Issued on: 03/03/08
NORTHAMPTON BOROUGH COUNCIL
OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE 1 - PARTNERSHIPS, REGENERATION, COMMUNITY SAFETY AND ENGAGEMENT
The next meeting will be held at the Guildhall in the Jeffrey Room on Thursday, 13 March 2008 at 6:00 pm
Chair - Councillor Andrew Simpson Deputy Chair - Councillor Joy Capstick
Councillors - Caswell, Chaudhury, Clarke, Conroy, Palethorpe, Reeve, Varnsverry and Wilson
AGENDA
1. Apologies
2. Minutes
Members are asked to approve the minutes of the meetings held in November and January.
3. Deputations/Public Addresses
4. Declarations (Including Whipping)
5. URGENT ITEM
Call in of Cabinet decision- Response to Voluntary Sector Task and Finish Group
Councillors Palethorpe and Hadland have submitted the following call in-
Decision 5E paragraph 3 taken on Monday 3 rd March 2008
“The amendment to Task and Finish group’s recommendation 4 to read;
‘The budget for the Community Enabling Fund will be for those organisations that have in the past been funded from the budget plus any new organisations meeting the funding criteria for CEFAP’
It is formally requested that the decision taken by the Cabinet under Item 5E para 3 above be called in for scrutiny by Overview & Scrutiny 1.
Reason for call in.
1. The decision has been taken after the formal invitation for applications, which may compromise the integrity of the current procedures and leave Northampton Borough Council open to challenge from organisations that have not been afforded the opportunity to apply for funding.
Councillor David Palethorpe Councillor Tim Hadland
Dated 7 March 2008
In accordance with the constitution this item has been referred to this meeting for consideration.
6. Local/Regional/National issues effecting the area
This is a new agenda item, which Management Committee agreed to put on the agenda of all committees to ensure that Overview and Scrutiny is examining issues currently affecting the local area.
County-wide Sustainable Communities Strategy
Nicci Marzec, Corporate Manager, Governance and Communication, will be in attendance to provide a full briefing to members.
Other items
Members are asked to decide what items they would like to cover at the next meeting under this heading.
7. Feedback from Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee
This is a new agenda item, which the Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee agreed to put on the agenda of all committees to give Chairs and Vice- Chairs opportunity to report issues, or decisions that effect the work of their committee.
8. Best Value Performance Indicator Monitoring
Members are asked to examine the performance indicators and make observations on them.
Members are asked to note that as agreed at the last meeting Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee to use the new performance-monitoring form. This will used from the next meeting of this committee. This form is attached for members information.
9. Forward Plan
This is a new agenda item which Management Committee agreed to put on the agenda of all the committees, to ensure that they are getting involved with policy development at a early stage.
Members are asked to examine the forward plan and decide if there are any items they wish to pre-decision scrutinise.
10. Final report of the Historic Buildings and Regeneration Task and Finish Group
Historic Buildings and Regeneration Task and Finish Group- Chair John Caswell
Members are asked to examine the final report and make recommendations to Cabinet.
11. Task and Finish Group Updates
Councillor Call for Action Task and Finish Group- Chair Councillor Andrew Simpson
Members are asked to note the progress of this Task and Finish Group and also examine the Task and Finish Groups comments on the Government consultation on Councillor Call for Actions and Local Petitions. Members are asked to make observations to the Chief Executive as he will be responding to the consultation on behalf of the Council. Attached is the Government consultation paper which needs to be read in conjunction with the groups comments.
Alcohol Related Violence/Polycarbonate glasses Task and Finish Group (Joint review with NCC)- Councillors Paul Varnsverry and Portia Wilson
Members are asked to note the progress of this joint Task and Finish Group.
12. Report back on Cabinet response to outstanding Overview and Scrutiny recommendations
Members are asked to note that there were outstanding Task and Finish Group recommendations, which Cabinet have now taken a decision on. Members are therefore asked to decide on monitoring arrangements for each report.
13. Work Programme Monitoring
Members are asked to review the work programme and note that the order in which the outstanding Task and Finish Groups will operate is a matter for the Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee to determine.
Members are also asked to note that the Councillor Call for Action Task and Finish Group will report in May- not April as stated in the report.
Agenda Item 2
OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE ONE – PARTNERSHIPS, REGENERATION, COMMUNITY SAFETY AND ENGAGEMENT (14 January 2008 DRAFT MINUTES)
Present: Councillor Andrew Simpson (Chair), Councillors Joy Capstick (Deputy Chair) John Caswell, Sadik Chaudhury, Tony Clarke, Jenny Conroy, David Palethorpe, Kevin Reeve, Paul Varnsverry and Portia Wilson
In attendance: Councillor Woods, David Kennedy, Dale Robertson, Debbie Ferguson, Ashley Gunn Ann Davies, Mark Farmer, Ben Bix
1. Apologies
Apologies were received from Thomas Hall and Dale Phillipson
2. Minutes
The minutes of the meeting held on 7 th November were deferred for agreement at the next meeting, 13 th March 2008
3. Deputations/Public Addresses
• Mr Norman Adams would address the committee in respect of item 5 • Mr Chris Swinn would address the committee in respect of items 5, 6 and 10
4. Declarations (Including Whipping)
None
5. Corporate Plan Consultation Councillor Woods presented the Corporate Plan and informed the committee that;
• This was a refresh of the previous Corporate Plan • The Council is awaiting the completion of the Sustainable Community Strategy • Public consultation meetings have been scheduled and are underway
Additionally, Cllr Woods informed the meeting that a Cabinet ‘visioning away day’ had been held in September with both the previous and current Chief Executive. The outcomes of this meeting would be published in a further ‘Cabinet Prospectus’ supporting the Corporate Plan.
Mr Norman Adams addressed the meeting and explained that;
• The previous Corporate Plan contained a target that all Council Houses would meet the Decent Homes Standard by 2010. This had been substantially changed in this plan to say that the Decent Homes Standard would be met at the ‘earliest opportunity’. (page 3) • Mr Adams questioned why this target had been changed.
Mr Chris Swinn addressed the meeting and questioned;
• How the results of this consultation would be fed back to citizens • The lack of performance reporting and review to NTACT
In response, Cllr Simpson informed the meeting that Housing Performance was due to be considered at the meeting of Overview and Scrutiny 2, 31 January 2008. Additionally Cllr Palethorpe concurred with Mr Swinn that community engagement with Tenants is not good.
The responses from Councillor Woods were;
• That the 2010 Decent Homes target was a ‘stretch target’ due to challenges in some estates relating to design, construction and location. Whilst overall the Council was trying to meet (and exceed) the Decent Homes target in some cases different solutions may be more appropriate in particular areas. • Housing Performance data will be made available to NTACT - there had been some issues with the upgrading of the electronic reporting system.
Committee Councillors then commented on the Corporate Plan as follows;
• The Plan did not deliver a picture of the long term direction of the council • There is no mention of a desire for Northampton Borough to become a unitary council • That the most prominent need is to ensure that the council is fit for purpose • Why there is annual consultation on the plan • Why both the Corporate Plan and the Budget were being consulted on at the same time when it was commented that the plan should drive the budget • How Overview and Scrutiny could be more involved in future Corporate Planning
Councillor Woods responded;
• There was an aim to make the Corporate Plan document more vibrant and interesting • The structure of local government in Northampton was noted during CPA 2004 as not being fit for purpose but also that the Borough Council appeared to be ‘fixated’ with pursuing Unitary status to the point of damaging its performance. It was important to concentrate on improving performance at this stage. • The Corporate Plan has consistently been prepared too late in the year and that next year the plan would be brought forward earlier • That the ‘Cabinet Prospectus’, when prepared, will be made available for Overview and Scrutiny to review. And that; o Scrutiny could examine the County Councils Sustainable Community Strategy as it appears to not to fully recognise the status of Northampton itself o Scrutiny should examine the LAA 2 document to ensure that it covers the challenges and opportunities associated with Northampton itself
The Chief Executive explained that the plan was subject to rolling updates and that these would take place annually. LAA priorities were subject to change at county level with the move from LAA 1 to LAA 2. This would have implications for the Corporate Plan. LAA 2 would be more fluid and contain more than the four current themes. Additionally, the LAA 2 process would take place around May 2008 and would be a good opportunity for cross authority scrutiny.
6. Budget Consultation
Mr Chris Swinn addressed the meeting and commented; • That more detailed information was presented last year • In Mr Swinns’ opinion, the Council should not be allocating £440,000 to funding the Royal and Derngate Theatre as the funding could be used in other ways to meet the needs of residents • The council should not be funding leisure centres as again this wasn’t the best way to meet the needs of all residents • That the community development function of the council had been ‘decimated’ in recent years.
Committee Councillors commented on the Budget report prepared for committee as follows;
• Councillor Clarke informed the meeting that this was not a budget for consultation as all that had been presented was a series of recommendations without any alternative proposals. Without line-by-line detail, councillors would not be able to make informed comments on a budget that will be collectively agreed by council. Councillor Clarke also commented on accounting issues and potential inaccuracies such as, Car Parking and Leisure Services increase in charges – where the figures presented 2 options but then incorrectly presented the 2 options together as total savings rather than offer a potential total saving reflecting each option.
In response, Accountancy Officers informed the committee that;
o The numbers are correctly presented as ‘either or’ options o That, however, the total was inaccurately presented and was not cumulative
• Councillor Palethorpe commented that funding for non-priority services appear to remain the same as last year. • Councillor Simpson queried whether the budgetary implications of last years Task and Finish Groups had been accounted for in the budget this year. • Cllrs Palethorpe and Varnserry requested clarification on the £90,000 allocated for Community Engagement.
In response to the committee;
• Councillor Woods explained that this was a continuation budget, increased for inflation and growth • Accountancy Officers agreed to provide clarification on community engagement funding • The Chief Executive commented that changes are fully explained in the report to committee and that additional information will be made available to members on request.
The committee then commented on the Budget Consultation document ‘growing your future’
• Councillor Simpson asked for clarification on the freezing of Voluntary Sector grants at 2007/08 levels • Councillor Clarke raised the following issues; o That the post of an individual had been identified on a document for public consultation o The Council is required to provide some elements of Leisure services o Car parking charges will either rise by 12% or 20% over the next three years but the document shows this, for example as 6% 2008/09, 0% 2009/10 and 6% 2010/11 rather than a 4% increase for 4 years o The proposal to invest in IT is not supported by an actual figure. Furthermore, there is only 1 figure in the whole consultation document o The proposal to reinstate the christmas lights is misleading. It should be made clear that this is not reinstating previous levels of funding, rather it matches the level put forward last year as an emergency fund o It is unclear why an example of a council newspaper is used as a way of improving engagement with local people when this was not a recommendation of the recent task and finish group.
In response to the issues raised by the committee
• The Chief Executive confirmed that the budget does not include inflation on community grants. • Councillor Woods commented that car parking need not be increased annually • Elements of Leisure funding are required for social inclusion and well being • There is no commitment to producing a council newspaper – it is only one suggested method of improving engagement
7. Best Value Performance Indicator Monitoring
Dale Robertson circulated the information requested at the meeting held 7 th November 2007 and informed the meeting of the availability of further information. Additionally, bi monthly reviews are being held with Corporate Managers as part of the Councils performance management framework.
Debbie Ferguson reported that;
• There had been a 25% reduction in Anti Social Behaviour due to a ‘hot spot’ approach • Although the burglary figure was red, this is the second year of improvement • Violent crime is still an issue – can fluctuate due to one bad night in town • Robbery figures have improved • It is hoped that vehicle crime will be green by the end of the year
With reference to BVPI 109 - Planning applications, Cllr Clarke queried whether the performance of WNDC affects the performance of the council. The Chief Executive clarified that the council is measured only on its performance and that the latest comparative data would be made available to committee members.
8. Post Office Closures – Council Response
Subject to confirmation from the Chief Executive that the 2007 Indices of Multiple Deprivation had been used in the report, Cllr Capstick thanked officers for their work compiling the report.
9. Task and Finish Group Updates
Councillors Caswell, Simpson, Varnsverry and Wilson provided updates on the progress of Task and Finish Groups and confirmed that each Group will present a final report to the next committee meeting 13 March 2008
10. Monitoring
Mr Chris Swinn made the following comments;
• The size of the community development function at the Council has reduced to the point that only the management of community centres is left • All emphasis now appears to be on Neighbourhood Management • Much proactive work of the community development team has now been lost • There is a lack of citizen involvement in decision making
Councillor Varnsverry circulated the monitoring report of the Community Engagement Task and Finish Group, explaining that the report combined the reviews undertaken in 2005 and 2007, and that a key outcome was the councils Community Engagement Strategy. Additionally, Cllr Varnsverry informed the committee that the Constitutional Working Party is meeting to consider the current arrangements on Public Address at full council.
Councillor Capstick updated the committee on the monitoring report of the Voluntary Sector Task and Finish Group and summarised that;
• Councillors will ensure that CEFAP will start to meet again • That the original scope for the Voluntary Sector Task and Finish Group had not been completed and that reconvening the Group to scope further tasks would take place after the three current Groups had concluded.
Work Plan – the committee reviewed the current work plan and amended Task & Finish Group start and Finish dates accordingly. This is to be updated and circulated prior to the next meeting.
11. Exclusion of the Public and Press
The meeting closed at 20:35
Agenda Item 8a6
Item No. Appendices - 1 8 (a)
CABINET REPORT Report Title Sustainable Communities Strategy for Northamptonshire
AGENDA STATUS: PUBLIC
Cabinet Meeting Date: 11 th February 2008
Key Decision: NO
Listed on Forward Plan: NO
Within Policy: NO
Policy Document: NO
Directorate: Governance & Communications
Accountable Cabinet Member: Councillor Anthony Woods
Ward(s) ALL
1. Purpose
1.1 The purpose of this report is to present to Cabinet the draft Sustainable Communities Strategy for Northamptonshire as part of the County Council’s consultation process and agree that, following consultation within the council, a formal draft response to the consultation be approved by Cabinet at its meeting on 7 th April prior to submission to the County Council by 10 th April 2008.
2. Recommendations
2.1 It is recommended that Cabinet approves the consultation process to inform the development of the Council’s response for consideration at the Cabinet meeting on 7 th April 2008.
3. Issues and Choices
3.1 Report Background
3.1.1 The Sustainable Community Strategy for Northamptonshire has been developed as the key strategy document for the county and is designed to influence proposed growth and infrastructure development aligned to the Milton Keynes South Midlands housing development, inform economic development investment decisions at the East Midlands regional level and be the collective vision for the second Local Area Agreement for Northamptonshire.
3.1.2 The consultation on the strategy was launched on 17 th January 2008 and will run until 10 th April 2008. It is proposed that Northampton Borough council will submit a formal response to the consultation following the Cabinet meeting on 7th April 2008. It is intended that the draft strategy will be considered by Overview and Scrutiny on 13 th March and two further workshop sessions are planned with councillors to enable wide consultation within the council.
3.2 Issues
3.2.1 The consultation document outlines the proposed collective vision for the county and 10 strategic objectives which seek to deliver against that vision. The consultation seeks partners’ views on the vision and objectives and to identify the three key activities for the partnership to focus on delivering through the Local Area Agreement.:
3.3 Choices (Options)
3.3.1 The Sustainable Community Strategy for Northamptonshire will be a key document to inform the county ambition for the future at a local, regional and national level and the key priorities for delivery with the second Local Area Agreement. It is therefore vital that the council considers the implications of the strategy for the town and county in terms of future growth and investment and influences the future aspirations for Northamptonshire.
3.3.2 It is proposed that the draft strategy is considered by Overview and Scrutiny 1 (Partnerships, Regeneration, Safety and Community Engagement) at its meeting on 13 th march. Two further councillor workshops are also being scheduled to enable facilitated input into the consultation.
4. Implications (including financial implications)
4.1 Policy . The Northamptonshire Sustainable Community Strategy will set the strategic vision for the county, however, this needs to reflect the strategic vision for Northampton as a town which is outlined in the Northampton Sustainable Communities Strategy. The consultation process needs to allow for the analysis between the two strategies to ensure that that links exist between the two and that those links are appropriate
4.2 Resources and Risk
There are currently no financial implications related directly to the Northamptonshire Sustainable Communities Strategy.
There are potential implications for the Council if the final strategy does not adequately reflect the needs of the county at the local regional and national level as the strategy document will inform future investment and growth within the county.
4.3 Legal
None directly related to this report, notwithstanding the legal requirement for Local Authorities to develop and produce Sustainable Community Strategies.
4.4 Equality
There are no specific equality and diversity issues associated with this report.
4.5 Consultees (Internal and External)
The draft strategy is currently out to consultation with partners, stakeholders and the public. The consultation is being led by the County Council and Northampton Borough Council is a formal consultee within that process.
4.6 How the Proposals deliver Priority Outcomes
The final strategy document will detail priority objectives for Northamptonshire and influence the priority outcomes for the Local Area Agreement, to which Northampton Borough Council is a signatory.
4.7 Other Implications
None
5. Background Papers
5.1 Sustainable Communities Strategy for Northamptonshire, LAA Office, Northamptonshire County Council, County Hall
Nicci Marzec, Corporate Manager, Ext 7431
CABINET REPORT
SIGNATORIES
Report Title Sustainable Communities Strategy for Northamptonshire Date Of Call-Over 31/01/2008
Following Call-Over and subsequent approval by Management Board, signatures are required for all Key Decisions before submitting final versions to Meetings Services.
Name Signature Date Ext. Monitoring Officer or Deputy Section 151 Officer or Deputy
Consultation Draft
Sustainable Communities Strategy for Northamptonshire
The following pages contain the key section for the Sustainable Communities Strategy for Northamptonshire. This strategy will be the key document for the county for the foreseeable future, designed to: a) influence proposed growth and infrastructure development aligned to the Milton Keynes South Midlands housing development; b) inform economic development investment decisions at the East Midlands regional level; and c) to be the vision for the second Local Area Agreement for Northamptonshire. It will represent our collective vision for the county from now until 2031 to link in with the duration of planned growth in Northamptonshire.
To deliver on each of these, 10 strategic objectives have been proposed within the strategy, and are set out in the following section.
We would like you to consider the objectives and respond to the following questions:
1. There is a strapline and longer vision on page 1. Is the strapline sufficient? Does the longer vision require anything else to ensure the strategy sets out the total of our short to medium term ambitions for Northamptonshire?
2. Are the strategic objectives broadly right, bearing in mind the strategy is due to inform all partner agencies for the foreseeable future? Do they cover what we will need to tackle in relation to how we want Northamptonshire to develop over the next quarter century? Is anything missing?
3. Within each strategic objective there are grey boxes (not all of which are completed) which include some practical activities that could be undertaken to deliver related benefit. These have been included to stimulate thought and discussion based on whether or not you agree with them, if they are ambitious enough and deliverable through partnership working.
Based on this, could you please identify the top three things you think the partnership should focus on delivering?
There is a response sheet at the end of this document. Please continue on a separate sheet if necessary.
Responses to the consultation should be returned to
Peter McLaren, LAA Partnership Manager, LAA Office, Room 23, County Hall, Northampton, NN1 1AT
Or at [email protected]
By 10 th April 2008 Item8aNorthantsSCS20.doc
1 Item8aNorthantsSCS20.doc
OUR VISION, OBJECTIVES, PROPOSALS AND OUTCOMES
We will: "Develop and strengthen sustainable communities by delivering real improvements in the quality of life for everyone in Northamptonshire."
In this section of the Strategy we explain our vision for Northamptonshire between now and 2031. We outline our individual objectives and proposals, along with the outcomes that will be delivered through our second Local Area Agreement (LAA2).
Our Vision
By 2031 Northamptonshire will have, through the sustainable management of growth, become a dynamic part of the economy of the greater south-east whilst retaining its traditional connections with the East Midlands.
It will be economically, environmentally and socially successful through becoming a modern, outwardly facing part of the UK, where individual and community ambitions are high, new ideas and trends are grasped and implemented and where history and local identity are celebrated: a place where people will want to live, work and visit.
It will have become a more diverse, yet more cohesive county, where the gaps in income, living conditions and in life expectancy will have been narrowed through reducing inequalities, building more cohesive communities and where innovative, efficient and coordinated public services that deliver fairness and engagement with local communities have been developed.
Northamptonshire will have become an even more distinctive and attractive county through having:
• Grown Northampton as the nationally influential heart of the county and developed Daventry into a successful sub-regional centre.
• Transformed Corby, Kettering and Wellingborough into key drivers of the wider regional economy, with a strategic development focus on their individual town centres.
• Established appropriate links to service centres of excellence some of which may be based outside the county, to improve service delivery and access for the population of Northamptonshire.
• Provided a sustainable and efficient public transport system that meets the modern needs of both new and existing communities.
• Made our smaller market towns self-sustaining centres of enterprise that serve to support the functions of our urban centres and rural communities.
• Worked to address disadvantage, engage citizens and build cohesive communities, new and existing, that benefit from the opportunities that the growth agenda offers.
• Ensured that the population of the county has adopted healthier lifestyles by reducing smoking and obesity together with increasing physical activity.
• Brought about vibrant and sustainable rural areas.
• Created a quality of life which reflects the economic success of the sub-region in its cultural and social fabric.
• Provided the facilities and services needed by children and young people, as the future citizens and employees of the county
2 Item8aNorthantsSCS20.doc
Strategic Objectives for the Sustainable Communities Strategy and LAA2 Outcomes
To deliver this vision we have developed a Northamptonshire Sustainable Communities Strategy which:
• Provides countywide leadership in moving forward and delivering the growth and development agenda. • Is rooted in its locality and thus outlines a distinctive way forward for our sub-region. • Articulates the strategic objectives of the main social, economic and environmental factors affecting and providing opportunities to the county. • Captures the priorities and responsibilities of all the key delivery partners in delivering these Northamptonshire strategic objectives.
We have ten strategic objectives that will enable us to influence regional and national spatial planning and investment, and improve service delivery.
Our objectives are to develop a Northamptonshire:
1. With a clear infrastructure investment framework. 2. With a strong and distinct identity. 3. With a vibrant and dynamic economy. 4. Where all can share in our success and growing prosperity. 5. Where we have strong, safe and cohesive communities. 6. That looks after and optimises its natural resources and assets. 7. That people can readily move around in. 8. Where people are healthy, have a good quality of life and the most vulnerable are supported to access appropriate services according to need. 9. Where every child and young person matters. 10. With a thriving cultural economy.
Below we look at these strategic objectives in more detail, explaining how we propose to achieve each one, outlining specific proposals agreed with our partners.
3 Item8aNorthantsSCS20.doc
Strategic Objective 1: A Northamptonshire with a clear infrastructure investment framework
To create the framework for delivery of the priorities for future public and private collaboration and investment in Northamptonshire’s infrastructure and economy in a way that gives confidence to investors and communities.
Northamptonshire has the conditions, location and opportunity to play a significant role in a changing UK where there is greater emphasis on the sub-regions. We must be clear about our investment needs and influence decision-making at national and (pan) regional levels, and with private sector investors. We need to show we are a dynamic location that makes the most of the opportunities created by change.
Benefiting from being the country’s key growth area
Northamptonshire’s great opportunity - and challenge – is our role as the country’s key growth location. We plan to make the most of the investment that flows from this to deliver successful new communities and regenerate older and less successful ones. Investment in people is as important as investment in infrastructure and in the built and natural environment.
Improving road and rail connections To benefit from this significant national role we need greater investment in our national, regional and sub-regional connections. That means improving links to London as well as east- west links.
We will push for road investment because three quarters of the UK’s population is within two hours drive of Northamptonshire. More specifically we will call for widening and junction improvements to the A14 and the A43/A45/A605 corridors. We will benefit from improved rail links south and north, including the new Eurostar station at St Pancras.
Raising the status of our urban areas Northampton is the county’s major urban centre and it will grow considerably. It will become a large metropolitan centre, serving the wider city region with specialised services and facilities. There will also be significant growth in the rest of the county’s urban spine at Corby, Kettering and Wellingborough. These towns will have raised status, as will Daventry, which will take on an important sub-regional role. All of the county’s urban areas will continue to be proud and self-sufficient centres in their own right but they will collaborate to share services and industries that would not otherwise come to the county.
This objective will be achieved through:
4 Item8aNorthantsSCS20.doc
• Delivering the infrastructure, jobs and services needed to support Northamptonshire’s step change in growth. • Building sustainable and regenerated communities in a timely and planned manner for all people living in, working in and moving to Northamptonshire. • Creating more self-sufficiency within the communities of Northamptonshire with no net movement of services and facilities out of the county. • Development of a robust and sustainable transport network for Northamptonshire, including fast and efficient bus services between towns and improved networks within towns. • Maintaining the network and providing all road users with an effective and efficient service in order to minimise journey times and ensure road users get to their destination by the most suitable routes. • Improved external connections to London, Birmingham and other core centres and international economic gateways. • Optimising Northamptonshire’s competitive location at the crossroads of England’s key north-south corridor, the outer-south east and Oxford-Cambridge knowledge arc. • City-region status for Northampton, and a transformation of its central area, to match its growth and enhanced status and significant improvement of other town centres, particularly for jobs. • Promoting smart card solutions for easy access to facilities including workplaces and transport. • Working to ensure the county receives an appropriate share of regional and national resources to help deliver planned growth.
Significant Proposals to Deliver Objective 1 may include:
• Northampton Castle station gateway and commercial hub • Northampton central area public realm transformation • Major expansion of the Northampton central area retail offer • A14 upgrading at Kettering • Dualling of A45 between Stanwick and Thrapston (with grade separation) • Grade separation of significant at grade junctions on A45/A43 trunk roads • Improvements to M1 Junction 19 and the interchange with the A14 • Wellingborough station gateway • Development of the M1 ‘Arch’(See Map 6)
GREY BOXES TO BE DEVELOPED AS EVIDENCE BASE AND CONSULTATION PROCESS BUILD 1
1 All grey boxes of significant proposals to deliver objectives” in this chapter are subject to development as the consultation process proceeds through the Winter of 2007/8 and as the evidence base develops (e.g. the Joint Strategic Needs Assessments for adult care and health and for children will be completed in December/January and will therefore be brought in as key evidence for Northamptonshire prioritisation and action planning as they become available 5 Item8aNorthantsSCS20.doc
Strategic Objective 2: A Northamptonshire with a strong and distinct identity
To harness investment in the local fabric to secure the physical attractiveness of the county; building on pride in its local identities, its history and its heritage, making Northamptonshire welcoming and adaptable to change, as well as successfully positioned in the UK as a driver of sustainable growth .
Over 125,000 new homes will be built in Northamptonshire between now and 2031. Around 70 per cent will be in Northampton, Corby, Kettering and Wellingborough. Many new homes will also be built in Daventry and Towcester. The result will be a reshaping of six of our urban areas, including our four largest communities.
To develop truly sustainable communities we need improved design of urban areas and an integrated approach to land use - sustainability should be at the heart of design and planning decisions. We want to achieve a high quality built fabric, local identity and a sense of community that will endure.
Strengthening urban centres Competitive and sustainable economies need strong urban centres to act as economic hubs. We need to regenerate Northamptonshire’s town centres so that they attract and support residents, visitors and businesses.
Enhancing rural locations We also need to strengthen key rural locations that act as centres of employment and services - making the best use of community facilities, community ownership and local delivery. Through the planning system we will promote service provision in rural areas and sustain the physical infrastructure that supports community life.
Promoting a county identity We want those outside Northamptonshire to know it as an attractive, dynamic, historic county. We want to show how it has balanced modern aspirations and opportunities, while enhancing its ecological and historical heritage, its urban and rural assets. We will also put greater emphasis on the county’s role at the heart of British motorsport.
Accentuating Northampton At the heart of these ambitions is the role of Northampton. Already a University town, Northampton provides the main economic drive for the sub-region, as well as the focus for social, cultural and leisure pursuits. Northampton will have a regional park with considerably increased biodiversity and other environmental assets for the county, as well as offering a major leisure attraction in its own right.
Putting Northamptonshire on the map Our rural environment and landscape already challenges the Cotswolds in attractiveness. We want it to become as well regarded as its Gloucestershire equivalent.
6 Item8aNorthantsSCS20.doc
We want people to know when they have arrived here, so we will develop county gateways to tell people they have entered this dynamic sub-region of the UK.
This objective will be achieved through: • Promoting an integrated mix of neighbourhoods and districts with their own focus/character. • High quality urban development at Northampton, Corby, Kettering, Wellingborough and Daventry, making the most of previously developed land. • New and revitalised neighbourhoods that build local identity and cohesive communities. • Strengthening town centres so they retain more of their natural customer base and attract custom from a wider area, irrespective of current size and footfall. • Promoting and enhancing those parts of the landscape and built environment that are distinctly ‘Northamptonshire’, from the historic cores of Oundle and Towcester to areas with a boot and shoe heritage. • Raising local awareness of what Northamptonshire has to offer to increase engagement and raise aspirations. • Protecting and enhancing our market town heritage, while boosting Northampton’s role as a city for the future • Ensuring any village development is sustainable and appropriate in style and scale. • Public spaces that are safe, well designed and well-maintained. • Developing communities where all residents live safely together and there is recognition for the positive contributions of diverse communities and age groups. • Developing distinctive and iconic buildings that emphasise rather than detract from their sense of place. • Developing the ‘place-making’ role of local public service partners. • Developing a Northamptonshire identity - ‘Let Yourself Grow’ - that makes the area known as one where change and growth mixes well with tradition. • Infrastructure and support to make the sub-region a known centre of sporting, leisure, cultural and artistic excellence.
Significant Proposals to Deliver Objective 2 may include:
• Completion of a new town centre and civic hub for Corby. • Northamptonshire branding agreed and rolled out. • Northampton Market Place rejuvenated. • Kettering town centre regenerated and enhanced. • Enhancement schemes for rural service centres. • Citizenship ceremonies. • “Northamptonshire Day”.
7 Item8aNorthantsSCS20.doc
Strategic Objective 3: A Northamptonshire with a vibrant and dynamic economy
To develop Northamptonshire as a powerful sub-regional economy that has the ambition to raise the number and quality of jobs and skills to match and move ahead of its competitors in the greater south east of England.
Our challenge is to create 85,000 additional jobs between 2001 and 2021. Many will develop naturally as the population expands. But we want to shape a stronger, more dynamic and higher-value economy by developing: • Key sectors such as high performance engineering and environmental technologies; • Our workforce (current and future). • Our location at the heart of the Oxford to Cambridge arc and mid-way between London and Birmingham. • Our environment (existing assets and sites for new development). • The significant will and capacity of all our partners from the public, private, learning, voluntary and community sectors.
Tackling economic issues Development pressures have restrained the expansion of employers’ sites and premises . Unfortunately, our towns haven’t presented a competitive ‘offer’ to those wishing to invest, visit or shop in the county. We still face strong competition from other towns and cities that have had greater capacity and resource. In addition many communities have been excluded from taking up new opportunities as they arise.
We are already supporting the growth of existing employers and promoting support to start-up and small businesses, especially creative enterprises. We have a particular focus on attracting ‘knowledge economy’ businesses into the county, and we are trying to ensure new opportunities are accessible.
Responding to skills needs and aspirations Local companies increasingly have to compete in a global market. Businesses embracing new technologies and new processes need employees with a higher level of education and skills. As our economy grows there will be more emphasis on higher skills and “job-ready” aptitudes, particularly among young people. However, there is a perception that our workforce has low aspirations and low skills. Employment opportunities for those with skills attainments below level 2 (five GCSEs) are diminishing rapidly. Unfortunately Northamptonshire has a skills gap that prevents businesses in a range of sectors being as productive as companies in other places.
We need to provide the very best quality learning and skills for those in work and those wishing to enter employment. This means competent levels of numeracy and literacy; good results at Key Stage 4; clear and strong progression routes from Level 2 through to Level 4; and higher education all aligned to the needs of business.
Dealing with an ageing population In the coming years there will be a significant rise in the older population, with increasing numbers of people working later into life. Education and training can enable an aging population to continue to contribute positively to society.
In order to produce skilled people for a growing county our vision is a place where: • Young people exceed the national average attainment at school (Level 2). • Choices and options for further and higher education are an automatic next step (Lifelong Learning). • All skills are linked to employability and businesses in Northamptonshire value the Learning Chain. • All Vocational Learning is high quality and seen as something to aspire to.
8 Item8aNorthantsSCS20.doc
• Businesses see learning as intrinsically valuable. • Adults have competent levels of numeracy and literacy and feel able to ask for guidance. • Northamptonshire is known for its learning pathways which help attract people and business to the County. • 21st Century education facilities are integrated and multi-use. • High quality learning choices are available for all. • There is access to university level provision in localities away from Northampton.
This objective will be achieved through: • Improving skill levels of our current and future workforce by raising ambitions of our children, young people and adults, employers and delivery partners. • Ensuring a growth in higher-skilled, better paid and more secure jobs. • Ensuring all residents have equal opportunity to access training, acquire skills and participate in this growth wherever they live. • Attracting people with vision and creativity to live and work in the county. • Stimulating significant increases by developers in the county’s portfolio of commercial sites and premises, to meet the needs and expectations of new investors, with a particular emphasis on strategic employment locations. • Securing new investment by existing and new businesses, with particular emphasis on those that create higher-skilled jobs from the key sectors that Northamptonshire is well positioned to build upon. • Developing and sustaining the University’s role in establishing local research posts to inform models of good practice and enhance centres of excellence. • Focusing on support to sectors and businesses that add most value to our economy, to develop stronger clusters and supply chains that retain them here. • A focus on developing town centres as employment areas and in particular major focus on office development and jobs at Northampton city centre to create an office centre of national status • Increasing the number of start-up businesses in the county, and promoting their sustainability, including focus on those start-ups that add most the county’s offer, such as innovative and creative businesses. • Promoting Northamptonshire as an area recognised for its low levels of business crime, thereby helping to secure existing and future business investment. • Growing and supporting cultural and creative industries. • Ensuring Northamptonshire’s residents of all ages have no problems accessing employment by sustainable modes of transport. • Targeting support to young people to maximise the number in education, employment or training.
Significant Proposals to Deliver Objective 3 may include:
• Commercial hub in Northampton central area. • Corby station gateway. • Silverstone circuit development and employment area. • Development of University of Northampton campuses.
9 Item8aNorthantsSCS20.doc
Strategic Objective 4: A Northamptonshire where all can share in our success and growing prosperity
To create the conditions where local people are and feel actively involved in the management of their areas; where all communities have sufficient community support, opportunity and capacity to contribute to and benefit from the local economy, local amenities and access to quality services and opportunities.
