridge in 2015 is calculated as 30,543. These figures are circulated by the YJB. Rat Rat Rat Rat Rat Year Q1 e Q2 e Q3 e Q4 e Total e 2013- 3.8 (3/7 0.1 8.9 (7/7 0.2 12.9 (9/7 0.3 15.4 (8/5 0.2 9.7 (27/27 2014 % 8) 0 % 9) 3 % 0) 0 % 2) 7 % 9) 0.90 2014- 0.0 (0/5 0.0 7.0 (4/5 0.1 (2/5 0.0 (5/6 0.1 4.8 (11/23 2015 % 7) 0 % 7) 3 3.6% 5) 7 8.1% 2) 7 % 1) 0.37 2015- 3.1 (1/3 0.0 5.5 (3/5 0.1 15.6 (7/4 0.2 (1/4 0.0 6.6 (12/18 2016 % 2) 3 % 5) 0 % 5) 3 2.0% 9) 3 % 1) 0.39 2016- 5.3 (4/7 0.1 5.5 (3/5 0.1 (3/3 0.1 6.1 (10/16 2017 % 5) 3 % 5) 0 8.6% 5) 0 % 5) 0.33 3. Ethnic Composition of Young People at YOTPS Substantive Outcomes Triage Starts 2011 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 Ethnicit Cens Q Q Q Q Tot y us No Prop Diff No Prop Diff No Prop Diff 1 2 3 4 al % Diff 30.4 44.3 13.9 42.8 12.3 35.2 1 1 1 40.4 White % 93 % % 77 % % 57 % 4.8% 3 3 8 44 % 9.9% 11.4 12.3 Mixed 7.9% 24 % 3.5% 13 7.2% -0.7% 20 % 4.4% 1 5 1 7 6.4% -1.5% - - - - 45.7 21.9 23.8 23.3 22.3 24.1 21.6 1 2 34.9 10.8 Asian % 46 % % 42 % % 39 % % 0 0 8 38 % % Black 13.0 46 21.9 8.9% 48 26.7 13.7 46 28.4 15.4 6 8 5 19 17.4 4.4% Page 187 % % % % % % % Other 3.0% 1 0.5% -2.5% 0 0 0 1 1 0.9% -2.1% Unkno wn 2 5 4 0 0 0 21 18 16 3 4 3 Total 2 5 6 0 7 2 109 4. ETE – Engagement by Young People Who Offend in Suitable Education Training and Employment Young people are counted here when they cease being supervised by the YOTPS on a statutory programme. The target number of hours of ETE up to Year 11 is 25, and 16hours for Years 12 and 13. Year Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Total 2014-2015 78.6% (22/28) 89.5% (17/19) 78.8% (26/33) 78.1% (25/32) 80.4% (90/112) 2015-2016 88.0% (22/25) 84.6% (22/26) 85.7% (24/28) 86.4% (19/22) 86.1% (87/101) 2016-2017 76.9% (20/26) 73.1% (19/26) 81.8% (18/22) 77.0% (57/74) 5. FTE – First Time Entrants to the Youth Justice System Aged 10–17 With a cumulative total of 71 FTEs so far this year it is likely the full year figure will be higher than the previous year (79). FTE Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Total Average 2013-2014 28 27 24 22 101 25 2014-2015 26 26 16 23 91 23 2015-2016 17 27 11 24 79 20 2016-2017 36 22 13 71 24 The YJB also produce FTE data extracted from the PNC. It is calculated based on a rolling 12 month period as a rate per 100,000 of the Redbridge 10-17 population (30,543). Period Redbridge London Statistical England Rate Actual Neighbours Jul 2014 – Jun 2015 303 425 398 392 Jul 2015 – Jun 2016 337 103 407 360 348 Percentage Change +11.2% -4.2% -9.5% -11.2% 6. Out of Court Disposals Triage + covering targeted referrals from schools and in relation to (CLA) Children Looked After and (CiN) Children in Need (in addition to young people arrested) was introduced in Quarter 1 2013-14. Triage Youth Cautions and Youth Conditional Cautions Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Total Average Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Total Average 2013-2014 56 43 45 51 195 49 ------2014-2015 45 35 35 50 165 41 8 8 7 14 37 9.3 2015-2016 46 48 40 54 188 47 16 22 17 22 77 19.3 2016-2017 30 47 32 109 36 18 13 5 36 12 7. Looked After Children on Statutory Programmes Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Page 188 Q Q Q Q LA LA LA LA Supervised LA in Ever Supervised LA in Ever Supervised LA in Ever Supervised LA in Ever Local 117 19 34 133 21 36 119 19 38 114 14 26 Other 24 17 19 24 19 21 25 19 23 32 29 30 2015-16 Total 141 36 53 157 40 57 144 38 61 146 43 56 Local 120 19 29 126 17 26 102 17 24 Other 22 19 21 23 21 22 22 21 21 2016-17 Total 142 38 50 149 38 48 124 38 45 The ‘Supervised’ column counts all young people supervised by the Redbridge YOTPS during the quarter. In the last quarter, 38 individuals were Looked After at some point during the quarter (made up of 17 from Redbridge and 21 from other boroughs) with an additional 7 who had been Children Looked After at some point previously. 8. Gang Affected This number and percentage has increased due to the number of ‘transfers in’ from other areas and better intelligence related to the gangs matrix. Year Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Average 2013-2014 7.7% (14/181) 7.3% (12/165) 7.9% (13/164) 7.5% (12/160) 7.6% 2014-2015 8.2% (13/159) 7.4% (11/148) 12.4% (18/145) 14.6% (22/151) 10.6% 2015-2016 18.4% (26/141) 19.7% (31/157) 18.8% (27/144) 24.0% (35/146) 20.2% 2016-2017 21.8% (31/142) 24.2% (36/149) 33.1% (41/124) 26.4% Page 189 Agenda Item 15 Cabinet Meeting Date Classification 4 April 2017 Public From The Cabinet Member for Children’s Services and Young People to the Cabinet Relevant Service Committee Title Of Report Children and Young People Service Continuation of the 4 Borough Emergency Duty Committee Team Service 30th March 2017 1. Executive Summary 1.1 A four borough Children’s Emergency Duty Team (EDT) service currently provides a standardised service across the London Boroughs of Havering (LBH), Barking & Dagenham (LBB&D), Waltham Forest (LBWF) and Redbridge (LBR). The service is managed and delivered by Redbridge Council on behalf of the four boroughs. 1.2 This report recommends that the current arrangements should continue and a new three year agreement is entered into by the four boroughs to run from an agreed start date between April and June 2017 to March 2020. The service will continue to be managed and delivered by Redbridge Council on behalf of the four boroughs. 1.3 The current 3 year four borough agreement ends on 31 March 2017. 1.4 The four borough Emergency Duty Team board has discussed extending the current arrangements through a new 3 year agreement. LBH, LBBD and LBWF have indicated that they wish to continue with the arrangement and enter into a new 3 year agreement. 1.5 LBH, LBBD, LBWF will provide formal confirmation that they wish to continue with the four borough arrangement via authorisation from their respective Cabinets. 2. Recommendation Cabinet is recommended to: 2.1 agree that the Corporate Director of People, with the agreement of the respective Cabinet Members, be authorised to negotiate the terms of and to enter into the necessary legal agreements to continue a children’s EDT service. This is to include agreeing a deed of variation to the previous agreement which ends on 31 March 2017, so that there is a continuation of the service for a short period while the new arrangement is being formalised. Page 190 THE DECISION PROPOSED IN THE RECOMMENDATION TO THIS REPORT MAY BE REQUISITIONED Cabinet Member Contact Point Name: Cllr Elaine Norman Position: Deputy Leader/Cabinet Member for Children’s Services Telephone: 0208 708 9722 Email: [email protected] Officer Contact Point Name: Caroline Cutts Position: Operational Director Service: Children and Families Telephone: 0208 708 5304 Email: [email protected] Page 191 3. Background 3.1 The Emergency Duty Team (EDT) arrangements for children in Redbridge, Barking and Dagenham (B&D), Havering and Waltham Forest (LBWF) are currently provided by Redbridge through a four borough agreement. The EDT arrangements for adults are also delivered to the same four boroughs and are managed by the North East London Health Foundation Trust (NELFT). 3.2 The current 3 year arrangement for children’s EDT began in May 2014 and will finish on 31st March 2017. 3.3 The 4 London boroughs have stated that they wish for the current arrangements for children’s EDT to continue and want to enter into a new three year agreement to take effect from an agreed date between April and June2017. 3.4 The current four borough children’s EDT was proposed by East London Solutions (ELS). ELS comprised the boroughs of Waltham Forest, Barking and Dagenham, Havering, Tower Hamlets, Newham and Redbridge and was a sub-regional arrangement amongst London local authorities. ELS worked with officers across the six boroughs to explore joint working opportunities in order to deliver savings, drive efficiencies and enable service improvement. 3.5 As a part of this work in October 2011, Redbridge, Havering and B&D via ELS jointly reviewed the arrangements for Children’s Emergency Duty Teams and how they could be progressed jointly. Subsequently, the remit was expanded to include LBWF. The review led to the decision to develop a four borough children’s EDT to be hosted by Redbridge. 3.6 The review was recommended because it was acknowledged that the effectiveness of the EDT was largely due to the experience of the staff, all of whom were Approved Mental Health Practitioner (AMHP) senior social workers with extensive experience in Children’s Services. Due to changes in working practices, it was unlikely that future staff would have the same experience and qualifications in both Children’s and Mental Health Services as they did and so in order to maintain service provision changes to the arrangements were necessary. 3.7 The total cost of the four borough EDT service under the current arrangements is £916,121 per annum with each partner funding a representative proportion of the total. 3.8 The number of contacts through the EDT service up to the end of December 2016 is in excess of 41,000. The table below identifies the contact referrals for each authority during the period from May 2014 to December 2016. Authority Number of % of Total Contacts Contacts LB Waltham Forest 12,591 30 LB Havering 8,079 19 LB Barking & Dagenham 11,301 27 LB Redbridge 9,120 22 Other 621 1 Total 41,712 Page 192 3.9 The first 3 quarters of 2016-17 have seen a 13.6% increase in the number of contacts to the EDT service to 13,341 contacts compared to 11,748 in the first three quarters of 2015-16. 4. Current EDT Arrangements in Redbridge, Waltham Forest, Havering and Barking and Dagenham 4.1 The four borough EDT has a full time service manager, service coordinator, data officer, two practice managers and 6 senior practitioners. 4.2 The service also utilises a bank of staff of nine senior practitioners who are on a zero hours contract and undertake shifts as required to cover sickness, annual leave and other absences as required (Appendix A). 4.3 The service is delivered from 5.00pm – 9.00 am weekdays and throughout weekends and bank holidays. 4.4 There is a standardised service across Havering, Barking & Dagenham, Waltham Forest and Redbridge. The service is delivered from two location teams covering Barking and Dagenham & Havering (Team1) and LB Redbridge & LB Waltham Forest (Team 2). 4.5 Redbridge is authorised to discharge all of the executive functions which a Children’s EDT service may need to deliver. This includes duties arising from s17 children in need arrangements and s20 looked after children arrangements. The arrangements do not absolve the authority concerned of any statutory duties that might arise, nor will it prevent that authority’s workers from exercising those functions should the need arise. 