020 8547 5125) e.mail: [email protected] ...

For enquiries on this agenda please contact: Wendy Windmill, 020 8547 5020 (Fax: 020 8547 5125) e.mail: [email protected] This agenda is available on www.kingston.gov.uk/council/CommitteeMinutes 12 March 2007

EXECUTIVE

The EXECUTIVE will meet at THE GUILDHALL, HIGH STREET, KINGSTON UPON

THAMES on TUESDAY 20 MARCH 2007 at 7:30 pm

Councillor Derek Osbourne (Chair) - Leader of the Council Councillor Patricia Bamford - Children and Young People’s Services Councillor Rolson Davies - Health and Community Councillor Simon James - Transport, Planning and Regeneration Councillor Ian Reid - Improvement and Performance Councillor Liz Shard - Sustainability and Biodiversity Councillor Penny Shelton - Housing and Adult Services

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

From 7.30 pm, for up to thirty minutes, members of the public may put questions to the Executive and officers relating to the functions and responsibilities of the Executive. The questions may be sent in writing by e mail or fax before the meeting or handed in at the start of the meeting on the form provided. For enquiries please contact Wendy Windmill, 020 8547 5020 (Fax: 020 8547 5125) e.mail: [email protected] The questions will be considered in the order of their receipt. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Contributions from members of the Authority and from members of the public can be made on items which appear on the Executive agenda. A place is reserved for members of the public wishing to address the Executive. When their contributions are completed, they shall retire to the public gallery. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST Members of the Executive are invited to identify any personal or prejudicial interests relevant to items on this agenda.

2

APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE EXECUTIVE MEMBERS’ INFORMATION ROUND-UP CHIEF EXECUTIVE’S and DIRECTORS’ UPDATES MINUTES To approve as a correct record the minutes of the previous meeting.

1. GRANTS TO VOLUNTARY ORGANISATIONS: PROJECT

GRANTS 2007/08 Appendix A

2. ANNUAL AUDIT AND INSPECTION LETTER FOR THE ROYAL

BOROUGH OF KINGSTON UPON THAMES - AUDIT 2005/06

Copies of the Letter were circulated to all Members of the Council as Appendix A to the agenda for the Audit Committee’s meeting of 13 March 2007. Please bring the Letter to the meeting. Mr Hamid Khan, the Audit Manager from the Audit Commission will attend the meeting to present the Letter.

3. COMPREHENSIVE PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT - INSPECTION OUTCOMES

(a) FIT FOR THE FUTURE – LEARNING FROM CORPORATE

ASSESSMENT

Appendix B

(b) ACTION PLAN IN RESPONSE TO THE JOINT AREA REVIEW

AND ENHANCED YOUTH SERVICE INSPECTION

Appendix C

4. LOCAL AREA AGREEMENT Appendix D 5. CLIMATE CHANGE AND ENERGY STRATEGY Appendix E 6. GREEN SPACES STRATEGY Appendix F 7. REVIEW OF THE ROLES AND FUNCTIONS OF

NEIGHBOURHOOD COMMITTEES Appendix G

8. ADMISSION ARRANGEMENTS FOR COMMUNITY SCHOOLS

FOR SEPTEMBER 2008 Appendix H

9. LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK: LOCAL DEVELOPMENT

SCHEME AND MEMBER STEERING GROUP Appendix I

10. SAVING UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICIES Appendix J 11. NON DOMESTIC RATES – DISCRETIONARY RATE RELIEF Appendix K 12. COUNCIL TAX LOCAL DISCOUNTS Appendix L

3

13. LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (LIP) FUNDING 2007- 2008

ALLOCATION OF BIDS Appendix M

14. BUDGET MONITORING 2006/07 – MONTH 10 Appendix N 15. IRRECOVERABLE DEBTS FOR WRITE OFF Appendix O 16. RETIREMENT AND STAFFING REDUCTIONS POLICIES Appendix P 17. URGENT ITEMS AUTHORISED BY THE CHAIR 18. EXCLUSION OF PRESS AND PUBLIC

The following reports contain exempt information in relation to reports set out in the non-exempt section of the agenda. These matters may be considered in private if the Executive agrees that, under Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public are excluded from the meeting on the grounds that it is likely that exempt information, as defined in the paragraphs 1 and 3 of Part I of Schedule 12A to the Act, would be disclosed. This paragraph covers information about the financial or business affairs of any particular person. IRRECOVERABLE DEBTS FOR WRITE OFF – Annex 1 to Appendix O RETIREMENT AND STAFFING REDUCTIONS POLICIES – Annex 1 to Appendix P

APPENDIX A

Executive, 20 March 2007

GRANTS TO VOLUNTARY ORGANISATIONS: PROJECT GRANTS 2007/08 Report by the Head of Democratic Services and Partnership Executive Member for Health and Community

Purpose This report presents the details of applications from voluntary organisations for Project grants in 2007/08 for consideration. Action proposed by the Executive Member for Health and Community: The Executive is requested to: agree the amount of grant aid to be offered to the voluntary organisations for 2007/08 as set out in the report. Reason for action proposed So that decisions can be made on applications for grant aid from voluntary organisations. BACKGROUND 1. Following the Review of Grant making carried out in 2002, the Council adopted a

new approach to the funding of voluntary organisations for 2003/04 and beyond, as follows:

• One corporate grants budget rather than a number of Directorate based

budgets; • Strategic three year funding for key local organisations extended; • resources targeted at services and activities that reflect the Council’s priorities; • support to continue to be given for annual project work; and • the grant making process to encourage and spread good practice In 2006, it was agreed that the Grants and Awards Panel would be discontinued and strategic and project grants would be considered by the Executive.

APPLICATIONS FOR 2007/08 2. The following applications have been received:

23 applications for strategic funding (total bid £808,813) 45 project applications (total bid £128,834), and 34 small grant applications (total bid £20,647)

A2

Total: 102 applications totalling £958,294. A further £465,731 is committed for 19 three year strategic grants making a total bid of £1,424,025.

3. The process for considering these applications is as follows:

Executive Meeting 23 January 2007 Strategic grant Applications 13 February 2007 Project grant applications 20 March 2007 Project grant applications

4. Project Grants are annual grants of between £750 and £3,000 which are for one-

off projects/events or running costs, although organisations are encouraged not to become dependent on funding from the Council in the long term. The following is a summary of Council priorities and applications are expected to meet one or more of these.

General Priorities: • Projects which promote social inclusion – accessible services/activities,

particularly for people with disabilities and disadvantaged groups. • Projects which develop services and activities that will meet the needs of the

most vulnerable members of society. • Projects which promote cultural diversity in the Borough and provide a wide

range of cultural activities. • Projects which raise awareness about the environment and healthy living.

Sports Priorities: 1) Promote out of school physical activity for young people. 2) Increase access to physical activity opportunities for adults, families and people

with disabilities. 3) Improve the range and quality of sports and recreation activities and venues

where there are limited sports and recreation opportunities for children.

Arts Priorities: 1) Provide opportunities for young people, aged 11-18, to enjoy and participate in

high quality arts events or projects. Applicants will be expected to explain how they will involve young people in the planning of such events and how they will be evaluated. Preference will be given to projects that target young people who have relatively few opportunities to engage with the arts and, ideally, that can in part be enjoyed by the wider community.

2) Provide opportunities for people to enjoy artistic events of a high quality, especially those that are promoted in a way that makes them as accessible as possible (such events are likely to have a professional element, although work of a professional standard would satisfy this criterion even if it was not provided on a fully professional basis).

3) Provide good quality arts projects and events that meet the needs of people who, for whatever reason, may not be able to take advantage of “mainstream” provision.

4) Contribute to improved access to arts venues and spaces through physical improvements, signage and information.

5) Contribute to the development of schemes that enable artists and creative people to have their professional base and premises in the Borough.

A3

Play Priorities: Applications for projects related to children’s play should meet both of the following criteria: 1) Actively work towards including children: with disabilities and special needs, with

English as an additional language, with anti-social behaviour, from low income families, from refugee families or children displaying challenging behaviour.

2) Be able to show that they have either already had success in this work or, if not, an action plan to show how they plan to include these children in their groups in the future.

In addition we are unlikely to fund any group for play activity if they are not registered, or in the process of registering, with Ofsted (if they are able to be).

Youth Priorities: 1) Provide positive activity programmes for vulnerable young people. 2) Provide informal learning activities to enable young people to gain recorded and

accredited outcomes. 3) Provide opportunities for young people to participate in, and influence, decision

making at local and national level. • Note: ‘young people’ are considered by the Youth Service to be those aged 13-

19

Environmental Priorities: Applications for environmental projects should meet all three of the following criteria: 1) Increase environmental knowledge and understanding. 2) Address one or more of the following aims:

• reduce waste and increase recycling • save energy, promote alternative and renewable energy, and cut emissions of

Carbon Dioxide • reduce the need to travel and promote the use of public transport, cycling and

walking • cut pollution and encourage improvements to the quality of air, water and land • maintain or improve natural resources through conservation and sustainable

consumption • protect and enhance biodiversity and the natural environment • involve the community in environmental action

3) Be compatible with the aims of Sustainable Development, which brings together: • environmental protection and enhancement , • quality of life – both material wealth and social and cultural well-being, • providing for the future, • equity and fairness – between individuals, generations and countries

5. 45 applications were received for project funding for 2007/08 with grant requests

totalling £128,834. One organisation, which applied for a strategic grant has been referred for consideration as a project grant.

A4

6. The grants in this report are in the following categories • Sports • Arts • Play • Youth • Environment

Applications for grants in the categories of Social Welfare, Community Language and Culture and Tourism and Events were considered at the Executive meeting on 13th February 2007 and £30,320 was committed.

BUDGET FOR 2007/08 7. The total budget for 2007/08 is £1,084,300, which includes a 2% uplift for inflation.

19 organisations are on three year funding and the commitment to these organisations is £465,731.

8. A total of £1,054,696 has been committed to strategic and development applications at the Executive meeting held on 23rd January. A figure of £29,604 would then have remained in the budget for allocation to the 45 project applications and 34 small grant applications (total bid £149,481). As this figure would have been a significant reduction in the budget available for project and small grants, the grants budget has been increased by £40,000. If £10,000 is set aside for small grants, a sum of £59,604 will therefore be available for project grants.

9. In addition, in line with the policy programme to invest in environmental projects, a

further £10,000 is earmarked for environmental projects and £15,000 of the budget set aside for the Community Furniture Project is being added to that amount, making a total of £25,000. The Community Furniture project is unlikely to require its full allocation in 2007/08 because of increases in income and grants carried over.

SUMMARY OF APPLICATIONS 10. The summary of applications for project grants is included at Annex 2. Details of

grant aid applications which the Executive is required to approve, are provided in Annex 1.

STATUTORY POWERS FOR GRANT MAKING 11. Grant-aid for the grants contained in this report may be authorised under the

following Local Government Acts:

• Section 19 Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976 gives local authorities power to provide premises for the use of clubs or societies having athletic, social or recreational objectives; to make recreational facilities available free or at reduced charges to such people as they think fit and to make grants or loans to help voluntary bodies provide recreational facilities of a kind which the local authorities have power to provide. This covers recreational facilities inside and outside of the local authority.

• Section 145 of the Local Government Act 1972, relating to the provision of

entertainment, which gives local authorities the power to contribute towards the expenses of anything necessary or expedient for the provision of entertainment of

A5

any nature, and for the development and improvement of the Council’s understanding and practice of the arts.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS 12. There are potential environmental benefits from encouraging voluntary

organisations to adopt good environmental practice. The grant recommended in the Environment category will support environmental education and awareness of young people.

TIMESCALE 13. When decisions have been made on the allocation of grants to individual voluntary

organisations, the organisations will be informed. The grant payments will be made after 1 April 2007.

Background Papers Author of the Report - Gillian Pennington (020 8547 6072) and Barnaby Hopson (020 8547 6068) • Applications from the voluntary organisations • Full reports on each organisation’s application Held by Kingston Voluntary Sector Unit (020 8547 6068/6072)

A6

Gra

nt A

id -

Pro

ject

App

licat

ions

200

7/08

AN

NE

X 1

Org

anis

atio

nD

etai

lsA

pplic

atio

n fo

r 200

7/08

Gra

nt

06/0

7R

ecom

men

datio

n 20

07/0

8

SPO

RTS

Avo

ndal

e G

ymna

stic

s C

lub

This

clu

b pr

ovid

es g

ymna

stic

s co

achi

ng

for o

ver 4

00 y

oung

peo

ple

of a

ll ag

es

from

bas

ic to

nat

iona

l lev

els.

£1,0

00To

con

tribu

te to

war

ds th

e co

sts

of

a tu

mbl

e tra

ck to

hel

p w

ith

gym

nast

ics

train

ing.

n/a

£1,0

00Th

is w

ill b

e a

usef

ul n

ew p

iece

of

equi

pmen

t tha

t will

impr

ove

the

safe

ty a

nd

deve

lopm

ent o

f the

you

ng g

ymna

sts.

Sp

ecia

l Con

ditio

ns:

see

belo

w*

Mal

den

Wan

dere

rs

Cric

ket C

lub

The

club

pro

vide

s cr

icke

t coa

chin

g an

d co

mpe

titiv

e ga

mes

for p

eopl

e of

all

ages

.£3

,000

Tow

ards

the

cost

of c

ricke

t co

achi

ng in

volv

ing

200

girls

and

bo

ys.

£2,0

00£1

,500

RB

K h

as p

rovi

ded

tape

red

fund

ing

for t

his

coac

hing

for t

he la

st th

ree

year

s, o

ne

furth

er c

ontri

butio

n is

reco

mm

ende

d.

Spec

ial C

ondi

tions

: see

bel

ow*

Spa

rtan

Sw

imm

ing

Clu

b fo

r Phy

sica

lly

Dis

able

d

Spa

rtan

Sw

imm

ing

Clu

b pr

ovid

es

spec

ialis

ed s

wim

min

g in

stru

ctio

n an

d w

ater

enj

oym

ent f

or a

nyon

e w

ho h

as a

ph

ysic

al d

isab

ility

and

has

65

mem

bers

.

£3,5

00To

pay

for a

nnua

l poo

l hire

of t

he

Mal

den

Cen

tre.

£3,5

00£3

,000

The

max

imum

gra

nt o

f £3,

000

is

reco

mm

ende

d to

cov

er th

e co

st o

f poo

l hi

re. S

peci

al C

ondi

tions

: 1) T

he c

lub

to

wor

k w

ith th

e C

omm

unity

Spo

rts C

oach

for

Dis

able

d pe

ople

to e

ncou

rage

mor

e yo

ung

disa

bled

sw

imm

ers

to jo

in th

e cl

ub. 2

) see

be

low

*Fr

iend

s of

Tol

wor

th

Gym

nast

ics

Clu

bTh

is c

lub

prov

ides

gym

nast

ics

coac

hing

fo

r you

ng p

eopl

e, in

clud

ing

thos

e w

ith

spec

ial n

eeds

, fro

m b

asic

to n

atio

nal

leve

ls. T

hey

have

ove

r 850

use

rs.

£3,0

00To

con

tribu

te to

war

ds th

e co

st o

f ne

w s

afet

y m

attin

g th

at w

ill b

e of

pa

rticu

lar b

enef

it to

use

rs w

ith

disa

bilit

ies.

£2,0

00

(aw

arde

d in

20

05/0

6)

£2,0

00A

con

tribu

tion

is re

com

men

ded

beca

use

repl

acem

ent s

afet

y m

ats

wou

ld e

nabl

e be

tter p

rovi

sion

and

saf

ety

for s

peci

al

need

s ch

ildre

n. S

peci

al C

ondi

tions

: see

be

low

*To

lwor

th Y

outh

B

owlin

g C

lub

This

clu

b or

gani

ses

a w

eekl

y te

n pi

n bo

wlin

g le

ague

and

pro

vide

s co

achi

ng

for 7

0 yo

ung

bow

lers

at t

he C

harr

ingt

on

Bow

l in

Tolw

orth

.

£3,0

00To

war

ds th

e co

st o

f coa

chin

g ai

ds,

atte

ndin

g to

urna

men

ts a

nd

bow

ling

equi

pmen

t for

ver

y yo

ung

bow

lers

.

n/a

£0B

owlin

g is

not

a p

riorit

y sp

ort f

or th

e C

ounc

il an

d it

wou

ld b

e m

ore

appr

opria

te

for t

his

grou

p to

con

side

r app

lyin

g fo

r a

Nei

ghbo

urho

od G

rant

in th

e fu

ture

.£1

3,50

0£7

,500

*Spe

cial

Con

ditio

ns: A

ll or

gani

satio

ns in

re

ceip

t of a

Cou

ncil

gran

t for

spo

rting

ac

tiviti

es a

re e

xpec

ted

to p

artic

ipat

e in

the

Kin

gsto

n Fe

stiv

al o

f Spo

rt as

wel

l as

the

Lond

on Y

outh

Gam

es.

A7

Gra

nt A

id -

Pro

ject

App

licat

ions

200

7/08

AN

NE

X 1

Org

anis

atio

nD

etai

lsA

pplic

atio

n fo

r 200

7/08

Gra

nt

06/0

7R

ecom

men

datio

n 20

07/0

8

AR

TSG

reen

The

atre

C

ompa

nyTh

is th

eatre

com

pany

cre

ates

op

portu

nitie

s fo

r you

ng p

eopl

e to

pa

rtici

pate

in a

ll as

pect

s of

thea

tre,

incl

udin

g pe

rform

ing,

writ

ing,

dire

ctin

g,

tech

nica

l des

ign

and

oper

atio

n. T

hey

have

45

mem

bers

and

put

on

5-7

prod

uctio

ns a

yea

r with

typi

cal a

udie

nces

of

50.

£3,0

00To

war

ds th

e co

st o

f bui

ldin

g m

aint

enan

ce.

£1,0

00£2

,000

The

orga

nisa

tion

wor

ks h

ard

to m

aint

ain

its

prem

ises

, whi

ch a

re le

ased

from

the

Cou

ncil,

and

it is

reco

mm

ende

d th

at a

co

ntrib

utio

n be

mad

e. S

peci

al C

ondi

tion:

1)

a fu

ndra

isin

g an

d bu

sine

ss p

lan

to b

e su

bmitt

ed 2

) quo

tes

for a

ll bu

ildin

g w

ork

to

be s

ubm

itted

prio

r to

any

gran

t pay

men

t.

ITC

Fin

e A

rtsIT

C (I

nstit

ute

of T

amil

Cul

ture

) Fin

e A

rts

prom

otes

aw

aren

ess,

app

reci

atio

n an

d un

ders

tand

ing

of S

outh

Asi

an D

ance

and

re

late

d pe

rform

ing

arts

. The

y or

gani

se

wor

ksho

ps fo

r you

ng p

eopl

e an

d st

age

mul

ti-cu

ltura

l con

certs

with

aud

ienc

es o

f up

to 6

00.

£1,3

20To

war

ds th

e co

st o

f hiri

ng

prem

ises

for r

ehea

rsal

s an

d a

final

pe

rform

ance

for t

heir

2007

pr

ogra

mm

e in

volv

ing

80 y

oung

pe

ople

.

£1,0

00£1

,000

The

orga

nisa

tion

has

a go

od tr

ack

reco

rd o

f pu

tting

on

high

qua

lity

perfo

rman

ces.

Kin

gsto

n A

rts

Ass

ocia

tion

KA

A s

uppo

rts th

e K

ings

ton

Mus

ic a

nd

Arts

Ser

vice

. Org

anis

atio

ns th

at c

ome

unde

r its

um

brel

la a

re th

e K

ings

ton

You

th C

once

rt B

and

and

Kin

gsto

n P

rimar

y S

choo

ls M

usic

Ass

ocia

tion

£3,0

00To

war

ds th

e co

st o

f six

mus

ic,

danc

e an

d dr

ama

fest

ival

s fo

r K

ings

ton

scho

ols

invo

lvin

g 2,

000

youn

g pe

ople

and

46

scho

ols.

£2,2

50

(aw

arde

d in

20

05/0

6)

£0It

is c

onsi

dere

d in

appr

opria

te fo

r a C

ounc

il se

rvic

e to

app

ly fo

r fun

ding

for a

n ac

tivity

th

at it

dire

ctly

pro

vide

s an

d th

ese

fest

ival

s sh

ould

be

self

finan

cing

.

Loki

Mus

icLO

KI o

rgan

ises

mus

ic c

once

rts a

nd

wor

ksho

ps a

bout

mus

ic fr

om d

iffer

ent

hist

oric

al p

erio

ds a

nd c

ultu

res.

£3,0

00To

war

ds th

e K

ings

ton

Ear

ly M

usic

Fe

stiv

al in

200

7.

£2,0

00

(pai

d vi

a K

ings

ton

Arts

C

ounc

il)

£0A

n in

com

plet

e ap

plic

atio

n fro

m a

n or

gani

satio

n th

at h

as n

ot y

et a

ddre

ssed

the

conc

erns

rais

ed la

st y

ear.

A8

Gra

nt A

id -

Pro

ject

App

licat

ions

200

7/08

AN

NE

X 1

Org

anis

atio

nD

etai

lsA

pplic

atio

n fo

r 200

7/08

Gra

nt

06/0

7R

ecom

men

datio

n 20

07/0

8

Ora

nge

Tree

The

atre

The

Ora

nge

Tree

pro

vide

s a

year

roun

d pr

ogra

mm

e of

pro

fess

iona

l the

atre

, as

wel

l as

com

mun

ity a

nd e

duca

tion

prog

ram

mes

with

wor

ksho

ps a

nd

proj

ects

for y

oung

peo

ple.

£2,0

00To

war

ds a

wee

k lo

ng P

rimar

y S

choo

l Sha

kesp

eare

resi

denc

y pr

ogra

mm

e in

Jan

uary

200

8. T

his

will

invo

lve

100

youn

g pe

ople

from

fo

ur K

ings

ton

prim

ary

scho

ols.

£0

(200

6/07

), £

1,00

0 (2

005/

06)

£1,0

00Th

is p

roje

ct w

ould

link

in w

ith th

e R

ose

of

Kin

gsto

n’s

educ

atio

n an

d ou

treac

h pr

ogra

mm

e bu

t a re

duce

d am

ount

is

reco

mm

ende

d as

sch

ools

cou

ld b

e ex

pect

ed to

con

tribu

te m

ore.

Spe

cial

C

ondi

tion:

The

thea

tre is

to li

aise

with

K

MA

S, R

BK

's P

rinci

pal A

rts O

ffice

r, th

e R

ose

of K

ings

ton

and

the

loca

l sch

ools

cl

uste

r.S

ahel

iS

ahel

i is

a gr

oup

for

Asi

an w

omen

. It

orga

nise

s m

eetin

gs a

nd d

iscu

ssio

n ev

enin

gs, o

utin

gs a

nd c

ultu

ral e

vent

s w

ith th

e ai

m o

f com

batin

g is

olat

ion

for

wom

en in

the

Asi

an c

omm

unity

. The

y ha

ve 2

20 m

embe

rs.

£3,0

00To

war

ds th

eir p

rogr

amm

e of

ac

tiviti

es in

200

7/08

.£1

,000

£1,0

00Th

e gr

oup

cont

ribut

e to

the

cultu

ral l

ife o

f th

e bo

roug

h an

d a

gra

nt th

e sa

me

as la

st

year

is re

com

men

ded.

Spe

cial

Con

ditio

n:

Sah

eli a

re to

mak

e us

e of

KV

A’s

free

CaS

H

serv

ice

to re

view

the

way

they

pre

sent

thei

r ac

coun

ts.

Sak

oba

Dan

ce fo

r All

Sak

oba

Dan

ce T

heat

re ru

n ‘p

ost-m

oder

n’

Afri

can

danc

e w

orks

hops

and

put

on

perfo

rman

ces

at lo

cal s

choo

ls.

£3,0

00To

war

ds th

e co

st o

f dan

ce

wor

ksho

ps in

volv

ing

120

youn

g pe

ople

from

four

Kin

gsto

n sc

hool

s.

£2,3

00£2

,000

The

grou

p ha

s an

exc

elle

nt tr

ack

reco

rd o

f hi

gh q

ualit

y w

ork

in th

e bo

roug

h an

d a

cont

ribut

ion

to th

ese

wor

ksho

ps is

re

com

men

ded.

Spe

cial

Con

ditio

n:

Bre

akdo

wn

of th

e pr

ojec

ts a

ctua

l inc

ome

and

expe

nditu

re to

be

supp

lied

once

the

activ

ity h

as ta

ken

plac

e.S

arvo

day

Hin

du

Ass

ocia

tion

Sar

voda

y H

indu

Ass

ocia

tion

orga

nise

s so

cial

, cul

tura

l and

relig

ious

act

iviti

es a

nd

prom

otes

the

gene

ral w

elfa

re o

f the

G

ujar

ati s

peak

ing

com

mun

ity.

£3,0

00To

war

ds th

e co

st o

f the

Nav

ratri

fe

stiv

al in

200

7, w

hich

take

s pl

ace

over

nin

e ni

ghts

in O

ctob

er w

ith

audi

ence

s of

300

-1,2

00 p

eopl

e.

£1,2

50£1

,000

This

fest

ival

is v

ery

impo

rtant

to th

e G

uaja

rati

com

mun

ity. H

owev

er, h

all h

ire is

lik

ely

to b

e le

ss th

an b

udge

ted

and

the

grou

p ha

d a

larg

e su

rplu

s la

st y

ear (

year

en

d O

ct '0

5) th

eref

ore

a re

duce

d am

ount

is

reco

mm

ende

d.

A9

Gra

nt A

id -

Pro

ject

App

licat

ions

200

7/08

AN

NE

X 1

Org

anis

atio

nD

etai

lsA

pplic

atio

n fo

r 200

7/08

Gra

nt

06/0

7R

ecom

men

datio

n 20

07/0

8

Sto

nele

igh

You

th

Orc

hest

ra S

ocie

tyTh

e so

ciet

y ru

ns a

mai

n or

ches

tra a

nd a

tra

inin

g or

ches

tra in

volv

ing

a to

tal o

f 81

youn

g m

usic

ians

(17

of w

ho c

ome

from

K

ings

ton)

.

£3,0

00To

war

ds m

usic

al e

quip

men

t and

sc

ores

to h

elp

recr

uit a

nd re

tain

th

eir y

oung

er m

embe

rs, a

ged

10-

12.

£0£0

The

orch

estra

is b

ased

out

side

the

boro

ugh

and

has

limite

d lin

ks w

ith th

e bo

roug

h an

d lo

cal y

oung

peo

ple

can

now

dev

elop

thei

r m

usic

al ta

lent

s w

ith th

e ne

w T

ham

es Y

outh

O

rche

stra

.S

urbi

ton

Roy

al B

ritis

h Le

gion

You

th

Mar

chin

g B

and

This

mar

chin

g ba

nd p

rovi

des

mus

ical

tra

inin

g fo

r the

ir 35

you

ng m

embe

rs a

nd

perfo

rms

at s

ever

al e

vent

s th

roug

hout

th

e ye

ar.

£3,0

00To

war

ds th

e co

st o

f new

in

stru

men

ts, u

nifo

rms,

taba

rds

and

a to

ur to

Ger

man

y

£1,2

50£1

,500

This

is a

n im

porta

nt b

and

that

con

tribu

tes

to

man

y lo

cal e

vent

s. A

con

tribu

tion

is

reco

mm

ende

d to

war

ds in

stru

men

ts a

nd

unifo

rms

as th

is w

ill h

elp

attra

ct a

nd

mai

ntai

n yo

ung

mem

bers

.

Tham

es P

hilh

arm

onic

C

hoir

This

cho

ir or

gani

se p

erfo

rman

ces

of h

igh

qual

ity c

hora

l mus

ic.

£2,0

00To

war

ds th

e co

st o

f a

perfo

rman

ce in

Kin

gsto

n P

aris

h C

hurc

h in

Dec

embe

r 200

7.

£1,0

00£1

,250

The

prop

osed

con

cert

will

be

a ve

ry s

peci

al

even

t and

a c

ontri

butio

n is

reco

mm

ende

d.

Spec

ial C

ondi

tions

: The

Cho

ir is

to

dem

onst

rate

wha

t the

y w

ill d

o to

mak

e th

is

conc

ert m

ore

acce

ssib

le to

peo

ple

who

m

ight

not

nor

mal

ly a

ttend

suc

h an

eve

nt.

£29,

320

£10,

750

PLA

Y C

hess

ingt

on K

ids

Clu

b - H

olid

ay C

lub

(Pla

ysch

eme)

Che

ssin

gton

Kid

s C

lub

oper

ates

hol

iday

cl

ubs

each

day

dur

ing

ever

y sc

hool

ho

liday

. C

hild

ren

with

spe

cial

nee

ds a

re

enco

urag

ed to

par

ticip

ate

in th

ese

play

sc

hem

es.

£2,3

78To

war

ds th

e co

st o

f Sup

port

Wor

kers

that

will

ena

ble

them

to

offe

r pla

ces

to fi

ve c

hild

ren

with

sp

ecia

l nee

ds e

ach

day.

£1,7

50£2

,378

An

impr

ovin

g cl

ub w

ith a

'goo

d' O

fste

d ra

ting

that

pro

vide

s in

tegr

ated

pla

y op

portu

nitie

s. S

peci

al C

ondi

tion:

1) T

he

club

is to

pro

duce

one

con

solid

ated

set

of

acco

unts

for t

he w

hole

org

anis

atio

n. 2

) The

cl

ub is

to w

ork

with

the

Cou

ncil's

Out

of

Sch

ool D

evel

opm

ent A

dvis

or.

Kin

gsto

n To

wn

Cen

tre M

anag

emen

t Lt

d

KTC

M’s

mai

n ac

tiviti

es a

re th

e pr

omot

ion,

enh

ance

men

t and

m

anag

emen

t of

Kin

gsto

n To

wn

Cen

tre.

£1,5

00To

war

ds th

e co

st o

f the

Thu

mbs

U

p It

Thur

sday

pla

ysch

eme

that

ta

kes

plac

e ea

ch T

hurs

day

over

th

e su

mm

er h

olid

ays.

£1,2

50£1

,500

This

is a

pop

ular

and

var

ied

activ

ity th

at is

w

ell a

ttend

ed a

nd th

e re

ques

t is

supp

orte

d.

A10

Gra

nt A

id -

Pro

ject

App

licat

ions

200

7/08

AN

NE

X 1

Org

anis

atio

nD

etai

lsA

pplic

atio

n fo

r 200

7/08

Gra

nt

06/0

7R

ecom

men

datio

n 20

07/0

8

Ref

ugee

Act

ion

Kin

gsto

nR

AK

offe

rs s

uppo

rt, a

dvic

e an

d in

form

atio

n to

refu

gees

livi

ng in

the

Bor

ough

. It

also

aim

s to

rais

e th

e aw

aren

ess

of th

e pu

blic

of t

he n

eeds

of

refu

gees

.

£1,5

00To

war

ds th

e co

st o

f the

free

su

mm

er p

lays

chem

e in

Aug

ust

that

will

invo

lve

30 c

hild

ren

from

ne

wly

arr

ived

refu

gee

fam

ilies

.

£1,5

00

(plu

s S

trate

gic

Gra

nt o

f £4

1,88

9 in

06/

07)

£1,5

00Th

is is

a w

ell e

stab

lishe

d sc

hem

e th

at h

elps

ne

wly

arr

ived

refu

gee

fam

ilies

to in

tegr

ate.

It

rece

ived

an

Ofs

ted

ratin

g of

'goo

d'.

£0£5

,378

YOU

TH1s

t Sur

bito

n (S

ealio

n)

Sea

Sco

ut G

roup

This

sco

ut g

roup

pro

vide

s va

rious

ac

tiviti

es fo

r you

ng p

eopl

e to

dev

elop

th

eir p

hysi

cal,

men

tal a

nd s

ocia

l abi

litie

s su

ch a

s bo

atin

g, c

ampi

ng, t

rips

and

othe

r ou

tdoo

r exc

ursi

ons.

£3,5

00To

war

ds th

e co

st o

f a s

ailin

g gi

g to

re

plac

e an

othe

r 50

year

old

boa

t th

at is

bey

ond

repa

ir. T

he n

ew

boat

will

be

used

by

60 s

ea

scou

ts.

£0£2

,000

The

prop

osed

boa

t wou

ld b

e w

ell u

sed

and

a co

ntrib

utio

n is

reco

mm

ende

d.

£2,0

00EN

VIR

ON

MEN

TK

ings

ton

Frie

nds

of

the

Ear

thK

FoE

pro

mot

es e

nviro

nmen

tal

awar

enes

s an

d ed

ucat

ion.

£2,5

17To

pay

for a

sch

ools

en

viro

nmen

tal e

duca

tion

proj

ect.

£2,8

00£0

No

gran

t is

reco

mm

ende

d du

e to

a la

ck o

f cl

arity

abo

ut th

e pr

opos

ed p

roje

ct a

nd

conc

erns

abo

ut th

e ca

paci

ty o

f the

or

gani

satio

n to

man

age

such

a p

roje

ct. T

he

appl

icat

ion

and

subs

eque

nt c

omm

unic

atio

n w

ith th

e gr

oup

does

not

dem

onst

rate

a

will

ingn

ess

to w

ork

in p

artn

ersh

ip w

ith th

e C

ounc

il to

del

iver

env

ironm

enta

l edu

catio

n pr

ojec

ts in

sch

ools

.

Riv

er T

ham

es B

oat

Pro

ject

This

gro

up p

rovi

des

day

and

resi

dent

ial

crui

ses

and

educ

atio

nal a

ctiv

ities

on

the

Tham

es fo

r old

er p

eopl

e, c

hild

ren,

pe

ople

with

dis

abili

ties,

com

mun

ity

orga

nisa

tions

and

sch

ools

.

£2,1

00To

con

tribu

te to

war

ds th

e co

st o

f fiv

e en

viro

nmen

tal e

duca

tion

days

on

the

river

Tha

mes

for K

ings

ton

prim

ary

scho

ols.

£500

£2,1

00A

gra

nt is

reco

mm

ende

d to

fund

sch

ools

w

ho h

ave

not p

revi

ousl

y be

en a

par

t of t

his

prog

ram

me.

£4,6

17TO

TAL

£2,1

00

A11 ANNEX 2

PROJECT GRANT APPLICATIONS 2007/08BUDGET

APPLIC REC AWD0607SPORT

1 Avondale Gymnastics Club 1,000 1,000 02 Malden Wanderers Cricket Club 3,000 1,500 2,0003 Spartan Swimming Club for the Physically Disabled 3,500 3,000 3,5004 Friends of Tolworth Gymnastics Club 3,000 2,000 05 Tolworth Youth Bowling Club 3,000 0 0

13,500 7,500

ARTS1 Green Theatre Company 3,000 2,000 1,0002 ITC Fine Arts 1,320 1,000 1,0003 Kingston Arts Association 3,000 0 04 Loki Music 3,000 0 2,0005 Orange Tree Theatre 2,000 1,000 06 Saheli 3,000 1,000 1,0007 Sakoba Dance For All 3,000 2,000 2,3008 Sarvoday Hindu Association 3,000 1,000 1,2509 Stoneleigh Youth Orchestra Society 3,000 0 0# Surbiton Royal British Legion Youth Marching Band 3,000 1,500 1,250# Thames Philharmonic Choir 2,000 1,250 1,000

29,320 10,750

PLAY1 Chessington Kids Club - Holiday Club (Playscheme) 2,378 2,378 1,7502 Kingston Town Centre Management Ltd 1,500 1,500 1,2503 Refugee Action Kingston - Summer Play Scheme 1,500 1,500 1,500

5,378 5,378

YOUTH1 1st Surbiton (Sealion) Sea Scout Group 3,500 2,000 0

3,500 2,000ENVIRONMENTAL

1 Kingston Friends of the Earth 2,517 0 2,8002 River Thames Boat Project 2,100 2,100 500

4,617 2,100

TOTAL PROJECT GRANTS 56,315 27,728

A2GrantsprojectsumSportArtPlyYthEnv07080.xls

APPENDIX B Executive, 20 March 2007

FIT FOR THE FUTURE – LEARNING FROM CORPORATE ASSESSMENT Report by Chief Executive Leader of the Council and Executive Member for Performance & Improvement

Purpose The Council underwent its most intensive inspection ever in September 2006 when both the Corporate Assessment and Joint Area Review took place. Since then the Council has been progressing its medium-term service and financial planning process leading to the recent publication of “Changing Kingston – Choosing Our Future”. It is therefore timely to bring together in one report an assessment of the main corporate work streams and improvement projects that we will need to take forward in order to ensure that we build on our strengths as a Council and continue to deliver well against our residents’ priorities despite more constrained finances. Accordingly, this report summarises the findings of the Corporate Assessment, including the areas for improvement, and the actions we are taking to develop and improve our approach. Alongside these the report also identifies the main work streams that have emerged through the medium-term planning exercise that will be vital to achieving the changes and targets set out in the new four year plan. These strands are drawn together into a summary improvement programme which forms Annex 1 to the report. Action proposed by the Leader of the Council and Executive Member for Performance & Improvement: The Executive is requested to 1. Note the findings of the Corporate Assessment of the Council published in December

2006; 2. Comment on and endorse the approach set out in this report to secure the changes

and improvements required to fulfil our future ambitions and our medium-term plan; and

3. Approve the summary improvement programme set out at Annex 1 to this report as a basis for further development work.

Reason for action proposed To ensure that the Council can secure the changes and improvements required to fulfil its future ambitions and medium term plan.

BACKGROUND 1. Two major inspections of the Council were carried out in the first two weeks of

September last year. The Corporate Assessment (CA) looked at how effectively the council functions corporately and with its partners to deliver services and improved outcomes for local people; the Joint Area Review (JAR) focused on all publicly funded services for children and young people in the local area and how well such services work together to improve outcomes.

B2

2. Both inspections form part of the overall Comprehensive Performance Assessment (CPA) regime for local authorities. Together they represent the most intense and thorough inspection ever undertaken at Kingston, involving three weeks’ on-site inspection activity by two teams which numbered at their peak more than 25 inspectors.

3. The JAR is covered by a separate report on this Executive agenda. This report

concentrates mainly on the CA.

CORPORATE ASSESSMENT (CA)

4. The CA examines how the council is working corporately, and with its partners to improve services and deliver improved outcomes for local people. It examines the community, political and managerial leadership of the council, measures how well councils understand their local communities and how this translates into a council’s ambitions and priorities; the CA also examines a council’s capacity to deliver on its ambitions and looks at what it has achieved.

5. Both the Corporate Assessment and Joint Area Review reports were published on

12 December 2006. The CA report is enclosed separately from the agenda for Members of the Council only. The inspectors found that Kingston Council consistently performs well and awarded us the highest rating in the country (‘Outstanding’) for children’s services.

6. The Audit Commission scored the Council against five key themes and made a series

of judgements and statements about how we are doing. These have been summarised below:

B3

7. The Corporate Assessment report presents a very positive picture of the Council. The strengths highlighted by the Inspectors include:

• The Council is a respected, strong and creative community leader, and works

extensively in partnership with key stakeholders, the private and voluntary sectors and with communities.

• Political and managerial leadership is strong and provides effective leadership on

difficult issues. • The importance of partnership working to deliver wider community outcomes is

established and understood. • The four established neighbourhood committees enable the Council to champion

local needs to good effect. • Achievements are strong and outstanding in some areas. These are recognised in

areas which matter the most to local people, such as crime and the quality of the local environment.

• The Council provides good value for money across the services it delivers. • The Council benefits from a highly motivated and empowered workforce.

8. We are the first (and still the only) council to score 4 for Achievement and we only just

missed being the first council to be scored 4 for its Corporate Assessment overall. We are the first to receive a score of 4 and a judgement of ‘Outstanding’ for our Children’s Services.

9. The CA methodology enables the inspection teams to benchmark our performance

against other councils. The report provides a wealth of information not only about our strengths but also about areas where there is scope for improvement. We need to use this learning effectively in our improvement and service planning.

10. The main areas for improvement identified by the CA Team are set out on page 9 of

their report. In summary these focus on the following areas-

• Ensuring more consistency in service/ team plans so that these include specific targets that focus more on outcomes – so that it is clearer what difference / impact is expected.

• Extending our performance management arrangements so that they are better integrated across our partnership working – so that as we work ever more seamlessly with partners we can maintain a strategic overview of performance measured against our wider community ambitions.

• Using ICT better to manage and share performance information across the council and within our partnerships – so that we can more easily and quickly identify issues that may require a corporate or partnership response.

• Ensuring that our developing approach to Member development is comprehensive and geared to supporting both individual members and the Council’s needs in delivering its ambitions.

• Building more capacity in project management skills that will be needed to deliver the Council’s ambitious agenda including an increasing volume of change management projects.

B4

CHANGING KINGSTON - CHOOSING OUR FUTURE 11. The CA report highlights other areas where the Council has started to put

improvements in place. Foremost among these is the development of our approach to medium term service and financial planning that was already underway when the CA inspection was on site. In addition there is also reference to a number of areas that are closely linked to the medium-term planning process, such as developing a more corporate approach to asset management, a sharper delineation of priorities within the Policy Programme, and a more systematic approach to benchmarking value for money including comparing process, costs and outcomes with partners and other providers.

12. Chapter 5 of “Changing Kingston – Choosing Our Future” sets out some of the

principles and projects that will be needed in order deliver the changes required of the Council over the next few years. In particular it identifies five Shaping Principles which underpin how we will re-shape our services in the future in order to deliver our vision of 2011 and to help us address the challenges and changes ahead-

• Prevention – we will invest now in those services which will reduce the need for

more intensive and expensive services later.

• Personalisation, choice and control – we will tailor our services to meet individuals’ and communities’ needs and aspirations and allow them greater control over the services they receive and how they receive them;

• Local settings – we will deliver services as close to the users as we can, at home or in local neighbourhoods will be our preferred approach.

• Customer focus – we will put the customer first in all we do and align our organisation to our customers rather than to our services.

• Working with partners – we will work closely with a full range of partners, voluntary, public and private in order to ensure that the most effective and efficient services are provided.

13. “Changing Kingston” also identifies a number of workstreams, such as customer first, shared services and asset management, that will be taken forward jointly by the Executive and the officer Strategy Board. All will impact on every part of the Council and all will demand a concerted corporate approach. Many will extend beyond the Council and involve the engagement of key partners, as part of our journey towards an increasingly integrated partnership approach which brings partners together with a shared focus on meeting the needs of our citizens and communities.

A Consolidated Improvement Plan 14. Because of the importance of our medium-term plan in delivering the changes and

improvements needed over the next four years, it makes sense to incorporate the “Changing Kingston” projects with our CA improvements in a single plan. A summary of projects is set out for consideration and approval at Annex 1. This includes a brief position statement for each project, and Members will see that the projects are at different stages of development and all will be subject to further detailed consideration by the Executive over the next few months.

B5

The Future of CPA

15. Although the chief driver for these changes is our ability to work with our partners to maximise outcomes for residents within the resources available, it is worth noting the changes that will be made to the performance framework for councils from 1 April 2009 onwards. These can be summarised as follows-

• CPA will become Comprehensive Area Assessment (CAA) with the implication that

increasingly it will be the performance of the local public sector as a whole that is being measured

• Elements of CPA will be retained – Direction of Travel, and Use of Resources • Annual Risk Assessment will be carried out, led by the Audit Commission,

including information from Government departments and other regulators, and including assessment of LSP/LAA performance

• The new system will not be structured around a big inspection event – there will be no CA or JAR – but an inspection could be triggered by risk assessment

• Generally there will be greater reliance on subjective judgement and performance information

• Significant reduction in performance indicators – a single national set of 200 against which all areas will report

• These national indicators will be outcome measures and citizen perspective/ satisfaction will feature prominently.

• From the 200 national set, around 35 Local Area Agreement (LAA) improvement targets will be agreed for each area – representing an agreement between central government and local areas “about priorities for improving performance against national priorities and local place-shaping ambitions”.

• New LAAs built on this model to be in place from April 2008 in advance of full implementation of new performance framework in 2009.

16. The summary of projects set out at Annex 1 also seeks to anticipate these changes, in

particular the increasing importance of integrating the performance management of our delivery partnerships around the LAA.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS

17. There are no environmental implications arising directly from this report. Author of the report: Chris Field, Chief Policy Officer 020 8547 5010 [email protected] Background Papers CPA 2005 Key lines of enquiry for corporate assessment, Audit Commission, February 2006 Corporate Assessment Self Assessment – Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames, June 2006 Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames Corporate Assessment Report, published 12 December 2006

B

6

AN

NEX

1

FIT

FOR

TH

E FU

TUR

E –

LEA

RN

ING

FR

OM

CO

RPO

RA

TE A

SSES

SMEN

T SU

MM

AR

Y IM

PRO

VEM

ENT

PLA

N

PRO

JEC

T D

ESC

RIP

TIO

N O

F PR

OJE

CT

AN

D W

HY

IT IS

IM

POR

TAN

T C

UR

REN

T PO

SITI

ON

/ N

EXT

STEP

S 1.

Ref

resh

ing

the

Com

mun

ity P

lan

(CP)

and

the

Loca

l A

rea

Agr

eem

ent

(LA

A)

The

CP

is b

ecom

ing

out o

f dat

e, p

artly

bec

ause

of t

he

adve

nt s

ince

it w

as p

rodu

ced

of L

AA

s an

d th

e in

tegr

ated

chi

ldre

n’s

agen

da.

At t

he s

ame

time

the

new

Loc

al G

over

nmen

t Bill

is m

akin

g LA

As

stat

utor

y an

d gi

ving

them

a c

ritic

al ro

le in

the

new

per

form

ance

fra

mew

ork

for l

ocal

are

as th

at w

ill co

me

fully

into

ef

fect

in A

pril

2009

. Th

ere

is a

nee

d th

eref

ore

durin

g 20

07 to

refre

sh o

ur c

omm

unity

stra

tegy

and

the

need

s an

alys

is o

n w

hich

it is

bas

ed.

This

will

then

pro

vide

a

mor

e up

-to-d

ate

cont

ext f

or re

shap

ing

/ ren

egot

iatin

g ou

r LA

A fr

om 2

008

onw

ards

; and

ena

ble

us to

sho

w

how

the

thre

e-ye

ar im

prov

emen

t tar

gets

in th

e LA

A s

it w

ithin

the

long

er-te

rm a

mbi

tions

of t

he c

omm

unity

pl

an.

This

wor

k is

bei

ng o

vers

een

by th

e C

omm

unity

Lea

ders

hip

Stra

tegy

G

roup

(CLS

G) a

nd th

e P

artn

ersh

ip

Del

iver

y B

oard

(PD

B).

Key

mile

ston

es a

re th

e pr

oduc

tion

of

a K

ings

ton

Pro

file

docu

men

t by

June

20

07 a

nd a

com

mun

ity s

trate

gy

visi

onin

g ev

ent w

ith p

artn

ers

in J

uly

2007

. A

mee

ting

betw

een

the

Exe

cutiv

e an

d th

e C

LSG

is p

lann

ed in

May

w

hich

will

revi

ew th

is p

rogr

amm

e of

ac

tivity

. 2.

“C

hang

ing

Kin

gsto

n - d

evel

opin

g an

d im

plem

entin

g ou

r m

ediu

m-te

rm

serv

ice

and

finan

cial

pla

n –

alig

ning

prio

ritie

s,

reso

urce

s, a

nd

outc

omes

”

It is

vita

l tha

t we

build

on

the

mom

entu

m g

ener

ated

by

“Cha

ngin

g K

ings

ton”

to d

rive

forw

ard

the

chan

ges

requ

ired

over

the

next

four

yea

rs s

o th

at th

e ta

rget

s an

d pr

inci

ples

of t

he m

ediu

m-te

rm p

lan

are

met

and

re

side

nts’

prio

ritie

s re

alis

ed w

ithin

the

reso

urce

s av

aila

ble.

In

par

ticul

ar, f

ollo

win

g th

e pu

blic

atio

n of

the

MTS

FP,

furth

er w

ork

is re

quire

d to

arti

cula

te m

ore

prec

isel

y th

e ta

rget

s an

d ou

tcom

es w

e ar

e ex

pect

ing

from

se

rvic

es o

ver t

he n

ext t

hree

yea

rs g

iven

the

reso

urce

s av

aila

ble.

W

e al

so n

eed

to u

se th

is a

s a

sprin

gboa

rd to

brin

g ab

out g

reat

er c

larit

y an

d co

nsis

tenc

y in

our

ser

vice

/

Thro

ugh

the

“Cha

ngin

g K

ings

ton”

pr

oces

s w

e w

ill ne

ed to

gen

erat

e a

clea

rer p

erfo

rman

ce fr

amew

ork

for

our P

olic

y P

rogr

amm

e sh

owin

g th

e re

latio

nshi

p be

twee

n th

e ch

angi

ng

leve

l of r

esou

rces

and

the

outc

omes

ex

pect

ed.

This

wor

k w

ill be

take

n fo

rwar

d by

Stra

tegi

c S

ervi

ces

with

D

irect

orat

es, a

nd in

liai

son

with

E

xecu

tive

Mem

bers

. Th

is w

ill be

fu

lly re

flect

ed in

nex

t yea

r’s

“Cha

ngin

g K

ings

ton”

doc

umen

t with

pr

ogre

ss re

porte

d in

our

200

7 P

erfo

rman

ce P

lan.

B

7

team

pla

ns a

bout

the

targ

ets

we

are

setti

ng, a

gain

w

ith a

gre

ater

em

phas

is o

n ou

tcom

es.

In ta

ndem

with

this

we

will

also

m

ount

an

initi

ativ

e to

sup

port

seni

or

man

ager

s to

impr

ove

targ

et-s

ettin

g an

d ou

tcom

e fo

cus

in th

eir s

ervi

ce

plan

ning

with

a v

iew

to

impr

ovem

ents

bei

ng fu

lly

impl

emen

ted

in 2

008/

09 te

am p

lans

. 3.

Dev

elop

ing

and

Inte

grat

ing

Perf

orm

ance

M

anag

emen

t

The

futu

re s

ucce

ss o

f our

loca

l are

a w

ill de

pend

in

part

on o

ur a

bilit

y to

con

ceiv

e, p

lan

and

deliv

er in

co

ncer

t with

our

par

tner

s, a

nd fo

r tha

t pur

pose

we

need

to fu

rther

dev

elop

and

inte

grat

e ou

r per

form

ance

m

anag

emen

t acr

oss

the

coun

cil a

nd w

ithin

our

pa

rtner

ship

s.

This

dep

ends

in p

art o

n ite

m 1

and

our

abi

lity

to

refre

sh o

ur c

omm

unity

pla

n an

d LA

A to

pro

vide

sh

ared

com

mun

ity a

mbi

tions

that

focu

s ou

r pa

rtner

ship

act

ivity

. W

e al

so n

eed

to m

ake

bette

r use

of I

CT

to m

anag

e an

d sh

are

perfo

rman

ce in

form

atio

n, s

o th

at w

e ca

n m

aint

ain

a st

rate

gic

over

view

of p

erfo

rman

ce a

nd

mor

e ea

sily

and

qui

ckly

iden

tify

issu

es th

at m

ay

requ

ire a

cor

pora

te o

r par

tner

ship

resp

onse

. In

ad

ditio

n, th

e LA

A a

nd th

e ne

w a

rea

perfo

rman

ce

fram

ewor

k pl

ace

high

exp

ecta

tions

on

the

qual

ity a

nd

timel

ines

s of

our

per

form

ance

dat

a sy

stem

s an

d w

e w

ill ne

ed to

be

able

to m

eet t

hose

requ

irem

ents

.

In ta

ndem

with

the

proc

ess

of

refre

shin

g th

e C

omm

unity

Pla

n an

d th

e LA

A, w

e w

ill ne

ed to

con

tinue

to

embe

d th

e ne

w g

over

nanc

e ar

rang

emen

ts fo

r our

par

tner

ship

w

orki

ng s

o th

at th

e ne

w P

artn

ersh

ip

Del

iver

y B

oard

can

mai

ntai

n an

ov

ervi

ew o

f the

per

form

ance

of o

ur

mai

n de

liver

y pa

rtner

ship

s ar

ound

th

e LA

A.

Alo

ngsi

de th

is w

e w

ill be

pilo

ting

new

per

form

ance

sof

twar

e in

itial

ly

conc

entra

ting

on th

e da

ta s

ets

for

the

Pol

icy

Pro

gram

me

and

the

LAA

.

4. C

hang

ing

Kin

gsto

n –

The

Wor

k to

R

esha

pe

Kin

gsto

n’s’

Se

rvic

es

Ach

ievi

ng o

ur a

mbi

tions

ove

r the

nex

t fou

r yea

rs

with

in th

e re

sour

ces

avai

labl

e m

eans

that

the

Cou

ncil

need

s to

cha

nge.

“C

hang

ing

Kin

gsto

n” e

stab

lishe

s pr

inci

ples

that

will

unde

rpin

how

we

resh

ape

serv

ices

an

d id

entif

ies

a nu

mbe

r of k

ey w

orks

tream

s th

at a

re

vita

l to

achi

evin

g th

e ch

ange

s re

quire

d. T

hese

will

incl

ude-

Thes

e w

orks

tream

s w

ill be

take

n fo

rwar

d jo

intly

by

the

Exe

cutiv

e an

d th

e of

ficer

Stra

tegy

Boa

rd, a

nd w

ill

all b

e su

bjec

t to

furth

er d

etai

led

cons

ider

atio

n by

the

Exe

cutiv

e ov

er

the

next

few

mon

ths.

B

8

• an

on-

goin

g pr

oces

s of

ben

chm

arki

ng o

ur

serv

ices

aga

inst

oth

ers

to e

nsur

e th

at w

e ar

e ge

tting

val

ue fo

r mon

ey a

nd th

at p

erfo

rman

ce

and

spen

d re

flect

our

prio

ritie

s;

• pr

ogre

ssin

g “C

usto

mer

Firs

t” to

enc

ompa

ss a

ll pa

rts o

f the

cou

ncil

to c

reat

e a

sing

le a

ppro

ach

for c

usto

mer

s, m

akin

g al

l arr

ange

men

ts

cons

iste

nt, e

ffici

ent a

nd e

ffect

ive

in a

way

w

hich

bes

t sui

ts c

usto

mer

nee

ds;

• in

vest

igat

ing

the

pote

ntia

l for

sha

red

serv

ices

an

d ne

w s

trate

gic

partn

ersh

ips

as a

sou

rce

of

both

effi

cien

cy s

avin

gs a

nd im

prov

ed s

ervi

ce

deliv

ery;

•

a m

ajor

exe

rcis

e to

mat

ch o

ur a

sset

s ag

ains

t ou

r fut

ure

serv

ice

need

s an

d pr

iorit

ies

in o

rder

to

pro

duce

the

syne

rgie

s w

e ne

ed, n

ot ju

st

with

in th

e C

ounc

il bu

t with

in o

ur p

artn

ersh

ips;

th

is p

roje

ct w

ill a

lso

need

to a

ddre

ss th

e ne

ed

to b

uild

mor

e in

tern

al c

apac

ity o

n pr

ojec

t m

anag

emen

t; •

prog

ress

ivel

y re

-mou

ldin

g ou

r org

anis

atio

n to

ke

ep it

fit f

or p

urpo

se a

nd e

nsur

e its

sha

pe a

nd

size

mee

t fut

ure

need

s.

5. M

embe

r D

evel

opm

ent

The

CA

team

foun

d th

at th

ere

is a

n ef

fect

ive

mix

of

skills

and

exp

erie

nce

amon

g th

e E

xecu

tive

and

with

in

the

Nei

ghbo

urho

od C

omm

ittee

s, b

ut c

onsi

dere

d th

at

furth

er p

rogr

ess

was

requ

ired

to d

evel

op a

mor

e co

mpr

ehen

sive

pro

gram

me

for m

embe

r dev

elop

men

t th

at s

uppo

rted

both

the

indi

vidu

al n

eeds

of c

ounc

illor

s an

d th

e C

ounc

il’s a

bilit

y to

del

iver

its

impr

ovem

ent

agen

da.

The

Mem

ber D

evel

opm

ent S

teer

ing

Gro

up e

stab

lishe

d by

the

Exe

cutiv

e ha

s se

t in

train

an

asse

ssm

ent o

f M

embe

r Dev

elop

men

t and

Tra

inin

g ne

eds.

Thi

s w

ork

is b

eing

un

derta

ken

by th

e Lo

cal

Gov

ernm

ent I

nfor

mat

ion

Uni

t and

w

ill e

nabl

e us

to re

flect

the

outc

ome

of th

e as

sess

men

t int

o a

new

Tr

aini

ng a

nd D

evel

opm

ent

Pro

gram

me

for M

embe

rs. T

his

prog

ram

me

will

have

rega

rd to

the

B

9

expr

esse

d ne

eds

of M

embe

rs, b

ut

also

the

Cou

ncil's

nee

ds in

de

liver

ing

its a

mbi

tions

in th

e sh

ort,

med

ium

and

long

er te

rm. T

he

asse

ssm

ent i

s du

e to

be

com

plet

ed

by e

arly

Apr

il, 2

007.

Corporate Assessment Report

November 2006

Corporate Assessment

Royal Borough of Kingston Upon Thames

© Audit Commission 2006

For further information on the work of the Commission please contact:

Audit Commission, 1st Floor, Millbank Tower, Millbank, London SW1P 4HQ

Tel: 020 7828 1212 Fax: 020 7976 6187 Textphone (minicom): 020 7630 0421

www.audit-commission.gov.uk

The Audit Commission is an independent body responsible for ensuring that public money is spent economically, efficiently and effectively, to achieve high quality local services for the public. Our remit covers around 11,000 bodies in England, which between them spend more than £180 billion of public money each year. Our work covers local government, health, housing, community safety and fire and rescue services.

As an independent watchdog, we provide important information on the quality of public services. As a driving force for improvement in those services, we provide practical recommendations and spread best practice. As an independent auditor, we ensure that public services are good value for money and that public money is properly spent.

Copies of this report

If you require further copies of this report, or a copy in large print, in Braille, on tape, or in a language other than English, please call 0845 056 0566.

Corporate Assessment Contents 3


Contents

Introduction 4

Executive summary 6

Areas for improvement 9

Summary of assessment scores 10

Context 11

The locality 11

The Council 12

What is the Council, together with its partners, trying to achieve? 13

Ambition 13

Prioritisation 15

Capacity 18

Performance management 21

What has been achieved? 25

Sustainable communities and transport 26

Safer and stronger communities 28

Healthier communities 31

Older people 33

Children and young people 34

Appendix 1 - Framework for Corporate Assessment 37

4 Corporate Assessment Introduction


Introduction1 Comprehensive Performance Assessment (CPA) is the means by which the Audit

Commission fulfils its statutory duty under section 99 of the Local Government Act 2003 to make an assessment, and report on the performance, of local authorities. Corporate assessment is one element in the overall assessment that leads to a CPA score and category.

2 The purpose of the corporate assessment is to assess how well the Council engages with and leads its communities, delivers community priorities in partnership with others, and ensures continuous improvement across the range of Council activities. It seeks to answer three headline questions which are underpinned by five specific themes.

What is the Council, together with its partners, trying to achieve?

Ambition

Prioritisation

What is the capacity of the Council, including its work with partners, to deliver what it is trying to achieve?

Capacity

Performance management

What has been achieved?

Achievement

Considered against the shared priorities of:

sustainable communities and transport;

safer and stronger communities;

healthier communities;

older people; and

children and young people.

3 Corporate assessments are normally aligned with a joint area review of services for children and young people (JAR). In practice this means that the Council’s achievements in relation to children and young people are assessed using the evidence provided from the JAR. In addition, examples of outcomes and activity, which are relevant to the other themes and which are identified through the JAR, are considered within the corporate assessment.

Corporate Assessment Introduction 5


4 The JAR covers all services for children and young people that are directly managed or commissioned by the Council, as well as health and youth justice services provided by other bodies. It focuses on the contributions made by services to improving outcomes. The separate JAR report covers the leadership and management of services for children and young people and, in particular, the way that such services work together to improve outcomes. The description and judgement in respect of children and young people in this report is summarised from the JAR report.

6 Corporate Assessment Executive summary


Executive summary 5 Kingston Council is performing well. It has a clear vision underpinned by a set of

challenging long term ambitions linked to the medium term Community Plan. Taken together, these aim to make a measurable difference to Kingston, the place and for its local communities over the next 20 years. Supported by effective prioritisation and based on a shared understanding of need and what matters the most to local people, there is realism for its delivery. Key service and partnership strategies, including the recently agreed Local Area Agreement (LAA) set out short, medium and longer term improvements. These will deliver significant redevelopment of Kingston Town Centre, key to the overall economic well being of the borough, as well as an appropriate range of anti-poverty and social inclusion initiatives targeted at the borough's vulnerable and disadvantaged groups. However, not all supporting actions and targets are outcome focused and some strategies are not in place.

6 Capacity to deliver the ambitions is good overall. The Council benefits from a highly motivated and empowered workforce, a strong track record in securing additional funding to increase capacity in priority areas and effective risk management arrangements. The devolved approach to performance management and evident performance culture has been successful in delivering some high quality, value for money services. Some areas are still developing though, such as the corporate approach to asset management, utilising the full capacity of ICT, and consistent performance management arrangements within key partnerships.

7 The Council provides good value for money across the services it delivers. There is a clear culture of delivering efficiency savings whilst maintaining the quality of services. The Council has secured £1 million of cashable savings per year since 2002, which are targeted to priority areas. The recently modernised approach to procurement is acting as a driver for efficiency, service improvement and innovation. The use of ICT is also playing its role through reducing and streamlining processing and handling costs. However joint monitoring and management of value for money across partnerships is underdeveloped.

Corporate Assessment Executive summary 7


8 User focus and diversity is clearly embedded in service planning, with numerous examples of users influencing the design of services, including BME and vulnerable groups. Access to services is monitored for BME and vulnerable groups and steps are taken to address issues where these arise. Personalisation and choice are actively promoted through for example the Council's longstanding commitment to direct payments and more recently choice based letting in housing. There is a good record of decision making informed by widespread engagement and consultation with residents and stakeholders, but feedback is inconsistent, and there is limited involvement in setting specific standards and targets and in performance review. The needs of vulnerable communities are at the heart of the LAA. An appropriate range of targeted social inclusion and anti-poverty initiatives complement the high quality universal services such as education, which are seen by the Council as key to improving the quality of life for all communities. The Council works closely with the race equality council in delivering its responsibilities under race equality legislation.

9 Political and Managerial leadership is strong and respected both internally and externally. The Leader and the Chief Executive provide effective leadership on difficult issues, for example in relation to Kingston Town Centre and the new Rose Theatre. There is a clear commitment to delivering consistently high quality services and the importance of partnership working to deliver wider community outcomes is established and understood. Member officer relations are good, with a healthy mutual respect for their different roles. There is an effective mix of skills and experience amongst the Executive and within the established four neighbourhood committees. New overview and scrutiny arrangements are very recent, but early signs indicate a positive foundation for holding the Executive to account. However, progress on developing a comprehensive member development programme which meets their needs and those of the authority in delivering the ambitions is slow.

10 The Council is a respected, strong and creative community leader, and works extensively in partnership with key stakeholders, the private and voluntary sectors and with communities. It is an effective lobbyer over issues such as public transport provision. The Council takes a collaborative leadership approach to the LSP, fostering for example strong working relationships with the active voluntary sector, who co-chaired each of the theme groups developing the LAA. In partnership with local businesses, Kingston Town Centre became the first Business Improvement District in the Country, securing substantial additional investment that would otherwise have been unachievable. The four established neighbourhood committees enable the Council to champion local needs to good effect. With delegated budgets and Executive functions for a range of operational services, decision making is taken close to those most likely to be affected.Sixty four per cent of residents believe they can influence decisions that affect their neighbourhood.

8 Corporate Assessment Executive summary


11 Achievements are strong overall and outstanding in some areas. These are recognised in areas which matter the most to local people, such as in crime and the quality of the environment, and are in line with national priorities. Outcomes for those most at risk of disadvantage are good. Overall crime has reduced from an already low level, and is decreasing further. National targets for the numbers in drug related treatment programmes have been exceeded. Streets are cleaner and recycling has increased from an already higher than the national average position. The Council is achieving a shift towards more environmentally friendly forms of transport through a host of ongoing infrastructure and innovative behavioural change initiatives such as personalised travel planning. The overall effectiveness of the Council's children's services is outstanding. All services for children and young people are at least good and have had a very substantial impact on improving outcomes for almost all children and young people. A broader approach to older people, building on the already excellent social care services is being implemented. Delayed discharges from hospital are kept at a low level and a high proportion of people are able to live at home. Multi-agency projects are increasing the uptake of benefits to older people. Teenage pregnancy has exceeded national targets with a continuing downward trend. Fuel poverty is reducing. Access to jobs for the disabled and those on incapacity benefits is improving. Health inequalities are being tackled through targeted activities in deprived areas of the borough such as through the Community Action Partnership, but measuring the impact on health outcomes is more difficult. Meeting the area's housing needs remains a challenging agenda particularly for affordable and sheltered housing.

Corporate Assessment Areas for improvement 9


Areas for improvement 12 Consistent SMART, outcome focused action planning requires attention both

within service planning and in partnership projects. The Council needs to move towards describing the outcomes of its and its partnership activities on a more consistent basis, rather than describing the activity or output. This will make it clearer internally and externally what difference is expected and ultimately what impact was delivered.

13 The Council needs to ensure it is able to deliver consistently high quality services in line with its ambitions. The implementation of the performance management framework in practice is leading to some inconsistencies internally and with partners. As the Council with its partners moves towards more integration and seamless delivery for users, the degree of corporate or strategic overview may require review to ensure consistency of provision. Building capacity in project management skills will also be key to delivering the Council's ambitious agenda.

14 The Council should consider a strategic approach to knowledge management to facilitate easy access to data, intelligence and learning across the Council and its partnerships. This should enable a greater sophistication in identifying and acting on issues and trends that may require a corporate or partnership response.

15 The Council would benefit from ensuring that its developing approach to member development is strategic. As proposal are considered it needs to ensure that they are fit for purpose in supporting individual members and the authority's needs in delivering the Council's ambitions in the short, medium and longer term, for example, in effectively fulfilling community leadership roles.

10 Corporate Assessment Summary of assessment scores


Summary of assessment scores

Headline questions Theme Score*

Ambition 3


Prioritisation 3

Capacity 3What is the capacity of the Council, including its work with partners, to deliver what it is trying to achieve?

Performance management 3

What has been achieved? Achievement 4

Overall corporate assessment score**

3

*Key to scores

1 – below minimum requirements – inadequate performance

2 – at only minimum requirements – adequate performance

3 – consistently above minimum requirements – performing well

4 – well above minimum requirements – performing strongly

**Rules for determining the overall corporate assessment score

Scores on 5 themes Overall corporate assessment score

Two or more themes with a score of 4

None less than score of 3

4

Three or more themes with a score of 3 or more

None less than score of 2

3

Three or more themes with a score of 2 or more 2

Any other combination 1

Corporate Assessment Context 11


Context

The locality

16 The Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames is situated in the south west of London. The borough is important as a destination in its own right. As a place to shop, Kingston Town Centre is one of the largest and most successful shopping centres in London. It is significant not only for the continued prosperity of the borough overall, but is regionally important as a Metropolitan Centre. However, it faces increasing pressure from other centres, such as Croydon, and has been slipping down the UK Town Centre League. Kingston First, the first Business Improvement District (BID) in the country aims to reverse this decline and restore visitor numbers. K+20, the area action plan, with the proposed majorre-development of a large part of the town will have a significant impact on Kingston economically and socially.

17 As a place to learn, Kingston is a centre of excellence for education with many fine schools and an excellent Further Education College and University. As a place for leisure activities, over 30 per cent of the borough is Metropolitan Open Land or green belt. It is a centre for nightlife in London with three major clubs and is home to Chessington World of Adventures. As a place to do business it enjoys a buoyant local economy and is a centre for many knowledge based small companies. The independent district town centres of New Malden, Surbiton and Tolworth survive in their own right.

18 The population is relatively affluent overall. In 2005, Kingston was ranked as the second least deprived of the London boroughs, and ranked 266 out of 354 nationally. However this masks pockets of relative deprivation, largely concentrated in small areas associated with social housing estates.

19 The population stands at 151,800, of which 15.5 per cent are from black and minority ethnic (BME) backgrounds. This rises to 20.6 per cent for those under 18. Kingston notably has the largest Korean population in Western Europe with recent estimates as high as 15,000. The population is growing, with forecasts predicting around a 5 per cent increase by 2016.

20 The borough itself is relatively compact at 37 km2. It is characterised by attractive suburban residential areas, with large areas of Metropolitan Green Belt and Metropolitan Open Land. This inevitably places pressure on the availability of land for housing and importantly for the borough, affordable housing.

21 Unemployment is low at 2.2 per cent compared with the outer London average of 3.7 per cent in March 2005. Over 50 per cent of Kingston's residents work in the borough. Whilst the borough has a highly qualified population, with over a third of residents having a degree, the economy itself is largely low wage.

12 Corporate Assessment Context


22 There is good coverage of bus services across the borough. Main line train services run from the South West to London via Surbiton, and radial road routes to the South and South West fan out from Kingston Bridge, while the A3 trunk road links the borough with inner London and the M25.

The Council

23 Following the May 2006 elections, a Liberal Democrat administration was returned. The Council has 48 members overall, one Parliamentary constituency and a shared constituency with the neighbouring borough of Richmond upon Thames. The Liberal Democrats hold 25 seats, the Conservatives 21 seats and Labour 2 seats. The Executive comprises members of the controlling group of Liberal Democrats and includes the Leader and six Executive members, each responsible for a cross cutting portfolio. Following a recent constitutional review, overview and scrutiny functions have now been split with a dedicated Scrutiny Panel, chaired by the opposition and an administration led Overview Commission. In addition a Shadow Executive, comprised of opposition members has recently been established.

24 The Council has a long established model of devolved decision making to four Neighbourhood Committees, made up of councillors representing the electoral wards within the Neighbourhood. They make decisions on a wide range of services from traffic management and planning applications, parks to libraries and grants to Voluntary Organisations.

25 The Council is relatively small, with a workforce of around 4,069. The Council's net revenue budget for 2006/07 is £103.3 million. Kingston receives a low level of government grant support for local services due to its relative affluence. Consequently 68 per cent of local expenditure is funded by the Council tax compared to the London average of only 42 per cent. This means there is little headroom for council tax increases. The Council tax for a Band D property in 2006/07 is £1,448.86, which represents an increase of 5.38 per cent compared to 2005/06.

26 The Leader chairs the Local Strategic Partnership which brings together a broad range of stakeholders that deliver services or represent local interest groups. The Partnership's Community Strategy runs from 2004 to 2009, and has recently been underpinned by a Local Area Agreement (LAA) which sets out greater specificity on the outcomes that will be delivered over the next three years in support of the Community Strategy. The partnership itself has recently been restructured. A Community Leadership Strategy Group provides the strategic direction and links formally with the Council's Executive. A Partnership Delivery Board (PDB), with links to the Council's corporate management team and chaired by the Chief Executive sits beneath this. Two members from each of the four rationalised delivery groups sit on the PDB including: Children and Young People's Trust Board; Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnership; Adults/Health and Well Being; and Sustainable Communities and Transport.

Corporate Assessment What is the Council, together with its partners, trying to achieve? 13



Ambition

27 The Council is performing well in this area. It has a clear set of challenging long term ambitions consistent with the medium term Community Plan. Based on a shared understanding of need and established and strong partnership working, there is clear commitment to their delivery. Taken together, these aim to make a measurable difference to Kingston, the place, and for its local communities over the next 20 years. However, understanding of the ambitions amongst some smaller stakeholders is less clear, and not all of the key strategies supporting the delivery of the ambitions are in place.

28 Kingston's Community Plan sets out clear and challenging medium term ambitions for the borough. The shared vision, described in the five year plan is to be, 'the best place to live and work'. Eight themes, framed in the national shared priorities sit beneath the vision. These aim to balance economic, social and environmental well being to enhance the quality of life of Kingston's communities. The recently agreed Local Area Agreement (LAA) provides the measurable outcomes that aim to be delivered over the next three years to support its delivery. An appropriate range of anti-poverty and social inclusion initiatives run throughout the agreement and aim to make a measurable difference to vulnerable and disadvantaged groups. For example, increasing civic participation by young people, better access to justice and referral pathways, and welfare to work programmes.

29 The Council's own ambitions are consistent with the Community Plan and set out a longer term challenging agenda for improvement. Six ambitions of equal importance, called strategic aims, provide the framework for the delivery of the Council's vision, to 'create the best opportunities, services and environment for the people of Kingston'. The strategic aims are supported by 12 key priorities and a range of linking long term strategies and effective partnerships, providing confidence for their delivery. They are as follows.

Investing in children and young people - to sustain a prosperous and inclusive community.

Caring for the environment - putting the environment at the heart of everything we do.

Enhancing Quality of Life - improve the quality of life of our residents - whether or not the Council runs the services.

Putting people first - we are proud of our diverse borough and value every resident.

Working in partnership - a strategic and campaigning Council.

14 Corporate Assessment What is the Council, together with its partners, trying to achieve?


Delivering improvement - quality services that offer the best value for money.

Communications and customer care, along with personalisation and choice are cross cutting themes within each of the six strategic aims. For example, customer contact centres in housing and environment, and building on the successes in direct payments through piloting the 'in-control' model of individualised social care budgets.

30 Long term strategies supporting the delivery of the six strategic aims are stretching and realistic, but some key strategies are not yet in place. The Local Implementation Plan has challenging targets, above the London Mayor's requirements, to deliver sustainable transport, including reducing car use to45 per cent by 2011. The 16 year waste strategy sets out a longer term sustainable solution to managing the borough's waste in partnership with neighbouring authorities, aiming to achieve 47 per cent recycling and composting by 2020. However, the Housing strategy is not yet in place and there is less clarity in other areas such as the After Dark Strategy. The latter is key to providing specific clarity on how the night time economy in Kingston Town Centre will be shaped. Having key strategies in place provides confidence for the delivery of the ambitions.

31 Long term plans to re-invent the regionally significant Kingston Town Centre (KTC) are challenging. Despite not being eligible for significant external funding streams due the borough's relative affluence, K+20 sets out a raft of development opportunities that will shape the metropolitan town centre for the next 20 years. Plans include: the growth of the retail offer through new landmark shopping facilities; provision of new and refurbished offices and business space including space for creative industries; and up to 1,500 high quality new housing units, of which 50 per cent will be affordable. Around 2,500 new jobs are expected along with a broadened night time offer, including the opening of the new Rose Theatre in 2007. Plans to redevelop part of the town in partnership with a developer are advanced and based on widespread stakeholder consultation and market analysis. This increases realism for their delivery.

32 Ambitions are based upon a shared understanding of the scale of opportunities and challenges facing the borough and what matters most to local people. Extensive and wide ranging consultation, engagement and analysis occurs at many levels to inform the Council's and partners' understanding of need. Community planning events, engagement with numerous existing groups such as the Interfaith and Disabled and Older Peoples forums, and the use of MORI surveys all informed the development of the Community Plan and the recent LAA. Targeted surveys of minority communities are also used to understand needs, for example in accessing health and social services. The broad understanding of needs results in ambitions rooted in what matters to local people and the areas in most need of improvement.



33 There is a good understanding and commitment to the vision and ambitions by members, officers and key partners. Communication to the wider public is improving - 56 per cent of residents feel they are kept well informed by the council in contrast to 47 per cent previously. However, there is less understanding amongst some smaller stakeholders, for example, smaller businesses outside of KTC, some smaller minority and voluntary sector groups.

34 The Council is a respected, strong and creative community leader. The established neighbourhood committees with executive functions and delegated budgets enable Chairs to actively champion local needs with positive results. Sixty four per cent of residents believe they can influence decisions that affect their neighbourhood. The Council has a collaborative community leadership style. In the recent development of the Local Area Agreement, the voluntary sectorco-chaired each of the theme areas. Through a cross party and cross authority lobby, a key bus route serving the north of the borough was saved.

35 Partnership working is strong. As one of the Council's six ambitions, the Council has a long standing commitment to partnership working, which is consistently externally recognised and respected. For example, the Council has been successful, in partnership with local KTC businesses in becoming the Country's first Business Improvement District, securing £3.5 million of additional investment over five years in the local environment and town centre management that would otherwise have been unachievable. Recent strengthening of partnership governance arrangements within the LSP has been implemented, including a Partnership Delivery Board. The Council's approach to the private sector is moving towards longer term partnering, with all contractors now signed up to the Partners' Charter. Strong partnership working brings capacity to support the delivery of the ambitions.

Prioritisation

36 The Council is performing well in this area. It has a set of clear priorities based on what matters most to local people and in the areas most in need of improvement. Not all of these are supported by measurable outcome focussed actions and targets for improvement. Services actively take into account differing needs of its communities, including BME and vulnerable groups, although feedback to participants of consultation and engagement activities is inconsistent. Resources follow priorities and difficult decisions are taken when required. The Council's approach to non priorities or those of lesser importance is not clearly set out in its plans.



37 Twelve priorities of equal importance support the delivery of the overall vision of the Community Plan and the Council's own ambitions. Eight of the priorities, called key objectives, set out in the Council's overarching Policy Programme focus on what will be delivered for residents. The remaining four support the ambitions for how the council itself will work to deliver the outcomes. These include: having a thriving voluntary sector; neighbourhoods and participation; financial responsibility and improving how the council works. The public facing priorities are:

prosperous and thriving local economy;

cleaner and safer neighbourhoods;

the best place to live;

reduce, re-use and recycle;

options for travel;

a fair deal for tenants;

caring for the vulnerable; and

better schools and services for young people and families.

38 Priorities reflect what matters most to local people and the areas in most need of improvement. The local quality of the environment, crime and fear of crime remain local people's consistent top concerns. Maintaining universal high quality education and social care services are recognised by the Council as being fundamental to promoting economic prosperity through tackling inequality and social inclusion.

39 Not all of the priorities are supported by measurable, outcome focused actions and targets for improvement. Short, medium and longer term targets are set out in some service plans, the LAA and some key service strategies. For example within the 'reduce, reuse, recycle' priority, the Waste strategy implementation plans contain clear short, medium and longer term outcomes to recycle and compost 35 and 47 per cent of waste by 2010 and 2020 respectively. Incremental improvements, from an above the national average base will be delivered until the new contract is let in 2008. Under 'cleaner and safer neighbourhoods' targets are set to reduce crime by 17.5 per cent between 1 April 2005 and 31 March 2008. However some plans lack outcome focused actions and targets. For example the Homelessness Action Plan under the priority, 'a fair deal for tenants', and the Cultural Strategy under the, 'best place to live', priority.



40 Local intelligence and residents views and expectations are used effectively at a service level to inform priorities. Consultation and engagement activities are mainstreamed, through the service planning framework and supplemented by a range of established forums. In addition there is ongoing engagement through neighbourhood committees, Citizens' panel, and the use of surveys. These ensure an ongoing understanding of individuals', groups' and area needs. Combating anti-social behaviour (ASB) was identified as a high priority for residents and businesses following detailed consultation and review, including engagement with youth in reducing crime and promoting diversionary activity. As a result a number of targets were set to tackle the underlying determinants, for example a 5 per cent increase in public satisfaction with visible policing by 2007/08. However, feeding back to participants on what has changed as a result of their input is inconsistent. Co-ordination of consultation activities and outcomes is just beginning as part of the new consultation strategy. By engaging with local people the Council increases the effectiveness of its planning and actions.

41 Services actively take account of the needs of BME and vulnerable groups in their design and delivery. The target for all bus stops to be fully accessible by 2008/09 came out of consultation with older people's and mobility impaired groups. The MILAAP centre for Asian Elders, and the New Malden helpdesk and translation of the A-Z of services into a ten page directory for the Korean Community came out of consultation exercises. Surveys of children and young people led to a recording studio in Hook. In addition the Council is working to meet level 3 of the Local Government Equality Standard.

42 The Council has been successful in influencing partners to line up behind priorities, including integrating approaches to setting priorities and allocating resources. Under, 'caring for the vulnerable' the Council has influenced the PCT to deliver an integrated service for disabled children by 2008, alongside established integrated health and social care teams for older people. Within 'cleaner and safer neighbourhoods', the council with the police deliver mixed neighbourhood policing teams. Within 'better schools and services for young people and families' the CYPP identifies a total of £126 million of revenue funding between the local authority, the Connexions service and the Learning and Skills Council to provide services for children and young people in 2006/07.

43 There is a clear link between priorities and financial planning, and difficult decisions are taken when necessary. The Council's policy led budget approach ensures service and financial planning is integrated through the Medium Term Financial Plan (MTFP). Both revenue and capital follows priorities to support their delivery. Almost £3.5 million of cashable savings since 2002 has been recycled back into priority areas. For example £295,000 went to recycling, £250,000 for road/street improvements and £150,000 to street cleansing. Difficult decisions have been taken for example in charging for domiciliary care, and proceeding with the opening of the Rose Theatre. The cutting of decorations to older people's Council properties was another example of a difficult decision needed in order to re-direct resources into achieving the Decent Homes Standard. The new MTFP is currently being worked on for 2007 to 2011 which will set out the approach to priority and budget setting for that period.



44 The Council's approach to non priorities or those of lesser importance is not clearly set out in its plans. The current overarching corporate policy programme does not set out a clear hierarchy of priorities, arranged in order of importance. Currently, services have to prioritise individually in collaboration with the relevant Executive member, and between neighbourhood committee areas. The resulting hierarchy is not explicitly set out in their plans. In addition, the Council has reduced the number of priorities in the policy programme from 24 to 12 following the recent local elections, but this represents an amalgamation of the previous set rather than a material change to current commitments. Priorities for the next two to four years are being refined in tandem with the developing MTFP, but it is too early to assess if priorities will change as a result.