Northamptonshire is a county of contrasts, with diverse communities and needs. There is some significant deprivation in our urban areas in contrast to relatively prosperous rural localities. However, there is also deprivation in some rural communities where unaffordable house prices, low levels of public transport and difficulty in accessing services can mean serious disadvantage and distress. Being disadvantaged in a rural area can be very isolating.
Planning neighbourhood renewal In 2005 Northamptonshire produced a Neighbourhood Renewal Strategy (NRS) with two long terms goals:
• In all the poorest neighbourhoods, to reduce the numbers of people without work, reduce crime and improve health, skills, housing and physical environment. • To narrow the gap on these measures between the most deprived neighbourhoods and the average.
The Rural renewal strategy and plans are being managed by the county’s Rural Renewal Partnership, reporting to the LAA Board.
We have worked with our strategic partners and stakeholders to identify 15 delivery areas for Neighbourhood and Rural Renewal. These are known as Neighbourhood Management/Neighbourhood Co-ordination in our urban areas, and in rural areas, they are known as Rural Pathfinders. Each has its own delivery plan.
Disadvantaged Communities - Our Top action Areas:
Urban: Northampton – Castle, Delapre, Spencer, Kingsthorpe, Eastfield/Headlands, Thorplands/Lumbertubs. Wellingborough - Queensway/ Brickhill, Swanspool, Croyland, Hemmingwell. Kettering - St Andrews, Avondale/ Warkton, Wicksteed. Corby – Kingswood, Beanfield, Hazel Leys and Exeter, Town Centre. Rural: Daventry – Southbrook, Woodford Halse. East Northamptonshire - Rushden (Highfield), Kings Cliffe. South Northamptonshire - Helmdon/Wappenham/Syresham Cluster.
Building inclusive communities We want Northamptonshire’s planned growth to lead to lively, safe, inclusive places that are resource-efficient, promote healthier lifestyles and have minimal environmental impact. New housing should be mixed, with a balance of tenure and affordability. It should be supported by networks and services which transform developments from housing estates into real communities. One way to build inclusive communities is to involve local people more actively in how their areas are governed – this is known as a neighbourhood management model.
We need to develop this model into a recognisable co-ordinated service involving partners from all sectors in its delivery. This approach will help to identify vulnerable people who are outside current services and those needing support for their particular circumstances.
Making affordable housing available “Affordable housing” needs to be genuinely affordable, with appropriate levels of social housing. In the future fewer vulnerable people will be living in institutional care. Providing 10 Item8aNorthantsSCS20.doc stable accommodation is a key factor in reducing homelessness and re-offending, as well as lessening the impacts of drug and alcohol misuse. Improving the supply of such accommodation is critical to developing a safer, stronger community that allows people with significant needs to live independently and enjoy a good quality of life. However, appropriate affordable housing needs to be available more widely across the population – not least to avoid any perceived unfairness in its allocation.
Tackling financial exclusion The financial well-being of our communities has a strong impact in many ways, for example on the health and life-chances of our children and young people. With our partners we have programmes that focus support on disadvantaged individuals, and aim to increase benefit take- up. However, more needs to be done to ensure those issues that affect financial inclusion – including education, childcare availability, training and employment – are made more readily available to all.
This objective will be achieved through: • Involving local people in setting priorities and ambitions to manage communities. • Actively tackling the most disadvantaged communities to ensure aspirations and achievements match those in the rest of the county. • Carefully managing the nationally significant housing growth at Northampton, Corby, Kettering and Wellingborough and major expansion of Daventry and Towcester. • Ensuring all members of the community, including new migrants, fully participate and benefit from growth, feel welcome and a part of Northamptonshire. • Increasing the skills, accessibility and the range of jobs for all Northamptonshire’s residents, especially through sectors related to growth and development. • Identifying specific health needs for varying communities and providing appropriate services. • Supporting young people to be “job-ready” as they enter the labour market and helping more young people aspire to higher education. • Renewing and balancing older “estate communities”, particularly in Northampton, Corby and Wellingborough, and strengthening their links with the rest of their urban areas and with new areas of development. • Supporting positive activities and opportunities for children and young people within their local communities. • Providing enhanced community infrastructure that addresses social problems, in particular anti-social behaviour, and supports those who are most at risk. • Ensuring a mix of genuinely affordable and lifetime homes which anticipate future needs, including the appropriate availability of social housing. • Development of locally accountable, public-facing services (provided by the public, third sector or privately) to match both need and, where appropriate, demand.
Significant Proposals to Deliver Objective 4 may include:
• We will carry out a childcare sufficiency audit regularly to help ensure that appropriate and affordable childcare is available to families who need it.
Work to be completed
11 Item8aNorthantsSCS20.doc
Strategic Objective 5: A Northamptonshire where we have strong, safe and cohesive communities
To create a county where we build strong and sustainable communities, where crime is low and people feel safe, where traditions are respected, all communities have a sense of a shared future and people have confidence to participate and can influence decision making.
Appreciating the county’s diversity Northamptonshire is a diverse county, made up of local areas with a rich and distinct identity. In a county of more than 630,000 people there are over 100 languages, at least 14 faiths, and a mix of urban and rural communities.
The population is 95.1 per cent white (599,900) with an ethnic minority population of 4.9 per cent (31,000) - compared with 6.5 per cent in the East Midlands and 7.9 per cent in the UK. The highest concentration of Black and Minority Ethnic groups is in Wellingborough – almost 10 per cent. Northampton borough is home to a large refugee community, approximately 3,500. The majority are of Somali origin, but there are other refugee communities, such as Liberian and Zimbabwean. According to research by emda , there is a growing economic migrant population, particularly from Poland, with a high density of economic migrants in Corby, Daventry and Northampton.
Building community cohesion We all benefit from a county in which community cohesion is the norm; where everyone enjoys a daily experience of respect and acceptance within a safe and nurturing environment. The community cohesion strategy “A Shared Future for all our communities” states how we aspire to: “Building strong and positive relationships between people from different backgrounds in the workplace, schools and across the whole county.” This framework helps to inform local community cohesion plans.
Involving people in developing their communities When people are actively involved in developing and running their communities they feel better about themselves. The community benefits too. We need to engage more people of all ages in community activities,at all levels - from taking part in local Joint Action Groups and community groups or becoming a volunteer, to taking part in decision-making, becoming a councillor, or helping with the design of public services.
Working with the third sector Voluntary and community organisations are key partners in building community cohesion. The county’s Third Sector Strategy builds on significant developments over previous years. Some of the key objectives of the strategy are: • Further development of a strong and vibrant third sector infrastructure. • Increasing public service delivery by the third sector. • Increasing volunteering. • Supporting and improving community engagement. • Developing social enterprise. • Supporting community cohesion. • Improving third sector representation across all LAA strategic partnerships.
Ensuring community safety In November 2007, The Partnership Strategic Assessment identified five key priorities for partners: • Supporting vulnerable young people. • Drugs and Alcohol. • Environment. • Offender management and repeat victimisation.
12 Item8aNorthantsSCS20.doc
• Community Cohesion.
Crime has fallen consistently over recent years. But many places still have higher levels than comparable areas elsewhere in England. Levels of acquisitive crime remain high. We have had some local success in reducing violent crime whilst it has been rising nationally. Nevertheless further reducing levels of violence remains a local priority, in particular town centre disorder and domestic abuse.
Safer Community Teams and Neighbourhood Management Teams need to work together on their crime reduction priorities, involving local people in resolving their problems. Revitalised Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnerships need to identify priorities at a district and borough level. We need a strong county-wide response to serious and organised crime, business crime, managing dangerous offenders, targeting prolific offenders, and tackling underlying issues in particular drugs and alcohol.
Measures to design out crime and create safer stronger communities will be integral to new development. We will also continue working with the business community to reduce business crime, making the county a secure place for economic growth. We need to further develop targeted prevention programmes - with young people, their families and schools, and with young offenders. Work also needs to be undertaken to reduce re-offending amongst adult offenders. With our partners we need to help prisoners reintegrate successfully and tackle issues that underpin re-offending, such as drug use, alcohol use, housing, education and employment.
Fear of crime remains high and we need to respond to these concerns. Older people and people living in more isolated and rural areas tend to have the highest levels of concern over crime, whilst in reality young people living in urban areas are much more likely to be a victim of crime. In addition we need to focus on improving detection rates, bringing more offences to justice and giving better attention to victims and witnesses.
This objective will be achieved through: • Enhanced support for the most disadvantaged communities in the county’s 15 priority areas. • Enabling a thriving and ambitious third sector to contribute to public service delivery. • Encouraging volunteering across all sectors and communities. • Building cohesive communities through a shared set of values and goals. • Providing equality of opportunity regardless of peoples’ background. • Building community confidence and resilience by enabling communities to participate and influence decision making. • Fully engaging with communities to ensure we meet their needs and ambitions. • Reducing crime, reducing harm and preventing crime. • Locally-based policing and community safety activity, and engaging communities in reducing crime, substance misuse and anti-social behaviour. • Working positively with young people to prevent offending and anti-social behaviour. • Building effective, inclusive partnerships to reduce substance misuse and anti-social behaviour and prevent harm. • Improving independent mobility, especially for children and young people, by improving personal and traffic related safety and providing adequate infrastructure.
Significant Proposals to Deliver Objective 5 may include:
• Enhancement of Kings Heath area as part of Dallington Heath urban extension. • Will be informed by Partnership Strategic Assessment • Opportunities for every adult to become involved as a volunteer, ambassador or coach; •
13 Item8aNorthantsSCS20.doc
Strategic Objective 6: A Northamptonshire that looks after and optimises its natural resources and assets
To manage and enhance the natural and built resources and assets of Northamptonshire in a manner that is both co-ordinated and sustainable and ensures minimal impact on climate change.
We need to safeguard Northamptonshire’s environment and make the most sustainable use of our natural assets and resources.
Using growth as a tool for improving the environment We can use growth to enhance our environment, by: • Increasing our biodiversity. • Creating the infrastructure to manage our resources in the most sustainable way. • Supporting behavioural change amongst those who live, work and operate businesses here.
We will invest in green spaces and networks, particularly those within and between the major growth towns to bring about a net gain in biodiversity. We will make the most of opportunities provided by the River Nene and the quality of the Northamptonshire landscape. The network of sub-regional and local green corridors shown below will help to safeguard and add to the county’s environmental capital.
We will promote development patterns and construct new buildings that minimise waste and the use of natural resources – in construction and operation. New materials and technologies should be used where this doesn’t erode a Northamptonshire local identity. Local materials should be used where relevant, especially in rural areas, and local design. We should ensure water and waste are sustainably managed and that our communities are safeguarded from natural risk, such as from flooding.
Reducing waste and increasing recycling On top of existing pressures, such as the European LATS Directive, the significant growth means our residents and businesses will need to reduce the amount of waste they produce and increase the amount that is recycled, composted and re-used. This is a challenge for everyone and is not limited to the 12 per cent of waste that local authorities must manage.
Improving the built environment
14 Item8aNorthantsSCS20.doc
Northamptonshire’s built environment can also be enhanced through growth. We want to see townscape and streetscape improvements, particularly where they will act as a shop window for visitors - in our town centres and key gateways to the county.
Investing in public spaces Northamptonshire is well-served with parks and open green spaces which contribute to the quality of life of local people. Some are significant visitor attractions. They provide space for play, exercise, relaxation, sport, events and social interaction, but only if they are well maintained and seen as safe to use. Investment in these areas, particularly within the major growth area towns, is crucial. We need to enhance and maintain trees, facilities and services, investing in tree-planting and other schemes and wardens.
Residents and visitors are entitled to enjoy public spaces that are free from litter, graffiti, fly tipping and abandoned vehicles. Residents also have increasing expectations about the quality of roads and pavements and the speed and quality of repairs and maintenance. These, along with well-kept verges and highway trees, are highly valued and add significantly to the quality of the environment. They also give residents a sense of pride in their neighbourhoods and towns.
This objective will be achieved through: • Expansion and development of a varied and linked network of green spaces, parks, river and other corridors around Northamptonshire, open and accessible for all. • Sustainable waste, water and energy management in every new development. • A robust approach to the minimisation of waste and waste management. • Ensuring a net gain in biodiversity and landscape assets that are rich and distinctive, whilst enhancing those of poorer quality. • Development that seeks to be carbon neutral and utilises the latest sustainable construction methods. • Clear urban boundaries to Northampton, Corby, Kettering, Wellingborough, Rushden and Daventry to minimise urban sprawl, and to manage the transition from the towns to the countryside. • Initiatives to change how Northamptonshire people and businesses use our valuable natural resources and assets. • An innovative approach to the conservation and development of the built environment. • Maintaining the counties highway assets in the most economical and environmentally sustainable long-term manner. • Exploiting “green opportunities” within the county – building up learning opportunities and businesses who can lead on new technologies for environmental benefit.
Significant Proposals to Deliver Objective 6 may include:
• Implementation of Waste PFI through new integrated waste facility in the county to handle municipal waste. • Signature environmental projects at xxx and xxxx developed. • Promotion of a sustainable urban extension fully on ‘eco-town’ principles. • Tree planting schemes. • Graffiti removal teams with the police and probation. • All new public service vehicles to be hybrid or alternate fuel powered; • All new public buildings to be commissioned to eco excellent standards; •
15 Item8aNorthantsSCS20.doc
Strategic Objective 7: A Northamptonshire that people can readily move around in.
To develop local and sub-regional patterns of travel, movement and local services across and adjacent to the county that are integrated, sustainable and which help to join up the communities and neighbourhoods of Northamptonshire, economically and socially.
The Transport Strategy for Growth describes the transport interventions needed to manage growth in Northamptonshire. We cannot accommodate the projected levels of car use from all the new housing and jobs - both in terms of numbers and lengths of car journey. So we need to develop travel alternatives for both existing and future car users.
Reducing congestion We have a congestion reduction strategy with three parts : • Improving our management of the existing highway network to make the most of existing capacity. We will define a core network of roads essential to the county’s prosperity, and use technology to manage them better. • Developing high quality alternatives to car travel and encouraging people to use them. We need to ensure they are available for those who wish to use them. This includes making improvements to bus services in urban areas, on key inter-urban routes and in rural areas. We also need to develop strategic park and ride services in Northampton to discourage car driving and parking in the town centres. We will also encourage walking and cycling to reduce the amount of car trips made in the county. • Making selective road improvements.
Promoting effective public transport We will bring land use and transport planning functions together to ensure the right services are provided in the right places. We will provide upgraded and more extensive passenger transport services to increase take-up and improve the perception of public transport as a viable and attractive alternative to the car. We need to improve transport services for isolated communities, both urban and rural, where they currently experience social exclusion. Improved marketing, travel plans for schools and businesses, and information about alternatives to using cars will become increasingly important in dampening traffic growth. We need to introduce a new and improved walking and cycling infrastructure to key destinations and on the most-used routes.
Ensuring developments are accessible and sustainable At the same time we need to work with developers to ensure all new developments are accessible in a sustainable way.
We need to take account of the constraints of current and future transport systems are when planning new developments. This will include ensuring that:
16 Item8aNorthantsSCS20.doc
• Public transport, walking and cycling facilities really do provide attractive and viable alternatives to the car. • We receive adequate developer contributions. • The provision of jobs and other services are adequate and easily accessible.
We will achieve this change in how people get about (modal shift) by introducing Smart Cards, promoting strategic connectivity, encouraging walking and cycling, developing and promoting public transport, and actively managing of parking. We will also look at estate layouts, the core road network, town strategies, rural areas and other Local Transport Plan priorities, as well as using marketing, promotions and information.
Boosting accessibility planning Improving accessibility means reducing the gap between those who can access key services in the County and those who cannot. We aim to get accessibility planning “mainstreamed” into policy and project development across all service areas and partner organisations – as we are doing with the multi-application smart card.
Accessibility planning will bring together those working on transport and spatial plans, including regeneration and economic development and strategic local services such as health care and education.
This objective will be achieved through: • Providing a transport system to support and manage growth in the county, ensuring it is integrated with planning policy and decisions. • Consolidation of urban hubs in Northampton, Corby, Kettering, Wellingborough and Rushden providing a focus for the communities that they serve, and allowing development of sustainable bus networks focussed on the town centres. • Making Daventry town centre a sub-regional service centre. • Developing vibrant free-standing rural service centres, such as at Towcester and Thrapston. • Identifying local service centres in rural areas to act as focal points for more remote rural settlements. • A core network of fast, frequent and user-friendly buses that link key areas as determined by local people who will want to use them as an alternative to the car. • Development where the pedestrian and cyclist is placed first. • Using ICT to provide information across the area and offer customer-focussed services across the county. • Promoting sustainable travel and optimising accessibility to local facilities and employment. • Integrated transport solutions including new roads where required to enable growth. • Managing congestion through technology to encourage better use of existing roads, a shift towards public transport, and targeted road improvements.
Significant Proposals to Deliver Objective 7 may include:
• Towcester bypass and its link in to the A43, Roade bypass. • Re-categorising of the A361 following traffic management work. • Pilot of transport smartcard scheme. • Creation of a new transport hub in Northampton replacing the existing bus station. • A hub and feeder public transport system being introduced in South and East Northants. • Introduce bus rapid transit (BRT) on the most congested inter-urban routes. • Roll out the Intelligent Transport System (ITS) to all the major growth towns. • A43 dualling and A45 bypasses. • A509 link to Wellingborough. • Kettering Eastern Avenue (developer funded). • Isham bypass and Corby Relief Road. • Extended evening and weekend bus services in every settlement in the County – scheduled or community transport based;
17 Item8aNorthantsSCS20.doc
Strategic Objective 8: A Northamptonshire where people are healthy, have a good quality of life and the most vulnerable are supported to access appropriate services according to need.
To create communities where people are enabled and supported to make informed choices on healthy lifestyles and where they can enjoy good health and well-being and receive appropriate and accessible services.
There is a significant difference in life expectancy between the most deprived areas in Northamptonshire and the most affluent. There are also factors affecting the amount of healthy life expectancy. Health inequalities take a range of forms such as inequality in health access, health outcomes, experience or opportunity. Tackling health inequalities often means dealing with the symptoms through a range of interventions and treatments. But to really combat health inequalities we need to focus on the root causes and address the key determinants of health. So we need to take action on inequalities linked to income, employment, training, education and housing, likewise service design, availability and access.
Our vision for health is driven by clinicians, is patient-centred, with a focus on appropriate services, which should be localised where possible, and concentrated where necessary.
Improving physical and mental well-being Mental well-being has a positive effect on life expectancy and can help to narrow the gap between different areas. Work on increasing life expectancy can incorporate improvements across the age range, from increasing the take up of breastfeeding, to improved education, supporting improved lifestyles, and ensuring the provision of appropriate care during older age.
Focusing on prevention The LAA Partnership supports a Prevention Strategy for all ages which focuses agencies on building healthier, safer and stronger communities. Our focus on prevention and the reduction of negative situations (in youth offending, anti-social behaviour, abuse and neglect) takes a generic approach to the needs of children, young people and their families. We need to develop better multi-agency services - children’s centres and extended services through schools, and other services focussed on young people - from pre-birth onwards. These will support the resilience of families and their children by ensuring that information, appropriate activities for children and young people of all ages, and family/parent support can prevent negative outcomes.
Factors affecting the health of young people are the responsibility of all agencies (housing, education, employment, health care, access to services and information). We have to ensure that we have a joint response to ensure children and teenagers in Northamptonshire are happy, healthy, confident and able to achieve their full potential. That means working together on issues such as teenage pregnancy, alcohol and other substance misuse, self-esteem, nutrition and mental health and well-being to generic approaches like the healthy schools initiative, the teens and toddlers project and support for carers,
Encouraging healthier lifestyles The lifestyle choices of all our residents are a key priority. For instance we need to increase levels of physical activity and address healthy eating, smoking, alcohol and substance misuse amongst all ages. Two areas - Northampton and Corby - have a level of alcohol-related harm across all domains (health, crime, social, disorder) in the top 10 per cent quartile nationally and on some domains Corby is in the top 10 authorities in England with the most problems.
The LAA includes a county alcohol harm reduction strategy for Northamptonshire. Its implementation needs sustained support from all partners to reduce the overall harm from alcohol in the county.
Supporting vulnerable people
18 Item8aNorthantsSCS20.doc
There is a rapidly increasing elderly population and a significant increase in the numbers of people with disabilities. At the same time there is a move away from directly providing care. Instead people receive support to live independently at home. Vulnerable people living at home should be able to enjoy a good quality of life – socially included, with less fear of crime. They should be supported by all agencies who can provide appropriate information, support their take up of benefits and help them find employment.
Promoting healthier travel choices We need to encourage people to make healthier travel choices and concentrate on removing barriers that currently prevent people from doing so. We will provide safe walking and cycling routes based on actual needs and well-linked to desired routes and destinations.
This objective will be achieved through: • Providing health and social care support for people of all ages at all levels of need. • Improving access to services at the local level, including better access to outpatient facilities and diagnostics to improve patient experience. • Focussing on the key determinants of health, particularly in areas of greatest need through the 15 priority areas to narrow the gap in life expectancy. • Co-ordinating and integrating appropriate and timely preventative services, e.g. falls prevention, early intervention for families with children with physical/medical difficulties. • Partner ownership of preventative strategies and encouraging the participation of voluntary and community organisations in service delivery. • Active encouragement for individuals to make informed lifestyle choices. • Reducing smoking and alcohol consumption. • Supporting independent living within caring communities that support a good quality of life. • Supporting families to provide a healthier future for their children. • Providing leisure, sport, recreational and cultural opportunities across all our communities and promoting physical activity and sport. • Shaping health services across Northamptonshire to ensure the delivery of a shared local vision. • Changing attitudes by promoting sustainable transport options.
Significant Proposals to Deliver Objective 8 may include:
• Will be informed by Joint Strategic Needs Assessment. • LAA Prevention Strategy will inform priorities. • LIFT programme, Darzi review. • Free health/fitness facilities and health coaches in every priority neighbourhood (and Parish?); • Free smoking cessation courses/clinics in every priority neighbourhood in the County. •
19 Item8aNorthantsSCS20.doc
Strategic Objective 9: A Northamptonshire where every child and young person matters
To create an environment where children and young people are healthy, safe, and are able to enjoy and achieve, so that they will make a positive contribution to their communities throughout their lives and help to achieve economic well-being.
Successful education and training is linked to strong family support for the child/young person from an early stage, high self-esteem and also high aspirations (both in the family and the community). The community plays a significant role in achieving these aims. With all these things in place the young person is less likely to be absent from school, be bullied or to bully others, be excluded from school, take drugs, embark on offending behaviors or experience early pregnancy. In turn, this contributes to high educational achievement. Support from pre- birth, and strong early years provision along with appropriate services to help families help to promote high levels of achievement for teenagers
Supporting vulnerable young people Particular groups of children and young people need specific support to do well, both in education and in later life. Vulnerable groups, such as those with mental health difficulties or disabilities, or those living in disadvantaged circumstances need specific effective services so that they can take their place in the community as they become adults. To enable them to do so helps both them and the community. It also ensures that they are able to make a useful contribution in the workplace.
Equipping young people with the right education and skills We are trying to ensure the education and skills agenda fully meets the needs of the county’s current and future business community. Young people need to be suitably qualified and trained if they are to take their place in the expanding and demanding economic environment. This will also help them make the most of opportunities throughout their lives.
Reducing the number of NEETs We need to reduce the proportion of young people aged 16 –18 who are not in education, employment or training (“NEETs”) to ensure the economic wellbeing for our children and young people. We will do this by improving positive progression and increasing the range of opportunities and options available to them.
Encouraging active citizens To enable children and young people to achieve throughout their lives, we must provide effective, accessible and integrated services. This is best achieved where young people themselves are engaged in the design and development of services. This engagement in the process will, in turn, prepare them for active citizenship in adult life
This objective will be achieved through: • Providing integrated multi-agency support to children, young people and their families to ensure services are timely and co-ordinated . • Targeting preventive services at children, young people and their families at the earliest point to reduce the need for crisis intervention. • Developing an area-based model of service delivery across agencies. • Ensuring the changes in delivery are supported by significant workforce development across agencies and sectors. • Ensuring a positive response to young people at risk of offending and anti-social behaviour to reduce the risk of more serious activity. • Ensuring children and young people receive appropriate and timely health advice, care and support and the educational support and opportunities they need to achieve their potential. • Ensuring that children, from birth, develop resilience to and are protected from abuse, neglect, bullying and crime.
20 Item8aNorthantsSCS20.doc
• Ensuring children have opportunities to develop through play and young people have access to sport, cultural and leisure facilities. • Ensuring young people have access to a wide range of educational, employment and training opportunities to maximise their life chances, including mechanisms that link employers with young people to break-down the barrier between learning and working and ensure young people have the skills and aptitudes required of employers. • Ensuring the involvement of children, young people, their families and other stakeholders in service design and planning. • Ensuring an easy transition from early years, through primary and secondary education into further and higher education. • Ensuring services are included in the development of the most deprived and disadvantaged communities. • Development of modern secondary education campuses in areas of major new development at Northampton, Corby, Kettering and Daventry. • Providing help to parents to enable them to support their children to achieve the “Five Outcomes” of the Every Child Matters programme. • Promoting and developing safe walking and cycling routes to encourage an increase in exercise and to increase access to opportunities for all children and young people. • Developing the role of third sector organisations in providing a wide range of meaningful activities for young people. • Ensuring all public services recognise their “corporate parenting” responsibilities.
Significant Proposals to Deliver Objective 9 may include:
• Joint commissioning arrangements. • A move to area-based integrated service delivery model. • Develop multi-agency integrated Youth Offer and Targeted Youth Support. • New secondary campus at Dallington Heath to serve the new area and Kings Heath. • Increased educational opportunities in the Silverstone development. • Will be informed by Children and Young People’s Plan. • New secondary and primary schools as part of the development of urban extensions in all the growth towns. • Opportunities for every schoolchild in the County to participate in the sporting and cultural Olympiad; • School holiday access to free swimming and leisure activities for every child in the county; • Free book for every child every month for the first five years of its life • A youth club in every Parish and neighbourhood in the county;
21 Item8aNorthantsSCS20.doc
Strategic Objective 10: A Northamptonshire with a thriving cultural economy
To develop Northamptonshire’s cultural offer so it is a more dynamic and attractive place for people to live, work and visit.
Culture and sport can make a positive contribution to people’s lives and the sustainable development of communities. This is because these themes are cross-cutting or 'joined-up'. They are linked to our personal, community, regional and national identities, which is fundamental to developing a “Sense of Place”.
Culture is joined up with our diverse lifestyles and social environments. It links with the way we live, work and play. It is increasingly joined up with our capacity for sustainable economic development and attracting inward investment in a knowledge-based and creative economy. It contributes to the ways we can make our expanding communities and places physically attractive, socially and economically dynamic and diverse. It is joined up, ultimately, to our whole quality of life.
Building on our heritage Northamptonshire is a county with a strong cultural and sporting heritage. It has unique characteristics which need to be exploited and celebrated. These include its place in the history of England, the history of boot and shoe manufacture and other industrial heritage, and the wealth of historic houses and churches.
Investing in our cultural infrastructure We have a number of nationally recognised and leading edge contemporary cultural organisations. However, relative to the rest of the East Midlands, the cultural infrastructure in the county is under-developed and receives a relatively low level of investment. As the population grows the disparity between current provision and the expectations of residents and visitors will widen.
Over the next 10 to 20 years we have the opportunity to develop this infrastructure to increase participation in culture and sport. We will build on our existing strengths and provide an improved cultural opportunity consistent with the county’s increasing economic success.
This investment will help put Northamptonshire on the map as an attractive place to live, work and visit. The value of such development isn’t just economic. Engaging people in the county’s rich heritage, its diverse range of arts, sports and recreational activities, will help develop confidence, self esteem and pride. It will also help to encourage healthier lifestyles, will nurture new skills, and will enable people to get involved in their communities.
Using culture to improve people’s lives Expanding people’s horizons and raising aspirations through culture and sport helps people gain access to experiences, knowledge and information that will inspire and produce a more rounded, healthy and happy population.
This objective will be achieved through: • A focussed approach to developing the infrastructure for culture and sport within the county that supports and grows the existing strengths within the sectors. • Raising the profile of Northamptonshire’s cultural offer in heritage, arts, sports and recreational activities locally, regionally and nationally. • Developing “cultural centres” that include places for thriving creative businesses. • Working with key partners such as the University of Northampton to develop skills within the sector and to retain graduates. • Developing participation in culture and sport to facilitate community cohesion, health and well-being.
22 Item8aNorthantsSCS20.doc
• Increasing the value of the visitor economy of the county by simultaneously targeting marketing to increase visitor spend and increasing the quality and diversity of the visitor offer (hotels, restaurants, conference, attractions, events, accessibility), whilst the existing values of our offer (landscape, heritage, etc) are enhanced. • Development of a Northamptonshire identity that makes the area known as one where change and growth mixes well with tradition. This will include all partners promoting the county brand (“Let Yourself Grow”), particularly at external investors, visitors and potential new residents. • Adding to the county’s cultural offer by promoting increased enterprise activity in creative industries. • Increased access to sport and leisure activities within the county schools network. • Development of Kettering Conference Centre and theatre. • Modernisation of the County Library services and facilities.
Significant Proposals to Deliver Objective 10 may include:
• Corby Parkland Gateway. • Key schemes in Northampton’s cultural quarter/mile. • New conference centre/venue in Northampton. • Development of Cultural Investment Plans in North Northants and West Northants in partnership with key stakeholders. • Build on the research carried out for the creative industries in Northants, and seek to develop new and support existing creative businesses through ‘Creative Northants’. • Respond to all master planning/consultation/policy and planning documents to ensure embedding of cultural content within local development frameworks – particularly for town centre redevelopment, emphasising public realm and creating a sense of place for the county.
23 Item8aNorthantsSCS20.doc
Consultation response sheet
Name: ……………………………………………………………………………………………….. Organisation: ………………………………………………………………………………………..
Question Response 1. There is a strapline and longer vision on page 1. Is the strapline sufficient? Does the longer vision require anything else to ensure the strategy sets out the total of our short to medium term ambitions for Northamptonshire?
2. Are the strategic objectives broadly right, bearing in mind the strategy is due to inform all partner agencies for the foreseeable future? Do they cover what we will need to tackle in relation to how we want Northamptonshire to develop over the next quarter century? Is anything missing?
24 Item8aNorthantsSCS20.doc
3. Comments on Strategic Objective 1
4. Comments on Strategic Objective 2
5. Comments on Strategic Objective 3
25 Item8aNorthantsSCS20.doc
6. Comments on Strategic Objective 4
7. Comments on Strategic Objective 5
8. Comments on Strategic Objective 6
26 Item8aNorthantsSCS20.doc
9. Comments on Strategic Objective 7
10. Comments on Strategic Objective 8
11. Comments on Strategic Objective 9
27 Item8aNorthantsSCS20.doc
12. Comments on Strategic Objective 10
4. Within each strategic objective there are grey boxes (not all of which are completed) which include some practical activities that could be undertaken to deliver related benefit. These have been included to stimulate thought and discussion based on whether or not you agree with them, if they are ambitious enough and deliverable through partnership working.
Based on this, could you please identify the top three things you think the partnership should focus on delivering?
28 Item8aNorthantsSCS20.doc
13. Any other comments or suggestions:
29 KEY TO STATUS COLOURING KEYS PERFORMANCE REPORT : January 2008 - Overview & Scrutiny Committee 1 KEY TO QUARTILE COLOURING (Within NBC 05/06 Outturn & quartile position) CURRENT STATUS GREEN: 2 LOCAL INDICATOR [quartile data unavailable] Overall performance on or exceeding target = 3 [37.5%] = 2 [25%] = 3 [37.5%] NO DATA = 0 [0%] Top or Upper Median Quartile
MONTH ON MONTH TREND & QUARTER ON QUARTER TREND AMBER: BVPI ID column denotes Corporate Priority Indicator
Overall performance within range stated in "Target Tolerances" column* n = 3 [37.5%] l = 1 [12.5%] p = 4 [50%]NO DATA = 0 [0%] Lower Median Quartile
YEAR ON YEAR TREND RED: ~ Interim figures yet to be validated
Overall performance outside the stated "Target Tolerances" n = 6 [75%] l = 0 [0%]p = 1 [12.5%]NO DATA = 1 [12.5%] Bottom Quartile * 'Harder Target' test applied - Please refer to "Target Tolerances" column for individual test applied.
Please contact Dale Robertson Ext 7110, if you require further information or support.
ANNUAL CURRENT OVERALL NBC 06/07 NBC 05/06 OVERALL PERFORMANCE TARGET & PROFILED * TARGET PERFORMANCE OUTTURN & OUTTURN & ID NAME APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR PERFORMANCE AGAINST LAST TARGETED TARGET TOLERANCES AGAINST SAME QUARTILE QUARTILE TO DATE MONTH QUARTILE [if any] TIME LAST YEAR POSITION POSITION
Development, Building Control & Environmental Health [Christine Stevenson] = 2 = 1 = 1
Monthly Indicators
Percentage of major planning No No 2% No comparable 66.67% 64.18% n BV109a 0 66.67 50 100 50 100 100 100 64.71% 70% applications determined within 13 weeks Applications Applications points l data Lower Median Lower Median
Percentage of planning applications determined in line with the government's 2% 64.98% 74.55% n BV109b new development control targets to 84.62 95.24 76.47 85.71 89.47 85 84.62 95.45 94.44 90.63 87.50% 81% n points p Bottom Upper Median determine: 65% of minor applications in 59.44% 8 weeks
Percentage of planning applications 2% 75.98% 85.62% n BV109c determined: 80% of other applications in 92.41 96.39 89.42 92.50 93.33 98.59 96.77 97.70 97.67 95.59 94.78% 92% n points p Bottom Lower Median 8 weeks 72.53%
The number of decisions delegated to 2% n PLI 188 92.52 99.04 88.65 94.78 87.83 95.65 94.31 98.20 96.77 98.04 94.23% 95% n n 92.30% 2 officers as a percentage of all decisions points 92.12%
Community Safety, Leisure & Town Centre Operations [Thomas Hall] = 1 = 1 = 2
Monthly Indicators Domestic burglaries per year per 1,000 21.4 22.1 p BV126 1.6 1.8 1.9 1.7 1.9 1 1.8 1.5 2.2 2 17.4 14 5% n n households in local authority area 18.8 Bottom Bottom
26 27 p BV127a Violent crime per year, 1000 population 2.4 2.3 2.3 2.7 2.6 2.4 2.3 2.1 2.2 2 22.9 24.66 5% n p 22 Bottom Bottom
3.5 3.4 p BV127b Robberies per year, 1000 population 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.2 2.4 2.83 5% p n 3 Bottom Bottom The number of vehicle crimes per year, 19.8 21.6 p BV128 per 1,000 population in the local 1.7 1.4 1.5 1.3 1.1 0.9 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.4 13.0 15.41 5% n p Bottom Bottom authority area 16.4 Agenda Item8
Jan 08 [updated 26/02/2008 @ 15:00] Page 1 of 1 KEY TO STATUS COLOURING KEYS PERFORMANCE REPORT : December 2007 - Overview & Scrutiny Committee 1 KEY TO QUARTILE COLOURING (Within NBC 05/06 Outturn & quartile position) CURRENT STATUS GREEN: 2 LOCAL INDICATOR [quartile data unavailable] Overall performance on or exceeding target = 7 [33%] = 4 [19%] = 10 [48%] NO DATA = 0 [0%] Top or Upper Median Quartile
MONTH ON MONTH TREND & QUARTER ON QUARTER TREND AMBER: BVPI ID column denotes Corporate Priority Indicator
Overall performance within range stated in "Target Tolerances" column* n = 3 [14%] l = 6 [29%] p = 12 [57%]NO DATA = 0 [0%] Lower Median Quartile
YEAR ON YEAR TREND RED: ~ Interim figures yet to be validated
Overall performance outside the stated "Target Tolerances" n = 8 [38%] l = 1 [4%]p = 6 [29%]NO DATA = 6 [29%] Bottom Quartile * 'Harder Target' test applied - Please refer to "Target Tolerances" column for individual test applied.