4.6 Clear processes and procedures are in place for service delivery. There are 2 senior practitioners on duty each night or day as appropriate with each being responsible for one team. Referrals are received via the boroughs’ out of hours call centres and are received via secure email into a generic inbox. The senior practitioners respond to the referrals for their team and respond in line with the process and procedures. 4.7 The social care record is updated for each referral on the relevant borough’s Integrated Children’s System (ICS). Additionally, a record of all referrals received and the response for all four boroughs is updated on the Redbridge ICS. This means that uniform data is available for reporting and planning purposes for the service. 4.8 Ofsted inspections have taken place in three boroughs over the last three years. An inspection in LBBD in May 2014 recognised that the new agreement had only just started and was ‘yet to show’ the impact of the new agreement. LBR and LBH had Ofsted inspections in the later part of 2016. LBR was rated as ‘Good’ with comments including that ‘Arrangements for the out of hour’s service to hand over to daytime services are secure. Information received by the MASH on emergency responses that were required out of office hours is responded to swiftly and robustly.’ Page 193 Havering Local Authority received a rating of ‘Requires improvement’. The EDT feedback was that some of the systems within EDT are weak. EDT has not consistently provided a timely response out of hours. However senior managers have taken appropriate remedial action to challenge this, and provide training and clearer guidelines to staff (Ofsted recommendation). Children are not always seen by a social worker when they are accommodated or workers do not have the appropriate paperwork for foster carers. 5. Service Development 5.1 There have been a number of developments in the service since May 2014. 5.2 In December 2015 a new recording system was developed within ICS so that there would be one record of all EDT work undertaken across the four boroughs. 5.3 Staffing arrangements have altered over the three years, streamlining the service to be more efficient and effective. Two practice managers, one for each team replaced the original team manager and some shifts were reduced from having two workers on duty for each team to one in line with service requirements. 5.4 A Placements Group was introduced with representation from each borough to address the challenge of placement finding for children taken into care or where their placement needed to be changed suddenly. 5.5 The service initially undertook planned work requests where discreet pieces of work had to take place out of hours. This work is now undertaken by the day time teams through separate arrangements and the EDT service focuses on the emergency referrals received. 5.6 Other developments have included the development of the performance reports for the Board and the introduction of an audit system. Both these mechanisms support the review and development of the service to be more efficient and effective. 6. Options 6.1 Discussions on extending a four borough agreement have been held at the quarterly four Borough EDT Board meetings from July 2016 onwards and by the Redbridge Children and Families Service separately. 6.2 The options available were; (1) that the current arrangement continued; (2) that boroughs chose instead to operate separately; (3) that a new arrangement was developed with different boroughs - It could be that a new arrangement was made with fewer or different boroughs. 6.3 The other consideration was to merge the adult and children’s EDT service as existed prior to the current arrangements. This is a significant undertaking which could not be progressed in order to meet the timelines of the new agreement. It will be considered further in the future. Page 194 6.4 The Board recognised that if the four borough agreement was discontinued then each of the boroughs, excluding Redbridge, would incur additional costs by having to develop a new EDT Children’s Service and the required management and service support and there may be implications arising under Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 (as amended) (“TUPE”) that would need to be considered. 6.5 The Board concluded that none of the partners would be able to run a Children’s EDT service for the same cost due to the loss of the current benefits of economies of scale. Therefore it was recommended to continue with the current arrangements. 6.6 The service re-examined the current funding provisions in line with the existing agreement and proposed to the Board a reset of the baseline funding requirement of each partner to continue the four borough EDT service. This was based on the proportional % of the number of contacts made from each authority. The future overall funding requirement has reduced by £65,080 to £851,041 as a result of the implementation of efficiencies within the service. 6.7 The table below indicates the total funding required to continue the 4 borough EDT service which is to be funded proportionately on the number of contacts relating to each authority. 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 £000’s £000’s* £000’s* EDT Funding requirement 851 859 866 *Each subsequent year after 2017/18 has an uplift of 1% applied. 6.8 The measures together will mean a reduction in the financial requirement for Redbridge council of £22,437 for 2017/18 compared to 2016/17. 7. Financial Implications 7.1 The overall cost budget for the Emergency Duty Team service covering the four boroughs is £0.916m. The projected cost under the arrangements from 2017/18 will be £0.851m in 2017/18, £0.859m in 2018/19 and £0.866m in 2019/2020. This will be a saving to the 4 boroughs combined of £0.065m in 2017/18 and £0.057m and £0.050m in 2018/19 and 2019/20 respectively. 7.2 The 2016/17 net budget for the current service to LB Redbridge is £0.214m. The net annual saving which will accrue to LB Redbridge from the continuation of the current EDT service is projected to be approximstely£0.022m in 2017/18 compared to current costs. Due to the inflationary uplift for the service, this will reduce to approximately £0.020m and £0.018m in the subsequent two years. 7.3 This saving will be utilised to partially offset the underlying budget pressures facing Children’s Services and/or be a contribution to meeting Children’s Services overall budget savings. Page 195 7.4 Children and Families detail in paragraph 6 of the report the appraisal of the various options. Based on this and taking account of financial, economies of scale and human resources considerations there is a benefit to the Council of continuing with the current arrangements. These are consequently recommended. 7.5 The costs arising from the negotiation of terms, legal arrangements and associated administration will need to be contained within the approved budgets of the Directorate of People. 8. Legal Implications 8.1 This report is seeking approval to enter into a new three-year shared service arrangement with the London Boroughs of Havering, Barking and Dagenham and Waltham Forest for the provision of a statutory function, namely the Children’s Emergency Duty Team Shared Service. 8.2 The legislative authority for local authorities to share services is contained within the Local Government Act 1972. Section 101 of the Local Government Act 1972 allows local authorities to delegate functions to other local authorities. 8.3 Although the shared service arrangement will involve the Council entering into a binding contract with the other boroughs in the form of a Shared Service Agreement, under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 (“PCR 2015”) an exemption has been provided for contracts which establish or implement cooperation between contracting authorities. Providing the arrangement is a genuine collaboration between the local authorities, this will not be an agreement which is subject to the PCR 2015. Background Papers None Page 196 Agenda Item 16 Cabinet Meeting Date Classification 4 April 2017 Public From The Cabinet Member for Children and Young People to the Cabinet Relevant Service Committee Title Of Report Children and Young People Service Use of Land at Aldborough Road North for New Committee – 30 March 2017 Special Free School 1. Executive Summary 1.1 A decision was taken by the Cabinet Member for Children and Young People on 11 April 2016 to: appropriate part of the land adjoining William Torbitt Primary School at Aldborough Road North from the Children’s Service portfolio to the non-operational portfolio; appropriate, subject to the consent of the Secretary of State, land currently forming part of William Torbitt Primary School, from the Children’s Services portfolio to the non-operational portfolio; release £250,000 from the Capital Reserve to procure a new caretakers house. 1.2 In October 2016 the DfE published guidance on an opportunity for LAs to bid for funding for special free school provision. An Expression of Interest was submitted by LBR for a 64 place special free school for pupils aged 2 – 7, with notice that a suitable site to accommodate the proposed provision was being explored and would be notified to the DfE if approved through governance processes. The use of surplus land on the above sites has been identified as a suitable option. 2. Recommendations The Cabinet is recommended to:- 2.1 agree that, in view of the changed circumstances set out in the report, not to proceed with the decisions made by the Cabinet Member for Children and Young People on 11 April 2016 in relation to surplus land at the Alborough Road North/William Torbitt Primary School sites; 2.2 approve the use of the surplus land for a new DfE funded special free school, on the condition that the Expression of Interest submitted by LBR is successful and subject to school build/refurbishment and outside area costs and pre and post-opening start-up grants being provided by the DfE; and a 2.3 approve the land for a new DfE funded special free school on the condition that the Expression of Interest submitted by LBR is successful and subject to any costs incurred in relation to potential relocation and new build of the Caretaker’s house being met by the DfE. Page 197 THE DECISIONS PROPOSED IN THE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THIS REPORT MAY BE REQUISITIONED Cabinet Member Contact Point Name: Cllr. Elaine Norman Position: Cabinet Member for Children and Young People Telephone: 0208 708 9722 Email: [email protected] Officer Contact Point Name: Colin Stewart Position: Operational Director – Education and Inclusion Service: People Directorate Telephone: 0208 708 3378 Email: [email protected] Page 198 3. Background 3.1 The Council expanded William Torbitt Primary School from 3 forms of entry (fe) to 4fe in September 2014. As part of the construction works to provide the accommodation necessary to support the expansion, it was agreed that the hall on the main school site would be expanded to be used as a dining hall. In return for expanding the dining facilities the governing body agreed to support the council in an application to the Secretary of State (SoS) for Education to appropriate the land that was occupied by the dining hall and the caretaker’s house, (B and E on plan) provided that the caretaker was rehoused on the site. 3.2 The Council is obliged to seek permission from the SoS prior to disposing of the school land as it has been used for education purposes within the preceding 8 years under Schedule 1 of the Academies Act 2010. The areas marked B and E on the plan require such an application. Schedule 1 allows the SoS to consider whether the land can be used to provide a free school. The area marked E on the plan has been in use as educational land as an outdoor nature area, and consent for this area is also required under section 77 of the School Standards and Framework Act 1998 because it is classified as a potential ‘playing field’. Section 77 consent ensures land classified as potential playing field is protected. 