45 The Council effectively maintains its focus on delivering the priorities. Following the May 2006 local elections officers have worked quickly to translate the manifesto into the overarching policy programme which sets out the actions that will be delivered over the first year. Portfolio holders undertake ongoing monitoring of actions through regular meetings with service heads and informal communications. Progress reports on individual actions such as the library plan go to neighbourhood committees. Member and officer groups provide a more intensive focus on areas for improvement such as Housing and Waste services, with improvements successfully delivered in each. These formal and informal mechanisms ensure focus is maintained.

Capacity

46 The Council is performing well in this area. Capacity is enhanced through strong political and managerial leadership and a committed and motivated workforce. Partnership working is effectively utilised to deliver the ambitions for the borough. Financial management is sound and there is a track record of successfully securing external funding to support delivery in priority areas. The Council has been investing in building longer term sustainable capacity through procurement practices, strengthened overview and scrutiny arrangements and revised LSP governance structures. Progress on member development is slow, and the corporate approach to asset management is underdeveloped. The Council's ICT capacity is not fully utilised, for example in knowledge management.

47 Political and managerial leadership is strong. The Leader and the Chief Executive provide effective leadership, for example in relation to Kingston Town Centre and the new Rose Theatre. They are well respected both internally and amongst partners. There is an effective mix of skills and experience amongst the single party Executive and within the established four neighbourhood committees which take delegated decisions on a range of operational services. However slower progress is being made to understand and meet the skills and competency requirements of members to deliver the future priorities. This is acknowledged and proposals to address this are underway. There has been a lack of evaluation on the effectiveness of the previous years' programme limiting progress.



48 The Council benefits from a committed and highly motivated workforce, supported by effective and successful human resource (HR) management. HR practices, including training and development for staff, are regularly reviewed and linked to corporate strategies and priorities ensuring competencies and skills are in place to deliver the Council’s ambitions. The workforce is largely reflective of the local community, with action being taken to improve the representation of women and BME at senior management level. Sickness levels are low, with figures in the best quartile for the past three years. Staff are empowered to innovate in service delivery, such as the direct payment initiative. Project management skills however, need to be harnessed and developed, given the ambitious agenda to deliver projects such as K+20.

49 There is a strong approach to workforce planning both within the Council and with partners to support the delivery of its future plans. Consequently performance on recruitment and retention is good. For example the Council, in partnership with the local PCT, voluntary and community sector partners has developed a five year strategic Workforce Development Framework aimed at enhancing the quality of social care staff.

50 Member and officer relations are strong, open and mutually respectful. There is clarity and a healthy working respect for their different roles. The Council's Standards Committee is working well and has an appropriate profile. The Corporate Development Team (CDT) and Executive members work jointly to provide an effective focus at strategic level on driving improvement and achieving long term objectives.

51 The Council is improving its Overview and Scrutiny functions, building on some satisfactory performance, for example in the Health Overview and Scrutiny Panel. Previous arrangements were adequate overall. Overview and Scrutiny are now separate with a single opposition led Scrutiny Panel and an administration led Overview Commission contributing to policy development. These arrangements, established after the recent elections, are new and in the process of being embedded. Early indications from the first Scrutiny Committee are that the new arrangements provide a sound foundation to build on in holding the Executive to account.

52 The openness and transparency of key officer decisions is not effective. There are no arrangements to record key decisions taken by officers under delegated authority. This creates the risk that these are not available for call-in or are easily accessible.

53 The role of the established neighbourhood structures is being enhanced to deliver the key ‘neighbourhoods and participation’ priority. The four neighbourhood committees, with their dedicated budgets, already effectively bring decision making close to residents and local communities. However, following the constitutional review and independent expert input, their remit is being developed to enhance their community leadership role across a wider range of issues and to extend the opportunities to engage more widely with their local communities. Neighbourhood charters, linked to the aims of the Community Plan, are in the process of being developed. As a result the Council is strengthening further its responsiveness and ability to provide tailored responses to local needs.



54 Partnership working is particularly strong, well established and effectively utilised to deliver the ambitions for the borough. In line with the priority of, ‘having a thriving voluntary sector’ the Council is enhancing its capacity to address inequalities and social inclusion by supporting the already active sector to play its key role in delivering the vision and the LAA. Grants to the voluntary and community sector range from small and neighbourhood grants to strategic three year funding. For example the Council provides strategic funding to the MILAAP centre for Asian elders, who work with the Kingston Chinese Association to offer recreational and community support to the local Chinese community at the centre. A Voluntary Sector Board has recently been set up to further improve partnership arrangements by increasing communication and access to elected members, and providing an opportunity to discuss wider partnership issues.

55 The Council’s strategic approach to partnering and procurement is enhancing its long term capacity to deliver more cost effective services in innovative ways. Recently awarded long term contracts such as, Leisure Services, and Parks Management and Grounds Maintenance are intended to lever in investment and secure improvement through stable but flexible long term partnerships. The recently revised Procurement Strategy, in partnership with the local Chamber of Commerce is also being used to support local supply chains through sourcing minor and routine procurement locally and encouraging its main contractors to use local sub-contractors. Twenty eight per cent (£28 million) of procurement spend in the last year has been to local businesses. This has increased to 31 per cent since April 2006.

56 Partnership governance arrangements of the wider LSP have recently been rationalised and strengthened. The Community Leadership Strategy Group (CLSG) maintains the strategic overview. The Partnership Delivery Board (PDB) focuses on driving improvements and delivery of the outcomes of the LAA. The new arrangements better align with the Council’s own governance arrangements, formally linking the Executive with the CLSG and the CDT with the PDB. This helps to develop a greater strategic understanding and focus as well as increased local capacity to deliver the vision and LAA outcomes. Whilst arrangements are new, there is clear commitment from both the partners and the council to make it work successfully.

57 The Council has secured financial capacity to deliver on its 2006/07 priorities. The approved capital programme funding takes account of all external funding, which has delivered additional capacity of £20.9 million for the next two years. The Council has agreed a medium term financial plan (MTFP) for 2005/06 to 2008/09, based on the previously approved Policy Programme. The Council has maintained a focus on reducing service costs, investing the efficiency savings and building up its reserves. This has enabled it to contain council tax increases and to improve value for money.



58 Kingston has a strong track record in securing external funding to increase its capacity to deliver in priority areas. Examples include, successfully bidding for £3.9 million for highways related schemes in 2006/07 from Transport for London (TfL), and securing £9.9 million from the Department for Education and Skills in capital grants for maintaining and modernising its schools. The Council is utilising prudential borrowing to fund its capital works, amounting to just over 50 per cent of its capital funding programme. As a result, the Council has been able to invest £2.4 million in undertaking a programme of major repairs to Council buildings and meeting its obligation under the DDA, as well as investing £1.75 million in highways investments and lighting.

59 The Council’s corporate approach to asset management is underdeveloped. Until recently, property was seen as a fixed asset within individual departments. An asset and project management group is currently being formed to facilitate a corporate landlord approach to managing and securing best value from its assets. This is being linked to the review of the MTFP and remaining two to four years of the Policy Programme.

60 The Council has sound arrangements in place for risk management. Corporate risks have been reviewed and reassessed, and explicitly form part of strategic and service planning. There is a strong track record of the successful and effective risk management in service developments. For example an inspection and maintenance system based on the volume of pedestrian traffic was developed in the highways department. As a result, the risk of accidents is reduced.

61 The Council's use of its ICT capacity is not fully effective. ICT is used to improve access to services, through the website; the use of electronic kiosks throughout the borough, and users' ability to make payments and book facilities on line. The Council has recently implemented the Children’s integrated assessment and information system. However, whilst data and intelligence is shared effectively within partnerships, the Council does not maximise its ICT capacity to hold and manage knowledge across services and between partnerships as a strategic resource. In addition some internal administrative IT systems such as the HR system are nearing the end of its useful life. Whilst action is being taken to replace the system, its current capacity impacts on payroll administration issues with contractual partners.

Performance management

62 The Council is performing well in this area. The clear member and officer commitment to devolved performance management has been successful in delivering some high quality value for money services. Financial monitoring and performance review are linked and effective in ensuring focus is maintained on delivering priorities and securing improvements. But there are some inconsistencies in practice, and in the frequency of performance reporting. Performance management arrangements across the Children's partnership are good, but are developing across other partnerships.



63 The Council has a good record of being a performance driven organisation delivering effective and efficient services. There is a strong member and officer commitment to a devolved approach to owning, managing and monitoring performance, which delivers ongoing improvements in services for local people. Underpinned by its policy programme, key service strategies and service delivery plans, staff are consistently clear what is expected of them and what training and development support is available in delivering their targets. As a result the evident performance culture is helping to deliver tangible improvements in service priorities, both within already high performing services, as well as previously underperforming ones. For example, the Council is one of only eight in England to have the highest rating, three-star education and social care services.Un-audited 2005/06 figures for the CPA basket of performance indicators demonstrate positive absolute performance and direction of travel. Sixty eight per cent of selected PIs improved between 2004/05 and 2005/06, with 31 per cent in the best quartile and 55 per cent overall in the best and second quartile.

64 User involvement in shaping services is good, For example, the Kingston Panel is routinely engaged to seek views in a range of issues including parking, recycling and on local spending priorities. As a result the opening hours in two Town Centre multi-storey car parks were extended and provision made for parking spaces for bicycles.

65 The Council provides good value for money across the services it delivers. Well established principles for reviewing and improving efficiencies are consistently applied across all services. There is a clear culture of delivering efficiency savings whilst maintaining the quality of services. Over the past six years, the Council has achieved £20 million in real terms budget savings, with £1 million of cashable savings per year since 2002. As a result, in the 2006/07 budget, identified efficiency savings from back office functions, day care for the elderly and sports, arts and adult education are targeted to priority areas. As a result of grant funding from the Council, the Citizens' Advice Bureau, is able to extend advisory services to twice as many clients than the Council could have done.

66 Financial monitoring is sound, well embedded and linked to performance monitoring. The CDT has a prominent and active role in reviewing budgets, especially in dealing with spends and potential overspends. Variances in budgets are addressed effectively. For example, in November 2005 the Council was predicting an overspend. Through effective and strong financial controls, led by the CDT, the Council was able to turn around the position, achieving anunder-spend by the end of the financial year, part of which helped build reserves and contain increases in council tax levels. Budgets and performance are monitored by CDT and Executive and by individual Portfolio members with service heads.



67 The performance framework is clear, understood and owned by staff and members, but there are some inconsistencies in approach. Comprehensive guidance on service planning is issued to managers but this is not consistently followed across the organisation. Some examples include Trading Standards, Income and Cashiers Department and Life Long Learning and Leisure. Ensuring a consistent approach is important to delivering the ambition of consistently high quality services.

68 SMART, outcome focused action planning and robust target setting is varied. Whilst there are examples where this is done effectively, this is not replicated consistently across services. For example, the Homelessness Action Plan contains targets that are not consistently outcome focused or challenging and can demonstrate attributes of being SMART. Actions included in some service plans focus on processes rather than impact. User engagement in setting specific standards and targets is limited.

69 Performance comparisons are used effectively to promote self awareness and drive improvements within services and across some partnerships. Top level PIs are compared with top performing authorities, and service benchmarking has delivered improvements in services such as highways. The CDRP receives crime figures on a regular basis showing comparisons with national and London performance. However there is a lack of comparison undertaken on financial and value for money aspects. Mechanisms do not currently exist to compare and evaluate process, costs and outcomes with partners and other providers.

70 There are effective performance review mechanisms in place to ensure focus is maintained on delivering priorities, but the frequency of formal reporting is inconsistent. At service level, reviews are undertaken as part of regular meetings between service heads and portfolio members, or through more intensive dedicated member officer groups, with positive effect. For example, Housing is now rated as a three out of four service block in the CPA. Corporately, top level PIs linked to the priorities are reviewed quarterly by the Everyone Counts group (ECG), chaired by the Chief Executive before reporting formally to the Executive. However, over the last 12 months reporting has occurred only twice. User involvement is also limited in reviewing performance. For example tenants are involved in engaging new repairs and maintenance contractors but are not involved in reviewing their performance. As a result, performance reporting is not as open and transparent and readily accessible to all members, stakeholders and to the wider community. This has the potential to impact on their ability to be able to challenge performance effectively.

71 Overall, performance management arrangements with key delivery partners are developing. Refined LSP governance arrangements have recently been put in place to strengthen accountability and a focus on delivery. The Council with its partners is in the process of developing a performance management framework for the delivery of the recently agreed LAA, but this is not yet in place. Performance management across the Children and Young People's Trust Board is more advanced and is good. With a clear focus on underperformance, improvement has already been delivered. For example improved standards in lower performing sixth forms.



72 The Council is open to sharing data with individual partnerships to good effect. Several partnerships, for example the crime and disorder partnership and the Health partnership, routinely share data to redesign and flex services. As a result, it targets additional support to areas in need of improvement; for example, it commissioned a voluntary community sector (VCS) partner to survey BME service users to identify reasons. Cultural and transport issues were identified as barriers and these have influenced the partnership's childcare strategy to improve access to services. However, the Council does not have a systematic approach to sharing data and intelligence across partnerships and as a result a corporate or more strategic partnership response is more difficult to identify and achieve.

73 The Council is an open and learning organisation, making good use of external evaluations and responding effectively to user views. There is constructive use of consultation and user satisfaction information to review and improve service performance. Complaints of alcohol misuse and discovery of discarded needles at a local park, triggered an alcohol free zone at Fairfield park and the Council's Alcohol and Harm Reduction Strategy. The Council has recently invited peer review and commissioned a review on constitutional arrangements. The role of scrutiny in reviewing performance management was limited under previous arrangements. Following the external review, revised arrangements are in place, with scrutiny now chaired by the opposition. This demonstrates a constructive use of external evaluation in order to learn and reflects a high degree of self awareness.

Corporate Assessment What has been achieved? 25


What has been achieved? 74 The Council is performing strongly in this area. The ambitions of the Community

plan are framed in the national shared priorities. The Council's own priorities flow from these and reflect national, regional and local agendas. Cross cutting agendas such as social inclusion and anti-poverty are mainstreamed throughout the Council's and partnership activities and embodied in the LAA.

75 Capacity to deliver its ambition and priorities is effectively enhanced through extensive partnership working and importantly co-ordinating activities across its own services to maximise impact. For example with the Police and Kingston First to deliver the, 'cleaner safer neighbourhoods' and, 'a prosperous and thriving local economy' priorities. In partnership with local businesses, Kingston Town Centre became the first Business Improvement District in the Country, securing substantial additional investment to improve the physical environment and management that would otherwise have been unachievable. Planning, transport, youth and housing services work effectively to contribute to the delivery of the safer and stronger agenda. The Council has been particularly successful in securing external funding and lobbying in line with priorities, such as highways improvements and increased frequencies and extensions to bus services to improve access. Longer term sustainable capacity is being enhanced through new procurement approaches. Performance management is used effectively to deliver improvements in underperforming services, such as environment services and housing and in already high performing service such as education.

26 Corporate Assessment What has been achieved?


76 Achievements are good overall and outstanding in some areas. These are recognised in areas which matter the most to local people, such as in crime and the quality of the environment, and are in line with national priorities. Outcomes for those most at risk of disadvantage are good. Overall crime has reduced from an already low level, and is decreasing further. National targets for the numbers in drug related treatment programmes have been exceeded. Streets are cleaner and recycling has increased from an already higher than the national average position. The Council is achieving a shift towards more environmentally friendly forms of transport through a host of ongoing infrastructure and innovative behavioural change initiatives such as personalised travel planning. The overall effectiveness of the Council's children's services is outstanding. All services for children and young people are at least good and have had a very substantial impact on improving outcomes for almost all children and young people. A broader approach to older people, building on the already excellent social care services is being implemented. Delayed discharges from hospital are kept at a low level and a high proportion of people are able to live at home. Multi agency projects are increasing the uptake of benefits to older people. Rates of teenage pregnancy are lower than national targets with a continuing downward trend. Fuel poverty is reducing. Access to jobs for the disabled and those on incapacity benefits is improving. Health inequalities are being tackled through targeted activities in deprived areas of the borough such as through the Community Action Partnership, but measuring the impact on health outcomes is more difficult. Meeting the areas housing needs remains a challenging agenda particularly for affordable and sheltered housing.

Sustainable communities and transport

77 The Council has a holistic and integrated approach to delivering its vision for being the 'best place to live and work'. Achievements are evident against all of the key objectives which underpin this shared priority area, although progress in meeting the area's housing needs is slower.

78 A comprehensive programme of infrastructure improvements is well advanced, supporting the delivery of the, 'options for travel' priority. Investments in the highway infrastructure have seen principal and non principal roads achieving top quartile performance, in line with local people's wishes. Ongoing investments will make all bus stops fully accessible and bring all footway conditions up to standard by 2008/09. One hundred per cent of the bus fleet is now accessible with further increases in frequency and extensions to routes planned for implementation in 2007/08. Bus patronage has increased with 78 per cent of residents very satisfied with buses.



79 In line with the 'options for travel' priority, the Council is achieving modal shift through a range of proactive and innovative approaches. A 10 per cent reduction in car usage has been recorded to date. The successful Christmas Park and Ride Scheme for Kingston Town centre saved 40,000 car trips, with a 10 per cent growth in passenger numbers in 2005. However, key plans for a permanent park and ride scheme are more developmental. Forty per cent of schools now have an approved travel plan with the remaining 60 per cent on target to have them by 2009. The New Malden pilot for the innovative 20,000 household personalised travel planning initiative, in partnership with Tfl has recently finished, and is undergoing evaluation.

80 Improving the quality of the environment has been achieved and recognised in line with the priority. In partnership with Kingston First, improvements to the quality of KTC's physical environment has been achieved through: enhanced street cleaning, environment rangers operating seven days a week, new and refurbished street furniture, regular gum removal; daily street washing in high traffic areas; and enhanced hanging baskets, tree and planting programmes. More responsive graffiti removal and the removal of abandoned cars borough wide are recognised by residents and stakeholders. Whilst improvements are recognised in street cleaning borough wide the latest Encams survey returned a slight drop in performance, largely due to issues with detritus.

81 Much has been delivered against the, 'reduce, re-use and recycle' priority. Twenty five per cent of waste was recycled/composted in 2005/06, as a result of increased participation in the kerbside recycling scheme, estate based recycling, and refurbishment of the boroughs bring banks. Growth in waste has reduced by 3 per cent, although it is too early to determine if this is a long term trend or largely the result of improvements in data quality. Plans to develop a longer term sustainable solution to managing the borough's waste in partnership with neighbouring authorities are advancing, with promising private sector interest.

82 Whilst unemployment is low at 2.2 per cent, the Council, with its partners has been proactive in supporting a 'prosperous and thriving local economy'. This recognises the importance of a sustainable and vibrant local economy for the well being of the borough overall. Policies and initiatives include safeguarding employment workspace through planning and improving access to jobs for targeted groups, such as the disabled and those on incapacity benefits through welfare to work programmes. Forty people have been helped into jobs over the last year. Local Business are supported through the buy local commitment within the new Procurement Framework and local retail skills gaps are being addressed in collaboration with Kingston College. Enhancing the physical appearance of centres outside of the main Kingston Town Centre in order to improve viability and economic growth and jobs is seen as key to the Council's approach. Improvements to the streetscape have been delivered in New Malden with investments secured for improvements to Tolworth, including the filling in of a subway and landscaping. Surbiton businesses are being supported through the development of a loyalty scheme.



83 Kingston town centre remains economically significant to the borough and in partnership with Kingston First, achievements are being realised. In the first 15 months of the BID a cleaner and safer town centre has been achieved. Dedicated marketing campaigns returned a rise on town centre footfall by approximately five per cent in the four weeks leading up to Christmas in 2005. Public transport access to the centre is improving. Successful lobbying to support the night time economy has secured increases in frequencies and extensions to bus services to and from the town centre including night services to Chessington in the south of the borough. Long term investment plans to re-develop part of the town centre through K+20 are progressing with a private developer.

84 The Council has been less successful in ensuring housing supply meets the needs of the area. Steps are being taken to ensure affordable housing is secured from major developments. For example, the Royal Court development in partnership with Richmond Churches Housing Association has delivered 110 affordable units, of which 30 plus intermediate homes are affordable to households earning less than £30,000 a year. Fifty per cent of the proposed residential units across three of the major sites in KTC will be affordable following agreement with the developer. However, current delivery of 179 affordable homes between 2004 and 2006, in contrast to the anticipated housing need for 1,365 affordable homes annually falls short of need. Demand still significantly outstrips supply, which also has the potential to impact on local recruitment and retention. The Council’s sheltered housing needs modernising. Twenty per cent of the stock has shared facilities. A housing needs survey is currently in progress which will feed into the delayed overarching housing strategy. The Council is on track to achieve the decent homes standard by 2010 for its social housing stock and is improving choice through the recent successful launch of the choice based letting scheme.

Safer and stronger communities

85 The Council works effectively through a range of partnerships to achieve its priorities for safer and stronger communities. It has been identified as the safest borough in London in the independent Reform Group's recent report. The Kingston Community and Police Partnership includes the Kingston Domestic Violence Forum and the Drug and Alcohol Action Team. There is good understanding of their respective roles by the partners and close co-ordination of activities. The Council’s community safety strategy, for 2005 to 2008, is comprehensive and accessible and contains clear priorities and targets, including some joint targets with the police.



86 Overall crime has reduced. Between 2004/05 and 2005/06 overall crime reduced by 3.9 per cent from an already low base, meeting most of the targets for crime reduction and sanctioned detections (crimes solved) and exceeding many. The first four months of this performance year have seen an 11.9 per cent reduction, building on the successes already achieved in 2005/06. To support the night-time economy at Kingstown Town Centre, the Council in partnership with the police and the business sector has put in place a range of initiatives. For example, the installation of three licensed mini-cab booking kiosks in the vicinity of the main night club areas for a trial period over the summer to make it easier to book cabs at night. Cab marshals are provided by the night club and paid for by the mini cab companies. The project is supported by Kingston First, Kingston Police and the Council in association with TfL's Public Carriage Office. As a result, Kingston First achieved a 14 per cent reduction in assaults in Kingston town centre.

87 The Council demonstrates a comprehensive approach in using its services, such as the planning system, transport, and housing, to effectively contribute to its safer and stronger agenda. It recognises the need to address environmental and economic concerns as well as general crime if it is going to have a sustainable and long term impact on crime and anti-social behaviour. Examples include undertaking planting schemes on housing estates aimed at deterring youth from congregating, designing a purpose-built youth shelter to provide alternative places for young people and clearing a dumping hotspot in Surbiton with joint input from the probation service, the rangers and the Council's environment services.

88 Partners recognise the priority the Council places on safer and stronger communities and its contribution through a range of initiatives. Initiatives include jointly funded posts within the police borough intelligence unit enabling better information exchange, as well as reducing the potential for duplication, thus gaining maximum value for money. The Council is using mixed neighbourhood policing teams to tackle community concerns such as solving crime and dealing with anti-social behaviour. Partnership initiatives instituted over the last year have brought considerable payback in terms of reducing crime and disorder, and police and partners are increasingly visible in the Town Centre in the form of Town Centre Rangers, Cab Marshals and Street Pastors. The Council has recently signed a protocol with NCP, which has brought the Borough’s parking attendants into the extended policing family. Such initiatives ensure that activities areco-ordinated between partners to make them more effective and provide for a higher visible uniformed presence.



89 The council is making investments to build strong and cohesive communities. Examples include the well attended annual, 'Kingston Carnival', organised by Kingston Racial Equality Council (KREC) in partnership with the Council and various organisations based in Kingston. The event promotes diversity and multiculturalism through celebration and dance with an underlying message of tolerance and respect. Recently, the council, the police and the KREC issued a joint press release following the recent London bombings. In addition, the council, with contributions from the Police, the Inter-Faith Forum, KREC and other voluntary groups has launched a London Peace forum, with open days in the Police Station, local churches, synagogue and mosque, as well as stalls for providing community safety advice to international students arriving at the local university. The Interfaith forum also acts as an effective channel of communication and consultation in events of developing crisis. It aids open discussion of welfare issues affecting members of faith and ethnic minority groups, including students at Kingston University.

90 The Council’s approach to the resilience agenda is fit for purpose. Clearly set out in its Business Continuity and Emergency Plan, it is linked to business continuity plans and co-ordinated with other south London authorities for mutual aid. In partnership with the Chamber of Commerce, the Council has developed a framework for the development of corporate and service business continuity plans, and there are up-to-date risk assessments. The Council is also actively promoting business continuity within the borough. The Council has undertaken emergency exercises, led by the police, and has actively secured involvement of the voluntary sector within the Incident Support Team to add value on the caring aspects of emergency planning, assisting in the setting up of family assistance and rest centres.

91 The Council has secured effective partnership working to reduce accidents. One thousand children are trained annually on cycling proficiency and as a result of a variety of education and traffic calming measures the Council is on track to meet the statutory casualty reduction targets by 2010. Other initiatives include providing a summer scheme at Tolworth Recreation Ground, aimed at children to provide guidance on the importance of crossing road safely. The Council’s Road Safety and Travel Awareness Unit also provides play equipment free of charge to local nurseries and playgroups.

92 The Council has worked effectively with the local Fire Brigade in reducing accidental fires by 19 per cent. Over 1,000 Home Fire Safety checks for residents over the past two years, including the fitting of a free smoke alarm where needed has resulted in a 5 per cent reduction in accidental dwelling fires. Other measures to reduce accidents include undertaking testing of electric blankets for older people and undertaking fire safety campaigns aimed at children.



93 The Council has a good track record in acting as a community leader in reducing anti-social behaviour in Kingston with partners. This includes tackling domestic violence and seeking to get drug users into treatment and rehabilitation. The Council has an ASB strategy in place, structured around the key themes of prevention, education, community support and engagement, enforcement and rehabilitation. Resident representatives active in the Crime and Disorder Partnership and Safer Neighbourhood Panels reported that the Council has been successful in controlling and reducing anti-social behaviour. However, there is a lack of clear outcome focussed targets to evaluate achievement of the identified outcome measures.

94 The Council has a shared Alcohol Harm Reduction Strategy with partners, delivering some positive outcomes. The Council has exceeded national targets for the numbers in drug related treatment programmes. As a result, last year 334 Kingston drug users entered treatment, beyond the target of 283 Kingston residents set for 2005/06. Fifty two per cent of drug users completed treatment or stayed in treatment in excess of 12 weeks, again beyond the 2005/06 target of45 per cent. The Youth Interventions Partnership became operational in November 2005. To date 19 young people have been referred, 12 offered an intervention, with seven still being assessed at May 2006. None of the 12 receiving an intervention has entered the Youth Justice system to date. Another example of the Council taking active steps following consultation, is the needle exchange programme led by the Kaleidoscope project.

Healthier communities

95 The Council, with its partners undertakes a wide range of proactive activities to deliver national and local priorities with some positive results. Kingston’s Choosing Health implementation plan sets out actions agreed by all partners to deliver national and local priorities. For example, joint activities to promote smoking cessation range from smoke free council offices to targeted smoking cessation activities at schools serving relatively disadvantaged areas. As a result the numbers of people quitting smoking has risen from 485 in 2003/04 to 647 in 2005/06. Youth club programmes include preventative work on the use of alcohol and a specialist worker linked to the street based team, targets young people who are mis-using alcohol. All centres have a range of leaflets and information on drug and alcohol misuse. Young people report being better informed on issues.



96 People in Kingston are healthier than average. Life expectancy is rising and among the highest in London. Infant mortality is in line with benchmarked groups and significantly below the national average. There are lower than average numbers of people with mental health problems and there is evidence of some good health choices being made as a result of partnership activities. Whilst benefiting from being a prosperous borough overall, geographical pockets of deprivation exist in some wards and sub-wards. There is a degree of understanding of health inequalities, but current mapping is currently not sophisticated enough to be able to identify health outcomes for discrete groups, such as BME. Developing a more robust partners' health information strategy is a key task of the recently appointed joint Director of Public Health, which will help to more accurately target provision and activities.

97 Obesity among eight to ten year olds in increasing. The multi-agency Obesity Strategy Partnership Group is developing a joint approach to diet, nutrition and exercise across the borough, targeting high-risk groups and including the promotion of exercise in schools and community settings. Participation in the Healthy Schools Programme is high at 55 per cent and all schools with infant children participate in the five fruit and vegetables a day project. The Youth Service positively promotes healthy lifestyles and offers opportunities for physical exercise. The Splash youth clubs for eight to twelve year olds includes physical activity as a significant element of each session with an emphasis on play and participation. A Youth Opportunity Card to increase access to the Council's leisure facilities for vulnerable children is in place, but its impact is not yet clear.

98 The Council is reducing fuel poverty through targeted investments and increasing grant uptake. Targeted work has resulted in an increased uptake of cold busters grants from £85,000 to £174,00 over four years. An ongoing three year programme in the Council's housing stock will result in the replacement of all boilers with the highest rated energy efficiency ones, along with a programme of insulation. There is a marked reduction in the percentage of people living without central heating.

99 Other good examples of joint working include the borough’s neighbourhood based, integrated health and social care teams which offer holistic assessments of need and user contribution to service design for older people and other vulnerable groups.

100 The council commissioned a survey of minority views in 2005 and Health Equalities Assessments have been implemented to measure access to services. The ’Update of Black and Minority Ethnic Communities’ Health and Social Care News’ aims to promote access to services across minority communities. A good range of consultation has taken place with young people in the design of new services. For example in KU19, which offers sexual health and contraception advice; in the design and development of the borough’s new adventure playgrounds and the Family Advice and Support Service (FASS), a multi-disciplinary early intervention for children’s mental health. The target for reducing the number of conceptions among 15-17 year olds has bettered national expectations with a continuing downward trend.



101 The Community Action Partnership aims to improve services for people in the most deprived area of the borough. A commissioning group of local people, the PCT, the voluntary sector and the police has set priorities and manages the budget. However, more than two years into the project, the impact on health outcomes is unclear and take-up of some services, such as the shopping bus for older people, is low.

Older people

102 The Council and its partners have a good strategic approach to meeting the needs of older people. High level commitment is articulated through the community plan and LAA. The Active Ageing Strategy comprehensively addresses the national active ageing agenda, including helping people to be healthy and live longer as well as to improve the quality of life and independence of adults who need assistance.

103 The Council consults extensively with older people to understand their future needs and aspirations. The number of older people in Kingston has declined over the last ten years, but increasing numbers are forecast for the future. The Older People's Partnership Board has considered the implications of future needs and aspirations. For example, priority has been given to the development of Amy Woodgate, an existing residential home for older people, to meet the needs of the growing client group needing specialist provision for dementia.

104 There is good co-ordination of cross cutting agendas for older people, including strong links between housing, community services, the police, fire service, PCT and the voluntary sector. As a result a high proportion of people are able to live at home. Cross-departmental and cross-sector information for the over 50s is easily accessed via the council’s website with links to partner websites such as the PCT and Age Concern. The Council has actively sought ways of communicating effectively with older people, piloting novel approaches such as using cell phone texting to alert older people to self-help strategies during the heatwave. The Council has helped to set up the Iraqi elders group, a West African elders group and older people in Chessington were consulted about what preventative services they would like to have available from a new centre.

105 Multi-agency projects are increasing the uptake of benefits to older people andpromoting intergenerational understanding. The Kingston Information Partnership, with advice through Age Concern and access to two full time welfare benefits staff located in the Department for Work and Pensions, has increased the uptake of benefits to older people. Age Concern Kingston has developed an innovative Age and Youth Programme involving older volunteers supporting children's learning in a number of primary schools. The Executive member for Housing and Adult Services is the older people’s champion. This role has enabled practical problem solving, including the relocation of MILAAP day care services for Asian older people from poor premises to empty purpose built accommodation.



106 Kingston has the second highest proportion of older people helped to live at home in its comparison group. Services to support people at home include the Handy Person scheme and ‘sloppy slipper’ falls prevention events. The council was a lead partner in the national development of direct payments. The partnership is on track to meet all LPSA targets, including further increases in the use of direct payments.

107 The Council has been very successful at keeping delayed transfers of care at a low level, exceeding its 2004/05 target. Integrated health and social care teams - Patient Individual Care Kingston (PICK) - are jointly funded and managed by the council and the PCT and were runners up in the national 2004 Health and Social Care Awards. Community Matrons linked to the teams and to GP practices lead on risk assessments and the management of long-term conditions with targets to reduce in-patient hospital admissions, promote person centred care, independent living and quality of life. An integrated community equipment service funded by a pooled budget has been in place for over two years. A small grant of £72,000 has been received from government for assisted technology and is being used to pilot the national scheme with small numbers of high-dependency older people.

Children and young people

108 The overall effectiveness of the council’s children’s services is outstanding. All services for children and young people are at least good and have had a very substantial impact on improving outcomes for almost all children and young people. Education services are outstanding. Very good progress has been made in strengthening the quality of universal services and developing and implementing preventative services to reduce levels of vulnerability. The capacity to build on these achievements and improve services further is good.

109 The management of services for children and young people is good. Good ambitions for children and young people are comprehensively set out in the Children and Young People’s Plan ‘Making a difference together’ which provides a challenging agenda for improvement based on a sound needs assessment. Strong leadership of the children’s agenda supported by high calibre staff and elected members underpinned by good relationships contribute to effective problem solving and a very good rate of progress. A Children and Young People’s Trust Board is in place, chaired by the council’s Chief Executive, with a good level of representation of key partners. Highly effective strategies for recruitment and retention and integrated workforce planning and development are contributing strongly to organisational capacity. The council has a good track record of increasing financial capacity through successful bids for additional funding. Current management of resources and value for money at the council are good. Performance management across the partnership is good. The council has a strong track record of focus on, and resolution of underperformance, exemplified by rapid and significant improvement in the youth service, and improved standards in the lower performing sixth forms.



110 The general support given to parents and carers to keep their children healthy is good. Children have good access to age appropriate health services when they are ill. However, in-patient services are not provided in an appropriate setting for adolescents and unaccompanied asylum seeker children (UASC) do not have the same ease of access to health services as other looked after children (LAC). A new tier 2 Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service is providing good support to front line staff in identifying mental health problems and making appropriate referrals. The integrated support for very young children and their families with learning difficulties and/or disabilities (LDD) is very good but is less wellco-ordinated for school aged children with LDD.

111 Children and young people who are most at risk are protected well through good inter-agency collaboration and well managed procedures. Professionals in key agencies generally work well together and share information. However, not all agencies are consistently working in accordance with national guidelines to refer children who are affected by domestic violence appropriately. In addition there are some aspects of social care practice in the area of domestic violence that requires improvement. Very good progress has been made in setting up preventative services which provide early support as well as more intensive work for children and their families. Support for LAC is good but more variable for UASC. Reviews for LAC are held in a timely way, however, the Independent Reviewing Officer service is having insufficient impact on improving the quality of this work. Good support is provided for children with LDD and their families.

112 Standards in schools overall are excellent, well above national averages and generally above those in similar authorities. Services for school improvement are a particular strength. The strengthening focus on identifying and supporting specific groups of vulnerable pupils has improved their progress and attainment. Attendance is very good and innovative activities are being implemented to further reduce the low rate of unauthorised absences and improve the broadly satisfactory attendance of LAC. Good quality practice in youth work settings contributes strongly to good standards of achievement.

113 Children and young people, including LAC, are supported well to contribute to society and in managing changes in their lives. The well-conceived participation strategy reflects the strong commitment across the partnership to involve children and young people in the decisions that affect them but is not yet consistently implemented. Good targeted collaborative partnership work is effectively reducing anti-social behaviour. The council has effectively managed the rising number of young people who offend for the first time through well targeted early intervention and re-offending rates are reducing significantly.



114 Opportunities for children and young people to achieve economic well-being and prepare for working life are outstanding. A very high proportion of young people, including those who are more vulnerable, remain in full time education at age 16. A high proportion of young people achieve level 2 and 3 qualifications by age 19. A clear and appropriate strategy to meet the needs of 14-19 year olds is being systematically implemented. Some new school sixth form partnerships are not yet well established and there is variation in standards of attainment between school sixth forms. Most young people live in appropriate accommodation, although there is a shortage of permanent accommodation for care leavers. Good transition arrangements are in place for LAC to support their progression at age 16.

Corporate Assessment Appendix 1 - Framework for Corporate Assessment 37


Appendix 1 - Framework for Corporate Assessment

1 This corporate assessment was carried out under section 10 of the Local Government Act 1999, under which the Audit Commission has power to inspect local authorities’ arrangements for securing continuous improvement. The results of the corporate assessment contribute to the determination of the overall CPA category for an authority, which the Audit Commission is required to assess and report on under section 99 of the Local Government Act 2003.

2 The Council’s self assessment provided a key resource in focusing the assessment activity which included consideration of:

key documentation, including the Council’s improvement plan;

updated performance indicators and performance data; and

interviews and meetings attended.

3 The assessment for Royal Borough of Kingston Upon Thames was undertaken by a team from the Audit Commission and took place over the period from 4 to 15 September 2006.

4 This report has been discussed with the Council, which has been given the opportunity to examine the Audit Commission’s assessment. This report will be used as the basis for improvement planning by the Council.

APPENDIX C Executive, 20 March 2007

PUBLICATION OF THE ACTION PLAN IN RESPONSE TO THE JOINT AREA REVIEW AND ENHANCED YOUTH SERVICE INSPECTION Report by the Strategic Director of Learning and Children’s Services Executive Member Children and Young People’s Services Purpose To approve the proposed action plan in response to the recommendations in the Joint Area Review (JAR) inspection report and the enhanced Youth Service Inspection report. Action Proposed by the Executive Member for Children and Young People’s Services The Executive is requested to approve the action plan in response to the recommendations of the Joint Area Review and Enhanced Youth Inspection Reason for the action proposed It is a legislative requirement to provide and publish an Action Plan in response to the findings of the JAR and Enhanced Youth Service Inspection, and submit it to the Secretary of State and Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector, OFSTED, by 23 March 2007. BACKGROUND 1. The Joint Area Review (JAR) and Enhanced Youth Inspection took place in

Kingston in September 2006. The inspection reports were published on 12 December 2006.

2. The JAR describes the outcomes achieved by children and young people

growing up in the Kingston upon Thames area and evaluates the way Kingston Council and a range of partners are working together to contribute to their achievements, progress and well-being. The services reviewed include council services, health services, police, Learning and Skills Council, Connexions and publicly funded services provided by voluntary bodies. Evidence from other inspections, including schools, the Further Education College and residential settings also contributed to the review.

3. The JAR was enhanced to enable coverage of the Youth Service. Inspectors

considered the Youth Service’s self-assessment and met officers and a cross-section of staff. They reviewed key service documentation and carried out direct observation of a sample of youth work sessions across the borough and as part of the JAR neighbourhood study area.

C2

4. Following publication of the JAR Report the Council is responsible for publishing the report locally within 30 working days. The report has been circulated appropriately and is available on the Council’s website.

5. The Council, with its partners, is required to make a written statement of

proposed action, or action plan, in response to the recommendations in the reports. The regulations do not stipulate the form or content of the action plan, other than saying it must state when action is proposed to be taken.

6. A copy of the Action Plan must be sent to her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of

Schools and the Secretary of State by 23 March 2007 and made available to those who were sent the report. There is no requirement for approval of the Action Plan by the Secretary of State or by OFSTED.

JAR OUTCOMES 7. The JAR inspection team reported that ‘Outcomes for children and young people

in Kingston upon Thames are good in all areas and outstanding in most” and at the time of publication of the report Kingston upon Thames was the first area to be awarded a grade 4 (outstanding) for Children’s Services since the JAR inspections started in September 2005.

8. The JAR inspection team graded service provision in several areas. Grades

were allocated according to the following scale: 4-Outstanding, 3-Good, 2-Adequate, 1-Inadequate. Kingston upon Thames was awarded grades as follows: -

Local

Services Overall

Council Services

Health Services

Be Healthy 3 Stay Safe 3 Enjoy & Achieve 4 Making a Positive contribution 3 Achieving economic Well Being 4 Service Management 3 Capacity to Improve 3 3 Children’s Services 4 The education service 4 The social care services for children 3 The health service 3

YOUTH SERVICE OUTCOMES 9. The Youth Service inspectors found that “young people in Kingston are served

well by a good youth service providing good value for money.” They judged the Youth Service to be good in every respect and that there has been very good progress since the last inspection in 2001. The contributions to improving the 5

C3

ECM outcomes are good and very good in enjoy and achieve and in making a positive contribution. Grades were awarded as follows:

Standards of young people’s achievement 3 Quality of youth work practice 3 Quality of curriculum and resources 3 Strategic and operational leadership and management

3

RECOMMENDATIONS IN THE INSPECTION REPORTS 10. In response to the Joint Area Review Report and Youth Service Inspection

Reports the Council with its partners has prepared an action plan to address the recommendations. This Action Plan (Annex 1) was agreed by the Children and Young People’s Trust Board on 5 March 2007.

11. The JAR inspectors made 6 recommendations to be addressed by the Council

and/or its partners and these are addressed in the Action Plan. The recommendation are:

For action over the next six months

• in relation to domestic violence, secure improvements in social care practice and the consistent implementation of the Working Together to Safeguard Children 2006 national guidelines by some community health staff to ensure that children who are affected by domestic violence are referred in line with these guidelines

• implement a coordinated joint commissioning function as soon as Health budgets for children’s services have been identified

• ensure that all services and partners who work with children and young people implement the participation strategy

• establish clear structures to enable feedback from the Independent Reviewing Officer service to systematically improve practice

• review and improve access to all services for children and young people who are unaccompanied asylum seekers; and ensure all looked after children are aware of opportunities to make a positive contribution and understand the advocacy and complaints service.

For action in the longer term • review the commissioning arrangements to improve access for children and

young people with social and communication learning difficulties and/or disabilities to therapy and equipment services.

12. The Youth Service report contains 4 areas for development. These can be

found on Page 3 of the Youth Service report and are addressed in the Action Plan. They are:

• Address health and safety issues in some centres.

C4

• Tackle inconsistencies in session planning. • Improve the quality of written evaluations by youth workers and young

people. • Further standardise quality assurance arrangements and performance

management records. 13. The Action Plan will be monitored by the Children and Young People’s Trust

Board as part of its programme to regularly monitor, evaluate and review the Children and Young People's Plan. The Children and Young People’s Partnership will also receive, and comment on, progress reports on the Action Plan.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS 14. There are no environmental implications arising directly from this report Author of the Report : Patrick Leeson, Director of Learning and Children’s Services 020 8547 5220 [email protected] Background Papers Kingston upon Thames Joint Area Review Report published 12 Dec 2006 Kingston upon Thames Youth Service Report published 12 Dec 2006

C5

Roy

al B

orou

gh o

f Kin

gsto

n up

on T

ham

es

A

NN

EX 1

Join

t Are

a R

evie

w

Enh

ance

d Yo

uth

Insp

ectio

n

Act

ion

Plan

Mar

ch 2

007

C5

C6

Intr

oduc

tion

The

Join

t Are

a R

evie

w (J

AR

) and

Enh

ance

d Y

outh

Insp

ectio

n to

ok p

lace

in K

ings

ton

in

Sep

tem

ber 2

006

and

the

insp

ectio

n re

ports

wer

e pu

blis

hed

on 1

2 D

ecem

ber 2

006.

Th

e C

ounc

il, w

ith it

s pa

rtner

s, is

requ

ired

to m

ake

a w

ritte

n st

atem

ent o

f pro

pose

d ac

tion,

or

actio

n pl

an, i

n re

spon

se to

the

reco

mm

enda

tions

in th

e re

port.

Th

e JA

R in

spec

tion

team

repo

rted

that

‘Out

com

es fo

r chi

ldre

n an

d yo

ung

peop

le in

Kin

gsto

n up

on T

ham

es a

re g

ood

in a

ll ar

eas

and

outs

tand

ing

in m

ost”

and

at th

e tim

e of

pub

licat

ion

of

the

repo

rt K

ings

ton

upon

Tha

mes

was

the

first

are

a to

be

awar

ded

a gr

ade

4 (o

utst

andi

ng) f

or

Chi

ldre

n’s

Ser

vice

s si

nce

the

JAR

insp

ectio

ns s

tarte

d in

Sep

tem

ber 2

005.

The

You

th S

ervi

ce in

spec

tors

repo

rted

that

“you

ng p

eopl

e in

Kin

gsto

n ar

e se

rved

wel

l by

a go

od y

outh

ser

vice

pro

vidi

ng g

ood

valu

e fo

r mon

ey.”

The

y ju

dged

the

You

th S

ervi

ce to

be

good

in e

very

resp

ect a

nd th

at th

ere

has

been

ver

y go

od p

rogr

ess

sinc

e th

e la

st in

spec

tion

in

2001

.

In re

spon

se to

the

Join

t Are

a R

evie

w R

epor

t and

You

th S

ervi

ce In

spec

tion

Rep

orts

the

coun

cil

with

its

partn

ers

has

prep

ared

this

act

ion

plan

to a

ddre

ss th

e re

com

men

datio

ns.

A

ll th

e ac

tions

in th

is p

lan

are

inco

rpor

ated

in th

e re

vise

d C

hild

ren

and

You

ng P

eopl

e’s

Pla

n.

The

Act

ion

Pla

n w

ill be

mon

itore

d by

the

Chi

ldre

n an

d Y

oung

Peo

ple’

s Tr

ust B

oard

as

part

of

its p

rogr

amm

e to

regu

larly

mon

itor,

eval

uate

and

revi

ew th

e C

hild

ren

and

You

ng P

eopl

e's

Pla

n. T

he C

hild

ren

and

You

ng P

eopl

e’s

Par

tner

ship

will

also

rece

ive,

and

com

men

t on,

pr

ogre

ss re

ports

on

the

Act

ion

Pla

n.

Enh

ance

d Y

outh

Ser

vice

Insp

ectio

n A

ctio

n P

lan

C7

JAR

Rec

omm

enda

tion

1 (fo

r act

ion

in n

ext 6

mon

ths

(end

Jun

e 07

)) In

rela

tion

to d

omes

tic v

iole

nce,

sec

ure

impr

ovem

ents

in s

ocia

l car

e pr

actic

e an

d th

e co

nsis

tent

impl

emen

tatio

n of

the

Wor

king

To

geth

er to

Saf

egua

rd C

hild

ren

2006

nat

iona

l gui

delin

es b

y so

me

com

mun

ity h

ealth

sta

ff to

ens

ure

that

chi

ldre

n w

ho a

re a

ffect

ed

by d

omes

tic v

iole

nce

are

refe

rred

in li

ne w

ith th

ese

guid

elin

es

Lead

Res

pons

ibili

ty: D

unca

n C

lark

M

onito

ring:

LC

SB

, CY

PP

Sta

ying

Saf

e su

b gr

oup,

CY

P T

rust

Boa

rd

Key

PIs

: %

refe

rral

s w

ith d

omes

tic v

iole

nce

as a

fact

or

% c

hild

ren

on c

hild

pro

tect

ion

regi

ster

for m

ore

than

2 y

ears

whe

re d

omes

tic v

iole

nce

as a

fact

or

% c

ore

asse

ssm

ents

with

dom

estic

vio

lenc

e as

a fa

ctor

com

plet

ed o

n tim

e an

d to

agr

eed

stan

dard

A

ctio

ns

K

ey m

ilest

ones

and

tim

esca

les

Perf

orm

ance

mea

sure

s an

d in

dica

tors

R

espo

nsib

ility

/lead

Aud

it of

dom

estic

vio

lenc

e Tr

aini

ng fo

r all

soci

al c

are

staf

f A

udit

com

plet

ed b

y Fe

brua

ry

2007

Dat

a av

aila

ble

on tr

aini

ng n

eeds

D

iane

Web

b

Del

iver

dom

estic

vio

lenc

e Tr

aini

ng to

all

soci

al c

are

staf

f Tr

aini

ng p

acka

ge d

evel

oped

an

d de

liver

ed to

sta

ff by

Jun

e 20

07

100%

soc

ial c

are

staf

f hav

e be

en tr

aine

d

100%

soc

ial c

are

staf

f abl

e to

id

entif

y an

d re

spon

d to

do

mes

tic v

iole

nce

to e

ffect

ivel

y sa

fegu

ard

child

ren

in a

co

nsis

tent

way

Dia

ne W

ebb

All

com

mun

ity h

ealth

sta

ff re

ceiv

e tra

inin

g in

Wor

king

To

geth

er a

nd d

omes

tic

viol

ence

Sta

ff m

eetin

gs s

et u

p to

del

iver

tra

inin

g by

Jun

e 20

07

100%

com

mun

ity h

ealth

sta

ff kn

ow h

ow to

resp

ond

to

dom

estic

vio

lenc

e co

ncer

ns in

a

cons

iste

nt a

nd a

ppro

pria

te w

ay

Ran

i Ste

war

t

Cas

e au

dits

und

erta

ken

on

dom

estic

vio

lenc

e ca

ses

for

Con

sist

ent i

mpl

emen

tatio

n of

pr

actic

e m

onito

red

on 6

10

0% c

ompl

ianc

e to

“goo

d pr

actic

e” s

tand

ard

for d

omes

tic

DM

T

Enh

ance

d Y

outh

Ser

vice

Insp

ectio

n A

ctio

n P

lan

C8

soci

al c

are

mon

thly

bas

is

vi

olen

ce to

ens

ure

prac

tice

is o

f a

high

qua

lity

to e

ffect

ivel

y sa

fegu

ard

child

ren

Dev

elop

loca

l gui

delin

es fo

r re

spon

ses

acro

ss a

genc

ies

Dom

estic

Vio

lenc

e S

ubgr

oup

deve

lop

guid

elin

es b

y Ju

ne

2007

Agr

eed

guid

elin

es e

stab

lishe

d an

d di

ssem

inat

ed to

dev

elop

co

nsis

tent

hig

h qu

ality

inte

r-ag

ency

wor

king

Dom

estic

Vio

lenc

e S

ubgr

oup

(Eoi

n R

ush)

JAR

Rec

omm

enda

tion

2 (fo

r act

ion

in n

ext 6

mon

ths

(end

Jun

e 07

)) Im

plem

ent a

coo

rdin

ated

join

t com

mis

sion

ing

func

tion

as s

oon

as H

ealth

bud

gets

for c

hild

ren’

s se

rvic

es h

ave

been

iden

tifie

d Le

ad R

espo

nsib

ility

: Ann

e R

edpa

rth

Mon

itorin

g: J

oint

Com

mis

sion

ing

Gro

up, C

YP

Tru

st B

oard

A

ctio

ns

Key

mile

ston

es a

nd

times

cale

s Pe

rfor

man

ce m

easu

res

and

indi

cato

rs

Res

pons

ibili

ty/le

ad

Hol

d Jo

int C

omm

issi

onin

g G

roup

Aw

ayda

y to

dev

elop

dr

aft C

omm

issi

onin

g S

trate

gy

& F

ram

ewor

k

Eve

nt h

eld

19 J

anua

ry

Rep

ort t

o Tr

ust B

oard

5 M

arch

Par

tner

s ag

ree

draf

t Stra

tegy

w

ith a

gree

d ro

les

&

resp

onsi

bilit

ies

for j

oint

pl

anni

ng &

com

mis

sion

ing

with

in T

rust

stru

ctur

e

Ann

e R

edpa

rth, D

irect

orat

e H

ead

of R

esou

rces

L&

CS

Res

ourc

es to

del

iver

Chi

ldre

n &

You

ng P

eopl

e’s

Pla

n co

nfirm

ed b

y al

l par

tner

s.

PC

T id

entif

y re

sour

ces

for

Chi

ldre

n’s

Ser

vice

s by

Apr

il 20

07.

PC

T C

omm

issi

onin

g B

udge

t fo

r Chi

ldre

n’s

Ser

vice

s 20

07-

08 c

onfir

med

, and

tota

l re

sour

ces

to d

eliv

er C

YP

P

iden

tifie

d.

Pau

la H

ead,

PC

T D

irect

or o

f S

trate

gy &

Com

mis

sion

ing.

Rev

iew

cur

rent

Joi

nt

Aud

it of

cur

rent

Joi

nt

Aud

it of

cur

rent

join

t Jo

int C

omm

issi

onin

g G

roup

Enh

ance

d Y

outh

Ser

vice

Insp

ectio

n A

ctio

n P

lan

C9

Com

mis

sion

ing

reso

urce

s C

omm

issi

onin

g re

sour

ces

com

plet

ed b

y M

arch

200

7 co

mm

issi

onin

g gr

oups

/ jo

int

wor

king

with

in T

rust

com

plet

ed(le

ad A

nne

Red

parth

)

Rev

iew

cur

rent

Joi

nt P

lann

ing

& C

omm

issi

onin

g ar

rang

emen

ts a

nd id

entif

y re

sour

ces

nece

ssar

y to

es

tabl

ish

a U

nit

Iden

tify

reso

urce

s to

est

ablis

h U

nit

Rev

iew

reco

mm

enda

tion

to

esta

blis

h a

Uni

t app

rove

d by

Tr

ust B

oard

23

Apr

il

Stru

ctur

e an

d fu

ndin

g fo

r ‘U

nit’

agre

ed

Uni

t est

ablis

hed

July

200

7

Join

t Com

mis

sion

ing

Gro

up

(lead

Ann

e R

edpa

rth)

Con

sult

on d

raft

Com

mis

sion

ing

Stra

tegy

&

Fram

ewor

k w

ith a

ll st

akeh

olde

rs

Con

sulta

tion

held

Jun

e –

July

20

07

Fram

ewor

k ap

prov

ed b

y Tr

ust

Boa

rd 3

Sep

tem

ber 2

007

Join

t Pla

nnin

g an

d C

omm

issi

onin

g S

trate

gy &

Fr

amew

ork

agre

ed b

y al

l pa

rtner

s.

Futu

re d

ecis

ions

rega

rdin

g us

e of

reso

urce

s to

del

iver

CY

PP

w

ill be

co-

ordi

nate

d an

d en

able

reso

urce

s to

be

targ

eted

to h

ighe

st p

riorit

ies,

an

d in

clud

e jo

int

de/re

/com

mis

sion

ing

of

serv

ices

.

Join

t Com

mis

sion

ing

Gro

up

(lead

Ann

e R

edpa

rth)

Enh

ance

d Y

outh

Ser

vice

Insp

ectio

n A

ctio

n P

lan

C10

JAR

Rec

omm

enda

tion

3 (fo

r act

ion

in n

ext 6

mon

ths

(end

Jun

e 07

)) E

nsur

e th

at a

ll se

rvic

es a

nd p

artn

ers

who

wor

k w

ith c

hild

ren

and

youn

g pe

ople

impl

emen

t the

par

ticip

atio

n st

rate

gy

Lead

Res

pons

ibili

ty: G

illia

n H

all

Mon

itorin

g: M

ake

a P

ositi

ve C

ontri

butio

n su

b gr

oup,

CY

P P

artn

ersh

ip, C

&Y

P T

rust

Boa

rd

Key

PIs

: N

umbe

r of k

ey is

sues

bei

ng id

entif

ied

annu

ally

by

child

ren,

you

ng p

eopl

e an

d ca

rers

that

hav

e in

fluen

ced

serv

ice

deliv

ery

N

umbe

r of F

TE p

lace

s av

aila

ble

for y

oung

peo

ple

to p

artic

ipat

e in

pos

itive

act

iviti

es d

urin

g th

e sc

hool

ho

liday

s

Act

ions

Key

mile

ston

es a

nd

times

cale

s Pe

rfor

man

ce m

easu

res

and

indi

cato

rs

Res

pons

ibili

ty/le

ad

Incl

ude

spec

ific

obje

ctiv

e in

C

hild

ren

&Y

oung

Peo

ple’

s P

artic

ipat

ion

Act

ion

Pla

n fo

r 20

07-0

8 “T

o em

bed

the

prin

cipl

es o

f pa

rtici

patio

n in

to th

e w

ork

of a

ll se

rvic

es a

nd p

artn

ers

who

w

ork

with

chi

ldre

n an

d yo

ung

peop

le”

2007

/08

Act

ion

Pla

n ag

reed

by

C&

YP

Par

tner

ship

Apr

il 20

07

By

Sep

t 200

7 id

entif

ied

lead

of

ficer

s fo

r spe

cific

act

iviti

es

repo

rt on

pro

gres

s to

P

artic

ipat

ion

Ste

erin

g G

roup

Par

ticip

atio

n A

ctio

n P

lan

circ

ulat

ed to

C&

YP

Par

tner

ship

Ta

rget

s in

Act

ion

Pla

n ac

hiev

ed

Gill

ian

Hal

l G

illian

Hal

l and

Par

ticip

atio

n S

teer

ing

Gro

up

Incr

ease

the

rang

e of

m

embe

rs o

n th

e P

artic

ipat

ion

Ste

erin

g G

roup

Lead

/nam

ed p

erso

n fro

m

polic

e, h

ealth

and

oth

er

depa

rtmen

ts w

ithin

RB

K a

re

mem

bers

of

Par

ticip

atio

n S

teer

ing

Gro

up b

y Ju

ne 2

007

Targ

ets

iden

tifie

d in

200

7/08

P

artic

ipat

ion

Act

ion

Pla

n w

ith

rega

rd to

oth

er C

ounc

il se

rvic

es a

nd p

artn

er a

genc

ies

achi

eved

.

Gill

ian

Hal

l

Est

ablis

h fo

rmal

pro

cedu

re to

en

gage

with

non

-sta

tuto

ry

sect

or w

ith re

gard

to

Par

ticip

atio

n of

chi

ldre

n an

d

Iden

tify

lead

nam

ed p

erso

n fro

m K

ings

ton

Gra

nts

Uni

t to

be m

embe

r of

Par

ticip

atio

n S

teer

ing

Gro

up b

y M

ay 2

007

Info

rmat

ion

is d

isse

min

ated

to

volu

ntar

y se

ctor

in s

truct

ured

w

ay.

Gilli

an H

all/L

ead

pers

on

Gra

nts

Uni

t

Enh

ance

d Y

outh

Ser

vice

Insp

ectio

n A

ctio

n P

lan

C11

youn

g pe

ople

. Fo

rmal

pro

cess

for e

ngag

ing

volu

ntar

y se

ctor

agr

eed

by

Sep

t 200

7

Targ

ets

iden

tifie

d in

200

7/08

P

artic

ipat

ion

Act

ion

Pla

n w

ith

rega

rd to

Vol

unta

ry/n

on

stat

utor

y se

ctor

ach

ieve

d.

JAR

Rec

omm

enda

tion

4 (fo

r act

ion

in n

ext 6

mon

ths

(end

Jun

e 07

)) E

stab

lish

clea

r stru

ctur

es to

ena

ble

feed

back

from

the

Inde

pend

ent R

evie

win

g O

ffice

r ser

vice

to s

yste

mat

ical

ly im

prov

e pr

actic

e

Lead

Res

pons

ibili

ty: D

unca

n C

lark

M

onito

ring:

LC

SB

, Sta

ying

Saf

e su

b gr

oup,

CY

P T

rust

Boa

rd

Key

PIs

: %

LA

C w

ho re

gula

rly c

ontr

ibut

e to

thei

r sta

tuto

ry re

view

%

full

time

LAC

dis

able

d ch

ildre

n pr

ovid

ed w

ith a

n ac

cess

ible

con

sulta

tion

form

at fo

r the

ir re

view

s A

ctio

ns

Key

mile

ston

es a

nd

times

cale

s Pe

rfor

man

ce m

easu

res

and

indi

cato

rs

Res

pons

ibili

ty/le

ad

Est

ablis

h a

clea

r pro

toco

l for

re

porti

ng c

once

rns

rega

rdin

g C

hild

ren’

s P

lace

men

ts.

Pro

toco

l agr

eed

by M

ay 2

007

100%

of c

once

rns

repo

rted

are

acte

d up

on to

ens

ure

child

ren

are

plac

ed in

saf

e an

d po

sitiv

e en

viro

nmen

ts.

Dia

ne W

ebb/

Tim

Wel

ls

List

enin

g to

chi

ldre

n to

geth

er –

IR

O/S

ocia

l Wor

ker W

orks

hop

List

enin

g to

chi

ldre

n pr

otoc

ol

agre

ed b

y A

pril

2007

E

vide

nce

of im

prov

ed

com

mun

icat

ion

betw

een

child

ren,

you

ng p

eopl

e, s

ocia

l w

orke

r and

IRO

s

Tim

Wel

ls

Ens

ure

quar

terly

IRO

m

onito

ring

mee

tings

rout

inel

y in

clud

e pr

actic

e de

velo

pmen

t an

d re

view

as

a st

andi

ng

agen

da it

em.

Am

end

Term

s of

Ref

eren

ce fo

r IR

O q

uarte

rly m

onito

ring

mee

tings

by

Te

rms

of re

fere

nce

agre

ed a

nd

sign

ed o

ff by

Jun

e 20

07

Goo

d ou

tcom

es fo

r chi

ldre

n ar

e ac

hiev

ed b

y th

e pr

oact

ive

iden

tific

atio

n of

issu

es b

y th

e IR

O ro

le a

nd u

nder

stoo

d by

an

d ac

ted

upon

. 10

0% o

f ide

ntifi

ed p

ract

ice

deve

lopm

ent i

ssue

s ar

e ac

ted

Tim

Wel

ls a

nd D

iane

Web

b

Enh

ance

d Y

outh

Ser

vice

Insp

ectio

n A

ctio

n P

lan

C12

upon

E

nsur

e al

l LA

C c

hild

ren

have

co

mm

unic

atio

n &

con

sulta

tion

prof

ile c

ompl

eted

.

Agr

ee s

peci

ficat

ion

for L

AC

co

mm

unic

atio

n pr

ofile

by

June

20

07.

Eng

age

youn

g pe

ople

in

desi

gnin

g th

e fo

rmat

. D

esig

n an

d ag

ree

form

at a

nd

para

met

ers

by S

ept 2

007

100%

of a

gree

d co

mm

unic

atio

n pr

ofile

s ar

e de

sign

ed a

nd im

plem

ente

d to

en

able

LA

C to

hav

e th

eir v

iew

s he

ard.

Tim

Wel

ls

JAR

Rec

omm

enda

tion

5 (fo

r act

ion

in n

ext 6

mon

ths

(end

Jun

e 07

)) R

evie

w a

nd im

prov

e ac

cess

to a

ll se

rvic

es fo

r chi

ldre

n an

d yo

ung

peop

le w

ho a

re u

nacc

ompa

nied

asy

lum

see

kers

; and

ens

ure

all

look

ed a

fter c

hild

ren

are

awar

e of

opp

ortu

nitie

s to

mak

e a

posi

tive

cont

ribut

ion

and

unde

rsta

nd th

e ad

voca

cy a

nd c

ompl

aint

s se

rvic

e.

Lead

Res

pons

ibili

ty: D

unca

n C

lark

M

onito

ring:

LS

CB

, Sta

ying

Saf

e su

b gr

oup,

Mak

e a

posi

tive

cont

ribut

ion

sub

grou

p, C

YP

Tru

st B

oard

K

ey P

Is:

% U

ASC

livi

ng in

sui

tabl

e ac

com

mod

atio

n

%

UA

SC w

ho s

it at

leas

t 1 G

CSE

ach

ievi

ng a

t lea

st 1

A*-

G

% U

ASC

in E

ET

Act

ions

K

ey m

ilest

ones

and

tim

esca

les

Perf

orm

ance

mea

sure

s an

d in

dica

tors

R

espo

nsib

ility

/lead

UA

SC

acc

omm

odat

ion,

adv

ice

and

finan

cial

ass

ista

nce

are

inte

grat

ed w

ith L

AC

and

Car

e Le

aver

s ar

rang

emen

ts.

Join

t fin

anci

al a

ssis

tanc

e pr

oced

ures

and

gui

danc

e ag

reed

by

May

200

7

100%

of U

AS

C re

ceiv

e ag

reed

fin

anci

al a

ssis

tanc

e re

gula

rly.

By

May

200

7 10

0% o

f UA

SC

in F

E re

ceiv

e a

regu

lar E

duca

tion

Mai

nten

ance

Allo

wan

ce

Tim

Wel

ls

Incr

ease

UA

SC

ac

com

mod

atio

n op

tions

. E

ngag

e w

ith p

rovi

ders

thro

ugh

LAS

C a

nd p

rovi

de a

ppro

pria

te

All

UA

SC

are

in m

ore

appr

opria

te a

nd

sust

aina

ble

plac

emen

ts

Tim

Wel

ls

Enh

ance

d Y

outh

Ser

vice

Insp

ectio

n A

ctio

n P

lan

C13

loca

l acc

omm

odat

ion

by M

arch

20

07

End

use

of K

alei

dosc

ope

YA

SK

Hos

tel b

y Ju

ne 2

007

Est

ablis

h a

prot

ocol

with

ho

usin

g re

gard

ing

acce

ss to

su

stai

ned

tena

ncie

s fo

r elig

ible

U

AS

C w

ho a

re C

are

Leav

ers

Dra

ft ac

com

mod

atio

n pa

thw

ay

for U

AS

C a

s fo

r all

care

le

aver

s ag

reed

by

May

200

7 Fo

reca

st a

nd a

gree

hou

sing

no

min

atio

ns fo

r all

care

le

aver

s in

clud

ing

UA

SC

.

Onc

e el

igib

le fo

r pub

lic h

ousi

ng U

AS

C

are

equa

lly re

pres

ente

d w

ithin

the

hous

ing

nom

inat

ion

quot

e fo

r car

e le

aver

s an

d pa

thw

ay a

gree

d

Tim

Wel

ls

Rev

iew

, rev

ise

and

re-la

unch

LA

C c

ompl

aint

s pr

oces

ses

to

take

full

acco

unt o

f nee

ds o

f U

ASC

Com

plai

nts

path

way

for L

AC

an

d C

are

Leav

ers

agre

ed b

y M

ay 2

007

Num

ber o

f com

plai

nts

rece

ived

N

umbe

r of c

ompl

aint

s re

ceiv

ed fr

om

UA

SC

as

a %

of t

otal

10

0% o

f com

plai

nts

from

UA

SC

act

ed

on a

ppro

pria

tely

Tim

Wel

ls

JAR

Rec

omm

enda

tion

6 (fo

r act

ion

in th

e lo

nger

term

) R

evie

w th

e co

mm

issi

onin

g ar

rang

emen

ts to

impr

ove

acce

ss fo

r chi

ldre

n an

d yo

ung

peop

le w

ith s

ocia

l and

com

mun

icat

ion

lear

ning

di

fficu

lties

and

/or d

isab

ilitie

s to

ther

apy

and

equi

pmen

t ser

vice

s Le

ad R

espo

nsib

ility

: Dun

can

Cla

rk

Mon

itorin

g: S

tayi

ng S

afe

sub

grou

p, J

oint

Com

mis

sion

ing

Gro

up, C

YP

Tru

st B

oard

K

ey P

Is:

% c

hild

ren

wai

ting

less

than

12

mon

ths

for a

sses

smen

t and

dia

gnos

is o

f soc

ial a

nd c

omm

unic

atio

n di

fficu

lties

%

whe

re a

vera

ge w

aitin

g tim

e fo

r the

rapi

es is

less

than

4 m

onth

s A

ctio

ns

K

ey m

ilest

ones

and

tim

esca

les

Perf

orm

ance

mea

sure

s an

d in

dica

tors

R

espo

nsib

ility

/lead

Dev

elop

a s

trate

gy to

redu

ce

wai

ting

times

for d

iagn

osis

A

gree

stra

tegy

to r

educ

e A

SD

w

aitin

g tim

es b

y A

pril

2008

10

0% c

hild

ren

asse

ssed

and

di

agno

sed

with

in 1

2 m

onth

s M

ike

Cor

rigan

S

teve

Sim

per

Enh

ance

d Y

outh

Ser

vice

Insp

ectio

n A

ctio

n P

lan

C14

Ave

rage

wai

ting

time

no m

ore

than

4

mon

ths

Dev

elop

a th

erap

y st

rate

gy fo

r di

sabl

ed c

hild

ren

in

partn

ersh

ip w

ith a

ll st

akeh

olde

rs

Fund

ing

for s

trate

gy

deve

lopm

ent a

gree

d by

end

M

ay 2

007

Focu

s gr

oup

incl

udin

g pa

rent

s to

sha

pe s

trate

gy b

y en

d of

Ju

n 07

P

repa

re c

onsu

ltatio

n do

cum

ent b

y en

d A

ugus

t 200

7 (6

wee

k co

nsul

tatio

n).

Agr

ee s

trate

gy w

ith

stak

ehol

ders

by

end

Oct

07

Ther

apy

wai

ts fo

r chi

ldre

n re

duce

d

Mik

e C

orrig

an

Ext

end

Loca

l Aut

horit

y’s

equi

pmen

t ser

vice

for c

hild

ren

to in

clud

e he

alth

ther

apis

ts

Map

ping

of h

ealth

equ

ipm

ent

path

way

s by

end

Aug

ust 2

008

Agr

ee fu

ndin

g w

ith P

CT

by

end

Nov

embe

r 200

8 R

e- n

egot

iatio

n of

soc

ial c

are

curr

ent e

quip

men

t con

tract

w

ith c

omm

unity

car

e se

rvic

es

by e

nd D

ecem

ber 2

008

Pol

icie

s an

d pr

oced

ures

for

inte

grat

ed s

ervi

ce b

y en

d M

ar

2009

Ser

vice

acc

esse

d ac

ross

all

setti

ngs

usin

g co

mm

on p

olic

y an

d pr

oced

ures

C

hild

ren

can

live

posi

tive

and

activ

e liv

es b

y re

ceiv

ing

the

requ

ired

equi

pmen

t in

a tim

ely

way

Mik

e C

orrig

an

Enh

ance

d Y

outh

Ser

vice

Insp

ectio

n A

ctio

n P

lan

C15

Con

tract

in p

lace

by

1 A

pr

2009

Im

prov

e ac

cess

to th

erap

ies

for c

hild

ren

outs

ide

the

inte

grat

ed d

isab

led

child

ren’

s se

rvic

e

Red

uce

inap

prop

riate

refe

rral

s by

Apr

il 20

08

Use

scr

eeni

ng to

ol in

all

rece

ptio

n cl

asse

s by

Jul

y 20

08

Incr

ease

ther

apy

inpu

t to

clin

ics

by D

ec 2

007

Chi

ldre

n ag

ed 0

-5 w

ill be

ass

esse

d w

ithin

13

wee

ks o

f ref

erra

l R

educ

e th

e nu

mbe

r of p

upils

goi

ng o

ut

of b

orou

gh fo

r spe

cial

ist s

peec

h an

d la

ngua

ge p

rovi

sion

R

educ

e th

e nu

mbe

r of

stat

utor

y as

sess

men

ts fo

r spe

ech

and

lang

uage

as

sess

men

ts

J E

ly

K B

enne

t

Yout

h Se

rvic

e A

rea

for i

mpr

ovem

ent 1

A

ddre

ss H

ealth

and

Saf

ety

issu

es in

som

e C

entre

s

Lead

Res

pons

ibili

ty: G

illia

n H

all

Mon

itorin

g: R

BK

Hea

lth a

nd S

afet

y O

ffice

r A

ctio

ns

Key

mile

ston

es a

nd

times

cale

s Pe

rfor

man

ce m

easu

res

and

indi

cato

rs

Res

pons

ibili

ty/le

ad

Sea

rchl

ight

You

th C

entre

–

Bar

bed

wire

to b

e ta

ken

dow

n fro

m ro

of

Wor

k co

mm

issi

oned

and

un

derta

ken

– O

ctob

er 2

006

Wor

k co

mpl

eted

S

atis

fact

ory

repo

rt fro

m H

ealth

an

d S

afet

y O

ffice

r

Ela

ine

Cou

lon

Dic

kera

ge A

dven

ture

P

layg

roun

d –

Red

esig

n ca

r pa

rk a

rea.

Sur

vey

unde

rtake

n by

pro

perty

se

rvic

es –

Oct

ober

200

6 W

ork

Com

mis

sion

ed –

D

ecem

ber 2

006

Sur

vey

com

plet

ed

Wor

k co

mm

issi

oned

Ela

ine

Cou

lon

Enh

ance

d Y

outh

Ser

vice

Insp

ectio

n A

ctio

n P

lan

C16

Wor

k to

be

carri

ed o

ut in

Apr

il as

par

t of 2

007/

08 c

apita

l pr

ogra

mm

e

New

ly d

esig

ned

car p

ark

area

op

erat

iona

l. S

atis

fact

ory

repo

rt fro

m H

ealth

an

d S

afet

y O

ffice

r Yo

uth

Serv

ice

Insp

ectio

n A

reas

for i

mpr

ovem

ent 2

, 3 a

nd 4

Ta

ckle

inco

nsis

tenc

ies

in s

essi

on p

lann

ing

Impr

ove

the

qual

ity o

f writ

ten

eval

uatio

ns b

y yo

uth

wor

kers

and

you

ng p

eopl

e Fu

rther

sta

ndar

dise

qua

lity

assu

ranc

e ar

rang

emen

ts a

nd p

erfo

rman

ce m

anag

emen

t rec

ords

. Le

ad R

espo

nsib

ility

: G

illia

n H

all

Mon

itorin

g: C

hild

ren

and

You

ng P

eopl

e’s

Par

tner

ship

K

ey P

Is:

% y

outh

ser

vice

par

ticip

ants

ach

ievi

ng a

ccre

dite

d aw

ard

% y

outh

ser

vice

par

ticip

ants

ach

ievi

ng a

ccre

dite

d ou

tcom

es

Act

ions

K

ey m

ilest

ones

and

tim

esca

les

Perf

orm

ance

indi

cato

rs

Res

pons

ibili

ty/le

ad

Impl

emen

t Rev

ised

Ses

sion

P

lann

ing

She

et t

hrou

ghou

t the

se

rvic

e

Pla

nnin

g sh

eets

to b

e re

view

ed b

y fu

ll tim

e te

am b

y Fe

b. 2

007

New

form

to b

e di

strib

uted

ac

ross

Tea

ms

by M

arch

200

7 H

old

wor

ksho

p fo

r sta

ff in

Apr

il 20

07

Incl

ude

new

form

in n

ew

Indu

ctio

n P

ack

for s

taff

New

ses

sion

pla

nnin

g sh

eet

bein

g im

plem

ente

d co

nsis

tent

ly a

cros

s th

e se

rvic

e.

100%

of s

taff

subm

it ag

reed

P

lann

ing

She

et fr

om S

umm

er

Term

200

7.

Ser

vice

mon

itorin

g w

ill ev

iden

ce th

at 1

00%

sta

ff pl

an

sess

ions

in li

ne w

ith a

gree

d re

quire

men

ts

Dav

id B

rack

en

Enh

ance

d Y

outh

Ser

vice

Insp

ectio

n A

ctio

n P

lan

C17

Pla

nnin

g sh

eet u

sed

by s

taff

from

sum

mer

term

E

valu

atio

n tra

inin

g in

pla

ce fo

r yo

uth

wor

kers

R

evie

w o

f exi

stin

g ev

alua

tions

un

derta

ken

in M

arch

200

7 an

d ar

eas

for d

evel

opm

ent i

n ev

alua

tions

iden

tifie

d.

Pee

r dis

cuss

ions

and

w

orks

hops

on

Eva

luat

ions

in

Mar

ch 2

007

and

area

s fo

r fu

rther

tra

inin

g/re

view

id

entif

ied

Eva

luat

ion

incl

uded

in 2

007/

08

You

th S

ervi

ce T

rain

ing

Pro

gram

me.

100%

Sta

ff at

tend

ance

at

train

ing

even

t. 10

0% s

taff

subm

it ap

prop

riate

an

d in

form

ativ

e ev

alua

tions

Dav

id B

rack

en

Impr

ove

qual

ity o

f writ

ten

eval

uatio

ns b

y yo

ung

peop

le

Rev

iew

exi

stin

g re

sour

ces

in

rela

tion

to fe

edba

ck fr

om

youn

g pe

ople

– A

pril

200

7 Id

entif

y ne

w a

nd a

ppro

pria

te

reso

urce

s fo

r fee

dbac

k fro

m

youn

g pe

ople

– A

pril

2007

D

etai

ls o

f res

ourc

es to

be

circ

ulat

ed to

sta

ff –

June

200

7 Id

entif

y A

QA

for y

oung

peo

ple

in re

latio

n to

ev

alua

tion/

feed

back

Num

bers

of y

oung

peo

ple

gain

ing

accr

edite

d ou

tcom

e in

ev

alua

tion

100%

sta

ff at

tend

ance

at

train

ing

even

t. In

crea

se in

num

ber o

f you

ng

peop

le p

rovi

ding

writ

ten

feed

back

. N

umbe

r of e

valu

atio

ns b

y yo

ung

peop

le w

hich

lead

to

impr

ovem

ents

in s

essi

ons

Dav

id B

rack

en

Enh

ance

d Y

outh

Ser

vice

Insp

ectio

n A

ctio

n P

lan

C18

Incl

ude

Feed

back

from

you

ng

peop

le a

s pa

rt of

trai

ning

for

part

time

and

full

time

staf

f in

2000

7/08

trai

ning

pla

n.

Impr

ove

perfo

rman

ce

man

agem

ent r

ecor

ds

Rev

iew

of p

ossi

ble

yout

h se

rvic

e m

anag

emen

t in

form

atio

n sy

stem

s un

derta

ken

in J

anua

ry 2

007

Sho

rt lis

t of p

rovi

ders

pre

sent

to

pan

el o

f RB

K s

taff

from

C

hild

ren

& L

earn

ing

Ser

vice

s an

d IC

T in

Apr

il 2

007

New

MI s

yste

m id

entif

ied

by

May

200

7 an

d co

ntra

ct fo

r pu

rcha

se a

gree

d.

Act

ion

Pla

n in

pla

ce fo

r in

stal

latio

n, tr

aini

ng a

nd

impl

emen

tatio

n of

new

sys

tem

–

June

200

7

New

NI s

yste

m in

pla

ce

prov

idin

g m

ore

deta

iled

info

rmat

ion

avai

labl

e to

info

rm

plan

ning

Gill

ian

Hal

l

APPENDIX D Executive, 20 March 2007

LOCAL AREA AGREEMENT Report by the Chief Executive Leader of the Council and Executive Member for Improvement and Performance Purpose Following on from previous reports on the Local Area Agreement (LAA) submitted to the Executive on 21 March 2006, when it approved our LAA 2006/09, this report seeks approval of the annual refresh of the LAA targets following the successful conclusion of negotiations with Central Government. Action proposed by the Leader of the Council and Executive Member for Improvement & Performance: The Executive is requested to approve on behalf of the Council the refresh of Kingston’s Local Area Agreement. Reason for action proposed To approve the updated Local Area Agreement.

BACKGROUND 1 Kingston’s Local Area Agreement (LAA) is a three year agreement that started in April

2006. It is an agreement between: central government, represented by our Government Office (Government Office London); a local area, represented by the local authority; the Local Strategic Partnership (the Community Leadership Forum) and other key partners at local level. Taken together nationally, LAAs will better enable local authorities and their partners to deliver national outcomes in a way that reflects local priorities.

2 Our LAA is founded on our community aspirations for our local area and plays a key

role in fulfilling our role as a Community Leader. The priorities in our LAA are drawn from our Policy Programme and our Community Plan. Our 12 LAA priorities are sub divided into outcomes that provide a flexible framework for public, private and voluntary and community sector partners in Kingston to work together and to prioritise spending to achieve the outcomes identified. The outcomes are supported by a comprehensive set of performance indicators drawn from all partners that are used to measure progress towards achieving these shared outcomes and so communities’ aspirations.

3 Not only does the LAA reflect and extend our Community Plan by being its practical

expression or action plan, but the recent publication of the Government White Paper ‘Strong and Prosperous Communities’ makes it clear that central government intend that LAAs will be central to how our delivery through partnership is structured and assessed in future.

4 The Kingston LAA has been developed and overseen by the Community Leadership

Strategy Group (CLSG) which is chaired by the Leader of the Council, and which includes representatives from key partner agencies such as the Police and the Primary Care Trust, as well as from the local voluntary and community sector and

D2

from the local business community. Henceforth, it is intended that the Executive and the CLSG meet together twice annually, and it is proposed that the first such meeting be held in May/June when the LAA and its future development would be one of the main items for discussion.

5 The refresh of the LAA is an annual activity which reviews the outcome framework

and allows changes in national or local priorities to be reflected in and targets and indicators to ensure the agreement remains up to date. The Executive is now being asked to sign off the refresh of the agreement.

OBJECTIVES OF THE LAA 6 The primary objective of an LAA is to deliver genuinely sustainable communities

through better outcomes for local people. Kingston has been at the forefront of the campaign for more freedom for local partners to deliver a local vision and LAAs are, in large part, the government’s response. The White Paper ‘Strong and Prosperous Communities’ takes this agenda to the next stage and places greater emphasis on the Council's community leadership role and capacity for place shaping.

7 LAAs also have the secondary objectives of:

- Improving central and local government relations;

- Enhancing efficiency;

- Strengthening partnership working;

- Offering a framework within which local authorities can enhance their community leadership role.

8 We have particularly championed and welcomed the reduction in performance

management proposed in the LAA, not just for the Council but for our partners too. The concept was that by putting more focus on a locally negotiated LAA, which represented what was agreed to be most important locally, other targets, reporting and assessment requirements could fall away. We have particularly welcomed this as correcting some of the weaknesses of Comprehensive Performance Assessment (CPA) which we see as increasingly based on standardised sets of performance indicators and box ticking requirements that give little insight about how well we are driving improvement in our local context. We remain concerned that the desired cultural shift in central/local government relations and promised lightening of the reporting burden has not yet been forthcoming.

9 At the moment there is an additional concern that, for a Council so recently judged

through its Corporate Assessment and Joint Area Review as performing well the Government Office for London (GOL) is developing the LAA, as a parallel performance management regime and taking a role towards us that has not previously existed. As a result, there is the perception that rather than having the burden lifted, we face an additional level of performance assessment. Moreover, there is a danger that this system is just as rigid and resource intensive, despite the rhetoric of Strong and Prosperous Communities.