Please contact Dale Robertson Ext 7110, if you require further information or support.
ANNUAL CURRENT OVERALL NBC 06/07 NBC 05/06 OVERALL PERFORMANCE TARGET & PROFILED * TARGET PERFORMANCE OUTTURN & OUTTURN & ID NAME APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR PERFORMANCE AGAINST LAST TARGETED TARGET TOLERANCES AGAINST SAME QUARTILE QUARTILE TO DATE MONTH QUARTILE [if any] TIME LAST YEAR POSITION POSITION
Development, Building Control & Environmental Health [Christine Stevenson] = 2 = 1 = 1
Monthly Indicators
Percentage of major planning No No 2% 66.67% 64.18% n BV109a 0 66.67 50 100 50 100 100 60% 70% n Applications Applications l applications determined within 13 weeks points 54.54% Lower Median Lower Median
Percentage of planning applications determined in line with the government's 2% 64.98% 74.55% n BV109b new development control targets to 84.62 95.24 76.47 85.71 89.47 85 84.62 95.45 94.44 87.08% 81% n points p Bottom Upper Median determine: 65% of minor applications in 58.95% 8 weeks
Percentage of planning applications 2% 75.98% 85.62% n BV109c determined: 80% of other applications in 92.41 96.39 89.42 92.50 93.33 98.59 96.77 97.70 97.67 94.70% 92% n points p Bottom Lower Median 8 weeks 72.14%
The number of decisions delegated to 2% n PLI 188 92.52 99.04 88.65 94.78 87.83 95.65 94.31 98.20 96.77 93.83% 95% p n 92.30% 2 officers as a percentage of all decisions points 92.72%
Community Safety, Leisure & Town Centre Operations [Thomas Hall] = 1 = 1 = 2
Monthly Indicators Domestic burglaries per year per 1,000 21.4 22.1 p BV126 1.6 1.8 1.9 1.7 1.9 1 1.8 1.5 2.2 15.4 14 5% p n households in local authority area 17.12 Bottom Bottom
26 27 p BV127a Violent crime per year, 1000 population 2.4 2.3 2.3 2.7 2.6 2.4 2.3 2.1 2.2 20.9 24.66 5% p p 19.9% Bottom Bottom
3.5 3.4 p BV127b Robberies per year, 1000 population 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 2.1 2.83 5% n n 2.7% Bottom Bottom The number of vehicle crimes per year, 19.8 21.6 p BV128 per 1,000 population in the local 1.7 1.4 1.5 1.3 1.1 0.9 1.3 1.3 1.3 11.6 15.41 5% p l Bottom Bottom authority area 14.6 Governance & Communications [Nicci Marzec] = 3 = 1 = 0
Quarterly Indicators The level of the Equality Standard for No data as this Level 1 local government to which the authority indicator was n BV2a Level 1 Level 1 (70% achieved Level 2 N/A Level 1 Level 1 conforms in respect of gender, race and l previously reported towards Level 2) disability annually No data as this The quality of an authority's Race indicator was 16% 39% n BV2b Equality Scheme and the improvements 16 84 58 58% 48% 5% p previously reported Bottom Bottom resulting from it's application annually The number of racial incidents recorded l BV174 by the authority per 100,000 0.50 4 2.99 7.49 7.99 5.99 5% p n 8.2 18.48 populations. 5.64%
The percentage of racial incidents that 2% 100% 100% n BV175 100 100 100 100% 100% l l resulted in further action. points 100% Top Top
Dec 07 [updated 07/02/2008 @ 15:33] Page 1 of 2 KEY TO STATUS COLOURING KEYS PERFORMANCE REPORT : December 2007 - Overview & Scrutiny Committee 1 KEY TO QUARTILE COLOURING (Within NBC 05/06 Outturn & quartile position) CURRENT STATUS GREEN: 2 LOCAL INDICATOR [quartile data unavailable] Overall performance on or exceeding target = 7 [33%] = 4 [19%] = 10 [48%] NO DATA = 0 [0%] Top or Upper Median Quartile
MONTH ON MONTH TREND & QUARTER ON QUARTER TREND AMBER: BVPI ID column denotes Corporate Priority Indicator
Overall performance within range stated in "Target Tolerances" column* n = 3 [14%] l = 6 [29%] p = 12 [57%]NO DATA = 0 [0%] Lower Median Quartile
YEAR ON YEAR TREND RED: ~ Interim figures yet to be validated
Overall performance outside the stated "Target Tolerances" n = 8 [38%] l = 1 [4%]p = 6 [29%]NO DATA = 6 [29%] Bottom Quartile * 'Harder Target' test applied - Please refer to "Target Tolerances" column for individual test applied.
Please contact Dale Robertson Ext 7110, if you require further information or support.
ANNUAL CURRENT OVERALL NBC 06/07 NBC 05/06 OVERALL PERFORMANCE TARGET & PROFILED * TARGET PERFORMANCE OUTTURN & OUTTURN & ID NAME APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR PERFORMANCE AGAINST LAST TARGETED TARGET TOLERANCES AGAINST SAME QUARTILE QUARTILE TO DATE MONTH QUARTILE [if any] TIME LAST YEAR POSITION POSITION
Community Safety, Leisure & Town Centre Operations [Thomas Hall] = 1 = 1 = 3
Quarterly Indicators The number of visits to/usage’s of local 863 1,287 n BV170a authority funded or part funded 238 235 187 691 880 684 5% n p Upper Median Top museums per 1,000 population 678 The number of those visits to local authority funded or part funded 845 800 n BV170b 234 229 160 618 850 661 5% p p museums that were in person per 1,000 665 Top Top population
The number of pupils visiting museums 10,016 14,067 n BV170c 1,387 756 2,756 4,899 10,500 6,950 5% n p and galleries in organised school groups 7,911 Top Top No data as this Domestic violence checklist- The 2% indicator was n BV225 81.8 90.9 90.9 90.9% 100% 81.8% 63.6% percentage of questions answered ‘yes’ points l previously reported annually
Number of swims and other visits per n ELPI7 1,115.96 1,151.47 1,010.47 3,231.98 4,430 3,319.69 5% p p 4,427.62 4,821 1000 population 3,329.63
Regeneration, Growth & Community Development [Chris Cavanagh] = 0 = 0 = 2
Quarterly Indicators No data as this Percentage of new homes built on 2% indicator was 87.08% 84% n BV106 47.06 37.24 41.79% 65% previously developed land points p previously reported Upper Median Upper Median annually No data as this Has the local Planning authority met the indicator was l BV200b milestones which the current local Yes Yes No No Yes N/A Yes No p previously reported Development scheme set out? annually
Development, Building Control & Environmental Health [Christine Stevenson] = 0 = 0 = 2
Quarterly Indicators Percentage of appeals allowed against 21.1% 34.8% p BV204 the authority’s decision to refuse 30 37.5 28.6 31.3% 25% 5% p n Top Lower Median planning applications 18.5% No data as this 2% indicator was 77.8% 77.7% n BV205 Quality of Service checklist for Planning 78 77.8 77.8 77.8% 80% points l previously reported Bottom Bottom annually
Dec 07 [updated 07/02/2008 @ 15:33] Page 2 of 2 Overview and Scrutiny Performance Form Northampton Borough Council- Overview and Scrutiny Committee One
Action for Councillors Action for Officers Chair and Vice- Chair identify performance indicator with reasons for wanting to examine it:
Relevant Corporate Manager response to initial query (eg. Why there is underperformance and what is the planned improvement?);
Chair and Vice-review response. Does the matter still need to be scrutinised and if it does is any further information required?
Overview and Scrutiny Officers place on the agenda of the next available meeting and carry out any further work required:
Meeting takes place and item considered. Overview and Scrutiny Officers record key points and recommendations:
In some cases Cabinet may need to respond; Relevant Corporate Manager response with proposals for action and timescales based on Committee discussion;
Chair and Vice-Chair set date for review of progress towards addressing recommendations and/or to review improvement progress
PUBLISHED: 15 FEBRUA RY 2008
FORWARD PLAN
FOR THE PERIOD 1 MARCH 2008 TO 30 JUNE 2008
What is a Forward Plan? The Forward Plan is a list of the key decision, which are due to be taken, by the Cabinet during the period covered by the Plan. The Council has a Statutory duty to prepare a Forward Plan. The Plan is updated monthly and is available to the public 14 days before the beginning of each month. It covers a 4-month rolling period. It can be accessed from The Guildhall Office and/or the Council website www.northampton.gov.uk .
What is a Key Decision? A key decision in the Council’s constitution is defined as:
Any decision in relation to the Executive function* which results in the Council incurring expenditure which is, or the making of saving which are significant having regard to the Council’s budget for the service or function to which the decision relates. For these purpose the minimum financial threshold will be £50,000;
Where decisions are not likely to involve significant expenditure or savings but nevertheless are likely to be significant in terms of their effects on communities in two or more wards or electoral divisions; and
For the purpose of interpretation a decision, which is ancillary or incidental to a Key decision, which had been previously taken by or on behalf of the Council shall not of itself be further deemed to be significant for the purpose of the definition.
Agenda Item9 * Executive functions are those, which are the responsibility of the Cabinet as opposed to, for example, regulatory functions, which are the responsibility of the Council’s Planning or Licensing Committees.
Who takes Key Decisions? Under the Council’s constitution, key decisions are taken by Cabinet The Leader or Deputy Leader (in matters of urgency only) Individual officers acting under delegated powers (it is rare for any decision delegated to an officer to be a key decision)
Are only Key Decisions listed in the Forward Plan? The Council only has a statutory obligation to publish only Key Decisions one the Forward Plan. However, the Council has voluntarily decided to list non-key Cabinet decisions on the as well. In order to clarify matters on the Plan, Key decisions have a symbol net to the item.
What does the Forward Plan tell me? The Plan gives information about: What key and non-key decisions are coming forward in the next four months (these decisions have a symbol next to them) Other non-key Cabinet decisions that are coming forward in the next four months Whether the decision will be taken in public or private When those key decisions are likely to be made Who will make those decisions What consultation will be undertaken Who you can contact for further information
Who is the Cabinet? The Members of the Cabinet and their areas of responsibility are:
Councillor Tony Woods Leader of the Council and Portfolio Holder for Partnerships and [email protected] Improvement Councillor Brendan Glynane Deputy Leader and Portfolio Holder for Community Engagement [email protected] and Safety Councillor Sally Beardsworth Portfolio Holder for Housing [email protected] Councillor Richard Church Portfolio Holder for Regeneration [email protected] Councillor Trini Crake Portfolio Holder for Environment [email protected] Councillor Brian Hoare Portfolio Holder for Performance [email protected] Councillor Malcolm Mildren Portfolio Holder for Finance [email protected]
What is the role of Overview and Scrutiny? The Council has three Overview and Scrutiny Committees namely Overview and Scrutiny 1 - Partnerships, Regeneration, community Safety and Engagement Overview and Scrutiny 2 - Housing and Environment Overview and Scrutiny Committee 3 - Improvement, Performance and Finance
The Committees’ role is to contribute to the development of Council policies, to scrutinise decisions of the Cabinet and to consider any matter affecting the area of Northampton or its citizens. Dates of these meetings and other Council meetings can be found at www.northampton.gov.uk
How and who do I contact? Each entry in the Plan indicates the names of all the relevant people to contact about that particular item. Wherever possible, full contact details are listed in the individual entries in the Forward Plan. They can also be reached via the switchboard (01604) 837837.
For general information about the decision-making process please contact Frazer McGown, Meeting Services Manager at The Guildhall, St Giles Square, Northampton NN1 1DE Tel: 01604 837101, E-mail: [email protected] . Councillor Tony Woods, Leader of Northampton Borough Council = Key Decision Forward Plan : 1 March 2008 to 30 June 2008 Subject Expected Decision to be Decision Expect Key Who Will be How will Report available/Portfolio Made to be edDat or consulted they be holder/Contact Officer made by e of Non- consulte Decisi Key d on Decisi on Allocations Policy To adopt a new Allocations Cabinet 3 Mar KEY Registered E-mail, 01.02.08 Cllr Beardsworth Review and Policy and note progress made 2008 Social questionn Fran Rodgers, Corporate Choice Based towards the implementation of Landlords, aire & Manager, Housing and Lettings Choice Based Lettings. Tenant Groups, stakehold Residential Operations housing er forums [email protected] applicants k
Environment Act To approve Harborough Cabinet 3 Mar KEY General Public, Memo, 22.02.08 Cllr. Crake 1995 - Proposed Road, Kingsthorpe, 2008 Local Authorities letter or Christine Stevenson, Air Quality Northampton as an Air Quality in press Corporate Manager, Management Management Area. Northamptonshir release Planning, Leisure and Areas e, Milton Keynes Building Control Council, [email protected]
Highways v.uk Agency, and Joe Alfano, Principal internal Environmental Health Officer, directorates. [email protected]
New Look Local To recommend the Cabinet 3 Mar KEY Trade Unions Written 22.02.08 Cllr. B Hoare Government implementation of the New 2008 and NCC and via Maria Mina, Corporate Pension Scheme Look Local Government Pensions meetings Manager, Human Resources Pension Scheme to Authority [email protected] General Purposes Committee Employee To receive the findings of the Cabinet 3 Mar NON- Employees Questionai 22.02.08 Cllr B. Hoare Opinion Survey Employee Opinion Survey. 2008 KEY re Maria Mina, Corporate Manager, Human Resources [email protected]
1 = Key Decision Forward Plan : 1 March 2008 to 30 June 2008 Subject Expected Decision to be Decision Expect Key Who Will be How will Report available/Portfolio Made to be edDat or consulted they be holder/Contact Officer made by e of Non- consulte Decisi Key d on Decisi on Pay and Grading To determine ‘in private’ the Cabinet 3 Mar KEY Trade Unions Consultati 22.02.08 Cllr B Hoare Review pay structure resulting from 2008 ve Maria Mina, Corporate Pay and Grading Review, to machinery Manager, Human Resources be put to a ballot of staff who [email protected] are members of Unison and GMB. Carbon To approve the Council’s Cabinet 3 Mar KEY Cabinet and Circulation 22.02.08 Cllr Crake Management Carbon Management Strategy 2008 Senior of draft Christine Stevenson, Programme and Implementation Plan Management SIP for Corporate Manager, Team comments Planning, Leisure and Building Control, [email protected] v.uk Stuart Wright, Sustainable Development officer [email protected]
Procurement Cabinet is requested to Cabinet 3 Mar KEY Internal Electronic 22.02.08 Cllr Mildren Strategy April approve the strategy. 2008 stakeholders, ally and Gavin Chambers, Head of 2008 - March cabinet meetings Finance 2011 members for [email protected] Finance, v.uk Overview and Scrutiny 3 Streetcare, To note the outcomes of the Cabinet 3 Mar NON- Key 22.02.08 Cllr Crake Environment and consultation on the proposed 2008 KEY stakeholders Carl Grimmer, Corporate Waste Service service standards for Manager, Streetscene Standards Streetcare, Environment and [email protected]. Waste Services and agree the uk revised service standards.
2 = Key Decision Forward Plan : 1 March 2008 to 30 June 2008 Subject Expected Decision to be Decision Expect Key Who Will be How will Report available/Portfolio Made to be edDat or consulted they be holder/Contact Officer made by e of Non- consulte Decisi Key d on Decisi on Streetscene and To agree the Strategic Cabinet 3 Mar NON- N/A N/A 22.02.08 Cllr. Crake Waste Improvement Plan for 2008 KEY Carl Grimmer, Corporate Management Streetscene and Waste Manager, Streetscene Strategic Management Services as the [email protected]. Improvement strategic document to inform uk the development of service plan priorities for 2008/2011.
Performance (a) To note the report and approve Cabinet March NON- Corporate Via the 22.02.08 Cllr Mildren / Cllr B Revenue Budget virements if appropriate. 2008 KEY Managers Corporate Hoare Monitoring:2007/ Manager Gavin Chambers, Head of 08 Position (b) To note the current position service Finance Performance accountan [email protected] t meetings v.uk Monitoring in relation (Monthly Report) to their forecasts
3 = Key Decision Forward Plan : 1 March 2008 to 30 June 2008 Subject Expected Decision to be Decision Expect Key Who Will be How will Report available/Portfolio Made to be edDat or consulted they be holder/Contact Officer made by e of Non- consulte Decisi Key d on Decisi on Capital Approve the capital Cabinet March KEY S.151 Officer, Review 22.02.08 Cllr Mildren Programme schemes in, or to be added to, 2008 Monitoring and sign Bev Dixon, Finance Manager 2007/08: Position the programme. To note Officer, Project off of [email protected] (Monthly Report) programme outturn forecasts Manager, and capital and how the programme is to relevant portfolio appraisal be funded. holders, forms Directors, and detailing Corporate the project Managers. and its relevance and importanc e to the authority. Budget Managers consulted on 2007/08 outturn forecasts. Gypsy and To receive the Gypsy and Cabinet 7 Apr KEY N/a N/a 28.03.08 Cllr Crake Travellers Travellers accommodation and 2008 Clive Thomas, Corporate Accommodation assessment report. Director Assessment [email protected] k
4 = Key Decision Forward Plan : 1 March 2008 to 30 June 2008 Subject Expected Decision to be Decision Expect Key Who Will be How will Report available/Portfolio Made to be edDat or consulted they be holder/Contact Officer made by e of Non- consulte Decisi Key d on Decisi on Grosvenor/Greyfr To agree ‘in private’ terms Cabinet 7 Apr KEY Section 151 Briefings 28.03.08 Councillor R Church iars Conditional of Conditional Development 2008 Officer, with Chris Cavanagh, Corporate Development Agreement to bring forward Monitoring Director, Manager, Regeneration and Agreement Town Centre Scheme. Officer, Leader, Corporate Growth relevant Manager [email protected] Portfolio for v.uk Holders, Regenerat Directors, ion and Corporate Growth, Managers together with specialist advisers Play areas and To approve the (1) adoption Cabinet 7 Apr KEY Internal Draft 28.03.08 Cllr Glynane Multi Use Games and ongoing maintenance of 2008 Directorates. reports to Thomas Hall, Corporate areas procedure existing CASPAR Multi Use be Manager, Citizen and protocol Games areas (MUGA) and circulated Engagement, children’s play areas, (Bellinge for [email protected] , and Thorplands) (2) the comments Denise King, Neighbourhood ownership proposals put prior to Project Manager forward and (3) the future submissio [email protected] protocol for new children’s play n to areas and MUGAs. Cabinet.
5 = Key Decision Forward Plan : 1 March 2008 to 30 June 2008 Subject Expected Decision to be Decision Expect Key Who Will be How will Report available/Portfolio Made to be edDat or consulted they be holder/Contact Officer made by e of Non- consulte Decisi Key d on Decisi on CCTV Strategy To agree and approve the Cabinet 7 Apr KEY Relevant Consultati 28.03.08 Cllr Glynane CCTV Strategy for 2008 partners within on already Thomas Hall, Corporate Northampton. Safer Stronger carried out Manager, Citizen Northampton and Engagement Partnership, contributio [email protected] portfolio holder, ns made Debbie Ferguson, Corporate to the final Community Safety Manager Manager. strategy. communitysafety@northampt on.gov.uk ,
Future of Grant of long lease of the Cabinet 7 Apr KEY Relevant In writing / 28.03.08 Cllr. Mildren Archway property 2008 Organisations meetings/ Gavin Chambers, Head of Cottage, and relevant discusison Finance Abington Park Ward s [email protected] Councillors v.uk
Northampton To agree Northampton Cabinet 7 Apr KEY This report 28.03.08 Cllr Church Economic Economic Regeneration 2008 is the Chris Cavanagh, Corporate Regeneration Strategy. result of a Manager, Regeneration and Strategy consultatio Growth n process [email protected] agreed on v.uk 1 October 2007. Housing To approve the Housing Cabinet 7 Apr NON- Employees Various 28.03.08 Cllr Beardsworth Improvement Improvement Plan 2008 KEY means Janet Dean, Interim Strategic Plan Director [email protected]
6 = Key Decision Forward Plan : 1 March 2008 to 30 June 2008 Subject Expected Decision to be Decision Expect Key Who Will be How will Report available/Portfolio Made to be edDat or consulted they be holder/Contact Officer made by e of Non- consulte Decisi Key d on Decisi on Management To agree the Management Cabinet April KEY All employees Staff Cllr. Woods Restructure Structure for the Council 2008 briefing. David Kennedy, Chief following the previous decision Executive that went to Cabinet on 28 th [email protected]. January 2008. uk
St John's To enter into developer Cabinet 6 May KEY Stakeholders, Various 24.04.08 Cllr Church Development agreement with development 2008 Steering Group. means Mike Kitchen, Project partner Management and Development Team Manager [email protected]. uk
Local Area To agree the LAA2 Draft Cabinet 6 May KEY Partners and Through 24.04.08 Cllr Woods Agreement 2 outcomes 2008 stakeholders our Nicci Marzec (LAA2) communic [email protected] ations and k engageme nt strategy. Market Square To receive proposals for Cabinet 6 May KEY Stakeholders; Various 24.04.08 Cllr Church Study Report future development of the 2008 Steering Group means Mick Lorkins, Economic Market Square Intelligence Officer [email protected] k
7 = Key Decision Forward Plan : 1 March 2008 to 30 June 2008 Subject Expected Decision to be Decision Expect Key Who Will be How will Report available/Portfolio Made to be edDat or consulted they be holder/Contact Officer made by e of Non- consulte Decisi Key d on Decisi on Strategic To agree a process to Cabinet 6 May KEY Management Via 24.04.08 Cllr Woods Business Review review the strategic business 2008 Board and meetings David Kennedy, Chief direction of Council services. Group Leaders and Executive and Councillors electronic [email protected]. correspon uk dence.
8 Agenda Item 10
Review of Historic Buildings and Regeneration Opportunities
Overview and Scrutiny Committee 1 Task and Finish Group
1 Index
Chair’s Foreword Page 3
Executive Summary and Key Findings Pages 4 to 8
Recommendations Pages 9 to 10
Evidence Pages 11 to 65
Appendix A Enquiry by Design Information from the Princes Foundation for the Built Environment
Appendix B Enquiry by Design Information from the Princes Foundation for the Built Environment- Lincoln City Council
Appendix C Powerpoint presentation on the Castle area by Brian Giggins
2 Foreword
The protection of Northampton’s historic buildings is of concern to many local residents given the unprecedented levels of regeneration in Northampton; more and more of our historic buildings are under threat of demolition or significant alteration. People quite rightly expect the Council and its partners to take action to protect the town’s heritage.
The Task and Finish Group first met in September 2007 and concluded its review in January 2008. The findings of this review will be presented to Overview and Scrutiny Committee One, Partnerships, Regeneration, Community Safety and Engagement; at it’s meeting on the 23rd of March 2008.
The decision on how and in what way the group’s recommendations are taken forward lies with this committee. Once a decision has been taken on this, it is for the Council’s Cabinet to take a decision on the implementation of the committee’s recommendations. The area for review was very broad, that it was clear very early on in the review and that the group would not be able to consider all of the areas as originally scoped in full detail. The group therefore decided to focus on what needs to happen to improve the town’s approach to addressing conservation issues.
Membership of the group was myself as Chair, Councillor Paul Varnsverry as Vice-Chair and group members Councillors Tony Clarke and Andrew Simpson. Councillor Jean Hawkins, as the Council’s Heritage Champion was co-opted onto the committee.
I would like to take this opportunity to thank everyone who gave evidence to this review, the Overview and Scrutiny Officers for their advice, managing the process and drafting this report and thanks also to the Regeneration and Growth department for advice and guidance on conservation and regeneration matters.
Councillor John Caswell Chair of the Historic Buildings Overview and Scrutiny Task and Finish Group
3 Executive Summary and Key Findings
At its scoping meeting, the Task and Finish Group agreed that it would do the following;
x Use the issues around Castle and the Masterplan proposals as a paradigm case
x The Chair of this task and finish group would that this Council’s Administration requests that West Northamptonshire Development Corporation defer any planning decisions affecting the Castle area of Northampton until the work of this task and finish group is completed, as recommendations regarding future Planning Policy maybe made, in particular with regard to historic and important sites and buildings.
x Review of the current powers and those of partner organisations.
x Review of the extent of the Borough Conservation Areas including the Management Plan Programme in hand.
x Review proposals for mapping of buildings that are not listed but are of value to the Town.
x Review proposals for mapping of Regeneration projects.
x Assess a resources plan to compile a wider assessment of buildings of value including potential funding available from other sources.
x Examine the powers available to NBC are established and those that are not, ascertain who has them
x Recognise the impact that the role of NBC has on WNDC and how they carryout their respective roles.
x Strengthened partnership working through agreed partnership agreement in respect of historic buildings and regeneration
x Consider possible consequences of not following recommendations from above work.
4 At the end of the review, the progress against the original scope is;
Scope Progress The task and finish group would use Presentation on the Castle area the issues around Castle and the delivered to the group on the 29th Masterplan proposals as a of November 2007 paradigm case Group meeting on the 11th of January 2008 to examine the evidence and consider any outcomes arising from it
The Chair of this task and finish Letter sent and response received group to ask that this Council’s Administration requests that West Response letter from WNDC Northamptonshire Development rejected request to defer planning Corporation defer any planning applications. decisions affecting the Castle area of Northampton until the work of this task and finish group is completed, as recommendations regarding future Planning Policy maybe made, in particular with regard to historic and important sites and buildings. Review of the current powers and Briefing note was provided by those of partner organisations. Jane Jennings and circulated to the group
Noted that the national consultation on amending the powers available to local authorities has closed. The new legislation will no doubt create an increase in workload (to review)
Review of the extent of the Borough Paul Lewin provided additional Conservation Areas including the information on this (Mark Farmer Management Plan Programme in phone conversation on the 10th of hand. January)
There is an ongoing programme to review areas
Four a year are carried out. Additional resources would be needed if more were required
Review proposals for mapping of Briefing note provided by Jane buildings that are not listed but are Jennings stated that there no in- of value to the Town. house resources available
Paul Lewin provided additional 5 information on this (Mark Farmer phone conversation on the 10th of January)
Maybe possible that trained NHAG volunteers could do this work or funding found to commission outside people to carry out this work
Review proposals for mapping of Paul Lewin provided additional Regeneration projects. information on this (Mark Farmer phone conversation on the 10th of January)
Part of the work carried out when proposals come forward to regenerate an area
Assess a resources plan to compile Briefing note provided by Jane a wider assessment of buildings of Jennings stated that there no value including potential funding current resources available to available from other sources. complete this work
Powers available to NBC are Briefing note was provided by established and those that are not, Jane Jennings and circulated to ascertain who has them the group
Noted that the national consultation on amending the powers available to local authorities has closed. The new legislation will no doubt create an increase in workload (to review)
Recognise the impact that the role Briefing note was provided by of NBC has on WNDC and how they Jane Jennings and circulated to carryout their respective roles. the group
Strengthened partnership working Paul Lewin provided additional through agreed partnership information on this (Mark Farmer agreement in respect of historic phone conservation on the 10th of buildings and regeneration January)
Conservation section would like to develop closer working relationships with WNDC to ensure that they give more consideration
The County Council as a partner 6 needs to provide an Archaeological service
For information the following people are Northampton Borough Council Officers and hold the following roles;
Mark Farmer is an Overview and Scrutiny Officer. Jane Jennings is a Principal Planning Officer with responsibility for conservation issues. Paul Lewin is the Planning Policy and Conservation Manager
7 The key findings of the review are that;
Resourcing
In comparison to other local authorities Northampton Borough Council’s conservation service is under resourced. The review compared the level of conservation activity in Northampton and the resources available to support this work. Areas that are comparable to Northampton Borough Council have at least two more officers and do not have the same levels of regeneration activity. The group also received an outline of the new Historic Buildings protection legislation that the Government is currently consulting. The group is minded to recommend that additional resources are found to increase the size of the conservation team- to bring it to the same size of other comparable areas and to ensure that there is enough capacity to cope with the additional workload created by the new legislation. It is estimated that a team size of six officers would be appropriate.
Partnership working with the West Northamptonshire Development Corporation (WNDC)
It is clear that the council’s relationship and partnership arrangements with West Northamptonshire Development Corporation need to be improved. Working protocols on the way in which conservation issues will be dealt before the planning application stage need to be developed to ensure that the West Northamptonshire Development Corporation is considering conservation issues at an early stage of regeneration proposal development. The group has therefore recommended that work is carried out to improve working protocols between West Northamptonshire and given the limited time available for this review that the Task and Finish Group that is established to review the council’s partnership working with the West Northamptonshire Development Corporation should consider the issues outlined in this report.
The group received a presentation on the historical importance of the Castle area. The presentation highlighted a number of issues relating to the conservation issues surrounding the area. Given the historical importance of the area, it is recommended that any plans that are brought forward either by WNDC or Northampton Borough Council to regenerate the gateway entrance reflect the history of the area.
The future
The group as part of its evidence gathering were made aware that a secondary list of buildings that are of historical interest, but are not formally adopted for protection existed. Group members therefore feel that this list should be adopted in order to demonstrate that the council is serious about protecting the town’s heritage. Other proposals to help protect the town’s heritage include developing a county storage facility for archaeological finds and mapping out the town’s historical buildings.
The group was made aware of the new conservation legislation that the Government is currently consulting on. This new legalisation should enable councils to provide better protection to historic buildings. Until this time it is noted that one of the few ways in which to protect buildings is to establish a conservation area. It was unclear at the time of this review how the government intends to take forward the new legislation. Members are therefore recommending that officers provide members with a response to how the council will implement the new legalisation. It is clear that the new legislation will have a significant impact on the workload of the conservation office (as a number of powers will be transferred from English Heritage to NBC the group is of the view that additional resources will need to be found to deal with this additional workload)
8 Recommendations
These recommendations will be presented with the report to Overview and Scrutiny Committee One, Partnerships, Regeneration, Community Safety and Engagement on the 13th of March 2008.
Recommendations are that;
Cabinet allocates;
1. Additional resources to the conservation service, (The group estimates that a team of six officers is required);
In order to;
x Ensure that there is sufficient resource available to respond to the emerging legislation on the protection of historic buildings x Ensure that there is sufficient resource available to deal with the increasing demands placed upon the service as a result of increasing levels of regeneration
Cabinet instructs officers;
1. To bring forward proposals to map buildings that are not listed, but of value to the town. (Proposals could include using volunteers or consultants to carry out the mapping process)
2. To bring forward proposals to adopt the secondary list; this would recognise that these buildings are important and that the council would wish to protect them
3. To work with our partners to review county archaeological advice and storage arrangements
4. To examine the feasibility of building a physical and computer model of Northampton central area - so that an understanding can be gained of the potential impact of proposed new developments on historic buildings
Cabinet is asked to note;
1. That when WNDC, NCC and Cabinet consider regeneration proposals for the Castle gateway, that the proposals must be sympathetic to and help promote the historical importance of the area
2. Cabinet is made aware that for historic buildings that are not listed or scheduled ancient monuments, location within a conservation area provides some potential for protection from significant change or demolition
3. Overview and Scrutiny Committee One has instructed officers to bring forward a report from on the new legislation and how it will be implemented in Northampton- as soon as the Government lets local authorities know how it intends to implement it
Recommendation to Overview and Scrutiny Committee One;
9 1. That the Task and Finish Group which will be established to examine partnership working with WNDC, consider the issues relating to partnership working raised in this report
10 Evidence
The Task and Finish Group met on the following dates;
24th of September 2007 11th of October 2007 12th of November 2007 29th of November 2007 11th of December 2007 11th of January 2008 7th of February 2008
The group took evidence from the following organisations and bodies;
Northampton Borough Council Regeneration Team Northampton Borough Council Conservation Team English Heritage Northampton Heritage Action Group Martin Ellison Local resident and conservation officer with a local council Brian Giggins Castle area expert Paul Hobden Local business owner Heritage Hunters
Any evidence presented to the group throughout the review is included in the rest of this report.
11 Record of meetings Historic Buildings and Regeneration Task and Finish Group (September 2007 to February 2008)
Meeting One
24th of September 2007 NORTHAMPTON BOROUGH COUNCIL
OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY HISTORIC BUILDLINGS/REGENERATION OPPORTUNITIES TASK AND FINISH GROUP
Monday, 24 September 2007
PRESENT:
Councillor John Caswell Chair
Councillors:
Tony Clarke Jean Hawkins Co-Optee Andrew Simpson Paul Varnsverry
Mike Kitchen, Regeneration Project Officer John Dalby, Interim Planning Policy Manager Simone Wade, Policy, Governance and Community Development Manager
1. APOLOGIES Apologies were received from Chris Cavanagh and Jane Jennings
2. WELCOME AND INTRODUCTIONS Councillor Caswell opened the meeting and welcomed everyone.
John Dalby introduced himself and outlined his role as interim Policy Planning Manager and stated that the new post holder Paul Lewin would be in post from the 1st October 2007.
3. SCOPING EXERCISE A list of listed buildings was circulated and discussion took place regarding any omissions from the list, and how current it was.
Points of discussion were noted as:
a. Is the purpose/objectives of the review too broad given the timescale of the review? Can quick wins be identified and those needing more time re-scheduled for further review? b. How can listed and important buildings be protected during a time of regeneration when the Council does not have control over the entire planning process? c. The history of the town in respect of previous mass development shows that planning was agreed around what was happening at the time than rather against policy. This 12 should be avoided in the future. d. The various roles undertaken by NBC and WNDC
AGREED: (1) The task and finish group would use the issues around Castle and the Masterplan proposals as a paradigm case.