3.3 The Aldborough Hatch Community Association (AHCA) leased the area adjacent to William Torbitt School, (C and D on the plan) until 2009. The building on the site has since been demolished and the site has remained largely vacant. 3.4 Approval was given by the Cabinet Member for Children and Young People on 11 April 2016 (subject to SoS consent) to: appropriate the land currently forming part of William Torbitt Primary School (B and E on the plan) from the Children’s Services portfolio to the non-operational portfolio; release £250,000 from the Capital Reserve to procure a new caretaker house on part of the former AHCA site (D on the plan), demolish the existing structures on the plot and erect a hoarding around the site; appropriate part of the former AHCA site (C on the plan) from the Children’s Services Portfolio to the non-operational portfolio. 3.5 A Schedule 1 application in relation to areas B and E and a Section 77 application in relation to area E have been submitted to the DfE but decisions have not yet been taken. The DfE has requested further information which has yet to be progressed. (There is a risk that Section 77 consent from the DfE would not be granted and the land would instead be utilised by the DfE as a site for alternative Free School provision.) 3.6 In October 2016 the DfE published guidance on an opportunity for LAs to bid for funding for special free school provision. This does not replace the “presumption” route or the LA’s sufficiency duty. The DfE is providing a separate capital fund of £215m to allocate to LAs to supplement their basic need funding and help them to grow and enhance provision for children with EHC plans. New special schools commissioned through this process are part of DfE’s central free school process and will be delivered and funded as such. Page 199 3.7 Redbridge is a net importer of children with SEN and statements or EHC plans, attracted by the outstanding special schools. This, together with growth from housing development; increased birth rate; higher occupancy of housing; and changing patterns of need, puts significant pressure on places at special schools in the locality which have limited site capacity to further expand . Forecasts show a deficit of over 100 special school places across the age range in Redbridge over the next 6 years and currently some children moving into the area are maintained in their previous placement which can incur significant costs, especially transport. Redbridge does not currently have assessment nursery provision for young children with emerging complex needs and who would benefit from a period of detailed assessment to ensure educational arrangements at statutory school age maximise potential and opportunity for inclusion. 3.8 Interested LAs were asked to submit a completed Expression of Interest (EoI) form by 11 November 2016, including site information (where a site had been identified). It was stated in the guidance that by making a site available on a peppercorn lease gives the greatest chance of the school opening successfully, and on time. The Regional Schools Commissioner (RSC) will decide whether to publicise the opportunity as part of the free schools programme. 3.9 Redbridge Borough Council submitted an EoI for a new 64 place Special Free School for ages 2-7. It was explained within the EoI that potential sites to accommodate the proposed provision had been explored and were subject to detailed feasibility and formal approvals and ratification that the LA will release the site for the school. 3.10 Site explorations resulted in very limited site options, however desk top feasibility identified the combined surplus land at William Torbitt Primary School Site and adjacent area of land in Aldborough Road North as a potential suitable option for the special free school provision that could be progressed and delivered within a relatively short timescale. The overall site area of 4,034m² is short of the area recommended by the guidance (building bulletin 104) of 8,960m². It is not uncommon, however, for schools in an urban setting to be largely deficient from the site area guidance. 3.11 Discussions are being progressed with William Torbitt Primary School to explore alternative locations for a relocated caretaker house and the inclusion of an all-weather pitch or MUGA on its large site for shared use to enhance outdoor provision for William Torbitt and increase the size of the outdoor area for the potential new Special Free School. 3.12 If an application for a new Special Free School is successful through this DfE initiative, and subsequently a strong proposal from a provider that both the LA and the Secretary of State for Education wish to approve is received, and an affordable site is secured that fits within the constraints of available DfE capital, the Special Free School will be established through the central free school process. Build/ refurbishment costs and pre and post-opening start-up grants will be provided by the DfE which could result in significant capital investment and grant funding. 3.13 At this stage, successful bids and basic need funding allocations for capital projects are not known and the DfE has informed LBR that the assessment Page 200 process is ongoing. The DfE has requested further site information from LBR once a site has been confirmed and has been notified that site information will be provided if approved by Cabinet. 4. Options 4.1 Within the DfE guidance relating to the Expression of Interest it was stated that by making a site available on a peppercorn lease gives the greatest chance of the school opening successfully, and on time. The surplus land at Alborough Road North/ William Torbitt Primary would provide such a site and, if the EoI is successful, would result in significant capital investment from the DfE. Identification of a site does not, however, mean that the EoI will be successful. 4.2 Not offering a site for the proposed free school does not mean that the EoI would be unsuccessful. However, with limited site options in Redbridge, and the challenge for a number of providers of approved free schools to identify larger sites in the borough it is unlikely that a an alternative suitable site could be identified for the special free school within a short timescale, in accordance with this DfE initiative. 4.3 Potential relocation and new build of the Caretaker’s house would be a consideration for the DfE in its assessment of the site for the special free school provision. 4.4 If this site option for a new special free school were not to proceed it would enable plans to appropriate the sites to the non-operational portfolio to continue, which could result in a potential net capital receipt of £1.550M for the sale of the site, subject to the necessary DfE consents being given. 5. Fairness Implications, including Equality and Diversity 5.1 There are no adverse impacts anticipated from this proposal. The potential establishment of a new special free school will provide much needed additional special school places to meet predicted demand. 6. Financial Implications 6.1 A separate capital fund of £215m is being provided by the DfE to allocate to LAs to supplement their basic need funding and help them to grow and enhance provision for children with EHC plans. New special schools commissioned through this process are part of DfE’s central free school process and will be delivered and funded as such. 6.2 LBR has submitted an Expression of Interest for special school provision and, subject to the Expression of Interest being successful, this would result in capital investment being provided from the DfE for new special free school provision, together with pre and post-opening start-up grants for the new provision. 6.3 Use of the site for Special Free School provision would mean that the potential net capital receipt of £1.550m, for the sale of the site (subject to SoS consent being given to appropriate the land) would no longer be available. Page 201 7. Legal Implications 7.1 As set out in the Cabinet Report dated 7 April 2016, approved at the Cabinet Meeting on 12 April 2016, Section 13 of the paragraph 6 of Schedule 1 to the Academies Act 2010 provides that the Council must not make an appropriation of land without the consent of the Secretary of State for Education in the following circumstances: The Council has a freehold or leasehold interest in the land; It proposes to make an appropriation under s122 of the Local Government Act 1972; and At any time in the 8 years preceding the appropriation it was used wholly or mainly for the purposes of a school. All of those factors were present in respect of this land and so and as this report explains, the Council applied for the Secretary of State’s consent. As now the recommendation is not to proceed with such consent and change of portfolio it is permissible to proceed with a Free School with powers drawn from the Academies Act. 7.2 The process of appropriating the land from the Children’s Services portfolio to the non-operational portfolio can only be put into effect once the above consents have been obtained. The above consents have not yet been given by the Secretary of State for Education and the land therefore currently remains within the Children’s Services portfolio for use by that department as now intended. BACKGROUND PAPERS Cabinet Report dated 12 April 2016– Appropriation of Land at Aldborough Road North Page 202 APPENDIX A Local authority commissioned special free schools An expression of interest form for local authorities interested in commissioning a special free school October 2016 Page 203 Overview Since local authorities play a key role in