D3

THE REFRESH 10 The negotiation of a Local Area Agreement is a potentially complex process involving

numerous stakeholders both at the local level and within Central Government. This is the first refresh of LAAs nationally managed by Government Offices so the extent of changes undertaken has been more limited than we would anticipate in future.

11 The refresh of the LAA has enabled the completion of those parts of the LAA where

information or data was not available when the LAA was signed off in March 2006. Where gaps in the agreement have been identified these have been filled and targets set where they were to be agreed. In particular the refreshed agreement includes the finally negotiated 12 stretch targets, a more comprehensive range of health indicators for both young people and adults and a respect outcome to improve community safety. Other changes are technical and include bringing LAA targets in line with targets in the Children and Young Peoples’ Plan.

12 Attached is a schedule showing the LAA outcomes and targets with the refreshed

data added (ANNEX 1). Those items in bold show the changes made. Please note that, as the 2005/06 outturn figures are added, some of the future years’ targets negotiated during 2005 now appear to represent a drop compared to our most recent performance. However, the targets were set as a three year improvement profile in those key performance areas and have not been renewed. It is inevitable then that we have out-performed expectations in some areas during 2005/06, however, this does not necessarily mean that it will be possible in all cases to sustain such increases in future years.

THE APPROVAL PROCESS 13 The new partnership governance arrangements for our four areas of strategic

partnership work are now substantially in place and their work is being joined up by the Partnership Delivery Board. Our four partnership areas are currently termed: Safer and Strong Communities (the Crime and Disorder Partnership (CDRP)); Children and Young People (the Children and Young Peoples’ Partnership (CYPP)); Adult Health and Wellbeing (the Adult Health and Wellbeing Board (AHWB)); and Sustainable Communities for partnerships working in the sustainable environment area where arrangements at still under development.

14 All the LAA outcomes have a home in one of the strategic partnerships. Each

partnership delivery group identifies and agrees with its partners its input into the LAA and manages its range of targets, indicators and outcomes to deliver against its own priorities. Priorities are established by local negotiations led by GOL and accommodate both national and local priorities. Once agreed these are joined up under our LAA priorities to form the full agreement.

15 We submitted our final LAA refresh proposals to Government Office by the January

deadline. GOL then get these agreed with central departments and make any final adjustments so the agreement can be signed off in March for the next year. The next step is the formal signing off of the refreshed agreements which is due to happen by the end of March. On the Government side, GOL will make a recommendation to the Department of Communities and Local Government on each LAA.

16 Local arrangements to sign up to the LAA should take place in parallel with the

Whitehall clearance process. So individual members of the Kingston Community

D4

Leadership Forum and through the strategic partnerships will, where necessary, seek formal agreement of their respective organisations.

17 In signing off the refreshed Local Area Agreement, the Executive is advised that we

will be scrutinising closely how the relationship with GOL develops and the way that the LAA is managed and will report back further to the Executive if further issues arise that require their consideration and action.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS 18 There are no direct environmental implications but the LAA includes a number of

priority outcomes that reflect the Council’s wider agenda on environmental issues. Background Papers Held by Chris Field 020 8547 5010 or [email protected] (author of report)-

1. Local Area Agreements, Guidance for Refresh , published by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister

2. Local Area Agreements – progress reports to Executive, 18 October 2005 & 17 January 2006 and 21 March 2006

D5

LAA

OU

TCO

ME

S A

ND

TA

RG

ETS

AN

NE

X 1

Out

com

eP

erfo

rman

ce M

easu

re /

Indi

cato

rR

efre

sh

Bas

elin

eP

erfo

rman

ce

Enh

ance

men

tC

omm

ents

2004

/05

2005

/06

2006

/07

2007

/08

With

out

Rew

ard

With

R

ewar

d

i. #

who

gai

n em

ploy

men

t15

*18

20*e

stim

ate

ii. %

sus

tain

em

ploy

men

t for

a p

erio

d of

4 w

eeks

75%

*78

%80

%*e

stim

ate

iii. #

sta

rt w

ith a

Tut

or o

n a

Bas

ic S

kills

A

war

d45

*50

55*e

stim

ate

iv. #

gai

n a

Bas

ic S

kills

Aw

ard

6*8

10*e

stim

ate

# Pr

iorit

y an

d Pr

olifi

c O

ffend

ers

47*

42*

38*

*10%

redu

ctio

n - t

o be

fina

lised

onc

e 06

/07

outtu

rn

% y

oung

offe

nder

s52

.50%

49.9

%*

*for

det

ail s

ee re

fresh

te

mpl

ate

i. #

of t

hefts

of m

otor

veh

icle

s33

637

034

8ii.

# o

f the

fts fr

om m

otor

veh

icle

s93

858

055

1iii

. # o

f mot

or v

ehic

le in

terfe

renc

es47

7271

iv. #

of d

omes

tic b

urgl

arie

s62

641

540

3v.

# o

f the

fts o

f ped

al c

ycle

s85

967

063

6vi

. # o

f inc

iden

ts o

f crim

inal

dam

age

2785

2522

2371

vii.

# of

wou

ndin

gs (A

BH

& G

BH

)17

8011

2010

52vi

ii. #

of c

omm

on a

ssau

lts74

010

9910

33ix

. # o

f the

fts p

erso

n –

pick

poc

ketin

g an

d 43

337

336

1x.

# o

f rob

berie

s of

per

sona

l pro

perty

316

223

221

i. %

of r

esid

ents

who

say

they

feel

ver

y or

fa

irly

unsa

fe o

utsi

de a

fter d

ark

43n/

a42

41.5

Res

iden

ts s

urve

y 20

05

ii. %

of l

ocal

resi

dent

s w

ho s

ay th

ey fe

el

satis

fied

with

thei

r loc

al e

nviro

nmen

t 68

n/a

6970

Res

iden

ts s

urve

y 20

05

iii. %

sat

isfa

ctio

n w

ith v

isib

le p

olic

ing

-

satis

fact

ion

with

the

way

in w

hich

the

area

is

pol

iced

- sat

ifact

ion

with

the

frequ

ency

of

foot

/bic

ycle

pat

rols

28n/

a32

35R

esid

ents

sur

vey

2005

- P

ublic

Atti

tude

S

urve

y 20

05/2

006

Out

turn

1.1a

(i) T

o re

duce

crim

e, th

e ha

rm c

ause

d by

ille

gal d

rugs

, and

to re

assu

re th

e pu

blic

, red

ucin

g th

e fe

ar o

f crim

e

(ii)

SS

C1:

Red

uctio

n in

crim

e by

15%

and

m

ore

in h

igh

crim

e ar

eas

by 2

007/

08 a

s m

easu

red

thro

ugh

the

PS

A1

bask

et o

f in

dica

tors

(loc

al ta

rget

17.

5% o

ver t

hree

ye

ars

base

d on

200

3-04

bas

elin

e)

1. S

AFE

R C

OM

MU

NIT

IES

1. R

educ

e C

rime

(for

det

ail s

ee re

fres

h te

mpl

ate)

2008

/09

Per

form

ance

Tar

gets

b. #

of a

dults

sub

ject

to P

roba

tion

Com

mun

ity S

uper

visi

on o

r Lic

ence

s w

ho, d

urin

g th

eir p

erio

d of

su

perv

isio

n/lic

ence

:

a. R

educ

e th

e pr

opor

tion

of a

dult

and

youn

g of

fend

ers

and

prol

ific

and

othe

r pr

iorit

y of

fend

ers

who

re-o

ffend

1.1b

Bui

ld re

spec

t in

com

mun

ities

and

re

duce

ant

i soc

ial b

ehav

iour

D6

LAA

OU

TCO

ME

S A

ND

TA

RG

ETS

AN

NE

X 1

Out

com

eP

erfo

rman

ce M

easu

re /

Indi

cato

rR

efre

sh

Bas

elin

eP

erfo

rman

ce

Enh

ance

men

tC

omm

ents

2004

/05

2005

/06

2006

/07

2007

/08

With

out

Rew

ard

With

R

ewar

d

Out

turn

2008

/09

Per

form

ance

Tar

gets

iv. I

ncre

ase

% o

f peo

ple

who

feel

in

form

ed a

bout

wha

t is

bein

g do

ne to

ta

ckle

ASB

in th

eir a

rea

awai

ting

LGU

SS

tba

tba

Res

iden

ts s

urve

y

v. In

crea

sed

% o

f peo

ple

who

feel

that

pa

rent

s in

thei

r loc

al a

ra a

re m

ade

to

take

resp

onsi

bilit

y fo

r the

beh

avio

ur o

f th

eir c

hild

ren

awai

ting

LGU

SS

tba

tba

Res

iden

ts s

urve

y

vi. I

ncre

ased

% o

f peo

ple

who

feel

that

pe

ople

in th

eir a

rea

trea

t the

m w

ith

resp

ect a

nd c

onsi

dera

tion

42n/

aaw

aitin

g LG

US

Stb

atb

aR

esid

ents

sur

vey

vii.

Red

uce

peop

le's

per

cept

ion

of A

SB

(usi

ng th

e 7

issu

es s

tate

d in

the

surv

ey)

awai

ting

LGU

SS

tba

tba

i. #

of C

omm

unity

Ord

ers

with

DR

Rs*

4136

40ii.

# o

f com

plet

ed C

omm

unity

Ord

ers

with

D

RR

s*10

1315

iii. #

of s

anct

ion

dete

ctio

ns a

gain

st th

ose

who

unl

awfu

lly s

uppl

y co

ntro

lled

drug

s37

4545

Rev

iew

ed a

nnua

lly

vi. H

ow m

uch

loca

l dru

g de

alin

g an

d dr

ug u

se is

see

n as

a p

robl

em in

the

loca

l are

a

awai

ting

LGU

SS

tba

tba

Sur

vey

i. #

of h

ouse

hold

s ac

cept

ed a

s ho

mel

ess

as a

resu

lt of

DV

and

oth

er

actu

al/th

reat

ened

vio

lenc

e

(a) F

rom

add

ress

es in

the

boro

ugh

1537

45S

chem

e co

mm

ence

d 06

/07

(b

) In

tota

l53

132

160

Ann

ual f

igur

es fo

r 20

04/0

5ii.

# (c

umul

ativ

e) o

f man

agem

ent t

rans

fers

ap

prov

ed a

s a

resu

lt of

dom

estic

vio

lenc

e an

d ot

her h

ate

crim

e

1741

50A

nnua

l fig

ure

for

cale

ndar

yea

r 200

5

1.1b

(con

tinui

ng to

) Bui

ld re

spec

t

1.1c

Red

uce

the

harm

cau

sed

by il

lega

l dr

ugs

1.2a

Pro

vide

hou

sing

sup

port

to v

ictim

s of

ha

te c

rime

(incl

udin

g do

mes

tic v

iole

nce)

D7

LAA

OU

TCO

ME

S A

ND

TA

RG

ETS

AN

NE

X 1

Out

com

eP

erfo

rman

ce M

easu

re /

Indi

cato

rR

efre

sh

Bas

elin

eP

erfo

rman

ce

Enh

ance

men

tC

omm

ents

2004

/05

2005

/06

2006

/07

2007

/08

With

out

Rew

ard

With

R

ewar

d

Out

turn

2008

/09

Per

form

ance

Tar

gets

iii. #

(cum

ulat

ive)

of n

ew s

anct

uary

pl

acem

ents

with

in th

e bo

roug

h0

1.2b

* S

uppo

rt th

e vi

ctim

s do

mes

tic

viol

ence

% o

f inc

iden

ts o

f dom

estic

vio

lenc

e re

porte

d to

the

polic

e w

hich

resu

lt in

sa

nctio

ned

dete

ctio

ns

20.9

3437

(+3)

7 pe

rcen

tage

po

ints

(c

umul

ativ

e)

see

full

targ

et

defin

ition

1.4*

Mor

e ef

fect

ive

and

endu

ring

drug

tre

atm

ent p

rogr

amm

esi.

# (c

umul

ativ

e) o

f ind

ivid

uals

in c

onta

ct

with

stru

ctur

ed d

rug

treat

men

t ser

vice

s42

575

078

535

see

full

targ

et

defin

ition

ii. %

of i

ndiv

idua

ls re

tain

ed in

trea

tmen

t73

8085

5se

e fu

ll ta

rget

de

finiti

on1.

5 R

educ

tion

in n

umbe

r of r

e-re

ferr

als

to

Chi

ldre

n an

d Fa

mily

Ser

vice

occ

urrin

g w

ithin

12

mon

ths

% re

duct

ion

in re

ferr

al ra

te14

.89

8

1.6

Red

uce

the

num

ber o

f chi

ldre

n de

regi

ster

ed fr

om th

e C

hild

Pro

tect

ion

Reg

istra

r who

hav

e be

en o

n th

e re

gist

rar

for t

wo

year

s or

mor

e

% o

f chi

ldre

n de

regi

ster

ed fr

om th

e C

hild

P

rote

ctio

n R

egis

ter w

ho h

ave

been

on

the

regi

ster

for t

wo

year

s or

mor

e

4.7

65

1.7

Incr

ease

the

num

ber o

f sub

stan

ce

mis

usin

g pa

rent

s ac

cess

ing

treat

men

t#

of s

ubst

ance

mis

usin

g pa

rent

s ac

cess

ing

treat

men

tun

der C

YP

P/D

AA

T re

view

1.8

Saf

er ro

ads,

mea

sure

d in

term

s of

bo

th c

asua

lty re

duct

ion

and

perc

eptio

n of

sa

fety

% o

f kill

ed a

nd s

erio

usly

inju

red

(KS

I) ro

ad u

sers

com

pare

d to

all

KS

I63

5754

defin

ition

to b

e re

vise

d (#

) Ann

ual i

n Ja

ni.

% o

f LA

C w

ith 3

or m

ore

plac

emen

ts

durin

g th

e ye

ar15

108

SS

(LA

C)2

, PA

F A

1 at

31

Dec

200

6ii.

% o

f LA

C 4

+ ye

ars

who

wer

e in

fost

er

plac

emen

t 2+

year

s44

5660

SS

(LA

C)3

PA

F D

35

at 3

1 D

ec 2

006

ii. E

stab

lish

base

line

data

, mon

itorin

g an

d re

porti

ng s

yste

ms

Rev

iew

the

alco

hol s

trate

gy a

nd re

-pr

iorit

ise

actio

n pl

anpr

oces

s ba

sed

- w

orke

r rec

ruite

d - o

n tra

ck

Targ

et u

nder

CY

PP

/DA

AT

revi

ew

i. D

evel

opm

enta

l wor

k ag

reed

in th

e al

coho

l st

rate

gy a

ctio

n pl

an

1.9

Sta

bilit

y of

pla

cem

ent

1.3

Effe

ctiv

e an

d en

durin

g al

coho

l tre

atm

ent p

rogr

amm

es

To b

e es

tabl

ishe

d

D8

LAA

OU

TCO

ME

S A

ND

TA

RG

ETS

AN

NE

X 1

Out

com

eP

erfo

rman

ce M

easu

re /

Indi

cato

rR

efre

sh

Bas

elin

eP

erfo

rman

ce

Enh

ance

men

tC

omm

ents

2004

/05

2005

/06

2006

/07

2007

/08

With

out

Rew

ard

With

R

ewar

d

Out

turn

2008

/09

Per

form

ance

Tar

gets

2.1*

Cle

aner

nei

ghbo

urho

ods

– E

ncam

s m

easu

re%

of r

elev

ant l

and

and

high

way

s as

sess

ed a

s ha

ving

com

bine

d de

posi

ts o

f lit

ter a

nd d

etrit

us th

at fa

ll be

low

an

acce

ptab

le le

vel

2820

164

see

full

targ

et

defin

ition

2.2

Per

sona

lised

trav

el p

lann

ing

deliv

erin

g m

odal

shi

ft an

d C

O2

emis

sion

sa

ving

s

to b

e ag

reed

2.3

Red

uce

fuel

pov

erty

and

incr

ease

en

ergy

effi

cien

cy in

hom

es%

ene

rgy

incr

ease

in e

nerg

y ef

ficie

ncy

in

hom

es1.

51.

51.

5

3.1

Red

uced

bus

ines

s w

aste

and

in

crea

sed

recy

clin

g an

d en

ergy

effi

cien

cy

on in

dust

rial e

stat

es

% in

crea

se o

f bus

ines

ses

on in

dust

rial

esta

tes

that

hav

e IS

O14

001

and

BS

8555

ce

rtifie

d en

viro

nmen

tal m

anag

emen

t sy

stem

s in

pla

ce

100

+10%

+20%

Gre

enin

g B

usin

ess

Offi

cers

recr

uite

d

i. S

tatu

s of

Cou

ncil

cont

ribut

ion

to th

e K

ings

ton

Bio

dive

rsity

Act

ion

Pla

nM

onito

ring

fram

ewor

k in

pla

ceii.

% o

f und

esig

nate

d la

nd is

sur

veye

d to

id

entif

y pr

esen

ce o

f and

opp

ortu

nitie

s fo

r m

aint

enan

ce a

nd o

r enh

ance

men

t of

biod

iver

sity

15se

e co

mm

ent

6090

GLA

sur

vey

of s

ites

com

plet

ed.

RB

K

asse

ssm

ent

unde

rway

.

iii.

% a

rea

(ha)

of L

ocal

Nat

ure

Res

erve

s pe

r 1,0

00 p

opul

atio

n0.

674

haA

reas

id

entif

ied

1215

Res

ourc

es b

eing

id

entif

ied

i. %

of a

ll tri

ps m

ade

by c

ycle

4se

e co

mm

ent

4.75

5R

epor

t dep

enda

nt o

n Tf

L de

man

d su

rvey

ii. %

of w

ork

trips

by

car

n/a

"44

.343

.53.

4* Im

prov

e co

nditi

on o

f foo

tway

s%

of t

he c

ateg

ory

1, 1

a an

d 2

foot

way

ne

twor

k w

here

stru

ctur

al m

aint

enan

ce

shou

ld b

e co

nsid

ered

3826

179

see

full

targ

et

defin

ition

i. R

educ

tion

in th

e %

of m

unic

ipal

w

aste

land

fille

d76

.03

72.7

472

.45

ii. In

crea

se in

the

% o

f mun

icip

al w

aste

re

cycl

ed17

.41

17.9

978

.04

3.3

An

impr

oved

env

ironm

ent f

or w

alki

ng

and

cycl

ing

and

an in

crea

se in

use

of

thes

e fo

rms

of tr

ansp

ort

3.5

Red

uce

was

te to

land

fill a

nd

incr

ease

recy

clin

g

Bud

get i

dent

ified

for

supp

ortin

g of

ficer

and

op

erat

ing

cost

s

Hab

itat &

spe

cies

ac

tion

plan

s

2. C

LEA

NE

R C

OM

MU

NIT

IES

proj

ect i

ntiia

ted

- bas

elin

e be

ing

esta

blis

hed

in c

onsu

ltatio

n w

ith T

fL

3. G

RE

EN

ER

CO

MM

UN

ITIE

S

3.2

Enh

ance

the

loca

l env

ironm

ent

thro

ugh

the

cons

erva

tion

of b

iodi

vers

ity

and

the

natu

ral e

nviro

nmen

t

D9

LAA

OU

TCO

ME

S A

ND

TA

RG

ETS

AN

NE

X 1

Out

com

eP

erfo

rman

ce M

easu

re /

Indi

cato

rR

efre

sh

Bas

elin

eP

erfo

rman

ce

Enh

ance

men

tC

omm

ents

2004

/05

2005

/06

2006

/07

2007

/08

With

out

Rew

ard

With

R

ewar

d

Out

turn

2008

/09

Per

form

ance

Tar

gets

i. %

of e

duca

tion

trip

s by

car

n/a

3332

ii. %

sch

ools

with

sch

ool t

rave

l pla

ns17

3960

100%

= 5

2 - T

arge

t 10

0% b

y 20

10

i. #

of y

oung

peo

ple

votin

g in

the

natio

nal

You

th P

arlia

men

t ele

ctio

n42

76 (3

6%)

38%

40%

ii. #

of Y

outh

For

ums

held

2011

12iii

. # o

f for

mal

Mem

ber l

evel

mee

tings

at

whi

ch y

oung

peo

ple

play

an

activ

e ro

le13

910

i. #

of p

eopl

e at

tend

ing

Nei

ghbo

urho

od

Com

mitt

ee m

eetin

gs e

ach

year

1,10

82,

500

2,60

0

ii. #

of p

eopl

e (i.

e. m

embe

rs o

f the

pub

lic)

cont

ribut

ing

to d

ebat

es a

t Nei

ghbo

urho

od

Com

mitt

ee m

eetin

gs e

ach

year

341

320

340

iii. #

of p

eopl

e sp

eaki

ng o

n pl

anni

ng

appl

icat

ions

at N

eigh

bour

hood

Com

mitt

ee

mee

tings

9217

018

0

iv. %

of p

eopl

e w

ho fe

el th

at th

eir l

ocal

ar

ea is

a p

lace

whe

re p

eopl

e fr

om

diffe

rent

bac

kgro

unds

get

on

wel

l to

geth

er

awai

ting

LGU

SS

tba

tba

i. #

of p

eopl

e at

tend

ing

Saf

er

Nei

ghbo

urho

ods

mee

tings

n/a

4000

4000

+Fi

rst m

eetin

gs 2

004

ii. I

ncre

ased

eng

agem

ent o

f BM

E

com

mun

ities

n/a

Res

iden

ts S

urve

y

iii %

of p

eopl

e w

ho fe

el th

ey c

an in

fluen

ce

deci

sion

s th

at a

ffect

thei

r loc

al a

rea

38n/

a48

53R

esid

ents

Sur

vey

i. #

of a

genc

ies

invo

lved

in th

e ad

vice

and

in

form

atio

n ne

twor

k5

910

ii. #

of i

nter

vent

ions

with

in th

e ne

twor

k ar

rang

emen

ts e

ach

year

4032

848

0

to b

e ag

reed

4.4

Pro

mot

ion

of s

ocia

l inc

lusi

on –

acc

ess

to ju

stic

e an

d re

ferr

al p

athw

ays

4.2

Empo

wer

loca

l peo

ple

to h

ave

a gr

eate

r voi

ce a

nd in

fluen

ce o

ver l

ocal

de

cisi

on m

akin

g an

d a

grea

ter r

ole

in

publ

ic s

ervi

ce d

eliv

ery

3.6

Mod

al s

hare

in s

choo

l tra

vel

4.1

Incr

ease

civ

ic p

artic

ipat

ion

by y

oung

pe

ople

4. C

OM

MU

NIT

Y E

NG

AG

EM

EN

T

4.3

Bet

ter p

erce

ptio

ns o

f com

mun

ity

enga

gem

ent a

nd c

ohes

ion

D10

LAA

OU

TCO

ME

S A

ND

TA

RG

ETS

AN

NE

X 1

Out

com

eP

erfo

rman

ce M

easu

re /

Indi

cato

rR

efre

sh

Bas

elin

eP

erfo

rman

ce

Enh

ance

men

tC

omm

ents

2004

/05

2005

/06

2006

/07

2007

/08

With

out

Rew

ard

With

R

ewar

d

Out

turn

2008

/09

Per

form

ance

Tar

gets

i. #

of re

side

nts

250

300

600

300

ii. #

of r

esid

ents

from

soc

ially

exc

lude

d gr

oups

133

360

635

275

4.6

Em

pow

er lo

cal p

eopl

e to

hav

e gr

eate

r ch

oice

and

influ

ence

ove

r loc

al d

ecis

ion

mak

ing

and

a gr

eate

r rol

e in

pub

lic

serv

ice

deliv

ery

% o

f peo

ple

who

feel

that

thei

r loc

al a

rea

is a

pla

ce w

here

peo

ple

from

diff

eren

t ba

ckgr

ound

s ge

t on

wel

l tog

ethe

r

48S

urve

y

i. #

of y

oung

peo

ple

rece

ivin

g sp

ecia

list

subs

tanc

e m

isus

e se

rvic

es20

5060

ii. #

of p

rofe

ssio

nals

wor

king

with

chi

ldre

n an

d yo

ung

peop

le w

ho re

ceiv

e dr

ug a

nd

alco

hol t

rain

ing

n/a

7090

Aca

dem

ic y

ear

i. #

of n

eigh

bour

hood

-bas

ed s

exua

l hea

lth

serv

ices

n/a

23+

ii %

of 1

5-24

yea

r old

s ac

cept

ing

Chl

amyd

ia s

cree

ning

n/a

To b

e de

fined

by

DH

To b

e de

fined

by

DoH

iii %

of m

aint

aine

d sc

hool

s w

ith a

re

view

ed S

RE

pol

icy

in li

ne w

ith la

test

gu

idan

ce

data

bei

ng

colle

cted

8010

0B

asel

ine

bein

g es

tabl

ishe

d

5.3

Red

uce

the

rate

of u

nder

18

conc

eptio

ns#

of c

once

ptio

ns o

f tho

se u

nder

18

per

thou

sand

25.6

22.4

21.1

Alig

ned

with

CY

PP

i. %

sch

ools

acc

redi

ted

to th

e H

ealth

y S

choo

ls s

chem

e50

7595

20se

e fu

ll ta

rget

de

finiti

onii.

% o

f sch

ools

wor

king

tow

ards

the

Hea

lthy

Sch

ools

sch

eme

7090

100

10se

e fu

ll ta

rget

de

finiti

oni.

Hal

t yea

r on

year

rise

in o

besi

ty u

nder

11

by

2010

Crit

eria

to b

e se

t by

DoH

ii. D

evel

op m

ulti-

face

ted

prog

ram

me

aim

ed a

t pre

vent

ing

over

wei

ght a

nd

obes

ity a

mon

g ch

ildre

n an

d fa

mili

es

0

iii. #

of e

xten

ded

scho

ol c

lust

ers

01

2un

der C

YP

P re

view

mea

sues

to b

e ag

reed

4.5*

Gen

erat

e co

mm

unity

eng

agem

ent

thro

ugh

volu

ntee

ring

5. H

EA

LTH

Y A

CTI

VE

LIV

ES

FO

R Y

OU

NG

PE

OP

LE

5.4*

Hea

lthie

r sch

ools

5.5

Hea

lthy

eatin

g an

d ac

tive

lifes

tyle

s

5.1

Red

uce

drug

and

alc

ohol

rela

ted

harm

to

chi

ldre

n an

d yo

ung

peop

le

5.2

Impr

oved

acc

ess

to s

exua

l hea

lth

serv

ices

for y

oung

peo

ple

Crit

eria

to b

e se

t by

DoH

Pro

gram

me

deve

lope

d

D11

LAA

OU

TCO

ME

S A

ND

TA

RG

ETS

AN

NE

X 1

Out

com

eP

erfo

rman

ce M

easu

re /

Indi

cato

rR

efre

sh

Bas

elin

eP

erfo

rman

ce

Enh

ance

men

tC

omm

ents

2004

/05

2005

/06

2006

/07

2007

/08

With

out

Rew

ard

With

R

ewar

d

Out

turn

2008

/09

Per

form

ance

Tar

gets

5.6

Impr

ove

supp

ort o

f vul

nera

ble

child

ren

- psy

chol

ogic

al a

nd m

enta

l hea

lth#

of fu

ll tim

e so

cial

wor

kers

or r

elat

ed

prof

essi

onal

s ba

sed

with

in th

e C

AM

HS

3.3

56

i. %

of s

choo

l stu

dent

s in

spe

cial

sch

ools

ag

ed 5

to 1

6 pa

rtici

patin

g in

at l

east

two

hour

s of

hig

h qu

ality

PE

and

sch

ool s

port

per w

eek

1365

8520

ii. #

of s

choo

l stu

dent

s w

ith s

peci

al

educ

atio

nal n

eeds

or d

isab

ilitie

s at

tain

ing

leve

l 4 in

yea

r 6 in

PE

020

5838

Red

uce

heal

th in

equa

litie

s w

ithin

the

loca

l are

a, b

y na

rrow

ing

the

gap

in a

ll-ag

e, a

ll-ca

use

mor

talit

y

i. In

itiat

ion

of b

reas

t-fee

ding

Q2

89.

0%90

.32%

90.3

2%

ii. A

cces

s to

GU

M s

ervi

ces

with

in 4

8 hr

s of

con

tact

ing

the

serv

ice

Aug

ust

71.9

%85

%10

0%

iii. M

MR

Imm

unis

atio

n by

age

of 2

90.6

1%95

%95

%

6.1*

Act

ive

agin

g%

of a

dults

age

d 45

+ pa

rtici

patin

g in

at

leas

t 30

min

utes

mod

erat

e in

tens

ity s

port

and

activ

e re

crea

tion

to b

e co

nfirm

ed0

4545

i. O

besi

ty s

tatu

s am

ong

GP

regi

ster

ed

popu

latio

n of

50+

n/a

Yea

r 2

mon

itor

5%

redu

ctio

n20

06/0

7 as

a

base

line

for y

ears

two

and

thre

e

ii. #

of G

P p

ract

ices

to re

fer p

atie

nts

to

new

pro

gram

mes

0

12

iii. #

of p

oten

tial ‘

heal

th tr

aine

rs’ i

dent

ified

fro

m tr

aine

d ad

viso

rs0

48

6.2

Impr

ove

heal

th/re

duce

obe

sity

in o

ver

50s

5.7*

Incr

ease

Exe

rcis

e Le

vels

and

at

tain

men

t of L

evel

4 in

PE

for C

hild

ren

with

Spe

cial

Nee

ds a

nd d

isab

ilitie

s.

6.4.

Impr

oved

Hea

lth a

nd re

duce

d H

ealth

Ineq

ualit

ies

6. H

EA

LTH

Y A

CTI

VE

LIV

ES

FO

R A

DU

LTS

D12

LAA

OU

TCO

ME

S A

ND

TA

RG

ETS

AN

NE

X 1

Out

com

eP

erfo

rman

ce M

easu

re /

Indi

cato

rR

efre

sh

Bas

elin

eP

erfo

rman

ce

Enh

ance

men

tC

omm

ents

2004

/05

2005

/06

2006

/07

2007

/08

With

out

Rew

ard

With

R

ewar

d

Out

turn

2008

/09

Per

form

ance

Tar

gets

i. #

of a

dults

with

a le

arni

ng d

isab

ility

(a

ged

18-6

4 ye

ars)

hel

ped

to li

ve a

t hom

e18

217

918

1Li

nks

to P

AF

C30

ii. #

of p

eopl

e ag

ed 1

8 or

ove

r who

hav

e a

lear

ning

or p

hysi

cal d

isab

ility

who

hav

e re

ceiv

ed d

irect

pay

men

ts d

urin

g th

e ye

ar

121

130

140

Link

to P

AF

C51

iii. %

of t

he le

arni

ng d

isab

ility

ser

vice

us

ers

aged

18-

64 th

at a

re h

elpe

d to

live

at

hom

e

56.2

53.5

54Li

nk to

PA

F C

11

Red

uce

heal

th in

equa

litie

s w

ithin

the

loca

l are

a, b

y na

rrow

ing

the

gap

in a

ll-ag

e, a

ll-ca

use

mor

talit

y

i. R

educ

ing

canc

er m

orta

lity

rate

2002

/04

113.

011

510

0

ii. R

educ

ing

CVD

mor

talit

y ra

te20

02/0

4 82

.177

73

iii. C

ervi

cal s

cree

ning

rate

s77

.30%

80%

80%

iv. S

mok

ing

durin

g pr

egna

ncy

Q2

7%

16.0

4%5.

98%

7.1

New

affo

rdab

le h

ousi

ng%

of n

ew a

fford

able

hom

es c

ompl

eted

in

the

boro

ugh

28%

see

com

men

t73

%27

%

7.2

Spar

eC

ombi

ned

with

7.3

7.3

Red

uce

the

num

ber o

f chi

ldre

n th

at

live

in h

omes

whi

ch d

o no

t mee

t dec

ency

st

anda

rds

Ann

ual %

cha

nge

in p

ropo

rtio

n of

non

de

cent

LA

hom

es20

115

BV

PI 1

84a

7.4

Spar

eC

ombi

ned

with

7.5

7.5

Red

uce

num

ber o

f chi

ldre

n liv

ing

in

tem

pora

ry a

ccom

mod

atio

nA

vera

ge le

ngth

of t

ime

in B

&B

for

hous

ehol

ds w

ith c

hild

ren

or p

regn

ant

wom

en

4.5

4.5

4B

VP

I 183

a

7. S

US

TAIN

AB

LE C

OM

MU

NIT

IES

6.3

Impr

ove

the

qual

ity o

f life

of d

isab

led

peop

le b

y en

ablin

g m

ore

peop

le w

ith

lear

ning

and

phy

sica

l dis

abili

ties

to li

ve in

th

eir o

wn

hom

es

6.4.

Impr

oved

Hea

lth a

nd re

duce

d H

ealth

Ineq

ualit

ies

D13

LAA

OU

TCO

ME

S A

ND

TA

RG

ETS

AN

NE

X 1

Out

com

eP

erfo

rman

ce M

easu

re /

Indi

cato

rR

efre

sh

Bas

elin

eP

erfo

rman

ce

Enh

ance

men

tC

omm

ents

2004

/05

2005

/06

2006

/07

2007

/08

With

out

Rew

ard

With

R

ewar

d

Out

turn

2008

/09

Per

form

ance

Tar

gets

i. %

of C

ounc

il sp

end

goin

g to

loca

l SM

Es

and

third

sec

tor e

nter

pris

es0

+x%

+x

%pr

oces

s ba

sed

- un

der n

egot

iatio

nii.

% o

f sup

plie

rs th

at a

re lo

cal S

ME

s or

th

ird s

ecto

r ent

erpr

ises

0 +

x%

+x%

proc

ess

base

d -

unde

r neg

otia

tion

8.2

Impr

oved

com

mun

ity tr

ansp

ort o

ptio

ns

lead

ing

to g

reat

er s

ocia

l inc

lusi

on#

of E

nter

pris

e S

chem

es

0S

chem

e 1

full

oper

atio

n

Sch

eme

2 fu

ll op

erat

ion

i.

# of

peo

ple

in re

ceip

t of i

ncap

acity

be

nefit

s fo

r a m

inim

um o

f at l

east

26

wee

ks h

elpe

d in

to s

usta

ined

em

ploy

men

t of

at l

east

16

hour

s a

wee

k fo

r 13

cons

ecut

ive

wee

ks o

r mor

e

1030

9060

see

full

targ

et

defin

ition

ii. #

of p

eopl

e in

rece

ipt o

f inc

apac

ity

bene

fits

for a

min

imum

of a

t lea

st 2

6 w

eeks

hel

ped

into

wor

k of

less

than

16

hour

s fo

r 13

cons

ecut

ive

wee

ks o

r mor

e

2266

116

50se

e fu

ll ta

rget

de

finiti

on

i. #

of le

arne

rs p

rogr

essi

ng fr

om N

VQ

le

vel 1

to le

vel 2

ach

ieve

d th

roug

h K

ings

ton

Col

lege

reta

il C

oVE

out

reac

h in

itiat

ive

and

any

othe

r rel

ated

initi

ativ

es

010

0 le

arne

rs11

0 le

arne

rs

ii. #

of l

earn

ers

prog

ress

ing

from

NV

Q

leve

l 2 to

leve

l 3 th

roug

h K

ings

ton

Col

lege

re

tail

CoV

E o

utre

ach

initi

ativ

e an

d an

y ot

her r

elat

ed in

itiat

ives

075

lear

ners

82 le

arne

rs

iii. #

of b

usin

esse

s ac

tivel

y en

gage

d in

the

proj

ect -

Kin

gsto

n C

olle

ge re

tail

CoV

E

outre

ach

initi

ativ

e an

d an

y ot

her r

elat

ed

initi

ativ

es

050

60

8.1

Sup

porti

ng lo

cal S

ME

s an

d 3r

d S

ecto

r or

gani

satio

ns to

pro

cure

from

pub

lic

sect

or o

rgan

isat

ions

8.3*

Sup

porti

ng p

eopl

e w

ith h

ealth

rela

ted

prob

lem

s in

to w

ork

8.4

Incr

ease

loca

l ski

ll le

vels

with

re

fere

nce

to lo

cal b

usin

ess

need

8. E

CO

NO

MIC

WE

LL B

EIN

G

D14

LAA

OU

TCO

ME

S A

ND

TA

RG

ETS

AN

NE

X 1

Out

com

eP

erfo

rman

ce M

easu

re /

Indi

cato

rR

efre

sh

Bas

elin

eP

erfo

rman

ce

Enh

ance

men

tC

omm

ents

2004

/05

2005

/06

2006

/07

2007

/08

With

out

Rew

ard

With

R

ewar

d

Out

turn

2008

/09

Per

form

ance

Tar

gets

8.5

Con

tinue

to s

uppo

rt m

ore

disa

bled

ch

ildre

n an

d th

ose

with

lear

ning

diff

icul

ties

to e

ngag

e in

wor

k ex

perie

nce

% o

f dire

ct p

aym

ents

to d

isab

led

child

ren

and

thei

r fam

ilies

as

a pr

opor

tion

of th

e es

timat

es to

tal o

f dis

able

d ch

ildre

n

2.35

2.65

2.8

i. M

onito

r ret

ail a

nd b

usin

ess

offe

r (a

mou

nt o

f new

/refu

rbis

hed

floor

spa

ce)

n/a

proc

ess

base

d -

unde

r neg

otia

tion

ii. M

onito

r the

rang

e of

leis

ure/

en

terta

inm

ent a

nd c

ultu

ral f

acili

ties

n/a

proc

ess

base

d -

unde

r neg

otia

tion

9.2*

Mai

ntai

n a

safe

env

ironm

ent i

n K

ings

ton

tow

n ce

ntre

by

day

and

nigh

t#

(cum

ulat

ive)

of w

ound

ing

and

com

mon

as

saul

t offe

nces

in G

rove

War

d (in

clud

ing

dom

estic

vio

lenc

e)

927

2575

2528

47se

e fu

ll ta

rget

de

finiti

on

9.3

A m

ore

sust

aina

ble

envi

ronm

ent i

n K

ings

ton

tow

n ce

ntre

Mon

itor t

he e

nviro

nmen

t and

sus

tain

abili

tyn/

a

9.4

Impr

ove

trans

port

and

acce

ss in

and

to

Kin

gsto

n to

wn

cent

reM

onito

r im

prov

emen

ts in

tran

spor

t and

ac

cess

n/a

i. %

of p

upils

ach

ievi

ng K

ey S

tage

3 le

vel

5 m

aths

who

then

ach

ieve

GC

SE

A*

- C in

m

aths

2530

355

see

full

targ

et

defin

ition

ii. %

of p

upils

ach

ievi

ng 5

A*

- C (i

nclu

ding

E

nglis

h an

d m

aths

)59

.161

632

see

full

targ

et

defin

ition

10.2

Red

uce

# of

16-

18 y

ear o

lds

not i

n ed

ucat

ion,

em

ploy

men

t or t

rain

ing

(NEE

T)

% o

f 16-

18 y

ear o

lds

not i

n ed

ucat

ion,

em

ploy

men

t or t

rain

ing

(NEE

T)3.

53.

53.

5A

ligne

d w

ith C

YP

P -

link

to c

onne

xion

s fu

ndin

g10

.3 I

ncre

ase

% o

f 19

year

old

car

e le

aver

s in

edu

catio

n, e

mpl

oym

ent o

r tra

inin

g

% in

edu

catio

n, e

mpl

oym

ent a

nd tr

aini

ng74

8585

see

10.6

i. #

of v

ulne

rabl

e yo

ung

peop

le

invo

lved

in ta

rget

ted

PAYP

and

Su

mm

er C

onne

xion

s Pr

ogra

mm

e

6670

70

9. K

ING

STO

N T

OW

N C

EN

TRE

10. A

TTA

INM

EN

T

10.4

Inte

rven

tion

to e

nsur

e vu

lner

able

16-

year

old

s ha

ve a

n ap

prop

riate

des

tinat

ion

Pro

gres

s on

Ros

e Th

eatre

and

hot

els

10.1

* In

crea

se th

e %

of P

upils

with

5+

GC

SE

A*-

C in

clud

ing

Eng

lish

and

mat

hs

by th

e en

d of

KS

4

9.1

Mai

ntai

ning

a ro

bust

and

div

erse

ec

onom

y in

Kin

gsto

n to

wn

cent

re

espe

cial

ly in

the

perio

d pr

ior t

o an

d du

ring

maj

or re

deve

lopm

ent

Iden

tify

spec

ific

impr

ovem

ents

Id

entif

y sp

ecifi

c im

prov

emen

ts

Wor

k w

ith H

amm

erso

n de

velo

per a

nd

asso

ciat

ed m

ilest

ones

D15

LAA

OU

TCO

ME

S A

ND

TA

RG

ETS

AN

NE

X 1

Out

com

eP

erfo

rman

ce M

easu

re /

Indi

cato

rR

efre

sh

Bas

elin

eP

erfo

rman

ce

Enh

ance

men

tC

omm

ents

2004

/05

2005

/06

2006

/07

2007

/08

With

out

Rew

ard

With

R

ewar

d

Out

turn

2008

/09

Per

form

ance

Tar

gets

ii. %

Yea

r 11

from

Kin

gsto

n sc

hool

s re

ceiv

ing

an o

ffer o

f a p

lace

in E

ET10

010

010

0In

clud

ed fr

om C

YP

P

D16

LAA

OU

TCO

ME

S A

ND

TA

RG

ETS

AN

NE

X 1

Out

com

eP

erfo

rman

ce M

easu

re /

Indi

cato

rR

efre

sh

Bas

elin

eP

erfo

rman

ce

Enh

ance

men

tC

omm

ents

2004

/05

2005

/06

2006

/07

2007

/08

With

out

Rew

ard

With

R

ewar

d

Out

turn

2008

/09

Per

form

ance

Tar

gets

i. %

ach

ievi

ng le

vel 5

+ E

nglis

h in

Key

S

tage

2 S

ATs

3440

444

see

full

targ

et

defin

ition

ii. %

ach

ievi

ng le

vel 5

+ m

aths

in K

ey

Sta

ge 2

SA

Ts40

4346

3se

e fu

ll ta

rget

de

finiti

on10

.6 In

crea

se th

e nu

mbe

r of l

ooke

d af

ter

child

ren

in fu

rther

edu

catio

n, e

mpl

oym

ent

and

train

ing

% o

f loo

ked

afte

r chi

ldre

n in

furth

er

educ

atio

n, e

mpl

oym

ent a

nd tr

aini

ng84

see

com

men

t90

90un

der C

YP

P re

view

- se

e 10

.3

10.7

Im

prov

e sc

hool

atte

ndan

ce o

f lo

oked

afte

r chi

ldre

n%

of L

AC

abs

ent f

rom

sch

ool f

or 2

5 da

ys

or m

ore

08

7

i. %

of c

are

leav

ers

with

A-G

GC

SE

8265

65R

evie

w C

YP

P d

ata

ii. #

of c

are

leav

ers

16+

with

5+

GC

SE

A* t

o C

or a

GN

VQ3

22

Alig

ned

with

CY

PP

11.2

Im

prov

e ac

hiev

emen

ts fo

r chi

ldre

n w

ith d

isab

ilitie

s/sp

ecia

l edu

catio

nal n

eeds

% m

inim

um o

f goa

ls s

et w

ithin

thei

r ow

n IE

P e

very

dis

able

d ch

ild a

chie

ves

n/a

8595

unde

r CY

PP

revi

ew

11.3

Inc

reas

e up

-take

of d

irect

pay

men

ts

by fa

mili

es w

ith d

isab

led

child

ren

# of

chi

ldre

n ac

cess

ing

dire

ct p

aym

ents

or

vouc

hers

n/a

1316

11.4

Pro

vide

pos

itive

act

iviti

es d

urin

g ou

t of

sch

ool t

ime

for v

ulne

rabl

e yo

ung

peop

le

# of

fte

plac

es a

vaila

ble

for y

oung

peo

ple

to p

artic

ipat

e in

pos

itive

act

iviti

es d

urin

g sc

hool

hol

iday

s

911

12

11. O

PP

OR

TUN

ITY

10.5

* Im

prov

e pr

ogre

ss ra

tes

for m

ore

able

pup

ils a

t Key

Sta

ge 2

11.1

Mai

ntai

n th

e ed

ucat

iona

l out

com

es

of c

are

leav

ers

D17

LAA

OU

TCO

ME

S A

ND

TA

RG

ETS

AN

NE

X 1

Out

com

eP

erfo

rman

ce M

easu

re /

Indi

cato

rR

efre

sh

Bas

elin

eP

erfo

rman

ce

Enh

ance

men

tC

omm

ents

2004

/05

2005

/06

2006

/07

2007

/08

With

out

Rew

ard

With

R

ewar

d

Out

turn

2008

/09

Per

form

ance

Tar

gets

12.1

Red

uctio

n in

num

ber o

f loo

ked

afte

r ch

ildre

n re

ceiv

ing

form

al w

arni

ngs/

co

nvic

tions

% o

f loo

ked

afte

r chi

ldre

n re

ceiv

ing

form

al

war

ning

s/ c

onvi

ctio

ns1.

32.

42

12.2

Red

uctio

n in

num

ber o

f firs

t tim

e of

fend

ers

ente

ring

the

yout

h ju

stic

e sy

stem

# of

firs

t tim

e en

trant

s to

the

You

th J

ustic

e sy

stem

161

118

115

12.3

Effe

ctiv

enes

s of

the

outc

ome

of

parti

cipa

tion

by c

hild

ren

and

youn

g pe

ople

di

rect

ly in

fluen

cing

ser

vice

dev

elop

men

t

# of

key

issu

es id

entif

ied

annu

ally

by

child

ren

and

youn

g pe

ople

whi

ch

influ

ence

d se

rvic

e de

liver

y

911

12

i. #

of A

SB

Os

mad

e in

resp

ect o

f you

ng

peop

le 1

7 ye

ars

and

unde

r in

any

one

year

63

2

ii. #

of A

BC

s m

ade

in re

spec

t of y

oung

pe

ople

17

year

s an

d un

der

4639

41

iii. %

chi

ldre

n ag

ed 8

-13

per y

ear f

or

asse

ssm

ent a

nd p

lann

ed in

terv

entio

ns

targ

eted

by

the

You

th In

clus

ion

and

Sup

port

Pan

el

37co

mm

ence

d N

ov

2005

set a

fter A

pr 0

7

12. M

AK

E A

PO

SIT

IVE

CO

NTR

IBU

TIO

N

12.4

Red

uce

anti-

soci

al b

ehav

iour

by

youn

g pe

ople

APPENDIX E Executive, 20 March 2007

CLIMATE CHANGE AND ENERGY STRATEGY Report by the Director of Environmental Services Executive Member for Sustainability and Biodiversity

Purpose

This report sets out the international, national, regional and local background and drivers for the development of strategies to tackle Climate Change and energy consumption. It describes the work undertaken, some existing good practice and makes proposals for the development of a Climate Change and energy strategy. It proposes that the Council signs the Nottingham Declaration on Climate Change; and responds to an e-petition on the development of an energy strategy. Action proposed by the Executive Member for Sustainability and Biodiversity: The Executive is requested to: 1. agree the process and timescale for the development of the strategy; 2. agree the scope of the energy strategy as set out in this report; 3. approve the signing of the Nottingham Declaration on Climate Change; 4. approve the course of action relating to the ePetition. 5. authorise the Head of Environment and Sustainability to identify up to £40,000 from

existing budgets to resource the development of the strategy. Reason for action proposed To ensure that Climate Change is given due importance and that the Council has an effective energy strategy that both addresses climate change and the proper management of Council resources.

BACKGROUND International 1. The challenges presented by Climate Change are real and significant. The 2007

IPCC (International Panel on Climate Change) report leaves no doubt that human activity contributes to global warming, and that climate change is happening now and in many places in the world. The burning of fossil fuels (coal, gas, oil etc) for energy leads to emissions of CO2, in volume the most significant global warming gas.

2. The Stern Review, published in November 2006, addresses the economics of

climate change and concludes that ignoring climate change will eventually damage economic growth. Mitigation – taking strong action to reduce emissions – must be

E2

viewed as an investment; and that the benefits of strong early action outweigh the costs. Stern also notes that, given that climate change is happening, measures to help people adapt to it are essential. The less mitigation we do now, the greater will be the difficulty of continuing to adapt in the future. The report also concludes that there is still time to avoid the worst impacts of climate change if strong collective action starts now.

3. European, National and Regional governance each provide imperatives for action

and recognise that local authorities are at the forefront of efforts to combat climate change. With their position as major energy consumers and community leaders, local authorities are ideally placed to promote energy efficient behaviour in communities and drive the behavioural change necessary to meet crucial carbon emissions reduction targets.

European 4. The European Union and the individual Member States are parties to the UN

convention on climate change and the Kyoto Protocol. The European Climate Change strategy addresses carbon capture and storage, passenger road transport, aviation, and carbon trading. Of particular interest to Local Authorities is the European Directive on the energy performance of buildings. It includes minimum energy requirements for new and for large existing buildings being renovated, and the energy certification of buildings. For public buildings which require an energy certificate it must be on public display. Certificates are required for new buildings and when buildings are sold or rented out.

5. Other European legislative drivers include the EU emissions trading scheme. National 6. The UK Climate Change Strategy 2006 was published in March of that year. It sets

a domestic target to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 20% below 1990 levels by 2010 and notes that action by local authorities is likely to be critical to the achievement of the government’s climate change objectives. Local authorities are uniquely placed to provide vision and leadership to local communities, raise awareness and help change behaviours. In addition, through their powers and responsibilities (housing, planning, local transport, powers to promote well-being and through activities such as their own local procurement and operations) they can have significant influence over emissions in their local areas. In future changes to the local government performance framework it is very likely there will be more focus on action to tackle climate change.

7. The Audit Commission in England and Wales has recommended that the level of

energy investment should equate to 10% of the energy bill. It is almost certain that there will be significant “invest to save” opportunities to be gained.

8. Under the new planning system there is greater emphasis on delivering the national

sustainable development and climate change strategies. The planning documents that Local Planning Authority’s produce are subject to Sustainability Appraisal. Three Government current or developing planning policy statements are particularly relevant. These are on renewable energy, development and flood risk and on climate change.

E3

Regional 9. The Mayor of London published his Energy Strategy “Green Light to Clean Power”

in February 2004. This addresses energy efficiency, fuel poverty and reducing emissions. On 27 February 2007 he published his “Action Today to Protect Tomorrow - the Mayor’s Climate Change Action Plan” which focuses on CO2 mitigation and on what is required to deliver the CO2 targets in the proposed draft Further Alteration to the London Plan. The Mayor’s detailed strategy and approach towards climate change, including both mitigation and adaptation, will be outlined in a new Mayor’s Climate Change Mitigation and Energy Strategy and a Mayor’s Climate Change Adaptation Strategy; the latter will be published in the first half of 2007. The London Boroughs will have a key role to play and the Mayor of London will use planning and transport powers and partnerships to implement change in London.

Petition 10. A petition initiated by Dr Birley, to the Council on these matters shows that the

borough’s residents share the concerns and want the Council to take action. It received 58 signatures and read:

‘Many people in our community now recognise that climate change is a major threat to our future well-being and that of our children. Kingston Borough Council have recognised that threat but not yet taken concerted action by developing an energy strategy. By contrast, nearby Woking council have already reduced their carbon emissions by about 70%, and reduced their energy bill by about 40%, while obtaining a net 8% return on investment. Merton Council have established a rule requiring at least 10% renewable energy generation on-site for all major new projects. So it can be done. We petition the council to take urgent action to develop an energy strategy that will substantially reduce carbon emissions, increase energy efficiency, and reduce recurrent expenditure.”

11. The Council understands that the challenges presented by Climate Change are

significant and require it to be far sighted and very proactive. It is clear though that while the Council is very effective in many areas in actions to address energy efficiency and climate change it does not have an overarching Climate Change strategy nor yet a comprehensive energy strategy.

AVAILABLE EVIDENCE IDENTIFYING GAPS AND GOOD PRACTICE WITHIN THE COUNCIL 12. Two reports have been written which review the Council’s position on energy

matters. Together they identify good practice, gaps and the issues to be addressed in an energy strategy.

13. The first is by CEN (Creative Energy Networks) and provided an initial overview of

the borough’s sustainable energy activities, potential gaps in activities and made initial recommendations for future work. This was reported to the Environment and Neighbourhood Overview Panel of 8 September 2005.

14. The Environment and Neighbourhood Overview Panel agreed to:

E4

1. recognise the importance of energy use in addressing climate change, fuel

poverty, and securing financial savings and value; 2. recognise the good practice that has been implemented by the Council but notes

that RBK does not have a comprehensive Energy Strategy;

3. recommend to the Executive that:

(1) it considers the CEN report and its recommendations and in particular in relation to:

(i) Fuel Poverty: Continues to prioritise investment and considers setting

targets to eliminate Fuel Poverty in Kingston by a date to be agreed, identifying the annual investment needed to meet the targets set.

(ii) Fuel Poverty: Continue with investment in the training of health and

social care professionals to identify clients in fuel poverty who would benefit from intervention.

(iii) Fuel Rich: Welcome the targeting of energy hotspots and consider

the investment of £5000 to £8000 annually to gain the maximum improvements in energy efficiency and hence impact on carbon dioxide emissions from such targeting.

(iv) Planning: Develop robust energy policies for energy efficient

buildings and the use of renewable energy in the emerging Local Development Framework and considers the CEN recommendation to implement prescriptive planning targets for renewables.

(v) Planning: Consider placing prescriptive targets for renewables in all

developments, not just major new builds.

(2) a comprehensive Energy Strategy is developed covering the Council’s role as a facilitator, as a Planning Authority, and as a major employer and energy user as identified in the CEN report and that commitment to action is demonstrated by ensuring that it is supported by:

(i) an action plan (ii) regular monitoring reports (iii) the allocation of resources

15. The second is a draft Internal Audit report on Energy and Water Management. The

purpose of the audit was to assess the adequacy and application of appropriate controls and to offer suggestions for improvement where appropriate. The audit examined practices and procedures to determine whether a number of control objectives were being achieved.

16. Both these reports and the petition acknowledge that there is good practice within

the Council. A considerable amount of information is available but its value could be improved with appropriate reporting. The reports identified that the responsibility for energy management, policy, and performance monitoring and

E5

reporting sits throughout the organisation but that at present there is no corporate oversight or staff resource dedicated solely to energy matters. It is this, which in part, explains the gaps, potential opportunities and slow progress in developing a comprehensive strategy.

RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE CEN REPORT 17. The Council should develop an Energy strategy to address the Council’s roles as

community leader, planning authority, and as major consumer of resources. 18. As community leader to:

a. alleviate fuel poverty b. engage and support the fuel rich in adopting sustainable energy measures c. supporting communities, housing associations and small and medium

enterprises (SMEs) to access sustainable energy support 19. As a planning authority

a. to develop robust sustainable energy policy, ensure planners have the

knowledge and support to implement these policies and that developers are provided with the necessary guidance.

20. As a major consumer of resources to:

a. maximise energy efficiency through its own refurbishment programmes b. benefit form central government funding such as the Carbon Trust Local

Authority Carbon Management Programme and the Invest to Save budget focused on sustainable energy

c. Benefit from programmes such as CEN’s CHP services. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE DRAFT INTERNAL AUDIT REPORT 21. The main function of energy management is to control energy consumption and

costs in all Council Public buildings and facilities. 22. Over many years there has been investment and improvement in energy efficient

measures and the Council has invested in energy management resources. In the past budgets were established for energy conservation programmes, particularly for initiatives with short pay-back periods. Some important elements of co-ordination and control are in place. In recent years there does not appear to have been any review of policy or strategy for driving the management of water and energy usage and conservation, with co-ordination and control undertaken at a corporate level.

23. The draft recommendations include:

a. the development of an energy and water strategy b. the establishment of ownership and responsibility for energy and water

conservation c. the undertaking of a baseline and regular bench marking exercise to measure

water, gas and electricity consumption d. production of an annual report which reviews performance in reducing

consumption, including an accurate assessment of any investment

E6

e. consideration of various funding arrangement for the achievement of energy and

water conservation WHAT THE COUNCIL IS CURRENTLY DOING 24. There are a number of things the Council is already doing that address the issues

identified in this report. These include:

a. As part of the Council’s new procurement strategy energy us is at the forefront of both the specification of services and the decision making process. Smith & Byford carry out the Council’s electrical contracting work and look to introduce energy efficient measures, photovoltaic panels; energy efficient controls and low energy lighting over the life of the contract.

b. The Council uses the LASER (Local Authorities South East Region) buying

group to obtain the most competitive rates for energy, including renewable energy sources on an ongoing basis. This has been very important in the face of rising prices.

c. The Council also uses significant amounts of energy in street lighting and

illuminated signs. Since April 2002 more energy efficient lighting has been used for all new and replacement lighting and signs works. In 2005 the Department of Transport approved the use on non-illuminated ‘keep left’ bollards in certain locations. These have been successfully trialled and they are now to be used as standard in approved locations. A capital budget of £50,000 has been allocated in 2006/7 for planned maintenance of street signs and the priority for this has been invest to save measures directed at energy reduction.

d. Wherever possible the design of new buildings and the refurbishment of existing

buildings ensure that energy efficient heat and light sources are recognised as a key element of the project. The rebuilding of Tiffin Girls’ School included an innovative low-energy approach to minimise the delivered energy to the buildings by maximising passive sources. The work at Chessington Community College will be a flagship model of sustainable development and its design should achieve at least a very good rating by the Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method.

e. Tolworth Infant School commissioned a renewable energy feasibility study to

provide advice on the integration of renewable energy technologies at the school.

f. The Council is working with the wider community and business to promote

environmental management, including energy efficiency, in voluntary organisations and business. The PEK (Positive Environment Kingston) initiative has provided support to a number of voluntary and non-profit organisations. And the Greening Business 5 borough LDA funded partnership project has provided the borough SMEs with a dedicated officer to provide resource management advice and small grants.

g. The Council’s Environmental Awareness Strategy has a focus on energy and

climate change and addresses residents and the business community.

E7

h. The Council’s Home Energy Conservation Act and Fuel Poverty initiative

includes an overall target to improve the energy efficiency of both private and public housing. “Coldbuster” grants, mainly to address fuel poverty, are available to help eligible residents introduce energy conservation measures such as improved insulation and efficient boilers into their homes The planned maintenance of Council housing stock and associated work to meet the Decent Homes Standard include improving energy efficiency.

i. The Unitary Development Plan includes a strategic policy to support

development which addresses reducing or minimising fossil fuel consumption and has development policies which seek to conserve energy and encourage the incorporation of renewable energy elements within new development. Planning applications are required to be accompanied by a Sustainability Statement which should address energy issues. Planning policies on energy and climate change will be strengthened with progress on the new Local Development Framework and associated planning policies and sustainability appraisals.

j. The Local Area Agreement for 2006 – 2009 includes a target to reduce fuel

poverty and increase energy efficiency in homes. k. The Council’s Sustainable Transport and Travel Awareness work is aimed at

changing modal split, reducing congestion, and promoting sustainable travel policies. The green travel plan officers help schools and businesses reduce dependency on private cars. This will help to constrain CO2 emissions from vehicle use.

l. NPS Property Services provides energy and water management services for

RBK and undertake the co-ordination and control of energy and water management for RBK premises, housing stock and schools. This includes professional technical support and advice, monitoring of energy and water use, and Energy Surveys and ratings.

m. Climate change is a global problem the partnership with Gwanak Gu provides

opportunities to work on this international issue together and to share learning and experiences.

25. Work on these and other initiatives will continue and develop in parallel with the

development of the energy strategy. CLIMATE CHANGE OR ENERGY STRATEGY? 26. The immediate priority is to address the findings and recommendations of the CEN

report, the draft Internal Audit Report, and to respond to the residents’ petition. The recommendations in the reports are such that a major piece of work is required demanding officer time and resources. If successful this work will secure financial efficiency benefits, social benefits and will make a significant contribution to the borough’s climate change impacts and in particular to mitigation and addressing CO2 emissions.

27. An Energy Strategy does not address all the matters pertinent to Climate Change.

These matters include global warming gases, other than CO2, flood and other weather impacts, the need for long term adaptation and shorter term emergency

E8

planning. Many of these issues are already addressed comprehensively within existing Council activities eg Emergency Planning and Business Continuity arrangements. In order to ensure that CO2 emissions are measured, managed and monitored in an Energy Strategy it is now considered to be good practice that this should be developed under the umbrella of a Climate Change Strategy.

28. It is therefore proposed to develop a Climate Change Strategy and to prioritise as

the first activity the development of the Energy Strategy. This will ensure that the focus on energy is maintained and that other climate change matters will also be addressed.

THE NOTTINGHAM DECLARATION 29. Almost 200 local authorities have signed the Nottingham Declaration. Of these 14

are London boroughs which include Sutton, Richmond and Croydon 30. It is endorsed by the Environment Agency, the I&DEA, ICLEI (the worldwide

association of local governments concerned with sustainability), the Local Government Association, the Carbon Trust, the UK Climate Impacts Programme, and the Energy Saving Trust which administers it and provides support to signatories.

31. A copy of the declaration is at Annexe 1 to this report. To demonstrate the

Council’s commitment to Climate Change it is proposed that the Council signs the Nottingham Declaration.

32. In signing the voluntary declaration the Council agrees, over a period of two years,

to develop plans with partners and local communities to progressively address the causes and impacts of climate changes.

33. The Council already has a number of mechanisms and policies in place that will

facilitate meeting this commitment. These include the Environmental Awareness Strategy, the Positive Environment Kingston community engagement project, planning guidance, the procurement strategy, and implementation of requirements under the Home Energy Conservation Act 1995.

RESPONSE TO DR BIRLEY’S E-PETITION 34. Dr Birley’s petition demonstrates the concern of residents about climate change and

identifies good practice for Kingston to consider. This interest is welcomed and we thank Dr Birley and the other signatories to the petition. We agree that the development of an Energy Strategy is necessary to addressing climate change and welcome the evidence that it is also a priority for residents. Dr Birley will be invited to provide further input for the development of a strategy.

PROPOSAL 35. It is proposed that in order to address the short, medium and long-term implications

for Kingston and its residents of climate change a Climate Change Strategy will be developed. It will address both mitigation and adaptation. Its coverage should include energy matters, flood risk and emergency planning, land use planning and public education. Because the impact of climate change is also on business, other

E9

Kingston organisations and the wider community the Climate change strategy will be developed in partnership with, and include business and community action. This supports both the Nottingham Declaration commitment and the Local Strategic Partnership approach to strategic planning.

36. The first and key step in addressing climate change is the development of an

energy strategy and this will be the first priority. 37. The energy strategy will cover the Council’s role as Community Leader, Planning

Authority, and service provider and major consumer of resources. It will address energy demand in public sector buildings, housing, and business and industry; and energy supply – conventional and alternative. It will consider transport energy, energy investment, and where practical energy security; and fuel poverty within the overall requirement to address energy efficiency in all residential accommodation. And it will be supported by short, medium and long term action plans and corporate reporting framework.

38. A comprehensive energy strategy would address gaps in activities and in controls.

It would also ensure that the Council is meeting national and international imperatives and protect the environment, economy and future well being of the borough and its residents.

39. The energy strategy will include an effective energy management strategy which

deals with the Council’s own energy use. This will address energy demand and energy supply and ensure that all necessary control, monitoring and reporting systems are put in place.

40. A good overarching climate change strategy and an energy strategy that

incorporate clear targets and actions can play a key role in successful funding bids. A good energy strategy can demonstrate to funding agencies the knowledge the organisation has of its own stock and estate and where opportunities for improvements are.

41. A time limited working group will be established to develop the strategy and to

ensure it comprehensively addresses the recommendations in the CEN report, the recommendations of the Environment and Overview Panel, the draft Internal Audit report, the issues raised in Dr Birley’s petition, and all service areas; and includes representatives from all departments with specific responsibility for energy management or energy policy. The Working Group will be lead by the Executive Member for Sustainability and Biodiversity with support from the Head of Environment & Sustainability and other appropriate officers.

42. To expedite the development of the strategy and in the absence of a dedicated

officer to support this work the Executive is recommended to authorise the Head of Environment & Sustainability to identify up to £40,000 from existing budgets to provide such a resource.

43. To demonstrate its commitment the Council will sign the Nottingham Declaration on

Climate Change.

E10

PROCESS AND TIMETABLE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A CLIMATE CHANGE AND ENERGY STRATEGY 44. In order to ensure the development of a comprehensive energy strategy as

described in this report the timetable below is proposed. 45. In parallel with the development of the strategy the existing initiatives to tackle the

issue will continue to be developed and practical actions taken.

Energy Strategy Development Timetable 20 March 2007 Report to Executive

By 30 April 20 07

Brief for supporting resource for working group written and agreed with Executive Member Resource to support the work identified

By 30 April 2007 Draft Brief for the Energy Strategy working group to address the issues identified in this report

By Mid May 2007 Identify members of working group and hold first meeting

Mid May to September 2007

Evidence gathering (building on CEN report and draft internal audit report) and identification of gaps Engagement with local interest groups and appropriate organisations

By 31 October 2007 1st Draft Energy Strategy available including initial short, medium and long term action plan, and first year action plan.

November 2007 Public Consultation

January 2008 2nd Draft Energy Strategy to Executive

February 2008 Scrutiny consideration of the 2nd Draft Energy Strategy

April 2008 Final Energy Strategy adopted by Executive 46. The timetable is such to ensure that all issues and services are addressed; that all

necessary personnel and organisations are appropriately involved in the development of the strategy; that proper scrutiny is given; and to accommodate committee deadlines. However depending on the progress made over the summer and autumn there may be some flexibility that allows the strategy to be adopted earlier; but it will be adopted within the next municipal year.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS 47. The implementation of an effective Energy Strategy will help to reduce CO2

emissions and mitigate the impacts of Climate Change. 48. The local impacts of climate change are likely to be unpredictable weather patterns

such as increased storm and wind intensity, flooding, and prolonged summer heat and drought. This could lead to more frequent flooding, storm damage, summer

E11

water shortages, and increased incidence of heat induced illness or death. The 2006 water restrictions in this area extended into 2007.

49. An effective energy and climate change strategy will ensure that RBK takes the

necessary decisions to adapt to these new conditions. This will help protect the infrastructure, homes and health of the borough’s residents and businesses.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS 50. There are short and longer term financial implications of this report. 51. The report contains a request for approval to spend up to £40,000 to secure the

necessary resources to expedite the energy strategy. This will be secured out of existing revenue budgets. It is however to be expected that the development of the energy strategy will provide longer term savings and help control the costs of climate change.

52. The past two years have seen increasing energy prices and improved energy

management, monitoring and control will enable costs to be controlled and invest to save opportunities realised. The sooner the energy strategy is in place the sooner potential savings can be quantified and realised.

53. The energy strategy itself will include consideration of financial implications

including “invest to save” and funding opportunities. Background papers: held by Frances Smith (author of the report), 020 8547 4758; e-mail: [email protected],gov.uk 1. Report to Environment and Neighbourhoods Overview Panel 30 September 2004 2. CEN Sustainable Energy Report to Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames

Environment and Neighbourhoods Overview Panel 3. Draft Internal Audit Report Energy and Water Management April 2006 4. The Nottingham Declaration on Climate Change 5. Green light to clean power – the Mayor’s Energy Strategy

http://www.london.gov.uk/mayor/environment/energy/index.jsp 6. Action today to protect tomorrow – the Mayor’s Climate Change Action Plan

http://www.london.gov.uk/mayor/environment/climate-change/ccap/index.jsp 7. UK climate change programme 2006

http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/climatechange/uk/ukccp/pdf/ukccp06-all.pdf 8. The Stern review report on the economics of Climate Change November 2006 www.hm-

treasury.gov.uk/independent_reviews/stern_review_economics_climate_change/stern_review_report.cfm

9. Climate Change 2007 The IPCC 4th Assessment report – summary for policy makers http://www.ipcc.ch/SPM2feb07.pdf

10. Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames Unitary Development Plan First Alteration 2005

We acknowledge that

• Evidence shows that climate change is occurring.

• Climate change will continue to have far reaching effects on the UK’s people and places, economy, society andenvironment.

We welcome the

• Social, economic and environmental benefits which come from combating climate change.

• Emissions targets agreed by central government and the programme for delivering change, as set out in the UKClimate Change Programme.

• Opportunity for local government to lead the response at a local level, encouraging and helping local residents,local businesses and other organisations - to reduce their energy costs, to reduce congestion, to adapt to theimpacts of climate change, to improve the local environment and to deal with fuel poverty in our communities.

• Endorsement of this declaration by central government.

We commit our Council from this date to

• Work with central government to contribute, at a local level, to the delivery of the UK Climate Change Programme,the Kyoto Protocol and the target for carbon dioxide reduction by 2010.

• Participate in local and regional networks for support.

• Within the next two years develop plans with our partners and local communities to progressively address thecauses and the impacts of climate change, according to our local priorities, securing maximum benefit for ourcommunities.

• Publicly declare, within appropriate plans and strategies, the commitment to achieve a significant reduction ofgreenhouse gas emissions from our own authority’s operations, especially energy sourcing and use, travel andtransport, waste production and disposal and the purchasing of goods and services.

• Assess the risk associated with climate change and the implications for our services and our communities ofclimate change impacts and adapt accordingly.

• Encourage all sectors in our local community to take the opportunity to adapt to the impacts of climate change, toreduce their own greenhouse gas emissions and to make public their commitment to action.

• Monitor the progress of our plans against the actions needed and publish the results.

Councilacknowledges the increasing impact that climate change will have on our communityduring the 21st century and commits to tackling the causes and effects of a changingclimate on our city/county/borough/district.

Chief ExecutiveLeader of the Council

Minister of StateClimate Change and

Environment

Office of the Deputy

Prime Minister

The NottinghamDeclarationon Climate Change

APPENDIX F Executive, 20 March 2007

GREEN SPACES STRATEGY Report by the Director of Environmental Services Executive Member for Sustainability and Biodiversity

Purpose The report informs the Executive of the intention to develop a long-term strategy for the Council’s Green Spaces, the Strategy will secure the necessary investment and improvement to meet the Council’s priorities; and sets out the process for the development of the Strategy. Action proposed by the Executive Member for Sustainability and Biodiversity: The Executive is requested to approve 1. the multifunctional approach to developing a Green Spaces Strategy; and 2. the process for consultation and the associated timetable for the development of the

Strategy. Reason for action proposed To ensure that the future management and maintenance of Kingston’s green spaces is developed within a strategic policy framework. BACKGROUND 1. In 2004 an Improvement Review of Kingston’s Parks and Grounds (IRPG) was

undertaken to plan how the service should be delivered in the future. The systematic review which included public and stakeholder consultation provided information for a set of strategic principles which would guide the procurement process of future contractors and form the basis for a ten-year Green Space Strategy.

2. The subsequent report (Executive 18 January 2005) and procurement review explored the way forward for the Council with respect to all matters relating to the Parks and Grounds service. The report also explored different forms of contractual arrangements and the proposed a procurement process for the appointment of new contractors. Much of that report is still wholly relevant.

3. In February 2006 Quadron Services took over the contractual management of the Parks and Grounds Service in sole partnership with Kingston. The contract is initially for 10 years with an opportunity to extend for a further 5 years.

4. There are now several drivers for a strategy to guide and develop the service in the future. A priority is the new partnership arrangements with Quadron Services Ltd. Another driver is the recent Open Space Assessment (Atkins 2006) which has been completed as part of the LDF process and in response to guidance emphasising the value of recreational and open space requirements, most notably Planning Policy Guidance 17 (PPG17, 2002). This study includes an assessment of the quality,

F2

quantity and value of parks and open spaces in Kingston and identifies whether provision meets local needs.

5. In addition, The Greater London Authority London Plan (Feb 2004) states that London Boroughs should prepare Open Space Strategies (Policy 3D.11.) to understand the supply and demand of open spaces and identify ways of protecting, creating and enhancing them.

6. Current influential RBK policies and strategies which are either in preparation or adopted are:

a. Changing Kingston – Choosing our Future (February 2007) b. LA21 Plan 2000 c. RBK Unitary Development Plan (adopted 2005) d. The Community Plan 2004-2009 e. Policy Programme 2006-2010 f. Cultural Strategy 2007-2012 g. Waste Strategy August 2004 h. A Play Strategy 2004-2008 i. Environmental Awareness Strategy 2006 j. Biodiversity Action Plan 2004 k. Tree Strategy (in preparation) l. Allotment Strategy (in preparation) m. Local Development Framework (in preparation) n. Children and Young People’s Plan 2006-2010

THE PROPOSED STRATEGY 7. It is proposed that the framework for a Green Spaces Strategy be developed

around ten top line functions under which the strategic principles as agreed in the Executive report from January 2005 will fit. This multifunctional approach moves away from the ‘one size fits all’ historic philosophy of parks and grounds management.

8. The proposed ten top line functions (listed below) have been designed by the Countryside Agency in response to DEFRA’s Rural Strategy 2004. This broad multifunctional approach allows scope to incorporate and integrate the suite of polices and strategies previously discussed and any future strategies that appear as a result of resident’s demands and/or legislative changes into one over-arching document.

9. A multifunctional approach opens up opportunity for external funding especially to active voluntary and community groups that support the ethos of the strategy, such as ‘Friends of’ or the Hogsmill Action Group. In addition, these functions must be either fully or partially met to apply for to the Heritage Lottery Fund through the SW Green Arc (an established partnership of urban-fringe London Boroughs, Surrey CC, Countryside Agency and Groundwork to improve access from the green belt into urban areas. This may entail land purchase in the future).

F3

10. The report to Executive in January 2005 agreed ten strategic principles for the

development of the Council’s Green Spaces Strategy. These principles are still considered to be sound and should be used in the work to be undertaken. They are:

a. To plan and manage our green space to maximise community benefit b. To use our resources efficiently, effectively and flexibly c. To make them welcoming and accessible d. To make sure people feel safe e. To provide young people with a place to ‘hangout’ and residents with a place

to play sport f. To enhance play facilities g. To contribute to the health and well-being of residents h. To protect the natural environment i. To secure sustainable development/sustainability j. To support the local economy

11. A new Cultural Strategy for Kingston is in preparation and will be published in 2007.

The Strategy will cover the period leading up to the Olympic and Paralympic Games in London in 2012. It will emphasise the need to use sensitively Green and Open Spaces for sporting activity. This includes the possible use of green spaces for training facilities for athletes in disciplines such as archery.

12. The Action Plan for the Cultural Strategy includes the development of policies for Tennis court and Football pitch usage. ‘Participation in Sports’ and ‘The environment as a cultural issue’ are also key themes reflecting the importance of sensitive use of green spaces in areas such as the Hogsmill river corridor.

13. The Children and Young People’s Plan contains as a key objective ‘To improve access to cultural opportunities for all children and young people which support health and well being, achievement and enjoyment’.

14. It is intended that the Green Spaces Strategy remains ‘live’ for the 10-15 year term of the current grounds maintenance provision. It will be developed through a collaborative and consensual relationship with our external partners, Quadron Services and pertinent internal departments, primarily Planning and Development, Leisure and Lifelong Learning Services, Neighbourhood Services and Environment and Sustainability.

15. An Allotment Strategy and Tree Strategy are being developed in parallel with the Green Spaces Strategy. These two strategies will be integrated into the GSS, but will be stand alone policies in their own right. Each strategy will cover existing policy commitments in each distinct area. For example it will explore the possibility of using currently vacant allotment sites to set up a market garden for people with mental health problems.

INTEGRATION OF THE TOP LINE FUNCTIONS WITH THE STRATEGIC PRINCIPLES 16. Where appropriate the top line functions (TF) are described alongside the most

clearly related strategic principle (SP). However, it is not the intention to follow slavishly all the functional headings to make the strategic principles fit, rather, allow evolution of each through discussion and consultation so that the needs of the

F4

Kingston community are met. Above all, the GSS should seek to ensure effective, wise and responsible resource use whilst allowing green spaces to evolve in harmony with the environment. And that the strategy should cover all of the issues that surround the myriad of green spaces and their diverse uses.

17. There follows the description of the functions as laid down by the Countryside Agency with the relevant RBK strategic principles as agreed by Executive in January 2005.

i. A bridge to the country (TF1) – an urban network of parks, woodland and other green spaces where linked footpaths, bridleways and cycle paths form continuous green corridors. To make green spaces feel welcoming and accessible (SP3)- with clear signs and information (in community languages where appropriate) and better paths and toilets.

ii. A gateway to the town – the quality of open spaces management along minor and major transport routes are an indicator and advertisement of the quality of a town or city (TF2). To make sure people feel safe (SP4) – through a visible presence in the parks, landscape planning, additional security measures such as CCTV and help points and the removal of railings where appropriate.

iii. A health centre (TF3) – accessible and attractive green spaces close to where people live and work provide valuable respite from the stresses of urban living. To contribute to the health and well-being of residents (SP6) – through more attractive green space and better leisure and sport provision and integrated sports development.

iv. A classroom (TF4) – green space provides hands-on learning opportunities and occasion for social development and interaction. To provide young people with places to ‘hangout’ and play sport. To enhance play facilities (SP5) – taking an integrated approach to facilities for children with disabilities with an exemplar park in each neighbourhood and to support this play activity with a visible adult at key times.

v. A recycling and renewable energy centre (TF5). Green spaces play an important part in the sustainable management of waste, water and pollution generated in urban areas. To secure sustainable development/sustainability (SP8) – both in the management of our parks and open spaces and for the Borough and its community through the contribution parks and open spaces can make.

vi. A productive landscape (TR6) – this heading can be interpreted in to two strategic principles – the development of an Allotment Strategy. To use our resources efficiently, effectively and flexibly (SP2) and To support the local economy (SP9) through use of local contractors in same areas and by developing apprenticeship/training scheme with main contractor.

vii. A cultural legacy(TR7) – in line with the principles, aims and objectives of the emerging Cultural Strategy 2007-2012.

viii. A place for sustainable living (TR8)- provides residents with well-planned environmental infrastructure, green spaces and links to surrounding areas. To plan and manage our green spaces to maximise community benefit (SP1)

ix. An engine for regeneration (TR9)- strategies for local regeneration help communities develop their own confidence, skills and prospects. Communities that are fully involved bring about environmental improvements

F5

that make their neighbourhoods more liveable. To involve the community (SP10)- through effective communication, stronger links with Neighbourhood committees, further self-management of allotments and encouraging ‘Friends of’ groups.

x. A nature reserve (TR10)- thriving wildlife is an integral part, and indicator, of a sustainable landscape. To protect the natural environment (SP7) – by enhancing and conserving biodiversity, and avoiding harm through sensitive management practices.

DEVELOPMENT OF THE STRATEGY, TIMESCALE AND CONSULTATION 18. The production of the Green Space Strategy will be project managed by the

Environmental Co-ordination Unit Manager. A steering group of RBK and Quadron officers have met to discuss the content of this report. Further meetings will establish a long term vision, agreed aims, objectives and action plans and specific section authors. Each section author will in turn focus on a key function and action plan.

19. The role of the Neighbourhood Committees in the development of this Strategy is crucial. The decision as to how to prioritise services and approaches within each Neighbourhood must be a choice of that Neighbourhood’s Committee and must take account of that Neighbourhood’s local needs and plans for the future. To that end it is intended to have two periods of discussion and consultation with Neighbourhoods. The first will be informal (workshops / working group meetings to which all Members will be invited) and will be designed to identify issues and proposals. The second will be more formal (through the Committee meeting process) and will seek the Neighbourhood Committee’s endorsement of the proposals contained within the draft Strategy.

20. The evidence gathering, plan preparation, neighbourhood and stakeholder’s consultation will be undertaken using a range of methods. For example open forum workshops with Members and stakeholders, face to face interviews, on-line questionnaires and regular meetings with the steering group. The aim of this area of work is to ensure that the strategy responds to current local needs and issues within a longer-term vision.

21. A draft Green Spaces Strategy will be produced for formal public consultation in September 2007 with action plans and evaluation and monitoring methods that deliver the functions and strategic principles using a common template. This draft will be circulated to stakeholder organisations and the general public including representative bodies for comment.

22. Since the IRPG survey (2004) there have been further surveys to seek resident’s views on parks and open spaces. These have been completed in response to the Open Space Study (2005), to inform the Environmental Awareness Strategy (2006), and the 2005 Kingston Residents Survey (MORI). The trend of these and future demographic surveys will help steer and refine the strategy over its lifetime.

23. The proposed timetable for the development of the Green Spaces Strategy is as

follows:

F6

Green Spaces Strategy Development Timetable March 2007 Process agreed by Executive

April to August

Plan preparation, Evidence gathering, detailed discussion with Neighbourhoods and stakeholders

September and October

Public consultation

November Approval of the 1st Draft GSS by Executive

November Consideration of the 1st Draft GSS by Scrutiny

November Formal Consultation with Neighbourhood Committee’s

December and January 2008

Final preparation of the GSS

February 2008

Adoption of the Final GSS by Executive

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS 24. Green space is a vital part of the public realm and its management is a barometer

of the community (ODPM 2002). The Green Spaces Strategy will set out a long-term vision for using Kingston’s green spaces based on clear assessment of the local community’s current and future needs and opportunities within the strategic policy framework.

25. Well managed and designed green spaces whatever their size or location should provide safe and attractive havens for people and wildlife. The management of green spaces is an important contributing factor to the interests of everyone whether they visit them or not. Green spaces contribute to our environmental infrastructure and therefore should be considered as a key indicator in the natural environmental health of the area.

26. A Green Space Strategy encompasses cross-cutting partnerships and participation that contributes to the wider objectives of the council, supports national and regional policy objectives, establishes action plans that set out management and maintenance principles and identifies priorities to ensure that capital and revenue funds are allocated to meet performance standards.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS 27. The preparation and production of the Green Spaces Strategy can be undertaken

within existing budgets. 28. It is intended that the Draft Strategy will set out an investment programme for the

improvement of the parks. Due consideration will need to be given about the affordability of that investment programme during the consultation on, and completion of, the Strategy. Consideration of third party funding and opportunities for obtaining that will also be important.