(2) The Chair of this task and finish group to ask that this Council’s Administration requests that West Northamptonshire Development Corporation defer any planning decisions affecting the Castle area of Northampton until the work of this task and finish group is completed, as recommendations regarding future Planning Policy maybe made, in particular with regard to historic and important sites and buildings.
(3) The task and finish group work to the following purpose/objectives:
x Review of the current powers and those of partner organisations. x Review of the extent of the Borough Conservation Areas including the Management Plan Programme in hand. x Review proposals for mapping of buildings that are not listed but are of value to the Town. x Review proposals for mapping of Regeneration projects. x Assess a resources plan to compile a wider assessment of buildings of value including potential funding available from other sources. x Consider possible consequences of not following recommendations from above work.
(3) The task and finish group work to achieve the following outcomes:
a. Powers available to NBC are established and those that are not, ascertain who has them b. Recognise the impact that the role of NBC has on WNDC and how they carryout their respective roles. c. Strengthened partnership working through agreed partnership agreement in respect of historic buildings and regeneration
(4) All lists regarding listed buildings, historic and important buildings need reviewing
(5) The following background information is required:
i. Policies in support of the protection of built and natural heritage ii. Castle Masterplan iii. Land ownership regarding the paradigm case iv. Law regarding ancient monuments v. WNDC documentation
(6) Research regarding best practise in particular regard to York, Lincoln, Norwich and Ipswich. Additionally those Councils known to be good at making policy
(7) An evidence session is established with the Joint Planning Unit to inform their consultation process and that they in turn inform this task and finish group. 13 Discussion took place regarding the format of information and in particular sources of evidence both written and those requested to present to the task and finish group,
AGREED: (1) Written evidence against a set of questions would be required from the following organisations and people:
x Andy Chapman NCC Archaeology x Steve Parry Clive Fletcher English Heritage Advisor 44 Derngate Friends of St Peter’s Church Tom Walsh Gerald Smith Chronicle and Echo Regional Directors National Trust Regional Directors English Partnerships
(2) The following people would be invited to give evidence at the task and finish group meetings:
x Graham Cadman NCC Sites and Monuments Officer x Paul Hobden Conservation Architect x Kate Wills Heritage hunters x John Brown Blue Badge Guide Trust
(3) A questionnaire would be sent to all those attended the Heritage Day (4) The Chronicle and echo are approached in respect of them running a campaign regarding the questionnaire (5) Portfolio holders (Councillors Church and Glynane)are invited to give evidence. (6) Initial question to include, ‘How do we protect our heritage within the new dynamics of WNDC and NBC?’
4. PROPOSED SCHEDULE OF MEETINGS - FOR DISCUSSION x 11 October 2007 Desk top research x 1 November 2007 Evidence gathering from witnesses x 12 November 2007 Evidence gathering from witnesses x 29 November 2007 Finalise chair’s report
The meeting concluded at 5:45
Information presented to the meeting;
OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY SCOPING A REVIEW O&S COMMITTEE: FOCUS OF THE REVIEW:
1. Purpose / Objectives of the Review
2. Outcomes Required
3. Information Required e.g. 14 _ Charts _ Budgets _ Services _ Evidence from users/service employees _ Information from partners _ Best Practice councils _ Experts
4. Format of Information e.g. _ Officer Briefings _ Officer Reports _ Portfolio Holder Reports _ Councillor Reports _ Published Reviews by other organisations _ Case studies _ Expert Advice _ Surveys _ Witnesses verbal / written Evidence _ Commissioned Research _ Presentations _ Local / regional / national data
5. Methods Used to Gather Information e.g. _ Interviews in committee/ community _ Focus Groups / User Groups in the Community _ Public Meetings _ Working Groups _ Structured Visits to Other Organisations _ Site Visits _ Advertisements _ Media _ Questionnaires
6. Co-Options to the Review Committee
7. Evidence gathering Timetable (Including start and finish dates)
8. Responsible Officers
9. Resources and Budgets
3. Final report presented by:
4. Final report submitted to:
5. Monitoring procedure:
The Top 10 Questions To Ask Before Any Scrutiny Begins 15 The Top 10 questions that should be asked (and answered) when setting work programmes, Working Parties or Task & Finish Groups when working within the LAA block
1. Terms of reference a. Are they clear? b. Specific? c. Relevant?
2. What are the Governance arrangements for your particular subject? a. Cabinet Controlled Decisions b. Council Controlled Decisions c. Delegated Officer Decisions d. Outside Agency or Body Responsibility
3. Targets – Being careful not to predetermine the outcome of any investigation thefollowing information is likely to be requested a. The present targets set b. The present performance reports c. The past 3 years performance d. The future targets set (BVPP)
4. Risks a. What are the risks? b. How can you alleviate any such risks?
5. How are you going to measure success? a. What made you start the project? b. What are you looking to achieve?
5. Witness’s a. Who from the authority do you require? b. What other agencies do you need to invite? c. Community Leaders may be needed d. Private individuals with a specific interest
NORTHAMPTON BOROUGH COUNCIL
OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE 1 (Partnerships, Regeneration, Community Safety and Engagement)
16 Briefing Note
Regeneration and Growth
1. General: Following the Overview and Scrutiny meeting held on 21 June 2006, the Panel identified 6 pieces of work it would like to perform, 3 affecting Regeneration.
These 3 were:-
A. Historic Buildings/Regeneration Opportunities - To be led by Councillor John Caswell
B. WNDC Partnerships - To be led by Councillor Andrew Simpson
C. Regeneration Consultants - To be led by Councillor Tony Clarke
The Corporate Manager (Regeneration & Growth) met with the Portfolio Holder for Regeneration, Councillor Richard Church and Director (People, Performance & Regeneration) Clive Thomas to discuss the scoping, resourcing and programming of this work. This was in the context of the following constraints.
2. Resources General: The Council’s Regeneration Team comprises a funded resource for limited posts. This resource was cut by an efficiency saving in the form of a staff budget cut of £100k earlier this year reducing the capacity of the Service. Up until the end of December 2006, the Team had comprised of only one professional officer with the role supported by interim managers as it embarked on a recruitment campaign to fill posts. Recruitment has delivered one Renewal Project Officer who commenced in January 2007 and 3 further posts, a Regeneration Project Officer, an Assistant Regeneration Project Officer and an Assistant Regeneration & Renewal Officer all who commenced in May 07. The Team Leader also left the Council in May 2007.
In summary, the Regeneration Team comprises 4 posts.
3. Current workload
The Team are currently bringing forward a portfolio of key projects including:- x Grosvenor/Retail Centre incorporating regeneration of Greyfriars Bus Station x St John’s Cultural Quarter x Northampton Brownfield Initiative x Sixfields x The Breathing Spaces project across the Borough
With a low resource base, it is imperative that the Team provide support to overview and scrutiny without compromising key projects currently engaged and included within the Service Delivery Plans.
4. A. Historic Building/ Regeneration opportunities
Scope: It is suggested that an overview of the following be considered:-
x Review of the current powers and those of partner organisations. x Review of the extent of the Borough Conservation Areas including the Management Plan Programme in hand. x Proposals for mapping of buildings that are not listed but are of value to the Town.
17 x Proposals for mapping of Regeneration projects. x Assessment of a resources plan to compile a wider assessment of buildings of value including potential funding available from other sources. x Consider possible consequences of not following recommendations from above work.
Resources: To include input from the following (to support O & S): x Chris Cavanagh, Corporate Manager – Regeneration & Growth x Jane Jennings, Principal Planning Officer Built Environment (Conservation) x Mike Kitchen, Regeneration Project Officer x Clive Thomas, Corporate Director (People, Performance & Regeneration) x Cllr Richard Church – Portfolio Holder
Priority: This is considered a practical and valuable piece of work which could have worthwhile benefits for the planning and regeneration of Northampton.
B. WNDC Partnerships
Scope: This could be further wide ranging to include the effectiveness of partnerships with other key partnership organisations including NCC, NEL, EMDA, EP, LSP. This could also be extended in future beyond the scope of Regeneration. The panel could review:-
x Current Project Boards and Steering Panels, both Officer and Member Forums and review their terms of reference, modus operandi etc. x Consider leadership and decision making processes. x Consider funding opportunities through partnerships x Identify resource effectiveness and corporate support requirements to enable more effective working.
Resource Implications To include input from the following (to support O & S):
x Chris Cavanagh x Mike Kitchen x Clive Thomas x Cllr Richard Church x Partner Organisation WNDC (Board Member and Officer) and others
Priority: There is much partnership working in place, which may benefit from this review. This needs to be approached with some caution to help engage partners appropriately.
C. Regeneration Consultants
Scope: x Identify those consultants appointed, including those through partnerships. x Consider the reasons for employing consultants x Consider the basis of consultant appointments and their briefs x Review the output and value for money of employing consultants x Consider alternatives to employment of consultants and provide helpful guidance for future resource options.
Resource Implications To include input from the following (to support O & S): 18 x Chris Cavanagh x Clive Thomas x Cllr Richard Church x Appointed consultants (there will be financial implications which are not budgeted).
Priority: The Council is currently engaging consultants both in Regeneration and in other Service Areas across the Council.
Programme: After careful consideration by the Director, Corporate Manager and Portfolio Holder, the following programme is recommended. Since the Council is currently into Quarter 2 it is anticipated that commencement of this work would not be practical until September 2007 and that only two reviews can be undertaken this financial year without impacting on delivery of priority projects.
A. Historic Buildings/Regeneration Task and Finish – September 2007 to November 2007
B. Regeneration Consultants – December 2007 to February 2008
C. Regeneration Partnerships – April 2008 to June 2008
Author: Chris Cavanagh Corporate Manager
Meeting Two
11th of October 2007
19 NORTHAMPTON BOROUGH COUNCIL
OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY HISTORIC BUILDLINGS/REGENERATION OPPORTUNITIES TASK AND FINISH GROUP
Thursday, 11 October 2007
PRESENT: Councillor John Caswell (Chair); Councillors Tony Clarke, Jean Hawkins, Andrew Simpson.
Mike Kitchen, Regeneration Project Officer Jane Jennings, Principal Planning Officer Monique Ozlati, Secretary (note taker)
1. APOLOGIES Apologies were received from Councillor Paul Varnsverry and Simone Wade, Policy and Governance Manager
2. MINUTES OF MEETING HELD ON 24TH SEPTEMBER 2007 The minutes were agreed as a true record, however it was noted that written evidence is required from Tom Welsh not Walsh
3. DESKTOP RESEARCH It was confirmed that Castle Ward would be appropriate as a paradigm case as it features a historic building that has been demolished, a historic monument and a redevelopment brief. Discussion took place regarding the powers held by NBC and the Government that could be used to protect the heritage of the town, and ways in which they were or could be used within the Borough.
Points of discussion were noted as:
a) Conservation areas: The closest conservation area to the Castle Area finishes at the end of Gold Street/Start of Marefair. a. Conservation areas are reviewed on a systematic basis – Review is currently being done of Holy Sepulchre and All Saints’ conservation areas. b. NBC can declare conservation areas, and are obliged to review existing areas. In creating a conservation area NBC are obliged to inform the reasons for creating a Conservation Area, and noting what it is that makes it worthy of conservation. c. If there are buildings that fall outside a conservation area but that are worthy of conservation, that it may be prudent to create a new area rather than extend the boundaries, as Conservation areas with the wrong boundary may leave the area open to appeal.
b) Protecting Buildings by listing them; a. It is not in the remit of the Local Authority to make a building listed; Local Authority’s can however submit requests to Central Government to list a building b. Listed Buildings are those identified as being of National importance and are protected from any alterations, which may affect the land or structure; It is English Heritage that are delegated with deciding whether a building is worthy 20 of becoming listed. c. What are the criteria for listing a building? (It was noted that this information has recently been updated and is available on the English Heritage website). d. A Local list has been drawn up which identifies buildings that the Authority considers need to be protected; however this doesn’t provide the building with a statutory protection. e. If a building is in imminent danger it is possible to serve a Building Preservation Notice, which protects a building for 6 months, enabling a formal notice of listing to be submitted (Jane Jennings advised the group that this can pose a risk as you become liable for compensation if English Heritage decide not to allow listing). f. What is the process is in house for looking at Buildings and deciding whether or not a listed building application should be submitted? (It was advised that there are triggers internally which identify when a building may be at risk and it is then the Conservation Team which makes an application on behalf of NBC) g. How is protecting the character of the town taken into consideration? h. There is no formal review of the Local List c) Cllr Tony Clarke suggested three pieces of work that the group should focus on as being: o The Past – A short piece recording the significance of losing a Historic Building using the example of the Maltings; also considering whether NBC could have done anything differently? o The Present – where we are with the consultation regarding plans for the Needle etc o Work in respect of the Castle site/regional planning, enhancing the area and creating tourist attractions, creating a gateway to the town, rebuilding the castle wall with stones held at the Museum? AGREED: (1) An up to date Local List to be supplied for discussion at the next task and finish group meeting by Jane Jennings. (2) Arun Kotnis, retired officer, should be called to give evidence as a witness regarding Buildings in Northampton that are on the Local List; Simone Wade to make contact with Arun.
4. FURTHER EVIDENCE AND WITNESS EVIDENCE
The Chair asked Jane Jennings to comment on whether she thought we could have acted differently with regards to the Maltings; the group was advised that in April 2005 2 applications were submitted to English Heritage to list the Maltings and the Church, however they were rejected on the grounds that past works done on the properties made them unworthy of becoming listing – for example the Victorian balustrade that was added to the front of the Maltings at a date later than construction. It was noted that there was further discussion regarding the potential development of the Castle station area; There was suggestion of using the Princes Trust in order to help with facilitating this work and that following on from this maybe could consider creating a model which could be presented to Cabinet? It was identified that it would be necessary to highlight the level of community involvement. Cllr Hawkins identified that she had been in discussion with Cllr Church and English Heritage regarding the model of Lincoln, and the idea of enquiry by design. It was suggested that Lincoln may be a suitable example and that they should be contacted for information. Jane Jennings confirmed her view that using an example site 21 would be a good way forward. The issue of officer capacity was raised as LDF is creating a lot of work for officers and there is concern that there is not currently anyone that this could be delegated to. Cllr Clarke suggested that it may be prudent for this work to be outsourced to Arun Kotnis, and that he be approached with regards to doing a piece of work on a paid basis. Cllr Simpson advised that there is a Scrutiny budget, but that it may be necessary to address the wider issue that is with regards to capacity problems and resource gaps. Concern was raised with regards to Council spending in relation to consultants, particularly bearing in mind the future work to be undertaken by Overview and Scrutiny with regards to this matter. It was noted that Jane Jennings would be able to estimate the time required to complete the piece of work on presentation of a detailed brief outlining the necessary outcomes. AGREED: (1) It was confirmed that there are essentially four pieces of work required to be completed by the task and finish group: a) Past b) Present c) Future d) Examination of Witness Evidence (2) The tasks which would ordinarily fall under an Overview and Scrutiny Officer (not yet in post) be identified.
(3) The tasks requiring additional officer/consultant support be identified. (4) Cllr Simpson to raise the issue of workloads of current staff and potential use of funds from the Scrutiny budget at the next Scrutiny Management meeting. (5) That at the 1st November meeting the group formulates questions that will be posed to witnesses and that witnesses be prepared to give evidence at the 12th November meeting.
5. DATE OF NEXT MEETING Thursday 1st November 2007
Information presented to the meeting;
POLICIES IN SUPPORT OF THE PROTECTION OF BUILT AND NATURAL HERITAGE
Planning Policy: Legal Framework
Local authorities are legally required to prepare the LDF which conforms to national policies and meets the requirements set out in regional policies, including those relating to conservation. In addition, there are existing adopted policies in place to protect the Borough’s heritage although these policies may be obsolete in September.
National Guidance Planning Policy Statement 1 – Delivering Sustainable Development
22 One of the key themes of PPS 1 is protecting and enhancing the environment. This includes, as stated in paragraph 5, “protecting and enhancing the natural and historic environment, the quality and character of the countryside, and existing communities”.
PPS 1 continues, in paragraph 17, that planning policies have a requirement to protect and enhance the quality, character and amenity of urban areas as a whole, with a high level of protection given to the most valued townscapes.
PPS1 recognises that the condition of surroundings has a direct impact on the quality of life for residents. Therefore, it is seen to be the role of planning, in PPS 1, to maintain and improve the local environment and help to mitigate the effects of declining environmental quality.
Regional Guidance 8 (adopted March 2005)
D. Policy 27: Protecting and Enhancing the Region’s Natural and Cultural Assets
This is a broad and generic policy which seeks to ensure the protection, appropriate management and enhancement of the region’s natural and cultural assets (and their settings). Policy goes on to provide 6 key principles on how this can be achieved.
E. Policy 31: Regional Priorities for the Historic Environment
This is a key policy which states:
Development plans, future Local Development Frameworks, and other strategies should seek to understand, conserve and enhance the historic environment of the East Midlands, in recognition of its own intrinsic value, and its contribution to the region’s quality of life.
The LDF should pay particular attention to promoting the sensitive change of the historic environment, retaining local distinctiveness by:
Identifying and assessing the significance of specific historic and cultural assets (including their settings) Using characterisation to understand the landscape or townscape in areas of change Encouraging the refurbishment and reuse of disused or underused buildings of some historic or architectural merit and incorporating them sensitively into the regeneration scheme Promoting the use of local building materials Recognising the opportunities for enhancing existing tourism attractions and for developing the potential of other areas and sites of historic interest
Please note that there will be a revision to the RSS and a Public Examination was held in the summer of 2007.
Adopted Local Plan
The Local Plan, adopted in June 1997, contains policies which seek to protect and enhance the built and natural heritage. Under the 2004 Act, the adopted plan expires in September 2007. Some of the policies contained in the adopted plan will be saved for a further period. Government Office for the East Midlands is responsible for making the decisions on which policies should be saved.
23 It is therefore unknown at this stage whether the policies affecting historic and natural environment contained in the Local Plan will be saved beyond September 2007. It is equally unknown as to how long the “saved” policies will be saved for. NBC is awaiting confirmation from GOEM on this issue.
Local Development Framework
The Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 introduced a new system through the preparation of the Local Development Framework. The LDF contains a series of Local Development Documents comprising both the Development Plan Documents and Supplementary Planning Documents.
Northampton, together with the authorities of South Northamptonshire and Daventry, prepared a joint Local Development Scheme (LDS), which was brought into effect in March 2007. The LDS sets a timetable for the preparation and adoption of all the documents.
The preparation of each document is based on, amongst others:
Ensuring that robust evidence is gathered at the start of the process Continuous effective community engagement Meeting the requirements set out in the national and regional policies
The conservation and enhancement of the natural and built heritage are important elements in the preparation of the DPDs, both at spatial and local levels. These issues will be raised when the discussion papers for both the West Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy (WNJCS) and the Central Area Action Plan (CAAP) are released for consultation. It should be noted that the:
WNJCS discussion paper has been approved by the 3 Councils’ Cabinet and will be released for consultation formally on the 5th September 2007 CAAP discussion paper will be discussed at Northampton’s Cabinet on the 3rd September. If approved, public consultation will follow suite
The CAAP has a chapter dedicated to conservation, including the issues associated with built heritage and the options for sustaining and enhancing this provision.
Overview & Scrutiny
Heritage assets.
There are currently a number of ways our built heritage can be protected. Some have a statutory basis other are non-statutory.
F. Principle Act Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990.
G. Principle Guidance Planning Policy Guidance 15: planning and the historic environment. Planning Policy Guidance 16: planning and archaeology.
There are also numerous published documents by organisations and amenity bodies regarding conservation best practice.
24 Listed Buildings Are buildings included on the statutory list of important buildings considered to be of ‘Special architectural or historic interest’. It is one of the functions of English Heritage to consider whether buildings are sufficiently significant to be included on the statutory list. Once included in the list, consent is required for extension or alteration (inside or out) which may affect the special character or appearance of the building. It is the remit of the Local Authority to consider and determine applications for Listed Building Consent. Undertaking work without the necessary consent is a criminal offence.
For the purpose of listed building control, once included on the list protection is afforded to the principle building AND any object or structure which is fixed to the building, or is within the curtilage and forms part of the land and has done so since before 1 July1948.
Unauthorised work - if work has been undertaken without obtaining the necessary consent the Council has a number of courses of action available
x Do nothing x Serve a Listed Building Enforcement Notice requiring reinstatement x Commence prosecution proceedings.
Unauthorised work is an absolute offence and therefore the Council could commence prosecution proceeding AND serve a Listed Building Enforcement Notice simultaneously.
Any one can make an application to English Heritage for a building or structure to be included on the statutory list – this is usually done in written form with an accompanying justification, highlighting the importance of the building/structure.
Building Preservation Notices If a building is considered to be under imminent threat of alteration or demolition the Council can serve a Building Preservation Notice. This affords immediate protection to the building for a period of six months. Once a notice is served the Council has an obligation to make a formal application to English Heritage to have the building included on the statutory list. Should the building subsequently not be included on the list the Council can be liable for compensation for any losses incurred by the owner.
Conservation Areas Section 69 of the act places a duty on Local Authorities to designate ‘areas of special architectural or historic interest the character of which it is desirable to preserve or enhance’ as Conservation Areas. It is the quality and historic value of the area which is the principle consideration. Section 69 also places a duty on Local Authorities to review their conservation areas – the conservation team has a rolling programme of conservation area re-appraisals. Currently Holy Sepulchre and All Saints conservation areas are under review. Section 71 of the principle act places a duty on Local Authorities to formulate and publish proposals for the preservation and enhancement of conservation areas.
There are currently 19 designated conservation areas within the Borough.
x Abington Park x All Saints x Barrack Road x Collingtree Village x Dallington Village x Delapre x Derngate
25 x Duston Village x Great Billing Village x Great Houghton Village x Hardingstone Village x Holy Sepulchre x Kingsley x Kingsthorpe Village x Kingsthorpe (High Street/Manor Road) x St Crispin x St Giles x Weston Favell Village x Wootton Village
Designation offers control over the demolition of unlisted buildings and works to trees requires six weeks written notice to be given to the Council prior to work taking place. Permitted Development Rights are reduced for properties within conservation areas. It is the remit of the Local Authority to consider and determine applications for Conservation Area Consent.
Section 72 of the act requires Local Authorities to special attention to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of a conservation area when considering applications for planning permission within the designated area, or outside the boundary where it is considered the proposal would affect the setting of the conservation area.
Article 4 Directions An Article 4 Direction removes specified Permitted Development Rights, which requires the property owner to firstly obtain Planning Permission for the specified development covered by the direction.
Article 4(1) Direction – requires approval of Secretary of State
Article 4(2) Direction – relates to single dwelling houses. S of S approval not required.
Once an Article 4 Direction has been made owners/occupiers have a period of six months to raise objection/comment on the direction prior to the direction being confirmed (or otherwise).
When declaring an Article 4 Direction there is the potential that owners/occupies may claim compensation for abortive costs associated with any planning application which is directly attributable to the Article 4 Direction being made. The Council is only liable to pay compensation for a period of 12 months of the direction being introduced.
There a currently 3 Article 4(2) Direction’s in force
x Kingsley x Barrack Road x Abington – needs to be confirmed before 16 October 2007.
Each direction has been tailored to protect the identified character of the area.
Urgent Works Notice Section 54 of the act enables Local Authorities to undertake urgent works for the preservation of listed buildings in their area after giving notice to the owner. These powers 26 can only be used with regard to an unoccupied building or the unused part of a partially occupied building. The S of S can also use the power for an unlisted building in a conservation area.
Works are limited to urgent works – work necessary to keep a building wind and weather proof and safe from collapse.
Following the service of and urgent works notice, should the owner fail to undertake the work, the Council may enter the site, undertake the specified work and claim the costs from the owner. The owner has the right to appeal to the S of S on the grounds that some or all of the work was unnecessary or that the costs are unreasonable. Should the Council be minded to recover costs, the financial circumstances of the owner needs to be taken into account from the outset. The sums the authority wishes to recover should not be unreasonable in relation to the owner’s means.
Repairs Notice. Section 48 of the act enables Local Authorities to serve a repairs notice where it is considered that a listed building is not being properly preserved. The notice must specify the works necessary for the proper preservation of the building. The works are not confined to urgent work or to unoccupied buildings BUT the works must be reasonably necessary for the protection of the building.
The serving of a repairs notice is considered to be the start point for compulsory acquisition of the building. If the owner chooses not to fulfil the requirements of the notice the Council can commence CPO proceedings – serving a notice and not following through, if necessary, may send out the wrong message to the owners and others who are custodians of heritage buildings.
Registered Battlefields English Heritage has published Register of Historic Battlefields, which identifies a number areas where important ballets are sufficiently documented to be located on the ground. NBC has one registered battlefield at Delapre. Battlefields are not graded as Listed Buildings.
Historic Parks and Gardens English Heritage has published a register of Historic Parks and Gardens. Site are graded as I, II* and II which is independent of the grading of Listed Buildings. Currently there are no registered parks or gardens within the Borough
Scheduled Ancient Monuments Ancient Monuments are designated by the S of S under the Ancient Monuments Act 1995. Ancient Monuments can relate to a building structure or work above or below ground, considered to be of archaeological significance. Sometimes a building can be Listed and Scheduled – in this instance the scheduling takes precedence and scheduled monument consent would be required for any works. Currently applications for scheduled monument consent are determined and monitored by English Heritage.
There are currently 7 scheduled monuments within the Borough
x Multivallate Hill Fort, Hunsbury Hill x Queen Eleanor Cross, London Road (also Grade I Listed) x Northampton Castle x Upton deserted medieval Village x Saxon Palace Complex, Marefair (Listed Building within defined area) x Upton Bowl Barrow
27 x Churchyard cross base, St Michaels Churchyard, Upton
Archaeology Is not currently a statutory function. NCC have a small archaeology team who maintain the County wide Sites and Monument Record. NBC relied on the County Team for specialist archaeology advice until recently when the service was reduced. Advice included the provision of Building Recording Briefs and Archaeological Briefs in relation to development sites considered to be of significance and assessing submitted reports to ensure they fulfilled the requirements of the brief – this role has been picked up by the Borough conservation team which has had a resource implication.
Local List – non-statutory The Council recognises the importance of some buildings which, although not included on the statutory list, make an important contribution to the heritage base of the town. In June 1993 the council published a Local List of important buildings for the town centre and a draft list for the remainder of the town has also been drawn up. Both lists require review but are currently in abeyance due to limited staff resources.
Buildings included on the local list benefit from no statutory protection, but their importance is highlighted during pre-application discussions or during development proposals.
Design Guides/Development Briefs – non-statutory The Council has published a number of design guides and development briefs which aim to offer general advice on design and development issues. Some are generic and others are site specific. Example – shop front design guide (published April 1998) offering advice on the design of shop fronts including adverts and security.
Heritage Protection Review The manner in which our heritage is protected is currently under review by Central Government. It is proposed to rationalise the current numerous forms of protection into one cohesive list – the Heritage Asset Register – which will incorporate all existing protected buildings, areas and sites.
Principle issues
x Archaeology will become a statutory function – probably at district level which may have a resource implication for NBC.
x Local lists will be given some statutory status but not to the same level as listed buildings.
x Responsibility for determining applications for Scheduled Ancient Monument Consent may transfer to Local Authorities which will have a resource implication for NBC.
Resources The Conservation team currently has three full time staff – a principle officer and two planning officers.
It is the remit of the team to fulfil all the Council statutory heritage obligations and to facilitate the Council’s heritage policies including:-
28 x Undertaking a programme of Conservation Are re-appraisals and management plans in accordance with Government requirements and best practice guidance. x Identifying and assessing potential areas for Conservation area status. x Offering heritage advice to the Council’s development control team on planning and listed building applications as requested. x Offering heritage advice to development control on planning consultations from WNDC. x Offering advice to all other Council departments/teams as requested. x Offering heritage advice to amenity organisations and the public as requested. x Enforcing statutory listed building and conservation area controls. x Making applications on behalf of the Council for buildings to be included on the statutory list. x Assessing submitted information with regard to the discharge of planning and listed building conditions. x Offering archaeological advice to the Council’s development control team. x Evaluating submitted building recording and archaeological reports.
The principle officer is currently coordinating the corporate response to strategic WNDC consultations.
Meeting Three
12th of November 2007
NORTHAMPTON BOROUGH COUNCIL
29 OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY HISTORIC BUILDINGS/REGENERATION OPPORTUNITIES TASK AND FINISH GROUP
The next meeting will be held at the The Guildhall on Monday, 12 November 2007 at 6:00 pm
Chair - Councillor John Caswell Councillors Tony Clarke, Jean Hawkins, Andrew Simpson,Paul Varnsverry
Councillor Kevin Reeve observing
Chris Cavanagh Corporate Manager (Regeneration) Simone Wade Policy & Governance Manager Mike Kitchen Regeneration Project Officer Jane Jennings Principal Planning Officer Paul Lewin Planning, Policy & Conservation Manager
AGENDA 1. Apologies There were none.
2. Minutes of the meeting held on 11th October 2007 The minutes of the meeting were agreed as a true record, with the following amendments:
Item 3 Desk Top Research: Point A(c) – The last sentence should read “..as Consevation areas with an inappropriate boundary maybe difficult to justify at appeal.
Point B (e) – The last sentence should read “….(Jane Jennings advised the group that this can pose a risk as Northampton Borough Council may become liable for compensation if English Heritage decide not to allow listing.”
Point B (h) – The sentence should read “There is no formal process for review of the local list, but there is an informal review underway.”
Point C – Each of the headings should be underlined and the last head “The Future” inserted.
Point (2) of ‘Agreed’ should read “…as a witness and/or consider an option for him to do additional work…..”
3. Task & Finish Group Resources The Chair introduced Ben Bix, Overview & scrutiny officer to the group.
Simone Wade outlined the availability of overview and scrutiny officer support and spoke about Ben Bix and Mark Farmer’s experience in relation to the work of Overview & Scrutiny.
Chris Cavanagh outlined the resources available to him via his current Conservation Team. In summary, there were a number of vacant posts, with those officers in post providing support to other areas such as strategic planning applications which all added pressure to a small team.
30 In light of the comments made around existing resources there was further discussion around the possibility of buying in additional support. In the interests of keeping concluding review there was agreement that this option should be explored. There was further discussion around the possibility of using Arun Kotnis who had now retired from Northampton Borough Council either as a paid advisor or as a co-opted member.
Agreed: (1) Simone Wade would explore whether Arun Kotnis was available to assist.
4. Written questions for interviews
The group discussed the issues that they wished to seek answers for from the witnesses in the form of written questions:
The following comments were made: x There is a need to paint an historical picture so that it is possible to understand where we may have gone wrong in the past and why? x There is a need to understand what is missing now and what is it that is preventing the town from moving forward. x Is there a reason as to why heritage buildings have not been protected in the past? x Following on from the above, how do ‘we’ protect our heritage buildings of the future? x Why did we loose there buildings in the past? Was it due to the local authority, or developers or both?
There was discussion regarding the need to invite further organisations to future meetings and in some instances to consider co-opting them onto the group.
Agreed: (1) Simone Wade and Jane Jennings would produce a draft set pf questions for Councillors to consider.
(2) The questions are to be sent to the witnesses prior to the next meeting allowing enough preparation time.
4. Evidence
(A) Up To Date Local List
Jane Jennings made the following comments: x Northampton Borough Council adopted a list for the town centre and currently there is a draft list for the out of town area available. x Examples of the information held were circulated and included – Local list candidates, Local list of buildings of architectural or historic interest (town centre) & town centre conservation area map. x Both the Local list of buildings of architectural or historic interest (town centre) lists are being reviewed. x Resources have an impact on the progress being made and that currently activity is concentrated around statutory duties.
31 Agreed: (1). Simone Wade to research the resources required to undertake similar services within other local authorities.
(B) Information from Lincoln
An invitation by English Heritage was made to look at the process of enquiry by design, at Lincoln City.
The date for this visit is to be arranged. There was further discussion regarding the brief for the visit and whether this group could send some questions.
Agreed: (1) Councillor Hawkins to report back to the group. (2) Chris Cavanagh’s team to pull together a list of exemplar cases (3) Questions would be sent to Lincoln when feedback from the witnesses and other evidence has been considered.
5. Date of the next meeting
Thursday 29th November 2007 Tuesday 11th December 2007 Tuesday 8th January 2008
Information presented to the meeting;
Jane Jennings to provide list.
Information on Lincoln statement by design at the end of this report.
Meeting Four
29th of November 2007
32 Historic Buildings/Regeneration Opportunities Task and Finish Group 29 November 2007
Notes and actions
Attendees
Councillors Officers
Caswell (Chair) Jane Jennings Clarke (Apologies) Mike Kitchen Hawkins Chris Cavanagh (apologies) Simpson (Apologies) Mark Farmer Varnsverry Paul Lewin Ben Bix
o Kate Wells represented Heritage Hunters
o Valerie Knowles from Northampton Heritage Action Group was also in attendance
o The group requested that the presentation given by Brian Giggins be forwarded to WNDC
o Jane Jennings will involve Northampton Heritage Action Group with the production of the local list
o The list of questions were approved by the group and will be circulated to the other witnesses identified at the meeting on 12 November 2007
It was agreed that the next meetings of the group are as follows;
o 11th December – Evidence gathering o 7th February 2008 – Final report
The meeting closed at 8pm
33 Witness Æ Kate Wells Paul Hobden Brian Giggins Martin Ellison Question È (Heritage Hunters) 1, What do you think o Sense of o Sense of o Sense of pride – o Identity and pride our heritage brings place place, rewarding to an in family history to Northampton? o Historical something enquiring mind environment of interest o Value in tourism can provide and and education information something e.g. Birmingham on how the to raise & Manchester town has awareness o Potential for evolved major tourist o There is no draw single source of reference for how the town has evolved o A ‘millennium survey’ is currently underway o Planners need to be aware of appropriate building materials & how they weather o Planners tend to be Geographers but need an in depth knowledge of the town 2, Do you think o Each building o Brian o Not every o Most buildings do every building of any should be Giggins building should have a finite life heritage value judged on its gave a be saved o Buildings o should be saved? merits – presentation County function shouldn’t be On what basis buildings on the has ceased to saved for the should be Castle Site give advice sake of saving should this be saved if (attached) o Confusion over them considered? What possible current o ‘Miserable’ parameters do we o However, legislation and buildings are use to assess a there must policies. (Jane Mayorhold car buildings value in be an option Jennings park and the bus the context of to innovate response - local station regenerating the and be in the policies are still o Guildhall itself is a Town Centre where spirit of the applied) tribute to local age o When decisions democracy other benefits can o be delivered Design are made (design guidance is against policy competition on needed, in then a valid original building) the town reason must be centre - the made available scale and materials must be right
34 3, In respect of the o A specific o Design and o Disappointment at quality of new build, (not generic) access the lack of what criteria do we heritage statements are ‘statement’ made use to assess new study & made available by redevelopment buildings of value design guide and are of the Derngate. is needed for beneficial to lay and their Northampton person. contribution to the that is o Quality of plans local environment accessible to can be driven up all.