placing pupils with statements or Education, Health and Care (EHC) plans, it is important that they shape the range of provision in their area. Previously, proposals to establish special free schools have only been taken forward in consultation with local authorities. We are now providing a further opportunity for local authorities themselves to identify where a new special free school would benefit their area, inform their Regional Schools Commissioner (RSC), and potentially seek proposals for the new school they want, with the Department for Education (DfE) providing capital funding and start-up grants. This is in addition to the central route for special free schools, which continues to operate. This expression of interest (EOI) form is for local authorities that would like a new special school. It allows them to make a case that a special school would be beneficial in their area, including a case that it would help meet demographic growth, changing patterns of need, and cost pressures, without reducing inclusion. It provides RSCs with the initial information they need to understand what is wanted and why. If the EOI is successful, the opportunity will be advertised nationally, and if a strong proposal comes forward that both the local authority/authorities and the Secretary of State wish to take forward, the DfE will provide capital and start-up grant funding, subject to value for money assessments covering both the affordability of the site solution and the limitations on overall capital availability. Please see the accompanying guidance for further detail. The form should be completed by a local authority representative (or representatives, if it is a joint bid) with the approval of the Director of Children’s Services (DCS). This opportunity is intended to identify and meet untapped demand for special free schools as a supplement to LA’s existing resources. It does not replace the ‘presumption’ process nor does it replace a local authority’s duties to ensure appropriate placements for all children with Special Educational Needs (SEN). You should use this form to provide all the necessary information and evidence for your proposal. Please: email your RSC during October to say whether you are interested and give any headline facts available (email addresses are in the guidance) return this EOI, completed, to [email protected] in your RSC, by midday on 11 November. More detailed information about this process can be found in the local authority-commissioned special free schools guidance. Page 204 Section A – Key facts about the school and the local authorities that want to commission it A1: Who is putting forward this expression of interest? If this is a joint EOI, please fill in the table below for each LA involved and state the lead LA below. The Regional Schools Commissioner’s team may need to contact these people to understand more about the EOI. Please note that including a LA on this list means that they have committed to commissioning places. Name of LA Name of person leading Contact details London Borough of Redbridge Liz Hunt – Head of Access [email protected] and Inclusion Tel: 020 8708 3976 [if applicable – name of 2nd Not applicable LA. Page 205 A2: What type of school is wanted? Please provide key information about the school you would like to commission: Category of SEN provision SLCN, SEMH, Cognition and Learning, Communication and (if more than one type, with Interaction different top-up rates, please explain) Per-pupil revenue funding £10k per place plus £20,000 you would expect to pay (if a range of rates, please explain) 2-7 Age range Co-educational Gender (boys/girls/co- educational) 64 (includes Early Years provision) Total number of proposed places 16 Early years provision? If so, how many places? 16-19 provision? If so, how No many places? Joint commissioning of paediatric therapies to provide Community use/shared assessment and support. facilities Community use in specified areas during out of school hours. Please use this space to expand on any of the key information above [max. 200 words] The Borough is committed to the principles of inclusion and the development of local infrastructure to increase the local offer for Redbridge children. The number of children and young people in Redbridge schools with an Education, Health and Care Plan (EHCP) and or a Statement is on an overall upward trajectory with over 200 more children and young people with an EHCP or statement than in 2014. Approximately 1% of Redbridge children attend special schools and a shortfall of over 100 places is predicted over the next 6 years. There is evidence to suggest the needs of children in special schools in Redbridge are becoming more complex. There has been significant demographic growth and diversity of population within Page 206 the borough with an increase in the range of complex needs due to consanguinity amongst populations. Special schools offering primary and early years provision are operating at capacity, with no further opportunity to expand on site. Significant growth at Hatton Special School has put increased pressure on places. A new 2-7 place Special Free School will support the principles of inclusion and partnership working, complement the local landscape and help address the predicted demand for additional Special School places. A3: Conversations with partners Local authorities (in particular smaller ones) must speak to their neighbouring LAs to check whether they want to commit to commissioning places at the new school at the specified top-up rate. If they do not, LAs may put in a solo EOI. Authorities may speak to other partners in order to ensure that their EOI will complement the local landscape and be a close match for what families want. If you have not engaged with your Schools Forum before sending this EOI to your Regional Schools Commissioner, you will need to do so if successful. Who? Conversation summary (3 points max) Your neighbouring LAs – Discussed at a cross-border meeting on 8 November with please specify Waltham Forest, Enfield, Havering and Tower Hamlets. The provision is required to meet the predicted local demand in Redbridge. Optional: Your Parent / Carer Forum, or other representatives of parents and young people Optional: Any other partners, Group meetings with Headteachers of local maintained Special Schools forum, existing FE Schools. colleges etc (please specify) Page 207 Section B – The proposed location and site (if applicable) Please describe where the school would be located and whether a site has been made available/identified. Making a site available on a peppercorn lease gives the greatest chance of the school opening successfully, and on time. Please include as much detail as possible as this will help your EOI: Address and postcode Size of site Current and previous uses including planning designation (if known) Estimated timescale for formal ratification that the LA will release the site for the school (if agreed) Estimated date the site would be available for works to commence Tenure upon which the site will be made available (if agreed) If applicable, whether the site is co-located with another school etc. If you do not have a site please provide information on where this school would need to be located as this will ensure the Education Funding Agency (EFA) can look at property in the area should your EOI progress. Potential sites to accommodate the proposed provision have been explored and are subject to detailed feasibility and formal approvals and ratification (to be confirmed in January 2017). Please provide the name and contact details for the main LA contact about the site. The EFA may contact this person to ask questions about the site. If you know any of these site details before submitting your EOI, please let DfE know (by emailing [email protected]) so we can start conversations with you. Please see details above for Liz Hunt. Please tick the box below to confirm that the relevant Lead Member for Corporate Property has seen this expression of interest and is content with the information provided about site (if provided). I confirm that the Lead Member of Corporate Property at [London Borough of Redbridge] has seen this expression of interest and supports it. Please tick to confirm √ Page 208 Section C – Rationale for School Please provide an explanation of how and why this provision is required and how it would benefit the local area. [500 words max.] Please include: How the school will fit into the broader spectrum of SEN provision in the region (including neighbouring LAs if appropriate) The proposed Free School will provide provision for children (boys and girls) aged 2-7 with significant special educational needs and disabilities including: social, emotional and mental health (SEMH); speech, language and communication needs (SCLN); cognition and learning and communication and interaction difficulties. The Free School would provide a specialist nursery environment and it is expected that the school would work in partnership with existing Redbridge mainstream and special schools to support inclusion and management of transition at KS2. Children with severe and complex levels of need are almost always known about by age 2 and many from birth. There is a very effective planning process in Redbridge involving the multi-agency Pre School Liaison Group where children are discussed so that their need for places can be highlighted very early. Hatton Primary and Newbridge special schools in Redbridge are both rated outstanding by Ofsted. The schools are, however, unable to further expand on their existing sites and there is predicted to be increased pressure on reception and early years places at the schools. Redbridge does not currently have assessment nursery provision for young children with emerging complex needs and who would benefit from a period of detailed assessment to ensure educational arrangements at statutory school age maximise potential and opportunity for inclusion. How it would help meet pressures on special educational provision Expansion projects have taken place, where possible, at existing maintained special schools offering primary provision with satellite classes for Hatton School established to provide additional places in KS2. There is no scope for further expansion on existing special school sites to accommodate the predicted increases in the number of local children who will require a special primary school place in Redbridge. Redbridge is a net importer of children with SEN and statements or EHC plans. Based on historical trends, about half the children who move in require a place in a special school and this puts significant pressure on school places at special schools in the locality. Hatton School cohorts have grown considerably in size. For example, the cohort of reception at Hatton in 2011 was 17 and this rose to 