F7

Joint Report Authors: Rob Dickson, Head of Environment & Sustainability, 020 8547 4705 and Marie-Claire Edwards, Environmental Co-ordination Unit Manger, 020 8547 5372 Background papers : held by Marie-Claire Edwards, 020 8547 5372 e-mail: [email protected] Liberal Democrat Manifesto 2006 Parks and Grounds Improvement Review and Procurement of Service Appendix G - Executive Report (January 2005) The countryside in and around towns – a vision for connecting town and country in the pursuit of sustainable development – The Countryside Agency (January 2005) Rural Strategy DEFRA (July 2004) Kingston Open Space Assessment – Atkins (May 2006) Green Space Strategies – a good practice guide CABEspace (2003) Living places: Cleaner, Safer, Greener – ODPM (October 2002) Kingston Residents Survey 2005 (MORI). The Greater London Authority London Plan (Feb 2004) (Policy 3D.11.)

APPENDIX G Executive, 20 March 2007

REVIEW OF THE ROLES AND FUNCTIONS OF NEIGHBOURHOOD COMMITTEES Report by the Head of Democratic Services and Partnership Leader of the Council

Purpose To put forward for consideration the proposals developed by the Constitutional Review Working Group following a review of the roles and functions of Neighbourhood Committees. Action proposed by the Leader of the Council: The Executive is requested to consider the proposals of the Review Group as set out in Annex 2 and summarised in paragraphs 6-12 of this report and agree to recommend to Council the necessary changes to the Constitution in relation to Recommendation 20. Reason for action proposed To implement changes to develop the roles and functions of Neighbourhood Committees.

BACKGROUND 1 It will be recalled that during 2005 a Constitutional Review was undertaken with

assistance from Professor Steve Leach, from De Montfort University. In considering his original report on 7 February 2006, the Executive agreed that further work should be commissioned from him on developing the role of our Neighbourhood Committees.

2 This further work was carried out during the summer of 2006 leading to the

production of a second report from Professor Leach. On 9 October 2006 this second report was considered by the Constitutional Review Working Group that had previously been established by the Executive. At that meeting it was agreed that the report should be discussed at a Member Workshop (which subsequently took place on 4 December 2006) and then formally considered by each Neighbourhood Committee, with views being reported back. The outcome of this process was reported to the Working Group on 5 March 2007.

3 A summary of the views expressed at the Councillors’ workshop, together with the

views and comments of the Neighbourhood Committees, as submitted to the Working Group, are set out in Annex 1.

4 Copies of Professor Leach’s full report have already been circulated to all Members,

but further copies are available from Democratic Support on request. PROPOSALS OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL REVIEW WORKING GROUP 5 At its meeting on 5 March the Working Group gave further consideration to the

report from Professor Leach and, in particular, the recommendations. For ease of reference an updated version of what was Annex 2 to the Review Group’s Agenda

G2

is attached as Annex 2 to this report. This sets out the recommendations from Professor Leach’s report and incorporates the views of the Working Group on each. In summary, the position is set out below.

The Decision Making role of Neighbourhood Committees (recs 1-5) 6 The Group agreed that the proposals for the possible restructuring of

Neighbourhood meetings and for undertaking an internal review of the content of Neighbourhood Committee agendas were both matters for individual Neighbourhood Committees to consider themselves. It was, however, noted that there were potential resource implications in establishing additional Neighbourhood Committee meetings.

7 So far as Recommendation 3 is concerned the Group agreed that it would be useful

to have a guidelines document drawn up along the lines suggested by Professor Leach though on the basis that this did only represent guidelines and was not in anyway regarded as being a prescriptive Code of Practice. Recommendations 4 and 5 relating to the role of Chairs & Co-Chairs of Neighbourhood Committees and the proposal that a seminar should be arranged for all Members to help them understand more fully the powers that already exist were both felt to be matters that could be addressed through the current Member Training & Development Needs Assessment.

Involvement of Neighbourhood Committees in Policy Development & Review (recs 6-9) 8 The proposal in Recommendation 6 that policy documents submitted to

Neighbourhood Committees should be accompanied by a two-to-three page commentary drawing out the implications of the Policy for the particular Neighbourhood concerned was supported. It was felt, however, that the commentary should be prepared by the relevant officer in the Directorate concerned rather than the Neighbourhood Services Manager, but on the basis that the Neighbourhood Services Manager would have some input in terms of the potential impact on the Neighbourhood. It was also felt that, where appropriate, alternative forms of presentation (e.g. PowerPoint) should be considered for use at Neighbourhood meetings.

9 The other recommendations in this section were generally supported in that, by and

large, they reflected what already happened in any event. Community Leadership and Neighbourhood Committees (recs 10-16) 10 The Group felt that they needed more time, with a fuller report, to consider the

proposals set out by Professor Leach for establishing (or strengthening) local partnerships and for developing local community strategies. It was recognised that there was already a fair degree of Community engagement work being undertaken within Neighbourhoods and, of course, the Community Action Partnership in Norbiton was a prime example. The proposals in this section of the report needed to be considered also in the context of the Changing Kingston – Choosing Our Future Medium Term Plan given, in particular, that there were no additional resources within the 2007/08 Budget to carry this forward.

G3

Support for Enhanced Neighbourhood Working (recs 17-20) 11 Similarly the Group agreed to give further consideration to the proposals regarding

the status and level of remuneration of Neighbourhood Services Managers and the nomination of Link Officers in relevant service areas. There were different views about the desirability and practicality of change. It was felt that more clarity was needed in respect of their respective roles. In any event our way forward had to be affordable and this would need to be considered in the context of the new `place shaping’ role for local authorities envisaged in the Local Government White Paper and, of course, the ongoing debate on Changing Kingston – Choosing Our Future.

12 The proposal set out in Recommendation 19 that the Liaison Panel of Executive

Members and Neighbourhood Chairs & Co-Chairs should now be established and meet 2 to 3 times a year was agreed. So far as Recommendation 20 was concerned, the approach set out for dealing with what were judged to be strategic issues under consideration by the Kingston Town Neighbourhood Committee was agreed though it was recognised that, in practice, there were likely to be relatively few incidences when the arrangement needed to be put into practice.

RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS 13 As was set out in the report to the Working Group, no provision has been made in

the 2007-08 Budget for the cost of implementing the second phase of the Constitutional Review. As is clear from the report there could be resource implications in a number of areas including, for example, the cost of additional meetings of Neighbourhood Committees; any proposed enhancement of the role of Neighbourhood Services Managers; the development of the community leadership role, etc. Any decisions about future resourcing will have to be considered within the context of Changing Kingston – Choosing our Future. Choosing to do something now can be achieved by reallocating the resources which will be available to the Council. As will be known, the Executive’s earlier decision in October 2006 to allocate a new specific resource to the Scrutiny Panel had to be considered in the proposals approved by Council on 28 February against the resources available for 2007/8, resulting in a reduction in the total resource available for Democratic Support, which will have some impact on the capacity to support Scrutiny.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS 14 Nothing specific arising from this report. Background Papers Held by Andrew Bessant (author of report) on 020 8547 4628 Email: [email protected]

1. Review of the Roles and Functions of Neighbourhood Committees. – Report by Professor Steve Leach – De Monfort University September 2006.

2. Agenda for 5 March meeting of the Constitutional Review Working Group

G4

ANNEX 1

SUMMARY OF VIEWS COUNCILLORS WORKSHOP 1. A note summarising the various contributions from those present was submitted to the

Working Group. The main issues arising in the discussion can be summarised as follows:

• A concern on the part of some members that the proposals represented an increase in

bureaucracy and/or more meetings. • The need for Neighbourhood Committees to better understand the powers they

already had and the importance of their having financial responsibility for services if they were responsible in some way for their delivery.

• The need for a degree of structural change if some of the proposals were to be implemented.

• Support for the enhancement of the role of Neighbourhood Services Managers to increase their effectiveness.

• Support for the proposal for summaries of policy matters and more involvement in policy development.

• There were already a number of examples of Neighbourhood level Community Leadership/Engagement Initiatives.

• The need to make better use of the mechanisms that already existed to stimulate and generate debates and improve decision making.

• The need for more involvement from other directorates (i.e. other than Environmental Services) in the work of Neighbourhoods

VIEWS OF THE NEIGHBOURHOOD COMMITTEES

Kingston Town (7 February 2007)

2. The Committee agreed the following comments for submission to the Executive: The Decision-Making Role of Neighbourhood Committees (NC) • Same number of meetings - Planning, Highways & Transportation sub committee to

alternate with General including Environment sub committee • An internal review of the content of NC agendas should be undertaken - Neighbourhood

Services Managers to be part of review. • Neighbourhood Services Managers to be involved in drawing up guidelines on the

conduct of NC business meetings. • Neighbourhood Services staff will need to be focussed on Community Engagement. Involvement of Neighbourhood Committees in Policy Development and Review • Policy Document: Support recommendations 6-9 with the addition of clarifying what

community engagement has taken place and will take place and and/or how the Policy is shared with the community.

Community Leadership and Neighbourhood Committees • Support recommendations 10 – 16. The Community Action Partnership (CAP) report will

be considered by the Neighbourhood in March.

G5

Support for enhanced Neighbourhood working • Status of Neighbourhood Service Managers is important. They must be able to link with

other Council services and report to Neighbourhood Members. • Heavy support for link Officers needed. • Annual Report to Chairs Forum or Neighbourhood Committee. • Attendance of Officers at Business Meetings. • Neighbourhood Services Managers to be involved in the liaison panel (executive

members, Chairs and Co-Chairs of Neighbourhoods) which should be established and meet 2-3 times per year.

Summary • Fully support recommendations. • Maximise Neighbourhood Services Manager’s involvement. • Neighbourhood Services staff will also need to be focussed on

Community Engagement. • Encourage involvement by all areas of Council and external

partners. • Would like to see Neighbourhood Services move to a more

central location (Chief Executive) NOW rather than later.

Surbiton (8 February 2007)

3. The Committee originally decided that a special meeting should be held to consider the report. In the event, it wasn’t possible to arrange that within the timescale and it was agreed that views would be submitted on behalf of the two Party Groups represented on the Committee. Set out below are views received on behalf of the Liberal Democrat Members of the Committee. Views from the Conservative Members were received later and we attended separately.

Decision-Making Role of Neighbourhood Committees Members are generally supportive of the recommendations made to enable a more efficient, consistent approach to neighbourhood business and make the following comments:

- Options for future meetings: An amended form of Option B is preferred on the basis of 8 ordinary meetings and 2 for policy / development & emergency items

- There are concerns that the mechanism for streamlining the decision-making process and reducing the repetition of the same item appearing at committee is unrealistic.

- There should be more use of Chair’s action and working groups to oversee the public consultation process

- Decisions on some items such as street naming and relatively minor items could be delegated to Ward Councillors/Co-Chairs.

- Site inspections before the meeting should only be used if necessary. - The alert system for highlighting controversial issues is not felt to be necessary. - The Neighbourhood manager/report author/democratic support officer should plan a

consistent approach to each item and consult with Chair or Co-Chairs. - It is not felt that more use of deferring decisions, in particular where this relates to

matters of assessing public opinion, would be beneficial. - The required action and time frame should be understood and facilitated by discussion

at follow up meetings - The Neighbourhood Committee should be provided with information on the

implementation of items previously agreed.

G6

Involvement of Neighbourhood Committees in Policy Development and Review Members support the recommendations made to improve the neighbourhoods’ opportunity for influencing the development of policy. In particular the need to encourage brief, well written and to the point reports and the opportunity to influence major developments e.g. extended schools as well as leisure activities and parks etc. was highlighted. Community Leadership and Neighbourhood Committees In principle, Members support the process that Prof Leach has set out for two pilot schemes in each neighbourhood, one in an area with strong existing local groups and identity and one in an area without. The aim being, over time, to create a ‘bottom-up’, partnership approach with the neighbourhoods playing a lead role in developing community strategies covering all areas of the neighbourhood. The Alpha Road Estate is suggested as an area for the local partnership pilot in the Surbiton Neighbourhood. However, more detail is required on the operation of the local partnership arrangements as at this stage the proposals are too vague. Central Surbiton is suggested as a possible area for the second pilot, focusing on the development of a local community strategy. This pilot could make use of links with the existing local residents’ association. Support for enhanced neighbourhood working The recommendations for enhanced neighbourhood working are generally supported and the following issues highlighted:

- The Neighbourhood Services Managers’ involvement be maximised - The work of Neighbourhood Services be focussed on community engagement - The status of Neighbourhood Services be raised and all areas of the Council and

external partners be strongly encouraged to support the Neighbourhoods - There is a desire for Neighbourhood Services to move to a more central location

(Chief Executive), together with relevant support staff NOW rather than later. - Directors and Heads of Service meet Neighbourhood Services Managers 2/3 times a

year. 4. In addition, views of an individual Surbiton resident were submitted at the meeting.

South of the Borough (14 February 2007)

5. The Committee confirmed that its Members were committed to the Neighbourhood

system and supportive of the proposals made by Professor Leach. Members also made further comments at the meeting under the following themes:

The Decision-Making Role of Neighbourhood Committees • Benefits could be achieved for both the conduct of business and residents’ understanding

of the meetings if different aspects of the Neighbourhood’s work was carried out in separate meetings.

• Members expressed the view that the choice of meeting arrangements should be left to the individual Neighbourhoods to decide based on which best suited the needs of their area. Whilst in South of the Borough a combined Highways and Planning Sub-Committee

G7

alternating with general purpose meetings might be the best solution, in other neighbourhoods the large amount of planning applications could make this arrangement difficult. Different patterns of meetings could be tried to see which worked best in practice.

• It was agreed that the heavy focus on highways matters tended to squeeze out some of the broader issues that the Neighbourhood was developing work on.

Community Leadership and Neighbourhood Committees • The suggestion of strengthening the existing Community Action Partnership in Norbiton

with a view to establishing a local partnership needs further clarification. • More widespread and systematic use of community forums, street-level meetings with

residents and working groups would be supported as a way of engaging with residents to tackle issues.

Support for enhanced Neighbourhood working • The strengthening and development of the position of the Neighbourhood Services

Manager is fully supported. The Neighbourhood Services Manager is the “right hand man” of neighbourhood work and vital to the further development of the neighbourhood system.

• To better facilitate their increased role with other areas, including education and housing, Neighbourhood Services should be relocated to a central position under the Council’s structure. The Chief Executive’s Directorate is suggested as a suitable location.

Maldens & Coombe (14 February 2007)

6. The Committee were not able to give detailed consideration to the report at their

meeting and agreed to authorise the Head of Democratic Services & Partnership, in consultation with the Co-chair (Councillor David Edwards) to submit individual comments received from members of the Committee. These were attached separately.

HOUSING CONSULTATIVE COMMITTEE 7. At its meeting on 20 February the Housing Consultative Committee (meeting jointly

with the Leaseholders’ Forum) considered a report from the Head of Housing on proposals for enhancing community involvement in the work of the Housing Service. The report made reference to Professor Leach’s work and the Consultative Committee expressed its concern that it had not had an opportunity to consider those proposals. It decided, therefore, to set up a Working Group to consider further the Head of Housing’s report and that from Professor Leach and hoped to be able to submit comments to the Working Group.

G8

Professor Steve Leach Report – Summary SURBITON NEIGHBOURHOOD CONSERVATIVE CLLRS Thursday 1st March (Guildhall) 1. Introduction The view expressed by leading members and officers was that the current Neighbourhood Committee system had ‘plateaued’ in recent years and needs to be expanded in ways which reflect development. Although the Council has a national reputation for its neighbourhood working, this is not reflected in the organisational structures. 2. The Decision Making Role of Neighbourhood Committees Concerns over operation of NCs:

- The domination of local transport, highways and environmental issues are ‘crowding out’ other issues.

- This is what NCs are best at anyway, apart from local planning, and what most interests the public who turn up.

- There needs to be a clear division between those decisions made by members, and those

delegated to officers.

- All decisions appropriate to the NC should be open to public member scrutiny in the interest of transparency. Members should not be able to offload their responsibilities onto officers.

- Handling of ‘public pressure’ at meetings – A ‘red alert’ system is suggested for potentially

contentious decisions.

- Don’t really understand what this would be or how it could work in practice. - Level of directorate involvement (excl Environment) – extend decision making role and

influence into areas where NCs already have powers (libraries, policy formulation, etc)

- Many ‘powers’ possessed by NCs at present are more theoretical than practical and, unless supplemented by independent budgetary powers they are likely to remain so. We should acknowledge this and behave accordingly.

3. The Influence of Neighbourhood Committees on Policy

- Crowding out and the way draft policies are presented are at fault for the lack of involvement

in policy development. We have just established the Overview Commission to help out with policy development centrally. There’s no real need to alter the NCs activities to allow for more of the same. Consultations are quite successfully conducted within the existing framework. It is a matter of chairmanship to see to it that adequate time is allocated to various items within the Agenda.

- A 2-3 page interpretive analysis of the policy directed at the NC concerned could be provided by Neighbourhood managers (if relieved of some of their operational duties).

G9

- And who takes over the operational duties thus relieved?Is this a recipe for more staff recruitment at a time of restraint?

- NC agendas could be expanded to incorporate scrutiny of the impact of certain Neighbourhood

related policy.

- See policy development above. Additionally experience is that it is highly unlikely that cllrs from the same party as the Executive will embarrass it in public by submitting its policies to anything that smacks of criticism – such is the political culture of the controlling party.

- Scrutiny could operate by ‘calling to account’ an executive member/officer regarding the local

impact of policy, or request the Overview Commission set in motion an in-depth study.

- Can’t they do that now? If they don’t it merely bears out the point about political culture above.

4. The Role of Neighbourhood Committees in Community Leadership Strengthen the role of the NC in their profile in the work of the Council:

- A discussion forum including issues beyond those in the jurisdiction of the Council - Discussion forum = talking shop and encourages windbaggery and grandstanding on issues

over which the NC has no control. There will also be cost implications as it will give rise to either more meetings or lengthier ones or to more delegation of decision making outside the NC.

- - Ensure joined up N’hood Services and other agency service - Help each NC develop its N’hood Community Plan with local people, agencies and

organisations. - Having a plan is mere window dressing unless there are powers in the form of a budget

controlled by the NC and no-one else, to implement it. If we do go down that route we are moving perilously towards the notorious Tower Hamlets experiment of 20 years or so ago and setting up four mini-councils in the smallest Borough in London.

The Administration wants to set up working groups of local residents who will identify problems and issues within their area, and propose practical solutions. What are elected councillors for? Isn’t ‘government by focus group’ becoming rather discredited after the last 10 years? Having said that we value the input of residents associations and ad hoc issue groups which residents form themselves. The Community Action Partnership on the Cambridge Road Estate will become a pilot scheme for the proposal to set up local partnerships in community strategy which focus on four small areas within neighbourhoods where there is greatest potential for success (deprived and problematic areas) and a gradual extension in other areas to draw in the Borough. The CRE is a Housing concern. A Management Forum was established there by the Housing Committee in 1999. Similar ones followed in Alpha Road and School Lane and others were adumbrated. They were successful in so far as they had actual power to make things happen – and this meant a budget for estate improvements. Said budget was withdrawn to help fund prudential borrowing re the Decent Homes Standard. This enables the Administration to reach its goal of: ‘Establishing working groups of local residents to identify problems and issues’ and the government’s emergent ‘neighbourhood devolution agenda’.

G10

We welcome the creation of RAs where residents of an area see a need for them and fostering their participation in issues which intimately concern them and the impact of Council policy. Hence our support for the continuance of the Housing Consultative Committee, which RAs on Council estates value. But we doubt if it is the Council’s job to spend scarce resources establishing local focus groups, which will in any event be largely self-selecting in membership and which might serve to obscure rather than clarify the locus of responsibility for decision making. This may well be why the current Executive in RBK, like the present government, finds the idea so attractive. It is important that the Neighbourhood committees play a lead role in all these developments. This will require a good deal of detailed consideration and planning to get it up and running, and then space with in NC agendas to ensure its success. This space can be established by:

- Creating a sub-committee to deal with detailed highways, transport and environmental work. - This is what the whole NC does best anyway. See above. Also means yet more meetings, yet

more wasteful use of officer time, yet more expenditure devoted to matters other than actual services to actual residents.

- Differentiate NC meetings so some are business meetings and others concentrate on policy partnership and wider public involvement issues (this has been built into the programme of NC meetings for 2006/07).

See above. 5. Officer Support for Neighbourhood Working

- Structural reorganisation would not be a good use of time and resources.

- Neighbourhood managers need to be freed up to lead the next phase in development of the neighbourhood function. Operational responsibilities should be devolved to assistant managers. Their status and remuneration levels should be upgraded.

- Means more staff being paid more. Given RBK’s budgetary constraints and the pressure on

services to some of the most vulnerable in our society to reallocate resources in this way would be inexcusable.

- A series of link officers should be designated within each of the service areas which NCs have

jurisdiction.

- Time allocation should be increased 10 per cent for link officers in co-ordination with neighbourhood management work.

- More of the same. Hardly consistent with the need to save £22m in four years outlined by the

Leader at Budget Council. 6. Other Issues The Special Case of Kingston Town Centre:

- Kingston Town NC decisions sometimes affect all RBK residents and should be decided by a wider range of Councillors. An elected/advisory balance has to be struck.

- Agreed! - - If a decision is deemed to have ‘significant impact beyond the neighbourhood’s boundaries’ it

should be categorised as ‘strategic’ and referred to the Executive.

G11

- Is this a way of effectively undermining NCs’ powers on highway schemes. We note the irritation in some quarters caused by the policies adopted by M&C Neighbourhood and wonder who would categorise what policies as ‘strategic’.

The Democratic Costs of Neighbourhood Working

- Implementation would certainly involve increased costs. Link officers with directorates other than Environmental Services.

- There may be a cost associated with the requirements placed on Democratic Services. - The costs of administration should be regarded as ‘legitimate costs of democracy’, even though

there is not much scope for manoeuvre resulting from RBK’s financial settlement over the next 2-3 years.

Hardly consistent with the need to save £22m in four years outlined by the Leader at Budget Council. We find that most of the ‘problems’ are imaginary rather than real and that the ‘solutions’ proposed are at best potentially wasteful and irrelevant to providing service effectively to residents. At worst they tend towards the Tower Hamlets scenario of 4 mini-boroughs each with a growing number of meetings, consultation groups, sub-committees and staff which provide not one single new service to residents – in fact when such services are being curtailed. 7. Recommendations Restructure: - Either establish a Highways, Transport & Local Environment sub-Committee; Disagree

- Or monthly NCs with alternative business meetings and policy and development meetings. Disagree

- Internal review considering: - Reducing the number of occasions on which a particular parking scheme is considered at NC Disagree - Making more use of chair’s action in consultation oversight and reporting back Disagree on balance - Exploring scope for extending delegation to officers on non political issues Disagree, who decides what is non-political? Must be realistic about the political culture of RBK. - Arranging site inspections prior to NC meeting Agreed! A guidelines document should be drawn up to include: - A ‘red alert process’ - Full discussion prior to NC meeting to ensure consistency of approach - Capacity to defer decisions - ‘Follow up’ meetings to ensure action is facilitated Doubtful as to viability and therefore value. A job description should be developed for Chairs of NCs with an in-house training programme to familiarise them with guidelines. Training in chairing skills would be beneficial to many who undertake to chair meetings. But the post of NC chair is an annual appointment within the gift of the party group that controls the

G12

neighbourhood. They have their own concerns in making such appointments and skill in chairing isn’t always uppermost in their minds when making them. Set up seminars to explore opportunities of better facilitating decision-making powers. More talking shops not concerned with residents’ concerns.

G13

SKEL

ETO

N S

UM

MA

RY

OF

REC

OM

MEN

DA

TIO

NS

OF

REV

IEW

OF

RO

LES

AN

D F

UN

CTI

ON

S O

F N

EIG

HB

OU

RH

OO

D C

OM

MIT

TEES

Th

is s

kele

ton

sum

mar

y is

for e

ase

of q

uick

refe

renc

e on

ly a

nd s

houl

d be

con

side

red

with

refe

renc

e to

the

wor

ding

in P

rofe

ssor

Lea

ch’s

re

port

dat

ed S

epte

mbe

r 200

6 ite

m

Pro

fess

or L

each

reco

mm

enda

tion

N’h

ood

Ctte

e vi

ew

A.

Dec

isio

n-M

akin

g R

ole

1.

mee

tings

pro

gram

me

to b

e re

stru

ctur

ed

EITH

ER a

) Sub

-Ctte

e to

be

esta

blis

hed

for H

ighw

ays

/ Tra

nspo

rt /

Loca

l Env

ironm

ent

(eg

7 pe

r yea

r in

addi

tion

to P

lann

ing

Sub)

O

R

b) m

onth

ly N

’hoo

d C

ttee

mtg

s, a

ltern

atin

g bu

sine

ss w

ith p

olic

y / d

evel

opm

ent

Leav

e as

at p

rese

nt

with

ext

ra a

d ho

c if

and

whe

n re

quire

d

2.

agen

das

inte

rnal

revi

ew o

f the

con

tent

e.g

. •

redu

ce n

o of

tim

es a

sin

gle

issu

e is

con

side

red

e.g.

to d

evel

op a

par

king

sch

eme

•

mor

e us

e of

‘Cha

ir’s

actio

n’ &

WG

s to

ove

rsee

con

sulta

tion

proc

ess

• de

lega

ting

som

e ite

ms

to o

ffice

rs e

.g. s

tree

t nam

ing

• si

te in

spec

tions

bef

ore

ctte

e m

tgs

Agr

ee?

Not

hing

new

in th

is –

w

e ca

n do

this

und

er

pres

ent

arra

ngem

ents

3.

m

eetin

g co

nduc

t gu

idel

ines

to in

clud

e •

red

aler

t sys

tem

for p

ublic

pre

ssur

e ite

ms

• N

’hoo

d m

gr /

repo

rt a

utho

r / d

emoc

ratic

sup

port

offi

cer t

o pl

an c

onsi

sten

t app

roac

h to

ea

ch it

em

• m

ore

use

of d

efer

ring

to o

btai

n a

mor

e ba

lanc

ed re

pres

enta

tion

of lo

cal o

pini

on if

ne

eded

•

ensu

re re

quire

d ac

tion

is u

nder

stoo

d / f

acili

tate

d by

dis

c. a

t fol

low

-up

mee

tings

Red

ale

rt –

do

not

see

poin

t. O

ther

sug

gest

ions

to

o ex

pens

ive.

D

irect

orat

e sh

ould

pr

epar

e br

iefin

g pa

pers

–so

meo

ne

nom

inat

ed a

nd

iden

tifia

ble

4.

(Co)

Cha

ir’s

JD

& tr

aini

ng p

rogr

amm

e

• pa

rtic

ular

ly to

equ

ip to

han

dle

pres

sure

of p

ublic

opi

nion

at c

omm

ittee

(N

ote:

this

issu

e is

like

ly to

be

addr

esse

d by

the

ongo

ing

wor

k of

the

Mem

ber

Dev

elop

men

t Ste

erin

g G

roup

.)

OK

som

e m

ay n

eed

it –

but n

ot in

our

NH

ei

ther

whe

n pr

evio

usly

cha

ired

by L

ibD

ems

or

Con

serv

ativ

es

G14

5.

exis

ting

pow

ers

• se

min

ars

to h

ighl

ight

Ctte

es’ e

xist

ing

pow

ers

•

espe

cial

ly in

rela

tion

to h

ousi

ng, l

eisu

re a

nd re

crea

tion,

and

libr

arie

s is

sues

Agr

ee –

cer

tain

ly

hous

ing

– w

e ap

pare

ntly

hav

e no

bu

dget

– s

o no

po

wer

.

B.

Invo

lvem

ent i

n Po

licy

Dev

elop

men

t and

Rev

iew

6.

‘impl

icat

ions

’ co

mm

enta

ries

• to

acc

ompa

ny P

olic

y do

cum

ents

to s

how

spe

cific

impl

icat

ions

of t

he p

olic

y to

the

N’h

ood

• ap

prox

2-3

pag

es i.

e. b

rief /

sum

mar

isin

g

• by

N’h

ood

Mgr

in c

oope

ratio

n w

ith D

ept l

ink

offic

er

No

obje

ctio

n to

suc

h a

pape

r with

inpu

t fr

om N

H M

anag

er

but s

houl

d be

pr

epar

ed b

y D

irect

orat

e re

spon

sibl

e to

en

sure

con

tinui

ty

acro

ss B

orou

gh

7.

chan

ce to

Influ

ence

m

ajor

dev

elop

men

ts

• e.

g. e

xten

ded

scho

ols

• bu

ild in

tim

ely

cons

ider

atio

n to

allo

w d

etai

led

cons

ider

atio

n at

N’h

ood

leve

l

As

long

as

it is

re

alis

ed th

is w

ill

prol

ong

the

proc

ess

8.

calli

ng to

acc

ount

•

e.g.

of e

xecu

tive

mem

bers

and

sen

ior o

ffice

rs in

rela

tion

to d

ecis

ions

affe

ctin

g th

e N

eigh

bour

hood

•

e.g.

pro

blem

s w

ith s

ervi

ce d

eliv

ery

or im

plem

enta

tion

of p

olic

y (N

ote:

Nei

ghbo

urho

od C

omm

ittee

s ca

n al

read

y ca

ll-in

Exe

cutiv

e de

cisi

ons

that

impa

ct o

n th

e N

eigh

bour

hood

.)

This

is a

lread

y th

e si

tuat

ion

as I

unde

rsta

nd it

.

9.

prop

osin

g re

view

s •

to O

verv

iew

Com

mis

sion

for i

n-de

pth

cons

ider

atio

n N

eeds

to b

e pr

oper

st

ruct

ure

to th

is.

At

pres

ent m

embe

rs

are

bein

g as

ked

“any

body

got

any

id

eas

on th

is?”

Tha

t is

far t

oo c

asua

l and

un

prof

essi

onal

,

G15

C.

Com

mun

ity L

eade

rshi

p ro

le

10.

‘loca

l par

tner

ship

s’

(pilo

t 1)

- con

cept

• pi

lot s

chem

e ba

sis

•

one

area

in e

ach

N’h

ood

e.g.

Nor

bito

n fo

r KT

• w

ith p

artic

ular

pro

blem

s e.

g. re

lativ

e de

priv

atio

n

• fin

d jo

ined

up

solu

tions

with

par

tner

s

Agr

ee.

Such

as

the

Mal

den’

s an

d C

oom

be B

usin

ess

brea

kfas

t m

eetin

g.

11.

‘loca

l par

tner

ship

s’

- op

erat

ion

• co

mpo

sed

of th

e re

leva

nt lo

cal a

genc

ies

( will

var

y ac

cord

ing

to a

rea)

•

enco

urag

ing

publ

ic e

ngag

emen

t •

all s

ocia

l gro

ups

• ai

m to

dev

elop

a c

omm

unity

str

ateg

y fo

r tha

t are

a

Polic

e. H

elp

the

Age

d. Y

outh

Clu

bs.

Res

iden

ts

Ass

ocia

tions

12.

‘loca

l com

mun

ity

stra

tegy

’ (p

ilot 2

)

• pi

lot s

chem

e ba

sis

for a

noth

er (o

r cou

ld b

e th

e sa

me)

are

a in

the

N’h

ood

• w

hich

has

wel

l org

anis

ed s

ocia

l org

anis

atio

n al

read

y •

esta

blis

h w

orki

ng g

roup

s of

loca

l peo

ple

to id

entif

y pr

oble

ms

& is

sues

& p

ract

ical

so

lutio

ns

• as

bas

is fo

r a lo

cal c

omm

unity

str

ateg

y fo

r tha

t are

a

As

Abo

ve

13.

impl

emen

t loc

al

com

mun

ity s

trat

egie

s

• w

hen

read

y, e

stab

lish

loca

l par

tner

ship

mac

hine

ry to

impl

emen

t str

ateg

ies

Nee

d a

pape

r on

how

th

is w

ould

be

set u

p.

14.

exte

nsio

n of

pilo

ts

• gr

adua

l ext

ensi

on to

oth

er s

uita

ble

area

s •

aim

for c

ompr

ehen

sive

cov

erag

e by

loca

l com

mun

ity s

trat

egy

and

/ or l

ocal

par

tner

ship

st

rate

gy

• bo

ttom

-up

appr

oach

but

con

sist

ent w

ith B

orou

gh s

trat

egie

s

The

foru

m c

urre

ntly

us

ed is

the

‘info

rmal

’ ne

ighb

ourh

ood

Cha

irs F

orum

.

15.

Inco

rpor

ate

into

Lo

cal A

rea

Agr

eem

ent

• de

velo

p R

BK

Loc

al A

rea

Agr

eem

ent (

as a

sec

ond

phas

e) to

inco

rpor

ate

a fo

cus

on th

e 4

area

s of

rela

tive

depr

ivat

ion

iden

tifie

d by

NC

s

16.

refle

ct th

e pa

rtic

ular

an

d di

ffere

nt

• pi

lot s

chem

es a

nd e

xten

sion

s to

refle

ct th

e pa

rtic

ular

and

diff

eren

t circ

umst

ance

s of

th

e 4

N’h

oods

G16

D.

Supp

ort f

or e

nhan

ced

neig

hbou

rhoo

d w

orki

ng

17.

N’h

ood

Man

ager

s •

enha

nced

sta

tus

and

leve

l of r

emun

erat

ion

to re

flect

add

ition

al d

evel

opm

enta

l re

spon

sibi

litie

s fo

r exp

ansi

on o

f nei

ghbo

urho

od d

imen

sion

in R

BK

ope

ratio

ns

Wou

ld m

ean

recr

uitm

ent o

f new

pe

ople

to d

o th

e jo

b en

visa

ged

– th

e ad

ditio

nal

deve

lopm

enta

l rol

e -

is p

roba

bly

a se

nior

of

ficer

leve

l ran

k re

quire

d w

hich

ca

nnot

be

affo

rded

in

the

pres

ent

situ

atio

n –a

nyw

ay I

thin

k th

is s

houl

d be

do

ne b

y on

e pe

rson

in

eac

h D

irect

orat

e w

ho w

ould

be

resp

onsi

ble

to ll

NH

C

omm

ittee

s.

18

. Li

nk o

ffice

rs

• in

eac

h se

rvic

e ar

ea w

ith w

hich

Nei

ghbo

urho

od C

ttees

dea

l to

supp

ort N

’hoo

d C

ttee

with

info

and

adv

ice

Agr

ee

19.

Liai

son

Pane

l •

for e

xecu

tive

mem

bers

to m

eet f

orm

ally

with

(Co)

Cha

irs o

f N’h

ood

Ctte

es

• m

eetin

g 2-

3 tim

es p

er y

ear

The

purp

ose

of th

is

is n

ot c

lear

20.

Kin

gsto

n To

wn

‘str

ateg

ic’

issu

es

• if

repe

rcus

sion

s of

a K

ings

ton

Tow

n C

entr

e de

cisi

on e

xten

d si

gnifi

cant

ly in

to o

ther

N

’hoo

ds

• m

onito

ring

offic

er to

adj

udic

ate

on w

hich

are

‘str

ateg

ic’

• to

be

refe

rred

to E

xecu

tive

for d

ecis

ion

• w

ith K

TNC

vie

w c

lear

ly s

how

n •

such

dec

isio

ns to

be

subj

ect t

o us

ual c

all-i

n pr

oces

s

Prim

arily

KTN

yes

, but

ot

hers

als

o.

G17

ANNEX 2

CONSTITUTIONAL REVIEW

IMPLEMENTATION OF RECOMMENDATIONS FROM PROFESSOR STEVE LEACH’S REPORT

PROPOSALS OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL REVIEW WORKING GROUP

Rec. No RECOMMENDATION PROPOSAL

1 The Decision-Making role of Neighbourhood Committees

1. The meetings of neighbourhood committees (NCs) should be restructured in one of the following ways.

a. Establishment of a Highways, Transport and local Environment sub-committee of each NC, meeting with the same frequency, and on the same basis as the Planning sub-committees

b. NCs to meet on a monthly basis with alternate business meetings and policy and development meetings (urgent decision items only permitted at the latter)

2. An internal review of the content of NC agendas should be undertaken to assess the extent to which business could be conducted more efficiently. Particular attention should be paid to:

a. Reducing the number of occasions on which a particular parking scheme is considered at NC meetings

b. Making more use of chair’s action (or small working groups) to provide oversight of consultation procedures, and to report back on their outcome

c. Exploring the scope for extending delegation to officers of decisions taken at NCs which have little or no political significance (e.g. street naming)

d. Arranging site inspections (where necessary) prior to their consideration at NC meeting.

For individual Neighbourhoods to determine, but note potential resource implications of additional meetings. Again for individual Neighbourhoods to address, but any formal delegation of powers to individual Members as per b. would require a change to the Constitution.

G18


3. A guidelines document should be drawn-up and disseminated regarding the conduct of NC business meetings, including the following elements:

a ‘red alert’ process for identifying

those decisions where public pressure is likely to be experienced

b Full discussion prior to the NC meeting, between the committee administrator, neighbourhood manager and professional officer concerned, to ensure consistency of approach

c. Capacity to defer decisions where evidence of the views of other local interests is required before an informed decision can be reached

d Continuation of ‘follow-up’ meetings after each NC meeting, to ensure that action required is understood and facilitated

4. A ‘job description’ to be developed for Chairs and Co-Chairs of NC’s together with an in-house training and development programme which familiarises them with the guidelines and equips them to deal with the public pressures experienced at NC meetings.

5. Seminars should be arranged for all NC members, to explore the opportunities for making more use of decision-making powers which already exist, especially in relation to housing, leisure and recreation, and libraries issues.

Guidelines document to be produced for use by Neighbourhood Committees, but not on the basis that it is a prescriptive Code of Practice. To be addressed in the Members’ Training and Development Needs audit that will shortly be underway. To be addressed in the Members’ Training and Development Needs audit that will shortly be underway.

Involvement of Neighbourhood Committees in Policy Development and Review

6. Policy documents submitted to NCs should be accompanied by a 2-3 page commentary, drawing out the implications of the policy for the particular neighbourhood concerned. This commentary should be prepared by the neighbourhood manager, with the co-operation of the ‘link officer’ in the relevant department.

Agreed, but commentary to be produced by appropriate `Directorate Officer’, with input from each Neighbourhood Services Manager in relation to the potential impact on the Neighbourhood. Alternative forms of presentation of such reports also to be considered.

G19


7. Opportunities should be provided for NCs to influence the content of major development projects such as extended schools, within their areas, on a time scale which is conducive to detailed consideration.

8. NCs should continue to have the right to ‘call to account’ executive members or senior officers in relation to decisions which have affected their area, or implementation problems with existing policies or service delivery.

9. NCs should have the opportunity to put forward proposals to the Overview Commission for in-depth reviews on topics which they feel merit this.

Agreed. Agreed - Neighbourhoods can already call-in Executive decisions which impact on their area. Agreed – it is already open to Neighbourhoods to put forward such requests.

Community Leadership and Neighbourhood Committees

10. Local partnerships should be established (or

strengthened) on a ‘pilot scheme’ basis within areas or relative deprivation – or which are in some way problematical – in each of the four neighbourhoods. These partnerships should be used to explore the opportunities for joined-up solutions to the problems of the areas. Norbiton in the Kingston Town area should be one of the pilot schemes. The other NCs should consider options within their areas.

11. These local partnerships should be

composed of the relevant local agencies (this will vary from area to area) and should operate in a way which encourages the public engagement of all social groupings within the areas. At a later stage, when the social infrastructure has become more established, the opportunity should be taken to develop a neighbourhood community strategy for the area.

The Group to give further consideration to Recommendations 10-16 with the benefit of a fuller report and in the context of the `place-shaping’ role for local authorities envisaged in the current Local Government White Paper and the Changing Kingston – Choosing our Future Medium Term Plan.

G20


12. In each of the four neighbourhoods, a local

area should be identified where there is already a relatively high level of social organisation and social capital. Within these areas, working groups of local residents should be established to identify problems and issues within their area, and propose practical solutions, expressed in the form of a local community strategy.

13. When this stage has been reached, local

partnership machinery should be established to enable these strategies to be implemented.

14. Over time, the experience of these two types

of pilot scheme should be extended to other suitable areas within each neighbourhood, so that eventually there is a comprehensive coverage of both neighbourhood partnership and neighbourhood community strategies, developed from the bottom up (but also influenced by borough-wide strategies).

15. The second phase of the RBK Local Area

Agreement should incorporate a dimension which focuses on the four areas of relative deprivation identifies as part of the process set out in Recommendation 10

16. In all these pilot schemes, and their

subsequent extensions, neighbourhood committees should play the lead role, ensuring that the schemes reflect the particular (different) circumstances of the four neighbourhoods.

Support for Enhanced Neighbourhood Working

17. The status and level of remuneration of neighbourhood managers should be enhanced in a way which reflects the additional development responsibilities associated with the proposed expansion of the neighbourhood dimension in the operations of RBK.

The Group to give further consideration to this issue and the Link Officer proposal in Recommendation 18, in the context of the Changing Kingston – Choosing our Future Medium Term Plan.

G21


18. ‘Link Officers’ (approx 10-12) should be nominated in each of the relevant service areas with which NCs deal. Their role should be to provide information and advice on matters which NCs wish to decide, discuss or scrutinise. Link officers should be given a time allocation (up to 10%) and their performance in this role should be part of their annual appraisal.

19. The liaison panel of Executive members and chairs and co-chairs of NCs should be established and meet 2-3 times per year. Its key role should be to explore issues if consistency and to ensure that the strategic/operational division of responsibilities is operating effectively.

20. Issues which manifest themselves within Kingston Town Centre, but which have repercussions which extend significantly beyond the Kingston Town Centre neighbourhood boundaries should be deemed strategic (Monitoring Officer to make the judgement, if it is disputed) and referred to the Executive for decision, although the Kingston Town NC should have ample opportunity to make its own view clear. These decisions should be subject to the usual call-in processes.

As above. Agreed. Agreed, though acknowledging that relatively few issues would fall into this category. Amendment to Constitution required.

APPENDIX H Executive, 20 March 2007

ADMISSION ARRANGEMENTS FOR COMMUNITY SCHOOLS FOR SEPTEMBER 2008 Report of the Strategic Director of Learning and Children’s Services Executive Member for Children & Young People’s Services Purpose The admission arrangements for Community primary and secondary schools are the subject of annual consultation with all local schools and neighbouring Local Authorities (LAs). The arrangements should then be determined by the LA for admissions two Septembers ahead by 15 April each year. Consultation has taken place with all Kingston primary and secondary schools, Diocesan Boards and neighbouring authorities on admission arrangements for Community schools for September 2008. The Admissions Forum considered the arrangements proposed prior to consultation at a meeting on 16 October 2006. The Forum considered the responses to the consultation at its meeting on 5 February 2007 and approved each of the eight proposals that formed the subject of the consultation. The purpose of this report is to: bring to members’ attention the outcome of the consultation process; seek approval for the changes proposed; seek the adoption of the proposed admission arrangements for primary schools and secondary schools and, obtain the Executive’s approval for the admissions numbers proposed. Action Proposed by Executive Member for Children & Young People’s Services The Executive is requested to approve that for admissions to schools in September 2008: 1. no changes are made to the over subscription criteria for non-selective

Community schools; 2. no changes are made to the admissions criteria for the selective community

school (Tiffin Girls’ School); 3. no changes are made to admissions numbers for Community secondary and

primary schools for September 2008. 4. no significant changes are made to the co-ordinated admissions scheme for all

secondary schools for September 2008; 5. no significant changes are made to the co-ordinated admissions scheme for all

primary schools for September 2008; 6. no changes are made to the waiting list arrangements for community schools;

H2

7. the clarification of the admissions process for applications from twins, triplets, other multiple births and siblings born in the same academic year;

8. the clarification is given of admission arrangements for sixth form entry into

community secondary schools. Reason for proposed action To fulfil the LA’s statutory duty to determine admission arrangements for Community schools each year following consultation with schools and others. This includes the statutory duty for all LAs to adopt co-ordinated admission arrangements for secondary and primary school admissions for all Community, Foundation and Voluntary Aided schools. BACKGROUND INFORMATION 1. School Admission regulations stipulate that the admission arrangements for

Community schools, for which the Local Authority is the admission authority, have to be reviewed each year. Decisions about the arrangements to apply for admissions two Septembers ahead have to be taken by 15 April each year.

2. This annual review must include consultation with all Community, Voluntary

Aided (VA) and Foundation schools in Kingston and with neighbouring LAs. The closing date for this consultation was 15 January 2007. A consultation paper was sent to all schools in the borough, all neighbouring LAs and the Diocesan Boards. Responses to the consultation were received from Richmond and Wandsworth Councils. A summary of the responses is attached at Annex 1.

3. At its meeting on 16 October 2006 the Admissions Forum considered a report

from the Strategic Director of Learning and Children’s Services about his intention to consult on proposed changes to school admission arrangements for September 2008.

4. Kingston’s Admission Forum considered the issues raised in the consultation

paper at its meeting on 16 October 2006. All admission authorities have a duty to regard any advice from their local Admissions Forum.

5. At its meeting on 5 February 2007, the Admissions Forum considered the

responses to the consultation paper and approved each of the eight proposals that formed the subject of the consultation. Both of the responses received to the consultation paper agreed with all the proposals but suggested greater clarification in the wording on waiting list arrangements in the statutory consultation and within the secondary and primary schemes. The wording was revised to be clearer and these revisions were approved by the Admissions Forum on 5 February. The revised documents are attached at Annex 2 and the revised sections all relate to waiting list arrangements. These are paragraphs 15 and 16 of the statutory consultation, paragraph 45 of the secondary scheme and paragraph 32 of the primary scheme.

H3

OVERSUBSCRIPTION CRITERIA FOR COMMUNITY SCHOOLS Oversubscription criteria for Non-Selective Community Secondary Schools 6. No responses were received that opposed this proposal. 7. The proposed over-subscription criteria for September 2008 for non-selective

community secondary schools are as follows:

Where more applications are received than there are places availableplaces will be offered in the following order of priority:

i) places will be offered firstly to Looked After Children i.e. children who are

looked after by a public authority and are in public care. Applications made under this criterion must be accompanied by details of circumstance and professionally supported evidence (e.g. from a social worker);

ii) places will be offered next to children who have a brother or sister, including

an adopted, foster, half- or step- brother or sister, living at the same address and attending the same school at the time of admission;

iii) places will then be offered in cases of exceptional family, social or medical

need (which must be described on the application form and verified by professionally supported evidence) which makes the school concerned the most suitable one for the individual child;

iv) the remaining places will be offered to children who live nearest to the

school, as measured by the shortest approved walking route. All distances will be measured using the Council’s computerised Geographical Information System.

Oversubscription Criteria for Community Primary Schools 8. No responses were received that opposed this proposal. 9. The proposed oversubscription criteria for community primary schools are as

follows:

Where more applications are received than there are places available, places will be offered in the following order of priority:

i) places will be offered firstly to Looked After Children i.e. children who are



an adopted, foster, half- or step- brother or sister, living at the same address and attending the same school (or the paired infant school) at the time of admission;

H4

iii) places will then be offered in cases of exceptional family, social or medical need (which must be described on the application form and verified by professionally supported evidence) which makes the school concerned the most suitable one for the individual child;


school, as measured by the shortest approved walking route. All distances will be measured using the Council’s computerised Geographical Information System. For Ellingham Primary School (in Chessington) only, a child living in the Malden Rushett area will have priority over children who live nearer to the school but outside that area.

Oversubscription Criteria for Community Junior Schools 10. No responses were received that opposed this proposal.

11. The proposed oversubscription criteria for community junior schools are as follows:

Where more applications are received than there are places available, places will be offered in the following order of priority: i) places will be offered firstly to Looked After Children i.e. children who are


ii) places will be offered secondly to children attending the “paired” community

infant school;

iii) places will be offered next to children who have a brother or sister, including an adopted, foster, half- or step- brother or sister, living at the same address and attending the same school (or the paired infant school) at the time of admission;

iv) places will then be offered in cases of exceptional family, social or medical


v) the remaining places will be offered to children who live nearest to the

school, as measured by the shortest approved walking route. All distances will be measured using the Council’s computerised Geographical Information System.

Oversubscription criteria for Community Nursery Schools

12. No responses were received that opposed this proposal. 13. The proposed oversubscription criteria for community nursery schools are:

H5


i) places will be offered firstly to Looked After Children i.e. children who are looked after by a public authority and are in public care. Applications made under this criterion must be accompanied by details of circumstance and professionally supported evidence (e.g. from a social worker);


an adopted, foster, half- or step- brother or sister, living at the same address and attending the same school (or the paired infant or junior school) at the time of admission;

iii) places will then be offered in cases of exceptional family, social or medical



school, as measured by the shortest approved walking route. All distances will be measured using the Council’s computerised Geographical Information System. For Ellingham Primary School (in Chessington) only, a child living in the Malden Rushett area will have priority over children who live nearer to the school but outside that area.

Oversubscription criteria for the Selective Community Secondary School 14. No responses were received that opposed this proposal. 15. The Tiffin Girls’ School (selective): The Local Authority is proposing no change

to the criteria for Year 7 entry to the Tiffin Girls’ School. The proposed Year 7 entry criteria for September 2008 for the Tiffin Girls’ School are as follows:

i) places at The Tiffin Girls’ School will be offered to girls on the basis of

selection by ability as shown by their performance in the two selection tests of Non-Verbal Reasoning and Verbal Reasoning, standardised for age (within the eligible year group);

ii) in the event of a tied score to fill 120 places, a place or places will be

offered to the child or children who live nearest to the school, as measured by the shortest approved walking route. All distances will be measured using the Council’s computerised Geographical Information System.

SECONDARY CO-ORDINATED ADMISSIONS SCHEME FOR SEPTEMBER 2008 16. The consultation document proposed that the only small changes be made to

the current co-ordinated admissions scheme for secondary schools is in the dates of the commonly agreed timetable. The proposed secondary co-ordinated admissions scheme is attached at Annex 2.

17. No responses were received which opposed this proposal.

H6

18. However, as a result of the two responses received suggesting greater clarity of wording for waiting list arrangements, paragraph 45 of the scheme has been revised and is attached at Annex 2.

PRIMARY CO-ORDINATED ADMISSIONS SCHEME FOR SEPTEMBER 2008 19. The consultation document proposed that no significant changes be made to

the current co-ordinated admissions scheme for primary schools. 20. No responses were received that opposed this proposal. 21. However, as a result of the two responses received suggesting greater clarity of

wording for waiting list arrangements, paragraph 32 of the scheme has been revised and is attached at Annex 2.

ADMISSIONS NUMBERS FOR SEPTEMBER 2008 Secondary School Admission Numbers for September 2008 22. No changes are proposed to the admission number of any Community

secondary schools for September 2008. These numbers are as follows:

Chessington Community College 150 Coombe Girls’ School 210 Southborough School 150 The Tiffin Girls’ School 120 Tolworth Girls’ School 210

Primary School Admission Numbers for September 2008 23. No changes are proposed to the admission number of any Community primary

school for September 2008. These numbers are as follows:

School Proposed Admission No

Alexandra Infant 60 Buckland Infant 90 Burlington Infant 90 Burlington Junior 90 Coombe Hill Infant 90 Coombe Hill Junior 90 Ellingham Primary 30 Fern Hill Primary 60 Grand Avenue Primary 60 Green Lane Primary 60 King Athelstan Primary 60 Knollmead Primary 30 Latchmere Infant 90 Latchmere Junior 90 Lovelace Primary 60

H7

Malden Manor Primary 60 Maple Infant 60 Moor Lane Junior 90 Robin Hood Primary 30 The Mount Primary 60 Tolworth Infant 90 Tolworth Junior 90

25. No responses were received that opposed this proposal. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS 26. There are no environmental implications arising directly from the proposals

under consideration in this report. BACKGROUND PAPERS: Held by Hatija Bhatia 020 8547 5284 or [email protected] (author of report) 1. School Admission Regulations 2003 and DfES Code of Practice on

Admissions. 2. Reports to Kingston Admission Forum on 16 October 2006 and 5 February

2007. 3. School Admission Arrangements for Community Schools for the School Year

2008/09 Consultation Paper 4. Responses to consultation carried out between November 2006 and January

2007.

H8

ANNEX 1

SUMMARY OF RESPONSES RECEIVED TO THE CONSULTATION The Local Authority (LA) consulted with admission authorities within Kingston and neighbouring Councils and the Diocesan Boards. Consultation took place between 27 November 2006 and 15 January 2007 on the following proposals:

A. Admission criteria for non-selective community schools in Kingston

B. Admission criteria for the selective community school in Kingston

C. Admission numbers for community schools

D. Scheme for co-ordinated secondary admissions

E. Scheme for co-ordinated primary admissions

F. Waiting List arrangements for community schools

G. Admissions of twins, triplets, other multiple births or siblings born in the same academic year

H. Sixth form admissions into community secondary schools

Responses to the consultation There were two responses received to the consultation and both of the responses agreed with all proposals but suggested greater clarification to the wording on waiting list arrangements. Responses to the consultation are shown below: Response received Comments Richmond Council Agreed with all proposed arrangements

and suggested greater clarification in the wording on waiting list arrangements in the statutory consultation and within the secondary and primary schemes.

Wandsworth Council suggested greater clarification in the wording on waiting list arrangements in in the statutory consultation and within the secondary and primary schemes.

As a result of these responses, paragraphs 15 and 16 of the statutory consultation, paragraph 45 of the secondary scheme and paragraph 32 of the primary scheme have been revised and are contained the revised document attached at Annex 2.

H9

ANNEX 2

Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames Learning and Children’s Services

SCHOOL ADMISSION ARRANGEMENTS FOR COMMUNITY SCHOOLS

FOR THE SCHOOL YEAR 2008/09

Consultation by the Strategic Director of Learning and Children’s Services

Introduction This consultation paper covers the following areas for school admission arrangements for September 2008.

A. Admission criteria for non-selective community schools in Kingston

B. Admission criteria for the selective community school in Kingston

C. Admission numbers for community schools

D. Scheme for co-ordinated secondary admissions

E. Scheme for co-ordinated primary admissions

F. Waiting list arrangements for community schools

G. Admissions of twins, triplets, other multiple births or siblings born in the same academic year

H. Sixth form admissions into community secondary schools

A. Admissions Criteria for non-selective community schools

1. The Local Authority intends to continue with the existing criteria for non-

selective community schools except for two minor changes to the wording of the sibling criterion and to the criterion relating to family, social and medical need.

2. Under the current sibling criterion for non-selective community schools, siblings

are defined as “brother or sister, including adopted, step- or foster- brother or sister, living at the same address and attending the same school “.

3. Therefore the Local Authority is proposing to expand the definition to include

half-brothers or sisters so that the criterion is better defined. 4. The current criterion relating to family, social and medical need states that it is

applied to cases of “particular family, social or medical need (which must be described on the application form and then be verified) which makes the school concerned the most suitable one for the individual child ”.

H10

5. It is proposed to use the word “exceptional” instead of “particular” as this describes better the special circumstances which are considered under this criterion.

Community Secondary Schools 6. The proposed over-subscription criteria for September 2008 for non-selective

community secondary schools are as follows: Where more applications are received than there are places available, places will be offered in the following order of priority:


ii) places will be offered next to children who have a brother or sister,

including an adopted, foster, half- or step- brother or sister, living at the same address and attending the same school at the time of admission;

iii) places will then be offered in cases of exceptional family, social or

medical need (which must be described on the application form and verified by professionally supported evidence) which makes the school concerned the most suitable one for the individual child;

iv) the remaining places will be offered to children who live nearest to

the school, as measured by the shortest approved walking route. All distances will be measured using the Council’s computerised Geographical Information System.

Community Primary Schools

7. The proposed oversubscription criteria for community primary schools are as follows:




including an adopted, foster, half- or step- brother or sister, living at the same address and attending the same school (or the paired infant school) at the time of admission;

H11




the school, as measured by the shortest approved walking route. All distances will be measured using the Council’s computerised Geographical Information System. For Ellingham Primary School (in Chessington) only, a child living in the Malden Rushett area will have priority over children who live nearer to the school but outside that area.

Community Junior Schools

8. The proposed oversubscription criteria for community junior schools are as follows:


i) places will be offered firstly to Looked After Children i.e. children who

are looked after by a public authority and are in public care. Applications made under this criterion must be accompanied by details of circumstance and professionally supported evidence (e.g. from a social worker);

ii) places will be offered secondly to children attending the “paired”

community infant school;

iii) places will be offered next to children who have a brother or sister, including an adopted, foster, half- or step- brother or sister, living at the same address and attending the same school (or the paired infant school) at the time of admission;

iv) places will then be offered in cases of exceptional family, social or


v) the remaining places will be offered to children who live nearest to

the school, as measured by the shortest approved walking route. All distances will be measured using the Council’s computerised Geographical Information System.

Community Nursery Schools

9. The proposed oversubscription criteria for community nursery schools are:

H12




including an adopted, foster, half- or step- brother or sister, living at the same address and attending the same school (or the paired infant or junior school) at the time of admission;




the school, as measured by the shortest approved walking route. All distances will be measured using the Council’s computerised Geographical Information System. For Ellingham Primary School (in Chessington) only, a child living in the Malden Rushett area will have priority over children who live nearer to the school but outside that area.

B. Admission Criteria for the Selective Community Secondary School 10. The Tiffin Girls’ School (selective): The Local Authority is proposing no change

to the criteria for Year 7 entry to the Tiffin Girls’ School. 11. The proposed Year 7 entry criteria for September 2008 for the Tiffin Girls’

School are as follows:

i) places at The Tiffin Girls’ School will be offered to girls on the basis of selection by ability as shown by their performance in the two selection tests of Non-Verbal Reasoning and Verbal Reasoning, standardised for age (within the eligible year group);

ii) in the event of a tied score to fill 120 places, a place or places will be

offered to the child or children who live nearest to the school, as measured by the shortest approved walking route. All distances will be measured using the Council’s computerised Geographical Information System.

C. Admission Numbers 12. The LA is proposing no changes to the admission number of any community

secondary or primary schools for 2008–09. These numbers are as follows:

H13

Secondary School Admission Numbers for 2008/09

School Proposed Admission No Chessington Community College 150 Coombe Girls’ School 210 Southborough High School 150 The Tiffin Girls’ School 120 Tolworth Girls’ School 210

Primary school admission numbers for 2008/09

School Proposed Admission No

Alexandra Infant 60 Buckland Infant 90 Burlington Infant 90 Burlington Junior 90 Coombe Hill Infant 90 Coombe Hill Junior 90 Ellingham Primary 30 Fern Hill Primary 60 Grand Avenue Primary 60 Green Lane Primary 60 King Athelstan Primary 60 Knollmead Primary 30 Latchmere Infant 90 Latchmere Junior 90 Lovelace Primary 60 Malden Manor Primary 60 Maple Infant 60 Moor Lane Junior 90 Robin Hood Primary 30 The Mount Primary 60 Tolworth Infant 90 Tolworth Junior 90

D. Co-ordinated Secondary School Admission Arrangements 13. The co-ordinated scheme for secondary admissions for September 2008 is

attached as Appendix 1 and does not differ significantly from the LA’s scheme for 2007 admissions except in the dates of the commonly agreed timetable.

H14

E. Co-ordinated Primary School Admission Arrangements 14. The co-ordinated scheme for primary admissions for September 2008 is

attached as Appendix 2 and does not differ from the LA’s scheme for 2007 admissions except in the dates of the commonly agreed timetable.

F. Waiting list arrangements for community schools Community Secondary, Primary, Junior and Infant Schools 15. Following co-ordination, waiting lists will automatically consist of the names of

all unsuccessful applicants who have not had a higher preference offer together with any applicants who apply as a result of moving into the area and will be held in criteria order.

16. Names of children who received a higher initial offer and/or those who made

initial applications but did not name the school as a preference can be added to the waiting list. However, these names will be added to the list after the names of children described in (15) above.

Non-Selective Community Secondary, Primary, Junior and Infant Schools 17. The waiting lists for all community non-selective secondary, primary, junior and

infant schools will be held as described in paragraphs 15 and 16 until 31 August 2008.

18. From 1 September 2008, all names will be held on a single waiting list in criteria

order only. Selective Community Secondary School (The Tiffin Girls’ School) 19. For The Tiffin Girls’ School, the waiting list will be held in rank score order and

will automatically consist of names of children who have not had a higher preference offer.

20. The names of children who have sat the test and who have been offered a

higher preference school will be removed from the waiting list. Parents of these children can request that their child’s name is added to the waiting list, but their names will be added after all those who have not been offered a higher preference school.

21. The waiting list will be maintained as described in paragraphs 19 and 20

between 1 March 2008 and 31 December 2008. During this time, if the admission number for Year 7 (September 2008) falls below 120, a further offer will be made to the next child on the list.

22. If there is more than one child who achieves the score at which the next offer is

made, the place will be offered to the child who lives nearest to the school, as measured by the shortest approved walking route. All distances will be measured using the Council’s computerised Geographical Information System.

H15

23. The waiting list will be maintained from 1 March 2008 until 31 December 2008. After 31 December 2008, there will no longer be a waiting list. Candidates who have taken the test, but have not been offered a place by that date, will no longer be considered for a place in Years 7 to 11 at any future time.

Waiting List arrangements for Nursery Classes 24. All community schools with nursery classes and Surbiton Children’s Centre

Nursery, will maintain waiting lists using the published admissions criteria. Applications received after the closing date will be considered after all applications received by the closing date. After 23 June 2008, schools will draw up a new single waiting list using admissions criteria only.

G. Admission of twins, triplets, other multiple births and siblings born in the

same academic year 25. Where a parent applies for entry into the same year group at a community

school for more than one child and it is not possible to offer places to all the siblings(brothers and sisters), the children’s names will be added to the waiting list in accordance with the published admissions criteria, in the same way as for other children.

26. Where there is one school place available and there is more than one sibling

who is eligible for the place under the published admissions criteria, the parent will be asked to decide whether or not he/she wishes to accept the available place.

H. Sixth Form Admissions into community secondary schools for September

2008 27. Year 11 pupils currently studying at a Kingston secondary school and pupils in

the appropriate age range currently studying elsewhere may apply to join the sixth form at each of Kingston’s four non-selective and one selective community secondary schools.

28. The entry criteria for external applicants are the same as for those already in

the school except that applications from internal candidates will be considered first. More places may be available to external candidates, depending on the uptake of places by internal applicants. Admission into the sixth form (Year 12 and 13) at each school is dealt with by the school concerned.

Community Selective School (The Tiffin Girls School) 29. The minimum qualification for entry into the sixth form is eight GCSE “passes”

(grades A* - C), or AS grades A - E, including English, Mathematics and a science. Approximately 20 external candidates will be admitted to the sixth form.

30. Tiffin Girls’ School offers a range of courses and the availability of places for

specific courses will differ subject-by-subject depending on the uptake for each subject. The priority in each case is to match the course provided to the prior

H16

attainment and future aspirations of individual students, within available resources and staffing.

Community non-selective secondary schools (Chessington Community College, Coombe Girls School, Southborough High School and Tolworth Girls’ School) 31. These schools offer a range of courses and study pathways leading to different

levels of qualifications. The availability of places for specific courses will differ subject-by-subject depending on the uptake for each subject. The priority in each case is to match the course provided to the prior attainment and future aspirations of individual students, within available resources and staffing.

32. Admissions in Year 12 will only be considered if the student’s level of attainment

is suitable for the proposed course of study.

H17

APPENDIX 1 (to Annex 2)

THE ROYAL BOROUGH OF KINGSTON UPON THAMES LEARNING AND CHILDREN’S SERVICES

SCHEME FOR CO-ORDINATED SECONDARY SCHOOL ADMISSIONS

IN SEPTEMBER 2008

The Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames Local Authority (LA) will be administering admissions to secondary schools in accordance with the Pan London Co-ordinated Admissions scheme. This scheme has been adopted by all London boroughs and adjacent LAs including Surrey County Council, that have agreed to use a common scheme that incorporates a common timetable and application forms which have common elements. All London LAs allow parents to nominate up to six schools in preference order. It is hoped that the commonality of the schemes adopted by all participating authorities will help simplify the application procedure and processing, and help to achieve some equity of treatment for applicants to secondary schools across the London Region. Glossary of terms in the scheme “the Academic Year” the year in which the academic year commences “the Application Year” the academic year in which the parent makes an

application i.e. in relation to the academic year of entry, the year preceding it.

“the Board” the Pan London Admissions Executive Board, which is responsible for the Scheme

“the Common Application Form”

this is the form that each LA must have under the Regulations for parents to use to make their applications, set out in rank order

“the Equal Preference System”

the model whereby all preferences listed by parents on the Common Application Form are considered under the over-subscription criteria for each school without reference to parental rankings. Where a pupil is offered a place at more than one school within an LA, the rankings are used to determine the single offer by selecting the one ranked highest of the places offered

“the Highly Recommended Elements”

the elements of the Template Qualifying Scheme that are not mandatory but to which subscription is strongly recommended in order to maximise co-ordination and thereby simplify the application process as far as possible

“the Home LA” the LA in which the applicant/parent is resident “the Local Admission System (LAS)”

the IT module for administering admissions in each LA and for determining the highest offer both within and between participating LAs

“the Maintaining LA” the LA which maintains a school to which an applicant has applied, i.e. the borough or county in which the school is situated (as a general rule)

“the Mandatory those elements of the Template LA Scheme to

H18

Elements” which authorities must subscribe in order to be considered as ‘Participating Authorities’ and to benefit from the Pan-London Register and related funding

“the Notification Letter” the agreed form of letter sent to applicants on the Prescribed Day which communicates decisions granting or refusing admission to a secondary school, which is attached as Schedule 2

“the Prescribed Day” 1st March in the year following the relevant determination year except that, in any year which that day is not a working day, the prescribed day shall be the next working day.

“the Pan-London Register (PLR)”

the database which will transmit application and offer data between each LA’s local admission system

“the Pan-London Timetable”

the framework for processing of application data

“the Participating LA” any LA that has indicated in the Memorandum of Agreement that they are willing to incorporate, at a minimum, the mandatory elements of the Template LA Scheme presented here

“the Qualifying Scheme” the scheme which each LA is required to formulate pursuant to section 89B(1)(a) of the School Standards and Framework Act 1998 and the Regulations for co-ordinating arrangements for the admission of pupils to secondary schools

Applications 1. Applications from residents of this LA will be made on this authority’s Common

Application Form (CAF) which will be available in paper form and on-line. This will include all the fields and information specified in Schedule 1 (attached) to this Template LA Scheme. These will be supplemented by any additional fields and information deemed necessary by this LA.

2. This LA will advise home LAs of their resident pupils on the roll of this LA’s

maintained primary schools and whose parents are eligible to make application in the forthcoming application year.

3. This LA will take reasonable steps to ensure that every parent who has a child

in the last year of primary education within a maintained school, and is a resident in the Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames, receives a copy of the Royal Borough of Kingston’s “Which Secondary School” booklet, a CAF and supplementary information forms for RB Kingston schools, including details of how to apply online. The booklet and supplementary information forms will also be available to parents who are non-residents of this LA and will include information on how they can access their Home LA’s CAF.

4. Applicants will be able to express a preference for up to six maintained

secondary schools within and/or outside the Home LA (including Academies

H19

and any City Technical College that has agreed to participate in their LA’s Qualifying Scheme).

5. The admission authorities within this LA will not use supplementary information

forms except where the information is required to apply the published over-subscription criteria and the information available through the CAF is not sufficient for consideration of the application against a school’s published admissions criteria. This will apply to the two Catholic schools, Richard Challoner and The Holy Cross School. This will also apply to the two selective schools, Tiffin School and Tiffin Girls School, which require a photograph as supplementary verification for their selection test. The LA will seek to ensure admission authorities within its area only collect information that is required by the published over-subscription criteria, in accordance with the Admissions Code of Practice (Sept 2006).

6. Where supplementary information forms are used, these will be made available

with RBK’s “Which Secondary School“ booklet. Parents will be advised in the booklet which schools require these forms to be completed and to return the supplementary information forms direct to the school by the closing date. The supplementary information forms must also advise parents that they must also complete their Home LA’s CAF, in accordance with the Admissions Code of Practice (Sept 2006).

7. The order of preference given on the CAF will not be revealed except where a

parent resident in this LA expresses a preference for schools in the area of another LA, the order of preference for that LA’s schools will be given to that LA so that it can determine the highest ranked preference in cases where a child is eligible for a place at more than one school in that LA’s area.

8. Where a school receives a supplementary information form it will not be

regarded as a valid application unless the parent has completed their Home LA’s CAF and the school is nominated on it.

9. Where a CAF has been completed, but not a supplementary information form,

the preference is still valid and will be considered. However parents will be advised in the “Which Secondary School” booklet that not submitting a completed supplementary information form to schools which require supplementary information to apply their admissions criteria, may reduce their child’s chance of being offered a place.

10. This LA will share the details of each application with own admission authority

schools within RB Kingston to enable schools to apply their admissions criteria. 11. Schools requiring a supplementary information form will check that each

applicant has completed a supplementary information form and wherever possible, contact applicants to follow up any supplementary information forms that have not been received.

12. Schools which receive CAFs in error must inform the LA and send the forms to

the LA as soon as possible. If the LA receives supplementary information forms in error, it must send them to the schools as soon as possible.

H20

Processing 13. Applicants resident within this LA must return the CAF, which will be available

and able to be submitted on-line, to this LA by 19 October in the Application Year 2007.

14. Supplementary information forms, where they apply, must be returned to the

school by the date specified on the supplementary information form. 15. Application data relating to applications to schools in other participating LAs will

be up-loaded to the PLR by 12 November in the Application Year 2007. Supplementary information provided with the CAF will be sent to the maintaining LAs by the same date.

16. In consultation with the school admission authorities within this LA’s area and

within the framework of the Pan-London timetable, the draft timetable attached has been drawn up for the processing of application data and the application of admissions criteria. This may be subject to be alteration prior to the implementation of this scheme to reflect any required change under Pan London arrangements.

17. Between 13th November and 25th November 2007, this LA will check the

application data received via the PLR and prepare details of applicants to be sent to own admission authority schools by 26th November 2007.

18. All preferences for schools within this LA will be considered by the relevant

admission authorities between 26 November 2007 and 18 January 2008 without reference to rank order except where this is explicitly included in an admission authority’s published over-subscription criteria, subject to the provisions in the Admissions Code of Practice (Sept 06) for entry in September 2008.

19. This LA will participate in the data checking exercise to be scheduled between

17 December 2007 and 2 January 2008 in the Pan London timetable 20. By 21 January 2008, all admission authorities within the Royal Borough of

Kingston upon Thames, will have provided a list of applicants in criteria order to this LA and this LA shall, for each applicant who has qualified for more than one potential offer, use the highest ranked preference to decide which single potential offer to make.

Late Applications 21. The LA will only accept late applications and treat them as equivalent to

applications received by the closing date if the parent(s) move into the Royal Borough of Kingston Upon Thames after the closing date and can provide documentary evidence confirming this or if there are exceptional reasons why the application is late. Each late application will be considered separately and on its own merits. Any such applications will need to be received by 14

H21

December 2007, to enable them to be considered alongside applications received earlier.

22. Where such applications contain preferences for schools in other LAs, this LA

will forward the details to maintaining LAs via the PLR as they are received. This LA will accept late applications which are considered to be on time within the terms of the home LA’s scheme.

23. Where a parent moves from one participating Home LA to another after

submitting an on time application under the terms of the former Home LA’s scheme, the new Home LA will accept the applications as on time up to 14 December, on the basis that an on-time application already exists within the Pan London System.

24. Where a parent moves within the borough and wishes to change their

preferences to include schools closer to their new home address, any such applications will need to be received by 14 December 2007, to enable them to be considered alongside applications received earlier.

25. The latest date for the upload of late applications which are considered to be

on-time within the terms of the home LA’s scheme to the PLR is 14 December in the Application Year 2007.

26. Any late applications received after 14 December 2007 but before 1st March

2008 will not be considered in the initial allocation round and will be considered after all the on-time applications are processed.

Exchange of Offers Data via PLR 27. This LA will carry out all reasonable checks to ensure that pupil rankings are

correctly held in its LAS before uploading data to the PLR. 28. This LA will upload the highest potential offer available to an applicant for a

maintained school in this LA to the PLR by 6 February 2008. The PLR will transmit the highest potential offer made by the maintaining LA to the Home LA.

29. The local admissions system (LAS) of this LA, as the home LA for The Royal

Borough of Kingston upon Thames parents, will eliminate all but the highest ranked offer where an applicant has more than one potential offer across the maintaining LAs for whose school(s) he/she has applied (provided that those LAs each submit this information within the deadline to the PLR. This will involve exchanges of information between the LAS and the PLR which will continue until a steady state is achieved (which the PLR will indicate), or until 19 February 2008 if this is sooner. This LA will transmit to the PLR information about which final offers have and have not been made no less than 5 working days before 3 March 2008. The PLR will in turn transmit this information to the LAS of the relevant maintaining LAs for their information.

30. This LA will participate in the offer data checking exercise scheduled between

20 and 27 February 2008 in the Pan London timetable.

H22

31. This LA will send a file to the E-Admissions portal with outcomes for all residents who have applied online no later than 27 February 2008.

National Offer Day – 3 March 2008 32. On 3 March 2008, this LA will send out by first class post notification of the

outcome to resident applicants. 33. Details of the pupils to be offered will be made available to each Kingston

school by 3 March 2008. 34. Kingston parents whose children do not qualify for a place at any of the schools

they apply for (in any LA) will be offered an alternative school on the national offer day (3 March) if at all possible. This school will be the nearest non-selective school to the home address with places remaining for boys and/or girls (as applicable). Allocation will be made in accordance with the school’s admission criteria and in consultation with the school’s admission authority. These parents will also be offered the opportunity to make late applications to Kingston schools to which they did not originally apply.

35. This LA has agreed, for the purposes of paragraphs 2(e), 4(d) and 4(e) of the

Schedule to the Regulations, that as the Home LA it will inform all applicants who live within the borough of their highest offer of a school place, whether these were for schools in the home LA or in other LAs taking part in the Pan-London co-ordinated scheme.

36. This LA will provide primary schools with destination data of its resident

applicants before the end of the Summer term 2008. Post-offer Date Arrangements 37. Parents must accept or decline the offer of a place by 17 March 2008. If they

do not respond by this date, the LA or the school, where it is its own admission authority, will make every reasonable effort to contact the parent to find out whether or not they wish to accept or decline the place. Only where the parent fails to respond and the LA or the school, where it is its own admission authority, can demonstrate that every reasonable effort has been made to contact the parent, will the place be withdrawn.

38. Where a parent resident in this LA accepts or declines a place in a school

maintained by another LA by 17 March 2008, this LA will forward the information to the maintaining LA by 24 March 2008. Where such information is received from parents between 17 March and 31 August 2008, this LA will pass it to the maintaining LA as and when it is received.

39. In the period 3 March to 31 August 2008, this LA will seek to ensure that a

place is not offered at a school in its area which is ranked on the CAF as a lower preference than any school already offered.

40. In the period 3 March to 31 August 2008, this LA will inform the Home LA of

any change to an applicant’s offer status as soon as it occurs.

H23

41. In the period 3 March to 31 August 2008, this LA will accept new applications

(including additional preferences) for its schools from Home LAs. Waiting List Arrangements 42. Where a child does not receive an offer of their highest preference, their name

will automatically be placed on the waiting list for each Kingston school for which they are eligible, that is a higher preference school to the one they have been offered. Parents will be advised that if they want to go on the waiting list for an out-borough school they should contact that school’s maintaining LA.

43. F and VA schools will be sent their updated lists at this time and will include

outcomes of reply slips from parents. 44. Parents with a higher preference offer can request that their child’s name is

added to waiting lists for lower preference schools. 45. Until 31 August 2008, waiting lists for all non-selective schools will be held in

criteria order and will consist firstly of those children who had applied initially and for whom the school is still a higher preference together with any applicants who apply as a result of moving into the area; followed by those who received a higher initial offer and/or those who made initial applications but did not name the school as a preference.

46. From 1st September 2008, all names on all non-selective schools’ waiting lists

will be placed on a single new list in criteria order only. 47. For selective schools, the waiting lists will be generated by the ranked score list

and parental preference based on the outcome of co-ordinated admissions on 1st March 2008.

48. For The Tiffin Girls’ School, this waiting list will be maintained from 3 March

2008 until the end of the Autumn term in December 2008. During this period if the admission number for Year 7 falls below 120, further offers will be made from the waiting list and offered to the next child on the list. If there is more than one child who achieves the score at which the next offer is made, the place will be offered to the child who lives nearest to the school, as measured using the shortest approved walking route. All distances will be measured using the Council’s computerised Geographical Information system. Any remaining children who achieve the same score will remain on the waiting list in distance order, followed by the next pupil on the list in descending order of standardised score and distance , if applicable. The last score at which a place is offered by 31 December 2008, is the final cut-off mark for that year group.

49. For Tiffin School, the waiting list will be maintained from 3 March until 30

September 2008. 50. For F and VA schools, waiting lists will be maintained and places allocated, as

they become available, in accordance with each admission authority’s published admission arrangements.

H24

51. Where a place is allocated from the waiting list, the offering admission authority

must advise the LA as it occurs. For residents of this borough, this LA will check for alternative offers and, if the child has a multiple offer, will contact the parent to establish which offer they wish to accept. (For non-residents, this LA will advise the home LA). The outcome will be shared with each affected school and/or LA as appropriate.

52. Applications received after 3 March 2008, will be added to community school

waiting lists or passed on to the relevant admissions authority as appropriate. Casual Admissions 53. Casual admissions (overage admissions), i.e. the admission of children after the

normal age of admission to a school, will be administered in accordance with the overage admissions protocol used by admission authorities in RB Kingston. For over-subscribed year groups waiting lists will be maintained according to the published admissions criteria for the school.

H25

SCHEDULE 1 This LA’s Common Application Form will contain the following data fields as a minimum: Applicant’s details: Surname First name Date of Birth Gender Name of current primary school Address of primary school (if outside Home LA) Parent/Carer details (for one or two parents or carers): Title and initial Surname Initials or Forename Address Telephone Number (Home, Daytime, Mobile) Email address Relationship to child Details of each school given as a preference (up to a maximum of six): Name of secondary school Address of secondary school Preference ranking Local Authority in which school is based DfES Number of secondary school Additional information: Reasons for preferences (including any particular family, social or medical

needs) Does the applicant have a Statement of Special Educational Needs? Is the applicant a child looked after by a local authority?

If yes, name of local authority responsible for the child • If the applicant has sibling/s, name of school sibling/s attend? • Surname of Sibling • Forename of Sibling • DOB and Gender of Sibling Other • Signature of parent or guardian • Date of signature. • Where a school for which the applicant has applied requires further information to

apply its admission criteria, parents are advised to complete such supplementary information forms.

H26

SCHEDULE 2 KINGSTON COORDINATED SECONDARY ADMISSION ARRANGEMENTS 2008

DRAFT TIMETABLE (AS AT NOVEMBER 2006)

Date

Action

2007

June

Publicity for Year 5 parents

June – 31 August

Exchange data on out-borough resident Year 5 pupils in LA maintained schools

1 October

Cycle of Open Evenings commence

19 October

Closing date for applications

12 November

Deadline for ADT files to PLR

26 November

Application data passed to VA/Foundation schools – (target date for Tiffin is by 19 November to accommodate tests)

26 Nov 07– 21Jan 08

LA - process applications for Community Schools

26 Nov 07– 21Jan 08

VA/Foundation schools process applications against admissions criteria

14 December 07

Final date for receipt of “on-time” applications

2008

22 January

Ranked lists containing all applicants received by LA from VA/Foundation Schools

From 6 February –19 February

Sending/receiving of potential offers via PLR to out of borough LAs to identify single offer

3 March Send outcomes of applications to resident parents/guardians and inform RBK schools of final offers

17 March

Return of reply slips

By 24 March

LAs exchange data from reply slips and pass onto schools

H27

APPENDIX 2 (to Annex 2)

THE ROYAL BOROUGH OF KINGSTON UPON THAMES LEARNING AND CHILDREN’S SERVICES

CO-ORDINATED SCHEME FOR PRIMARY SCHOOL ADMISSIONS

FOR SEPTEMBER 2008 The School Admissions Code of Practice defines the responsibilities of Local Authorities (LAs) in determining primary admissions arrangements, which must be co-ordinated within LA boundaries, from September 2006 and beyond. Glossary of terms in the scheme “the LA area” means the area in respect of which the LA is the local

authority “the Home LA” means the LA in which the applicant is resident

“the Common Application Form”

this is the form that each LA must have under the Regulations for parents to use to make their applications which must be listed in rank order

“casual admission”

means any application for a place in the first year of primary education that is received after 1 September 2007

“the specified year”

means the school year beginning in September 2007

“eligible for a place”

means that a child has been placed on a school’s ranked list at such a point which falls within the school’s published admission arrangements

The Scheme The scheme shall be determined in accordance with the provisions set out in paragraphs 1 to 29 and processed in accordance with the timetable set out in Schedule 1. The scheme shall apply to every maintained primary school in the LA area, including Voluntary Aided and Foundation primary schools, (except special schools). Applications 1. Applications for any maintained primary school in Kingston will be made on

Kingston’s Common Application Form (CAF) or online, and listed in rank order of preference.

2. The CAF will be used for the purpose of admitting pupils into the first year of

primary or junior schools in the LA’s area in September 2008. 3. Applicants will be able to express three preferences, in rank order for a primary

H28

school maintained by the LA, and be able to give reasons for each preference. 4. Applicants will receive only one offer of a maintained primary school place in

Kingston. If a place cannot be offered at a nominated school, wherever possible, the LA will offer Kingston residents a place at an alternative school. This will be at the closest community school with a vacancy. The distance will be measured from the applicant’s home address using the shortest approved route measured by the Council’s computerised Geographical Information System. RB Kingston parents will also be advised of any RB Kingston VA or Foundation schools with possible vacancies.