4, Where buildings o Some o Even handed may not be of high buildings are appraisal is heritage or design already needed – a merit but may have inappropriate benchmarking of high community to the town buildings against o Sheep street a criteria – some value, how can should be may be these be assessed returned to important to establish whether its original nationally they should be layout o Understanding protected or retained o Sol and of theme and Mayorhold context is are important disappointing o Move away from consultants quick fix answers o A 3D town centre model needs to be made to visualise new development s as chronology and topography o More research and indicative studies are needed as very little is known about the town. o A Civic Forum would be beneficial 5, Are there any o Paul Hobden o There are o Credible o A real model other points you informed the lots of information to rather than a wish to raise. meeting of examples of inform policy & computer (and his where Development generated model questions/answers background artefacts Control process is more effective as an have is vital at meeting) Architect, disappeared o The model Town during would be a Planner and developmen development Developer, t control tool with recent o Jean o The urban area projects Hawkins database is not including the asked for an being used at regeneration estimate of the moment of St Peters how storage o Everything we 35 Court and the capacity is do must inform Southbridge needed for the Development scheme artefacts Control Process where old o Urban design buildings expertise is have been lacking in most renovated authorities (Jane along with Jennings providing response was over 1000 that Chartered new homes. Conservation o An ideal Officers are in scale of the post) model is o What happens 1:200 – between would conservation welcome joint areas is funding for important this and has identified potential model maker. o The town could be divided into 5 interest areas based on chronology rather than focussed on 1 central area. o More conservation areas are appropriate
Information presented to the meeting;
Suggested questions for Historic Buildings and Regeneration Task & Finish Group to put to the witnesses
For the meeting to be held on the 29th of November 2007 at 6pm.
1 What value do you think our heritage brings to Northampton?
2 Do you think every building of any heritage value should be saved? On what basis should this be considered? What parameters do we use to assess a buildings value in the context of regenerating the Town Centre where other benefits can be delivered?
3 In respect of the quality of new build, what criteria do we use to assess new buildings of value and their contribution to the local environment?
4 Where buildings may not be of high heritage or design merit but may have high community value, how can these be assessed to establish whether they should also be protected or retained?
5 Are there any other points you wish to raise?
36 Desktop Research
Briefing paper for the Historic Buildings and Regeneration Opportunities Task and Finish Group, 29 November 2007 6pm
Desktop research comparing the resources that Northampton Borough Council for uses for conservation work with other similar councils.
It is difficult to make direct comparisons with other local authorities for a number of reasons.
x Every area having a different range of buildings to Northampton, x Different levels of population growth and regeneration and x Differences in the urban/rural spread. x Northampton also has significant development pressure with the growth agenda.
This information and research therefore focuses on those councils identified at previous meetings as being suitable to compare with Northampton.
Resources at Northampton Borough Council for conservation work
There are two full time conservation officers (one of these posts is currently vacant) and one full time principal officer; however, this officer also works on other areas apart from conservation. There are 19 conservation areas in Northampton and there are 566 listed buildings. Northamptonshire County Council used to have a conservation unit, but this was disbanded a few years ago.
Resources at comparable Councils
Council Population Number Number of Additional (2001 of listed officers involved information Census) buildings in conservation (approx) work (excludes archaeologists)
Northampton 194458 566 2 FT + Principal 19 Officer Conservation Areas Ipswich 117,069 Over 600 1 FT Conservation 14 (Borough) Officer conservation. 1 PT Conservation Areas Officer Both report Suffolk directly to a head County of service and Council has a there is a archaeology development unit which control officer works on assisting with the conservation units workload issues Council Population Number Number of Additional (2001 of listed officers involved information Census) buildings in conservation (approx) work (excludes
37 archaeologists) Derby 221,708 387 2 FT Conservation (Unitary) Officer. 1 PT equiv Technician Plus FT Team Leader (they cover more than just conservation) Norwich City 121,600 1,500 3 FT conservation 17 (Borough) officer conservation 1 FT Team Leader areas (they cover more than conservation) Milton 207,057 Around 1 FT Conservation 27 Keynes 1,100 Architect conservation (Unitary) 1 FT Conservation areas Officer 1 FT eqv shared by two consultants 1 Team Leader (they cover more than conservation) Cherwell 131,785 Over 2 FT Conservation 54 District 3,000 Officers conservation 1 PT Conservation areas Officer 1 FT Team Leader
Conclusion
From the above information it would seem that the resources in Northampton are slightly below other comparable areas however, only Milton Keynes (Unitary) has similar development pressures. As Northampton grows and developers bring forward proposals to regenerate areas through demolition or renovation there will no doubt be greater demands on the councils conservation service.
Report Author Mark Farmer. Overview and Scrutiny Officer
Copy of questions sent to witnesses and used at the meeting
Suggested questions for Historic Buildings and Regeneration Task & Finish Group to put to the witnesses
For the meeting to be held on the 29th of November 2007 at 6pm.
6 What value do you think our heritage brings to Northampton?
7 Do you think every building of any heritage value should be saved? On what basis should this be considered? What parameters do we use to assess a buildings value in the context of regenerating the Town Centre where other benefits can be delivered.
8 In respect of the quality of new build, what criteria do we use to assess new buildings of value and their contribution to the local environment. 38 9 Where buildings may not be of high heritage or design merit but may have high community value, how can these be assessed to establish whether they should also be protected or retained. Are there any other points you wish to raise?
Powerpoint presentation on the Castle Area is included at the end of this report.
Information presented to the meeting;
Graham Croucher 18 Abbots Way St.James End Northampton NN5 5DB 07 December 2007 Councillor John Caswell Chair of Historic Buildings/Regeneration Opportunities Task & Finish Group Councillor Richard Church (Portfolio Holder for Regeneration) Councillor Andrew Simpson (Chair of Overview and Scrutiny) Councillor Jean Hawkins (NBC 'Heritage Champion'):
Historic Buildings/Regeneration Opportunities
Dear Sir/Madam, In reference to the above I write as an individual, to have my thoughts and ideas considered and hopefully added to the finished report. It was at a recent meeting that I was speaking to Councillor Paul Varnsverry about Heritage matters and he suggested that I write to yourselves with my thoughts. My topic of conversation concerns buildings in the St.James area. I have been either a resident or visitor, living in a neighbouring area and using the facilities of St.James, for about 33 years now so have a reasonable knowledge of the area and its people. For too long now I feel that the powers that be have been allowed, to systematically destroy our heritage locally and nationally. Many important and attractive buildings have been torn down over the years in the name of progress and profit. Many of these buildings were still useful in providing a function and had been in existence since the formation of their relevant communities and indeed were an integral part of the substance and fabric of these communities. As such they give the community a sense of place, belonging and security, a place they recognize as somewhere they can put down markers and roots and call their community “home”. In St.James alone many houses, shops and shoe factories have been swept away on the whim of the planners’ idea of a bright new world! They were replaced with square, featureless, concrete abominations which might serve a purpose of being cheap to construct but do nothing to blend in with the existing surroundings and create a sense of harmony and continuity. Fortunately, at the moment St.James still has quite a few buildings left, that give it its distinctive identity, and that it can be proud of, but for how long? St. James Church, already listed, St.James C of E Church school, shares the church site, St.James Bus garage, Church’s shoe factory and the Natwest Bank which was originally a Café and gave its name to “Café” Square as St.James Square was originally known. The Square itself with its remaining shops etc all are the very fabric and identity of St.James and have been part of St.James since the late 1800`s when St.James was created as a parish. Destroy any or all these buildings and you rip the heart and lungs out of a community and we all may as well move to places like Milton Keynes, with their faceless, uninteresting buildings and no history. St. James Church school This building is under immediate threat and it would be an absolute disgrace and tragedy if this building was allowed to be demolished. Created at the very inception of St.James as a parish it shares ground space with the church and I have fond memories of attending the school and going through the small gate from the playground to attend the church twice a week for prayers and hymns.
39 This school is an absolute Gem in terms of style, layout and history. It is attractive and has frontage on two roads. The Saints Rugby team were founded here at this School. The school also forms part of our religious heritage as it was a Church of England school and as already mentioned shares the site with the Church which is already listed. These sites are rare; there are not many Church schools left and in pretty much their original form. As part of our religious heritage this school needs preserving alone. The very idea that the Church provided schools back in the 1800`s shows us how much times have changed and how different things were back then. This image of a way of life needs to be preserved for future generations. This is our heritage and has a place in the modern world. St.James Bus Garage This building is also under threat when its current occupiers move out, reportedly in the next two years. I have seen plans to turn this site into residential buildings but as the existing structure is not listed then it seems it could all be demolished. We cannot allow this to happen as this building is far too important to lose. The Corporation bus garage has occupied this frontage for over 100 years and has been an important feature and landmark of St.James and its origins go back to the first electric trams that Northampton had. The original part of the building is the old tram sheds and was opened around 1904 and is an attractive building. It extends right back to Spencer St, behind the garage and runs along Sharman road. In conjunction with the above named roads, with their red brick terraced houses and the neighbouring Church’s shoe factory, this area gives us a fascinating glimpse and encourages further imagination, of what St.James was like and how it developed with the terraced houses housing the workers for the shoe factories and the tram depot. As such this area has much social history which needs to be preserved for future generations not just because of the aforementioned historical value but also because these buildings are attractive in their own right and complement any town particularly one which has suffered much destruction in recent years. The bus garage due its size is quite a landmark in St.James and is an intrinsic part of the make up of this area. Further use for this building, should the bus company withdraw as is likely, could be as a transport museum. This museum could house some of the many historic vehicles and artefacts of Northampton’s transport heritage that still exist. The East Midlands Vehicle Preservation Group, based locally, rents around three barns on local farms to store its burgeoning collection of historic buses, all privately owned and comprising well over fifty vehicles in its membership, but represent many different operators including vehicles from Northampton. These barns provide basic protection from the elements and enable a vehicle to be preserved, but a place to store, restore and exhibit this unique collection of vehicles such as The St.James Corporation bus garage would be truly marvellous. The 154 preservation society also would be interested in use of the bus garage as they currently store one of their vehicles, Northampton 1949 Daimler No.154 currently at the garage. They also own Northampton Daimler No 267 the last rear entrance open platform bus ever built for the home market. Both these vehicles are rare and are of local importance and would be fitting working exhibits in a transport museum based in their old working home. Buildings such as the bus garage are rare as this is not just any bus garage, as already mentioned it is also the original Northampton Corporation tramways, sheds. This building was purpose built to house the new electric trams in 1904. Many buildings such have this have been demolished and lost forever but Northampton has a chance to save theirs for future generations and it also has a potential further use, thus saving it from standing empty, which would put Northampton further on the tourist map as Northampton’s transport heritage has been overlooked and only warrants a small mention in the Central museum. Our transport heritage is very important as it shows how a place developed and how it was shaped because it is transport that is intrinsic in anything we do. It is not just road transport that could be displayed in the museum but rail and aviation also. The possibilities are endless and this could be, with the will and vision to do it, a real opportunity for Northampton to develop something else that would be important and famous both locally and nationally. Notable examples of where this idea has been tried and works are, Manchester, http://www.gmts.co.uk/index.htm St.Helens, http://www.hallstreetdepot.info/depot.htm Aston manor, http://www.amrtm.org Ipswich, http://www.ipswichtransportmuseum.co.uk/history.htm, These notable examples of former bus and tram and trolleybus depots have been preserved and they now have a further use as transport museums bringing in tourists, much needed money to the local economy and a valuable educational source. 40 Apart from the shoe museum, Northampton is not renowned for being a Mecca for tourists looking for museums, an idea such as this would, I feel, be of great importance and value to St.James and therefore the town. I understand that these sites have possibly been earmarked for residential development. I feel this would be a terrible blow to the area if we allow these buildings to be torn down and replaced with housing. As well as housing, a community also needs culture, employment and leisure opportunities for regeneration. These buildings could also partly be used for community based projects, where sections of the local community can go for either support or educational purposes. Further I also feel and I urge you to consider the idea that St.James be made a conservation area. I urge you to consider these fantastic buildings and add them to the list of Northampton’s buildings that need preserving and listing in order to protect them and consider them in terms of regeneration, but not for housing. I feel this is too important an opportunity to be missed.
Sincerely, Graham Croucher
cc: Councillor Paul Varnsverry Councillor Pam Varnsverry (St.James) Councillor Jenny Conroy (St.James) Councillor Terry Wire (St.James) Tracey Low (St.James Fusion Project)
41 Mr Ben Bix Overview and Scrutiny Officer Northampton Borough Council The Guildhall Northampton NN1 1DE 10 December 2007
Dear Mr Bix
NORTHAMPTON HISTORIC BUILDINGS RESEARCH
Thank you for your e-mail on 4 December requesting a contribution from English Heritage for the scrutiny review being carried out by Councillor Caswell, Clarke, Hawkins Simpson and Varnsverry. I note that members of the scrutiny panel have met with various interested parties and given the role of English Heritage as the government’s adviser on all aspects of the historic environment I hope very much that there will be an opportunity for some or all of the scrutiny panel members to meet likewise with our Historic Areas Adviser, Clive Fletcher. Subject to the practicalities of a congested diary, I too would welcome the opportunity of participating in this discussion with relevant Councillors.
I appreciate the panel’s concern to undertake a rapid strategic overview, but it is a tall order for us to distil in a few sentences the kind of rigorous response required to address the specific questions you have asked. Moreover, we are doubtful that these questions alone are sufficient to address such wide-ranging issues as ‘Historic Buildings and Regeneration Opportunities’ in Northampton. We have already written at length to the Borough Council on various matters relating to heritage-led regeneration in the town, and I am therefore enclosing a copy of the letter from Clive Fletcher dated 23 August 2007.
Relevant legislation, government policy and guidance must naturally be the starting point for your review. In particular therefore I would draw attention to Planning Policy Guidance No 15, Planning and the Historic Environment, and No 16 Archaeology and Planning. The contribution of ‘historic buildings’ to opportunities for regeneration is indivisible from the broader historic environment encompassing our understanding of historic character, topography and archaeology. Within this framework, I shall address your questions by reference to published policy, guidance and evidence.
42 Value of Heritage
The review in 2001 of Viewpoints on the Historic Environment of the East Midlands has articulated the wide ranging value of the region’s heritage. English Heritage publications such as Regeneration and the Historic Environment and Conservation Area Appraisal articulate these values specifically in relation to historic places. Built to Last demonstrates the commitment of English Heritage to promoting the understanding of historic places – in this case characterisation of the important urban landscape of boot and shoe manufacture in Northampton and neighbouring areas.
Protection of Historic Buildings
PPG16 explains the current arrangements for designation of ‘listed buildings’ and ‘conservation areas’ and identifies the various statutory controls that underpin the informed management of change. Proposed reform of heritage protection is set out in the recent Government White Paper. Revised Principles of Selection for listed buildings were published at the same time. Copies of these documents are enclosed.
New Build
English Heritage has prepared a toolkit to help decision-makers. Building in Context describes good practice in addressing the contribution of new buildings to the historic environment. Our portfolio of exemplary developments in Shared Interests demonstrates how good design can contribute positively to historic places. Community value is not reflected solely in buildings themselves; the value of groups of buildings, associated spaces and wider character and topography can best be protected and enhanced through conservation area designations. Despite clear recommendations from English Heritage these opportunities remain to be addressed in Northampton. Copies of English Heritage’s published guidance on Conservation Area Appraisal and Conservation Area Management are enclosed with the hard copy of this letter. We know that enlightened authorities are already using Conservation Area Appraisals as a vital instrument for the delivery of local government responsibilities for ‘place making’.
Other Issues
I hope that these comments will be helpful to the scrutiny panel. Our historic areas adviser has already arranged to introduce senior officers and members of the Borough Council to the principles of Enquiry by Design as a helpful approach to masterplanning. I do genuinely feel that it is very important for English Heritage to engage directly in the important work of the scrutiny panel so I will ask my PA, Julie Simkins, to contact you shortly in order to explore the practicalities.
Yours sincerely
DR ANTHONY D F STREETEN Regional Director, East Midlands
43 Enclosures: x Letter from Clive Fletcher dated 23 August 2007 x Viewpoints on the Historic Environment x Regeneration and the Historic Environment x Guidance on Conservation Area Appraisals x Guidance on the Management of Conservation Areas x Built to Last x Heritage Protection for the 21st Century x New Principles of Selection for Listed Buildings x Building in Context
44 Christopher Cavanagh, Northampton Borough Council, Cliftonville House, Bedford Road, Direct Dial 01604 735449 Northampton. Fax 01604 735401 NN4 7NR e-mail:clive.fletcher@english- heritage.org.uk
Date: 23rd August 2007
H. Dear Mr Cavanagh
Subject: HERITAGE LED REGENERATION IN NORTHAMPTON
I’m writing as promised to follow up our very useful meeting on the 16th. Our discussion managed to cram quite a breadth of topics into an hour and a half, but I think I’ve managed to recall all we discussed – if not, please do let me know.
First I’d like to say that we were very glad to hear that the Borough Council sees the historic environment as a positive asset to Northampton, and how it is regarded as a key element in its future revival. We hope that we can help you work towards realising its full potential. Beyond our statutory role in the planning system, as a national and regional organisation we are also in a position to disseminate relevant good practice through our involvement in other towns and cities, and we have a long track record of implementing heritage led regeneration.
The Boot and Shoe Industry Few large towns still possess such a totemic symbol of their identity in national and international terms. This isn’t however celebrated in the town or fully developed as a tourist attraction, and its economic regeneration potential remains untapped. We therefore welcome the news that ideas about drawing upon this as part of the regeneration effort are now being looked at seriously. We’d like to re-iterate our offer to take councillors to see the Jewellery Quarter conservation area in Birmingham, where the traditional jewellery manufacturing industry has been a key part of regeneration in the city. Our illustrated publication,
45 “Built to Last” explains the history of boot and show manufacture in the town and the county – we also wrote a similar volume about the Jewellery Quarter prior to its regeneration.
The BDP Master Plan. We have had sight of the BDP Master plan, and for a town centre the size of Northampton’s, it is a very thin document. Whilst it correctly identifies severance as a problem and the historic environment as an asset, it unfortunately doesn’t give any meaningful solutions to how these two issues will be handled apart from in very localised areas.
To achieve the step change we understand is needed in terms of growth and regeneration of the town centre a much larger piece of work will be necessary with a far greater scope and depth.
Enquiry by Design The enquiry by design process provides an unrivalled opportunity for partnership working towards design solutions, where the various partners participate rather than act as consultees in the design process. We are cognisant for instance that the highway authority leads on highway issues, but that doesn’t mean that highway engineering concerns should be paramount in urban highway design. In the case of Northampton, urban design solutions to the severance caused by the ring road need to be quite radical and urban designers and highway engineers will need to work closely together to achieve them.
In Lincoln, Enquiry by Design achieved a detailed and deliverable master plan for the whole city centre, including quite major surgery to the ring road, previously thought to be impossible. The “Lincoln Master plan” Enquiry by Design was a first at the time it was done, and was remarkably successful. We would be happy to facilitate a visit to Lincoln so that staff/members can meet the people responsible for instigating and implementing it.
Characterisation Characterisation has contributed strongly to regeneration projects around the country, perhaps most notably Liverpool. It is a fundamental prerequisite to good urban design, and often provides answers to apparently intractable urban planning and regeneration problems.
46 Town centres can be likened to complex organisms – the routes in and around them have often been compared to blood vessels or irrigation channels. While it is possible to zero in on specific areas – for a site design brief for instance – where a town centre as a whole is in need of regeneration characterisation has to look at the whole first before gaining an understanding of where localised problems originate – the solution to the problems of one part of town may actually lie outside of it.
We can advise further on characterisation, and potentially help to fund it.
THI Given the range of issues relating to regeneration and the historic environment in Northampton, you may wish to look at the Heritage Lottery “Townscape Heritage Initiative”, which can provide funding for public realm, historic building restoration and renovation of floor space in historic buildings, with partnership funding running to £2m (total budget £4m with project value of approx £6m) with up to £50k development funding and salaries of project officer(s) built in. The amount of matching funding that is currently available in the town may mean that the Borough could potentially run a very large scheme. The lead in time to such a project would be about two years. As I promised at the meeting, I am happy to come along for a day and advise on what could go into a stage one application.
The Grosvenor Centre The opportunity to re-plan areas of townscape that have been made dysfunctional by modern interventions are all too rare. In Northampton’s case, the bus station and the Grosvenor Centre truncated a substantial area of the city centre, both functionally and visually. The chance to re-plan this at a time when the centre needs to grow sustainably has enormous potential to stitch both this area and those adjacent and beyond into the historic town centre.
An essential background to making such design decisions however, is understanding, and again characterisation is the means of achieving this. A quick characterisation analysis of the urban form, for example, shows that most of the north/south routes through the town centre were blocked or rendered illegible by the construction of the original Grosvenor Centre. This legacy has effectively prevented the town from expanding north, limited the commercial viability of the historic buildings on Sheep Street, and cut off a beautiful part of town including the Round Church from the city centre. The historic buildings and mix of uses on Newland and Victoria Street have entirely vanished.
47 The expansion of the Grosvenor Centre is, (in purely design terms) not incompatible with the reconnection of this portion of town, but resides outside the formula of simply a larger internal shopping mall. For the town centre to grow sustainably it needs to form a new urban quarter that meshes with the historic street pattern, allowing flexibility in years to come, and complementarity with adjacent areas.
Protection of Unlisted Buildings outside Conservation Areas. While there are proposals in the new heritage white paper to allow planning authorities to protect locally listed buildings outside of conservation areas, the timeframe for the introduction of this is as yet undetermined. At present there are unfortunately no statutory mechanisms for protecting such buildings.
In the case of the now demolished Melting’s (“Pachanga’s”), inclusion within the conservation area could have saved the building, as although not ideal, separation by the ring road from the main conservation area would not have precluded its extension to encompass it. The tragic loss of the Basset Lowke warehouse could have been prevented in a similar manner. At present, most of the historic boot and shoe area is unprotected and there have been numerous losses of historic factories, most recently the original Church’s premises. We continue to advise that a conservation area is designated to protect these buildings at the earliest available opportunity - the research has after all already been done.
The timescale for the designation or extension of a conservation area is largely the discretion of the planning authority. It will be based upon how and if they wish to do public consultation and other factors such as expediency. All the Act requires is that the Secretary of State and English Heritage are notified and that advertisements are placed in the London Gazette and a local newspaper, all of which can be done rapidly.
Conclusion Northampton has suffered some setbacks in recent times, and it has often been perceived that a lack of confidence has hampered the town in achieving the sort of high value regeneration that other towns have enjoyed.
We have always believed that Northampton has the potential to be a special place because of its unique history and surviving historic environment - our development of conservation led regeneration techniques over many years has seen the regeneration of countless urban and rural centres.
48 The range of issues may seem to point to a seemingly large programme of work, but many of them are in fact overlapping – the formulation of a THI strategy could for instance encompass a number of issues including characterisation.
May I suggest a follow up meeting so that we can discuss next steps?
Yours sincerely,
CLIVE FLETCHER Historic Areas Advisor
Cllr Jean Hawkins Northampton Borough Council Cllr John Caswell Northampton Borough Council Jane Jennings Northampton Borough Council Anthony Streeten English Heritage
49 Meeting Five
Minutes
11th of December 2007 Historic Buildings/Regeneration Opportunities Task and Finish Group 11th of December 2007
Notes and actions
Attendees
Councillors Officers
Caswell (Chair) Jane Jennings Clarke (Apologies) Mike Kitchen Hawkins Chris Cavanagh (apologies) Simpson Mark Farmer Varnsverry Paul Lewin Ben Bix
o Mark Farmer to send a copy of the Brian Giggins Castle area presentation to West Northamptonshire Development Corporation
o Noted that the County Council did not send a representative to the evidence gathering meeting, but were asked to do so on a number of occasions
o On the review of the original plan, the meeting noted that not all the aims and objectives have been met. It was therefore agreed that a officers and elected members to meet to draft the report with the evidence gathered so far and fill the gaps if necessary afterwards
o Review of evidence to happen at the report draft meeting on the 11th of January
o The officers that have written the new economic strategy will need to consider the outcomes of this review
o Jane Jennings to circulate information on the national consultation on the protection of Historic Buildings
o Chris Cavanagh to provide further information on the level of resourcing for conservation work in Northampton
It was agreed that the next meetings of the group are as follows;
o 11th January – Draft report o 7th February 2008 – Final report
50 The meeting closed at 7.25pm
Further evidence taken at this meeting;
Witness Æ Jane Jennings Heritage Hunters Question È Is there sufficient resource o We can always do with o Would like to see a at the Borough Council to more resources- currently dedicated team that can ensure our historic understaffed; due to a focus on buildings that buildings are protected? vacant post with the team. are under threat. o With a significant increase in regeneration the level of current resources will probably be in-adequate What happens if a building o At the planning application o of historic importance is stage- conditions can be under threat? imposed o If work is carried out that does not comply with conditions officers do have the power of entry on listed sites to inspect the work o Any local planning authority can place a condition on a planning application o Buildings that do not require planning permission can be changed/demolished as the owner wishes Who monitors planning o This is done by the applications to ensure conservation team before historic buildings are application are approved protected? or sent to committee for decision o
Information presented to meeting;
Historic Buildings Task and Finish 11 December 2007 – Progress against scope identified
Scope Progress Action needed The task and finish group Presentation on the Presentation sent to would use the issues Castle area delivered to West Northants around Castle and the the group on the 29th of Development Masterplan proposals as a November 2007 Corporation paradigm case Group meeting on the Recommendations 11th of January 2008 to needed for final report examine the evidence and consider any
51 outcomes arising from it
The Chair of this task and Letter sent and For elected members finish group to ask that this response received to determine Council’s Administration requests that West Response letter from Northamptonshire WNDC rejected request Development Corporation to defer planning defer any planning applications. decisions affecting the Castle area of Northampton until the work of this task and finish group is completed, as recommendations regarding future Planning Policy maybe made, in particular with regard to historic and important sites and buildings. Review of the current Briefing note was Recommendations powers and those of provided by Jane needed for final report partner organisations. Jennings and circulated to the group
Noted that the national consultation on amending the powers available to local authorities has closed. The new legislation will no doubt create an increase in workload
Review of the extent of the Paul Lewin provided Recommendation Borough Conservation additional information needed Areas including the on this (Mark Farmer Management Plan phone conversation on Additional areas Programme in hand. the 10th of January)
There is an ongoing programme to review areas
Four a year are carried out. Additional resources would be needed if more were
52 required
Review proposals for Briefing note provided Recommendations mapping of buildings that by Jane Jennings needed for final report are not listed but are of stated that there no in- value to the Town. house resources available
Paul Lewin provided additional information on this (Mark Farmer phone conversation on the 10th of January)
Maybe possible that trained NHAG volunteers could do this work or funding found to commission outside people to carry out this work
Review proposals for Paul Lewin provided Recommendations mapping of Regeneration additional information needed for final report projects. on this (Mark Farmer phone conversation on the 10th of January)
Part of the work carried out when proposals come forward to regenerate an area
Assess a resources plan Briefing note provided Recommendations to compile a wider by Jane Jennings needed for final report assessment of buildings of stated that there no value including potential current resources funding available from available to complete other sources. this work
Consider possible Part of the evidence Recommendations consequences of not review on the 11th of needed for the final following January 2008 report recommendations from above work. Powers available to NBC Briefing note was Recommendations
53 are established and those provided by Jane needed for the final that are not, ascertain who Jennings and circulated report has them to the group
Noted that the national consultation on amending the powers available to local authorities has closed. The new legislation will no doubt create an increase in workload
Recognise the impact that Briefing note was Recommendations the role of NBC has on provided by Jane needed for the final WNDC and how they Jennings and circulated report carryout their respective to the group roles. Strengthened partnership Paul Lewin provided Recommendations working through agreed additional information needed for the final partnership agreement in on this (Mark Farmer report respect of historic phone conservation on buildings and regeneration the 10th of January)
Conservation section would like to develop closer working relationships with WNDC to ensure that they give more consideration
The County Council as a partner needs to provide a Archaeological service Possible recommendations;
1. That additional resources are found for the conservation service, (The group estimates that a team of six officers is required);
In order to;
x Ensure that there is sufficient resource available to respond to the emerging legislation on the protection of historic buildings x Ensure that there is sufficient resource available to deal with the increasing demands place upon the service as a result of increasing levels of regeneration
54 2. That the conservation service develops a closer working relationship with the West Northampton Development Corporation to ensure that the Corporation is considering conservation issues and previous planning enforcement when bringing forward regeneration proposals and planning applications
3. That the Corporate Manager for Growth and Regeneration brings forward proposals to map buildings that are not listed, but of value to the town. (Proposals could include using volunteers or consultants to carry out the mapping process)
4. That Overview and Scrutiny Committee One is given a full briefing by officers on the new legislation and how it implemented in Northampton- as soon as the Government lets local authorities know how it intends to implement it
5. That Growth and Regeneration officers work with our partners to review county archaeological advice and storage arrangements
6. Recommend to the Task and Finish Group that will be establish, that they examine the West Northamptonshire Development Corporation and our partnership with them, consider the issues relating to partnership working raised in this report
7. That Officers (with our partners) examine the feasibility of building a physical model of Northampton- which shows our historic buildings
Report Author- Mark Farmer, Overview and Scrutiny Officer
Meeting Six
11th of January 2008
x Given that the main purposes of this meeting was to form the recommendations no minutes were kept
Meeting Seven
7th of February 2008
x Given that the main purpose of this meeting was agree or amend this report no minutes were kept
55 Additional Information
The following additional written responses were received;
Letter seven E-mail received from Martin Ellison- Local resident and conservation officer with a local council
-----Original Message----- From: Martin Ellison [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 13 December 2007 15:53 To: Mark Farmer Cc: Paul Lewin; Jane Jennings Subject: Historic Buildings and Regeneration
Dear Mark
I set out below a summary of the points I made on 29.11.07 and a few extra bits.
1 What Value do you think our heritage brings to Northampton?
Northampton's standing buildings are unique to the town and give it its identity. This distinctiveness provides a sense of place and individual character that is irreplaceable. Many buildings are built of local materials that are not found anywhere else such as the iron rich sand and limestones. Craft skills employed in local work shops created many of the doors, windows and other external finishes in the surviving historic areas of the town. Some parts of the public realm still retain items of ironmongery produced in local foundries. These idiosyncrasies of the urban landscape, individual buildings and the detailing of fixtures and fittings are fascinating but are finite.
There is also a huge economic, educational and tourism potential that remains largely untapped. The combination of buildings in the town's Victorian suburbs in particular includes former shoe factories and associated trades buildings, chapels, schools, barracks, workhouses, public houses, brewery buildings and so on, a built landscape that can still inform us about how life was some 1oo years or so ago.
These buildings and the areas in which they are located could, by being made more attractive, generate much greater economic and social well being. By reusing the stock of inherited Victorian buildings more imaginatively there would not just be a benefit in terms of neighbourhood vibrancy, there would also be a benefit in terms of self confidence for those communities.
2 Do you think that every building of heritage value should be saved? On what basis should this be considered? What parameters do we use to assess a building's value in the context of regenerating the town centre where other benefits can be delivered?
The bedrock of conservation is knowledge. Built 'assets' have to be understood before the relative value of either an individual building or area can be judged. To assess the value of a building, information on age, rarity, type, function, intactness, innovation and associations is required.
56 The value placed on buildings also has to be informed by a detailed understanding of the historical development of the urban context in which they sit. Themed surveys are a way in which knowledge can be gained, another method is the use of intensive studies of an area which can inform us of the nature of a settlement's historic development. Here the town centre Urban Archaeological Database conducted by NBC and NCC, funded by EH should be brought to completion and used much more regularly in policy formulation and development control decisions.
Tremendous harm has been done to the town by developments promising 'regenerative' merits but often these benefits have proved elusive and/or have eroded the the town's character and confidence by requiring the loss of important historic buildings.
Too often demolition of standing buildings has been an option of first resort rather than last resort. Whilst recognising that some loss is inevitable there should be a much stronger presumption in favor of retaining all standing buildings. Demolishing buildings that have the potential to be reused is also incredibly wasteful.
3 In respect of new build what criteria do we use to assess new build, what criteria do we use to assess new buildings of value and their contribution to the local environment?
A major new provision of the planning system are design and access statements which should set out, both for the development control planners and local communities, the criteria that have influenced the design of new build. Informed criticism of proposals could be a means by which the quality of development is improved. I have consistently been disappointed by the quality of design and access statements submitted to and accepted by local planning authorities across the county. This is because the opportunity that D&A statements provide to allow everyone to comment meaningfully on applications that affect them and the opportunity to raise standards of planning applications is being missed.
4. Where buildings may not be of high heritage or design merit but have high community value, how can the these be assessed to establish whether they should also be protected or retained?
I have already touched on some of the considerations that could lend a building value either as a 'heritage' asset or by virtue of its 'design' in my answer to question 2. Very ordinary buildings can still be valuable locally because of their rarity or because of a function they once performed, or because they demonstrate some innovation in construction and so on. It is very difficult to protect a building or built landscape effectively if it is not properly understood.
5. Are there any other points you wish to make?
The resources allocated to building conservation and archaeology are inadequate. The framework in which building conservation and archaeology operate is also misunderstood.
The county council maintained, until recently, a curatorial building conservation and archaeology team. This team examined applications that affected buried archaeology and historic standing buildings that lay outside statutory protection, ie, not scheduled or listed or within a designated
57 conservation area. Nationally, for example, some 95% of buildings are unprotected and hence vulnerable to unsympathetic change or demolition. The county team was crucial in identfying archaeology and undiscovered buildings of merit and then, where possible, either seeking protection at the national level (some 25 or more shoe factories across the county were subsequently given listed protection because of the work of the county historic environment team). Where buildings and sites could not be protected in this way, recording conditions were attached to planning permissions requiring records to be made of a building that was about to be fundamentally altered or lost. The outcome of this work is held on the county Sites and Monument Record.