31 by Year 4 and the cohort of 17 in reception 2012 increased to 37 by Year 3. In 2014 three additional classrooms were built which enabled 21 children to start in reception but larger cohorts moving through the school has, and will continue to, put pressure on future reception and early years places. The proposed Free School would create additional places for children aged 2-7 and this, together with KS2 satellite provision, would reduce the local pressure on places in primary and early years special educational provision in the Borough. Page 209 The potential impact on inclusion, including (where applicable) types of expert support you would expect the school to provide to mainstream schools in the area It is expected that the Free School would work in partnership with Redbridge mainstream and special schools and the Local Authority to support inclusion. It is also expected that the Free School would provide a local offer for assessment within its specialist nursery environment, including an EY/SEN advisory service, EP, SLT/OT. Section D – Pupil data and existing SEN provision The purpose of this section is to help us to understand the need for a new school in the context of how existing provision is used, and future expected growth in need. We want to approve EOIs that: address demographic growth help LAs meet what pupils and parents want help LAs manage within their budgetary constraints We do not want to approve EOIs that have the side-effect of decreasing inclusion in mainstream schools, or of creating excess spare capacity in existing special schools. (eg. if several LAs each want a similar school, any one of those might make sense on its own but in aggregate there might not be enough need.) In this section you need to explain how the places in this school would be filled and where the pupils would come from (D1). You also need to explain the general demographic trends and placement trends for all pupils with EHC plans (D2). D1: Pupils who would go to the new special school Please indicate how you expect the places in this school to be filled, and the impact on inclusion. [500 words max.] Please include: Where the pupils will come from – what is the balance of demographic growth (eg new housing developments) vs changing patterns of need (eg which are the schools the pupils would attend if this school did not go ahead)? The significant rise in pupil numbers in Redbridge has resulted in a corresponding increase in the number of children with special educational needs and disabilities. Redbridge is a net importer of children with SEN and statements or EHC plans, attracted by the outstanding special schools. This, together with growth from housing development; increased birth rate; higher occupancy of housing; and changing patterns of need, puts significant pressure on places at special schools in the locality. If the school did not go ahead there would be insufficient places at existing special schools to accommodate the predicted additional demand. The Local Authority has worked with Redbridge special and mainstream schools to develop KS2 satellite provision to existing special schools on mainstream school sites. Further satellite provision is being explored and would need to be Page 210 developed, potentially through capital build projects. However, the need for a specialist multi-agency assessment provision for complex needs would not be addressed by satellite provision. There would be an increased need for commissioned outreach services in mainstream schools and nursery settings. The impact on numbers and proportion of students with SEN at mainstream schools Data from the January 2016 census shows that about 1.6% of children and young people in mainstream schools have statements or EHC plans. The predicted growth in mainstream schools would include a proportionate increase in the number of students in attendance at a mainstream school with EHC plans. The predicted deficit in Special School places over the next 6 years is based on a historical pattern of approximately 1%. The proposed provision would reduce the predicted deficit of numbers in Special Schools and would not impact on the proportion of students with SEN at mainstream schools. The role of assessment places would enable more effective and sustained placements across the sector. It is expected that the school would support the vision of the Local Authority and work with the Local Authority and its partners to support inclusion. How the school would be financially sustainable within budgetary constraints in the long term, including (if applicable) how it would help deliver wider value for money (for example in reducing transport costs). Redbridge Borough plans to review the high needs block to operate on a traded basis for services that it currently funds centrally, at no extra cost to the schools. Along with the proposed High Needs Funding Reform it is predicted that there should be sufficient funds to fund the new provision. The assessment nursery provision will ensure educational arrangements at statutory school age maximise potential and opportunity for inclusion. It is planned to review all placements in light of the new provision with a view to reducing high cost placements, such as out of borough. Hatton School cohorts have grown to accept as many children moving into the area as possible, but some are maintained in their previous placement which can incur significant costs, especially transport. The Free School proposal will open up additional places at Hatton School and potentially reduce transport costs. D2: Trends in your specialist provision for all children with EHC plans Please use the table below to describe the recent, current and projected trends of specialist provision that caters for children with EHC plans living in your LA(s), of the age range for which you want the new school (drawing upon SEN2 Data ). If this is a joint bid, ie. other LAs are committed to commissioning places, either fill in the table once for the LAs together, or copy/paste the table and fill it in for each LA (please say which you have done). The projected data for 2020 should show the pattern you expect if this EOI is successful. Page 211 Please indicate the no. of pupils with an EHC plan living in your LA who are placed within these No. of Information to be included settings Settings 2016 (as at 2012 2020 Sep 2016) Resourced provision and units 5 94 147 230 inside LA Resourced provision and units 0 0 0 0 outside LA Special schools (either maintained 4* 413 490 581 or academies) inside LA Special schools (either maintained 27 53 65 80 or academies) outside LA Independent / non-maintained 0 0 0 0 special schools inside LA Independent / non-maintained 27 71 84 99 special schools outside LA Mainstream schools inside LA 72 655 707 763 Mainstream schools outside LA 22 75 53 15 General FE colleges (if relevant) inside LA General FE colleges (if relevant) outside LA Specialist FE providers (if relevant) inside LA Specialist FE providers (if relevant) outside LA *The number of special schools would increase to 5 in 2020 Page 212 Please provide a brief explanation of any recent trends and the rationale for future projections [200 words max.] Please include: anything the RSC should know about why you are expecting the changes you have described from now to 2020 The current and predicted rise in the child population of Redbridge will see a corresponding increase in the numbers of children with special education needs and disabilities requiring special school places and resource provision. The pre-submission draft of the Local Plan dated 2016 identifies significant new housing development over the next 15 years, and shows a total of 6,848 housing units in phase 1 of the plan (2015-2020). Redbridge is a net importer of children with SEN and statements or EHC plans and the Borough has continued to see a rise in in-year growth of primary age children which has put significant pressure on special schools offering primary provision. any changes to capacity you are already expecting (eg. planned expansions / closures / other new schools and how this school would sit alongside those) Feasibility work is currently being undertaken to increase satellite provision to special schools and this partnership arrangement will continue to further promote inclusion. Primary places provided through satellite provision are small in number and would not address specialist multi-agency assessment provision for complex needs and would therefore be insufficient to cater for the provision requirements in this proposal. details of any wave 12 free school applications The application for the expansion of the current outstanding specialist provision (Beacon Communication School), located on Beal High School site would provide additional secondary places and does not impact on this proposal. Confirmation I confirm that the Director of Children’s Services at [London Borough of Redbridge] has seen this expression of interest and supports it. Please tick to confirm √ Date (DD/MM/YYYY) 11th November 2016 © Crown copyright 2016 Page 213 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 30303030303030 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 30303030303030 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 30303030303030 30303030303030 30303030303030 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 85858585858585 85858585858585 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 APPENDIX4 4 4 4 4 4 4 B 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 A = WTPS Site - 42,2203 3 3 3 3 3 3 m2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 B = Former Dining2 Hall area - 2,137 m2 22202020202000 22202020202000 22202020202000 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 4 14 14 14 14 14 14 1 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 4 14 14 14 14 14 14 1 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 11121212121222 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 11121212121222 11121212121222 22282828282888 11121212121222 22282828282888 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 22282828282888 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 22282828282888 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 22282828282888 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 2222222 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 C = Former Aldborough Hatch Community Centre - 941.7 m2 2222222 2222222 2222222 26.8m26.8m26.8m26.8m26.8m26.8m26.8m 26.8m26.8m26.8m26.8m26.8m26.8m26.8m RRRROOOOYYYY RRRROOOOYYYY G G GGAAAARRRRDDDD GGGGAAAARRRRDDDDEEEE 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 AAAARRRRDDDDEEEENNNN 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 RRRR EEEE 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 DDDD NNNN 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 RRRR EEEE SSSS 