5. Kingston residents who apply for a Year 3 place at a junior school and who are

not offered one of their preferences, will be offered a place at an alternative school if they are not already attending a primary school. This will be at the closest community junior school with a vacancy. The distance will be measured from the applicant’s home address using the shortest approved route measured by the Council’s computerised Geographical Information System. RB Kingston parents will also be advised of any RB Kingston VA or Foundation schools with possible vacancies.

6. If a place cannot be offered to an applicant who does not live in Kingston he/she

will be advised to contact their ‘Home LA’ for further guidance. 7. If a child is eligible for more than one school for which an application has been

made on the CAF, a place will be offered at the highest ranking nominated school for which they are eligible for a place.

8. The LA will take all reasonable steps to ensure that every parent who is resident

in the LA area who will be applying for a place in a Reception class of a primary school or the first year of a junior school for their child receives a copy of the CAF and a copy of the Primary School Admissions Booklet.

9. The LA will make appropriate arrangements to ensure that the CAF is available

on request from the LA and from all maintained primary schools in the LA area. 10. The LA will ensure that the CAF is accompanied by a written explanation of the

co-ordinated admissions scheme and that parents are clearly informed of how to apply for schools outside the LA area.

11. Parents will be advised in RB Kingston’s “Primary Schools Admissions Booklet”

of the importance of completing supplementary information forms to enable schools which require this additional information to apply their admissions criteria. This LA will also advise parents that any applications made without completing supplementary information forms for schools which require them, will be ranked after all those which submitted completed supplementary information forms.

12. This LA will share the details of each application with own admission authority

schools to enable schools to apply their admission criteria. 13. All preferences expressed on the CAF are valid applications. The governing

H29

body of a foundation or VA school can require parents who wish to nominate, or have nominated, their school on the CAF, to provide additional information on a supplementary information form only where the additional information is required for the governing body to apply their over-subscription criteria to the application. Where a supplementary information form is required it must be returned to the school/s.

14. Where a school receives a supplementary information form it will not be

regarded as a valid application unless the parent has also completed a CAF and the school is nominated on it.

15. Under the requirements of the scheme, parents will not be under any obligation

to complete an individual school’s supplementary information form where this is not strictly required for the governing body to apply their over-subscription criteria.

16. Schools which receive CAFs in error must inform the LA and send the forms to

them as soon as possible. If the LA receives supplementary information forms in error, it must send them to the schools as soon as possible.

17. Schools requiring a supplementary information form will check that each

applicant has completed a supplementary information form and contact applicants to follow up any supplementary information forms that have not been received,

Processing of CAFs and determining offers in response to the CAF 19. The closing date for receipt of completed CAFs is 31 January 2008. Completed

CAFs are to be returned to the LA. 20. The LA will act as a clearing house for the allocation of places by the relevant

admission authorities in response to the CAFs. The LA will make a decision with respect to the offer or refusal of a place in response to any preference expressed on the CAF where :

i) it is acting in its separate capacity as an admission authority, or ii) an applicant is eligible for a place at more than one school, or

iii) an applicant is not eligible for a place at any school that the parent has

nominated. 21. By 26 February 2008 the LA will notify admission authorities of every application

that has been made for their school. This will include any information submitted by the applicant which schools require in order to apply their over-subscription criteria.

22. By 17 March 2008, the admission authority for each school will consider all

applications for their schools, apply the school’s admissions criteria and provide the LA with a list of those applicants ranked according to the school’s admissions criteria.

H30

23. The LA will match this ranked list against the ranked lists of the other schools

nominated, and:

i) where the child is eligible for a place at only one of the nominated schools, that school will be allocated to the child;

ii) where the child is eligible for a place at two or more of the nominated

schools, he/she will be allocated a place at the highest ranking nominated school for which he/she is eligible ;

iii) where the child is not eligible for a place at the nominated school or any

of the nominated schools, and if the child is a Kingston resident, wherever possible, he/she will be allocated the nearest appropriate Kingston community school with a place available. Parents will also be advised of any RB Kingston VA or Foundation schools with possible vacancies.

iv) where the child is not eligible for a place at the nominated school or any

of the nominated schools, and if the child is not a Kingston resident, the letter which will inform the parent of the outcome of the application, will advise the parent to contact their Home LA i.e. the Education department of the borough where the child resides.

24. On the 21 April 2008 the LA will inform its schools of the pupils to be offered

places at their schools. Notification of outcome of application 25. On 22 April 2008 the LA will send notification to parents advising of the outcome

of their application(s), including (where appropriate) the offer of a place at the allocated school.

26. This letter will name the school at which a place is offered and, if appropriate,

provide a brief explanation of why the child is not being offered a place at any of the other higher ranked schools nominated on the CAF. The letter will advise parents about their statutory right of appeal against the decision(s) to refuse a place at the other nominated school(s). Parents will also be provided with contact details for the LA and other relevant admission authorities for those nominated foundation and VA schools where they were not offered a place, so that they can lodge an appeal with the governing body.

27. A reply slip will be attached, on which parents must state whether or not they

are accepting the place offered, to be returned to the preferred school being offered, by 14 May 2008.

28. If parents do not respond by 14 May 2008, schools will follow up any parents

who have not returned their reply slips.

H31

29. After 14 May 2008, places that may have become vacant since 22 April 2008, will be re-allocated by each admission authority in accordance with its published admission arrangements.

30. Admission authorities will inform the LA of further offers made and of known

alternative destinations of children who refuse offers. Waiting List Arrangements 31. The letter, notifying parents of the outcome of their application, will also inform

them that their child’s name will be automatically placed on the waiting list for higher preference schools than the one offered.

32. Parents with a higher preference offer can request that their child’s name is

added to waiting lists for lower preference schools. 33. Until 31st August 2008, waiting lists for community schools will be held in criteria

order and will consist firstly of those children who had applied initially and for whom the school is still a higher preference together with any applicants who apply as a result of moving into the area; followed by those who received a higher initial offer and/or those who made initial applications but did not name the school as a preference.

34. From 1st September 2008, all names on community schools’ waiting lists will be

placed on a single new list in criteria order only. 35. For F and VA schools, waiting lists will be maintained and places allocated, as

they become available, in accordance with each admission authority’s published admission arrangements.

Late Applications

36. The closing date for applications in the normal admissions round is 31 January

2008. The LA will only accept late applications and treat them as equivalent to applications received by the closing date if the parent(s) move into the borough after the closing date and can provide documentary evidence confirming this or if there are exceptional reasons why the application is late. Each late application will be considered separately and on its own merits. Any such applications will need to be received by 22 February 2008, to enable them to be considered alongside applications received earlier.

37. Where a parent moves within the borough and wishes to change their

preferences to include schools closer to their new home address, any such applications will need to be received by 22 February 2008, to enable them to be considered alongside applications received earlier.

37. Any late applications made direct to any school on the CAF must be forwarded

to the LA immediately. Where a school receives a supplementary information form after the closing date the school must inform the LA immediately so it can verify whether a CAF has been received from the parent and, if not, contact the parent and ask them to complete a CAF. The LA will enter the CAF details onto

H32

its central database and, after consultation with the relevant admission authority, offer a place at the highest ranked school with a place available or if this is not possible at the nearest community school with a place available. Applicants who are not Kingston residents will be advised to contact their Home Authority for further advice.

Casual Admissions 38. Applications received after 1 September 2008, and applications for places in a

year group other than the normal year of entry to primary school, will be treated as casual admissions. These applications should be made direct to the parents’ preferred school/s.

H33

Schedule 1

KINGSTON COORDINATED PRIMARY ADMISSION ARRANGEMENTS FOR SEPTEMBER 2008

DRAFT TIMETABLE OF CO-ORDINATED SCHEME Date

Action

31 January 2008

Closing date for receipt of CAFs to LA and supplementary information forms to schools

22 February 2008 Final date for receipt of late applications (as defined in paragraphs 35 and 36) to be considered as on-time applications

26 February 2008

Details of applications to be sent to VA and Foundation schools

17 March 2008

Foundation and VA schools to provide LA with ranked list of applicants

17 March – 21 April 2008

LA will match ranked lists of all schools and allocate places in accordance with paragraph 22

21 April 2008 LA will inform schools of pupils to be offered places at their schools

22 April 2008

Notification of outcomes of application(s) sent to parents

14 May 2008

Last date for offers to be accepted by parents

14 May 2008

Each admission authority will assume the responsibility of maintaining their own waiting lists and of making further offers

28 May 2008

Deadline for receipt of community school appeals from parents

June /July 2008

Appeal hearings for community infant, primary and junior schools

APPENDIX I Executive, 20 March 2007

LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK: LOCAL DEVELOPMENT SCHEME AND MEMBER STEERING GROUP Report by the Head of Planning and Development Executive Member for Transport, Planning and Regeneration

Purpose This report sets out a revised local development scheme (LDS) outlining the Council’s timetable for preparing local development documents. It also sets out proposals for a member steering group to inform and oversee the work on emerging local development documents. Action proposed by the Executive Member for: Transport, Planning and Regeneration The Executive is requested to: 1. approve the revised Local Development Scheme (Annex 1) for submission to the

Secretary of State, and agree that the revised Local Development Scheme be brought into effect four weeks from the date of submission to the Secretary of State, unless the Secretary of State intervenes during the period (or requests more time); and

2. agree that a member steering group be established to oversee and inform preparation

of the Local Development Framework, based upon the following principles:

a) Proportionate party representation; b) Cross neighbourhood representation; c) Membership shall include the Executive Member for Transport, Planning

and Regeneration, and the Chair of the Development Control Committee (to establish a link between policy formulation and development control decisions).

Reason for action proposed To enable a revised LDS to be submitted to the Secretary of State ahead of the deadline (1st April 2007), and to formally establish an LDF member steering group. BACKGROUND 1. The Council’s Local Development Framework is currently being prepared.

Some documents have already been adopted (Statement of Community Involvement and three supplementary planning documents). The Kingston Town Centre Area Action Plan (K+20) is due to be submitted to the Secretary of State in May 2007. Work has started on the core strategy, development control policies, a waste plan, and an area action plan for the Hogsmill Valley/Kingsmeadow area.

I - 2

2. This report proposes that a revised Local Development Scheme be approved for

submission to the Secretary of State, and that a member steering group be established to help deliver the programme of work contained within the scheme.

LOCAL DEVELOPMENT SCHEME 3. The Local Development Scheme (LDS) is an important element of the LDF. It is the

Council’s published programme for preparing local development documents – the component parts of the LDF. The Council’s first LDS was published in March 2005, and was subsequently revised in February 2006. A further revision is proposed at Annex 1. This further revision has been prompted by, and is in response to, government advice which has stated that planning authorities might want to reassess their LDSs in light of their Annual Monitoring Reports and of documents that need to be prepared to support the implementation of PPS3 (Housing) which was published in November 2006.

5. The LDF is a long-term and ongoing project – there will always be a need to prepare,

replace or revise documents. For this reason the LDS can and should be updated as the need arises. However, the LDS is also supposed to provide a definitive programme of document preparation so that stakeholders know what to expect and when. Slippage against milestones has been commonplace as planning authorities grapple with the complexities of the new planning system.

6. The government is now looking to improve the reliability of LDS’s. Planning authorities

have until 1st April 2007 to submit a revised LDS in light of annual monitoring and recent changes to national policy. After 1st April 07 LDS’s will be regarded as the definitive programme management document. Departure from the agreed programme will only be sanctioned by government in exceptional circumstances or as agreed in response to annual monitoring. Poor performance against milestones is likely to result in a reduced funding allocation to the Planning service.

PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE 2006 LDS 7. The proposed changes to the LDS have been made in response to recent and

emerging government guidance, and having taken into account the outcomes of recent Examinations on other LDF documents across the country. Kingston’s Annual Monitoring Report, reported to Executive in November 2006, flagged up the need to revise the LDS for the following reasons:

• problems implementing the new planning system (illustrated by the country’s first two core strategies being rejected as unsound);

• discussions with GOL over the soundness of K+20; • the need to redraft a key sustainability appraisal document; • the need to undertake Appropriate Assessment, a new requirement to ensure

that sites of European importance for wildlife habitat are protected. 8. Furthermore, in accordance with best practice and having regard to government

advice, consultation has been taking place with the Government Office for London (GOL) and the Planning Inspectorate (PINS) to ensure that the revised LDS is sound, realistic and robust. The main issue arising was the submission of multiple documents at the same time - an approach that was taken in an early draft of the LDS. For this reason the timing of the development control policies and the Hogsmill area action

I - 3

plan have been amended so that they will be examined after the inspector’s findings on the core strategy have been published.

9. The proposed revised LDS is attached at Annex 1. The following bullets summarise

the key proposed changes to the Council’s currently adopted LDS:

• Statement of Community Involvement: This has now been adopted so no longer appears with a timeline.

• Kingston town centre Area Action Plan (AAP): submission has slipped from

September 2006 to May 2007 following protracted discussions with GOL over the soundness of the plan.

• Core strategy: There has been 16 months slippage to the Preferred Options stage.

Whilst early work has been progressing on the core strategy, the original milestone was clearly over-ambitious. In addition it was necessary to ‘take stock’ in light of the country’s first two core strategies being deemed unsound by the inspectorate. Some authorities have withdrawn their core strategies from proceeding to examination in light of those decisions whilst others are considering repeating early stages. Progress is now being made, with consultation on issues presently underway, and consultation on policy options scheduled for September 2007.

• Development control policies: Instead of preparing these in two tranches as was

originally proposed, it is now planned to undertake them in one phase, following the core strategy with which they must comply.

• Hogsmill Valley/Kingsmeadow area action plan: slippage to the timetable has

been caused by the prolonged process for K+20, and slippage on the core strategy with which the Area Action Plan must conform. The AAP is programmed to follow the core strategy so that it can be examined as soon as possible after the core strategy examination.

• Site-specific allocations: This document will follow the core strategy.

Commencement is due mid 2010 once the bulk of work is complete on the core strategy and development control policies. Should monitoring of development identify a need to make site allocations this document will become more of a priority and the Local Development Scheme will be amended accordingly. However at the moment the borough has sufficient housing land supply including saved UDP sites and sites within the Kingston town centre area action plan.

• Waste: A waste DPD, to be prepared jointly with Sutton, Merton and Croydon, was

mentioned in the previous LDS as a possibility. This is now formally enshrined in the LDS, albeit without a timeline as yet. The timetable is being worked up by the consultants employed to prepare the document and will need to be inserted once known. This will need another report to Executive at a future date.

• Kingston University, Knights Park development brief (supplementary planning

document): This has been cancelled since the University is no longer planning to dispose of the site.

• Kingston Old Town supplementary planning document: This will add detail and

guidance to the town centre area action plan policies that relate to the Old Town

I - 4

conservation area, building on work already done to inform the AAP. The intention is to publish a draft as soon as the town centre area action plan is adopted.

• Supplementary Planning Documents on residential design and planning

obligations: These documents will be prepared to add detail and guidance to the relevant core strategy policies. They are therefore affected by changes to the core strategy timetable. The planning obligations SPD is also affected by the government’s proposed reform of planning obligations and the introduction of Planning Gain Supplement.

LDF MEMBER STEERING GROUP 10. It is recommended that a member steering group be set up to oversee and

inform the LDF. A member group did previously exist which began life as the K+20 steering group and evolved into the LDF member working group. That group was chaired by the Executive Portfolio holder with responsibility for planning and comprised around eleven members. This number was quite difficult to administer, and attendance varied. It is considered that a smaller group would produce better oversight, with composition based upon the following principles:

Proportionate party representation; Cross neighbourhood representation; The membership shall include the Executive Member for Transport,

Planning and Regeneration, and the Chair of the Development Control Committee.

11. It is considered important to ensure that a strong link is established

between policy formulation and the Council’s development control function. This would help to ensure that development control decisions are taken against the backcloth of a strategic policy framework.

12. The steering group would not have decision-making powers. That would

reside with the Executive/ Council as appropriate, but the group would provide invaluable support in steering and advising on the production of the various documents, reporting through the Executive.

13. The group is important given the need to speed up plan production and streamline

plan-making processes. A particularly valuable role is in giving advice, from both a strategic and local perspective, on emerging documents before they are approved for consultation. Neighbourhoods would then be able to give their views as part of the consultation process.

14. Such a group has proved very helpful in the past with UDP and the earlier stages of

LDF preparation. Its relative informality has allowed new ideas and approaches to surface and current views to be challenged, which is particularly valuable when the documents are still at an early stage of development.

15. It is likely that the Steering Group will meet on average about every two months but

frequency may vary as different stages are reached with different documents. The first meeting could be scheduled for April 2007.

I - 5

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS 16. There are no direct environmental implications arising from the LDS, though the

planning policy documents proposed within it will address environmental issues. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS 17. There are no direct financial implications arising from the establishment of a Member

steering group. The programme of work for the LDF is funded from existing budgets and Planning Delivery Grant allocations.

NETWORK IMPLICATIONS 18. There are no network implications arising from the revised LDS and establishment of a

Member Steering Group. Links between transport and planning policy will be addressed in the Local Development Documents themselves.

Background papers: held by Daniel Hawes, 020 8547 5355; e-mail: [email protected],gov.uk

• RBK Local Development Scheme (First Revision), February 2006 • PPS12: Local Development Frameworks

ANNEX TO APPENDIX I

Local Development Scheme

Draft Second Revision

For consideration by Executive on 20th March 2007

To be submitted to the Secretary of State by 1st April 2007

If you would like to get in touch with the Council on any issue relating to the Local Development Framework then please contact: Planning Policy Section: Guildhall 2 Kingston Upon Thames Surrey KT1 1EU Telephone 020 8547 5302 Fax 020 8547 5363 E-mail [email protected]

Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames Local Development Framework

Contents Page

1. Introduction 1 2. Process for preparing Local Development Documents 5 3. Kingston’s LDF programme 5 4. Resources 10 5. Risk Assessment 10 Table 1 Summary of Kingston’s Local Development Framework 3 Table 2 Royal Borough of Kingston Supplementary Planning Guidance 4 Table 3 Process for preparing Local Development Documents 5 Table 4 Three-year timelines for RBK Local Development Documents 9 Annex 1 Profiles of Local Development Documents 11 • Area Action Plan for Kingston Town Centre DPD 11 • Core Strategy DPD 13 • Waste DPD 14 • Hogsmill Valley /Kingsmeadow Area Action Plan DPD 15 • Development Control Policies DPD 16 • Site allocations DPD 17 • Proposals Map and Inset Maps DPD 18 • Kingston Old Town Conservation Area SPD 19 • Residential Design SPD 20 • Planning Obligations SPD 21 Annex 2 Glossary 22

- 2 -

1. Introduction The Local Development Framework 1.1 Under Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 the Council must prepare a Local Development Framework (LDF) to replace its Unitary Development Plan: First Alteration (UDP). The Local Development Framework will contain local planning policies and guidance for the Royal Borough of Kingston Upon Thames, and will comprise several documents:

• Local Development Scheme • Development Plan Documents (DPDs) including a core strategy • Supplementary Planning Documents (SPDs) • Statement of Community Involvement • Annual Monitoring Report

1.2 Whilst the LDF is being prepared, UDP policies are automatically saved for a three year period, starting either from the date the Act commenced (September 2004) or the date the UDP was adopted (August 2005). They can be saved for longer, subject to approval by the Secretary of State (see paragraph 1.10 for more on saving Kingston’s UDP policies). Local Development Scheme 1.3 This Local Development Scheme is a published project plan for the other documents in the LDF. The original LDS was published in March 2005, followed by a first revision in January 2006. This version is the second revision of the original scheme. 1.4 Table 1 summarises the documents in Kingston’s LDF, with the date they were adopted, or are scheduled for adoption. Section 2 explains the statutory process for preparing Local Development Documents, with timelines for the production of LDDs in Kingston. Further detail on each document is provided at Annex 1. 1.5 Future documents not outlined in this scheme are likely to include an Area Action Plan for Tolworth. Other documents will be brought forward through a revised LDS as the need arises. The Council’s annual monitoring report will inform future revisions of the scheme. Development Plan Documents (DPDs) 1.6 These documents include a core strategy, development control policies, area action plans and topic based policy documents (e.g. waste). Together with the London Plan they comprise the statutory development plan. Planning applications should be determined in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. 1.7 DPDs are subject to rigorous procedures of community involvement and examination by an independent Inspector. Development Plan Documents must

- 3 -

comply with government policy and be in general conformity with the London Plan.

Supplementary Planning Documents (SPDs) 1.8 These provide more detailed guidance on specific topics or sites. Supplementary Planning Documents must be consistent with Development Plan Documents. They are a material consideration when determining planning applications, but are not subject to independent examination. They are therefore afforded less ‘weight’ than Development Plan Documents. Statement of Community Involvement 1.9 The Council adopted a Statement of Community Involvement (SCI) in January 2007. This sets out how the community will be engaged when preparing local development documents and in the planning applications process. Annual Monitoring Report (AMR) 1.10 Each year the Council prepares an annual monitoring report which sets out the progress of document production against the timescales in the scheme. It also monitors the effect of policies and proposals in the UDP or LDF. The Council will produce its AMR before the end of December each year. The AMR may highlight the need to review the programme of work detailed in the Local Development Scheme. Saving the UDP policies 1.11 The UDP first alteration was adopted in August 2005. It was a partial review of the original 1998 UDP. Policies that were not subject to review are automatically saved to September 2007. Policies that were altered during the review are automatically saved until August 2008. In accordance with the DCLG Protocol for extending saved policies (published August 2005), the Council will make two applications to the Secretary of State to save UDP policies beyond the relevant three year period. Saved UDP policies will be replaced as new DPDs are adopted. Supplementary Planning Guidance 1.12 This is the forerunner of SPDs. The Council currently has a number of SPGs listed at Table 2.

- 4 -

Table 1: Royal Borough of Kingston’s Local Development Framework Document Purpose Adoption Statement of Community Involvement

Sets out approach to community and stakeholder involvement both for plan-making and planning applications

January 2007

Development Plan Documents Kingston Town Centre Area Action Plan

To promote and manage the future development of Kingston Town Centre

October 2008

Core Strategy Sets the vision and strategy for meeting anticipated development needs for the next 10-15 years

June 2010

Waste DPD To identify sites for new waste management facilities across Kingston Upon Thames, Croydon, Sutton and Merton boroughs

Timetable to be confirmed

Hogsmill Valley /Kingsmeadow Area Action Plan

To promote the enhancement and use of this area of the Hogsmill Valley and adjacent sites, identify appropriate development opportunities and review the MOL boundary.

January 2011

Development Control Policies

To provide detailed development control policies to help implement the core strategy objectives

October 2011

Site allocations DPD To identify sites for development and specify the use on those sites

December 2012

Proposals Map and Inset Maps

To illustrate area and site-specific policies and proposals.

To be updated with each Development Plan Document

Supplementary Planning Documents Access for All To provide guidance on designing in

inclusive access arrangements in new development

June 2005

Shopfronts and Shopsigns Design Guide

To provide guidance on design of shop fronts and shop signs.

June 2005

Affordable Housing To provide detailed guidance to assist the effective implementation of affordable housing policy.

February 2006

Kingston Old Town Conservation Area

To provide additional guidance on the Old Town Conservation Area, supporting the Kingston Town Centre Area Action Plan

April 2009

Residential Design To provide guidance on achieving good design appropriate to the borough.

February 2011

Planning Obligations

To provide additional information on planning obligations. Content will be affected by the proposed Planning Gain Supplement

February 2011

- 5 -

Table 2: Royal Borough of Kingston Supplementary Planning Guidance Title Published Residential Extensions SPG 1982

Landscape Design Guide SPG 1992

Conservation Area General Guide SPG 2002

Sustainable Construction SPG

2004

Development Briefs

Kingston Power Station, Skerne Road (PS1) April 1995

Kingston University, Kingston Hill (PS32) October 1993

Ashdown Road (UDP PS 22) Feb 2002

Kingston Hospital, Galsworthy Road (PS31) Dec 2001

St John’s Industrial Area (PS29) March 2003

Hook Rise South, Tolworth (PS42) March 2003

Vicarage Road, Kingston (PS2) June 2003

Cocks Crescent, New Malden (PS33a) April 2003

Station Car Park, Surbiton (PS39a) June 2004

- 6 -

2. Process for Preparing Local Development Documents 2.1 The process for preparing Development Plan Documents and

Supplementary Planning Documents is set down in Government Regulations and Planning Policy Statement 12 ‘Local Development Frameworks’. The stages of production are summarised as follows:

Table 3: Statutory processes for preparing local development documents Process for preparing Development Plan Documents 1 Issues and

Options Evidence gathering, early contact with key stakeholders, and local communities

2 Preferred options

Formal public participation on preferred options for policies and proposals over a six-week period (accompanied by a ‘sustainability report’).

3 Submission

The Council submits its plan to the Secretary of State. Representations can be made which the inspector will consider when testing the plan for soundness.

4 Examination The Inspector considers whether the plan is ‘sound’, based on nine tests of soundness.

5 Inspector’s report

The Council receives the Inspector’s findings which are binding on the authority.

6 Adoption The Council can formally adopt the Development Plan Document

Process for preparing Supplementary Planning Documents 1 Prepare

consultation draft

Evidence gathering, early contact with key stakeholders, and local communities

2 Publish Draft SPD

4 to 6 week period for consultation on draft Supplementary Planning Document

3 Adoption Council makes changes in light of representations and adopts the Supplementary Planning Document.

3. Kingston’s LDF programme 3.1 Table 4 below shows the timelines for all the proposed Local Development Documents, indicating the key ‘milestones’. The rationale for the programme outlined in table 4, and in the documents profiles at Annex 1 is as follows: Development Plan Documents 3.2 The Kingston town centre AAP is the Council’s first DPD – the programmed date for submission is May 2007. This plan is crucial to the future development and well-being of Kingston town centre, which itself is the principal focus for change and development within the Borough. The AAP proposes significant new development and a range of improvements to enhance

- 7 -

Kingston’s role as a metropolitan centre and sub-regional shopping centre consistent with the London Plan and PPS6 (Planning for Town Centres). 3.3 The area action plan is programmed ahead of the core strategy in response to local circumstances and the priority afforded to this metropolitan town centre. The need for action to shape future development and regeneration of the town centre was recognised in 2001. After a decade of steady growth concerns were being expressed about the loss of daytime visitors and about the future attractiveness and vitality of the centre. Furthermore a retail study carried out in 2002 identified a need (and capacity) for additional retail floorspace, environmental and access improvements, and there was renewed developer interest in the town centre for significant retail development. 3.4 In November 2002 the Council’s Executive endorsed the preparation of a strategy for Kingston town centre, to be known as K+20. With the onset of the new planning system (introduced in September 2004) it made sense to prepare K+20 as an area action plan. The timing meant it would precede the core strategy, which could not realistically be prepared until the UDP was adopted (August 2005). The area action plan would be prepared in the context of the London Plan and up-to-date saved strategic (Part 1) policies in the UDP (which will themselves be replaced by the core strategy in due course). This aligns with the circumstances set out in PPS12 paragraph 2.9 which states “The core strategy should normally be the first development plan document to be produced except where the local planning authority has up to date saved policies and where the priority in the local development scheme is the preparation of an area action plan or other development plan document.” 3.5 Following submission of the plan in May 2007, it is envisaged that 5 months will be needed to carry out the two statutory periods for making site related representations (Regulations 29 and 33) and to prepare the material for the inspectorate before a pre-examination meeting. A pre-examination meeting is therefore envisaged in October 2007. The planning inspectorate suggest 2 - 3 months is necessary before the examination itself, so January 2008 is proposed for the examination, avoiding December and the Christmas period. On the basis that 6 months is allowed for receipt of the Inspector’s report, the Council should receive that by July 2008. The first opportunity to take the plan to Council for adoption is October 2008. 3.6 The core strategy timetable is considered to represent a realistic programme for preparation, given the need for significant community engagement and considerable close working across many sectors of the Council and its partners, including the Local Strategic Partnership. 3.7 The development control policies DPD can only be examined for soundness once the core strategy is found to be sound. The development control policies need to be written so that they comply with, and will help implement, the core strategy. The approach has therefore been taken to submit

- 8 -

the development control policies after the Inspector’s report has been received into the core strategy. The timeline allows for amendments to be made to the development control policies ahead of submission in response to any changes the inspector makes to the core strategy. 3.8 The Hogsmill/Kingsmeadow AAP has a regeneration focus and will be progressed as soon as it can following the core strategy with which it must comply. 3.9 A site allocations DPD is scheduled for later in the programme. This allows a discussion on sites to be had in the context of an approved core strategy. It also reduces the risk of slippage on the core strategy (which is the Council’s priority) being caused by prolonged discussion and debate on site specific matters resulting from the allocations DPD being prepared alongside it. As explained in its annual monitoring report, the Council is satisfied that it has sufficient housing land supply, including sites within the Kingston town centre area action plan, to meet housing requirements over the period at least until the site allocations DPD is proposed to be adopted. If monitoring suggests a need for a site allocation DPD to be brought forward this would be addressed through a revised LDS. 3.10 On the issue of waste the Council is working with the south London boroughs of Merton, Sutton and Croydon to establish joint waste procurement processes for municipal waste. In parallel, the principle of working jointly on planning issues for all waste is currently being progressed, alongside developing a joint strategy and programme for delivering sites to meet the waste imperative through the waste planning DPD. However, until the work has been progressed and the joint working arrangements formalised it is not possible to identify a fully considered timetable. This Council and its partner authorities are fully committed to progress the waste planning DPD in good time to meet the July 2010 target date of Article 7 of the Waste Framework Directive target. The LDS will be revised to include key milestones once a timetable for the waste DPD has been established. Supplementary Planning Documents 3.11 An SPD for the Kingston Old Town Conservation Area is proposed to help achieve objectives for the conservation area in line with the Kingston Town Centre area action plan. A character appraisal and management proposals have been prepared and it is proposed to publish a draft SPD following adoption of the area action plan. 3.12 An SPD on residential design will give guidance to help implement a core strategy policy on design. It will be informed by a borough character appraisal which will also serve to inform the core strategy. It is proposed to publish a draft SPD following adoption of the core strategy.

- 9 -

3.13 An SPD on planning obligations is also proposed to give guidance on the implementation of core strategy policies on infrastructure and planning obligations. It is proposed to publish a draft SPD following adoption of the core strategy. The content of the SPD (and possibly its timing) will depend on the government’s proposals for a Planning Gain Supplement with scaled back Section 106 contributions.

- 1

0 -

Tabl

e 4

: Th

ree-

year

tim

elin

es f

or R

BK

Loc

al D

evel

opm

ent

Doc

um

ents

20

07

20

08

20

09

20

10

Doc

um

ent

A

M

J J

A

SO

ND

JF

MA

MJ

JA

SO

ND

J F

MA

MJ

JA

SO

ND

JF

MA

MJ

JA

S O

N

King

ston

Tow

n Ce

ntre

Are

a Ac

tion

Plan

DPD

S

E

IR

A

Core

Str

ateg

y D

PD

P

O

S

E

IR

A

Join

t W

aste

DPD

P

rogr

amm

e to

be

dete

rmin

ed b

y So

uth

Wes

t Lo

ndon

Was

te P

lann

ing

Gro

up

Hog

smill

Val

ley/

Ki

ngsm

eado

w A

AP D

PD

PO

S

E

IR

Dev

elop

men

t Co

ntro

l Po

licie

s D

PD

P

O

S

Site

allo

catio

ns D

PD

C

King

ston

Old

Tow

n Co

nser

vatio

n Ar

ea S

PD

C

C

D

A

Res

iden

tial D

esig

n SP

D

C

CD

Infr

astr

uctu

re &

Ser

vice

s

Plan

ning

Obl

igat

ions

SPD

C

CD

Key

: C

=

Com

men

ce p

repa

ratio

n, g

athe

r ev

iden

ce a

nd e

ngag

e st

akeh

olde

rs

PO

= P

refe

rred

opt

ions

con

sulta

tion

S

=

Sub

mit

to S

ecre

tary

of

Stat

e

IR

= T

he C

ounc

il re

ceiv

es t

he I

nspe

ctor

’s R

epor

t (6

mon

ths

afte

r th

e ex

amin

atio

n in

acc

orda

nce

with

adv

ice

from

the

Pl

anni

ng I

nspe

ctor

ate)

E

=

Exa

min

atio

n

A

= A

dopt

ion

CD

= C

onsu

ltatio

n dr

aft

of S

PD

- 11 -

4. Resources 4.1 The Council’s Policy and Implementation Section within the Planning and

Development Department has responsibility for preparing the LDF. Within that section the Planning Policy Team and the Projects Team have responsibility for most of its elements. Conservation and Design teams also sit within Policy and Implementation and have a key role. Development Control teams will also be involved, as will many other departments and directorates outside Planning and Development to ensure a spatial planning approach is taken to deliver more corporate objectives. Consultants have been used to develop specific aspects of the evidence base, and in a more general advisory capacity.

4.2 Costs anticipated to be incurred by the LDF process are factored into

budgets set for the year. Planning Delivery Grant has helped develop certain evidence base studies and to receive expert advice, but there is uncertainty over future income from this source.

5. Risk Assessment 5.1 The main areas of risk, which could lead to slippage in the programme

have been identified as:

• Inadequate skills base, staff turnover and recruitment problems in the exceptionally tough London labour market;

• Uncertainty over the future level of Planning Delivery Grant generally and specifically the allocations for this Council;

• Political changes to policy directions or Council organisation and procedures, including through Council elections;

• Capacity of the Planning Inspectorate and other agencies to cope with demand for their services;

• Failure to make robust arrangements to meet the examination timetable

• Legal or other challenges. We will work closely with GOL, the Planning Inspectorate, the GLA and other agencies to ensure that the policies have a robust evidence base, there is well-audited community engagement, and correct procedures have been used.

• Changing circumstances or emerging development pressures which alter priorities and will lead to proposed addition or substitution of Local Development Documents.

• Poor project management • The scale and nature of consultation responses • Unanticipated delays in external events in particular examinations • Unexpected new evidence or poor management of the supply of

evidence

ANNEX 1

- 12 -

Profiles of each Local Development Document Area Action Plan for Kingston Town Centre Role and Purpose Kingston town centre is a popular and successful metropolitan centre. After a decade of steady growth in the 1990s, concerns were expressed about its future attractiveness and vitality following a loss of day time visitors to other centres. Kingston needs to enhance its role as a metropolitan centre, consistent with the London Plan and PPS6, by promoting new retail and commercial development alongside a range of other uses and improvements, to maintain its competitiveness and attraction, especially to catchment area shoppers. In June 2003, the Council launched K+20, with the aim of developing a vision and strategy for the town centre, in consultation with stakeholders and the local community. There is strong developer interest in redeveloping parts of the town centre which are in need of significant upgrading. In July 2003, the Council entered into a Co-operation Agreement with developer Hammerson, who are working on a masterplan for retail led mixed-use development. This agreement has been extended to mid 2007. Under the new planning system, an Area Action Plan is an appropriate tool to provide a planning framework to guide future development and improvement and actively plan for growth. The Issues consultation in 2004 is counting as the initial Regulation 25 consultation. Formal consultation under Regulation 26 was carried out in June/July 2005, including on an accompanying Sustainability Appraisal. It is vital that the Council can proceed with the Area Action Plan, which provides the basis for a pro-active approach to managing change, as well as conservation and enhancement of the town centre. Status Development Plan Document Geographical Coverage Kingston town centre. The town centre boundary in the AAP is consistent with that in the UDP. UDP Policies to be replaced All the policies in Chapter 12 on Kingston: STR21 (The Range of Functions in Kingston Town Centre), STR22 (Townscape Strategy), STR23 (Accessibility to and within the Town Centre), policies KTC1 to KTC27 and policies for Proposal Sites PS1 to 22a and PS29a. Conformity With national policies, the London Plan, saved UDP (Part 1) policies (except those it is intended to replace) and having regard to the Community Plan.

ANNEX 1

- 13 -

Timetable Evidence gathering / preparing issues and options in consultation (Regulation 25)

Began in 2003 as part of the K+20 strategy and ongoing to May 2005.

Formal six week public participation on preferred options (Regulation 26)

June – July 2005

Submission of DPD and ‘Submission Proposals Map’ showing how the adopted Proposals Map is to be amended.

May 2007

Pre-examination meeting October 2007 Examination commences January 2008 Adoption October 2008

Arrangements for Production Organisational Lead

Planning Projects Manager

Political Management

Executive Member with responsibility for planning.

Internal resources Projects Team Planning Policy Team Conservation and Design Team Highways and Transportation Partnership and Regeneration Unit Housing Department Environment and Sustainability Leisure Services

External resources

Consultants have undertaken various studies (retail, office capacity, parking, park and ride, cycle parking, integrated transport and Old Town Conservation Area) the results of which have informed the AAP.

Forms of consultation/ engagement

Initial engagement with stakeholders and consultation was undertaken as part of the K+20 strategy and included a workshop/launch event. For the ‘preferred options’ stage (Reg 26) a range of consultation methods were used including a questionnaire, workshop, meetings and exhibitions.

ANNEX 1

- 14 -

Core Strategy Role and Subject The Core Strategy will set the vision, strategic objectives, spatial strategy and core policies for the borough over a 10 to 15 year time horizon. Status Development Plan Document Geographical Coverage Borough-wide UDP Policies to be replaced The Core Strategy will replace a number of UDP policies, in particular the strategic (STR) policies. Conformity With the London Plan, and with regard to the Community Plan and other strategies. Timetable Evidence gathering / preparing issues and options/ early engagement/ consultation (Regulation 25)

January 2006


June 2008


March 2009

Pre-examination meeting June 2009 Examination commences September

2009 Adoption June 2010

Arrangements for Production

Organisational Lead LDF Manager Political Management Executive Member with responsibility for Planning Internal Resources

Planning Policy Team Development Control Team Projects Team Conservation and Design Highways & Transportation - Strategic Transport Manager and various other officers Environment & Sustainability – various. Plus input from Housing Services, Community Services, Education & Leisure, Partnerships & Regeneration and Central Policy team

External Resources Consultants for evidence base studies. Forms of Consultation/engagement

In accordance with the SCI.

ANNEX 1

- 15 -

Waste DPD Role and Purpose To address the need for sites for new waste management facilities on a sub-regional basis across the boroughs of Kingston upon Thames, Sutton, Merton and Croydon. Status Development Plan Document Geographical Coverage Kingston-Upon-Thames, Sutton, Merton and Croydon UDP Policies to be replaced MW1 Development of Waste Management Facilities, MW2 Waste and Environment Conformity With the London Plan and emerging Core Strategy. Timetable The timetable is in the process of being prepared. Evidence gathering, issues and options in consultation with key stakeholders (Regulation 25)

To be programmed


To be programmed

Submission of DPD and ‘Submission Proposals Map’ showing how the adopted Proposals Map is to be amended by the DPD

To be programmed

Pre-Examination Meeting To be programmed

Examination commences To be programmed

Estimated date for adoption To be programmed

Arrangements for Production Organisational Lead Senior policy planners working with

consultants Political Management Internal resources Planning Policy Team

Environment and Sustainability Dept External resources Enviros consultancy preparing the DPD Forms of Consultation/ Engagement

In accordance with the SCI.

ANNEX 1

- 16 -

Hogsmill Valley North & Kingsmeadow Area Action Plan Role and Purpose To provide the planning framework for the enhancement of the Metropolitan Open Land (MOL) in the Hogsmill Valley including the Hogsmill Sewage Works and its surrounding land, the Kingsmeadow area and neighbouring sites. The AAP will consider options available to enhance this underused area, and identify appropriate uses. This wide northerly part of the Hogsmill Valley MOL is subject to development pressures, e.g. for student housing on a disused part of the Hogsmill sewage works and new leisure facilities at Kingsmeadow sports ground. An important aim of the AAP will be progressing the implementation of the Hogsmill Valley Walk Strategy. Status Development Plan Document. Geographical Coverage Hogsmill Valley North / Kingsmeadow area. UDP Policies to be replaced Any UDP allocations and designations within the AAP boundary. Conformity With the London Plan and Core Strategy. Timetable Evidence gathering / preparing issues and options in consultation (Regulation 25)

January 2006


January 2009

Submission of DPD and ‘Submission Proposals Map’ showing how the adopted Proposals Map is to be amended by the DPD

November 2009

Pre-examination meeting March 2010 Examination commences May 2010 Adoption January

2011 Arrangements for Production Organisational Lead Planning Projects Manager Political Management Executive Member with responsibility for

Planning Internal Resources Projects Team

Planning Policy Team Conservation and Design Team Development Control Team Environment and Sustainability Highways and Transportation Leisure Services.

External Resources None Forms of Consultation/engagement

In accordance with the SCI

ANNEX 1

- 17 -

Development Control Policies Role and Content To provide detailed policies to help determine planning applications in accordance with the core strategy Status Development Plan Document Geographical Coverage Borough wide and site/area-specific. UDP Policies to be replaced A number of saved policies will be replaced by this DPD. Conformity With the London Plan and Core Strategy Timetable Evidence gathering / preparing issues and options in consultation (Regulation 25)

January 2006


September 2009


September 2010

Pre-examination meeting December 2010

Examination commences March 2011 Adoption October 2011 Arrangements for Production Organisational Lead LDF Manager Political Management Executive Member responsible for planning Internal resources Planning Policy team

Projects Team Development Control Team Conservation and Design Team Highways and Transportation Dept Housing Department Environment & Sustainability

External resources None Forms of Consultation/Engagement In accordance with the SCI

ANNEX 1

- 18 -

Site Allocations Role and Content To identify sites for development, and determining the uses on those sites. Status Development Plan Document Geographical Coverage Borough wide UDP Policies to be replaced Saved proposal sites Conformity With the London Plan and Core Strategy Timetable Evidence gathering / preparing issues and options in consultation (Regulation 25)

June 2010


February 2011


September 2011

Pre-examination meeting December 2011

Examination commences March 2012 Adoption December

2012 Arrangements for Production Organisational Lead LDF Manager Political Management Executive Member responsible for planning Internal resources Planning Policy team

Projects Team Development Control Team Conservation and Design Team Highways and Transportation Dept Housing Department Environment & Sustainability

External resources Potential use of consultants for evidence base studies and public participation.

Forms of Consultation/Engagement In accordance with the SCI

ANNEX 1

- 19 -

Proposals Map and Inset Maps Role and Purpose To illustrate on an OS base map, area and site-specific policies and proposals in the Development Plan Documents. It will also show saved area/site-specific policies until such time as they are replaced in Development Plan Documents. Further detail will be shown on inset maps. Status Development Plan Document Geographical Coverage Borough-wide (Proposals Map), parts of Borough (Inset Maps). UDP Policies to be replaced As Development Plan Documents replace UDP policies, the UDP Proposals Map and insets will be updated accordingly. Conformity With saved policies and adopted DPDs Timetable

Updated as each DPD is adopted

Development Plan Document Date of adoption Kingston Town Centre Area Action Plan October 2008 Core Strategy June 2010 Joint Waste DPD To be programmed Hogsmill Valley North/Kingsmeadow Area Action Plan January 2011 Development Control Policies DPD October 2011 Site Allocations DPD December 2012 Arrangements for Production Organisational lead LDF Manager Political management Executive Member with responsibility for

Planning Internal resources Planning Policy team

GIS Development Team Presentation Unit

External resources Printing and Production selected by competitive tender.

Forms of consultation/engagement

N/A

ANNEX 1

- 20 -

Kingston Old Town SPD Role and Purpose To provide detailed planning guidance for the old town conservation area, supplementing policies in the Kingston Town Centre Area Action Plan. Status Supplementary Planning Document. Geographical Coverage Kingston Old Town Conservation Area Conformity With the Kingston Town Centre Area Action Plan Timetable Evidence gathering/ Preparation of draft SPD November 2007 Public participation on draft SPD November 2008 Adoption April 2009 Arrangements for Production Organisational Lead Conservation Manager Political Management Executive Member with responsibility for Planning Internal resources Conservation and Design Team

Development Control Team Planning Policy team Projects Team

External resources Consultants have prepared a character appraisal of the Conservation Area which will inform the SPD.

Forms of Consultation/ Engagement


ANNEX 1

- 21 -

Residential Design SPD Role and Purpose Guidance on the design of residential development and residential extensions. Will review and expand on the advice provided in the existing Residential Extensions SPG, to provide guidelines for the form and type that any proposed residential development should take in an area. This will seek to achieve a higher standard of design by helping to ensure that the best possible use is made of urban land whilst respecting the character and appearance of the surrounding area. Status Supplementary Planning Document. Geographical Coverage Borough wide. Conformity Must be in general conformity with the London Plan and the emerging core strategy, having regard to the community plan. Timetable Evidence gathering/ Preparation of draft SPD May 2009 Public participation on draft SPD September 2010 Adoption February 2011 Arrangements for Production Organisational Lead Design Manager Political Management Executive Member with responsibility for Planning Internal resources Conservation and Design Team

Development Control Team Planning Policy team

External resources Sub-Regional study on housing issues to be funded by the Southern region of ‘Urban Design London’.

Forms of Consultation/ Engagement


ANNEX 1

- 22 -

Planning Obligations SPD Role and Purpose To provide guidance on the requirements and mechanisms for infrastructure contributions, and related social, economic, environmental and cultural provision (including open space, transport, training and enterprise support provision, education and community facilities, safety and security features) through developments in the borough. Status Supplementary Planning Document. Geographical Coverage Borough- wide Conformity Must be in general conformity with the London Plan and the Core Strategy, and have regard to the Community Plan. Timetable Evidence gathering /Preparation of draft SPD May 2009 Public participation on draft SPD September 2010 Adoption February 2011 Arrangements for Production Organisational Lead Planning Projects Manager Political Management Executive Member with responsibility for

Planning Internal resources Projects Team

Planning Policy team Legal Services

External resources None Forms of Consultation/Engagement In accordance with the SCI

ANNEX 2

- 23 -

Glossary (note: terms in italics are explained elsewhere in the glossary) The Act: the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 Annual Monitoring Report (AMR): part of the Local Development Framework, the annual monitoring report will assess the implementation of the Local Development Scheme and the extent to which policies in the Local Development Documents are being successfully implemented. Area Action Plan (AAP): used to provide a planning framework for areas of change and areas of conservation. Area Action Plans will have the status of Development Plan Documents. Community Plan: prepared as a requirement of the Local Government Act 2000, it sets out vision for Kingston based on a community planning process. It was produced by the Kingston Community Leadership Forum; a partnership of organisations representing all sectors of the Kingston Community. Go to http://www.kingston.gov.uk/community_planning Core Strategy: sets out the long-term spatial vision for the local planning authority area, strategic objectives, and strategic policies to deliver that vision. The Core Strategy will have the status of a Development Plan Document. Development Plan: in Kingston this consists of the Spatial Development Strategy for London (The London Plan), saved Unitary Development Plan policies, and Development Plan Documents within the Local Development Framework. Development Plan Documents (DPDs): spatial planning documents that are subject to independent examination, and together with the London Plan will form the development plan for the local authority area. Development Plan Documents can include Core Strategy, Site-specific Allocations of Land, and Area Action Plans (where needed). Other Development Plan Documents including generic Development Control Policies, can be produced. They will all be shown geographically on an adopted proposal map. Individual Development Plan Documents or parts of a document can be reviewed independently from other Development Plan Documents. Each Authority must set out the programme for preparing its Development Plan Documents in the Local Development Scheme. Examination: all Development Plan Documents and the Statement of Community Involvement are subject to independent examination by the Planning Inspectorate. This examination will test the ‘soundness’ of the document. Generic development control policies: these will be a suite of criteria-based policies which are required to ensure that developments within the area meet the spatial vision and objectives set out in the Core Strategy. These may be included in any Development Plan Document or may form a stand-alone document. Inspector’s Report: a report issued by the Inspector or Panel who conducted the Examination, setting out their conclusions on the matters raised and detailing amendments to be made to the document. The inspectors report is binding on the local planning authority.

ANNEX 2

- 24 -

Issues and options: produced during the early production stages of the preparation of Development Plan Documents and may be issued for consultation to meet the requirements of Regulation 25. Local Development Documents (LDDs): the collective term in the Act for Development Plan Documents, Supplementary Planning Documents, and the Statement of Community Involvement (SCI). Local Development Framework (LDF): The name of the portfolio of Local Development Documents. It consists of Development Plan Documents, Supplementary Planning Documents, a Statement of Community Involvement, the Local Development Scheme and Annual Monitoring Reports. Together these documents provide the framework for delivering spatial planning strategy for a local authority area and may also include local development orders and simplified planning zones. Local Development Scheme (LDS): sets out the programme for preparing Local Development Documents. This must be submitted to the Secretary of State for approval within six months of the commencement of the Act. London Plan: the Spatial Development Strategy for London. It provides a strategic framework for Borough’s Local Development Framework. It has the status of a development plan under the Act. The Kingston Local Development Framework is required to generally conform to the London Plan. Planning Policy Statement (PPS): national planning policy produced by the Government. Previously known as Planning Policy Guidance notes (PPGs) they set out the Government’s spatial planning policies for England. Preferred options document: produced as part of the preparation of a Development Plan Document and is issued for formal public participation as required by Regulation 26. Proposals map: the adopted proposals map illustrates on a base map (reproduced from, or based upon a map base to registered scale) all the policies and proposals contained in Development Plan Documents, together with any saved policies. To be revised as each new Development Plan Document is adopted and it should always reflect the up-to-date planning strategy for the area. Proposals for changes to the adopted proposals map accompany submitted development plan documents in the form of a submission proposals map. The Regulations: Town and Country Planning (Local Development) (England) Regulations 2004, and the Town and Country Planning (Transitional Arrangements) Regulations 2004. Saved Policies: policies in the Unitary Development Plan which remain effective. Site Specific Allocations: allocations of sites for specific or mixed uses or development to be contained in Development Plan Documents. Policies will identify any specific requirements for individual proposals. Spatial Development Plan for London the Spatial Development Strategy for London provides a strategic framework for Boroughs’ Local Development Framework. It has the status of a development plan under the Act. The Kingston Local Development Framework is required to generally conform to the London Plan.

ANNEX 2

- 25 -

Statement of Community Involvement (SCI): sets out the standards which the Council will achieve with regard to involving the community in the preparation of Local Development Documents and development control decisions. The Statement of Community Involvement is not a Development Plan Document but is subject to independent examination. Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA): a generic term used to describe environmental assessment as applied to policies, plans and programmes. The European ‘SEA Directive’ (2001/42/EC) requires a formal ‘environmental assessment of certain plans and programmes, including those in the field of planning and land use’. Supplementary Planning Documents (SPDs) provide supplementary information in respect of the policies in Development Plan Documents. They do not form part of the development plan and are not subject to independent examination. Sustainability Appraisal (SA): tool for appraising policies to ensure they reflect sustainable development objectives (i.e. social, environmental and economic factors) and required in the Act to be undertaken for all Local Development Documents. It encompasses all the requirements of the SEA (see above). Unitary Development Plan (UDP): A borough wide statutory development plan, setting out the Council’s policies for the development and use of land. This will be replaced by the Local Development Framework.

APPENDIX J Executive, 20th March 2007

SAVING UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICIES Report by the Head of Planning and Development Executive Member for Transport, Planning and Regeneration

Purpose The purpose of this report is to seek the agreement of the Executive for an application to the Secretary of State to save certain Unitary Development Plan policies beyond September 2007.

Action proposed by the Executive Member for: Transport, Planning and Regeneration The Executive is requested to agree the schedules at annexes 2 and 3 as the basis of an application to the Secretary of State to issue a direction to save UDP policies beyond September 2007. Reason for action proposed To enable an application to be made to the Secretary of State to save certain UDP policies that are only otherwise saved to September 2007.

BACKGROUND 1. The Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 gave local planning

authorities the statutory powers to commence the preparation of Local Development Frameworks (LDF’s). LDF’s will replace old style Development Plans (in RBK’s case, the Unitary Development Plan). Subsequently, some authorities have chosen to adopt existing Development Plans that were nearing completion, whilst others commenced work immediately on their new LDF.

2. The Council adopted its Unitary Development Plan First Alteration in

August 2005. It was a partial review, i.e. some policies changed from the original 1998 UDP, but others remained untouched. Those policies that were reviewed are automatically saved until August 2008, 3 years from the date of adoption. Those that weren’t reviewed (hereafter named “old policies”) are automatically saved until September 2007, 3 years after the commencement of the Planning and Compulsory Act 2004. A request can be made of the Secretary of State to save policies beyond the relevant three year period. The deadline is 1st April 2007 for policies due to ‘expire’ in September 2007.

CRITERIA FOR SAVING POLICIES 3. Part of the rationale for the new planning system was to slim down plans,

avoiding unnecessary policies such as those that are not or rarely used, those that duplicate others or those which simply shouldn’t belong in a

J2

spatial plan. The Council must therefore justify the policies it wishes to save. A Department of Communities and Local Government (DCLG) protocol sets out the criteria against which saved policies will be assessed:

(i) where appropriate, there is a clear central strategy; (ii) policies have regard to the Community Strategy for the area; (iii) policies are in general conformity with the regional spatial strategy or spatial

development strategy; (iv) policies are in conformity with the core strategy development plan document

(where the core strategy has been adopted); (v) there are effective policies for any parts of the authority’s area where significant

change in the use or development of land or conservation of the area is envisaged; and

(vi) policies are necessary and do not merely repeat national or regional policy.

5. In addition, the government will also have particular regard to:

o Policies that support the delivery of housing, including unimplemented site allocations, up to date affordable housing policies, policies relating to the infrastructure necessary to support housing;

o Policies on Green Belt general extent in structure plans and detailed boundaries in

local plans/UDPs;

o Policies that support economic development and regeneration, including policies for retailing and town centres;

o Polices for waste management, including unimplemented site allocations;

o Policies that promote renewable energy; reduce impact on climate change; and

safeguard water resources.

6. Applications to the Secretary of State to save old policies must be submitted by April 1st 2007. The application must comprise two lists:

• those saved policies the Council wishes to extend beyond the 3

years saved period, with reasons; and

• those saved policies the Council does not wish to see saved beyond the 3 years saved period, with reasons.

7. A full analysis has been undertaken of all the old policies (listed at Annex

1). It is recommended that the Secretary of State be asked to save a significant majority, for the reasons set out in Annex 2 (Annex 2 is not included with the agenda due to its size (91 pages), but is available on the website at http://www.kingston.gov.uk/information/your_council/committeeminutes or from the planning policy team (020 8547 5302, email: [email protected] ). However, there are a number of polices which do not meet some or all of the criteria and which it is not

J3

necessary to be saved further, for reasons set out in Annex 3. The summary table below lists those policies and the reason for deletion.

Policy title Reason for recommending deletion H4: Provision of Residential Accommodation Above Ground Floor

The issue is covered by other UDP policies as well as national and London Plan policies.

H8: Separate Garage Blocks

The issues are covered by other UDP policies on residential amenity.

H11: Mobility Housing Superseded by a more stringent and beneficial London Plan policy H12: Wheelchair Housing Superseded by a more stringent and beneficial London Plan policy RL5: Enhanced Use of Existing Leisure Facilities

This policy is unnecessary as it duplicates policies STR8 Diversifying leisure facilities, MW7 Noise, T1 Transport Safety, T21 New Development and on-street parking

RL6: Allotments

This policy is unnecessary as it duplicates other open space policies that protect allotments.

STR22: Townscape Strategy

Not a strategic policy. Townscape addressed by other policies.

STR23: Accessibility to and within the Town Centre

This issue is covered by other UDP policies: Policies STR13 (A sustainable transport strategy); KTC14 (Implementation of townscape strategy); KTC24 (Pedestrian network) and KTC27 (Inner area of parking restriction).

KTC6: Restriction of Open Air Operations

The policy is unnecessary as the circumstances in which it would be used would never arise.

KTC10: The Central Library

The policy is unhelpful as written and the issue is covered by Policy KTC9 (provision of leisure, recreational, cultural and entertainment facilities).

KTC15: Building Heights Design in the town centre is covered by KTC13. A blanket approach to building heights can prevent good design and interesting townscape.

KTC16: Riverside Walks The public riverside walk has now been implemented. Policy KTC24 (Pedestrian network) adequately addresses other objectives of the policy.

KTC17: Design of Pedestrian Ways

This policy is unnecessary as Policy BE22 (pedestrian environment deals with pedestrian routes and areas. Policy BE15 (Safety and Lighting of Public Areas) is also relevant ensuring that crime and safety is taken into account in design.

KTC18: Width of New Buildings

Policy KTC13 adequately covers design. Conservation Area policies will also apply in the Kingston Old Town conservation area.

KTC19: Frontage Lines Policy KTC13 adequately covers design. KTC20: Plot Ratios Policy KTC13 adequately covers design and is less prescriptive

allowing good design that makes best use of land. KTC21: Design of Multi-Storey Car Parks

The original purpose of this policy was to ensure good design of proposed interceptor car parks for Kingston town centre. These have now been built. Certain criteria in the policy are also obsolete (e.g. a well designed car park need not be screened such as Seven Kings award winning car park).

KTC22: Bus Priority Measures

This policy is unnecessary duplication of Policy T9 (Bus Priority Measures) in the Transport Chapter.

DC6: Pedestrian Environment

This policy duplicates Policy T14 Pedestrian Network which is a much more comprehensive policy.

TOL2: Consolidation of Retail Area (in Tolworth District Centre)

This policy duplicates Policy DC1 (New retail floorspace) which seeks to consolidate and enhance the defined retail areas in all the district centres.

Proposal site PS30: Albany Park Sailing Base,

This proposal site (Albany Park Sailing base) is council owned property already being used for river based community/leisure, and the council

J4

Policy title Reason for recommending deletion Lower Ham Road, Kingston

has no plans for the use of this site to change in the future. It is therefore unnecessary for the site to be a proposal site allocation in the UDP. Any future changes to the site would be controlled by the saved UDP policies.

NEXT STAGES 8. A second application to the Secretary of State will need to be made in February/March

2008 which will deal with those UDP policies that were subject to the partial review of the UDP and adopted in August 2005 – the UDP First Alteration.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS 9. The policies have been analysed to ensure that those recommended for deletion are

not required and therefore unnecessary. Assuming the application to the Secretary of State is successful there will be no discernable negative environmental implications. If the Secretary of State decides not to save certain policies that the Council wishes to save then the potential consequences will be assessed accordingly.

RISK ASSESSMENT 10. If some or all of the old policies are not saved for whatever reason, there may be a

‘policy vacuum’ until the LDF Core Strategy and DC policies are adopted. However, due to the overlapping nature of many of the policies within the UDP, there will be a degree of protection given by the ‘new’ policies that were reviewed through the UDP Alteration process. It is unlikely that the Secretary of State will refuse an application to save the policies, provided a robust justification is made for each. However, in these circumstances, the implications will be assessed and proposed mitigating measures reported back to the Executive in the appropriate way.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS 11. There are no direct financial implications arising from the application to save UDP

policies. NETWORK IMPLICATIONS 12. There are no foreseeable network implications arising from the application to save

UDP policies. Background papers: held by Daniel Hawes, 020 8547 5355; e-mail: [email protected],gov.uk

• Unitary Development Plan First Alteration • Royal Borough of Kingston Community Plan • London Plan (Spatial Development Strategy for Greater London) • PPS12: Local Development Frameworks

J5

ANNEX 1

List of UDP policies that were not reviewed during the first alteration. These policies are the subject of the application to the Secretary of State to save or delete. Chapter number

Chapter / policy title Propose to save or delete

3. Housing and the Residential Environment

STR3 Housing Need Save H1 Protection of Residential Amenities Save H2 Residential and Other Uses in Residential Areas Save H3 Change from Residential Use Save H4 Provision of Residential Accommodation Above

Ground Floor Delete

H7 Residential Conversions and Houses in Multiple Occupation

Save

H8 Separate Garage Blocks Delete H10 Sheltered Housing for Elderly People and People with

Disabilities Save

H11 Mobility Housing Delete H12 Wheelchair Housing Delete H13 Conversion of Large Houses to Nursing Homes, etc. Save H14 Hostels for Single People Save 4. Economy and Employment E4 Relocation of Existing Employment Uses Outside

Industrial / Warehouse / Business Areas Save

E5 Hazardous Processes Save E6 Range of Unit Sizes

Save

5. Shopping S4 Retention of Shops Outside Kingston Town Centre

and the District and Local Shopping Centres Save

S5 Alternative Use of Shops Outside Kingston Town Centre, District and Local Shopping Centres

Save

S6 New Small Shops Outside Centres Save S7 Vehicle Sales etc. Save S8 Takeaway Food Shops, Restaurants etc. Save S9 Outdoor Markets Save

6. Built Environment STR6 Conserving and Enhancing the Built Environment Save BE1 Strategic Areas of Special Character and the

Protection of Key Views Save

BE2 Local Areas of Special Character Save BE3 Development in Conservation Areas Save BE4 Demolition of Buildings in Conservation Areas Save BE5 Demolition of Listed Buildings Save BE6 Works Affecting the Character of Listed Buildings Save BE7 Change of Use of Listed Buildings Save

J6

Chapter number


BE10 Grass Verges Save BE11 Design of New Buildings and Extensions Save BE12 Layout and Amenity of Buildings and Extensions Save BE13 Location of Building Plant Save BE14 Height of Buildings Save BE15 Safety and Lighting of Public Areas Save BE16 Design of New Shopfronts Save BE19 Areas of Archaeological Significance Save BE20 Ancient Monuments Save BE22 Pedestrian Environment Save BE23 Art in New Development Save 7. Open Environment OL1 The Green Belt Save OL2 Reuse of Buildings in the Green Belt Save OL3 Agriculture in the Green Belt Save OL4 Metropolitan Open Land Save OL5 New Buildings in the Green Belt and Metropolitan

Open Land Save

OL12 Stables, Riding Schools and Other Similar Establishments

Save

OL17 The River and Water Environment Save OL18 Flooding Save

8. Recreation and Leisure

STR8 Diversifying Leisure Facilities Save RL3 Retention or Replacement of Indoor Leisure Facilities Save RL4 Dual Use of Education and Community Facilities for

Leisure Purposes Save

RL5 Enhanced Use of Existing Leisure Facilities Delete RL6 Allotments Delete RL7 Children’s Play Provision Save RL8 New Hotel Accommodation Save RL9 Tourism and Visitors Save

9. Community Services STR9 Community Services Save CS1 New Community Facilities and the Extension of

Existing Community Facilities Save

CS2 Facilities for Care in the Community Save CS3 Adult Education Facilities and Youth Centres Save CS4 Customer Facilities and Conveniences Save CS5 Gypsies and Travellers Save 10. Minerals, Waste, Energy and Pollution Control

MW7 Noise Save 11. Transport T1 Transport Safety Save T2 Restriction on Delivery Hours Save

J7

Chapter number


T4 Management and Improvement of the Secondary Road Network

Save

T5 Local Distributor Roads Save T7 Traffic Calming in New Developments Save T8 Lorry Routes Save T9 Bus Priority Measures Save T11 Public Transport Accessibility Save T14 Pedestrian Network Save T16 Overnight Lorry Parking Save T26 Temporary Car Parking Save T28 Off-Street Servicing and Parking Save T29 Use of Shopping Forecourts Save

12. Kingston Town Centre

STR22 Townscape Strategy Delete STR23 Accessibility to and within the Town Centre Delete KTC1 Shopping Provision in Kingston Town Centre Save KTC3 Small Shop Units Save KTC4 Markets Save KTC6 Restriction of Open Air Operations Delete KTC7 Location of Arts and Craft Workshops Save KTC10 The Central Library Delete KTC11 Open Space in Kingston Town Centre Save KTC12 Provision of Hotel and Other Visitor Facilities Save KTC13 Design Standards Save KTC15 Building Heights Delete KTC16 Riverside Walks Delete KTC17 Design of Pedestrian Ways Delete KTC18 Width of New Buildings Delete KTC19 Frontage Lines Delete KTC20 Plot Ratios Delete KTC21 Design of Multi-Storey Car Parks Delete KTC22 Bus Priority Measures Delete KTC24 Pedestrian Network Save KTC25 Servicing Facilities in the Pedestrian Priority Area Save

13. District Centres DC1 New Retail Floorspace Save DC4 Areas of Mixed Use Save DC6 Pedestrian Environment Delete NM2 Rear Service Roads Save NM3 Design and Scale of New Development Save SUR3 Design and Scale of New Development Save SUR4 Rear Service Roads Save TOL2 Consolidation of Retail Area Delete TOL3 Design and Scale of New Development Save TOL4 Broadoaks Rear Service Road Save 14. Resources and Implementation RES1 Control of Development, Site Assembly, etc. Save RES2 Planning Conditions and Agreements Save

J8

Chapter number


RES4 Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) Save RES5 Temporary Planning Permissions and Renewal of

Expired Permissions Save

RES6 Provision of Adequate Infrastructure Save RES7 Monitoring Save RES8 Community Benefit Save 15. Proposal Sites PS1 Former Power Station, Skerne Road/Canbury

Gardens Save

PS10 North West Corner of Fife Road Save PS11 107-163 Clarence Street/Station Buildings, Fife Road

and 58-66 Fife Road/30 Castle Street and Former Empire Works

Save

PS12 55-83a Clarence Street, 4-46 Fife Road Save PS17 Guildhall/Bath Passage/St James’ Road Save PS19 Surrey County Hall, Penrhyn Road Save PS27 Rex Motors, 196-198 Cambridge Road, Kingston Save PS30 Albany Park Sailing Base, Lower Ham Road, Kingston Delete PS32 Kingston University, Kingston Hill Save PS40 Tolworth Main Allotments, Surbiton Save PS43 Land at Kingston Road / Jubilee Way, Tolworth Save PS44 Tolworth Court and Farm Lands, Tolworth Save PS45 King Edward’s Playing Field and Land North of

Clayton Road, Hook Save

PS47 Churchfields Allotments, Church Lane, Chessington Save PS50 Chessington World of Adventures Save

J9

ANNEX 2

Schedule of UDP policies to be saved At 91 pages this schedule is too large to be printed with the Executive meeting agenda. Those wishing to see the justification for policies to be saved can access the document as part of the agenda for the Executive meeting on 20th March 2007 via the following link: http://www.kingston.gov.uk/information/your_council/committeeminutes Alternatively please contact the Planning Policy Team on 020 8547 5302 and they can provide a copy.

J10

ANNEX 3

Schedule of UDP policies proposed to be deleted

UDP First Alteration – policies to be deleted with reasons

Policy Reasons for deletion

Provision of Residential Accommodation Above Ground Floor H4 IN ORDER TO INCREASE THE PROVISION OF RESIDENTIAL ACCOMMODATION IN KINGSTON TOWN CENTRE, THE DISTRICT AND LOCAL SHOPPING CENTRES, THE COUNCIL WILL:- 1. IN KINGSTON TOWN CENTRE GIVE PRIORITY TO RESIDENTIAL USE OF UPPER FLOORS IN ACCORDANCE WITH POLICY KTC5; 2. IN THE DISTRICT AND LOCAL SHOPPING CENTRES GIVE PRIORITY, SUBJECT TO AMENITY AND ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS, TO THE RESIDENTIAL USE OF UPPER FLOORS IN SHOPPING STREETS; 3. GIVE PLANNING PERMISSION FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ON APPROPRIATE SITES IN KINGSTON TOWN CENTRE AND THE DISTRICT CENTRES.

This policy gives priority to residential uses above ground floors. In fact PPS6 gives equal encouragement to offices above ground floors stating “residential or office development should be encouraged as appropriate uses above ground floor retail, leisure or other facilities within centres.” Other UDP policies encourage (rather than give priority to) residential accommodation above shops in Kingston town centre (Policy KTC5), in New Malden (Policy NM1) and Surbiton (Policy SUR) and are therefore more in line with national policy. The third point in the policy about giving planning permission for residential development in the town and district centres is also considered irrelevant in light of PPS6 and the London Plan which encourage residential development in town centres.

Separate Garage Blocks H8 WITHIN RESIDENTIAL AREAS THE DEVELOPMENT OF GARAGE BLOCKS SEPARATE FROM RESIDENTIAL UNITS WILL NOT BE PERMITTED UNLESS THEY FORM PART OF, AND ARE TO BE USED SOLELY BY THE OCCUPIERS OF AN ASSOCIATED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. THE LOSS OF EXISTING GARAGES AND OFF-STREET PARKING SERVING A RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WILL BE RESISTED, ESPECIALLY WHERE ON-STREET PARKING IS WELL UTILISED.

The reason for this policy is twofold; firstly, to prevent the development of independent blocks of lock-up garages within residential areas because of loss of privacy, security and amenity; and secondly, to resist the loss of off-street parking where this would create on-street parking problems. The first issue is adequately covered by Policy H1: (protection of residential amenities) which apply to all development stating that the Council will have regard to residential amenities in terms of noise, disturbance, privacy, safety, outlook and daylight. Policy BE15 (safety and lighting) is also relevant. The second issue (concern over on-street parking) is covered by Policy T21 (New development and on-street parking) which says that “planning permission will not be granted for development that would result in an increase in on-street parking where it would adversely affect traffic flows, bus movement, road safety, the amenities of local residents or the local environment unless a range of measures is included as part of the development which would satisfactorily prevent any further increase in on-street parking.” The concerns over the issues raised in Policy H8 are therefore adequately covered by other UDP policies.

Mobility Housing H11 THE COUNCIL WILL SEEK TO NEGOTIATE, WHERE IT IS APPROPRIATE, ELEMENTS OF MOBILITY HOUSING AS PART OF NEW DEVELOPMENT ON

Mobility housing is an outdated concept. The Council is currently applying London Plan Policy 3A.4 which requires 100% of new homes throughout London to be built to Lifetime Homes Standards.

J11



SUITABLE SITES. Wheelchair Housing H12 IN DEVELOPMENTS OF 20 OR MORE DWELLING UNITS ON SUITABLE SITES, THE COUNCIL WILL SEEK TO NEGOTIATE WITH THE DEVELOPER FOR AN APPROPRIATE PROPORTION OF THE UNITS, CONSISTENT WITH THE ESTABLISHED NEED IN THE BOROUGH, TO BE CONSTRUCTED TO WHEELCHAIR HOUSING SPECIFICATIONS.

The issue of wheelchair housing is covered by the London Plan Policy 3A.4 (Housing Choice) which requires 10% of new housing is designed to be wheelchair accessible or easily adaptable for residents who are wheelchair users.

Enhanced Use of Existing Leisure Facilities RL5 PROPOSALS WHICH ENABLE EXISTING FACILITIES TO BE MORE INTENSIVELY USED WILL BE ENCOURAGED AND WILL NORMALLY BE GRANTED PERMISSION PROVIDED THAT:- (A) EXCESSIVE NOISE OR DISTURBANCE TO LOCAL RESIDENTS DOES NOT OCCUR; AND (B) TRAFFIC CONDITIONS AND ON-STREET CAR PARKING ARE NOT ADVERSELY AFFECTED.

This policy is unnecessary as it duplicates policies STR8 Diversifying leisure facilities, MW7 Noise T1 Transport Safety, T21 New Development and on-street parking,

Allotments RL6 THE COUNCIL WILL NOT NORMALLY GRANT PERMISSION FOR DEVELOPMENT WHICH WILL RESULT IN THE LOSS OF ALLOTMENT LAND. HOWEVER, WHERE TENANCY RATES ARE LOW AND NOT EXPECTED TO INCREASE AND THE CONDITION OF PLOTS IS POOR, THE COUNCIL WILL CONSIDER: 1. FIRSTLY, OTHER APPROPRIATE OPEN SPACE USES; 2. SECONDLY, THE PROVISION OF INDOOR RECREATIONAL OR COMMUNITY FACILITIES; AND 3. FINALLY, OTHER DEVELOPMENT SUBJECT TO OTHER POLICIES IN THE PLAN.

This policy is unnecessary as it duplicates other open space policies. Allotments are protected through Policies OL1 (Green Belt), OL4 (Metropolitan Open Land), OL6 (Protection of other open land) and OL8 (Appearance and underuse of open land). PPG17’s definition of open space includes allotments (Annex para2 (vii)) ensuring that the principles of national guidance can be applied at the local level. Allotments are also controlled by statutory legislation, in particular section 8 of the 1925 Allotments Act provides that the Secretary of State’s consent is required for the disposal of land by a local authority which they have purchased or appropriated for use as allotments, if the propose to sell the land or appropriate it for another use.

Townscape Strategy STR22 A TOWNSCAPE STRATEGY (AS SHOWN ON MAPS KTC1a AND KTC1b) WILL BE IMPLEMENTED THROUGHOUT THE TOWN CENTRE TO FULLY INTEGRATE THE DESIGN OF BUILDINGS WITH THE STREETS, PATHS AND SPACES OF THE CENTRE. THE MAIN COMPONENTS OF THIS WILL BE: (A) THE DESIRABILITY OF PRESERVING OR ENHANCING THE CHARACTER AND APPEARANCE OF THE TOWN CENTRE, ITS CONSERVATION AREAS AND THE PRESERVATION OR ENHANCEMENT OF THE

The townscape strategy policy is not really a strategic policy. The issue of townscape in the town centre is covered by Policy KTC14 (Implementation of townscape strategy). Policy KTC13 (Design Standards) is also relevant. The Part 1 strategic policies that relate to Kingston town centre (STR 21, 22 and 23) will be replaced as part of the Kingston Town centre area action plan because they are effectively out of date. Other Part 1 policies, in particular STR4 (Local Economy) and STR5 (Shopping and town centres) provide a more genuinely strategic framework for both the forthcoming area action plan and the detailed UDP policies that relate to the town centre (KTC policies).

J12



RIVERSIDE; (B) THE ‘GREENING’ OF A NETWORK OF LANDSCAPED LINKS AND SPACES INCLUDING THE RIVERSIDE AND PEDESTRIAN AND VEHICULAR ROUTES INTO THE TOWN CENTRE (SEE ALSO KTC14); (C) WITHIN A GENERAL RESTRICTION OF THE HEIGHT OF NEW DEVELOPMENT, TO IDENTIFY SPECIFIC FOCAL POINTS FOR THE INCORPORATION OF LANDMARK FEATURES WHICH MAY COMPRISE LANDSCAPING, URBAN DESIGN FEATURES AND ARTISTIC ELEMENTS, OR A COMBINATION OF THESE.

Accessibility to and within the Town Centre STR23 THE COUNCIL WILL SEEK TO IMPROVE ACCESSIBILITY TO, AND WITHIN, THE TOWN CENTRE BY GIVING GREATER EMPHASIS TO THE NEEDS OF PUBLIC TRANSPORT USERS, PEDESTRIANS, CYCLISTS AND PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES. IN PARTICULAR THE COUNCIL HAS DEFINED A ZONE WITHIN THE TOWN CENTRE, AS SHOWN ON MAP KTC1(b), WHERE PRIORITY WILL BE GIVEN TO PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY CONSISTENT WITH ACCESSIBILITY BY PUBLIC TRANSPORT AND BICYCLE.

The Part 1 strategic policies that relate to Kingston town centre will be replaced as part of the Kingston Town centre area action plan. Other Part 1 policies provide a more genuinely strategic framework for both the forthcoming area action plan and the detailed UDP policies that relate to the town centre (KTC policies). Policy STR13 (A sustainable transport strategy) covers the same ground as STR23 in terms of promoting sustainable transport. Policies KTC14 (Implementation of townscape strategy), KTC24 (Pedestrian network) and KTC27 (Inner area of parking restriction) adequately cover the issues.

Restriction of Open Air Operations KTC6 THE USE OF LAND FOR OPEN-AIR OPERATIONS SUCH AS SCRAPYARDS, DEMOLITION CONTRACTORS AND CAR-BREAKERS WILL NOT NORMALLY BE PERMITTED; SUCH USES SHOULD NORMALLY BE LOCATED IN INDUSTRIAL AREAS OF THE BOROUGH.

This policy is not required because the circumstances in which it could be used would never arise. This policy seeks to protect the environmental quality of the town centre, but it is very specific to certain uses which are not viable in the town centre. Other policies protect the environment of the town centre.

The Central Library KTC10 THE CENTRAL LIBRARY WILL BE RATIONALISED AND/OR EXTENDED AS NECESSARY, ON ITS EXISTING SITE OR ELSEWHERE IN THE TOWN CENTRE, AS RESOURCES BECOME AVAILABLE.

This policy is unnecessary and offers nothing helpful in terms of planning. Policy KTC9 (Provision of leisure, recreational, cultural and entertainment facilities) would cover proposals for the town centre library.

Building Heights KTC15 (A) IN THE OLD TOWN CONSERVATION AREA, THE RIVERSIDE, AND IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS, NEW DEVELOPMENT SHOULD NORMALLY BE OF TWO OR THREE STOREYS. ELSEWHERE IN THE TOWN CENTRE NEW DEVELOPMENT OF THREE TO FIVE STOREYS WILL NORMALLY BE APPROPRIATE, AND IN THE VICINITY OF KINGSTON RAILWAY STATION NEW DEVELOPMENT OF BETWEEN FIVE AND SIX STOREYS WILL NORMALLY BE CONSIDERED

This policy is overly prescriptive. The important point is that design should relate to its context. The application of a blanket height restrictions does not encourage good design. Policy KTC13 Design Standards covers the issue.

J13



APPROPRIATE. THESE RESPECTIVE AREAS ARE DEFINED ON MAP KTC2. (B) IN THE CASE OF INFILL DEVELOPMENT, THE HEIGHT WILL NORMALLY BE RESTRICTED TO THAT OF ADJACENT BUILDINGS. HOWEVER REGARD WILL BE HAD TO THE PROVISION OF MAP KTC2 WHERE THIS WILL PROVIDE INTEREST BY ALLOWING VARIATIONS OF PARAPET OR EAVES LEVEL WITHOUT CREATING AN UNACCEPTABLE PRECEDENT. Riverside Walks KTC16 THE COUNCIL WILL SECURE COMPLETION OF A PUBLIC RIVERSIDE WALK BETWEEN QUEENS PROMENADE AND CANBURY GARDENS INCLUDING A BRIDGE OVER THE HOGSMILL AND A CONTINUOUS PUBLIC WALKWAY ALONGSIDE THE HOGSMILL IN THE TOWN CENTRE. ADDITIONAL AND IMPROVED PEDESTRIAN LINKS TO THE RIVERSIDE WILL BE SOUGHT. REDEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS ADJOINING PROPOSED RIVERSIDE WALKWAYS SHOULD INCORPORATE PROPOSALS FOR THE WALK AND SHOULD INCORPORATE FUNCTIONAL, PHYSICAL AND VISUAL LINKS BETWEEN THE DEVELOPMENT AND THE WALK. (Cross reference Policies KTC17 and OL13).

The public riverside walk has now been implemented. Policy KTC24 (Pedestrian network) adequately addresses other objectives of the policy.

Design of Pedestrian Ways KTC17 THE COUNCIL WILL REQUIRE THE DESIGN OF NEW PEDESTRIAN WAYS AND IMPROVEMENT OF EXISTING ONES TO PROVIDE A SAFE ENVIRONMENT ACCESSIBLE TO ALL, WITH SYMPATHETIC PAVING, GOOD LIGHTING AND GOOD SIGHTLINES, AND TAKING OPPORTUNITIES TO IMPROVE ROUTES PROVIDED BY REDEVELOPMENT OF ADJACENT BUILDINGS. (Cross reference Policy BE22).

This policy is unnecessary as Policy BE22 (pedestrian environment deals with pedestrian routes and areas. Policy BE15 (Safety and Lighting of Public Areas) is also relevant ensuring that crime and safety is taken into account in design.

Width of New Buildings KTC18 NEW BUILDINGS WILL BE EXPECTED TO RESPECT THE WIDTH OF EXISTING FRONTAGES WHERE THEY ARE AN IMPORTANT FEATURE OF THE STREET SCENE, ESPECIALLY IN THE OLD TOWN CONSERVATION AREA AND THE RIVERSIDE AREA.

Policy KTC13 adequately covers design. Conservation Area policies will also apply in the Kingston Old Town conservation area.

J14



Frontage Lines KTC19 NEW BUILDINGS WILL NORMALLY BE REQUIRED TO MAINTAIN EXISTING FRONTAGE LINES OTHER THAN IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OUTLINED IN KTC14(D) AND FOR COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT SCHEMES WHERE IT MAY BE APPROPRIATE TO SET BACK BUILDINGS TO PROVIDE FOR TREE PLANTING, OPEN SPACE OR PAVEMENT WIDENING.

Policy KTC13 adequately covers design.

Plot Ratios KTC20 WITHIN THE TOWN CENTRE INSET AREA, PLOT RATIOS OF AROUND 1.75:1 WILL NORMALLY BE ACCEPTABLE. HOWEVER, THE COUNCIL WILL WISH TO SEE DEVELOPMENTS THAT ARE APPROPRIATE IN SCALE TO THEIR LOCATION AND ON OCCASION THIS MAY RESULT IN A SOMEWHAT HIGHER OR LOWER PLOT RATIO THAN THAT STATED, WHEN THE VARIOUS FACTORS THAT AFFECT THE SITE HAVE BEEN TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT.

Policy KTC13 adequately covers design and is less prescriptive allowing good design that makes best use of land.

Design of Multi-Storey Car Parks KTC21 NEW MULTI-STOREY CAR PARKS IN THE TOWN CENTRE SHOULD BE: (i) SCREENED BY OTHER BUILDINGS WHEREVER POSSIBLE; (ii) DESIGNED WITH FEATURES SUCH AS STAGGERING, AND VERTICAL ELEMENTS, WHERE APPROPRIATE; (iii) CLAD IN BRICK, RATHER THAN EXPOSED CONCRETE, ON ALL ELEVATIONS VISIBLE FROM THE STREET; (iv) DESIGNED TO INCORPORATE FEATURES WHICH ENHANCE PERSONAL SAFETY, INCLUDING ADEQUATE INTERNAL LIGHTING.

The original purpose of this policy was to ensure good design of proposed interceptor car parks for Kingston town centre. These have now been built. Certain criteria in the policy are also obsolete (e.g. a well designed car park need not be screened such as Seven Kings award winning car park). Policy KTC13 adequately covers design. Policy BE15 covers safety and security in design.