The borough council conservation team assists development control planners in making decisions that affect buildings that are already protected by virtue of being located in a conservation area or from being listed. There is little or only arbitary archaeological advice available at present as I understand it. However, the council has a much greater role to play, as yet unfulfilled, in protecting an extensive and unique urban landscape from unsympathetic development by designating conservation areas across the shoe industry urban landscapes in the town. With current resource levels and priorities this is probably impossible to achieve.
If the Victorian suburbs are ever to play a proper role in, and meet their potential for, the regeneration and well being of the town and the residents, their protection is a vital first step. There is a renaissance waiting to happen in The Mounts and Abington areas of the town. Without taking the first step, this may never happen, or if it does, many as yet unrecognised buildings of value could be lost thus ruining the very features from which these areas derive their character and interest.
The county council is an unreliable partner and so an alternative basis for investigation and mitigation advice to provided needs to be found in partnership with other local service authorities, perhaps similar in operation to the joint planning units. The difficulty here is that the county council still retains the duty to operate the Sites and Monuments Record and this could create an awkward and unhelpful detachment from those using the resource on a day to day basis and the officers responsible for maintaining it.
I still have other things to say but this email is already far too long (and a bit too earnest!). If at any point, however, you wish to recontact me please do so. Please note that I am also involved in a small consultancy that may be able to assist in future conservation based projects.
I would be grateful if you could confirm receipt of this email. Thank you also for inviting me to the Task and Finish Group meeting. I trust that the above comments are found to be helpful regards
Martin
58 Historic Buildings and Regeneration Task and Finish Group
[Initial draft of points for meeting on 28.11.2007 prepared by Paul Hobden]
I’m pleased to have this opportunity to give evidence. Firstly I should perhaps clarify that although you agenda describes me as a developer I am in fact a chartered architect who has undertaken postgraduate studies in history, planning and urban design. I am the principal of Derngate based Hobden Associates and a director of three other businesses undertaking respectively; planning and urban regeneration, project management and development, and finally property investment in Bath, London, Northampton and Oxford.
I was born in Northampton, my family have lived in the town from at least the nineteenth century, and have run businesses in the town for over fifty years. Hobden Associates, and my other associated businesses have been established for about twenty-five years during which time they have been responsible for heritage led regeneration projects totally over £100m in the town, and surrounding areas, including the restoration of a number of listed buildings and the creation of over 1,000 new homes on brownfield sites. Our first restoration project in the town was the refurbishment of the town’s oldest secular building, Hazelrigg House grade II*, for the Borough Council as part of our regeneration of the south side of Marefair which was awarded the 1991 Business Environment Award from Northamptonshire County Council. Subsequent projects include the master-planning of the redevelopment of the former High School for Girls site in Derngate including the design of the Scholars Court housing development and the restoration of a number of listed buildings in Derngate, including number 44 for English Heritage. More recently we have been responsible for the master-planning and regeneration of Southbridge. We are committed to using a proportion of our profits to support local good causes which have included sponsoring the town’s heritage days for several years, and financial support for 78 Derngate, the University of Northampton and a number of local charities. We have also been financing a survey of Northampton’s architectural heritage for the past couple of years.
1 What do you think our heritage brings to Northampton?
59 Northampton’s built heritage endows the town with a unique ‘sense of place’ and has the potential to bring considerable commercial benefit to the town. It also provides an enduring reflection of the town’s rich history and can help reveal the complex matrix of forces that shape the urban environment. Such information is crucial to ensuring that future planning policies take full account of the characterization of the town and can provide vital information to help prepare supplementary planning guidance to raise the standard of contextual design in the town’s public realm. It should be noted that individual areas of the town, particularly the town centre, have their own particular characteristics initially resulting from a synthesis of geography, geology and topography blended together by the skills and limitations of early builders. Post the fire of 1675 the range of materials used in the town widened due partly to the introduction of basic building regulation and the influence of the Renaissance but the use of brick as a facing material only dates from the early nineteenth century. It is essential that conservation officers, planners, and architects as the principal custodians of the historic built environment are fully aware of the fine detail of the town’s heritage. At present no single source of information provides this knowledge and I, therefore, urge the Task and Finish Group to use their influence to encourage the Council to commission such a document.
Three Quotes Morris, Summerson , Ruskin
William Morris that fine buildings of the past do not belong to us only; they have belonged to our forefathers and will belong to our descendents unless we play them false’ Sir John Summerson (1973): No English town would be worth visiting than any other English town were it not for the enormous, obstinate and overwhelming legacy of the past John Ruskin: When we build, let it be such a work as our dependants will thank us for: and let us think, as we lay stone on stone, that a time is to come when those stones held sacred because our hands touched them, and that men we say as they look upon them, see this our fathers did for us
2 Should every building of heritage value be saved?
Clearly this is a complex question and each individual case must be judged on its merits but this should be within a context that ensures the retention of individual or groups of buildings that make a particular contribution to the historic townscape. Where regeneration is envisaged it is highly desirable that any historic buildings are retained and that new buildings take full account of their context. This should not inhibit innovative design but careful attention needs to be given to contextual design that takes full account of the scale, quality of materials and weathering of new buildings and the spaces they enclose. The present planning and
60 development control procedures often fail to deliver the quality of building needed to enhance the town and there is an urgent need for greater urban design expertise informed by a detailed appropriate supplementary design guidance.
3 Criteria for assessing new buildings?
As highlighted in my answers to questions 1 and 2, I believe the essential first steps are a Heritage Study, that provides a deeper understanding of the town’s historic environment, and the preparation of supplementary planning guidance to explain what it required to potential applicants and to raise design standards in the public realm. Ideally, a panel should be established to consider all applications. The panel should include some members with professional urban design sills who can understand the likely ramifications of complex regeneration proposals as well as elected Councillors who can have an informed knowledge of the town, its traditions and potential.
4 Buildings that may not be of high heritage or design merit?
A Heritage Study as mentioned earlier would identify areas of good and poor townscape and should identify both good and poor buildings. A recent past president of the Royal Institute of British Architects, George Graham, who has been very critical of the mediocre quality of many post-war buildings, and has highlighted a number of such buildings in the town, has suggested a cross rating. Three crosses could be applied to the worst offenders that should be replaced as a high priority. I’m sure we all have a number in mind perhaps including the bus station, Mayorhold car park, the Park Inn, and the Sole Centre for starters. Two stars might include other builders that should be replaced over time such as the elevations of the Grosvenor Centre and Peacock Arcade that do so much to detract from the appearance of the Market Square. One star would be applied to smaller scale buildings to be replaced over time.
Other points: As mentioned earlier the urban environment is very complex and any enquiry into historic buildings needs to consider the wider matrix of complex forces that shape the urban landscape. We touched on some but I believe there is value in considering a few other points including:
1 Civic Forum headed up by Design & Heritage Tsar 2 Research & Indicative Studies 3 Education & Training: Local Expertise & Resources 4 Environment & Transport
61 5 Sub-Regional & Wider Issues
1 Civic Forum headed up by Design & Heritage Tsar
I believe there could be considerable merit in having some form of civic forum where design and heritage matters could discussed. Ideally this would include councillors with a particular interest in design, heritage and regeneration, officers with similar responsibilities, and representatives of the local architectural and planning profession. The appointment of a design and heritage tsar, perhaps on a non paid voluntary basis, reporting directly to the Leader or a councillor or councillors such as Richard Church (regeneration) or Jean (heritage) or the committee could help raise the profile of good design and heritage and help reassure the public. Major cities such as Barcelona and Edinburgh have established international reputations due to the standard of their heritage and urban design. Whilst it may not be realistic for Northampton to compete with the nations core cities more could certainly be done to raise the profile of the town’s heritage. As the group may know was considered to be one of the most attractive towns in England after it was rebuilt following the fire of 1675 and many of the town’s finest old buildings still exists together with an impressive Victorian legacy. Photographic evidence confirms that the town centre was a vibrant and highly attractive place in the 1920s with its trams and traditional buildings. The town’s historic townscape remained largely untouched until the 1970s and it is not too late to correct some of the errors of the past thirty years. The Borough’s conservation offices have succeeded in protecting some areas of the town but a more comprehensive twenty-five year strategy for the whole town could help transform the town visually.
2 Research & Indicative Studies
Another useful proposal would be a series of indicative studies that illustrate how particular areas and sites in the town could be improved. Three or four areas that spring to mind include; Marefair and Freeschool Street (the planning departments present design brief for the latter site beggars belief), how to reunite the truncated north and south sections of Sheep Street, how to improve Abington Street, and the St John’s area to the river. However, before undertaking such studies it would be very informative to establish the successes and failures of post-war planning in the town as a starting point to inform future policies. Much of the conservation work undertaken is of an excellent standard and the same standards now need to be applied to the town as a whole.
3 Education and training
62 Many people are unaware of the fact that the genesis of modern town planning only dates from the twentieth century. The first planning act, which deal solely with housing dates from 1909. Two particularly important figures were Patrick Geddes and Patrick Abercrombie. (They together with William Morris [SPAM], also pioneered conservation Geddes [Coburn Society] Abercrombie [CPRE]
“It is perhaps safe to say that the modern practice of town-planning in this country would be a much simpler thing if it had not been for Geddes. There was a time when it seemed only necessary to shake up into a bottle the German town-extension plan, the Parisian Boulevard and Vista, and the English Garden Village, to produce a mechanical mixture which might be applied indiscriminately and beneficiently to every town in this country; thus would it be ‘town-planned’ according to the most up- to-date notions. Pleasing dream! First shattered by Geddes, emerging from his Outlook Tower in the frozen north, to produce that nightmare of complexity, the Edinburgh Room at the great Town Planning Exhibition of 1910.”
The second act, in 1919, required towns with a population of 20,000 or more to prepare a town planning scheme which commissioned in 1925. Just after the war in 1950 another town plan and exhibition was held and in 1975 the then civic society undertook a survey of the town. Each of these studies provide valuable material on the town’s heritage and a knowledge of them and the town’s evolution could have help give BDP’s more substance. In the late 1950s early ‘60s Jeremy Whitehand of the University of Birmingham carried out an urban morphological study of Northampton (and Watford) and concluded that the town’s buildings and character had been retained due principally to two factors greater local ownership and local professional expertise. At that time it most architects in the town and county had been trained with local offices and/or at the Leicester School of Architecture. They thus acquired a depth of knowledge of local evolutions and materials. Most officers in local government were local or remained in post for long periods and acquired considerable local knowledge. This is often no longer the case. There has been a gradual erosion of informed local decision making post the 1947 Act and changes in the structure of local government post the Heath’s government reforms of the 1970’s.
4 Environment & Transport
I also believe that there should be a positive proposal for easing traffic congestion and air and noise pollution. There should be a plan demonstrating how a limited tram system could be introduced to initially link the station with the town centre with the option of extending it to
63 two or three park and ride locations on the major roads into the town, and later linking it to major housing and employment areas. If Northampton is to grow to a population of 250,000 and perhaps beyond it is essential to reduce traffic volumes whilst still providing short and longer term parking in the centre of town for shoppers. Caen in northern France, and a number of other European towns, that have a similar populations to the planned population of the town have such systems and urgent action is needed now to persuade WNDC, EMDA, and their masters that it is essential to tackle this problem before there is any further expansion of the town. A quiet pollution free transport system would have the great advantage of inspiring people to visit the town and allowing the central area to be re-planned to create the ambiance of the best continental European towns. No doubt many will cry it is not such proposals are not financially viable but I was told this was also the case in Marefair, Derngate and Southbridge and all three areas have now been regenerated. 5 The Sub-Region and Wider Issues
It should also be remembered that Northampton it one of fifty-six urban areas with a population exceeding 125,000. Its future needs to be considered within a sub-regional, regional, national and international context. At present I am undertaking a doctoral study at University College London that is considering the evolution England’s built heritage and the aesthetic and social consequences of post-war planning policies with particular reference to Northampton and the South Midlands sub-region. The conclusions of the thesis will consider the advantages of future strategic urban design policies that can help ensure that future proposals in older towns ensure that the historic built environment in preserved and enhance. These are complex issues that are require a deep understanding of historic evolution and contemporary challenges backed up by a robust and well informed local development framework with supplementary design guidance. I don’t pretend to know all the answers to these challenges but after almost fifty years experience of studying and working towards improving the built environment I at least have a firm knowledge of most of the questions that need to be considered. I am keen to share this knowledge and to engage with others to improve the town and would be pleased to provide any further information that may be of assistance.
Paul Hobden MA DArch(Edin) FRSA RIBA
64 Hobden Associates Chartered Architects, Urban Designers and Planning Consultants 68 Derngate, Northampton NN1 1UH Tel. 23363. Fax 239112 Email. [email protected]
Postscript
I’d be delighted to provide the Council with a copy of the final thesis. On a slightly different theme I’ve also recently agree to sit on a parliamentary commission set up under the chairmanship of Brian Binley MP that is consider the future of independent shops in town centres. My role is to advise the commission, which consists of a number of MPs and representatives of the major retail trade organisations on architectural, planning and regeneration issues. The commission has already received written evidence from over thirty organisations and individuals which also has provides much potentially valuable information some of which relates to historic centres. I’m sure Brian would be delighted to let the Council have a copy of the Commission’s report in due course which could have particular relevance to the future of the town’s retail sector and the impact, positive or otherwise, of plans to substantially increase the size of the Grosvenor centre. The latter of course also needs to be considered very carefully in relation to the town’s heritage and townscape.
Other possibility: set up public-private partnership to buy and restore buildings at risk? Report author, Mark Farmer, Overview and Scrutiny Officer
65 )QTXLU\E\(HVLJQ &\8KH4ULQFH¡V*RXQGDWLRQIRUWKH&XLOW)QYLURPHQW Introduction e Prince’s Foundation for the Built Environment is an educational charity that seeks to improve the quality of people’s lives by teaching and practicing timeless and ecological ways of planning, designing and building.
What is Enquiry by Design? e Enquiry by Design (EbD) process is a key planning tool trademarked by e Prince’s Foundation, which involves stakeholders and the local community in shaping a vision for a place. Is an intensive design enquiry where every issue is tested by being drawn. e fun- damental di erence between an Enquiry by Design and the conventional design/ planning process is that Enquiry by Designs are simultaneously interactive rather than sequentially reactive, as is usually the norm. Equiry by Design is a crucial element in achieving sustain- able communities, delivering master plans based on enduring design principles, and devel- oping the place-making skills of all participants in the workshop process.
How does it work in practice? e Enquiry by Design process brings together the key stakeholders in a proposed develop- ment to collaborate in articulating a vision for a site or place through an intensive workshop, facilitated by a multi-disciplinary design team. is will normally include local statutory agencies and authorities, landowners, local community, voluntary groups, representatives of employers, retailers and other interest groups. is is not just a means of informing the community about a planned development but actively engages them in the planning and design of their community, helping to build up the con dence and collective enthusiasm to allow the vision to be taken forward a er the workshop has been completed.
Because the Enquiry by Design process relies on extremely concise and concentrated e ort over a relatively short period of time, assembling the right )QTXLU\E\(HVLJQ information is critical. e whole exercise will nor- mally includes extensive preparation and a lead-in EbD Workshop - Sherford, Southams period of ve or six months to the actual workshop is usual. e list infomation typically gathered prior to the workshop includes:
◆ Technical information from the scale of the site to the regional level, and relating to relevant policy, economic, social and environmental conditions and constraints ◆ Detailed studies of the local/historical built form and street patterns, sometimes assembled in the form of a Pattern Book
e number of days for an Enquiry by Design can vary, and by its very nature there can be no such thing as a ‘generic Enquiry by Design’ since every site is di erent. However, it is normal for an Enquiry by Design to run for ve working days and to be proceeded by a number of preparatory sessions, to begin to EbD Workshop - Newquay, Cornwall )QTXLU\E\(HVLJQ
explore key issues and to familiarise key stakeholders with the process ahead of the main workshop.
In general, the Enquiry by Design workshop structure will include:
Day One – Exploring Key Issues ◆ Technical brie ngs EbD Workshop - Harlow ◆ Site Tour ◆ Initial Structure Plans
Day Two – Testing of Initial Concepts ◆ Multiple Masterplans ◆ Point of maximum confusion
Day ree and Four – Agreement and Development of Vision ◆ Sign-o of Vision ◆ Consolidation of plan ◆ Specialist strategies worked up along with detailed studies
Day Five – Production and Final Presentation ◆ Resolution of any outstanding political, delivery and funding issues ◆ Production of nal plans and drawings ◆ Communication to general public
e number of participants in a workshop can range from around twenty through to several hundred and this varies at di erent points throughout the workshop. Landowners on and around the site, local politicians, relevant council ocers and local community representatives need to be involved as they are the key decision makers. Without their backing the exercise would be largely pointless. Along with the Foundation’s design team these parties form the Core Team for the workshop and attend all sessions. EbD Workshop - Sherford, Southams
EbD Workshop - Sherford, Southams Typical EbD Consolidation Plan - Sherford, Southams Representatives of any group with an interest in and knowledge about the site should also be involved as well as any regulatory bod- ies that may have an important inuence on the site’s development. ese groups form the second tier of participants – those who can actively input technical knowledge into the evolution of the site de- sign – and will be invited to attend a number of key sessions during the workshop. e third tier of participants is formed of anyone with an interest in development of the particular site – typically nearby residents and people who work in the area. is group would normally attend the main presentations on the rst and last day of the workshop.
What is achieved? By the end of the h day, at the close of the Enquiry by Design, the product of the week is a vision for the town or speci c site which is shared by everyone who is linked to the development, including those responsible for granting the planning permission. is makes a quick delivery of the plan more achievable in a shorter space of time.
For further information on Enquiry by Design, visit www.princes- foundation.org or contact e Foundation on 02076138500 or re- Lincoln Masterplan [email protected]
Lincoln
Upton masterplan, Northampton Watercolor - Whitefield, Nelson
8KH4ULQFH¡V*RXQGDWLRQIRUWKH&XLOW)QYLURQPHQW 'KDUORWWH6RDG0RQGRQ)'%7+ ZZZSULQFHVIRXQGDWLRQRUJ 7)'8-32
8KH)QTXLU\E\ (HVLJQ7FRSHRI;RUN 8KH0RRS 6HODWHG7LWHVRI-QWHUYHQWLRQ
8KH4ULQFH¡V*RXQGDWLRQIRUWKH&XLOW)QYLURQPHQW 8KH)QTXLU\E\ (HVLJQ7FRSHRI;RUN 8KH0RRS 6HODWHG7LWHVRI-QWHUYHQWLRQ
8KURXJKRXW WKH SUHSDUDWRU\ ZRUN IRU WKH )QTXLU\ E\ (HVLJQ ZRUNVKRS WKH FLW\ FHQWUH ZDV DOZD\V LGHQWLILHG DV DNH\FRPSRQHQWLQ0LQFROQ¡VXUEDQIDEULFWKDWLISURSHUO\ FRQVLGHUHGFRXOGXQORFNDJUHDWGHDORIWKHFLW\¡VSRWHQWLDO
8KH )QTXLU\ E\ (HVLJQ VWXG\ DUHD LV GHOLQHDWHG E\ DQG LQFOXGHV WKH &URDGJDWH OLQN WR WKH HDVW WKH 'DVWOH DQG 'DWKHGUDO DUHD WR WKH QRUWK WKH KLVWRULF SRRO RU &UD\IRUG ;KDUIWRWKHZHVWDQGWKHUDLOZD\VWDWLRQDUHDWRWKHVRXWK
;LWKLQWKLVDUHDDQXPEHURIRSSRUWXQLWLHVZHUHLGHQWLILHG 8KHVHEURDGO\DLPHGDW
LPSURYLQJWKHYLWDOLW\RI0LQFROQFLW\FHQWUH LPSURYLQJWKHVWUXFWXUHFKDUDFWHURILWVXUEDQIDEULF GHYHORSLQJDPL[HGXVHVWUDWHJ\IRUWKHDUHD HQKDQFLQJZDONDELOLW\RIWKHFLW\FHQWUH LPSURYLQJFRQQHFWLRQVEHWZHHQFLW\FHQWUHDQG DGMDFHQWQHLJKERXUKRRGV
6HODWLQJGLUHFWO\WRWKHVHDVSLUDWLRQVWKH)E(VFRSHRIZRUN IRFXVVHGRQ
8KHVXFFHVVRIUHWDLODUHDVDQGKRZWKHSHUIRUPDQFH H[SHULHQFHRIWKHKLJKVWUHHWFRXOGEHLPSURYHG8KLV ZDVLGHQWLILHGDVWKH%VLWHEULHI
8KHQRUWKVRXWKZDONDEOHURXWHVZKLFKLQDGGLWLRQ WRWKH,LJK7WUHHWRUVLWH%DOVRLQFOXGHWKHOLQN EHWZHHQWKHXQLYHUVLW\VLWHDQGWKHFDVWOHRU&ORRS DQGWKHOLQNEHWZHHQWKHUDLOZD\VWDWLRQDQGWKH FDWKHGUDORU'ORRS
8KHHDVWZHVWFRQQHFWLRQVEHWZHHQWKH'LW\ 'HQWUHDQGLWVDGMDFHQWHDVWHUQDQGZHVWHUQ QHLJKERXUKRRGV8KLVPHDQWWDFNOLQJWKH FRPSRQHQWVWKDWDFWDVDVHYHUDQFHEHWZHHQ WKHGLIIHUHQWSDUWRIWKHXUEDQIDEULFVXFKDV WKH&URDGJDWHOLQNWRWKHHDVW8KHVHOLQNVZHUH LGHQWLILHGDVWKH,VLWHVEULHIVDQGKDGWREHWDFNOHG ZLWKLQDQRYHUDOOWUDQVSRUWVWUDWHJ\IRU0LQFROQ WRJHWKHUZLWKDVSHFLILFKLJKZD\VJURXSZRUNLQJ WKURXJKRXWWKH)QTXLU\E\(HVLJQWRWHVWIHDVLELOLW\ RISURSRVDOVDQGWKHLULPSDFWRQWKHXUEDQIDEULF
,HULWDJHDQGFXOWXUDODVVHWVDQGKRZWKHVHFRXOG EHHQKDQFHGLQWHJUDWHGZLWKKLJKTXDOLW\XUEDQ GHVLJQ8KLVZDVLGHQWLILHGDVWKH(VLWHVEULHI
0-2'302'-8=')286)6)+)2)6%8-32 )QTXLU\E\(HVLJQ6HSRUW
8RLQFUHDVHWKHSRWHQWLDORI0LQFROQ¡VFLW\FHQWUHDQXPEHURIVLWHVZHUHLGHQWLILHG E\WKHPDVWHUSODQQLQJWHDPDVVWUDWHJLFLQWHUYHQWLRQDUHDVQHHGLQJVSHFLILF GHYHORSPHQWEULHIV8KHVHDUHPDUNHGXSLQWKHGLDJUDPEHORZ
Lincoln EbD day 1: walking together
A: The High Street
B1: Michaelgate Site B2: Hungate Site B3: Binns Site B4: Wigford Way Site B5: University Site B6: St. Marks Site
C1: Museum Site C2: Drill Hall Site C3: St. Swithins Site C4: City Square Site C5: Lindongate Site C6: Station Crossing C7: South Station Site
H1: Tentercroft Street Link H2: Norman Street Link H3: Waterlane Link H4: St. Swithins Link H5: Baker Street Link
8KH4ULQFH¡V*RXQGDWLRQIRUWKH&XLOW)QYLURQPHQW 0-2'302'-8=')286)6)+)2)6%8-32 )QTXLU\E\(HVLJQ6HSRUW
Circa 1200
Masonry from the King’s Chamber 12th century Inner Bailey Gatehouse used by Sir Thomas a Becket St. Andrew’s Road Surviving jamb Northampton Castle West Curtain Wall & Buttresses West Curtain Wall
Northern Bailey Saxon defences
North Bailey South Bailey ditch and bridge Tower ? Medieval building Castle gatehouse Curtain wall ? Henry III Royal Medieval chamber Apartment ?
South Bailey St. Mary’s Churchyard Curtain wall ? Curtain wall Gatehouse ? ARCHAEOLOGY IN NORTHAMPTONSHIRE
• The County Council employ a • There is a Sites & Monuments planning archaeologist (Dan Windwood) for their own work Record but this is now under the and have an archaeology team Record Office. Information still for excavation works. The available to districts when planning archaeologist will now requested. provide advice on: • No County Museum Service. • Greenfield sites over 1ha for Districts responsible for curating residential or 2ha for non- archaeological archives (not the County) = need for an residential archaeological store. • Residential = 50 dwellings on • New Heritage Protection Greenfield or 100 in urban Legislation due 2008 will introduce areas. joint consents and will pass • Mixed use development = Scheduled Ancient Monuments 5000 sq m in urban. Consents to L.A’s (with EH guidance). • Employment etc. = 5000 sq m • Potential for amenity groups to in built up area officially complain where archaeology not properly considered in respect of planning applications – Ombudsman? Where next? •Planners within the Districts & Development Corporations must obtain archaeological advice to deal with planning consents, write briefs, check written schemes of investigation, monitor archaeological investigations, check reports, ensure publication and deposition of archives. This cannot be done by planners! •Pre-determination evaluations are essential to ensure that PPG 16 requirements are met and a suitable mitigation strategy evolved before planning consent granted •Districts need to budget for the provision of archaeological advice for smaller schemes not covered by the County •A county repository for archaeological archives desperately needs to be found •The question of dealing with small development sites needs to be a meeting of the Northamptonshire Councils Association Heritage sub- group . •Officers & Politicians need to be educated on Heritage matters – HELM meetings. Agenda Item 11
Comments of the Councillor Call for Action Task and Finish Group on the Government consultation on local petitions and Calls for Action
1. Overview and Scrutiny Committee One set-up a Task and Finish and Group to examine the Government proposals to introduce a Councillor Call for Action. Councillor Andrew Simpson chairs this Task and Finish Group.
2. At the 11 th February 2008 meeting the Task and Finish Group considered the Government consultation paper on local petitions and Councillor Calls for Actions.
3. The closing date for responses to Government is 20 March 2008.
4. Given the short timescales, the Chief Executive, Mr David Kennedy will be responding to the Government consultation on behalf of the council and will be retrospectively reporting his response to Cabinet. The Chief Executive is therefore asked to take the views of Overview and Scrutiny into consideration.
5. Overview and Scrutiny Committee One is therefore asked to consider the comments of the Councillor Call for Action Task and Finish and Group and provide the Chief Executive with observations.
Please note that this paper must read in conjunction with the Government consultation document attached entitled Consultation on local petitions and Calls for Action
In response to the consultation questions as outlined on Chapter 5, page 16, the Group at its meeting on the 11 th February the Task and Finish Group made the following comments;
Petitions
Question a) The Government believes there should be a statutory duty on local authorities to respond to local petitions. What conditions must be met before a local authority is required to respond formally to a petition?
o The Task and Finish group is of the view that the duty to reply to petitions should not only apply only to the functions of the local authority, other public services with shared delivery responsibilities with the local authority through the local area agreement or other partnership arrangement arrangements.
o The Group felt that the duty should also apply to the business and voluntary sectors- this is in recognition of their increasing role in the delivery of public services and the role that that they have in place shaping. The business and voluntary sectors should therefore be treated as a equal partner and be opened to the same level of accountability.
o Experience from other areas suggests that these sectors would welcome being regarded as equal partners through being held to account like everyone else.
Question b) In particular, how should we define the level of support required before a petition must get a formal, substantive response?
o The Task and Finish Group is of the view that it should be for each local authority (in consultation with its partners) to decide what the petition threshold should be.
o The group also is of the view that petitions with a few signatures could be as legitimate as one with many. For example, some areas or roads group of residents would not meet a numerical threshold or percentage. Therefore the group feels that there should be no numerical or percentage threshold set.
There is no question c
Calls for Action
Question d) What if any matters should be excluded from the call for action?
o The Task and Finish Group is of the view that very little should be excluded from a Councillor Call for Action as locally elected representatives should have similar powers to members of national select committees and be able to hold a wide range of people to account. The group feels that the following should be excluded;
o Quasi judicial matters for example planning and licensing o Individual matters o Vexatious or frivolous matters o Matters that have been raised previously o Matters that are subject to legal scrutiny or decision
Question e) What guidance should Government provide on the operation of the councillor call for action?
o The Task and Finish Group is of the view that the guidance shouldn’t be too prescriptive and that Councils should be able to have local arrangements that have been agreed with partners that have been designed to meet local needs. This includes leaving Councils with their partners to decide within the law what forms a Councillor Call for Action.
o The Task and Finish Group believes that Councillor Call for Action need to apply to all council partners including the business and voluntary sector (given their respective roles in an area), if citizens through their Councillors are to begin to feel truly empowered and if councillors are to fufill their placing shaping role.
o The Task and Finish Group is of the view that apart from the legislative changes suggested the only additional legal requirement should be Ta legal duty on partners for them to respond to issues referred by Overview and Scrutiny Committees with a time limit for the Council to determine in conjunction with its partners.
Overall
Question f) Taken together, would petitions and calls for action sufficiently empower communities to intervene with their elected representatives? Should we contemplate other measures?
o The Task and Finish Group does not support the view that the petitions and call for action sufficiently empower communities to intervene with their elected representatives. The Government should open a positive dialogue with local councils, councillors and local residents about what more needs to happen to truly empower communities and local representatives.
Question g) Do you have other views on the operation of the new duty to respond to petitions and the call for action?
o The Task and Finish Group is of the view that in three tier and two tier areas it should be for Parish/District/Borough/County Councils to determine how responding to issues that are lodged with or raised by local residents and Councillor through petitions or CCFAs are handled between the different authorities. It is acknowledged that the different tiers may receive a petition or CCFA relating to one or the other.
o The Task and Finish Group is of the view that the Government will need to provide councils with resources;
o To enable Councils to publish a public user guide to describe how the petitions mechanisms and Councillor Call for Action works
o To enable petitioners, CCFA requesters, elected members and partners to understand/manage the process, provide resources for training.
o To truly empower local communities through their elected representatives, provide resources for Councils to develop cross partner IT systems that will enable petition and CCFA information to be shared across partners, and;
o To enable Councils to provide an out of hours service for members of the public to contact Councils out of hours when it suits them,
o To provide resources for better member support and for Councils to develop a national e-petitioning system like the one successfully used by the Prime Ministers office; making it simple for local people to raise petitions.
o To enable the smooth operation of the petition and Councillor for Action processes provide additional resources to enable Councils to provide additional officer support (The new requirements will potentially have a significant impact on support resources)
o The Task and Finish Group is of the view that anyone should be able to raise a Councillor Call for Action or be able to petition a council on matters and that the these processes should not be confined for use by local residents only. For example, someone in a neighbouring authority maybe effected by a issue through them using facilities in that area.
Report Authors: Mark Farmer and Ben Bix; Overview and Scrutiny Officers Local petitions and Calls for Action Consultation
www.communities.gov.uk community, opportunity, prosperity
Local petitions and Calls for Action Consultation
December 2007 Department for Communities and Local Government Communities and Local Government Eland House Bressenden Place London SW1E 5DU Telephone: 020 7944 4400 Website: www.communities.gov.uk
© Crown Copyright, 2007
Copyright in the typographical arrangement rests with the Crown.
This publication, excluding logos, may be reproduced free of charge in any format or medium for research, private study or for internal circulation within an organisation. This is subject to it being reproduced accurately and not used in a misleading context. The material must be acknowledged as Crown copyright and the title of the publication specified.
Any other use of the contents of this publication would require a copyright licence. Please apply for a Click-Use Licence for core material at www.opsi.gov.uk/click-use/system/online/pLogin.asp, or by writing to the Office of Public Sector Information, Information Policy Team, St Clements House, 2-16 Colegate, Norwich, NR3 1BQ. Fax: 01603 723000 or email: HMSOlicensing@cabinet-office.x.gsi.gov.uk
If you require this publication in an alternative format please email [email protected]
Communities and Local Government Publications PO Box 236 Wetherby West Yorkshire LS23 7NB Tel: 08701 226 236 Fax: 08701 226 237 Textphone: 08701 207 405 Email: [email protected] or online via the Communities and Local Government website: www.communities.gov.uk 75%
December 2007
Product Code: 07CE04983 Contents 3
Contents
Preface Rt Hon Hazel Blears MP, Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government 5
Chapter 1. Introduction 6
Chapter 2. The consultation criteria 7
Chapter 3. Local petitions 9 Evidence for change 9 General principles underpinning a new duty 10 Signatures 11 Guidance 12
Chapter 4. Calls for Action 13 The Councillors’ Call for Action 13 Empowering communities to call for action 14
Chapter 5. Consultation questions 16
Chapter 6. How to submit your views 17 Next steps 18
Regulatory Impact Assessment 18 4 Consultation on local petitions and Calls for Action Preface 5
Preface
This Government is determined to breathe new life into local democracy. That means giving elected local councillors the space to show a lead: less red tape from Whitehall and more freedom to spend money on local priorities. But it also means giving local people new opportunities to set the agenda for themselves, to have their say about local services and get things done on the issues they care about. Whether it’s improving housing, cleaning up the streets, or getting tough with anti-social behaviour, it’s often local people themselves who understand the problem best and can come up with the best solutions.
We’ve taken big steps towards ‘devolution to the doorstep’ in recent years. The 2006 Local Government White Paper Strong and Prosperous Communities made clear that new discretion for town halls needed to go hand in hand with greater accountability to local people. The Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007 provided a vital framework – a duty on local authorities to inform, consult and involve local people in their decisions and services, and new powers for local councillors to call for action on a broad range of local issues.
Today, we want to go further still. In The Governance of Britain the Prime Minister launched a national conversation about renewing our democracy, including at the local level; and in October, I published an Action Plan for Community Empowerment, setting out what my Department is doing to give people a real say over their neighbourhood.
This consultation takes forward one of the commitments in that plan – to look carefully at the idea of placing a duty on local authorities to respond constructively to the petitions they receive from local people.
We in the UK are some of Europe’s biggest petition writers. People use petitions as a way to raise local issues they really care about – speed bumps, local shops, social care. Many local authorities already deal with petitions systematically, scrupulously and fairly.
But I want everyone, no matter where they live, to have the confidence of knowing that their concerns will be taken seriously. I believe that there is a case for acting to ensure that standards everywhere are brought up to those of the best, and am inclined to put all authorities on the same footing by providing a legislative framework for dealing with local petitions. I want to give people the chance to help shape that framework before reaching a conclusion on the best way forward.
I look forward to hearing your views.
Rt Hon Hazel Blears MP, Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government 6 Consultation on local petitions and Calls for Action
Chapter 1
Introduction
1. The Governance of Britain Green Paper, published in July 2007, said that petitions can provide an important way for local communities to express their views collectively and generate local debate, and improve the connection between residents and local authorities. It added that the Government is considering the introduction of a duty requiring local authorities to consider and investigate petitions from local communities, and guarantee a response on the issues which have been raised.