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 DDDD NNNN 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 EEEE SSSS 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 DDDD NNNN 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 EEEE SSSS 4 54 54 54 54 54 54 5 NNNN 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 EEEE SSSS 4 54 54 54 54 54 54 5 NNNN 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 D = Proposed Caretakers House - 251 m2 (within C) 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 SSSS NNNN 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 SSSS 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 SSSS 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 27.1m27.1m27.1m27.1m27.1m27.1m27.1m 27.1m27.1m27.1m27.1m27.1m27.1m27.1m 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11191919191999 1 11191919191999 E = Land11191919191999 subject to SoS Sec 77 consent - 954.7 m2 11191919191999 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 TTTTTTT 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 hhhhhhh 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 TTTTTTT 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 hhhhhheheeeeee 5 5 5 5 5 5 9999999 5 TTTTTThThhhhheeheee e e S S SS 9999999 TTTTTThhThhhheeheee e e S S ShShhhhrhrhrrurururuuuu 9999999 TTTTTThhThhhheeheee e e S S ShShhhhrhrhrrurururuuubbubbbbbbbbbebeeeeee 9999999 S S ShShhhhrhrhrrurururuuubbubbbbbbbbbeebeeerererriririeireieieiesesesssss CCCCCCC bbbbbbbbbbeebeeerererriririeireieieiesesesssss CCCCCCC eeeeerererriririeireieieiesesesssss 7 7 7 7 7 7 CCCCCCC 7 iiieieieieiesesesssss 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 7 7 7 7 7 7 CCCCCCC 7 sssssss 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 7 7 7 7 7 7 CCCCCCC 7 2 2 2 2 2 2 HHHHHHH 2 7 7 7 7 7 7 CCCCCCC 7 2 2 2 2 2 2 HHHHHHH 2 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 2 2 2 2 2 2 HHHHHHH 2 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 2 2 2 2 2 2 HHHHHHH 2 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 2 2 2 2 2 2 HHHHHHH 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 HHHHHHH 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 HHHIIHIHIHIHII 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 IIIIIII 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 ILILILILILILIL 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 ILILILILILILIL 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 ILILILILILILIL 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 ILILILILILILIL 3 LLTLTLTLTLTLTT TTTTTTT 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 mmmm TTTTTTT 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 mmmm TTETETETETETEE 17171717171717 11111m11mmm TTETETETETETEE 17171717171717 ...1.1.1.1.1m11mmm EEEEEEE 17171717171717 77777.7.7.1.1.1.1.1m11mmm EEEEEEE 17171717171717 77777.7.7.1.1.1.1.1m11mmm EEEEEEE 17171717171717 222227272777.7.7.1.1.1.1.1m11mmm EERERERERERERR 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 2222222...1.1.1.1.111 EEEEEEE 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 222227272777.7.7.1.1.1.1.111 RRRRRRR 22222727277777 RRRRRRR 2222222 RRNRNRNRNRNRNN 7 7 7 7 7 7 2222222 RRNRNRNRNRNRNN 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 NNNNNNN 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 NNNNNNN 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 NNNNNNN 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 NNNNNNN 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 5 5 5 5 5 NNN N N N N 5 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 R R R R R R R 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 R R R R R R R 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 R R R R R R R 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 R R R R R R R 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 R R R R R R R 5 Land subject to SoS RRScheduleOROROROROROO 1 - 3,092 m2 (Areas B & E) OOOOOOO OOOOOOO OOOOOOO 6 6 6 6 6 6 OOOAOAOAOAOAAA 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 AAAAAAA 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 AAAAAAA 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 3 3 3 3 3 3 AAAAAAA 3 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 3 3 3 3 3 3 AAAAAAA 3 4 6 6 4 6 6 4 6 4 4 6 4 6 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 AAAAAAA 3 6 4 6 4 6 6 4 6 4 6 4 4 6 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 AADADADADADADD 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 DDDDDDD 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 DDDDDDD 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 DDDDDDD 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 DDDDDDD 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 DDDDDDD 4 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ElElElEl Sub Sub SubSub Sta Sta StaSta UUUEUEEE VVVEVEENENNUNUUEUEEE A A AVAVVEVEENENNUNUUU IIIAIIAIIANANN N A A AVAVVEVEEE BBBRBRRIRIIAIIAIIANANN N 1 1 1 1 1 1 BBBRBRRIRIIIIII 1 6 6 6 6 6 6 AAAA 6 1 1 1 1 1 1 BBBRBRRIRIIIIII 1 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 1 1 1 1 1 1 MMMMBBBRBRRR 1 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 1 1 1 1 1 1 MMMMBBBRBRRR 1 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 1 1 1 1 1 1 AAAMAMMMBBBB 1 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 1 1 1 1 1 1 AAAMAMMMBBBB 1 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 1 1 1 1 1 1 CCCACAAMAMMM 1 6 6 6 6 6 6 CCCACAAMAMMM 6 CCCACAAA 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 4 34 34 34 34 34 34 3 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 4 34 34 34 34 34 34 3 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 27272727272727 27272727272727 27272727272727 31313131313131 31313131313131 32323232323232 31313131313131 32323232323232 31313131313131 32323232323232 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 29292929292929 29292929292929 29292929292929 29292929292929 29292929292929 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 sssssss sssssss sssssss sssssss sssssss sssssss sssssss nnnnnnn nnnnnnn nnnnnnn nnnnnnn nnnnnnn nnnnnnn nnnnnnn eeeeeee eeeeeee eeeeeee eeeeeee eeeeeee eeeeeee eeeeeee ddddddd ddddddd ddddddd ddddddd rdrdrdrdrdrdrd rdrdrdrdrdrdrd rdrdrdrdrdrdrd r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r aaaaaaa aaaaaaa aaaaaaa aaaaaaa aaaaaaa aaaaaaa CommunityCommunityCommunityCommunity Care Care CareCare aaaaaaa CommunityCommunityCommunityCommunity Care Care CareCare GGGGGGG CommunityCommunityCommunityCommunity Care Care CareCare GGGGGGG CommunityCommunityCommunityCommunity Care Care CareCare GGGGGGG CommunityCommunityCommunityCommunity Care Care CareCare G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 nnnnnnn 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 nnnnnnn 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 nnnnnnn 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 ininininininin 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 ininininininin 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 8 8 8 8 8 8 BBBBBBB 8 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 AdviceAdviceAdviceAdvice Centre Centre CentreCentre nnnnnnn i i i i i i i 8 8 8 8 8 8 BBBBBBB 8 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 AdviceAdviceAdviceAdvice Centre Centre CentreCentre nnnnnnn i i i i i i i 8 8 8 8 8 8 BBBBBBB 8 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 AdviceAdviceAdviceAdvice Centre Centre CentreCentre i i i i i i i 8 8 8 8 8 8 BBBBBBB 8 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 AdviceAdviceAdviceAdvice Centre Centre CentreCentre BBBBBBB i i i i i i i 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 AdviceAdviceAdviceAdvice Centre Centre CentreCentre BBBBBBB i i i i i i i 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 AdviceAdviceAdviceAdvice Centre Centre CentreCentre BBBRBRBRBRBRRR AdviceAdviceAdviceAdvice Centre Centre CentreCentre ooooooo RRRRRRR ooooooo RRRRRRR ooooooo RRRRRRR ooooooo RRRRRRR ooooooo RRREREERREEREE ooooooo RRREERREREEREE ooooooo EEEEEEE ppppppp EEEEEEE ppppppp EEEEEEE ppppppp GGGGGGG EEENNEENENNENN ppppppp GGGGGGG NNNNNNN rprprprprprprp GGGGGGG NNNNNNN rprprprprprprp GGGGGGG NNNNNNN rprprprprprprp GGGGGGG NNNNNNN r r r r r r r GGGGGGG NNNDDNNDNDDNDD r r r r r r r GGGAGAGAGAGAAA DDDDDDD r r r r r r r AAAAAAA DDDDDDD r r r r r r r AAAAAAA DDDDDDD aaaaaaa AAAAAAA DDDDDDD aaaaaaa AAAAAAA DDDODODODOODOO aaaaaaa AAARARARRARARR DDDOODDODOODOO aaaaaaa AAARARRARARARR OOOOOOO aaaaaaa RRRRRRR OOOOOOO aaaaaaa RRRRRRR OOOOOOO eaeaeaeaeaeaea RRRRRRR OOONONONONONNN eeeeeee RRRDRDRDDRDRDD NNNNNNN eeeeeee RRRDRDDRDRDRDD NNNNNNN eeeeeee DDDDDDD NNNNNNN eeeeeee DDDDDDD NNNNNNN eeeeeee DDDDDDD NNNNNNN eeeeeee DDDEDEDEEDEDEE NNNNNNN ppppppp DDDEDEEDEDEDEE ppppppp EEEEEEE ppppppp EEEEEEE ppppppp EEEEEEE ppppppp EEEEEEE ppppppp EENENENENENENN ppppppp NNNNNNN SSSSSSS NNNNNNN SSSSSSS NNNNNNN SSSSSSS NNNSNSSNSNSNSS SSSSSSS NNNSNSSNSNNSSS SSSSSSS SSSSSSS SSSSSSS SSSSSSS SSSSSSS SSSSSSS 9999999 9999999 9999999 9999999 9999999 9999999 9999999 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 TTTT TTTTOOOORRRR OOOORRRRBBBBIIIITIITITTTTT BBBBIIIITIITITTTTT WWWAAAAYYYY WWWAAAAYYYY 25.3m25.3m25.3m25.3m25.3m25.3m25.3m 25.3m25.3m25.3m25.3m25.3m25.3m25.3m 44464646464666 444646469469469c69c69c9c9ccc CCC 444646469469469c69c69c9c9ccc CCC 444646469469469c69c69c9c9ccc CCC ccccccc 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4444444 444646469469469b69b69b9b9bbb 444646469469469b69b69b9b9bbb 444646469469469b69b69b9b9bbb 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 4444444 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 1 6666666 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 44444949499999 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 1 66666a6a6aaaaa 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 44444949499999 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 1 66666a6a6aaaaa 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 44444949499999 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 66666a6a6aaaaa 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 44444949499999 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 66666a6a6aaaaa 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 44444949499999 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 66666a6a6aaaaa 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 44444949499999 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 66696969a69a69a9a9aaa 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 44 7 4444 7 4 7 6666666 7 7 7 7 99 9 7 44 44999 7 4 49 7 64666666 7 7 7 7 7 4 99 99 7 4 449 9 7 46466466696 7 7 7 7 7 9 9 7 44 4949 9 7 444646469469469696999 444646469469469696999 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 4444444 444646467467467b67b67b7b7bbb 444646467467467b67b67b7b7bbb 444646467467467b67b67b7b7bbb 