Bus Priority Measures KTC22 THE COUNCIL WILL SEEK OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE INTRODUCTION OF FURTHER BUS PRIORITY MEASURES AS PART OF ANY CHANGES TO THE TOWN CENTRE ROAD NETWORK, OR TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT MODIFICATIONS, IN THE CENTRE.

This policy is unnecessary duplication of Policy T9 (Bus Priority Measures) in the Transport Chapter.

Pedestrian Environment DC6

This policy duplicates Policy T14 Pedestrian Network which is a much more comprehensive policy.

J15



WITHIN THE DISTRICT CENTRES THE COUNCIL WILL ENHANCE THE ENVIRONMENT FOR PEDESTRIANS BY UNDERTAKING APPROPRIATE MEASURES AND WILL REQUIRE DEVELOPMENTS TO MAINTAIN AND WHERE APPROPRIATE IMPROVE PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION, ACCESS AND SAFETY. Consolidation of Retail Area TOL2 RETAIL ACTIVITY IN TOLWORTH WILL BE CONSOLIDATED IN THE RETAIL AREA, AS INDICATED ON THE INSET MAP, WHERE EXTENSIONS AND IMPROVEMENTS TO EXISTING PREMISES WILL NORMALLY BE PERMITTED.

This policy duplicates Policy DC1 (New retail floorspace) which seeks to consolidate and enhance the defined retail areas in all the district centres.

PS30: Albany Park Sailing Base, Lower Ham Road, Kingston Allocated for river based community/leisure

This proposal site (Albany Park Sailing base) is council owned property already being used for river based community/leisure, and the council has no plans for the use of this site to change in the future. It is therefore unnecessary for the site to be a proposal site allocation in the UDP. Any future changes to the site would be controlled by the saved UDP policies.

Ann

ex 1

: Ana

lysi

s of

UD

P po

licie

s pr

opos

ed to

be

save

d

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi

Intention for the saved

policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

Hou

sing

Nee

d ST

R3

THE

CO

UN

CIL

WIL

L SE

EK T

O E

NSU

RE

THA

T A

LL R

ESID

ENTS

OF

THE

BO

RO

UG

H E

NJO

Y A

ST

AN

DA

RD

OF

AC

CO

MM

OD

ATI

ON

TO

MEE

T TH

EIR

NEE

DS.

PA

RTI

CU

LAR

CO

NSI

DER

ATI

ON

W

ILL

NEE

D T

O B

E G

IVEN

TO

GR

OU

PS W

HIC

H

HA

VE S

PEC

IAL

NEE

DS

OR

LIM

ITED

AC

CES

S TO

TH

E H

OU

SIN

G M

AR

KET

INC

LUD

ING

PE

OPL

E W

ITH

DIS

AB

ILIT

IES,

ELD

ERLY

PE

OPL

E, S

TUD

ENTS

AN

D P

EOPL

E O

N L

OW

IN

CO

MES

.

N

/A

To

be

repl

aced

by

the

core

st

rate

gy

i) P

olic

y S

TR3

form

s pa

rt of

the

cent

ral s

trate

gy p

rovi

ded

by th

e P

art 1

pol

icie

s.

ii) T

his

polic

y ha

s re

gard

to th

e H

ousi

ng o

bjec

tives

of t

he

Cou

ncil’s

Com

mun

ity P

lan,

in p

artic

ular

the

prio

ritie

s to

mee

t the

ho

usin

g ne

eds

of K

ings

ton’

s di

vers

e co

mm

uniti

es a

nd m

axim

ise

the

supp

ly o

f hou

sing

. iii

) Pol

icy

STR

3 is

in g

ener

al c

onfo

rmity

with

Lon

don

Pla

n po

licie

s 3A

.4 (H

ousi

ng C

hoic

e), 3

A.7

(Affo

rdab

le h

ousi

ng

targ

ets)

, 3A

.8 (N

egot

iatin

g af

ford

able

hou

sing

in in

divi

dual

pr

ivat

e re

side

ntia

l and

mix

ed-u

se s

chem

es) a

nd 3

A.1

0 (S

peci

al

need

s an

d sp

ecia

list h

ousi

ng).

iv) N

/A

v) N

/A

vi) T

he p

olic

y do

es n

ot re

peat

hig

her p

olic

y an

d is

nec

essa

ry to

en

sure

that

mee

ting

hous

ing

need

is a

stra

tegi

c po

licy

in th

e U

DP

, pro

vidi

ng th

e co

ntex

t for

det

aile

d po

licie

s in

clud

ing

Pol

icy

H9

(Low

cos

t and

affo

rdab

le h

ousi

ng).

The

polic

y co

mpl

ies

with

th

e pr

inci

ples

of P

PS

3: H

ousi

ng w

hich

spe

cific

ally

requ

ires

LPAs

to

pla

n fo

r a m

ix o

f hou

sing

hav

ing

rega

rd to

the

spec

ific

requ

irem

ents

of c

erta

in g

roup

s (p

ara

21).

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

Res

iden

tial a

nd O

ther

Use

s in

Res

iden

tial A

reas

H2

WIT

HIN

RES

IDEN

TIA

L A

REA

S TH

E R

ESID

ENTI

AL

USE

OF

LAN

D W

ILL

NO

RM

ALL

Y B

E A

N A

CC

EPTA

BLE

USE

, AN

D T

HE

CO

UN

CIL

W

ILL

SEEK

TH

E R

EPLA

CEM

ENT

OF

ENVI

RO

NM

ENTA

LLY

HA

RM

FUL

USE

S W

ITH

A

RES

IDEN

TIA

L U

SE O

R O

THER

USE

C

OM

PATI

BLE

WIT

H T

HE

AR

EA W

HER

E TH

IS IS

C

ON

SIST

ENT

WIT

H O

THER

PLA

N P

OLI

CIE

S.

N

/A

Th

e is

sue

will

be d

ealt

with

in

eith

er th

e co

re s

trate

gy

or

deve

lopm

ent

cont

rol p

olic

y D

PD

i) Th

is p

olic

y su

ppor

ts a

nd e

xpan

ds o

n sa

ved

polic

y S

TR2

Res

iden

tial E

nviro

nmen

t whi

ch a

ims

to s

afeg

uard

and

enh

ance

th

e ch

arac

ter o

f res

iden

tial a

reas

. ii)

Thi

s po

licy

has

rega

rd to

the

over

all H

ousi

ng a

nd

Env

ironm

ent o

bjec

tives

of t

he C

ounc

il’s C

omm

unity

Pla

n.

iii) P

olic

y H

2 is

in g

ener

al c

onfo

rmity

with

Lon

don

Pla

n po

licie

s 3A

.1 a

nd 3

A.2

whi

ch re

quire

dev

elop

men

t pla

n po

licie

s to

m

axim

ise

the

prov

isio

n of

add

ition

al h

ousi

ng.

iv) N

/A

v) N

/A

vi) T

his

polic

y is

nec

essa

ry in

the

Kin

gsto

n co

ntex

t whe

re

resi

dent

ial a

reas

are

an

impo

rtant

sou

rce

of n

ew h

ousi

ng

prov

ided

thro

ugh

rede

velo

pmen

t. It

is a

lso

cons

ider

ed im

porta

nt

to e

xpre

ssly

sta

te th

e C

ounc

il’s in

tent

ion

to re

plac

e ha

rmfu

l use

s w

ith re

side

ntia

l or o

ther

ben

ign

uses

in re

side

ntia

l are

as.

C

hang

e fr

om R

esid

entia

l Use

H

3 U

NLE

SS T

HER

E A

RE

EXC

EPTI

ON

AL

CIR

CU

MST

AN

CES

, TH

E C

OU

NC

IL W

ILL

RES

IST

THE

LOSS

OF

RES

IDEN

TIA

L LA

ND

AN

D

BU

ILD

ING

S TO

OTH

ER U

SES.

N

/A

To

be

repl

aced

in

the

deve

lopm

ent

cont

rol D

PD

i) Th

is p

olic

y he

lps

deliv

er p

olic

y S

TR1

Hou

sing

Sup

ply

whi

ch

seek

s to

incr

ease

the

supp

ly o

f hou

sing

in th

e bo

roug

h.

ii) T

his

polic

y ha

s re

gard

to th

e C

omm

unity

Pla

n H

ousi

ng

obje

ctiv

e to

max

imis

e th

e su

pply

of h

ousi

ng.

iii) P

olic

y H

2 is

in g

ener

al c

onfo

rmity

with

Lon

don

Pla

n po

licie

s 3A

.1an

d 3A

.2 w

hich

see

k th

e m

axim

um p

rovi

sion

of a

dditi

onal

ho

usin

g an

d po

licy

3A.1

2 w

hich

requ

ires

boro

ughs

to h

ave

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

polic

ies

to p

reve

nt th

e lo

ss o

f hou

sing

. iv

) N/A

v)

N/A

vi

) Thi

s po

licy

does

not

repe

at h

ighe

r pol

icy

and

is n

eces

sary

to

ensu

re th

e pr

otec

tion

of re

side

ntia

l lan

d an

d bu

ildin

gs.

In s

o do

ing

it su

ppor

ts th

e go

vern

men

t’s s

trate

gic

obje

ctiv

es fo

r ho

usin

g se

t out

in P

PS

3: H

ousi

ng.

R

esid

entia

l Con

vers

ions

and

Hou

ses

in M

ultip

le

Occ

upat

ion

H7

THE

CO

NVE

RSI

ON

OF

LAR

GE

HO

USE

S IN

TO

SMA

LLER

UN

ITS

OR

MU

LTIP

LE O

CC

UPA

TIO

N

WIL

L B

E A

LLO

WED

PR

OVI

DED

TH

AT

NO

SI

GN

IFIC

AN

T H

AR

M IS

CA

USE

D T

O:

A.

THE

CH

AR

AC

TER

AN

D A

PPEA

RA

NC

E O

F TH

E A

REA

; B

. TH

E A

MEN

ITIE

S O

F N

EAR

BY

RES

IDEN

TS;

C.

THE

FREE

FLO

W O

F TR

AFF

IC A

ND

TH

E SA

FETY

OF

HIG

HW

AY

USE

RS.

TH

E C

ON

VER

SIO

N O

F O

THER

BU

ILD

ING

S W

ILL

BE

ALL

OW

ED S

UB

JEC

T TO

TH

E A

BO

VE

CR

ITER

IA. A

LA

RG

E H

OU

SE IS

DEF

INED

AS

A

DW

ELLI

NG

TH

AT

HA

S M

OR

E TH

AN

TH

REE

B

EDR

OO

MS

AN

D A

NET

FLO

OR

SPA

CE

OF

N

/A

To

be

repl

aced

by

the

deve

lopm

ent

cont

rol

polic

ies

DP

D

i) Th

is p

olic

y su

ppor

ts s

aved

pol

icy

STR

1 H

ousi

ng S

uppl

y in

that

it

allo

ws

for r

esid

entia

l con

vers

ions

and

HM

Os,

but

it a

lso

adds

he

lpfu

l crit

eria

to e

nsur

e th

at th

e ob

ject

ives

of S

TR2

(Res

iden

tial

Env

ironm

ent)

are

met

.

ii) T

his

polic

y ha

s re

gard

to th

e H

ousi

ng o

bjec

tives

of t

he

Cou

ncil’s

Com

mun

ity P

lan,

in p

artic

ular

the

prio

ritie

s to

mee

t the

ho

usin

g ne

eds

of K

ings

ton’

s di

vers

e co

mm

uniti

es a

nd m

axim

ise

the

supp

ly o

f hou

sing

. iii

) Pol

icy

H7

is in

gen

eral

con

form

ity w

ith L

ondo

n P

lan

polic

ies

3A.1

and

3A

.2 w

hich

requ

ire d

evel

opm

ent p

lan

polic

ies

to

max

imis

e th

e pr

ovis

ion

of a

dditi

onal

hou

sing

and

pol

icy

3A.1

0,

in p

artic

ular

par

agra

ph 3

.54

whi

ch re

cogn

ises

the

role

that

H

MO

s ca

n pl

ay in

pro

vidi

ng a

ccom

mod

atio

n fo

r tho

se w

ho

cann

ot a

cces

s so

cial

rent

ed o

r affo

rd ‘c

onve

ntio

nal’

mar

ket

hous

ing.

iv

) N/A

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

MO

RE

THA

N 1

16 S

Q M

(1,2

48 S

Q F

T) (B

ASE

D

ON

TH

E O

RIG

INA

L FL

OO

RSP

AC

E A

ND

TH

E N

UM

BER

OF

BED

RO

OM

S PR

IOR

TO

AN

Y EX

TEN

SIO

N).

v) N

/A

vi) T

his

polic

y is

con

sist

ent w

ith P

PS

1 w

hich

sta

tes

that

“p

lann

ing

polic

ies

shou

ld s

eek

to p

rote

ct a

nd e

nhan

ce th

e qu

ality

, cha

ract

er a

nd a

men

ity v

alue

of t

he c

ount

rysi

de a

nd

urba

n ar

ea a

s a

who

le”,

but i

t doe

s no

t rep

eat h

ighe

r pol

icy.

It i

s co

nsid

ered

nec

essa

ry b

ecau

se th

e sp

ecifi

c is

sues

ass

ocia

ted

with

con

vers

ions

into

sm

alle

r res

iden

tial u

nits

are

not

ade

quat

ely

cove

red

else

whe

re in

the

UD

P.

Ther

e ar

e oc

casi

ons

whe

n co

nver

sion

of l

arge

hou

ses

to s

mal

ler u

nits

or m

ultip

le

occu

patio

n w

ill be

to th

e de

trim

ent o

f the

cha

ract

er o

f the

are

a.

The

UD

P’s

gen

eric

des

ign

polic

y co

vers

new

bui

ldin

gs a

nd

exte

nsio

ns, w

ithou

t exp

ress

ly d

ealin

g w

ith c

onve

rsio

ns.

It is

al

so c

onsi

dere

d he

lpfu

l to

deal

with

the

impa

ct c

ause

d by

ext

ra

cars

ass

ocia

ted

with

the

deve

lopm

ent.

This

pol

icy

is ro

oted

in

evid

ence

: the

Res

iden

tial E

nviro

nmen

t and

Am

enity

Stu

dy 1

991.

Shel

tere

d H

ousi

ng fo

r Eld

erly

Peo

ple

and

Peop

le w

ith D

isab

ilitie

s H

10

THER

E W

ILL

BE

SUPP

OR

T FO

R S

CH

EMES

W

HIC

H P

RO

VID

E SH

ELTE

RED

RES

IDEN

TIA

L A

CC

OM

MO

DA

TIO

N F

OR

ELD

ERLY

PEO

PLE

AN

D P

EOPL

E W

ITH

DIS

AB

ILIT

IES

PRO

VID

ED

THER

E IS

A C

ON

TIN

UIN

G N

EED

FO

R S

UC

H

AC

CO

MM

OD

ATI

ON

AN

D P

RO

VID

ED T

HA

T TH

E PR

OPO

SAL:

- (A

) IS

CO

NVE

NIE

NTL

Y LO

CA

TED

TO

N

/A

To

be

repl

aced

by

the

deve

lopm

ent

cont

rol

polic

ies

DP

D

i) Th

is s

uppo

rts p

olic

y S

TR3

Hou

sing

Nee

d w

hich

see

ks to

pr

ovid

e ho

usin

g to

mee

t the

requ

irem

ents

of a

ll bo

roug

h re

side

nts,

giv

ing

parti

cula

r con

side

ratio

n to

thos

e w

ith s

peci

alis

t ne

eds.

ii)

Thi

s po

licy

has

rega

rd to

the

Hou

sing

obj

ectiv

es o

f the

C

ounc

il’s C

omm

unity

Pla

n, in

par

ticul

ar th

e pr

iorit

y to

mee

t the

ho

usin

g ne

eds

of K

ings

ton’

s di

vers

e co

mm

uniti

es.

iii) P

olic

y H

10 is

in g

ener

al c

onfo

rmity

with

Lon

don

Pla

n po

licie

s 3A

.4 (H

ousi

ng c

hoic

e) a

nd 3

A.1

0 (S

peci

al n

eeds

and

spe

cial

ist

hous

ing)

whi

ch re

quire

dev

elop

men

t pla

ns to

incl

ude

polic

es

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

PUB

LIC

TR

AN

SPO

RT

FAC

ILIT

IES;

(B

) IS

CO

NVE

NIE

NTL

Y LO

CA

TED

TO

LO

CA

L SH

OPS

, SER

VIC

ES A

ND

OTH

ER

CO

MM

UN

ITY

FAC

ILIT

IES;

(C

) PR

OVI

DES

A S

ATI

SFA

CTO

RY

ENVI

RO

NM

ENT

FOR

RES

IDEN

TS.

that

enc

oura

ge th

e pr

ovis

ion

of a

rang

e of

hou

sing

type

s ta

king

ac

coun

t of t

he re

quire

men

ts o

f diff

eren

t gro

ups

incl

udin

g th

ose

who

requ

ire s

peci

al n

eeds

or s

peci

alis

t hou

sing

. iv

) N/A

v)

N/A

vi

) Nat

iona

l and

regi

onal

pol

icy

enco

urag

e sp

ecia

list h

ousi

ng to

m

eet l

ocal

nee

ds, b

ut p

olic

y H

10 g

oes

furth

er m

akin

g a

link

with

ac

cess

ibili

ty to

pub

lic tr

ansp

ort a

nd fa

cilit

ies.

Th

e po

licy

supp

orts

the

deliv

ery

of h

ousi

ng in

Kin

gsto

n.

C

onve

rsio

n of

Lar

ge H

ouse

s to

Nur

sing

Hom

es,

etc.

H

13

THE

CO

NVE

RSI

ON

OF

LAR

GER

DET

AC

HED

H

OU

SES

OF

SIX

OR

MO

RE

BED

RO

OM

S FO

R

USE

AS

RES

IDEN

TIA

L C

AR

E H

OM

ES,

NU

RSI

NG

HO

MES

OR

HO

SPIT

ALS

, OR

R

ESID

ENTI

AL

INST

ITU

TIO

NS

(CLA

SS C

2) W

ILL

NO

RM

ALL

Y B

E A

CC

EPTA

BLE

PR

OVI

DED

TH

AT

THE

PRO

POSA

L:-

(A)

IS

CO

NVE

NIE

NTL

Y LO

CA

TED

TO

PU

BLI

C T

RA

NSP

OR

T FA

CIL

ITIE

S;

(B)

IS

CO

NVE

NIE

NTL

Y LO

CA

TED

TO

LO

CA

L SH

OPS

, SER

VIC

ES A

ND

OTH

ER

CO

MM

UN

ITY

FAC

ILIT

IES;

N

/A

To

be

addr

esse

d in

th

e de

velo

pmen

t co

ntro

l po

licie

s D

PD

i) Th

is p

olic

y he

lps

impl

emen

t pol

icie

s ST

R 2

Res

iden

tial

Env

ironm

ent a

nd S

TR3

Hou

sing

Nee

d by

pro

vidi

ng c

riter

ia

agai

nst w

hich

pla

nnin

g ap

plic

atio

ns to

con

vert

larg

e ho

uses

to

nurs

ing

hom

es a

nd s

imila

r dev

elop

men

ts c

an b

e ju

dged

.

ii) T

his

polic

y ha

s re

gard

to th

e H

ousi

ng o

bjec

tives

of t

he

Cou

ncil’s

Com

mun

ity P

lan,

in p

artic

ular

the

prio

rity

to m

eet t

he

hous

ing

need

s of

Kin

gsto

n’s

dive

rse

com

mun

ities

. iii

) Pol

icy

H13

is in

gen

eral

con

form

ity w

ith p

olic

y 3A

.4 (H

ousi

ng

Cho

ice)

and

3A

.10

(Spe

cial

nee

ds a

nd s

peci

alis

t hou

sing

) of t

he

Lond

on P

lan

whi

ch p

rom

ote

spec

ial n

eeds

hou

sing

, and

Pol

icy

4B.1

whi

ch s

eeks

to e

nsur

e th

at d

evel

opm

ents

resp

ect l

ocal

co

ntex

t, ch

arac

ter a

nd c

omm

uniti

es.

iv) N

/A

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

(C)

W

OU

LD N

OT

RES

ULT

IN A

N O

VER

-C

ON

CEN

TRA

TIO

N IN

AN

Y ST

REE

T W

ITH

IN

RES

IDEN

TIA

L A

REA

S; A

ND

(D

)

INVO

LVES

A B

UIL

DIN

G W

HIC

H IS

TO

O

LAR

GE

FOR

USE

AS

A S

ING

LE D

WEL

LIN

G,

AN

D W

HO

SE C

ON

VER

SIO

N W

OU

LD N

OT

DET

RA

CT

FRO

M T

HE

VISU

AL

CH

AR

AC

TER

OF

THE

AR

EA.

v) N

/A

vi) P

PS

3 re

quire

s LP

As

to p

lan

for a

mix

of h

ousi

ng h

avin

g re

gard

to th

e sp

ecifi

c re

quire

men

ts o

f cer

tain

gro

ups

incl

udin

g ol

der a

nd d

isab

led

peop

le (p

ara

21).

Pol

icy

H13

doe

s no

t re

peat

nat

iona

l pol

icy.

It a

ddre

sses

a lo

cal i

ssue

to a

void

an

over

-con

cent

ratio

n of

suc

h us

es, a

nd e

nsur

es th

at s

uch

deve

lopm

ents

are

sus

tain

able

in te

rms

of th

eir a

cces

sibi

lity.

Hos

tels

for S

ingl

e Pe

ople

H

14

PLA

NN

ING

APP

LIC

ATI

ON

S FO

R H

OST

ELS

AN

D

AC

CO

MM

OD

ATI

ON

FO

R S

ING

LE P

EOPL

E W

ILL

BE

CO

NSI

DER

ED IN

REL

ATI

ON

TO

:- (A

) TH

E C

HA

RA

CTE

R O

F TH

E A

REA

AN

D

IMPA

CT

ON

AD

JOIN

ING

RES

IDEN

TS;

(B)

PRO

XIM

ITY

TO G

OO

D P

UB

LIC

TR

AN

SPO

RT

FAC

ILIT

IES

AN

D T

O T

HE

MA

IN

RO

AD

NET

WO

RK

; (C

) PR

OXI

MIT

Y TO

DIS

TRIC

T C

ENTR

ES

AN

D/O

R P

LAC

E O

F EM

PLO

YMEN

T;

(D)

THE

CO

NTI

NU

ING

NEE

D F

OR

SU

CH

A

CC

OM

MO

DA

TIO

N.

N

/A

To

be

addr

esse

d in

a de

velo

pmen

t co

ntro

l po

licie

s D

PD

i) Th

is s

uppo

rts p

olic

y S

TR3

Hou

sing

Nee

d an

d S

TR13

whi

ch

seek

s to

redu

ce th

e ne

ed to

trav

el b

y ca

r. ii)

Thi

s po

licy

has

rega

rd to

the

Hou

sing

obj

ectiv

es o

f the

C

ounc

il’s C

omm

unity

Pla

n, in

par

ticul

ar th

e pr

iorit

y to

mee

t the

ho

usin

g ne

eds

of K

ings

ton’

s di

vers

e co

mm

uniti

es.

iii) P

olic

y H

14 is

in g

ener

al c

onfo

rmity

with

pol

icy

3A.4

(Hou

sing

C

hoic

e) a

nd 3

A.1

0 (S

peci

al n

eeds

and

spe

cial

ist h

ousi

ng) o

f the

Lo

ndon

Pla

n w

hich

requ

ire d

evel

opm

ent p

lans

to in

clud

e po

lices

th

at e

ncou

rage

the

prov

isio

n of

a ra

nge

of h

ousi

ng ty

pes

taki

ng

acco

unt o

f the

requ

irem

ents

of d

iffer

ent g

roup

s in

clud

ing

thos

e w

ho re

quire

spe

cial

nee

ds o

r spe

cial

ist h

ousi

ng.

iv) N

/A

V) N

/A

vi) T

he p

olic

y co

mpl

ies

with

PP

S 3

: Hou

sing

whi

ch re

quire

s LP

As

to p

lan

for a

mix

of h

ousi

ng (p

ara

21) h

avin

g pa

rticu

lar

rega

rd to

the

spec

ific

requ

irem

ents

of c

erta

in g

roup

s in

clud

ing

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

sing

le p

erso

n ho

useh

olds

(par

a 20

). H

owev

er it

doe

s no

t rep

eat

natio

nal p

olic

y. I

t add

s re

leva

nt c

riter

ia to

ens

ure

that

suc

h us

es

are

appr

opria

tely

loca

ted.

Th

is p

olic

y su

ppor

ts th

e de

liver

y of

hou

sing

in K

ings

ton.

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

Rel

ocat

ion

of E

xist

ing

Empl

oym

ent U

ses

Out

side

Indu

stria

l / W

areh

ouse

/ B

usin

ess

Are

as

E4

THE

REL

OC

ATI

ON

AN

D/O

R D

ISC

ON

TIN

UA

NC

E O

F EM

PLO

YMEN

T U

SES

PRES

ENTL

Y LO

CA

TED

OU

TSID

E TH

E IN

DU

STR

IAL/

W

AR

EHO

USE

/ BU

SIN

ESS

AR

EAS

(SEE

PO

LIC

Y E1

) WIL

L B

E SO

UG

HT

IF T

HE

OPE

RA

TIO

N IS

C

AU

SIN

G A

N U

NA

CC

EPTA

BLE

LEV

EL O

F D

ISTU

RB

AN

CE

OR

NU

ISA

NC

E IN

A

RES

IDEN

TIA

L A

REA

, MET

RO

POLI

TAN

OPE

N

LAN

D, G

REE

N B

ELT

OR

OTH

ER P

UB

LIC

OPE

N

SPA

CE,

OR

OTH

ERW

ISE

IS S

ERIO

USL

Y D

AM

AG

ING

EN

VIR

ON

MEN

TAL

CO

ND

ITIO

NS

IN

THE

SUR

RO

UN

DIN

G A

REA

.

N/

A

Cor

e st

rate

gy

and/

or

deve

lopm

ent

cont

rol

polic

ies

DP

D

i) P

art 1

pol

icie

s pr

ovid

e th

e ce

ntra

l stra

tegy

, see

king

to

enha

nce

resi

dent

ial a

reas

(STR

2) a

nd th

e op

en e

nviro

nmen

t (S

TR6)

. ii)

Pol

icy

E4

impl

emen

ts C

omm

unity

Stra

tegy

obj

ectiv

e; L

ocal

E

nviro

nmen

t - P

riorit

y 3.

“cle

an a

nd s

afe

stre

ets,

par

ks a

nd

com

mun

al s

pace

s” (p

15).

iii) P

olic

y E

4. is

con

sist

ent w

ith th

e ob

ject

ives

of L

ondo

n P

lan

Pol

icy

3A.2

6 w

hich

requ

ires

boro

ughs

to s

uppo

rt

neig

hbou

rhoo

d pl

ans,

and

the

follo

win

g Lo

ndon

Pla

n po

licie

s w

hich

see

k to

pro

tect

and

pro

mot

e th

e qu

ality

and

nat

ure

cons

erva

tion

valu

e of

Met

ropo

litan

Ope

n La

nd, g

reen

bel

t an

d ot

her p

ublic

ope

n sp

aces

: P

olic

y 3D

.7 R

ealis

ing

the

valu

e of

ope

n sp

ace

Pol

icy

3D.8

Gre

en b

elt

Pol

icy

3D.9

Met

ropo

litan

Ope

n La

nd

Pol

icy

3D.1

0 O

pen

spac

e pr

ovis

ion

in U

DP

’s

Pol

icy

3D.1

1 O

pen

Spa

ce s

trate

gies

P

olic

y 3D

.12

Bio

dive

rsity

and

Nat

ure

Con

serv

atio

n iv

) N/A

v)

N/A

vi

) The

UD

P g

ener

ally

see

ks to

pro

tect

em

ploy

men

t use

s fro

m

rede

velo

pmen

t to

othe

r use

s (P

olic

ies

E1

and

E1a

).

How

ever

, the

issu

e he

re is

one

of a

men

ity a

nd e

nviro

nmen

tal

cons

ider

atio

ns. I

n in

stan

ces

whe

re th

ere

may

be

exis

ting

activ

ities

whi

ch a

re e

nviro

nmen

tally

una

ccep

tabl

e, o

r

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

prop

osal

s w

hich

wou

ld b

e se

rious

ly d

etrim

enta

l to

amen

ity,

Pol

icy

E4

give

s th

e C

ounc

il th

e to

ol to

inte

rven

e ap

prop

riate

ly. T

he p

rovi

sion

s of

this

pol

icy

are

not r

epea

ted

in

high

er p

olic

y or

in a

ny o

ther

pol

icy

prop

osed

to b

e sa

ved

in

the

UD

P.

H

azar

dous

Pro

cess

es

E5

THE

CO

UN

CIL

WIL

L N

OT

PER

MIT

PR

OPO

SALS

W

HIC

H IN

VOLV

E TH

E U

SE, S

TOR

AG

E,

PRO

CES

SIN

G O

R P

RO

DU

CTI

ON

OF

EXPL

OSI

VE, I

NFL

AM

MA

BLE

, CO

RR

OSI

VE,

TOXI

C O

R O

THER

HA

RM

FUL

MA

TER

IALS

IN

SUFF

ICIE

NT

QU

AN

TITI

ES T

O B

ECO

ME

A

POTE

NTI

AL

SAFE

TY H

AZA

RD

OTH

ER T

HA

N

WH

ERE

THE

CO

UN

CIL

IS S

ATI

SFIE

D T

HA

T TH

E N

ATU

RE

OF

THE

HA

ZAR

D IS

OU

TWEI

GH

ED B

Y EC

ON

OM

IC, S

OC

IAL

OR

OTH

ER B

ENEF

ITS

TO

THE

CO

MM

UN

ITY.

NA

Dev

elop

men

t co

ntro

l po

licie

s D

PD

i) Th

e R

BK

Was

te S

trate

gy o

utlin

es th

e bo

roug

hs’ a

ppro

ach

to

man

agin

g ha

zard

ous

was

te.

ii) P

olic

y E

5 is

con

sist

ent w

ith th

e br

oad

obje

ctiv

e of

Com

mun

ity

Stra

tegy

: Loc

al E

nviro

nmen

t - P

riorit

y 3.

“To

safe

guar

d an

d en

hanc

e th

e B

orou

gh’s

loca

l env

ironm

ent,

enab

ling

deve

lopm

ent t

o m

eet t

he n

eeds

of r

esid

ents

with

out

unde

rmin

ing

the

valu

e or

via

bilit

y of

the

natu

ral e

nviro

nmen

t.”

iii) T

he L

ondo

n P

lan

Pol

icy

4A.1

7 di

rect

s Lo

cal A

utho

ritie

s to

en

sure

that

thei

r UD

P’s

incl

ude

polic

ies

whi

ch re

gula

te th

e lo

catio

n of

‘est

ablis

hmen

ts w

here

haz

ardo

us s

ubst

ance

s ar

e us

ed o

r sto

red…

boro

ughs

[are

dire

cted

to]..

take

into

acc

ount

th

e pr

esen

ce o

f haz

ardo

us s

ubst

ance

s in

mak

ing

polic

ies

and

dete

rmin

ing

appl

icat

ions

.’ P

olic

y E

5 is

con

sist

ent w

ith a

nd

achi

eves

this

requ

irem

ent.

iv) N

/A

v) N

/A

vi) P

olic

y E

5 he

lps

impl

emen

t the

Cou

ncil’s

was

te s

trate

gy a

nd

trans

late

s th

e ob

ject

ives

of P

PS

10

and

Lond

on P

lan

polic

y 4A

.17

to a

bor

ough

leve

l, by

regu

latin

g de

velo

pmen

ts

invo

lvin

g th

e us

e, s

tora

ge o

r dis

posa

l of h

azar

dous

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

subs

tanc

es. T

he p

olic

y do

es n

ot re

peat

hig

her p

olic

y or

any

ot

her p

olic

y pr

opos

ed to

be

save

d in

the

UD

P.

R

ange

of U

nit S

izes

E6

LA

RG

E SC

ALE

DEV

ELO

PMEN

TS P

RO

VID

ING

N

EW B

USI

NES

S (B

1), I

ND

UST

RIA

L B

2), A

ND

W

AR

EHO

USI

NG

(B8)

AC

CO

MM

OD

ATI

ON

SH

OU

LD N

OR

MA

LLY

INC

OR

POR

ATE

A R

AN

GE

OF

UN

IT S

IZES

.

N/

A

Cor

e st

rate

gy

and/

or

deve

lopm

ent

cont

rol

polic

ies

DP

D

i) P

art 1

pol

icie

s in

par

ticul

ar S

TR4

Loca

l eco

nom

y pr

ovid

e th

e ce

ntra

l stra

tegy

. ii)

Pol

icy

E6

is c

onsi

dere

d to

be

cons

iste

nt w

ith th

e br

oad

obje

ctiv

es o

f the

Com

mun

ity S

trate

gy: L

ocal

Eco

nom

y an

d H

ousi

ng -O

vera

ll ob

ject

ive:

‘To

ensu

re th

at th

e R

oyal

B

orou

gh’s

eco

nom

y is

pro

sper

ous

and

thriv

ing,

gen

erat

ing

a di

vers

e ra

nge

of e

mpl

oym

ent o

ppor

tuni

ties

and

prov

idin

g go

ods

and

serv

ices

for t

he w

hole

com

mun

ity’ a

nd P

riorit

y 5:

to

‘Sup

port

the

deliv

ery

of a

n ad

equa

te s

uppl

y of

site

s an

d pr

emis

es to

geth

er w

ith a

ppro

pria

te in

frast

ruct

ure

that

can

m

eet t

he n

eeds

of l

ocal

bus

ines

ses

and

is s

uita

ble

for i

nwar

d in

vest

ors.

’ iii)

Pol

icy

E6

is c

onsi

sten

t with

, and

pro

vide

s lo

cal c

onte

xt to

the

Lond

on P

lan

polic

ies

3B.1

Dev

elop

ing

Lond

on’s

Eco

nom

y an

d P

olic

y 3B

.2 O

ffice

Sup

ply

and

Dev

elop

men

t. Th

ese

polic

ies

flag

up th

e M

ayor

s in

tent

ions

to w

ork

with

stra

tegi

c pa

rtner

s to

see

k th

e pr

ovis

ion

of a

rang

e of

pre

mis

es o

f di

ffere

nt ty

pes,

siz

es a

nd c

osts

. Th

e Lo

ndon

Pla

n po

licie

s 3B

1 an

d 3B

2 sp

ecifi

cally

men

tion

the

May

ors

inte

ntio

n to

w

ork

with

‘stra

tegi

c pa

rtner

s’ to

ens

ure

that

an

adeq

uate

su

pply

of e

mpl

oym

ent u

nits

of v

ario

us s

izes

are

pro

vide

d.

How

ever

, the

se p

olic

ies

are

cons

ider

ed to

be

a st

atem

ent o

f in

tent

and

do

not a

dequ

atel

y im

pose

a ‘r

equi

rem

ent’

on

deve

lope

rs to

pro

vide

a m

ix o

f em

ploy

men

t pre

mis

es. P

olic

y

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

E6

trans

late

s th

e M

ayor

s in

tent

ions

as

stat

ed in

pol

icie

s 3B

.1

and

2 in

to lo

cal p

olic

y.

iv) N

/A

v) N

/A

vi) T

he b

orou

ghs’

eco

nom

y is

bas

ed o

n a

varie

ty o

f bus

ines

ses

and

indu

strie

s w

ith v

aryi

ng n

eeds

in te

rms

of a

ccom

mod

atio

n.

Ther

e is

no

spec

ific

refe

renc

e in

nat

iona

l gui

danc

e to

the

need

for a

mix

of u

nit s

izes

and

ther

e ar

e no

oth

er b

orou

gh

polic

ies

on th

e ra

nge

of e

mpl

oym

ent p

rem

ises

requ

ired

in

RB

K.

Ret

entio

n of

Sho

ps O

utsi

de K

ings

ton

Tow

n C

entr

e an

d th

e D

istr

ict a

nd L

ocal

Sho

ppin

g C

entr

es

S4

OU

TSID

E K

ING

STO

N T

OW

N C

ENTR

E A

ND

TH

E D

ISTR

ICT

AN

D L

OC

AL

SHO

PPIN

G C

ENTR

ES

PRO

POSA

LS W

HIC

H IN

VOLV

E TH

E LO

SS O

F R

ETA

IL A

CC

OM

MO

DA

TIO

N W

ILL

BE

RES

ISTE

D

WH

ERE:

(A

) A

DEQ

UA

TE A

LTER

NA

TIVE

RET

AIL

FA

CIL

ITIE

S A

RE

NO

T A

VAIL

AB

LE T

O S

ERVE

LO

CA

L R

ESID

ENTS

, AN

D

(B)

THE

PRO

VISI

ON

OF

A R

AN

GE

OF

BA

SIC

SH

OPP

ING

FA

CIL

ITIE

S IS

AD

VER

SELY

A

FFEC

TED

.

N

/A

N

/A

To

be

repl

aced

via

co

re s

trate

gy

and/

or

deve

lopm

ent

cont

rol D

PD

i) ce

ntra

l stra

tegy

pro

vide

d by

Par

t 1 p

olic

ies

ii) S

uppo

rts c

omm

unity

pla

n ob

ject

ive

to re

duce

the

need

to

trave

l ii)

In c

onfo

rmity

with

Pol

icy

3D.3

Mai

ntai

ning

and

Impr

ovin

g re

tail

faci

litie

s, b

ulle

t poi

nts

1 an

d 3.

iv

) N/A

v)

N/A

vi

) The

pol

icy

is n

eces

sary

to p

rote

ct lo

cal s

hops

out

side

ce

ntre

s, im

plem

entin

g P

PS 6

par

agra

ph 2

.58

whi

ch s

tate

s “lo

cal

auth

oriti

es s

houl

d w

here

app

ropr

iate

see

k to

pro

tect

exi

stin

g fa

cilit

ies

whi

ch p

rovi

de fo

r peo

ple’

s da

y to

day

nee

ds.”

Alte

rnat

ive

Use

of S

hops

Out

side

Kin

gsto

n

n/

a

To b

e i)

cent

ral s

trate

gy p

rovi

ded

by P

art 1

pol

icie

s

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

Tow

n C

entr

e, D

istr

ict a

nd L

ocal

Sho

ppin

g C

entr

es

S5

OU

TSID

E K

ING

STO

N T

OW

N C

ENTR

E A

ND

TH

E D

ISTR

ICT

AN

D L

OC

AL

SHO

PPIN

G C

ENTR

ES

AN

D W

HER

E A

DEQ

UA

TE A

LTER

NA

TIVE

SH

OPP

ING

FA

CIL

ITIE

S A

RE

AVA

ILA

BLE

, A

CH

AN

GE

OF

USE

OF

AN

EXI

STIN

G S

HO

P M

AY

BE

PER

MIT

TED

TO

:- (A

)

FIN

AN

CIA

L O

R P

RO

FESS

ION

AL

SER

VIC

ES A

PPR

OPR

IATE

TO

A S

HO

PPIN

G

AR

EA (C

LASS

A2)

, OR

LA

UN

DER

ETTE

, OR

A3

USE

S, S

UB

JEC

T TO

TH

ERE

BEI

NG

NO

A

DVE

RSE

IMPA

CT

ON

RES

IDEN

TIA

L A

MEN

ITY,

O

R S

MA

LL O

FFIC

ES P

RO

VID

ING

AN

ES

SEN

TIA

L LO

CA

L SE

RVI

CE;

(B

)

RES

IDEN

TIA

L U

SE;

(C)

CO

MM

UN

ITY

FAC

ILIT

IES,

INC

LUD

ING

SU

RG

ERIE

S, C

ON

SIST

ENT

WIT

H P

OLI

CY

CS1

.

repl

aced

via

co

re s

trate

gy

and/

or

deve

lopm

ent

cont

rol D

PD

ii) N

o re

fere

nce

is m

ade

to s

hops

out

side

the

cent

res

in th

e co

mm

unity

pla

n iii)

In c

onfo

rmity

with

Pol

icy

3D.3

Mai

ntai

ning

and

Impr

ovin

g re

tail

faci

litie

s iv

) N/A

v)

N/A

vi

) Thi

s po

licy

is n

eces

sary

as

it co

mpl

emen

ts p

olic

y S

4 in

list

ing

pref

erre

d al

tern

ativ

e us

es to

a s

hop.

New

Sm

all S

hops

Out

side

Cen

tres

S6

A

PPLI

CA

TIO

NS

FOR

NEW

, SM

ALL

, C

ON

VEN

IEN

CE

SHO

PS IN

DIS

PER

SED

LO

CA

TIO

NS

WIL

L B

E C

ON

SID

ERED

FA

VOU

RA

BLY

IN A

REA

S W

HER

E C

ON

VEN

IEN

CE

SHO

PS A

RE

BEY

ON

D

REA

SON

AB

LE W

ALK

ING

DIS

TAN

CE.

ON

LY

N/

A

To

be

repl

aced

via

co

re s

trate

gy

and/

or

deve

lopm

ent

cont

rol D

PD

i) P

art 1

pol

icie

s pr

ovid

e th

e ce

ntra

l stra

tegy

ii)

Sup

ports

Com

mun

ity P

lan

obje

ctiv

e to

redu

ce th

e ne

ed to

tra

vel.

iii) In

gen

eral

con

form

ity w

ith L

ondo

n P

lan

polic

y 3D

.3 b

ulle

t po

int 3

. iv

) N/A

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

SHO

PS W

ITH

IN T

HE

A1

SHO

PS U

SE C

LASS

, O

R W

HIC

H D

IREC

TLY

BEN

EFIT

LO

CA

L R

ESID

ENTS

, WIL

L B

E A

CC

EPTA

BLE

. TH

ERE

SHO

ULD

BE

NO

AD

VER

SE E

FFEC

T O

N T

HE

AM

ENIT

IES

OF

NEA

RB

Y R

ESID

ENTS

.

v) N

/A

vi) T

he p

olic

y is

nec

essa

ry to

gui

de th

e pr

ovis

ion

of s

hops

ou

tsid

e sh

oppi

ng a

reas

suc

h th

at n

eeds

are

met

in a

ccor

danc

e w

ith P

PS

6 p

arag

raph

2.5

8.

Vehi

cle

Sale

s et

c.

S7

A D

EVEL

OPM

ENT

PRO

POSA

L IN

VOLV

ING

PE

TRO

L FI

LLIN

G S

TATI

ON

S, V

EHIC

LE S

ALE

S,

VEH

ICLE

HIR

E, C

OU

RIE

R S

ERVI

CES

/MIN

I CA

B

OFF

ICES

AN

D S

IMIL

AR

USE

S SH

OU

LD M

EET

ALL

TH

E FO

LLO

WIN

G C

ON

DIT

ION

S:-

(A)

TH

E PR

OPO

SAL

WIL

L N

OT

AD

VER

SELY

AFF

ECT

THE

AM

ENIT

IES

OF

NEA

RB

Y R

ESID

ENTS

, EN

VIR

ON

MEN

TAL

CO

ND

ITIO

NS,

OR

TR

AFF

IC C

ON

DIT

ION

S A

ND

SA

FETY

; (B

)

THE

PRO

POSE

D S

ITE

POSS

ESSE

S A

M

AIN

RO

AD

FR

ON

TAG

E;

(C)

TH

E PR

OPO

SED

SIT

E IS

OF

AD

EQU

ATE

SI

ZE T

O E

NSU

RE

THA

T A

LL P

AR

KIN

G,

SER

VIC

ING

, LO

AD

ING

AN

D U

NLO

AD

ING

R

EQU

IREM

ENTS

OF

THE

PRO

POSE

D U

SE A

RE

CO

NTA

INED

WIT

HIN

TH

E C

UR

TILA

GE

OF

THE

DEV

ELO

PMEN

T SI

TE.

N/

A N

/A

N/

A

To

be

repl

aced

via

co

re s

trate

gy

and/

or

deve

lopm

ent

cont

rol D

PD

i) P

art 1

pol

icie

s pr

ovid

e th

e ce

ntra

l stra

tegy

ii) N

/A

iii) N

/A

vi) N

/A

v) N

/A

vi) T

he ty

pes

of d

evel

opm

ent d

iscu

ssed

do

pose

par

ticul

ar

issu

es in

term

s of

traf

fic g

ener

atio

n an

d ac

cess

, and

impa

ct o

n am

enity

if p

oorly

site

d. T

he p

olic

y an

d su

ppor

ting

text

pro

vide

he

lpfu

l gui

danc

e an

d cr

iteria

to a

ssis

t tho

se w

ishi

ng to

dev

elop

th

ese

uses

.

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

Take

away

Foo

d Sh

ops,

Res

taur

ants

etc

. S8

O

UTS

IDE

KIN

GST

ON

TO

WN

CEN

TRE

AN

D T

HE

DIS

TRIC

T A

ND

LO

CA

L SH

OPP

ING

CEN

TRES

PR

OPO

SALS

INVO

LVIN

G T

HE

SALE

OF

FOO

D

AN

D D

RIN

K (C

LASS

A3)

AN

D A

MU

SEM

ENT

CEN

TRES

WIL

L B

E PE

RM

ITTE

D W

HER

E A

LL

THE

FOLL

OW

ING

CO

ND

ITIO

NS

AR

E M

ET:-

(A)

THE

PRO

POSA

L W

ILL

NO

T EI

THER

IN

DIV

IDU

ALL

Y O

R C

UM

ULA

TIVE

LY

AD

VER

SELY

AFF

ECT:

(I)

TH

E A

MEN

ITIE

S O

F N

EAR

BY

RES

IDEN

TS B

Y VI

RTU

E O

F N

OIS

E, L

ITTE

R,

FUM

ES, S

MEL

LS E

TC;

(II)

TRA

FFIC

CO

ND

ITIO

NS

AN

D S

AFE

TY;

(B)

THE

PRO

POSE

D S

ITE

POSS

ESSE

S A

M

AIN

RO

AD

FR

ON

TAG

E.

N/

A N

/A

N/

A

To

be

repl

aced

via

co

re s

trate

gy

and/

or

deve

lopm

ent

cont

rol D

PD

i) P

art 1

pol

icie

s pr

ovid

e th

e ce

ntra

l stra

tegy

ii)

N/A

iii)

N/A

vi

) N/A

v)

N/A

vi

) The

type

s of

dev

elop

men

t dis

cuss

ed d

o po

se p

artic

ular

is

sues

in te

rms

of tr

affic

gen

erat

ion

and

acce

ss, a

nd im

pact

on

amen

ity if

poo

rly s

ited.

The

pol

icy

and

supp

ortin

g te

xt p

rovi

de

help

ful g

uida

nce

and

crite

ria to

ass

ist t

hose

wis

hing

to d

evel

op

thes

e us

es.

Out

door

Mar

kets

S9

PE

RM

ISSI

ON

WIL

L N

OT

NO

RM

ALL

Y B

E G

RA

NTE

D F

OR

OU

TDO

OR

MA

RK

ETS

OR

IN

DIV

IDU

AL

MA

RK

ET S

TALL

S, O

THER

TH

AN

IN

PUR

POSE

DES

IGN

ED D

EVEL

OPM

ENTS

IN

KIN

GST

ON

TO

WN

CEN

TRE

AN

D T

HE

DIS

TRIC

T A

ND

LO

CA

L C

ENTR

ES, A

ND

TH

EN O

NLY

W

HEN

IT C

AN

BE

SATI

SFA

CTO

RIL

Y

N

/A

N

/A

To

be

repl

aced

via

co

re s

trate

gy

and/

or

deve

lopm

ent

cont

rol D

PD

i) P

art 1

pol

icie

s pr

ovid

e th

e ce

ntra

l stra

tegy

ii)

N/A

iii

) In

gene

ral c

onfo

rmity

with

Lon

don

Pla

n P

olic

ies

3D.1

, 3D

.2

and

3D.3

. iv

) N/A

v)

N/A

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

DEM

ON

STR

ATE

D T

HA

T TH

E EX

ISTI

NG

M

AR

KET

S IN

KIN

GST

ON

TO

WN

CEN

TRE

WIL

L N

OT

BE

AD

VER

SELY

AFF

ECTE

D.

vi) T

his

polic

y is

nec

essa

ry to

cla

rify

the

polic

y on

mar

ket s

talls

, i.e

. tha

t the

y ar

e ac

cept

able

onl

y if

done

pro

perly

in e

xist

ing

reta

il ar

eas.

Con

serv

ing

and

Enha

ncin

g th

e B

uilt

Envi

ronm

ent

STR

6 TH

E C

OU

NC

IL W

ILL

SEEK

TO

AC

HIE

VE A

HIG

H

QU

ALI

TY B

UIL

T EN

VIR

ON

MEN

T IN

TH

E B

OR

OU

GH

BY:

- C

ON

SER

VIN

G O

R E

NH

AN

CIN

G T

HE

EXIS

TIN

G

ENVI

RO

NM

ENT,

PA

RTI

CU

LAR

LY A

REA

S O

F H

IGH

QU

ALI

TY A

ND

CH

AR

AC

TER

AN

D

BU

ILD

ING

S A

ND

SIT

ES A

SSO

CIA

TED

WIT

H

THE

HIS

TOR

Y O

R H

ERIT

AG

E O

F TH

E B

OR

OU

GH

; R

EQU

IRIN

G A

HIG

H S

TAN

DA

RD

OF

DES

IGN

FO

R N

EW D

EVEL

OPM

ENT,

APP

RO

PRIA

TE T

O

THE

CH

AR

AC

TER

OF

THE

SUR

RO

UN

DIN

GS;

SA

FEG

UA

RD

ING

KEY

VIE

WS

WIT

HIN

, OU

T O

F,

AN

D IN

TO T

HE

BO

RO

UG

H.

n/

a

Rep

lace

with

th

e co

re

stra

tegy

i) P

art 1

pol

icie

s in

clud

ing

polic

y S

TR6

form

the

cent

ral s

trate

gy.

The

polic

y al

so h

elps

del

iver

Key

Obj

ectiv

e 12

(The

Bes

t Pla

ce

to L

ive)

of t

he C

ounc

il’s c

orpo

rate

Pol

icy

Pro

gram

me

2006

-20

10.

ii) T

he C

omm

unity

Pla

n do

es n

ot s

ay a

nyth

ing

spec

ific

abou

t co

nser

vatio

n or

the

desi

gn q

ualit

y of

the

built

env

ironm

ent.

iii)

The

app

roac

h is

in g

ener

al c

onfo

rmity

with

the

follo

win

g Lo

ndon

Pla

n po

licie

s: 4

B.1

(Des

ign

prin

cipl

es fo

r a c

ompa

ct

city

), 4B

.4 (e

nhan

cing

the

qual

ity o

f the

pub

lic re

alm

), 4B

.7

(Res

pect

loca

l con

text

and

com

mun

ities

), 4B

.10

(Lon

don’

s bu

ilt

herit

age)

, 4B

.11

(Her

itage

con

serv

atio

n) a

nd 4

B.1

5 (L

ondo

n vi

ew p

rote

ctio

n fra

mew

ork)

. iv

) N/A

v)

Thi

s po

licy

is im

porta

nt fo

r are

as w

here

con

serv

atio

n is

en

visa

ged.

vi

) Th

is p

olic

y is

nec

essa

ry to

set

the

over

all a

ppro

ach

to

achi

evin

g hi

gh q

ualit

y de

sign

, con

serv

atio

n an

d th

e pr

otec

tion

of

key

view

s, in

acc

orda

nce

with

PP

S1

and

PP

G 1

5: p

lann

ing

and

the

hist

oric

env

ironm

ent (

whi

ch a

t par

agra

ph 2

.6 a

nd 2

.8 w

hich

st

ate

that

the

hist

oric

env

ironm

ent s

houl

d fe

atur

e as

a k

ey to

pic

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

in U

DP

par

t 1 p

olic

ies)

.

St

rate

gic

Are

as o

f Spe

cial

Cha

ract

er a

nd th

e Pr

otec

tion

of K

ey V

iew

s B

E1

THE

CO

UN

CIL

WIL

L SA

FEG

UA

RD

TH

E TO

WN

SCA

PE O

F TH

E ST

RA

TEG

IC A

REA

S O

F SP

ECIA

L C

HA

RA

CTE

R D

EFIN

ED O

N T

HE

PRO

POSA

LS M

AP,

BY

PRO

TEC

TIN

G T

HE

SKYL

INES

, CH

AR

AC

TER

, SC

ALE

AN

D T

HE

QU

ALI

TY O

F M

AJO

R O

PEN

SPA

CES

AN

D

HIS

TOR

IC B

UIL

DIN

GS

REL

ATI

NG

TO

TH

EM. I

N

AD

DIT

ION

, TH

E C

OU

NC

IL W

ILL

SEEK

TO

PR

OTE

CT

A N

UM

BER

OF

KEY

VIE

WS,

WH

ICH

A

RE

LIST

ED B

ELO

W A

ND

IDEN

TIFI

ED O

N M

AP

BE1

.

n/

a

To b

e re

plac

ed b

y th

e co

re

stra

tegy

an

d/or

de

velo

pmen

t co

ntro

l po

licie

s D

PD

i) P

olic

y B

E1

expa

nds

on p

oint

s A

and

C o

f par

t 1 p

olic

y S

TR6

(see

abo

ve).

ii) T

he C

omm

unity

Pla

n do

es n

ot s

ay a

nyth

ing

spec

ific

abou

t co

nser

vatio

n or

the

desi

gn q

ualit

y of

the

built

env

ironm

ent.

iii) T

he a

ppro

ach

is in

gen

eral

con

form

ity w

ith p

olic

y 4B

.10

(Lon

don’

s bu

ilt h

erita

ge),

4B.1

1 (H

erita

ge c

onse

rvat

ion)

and

4B

.15

(Lon

don

view

pro

tect

ion

fram

ewor

k) o

f the

Lon

don

Pla

n.

iv) N

/A

v) P

rote

cts

area

s w

here

con

serv

atio

n of

the

exis

ting

char

acte

r is

para

mou

nt.

vi) T

he p

olic

y is

nec

essa

ry to

pro

tect

thos

e de

sign

ated

are

as o

f sp

ecia

l cha

ract

er (r

ecog

nise

d in

PP

S1

para

. 17

and

PP

S3)

.

Loca

l Are

as o

f Spe

cial

Cha

ract

er

BE2

TH

E C

OU

NC

IL W

ILL

SAFE

GU

AR

D T

HE

TOW

NSC

APE

OF

LOC

AL

AR

EAS

OF

SPEC

IAL

CH

AR

AC

TER

, AS

IDEN

TIFI

ED O

N T

HE

PRO

POSA

LS M

AP,

BY

PRO

TEC

TIN

G T

HE

IND

IVID

UA

L C

HA

RA

CTE

R, S

CA

LE A

ND

Q

UA

LITY

OF

THE

AR

EAS

AN

D A

NY

FEA

TUR

E W

HIC

H C

ON

TRIB

UTE

S TO

TH

AT

CH

AR

AC

TER

.

n/

a

To b

e re

plac

ed b

y th

e co

re

stra

tegy

an

d/or

de

velo

pmen

t co

ntro

l po

licie

s D

PD

i) P

olic

y B

E2

expa

nds

on p

oint

A a

nd B

of p

art 1

pol

icy

STR

6.

ii) T

he C

omm

unity

Pla

n do

es n

ot s

ay a

nyth

ing

spec

ific

abou

t co

nser

vatio

n or

the

desi

gn q

ualit

y of

the

built

env

ironm

ent.

iii) T

he a

ppro

ach

is in

gen

eral

con

form

ity w

ith p

olic

y 4B

.7

(res

pect

loca

l con

text

and

com

mun

ities

), 4B

.10

(Lon

don’

s bu

ilt

herit

age)

and

4B

.11

(Her

itage

con

serv

atio

n) o

f the

Lon

don

Pla

n.

iv) N

/A

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

v)

The

pol

icy

prot

ects

are

as w

here

con

serv

atio

n of

loca

l ch

arac

ter i

s pa

ram

ount

. vi

) The

pol

icy

is n

eces

sary

to p

rote

ct th

ose

desi

gnat

ed a

reas

of

spec

ial c

hara

cter

(rec

ogni

sed

in P

PS

1 pa

ra. 1

7 an

d P

PS

3).

Pol

icy

BE

2 is

als

o co

nsis

tent

with

PP

G15

: Pla

nnin

g an

d th

e H

isto

ric E

nviro

nmen

t whi

ch h

ighl

ight

s th

e du

ty o

n LP

As

to k

eep

cons

erva

tion

area

s un

der r

evie

w a

nd s

ugge

st th

at th

e ar

eas

in

min

d fo

r thi

s ar

e se

t out

in lo

cal p

lans

. Fut

ure

Con

serv

atio

n A

rea

desi

gnat

ions

are

like

ly to

be

draw

n fro

m th

e LA

SC

s de

fined

in

polic

y B

E2.

Dev

elop

men

t in

Con

serv

atio

n A

reas

B

E3

THE

CO

UN

CIL

WIL

L G

IVE

SPEC

IAL

ATT

ENTI

ON

TO

TH

E D

ESIG

N O

F D

EVEL

OPM

ENT

PRO

POSA

LS W

ITH

IN O

R A

DJO

ININ

G

CO

NSE

RVA

TIO

N A

REA

S. IN

SU

CH

INST

AN

CES

TH

E C

OU

NC

IL W

ILL:

- A

. R

ESIS

T TH

E LO

SS O

F B

UIL

DIN

GS,

TR

EES

AN

D O

THER

FEA

TUR

ES T

HA

T M

AK

E A

PO

SITI

VE C

ON

TRIB

UTI

ON

TO

TH

E C

HA

RA

CTE

R O

R A

PPEA

RA

NC

E O

F TH

E A

REA

; B

. PE

RM

IT D

EVEL

OPM

ENT

AN

D

RED

EVEL

OPM

ENT

ON

LY W

HER

E TH

E PR

OPO

SED

DEV

ELO

PMEN

T IS

OF

A H

IGH

D

ESIG

N S

TAN

DA

RD

AN

D W

OU

LD P

RES

ERVE

n/

a

To b

e re

plac

ed b

y th

e co

re

stra

tegy

an

d/or

de

velo

pmen

t co

ntro

l po

licie

s D

PD

i) P

olic

y B

E3

expa

nds

on p

oint

A a

nd B

of p

art 1

pol

icy

STR

6.

ii) T

he C

omm

unity

Pla

n do

es n

ot s

ay a

nyth

ing

spec

ific

abou

t co

nser

vatio

n or

the

desi

gn q

ualit

y of

the

built

env

ironm

ent.

iii) T

he a

ppro

ach

is in

gen

eral

con

form

ity w

ith p

olic

y 4B

.7

(res

pect

loca

l con

text

and

com

mun

ities

), 4B

.10

(Lon

don’

s bu

ilt

herit

age)

and

4B

.11

(Her

itage

con

serv

atio

n) o

f the

Lon

don

Pla

n.

iv) N

/A

v) T

he p

olic

y pr

otec

ts a

reas

of c

onse

rvat

ion

vi) P

PG

15: P

lann

ing

and

the

His

toric

Env

ironm

ent i

s cl

ear t

hat

issu

es re

gard

ing

cons

erva

tion

area

s an

d lis

ted

build

ings

sho

uld

be c

over

ed in

dev

elop

men

t pla

n po

licie

s. T

he L

ondo

n P

lan

does

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

OR

EN

HA

NC

E TH

E C

HA

RA

CTE

R O

R

APP

EAR

AN

CE

OF

THE

AR

EA.

not g

o in

to d

etai

l on

the

issu

e.

Dem

oliti

on o

f Bui

ldin

gs in

Con

serv

atio

n A

reas

B

E4

THE

CO

UN

CIL

WIL

L R

ESIS

T TH

E LO

SS O

F B

UIL

DIN

GS

THA

T M

AK

E A

PO

SITI

VE

CO

NTR

IBU

TIO

N T

O T

HE

CH

AR

AC

TER

OR

A

PPEA

RA

NC

E O

F A

CO

NSE

RVA

TIO

N A

REA

A

ND

WIL

L O

NLY

GR

AN

T C

ON

SEN

T FO

R T

HE

DEM

OLI

TIO

N O

F O

THER

BU

ILD

ING

S W

HER

E A

PPR

OVA

L H

AS

ALR

EAD

Y B

EEN

GIV

EN F

OR

SA

TISF

AC

TOR

Y R

EDEV

ELO

PMEN

T O

F TH

E SI

TE.

n/

a

To b

e re

plac

ed b

y de

velo

pmen

t co

ntro

l po

licie

s D

PD

i) P

olic

y B

E4

expa

nds

on p

oint

A o

f par

t 1 p

olic

y S

TR6.

ii)

The

Com

mun

ity P

lan

does

not

say

any

thin

g sp

ecifi

c ab

out

cons

erva

tion

or th

e de

sign

qua

lity

of th

e bu

ilt e

nviro

nmen

t iii)

The

app

roac

h is

in g

ener

al c

onfo

rmity

with

pol

icy

4B.1

0 (L

ondo

n’s

built

her

itage

) and

4B

.11

(Her

itage

con

serv

atio

n) o

f th

e Lo

ndon

Pla

n.

iv) N

/A

v) T

he p

olic

y pr

otec

ts a

reas

of c

onse

rvat

ion

vi) P

PG

15: P

lann

ing

and

the

His

toric

Env

ironm

ent i

s cl

ear t

hat

issu

es re

gard

ing

cons

erva

tion

area

s an

d lis

ted

build

ings

sho

uld

be c

over

ed in

dev

elop

men

t pla

n po

licie

s. T

he L

ondo

n P

lan

does

no

t go

into

det

ail o

n th

e is

sue.

D

emol

ition

of L

iste

d B

uild

ings

B

E5

THER

E IS

A P

RES

UM

PTIO

N IN

FA

VOU

R O

F TH

E PR

ESER

VATI

ON

OF

LIST

ED B

UIL

DIN

GS

EXC

EPT

WH

ERE

A S

TRO

NG

CA

SE C

AN

BE

MA

DE

FOR

DEM

OLI

TIO

N A

FTER

APP

LIC

ATI

ON

O

F TH

E FO

LLO

WIN

G C

RIT

ERIA

:- 1.

TH

E IM

POR

TAN

CE

OF

THE

BU

ILD

ING

n/

a

To b

e re

plac

ed b

y de

velo

pmen

t co

ntro

l po

licie

s D

PD

i) P

olic

y B

E5

expa

nds

on p

oint

A o

f par

t 1 p

olic

y S

TR6.

ii)

The

Com

mun

ity P

lan

does

not

say

any

thin

g sp

ecifi

c ab

out

cons

erva

tion

or th

e de

sign

qua

lity

of th

e bu

ilt e

nviro

nmen

t iii)

The

app

roac

h is

in g

ener

al c

onfo

rmity

with

pol

icy

4B.1

0 (L

ondo

n’s

built

her

itage

) and

4B

.11

(Her

itage

con

serv

atio

n) o

f th

e Lo

ndon

Pla

n.

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

IN T

ERM

S O

F IT

S IN

TRIN

SIC

AR

CH

ITEC

TUR

AL

AN

D H

ISTO

RIC

INTE

RES

T, IT

S C

ON

TRIB

UTI

ON

TO

TH

E LO

CA

L SC

ENE,

AN

D IT

S R

AR

ITY,

IN

BO

TH N

ATI

ON

AL

AN

D L

OC

AL

TER

MS;

2.

TH

E PA

RTI

CU

LAR

PH

YSIC

AL

FEA

TUR

ES O

F TH

E B

UIL

DIN

G W

HIC

H J

UST

IFY

ITS

INC

LUSI

ON

IN T

HE

LIST

; TH

E C

ON

DIT

ION

OF

THE

BU

ILD

ING

, TH

E C

OST

O

F R

EPA

IRIN

G A

ND

MA

INTA

ININ

G IT

IN

REL

ATI

ON

TO

ITS

IMPO

RTA

NC

E, A

ND

W

HET

HER

IT W

OU

LD B

E EL

IGIB

LE F

OR

G

RA

NTS

FR

OM

PU

BLI

C F

UN

DS;

TH

E IM

POR

TAN

CE

OF

AN

Y A

LTER

NA

TIVE

USE

FO

R T

HE

SITE

AN

D, I

N P

AR

TIC

ULA

R,

WH

ETH

ER T

HE

NEW

USE

WO

ULD

BR

ING

SU

BST

AN

TIA

L B

ENEF

ITS

FOR

TH

E C

OM

MU

NIT

Y. IN

AD

DIT

ION

, BEF

OR

E G

RA

NTI

NG

LIS

TED

BU

ILD

ING

CO

NSE

NT

THE

CO

UN

CIL

WIL

L EX

PEC

T TO

SEE

EVI

DEN

CE

THA

T TH

E FR

EEH

OLD

OF

THE

BU

ILD

ING

HA

S B

EEN

OFF

ERED

FO

R S

ALE

ON

TH

E O

PEN

M

AR

KET

.

vi) N

/A

v) T

he p

olic

y pr

otec

ts a

reas

for c

onse

rvat

ion

vi) P

PG

15: P

lann

ing

and

the

His

toric

Env

ironm

ent i

s cl

ear t

hat

issu

es re

gard

ing

cons

erva

tion

area

s an

d lis

ted

build

ings

sho

uld

be c

over

ed in

dev

elop

men

t pla

n po

licie

s. T

he L

ondo

n P

lan

does

no

t go

into

det

ail o

n th

e is

sue.

Pol

icy

BE

5 ac

cord

s w

ith th

e gu

idan

ce g

iven

in s

ectio

n 2

and

para

grap

hs 3

.16-

3.19

of P

PG

15

on d

emol

ition

.

Wor

ks A

ffect

ing

the

Cha

ract

er o

f Lis

ted

Bui

ldin

gs

BE6

TH

E C

OU

NC

IL W

ILL

ENSU

RE

THE

MA

INTE

NA

NC

E A

ND

REP

AIR

OF

LIST

ED

BU

ILD

ING

S B

Y U

SIN

G IT

S ST

ATU

TOR

Y

n/

a

N/

A

To b

e re

plac

ed b

y de

velo

pmen

t co

ntro

l po

licie

s D

PD

i) P

olic

y B

E6

expa

nds

on p

oint

A a

nd B

of p

art 1

pol

icy

STR

6.

ii) T

he C

omm

unity

Pla

n do

es n

ot s

ay a

nyth

ing

spec

ific

abou

t co

nser

vatio

n or

the

desi

gn q

ualit

y of

the

built

env

ironm

ent

iii) T

he a

ppro

ach

is in

gen

eral

con

form

ity w

ith p

olic

y 4B

.10

(Lon

don’

s bu

ilt h

erita

ge) a

nd 4

B.1

1 (H

erita

ge c

onse

rvat

ion)

of

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

POW

ERS

AN

D W

ILL

ON

LY P

ERM

IT

DEV

ELO

PMEN

T A

FFEC

TIN

G T

HE

SETT

ING

OR

TH

E A

LTER

ATI

ON

OR

EXT

ENSI

ON

OF

A

LIST

ED B

UIL

DIN

G W

HER

E TH

E PR

OPO

SALS

W

OU

LD N

OT

AD

VER

SELY

AFF

ECT

THE

BU

ILD

ING

’S C

HA

RA

CTE

R A

S O

NE

OF

SPEC

IAL

AR

CH

ITEC

TUR

AL

OR

HIS

TOR

IC IN

TER

EST.

the

Lond

on P

lan.

iv

) N/A

v)

N/A

vi

) PP

G15

: Pla

nnin

g an

d th

e H

isto

ric E

nviro

nmen

t is

clea

r tha

t is

sues

rega

rdin

g co

nser

vatio

n ar

eas

and

liste

d bu

ildin

gs s

houl

d be

cov

ered

in d

evel

opm

ent p

lan

polic

ies.

The

Lon

don

Pla

n do

es

not g

o in

to d

etai

l on

the

issu

e. T

his

polic

y ac

cord

s w

ith th

e pr

inci

ples

and

gui

danc

e se

t out

in P

PG

15

at p

arag

raph

s 2.

8 an

d 2.

16.

C

hang

e of

Use

of L

iste

d B

uild

ings

B

E7

THE

PREF

ERR

ED U

SE O

F A

LIS

TED

BU

ILD

ING

IS

NO

RM

ALL

Y TH

E O

NE

FOR

WH

ICH

IT W

AS

DES

IGN

ED. I

F TH

E C

OU

NC

IL IS

SA

TISF

IED

TH

AT

THE

OR

IGIN

AL

USE

IS N

O L

ON

GER

A

PPR

OPR

IATE

OR

VIA

BLE

, IT

WIL

L A

DO

PT A

FL

EXIB

LE A

PPR

OA

CH

IN D

EALI

NG

WIT

H A

NY

PRO

POSA

L FO

R A

N A

LTER

NA

TIVE

USE

, PR

OVI

DED

IT W

OU

LD S

AFE

GU

AR

D T

HE

CH

AR

AC

TER

AN

D S

ETTI

NG

OF

THE

BU

ILD

ING

.

n/

a

N/

A

To b

e re

plac

ed b

y de

velo

pmen

t co

ntro

l po

licie

s D

PD

i) P

olic

y B

E7

expa

nds

on p

oint

A o

f par

t 1 p

olic

y S

TR6.

ii)

The

Com

mun

ity P

lan

does

not

say

any

thin

g sp

ecifi

c ab

out

cons

erva

tion

or th

e de

sign

qua

lity

of th

e bu

ilt e

nviro

nmen

t iii)

The

app

roac

h is

in g

ener

al c

onfo

rmity

with

pol

icy

4B.1

0 (L

ondo

n’s

built

her

itage

) and

4B

.11

(Her

itage

con

serv

atio

n) o

f th

e Lo

ndon

Pla

n.

iv) N

/A

v) N

/A

vi) P

PG

15: P

lann

ing

and

the

His

toric

Env

ironm

ent i

s cl

ear t

hat

issu

es re

gard

ing

cons

erva

tion

area

s an

d lis

ted

build

ings

sho

uld

be c

over

ed in

dev

elop

men

t pla

n po

licie

s. T

he L

ondo

n P

lan

does

no

t go

into

det

ail o

n th

e is

sue.

Thi

s po

licy

acco

rds

with

the

prin

cipl

es a

nd g

uida

nce

set o

ut in

PP

G 1

5 at

par

agra

phs

2.8,

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

2.18

and

3.8

-3.1

1.

G

rass

Ver

ges

BE1

0 TH

E ER

OSI

ON

OF

GR

ASS

VER

GES

BY

BU

ILT

DEV

ELO

PMEN

T FO

R V

EHIC

LE C

RO

SSO

VER

S W

ILL

BE

RES

ISTE

D.

N

/A

To

be

repl

aced

by

deve

lopm

ent

cont

rol

polic

ies

DP

D

i) P

olic

y S

TR6

and

othe

r par

t 1 p

olic

ies

prov

ide

the

cent

ral

stra

tegy

ii)

The

Com

mun

ity P

lan

does

not

say

any

thin

g sp

ecifi

c ab

out

cons

erva

tion

or th

e de

sign

qua

lity

of th

e bu

ilt e

nviro

nmen

t iii

) The

app

roac

h is

in g

ener

al c

onfo

rmity

with

Lon

don

plan

po

licy

3D.1

2 bi

odiv

ersi

ty a

nd n

atur

e co

nser

vatio

n w

hich

re

cogn

ises

the

cont

ribut

ion

that

gra

ss v

erge

s m

ake

to L

ondo

n’s

Gre

en C

orrid

ors

(par

a 3.

257)

whi

ch, i

n tu

rn, “

may

con

tribu

te to

la

ndsc

ape

qual

ity a

s w

ell a

s bi

odiv

ersi

ty. T

his

appr

oach

is

furth

er s

uppo

rted

in ‘B

y D

esig

n: u

rban

des

ign

and

the

plan

ning

sy

stem

- tow

ards

bet

ter p

ract

ice’

. iv

) N/A

v)

N/A

vi

) The

pol

icy

is n

eces

sary

giv

en th

e na

ture

of s

ome

resi

dent

ial

area

s in

the

boro

ugh

and

the

nega

tive

impa

ct th

at to

o m

any

vehi

cle

cros

s-ov

ers

can

have

on

loca

l cha

ract

er.

The

polic

y ac

cord

s w

ith th

e ge

nera

l prin

cipl

es o

f env

ironm

enta

l en

hanc

emen

t and

sus

tain

abilit

y se

t out

in P

PS

1.

D

esig

n of

New

Bui

ldin

gs a

nd E

xten

sion

s B

E11

ALL

DEV

ELO

PMEN

T TH

RO

UG

HO

UT

THE

N

/A

To

be

repl

aced

by

deve

lopm

ent

cont

rol

i) P

olic

y B

E11

exp

ands

on

poin

t B o

f par

t 1 p

olic

y S

TR6.

ii)

The

Com

mun

ity P

lan

does

not

say

any

thin

g sp

ecifi

c ab

out

cons

erva

tion

or th

e de

sign

qua

lity

of th

e bu

ilt e

nviro

nmen

t

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

BO

RO

UG

H S

HO

ULD

AC

CO

RD

WIT

H S

OU

ND

PR

INC

IPLE

S R

ELA

TIN

G T

O D

ESIG

N,

APP

EAR

AN

CE

AN

D S

ITIN

G A

ND

SH

OU

LD N

OT

CA

USE

UN

AC

CEP

TAB

LE H

AR

M T

O T

HE

VISU

AL

QU

ALI

TY A

ND

CH

AR

AC

TER

OF

THE

LOC

ALI

TY. I

N P

AR

TIC

ULA

R, D

UE

REG

AR

D

WIL

L B

E G

IVEN

TO

TH

E FO

LLO

WIN

G:

REL

ATI

ON

SHIP

TO

AD

JOIN

ING

PR

OPE

RTI

ES,

INC

LUD

ING

TH

EIR

RO

OF

FOR

MS

AN

D O

THER

EX

TER

NA

L FE

ATU

RES

, AN

D T

HE

STR

EETS

CEN

E;

REL

ATI

ON

SHIP

TO

MA

IN B

UIL

DIN

G IN

TH

E C

ASE

OF

EXTE

NSI

ON

S A

ND

AN

CIL

LAR

Y B

UIL

DIN

GS;

C

) A

VOID

AN

CE

OF

VISU

AL

INTR

USI

ON

; D

) M

ATE

RIA

LS.

polic

ies

DP

D

iii) T

he a

ppro

ach

is in

gen

eral

con

form

ity w

ith p

olic

y 4B

.1

(Prin

cipl

es o

f dei

gn fo

r a c

ompa

ct c

ity) a

nd 4

B.7

(Res

pect

loca

l co

ntex

t and

com

mun

ities

) of t

he L

ondo

n P

lan.

iv

) N/A

v)

N/A

vi

) Thi

s po

licy

is a

key

gen

eric

des

ign

polic

y in

the

UD

P.

It ac

cord

s w

ith th

e pr

inci

ples

of P

PS

1 re

gard

ing

good

des

ign.

O

ther

UD

P p

olic

ies

rega

rdin

g de

sign

are

pro

pose

d fo

r del

etio

n on

the

basi

s th

at g

ener

ic d

esig

n po

licie

s re

mai

n sa

ved.

Layo

ut a

nd A

men

ity o

f Bui

ldin

gs a

nd

Exte

nsio

ns

BE1

2 A

LL D

EVEL

OPM

ENT

SHO

ULD

HA

VE P

RO

PER

R

EGA

RD

TO

TH

E A

MEN

ITY

OF

ITS

USE

RS

AN

D

THE

USE

RS

OF

NEA

RB

Y D

EVEL

OPM

ENTS

. PA

RTI

CU

LAR

CO

NSI

DER

ATI

ON

SH

OU

LD B

E G

IVEN

TO

TH

E FO

LLO

WIN

G:

A)

THE

MA

INTE

NA

NC

E O

F A

DEQ

UA

TE

DA

YLIG

HT

AN

D S

UN

LIG

HT

INTO

AN

D

BET

WEE

N B

UIL

DIN

GS;

N

/A

To

be

repl

aced

by

deve

lopm

ent

cont

rol

polic

ies

DP

D

i) P

olic

y B

E12

exp

ands

on

poin

t B o

f par

t 1 p

olic

y S

TR6.

ii)

The

Com

mun

ity P

lan

does

not

say

any

thin

g sp

ecifi

c ab

out

cons

erva

tion

or th

e de

sign

qua

lity

of th

e bu

ilt e

nviro

nmen

t iii)

Pol

icy

BE

12 is

in g

ener

al c

onfo

rmity

with

pol

icy

4B.1

(des

ign

prin

cipl

es fo

r a c

ompa

ct c

ity) a

nd 4

B.5

(cre

atin

g an

incl

usiv

e en

viro

nmen

t) of

the

Lond

on P

lan.

iv

) N/A

v)

N/A

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

B)

THE

PRO

TEC

TIO

N O

F PR

IVA

CY;

C

) LA

YOU

T A

ND

AC

CES

S FO

R A

LL

USE

RS,

INC

LUD

ING

CO

NSI

DER

ATI

ON

OF

THE

NEE

DS

OF

PEO

PLE

WIT

H M

OB

ILIT

Y D

IFFI

CU

LTIE

S;

D)

AVO

IDA

NC

E O

F N

OIS

E, V

IBR

ATI

ON

A

ND

OTH

ER F

OR

MS

OF

POLL

UTI

ON

; E)

TH

E PR

OVI

SIO

N O

F A

DEQ

UA

TE O

FF

STR

EET

PAR

KIN

G;

F)

THE

PRO

VISI

ON

OF

AD

EQU

ATE

A

MEN

ITY

SPA

CE.

vi) T

his

polic

y is

a k

ey g

ener

ic d

esig

n po

licy

in th

e U

DP

. It

acco

rds

with

the

prin

cipl

es o

f PP

S1

rega

rdin

g go

od d

esig

n.

Oth

er U

DP

pol

icie

s re

gard

ing

desi

gn a

re p

ropo

sed

for d

elet

ion

on th

e ba

sis

that

gen

eric

des

ign

polic

ies

rem

ain

save

d.

Loca

tion

of B

uild

ing

Plan

t B

E13

NEW

DEV

ELO

PMEN

T SH

OU

LD B

E D

ESIG

NED

TO

CO

NC

EAL

UN

SIG

HTL

Y ST

RU

CTU

RES

SU

CH

AS

AIR

CO

ND

ITIO

NIN

G P

LAN

T, F

IRE

ESC

APE

STA

IRS

AN

D L

IFT

MO

TOR

RO

OM

S.

n/

a

N/

A

To b

e re

plac

ed b

y de

velo

pmen

t co

ntro

l po

licie

s D

PD

i) P

olic

y B

E13

exp

ands

on

poin

t B o

f par

t 1 p

olic

y S

TR6.

ii)

The

Com

mun

ity P

lan

does

not

say

any

thin

g sp

ecifi

c ab

out

cons

erva

tion

or th

e de

sign

qua

lity

of th

e bu

ilt e

nviro

nmen

t iii)

Pol

icy

BE

12 is

in g

ener

al c

onfo

rmity

with

pol

icy

4B.1

(des

ign

prin

cipl

es fo

r a c

ompa

ct c

ity)

iv) N

/A

v) N

/A

vi) T

his

polic

y is

nec

essa

ry g

iven

the

othe

r gen

eric

des

ign

polic

ies

do n

ot c

over

the

issu

e of

bui

ldin

g pl

ant.

This

pol

icy

acco

rds

with

the

prin

cipl

es o

f PP

S1

rega

rdin

g go

od d

esig

n, in

pa

rticu

lar K

ey P

rinci

ple

iv a

nd p

arag

raph

s 33

-39

but d

oes

not

repe

at n

atio

nal p

olic

y.

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

Hei

ght o

f Bui

ldin

gs

BE1

4 PR

OPO

SALS

WH

ICH

DO

NO

T R

ESPE

CT

THE

HEI

GH

T O

F SU

RR

OU

ND

ING

BU

ILD

ING

S W

ILL

NO

T B

E PE

RM

ITTE

D IN

CO

NSE

RVA

TIO

N

AR

EAS,

AR

EAS

OF

SPEC

IAL

CH

AR

AC

TER

A

ND

RES

IDEN

TIA

L A

REA

S. E

LSEW

HER

E SU

CH

DEV

ELO

PMEN

T W

ILL

ON

LY B

E C

ON

SID

ERED

IN E

XCEP

TIO

NA

L C

IRC

UM

STA

NC

ES, S

UC

H A

S W

HER

E IT

W

OU

LD P

RO

VID

E A

PO

SITI

VE A

ND

B

ENEF

ICIA

L VI

SUA

L FO

CU

S W

ITH

OU

T H

AR

MIN

G T

HE

LOC

AL

ENVI

RO

NM

ENT.

n/

a

N/

A

To b

e re

plac

ed b

y de

velo

pmen

t co

ntro

l po

licie

s D

PD

i) P

olic

y B

E14

exp

ands

on

poin

t A a

nd B

of p

art 1

pol

icy

STR

6.

ii) T

he C

omm

unity

Pla

n do

es n

ot s

ay a

nyth

ing

spec

ific

abou

t co

nser

vatio

n or

the

desi

gn q

ualit

y of

the

built

env

ironm

ent

iii) P

olic

y B

E 1

4 is

in g

ener

al c

onfo

rmity

with

Lon

don

Pla

n po

licy

4B.7

(Res

pect

loca

l con

text

and

com

mun

ities

) iv

) N/A

v)

N/A

vi

) Thi

s po

licy

is n

eces

sary

giv

en th

e ot

her g

ener

ic d

esig

n po

licie

s do

not

cov

er th

e is

sue

of b

uild

ing

heig

hts.

Th

is p

olic

y is

nec

essa

ry to

impl

emen

t Key

Prin

cipl

e iv

of P

PS

1 re

gard

ing

good

des

ign.