2. In the Green Paper, the Government also announced its intention to consult on extending the right of people to intervene with their elected representatives through community rights to call for action.
3. This consultation paper seeks views on:
t IPXUIFBSSBOHFNFOUTGPSMPDBMQFUJUJPOTDBOCFTUSFOHUIFOFEBOEUIFEFUBJMTPG how the new system might operate t UIFDBMMGPSBDUJPOJOUSPEVDFEVOEFSUIF-PDBM(PWFSONFOUBOE1VCMJD Involvement in Health Act 2007. 4. This consultation does not cover petitions to the House of Commons or the Government, which are dealt with separately in paragraphs 157 to 163 of the Governance of Britain. Chapter 2 The consultation criteria 7
Chapter 2
The consultation criteria
5. The Government has adopted a code of practice on consultations. The criteria below apply to all UK national public consultations on the basis of a document in electronic or printed form. They will often be relevant to other sorts of consultation. Though they have no legal force, and cannot prevail over statutory or other mandatory external requirements (eg under European Community Law), they should otherwise generally be regarded as binding on UK departments and their agencies, unless ministers conclude that exceptional circumstances require a departure.
t $POTVMUXJEFMZUISPVHIPVUUIFQSPDFTT BMMPXJOHBNJOJNVNPGXFFLTGPS written consultation at least once during the development of the policy t #FDMFBSBCPVUXIBUZPVSQSPQPTBMTBSF XIPNBZCFBGGFDUFE XIBURVFTUJPOT are being asked and the timescale for responses t &OTVSFUIBUZPVSDPOTVMUBUJPOJTDMFBS DPODJTFBOEXJEFMZBDDFTTJCMF t (JWFGFFECBDLSFHBSEJOHUIFSFTQPOTFTSFDFJWFEBOEIPXUIFDPOTVMUBUJPO process influenced the policy t .POJUPSZPVSEFQBSUNFOUTFGGFDUJWFOFTTBUDPOTVMUBUJPO JODMVEJOHUISPVHIUIF use of a designated consultation co-ordinator t &OTVSFZPVSDPOTVMUBUJPOGPMMPXTCFUUFSSFHVMBUJPOCFTUQSBDUJDF JODMVEJOH carrying out a Regulatory Impact Assessment if appropriate.
6. The full consultation code may be viewed at: http://bre.berr.gov.uk/regulation/ consultation/consultation_guidance/index.asp
7. Are you satisfied that this consultation has followed these criteria? If not, or if you have any other observations about ways of improving the consultation process please contact:
Albert Joyce, Communities and Local Government Consultation Co-ordinator Zone 6/H10 Eland House Bressenden Place London SW1E 5DU
or by email to [email protected] 8 Consultation on local petitions and Calls for Action
8. Please note that responses to the consultation itself should be sent to the contact shown within the main body of the consultation (page 17).
9. A summary of responses to this consultation will be published by 12 June 2008 (within three months of end of consultation period) at the address below.
www.communities.gov.uk/corporate/publications/consultations/
Paper copies will be available on request.
10. Information provided in response to this consultation, including personal information, may be published or disclosed in accordance with the access to information regimes (these are primarily the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA), the Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA) and the Environmental Information Regulations 2004).
11. If you want the information that you provide to be treated as confidential, please be aware that, under the FOIA, there is a statutory Code of Practice with which public authorities must comply and which deals, amongst other things, with obligations of confidence. In view of this it would be helpful if you could explain to us why you regard the information you have provided as confidential. If we receive a request for disclosure of the information we will take full account of your explanation, but we cannot give an assurance that confidentiality can be maintained in all circumstances. An automatic confidentiality disclaimer generated by your IT system will not, of itself, be regarded as binding on the Department.
12. The Department will process your personal data in accordance with the DPA and, in the majority of circumstances, this will mean that your personal data will not be disclosed to third parties. Chapter 3 Local petitions 9
Chapter 3
Local petitions
Evidence for change
13. There is evidence that a formal process for handling petitions adds value to public life. In 2005, 38 per cent of respondents to the Citizenship Survey said they had undertaken a civic activity. 60 per cent of them claimed that they had signed a petition in the previous twelve months. Petitioning was the most commonly undertaken of the nine activities grouped under civic engagement for the purposes of this survey.
14. Qualitative research in 2006 found that participants felt that petitions were a good method for bringing issues to the attention of local government. However, they were sceptical about local government’s ability or willingness to act on or be responsive to petitions1.
15. Overall, research indicates that responsiveness is a key element to petitions’ political efficacy, whether in the form of a formal response from the governance body concerned, or of a referendum or ballot to decide the issue.
16. Petitioning is used in a number of countries as a trigger leading to electoral action, typically in the form of a referendum – Switzerland and the USA are typical examples. These can be either citizens’ initiatives or popular referendums. In some instances, the referendums are binding. Petitions can also be used to initiate recall ballots. This system is used in the USA (at state and local/municipal levels), and in British Columbia, Canada.
17. Other jurisdictions, for example Scotland and Queensland, have formal petitioning systems which do not lead to ballots. Instead, the petitioner can expect a response from either the relevant committee or MP. In these examples, a response is not guaranteed.
18. Political parties and campaign groups in countries where petitioning is a well- established feature of the democratic landscape have become adept at using petitions to further their own agendas. They can also counteract a petition campaign, either through developing a counter proposal or by demobilising support for the petition. The evidence therefore indicates that petitioning (as a tool of direct democracy), can support representative democracy.
1 BMG, 2006 10 Consultation on local petitions and Calls for Action
General principles underpinning a new duty
19. The Government believes that there should be a duty on local authorities to respond to petitions in the following circumstances:
(a) The subject of the petition relates to the functions of the local authority, or other public services with shared delivery responsibilities with the local authority through the Local Area Agreement or other partnership arrangement 20. Local authorities have a wide range of functions, which include the promotion of the social, environmental and economic wellbeing of the area and its people. They are the “place shapers” for their area, and this has been reinforced by provisions of the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007, which require a long list of partner organisations to cooperate with the local authority in developing the Sustainable Community Strategy for the area, and in setting local improvement targets. The role of local authorities has also been reinforced by the Sub National Review published in July 2007.
21. The Government’s proposal is that local authorities should be required to respond to any petition that asks them to consider any issue which falls within their broad functions as outlined above. Petitions which would more properly be dealt with by another public body – and raise issues which relate neither to local improvement targets agreed by that body, nor to the area’s sustainable community strategy – would fall outside the proposed new duty.
22. An important example of this principle will arise in the context of education services. A local authority would not be required to respond to a petition which raises issues which can only be addressed substantively by the governors and head-teacher of a particular school. On the other hand, the duty would apply where the petition relates to the education functions of the local authority.
(b) The petition has been organised by a local person 23. It is proposed that there should be nothing to prevent local petitioners from invoking the help of national organisations having wider interests – but that the organiser-of-record of a local petition should be a local person. It is that person who should present the petition to the local authority. We would welcome views about how “local person” should be defined. Obvious options are:
(a) a person appearing in the electoral register for the local authority’s area (b) any adult who lives or works in the area at the time the petition is submitted, or (c) any adult who has lived or worked in the area for at least a qualifying period of time before the petition is submitted. Chapter 3 Local petitions 11
24. Options (b) and (c) might both be extended to anyone who attends a school or college in the area, in order to make this form of engagement available to children. We would welcome respondents’ views on that possibility.
(c) The petition demonstrates a sufficient level of support from local people 25. On the one hand, requiring local authorities to respond to all petitions, even those with a minimum level of support, could impose unnecessary processes and costs. On the other, setting a very high level of support as a requirement for a petition to receive a formal response would frustrate the underlying purpose of the policy. There are three possible approaches to setting a threshold of a sufficient level of support. They are to define:
t JOBCTPMVUFUFSNTUIFOVNCFSPGSFMFWBOUTJHOBUPSJFTUIBUBRVBMJGZJOHQFUJUJPO must have (for example, “at least 250 signatures”); or t BRVBMJGZJOHQFUJUJPOBTPOFUIBUIBTUIFTJHOBUVSFTPGBHJWFOQSPQPSUJPOPGUIPTF whose signatures are regarded as relevant (for example, at least 1 per cent of the electorate of the area in question). This could make it difficult for the petition organiser to know how many signatures were required for the petition to be valid; or t BOBCTPMVUFOVNCFS PSBHJWFOQSPQPSUJPOPGUIFQPQVMBUJPO XIJDIFWFSJTUIF lower (for example. “200 signatures or 5 per cent of the population” would mean that communities of less than 4,000 people would have to find fewer than 200 signatures).
Signatures 26. In the above options, a “relevant” signature could be regarded as that either of:
(a) an elector of the area; or (b) anyone who lives or works in the area.
Support would have to be reasonably current (eg signature within the last 12 months).
27. We would, in either case, want to consider options for extending the range of relevant signatures to local children who either live in the area, or attend school there. We would welcome respondents’ views on that possibility.
28. Support for petitions might take the traditional form (signature, date, and address), but we would want to allow for electronic petitions too, and would be glad to have respondents’ views on how they might work.
29. We believe local authorities should be entitled to accept signatures without further validation if they have no reason to doubt them; but should be empowered to investigate if they felt it necessary, and to strike them out if appropriate. 12 Consultation on local petitions and Calls for Action
(d) The petition satisfies minimum requirements in relation to i) The manner in which it was submitted ii) its form iii) its content 30. It is proposed that petitioners ought to be able to present their petitions either to the council, or to one of its councillors.
31. Councils and their councillors would be under a general duty to consider whether any request or document they receive is a petition. We would hope to avoid technicalities here. The word “petition” would, we hope, have a plain English meaning; we would probably not seek to define it in statute. Where a council or councillor is of the view that a document is a petition, that decision would trigger the petition provisions.
32. We take the view that a petition should at least contain:
(a) the proposition which it promotes (b) the name and address of the organiser (c) the local authority from which a response is sought (and, if more than one, all the local authorities to which it has been submitted) (d) the area to which it relates (ie the whole authority, or a defined area forming part of it) (e) the names, addresses and signatures of those who support it (or, in the case of an electronic petition, their names, addresses and email addresses).
Guidance 33. We believe that the Secretary of State should have the power to issue guidance about all aspects of the process. Chapter 4 The Councillor’s Call for Action 13
Chapter 4
Calls for action
The Councillors’ Call for Action
34. In the recent Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007, Parliament amended section 19 of the Police and Justice Act 2006 – before, indeed, it had come into force – to align it with the provision in section 119 of the 2007 Act. All councillors are thus empowered to refer local government matters and local crime and disorder matters for consideration by the relevant overview and scrutiny committees of their local authorities.
35. The result amounts to a “councillor call for action”. Any councillor will be able to refer a local matter affecting his or her ward or division to the appropriate overview and scrutiny committee of his or her authority. In the case of a local crime and disorder matter, that will be to the authority’s crime and disorder committee.
36. The committee is required then to put the matter on its agenda, and discuss it at a meeting. It is not to be required to take any further action; but all the powers it has – to mount inquiries, to require information, and to make reports and recommendations – are to be available to it, if it decides to take the matter up.
37. The power to refer a matter is available only where the matter is of direct concern to the ward or division which the councillor represents. A councillor can refer a matter even if no citizen has asked him or her to consider it. There is no requirement for councillors in multi-member wards to agree – any of them can refer a matter.
38. A local government matter, in relation to a member of a local authority, is defined as a matter which:
(a) relates to the discharge of any function of the authority (b) affects all or part of the electoral area for which the member is elected or any person who lives or works in that area, and (c) is not an excluded matter. 14 Consultation on local petitions and Calls for Action
A local crime and disorder matter, in relation to a member of a local authority, has been defined to mean a matter concerning:
(a) crime and disorder (including in particular forms of crime and disorder that involve anti-social behaviour or other behaviour adversely affecting the local environment), or (b) the misuse of drugs, alcohol and other substances
that affects the electoral area represented by the member, or the people who live or work in that area.
39. It will no doubt happen that some local issues have implications in more than one field. The Government’s view is that, in such a case, the councillor would be entitled to refer it to every overview and scrutiny committee which covers some aspect of the issue. In practice, committees will, no doubt, take the sensible decision to join forces in order to consider such matters in the round.
Excluded matters
40. The Secretary of State has power to exclude by order specified descriptions of matter that would otherwise be “local government matters”. This was included primarily so that confusion could be avoided between calls for action and well-defined statutory processes such as planning and licensing appeals. We now wish, as part of this consultation, to seek views about exactly what ought to be excluded, and why.
Guidance
41. The Secretary of State is empowered to issue statutory guidance for local authorities, their committees, and their members. She intends to do so when these measures are brought into force. Respondents are invited to highlight the key issues on which guidance (whether statutory or not), would be helpful.
Empowering communities to call for action
42. In the Governance of Britain green paper, Government highlighted its desire to achieve greater direct empowerment of communities, and undertook to consult on a number of areas, including “extending the right of people to intervene with their elected representatives through community rights to call for action”. Chapter 4 The Councillor’s Call for Action 15
43. Having established a councillor call for action (in law, if not yet in practice), we take the view that a duty on local authorities to respond to qualifying local petitions would amount to a community call for action – albeit a call made by a community of interest. We should, however, like to hear views on whether other steps should be considered as well. 16 Consultation on local petitions and Calls for Action
Chapter 5
Consultation questions
44. We wish to take the views of citizens, local authorities, councillors and community organisations on all the details of the proposals set out in this document, but particularly on the following questions.
Petitions
(a) The Government believes there should be a statutory duty on local authorities to respond to local petitions. What conditions must be met before a local authority is required to respond formally to a petition? (Paragraph 19) (b) In particular, how should we define the level of support required before a petition must get a formal, substantive response?
t #ZBmYFEOVNCFSPGTJHOBUVSFT t #ZBQFSDFOUBHFPGUIFFMFDUPSBUFJOUIFBSFB t #ZBIZCSJEPGUIFUXP t 0SJOTPNFPUIFSXBZ (Paragraph 25) Calls for action
(d) What if any matters should be excluded from the call for action? (Paragraph 40) (e) What guidance should Government provide on the operation of the councillor call for action? (Paragraph 41)
Overall
(f) Taken together, would petitions and calls for action sufficiently empower communities to intervene with their elected representatives? Should we contemplate other measures? (Paragraph 43) (g) Do you have other views on the operation of the new duty to respond to petitions and the call for action? Chapter 5 How to submit your views 17
Chapter 6
How to submit your views
Responses from individuals and organisations may be submitted in writing to the Department for Communities and Local Government.
Comments should be received no later than 20 March 2008 and should be sent to:
Rosie Milner Communities and Local Government 5th floor, Zone F8 Eland House Bressenden Place London SW1E 5DU
or emailed to:
The consultation document and its response form can be downloaded from the consultations page on the Communities and Local Government website (www.communities.gov.uk). For details of how to order hard copies see the inside front cover.
This consultation is available on request in alternative formats.
We may publish or make public the responses and comments received. If you do not consent to this, you must clearly request that your response be treated confidentially. Any confidentiality disclaimer generated by your IT system in email responses will not be treated as such a request.
If you wish your response, if published, to be unattributable, please let us know when you send it to us. Unattributable responses may also be included in any statistical summary of comments received and views expressed. 18 Consultation on local petitions and Calls for Action
Next steps
The consultation will run until 20 March 2008. Once this deadline has passed, Government will consider the responses received by that date and issue a report on the consultation by 12 June 2008.
Regulatory Impact Assessment
An Impact Assessment has not been produced as the cost to the public sector is likely to be less than £5 million per annum and the impact on the private and third sectors is likely to be negligible and currently unquantifiable. We would welcome suggestions as to how such impacts might be determined and will consider the need for an Impact Assessment as we take this policy forward. Agenda Item 12
Cabinet decisions- In response to outstanding Overview and Scrutiny recommendations
These decisions were made at Cabinet at its 3 March 2008 meeting.
Leisure Services
Report of Interim Director Customer and Service Delivery (copy herewith)
Decision:
1. Progress in addressing the issues raised in the Task and Finish Group’s report is noted;
2. The adoption of the recommendations of the Task and Finish Group’s report, subject to the points 3, 4, 5 & 6 below is agreed;
3. The recommendations which refer to strategy as referring to the wider cultural strategy currently under development, and to leisure services and activities within the broader scope of cultural services and activities are interpreted;
4. The amendment in recommendation 6 to include the words “… and community cohesion” after “social inclusion” among the aims of leisure services are approved;
5. The amendment in recommendation 13 to read “The Council ensures that the role of culture and its interdependence with other physical, economic, social and environmental factors will be recognised in the Local Development Framework” is approved;
6. The amendment in recommendation 14 to read “The leisure survey, as included in the report, will be referred to in designing future leisure services surveys and questionnaires” is approved.
Community Safety/Dispersal Orders
Report of Interim Director Customer and Service Delivery (copy herewith)
Decision:
1. Progress in addressing the issues raised in the Task and Finish Group’s report is noted;
2. The adoption of the ten recommendations of the Task and Finish Group’s report, subject to two minor changes in 3 & 4 below is agreed;
3. The amended recommendation 7 is agreed and adopted such that the second sentence reads “The portfolio holder for community engagement and safety will receive an evaluation report following each Dispersal Order, and shall report on these regularly to the Safer and Stronger Northampton Partnership and to the Council”. 4. The amended recommendation 9 is agreed such that the second sentence reads “The portfolio holder for community engagement and safety will ensure that a programme to improve youth facilities across Northampton is included within the Integrated Youth Offer”, and to adopt the amended recommendation.
Voluntary Sector
Report of Chief Executive (copy herewith)
Decision:
1. The progress in addressing the issues raised in the Task and Finish Group’s report is noted;
2. It is noted that recommendations 1 – 5 detailed in section 3.5 of the report have been completed.
3. The amendment to Task and Finish group’s recommendation 4 to read: “The budget for the Community Enabling Fund will be for those organisations that have in the past been funded from the budget plus any new organisations meeting the funding criteria for CEFAP” is noted.
4. It is requested that a further work be undertaken during 2008/ 09 to consider the implications of recommendations 6 – 8 and to develop alternative proposals in relation to the future funding, commissioning and administration of support to the voluntary and community sector.
5. The intention of the Task and Finish group to reconvene to consider the outstanding issues detailed in the scope of their review which were not addressed during the time limited initial phase of the review is noted
Community Engagement
Report of Chief Executive (copy herewith)
Decision:
1. Progress in addressing the issues raised in the Task and Finish Group’s report is noted;
2. It is noted that, in response to the recommendations of the 2007 Task and Finish Group, a Community Engagement Strategy has been developed to establish the key principles through which the Council will carry out community engagement activity to be considered by Cabinet on 3 rd March 2008.
3. Adoption of the recommendations in principle are approved, subject to the adoption of the Council’s Community Engagement Strategy and informed by the development of a delivery plan for community engagement activities to be considered by Cabinet no later than June 2008.
4. It is requested that a further work be undertaken during 2008/ 09, aligned to the proposed neighbourhood service delivery arrangements, to consider the future roles of Neighbourhood Partnerships, Neighbourhood Management and Parish Councils. Agenda Item 5e
Item No. Appendices No
CABINET REPORT
VOLUNTARY SECTOR TASK AND FINISH GROUP – Report Title OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY RECOMMENDATIONS
AGENDA STATUS: PUBLIC
Cabinet Meeting Date: 3 March 2008
Key Decision: NO
Listed on Forward Plan: NO
Within Policy: YES
Policy Document: NO
Directorate: Chief Executive
Accountable Cabinet Member: Cllr Brendan Glynane
Ward(s) All
1 Purpose
1.1 To advise on progress made against implementing the recommendations of the Overview and Scrutiny Voluntary Sector Task and Finish Group’s report of September 2007;
1.2 To note progress already made in response to the Task and Finish Group’s recommendations.
1.3 To request that further work be undertaken in relation to those objectives identified for development as part of medium term planning and service development.
2 Recommendations
Cabinet is recommended to:
2.1 Note progress in addressing the issues raised in the Task and Finish Group’s report; 2.2 Note that recommendations 1 – 5 detailed in section 3.5 of the report have been completed.
2.3 Request that a further work be undertaken during 2008/ 09 to consider the implications of recommendations 6 – 8 and to develop alternative proposals in relation to the future funding, commissioning and administration of support to the voluntary and community sector.
2.4 To note the intention of the Task and Finish group to reconvene to consider the outstanding issues detailed in the scope of their review which were not addressed during the time limited initial phase of the review.
3 Background and Issues
3.1 The Overview and Scrutiny Voluntary Sector Task and Finish Group met between June and September 2007. The group was established to review the Council’s existing policies with regard specifically to funding the community and voluntary sector and to make recommendations arising from the review to Cabinet to assist in the budget process and medium term financial strategy for 2008-2011. Its report was presented to Cabinet on 25 th September 2007, when it was resolved to consider the recommendations in the light of budgetary considerations and report back.
3.2 The Task and Finish Group made recommendations in relation to short-term action to inform the 2008/ 09 budget process (Recommendations 1 – 6) and medium term planning for future years in relation to reconfiguration of support to the third sector.
3.3 Progress against those intended as short-term actions is detailed below and, subject to agreement to the 2008/ 09 budget at Council on 28 th September which will take place after the circulation of this report, all but recommendation 6 have been completed.
3.4 Proposed actions to implement recommendation 6 and those which were identified as longer term recommendations to be developed for implementation in 2010/ 11 at the conclusion of the current two year grant award period are detailed below for approval by Cabinet.
3.5 For ease of reference, the recommendations are listed as follows in bold , with commentary following:
1. That a Senior Officer, minimum of Corporate Manager level, is explicitly identified as being responsible for the relationship with the Voluntary Sector.
Nicci Marzec is the Corporate Manager responsible for liaison with the Community and Voluntary sector and meets regularly with Northampton Volunteering Centre as part of a joint monitoring arrangement with NCC to performance manage the Local Infrastructure Organisation
2. That a minimum of £700,000 is ringfenced in the budget for 2008/2009 for Voluntary Sector grants ahead of the full budget process so that the grant application process can proceed between now and March 2008 £50,000 of this sum be allocated to the Small Grants pot.
The Cabinet were not able to confirm the size of the voluntary sector grants budget in advance of the budget process for 2008/ 09. The draft budget which was consulted on during December and January included a commitment to roll forward the 2007/ 08 budget for grants to community and voluntary sector organisations without change. The final budget will be set by council on 28 th February 2008.
3. That funding to the Voluntary and Community Sector under the Partnership Fund be on a minimum three-yearly basis.
A commitment has been given to the Community and Voluntary sector to a funding round which will enable grants to be made for up to two years. This was negotiated with the Community and Voluntary sector as the best interim option given the longer term recommendations. Organisations were advised at the end of September that there would be no automatic roll over of funding in 2008/09 and that all organisations would have to apply against the Council’s corporate plan criteria for funding
4. That only Voluntary and Community Sector Organisations should be funded from the Voluntary and Community Sector grants pot.
The budget as determined for the Community Enabling Fund will be for those organisations which meet the funding criteria for CEFAP.
5. That interim arrangements for those organisations currently funded for one year (to end 31 March 2008) should be put in place and clearly communicated to organisations concerned no later than 30 November 2007.
All currently funded organisations were notified by the end of September that there would be no roll-over of funding to 2008/ 09 and that applications would be required from any organisation requiring funding for future years. Work has been carried out with Northampton Volunteering Centre to put in place an application process for 2008/ 09 funding which was launched on 30 th November as previously agreed with the C&VS. Applications will be determined against the community and voluntary sector grant budget once the budget has been determined.
6. That the Administration decides which of the currently funded organisations will be mainstream funded with funding linked to the corporate objectives and Council departments.
Consideration will be given to this as part of the 2008/ 09 budget process. However an overall approach to mainstreaming funding and commissioning from within the voluntary sector will continue into a longer term review during the course of 2008/ 09 for implementation in 2010.
7. That a feasibility study be carried out to ascertain whether the administrative function for grant applications should be outsourced.
This action will be built in to a review of departmental structures and capacity in 2008/ 09 following any changes to the structure of the organisation proposed by the Chief Executive
8. That the Council develops a Commissioning Strategy for the provision of services to meet the Council’s corporate objectives.
It is proposed that the council will develop a strategy for commissioning and delivering services through the third sector during the course of 2008/ 09 as part of the medium term planning process for implementation in 2010/ 11 following the end of the two year grant funding allocations for 2008/ 10.
9. That, given that the entire scope of the review was not fulfilled, the Task and Finish Group be reconvened early next year to carry out further work.
The task and finish group will need to determine when it will reconvene to carry out further work
4 Options
4.1 The Task and Finish Group’s recommendations are in line with best practice and seek to deliver more effective and efficient services in partnership with the community and voluntary sector.
4.2 It is therefore proposed that the recommendations should be adopted by the council, subject to any further recommendations from the Task and Finish Group once the further work they propose to undertake has been carried out.
4.3 It is suggested that further work be commissioned as part of the medium term planning process to investigate options for alternative approaches to commissioning and funding community and voluntary sector organisations and to consider alternative arrangements for administering Community Enabling Fund grants.
5 Implications (including financial implications)
5.1 Policy
5.1.1 No specific implications on policy for those recommendations which have been implemented. Further work to be undertaken in relation to alternative commissioning, funding and administration issues raised within the recommendations may result in changes to existing council policies.
5.2 Resources and Risk
5.2.1 There are no direct implications on resources from the recommendations above and the Community Enabling Fund grant awards will be made for two years to provide stability for those organisations in receipt of funding. However, further work to determine proposals for alternative funding and commissioning arrangements may impact on financial resources from 2010/ 11 onwards.
5.3 Legal
5.3.1 There may be legal implications in developing proposals for future commissioning, funding and administration arrangements for the community and voluntary sector. These will be detailed in the report to be brought back to Cabinet at a future date for consideration.
5.4 Equality
5.4.1 Equalities is a key strand of the Council’s corporate plan and the equalities issues will be incorporated into the development of new proposals for commissioning, funding and administering funding for the community and voluntary sector.
5.5 Crime and Disorder
5.5.1 Partnership activity funded through the community and voluntary sector contributes to the Council’s overall Crime and Disorder reduction targets.
5.6 Consultees (Internal and External)
5.6.1 The Task and Finish Group undertook consultation as described in its report. Any subsequent proposals for commissioning, funding and administering grants to the community and voluntary sector will be consulted on as required.
5.7 How the Proposals deliver Priority Outcomes
5.7.1 These proposals will contribute to Sustainable Communities Strategy and Corporate Plan objectives to work in partnership with the community and voluntary sector.
6 Background Papers
6.1 Report of the Overview and Scrutiny Voluntary Sector Task and Finish Group
Nicci Marzec Ext. 7431
Agenda Item 5f
Item No. Appendices 1
CABINET REPORT
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT TASK AND FINISH GROUP Report Title – OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY RECOMMENDATIONS
AGENDA STATUS: PUBLIC
Cabinet Meeting Date: 3 March 2008
Key Decision: NO
Listed on Forward Plan: NO
Within Policy: YES
Policy Document: NO
Directorate: Chief Executive
Accountable Cabinet Member: Cllr Brendan Glynane
Ward(s) All
1 Purpose
1.1 To advise on progress made against implementing the recommendations of the Overview and Scrutiny Community Engagement Task and Finish Group’s report of September 2007;
1.2 To note progress already made in response to the Task and Finish Group’s recommendations.
1.3 To note that the recommendations of the Task and Finish Group report of September 2007 have been integrated with those outstanding from the previous review in 2005.
1.4 To request that further work be undertaken in relation to those recommendations identified in the Appendix to the report.
2 Recommendations
Cabinet is recommended to: 2.1 Note progress in addressing the issues raised in the Task and Finish Group’s report;
2.2 Note that, in response to the recommendations of the 2007 Task and Finish Group, a Community Engagement Strategy has been developed to establish the key principles through which the Council will carry out community engagement activity to be considered by Cabinet on 3 rd March 2008.
2.3 Adopt the recommendations in principle, subject to the adoption of the Council’s Community Engagement Strategy and informed by the development of a delivery plan for community engagement activities to be considered by Cabinet no later than June 2008.
2.4 Request that a further work be undertaken during 2008/ 09, aligned to the proposed neighbourhood service delivery arrangements, to consider the future roles of Neighbourhood Partnerships, Neighbourhood Management and Parish Councils.
3 Background and Issues
3.1 The Overview and Scrutiny Community Engagement Task and Finish Group met between June and September 2007. The review was established to in order to perform a short, focused review of how the Council might engage more comprehensively with the residents of Northampton; particularly new and emerging communities who are difficult to reach. Specific attention was paid to the role and function of Neighbourhood Management and Partnerships in achieving this objective. Its report was presented to Cabinet on 25 th September 2007, when it was resolved to consider the recommendations in the light of budgetary considerations and report back.
3.2 The Task and finish Group made recommendations in relation to a range of consultation and engagement activities and also gave consideration to the previous Overview and Scrutiny Task and Finish Review conducted in 2005, many of the recommendations of which were never implemented.
3.3 The Task and Finish Group reconvened in November 2007 to consider progress against the actions of both reviews, the outcomes of which are detailed in the Appendix to the report.
3.4 Further recommendations have been made to Cabinet against those recommendations which still require action in the final column.
4 Options
4.1 The recommendations of both the 2005 and 2007 Task and Finish Group Reviews are in line with best practice and seek to improve the way in which the Council engages with customer and communities. It was agreed by the Task and Finish Group that where the recommendations of the two reviews reflected similar objectives that those recommendations should be integrated and considered together.
4.2 In response to the recommendations of the 2007 Task and Finish Group a Community Engagement Strategy has been developed to establish the key principles through which the Council will carry out community engagement activity. The strategy has been consulted on and is recommended to Cabinet on 3 rd March for adoption.
4.3 It is proposed that following adoption of the strategy a costed delivery plan for proposed engagement activities will be developed within the budget agreed by Council on 28 th February 2008. The priority activities within the delivery plan will reflect the principles of the recommendations made by the Task and Finish Groups report but may not be able to address all of the specific activity within the recommendations within resources available.
4.4 It is therefore proposed that the recommendations should be adopted by the council in principle, subject to the agreement of the Council’s Community Engagement Strategy as the underlying principle for addressing these recommendations and informed by the development of a delivery plan for community engagement activities to be considered by Cabinet no later than June 2008.
4.5 In relation to recommendations made in respect of Neighbourhood Management, Neighbourhood Partnerships and Parish Councils, further consideration should be given to how the Council engages with communities within proposals for area focused service delivery in the organisational restructure to ensure that future mechanisms for engagement are effectively aligned to new service delivery arrangements.
5 Implications (including financial implications)
5.1 Policy
5.1.1 No specific implications on policy for those recommendations which have been implemented. Adoption of the Council’s Community Engagement Strategy will create the policy through which the Council will develop community engagement priorities.
5.2 Resources and Risk
5.2.1 Resources for community engagement activities are required to deliver the recommendations within the report. Council will determine the budget for community engagement within the 2008/ 09 budget on 28th February 2008. Failure to commit resources to community engagement activity will likely result in failure to deliver improvements against the recommendations made by the Task and Finish Groups. The budget, through the development of a targeted delivery plan for community engagement activities, will determine the priorities for engagement; however, it is unlikely that all of the recommendations contained within the report can be acted on in the short term.
5.3 Legal
5.3.1 There are no specific legal implications contained within the recommendations within this report, however, it is best practice for Council’s to demonstrate engagement with communities in developing policies and services.
5.4 Equality
5.4.1 Equalities is a key strand of the Council’s corporate plan and the equalities issues will be incorporated into the development of the delivery plan for community engagement to ensure that all relevant issues are incorporated.
5.5 Crime and Disorder
5.5.1 No specific implications.
5.6 Consultees (Internal and External)
5.6.1 The Task and Finish Group undertook consultation as described in its report. Consultation was also carried out on the draft strategy for Community Engagement.
5.7 How the Proposals deliver Priority Outcomes
5.7.1 These proposals will contribute to Sustainable Communities Strategy, Corporate Plan and Service Improvement Plan objectives to improve engagement and communication with customers and communities.
6 Background Papers
6.1 Report of the Overview and Scrutiny Community Engagement Task and Finish Group
Nicci Marzec Ext. 7431 Update on recommendations arising from the report of the Overview and Scrutiny Public Engagement and Communication Task and Finish Group. (Progress against both 2005 review and 2007 review – recommendations matched were appropriate but retaining original numbering)
Blue = 2005 Review – progress at February 2007 Red = September 2007 Review Green = November 2007 update Black = Current position and recommendations to Cabinet
Management and Resources
Recommendation/Target Action Status Comment Action needed/lead Cabinet taken recommendation 1.1 Identification of member On hold Task assigned to Geoff Wilkins (Interim Responsibility needs to be Complete of staff the Communication Communications Manager) with Kath re-allocated once budget or Community Development Suer as secondee. GW has now left the realignment/responsibilities service area with specific authority and vacancy has not been reviewed – NM. responsibility for consultation filled. KS reassigned to other duties. for the council Other vacancies and priorities in the The Policy Team Leader has departmental structure have resulted in been identified as the a lack of capacity to appoint specific specific point of responsibility to any individual post contact/liaison co-ordinator holder. for consultation through the joint citizens panel. Current resources/capacity are insufficient to extend this to all consultation activity but will be reviewed as corporate priorities are revised 1.2 Service must provide None On hold No separate coding exists for Identify budget as part of Budget for
Update report on the Overview and Scrutiny Public Engagement and Communication Task and Finish Group December 2007 for consultation in own consultation work. Service Accounts medium-term financial plan Community budgets may be able to identify incurred for future years. Engagement expenditure but mainly as a backward activity to be looking process. Has been calculated A bid has been submitted to considered by based on nominal expenditure for support the council’s Council on 28 th Budgetary measures to be budget consultation 2007. community engagement & February. allocated in the next budget consultation activities for process No current central provision for 2008/09 and future years. consultation activity. Bid was made as part of budget process for consultation software but was not agreed. Likely 5.12 That a consultation that financial constraints will limit A specific bid has been budget be implemented. consultation to mandatory submitted to support Analysis should take place to requirements. May be required if full corporate consultation ascertain the amount of Equality Impact Assessment needed. through the citizens panel for resource required. 2008/09 and future years . 1.3 All consultation exercises Partly This was done in Budget consultation Good practice needs to be Consultation should be planned to include met work. All communications disseminated results are feedback to participants acknowledged and feedback given. distributed to This will form part of the specific Good practice to be disseminated community engagement and participating across service departments. consultation strategy – groups and principles will go out to available on the consultation Jan 2008 . website and intranet. 1.4 Costs and benefits Noted Partly To be undertaken by all service areas Good practice needs to be A programme of should be calculated in full met in line with project planning and disseminated. consultation for before process starts consultation protocols when agreed. 2008/ 09 is Will be incorporated into guidance to be currently being rolled out with the Community developed to Engagement and Consultation Strategy enable planning & use of citizens panel. and costing to be
Update report on the Overview and Scrutiny Public Engagement and Communication Task and Finish Group December 2007 carried out, including efficiencies through inter- departmental consultations.