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 HHHHHHH 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 HHHHHHH 1 1 1 1 1 1 BBB 1 HHHHHHH BB HHHHHHH B H HHH B HH H BBB HHHHHHH BBB HHHHHHH B 4444444 BBB 6666666 B 444646467467467a67a67a7a7aaa BBB 44444747477777 B 444646467467467a67a67a7a7aaa TTTTTTT BBB 66666a6a6aaaaa B 44444747477777 TTTTTTT BBB 66666a6a6aaaaa 44444747477777 444646467467467a67a67a7a7aaa TTTTTTT aaaaaaa TTTTTTT RRRRRRR RRRRRRR RRRRRRR RRRRRRR OOOOOOO 44464646464666 OOOOOOO 444646467467467676777 OOOOOOO 444646467467467676777 OOOOOOO 444646467467467676777 NNNNNNN NNNNNNN N N N N N N N N N N N N N N DDDDDDD DDDDDDD DDDDDDD DDDDDDD EEE AAAAAAA EE AAAAAAA E AAAA E AA A EEE AAAAAAA EE AAAAAAA EEE AAAAAAA OOOOOOO OOOOOOO OOOOOOO OOOOOOO RRRRRRR RRRRRRR R R R R R R R R R R R R R R HHHHHHH HHHHHHH HHHHHHH HHHHHHH 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 GGGGGGG 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 GGGGGGG 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 GGGGGGG 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 GGGGGGG 3 GGGGGGG UUUUUUU UUUUUUU UUUUUUU UUUUUUU S S S S S S OOOOOOO S S S S S S S OOOOOOO S S S S S S S S u u u u u u OOOOOOO u S S S S S S S u u u u u u OOOOOOO u S S S S S S S u u u u u u OOOOOOO u S S S S S S S r r r r r r r u u u u u u OOOOOOO u S S S S S S S r r r r r r r u u u u u u OOOOOOO u g g g g g g g r r r r r r r u u u u u u u g g g g g g g r r r r r r r u u u u u u u g g g g g g g r r r r r r r e e e e e e e g g g g g g g r r r r r r r e e e e e e e g g g g g g g r r r r r r r e e e e e e e r r g r g g g r r g r g g r e e e e e e RRRRRRR e r r g r g g g r g r r g g r y y e e y e e e y y y e e RRRRRRR y r r r r r r r y y y e e y e e e y y e e RRRRRRR y r r r r r r r y y y e y e y e e e y y e RRRRRRR e r r r r r r r y y y y y y RRRRRRR y r r r r r r r y y y y y y RRRRRRR y r r r r r r AA r y y y y y y A y RRRRRRR y y y y y y AAA y AAA OOOOOOO AAA OOOOOOO AAA OOOOOOO OOOOOOO OOOOOOO BBBBBBB BBBBBBB BBBBBBB BBBBBBB DDDDDDD DDDDDDD DDDDDDD DDDDDDD LLLLLLL LLLLLLL LLLLLLL LLLLLLL AAAAAAA AAAAAAA AAAAAAA AAAAAAA 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 DDD 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 DDD 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 DDD 1 hhhhhhh hhhhhhh gghghghghghghh gghghghghghghh ggggggg uugugugugugugg eeeeeee uugugugugugugg eeeeeee uuuuuuu eeeeeee uuuuuuu ddedededededee oououououououu ddedededededee oououououououu ddddddd rororororororo ddddddd rororororororo aadadadadadadd rororororororo aadadadadadadd oororororororr rarararararara oororororororr rarararararara ooooooo rarararararara ooooooo aararararararr bboboboboboboo aararararararr bboboboboboboo aaaaaaa bbbbbbb aaaaaaa ddbdbdbdbdbdbb PPaPaPaPaPaPaa ddbdbdbdbdbdbb PPPPPPP 2 2 2 2 2 2 ldldldldldldld PPPPPPP 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 ldldldldldldld PPPPPPP 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 ldldldldldldld PPPPPPP 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 ldldldldldldld PPPPPPP 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 l l l l l l l 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 AAlAlAlAlAlAl l 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 l l l l l l l 2 AAAAAAA AAAAAAA AAAAAAA 5555555 55050505050500 55050505050500 55050505050500 0000000 LLLLL LLLELEEE EEEYEYYY YYYY YYYSYSSS SSSWSWWW WWWW OOOO OOOOOOO OOOO DDDD DDDD D D DD DDDRDRRR RRRR 4444444 RRRR 4444444 RRRRIIIIIII 4444444 IIIVIIVIIVV 4444444 IIIVIIVIIVEVEEE EEEE 11818181818188 EEEE 11818181818188 EEEE 11818181818188 11818181818188 1111111 111111111 111111111 111111111 5555555 1111111 5555555 5555555 5555555 9999999 11919191919199 11919191919199 h 11919191919199 h 1111111 ggghg uuugugggh ooououuu 2222222 rrrrorroroo 11212121212122 rrrrorroroo 11212121212122 ooororrrrrr 11212121212122 oooorrrrrrr 1111111 bbbobooo llldlldlldbdbbb 6666666 llldlldlldd 6666666 llldlldlldd 6666666 AAAAlllllll 6666666 AAAA 7777777 0000000 AAAA 7777777 22020202020200 AAAA 7777777 22020202020200 7777777 22020202020200 7777777 2222222 3333333 33838383838388 11414141414144 33838383838388 11414141414144 11313131313133 33838383838388 11414141414144 11313131313133 8888888 11414141414144 11313131313133 11313131313133 22121212121211 22121212121211 22121212121211 22121212121211 44344343434333 44344343344333 44344343434333 44434343434333 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 llslslslslslss llslslslslslss oooolololollll ooooooo oooooooooo ooooooo hhhhhhh cccchchchchhhh ccccccc SSSScSSccScccc S S S S S SS S S S S S SS yyyy y y y rrryryryryryyy aaaararararrrr aaaaaaa 2222222 aaaaaaa 22626262626266 22626262626266 mmmm 22626262626266 mmmm 6666666 iimiimiimim rrriririririii rrrrrrr PPPPPPP P P P P P PP ttt t tt t ttttttttt iititititititt bbbbibibibiiii bbbbbbb rrrbrbrbrbrbbb oooororororrrr ooooooo TTTToToToToooo T T T T T TT T T T T T TT mmmm mmmm aaaamaamamm 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 iiaiaiaiaiaiaa 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 iiaiaiaiaiaiaa 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 iiaiaiaiaiaiaa 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 llililailailailaiaiaa 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 llilililililii 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 llilililililii 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 llllllillillillililii 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 llllllllllllll iililillillillillllll iilililililill WWWW W W W W eeee e e e eeeeeee hhhheheheheeee hhhhhhh TTTThThThThhhh TTTTTTT 22.9m22.9m22.9m22.9m22.9m22.9m22.9m 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 22.9m22.9m22.9m22.9m22.9m22.9m22.9m 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 22.9m22.9m22.9m22.9m22.9m22.9m22.9m 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 22.9m22.9m22.9m22.9m22.9m22.9m22.9m 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 22.9m22.9m22.9m22.9m22.9m22.9m22.9m 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 22.9m22.9m22.9m22.9m22.9m22.9m22.9m 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 22.9m22.9m22.9m22.9m22.9m22.9m22.9m 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1111111 11414141414144 11414141414144 11414141414144 4444444 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 8 9 8 9 9 8 8 9 8 8 9 9 8 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 8 9 8 9 9 8 9 8 8 9 9 8 8 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 8 8 9 8 9 9 8 8 9 9 8 8 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 8 8 9 8 9 9 9 8 8 9 9 8 8 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 6 9 9 6 6 6 6 9 9 6 9 6 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 6 9 9 6 6 9 6 6 9 6 9 9 6 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 6 9 6 9 6 9 6 6 9 6 9 9 6 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 6 9 6 9 6 9 6 9 9 6 6 9 9 6 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 4 t 9 4 t 9 t t t 4 9 4 t 9 4 9 4 4 t 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 o o o o o o o t 4 9 t 4 9 t t t 4 9 4 t 9 9 4 9 4 t 4 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 o o o o o o o t 4 9 t t 4 t 9 t 4 9 t 4 9 t 9 4 9 4 4 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 o o o o o o o t t 4 9 t 4 t 9 9 t 4 t t 9 9 4 9 4 4 9 4 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 o o o o o o o t 4 t t t t 4 t 4 t 4 4 4 4 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 o o o o o o o t t 4 t t t 4 4 t t 4 4 4 4 o o o o o o o t t 4 t t t 4 t 4 t 4 4 4 4 o o o o o o o aaaaaaa uuubububu buS b Sb SbtS t SatS atSatatataa 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 S S SuS u Su SbuSbubu buS b Sb SbtS t SatS atSatatataa 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 lllllllbbbbbbb 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 EEEE EES E S SuS u SuS uSuu u SS S t StS atS atSatatataa 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 lllllllbbbbbbb 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 EEEE EES E S SuS u SuS uSuu u SS St StS atS atSatatataa 9 2 2 9 2 9 2 2 9 2 9 9 2 9 lllllllbbbbbbb 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 EEEE E ESSE S u SuS uS uSuu u SS St StS atS atSatatataa 9 2 2 9 2 9 9 2 2 9 2 9 9 2 lllllllbbbbbbb 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 EEEE E ESS E Su SuS uS uSuu uS SS S SS S 9 2 2 9 9 2 9 2 9 9 2 2 9 2 lllllllbbbbbbb 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 EEEEE ESS E Su SuS uS uSuuu 9 2 2 9 2 9 9 2 9 2 9 9 2 2 lllllll 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 EEEEE E S SES SS S S 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 lllllll 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 EEEEEEE 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 AAAAAAA AAAAAAA AAAAAAA AAAAAAA LLLLLLL LLLLLLL 2222222 LLLLLLL 9 9 9 9 9 9 2222222 9 LLLLLLL 9 9 9 9 9 9 2222222 9 LLLLLLL 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 2222222 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 0 0 9 0 0 9 9 0 9 0 0 2222222 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 0 9 0 9 0 9 0 0 0 9 9 9 9 2222222 0 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 0 0 9 9 0 9 0 0 0 9 9 9 0 2222222 9 DDDDDDD 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 0 9 9 0 9 0 9 9 0 0 0 9 0 9 DDDDDDD 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 DDDDDDD 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 DDDDDDD 0 0 0 0 0 0 SubwaySubwaySubwaySubway 0 DDDDDDD SubwaySubwaySubwaySubway DDDDDDD SubwaySubwaySubwaySubway BBBBBBB BBBBBBB BBBBBBB BBBBBBB 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 BBBBBBB 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 24242424242424 24242424242424 5555555 2 2 2 2 242 2 42424242 24242 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 11515151515155 42424242424242 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 11515151515155 42424242424242 881818518518518515155 OOOOOOO 42424242424242 5555555 4 881818518518518515155 OOOOOOO 42424242 24242 8888888 2 881818518518518515155 OOOOOOO 2 2 2 2 2 2 88181818181811 OOOOOOO 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 8888888 OOOOOOO RRRRRRR RRRRRRR RRRRRRR RRRRRRR OOOOOOO OOOOOOO OOOOOOO OOOOOOO UUUUUUU UUUUUUU UUUUUUU UUUUUUU GGGGGGG GGGGGGG GGGGGGG GGGGGGG HHHHHHH HHHHHHH HHHHHHH HHHHHHH 1111111 8818181818181111 8818181818181111 8818181818181111 88181818181811 LBLBLBLBLBLBLB 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 LBLBLBLBLBLBLB 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 LBLBLBLBLBLBLB 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 LBLBLBLBLBLBLB 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 LBLBLBLBLBLBLB 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 9 6 6 9 6 9 9 9 6 6 6 9 9 6 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 6 9 