Safe

ty a

nd L

ight

ing

of P

ublic

Are

as

BE1

5 A

TH

E C

OU

NC

IL W

ILL

ENSU

RE

THA

T A

LL

NEW

DEV

ELO

PMEN

T IS

DES

IGN

ED T

O

PRO

MO

TE P

ERSO

NA

L SA

FETY

, PA

RTI

CU

LAR

LY F

OR

VU

LNER

AB

LE G

RO

UPS

, A

ND

TO

RED

UC

E TH

E R

ISK

AN

D F

EAR

OF

CR

IME.

DEV

ELO

PMEN

T W

HIC

H IS

LIK

ELY

TO

DEC

REA

SE P

ERSO

NA

L SA

FETY

WIL

L B

E R

ESIS

TED

. B

IN

CO

NSI

DER

ING

SC

HEM

ES

INVO

LVIN

G T

HE

LIG

HTI

NG

OF

EXTE

RN

AL

N

/A

To

be

repl

aced

by

deve

lopm

ent

cont

rol

polic

ies

DP

D

i) P

olic

y B

E15

exp

ands

on

poin

t B o

f par

t 1 p

olic

y S

TR6.

The

P

olic

y al

so c

ontri

bute

s to

the

deliv

ery

of K

ey O

bjec

tive

5 (s

afet

y an

d lig

htin

g) o

f the

Cou

ncil’s

Pol

icy

Pro

gram

me

2006

-10,

and

im

plem

ents

the

obje

ctiv

e in

the

Crim

e an

d D

isor

der S

trate

gy to

en

sure

crim

e is

take

n in

to a

ccou

nt in

the

desi

gn o

f new

bu

ildin

gs.

ii) T

his

polic

y he

lps

deliv

er c

omm

unity

saf

ety

obje

ctiv

es in

ch

apte

r 2 o

f the

com

mun

ity p

lan.

iii)

BE

15 is

gen

eral

con

form

ity w

ith L

ondo

n P

lan

polic

y 4B

.1

(des

ign

prin

cipl

es fo

r a c

ompa

ct c

ity)

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

AR

EAS,

TH

E C

OU

NC

IL W

ILL

HA

VE R

EGA

RD

TO

AC

HIE

VIN

G A

CC

EPTA

BLE

LEV

ELS

OF

ILLU

MIN

ATI

ON

IN O

RD

ER T

O E

NSU

RE

SAFE

TY, A

ND

TO

TH

E A

PPEA

RA

NC

E O

F TH

E FI

TTIN

GS.

AC

CO

UN

T W

ILL

ALS

O B

E TA

KEN

O

F TH

E EF

FIC

IEN

T U

SE O

F EN

ERG

Y A

ND

TH

E N

EED

TO

AVO

ID G

LAR

E.

iv) N

/A

v) N

/A

vi) T

his

polic

y is

nec

essa

ry g

iven

the

othe

r gen

eric

des

ign

polic

ies

do n

ot c

over

the

issu

e of

crim

e an

d sa

fety

. Th

is p

olic

y ac

cord

s w

ith th

e pr

inci

ples

of P

PS

1 re

gard

ing

good

de

sign

, in

parti

cula

r Key

Prin

cipl

e iv

and

par

agra

phs

16 (p

oint

5)

, 27

(poi

nt ii

i) an

d 33

-39.

Des

ign

of N

ew S

hopf

ront

s B

E16

IN A

LL P

RO

POSA

LS F

OR

NEW

SH

OPF

RO

NTS

, TH

E C

OU

NC

IL W

ILL

REQ

UIR

E A

HIG

H

STA

ND

AR

D O

F D

ESIG

N W

ITH

TH

E U

SE O

F G

OO

D Q

UA

LITY

MA

TER

IALS

AN

D A

REG

AR

D

TO T

HE

REL

ATI

ON

SHIP

WIT

H N

EAR

BY

SHO

PFR

ON

TS.

n/

a

N/

A

To b

e re

plac

ed b

y de

velo

pmen

t co

ntro

l po

licie

s D

PD

i) P

olic

y B

E16

exp

ands

on

poin

t B o

f par

t 1 p

olic

y S

TR6.

ii)

The

Com

mun

ity P

lan

does

not

say

any

thin

g sp

ecifi

c ab

out

cons

erva

tion

or th

e de

sign

qua

lity

of th

e bu

ilt e

nviro

nmen

t iii)

Pol

icy

BE

16 is

in g

ener

al c

onfo

rmity

Lon

don

Pla

n po

licie

s 3D

.1 (S

uppo

rting

tow

n ce

ntre

s) a

nd 3

D.3

(mai

ntai

ning

and

im

prov

ing

reta

il fa

cilit

ies)

. iv

) N/A

v)

N/A

vi

) Thi

s po

licy

is n

eces

sary

giv

en th

e ot

her g

ener

ic d

esig

n po

licie

s do

not

cov

er th

e is

sue

of s

hop

front

s. Im

porta

ntly

the

Cou

ncil

has

prep

ared

an

SP

D o

n S

hopf

ront

s an

d S

hops

igns

D

esig

n ad

opte

d Ju

ly 2

005

whi

ch s

uppo

rts p

olic

y B

E16

. Th

e lo

ss o

f Pol

icy

BE

16 w

ould

pre

sum

ably

mea

n th

e C

ounc

il co

uld

no lo

nger

app

ly th

is u

p to

dat

e S

PD

. P

olic

y B

E16

follo

ws

the

prin

cipl

es s

et o

ut in

PP

G19

Out

door

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

adve

rtise

men

t con

trol a

nd a

ccor

ds w

ith th

e pr

inci

ples

of P

PS

1 re

gard

ing

good

des

ign,

in p

artic

ular

Key

Prin

cipl

e iv

and

pa

ragr

aphs

33-

39.

A

reas

of A

rcha

eolo

gica

l Sig

nific

ance

B

E19

(A)

WH

ERE

DEV

ELO

PMEN

T PR

OPO

SALS

A

FFEC

T K

NO

WN

AR

EAS

OF

AR

CH

AEO

LOG

ICA

L SI

GN

IFIC

AN

CE,

AS

IDEN

TIFI

ED O

N T

HE

PRO

POSA

LS M

AP,

TH

E C

OU

NC

IL W

ILL

EXPE

CT

PRO

VISI

ON

TO

BE

MA

DE

FOR

A S

ITE

EVA

LUA

TIO

N, W

HER

E R

EQU

IRED

, BY

AN

AR

CH

AEO

LOG

ICA

L O

RG

AN

ISA

TIO

N A

PPR

OVE

D B

Y TH

E LO

CA

L PL

AN

NIN

G A

UTH

OR

ITY

PRIO

R T

O T

HE

DET

ERM

INA

TIO

N O

F PL

AN

NIN

G

APP

LIC

ATI

ON

S;

(B)

WH

ERE

EVA

LUA

TIO

N P

RO

VES

THE

EXIS

TEN

CE

OF

AR

CH

AEO

LOG

ICA

L R

EMA

INS,

TH

E FO

LLO

WIN

G A

PPR

OPR

IATE

AC

TIO

N W

ILL

APP

LY:

(i)

FOR

REM

AIN

S O

F M

AJO

R

AR

CH

AEO

LOG

ICA

L IM

POR

TAN

CE,

TH

E C

OU

NC

IL W

ILL

EXPE

CT

PRO

VISI

ON

TO

BE

MA

DE

FOR

PR

ESER

VATI

ON

IN S

ITU

AN

D W

ILL

CO

NSI

DER

TH

E N

EED

FO

R S

TATU

TOR

Y PR

OTE

CTI

ON

OF

MO

NU

MEN

TS O

F N

ATI

ON

AL

IMPO

RTA

NC

E;

n/

a

N/

A

To b

e re

plac

ed b

y de

velo

pmen

t co

ntro

l po

licie

s D

PD

i) P

olic

y B

E19

exp

ands

on

poin

t A o

f par

t 1 p

olic

y S

TR6.

ii)

The

Com

mun

ity P

lan

does

not

say

any

thin

g sp

ecifi

c ab

out

cons

erva

tion

or th

e de

sign

qua

lity

of th

e bu

ilt e

nviro

nmen

t iii

) Thi

s po

licy

is in

gen

eral

con

form

ity w

ith P

olic

y 4B

.14

(Arc

haeo

logy

) of t

he L

ondo

n P

lan

whi

ch re

quire

s bo

roug

hs h

ave

polic

ies

for p

rote

ctin

g ar

chae

olog

ical

ass

ets.

iv

) N/A

v)

N/A

vi

) Pol

icy

BE

19 is

nec

essa

ry to

impl

emen

t the

requ

irem

ents

of

PP

G 1

6, in

par

ticul

ar p

arag

raph

15

whi

ch s

tate

s th

at “

Det

aile

d de

velo

pmen

t pla

ns (i

e lo

cal p

lans

and

uni

tary

dev

elop

men

t pl

ans)

sho

uld

incl

ude

polic

ies

for t

he p

rote

ctio

n, e

nhan

cem

ent

and

pres

erva

tion

of s

ites

of a

rcha

eolo

gica

l int

eres

t and

of t

heir

setti

ngs”

Th

is p

olic

y ac

cord

s w

ith th

e ad

vice

giv

en a

t par

agra

ph 2

0 (p

oint

2)

of P

PS

1.

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

(ii)

FOR

OTH

ER R

EMA

INS

OF

AR

CH

AEO

LOG

ICA

L IM

POR

TAN

CE,

A F

ULL

A

RC

HA

EOLO

GIC

AL

EXC

AVA

TIO

N W

ILL

BE

REQ

UIR

ED P

RIO

R T

O A

NY

DEV

ELO

PMEN

T.

WH

ERE

THER

E A

RE

REA

SON

AB

LE G

RO

UN

DS

TO S

USP

ECT

THA

T A

RC

HA

EOLO

GIC

AL

REM

AIN

S M

AY

EXIS

T IN

OTH

ER A

REA

S, T

HE

PRO

VISI

ON

S M

AD

E U

ND

ER (A

) AN

D (B

) WIL

L B

E A

PPLI

ED.

Anc

ient

Mon

umen

ts

BE2

0 TH

E C

OU

NC

IL W

ILL

ENC

OU

RA

GE

THE

PRES

ERVA

TIO

N A

ND

MA

INTE

NA

NC

E O

F A

NC

IEN

T M

ON

UM

ENTS

AN

D W

ILL

NO

T PE

RM

IT D

EVEL

OPM

ENT

LIK

ELY

TO

AD

VER

SELY

AFF

ECT

THEI

R S

ETTI

NG

. TH

E C

OU

NC

IL W

ILL

ENC

OU

RA

GE

THE

ENH

AN

CEM

ENT

OF

THE

AM

ENIT

Y VA

LUE

OF

HIS

TOR

IC S

ITES

.

n/

a

N/

A

To b

e re

plac

ed b

y de

velo

pmen

t co

ntro

l po

licie

s D

PD

i) Th

is p

olic

y ex

pand

s on

poi

nt A

of p

olic

y S

TR 6

(see

abo

ve).

ii) T

he C

omm

unity

Pla

n do

es n

ot s

ay a

nyth

ing

spec

ific

abou

t co

nser

vatio

n or

the

desi

gn q

ualit

y of

the

built

env

ironm

ent

iii) T

his

polic

y is

in g

ener

al c

onfo

rmity

with

Pol

icy

4B.1

4 (A

rcha

eolo

gy) o

f the

Lon

don

Pla

n w

hich

requ

ires

boro

ughs

hav

e po

licie

s fo

r pro

tect

ing

sche

dule

d an

cien

t mon

umen

ts.

iv) N

/A

v) N

/A

vi) A

pol

icy

on a

ncie

nt m

onum

ents

is re

quire

d by

the

Lond

on

Pla

n P

olic

y 4B

.14

Arc

haeo

logy

and

PP

G16

Arc

haeo

logy

and

P

lann

ing

Pede

stria

n En

viro

nmen

t B

E22

N

/A

To

be

repl

aced

by

core

stra

tegy

i) P

olic

y B

E22

exp

ands

on

poin

t B o

f par

t 1 p

olic

y S

TR6.

ii)

Thi

s ap

proa

ch h

as re

gard

to O

bjec

tive

2 of

the

Cou

ncil’s

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

THE

CO

UN

CIL

WIL

L EN

CO

UR

AG

E TH

E C

REA

TIO

N O

F A

PPR

OPR

IATE

PE

DES

TRIA

NIS

ED R

OU

TES

AN

D A

REA

S, A

ND

TH

E EN

HA

NC

EMEN

T O

F TH

OSE

ALR

EAD

Y EX

ISTI

NG

. IN

PA

RTI

CU

LAR

, TH

E C

OU

NC

IL

WIL

L:

(i)

ENC

OU

RA

GE

PRO

VISI

ON

OF

ATT

RA

CTI

VE S

PAC

ES, P

AR

TIC

ULA

RLY

IN

KIN

GST

ON

TO

WN

CEN

TRE

AN

D T

HE

DIS

TRIC

T C

ENTR

ES, S

UIT

AB

LE F

OR

PED

ESTR

IAN

S,

WIT

H S

EATI

NG

, STR

EET

ENTE

RTA

INM

ENT,

ET

C;

(ii)

SEEK

TH

E PR

OVI

SIO

N IN

A

PPR

OPR

IATE

NEW

DEV

ELO

PMEN

TS O

F A

DEQ

UA

TE P

EDES

TRIA

N A

CC

ESS

AN

D

CIR

CU

LATI

ON

SPA

CE,

INC

LUD

ING

A

PPR

OPR

IATE

UPG

RA

DIN

G O

F A

NY

EXIS

TIN

G

AD

JAC

ENT

FOO

TWA

YS O

R F

OO

TPA

THS

AN

D

SUIT

AB

LE F

AC

ILIT

IES

FOR

PEO

PLE

WIT

H

DIS

AB

ILIT

IES;

(ii

i) IN

EXI

STIN

G A

REA

S O

F PE

DES

TRIA

N

AC

TIVI

TY, S

EEK

TO

IMPR

OVE

TH

E A

PPEA

RA

NC

E O

F H

AR

D S

UR

FAC

ES A

ND

IN

TRO

DU

CE

SOFT

LA

ND

SCA

PIN

G W

HER

E A

PPR

OPR

IATE

; (iv

) W

HER

E R

ELEV

AN

T, S

EEK

TO

EN

SUR

E TH

AT

STR

EET

FUR

NIT

UR

E PR

OPO

SED

IS O

F G

OO

D D

ESIG

N A

ND

WEL

L LO

CA

TED

, IN

O

RD

ER T

O A

VOID

CLU

TTER

OR

IMPE

DIN

G

and/

or

deve

lopm

ent

cont

rol

polic

ies

DP

D

Com

mun

ity P

lan

Tran

spor

t cha

pter

whi

ch s

eeks

to p

rom

ote

wal

king

faci

litie

s. T

he p

olic

y al

so c

ontri

bute

s to

the

deliv

ery

of

Key

Obj

ectiv

e 7

(opt

ions

for t

rave

l) an

d K

ey O

bjec

tive

12 (T

he

Bes

t Pla

ce to

Liv

e) o

f the

cou

ncil’s

cor

pora

te P

olic

y P

rogr

amm

e 20

06-2

010.

iii)

Pol

icy

BE

22 is

in g

ener

al c

onfo

rmity

with

Lon

don

Pla

n po

licy

3C.2

0 w

hich

see

ks to

ens

ure

that

loca

l pla

ns in

clud

e po

licie

s to

im

prov

e co

nditi

ons

for w

alki

ng a

nd p

edes

trian

acc

ess

and

with

po

licy

4B.4

whi

ch s

eeks

to e

nhan

ce th

e qu

ality

of t

he p

ublic

re

alm

. iv

) N/A

v)

N/A

vi

) Thi

s po

licy

is n

eces

sary

to c

over

the

rang

e of

issu

es

asso

ciat

ed w

ith th

e pe

dest

rian

envi

ronm

ent.

Oth

er p

olic

ies

such

as

thos

e fo

r Kin

gsto

n To

wn

Cen

tre a

re p

ropo

sed

for d

elet

ion

on

the

basi

s th

at th

is b

orou

gh-w

ide

polic

y re

mai

ns s

aved

.

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

PED

ESTR

IAN

MO

VEM

ENT;

(v

) SE

EK A

ND

EN

SUR

E TH

E A

DEQ

UA

TE

ILLU

MIN

ATI

ON

OF

PED

ESTR

IAN

RO

UTE

S A

ND

A

REA

S.

Art

in N

ew D

evel

opm

ent

BE2

3 TH

E C

OU

NC

IL W

ILL

ENC

OU

RA

GE

DEV

ELO

PER

S IN

KIN

GST

ON

TO

WN

CEN

TRE,

TH

E D

ISTR

ICT

CEN

TRES

AN

D O

THER

A

PPR

OPR

IATE

LO

CA

TIO

NS

TO P

RO

VID

E O

R

CO

NTR

IBU

TE T

O A

RT

IN T

HE

ENVI

RO

NM

ENT

AS

A C

OM

PON

ENT

WIT

HIN

TH

EIR

D

EVEL

OPM

ENT

PRO

POSA

L, E

ITH

ER IN

TH

E D

ESIG

N O

F N

EW B

UIL

DIN

GS

OR

IN P

UB

LIC

SP

AC

E A

RO

UN

D T

HE

BU

ILD

ING

S.

N

/A

To

be

repl

aced

by

core

stra

tegy

an

d/or

de

velo

pmen

t co

ntro

l po

licie

s D

PD

i) P

olic

y B

E22

exp

ands

on

poin

t B o

f par

t 1 p

olic

y S

TR6.

ii)

The

Com

mun

ity P

lan

does

not

say

any

thin

g sp

ecifi

c ab

out

cons

erva

tion

or th

e de

sign

qua

lity

of th

e bu

ilt e

nviro

nmen

t iii)

Thi

s pr

inci

ple

of th

is p

olic

y is

in g

ener

al c

onfo

rmity

with

pol

icy

3D.4

of t

he L

ondo

n P

lan

whi

ch e

ncou

rage

s lo

cal a

utho

ritie

s to

co

nsid

er ‘p

erce

nt fo

r art’

sch

emes

. Par

agra

phs

5.11

7-5.

121

of

the

May

or’s

Cul

tura

l Stra

tegy

for L

ondo

n di

scus

s th

e im

porta

nce

and

bene

fits

of a

rt of

in th

e pu

blic

real

m.

iv) N

/A

v) N

/A

vi) T

his

polic

y is

nec

essa

ry to

add

a s

patia

l dim

ensi

on a

t the

bo

roug

h le

vel t

o th

e M

ayor

’s p

olic

ies

enco

urag

ing

art w

ithin

new

de

velo

pmen

ts.

The

Gre

en B

elt

OL1

EX

CEP

T IN

VER

Y SP

ECIA

L C

IRC

UM

STA

NC

ES

APP

RO

VAL

WIL

L N

OT

BE

GIV

EN F

OR

D

EVEL

OPM

ENT

(OTH

ER T

HA

N T

HE

CH

AN

GE

OF

USE

OF

AN

EXI

STIN

G B

UIL

DIN

G) W

ITH

IN

To

be

repl

aced

in

the

core

st

rate

gy

and/

or

deve

lopm

ent

cont

rol D

PD

i) P

olic

y O

L1 a

dds

deta

il to

the

cent

ral s

trate

gy p

rovi

ded

by U

DP

pa

rt1 P

olic

y S

TR7

(saf

egua

rdin

g an

d en

hanc

ing

open

land

). ii)

Pol

icy

OL1

is o

ne o

f the

pla

nnin

g de

liver

y m

echa

nism

s fo

r the

ov

erar

chin

g en

viro

nmen

tal o

bjec

tive

of K

ings

ton’

s C

omm

unity

P

lan

(200

4-20

09) “

…to

live

saf

e, h

ealth

y, re

war

ding

live

s, w

ith

acce

ss to

an

undi

min

ishe

d na

tura

l env

ironm

ent,

whi

le p

rote

ctin

g

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

THE

GR

EEN

BEL

T, A

S D

EFIN

ED O

N T

HE

PRO

POSA

LS M

AP,

FO

R P

UR

POSE

S O

THER

TH

AN

:- 1.

A

GR

ICU

LTU

RE

AN

D F

OR

ESTR

Y;

2.

OU

TDO

OR

SPO

RT;

3.

C

EMET

ERIE

S;

4.

APP

RO

PRIA

TE R

ESID

ENTI

AL

INFI

LL

DEV

ELO

PMEN

T O

R A

MO

DES

T EX

TEN

SIO

N

WH

ICH

DO

ES N

OT

CH

AN

GE

THE

SCA

LE O

F A

N

EXIS

TIN

G P

RO

PER

TY A

ND

WH

ERE

NO

MO

RE

THA

N 2

5% O

F TH

E PL

OT

IS D

EVEL

OPE

D IN

TH

E FO

RM

OF

BU

ILD

ING

S, G

AR

AG

ES A

ND

H

AR

DST

AN

DIN

GS;

O

THER

USE

S W

HIC

H A

RE

OPE

N IN

C

HA

RA

CTE

R A

ND

APP

RO

PRIA

TE T

O A

RU

RA

L A

REA

.

the

futu

re w

ell-b

eing

of o

ther

s.”

With

rega

rd to

the

loca

l en

viro

nmen

t, th

e co

mm

unity

pla

n ob

ject

ive

is “t

o sa

fegu

ard

and

enha

nce

the

Bor

ough

’s lo

cal e

nviro

nmen

t, en

ablin

g de

velo

pmen

t to

mee

t the

nee

ds o

f res

iden

ts w

ithou

t un

derm

inin

g th

e va

lue

or v

iabi

lity

of th

e na

tura

l env

ironm

ent.”

iii

) Thi

s po

licy

is in

gen

eral

con

form

ity w

ith L

ondo

n P

lan

polic

y 3D

.8 G

reen

Bel

t whi

ch s

eeks

to m

aint

ain

the

prot

ectio

n of

Lo

ndon

’s G

reen

Bel

t iv

) N/A

v)

Gre

en B

elt p

olic

y se

eks

to c

onse

rve

the

open

nat

ure

of th

e co

untry

side

aro

und

the

city

. vi

) The

pol

icy

follo

ws

the

guid

ance

in P

PG 2

, whi

ch s

tate

s th

at

‘up-

to-d

ate

appr

oved

bou

ndar

ies

are

esse

ntia

l, to

pro

vide

ce

rtain

ty a

s to

whe

re G

reen

Bel

t pol

icie

s do

and

do

not a

pply

an

d to

ena

ble

the

prop

er c

onsi

dera

tion

of fu

ture

dev

elop

men

t op

tions

’. P

PG

2 al

so re

quire

s de

velo

pmen

t pla

ns to

mak

e cl

ear

the

appr

oach

that

the

auth

ority

will

take

with

rega

rd to

the

acce

ptab

ility

of re

plac

emen

t dw

ellin

gs.

This

poi

nt is

cov

ered

in

the

supp

ortin

g te

xt to

this

UD

P p

olic

y, p

arag

raph

7.1

8. T

he

supp

ortin

g te

xt o

f pol

icy

OL1

is a

lso

whe

re th

e co

unci

l def

ines

w

here

it c

onsi

ders

‘inf

ill’ d

evel

opm

ent t

o be

app

ropr

iate

and

the

loca

tions

whe

re it

is n

ot a

ccep

tabl

e.

R

euse

of B

uild

ings

in th

e G

reen

Bel

t

OL2

To b

e re

plac

ed in

i)

Pol

icy

STR

7 S

afeg

uard

ing

and

Enh

anci

ng O

pen

Land

pr

ovid

es th

e ce

ntra

l stra

tegy

for p

olic

y O

L2.

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

THE

CO

UN

CIL

WIL

L O

NLY

PER

MIT

PR

OPO

SALS

FO

R T

HE

CH

AN

GE

OF

USE

OF

BU

ILD

ING

S IN

TH

E G

REE

N B

ELT

WH

ERE:

1.

TH

E R

EUSE

WO

ULD

NO

T LE

AD

TO

TH

E U

NA

CC

EPTA

BLE

APP

EAR

AN

CE

OR

USE

OF

LAN

D A

DJA

CEN

T O

R A

NC

ILLA

RY

TO S

UC

H

BU

ILD

ING

S O

R T

O T

HE

UN

AC

CEP

TAB

LE

EXTE

NSI

ON

OF

THE

BU

ILD

ING

; 2.

A

BU

ILD

ING

IS O

F PE

RM

AN

ENT

AN

D

SUB

STA

NTI

AL

CO

NST

RU

CTI

ON

AN

D IS

C

APA

BLE

OF

CO

NVE

RSI

ON

WIT

HO

UT

MA

JOR

O

R C

OM

PLET

E R

ECO

NST

RU

CTI

ON

; 3.

TH

E N

EW U

SE W

OU

LD N

OT

HA

VE A

M

ATE

RIA

LLY

GR

EATE

R IM

PAC

T TH

AN

TH

E EX

ISTI

NG

ON

E O

N T

HE

OPE

NN

ESS

OF

THE

GR

EEN

BEL

T A

ND

TH

E PU

RPO

SES

OF

INC

LUD

ING

LA

ND

IN IT

; 4.

TH

E U

SE IS

NO

T O

F A

RES

IDEN

TIA

L N

ATU

RE

UN

LESS

OTH

ER U

SES

AR

E IM

PRA

CTI

CA

L O

R U

NA

CC

EPTA

BLE

. IN

GR

AN

TIN

G P

ERM

ISSI

ON

FO

R T

HE

USE

OF

AG

RIC

ULT

UR

AL

BU

ILD

ING

S FO

R N

ON

-A

GR

ICU

LTU

RA

L PU

RPO

SES,

TH

E C

OU

NC

IL

WIL

L N

OR

MA

LLY

ATT

AC

H A

N A

PPR

OPR

IATE

C

ON

DIT

ION

WIT

HD

RA

WIN

G F

UR

THER

R

ELEV

AN

T PE

RM

ITTE

D D

EVEL

OPM

ENT

RIG

HTS

.

the

core

st

rate

gy

and/

or

deve

lopm

ent

cont

rol D

PD

ii) P

olic

y O

L2 is

con

sist

ent w

ith th

e co

mm

unity

pla

n ob

ject

ive

“to

safe

guar

d an

d en

hanc

e th

e B

orou

gh’s

loca

l env

ironm

ent,

enab

ling

deve

lopm

ent t

o m

eet t

he n

eeds

of r

esid

ents

with

out

unde

rmin

ing

the

valu

e or

via

bilit

y of

the

natu

ral e

nviro

nmen

t.”

iii) T

his

polic

y is

in g

ener

al c

onfo

rmity

with

the

Lond

on P

lan

polic

y 3D

.8 G

reen

Bel

t - th

ere

is a

gen

eral

pre

sum

ptio

n ag

ains

t de

velo

pmen

t in

the

Gre

en B

elt,

such

dev

elop

men

t sho

uld

not b

e ap

prov

ed e

xcep

t in

very

spe

cial

circ

umst

ance

s.

vi

) N/A

v)

Gre

en B

elt p

olic

y se

eks

to c

onse

rve

the

open

nat

ure

of th

e co

untry

side

aro

und

the

city

. vi

) In

acco

rdan

ce w

ith P

PG

2, p

olic

y O

L2 p

rovi

des

the

Cou

ncil’s

pe

rspe

ctiv

e on

the

re-u

se o

f bui

ldin

gs in

the

gree

n be

lt, h

avin

g re

gard

to th

e re

quire

men

ts in

par

agra

ph’s

3.7

, 3.8

and

3.9

and

A

nnex

D o

f PP

G2.

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

Agr

icul

ture

in th

e G

reen

Bel

t O

L3

IN C

ON

SID

ERIN

G A

PPLI

CA

TIO

NS

ON

EXI

STIN

G

AG

RIC

ULT

UR

AL

LAN

D W

ITH

IN T

HE

GR

EEN

B

ELT

THE

CO

UN

CIL

WIL

L H

AVE

REG

AR

D T

O :

A.

THE

QU

ALI

TY O

F A

GR

ICU

LTU

RA

L LA

ND

; B

. TH

E EF

FIC

IEN

CY

AN

D U

PKEE

P O

F A

GR

ICU

LTU

RA

L H

OLD

ING

S C

. TH

E LO

CA

TIO

N A

ND

DES

IGN

OF

AG

RIC

ULT

UR

AL

BU

ILD

ING

S, A

ND

WH

ERE

NEC

ESSA

RY

THE

NEE

D T

O A

TTA

CH

A

GR

ICU

LTU

RA

L O

CC

UPA

NC

Y C

ON

DIT

ION

S.

IN C

ON

SID

ERIN

G A

PPLI

CA

TIO

NS

ON

LA

ND

A

DJA

CEN

T TO

AG

RIC

ULT

UR

AL

LAN

D T

HE

CO

UN

CIL

WIL

L H

AVE

REG

AR

D T

O A

NY

AD

VER

SE E

FFEC

TS O

N T

HE

EFFI

CIE

NC

Y A

ND

U

PKEE

P O

F A

GR

ICU

LTU

RA

L H

OLD

ING

S.

WH

ERE

AG

RIC

ULT

UR

AL

USE

IS N

O L

ON

GER

VI

AB

LE IN

TH

E EV

ENT

OF

NEW

TR

AN

SPO

RT

INFR

AST

RU

CTU

RE,

A C

HA

NG

E TO

PR

EDO

MIN

AN

TLY

DEC

IDU

OU

S W

OO

DLA

ND

A

ND

OPE

N G

RA

SSLA

ND

WIT

H P

UB

LIC

A

CC

ESS

WIL

L B

E EN

CO

UR

AG

ED, S

UB

JEC

T TO

TH

E N

EED

TO

PR

OTE

CT

ATT

RA

CTI

VE

VIST

AS

OF

OPE

N L

AN

D A

ND

VA

LUA

BLE

W

ILD

LIFE

HA

BIT

ATS

.

To

be

repl

aced

in

the

core

st

rate

gy

and/

or

deve

lopm

ent

cont

rol D

PD

i) P

olic

y S

TR7

Saf

egua

rdin

g an

d E

nhan

cing

Ope

n La

nd

prov

ides

the

cent

ral s

trate

gy fo

r pol

icy

OL3

ii)

Pol

icy

OL3

con

tribu

tes

tow

ards

the

deliv

ery

of th

e C

omm

unity

P

lan

obje

ctiv

e “to

saf

egua

rd a

nd e

nhan

ce th

e B

orou

gh’s

loca

l en

viro

nmen

t, en

ablin

g de

velo

pmen

t to

mee

t the

nee

ds o

f re

side

nts

with

out u

nder

min

ing

the

valu

e or

via

bilit

y of

the

natu

ral

envi

ronm

ent.”

iii

) Lon

don

Pla

n po

licy

3D.1

4 en

cour

ages

and

sup

ports

a th

rivin

g ag

ricul

tura

l sec

tor i

n Lo

ndon

. P

olic

ies

shou

ld p

rovi

de fo

r the

pr

otec

tion

of th

e be

st a

nd m

ost v

ersa

tile

agric

ultu

ral l

and

in

acco

rdan

ce w

ith n

atio

nal g

uida

nce.

Pol

icy

OL3

has

rega

rd to

th

e ag

ricul

tura

l qua

lity

of la

nd a

nd d

eliv

ers

the

prin

cipl

es o

f thi

s re

gion

al p

olic

y.

iv

) N/A

v)

The

Gre

en b

elt i

s an

are

a fo

r con

serv

atio

n of

the

open

ch

arac

ter.

vi) P

PG

2 st

ates

that

one

of t

he G

reen

Bel

t’s o

bjec

tives

is to

re

tain

land

in a

gric

ultu

ral,

fore

stry

and

rela

ted

uses

(par

agra

ph

1.6)

. P

olic

y O

L3 re

late

s to

the

agric

ultu

ral l

and

with

in th

e G

reen

B

elt.

PP

S7

reco

gnis

es th

e im

porta

nt a

nd v

arie

d ro

le o

f ag

ricul

ture

and

sta

tes

that

this

role

sho

uld

be re

cogn

ised

by

plan

ning

pol

icie

s (p

ara

27).

Agr

icul

tura

l use

s an

d fa

rm

dive

rsifi

catio

n sh

ould

be

give

n fa

vour

able

con

side

ratio

n in

the

Gre

en B

elt (

para

30

iii).

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

Met

ropo

litan

Ope

n La

nd

OL4

EX

CEP

T IN

VER

Y SP

ECIA

L C

IRC

UM

STA

NC

ES

APP

RO

VAL

WIL

L N

OT

BE

GIV

EN F

OR

D

EVEL

OPM

ENT

WIT

HIN

MET

RO

POLI

TAN

OPE

N

LAN

D, A

S D

EFIN

ED O

N T

HE

PRO

POSA

LS M

AP,

FO

R P

UR

POSE

S O

THER

TH

AN

:- 1.

A

GR

ICU

LTU

RE,

WO

OD

LAN

DS,

O

RC

HA

RD

S, A

LLO

TMEN

TS A

ND

NU

RSE

RY

GA

RD

ENS;

2.

PA

RK

S, O

PEN

SPA

CES

, NA

TUR

E C

ON

SER

VATI

ON

AN

D O

UTD

OO

R S

POR

T;

3.

CEM

ETER

IES;

4.

O

THER

APP

RO

PRIA

TE U

SES

WH

ICH

A

RE

OPE

N IN

CH

AR

AC

TER

.

To

be

repl

aced

in

the

core

st

rate

gy

and/

or

deve

lopm

ent

cont

rol D

PD

i) P

olic

y S

TR7

Saf

egua

rdin

g an

d E

nhan

cing

Ope

n La

nd

prov

ides

the

cent

ral s

trate

gy

ii) P

olic

y O

L4 c

ontri

bute

s to

war

ds th

e de

liver

y of

Kin

gsto

n’s

Com

mun

ity P

lan

obje

ctiv

e “to

saf

egua

rd a

nd e

nhan

ce th

e B

orou

gh’s

loca

l env

ironm

ent,

enab

ling

deve

lopm

ent t

o m

eet t

he

need

s of

resi

dent

s w

ithou

t und

erm

inin

g th

e va

lue

or v

iabi

lity

of

the

natu

ral e

nviro

nmen

t.”

iii) P

olic

y O

L4 is

in g

ener

al c

onfo

rmity

with

the

Lond

on P

lan

polic

y 3D

.9 M

OL

“..en

sure

that

aut

horit

ies

mai

ntai

n th

e pr

otec

tion

of M

OL

from

inap

prop

riate

dev

elop

men

t”. M

OL

shou

ld b

e af

ford

ed th

e sa

me

leve

l of p

rote

ctio

n as

Gre

en B

elt

and

cont

rolle

d in

line

with

PP

G2.

iv) N

/A

v) M

OL

is a

n ar

ea w

here

con

serv

atio

n of

the

open

cha

ract

er is

pa

ram

ount

. vi

) The

pol

icy

is n

eces

sary

in o

rder

for t

he p

ropo

sals

map

to

desi

gnat

e th

e M

OL

in a

ccor

danc

e w

ith L

ondo

n P

lan.

The

Lo

ndon

pla

n st

ates

that

bor

ough

s de

fine

the

boun

darie

s an

d al

tera

tions

are

und

erta

ken

thro

ugh

the

UD

P p

roce

ss. P

olic

y O

L4

supp

ortin

g te

xt p

rovi

des

the

just

ifica

tion

for t

he d

esig

natio

ns a

nd

wha

t use

s ar

e de

emed

app

ropr

iate

in s

peci

fic a

reas

.

New

Bui

ldin

gs in

the

Gre

en B

elt a

nd

Met

ropo

litan

Ope

n La

nd

To

be

repl

aced

in

i) P

olic

y S

TR7

Saf

egua

rdin

g an

d E

nhan

cing

Ope

n La

nd

prov

ides

the

cent

ral s

trate

gy

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

OL5

N

EW B

UIL

DIN

GS

WIT

HIN

, AB

UTT

ING

, OR

C

LEA

RLY

VIS

IBLE

FR

OM

TH

E G

REE

N B

ELT

AN

D A

REA

S O

F M

ETR

OPO

LITA

N O

PEN

LA

ND

SH

OU

LD:-

(A)

RES

PEC

T TH

E SE

TTIN

G IN

SC

ALE

, FO

RM

AN

D D

ESIG

N;

(B)

PRO

VID

E A

HIG

H S

TAN

DA

RD

OF

LAN

DSC

API

NG

, ESP

ECIA

LLY

WH

ERE

THIS

PR

OVI

DES

A B

ETTE

R D

EFIN

ITIO

N T

O T

HE

BO

UN

DA

RY

BET

WEE

N T

HE

BU

ILT

UP

AN

D

OPE

N A

REA

S;

(C)

AC

CO

MM

OD

ATE

AN

CIL

LAR

Y U

SES

SUC

H A

S C

AR

PA

RK

ING

WIT

H P

AR

TIC

ULA

R

CA

RE.

the

core

st

rate

gy

and/

or

deve

lopm

ent

cont

rol D

PD

ii) P

olic

y O

L5 c

ontri

bute

s to

war

ds th

e de

liver

y of

Kin

gsto

n’s

Com

mun

ity P

lan

obje

ctiv

e “to

saf

egua

rd a

nd e

nhan

ce th

e B

orou

gh’s

loca

l env

ironm

ent,

enab

ling

deve

lopm

ent t

o m

eet t

he

need

s of

resi

dent

s w

ithou

t und

erm

inin

g th

e va

lue

or v

iabi

lity

of

the

natu

ral e

nviro

nmen

t.”

iii) P

olic

y O

L5 is

in g

ener

al c

onfo

rmity

with

the

Lond

on P

lan

polic

y 3D

.9 M

OL

and

polic

y 3D

.14

Gre

en B

elts

. iv

) N/A

v)

MO

L an

d gr

een

belt

are

area

s w

here

con

serv

atio

n of

the

open

cha

ract

er is

par

amou

nt.

vi) P

olic

y O

L5 p

rovi

des

the

loca

l jus

tific

atio

n in

acc

orda

nce

with

pa

ragr

aph

3.4

and

3.6

of P

PG

2 fo

r new

bui

ldin

gs w

ithin

K

ings

ton’

s G

reen

Bel

t and

MO

L.

Stab

les,

Rid

ing

Scho

ols

and

Oth

er S

imila

r Es

tabl

ishm

ents

O

L12

STA

BLE

S, S

HEL

TER

S, R

IDIN

G S

CH

OO

LS A

ND

O

THER

EST

AB

LISH

MEN

TS A

SSO

CIA

TED

WIT

H

THE

KEE

PIN

G O

R R

IDIN

G O

F H

OR

SES

WIL

L O

NLY

BE

PER

MIT

TED

WH

ERE

IT C

AN

BE

DEM

ON

STR

ATE

D T

HA

T TH

E PR

OPO

SAL

WIL

L N

OT:

-

x

D

evel

opm

ent

cont

rol D

PD

i) P

olic

y S

TR7

Saf

egua

rdin

g an

d E

nhan

cing

Ope

n La

nd

prov

ides

the

cent

ral s

trate

gy

ii) P

olic

y O

L12

cont

ribut

es to

war

ds th

e de

liver

y of

Kin

gsto

n’s

Com

mun

ity P

lan

obje

ctiv

e “to

saf

egua

rd a

nd e

nhan

ce th

e B

orou

gh’s

loca

l env

ironm

ent,

enab

ling

deve

lopm

ent t

o m

eet t

he

need

s of

resi

dent

s w

ithou

t und

erm

inin

g th

e va

lue

or v

iabi

lity

of

the

natu

ral e

nviro

nmen

t.”

iii) T

here

is n

o re

fere

nce

to s

tabl

es a

nd ri

ding

est

ablis

hmen

ts in

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

(A)

RES

ULT

IN T

HE

FRA

GM

ENTA

TIO

N O

F O

R D

ETR

IMEN

TAL

EFFE

CT

UPO

N A

N

AG

RIC

ULT

UR

AL

UN

IT;

(B)

INVO

LVE

INSU

FFIC

IEN

T EX

ERC

ISE

OR

G

RA

ZIN

G L

AN

D F

OR

TH

E N

UM

BER

OF

HO

RSE

S IN

VOLV

ED;

(C)

AD

VER

SELY

AFF

ECT

THE

VISU

AL

AM

ENIT

IES

OR

CH

AR

AC

TER

OF

THE

LOC

AL

AR

EA;

(D)

BE

POO

RLY

LO

CA

TED

IN R

ELA

TIO

N

TO B

RID

LEW

AYS

OR

OPE

N A

REA

S, O

R

WO

ULD

RES

ULT

IN T

HEI

R O

VER

USE

; (E

) D

ETR

IMEN

TALL

Y A

FFEC

T A

SIT

E O

F N

ATU

RE

CO

NSE

RVA

TIO

N IM

POR

TAN

CE

OR

SI

TE O

F SP

ECIA

L SC

IEN

TIFI

C IN

TER

EST;

(F

) A

DVE

RSE

LY A

FFEC

T TH

E R

ESID

ENTI

AL

AM

ENIT

IES

OF

THE

OC

CU

PAN

TS O

F A

NY

NEI

GH

BO

UR

ING

D

WEL

LIN

GS.

the

Lond

on p

lan.

iv

) N/A

v)

N/A

vi

) The

pol

icy

does

not

repe

at n

atio

nal p

olic

y an

d ad

dres

ses

an

activ

ity th

at c

an h

ave

a si

gnifi

cant

ly d

etrim

enta

l effe

ct o

n th

e ap

pear

ance

of a

n ar

ea. I

n ac

cord

ance

with

PP

S7

para

32,

D

PD

s “.

. sho

uld

set o

ut p

olic

ies

for s

uppo

rting

equ

ine

ente

rpris

es th

at m

aint

ain

envi

ronm

enta

l qua

lity

and

coun

trysi

de

char

acte

r……

whe

re, a

ppro

pria

te, f

or th

e ne

eds

of tr

aini

ng a

nd

bree

ding

bus

ines

s.”

The

Riv

er a

nd W

ater

Env

ironm

ent

OL1

7 TH

E C

OU

NC

IL W

ILL

SAFE

GU

AR

D A

ND

PR

OM

OTE

TH

E B

OR

OU

GH

’S R

IVER

S A

ND

W

ATE

R E

NVI

RO

NM

ENT,

IN C

ON

SULT

ATI

ON

W

ITH

TH

E EN

VIR

ON

MEN

T A

GEN

CY,

BY:

1.

R

ESIS

TIN

G C

HA

NG

ES IN

LA

ND

USE

W

HIC

H W

ILL

LEA

D T

O A

DET

ERIO

RA

TIO

N IN

N

/A

To

be

repl

aced

in

the

core

st

rate

gy

and/

or

deve

lopm

ent

cont

rol D

PD

i) P

art 1

Pol

icy

STR

7b W

ater

Res

ourc

e M

anag

emen

t pro

vide

s th

e ce

ntra

l stra

tegy

for m

anag

emen

t of t

he b

orou

gh’s

wat

er

reso

urce

s.

ii) P

olic

y O

L17

cont

ribut

es to

war

ds th

e de

liver

y of

Kin

gsto

n’s

Com

mun

ity P

lan

envi

ronm

enta

l prio

rity

rega

rdin

g w

ater

– to

in

crea

se e

ffici

ency

, red

uce

pollu

tion

and

safe

guar

d aq

uatic

ha

bita

ts.

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

THE

QU

ALI

TY O

F U

ND

ERG

RO

UN

D O

R

SUR

FAC

E W

ATE

RS;

2.

R

ESIS

TIN

G D

EVEL

OPM

ENT

WH

ICH

W

OU

LD H

AVE

AN

AD

VER

SE IM

PAC

T O

N T

HE

NA

TUR

E C

ON

SER

VATI

ON

, FIS

HER

IES,

LA

ND

SCA

PE, P

UB

LIC

AC

CES

S O

R W

ATE

R-

REL

ATE

D R

ECR

EATI

ON

USE

OF

RIV

ERS

IN

THE

BO

RO

UG

H;

3.

VIEW

ING

FA

VOU

RA

BLY

PR

OPO

SALS

TH

AT

RES

ULT

IN T

HE

CO

NSE

RVA

TIO

N O

R

RES

TOR

ATI

ON

OF

THE

NA

TUR

AL

ELEM

ENTS

W

ITH

IN T

HE

RIV

ER C

OR

RID

OR

S, R

ESU

LT IN

LA

ND

SCA

PE IM

PRO

VEM

ENTS

, OR

WH

ICH

IM

PRO

VE P

UB

LIC

AC

CES

S.

iii)

Pol

icy

OL1

7 co

ntrib

utes

tow

ards

del

iver

ing

the

6 pr

inci

ples

of

the

Lond

on P

lan

Blu

e R

ibbo

n N

etw

ork

(cha

pter

4C

) – p

olic

y co

verin

g th

e w

hole

of L

ondo

n’s

wat

erw

ay’s

and

wat

er b

odie

s.

Th

is p

olic

y de

liver

s Lo

ndon

Pla

n po

licie

s: 4

C.1

The

Stra

tegi

c Im

porta

nce

of th

e B

lue

Rib

bon

Net

wor

k, 4

C.2

Con

text

for

Sus

tain

able

Dev

elop

men

t, P

olic

y 4C

.3 T

he N

atur

al v

alue

of t

he

Blu

e R

ibbo

n N

etw

ork,

Pol

icy

4C.4

Nat

ural

Lan

dsca

pe, 4

C.5

Im

poun

ding

of R

iver

s, P

olic

y 4C

.13

Pas

seng

er a

nd to

uris

m u

ses

on th

e B

lue

Rib

bon

Net

wor

k, 4

C.1

6 In

crea

sing

spo

rt an

d le

isur

e us

e on

the

Blu

e R

ibbo

n N

etw

ork,

Pol

icy

4C.1

7 In

crea

sing

ac

cess

alo

ngsi

de a

nd to

the

Blu

e R

ibbo

n N

etw

ork,

Pol

icy

4C.2

4 Im

porta

nce

of th

e Th

ames

and

Pol

icy

4C.3

1 R

iver

s, B

rook

s an

d S

tream

s. T

he L

ondo

n P

lan

stat

es th

at b

orou

ghs

shou

ld id

entif

y,

prot

ect,

enha

nce

etc

thro

ugh

thei

r UD

P p

olic

ies.

iv

) N/A

v)

N/A

vi

) Pol

icy

OL1

7 is

nec

essa

ry a

s it

prov

ides

the

prot

ectio

n to

su

rface

and

gro

undw

ater

reso

urce

s re

quire

d by

Lon

don

Pla

n an

d P

PS

23.

Floo

ding

O

L18

IN A

REA

S A

T R

ISK

FR

OM

FLO

OD

ING

, TH

E C

OU

NC

IL W

ILL

RES

IST

DEV

ELO

PMEN

T W

HIC

H

WIL

L IN

CR

EASE

TH

E R

ISK

OF

FLO

OD

ING

. W

HER

E A

NY

DEV

ELO

PMEN

T IS

PER

MIT

TED

,

N

/A

To

be

repl

aced

in

the

core

st

rate

gy

and/

or

deve

lopm

ent

cont

rol D

PD

i) P

olic

y S

TR7b

, pro

vide

s th

e ce

ntra

l stra

tegy

ii)

Pol

icy

OL1

7 co

ntrib

utes

tow

ards

the

deliv

ery

of K

ings

ton’

s C

omm

unity

Pla

n ob

ject

ive

“to s

afeg

uard

and

enh

ance

the

Bor

ough

’s lo

cal e

nviro

nmen

t, en

ablin

g de

velo

pmen

t to

mee

t the

ne

eds

of re

side

nts

with

out u

nder

min

ing

the

valu

e or

via

bilit

y of

th

e na

tura

l env

ironm

ent.”

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

THE

CO

UN

CIL

MA

Y R

EQU

IRE

APP

RO

PRIA

TE

FLO

OD

PR

OTE

CTI

ON

MEA

SUR

ES IN

C

ON

JUN

CTI

ON

WIT

H T

HE

ENVI

RO

NM

ENT

AG

ENC

Y.

iii) T

he L

ondo

n P

lan

polic

y 4C

.6 F

lood

Pla

ins

stat

es th

at

boro

ugh’

s sh

ould

iden

tify

area

s at

risk

of f

lood

ing

and

asse

ss

deve

lopm

ent i

n ac

cord

ance

with

PP

G25

(now

revi

sed

as

PP

S25

).

iv) N

/A

v) N

/A

vi) T

his

polic

y co

nfor

ms

with

the

envi

ronm

enta

l iss

ues

that

pla

n po

licie

s sh

ould

take

acc

ount

of i

n P

PS

1, in

par

ticul

ar p

arag

raph

20

‘…po

tent

ial i

mpa

ct o

f the

env

ironm

ent o

n pr

opos

ed

deve

lopm

ent i

n ar

eas

at ri

sk o

f flo

odin

g …

’ Thi

s po

licy

deliv

ers

the

deci

sion

mak

ing

prin

cipl

es o

f PP

S25

. D

iver

sify

ing

Leis

ure

Faci

litie

s ST

R8

THE

CO

UN

CIL

WIL

L EN

CO

UR

AG

E TH

E R

ETEN

TIO

N, U

PGR

AD

ING

AN

D

DIV

ERSI

FIC

ATI

ON

OF

LEIS

UR

E FA

CIL

ITIE

S IN

K

ING

STO

N T

OW

N C

ENTR

E A

ND

OTH

ER

PAR

TS O

F TH

E B

OR

OU

GH

, GIV

ING

A H

IGH

PR

IOR

ITY

TO M

EETI

NG

LO

CA

L D

EMA

ND

AS

WEL

L A

S PR

OM

OTI

NG

TO

UR

ISM

WH

ERE

IT

DO

ES N

OT

CA

USE

EN

VIR

ON

MEN

TAL

PRO

BLE

MS,

OR

AD

VER

SELY

AFF

ECT

RES

IDEN

TIA

L A

MEN

ITY.

n/

a

To b

e re

plac

ed b

y th

e C

ore

Stra

tegy

i) P

olic

y S

TR8

is a

Par

t 1 p

olic

y an

d is

ther

efor

e pa

rt of

the

cent

ral s

trate

gy.

ii) P

olic

y S

TR8

is c

onsi

sten

t with

Kin

gsto

n’s

Com

mun

ity P

lan,

H

ealth

and

Soc

ial C

are

obje

ctiv

e to

ens

ure

that

“..lo

cal r

esid

ents

ha

ve a

cces

s to

hig

h qu

ality

spo

rts a

nd fi

tnes

s pr

ovis

ion

thro

ugh

leis

ure

cent

res,

pla

ying

fiel

ds, p

arks

and

ope

n sp

aces

to s

uppo

rt he

alth

y liv

ing.

”

iii) T

he p

olic

y is

in c

onfo

rmity

with

Lon

don

Pla

n po

licy

3D.5

S

ports

Fac

ilitie

s, id

entif

ying

site

s fo

r a ra

nge

of s

ports

faci

litie

s to

mee

t loc

al s

ub-r

egio

nal a

nd w

ider

nee

ds. A

lso

polic

y 3D

.2

Tow

n C

entre

Dev

elop

men

t, us

ing

the

sequ

entia

l app

roac

h to

id

entif

y th

e pr

efer

red

loca

tions

and

pol

icy

3D.4

Dev

elop

men

t an

d P

rom

otio

n of

Arts

and

Cul

ture

.

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

iv) N

/A

v) N

/A

vi) T

he p

olic

y is

nec

essa

ry to

pro

mot

e le

isur

e an

d to

uris

m a

s pa

rt of

the

cent

ral s

trate

gy o

f the

UD

P.

Ret

entio

n or

Rep

lace

men

t of I

ndoo

r Lei

sure

Fa

cilit

ies

R

L3

EXIS

TIN

G IN

DO

OR

REC

REA

TIO

N, L

EISU

RE,

C

ULT

UR

AL,

SO

CIA

L O

R E

NTE

RTA

INM

ENT

USE

S SH

OU

LD N

OR

MA

LLY

BE

RET

AIN

ED O

R

REP

LAC

ED W

HER

E R

EDEV

ELO

PMEN

T IS

PR

OPO

SED

WIT

H A

FA

CIL

ITY

OF

APP

RO

PRIA

TE S

CA

LE O

R T

YPE

UN

LESS

TH

EY

AR

E C

AU

SIN

G E

XCES

SIVE

DET

RIM

ENT

TO

LOC

AL

AM

ENIT

Y.

n/

a

To b

e re

plac

ed in

th

e de

velo

pmen

t co

ntro

l pol

icy

DP

D

i) Th

e ce

ntra

l stra

tegy

is p

rovi

ded

by P

art 1

pol

icy

STR

8 (d

iver

sify

ing

leis

ure

faci

litie

s).

ii) P

olic

y R

L3 is

con

sist

ent w

ith K

ings

ton’

s C

omm

unity

Pla

n,

Hea

lth a

nd S

ocia

l Car

e ob

ject

ive

to e

nsur

e th

at “.

.loca

l res

iden

ts

have

acc

ess

to h

igh

qual

ity s

ports

and

fitn

ess

prov

isio

n th

roug

h le

isur

e ce

ntre

s, p

layi

ng fi

elds

, par

ks a

nd o

pen

spac

es to

sup

port

heal

thy

livin

g.”

iii

) Lon

don

Pla

n po

licy

3D.5

Spo

rts F

acilit

ies

prom

otes

spo

rts

faci

litie

s.

iv) N

/A

v) N

/A

iv) T

he p

olic

y is

nec

essa

ry to

pro

tect

faci

litie

s an

d is

in

conf

orm

ity w

ith P

PG

17 (P

lann

ing

for O

pen

Spa

ce, S

port

and

recr

eatio

n) w

hich

sta

tes

that

‘exi

stin

g op

en s

pace

, spo

rts a

nd

recr

eatio

nal b

uild

ings

and

land

sho

uld

not b

e bu

ilt o

n un

less

an

asse

ssm

ent h

as b

een

unde

rtake

n w

hich

cle

arly

sho

ws

the

open

sp

ace

or b

uild

ings

and

land

to b

e su

rplu

s to

requ

irem

ents

’. A

nd

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

that

‘loc

al a

utho

ritie

s sh

ould

see

k op

portu

nitie

s to

impr

ove

the

valu

e of

exi

stin

g fa

cilit

ies’

.

D

ual U

se o

f Edu

catio

nal a

nd C

omm

unity

Fa

cilit

ies

for L

eisu

re P

urpo

ses

RL4

W

IDER

CO

MM

UN

ITY

USE

FO

R L

EISU

RE

OF

EXIS

TIN

G S

CH

OO

L FA

CIL

ITIE

S A

ND

OTH

ER

FAC

ILIT

IES

IN P

UB

LIC

OR

PR

IVA

TE

OW

NER

SHIP

WIL

L B

E SO

UG

HT

SUB

JEC

T TO

: 1.

ED

UC

ATI

ON

AL

SER

VIC

ES O

R

EXIS

TIN

G IN

TER

ESTS

NO

T B

EIN

G A

DVE

RSE

LY

AFF

ECTE

D;

2.

THE

FAC

ILIT

IES

BEI

NG

SU

ITA

BLE

FO

R

USE

BY

THE

PUB

LIC

; 3.

TH

E EX

TEN

T A

ND

CO

ST O

F A

DA

PTA

TIO

N N

ECES

SAR

Y TO

EN

AB

LE W

IDER

PU

BLI

C U

SE;

4.

THE

PRO

TEC

TIO

N O

F LO

CA

L A

MEN

ITY.

n/

a

To b

e re

plac

ed in

th

e co

re

stra

tegy

an

d/or

de

velo

pmen

t co

ntro

l pol

icy

DP

D

i) P

art 1

pol

icy

STR

8 (d

iver

sify

ing

leis

ure

faci

litie

s) fo

rms

the

cent

ral s

trate

gy.

ii)

Pol

icy

RL4

is c

onsi

sten

t with

Kin

gsto

n’s

Com

mun

ity P

lan,

H

ealth

and

Soc

ial C

are

obje

ctiv

e to

ens

ure

that

“..lo

cal r

esid

ents

ha

ve a

cces

s to

hig

h qu

ality

spo

rts a

nd fi

tnes

s pr

ovis

ion

thro

ugh

leis

ure

cent

res,

pla

ying

fiel

ds, p

arks

and

ope

n sp

aces

to s

uppo

rt he

alth

y liv

ing.

”

iii) L

ondo

n P

lan

polic

y 3A

.15

prom

otes

the

prot

ectio

n an

d en

hanc

emen

t of s

ocia

l inf

rast

ruct

ure

and

com

mun

ity fa

cilit

ies.

iv) N

/A

v) N

/A

vi) T

his

polic

y is

nec

essa

ry b

ecau

se n

eith

er n

atio

nal n

or

regi

onal

pol

icy

spec

ifica

lly p

rom

otes

dua

l use

of s

choo

ls.

Chi

ldre

n’s

Play

Pro

visi

on

RL7

IN

AR

EAS

DEF

ICIE

NT

IN C

HIL

DR

EN’S

PLA

Y A

REA

S, A

S SH

OW

N O

N M

AP

RL1

, TH

E C

OU

NC

IL W

ILL

GIV

E PR

IOR

ITY

TO T

HE

USE

O

F SU

ITA

BLE

SM

ALL

SIT

ES A

S C

HIL

DR

EN’S

n/

a

To b

e re

plac

ed in

th

e co

re

stra

tegy

an

d/or

de

velo

pmen

t co

ntro

l pol

icy

i) P

art 1

pol

icy

STR

8 (d

iver

sify

ing

leis

ure

faci

litie

s) fo

rms

the

cent

ral s

trate

gy.

Kin

gsto

n ha

s an

ado

pted

pla

y st

rate

gy.

ii)

Pol

icy

RL7

is c

onsi

sten

t with

Kin

gsto

n’s

Com

mun

ity P

lan,

H

ealth

and

Soc

ial C

are

obje

ctiv

e to

ens

ure

that

“..lo

cal r

esid

ents

ha

ve a

cces

s to

hig

h qu

ality

spo

rts a

nd fi

tnes

s pr

ovis

ion

thro

ugh

leis

ure

cent

res,

pla

ying

fiel

ds, p

arks

and

ope

n sp

aces

to s

uppo

rt

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

PLA

Y A

REA

S.

THR

OU

GH

OU

T TH

E B

OR

OU

GH

TH

E C

OU

NC

IL

WIL

L R

EQU

IRE

THE

INC

OR

POR

ATI

ON

OF

SUIT

AB

LY E

QU

IPPE

D A

ND

DES

IGN

ED

CH

ILD

REN

’S P

LAY

AR

EAS

IN D

EVEL

OPM

ENTS

W

HIC

H IN

CLU

DE

A M

AJO

R P

RO

VISI

ON

OF

FAM

ILY

HO

USI

NG

DP

D

heal

thy

livin

g.”

iii

) Thi

s po

licy

is in

con

form

ity w

ith L

ondo

n P

lan

polic

y 3D

.7

Rea

lisin

g th

e va

lue

of o

pen

spac

e an

d po

licy

3A.1

5 P

rote

ctio

n an

d en

hanc

emen

t of s

ocia

l inf

rast

ruct

ure

and

com

mun

ity

faci

litie

s se

eks

adeq

uate

pro

visi

on fo

r com

mun

ity fa

cilit

ies

with

in

acce

ssib

le lo

catio

ns.

The

Lon

don

Pla

n A

ltera

tions

are

pr

opos

ing

a ne

w p

olic

y 3D

.11i

Chi

ldre

n an

d Y

oung

Peo

ple’

s pl

ay a

nd in

form

al re

crea

tion

stra

tegi

es w

hich

aim

s to

ens

ure

that

al

l chi

ldre

n ha

ve s

afe

acce

ss to

goo

d qu

ality

, wel

l des

igne

d,

secu

re a

nd s

timul

atin

g pl

ay a

nd in

form

al re

crea

tion

prov

isio

n.

iv) N

/A

v) N

/A

vi) T

his

polic

y is

nec

essa

ry to

sec

ure

suita

ble

open

spa

ce

prov

isio

n w

ith n

ew d

evel

opm

ent,

N

ew H

otel

Acc

omm

odat

ion

R

L8

PRO

POSA

LS F

OR

NEW

OR

AD

DIT

ION

AL

HO

TEL

AC

CO

MM

OD

ATI

ON

WIL

L B

E EN

CO

UR

AG

ED O

N S

UIT

AB

LE S

ITES

ID

ENTI

FIED

IN T

HE

PLA

N. E

LSEW

HER

E PR

OPO

SALS

FO

R L

AR

GE

SCA

LE H

OTE

L D

EVEL

OPM

ENT

WIL

L O

NLY

BE

GR

AN

TED

PL

AN

NIN

G P

ERM

ISSI

ON

AT

MA

JOR

FO

CA

L PO

INTS

WH

ERE

INFR

AST

RU

CTU

RE

AN

D

OTH

ER F

AC

ILIT

IES

AR

E A

VAIL

AB

LE, A

ND

n/

a

To b

e re

plac

ed in

th

e co

re

stra

tegy

an

d/or

de

velo

pmen

t co

ntro

l pol

icy

DP

D

i) P

art 1

pol

icy

STR

8 (d

iver

sify

ing

leis

ure

faci

litie

s) fo

rms

the

cent

ral s

trate

gy.

Pol

icy

RL8

con

tribu

tes

to d

eliv

erin

g K

ey

Obj

ectiv

e 8

‘A th

rivin

g lo

cal e

cono

my’

of t

he C

ounc

ils P

olic

y P

rogr

amm

e.

ii) P

olic

y R

L8 c

ontri

bute

s to

war

ds d

eliv

erin

g th

e C

omm

unity

P

lan

visi

on o

f ‘a

focu

s fo

r tou

rism

and

recr

eatio

n’ a

nd ‘a

regi

onal

en

terta

inm

ent a

nd c

ultu

ral c

entre

’. iii

) Lon

don

Pla

n po

licy

3D.6

Vis

itor a

ccom

mod

atio

n an

d fa

cilit

ies

aim

s to

del

iver

thro

ugh

wor

king

with

stra

tegi

c pa

rtner

s 36

,000

ad

ditio

nal h

otel

bed

room

s by

201

6 an

d to

impr

ove

the

qual

ity,

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

PRO

VID

ED T

HA

T TH

E PR

OPO

SAL

DO

ES N

OT

CO

NFL

ICT

WIT

H A

NY

OTH

ER P

OLI

CY

OF

THE

PLA

N. W

ITH

IN T

HE

BU

ILT

UP

AR

EA O

F TH

E B

OR

OU

GH

, PR

OPO

SALS

FO

R N

EW S

MA

LL

SCA

LE H

OTE

L A

ND

GU

EST

HO

USE

A

CC

OM

MO

DA

TIO

N A

ND

EXT

ENSI

ON

S TO

EX

ISTI

NG

AC

CO

MM

OD

ATI

ON

WIL

L B

E A

SSES

SED

AG

AIN

ST T

HE

FOLL

OW

ING

C

RIT

ERIA

: 1.

TH

E C

UM

ULA

TIVE

IMPA

CT

OF

HO

TEL

DEV

ELO

PMEN

T;

2.

THE

CH

AR

AC

TER

OF

THE

AR

EA;

3.

THE

AM

ENIT

Y O

F A

DJO

ININ

G

RES

IDEN

TS;

4.

PAR

KIN

G A

ND

SER

VIC

ING

; 5.

TR

AFF

IC C

ON

DIT

ION

S;

6.

LOC

ATI

ON

IN T

ERM

S O

F A

CC

ESS

TO

PUB

LIC

TR

AN

SPO

RT

AN

D T

HE

MA

IN R

OA

D

NET

WO

RK

.

varie

ty a

nd d

istri

butio

n of

vis

itor a

ccom

mod

atio

n an

d fa

cilit

ies.

Th

e po

licy

stat

es th

at s

mal

ler s

cale

acc

omm

odat

ion

shou

ld b

e de

liver

ed in

tow

n ce

ntre

s. P

olic

y R

L8 is

in g

ener

al c

onfo

rmity

w

ith th

is L

ondo

n P

lan

polic

y.

iv) N

/A

v) N

/A

vi) T

his

polic

y is

nec

essa

ry to

add

ress

the

loca

l circ

umst

ance

s of

hot

el p

rovi

sion

. It

is c

onsi

sten

t with

the

prin

cipl

es o

f PPS

6 an

d th

e Lo

ndon

Pla

n,

Tour

ism

and

Vis

itors

R

L9

THE

CO

UN

CIL

WIL

L SU

PPO

RT

PRO

POSA

LS

TO P

RO

MO

TE T

OU

RIS

M A

ND

CA

TER

FO

R

VISI

TOR

S TO

TH

E B

OR

OU

GH

, IN

CLU

DIN

G

MEA

SUR

ES W

HIC

H:-

(A)

CO

MPL

EMEN

T A

ND

BU

ILD

UPO

N T

HE

AD

VAN

TAG

ES O

F TH

E H

ISTO

RIC

TO

WN

n/

a

To b

e re

plac

ed in

th

e co

re

stra

tegy

an

d/or

de

velo

pmen

t co

ntro

l pol

icy

DP

D

i) P

art 1

pol

icy

STR

8 (d

iver

sify

ing

leis

ure

faci

litie

s) fo

rms

the

cent

ral s

trate

gy.

Pol

icy

RL9

con

tribu

tes

to d

eliv

erin

g K

ey

Obj

ectiv

e 8

‘A th

rivin

g lo

cal e

cono

my’

of t

he C

ounc

ils P

olic

y P

rogr

amm

e.

ii) P

olic

y R

L9 c

ontri

bute

s to

war

ds th

e C

omm

unity

Pla

n vi

sion

of

‘a fo

cus

for t

ouris

m a

nd re

crea

tion’

and

‘a re

gion

al e

nter

tain

men

t an

d cu

ltura

l cen

tre’.

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

CEN

TRE

OF

KIN

GST

ON

; (B

) IM

PRO

VE T

HE

QU

ALI

TY, S

ETTI

NG

AN

D

AC

CES

S A

RR

AN

GEM

ENTS

(IN

CLU

DIN

G B

Y PU

BLI

C T

RA

NSP

OR

T) O

F EX

ISTI

NG

TO

UR

IST

ATT

RA

CTI

ON

S, IN

PA

RTI

CU

LAR

AT

CH

ESSI

NG

TON

WO

RLD

OF

AD

VEN

TUR

ES;

AN

D

(C)

EXPL

OIT

TH

E O

PPO

RTU

NIT

IES

OFF

ERED

BY

THE

RO

YAL

BO

RO

UG

H’S

R

IVER

SID

E LO

CA

TIO

N A

ND

ITS

PRO

XIM

ITY

TO

A N

UM

BER

OF

PLA

CES

OF

MA

JOR

HIS

TOR

IC

INTE

RES

T;

SO L

ON

G A

S PR

OPO

SALS

DO

NO

T A

DVE

RSE

LY A

FFEC

T LO

CA

L A

MEN

ITIE

S A

ND

A

RE

CO

NSI

STEN

T W

ITH

TH

E PR

OTE

CTI

ON

OF

THE

ENVI

RO

NM

ENT.

iii) P

olic

y R

L9 is

in g

ener

al c

onfo

rmity

with

Lon

don

Pla

n po

licy

3D.6

Vis

itor a

ccom

mod

atio

n an

d fa

cilit

ies

stat

es th

at b

orou

ghs

shou

ld s

uppo

rt ex

istin

g an

d en

cour

age

deve

lopm

ent o

f new

to

uris

t attr

actio

ns. P

olic

y 3B

.10

tour

ism

indu

stry

see

ks to

im

prov

e th

e to

uris

t env

ironm

ent,

visi

tor i

nfor

mat

ion

and

man

agem

ent t

o pr

ovid

e a

bette

r exp

erie

nce.

iv

) n/a

v)

n/a

vi

) In

May

200

6 D

CLG

pub

lishe

d G

ood

Pra

ctic

e G

uide

on

Pla

nnin

g fo

r Tou

rism

, thi

s em

phas

ised

the

impo

rtanc

e of

in

clud

ing

polic

ies

on to

uris

m in

LD

F’s.

The

pol

icy

does

not

re

peat

hig

her p

olic

y pr

omot

ing

tour

ism

. It

is a

loca

lly s

peci

fic

polic

y an

d th

roug

h sa

ving

pol

icy

RL9

a fr

amew

ork

is in

pla

ce to

de

liver

tour

ism

in th

e bo

roug

h w

hils

t the

Cor

e S

trate

gy a

nd

Dev

elop

men

t Con

trol D

PD

em

erge

. C

omm

unity

Ser

vice

s ST

R9

ED

UC

ATI

ON

, SO

CIA

L A

ND

OTH

ER

C

OM

MU

NIT

Y S

ER

VIC

ES

RE

QU

IRIN

G A

S

TRA

TEG

IC L

OC

ATI

ON

IN O

RD

ER

TO

S

ER

VE

TH

E B

OR

OU

GH

OR

A W

IDE

R A

RE

A

WIL

L B

E E

NC

OU

RA

GE

D W

ITH

IN K

ING

STO

N

TOW

N C

EN

TRE

. O

THE

R M

OR

E L

OC

AL

SE

RV

ICE

S W

ILL

BE

EN

CO

UR

AG

ED

IN

DIS

TRIC

T C

EN

TRE

S A

ND

OTH

ER

SU

ITA

BLE

LO

CA

TIO

NS

.

N/

A

To b

e re

plac

ed in

th

e co

re

stra

tegy

an

d/or

de

velo

pmen

t co

ntro

l pol

icy

DP

Ds

Pol

icy

STR

9: p

rovi

des

the

loca

l spa

tial c

onte

xt fo

r the

re

quire

men

ts s

et o

ut b

y th

e Lo

ndon

Pla

n an

d P

PS

1 re

gard

ing

the

loca

tion

of e

duca

tion,

soc

ial a

nd o

ther

com

mun

ity s

ervi

ces.

Th

is p

olic

y pr

ovid

es a

spa

tial c

onte

xt fo

r the

det

aile

d U

DP

Par

t 2

Com

mun

ity S

ervi

ces

polic

ies.

i)

This

pol

icy,

alo

ng w

ith o

ther

Par

t 1 p

olic

ies

prov

ides

the

cent

ral s

trate

gy.

ii) P

olic

y S

TR9

is c

onsi

sten

t with

the

Com

mun

ity S

trate

gy:

Hea

lth a

nd S

ocia

l Car

e ov

eral

l obj

ectiv

e; ‘.

.ens

urin

g th

at:

Peo

ple

can

acce

ss in

form

atio

n an

d se

rvic

es w

hich

hel

p to

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

ac

hiev

e or

mai

ntai

n go

od h

ealth

’, P

riorit

y 5:

‘Mak

ing

sure

that

pe

ople

can

acc

ess

good

ser

vice

s an

d ar

e tre

ated

fairl

y,’ a

nd

the

Com

mun

ity S

trate

gy: E

duca

tion

and

Life

long

Lea

rnin

g ov

eral

l obj

ectiv

e ‘T

o m

ake

Kin

gsto

n a

plac

e w

here

eve

ryon

e va

lues

, enj

oys

and

bene

fits

from

lear

ning

’, by

enc

oura

ging

th

e pr

ovis

ion

of e

duca

tiona

l, so

cial

and

oth

er c

omm

unity

use

s in

stra

tegi

c, a

cces

sibl

e lo

catio

ns.

iii) P

olic

y S

TR9

is p

rovi

des

a lo

cal s

patia

l con

text

to th

e pr

ovis

ion

of c

omm

unity

ser

vice

s an

d fa

cilit

ies

cons

iste

nt w

ith

the

follo

win

g Lo

ndon

Pla

n po

licie

s; P

olic

y 3A

.15

Pro

tect

ion

and

enha

ncem

ent o

f soc

ial i

nfra

stru

ctur

e an

d co

mm

unity

fa

cilit

ies,

Pol

icy

3A.1

8 w

hich

enc

oura

ges

UD

P p

olic

ies

to

‘sup

port

the

prov

isio

n of

add

ition

al h

ealth

car

e fa

cilit

ies

and

iden

tify

pref

erre

d lo

catio

ns.’

and

Pol

icy

3A.2

1 w

hich

requ

ires

that

‘UD

P p

olic

ies

shou

ld e

nsur

e ad

equa

te p

rovi

sion

of p

re-

scho

ol, s

choo

l and

com

mun

ity le

arni

ng fa

cilit

ies.

’ iv

) N/A

v)

N/A

vi

) P

olic

y S

TR9

does

not

repe

at h

ighe

r lev

el p

olic

y an

d is

ne

cess

ary

beca

use

it ap

plie

s pa

ra 2

7(v)

of P

PS

1 to

the

loca

l le

vel.

PPS

1 se

eks

to P

rovi

de im

prov

ed a

cces

s fo

r all

to jo

bs,

heal

th, e

duca

tion,

sho

ps, l

eisu

re a

nd c

omm

unity

faci

litie

s,

open

spa

ce, s

port

and

recr

eatio

n, b

y en

surin

g th

at n

ew

deve

lopm

ent i

s lo

cate

d w

here

eve

ryon

e ca

n ac

cess

ser

vice

s or

faci

litie

s on

foot

, bic

ycle

or p

ublic

tran

spor

t. Th

e P

lann

ing

and

Com

puls

ory

Pur

chas

e A

ct in

trodu

ced

in 2

004

a ne

w s

tyle

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

of p

lann

ing

– sp

atia

l pla

nnin

g. P

olic

y S

TR9

is c

onsi

sten

t with

a

spat

ial p

lann

ing

appr

oach

and

pro

vide

s a

loca

l con

text

to

over

arch

ing

natio

nal o

bjec

tives

.

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

New

Com

mun

ity F

acili

ties

and

the

Exte

nsio

n of

Ex

istin

g C

omm

unity

Fac

ilitie

s C

S1

THE

CO

UN

CIL

WIL

L N

OR

MA

LLY

PER

MIT

PR

OPO

SALS

FO

R N

EW E

DU

CA

TIO

N, S

OC

IAL

AN

D O

THER

CO

MM

UN

ITY

SER

VIC

ES IN

D

ISTR

ICT

CEN

TRES

, AN

D P

RO

POSA

LS T

O

IMPR

OVE

OR

EXT

END

EXI

STIN

G F

AC

ILIT

IES

(INC

LUD

ING

HO

SPIT

AL

FAC

ILIT

IES)

WH

ERE

REQ

UIR

ED F

OR

OPE

RA

TIO

NA

L R

EASO

NS,

PR

OVI

DED

TH

E FO

LLO

WIN

G C

RIT

ERIA

AR

E M

ET:

(A)

AD

EQU

ATE

PU

BLI

C T

RA

NSP

OR

T IS

A

VAIL

AB

LE F

RO

M A

LL P

AR

TS O

F TH

E C

ATC

HM

ENT

AR

EA;

(B)

TRA

FFIC

CO

ND

ITIO

NS

AR

E N

OT

AD

VER

SELY

AFF

ECTE

D;

(C)

RES

IDEN

TIA

L A

MEN

ITIE

S A

ND

EN

VIR

ON

MEN

TAL

CO

NSI

DER

ATI

ON

S A

RE

NO

T A

DVE

RSE

LY A

FFEC

TED

.

N/

A

To b

e re

plac

ed in

th

e co

re

stra

tegy

an

d/or

de

velo

pmen

t co

ntro

l pol

icy

DP

Ds

Pol

icy

CS

1 pr

ovid

es fu

rther

det

ail t

o th

e sp

atia

l obj

ectiv

es o

f po

licy

STR

9 by

list

ing

crite

ria fo

r com

mun

ity d

evel

opm

ents

. i)

Par

t 1 p

olic

ies,

esp

ecia

lly S

TR9

prov

ide

the

cent

ral s

trate

gy.

ii) C

S1

is c

onsi

sten

t with

and

see

ks to

impl

emen

t the

follo

win

g C

omm

unity

Stra

tegy

ove

rall

obje

ctiv

es a

nd p

riorit

ies;

Hea

lth

and

Soc

ial C

are

to e

nsur

e th

at ‘P

eopl

e ca

n ac

cess

in

form

atio

n an

d se

rvic

es w

hich

hel

p to

ach

ieve

or m

aint

ain

good

hea

lth’ a

nd P

riorit

y 5:

‘…pe

ople

can

acc

ess

good

se

rvic

es a

nd a

re tr

eate

d fa

irly.

’ E

duca

tion

and

Life

long

Le

arni

ng o

vera

ll ob

ject

ive

‘To

mak

e K

ings

ton

a pl

ace

whe

re

ever

yone

val

ues,

enj

oys

and

bene

fits

from

lear

ning

’ and

the

Com

mun

ity S

trate

gy: T

rans

port

Prio

rity

7 ‘R

educ

ing

the

jour

ney

leng

th to

wor

k, s

choo

ls a

nd h

ospi

tals

.’ iii)

Pol

icy

CS

1 pr

ovid

es th

e lo

cal s

patia

l con

text

to, a

nd is

co

nsis

tent

with

, the

obj

ectiv

es o

f the

follo

win

g Lo

ndon

Pla

n po

licie

s:

3A.1

5 P

rote

ctio

n an

d en

hanc

emen

t of s

ocia

l inf

rast

ruct

ure

and

com

mun

ity fa

cilit

ies

3A.1

8 …

UD

P po

licie

s sh

ould

sup

port

the

prov

isio

n of

ad

ditio

nal h

ealth

car

e fa

cilit

ies

and

iden

tify

pref

erre

d lo

catio

ns.

3A.2

1 …

UD

P p

olic

ies

shou

ld e

nsur

e ad

equa

te p

rovi

sion

of

pre-

scho

ol, s

choo

l and

com

mun

ity le

arni

ng fa

cilit

ies.

3C

.16

Tack

ling

cong

estio

n an

d re

duci

ng tr

affic

iv

) N/A

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

v) N

/A

vi) C

S1

does

not

repe

at h

ighe

r lev

el p

olic

y. E

duca

tion,

Vol

unta

ry

Sec

tor a

nd P

rimar

y C

are

Trus

t im

plem

enta

tion

plan

s an

d st

rate

gies

for t

he b

orou

gh s

tress

the

impo

rtanc

e of

pr

ovid

ing

com

mun

ity fa

cilit

ies

and

serv

ices

in lo

catio

ns

easi

ly a

cces

sibl

e to

thei

r clie

nts

such

as

Dis

trict

C

entre

s. T

hese

pla

ns re

cogn

ise

that

loca

tions

for

faci

litie

s sh

ould

be

acce

ssib

le b

y pu

blic

tran

spor

t and

sh

ould

resp

ect t

he s

urro

undi

ng e

nviro

nmen

t. P

olic

y C

S1

supp

orts

thes

e lo

catio

nal o

bjec

tives

.

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

Faci

litie

s fo

r Car

e in

the

Com

mun

ity

CS2

IM

PRO

VEM

ENTS

IN T

HE

PRO

VISI

ON

OF

FAC

ILIT

IES

FOR

TH

E C

AR

E IN

TH

E C

OM

MU

NIT

Y O

F PE

OPL

E W

ITH

MEN

TAL

HEA

LTH

PR

OB

LEM

S A

ND

TH

OSE

WIT

H

LEA

RN

ING

OR

PH

YSIC

AL

DIS

AB

ILIT

IES

INC

LUD

ING

TH

OSE

RES

ULT

ING

FR

OM

A

GEI

NG

, WIL

L N

OR

MA

LLY

BE

SUPP

OR

TED

W

HER

E:

(A)

THE

AC

CO

MM

OD

ATI

ON

IS S

UIT

AB

LE

FOR

TH

EIR

NEE

DS;

(B

) A

PPR

OPR

IATE

DA

Y C

AR

E A

ND

OTH

ER

SER

VIC

ES A

RE

PRO

VID

ED T

O S

UPP

OR

T TH

EIR

LIV

ING

MO

RE

IND

EPEN

DEN

TLY;

(C

) TH

EY A

RE

SITE

D W

ITH

CO

NVE

NIE

NT

AC

CES

S TO

TR

AN

SPO

RT,

SH

OPS

AN

D

OPE

N S

PAC

ES (W

HER

E PO

SSIB

LE);

AN

D

(D)

IN T

HE

CA

SE O

F R

ESID

ENTI

AL

AC

CO

MM

OD

ATI

ON

IT C

AN

BE

SATI

SFA

CTO

RIL

Y LO

CA

TED

WIT

H

CO

NVE

NIE

NT

AC

CES

S TO

LO

CA

L C

OM

MU

NIT

Y SE

RVI

CES

.

N/

A

To b

e re

plac

ed in

th

e co

re

stra

tegy

an

d/or

de

velo

pmen

t co

ntro

l pol

icy

DP

Ds

Pol

icy

CS

2 is

con

side

red

cons

iste

nt w

ith th

e ob

ject

ives

of

natio

nal p

olic

y an

d re

gion

al p

olic

y an

d pr

ovid

es a

n ef

fect

ive

tool

fo

r enc

oura

ging

and

pro

vidi

ng fo

r hea

lth c

are

serv

ices

in

suita

ble

loca

tions

for p

eopl

e w

ith m

enta

l, le

arni

ng o

r phy

sica

l he

alth

pro

blem

s in

the

com

mun

ity. T

his

polic

y w

orks

in

conj

unct

ion

with

the

serie

s of

CS

pol

icie

s to

regu

late

de

velo

pmen

t and

the

prov

isio

n of

ser

vice

s.

i) P

art 1

pol

icie

s, e

spec

ially

STR

9 C

omm

unity

Ser

vice

s pr

ovid

e th

e ce

ntra

l stra

tegy

. ii)

Pol

icy

CS

2 is

con

sist

ent w

ith th

e C

omm

unity

Stra

tegy

: Hea

lth

and

Soc

ial C

are

over

all o

bjec

tive

whi

ch s

eeks

to e

nsur

e th

at

‘peo

ple

can

acce

ss in

form

atio

n an

d se

rvic

es w

hich

hel

p to

ac

hiev

e or

mai

ntai

n go

od h

ealth

… a

nd to

pro

vide

and

co

mm

issi

on s

ervi

ces

appr

opria

te to

the

iden

tifie

d ne

eds.