Information and Co-ordination
Recommendation/Target Action Status Comment Action needed/lead Cabinet taken recommendation 2.1 All consultation data and On hold Current IT system is not sophisticated. Include a central Consultation results the results of analysis should Developments and improvements repository for are available on the be accessible from a central imminent to intranet/internet and will be consultation and intranet and source investigated as part of the intranet feedback on the new internet. development in the short term and intranet/internet site. 5.2 That, once published, the through the information management Further work is web-based resource of strategy in the longer term. required to information on community The intranet now determine options engagement that is being includes an area where for improved produced by the organization consultation information approaches for `Involve’, be used by all can be posted centrally. information departments when carrying management. out consultation. (awaiting Internet update) 2.2 The outcomes of all On hold As above As above Consultation results consultations should be are available on the made available to all services intranet and internet.
Further work is required to
Update report on the Overview and Scrutiny Public Engagement and Communication Task and Finish Group December 2007 determine options for improved approaches for information management.
Systems and Protocols
Recommendation/Target Action Status Comment Action needed/lead Cabinet taken recommendation 3.1 Appropriate corporate none unmet On 19/9/05 the Executive agreed Develop updated Corporate consultation mechanisms that a draft strategy be adopted communication and consultation was should be in place by the subject to consultation. A consultation strategy to planned and carried Autumn to give the Council Communications and Consultation include consultation out for the 2008/ 09 meaningful results Strategy was produced by protocol – September budget and 2008/ 11 Communications consultants 2007. Corporate plan. A baseline should be 5/10/05. Processes are in established in order that Strategy has been place for progress can be monitored An Implementation plan was revisited and community consultation and developed to implement the engagement & engagement on recommendations in June 2006, consultation strategy will future plans and however, all individuals identified be consulted on during budget processes have since left the council or been January with within the medium moved to other roles. public/partners/stakeholde term planning rs. process. The strategy has broadly not been implemented and will now need to be revisited in the light of structural changes and budget constraints to ensure the strategy is deliverable, to include revised consultation protocol.
Update report on the Overview and Scrutiny Public Engagement and Communication Task and Finish Group December 2007 3.2 Northampton Borough As above. Revised consultation As above. This will be Community Council should adopt an protocol to be developed as part of adopted following Engagement effective consultation protocol a revised communication and consultation on the above. Strategy to be to circulate internally and consultation strategy. considered by externally within the council Cabinet on 3 rd March which, 5.4 That as Portsmouth City Further consideration will subject to approval Council’s Consultation Toolkit be given to this in the light and budget has been recognised as an of consultation on the determined by example of best practice, this Community Engagement Council on 28 th document be considered as a & Consultation Strategy & February will enable template for a Consultation budget outcomes to the development of Toolkit for Borough Council determine the a costed delivery Staff resources/capacity to plan for engagement implement and consultation activity. 3.3 A Corporate Policy and Community Engagement & Community implementation process on Consultation Strategy will require Engagement consultation and engagement implementation guidance once Strategy to be should be produced. strategy is approved. Recognition considered by is given in the strategy to Cabinet on 3 rd 5.3 That a Strategy for engagement with partners. The March which, Community Engagement be LAA Board has also commissioned subject to approval devised which reflects a working group to explore joint and budget organisational priorities and partnership communication to determined by increased partnership support LAA activity and align Council on 28 th working in accordance with communications/consultation February will enable the Local Area Agreement between partners in this area. This the development of (LAA) and the Local Strategic work is at an early stage but a costed delivery Partnership (LSP)’s devolved reflects recognition of this as an plan for engagement structures. It should be evolving area. and consultation recognised that this is an activity.
Update report on the Overview and Scrutiny Public Engagement and Communication Task and Finish Group December 2007 evolving area.
3.4 The pro-forma used at Complete The protocol has been circulated Identified template needs To be considered the Focus Group sessions for use in focus group consultation to be incorporated into a within the should be adopted so that it activity. It was used at the recent template bank for general development of can used generically within housing repairs task and finish use consultation action the Council group consultation event. plan to implement the programme of consultation for 2008/ 09 currently being developed. 3.5 The results of the Complete The council has carried out Information management Complete consultation need to be built where extensive consultation over the strategy needed into the decision making, required summer to inform the development service planning and priority of the community vision, agreed in setting processes in the February 2007, and to inform the Council budget and priorities process. This has been used to inform the budget and priorities setting 5.1 That reports to all process and will subsequently New revised report Committees contain an inform the department service template clearly identifies implications paragraph on planning process. in the specific implications Community Engagement and section a section for Consultation. Meetings consultees. All reports for Services should act as the committee must follow the gatekeeper to ensure that all internal process to ensure reports contain these details that these mandatory and reject any reports that do fields are completed not contain the relevant before entering the information. decision making process.
3.6 Northampton Borough Work in Partly met Council has reviewed Area Establish and cascade A review of current
Update report on the Overview and Scrutiny Public Engagement and Communication Task and Finish Group December 2007 Council should make use of progress Partnerships and Forum groups good practice Neighbourhood neighbourhood working for into a Neighbourhood Partnership Partnership and consultation processes and approach. Workshops to involve Neighbourhood wider working potential the community took place during An arms length Management the budget consultation in January management agreement arrangements 2007. has been reached with should be NCC to integrate undertaken within Proposed transfer of Neighbourhood proposals for local Neighbourhood Management Management for managed service delivery functions will allow for better areas within NBC. options being 5.7 That the philosophy of integration of community proposed within the Neighbourhood Management engagement with consultation outline is extended across the whole activity. organisational town. Each area should have review. its own Communication/Participation 5.7, 5.8, 5.10 - These will all be Plan that is resourced by the subject to review in 2008/09 as Council. Within this there part of organisation review of should be a feedback service delivery options. Corporate mechanism. priorities around improvement & 5.8 That Neighbourhood forthcoming inspections Partnerships be fully necessitate deferring these actions resourced in order that their until after April 2008. role can be enhanced and that they form part of each area’s plan (as described in recommendation 5.7) should this be appropriate for that area.
5.10 That it be recognised that the Neighbourhood
Update report on the Overview and Scrutiny Public Engagement and Communication Task and Finish Group December 2007 boundaries are not fixed and may need to be reviewed once sufficient evidence for change is established.
3.7 Plain language should be In NBC does not have anybody Corporate standards to be Community used in all Council progress qualified to carry out formal developed as part of Engagement documents in order that any accreditation. Costs involved are revised communication Strategy to be member of the public is able significant and has not currently strategy considered by to access Council material. been identified as a corporate Training to be rolled out Cabinet on 3 rd priority. However, current for report writing/letter March which, communications and reputation writing as part of subject to approval management activity will include a Improvement Plan activity. and budget corporate approach to preparation determined by on publicity material and Council on 28 th documentation, to include advice February will enable 5.5 That for the public to be and guidance on clear Consider future the development of more trusting of the Council, communication. accreditation of key a costed delivery it has to be open and documents plan for engagement transparent in reporting all of Training and guidance planned on and consultation its activities. All public report writing and decision making activity. information should therefore processes to improve the quality be widely available and and clarity of reports – June 2007. published.
5.11 That the Council recognises that in order to consult with hard to reach groups it will have to consider how best to inform those in the community whose contact This is picked up in with the Council is minimal. o Community Engagement
Update report on the Overview and Scrutiny Public Engagement and Communication Task and Finish Group December 2007 These will include passive Strategy members of the community o Improvement Plan who have limited social o Equalities and Diversity engagement, members of the Plan community for whom English is not their first language, members of the community who take a disinterest in the administration of Local Government. In order to reach these groups the Council should consider how to ensure that information written in clear, concise language can be delivered beyond people’s front doors and/or is communicated to them via the social networks they are engaged in.
3.8 It would be helpful for a Partly met A glossary has been developed Develop/expand existing Awaiting guidance to be produced on and will be in Overview and glossary and publish confirmation from Council and Local Authority Scrutiny Toolkit and Co-optees Existing O&S glossary to scrutiny officers – terminology guidance book. Consideration to be made available on will be inserted be given to making this available Intranet/Internet by end of before final report on the councils internet/intranet December issued. when relaunched 3.9 Councillors should be None To be Feedback mechanisms to be Further work to be Community supported in their role liaising developed developed to support councillors in developed post election to Engagement between the Council and the their council and community roles. agree feedback Strategy to be
Update report on the Overview and Scrutiny Public Engagement and Communication Task and Finish Group December 2007 community and be provided There are currently no clear arrangements for all roles. considered by with appropriate means and feedback mechanisms in place to Cabinet on 3 rd methods for feeding back the report back either in a community To be picked up as part of March which, outcomes of the capacity or as a representative of Community Engagement subject to approval consultations in their the council on outside bodies, eg Strategy and budget communities LSP. determined by Council on 28 th Mechanisms need to be developed February will enable and agreed post election the development of a costed delivery plan for engagement and consultation activity.
Engagement with Diverse Communities
Recommendation/Target Action Status Comment Action needed/lead Cabinet taken recommendations 4.1 Current methods of Noted Partly Budget Consultation exercise used a Build on good practice Community consultation should be and met number of mechanisms to ensure that all and follow Engagement supplemented with other trialled communities were reached, this included recommendations of Strategy to be mechanisms to reach a Area Partnerships and Forums Strategy. considered by larger and more diverse workshops (with a dissemination impact Cabinet on 3 rd population allowing citizens of over 2000 people), press, web Picked up within draft March which, to initiate and add to the questionnaires, chamber of commerce Community Engagement subject to approval debate. For example and LSP with the potential to involve the and Consultation and budget community groups could be hard to reach communities. Strategy. determined by encouraged and supported Council on 28 th to bring issues, ideas and February will enable concerns directly to the the development of council a costed delivery plan for engagement
Update report on the Overview and Scrutiny Public Engagement and Communication Task and Finish Group December 2007 and consultation activity. 4.2 A corporate brand that Noted The new communications strategy will Defer for consideration in Will require further helps Northampton Borough commence initial work on aligning the future consideration when Council to bring consistency council’s existing branding more Council has and inspire confidence effectively to ensure a corporate Will need to be achieved should be developed approach to communications, reconsidered when improvement publications and publicity. Council has achieved objectives/positive improvement inspection The cost of developing a new corporate objectives/positive brand is currently not resourced within inspection existing budgets. External advice would suggest that timing of such an exercise is critical and would not be advisable until the council’s progress has improved, particularly following recent budgetary pressures which could result in further negative perceptions.
Future work and Review
Recommendation/Target Action Status Comment Action needed/lead Cabinet taken recommendations 5.1 The consultation Noted There are no current resources No current resources to Community exercise undertaken as part available to repeat the consultation repeat consultation Engagement of the review by the Task exercise carried out by the Task and exercise for comparative Strategy to be and Finish Group be used as Finish Group. purposes. considered by a benchmark in 12 months Cabinet on 3 rd time to see what Mandatory consultations will be carried Budget bid for March which, improvement have been out as required within available consultation and subject to approval made by the council resources engagement but will and budget
Update report on the Overview and Scrutiny Public Engagement and Communication Task and Finish Group December 2007 need, if agreed, to be determined by prioritised against Council on 28 th corporate objectives. February will enable the development of a costed delivery plan for engagement and consultation activity. 5.2. Focussed work should Noted No specific work has been undertaken Consider as part of Community be undertaken to ensure that to date but could be developed as part service plan for Engagement the Council is accessing all of a review of Neighbourhood Neighbourhood Strategy to be groups in the community in a Management support arrangements. Management function considered by systematic and regular way 2007/8 Cabinet on 3 rd March which, Will be picked up through subject to approval improvement/equalities and budget work determined by Council on 28 th February will enable the development of a costed delivery plan for engagement and consultation activity. 5.3 Progress review of this Noted Progress review has indicated that there As detailed, above Overview and review in 6 months has been little specific action taken on actions against Scrutiny to review many of the recommendations. The recommendations are/will progress on the primary reason for this has been that be implemented against implementation of those staff allocated specific tasks and new strategies & the community responsibilities as part of the original corporate priorities. Must engagement proposed work programme have either still be noted that original strategy in left the organisation or been moved to recommendations of September 2008
Update report on the Overview and Scrutiny Public Engagement and Communication Task and Finish Group December 2007 other posts in the organisation. Duties in review in 2005 were relation to the recommendations in this accepted without report have not been reassigned. feasibility study of resources available to In addition, many of the implement & may require recommendations may not be able to be some modification in light accommodated, as originally proposed, of corporate priorities & within current resources as there had available resources. been significant reductions in budgets since the time of the review. A bid for resources to implement, for example the procurement of consultation software, was not agreed as part of the 2007/08 budget setting process.
The development of the council’s communications strategy over the next 6 months will include corporate approaches to communications, publicity and corporate branding and should include approaches to consultation to ensure that communications are co-ordinated in a consistent way.
Remaining recommendations from 2007 review not matched with 2005 review
Update report on the Overview and Scrutiny Public Engagement and Communication Task and Finish Group December 2007 Recommendation/Target Action Status Comment Action needed/lead Cabinet taken recommendations 5.6 That the mechanisms for Noted – will be reviewed A review of current receiving public feedback be with Neighbourhood Neighbourhood examined and a policy Management/Area service Partnership and produced. The mechanisms arrangements Neighbourhood for reporting back from Management Neighbourhood Management arrangements need to ensure that should be information received is undertaken within reported to the relevant proposals for local Council departments and service delivery Councillors. options being proposed within the outline organisational review. 5.9 That Parish Councils be Will be picked up through Community Noted – will be reviewed A review of current contacted and provided with Engagement & Consultation Strategy & with Neighbourhood Neighbourhood details of the plans for roll out of citizen’s panel as means of Management/Area service Partnership and Neighbourhood Management. consultation, subject to review of arrangements Neighbourhood It should be stated that where available methodologies & resources. Management the Council is aware of any arrangements overlap of duties and in that should be area there is an active Parish undertaken within Council that the Parish proposals for local Council complies, for service delivery example by hosting public options being meetings. The Council would proposed within the not wish to be involved but it outline would need to ensure that organisational Parish Councils sign up to its review.
Update report on the Overview and Scrutiny Public Engagement and Communication Task and Finish Group December 2007 Protocol if a particular Parish Council, after public consultation, did not want a Neighbourhood Partnership within their area. This will form part of the area’s plan as described in recommendation 5.7. 5.13 That consideration be To be considered given to internal and external within the mediums for the consultation development of process to ensure that cost consultation action effective and modern forms plan to implement of communication are the programme of considered. consultation for 2008/ 09 currently being developed.
Update report on the Overview and Scrutiny Public Engagement and Communication Task and Finish Group December 2007 Agenda Item 5a
Item No. Appendices No
CABINET REPORT
LEISURE SERVICES – OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY Report Title RECOMMENDATIONS
AGENDA STATUS: PUBLIC
Cabinet Meeting Date: 3 March 2008
Key Decision: NO
Listed on Forward Plan: NO
Within Policy: YES
Policy Document: NO
Directorate: Customers and Service Delivery
Accountable Cabinet Member: Cllr Glynane
Ward(s) All
1 Purpose
1.1 To advise on any practical and other issues associated with implementing the recommendations of the Overview and Scrutiny Leisure Services Task and Finish Group’s report of March 2007;
1.2 To adopt those recommendations, subject to the minor changes noted;
1.3 To note progress already made in response to the Task and Finish Group’s findings.
2 Recommendations
Cabinet is recommended to:
2.1 Note progress in addressing the issues raised in the Task and Finish Group’s report;
D:\modernGov\Data\AgendaItemDocs\4\1\4\AI00024414\LeisureTFCabinetMar08v20.doc 2.2 Adopt the recommendations of the Task and Finish Group’s report, subject to the following points;
2.3 Interpret the recommendations which refer to strategy as referring to the wider cultural strategy currently under development, and to leisure services and activities within the broader scope of cultural services and activities;
2.4 Amend recommendation 6 to include the words “… and community cohesion” after “social inclusion” among the aims of leisure services;
2.5 Amend recommendation 13 to read “The Council ensures that the role of culture and its interdependence with other physical, economic, social and environmental factors will be recognised in the Local Development Framework”;
2.6 Amend recommendation 14 to read “The leisure survey, as included in the report, will be referred to in designing future leisure services surveys and questionnaires”.
3 Background and Issues
3.1 The Overview and Scrutiny Leisure Services Task and Finish Group (from this point referred to as the Task and Finish Group) met between September 2006 and January 2007, with the remit to review the objectives of this service, the extent to which it met them, and whether it provided value for money. Its report was presented to Cabinet on 2 July 2007, when it was resolved to consider the recommendations in the light of budgetary considerations and report back.
3.2 These recommendations have been considered by the Council’s culture and leisure team. In general they are supported, and should not pose significant problems either in organisation or resources. Action has already been taken to address the issues raised, as described below.
3.3 For ease of reference, the recommendations are listed as follows in bold , with commentary following:
Leisure Services Strategy 1 A three-year Leisure Services Strategy for Northampton will be devised by December 2007, making reference to longer-term issues such as the 2012 Olympics and Paralympics and the growth agenda. This is supported as a principle. Following the ‘Towards an Excellent Service’ (TAES) assessment, the focus was broadened to culture generally. Taking its lead from this recommendation, an interim cultural strategy has been approved by Cabinet at its 11 February 2008 meeting. The final strategy, following consultation, will include the items referred to in this recommendation. 2 The role of Leisure Services in delivering healthier communities outcomes will be described in the strategy.
D:\modernGov\Data\AgendaItemDocs\4\1\4\AI00024414\LeisureTFCabinetMar08v20.doc This is supported. The interim cultural strategy has taken this on board, and describes the contribution to health made by leisure and by culture more generally. 3 It is recognised within the strategy that the Council’s role is to identify the needs for leisure within Northampton and facilitate provision of relevant services. This is supported. The Strategy has therefore been written to emphasise this Council’s interest as facilitator as well as direct service provider. 4 Northampton Borough Council engages with key partners, including planning and regeneration within the Council, WNDC and Northamptonshire County Council, in the development of the leisure strategy. This is supported. The interim cultural strategy is intended to form the agenda for detailed discussions with partners, with a view to reaching an agreed vision and action plan. Vision for Leisure Services 5 A clear vision for the improvement and development for leisure services in Northampton will be established. This is supported. The final cultural strategy will complete this action, where the interim strategy sets out the rationale. Aims for Leisure Services 6 The aims of leisure services are adopted as follows: - Leisure services and programmes should, wherever possible, address the following key areas: - • To improve health • Enhance social inclusion • Promote access and participation • Enhance community development This is supported, but with the addition of the words “…and community cohesion” to the second bullet. The interim strategy has built on this recommendation, incorporating the additional focus on cohesion. Assessment of Needs and Appraisal of Options 7 [Council] ensures that the aims and objectives for leisure services will be supported by a clear monitoring and evaluation process. This is supported. Work has begun with the development of better local performance indicators. This will become an integral part of service and corporate monitoring and accountability. 8 A needs assessment of the leisure provision will be undertaken, particularly addressing the following: - • the growth agenda • the implications of the 2012 Olympics and Paralympics • planning and regeneration policy process • the health agenda
D:\modernGov\Data\AgendaItemDocs\4\1\4\AI00024414\LeisureTFCabinetMar08v20.doc This is supported. A study has been commissioned through the West Northamptonshire Development Corporation, funded by Sport England. This will complement a similar piece of work on cultural infrastructure needs. 9 The value for money of Northampton Borough Council’s major leisure facilities will be assessed and recommendations provided before any future decision on the provision of leisure services is made. This is supported. This confirms that decisions about delivery options will be based on value for money. Such assessments will be made following the needs analysis described above. 10 A thorough options appraisal process will be carried out before a decision on future provision is made. This is supported, and follows on from the previous recommendation. 11 A copy of the Task and Finish Group’s final report will be forwarded to the relevant Corporate Managers (Planning, Regeneration and Leisure) for these areas to ensure that action is taken on the recommendations. This is supported and has happened. It will be complemented by the further strategic documents discussed here. 12 A copy of the Task and Finish Group’s final report will be forwarded to the Chief Executive of the PCT and the Chair of Northamptonshire County Council’s Healthier Communities Scrutiny Committee for consideration. This is supported. Through the interim cultural strategy which has grown out of the recommendations, a broad partnership discussion will soon be taking place. Planning Policy 13 [The Council] ensures that the vision of leisure services will be included in the Local Development… Framework. This is supported in principle. It is important that the LDF explicitly recognises the contribution of leisure and other cultural activity. It may do this in a number of ways. Leisure Services Survey 14 The leisure survey, as [included in the report], will be used as a template for future leisure services questionnaires. This is supported in principle. The principles of that survey, and specific questions from it, will form a basis for future surveys and allow comparability, but it will be necessary to develop and add to this exercise as appropriate.
4 Options
4.1 The Task and Finish Group’s recommendations are sound and do not commit this Council to the use of resources or effort beyond what is already within budgets and plans. Developments in the service, particularly the involvement of the Government Monitoring Board and the Towards an Excellent Service assessment, mean that some of the recommendations are technically out of date. However, the principles behind them remain valid and so, subject to the
D:\modernGov\Data\AgendaItemDocs\4\1\4\AI00024414\LeisureTFCabinetMar08v20.doc following paragraph, in each case the preferred option is to adopt the recommendation as Council policy.
4.2 In several cases the programme for developing a cultural strategy, rather than just a leisure strategy, needs to be reflected. Part of that strategy will focus on the strategic direction of leisure within Northampton. The recommendations to which this particularly applies are numbers 1, 4 and 12.
4.3 Related to this, the opportunity should be taken to refer to leisure’s role in enhancing community cohesion as one of its aims. This is consistent with the developing strategy. Recommendation 6 refers.
4.4 Recommendations 13 and 14 may be too restrictive, although the underlying purpose behind them is sound.
4.5 These changes are reflected in the wording suggested in the Recommendations section above (paragraphs 2.3 to 2.6).
5 Implications (including financial implications)
5.1 Policy
5.1.1 No obvious implications.
5.2 Resources and Risk
5.2.1 The financial, physical and staff resources necessary to act on these recommendations are already in place. There are no obvious risks in adopting the recommendations.
5.3 Legal
5.3.1 No obvious implications.
5.4 Equality
5.4.1 The Task and Finish Group’s report recognises the issues of inclusive access. This is reflected in the proposed aims for the service, among other places. The cultural strategy will explicitly describe the Council’s aims for equality in this field, and will itself be subject to an Equalities Impact Assessment.
5.5 Crime and Disorder
5.5.1 References in the aims for leisure to social inclusion indicate recognition of the role of leisure in reducing the social problems that lead to crime and disorder. This is amplified in the interim cultural strategy.
5.6 Consultees (Internal and External)
5.6.1 The Task and Finish Group undertook consultation as described in its report.
5.7 How the Proposals deliver Priority Outcomes
D:\modernGov\Data\AgendaItemDocs\4\1\4\AI00024414\LeisureTFCabinetMar08v20.doc
5.7.1 Leisure contributes significantly to all of the Council’s current priorities. The interim cultural strategy sets out explicitly how it demonstrably improves safety, health and economic vitality and contributes to meeting customers’ needs and working in partnership.
6 Background Papers
6.1 Report of the Overview and Scrutiny Leisure Services Task and Finish Group
Thomas Hall Corporate Manager, Community Safety, Leisure and Town Centre Operations Ext. 7593
D:\modernGov\Data\AgendaItemDocs\4\1\4\AI00024414\LeisureTFCabinetMar08v20.doc
D:\modernGov\Data\AgendaItemDocs\4\1\4\AI00024414\LeisureTFCabinetMar08v20.doc Agenda Item 5b
Item No. Appendices No
CABINET REPORT
DISPERSAL ORDERS – OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY Report Title RECOMMENDATIONS
AGENDA STATUS: PUBLIC
Cabinet Meeting Date: 3 March 2008
Key Decision: NO
Listed on Forward Plan: NO
Within Policy: YES
Policy Document: NO
Directorate: Customers and Service Delivery
Accountable Cabinet Member: Cllr Glynane
Ward(s) All
1 Purpose
1.1 To advise on any practical and other issues associated with implementing the recommendations of the Overview and Scrutiny Community Safety (Evaluation of Dispersal Orders) Task and Finish Group’s report of March 2007;
1.2 To adopt those recommendations, subject to the minor changes noted;
1.3 To note progress already made in response to the Task and Finish Group’s findings.
2 Recommendations
Cabinet is recommended to:
2.1 Note progress in addressing the issues raised in the Task and Finish Group’s report;
D:\modernGov\Data\AgendaItemDocs\5\1\4\AI00024415\DispersalOrdersCabinetMar08v20.doc 2.2 Adopt the ten recommendations of the Task and Finish Group’s report, subject to two minor changes as follows;
2.3 Amend recommendation 7 such that the second sentence reads “The portfolio holder for community engagement and safety will receive an evaluation report following each Dispersal Order, and shall report on these regularly to the Safer and Stronger Northampton Partnership and to the Council”, and adopt the amended recommendation;
2.4 Amend recommendation 9 such that the second sentence reads “The portfolio holder for community engagement and safety will ensure that a programme to improve youth facilities across Northampton is included within the Integrated Youth Offer”, and adopt the amended recommendation.
3 Background and Issues
3.1 The Overview and Scrutiny Community Safety (Evaluation of Dispersal Orders) Task and Finish Group (from this point referred to as the Task and Finish Group) met between January and March 2007, with the remit to investigate the effectiveness of Dispersal Orders. Its report was presented to Cabinet on 2 July 2007, when it was resolved to consider the recommendations in the light of budgetary considerations and report back.
3.2 These recommendations have been considered by the Council’s community safety team. In general they are all supported, and should not pose significant problems either in organisation or resources. Action has already been taken to address the issues raised, as described below.
3.3 For ease of reference, the recommendations are listed as follows in bold , with commentary following:
1 Borough Councillors receive more training and understanding of the Dispersal Order process if they are to perform their community leadership role effectively. This is supported. Understanding of Dispersal Orders has now been incorporated into the training offered to all councillors on their responsibilities under Section 17 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998. 2 The Anti Social Behaviour Unit contributes to the Councillor Induction explaining how Councillors should engage in the Dispersal Order process. A copy of this report will be used as part of the Councillor Induction process. This is supported. As with 1 above, this now forms part of the basic Section 17 training within councillor induction. 3 Greater emphasis should be placed by the Police on the gathering of evidence in support of Dispersal Orders or Anti Social Behaviour Orders (ASBOs). This need should be emphasised to the new Community Safety Teams. This is supported. The system and paperwork is in place for this kind of evidence and intelligence to be gathered. It is still necessary to re-emphasise
D:\modernGov\Data\AgendaItemDocs\5\1\4\AI00024415\DispersalOrdersCabinetMar08v20.doc to members of Safer Communities Teams the importance of completing the relevant sections of the forms. 4 Measuring the effectiveness of Dispersal Orders is essential and the ComPaSS Unit will be asked to provide statistical data before a Dispersal Order is implemented, during and once it has been completed. This data will inform the evaluation process. This is supported. Following this recommendation, ComPaSS is now providing the required data. 5 Prevention is better than cure. Joint Action Groups (JAGs) will engage with the community and inform residents prior to the implementation of a Dispersal Order. Resolution of the problem rather than implementing a Dispersal Order is the preferred outcome. This is supported, and has been put into place. 6 Entry and Exit Strategies will form an integral part of the Dispersal Order Process. They will be formulated at the planning stage and without them the Dispersal Order is not an effective long-term intervention in the improvement of community safety. This is supported, and has been put into place. 7 Monitoring and reporting back are essential elements in the process of improving community confidence. The Portfolio Holder for Business Intelligence, E-Government and People Support will present regular reports, including a summary of the evaluation of Dispersal Orders to the Community Safety Partnership (CSP). This is supported in principle. It is suggested that the portfolio holder for community engagement and safety receive the report referred to under 8 below, and use it to report to the Safer Stronger Northampton Partnership and as appropriate within his reports to Council. 8 It is also essential to improve the confidence of local communities following a Dispersal Order. Therefore a précised evaluation report will be sent to the local residents with details of ongoing plans to maintain community safety. This is supported. A report is now sent to residents within the immediate Dispersal Order zone. However, any wider dissemination would incur additional costs for which there is currently no budget. 9 The provision of diversionary youth facilities appears to be a potential contributor to the resolution of problems and therefore the lack of need to implement Dispersal Orders. The Portfolio Holder with responsibility for Community Safety will ensure that there is a programme to improve youth facilities across Northampton as an “invest to save programme”. This is supported in principle. The Integrated Youth Offer provides the appropriate opportunity to take this forward, and is doing so. Young people are now regularly involved in the groups referred to under recommendation 5. 10 Northampton Borough Council, and other Agencies, will work towards zero Dispersal Orders and see this as a success with problems being resolved at an earlier stage. If Dispersal Orders are
D:\modernGov\Data\AgendaItemDocs\5\1\4\AI00024415\DispersalOrdersCabinetMar08v20.doc used it indicates that problems are being allowed to escalate where this level of intervention is required. This is supported. There is clear evidence from the Anti-Social Behaviour Unit of problems being successfully tackled at an early stage. There are no direct resource implications from this recommendation.
4 Options
4.1 The Task and Finish Group’s recommendations are sound and do not commit this Council to the use of resources or effort beyond what is already within budgets and plans. Therefore, subject to the following paragraph, in each case the preferred option is to adopt the recommendation as Council policy.
4.2 In two cases other developments mean that the wording could usefully be changed to achieve the same desired result. This would reflect the current portfolio designations, the re-launch of the community safety partnership as the ‘Safer Stronger Northampton Partnership’, and the launch of the Integrated Youth Offer as a partnership approach to improving the life of young people in the area.
4.3 Those changes are reflected in the wording suggested in the Recommendations section above (paragraphs 2.3 and 2.4).
5 Implications (including financial implications)
5.1 Policy
5.1.1 No implications.
5.2 Resources and Risk
5.2.1 The financial, physical and staff resources necessary to act on these recommendations are already in place. There are no obvious risks in adopting the recommendations.
5.3 Legal
5.3.1 Successful preventative work should see a reduction in the need for Dispersal Orders and the legal processes associated with administering them.
5.4 Equality
5.4.1 Dispersal Orders are sometimes erroneously seen as applying only to young people. As with all measures against anti-social behaviour it is important to ensure they do not have an inappropriate or disproportionate negative effect on any section of the community.
5.5 Crime and Disorder
5.5.1 Dispersal Orders are part of a range of potential responses to local issues of anti-social behaviour. This Council can play an active part in reducing such
D:\modernGov\Data\AgendaItemDocs\5\1\4\AI00024415\DispersalOrdersCabinetMar08v20.doc issues through the judicious use of these responses. These recommendations help to establish how Dispersal Orders can be used to the greatest benefit.
5.6 Consultees (Internal and External)
5.6.1 The Task and Finish Group undertook consultation as described in its report.
5.7 How the Proposals deliver Priority Outcomes
5.7.1 Reduction of crime and anti-social behaviour, and improvement in perceptions of safety, are identified in the Corporate Plan as top of local people’s priorities.
6 Background Papers
6.1 Report of the Overview and Scrutiny Community Safety (Evaluation of Dispersal Orders) Task and Finish Group
Thomas Hall Corporate Manager, Community Safety, Leisure and Town Centre Operations Ext. 7593
D:\modernGov\Data\AgendaItemDocs\5\1\4\AI00024415\DispersalOrdersCabinetMar08v20.doc Northampton Borough Council - Overview & Scrutiny - Task & Finish Groups and Working Parties - Work Programme 07/08
Draft for comment 27/2/2008
Responsible Lead Portfolio Scoping Final Status Lead Officer OSC Advisor Jul-07 Aug-07 Sep-07 Oct-07 Nov-07 Dec-07 Jan-08 Feb-08 Mar-08 Apr-08 May-08 Committee Topic Objective Councillor Holder Meeting Report Monitoring
To identify the benefits to well-being Alcohol Related accrued through the introduction of On target to Report Report Monitoring - expected Violence/Polycarbonate Paul Varnsverry & Northamptonshire Northamptonshire Brendan 1 polycarbonate glasses within specified report March Jul-07 Mar-08 due 18 to O&S November 2008 glasses (Joint review with Portia Wilson County Council County Council Glynane localities such as city centres, sporting 18 2008 NCC) March 1 (O&S1) and leisure venues
To make recommendations arising Reported from the review to Cabinet to assist in August 2007 the budget process and medium term Monitored in Met Voluntary Sector financial strategy for 2008-1011. To Brendan December, 1 December David Palethorpe Nicci Marzec MF/BB Jun-07 Jul-07 Reported Monitored Funding/Partnerships review the organsiations currently Glynane Considered 2007 - being funded. To review the overall considering reconvening VCS partnership strategy against the reconvening national situation of funding.
Reported in Met to monitor September Convened for 2007 Met recommendations To review NBC's engagement new 18/2/08 - one Brendan Final from 2005 and 2007 1 Community Engagement activities, including neighbourhood Paul Varnsverry Nicci Marzec MF/BB Jul-07 Sep-07 Scoped Monitored Community off meeting Glynane Report reports. Monitoring management Engagement to receive expected at O&S1 Strategy results of August/September 08 consultation
Review of the current powers and those of partner organisations. Review of the extent of the Borough On target to Historic Report Conservation areas including the report to Richard 1 Buildings/Regeneration John Caswell Chris Cavanagh MF Sep-07 Mar-08 Scoped to O&S management plan Programme in O&S 1 13 Church Opportunities hand. Review proposalsfor mapping of March 08 1 buildings that are not listed but are of value to the Town.
To prepare for the Councillor Call for Overview and Brendan Report Expected November/ Councillor Call for Action On target Andrew Simpson BB/MF Nov-07 Apr-08 Scoped Action Scrutiny Officers Glynane to O&S1 December 2008 1
Richard Regeneration Assessing the costs of consultants Not started Tony Clarke Chris Cavanagh Church 1 Not identified Work surrounding To investigate performance and what Brendan Northampton Safer Stronger Not started David Palethorpe the Council is contributing Glynane 1 Communities Partnership Thomas Hall Not identified Partnership working with How the partnershop is defined and Richard Not started Andrew Simpson Chris Cavanagh WNDC how it can be improved Church Agenda Item13 1 Not identified
Does not include substantial workload of committees and development of overview and scrutiny