6 9 9 6 9 6 6 9 9 6 9 6 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 9 6 9 6 9 6 9 6 6 9 9 6 9 6 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 9 6 9 9 6 9 6 6 9 6 6 9 9 6 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 ShelterShelterShelterShelterShelterShelterShelter ShelterShelterShelterShelterShelterShelterShelter ShelterShelterShelterShelterShelterShelterShelter OOOOOOO RRRRRRR PPPOPOPOPOPOOO RRRRRRR PPPOPOPOOPPOOO RRRRRRR PPPOPOPOPOPOOO RRRRRRR PPPPPPP ClubClubClubClub OOOOOOO rrrrrrr ClubClubClubClub OOOOOOO eererererererr ClubClubClubClub OOOOOOO tetetretrteretretrerr ClubClubClubClub OOOOOOO ltlltelterltertelretlretrerr ClubClubClubClub OOOOOOO eeletleletletrltertelretlrtererr ClubClubClubClub hhehhelhetlehltehltertelretlrletrtererr SShSShSheheSlheSltehltehlteteletllettee SSShShSheheSlehSlehlhelelell AAAAAAA 5555555 SSShShhShSShhh AAAAAAA 00505050505055 SSSSSSS AAAAAAA 9 9 9 9 9 9 880808508508508505055 9 AAAAAAA 9 9 9 9 9 9 5555555 9 AAAAAAA 7 7 7 7 7 7 88080808080800 7 9 9 9 9 9 9 5555555 9 7 7 7 7 7 7 88080808080800 7 2 9 2 2 2 9 9 9 9 9 2 2 2 5555555 9 7 7 7 7 7 7 88080808080800 7 9 2 2 2 9 2 9 9 9 2 2 9 2 9 7 7 7 7 7 7 88080808080800 7 9 2 2 2 2 2 9 9 9 9 2 9 2 9 7 7 7 7 7 7 8888888 7 2 2 2 9 2 9 9 2 2 9 9 9 2 9 7 7 7 7 7 7 8888888 7 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 DDDDDDD 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 DDDDDDD 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 DDDDDDD DDDDDDD SSSSSSS DDDDDDD SSSSS 1111111 9 9 9 9 9 9 SSSSS 1111111 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 TTTTTTT 11414141414144 9 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 9 9 9 9 9 9 TTTTTTT 11414141414144 9 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 9 9 9 9 9 9 4444444 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 TTTTTTT 1111111 0 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 9 9 9 9 9 9 4444444 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 TTTTTTT 1111111 0 SSSSSSS 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 9 9 9 9 9 9 4444444 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 TTTTTTT 1111111 0 SSSSSSS 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 9 9 9 9 9 9 4444444 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 TTTTTTT 0 SSSSSSS 7 7 7 7 7 7 4444444 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 TTTTTATTAAA 0 SSSSSSS 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 AAAA 0 SSSSSSS 0 0 0 0 0 0 AAAA 0 SSSSSSS AAAA SSSSSSS 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 9 9 9 9 9 9 AAAA 9 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 9 9 9 9 9 9 AAAA 9 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 9 9 9 9 9 9 AAAA 9 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 8 8 8 8 8 8 PPPP 8 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 OOOOOOO 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 8 8 8 8 8 8 PPPPP 8 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 OOOOOOO 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 8 8 8 8 8 8 PPPPP 8 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 OOOOOOO 8 8 8 8 8 8 PPPPPP 8 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 OOOOOOO 8 8 8 8 8 8 PPPPP 8 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 OOOOOOO 8 8 8 8 8 8 PPPPP 8 OOOOOOO 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 8 8 8 8 8 8 PPPPP 8 LLLLLLL OOOOOOO 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 LLLLLELLEEE EEEEEE UUUUUUU EEEEEE UUUUUUU EEEEE UUUUUUU 9 9 E 9 E 9 9 E 9 EEFFFFFFF 9 UUUUUUU 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 F 6 6 F 6 F 6 F 6 F 6 F F 6 9 9 9 9 9 9 F 9 F 6 6 6 F 6 F 6 FF 6 F 6 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 F 6 F F 6 6 F 6 F 6 FF 6 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 6 6 6 6 6 6 F 6 FF 6 6 6 6 6 FFFF 6 6 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 6 6 6 6 6 6 F F 6 6 6 6 6 FF 6 FF 6 F 6 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 6 6 6 6 6 6 F 6 TTTTTTT 6 F 6 F 6 6 6 FFFF 6 OOOO 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 TTTTTTT 6 6 6 6 6 6 OOOO 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 OOOO 6 TTTTTTT 6 6 6 6 6 6 OOOO 6 TTTTTTT OOOO TTTTTTT OOORORRR TTTTTTT RRRR HHHHHHH RRRR HHHHHHH RRRR HHHHHHH DDDD HHHHHHH DDDD A A AA 1 1 1 1 1 1 A A AA 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 A A AA 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 6 6 6 6 6 A A AA 6 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 6 6 6 6 6 AAAA 6 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 6 6 6 6 6 AA 6 4 4 4 4 AA 4 A 4 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 4 4 A 4 A 4 AAA 4 AA 4 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 4 4 4 4 4 4 VVVVV 4 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 4 4 4 4 4 4 VVVVV 4 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 4 4 4 4 4 4 VVVVV 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 VVVVVV 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 VVVVVVEVEEEE 4 EEEEEEE EEEEENENNN NNNN NNNUNUUU UUUU EEEEEE 3333333 EEEEEE 880808308308308303033 EEEEE 880808308308308303033 EEEEE 880808308308308303033 88080808080800 21.9m21.9m21.9m21.9m21.9m21.9m21.9m eeee 21.9m21.9m21.9m21.9m21.9m21.9m21.9m dddedeee rrrrarraradaddd aaararrrarraraa PPPPaaaa P P PP lllellelle e P P PP aaalallellellee dddadaaa rrrrdrrdrdd eeererrrrrr lllvllvllveveee iiilililivlilvllvv 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 iiilililivlilvllvv 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 iiiiiii 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 lllllll 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 iiiiiii 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 lllllll 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 iiiiiii 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 iiiiiii 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 SSSS 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 iiiiiii 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 SSSS 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 SSSS 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 SSSS 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 SSSS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SSSS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 2 9 2 2 2 2 9 9 9 9 2 9 2 9 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 2 2 9 2 2 9 9 2 9 9 2 2 9 9 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 2 9 2 2 2 9 9 2 9 9 2 9 2 9 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 2 9 2 2 9 2 9 2 2 9 9 9 2 9 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2222222 2222222 2222222 2222222 2222222 2222222 2222222 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 2222222 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 8 9 9 8 9 8 9 9 8 8 8 9 9 8 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 8 9 9 8 9 9 8 9 8 8 8 9 9 8 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 9 8 8 9 9 9 8 9 8 8 9 8 8 9 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 8 9 9 8 9 9 8 9 8 8 9 8 8 9 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 21.9m21.9m21.9m21.9m21.9m21.9m21.9m 1111111 21.9m21.9m21.9m21.9m21.9m21.9m21.9m 779797197197197191911 21.9m21.9m21.9m21.9m21.9m21.9m21.9m Land at William779797197197197191911 Torbitt Primary21.9m21.9m21.9m21.9m21.9m21.9m21.9m School, Eastern Avenue, Newbury Park IG2 7SS. 21.9m21.9m21.9m21.9m21.9m21.9m21.9m 779797197197197191911 77979797979799 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 yyyyyyy 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 yyyyyyy 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 yyyyyyy ddddyddyydyyyy TTTTTTT dddddyyddyyyyy TTCTCTCTCTCTCC EEEE BBBBBdBdBddddd TTCTCTCTCTCTCC EEEE BBBBBdBdBddddd TTCTCTBCTBCTBCTCBCBBB EEEE B B B B B dBdBddddd TTCTCTBCTBCTBCTCBCBBB EEEE B B B B B BB TTCTCTCTCTCTCC UUUU BBBBBBB EEEE B B B B B BB CCCCCCC UUUU BBBBBBB EEEE dddd d dB dB B B B BB CCCCCCC UUUU BBBBBBB EEEE rrrdrdrdrdr d dB dB B B B BB BBBBBBB NNNNUUUU 1 1 1 1 1 1 rdr BBBBBBB 1 9 9 9 9 9 d 9 rrrdrdrddd 9 NNNNUUUU 1 1 1 1 1 1 drdrd 1 9 r 9 9 9 9 d 9 rrdrdrd 9 NNNNUUUU 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 5 5 5 5 5 araddd 5 9 9 9 9 a 9 d 9 aaarrdarrrrdd 9 NNNN 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 5 5 5 5 5 arrdrdd 5 6 a 6 9 6 9 6 9 6 9 6 9 6 9 aaaraarddrdrd 9 EEEENNNN 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 5 5 5 5 5 ararr 5 6 9 6 9 6 9 6 a 9 6 9 6 9 6 aaararrr 9 4 4 4 4 4 4 EEEENNNN 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 5 5 5 5 5 aar r 5 6 9 6 9 6 9 6 9 r 6 9 6 9 6 aaarraarr 9 4 4 4 4 4 4 EEEENNNN 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 5 5 5 5 5 aa 5 6 9 a 6 9 6 9 6 9 9 6 9 6 6 aaaa 9 4 4 4 4 4 4 EEEE 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 VVVV 5 5 5 5 5 5 WWaa 5 a 6 6 6 6 6 6 WWWaWaaa 6 4 4 4 4 4 4 EEEE 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 © Crown copyright and database4 rights 2016 Ordnance Survey. VVVV 5 5 5 5 5 5 W a 5 a 6 6 6 6 a 6 W 6 WWWaaaa 6 4 4 4 4 4 4 W W VVVVEEEE 4 6 6 6 W 6 6 6 WWW 6 4 4 4 4 4 4 Date. 01.03.16.EEEE 4 W W W W VVVV 4 4 4 4 4 4 dddd d dW d W W W AAAAVVVV 4 nnnndndndnd d d d AAAA nnnndnnddndddd RRRRRRR 2222222 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 aaaanananandndnnddddd RRRRRRR 2222222 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1111111 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 aaaanananannnn CCCRCRCRCRCRRR 2222222 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1111111 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 aaaanananannnn CCCRCRCRCRCRRR 2222222 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1111111 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 ttttatatatanananannnn CCCRCRCRCRCRRR 2222222 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 1111111 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 ttttatatataaaa CCCRCRCRCRCRRR 2222222 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 1111111 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 tt tt a ta ta ta a aa CCCRCRCRCRCRRR 11121212121222 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 sssststs tst a ta tat a a aa CCCCCCC 1111111 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 sssststst s tt tt CCCCCCC 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 sssststststttt 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 nnnnsnsnsnststststttt 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 oooononononsnsnsnssss CCCCCoCoCoononononnnn LB Redbridge 100017755 C C C C C oCoCooooo Planning & Regeneration oooo o oC oC C C C CC rrrororororo oo oooorororororororooo BBBBBoBoBooooo NORTH BBBBBBB SSSS Subject to distortion on copyingSSSISIIIIII ScaleKKKK 1:1750 Grid North IIILIILIILL RRRRKKKK IIILIILIILVLVVV RRRR VVVEVEEE AAAARRRR Page 214 PPPPAAAA