’ iii

) Lo

ndon

Pla

n po

licie

s 3A

.18,

3A

.17

and

3A.1

0 di

rect

UD

P

polic

ies

to ‘s

uppo

rt th

e pr

ovis

ion

of a

dditi

onal

hea

lth c

are.

.. as

id

entif

ied

by s

trate

gic

heal

th a

utho

ritie

s…’ (

3A.1

8), t

o ‘p

rom

ote

the

obje

ctiv

es o

f the

NH

S P

lan,

Loc

al d

eliv

ery

Pla

ns

and

Mod

erni

satio

n P

rogr

amm

es’ (

3A.1

7), a

nd to

‘pro

vide

for

spec

ial n

eeds

hou

sing

…’ (

3A.1

0). P

olic

y C

S1

reco

gnis

es a

nd

acts

upo

n th

is d

irect

ion.

iv

) N/A

v)

N/A

vi

) The

pro

posa

ls in

the

Whi

te P

aper

, Our

hea

lth, o

ur c

are,

our

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

say:

a n

ew d

irect

ion

for c

omm

unity

ser

vice

s (J

an 2

006)

, aim

to

: •

chan

ge th

e w

ay th

ese

serv

ices

are

pro

vide

d in

co

mm

uniti

es a

nd m

ake

them

as

flexi

ble

as p

ossi

ble

•

wor

k w

ith h

ealth

and

soc

ial c

are

prof

essi

onal

s an

d se

rvic

es

to g

et th

e m

ost a

ppro

pria

te tr

eatm

ent o

r car

e fo

r the

ir ne

eds.

K

PC

T se

eks

to e

ncou

rage

the

prov

isio

n fo

r car

ing

for p

atie

nts

in

the

neig

hbou

rhoo

d se

tting

as

far a

s pr

actic

able

. The

re is

an

incr

easi

ng re

quire

men

t for

peo

ple

with

a d

isab

ility

or i

llnes

s to

liv

e at

hom

e. It

is th

e ai

m o

f KP

CT

to in

crea

se th

e ca

paci

ty o

f lo

cal h

ealth

faci

litie

s an

d th

e ef

fect

iven

ess

of h

ealth

y liv

ing

sche

mes

to re

duce

the

num

ber o

f pat

ient

s w

ho n

eed

to g

o to

the

hosp

itals

for t

reat

men

t. P

olic

y C

S2

is c

onsi

sten

t with

this

aim

.

Adu

lt Ed

ucat

ion

Faci

litie

s an

d Yo

uth

Cen

tres

C

S3

THE

CO

UN

CIL

WIL

L S

EE

K S

UIT

AB

LE S

ITE

S

FOR

AD

DIT

ION

AL

YO

UTH

AN

D C

OM

MU

NIT

Y

CE

NTR

ES

WH

ER

E T

HE

RE

IS A

DE

MA

ND

FO

R T

HE

IR P

RO

VIS

ION

AN

D W

ILL

CO

NS

IDE

R T

HE

RE

QU

IRE

ME

NT

TO

RE

PLA

CE

TH

ES

E A

ND

AD

ULT

ED

UC

ATI

ON

FA

CIL

ITIE

S A

FFE

CTE

D B

Y

RE

DE

VE

LOP

ME

NT

PR

OP

OS

ALS

IN T

HE

LI

GH

T O

F E

XIS

TIN

G A

ND

EX

PE

CTE

D

FUTU

RE

DE

MA

ND

.

N/

A

To b

e re

plac

ed in

th

e co

re

stra

tegy

an

d/or

de

velo

pmen

t co

ntro

l pol

icy

DP

Ds

i) P

art 1

pol

icie

s, e

spec

ially

STR

9 C

omm

unity

Ser

vice

s pr

ovid

e th

e ce

ntra

l stra

tegy

ii)

Pol

icy

CS

3 st

ates

the

Cou

ncils

inte

ntio

ns to

see

k su

itabl

e si

tes

for a

dditi

onal

you

th, a

dult

and

com

mun

ity c

entre

s. T

he

prov

isio

n of

suc

h fa

cilit

ies

is c

onsi

sten

t with

the

Com

mun

ity

Stra

tegy

: Hea

lth a

nd S

ocia

l Car

e ob

ject

ive

3: S

uppo

rting

th

ose

adul

ts w

ho n

eed

assi

stan

ce, o

bjec

tive

4: A

dvan

cing

the

heal

th a

nd w

elfa

re o

f chi

ldre

n an

d yo

ung

peop

le, a

nd

obje

ctiv

e 5:

Mak

ing

sure

that

peo

ple

can

acce

ss g

ood

serv

ices

and

are

trea

ted

fairl

y.

iii) T

he C

ounc

ils in

tent

ions

iden

tifie

d in

Pol

icy

CS

3 ar

e

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

cons

iste

nt w

ith th

e Lo

ndon

Pla

n P

olic

ies;

3A

.15

‘UD

P p

olic

ies

shou

ld a

sses

s th

e ne

ed fo

r soc

ial i

nfra

stru

ctur

e an

d co

mm

unity

faci

litie

s an

d sh

ould

see

k to

ens

ure

appr

opria

te

faci

litie

s ar

e pr

ovid

ed’…

.3A

.21

‘UD

P p

olic

ies

shou

ld p

rovi

de

for b

oth

the

expa

nsio

n of

exi

stin

g fa

cilit

ies

and

prov

isio

n of

ne

w e

duca

tiona

l fac

ilitie

s’ a

nd 3

A.2

2 to

‘Tak

e in

to a

ccou

nt th

e fu

ture

nee

ds o

f the

sec

tor.’

iv

) N

/A

v)

N/A

vi

) A

lone

, a m

arke

t led

app

roac

h is

unl

ikel

y to

pro

vide

site

s fo

r co

mm

unity

faci

litie

s. T

he p

olic

y is

nec

essa

ry to

ens

ure

that

w

here

nec

essa

ry th

e co

mm

unity

faci

litie

s re

ferre

d to

in th

e po

licy

are

re-p

rovi

ded

thro

ugh

rede

velo

pmen

t.

The

obje

ctiv

e of

Bui

ldin

g S

choo

ls fo

r the

Fut

ure

(201

1) is

to

rais

e th

e st

anda

rds

of s

choo

ls th

roug

h a

prog

ram

of e

xten

sive

as

set/b

uild

ing

mai

nten

ance

and

rede

velo

pmen

t, en

cour

agin

g th

e re

tent

ion

of s

urpl

us s

ites

for a

com

mun

ity fa

cilit

y or

ser

vice

us

e. T

he C

hild

ren

and

You

ng P

erso

ns P

lan

enco

urag

es th

e op

enin

g up

of s

choo

ls, p

artic

ular

ly fo

r you

ng m

othe

rs,

vuln

erab

le p

erso

ns a

nd d

isab

led

child

ren,

see

king

to e

nsur

e th

e in

tegr

atio

n of

all

serv

ices

ass

ocia

ted

with

you

ng p

erso

ns a

cros

s al

l dep

artm

ents

and

org

anis

atio

ns.

C

usto

mer

Fac

ilitie

s an

d C

onve

nien

ces

CS4

n/

a

N/

A

Dev

elop

men

t co

ntro

l po

licie

s

i) P

art 1

pol

icie

s, e

spec

ially

STR

9 C

omm

unity

Ser

vice

s pr

ovid

e th

e ce

ntra

l stra

tegy

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

THE

CO

UN

CIL

WIL

L R

EQ

UIR

E

DE

VE

LOP

ER

S O

F M

AJO

R D

EV

ELO

PM

EN

TS

WH

ICH

ATT

RA

CT

LAR

GE

NU

MB

ER

S O

F V

ISIT

OR

S/C

US

TOM

ER

S, S

UC

H A

S

SH

OP

PIN

G C

EN

TRE

S, P

UB

LIC

TR

AN

SP

OR

T IN

TER

CH

AN

GE

S, L

EIS

UR

E F

AC

ILIT

IES

, AN

D

LAR

GE

RE

TAIL

OU

TLE

TS, T

O P

RO

VID

E

AD

EQ

UA

TE T

OIL

ETS

AN

D B

AB

Y C

HA

NG

ING

FA

CIL

ITIE

S F

OR

TH

E U

SE

OF

THE

IR

CU

STO

ME

RS

. S

UC

H F

AC

ILIT

IES

SH

OU

LD

ME

ET

THE

NE

ED

S O

F C

AR

ER

S W

ITH

C

HIL

DR

EN

AN

D S

HO

ULD

BE

AC

CE

SS

IBLE

TO

ALL

.

ii) T

here

are

no

polic

ies

in th

e C

omm

unity

Stra

tegy

that

dire

ctly

re

late

to th

e pr

ovis

ions

of p

olic

y C

S4.

iii

) Lon

don

Pla

n po

licy

4B1

seek

s to

ens

ure

that

dev

elop

men

ts

are

acce

ssib

le a

nd u

sabl

e.

iv) N

/A

v)N

/A

vi) A

lthou

gh o

ther

legi

slat

ion*

pro

vide

s st

atut

ory

min

imum

st

anda

rds

for t

he p

rovi

sion

of p

ublic

con

veni

ence

s th

e po

licy

is

cons

ider

ed n

eces

sary

bec

ause

it g

ives

the

Cou

ncil

the

mea

ns to

m

ake

sure

this

issu

e is

cov

ered

fully

at t

he p

lann

ing

stag

e, fo

r ex

ampl

e in

pre

-app

licat

ion

disc

ussi

ons

over

the

desi

gn o

f the

de

velo

pmen

t. It

enab

les

the

Cou

ncil

to n

egot

iate

app

ropr

iate

qu

antit

ies,

des

igns

and

loca

tions

of p

ublic

con

veni

ence

pr

ovis

ion

with

app

lican

ts fo

r the

bet

term

ent o

f the

use

r. *T

he B

uild

ing

Reg

ulat

ions

(200

0) S

ched

ule

1 G

1 im

pose

s a

min

imum

requ

irem

ent f

or th

e pr

ovis

ion

of p

ublic

con

veni

ence

s,

Sch

edul

e 1

M3(

3) re

quire

s th

at if

pub

lic c

onve

nien

ces

are

prov

ided

in a

ny b

uild

ing

whi

ch is

not

a d

wel

ling,

reas

onab

le

prov

isio

n sh

all b

e m

ade

for d

isab

led

peop

le. T

he C

hron

ical

ly

Sic

k an

d D

isab

led

Per

sons

Act

(197

0) re

quire

s th

at ‘a

ny b

uild

ing

or p

rem

ises

to w

hich

the

publ

ic a

re to

be

adm

itted

… in

mea

ns o

f ac

cess

bot

h to

and

with

in th

e bu

ildin

g or

pre

mis

es …

and

sa

nita

ry c

onve

nien

ces

(if a

ny) m

ake

prov

isio

n …

for t

he n

eeds

of

the

mem

bers

of t

he p

ublic

… w

ho a

re d

isab

led.

’ The

Dis

abilit

y

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

Dis

crim

inat

ion

Act

(199

5) s

ectio

ns 2

1(2)

(a),

(b) a

nd (c

) req

uire

s th

e pr

ovid

ers

of g

oods

and

ser

vice

s to

the

publ

ic to

mak

e re

ason

able

adj

ustm

ents

to th

eir p

rem

ises

to fa

cilit

ate

acce

ss b

y di

sabl

ed p

erso

ns.

G

ypsi

es a

nd T

rave

llers

C

S5

THE

CO

UN

CIL

WIL

L R

ETA

IN T

HE

EX

ISTI

NG

TR

AV

ELL

ER

S’ C

AR

AV

AN

SIT

E A

T H

OO

K

RIS

E.

AN

Y P

RO

PO

SA

L FO

R A

NE

W S

ITE

S

HO

ULD

INC

LUD

E P

RO

VIS

ION

FO

R B

AS

IC

AM

EN

ITIE

S A

ND

SE

RV

ICE

S A

ND

WIL

L B

E

AS

SE

SS

ED

IN R

ELA

TIO

N T

O O

THE

R

PO

LIC

IES

IN T

HE

PLA

N, E

SP

EC

IALL

Y

THO

SE

CO

NC

ER

NE

D W

ITH

AC

CE

SS

, TR

AFF

IC G

EN

ER

ATI

ON

, AN

D

EN

VIR

ON

ME

NTA

L P

RO

TEC

TIO

N.

N/

A

Issu

e to

be

addr

esse

d in

th

e co

re

stra

tegy

and

if

nece

ssar

y th

e si

te a

lloca

tion

DP

D.

i) P

olic

y S

TR2

Hou

sing

Nee

d al

ong

with

oth

er P

art 1

pol

icie

s pr

ovid

es th

e ce

ntra

l stra

tegy

ii)

Obj

ectiv

e 2

of R

BK

’s C

omm

unity

Stra

tegy

is to

mee

t the

ne

eds

of K

ings

ton’

s di

vers

e co

mm

uniti

es, p

artic

ular

ly th

ose

who

are

dis

prop

ortio

nate

ly re

pres

ente

d. T

his

incl

udes

the

Gyp

sy a

nd T

rave

ller p

opul

atio

n.

iii)

The

Lond

on P

lan:

Pol

icy

3A.1

1: s

peci

fical

ly d

irect

s U

DP

’s

to p

rote

ct e

xist

ing

Gyp

sy a

nd T

rave

ller s

ites

and

to s

et o

ut

crite

ria fo

r ide

ntify

ing

the

suita

bilit

y of

new

site

s.

iv)

N/A

v)

N/A

vi

) P

olic

y C

5 do

es n

ot re

peat

nat

iona

l pol

icy.

Circ

ular

01/

06

Pla

nnin

g fo

r Gyp

sy a

nd T

rave

ller C

arav

an S

ites,

OD

PM,

2006

requ

ires

that

the

core

stra

tegy

sho

uld

set o

ut c

riter

ia fo

r th

e lo

catio

n of

gyp

sy a

nd tr

avel

ler s

ites

whi

ch w

ill b

e us

ed to

gu

ide

the

allo

catio

n of

site

s in

the

rele

vant

DP

D. I

n th

e ab

senc

e of

a C

ore

Stra

tegy

pol

icy

CS

5 sa

tisfie

s th

is

requ

irem

ent.

N

oise

B

E21

N/

A

To b

e re

plac

ed in

i)

Pol

icy

BE

21 a

dds

deta

il to

pol

icy

STR

11 P

ollu

tion

Con

trol

whi

ch s

eeks

to w

ork

tow

ards

redu

cing

pol

lutio

n (in

clud

ing

nois

e)

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

THE

CO

UN

CIL

WIL

L TA

KE

AC

CO

UN

T O

F A

MB

IEN

T N

OIS

E LE

VELS

WH

EN C

ON

SID

ERIN

G

THE

DEV

ELO

PMEN

T A

ND

USE

OF

LAN

D, A

ND

W

HER

E N

ECES

SAR

Y R

EQU

IRE

THE

INC

LUSI

ON

OF

MEA

SUR

ES T

O A

LLEV

IATE

N

OIS

E A

ND

AN

Y O

THER

FO

RM

OF

INTR

USI

ON

. A

DD

ITIO

NA

LLY

THE

CO

UN

CIL

WIL

L IM

POSE

C

ON

DIT

ION

S TO

RED

UC

E N

OIS

E LE

VELS

W

HER

E LO

CA

L A

MEN

ITY

OR

EN

VIR

ON

MEN

TAL

CO

ND

ITIO

NS

AR

E SE

RIO

USL

Y A

FFEC

TED

, AN

D O

PPO

SE

FUR

THER

DEV

ELO

PMEN

TS O

R C

HA

NG

ES IN

A

CTI

VITY

WH

ICH

WO

ULD

SIG

NIF

ICA

NTL

Y A

FFEC

T N

OIS

E LE

VELS

. IN

PA

RTI

CU

LAR

TH

E C

OU

NC

IL W

ILL

SEEK

QU

IETE

R C

ON

DIT

ION

S O

UTS

IDE

NO

RM

AL

WO

RK

ING

HO

UR

S A

ND

ON

SU

ND

AYS

.

the

core

st

rate

gy

and/

or

deve

lopm

ent

cont

rol

docu

men

ts

in th

e bo

roug

h.

ii) T

his

polic

y ha

s re

gard

to th

e E

nviro

nmen

t obj

ectiv

es o

f the

co

mm

unity

pla

n

iii) T

his

polic

y is

in g

ener

al c

onfo

rmity

with

Lon

don

Pla

n po

licy

4A.1

4 on

redu

cing

noi

se a

nd th

e M

ayor

’s a

mbi

ent n

oise

st

rate

gy.

iv) N

/A

v) N

/A

vi) P

PG

24

Pla

nnin

g an

d N

oise

(par

as 3

– 7

) req

uire

s U

DP

par

t 2

to in

clud

e po

licie

s on

noi

se

Tran

spor

t Saf

ety

T1

DEV

ELO

PMEN

T PR

OPO

SALS

(IN

CLU

DIN

G

THO

SE R

EQU

IRED

FO

R V

EHIC

LE

CR

OSS

OVE

RS)

, HIG

HW

AY

AN

D T

RA

FFIC

M

AN

AG

EMEN

T SC

HEM

ES A

ND

PU

BLI

C

TRA

NSP

OR

T PR

OPO

SALS

WIL

L B

E A

SSES

SED

HA

VIN

G R

EGA

RD

TO

TH

EIR

SA

FETY

IMPL

ICA

TIO

NS

AN

D P

AR

TIC

ULA

RLY

TH

E EF

FEC

TS T

HEY

HA

VE O

N V

ULN

ERA

BLE

n/

a

To b

e re

plac

ed in

th

e de

velo

pmen

t co

ntro

l pol

icy

DP

D

i) P

art 1

pol

icie

s pr

ovid

e th

e ce

ntra

l stra

tegy

, as

does

the

Loca

l Im

plem

enta

tion

Pla

n

ii) T

his

polic

y di

rect

ly u

phol

ds P

riorit

y 4

(Roa

d S

afet

y), i

n th

e C

omm

unity

Pla

n Tr

ansp

ort c

hapt

er.

iii) T

his

polic

y br

oadl

y su

ppor

ts L

ondo

n P

lan

polic

ies

4B.4

(E

nhan

cing

the

qual

ity o

f the

pub

lic re

alm

), an

d 4B

.5 (C

reat

ing

an in

clus

ive

envi

ronm

ent).

How

ever

, it d

oesn

’t di

rect

ly s

uppo

rt th

e Lo

ndon

Pla

n be

caus

e it’

s a

spec

ific

deve

lopm

ent c

ontro

l po

licy.

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

RO

AD

USE

RS

SUC

H A

S PE

DES

TRIA

NS,

C

YCLI

STS,

FR

AIL

ELD

ERLY

PEO

PLE

AN

D

PEO

PLE

WIT

H D

ISA

BIL

ITIE

S. D

ECIS

ION

S W

ILL

BE

TAK

EN H

AVI

NG

REG

AR

D T

O:

(I)

TH

E LE

VEL

OF

PED

ESTR

IAN

AC

TIVI

TY

(II)

VIS

IBIL

ITY

(III)

TR

AFF

IC F

LOW

S (IV

) PA

RK

ING

CO

ND

ITIO

NS

IN T

HE

LOC

ALI

TY

(V)

PR

OXI

MIT

Y O

F TH

E PR

OPO

SED

D

EVEL

OPM

ENT

TO R

OA

D J

UN

CTI

ON

S,

TRA

FFIC

SIG

NA

LS, P

EDES

TRIA

N C

RO

SSIN

GS

AN

D O

THER

H

IGH

WA

Y FE

ATU

RES

(V

I) A

CC

ESS

AR

RA

NG

EMEN

TS O

F A

DJO

ININ

G

PRO

PER

TIES

.

iv) N

/A

v) N

/A

vi) T

his

polic

y do

es n

ot re

peat

hig

her l

evel

pol

icy.

It is

nec

essa

ry

to e

nsur

e th

at d

evel

opm

ents

hav

e re

gard

to h

ighw

ay s

afet

y.

This

pol

icy

is n

eces

sary

with

rega

rd to

a ra

nge

of re

gion

al a

nd

Gov

ernm

ent p

olic

ies

and

targ

ets,

for e

xam

ple

road

saf

ety

targ

ets,

acc

essi

bilit

y fo

r dis

able

d pe

ople

, and

faci

litat

ing

safe

en

viro

nmen

ts fo

r cyc

ling

and

wal

king

.

Res

tric

tion

on D

eliv

ery

Hou

rs

T2

IN C

ON

SID

ERIN

G P

LAN

NIN

G A

PPLI

CA

TIO

NS

THE

CO

UN

CIL

WIL

L, IN

APP

RO

PRIA

TE C

ASE

S,

RES

TRIC

T TH

E H

OU

RS

OF

DEL

IVER

Y TO

C

OM

MER

CIA

L PR

OPE

RTY

WIT

H T

HE

AIM

OF

MIN

IMIS

ING

EN

VIR

ON

MEN

TAL

INTR

USI

ON

A

ND

DIS

TUR

BA

NC

E, O

R O

THER

WIS

E LI

MIT

ING

TH

E IM

PAC

T O

F SU

CH

AC

TIVI

TIES

ON

TH

E SU

RR

OU

ND

ING

AR

EA A

ND

RO

AD

NET

WO

RK

, O

R E

NA

BLI

NG

“TI

ME

SHA

RE”

n/

a

To b

e re

plac

ed in

th

e de

velo

pmen

t co

ntro

l pol

icy

DP

D

i) P

art 1

pol

icie

s pr

ovid

e th

e ce

ntra

l stra

tegy

, as

does

the

Loca

l Im

plem

enta

tion

Pla

n ii)

Thi

s po

licy

but c

ould

ass

ist i

n so

me

Com

mun

ity P

lan,

aim

s,

such

as

Prio

rity

6 in

the

Tran

spor

t cha

pter

(Roa

d N

etw

ork

Man

agem

ent).

iii

) Thi

s po

licy

supp

orts

Lon

don

Pla

n po

licy

4A.1

4 (R

educ

ing

nois

e).

vi) N

/A

v) N

/A

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

PED

ESTR

IAN

ISA

TIO

N O

R S

IMIL

AR

SC

HEM

ES

TO B

E IM

PLEM

ENTE

D.

vi) T

his

polic

y do

es n

ot re

peat

hig

her l

evel

pol

icy.

It is

a lo

cal

leve

l pol

icy

bala

ncin

g th

e re

quire

men

ts o

f com

mer

cial

inte

rest

s an

d th

e ne

eds

of th

e lo

cal c

omm

unity

.

M

anag

emen

t and

Impr

ovem

ent o

f the

Se

cond

ary

Roa

d N

etw

ork

T4

THE

CO

UN

CIL

WIL

L IM

PLEM

ENT

IMPR

OVE

MEN

TS T

O T

HE

SEC

ON

DA

RY

RO

AD

N

ETW

OR

K T

O B

ENEF

IT T

HE

LOC

AL

ECO

NO

MY,

WH

ERE

APP

RO

PRIA

TE; T

O

ELIM

INA

TE R

ECO

GN

ISED

BO

TTLE

NEC

KS;

IM

PRO

VE R

OA

D S

AFE

TY; O

R P

RO

VID

E FO

R

THE

REM

OVA

L O

F A

NY

THR

OU

GH

TR

AFF

IC

FRO

M L

OC

AL

AC

CES

S R

OA

DS.

IN D

OIN

G S

O

THE

CO

UN

CIL

WIL

L:

I)

ENSU

RE

AT

LEA

ST O

NE

TRA

FFIC

LA

NE

IN E

AC

H D

IREC

TIO

N

BET

WEE

N J

UN

CTI

ON

S IS

M

AIN

TAIN

ED, A

ND

AVA

ILA

BLE

FO

R

TRA

FFIC

USE

, IR

RES

PEC

TIVE

OF

AN

Y SP

ECIF

IC L

OC

AL

AD

DIT

ION

AL

REQ

UIR

EMEN

TS, F

OR

EXA

MPL

E U

SE F

OR

BU

SES,

CYC

LES,

OR

ON

-ST

REE

T PA

RK

ING

; II)

C

ON

TRO

L N

EW D

EVEL

OPM

ENT

TO

n/

a

To b

e re

plac

ed in

th

e co

re

stra

tegy

an

d/or

de

velo

pmen

t co

ntro

l po

licie

s D

PD

i) P

art 1

pol

icie

s pr

ovid

e th

e ce

ntra

l stra

tegy

, as

does

the

Loca

l Im

plem

enta

tion

Pla

n

ii) T

his

polic

y up

hold

s P

riorit

y 6

(Roa

d N

etw

ork

Man

agem

ent)

in

the

Com

mun

ity P

lan

Tran

spor

t cha

pter

, and

rela

tes

to P

riorit

y 4

(Roa

d S

afet

y). I

t als

o co

ntrib

utes

to th

e O

vera

ll Tr

ansp

ort

Obj

ectiv

e to

prio

ritis

e w

alki

ng, c

yclin

g an

d pu

blic

tran

spor

t.

iii) T

his

polic

y is

in g

ener

al c

onfo

rmity

with

Lon

don

Pla

n po

licy

3C.1

5 (R

oad

sche

me

prop

osal

s), a

nd b

road

ly s

uppo

rts p

olic

ies

3C.1

7 (A

lloca

tion

of s

treet

spa

ce),

3C.1

8 (L

ocal

are

a tra

nspo

rt tre

atm

ents

), 3C

.19

(Impr

ovin

g co

nditi

ons

for b

uses

), an

d 3C

.20

(Impr

ovin

g co

nditi

ons

for w

alki

ng).

iv

) N/A

v)

N/A

vi

) Thi

s po

licy

does

not

repe

at h

ighe

r lev

el p

olic

y, re

ferr

ing

to

spec

ific

junc

tion

impr

ovem

ents

that

are

nec

essa

ry in

the

boro

ugh.

The

pol

icy

is h

elpf

ul to

the

Cou

ncil

whe

n m

akin

g bi

ds

to T

rans

port

for L

ondo

n fo

r the

junc

tion

impr

ovem

ents

spe

cifie

d in

the

polic

y’s

supp

ortin

g te

xt.

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

ENSU

RE

THA

T SU

CH

A T

RA

FFIC

LA

NE

IS A

VAIL

AB

LE F

OR

TR

AFF

IC

USE

AT

ALL

TIM

ES T

HR

OU

GH

OU

T TH

E D

AY;

III

) H

AVE

PA

RTI

CU

LAR

REG

AR

D T

O

THE

NEE

D F

OR

IM

PRO

VEM

ENTS

TO

BU

S, C

YCLE

AN

D P

EDES

TRIA

N

FAC

ILIT

IES

AN

D T

HE

NEE

DS

OF

PEO

PLE

WIT

H D

ISA

BIL

ITIE

S W

HEN

ES

TAB

LISH

ING

TH

E PR

IOR

ITIE

S FO

R T

HE

USE

OF

AN

Y SU

RPL

US

RO

AD

SPA

CE

IN A

DD

ITIO

N T

O T

HE

TRA

FFIC

LA

NE

IN U

SE.

THE

CO

UN

CIL

IS C

AR

RYI

NG

OU

T A

PH

ASE

D P

RO

GR

AM

ME

OF

CO

RR

IDO

R S

TUD

IES

TO ID

ENTI

FY

SUC

H IM

PRO

VEM

ENTS

AN

D H

AS

SO F

AR

IDEN

TIFI

ED T

HE

NEE

D F

OR

IM

PRO

VEM

ENTS

TO

SEL

ECTE

D

JUN

CTI

ON

S W

HIC

H A

RE

SHO

WN

O

N T

HE

PRO

POSA

LS M

AP.

Lo

cal D

istr

ibut

or R

oads

T5

TH

E C

OU

NC

IL W

ILL,

WH

ERE

PRA

CTI

CA

L,

DO

WN

GR

AD

E TH

E TH

RO

UG

H T

RA

FFIC

FU

NC

TIO

NS

OF

LOC

AL

DIS

TRIB

UTO

R R

OA

DS

TO G

IVE

PRIO

RIT

Y TO

TH

E R

ESID

ENTI

AL

n/

a

Poss

ibly

incl

. in

LIP

at

revi

ew a

nd

then

del

ete

from

U

DP

/LD

F.

i) P

art 1

pol

icie

s pr

ovid

e th

e ce

ntra

l stra

tegy

, as

does

the

Loca

l Im

plem

enta

tion

Pla

n ii)

Thi

s po

licy

supp

orts

the

over

all o

bjec

tives

of t

he C

omm

unity

P

lan

Tran

spor

t and

Env

ironm

ent c

hapt

ers.

iii

) Thi

s po

licy

gene

rally

con

form

s to

Lon

don

Pla

n po

licy

3C.1

5

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

ENVI

RO

NM

ENT

AN

D, W

HER

E N

ECES

SAR

Y,

INTR

OD

UC

E TR

AFF

IC C

ALM

ING

MEA

SUR

ES

TO L

IMIT

TH

E SP

EED

AN

D V

OLU

ME

OF

TRA

FFIC

USI

NG

SU

CH

RO

AD

S.

(Roa

d sc

hem

e pr

opos

als)

. It s

uppo

rts p

olic

y 3C

.17

(Allo

catio

n of

st

reet

spa

ce),

polic

ies

4B.4

(Enh

anci

ng th

e qu

ality

of t

he p

ublic

re

alm

), an

d 4B

.5 (C

reat

ing

an in

clus

ive

envi

ronm

ent)

and

3C.2

0 (Im

prov

ing

cond

ition

s fo

r wal

king

).

iv) N

/A

v) N

/A

vi) T

his

polic

y do

es n

ot u

nnec

essa

rily

repe

at h

ighe

r lev

el p

olic

y.

It is

a n

eces

sary

loca

l lev

el p

olic

y de

sign

ed to

redr

ess

the

bala

nce

betw

een

vehi

cles

(in

parti

cula

r fas

t tra

velli

ng v

ehic

les)

an

d th

e ne

eds

of p

eopl

e, in

env

ironm

ents

whi

ch a

re re

side

ntia

l. Th

is is

fully

in li

ne w

ith th

e ob

ject

ives

of a

rang

e of

nat

iona

l and

re

gion

al tr

ansp

ort p

olic

y su

ch a

s th

e G

over

nmen

t’s W

hite

Pap

er

on T

rans

port

(199

8) a

nd th

e M

ayor

’s T

rans

port

Stra

tegy

for

Lond

on.

Traf

fic C

alm

ing

in N

ew D

evel

opm

ents

T7

TH

E C

OU

NC

IL W

ILL

ENSU

RE

THA

T IN

ALL

N

EW D

EVEL

OPM

ENTS

INC

OR

POR

ATI

NG

TH

E PR

OVI

SIO

N O

F LO

CA

L O

R A

CC

ESS

RO

AD

S,

SUC

H R

OA

DS

AR

E D

ESIG

NED

AN

D

CO

NST

RU

CTE

D T

O IN

CO

RPO

RA

TE C

UR

REN

T TR

AFF

IC C

ALM

ING

MEA

SUR

ES A

ND

TE

CH

NIQ

UES

, PA

RTI

CU

LAR

LY IN

RES

PEC

T O

F C

ON

TRO

LLIN

G S

PEED

S A

ND

SEC

UR

ING

AN

A

TTR

AC

TIVE

AN

D S

AFE

EN

VIR

ON

MEN

T.

n/

a

To b

e re

plac

ed in

a

deve

lopm

ent

cont

rol p

olic

y D

PD

i) P

art 1

pol

icie

s pr

ovid

e th

e ce

ntra

l stra

tegy

, as

does

the

Loca

l Im

plem

enta

tion

Pla

n ii)

Thi

s po

licy

dire

ctly

uph

olds

Prio

rity

4 (R

oad

Saf

ety)

, in

the

Com

mun

ity P

lan

Tran

spor

t cha

pter

, and

cou

ld c

ontri

bute

to a

ta

rget

to re

duce

KS

Is in

volv

ing

vuln

erab

le ro

ad u

sers

(Yea

r 5

Pla

n, a

.).

It al

so c

ontri

bute

s to

the

Ove

rall

Tran

spor

t Obj

ectiv

e fo

r a ‘f

aire

r ba

lanc

e be

twee

n re

side

nts

and

trave

llers

,…’.

iii

) Thi

s po

licy

broa

dly

supp

orts

Lon

don

Pla

n po

licy

4B.4

(E

nhan

cing

the

qual

ity o

f the

pub

lic re

alm

).

It

very

bro

adly

sup

ports

Lon

don

Pla

n po

licy

3C.2

0 (Im

prov

ing

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

cond

ition

s fo

r wal

king

), an

d 4B

.1 (D

esig

n pr

inci

ples

for a

co

mpa

ct c

ity).

v)

N/A

vi

) Thi

s po

licy

does

not

repe

at h

ighe

r lev

el p

olic

y. It

is n

eces

sary

to

ens

ure

the

‘bui

ldin

g in

’ of m

eans

to c

reat

e sa

fe a

nd a

ttrac

tive

livin

g an

d w

orki

ng e

nviro

nmen

ts w

hich

are

not

sol

ely

desi

gned

to

be

acce

ssib

le fo

r tho

se in

veh

icle

s. T

his

is in

kee

ping

with

a

rang

e of

nat

iona

l and

regi

onal

pol

icy

for r

oad

safe

ty, b

alan

cing

th

e ne

eds

of a

rang

e of

road

use

rs, a

nd c

reat

ing

attra

ctiv

e an

d in

clus

ive

envi

ronm

ents

for p

eopl

e.

Lorr

y R

oute

s T8

FO

R E

NVI

RO

NM

ENTA

L A

ND

AM

ENIT

Y R

EASO

NS,

TH

E C

OU

NC

IL S

UPP

OR

TS IN

PR

INC

IPLE

TH

E PR

OVI

SIO

N O

F LO

RR

Y R

OU

TES

AN

D W

ILL

INTR

OD

UC

E LO

CA

L ZO

NA

L LO

RR

Y B

AN

S FO

R H

EAVY

GO

OD

S VE

HIC

LES

WH

ERE

IT W

OU

LD IM

PRO

VE

AM

ENIT

Y, R

EDU

CE

CO

NG

ESTI

ON

OR

RED

UC

E R

OA

D T

RA

FFIC

HA

ZAR

DS.

n/

a

To b

e re

plac

ed in

th

e C

ore

stra

tegy

or

deve

lopm

ent

cont

rol p

olic

y D

PD

i) P

art 1

pol

icie

s pr

ovid

e th

e ce

ntra

l stra

tegy

, as

does

the

Loca

l Im

plem

enta

tion

Pla

n .

ii) T

his

polic

y co

ntrib

utes

to P

riorit

y 6

(Roa

d N

etw

ork

Man

agem

ent)

in th

e C

omm

unity

Pla

n Tr

ansp

ort c

hapt

er.

iii) T

his

polic

y br

oadl

y su

ppor

ts L

ondo

n P

lan

polic

y 4A

.14

(Red

ucin

g no

ise)

.

iv) N

/A

v) N

/A

vi) T

his

polic

y do

es n

ot re

peat

hig

her l

evel

pol

icy.

It is

nec

essa

ry

as a

pra

ctic

al o

ptio

n to

ens

ure

freig

ht u

ses

the

mos

t sui

tabl

e ro

utes

.

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

Bus

Prio

rity

Mea

sure

s T9

TH

E C

OU

NC

IL W

ILL

IMPL

EMEN

T SC

HEM

ES,

INC

LUD

ING

TH

OSE

PA

RTS

OF

THE

LON

DO

N

BU

S PR

IOR

ITY

NET

WO

RK

TH

AT

FALL

WIT

HIN

TH

E B

OR

OU

GH

, WH

ICH

MIT

IGA

TE T

HE

EFFE

CTS

OF

TRA

FFIC

CO

NG

ESTI

ON

ON

TH

E R

ELIA

BIL

ITY

OF

BU

S SE

RVI

CES

, FO

R T

HE

PUR

POSE

S O

F IM

PRO

VIN

G A

CC

ESSI

BIL

ITY

BY

PUB

LIC

TR

AN

SPO

RT.

n/

a

To b

e re

plac

ed in

th

e C

ore

stra

tegy

i) P

art 1

pol

icie

s pr

ovid

e th

e ce

ntra

l stra

tegy

, as

does

the

Loca

l Im

plem

enta

tion

Pla

n

ii) T

his

polic

y co

ntrib

utes

to P

riorit

y 1

(Mor

e at

tract

ive

publ

ic

trans

port)

, in

the

Com

mun

ity P

lan

Tran

spor

t cha

pter

, and

the

Ove

rall

Tran

spor

t Obj

ectiv

e of

sus

tain

able

and

acc

essi

ble

trans

port.

iii)

Thi

s po

licy

dire

ctly

sup

ports

Lon

don

Pla

n po

licy

3C.9

(In

crea

sing

the

capa

city

, qua

lity

and

inte

grat

ion

of p

ublic

tra

nspo

rt to

mee

t Lon

don’

s ne

eds)

, pol

icy

3C.1

3 (E

nhan

ced

bus

prio

rity,

tram

and

bus

tran

sit s

chem

es),

and

3C.1

9 (Im

prov

ing

cond

ition

s fo

r bus

es).

It su

ppor

ts p

olic

y 2A

.5 (T

own

cent

res)

. iv

) N/A

v)

N/A

vi

) Thi

s po

licy

does

not

repe

at h

ighe

r lev

el p

olic

y. It

is a

ne

cess

ary

polic

y, re

flect

ing

for t

he lo

cal a

rea

the

regi

onal

re

quire

men

t (M

ayor

’s T

rans

port

Pla

n/Lo

ndon

Pla

n) to

impr

ove

the

relia

bilit

y of

bus

es s

o th

at th

ey b

ecom

e m

ore

viab

le, a

llow

ing

mor

e pe

ople

to s

witc

h m

ode

from

car

s, th

us re

duci

ng

cong

estio

n an

d ve

hicl

e em

issi

ons

(ove

rall)

. Thi

s is

als

o ve

ry

muc

h in

line

with

Gov

ernm

ent t

rans

port

polic

y w

hich

aim

s to

re

duce

car

use

. Th

e Lo

ndon

Pla

n do

es s

peci

fical

ly re

quire

that

[U

DP

s] h

ave

polic

ies

supp

ortin

g th

is, e

g 3C

.19.

Pu

blic

Tra

nspo

rt A

cces

sibi

lity

T11

n/

a

To b

e re

plac

ed in

th

e C

ore

i) P

art 1

pol

icie

s pr

ovid

e th

e ce

ntra

l stra

tegy

, as

does

the

Loca

l Im

plem

enta

tion

Pla

n

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

THE

CO

UN

CIL

’S T

RA

NSP

OR

T ST

RA

TEG

Y EN

CO

UR

AG

ES T

HE

USE

OF

PUB

LIC

TR

AN

SPO

RT.

AC

CO

RD

ING

LY IT

WIL

L SU

PPO

RT

IMPR

OVE

MEN

TS T

O T

RA

IN A

ND

B

US

SER

VIC

ES A

ND

FA

CIL

ITIE

S A

ND

WH

EN

CO

NSI

DER

ING

PR

OPO

SALS

INVO

LVIN

G

AC

CES

S/TR

AVE

L B

Y SI

GN

IFIC

AN

T N

UM

BER

S O

F PE

OPL

E, T

HE

LOC

ATI

ON

, FR

EQU

ENC

Y A

ND

SC

OPE

OF

PUB

LIC

TR

AN

SPO

RT

SER

VIC

ES W

ILL

BE

A M

ATE

RIA

L C

ON

SID

ERA

TIO

N.

stra

tegy

or

deve

lopm

ent

cont

rol p

olic

y D

PD

ii) T

his

polic

y di

rect

ly re

late

s to

Prio

rity

7 (P

lann

ing

sust

aina

ble

com

mun

ities

…) i

n th

e C

omm

unity

Pla

n Tr

ansp

ort c

hapt

er, a

nd

supp

orts

Prio

rity

1 (M

ore

attra

ctiv

e pu

blic

tran

spor

t), P

riorit

y 8

(…in

tegr

atio

n of

tran

spor

t mod

es),

and

the

Ove

rall

Tran

spor

t O

bjec

tive

of s

usta

inab

le a

nd a

cces

sibl

e tra

nspo

rt.

iii) T

his

polic

y su

ppor

ts L

ondo

n P

lan

polic

y 2A

.1 (S

usta

inab

ility

crite

ria).

It di

rect

ly s

uppo

rts p

olic

ies

3C.1

(Int

egra

ting

trans

port

and

deve

lopm

ent),

3C

.2 (M

atch

ing

deve

lopm

ent t

o tra

nspo

rt ca

paci

ty),

3C.3

(Sus

tain

able

tran

spor

t in

Lond

on),

3C.9

(In

crea

sing

the

capa

city

, qua

lity

and

inte

grat

ion

of p

ublic

tra

nspo

rt to

mee

t Lon

don’

s ne

eds)

, and

3C

.13

(Enh

ance

d bu

s pr

iorit

y, tr

am a

nd b

us tr

ansi

t sch

emes

).

It al

so s

uppo

rts 3

C.8

(Im

prov

ing

stra

tegi

c ra

il se

rvic

es),

3C.1

9 (Im

prov

ing

cond

ition

s fo

r bus

es),

and

polic

y 2A

.6 (S

patia

l st

rate

gy fo

r the

sub

urbs

).

vi) N

/A

v) N

/A

vi) T

his

polic

y do

es n

ot re

peat

hig

her l

evel

pol

icy.

It is

nec

essa

ry

beca

use

(mai

nly

the

seco

nd p

art o

f it)

refle

cts

the

prin

cipl

es o

f P

PS

13 (T

rans

port)

, for

loca

ting

maj

or tr

ip g

ener

ator

s cl

ose

to

avai

labl

e pu

blic

tran

spor

t, in

ord

er to

avo

id g

ener

atin

g la

rge

num

bers

of c

ar tr

ips.

Thi

s po

licy

is a

lso

spec

ifica

lly re

quire

d by

th

e Lo

ndon

Pla

n, e

g. P

olic

y 3C

.1 In

tegr

atin

g tra

nspo

rt an

d de

velo

pmen

t

Pede

stria

n N

etw

ork

n/

a

To b

e i)

Par

t 1 p

olic

ies

prov

ide

the

cent

ral s

trate

gy, a

s do

es th

e Lo

cal

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

T14

THE

CO

UN

CIL

WIL

L EN

CO

UR

AG

E W

ALK

ING

A

S A

N E

FFEC

TIVE

MEA

NS

OF

TRA

VEL

THR

OU

GH

A G

ENER

AL

IMPR

OVE

MEN

T O

F FA

CIL

ITIE

S FO

R P

EDES

TRIA

NS

AN

D W

ILL:

(I)

EN

SUR

E TH

AT

A S

AFE

R P

EDES

TRIA

N

ENVI

RO

NM

ENT

IS S

ECU

RED

WH

EN

DES

IGN

ING

NEW

SC

HEM

ES F

OR

TO

WN

C

ENTR

E ST

REE

TS A

ND

AR

EAS,

SH

OPP

ING

PA

RA

DES

AN

D IN

CA

SES

WH

ERE

TRA

FFIC

C

ALM

ING

MEA

SUR

ES A

RE

INTR

OD

UC

ED;

(II)

INTR

OD

UC

E PE

DES

TRIA

N R

OU

TES

WH

ERE

APP

RO

PRIA

TE, P

AR

TIC

ULA

RLY

IN

THE

CO

NTE

XT O

F R

EDEV

ELO

PMEN

T;

(III)

RES

IST

FOO

TWA

Y PA

RK

ING

, OTH

ER

THA

N IN

EXC

EPTI

ON

AL

CIR

CU

MST

AN

CES

, W

HER

E TH

ERE

IS A

DEQ

UA

TE F

OO

TWA

Y W

IDTH

TO

PR

OVI

DE

A P

RO

PER

AN

D S

AFE

PA

SSA

GE

FOR

PED

ESTR

IAN

S;

(IV)

ENSU

RE

THA

T TH

E N

EED

S O

F PE

OPL

E W

ITH

DIS

AB

ILIT

IES

AR

E TA

KEN

INTO

A

CC

OU

NT

IN T

HE

DES

IGN

AN

D

CO

NST

RU

CTI

ON

OF

ALL

NEW

FO

OTW

AY

AN

D

PAVI

NG

SC

HEM

ES;

(V)

GIV

E A

HIG

H P

RIO

RIT

Y TO

TH

E N

EED

S O

F PE

DES

TRIA

NS

WH

ERE

THEY

MIG

HT

REA

SON

AB

LY N

EED

TO

CR

OSS

TR

AFF

IC

RO

UTE

S, A

ND

WH

ERE

APP

RO

PRIA

TE

repl

aced

in

the

Cor

e st

rate

gy o

r de

velo

pmen

t co

ntro

l pol

icy

DP

D

Impl

emen

tatio

n P

lan

ii)

Thi

s po

licy

dire

ctly

sup

ports

Prio

rity

8 (E

ffici

ent t

rans

port

infra

stru

ctur

e an

d in

tegr

atio

n of

tran

spor

t mod

es),

in th

e C

omm

unity

Pla

n, in

par

ticul

ar Y

ear 1

Pla

n c.

, and

Prio

rity

2 (W

alki

ng fa

cilit

ies

and

prom

otio

n).

It a

lso

gene

rally

sup

ports

P

riorit

y 4

(Roa

d S

afet

y), a

nd c

ontri

bute

s to

the

Ove

rall

Tran

spor

t O

bjec

tive

of s

usta

inab

le a

nd a

cces

sibl

e tra

nspo

rt. I

t als

o su

ppor

ts p

riorit

ies

from

oth

er C

omm

unity

Pla

n ch

apte

rs, s

uch

as

Env

ironm

ent P

riorit

y 3

(Loc

al e

nviro

nmen

t), a

nd L

ocal

Eco

nom

y P

riorit

y 4

(Dis

trict

and

Loc

al C

entre

s…).

iii)

Thi

s po

licy

dire

ctly

sup

ports

Lon

don

Pla

n po

licy

3C.3

(S

usta

inab

le tr

ansp

ort i

n Lo

ndon

), an

d su

ppor

ts 3

C.2

0 (Im

prov

ing

cond

ition

s fo

r wal

king

). It

broa

dly

supp

orts

Lon

don

Pla

n po

licie

s 4B

.4 (E

nhan

cing

the

qual

ity o

f the

pub

lic re

alm

) an

d, w

ith th

e ju

stifi

catio

n no

tes,

sup

ports

4B

.5 (C

reat

ing

an

incl

usiv

e en

viro

nmen

t).

iv) N

/A

v) N

/A

vi) T

his

polic

y do

es n

ot re

peat

hig

her l

evel

pol

icy.

It is

nec

essa

ry

for e

nsur

ing

that

ped

estri

ans

are

take

n in

to a

ccou

nt a

t the

de

sign

sta

ge o

f sch

emes

. The

re is

a ra

nge

of G

over

nmen

t and

R

egio

nal p

olic

y, in

clud

ing

the

Lond

on W

alki

ng P

lan,

aim

ed a

t en

cour

agin

g w

alki

ng a

nd im

prov

ing

cond

ition

s fo

r ped

estri

ans,

as

wel

l as

impr

ovin

g th

e pu

blic

real

m. P

rom

otin

g an

d im

prov

ing

cond

ition

s fo

r ped

estri

ans

supp

orts

the

Cou

ncil’s

tran

spor

t pol

icy

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

PRO

VID

E SU

ITA

BLE

CR

OSS

ING

FA

CIL

ITIE

S.

w

hich

is to

enc

oura

ge th

e us

e of

non

-car

mod

es a

s m

uch

as

poss

ible

. T

he d

elet

ion

of o

ther

pla

n po

licie

s re

lies

on th

is

polic

y be

ing

save

d.

O

vern

ight

Lor

ry P

arki

ng

T16

THE

CO

UN

CIL

WIL

L, F

OR

TH

E PU

RPO

SES

OF

PRO

TEC

TIN

G R

ESID

ENTI

AL

AM

ENIT

Y,

OPE

RA

TE A

BA

N O

N O

VER

NIG

HT

ON

-STR

EET

LOR

RY

PAR

KIN

G O

THER

TH

AN

IN R

OA

DS

LOC

ATE

D E

XCLU

SIVE

LY O

N IN

DU

STR

IAL

ESTA

TES.

n/

a n/

a n/

a

To b

e re

plac

ed in

th

e C

ore

stra

tegy

or

deve

lopm

ent

cont

rol p

olic

y D

PD

i) P

art 1

pol

icie

s pr

ovid

e th

e ce

ntra

l stra

tegy

, as

does

the

Loca

l Im

plem

enta

tion

Pla

n ii)

Not

an

issu

e co

vere

d by

the

Com

mun

ity P

lan.

iii)

Not

an

issu

e co

vere

d in

the

Lond

on P

lan.

iv

) N/A

v)

N/A

. vi

) Thi

s po

licy

does

not

repe

at h

ighe

r lev

el p

olic

y. It

is n

eces

sary

fo

r pro

tect

ing

the

amen

ity o

f loc

al re

side

nts.

Tem

pora

ry C

ar P

arki

ng

T26

THE

CO

UN

CIL

WIL

L SE

EK A

GR

EEM

ENTS

WIT

H

OW

NER

S O

F SU

ITA

BLE

SIT

ES A

WA

ITIN

G

RED

EVEL

OPM

ENT

IN K

ING

STO

N T

OW

N

CEN

TRE

AN

D T

HE

DIS

TRIC

T C

ENTR

ES,

TAK

ING

AC

CO

UN

T O

F EN

VIR

ON

MEN

TAL

AN

D

TRA

FFIC

IMPL

ICA

TIO

NS,

TO

USE

TH

E SI

TES

FOR

TEM

POR

AR

Y C

AR

PA

RK

S,

PAR

TIC

ULA

RLY

TO

MEE

T A

NY

SHO

RTF

ALL

S IN

TH

E C

ENTR

E O

R T

O A

DD

RES

S U

ND

ER-

n/

a

To b

e re

plac

ed b

y th

e K

ings

ton

Tow

n ce

ntre

ar

ea a

ctio

n pl

an.

i) P

art 1

pol

icie

s pr

ovid

e th

e ce

ntra

l stra

tegy

, as

does

the

Loca

l Im

plem

enta

tion

Pla

n

ii) T

his

polic

y su

ppor

ts th

e C

omm

unity

Pla

n ob

ject

ive

to h

ave

effic

ient

tran

spor

t inf

rast

ruct

ure.

iii

) Lon

don

Pla

n po

licy

3C.2

2 (P

arki

ng s

trate

gy) s

eeks

to

“…ge

nera

lly re

sist

the

intro

duct

ion

of te

mpo

rary

car

par

ks…

”.

alth

ough

the

supp

ortin

g te

xt a

t par

a. 3

.213

ack

now

ledg

es th

at

“ther

e m

ay b

e ci

rcum

stan

ces

in w

hich

tem

pora

ry s

pace

s m

ay b

e al

low

ed o

n co

nditi

on th

at th

ese

are

with

draw

n w

hen

bette

r pu

blic

tran

spor

t bec

omes

ava

ilabl

e”.

This

is c

onsi

sten

t with

the

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

PRO

VISI

ON

AT

TIM

ES O

F PE

AK

DEM

AN

D.

inte

ntio

n of

Pol

icy

T26

whi

ch, w

ith it

s su

ppor

ting

text

, mak

es

clea

r tha

t suc

h ca

r par

ks w

ould

be

tem

pora

ry p

endi

ng p

ublic

tra

nspo

rt im

prov

emen

ts, a

nd o

bvio

usly

onl

y fo

r as

long

as

the

site

rem

ains

und

evel

oped

for a

n al

tern

ativ

e us

e. I

n th

e co

ntex

t of

maj

or to

wn

cent

re re

deve

lopm

ent a

t Kin

gsto

n te

mpo

rary

car

pa

rks

secu

red

this

way

may

wel

l be

nece

ssar

y to

ens

ure

that

th

e pa

rkin

g ta

rget

in th

e K

ings

ton

tow

n ce

ntre

are

a ac

tion

plan

ca

n be

met

.

iv) N

/A

v) N

/A

vi) W

hils

t the

Lon

don

Pla

n re

fers

tem

pora

ry c

ar p

arks

, pol

icy

T26

is n

ot re

petit

ion,

mak

ing

clea

r thi

s ap

proa

ch a

pplie

s to

the

tow

n an

d di

stric

t cen

tres.

O

ff-St

reet

Ser

vici

ng a

nd P

arki

ng

T28

THE

CO

UN

CIL

WIL

L EN

SUR

E, W

HER

EVER

PR

AC

TIC

AB

LE, T

HE

PRO

VISI

ON

AN

D

RET

ENTI

ON

OF

AD

EQU

ATE

OFF

-STR

EET

SER

VIC

ING

, LO

AD

ING

AN

D P

AR

KIN

G

FAC

ILIT

IES

IN A

LL C

OM

MER

CIA

L A

ND

MIX

ED

USE

DEV

ELO

PMEN

TS A

ND

EXT

ENSI

ON

S A

ND

IN

APP

RO

PRIA

TE C

ASE

S W

ILL

SEEK

TO

SE

CU

RE

REA

R S

ERVI

CIN

G T

O A

DJA

CEN

T PR

OPE

RTI

ES V

IA S

UC

H F

AC

ILIT

IES.

AN

Y PR

OPO

SALS

TH

AT

INVO

LVE

BU

ILD

ING

ON

n/

a

To b

e re

plac

ed in

th

e de

velo

pmen

t co

ntro

l pol

icy

DP

D

i) P

art 1

pol

icie

s pr

ovid

e th

e ce

ntra

l stra

tegy

, ii)

Thi

s po

licy

supp

orts

the

Com

mun

ity P

lan

obje

ctiv

e to

hav

e ef

ficie

nt tr

ansp

ort i

nfra

stru

ctur

e.

iii) T

his

polic

y su

ppor

ts L

ondo

n P

lan

polic

y 3C

.24

(Fre

ight

st

rate

gy) i

n en

surin

g ‘d

evel

opm

ents

incl

ude

appr

opria

te

serv

icin

g fa

cilit

ies…

’.

iv) N

/A

v) N

/A

vi) T

his

polic

y do

es n

ot re

peat

hig

her l

evel

pol

icy.

The

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

SUC

H A

REA

S W

ILL

BE

UN

AC

CEP

TAB

LE IF

TH

EY C

AN

NO

T B

E SA

TISF

AC

TOR

ILY

REP

LAC

ED A

S PA

RT

OF

THE

DEV

ELO

PMEN

T.

prov

isio

n/re

tent

ion

of o

ff-st

reet

load

ing

and

serv

icin

g is

ver

y im

porta

nt fo

r red

ucin

g pa

rkin

g/tra

ffic

flow

pro

blem

s on

the

high

way

– w

hich

is re

quire

d to

be

deal

t with

as

part

of th

e Tr

affic

M

anag

emen

t Act

, 200

4.

Use

of S

hopp

ing

Fore

cour

ts

T29

THE

CO

UN

CIL

, IN

APP

RO

PRIA

TE C

ASE

S A

ND

SU

BJE

CT

TO E

NVI

RO

NM

ENTA

L C

ON

SID

ERA

TIO

NS,

WIL

L EN

CO

UR

AG

E TH

E O

WN

ERS

OF

WID

E FO

REC

OU

RTS

AT

SHO

PPIN

G P

AR

AD

ES W

HER

E EX

ISTI

NG

ON

-ST

REE

T PA

RK

ING

AFF

ECTS

TH

E FR

EE F

LOW

O

F TR

AFF

IC O

N T

HE

MA

IN R

OA

D, T

O

CO

NVE

RT

PAR

T O

F TH

E FO

REC

OU

RT

TO A

LA

Y-B

Y O

R S

ERVI

CE

RO

AD

TO

SER

VE T

HE

SHO

PPIN

G P

AR

AD

E, P

RO

VID

ED

SATI

SFA

CTO

RY

SPA

CE

FOR

PED

ESTR

IAN

S A

ND

PEO

PLE

WIT

H D

ISA

BIL

ITIE

S IS

M

AIN

TAIN

ED.

n/

a

R

epla

cem

ent

will

be

cons

ider

ed a

s pa

rt of

de

velo

pmen

t co

ntro

l pol

icy

DP

D

i) P

art 1

pol

icie

s pr

ovid

e th

e ce

ntra

l stra

tegy

, ii)

Thi

s po

licy

rela

tes

to P

riorit

y 6

(Roa

d N

etw

ork

Man

agem

ent)

in th

e Tr

ansp

ort c

hapt

er o

f the

Com

mun

ity P

lan.

iii

) The

Lon

don

Pla

n ge

nera

lly s

eeks

to d

isco

urag

e ca

r use

and

en

cour

age

impr

oved

ped

estri

an e

nviro

nmen

ts. T

his

polic

y pr

ovid

es a

mea

ns o

f rel

ocat

ing

the

spac

e w

here

par

king

take

s pl

ace

(rat

her t

han

incr

easi

ng p

arki

ng p

rovi

sion

) and

als

o m

akes

su

re th

at th

ere

is a

dequ

ate

spac

e fo

r ped

estri

ans.

iv

) N/A

v)

N/A

. vi

) Thi

s po

licy

is n

eces

sary

to e

nabl

e th

e pr

ovis

ion

of la

y-by

es

and

serv

ice

road

s w

here

ther

e ar

e re

al tr

affic

flow

issu

es a

roun

d sh

oppi

ng p

arad

es.

Whe

re th

ese

issu

es e

xist

they

can

hav

e se

rious

kno

ck-o

n co

nseq

uenc

es fo

r the

saf

ety

and

runn

ing

of

the

rest

of t

he tr

ansp

ort s

yste

m. T

his

wou

ld b

e in

acc

orda

nce

with

the

Traf

fic M

anag

emen

t Act

200

4 w

hich

requ

ires

loca

l au

thor

ities

to k

eep

traffi

c flo

win

g. T

he p

olic

y al

so e

nsur

es th

at

such

dev

elop

men

t wou

ld n

ot b

e at

the

expe

nse

of p

edes

trian

s an

d pe

ople

with

dis

abili

ties,

als

o in

acc

orda

nce

with

the

Traf

fic

Man

agem

ent A

ct.

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

Sh

oppi

ng P

rovi

sion

in K

ings

ton

Tow

n C

entr

e K

TC1

THE

CO

UN

CIL

WIL

L SE

EK T

O P

RO

TEC

T A

ND

C

ON

SOLI

DA

TE K

ING

STO

N T

OW

N C

ENTR

E’S

RET

AIL

TR

AD

ING

PO

SITI

ON

AN

D E

NH

AN

CE

ITS

REG

ION

AL

SHO

PPIN

G R

OLE

BY

ENC

OU

RA

GIN

G IM

PRO

VEM

ENTS

IN T

HE

QU

ALI

TY O

F SH

OPP

ING

, TH

E SH

OPP

ING

EN

VIR

ON

MEN

T, A

ND

TH

E PR

OVI

SIO

N O

F A

W

IDE

RA

NG

E O

F R

ETA

IL F

AC

ILIT

IES

WIT

HIN

TH

E TO

WN

CEN

TRE.

W

ill b

e re

plac

ed b

y th

e K

ings

ton

tow

n ce

ntre

AA

P

i) Th

e ce

ntra

l stra

tegy

is p

rovi

ded

by th

e P

art 1

pol

icie

s.

ii) H

as re

gard

to th

e Lo

cal E

cono

my

and

Hou

sing

Obj

ectiv

e of

th

e C

omm

unity

Stra

tegy

. iii

) In

conf

orm

ity w

ith L

ondo

n P

lan

Pol

icie

s lis

ted:

2A

.5 T

own

Cen

tres;

3D

.1 S

uppo

rting

Tow

n C

entre

s bu

llet 2

; 3D

.3 M

aint

aini

ng a

nd Im

prov

ing

Ret

ail F

acili

ties;

and

5F

.1 T

he S

trate

gic

Prio

ritie

s fo

r Sou

th L

ondo

n, b

ulle

t 4.

iv) N

/A

v) It

is a

n ef

fect

ive

polic

y fo

r an

area

of s

igni

fican

t cha

nge

in th

e us

e or

dev

elop

men

t of l

and

and

cons

erva

tion

of th

e ar

ea.

vi) T

his

is th

e ov

eral

l pol

icy

for r

etai

l in

the

tow

n ce

ntre

, with

out

whi

ch th

e U

DP

wou

ld n

ot b

e cl

ear o

n w

hat i

t is

seek

ing

to

achi

eve

rega

rdin

g re

tail

in th

is m

etro

polit

an to

wn

cent

re.

Gov

ernm

ent p

olic

y pr

iorit

ies:

Th

is p

olic

y is

con

sist

ent w

ith th

e go

vern

men

t’s o

bjec

tive

to

supp

ort e

cono

mic

dev

elop

men

t and

rege

nera

tion

incl

udin

g po

licie

s fo

r ret

ailin

g an

d to

wn

cent

res.

Smal

l Sho

p U

nits

K

TC3

W

ill b

e re

plac

ed b

y th

e K

ings

ton

i) Th

e ce

ntra

l stra

tegy

is p

rovi

ded

by th

e P

art 1

pol

icie

s.

ii) H

as re

gard

to th

e Lo

cal E

cono

my

and

Hou

sing

Obj

ectiv

e of

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

SMA

LL S

HO

P U

NIT

S W

ILL

BE

PREF

ERR

ED IN

TH

E M

AR

KET

PLA

CE,

APP

LE M

AR

KET

, C

HU

RC

H S

TREE

T, C

RO

WN

AR

CA

DE,

CR

OW

N

PASS

AG

E, T

HE

GR

IFFI

N, A

DA

MS

CO

UR

T, H

IGH

ST

REE

T, C

AST

LE S

TREE

T, F

IFE

RO

AD

AN

D

THE

‘OTH

ER S

HO

PPIN

G P

AR

AD

ES’,

PAR

TIC

ULA

RLY

WH

ERE

SMA

LL S

HO

P U

NIT

S FO

RM

PA

RT

OF

THE

CH

AR

AC

TER

OF

THE

CO

NSE

RVA

TIO

N A

REA

.

tow

n ce

ntre

AA

P th

e C

omm

unity

Stra

tegy

. iii

) In

conf

orm

ity w

ith L

ondo

n P

lan

Pol

icie

s lis

ted:

2A

.5 T

own

Cen

tres

bulle

t 4;

3D.1

Sup

porti

ng T

own

Cen

tres

bulle

t 3; a

nd

3D.3

Mai

ntai

ning

and

Impr

ovin

g R

etai

l Fac

ilitie

s bu

llet 1

. iv

) N/A

v)

It is

an

effe

ctiv

e po

licy

for t

he c

onse

rvat

ion

of th

e ar

ea.

vi) T

his

polic

y do

es n

ot re

peat

nat

iona

l pol

icy

and

addr

esse

d a

parti

cula

rly lo

cal i

ssue

rela

ted

to th

e ch

arac

ter o

f cer

tain

par

ts o

f th

e to

wn

cent

re.

In th

is s

ense

it a

pplie

s P

PS

6 pa

ra 2

.3 2

nd b

ulle

t “m

anag

ing

the

role

and

func

tion

of e

xist

ing

cent

res

by fo

r ex

ampl

e pr

omot

ing

and

deve

lopi

ng a

spe

cial

ist o

r new

role

and

en

cour

agin

g sp

ecifi

c ty

pes

of u

ses

in s

ome

cent

res.

” M

arke

ts

KTC

4 TH

E C

OU

NC

IL W

ILL

SEEK

TO

SA

FEG

UA

RD

TH

E R

OLE

AN

D E

SSEN

TIA

L C

HA

RA

CTE

RIS

TIC

S O

F TH

E A

NC

IEN

T A

ND

M

ON

DA

Y M

AR

KET

S W

HIC

H A

RE

A C

ENTR

AL

FEA

TUR

E O

F K

ING

STO

N’S

SH

OPP

ING

A

TTR

AC

TIO

N A

ND

AR

E IM

POR

TAN

T TO

TH

E C

HA

RA

CTE

R O

F TH

E O

LD T

OW

N

CO

NSE

RVA

TIO

N A

REA

.

W

ill b

e re

plac

ed b

y th

e K

ings

ton

tow

n ce

ntre

AA

P

i) Th

e ce

ntra

l stra

tegy

is p

rovi

ded

by th

e P

art 1

pol

icie

s.

ii) H

as re

gard

to th

e Lo

cal E

cono

my

and

Hou

sing

Obj

ectiv

e of

th

e C

omm

unity

Stra

tegy

. iii

) In

conf

orm

ity w

ith L

ondo

n P

lan

Pol

icie

s lis

ted:

3D

.1 S

uppo

rting

Tow

n C

entre

s;

3D.2

Tow

n C

entre

Dev

elop

men

t; an

d 3D

.3 M

aint

aini

ng a

nd Im

prov

ing

Ret

ail F

acilit

ies.

iv

) N/A

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

v) It

is a

n ef

fect

ive

polic

y fo

r the

con

serv

atio

n of

the

area

. vi

) Thi

s do

es n

ot re

peat

nat

iona

l pol

icy

and

addr

esse

s a

parti

cula

r iss

ue a

nd c

hara

cter

istic

of K

ings

ton

tow

n ce

ntre

. Lo

catio

n of

Art

s an

d C

raft

Wor

ksho

ps

KTC

7 IN

APP

RO

PRIA

TE L

OC

ATI

ON

S SU

CH

AS

THE

RIV

ERSI

DE

AR

EA, T

HE

CO

UN

CIL

WIL

L EN

CO

UR

AG

E TH

E IN

CLU

SIO

N O

F A

RTS

AN

D

CR

AFT

WO

RK

SHO

PS W

ITH

RET

AIL

SA

LES

IN

MIX

ED D

EVEL

OPM

ENT

SCH

EMES

.

Th

e is

sue

of

arts

and

cra

fts

wor

ksho

ps

will

be

cons

ider

ed in

th

e co

re

stra

tegy

.

i) Th

e ce

ntra

l stra

tegy

is p

rovi

ded

by th

e P

art 1

pol

icie

s.

ii) H

as re

gard

to th

e Lo

cal E

cono

my

and

Hou

sing

Obj

ectiv

e of

th

e C

omm

unity

Stra

tegy

. iii)

In c

onfo

rmity

with

Lon

don

Pla

n P

olic

ies:

3D

.4 D

evel

opm

ent

and

Pro

mot

ion

of A

rts a

nd C

ultu

re.

3B.9

Cre

ativ

e In

dust

ries.

iv

) N/A

v)

The

tow

n ce

ntre

is a

n ar

ea o

f cha

nge

and

cons

erva

tion

Iv) I

t is

a co

unci

l obj

ectiv

e to

pro

mot

e ar

ts a

nd c

rafts

es

tabl

ishm

ents

par

ticul

arly

in th

e riv

ersi

de a

rea

whe

re th

is w

ould

en

hanc

e vi

talit

y an

d be

an

appr

opria

te ty

pe o

f dev

elop

men

t.

This

pol

icy

is n

eces

sary

to e

xpla

in th

e si

tuat

ions

whe

re a

rts a

nd

craf

ts w

orks

hops

will

be

soug

ht.

The

re is

a n

eed

for a

fford

able

w

orks

pace

for t

he C

reat

ive

Indu

strie

s an

d to

enc

oura

ge c

lust

ers

of s

uch

activ

ity.

O

pen

Spac

e in

Kin

gsto

n To

wn

Cen

tre

KTC

11

Will

be

repl

aced

by

the

Kin

gsto

n

i) C

entra

l stra

tegy

pro

vide

d by

Par

t 1 p

olic

ies.

ii)

Con

tribu

tes

to C

omm

unity

Stra

tegy

env

ironm

ent o

bjec

tive

to

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

THE

CO

UN

CIL

WIL

L R

ESIS

T TH

E LO

SS O

F O

PEN

SPA

CE

IN T

HE

TOW

N C

ENTR

E, A

ND

W

ILL,

WH

ERE

APP

RO

PRIA

TE, S

EEK

ITS

ENH

AN

CEM

ENT.

TH

E C

OU

NC

IL W

ILL

SEEK

TH

E PR

OVI

SIO

N O

F A

DD

ITIO

NA

L O

PEN

SPA

CE

IN S

UIT

AB

LE

LOC

ATI

ON

S A

ND

REQ

UIR

E SU

CH

SPA

CE

TO

BE

PRO

VID

ED O

N S

PEC

IFIE

D P

RO

POSA

L SI

TES.

tow

n ce

ntre

AA

P ha

ve “c

lean

and

saf

e st

reet

s, p

arks

and

com

mun

al s

pace

s in

K

ings

ton”

. iii)

Gen

eral

con

form

ity w

ith L

ondo

n P

lan

polic

y 4B

.4 E

nhan

cing

th

e qu

ality

of t

he p

ublic

real

m

iv) N

/A

v) T

he to

wn

cent

re is

an

area

sub

ject

to b

oth

chan

ge a

nd

cons

erva

tion,

and

the

prot

ectio

n an

d pr

ovis

ion

of g

ood

qual

ity

open

spa

ce is

a v

ital e

lem

ent o

f the

tow

n’s

desi

gn a

nd la

yout

. vi

) Thi

s po

licy

is n

eces

sary

bec

ause

it h

elps

cla

rify

the

appr

oach

to

ope

n sp

ace

in th

e to

wn

cent

re b

oth

in te

rms

of p

rote

ctin

g sp

aces

and

requ

iring

new

spa

ces

with

new

dev

elop

men

t.

Prov

isio

n of

Hot

el a

nd O

ther

Vis

itor F

acili

ties

KTC

12

THE

CO

UN

CIL

WIL

L SE

EK T

HE

PRO

VISI

ON

OF

IMPR

OVE

D F

AC

ILIT

IES

FOR

VIS

ITO

RS,

IN

PAR

TIC

ULA

R:

(A)

TRA

NSP

OR

T FA

CIL

ITIE

S IN

CLU

DIN

G

ATT

RA

CTI

VE R

AIL

AN

D B

US

STA

TIO

NS,

SU

ITA

BLE

PA

RK

ING

PR

OVI

SIO

N, I

NC

LUD

ING

FO

R C

OA

CH

ES, A

ND

PA

SSEN

GER

BO

AT

MO

OR

ING

S;

(B)

CLE

AR

SIG

NIN

G;

(C)

HO

TEL

PRO

VISI

ON

; (D

) IM

PRO

VED

HER

ITA

GE

EXH

IBIT

ION

Will

be

repl

aced

by

the

Kin

gsto

n to

wn

cent

re

AAP

i) C

entra

l stra

tegy

is p

rovi

ded

by P

art 1

pol

icie

s

ii) H

as re

gard

to th

e C

omm

unity

Stra

tegy

Vis

ion

for “

A fo

cus

for

tour

ism

and

recr

eatio

n” a

nd th

e Lo

cal E

cono

my

and

Hou

sing

O

bjec

tive,

spe

cific

ally

rega

rdin

g ‘K

ings

ton

Tow

n C

entre

’s ro

le

and

perfo

rman

ce’.

iii) I

n co

nfor

mity

with

Lon

don

Pla

n P

olic

ies

liste

d:

3D.4

Dev

elop

men

t and

Pro

mot

ion

of A

rts a

nd C

ultu

re;

3D.6

Vis

itors

Acc

omm

odat

ion

and

faci

litie

s; a

nd

3B.1

0 To

uris

m In

dust

ry.

iv) N

/A

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

SPA

CES

.

v) T

he to

wn

cent

re is

an

area

of c

hang

e an

d th

is p

olic

y hi

ghlig

hts

som

e ke

y is

sues

to b

e ad

dres

sed

as p

art o

f tha

t ch

ange

. vi

) It d

oes

not r

epea

t nat

iona

l pol

icy

and

is n

eces

sary

to a

ddre

ss

the

loca

l circ

umst

ance

s of

the

tow

n ce

ntre

. G

over

nmen

t pol

icy

prio

ritie

s:

This

pol

icy

is c

onsi

sten

t with

the

gove

rnm

ent’s

obj

ectiv

e to

su

ppor

t eco

nom

ic d

evel

opm

ent a

nd re

gene

ratio

n in

clud

ing

polic

ies

for r

etai

ling

and

tow

n ce

ntre

s.

D

esig

n St

anda

rds

KTC

13

THE

CO

UN

CIL

WIL

L R

EQU

IRE

ALL

NEW

D

EVEL

OPM

ENT

TO M

EET

A H

IGH

STA

ND

AR

D

OF

DES

IGN

AN

D R

ESPE

CT

KIN

GST

ON

TO

WN

C

ENTR

E’S

IMPO

RTA

NC

E A

S A

REG

ION

AL

CEN

TRE

AN

D T

OU

RIS

T A

TTR

AC

TIO

N W

HIL

ST

SAFE

GU

AR

DIN

G IT

S H

UM

AN

SC

ALE

, H

ISTO

RIC

CH

AR

AC

TER

AN

D U

NIQ

UE

QU

ALI

TIES

. N

EW D

EVEL

OPM

ENT

SHO

ULD

PR

OVI

DE

CO

HES

ION

WIT

HIN

TH

E EX

ISTI

NG

B

UIL

T EN

VIR

ON

MEN

T A

ND

INTE

RES

T IN

ITS

DET

AIL

ING

TH

RO

UG

H C

AR

EFU

L B

UT

IMA

GIN

ATI

VE U

SE O

F A

RC

HIT

ECTU

RA

L FE

ATU

RES

, RO

OFL

INES

, MA

TER

IALS

AN

D

OR

NA

MEN

TATI

ON

(Cro

ss re

fere

nce

Polic

ies

W

ill b

e re

plac

ed b

y th

e K

ings

ton

tow

n ce

ntre

AA

P

i) U

DP

Pol

icy

STR

6 m

akes

up

the

clea

r cen

tral s

trate

gy.

ii) S

uppo

rts c

omm

unity

pla

n ob

ject

ive

to s

uppo

rt an

d en

hanc

e th

e to

wn

cent

re’s

role

as

a m

etro

polit

an c

entre

iii

) In

conf

orm

ity w

ith L

ondo

n P

lan

Pol

icie

s lis

ted:

4B

.1 D

esig

n P

rinci

ples

for a

com

pact

city

; and

3D

.2 T

own

Cen

tre D

evel

opm

ent b

ulle

t 2.

iv) N

/A

v) T

he to

wn

cent

re is

faci

ng c

hang

e an

d de

sign

pol

icie

s th

at

addr

ess

the

spec

ific

circ

umst

ance

s of

the

tow

n ce

ntre

are

co

nsid

ered

nec

essa

ry.

vi) P

PS

1 an

d P

PS

6 re

cogn

ise

the

impo

rtanc

e of

des

ign.

It i

s co

nsid

ered

that

the

tow

n ce

ntre

war

rant

s de

taile

d de

sign

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

BE1

1 an

d B

E12)

.

polic

ies

to h

elp

impl

emen

t the

stra

tegi

c to

wns

cape

stra

tegy

po

licy.

Pede

stria

n N

etw

ork

KTC

24

THE

CO

UN

CIL

WIL

L SE

EK T

HE

PRO

VISI

ON

OF

A C

OM

PREH

ENSI

VE N

ETW

OR

K O

F PE

DES

TRIA

N R

OU

TES

OF

HIG

H S

TAN

DA

RD

TO

LIN

K A

LL A

REA

S O

F M

AIN

PED

ESTR

IAN

A

CTI

VITY

AN

D W

HIC

H W

ILL

LIN

K A

CR

OSS

TH

E R

ELIE

F R

OA

D T

O C

ON

NEC

T W

ITH

A F

UR

THER

N

ETW

OR

K O

F R

OU

TES

INTO

TH

E SU

RR

OU

ND

ING

BU

SIN

ESS,

LEI

SUR

E A

ND

R

ESID

ENTI

AL

AR

EAS.

TH

E ES

TAB

LISH

MEN

T O

F TH

IS N

ETW

OR

K O

F PE

DES

TRIA

N R

OU

TES

WIL

L IN

CLU

DE

THE

FOLL

OW

ING

:- (I)

TH

E PR

OVI

SIO

N F

OR

PED

ESTR

IAN

S TO

CR

OSS

MA

JOR

TR

AFF

IC R

OU

TES

WH

EREV

ER P

OSS

IBLE

ON

NA

TUR

AL

DES

IRE

LIN

ES, A

ND

AT

GR

OU

ND

LEV

EL, B

Y PR

OVI

SIO

N O

F ZE

BR

A/P

ELIC

AN

/TR

AFF

IC

LIG

HT

CO

NTR

OLL

ED F

AC

ILIT

IES;

(II

) TH

E PR

OVI

SIO

N O

F N

EW O

R

IMPR

OVE

D P

EDES

TRIA

N R

OU

TES

THR

OU

GH

A

PPR

OPR

IATE

RED

EVEL

OPM

ENT

SITE

S.

Rep

lace

with

K

ings

ton

tow

n ce

ntre

AAP

i) P

art 1

pol

icie

s pr

ovid

e th

e ce

ntra

l stra

tegy

. ii)

Has

rega

rd to

the

Loca

l Eco

nom

y an

d H

ousi

ng O

bjec

tive

of

the

Com

mun

ity S

trate

gy a

nd th

e Tr

ansp

ort O

bjec

tive,

mor

e sp

ecifi

cally

‘wal

king

faci

litie

s an

d pr

omot

ion’

. iii

) In

conf

orm

ity w

ith L

ondo

n P

lan

Pol

icie

s lis

ted:

2A

.5 T

own

Cen

tre b

ulle

t 3;

3C.2

0 Im

prov

ing

Con

ditio

ns fo

r wal

king

; and

3D

.1 S

uppo

rting

Tow

n C

entre

s bu

llet 2

. iv

) N/A

v)

the

tow

n ce

ntre

is a

n ar

ea fo

r sig

nific

ant c

hang

e an

d co

nser

vatio

n vi

) The

pol

icy

does

not

repe

at n

atio

nal p

olic

y an

d ad

dres

ses

parti

cula

r circ

umst

ance

s of

the

relie

f roa

d. I

t enc

oura

ges

mod

al

shift

to m

ore

sust

aina

ble

mea

ns o

f tra

nspo

rt an

d ad

ds d

etai

l to

STR

13 s

usta

inab

le tr

ansp

ort s

trate

gy.

Serv

icin

g Fa

cilit

ies

in th

e Pe

dest

rian

Prio

rity

Are

a K

TC25

To

be

repl

aced

in

the

Kin

gsto

n

i) Th

e ce

ntra

l stra

tegy

is p

rovi

ded

by th

e P

art 1

pol

icie

s ii)

Has

rega

rd to

the

Loca

l Eco

nom

y an

d H

ousi

ng O

bjec

tive

of

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

THE

CO

UN

CIL

WIL

L SE

EK IM

PRO

VED

SE

RVI

CIN

G F

AC

ILIT

IES,

PA

RTI

CU

LAR

LY R

EAR

SE

RVI

CIN

G, F

OR

DEV

ELO

PMEN

TS W

ITH

IN T

HE

PED

ESTR

IAN

PR

IOR

ITY

AR

EA T

O F

AC

ILIT

ATE

PE

DES

TRIA

NIS

ATI

ON

, IM

PRO

VE R

OA

D

SAFE

TY A

ND

EN

HA

NC

E TH

E EN

VIR

ON

MEN

T.

tow

n ce

ntre

AA

P th

e C

omm

unity

Stra

tegy

, spe

cific

ally

con

cern

ing

‘app

ropr

iate

ph

ysic

al in

frast

ruct

ure’

. iii

) In

conf

orm

ity w

ith L

ondo

n P

lan

Pol

icie

s lis

ted:

3C

.17

Allo

catio

n of

Stre

et S

pace

bul

let 1

; 3C

.22

Par

king

Stra

tegy

bul

let 5

; and

3C

.24

Frei

ght S

trate

gy b

ulle

ts 4

and

5.

iv) N

/A

v) T

he to

wn

cent

re is

an

area

of c

hang

e/co

nser

vatio

n vi

) It d

oes

not r

epea

t nat

iona

l pol

icy

and

is n

eces

sary

to e

nsur

e ad

equa

te s

ervi

cing

is p

rovi

ded

conc

urre

nt w

ith th

e pe

dest

riani

satio

n.

N

ew R

etai

l Flo

orsp

ace

DC

1 TH

E C

OU

NC

IL W

ILL

ENC

OU

RA

GE

THE

CO

NSO

LID

ATI

ON

AN

D E

NH

AN

CEM

ENT

OF

NEW

MA

LDEN

, SU

RB

ITO

N A

ND

TO

LWO

RTH

AS

DIS

TRIC

T SH

OPP

ING

CEN

TRES

BY

PER

MIT

TIN

G G

RO

WTH

IN R

ETA

IL

FLO

OR

SPA

CE

WIT

HIN

RET

AIL

AR

EAS,

IN

DIC

ATE

D O

N T

HE

DIS

TRIC

T C

ENTR

E IN

SET

MA

PS A

ND

BY

PRO

TEC

TIN

G L

OC

AL

CH

AR

AC

TER

AN

D A

MEN

ITY.

N

/A

To

be

repl

aced

in

the

Cor

e st

rate

gy

and/

or

deve

lopm

ent

cont

rol

polic

ies

DP

D

i) U

DP

Pol

icy

STR

5 s

hopp

ing

and

tow

n ce

ntre

s pr

ovid

es th

e cl

ear c

entra

l stra

tegy

. ii)

Sup

ports

the

com

mun

ity p

lan

obje

ctiv

e to

ens

ure

the

boro

ugh’

s di

stric

t and

loca

l cen

tres

play

to th

eir s

treng

ths,

co

mpl

emen

t eac

h ot

her a

nd m

axim

ise

pote

ntia

l. iii

) In

conf

orm

ity w

ith L

ondo

n P

lan

Pol

icie

s lis

ted:

3D

.1 S

uppo

rting

Tow

n C

entre

s bu

llet p

oint

s 1

and

3; a

nd

3D.3

Mai

ntai

ning

and

Impr

ovin

g R

etai

l Fac

ilitie

s bu

llet p

oint

3.

iv) N

/A

v) N

/A

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

vi) T

his

polic

y is

nec

essa

ry to

pro

mot

e vi

talit

y an

d vi

abilit

y in

the

dist

rict c

entre

s in

acc

orda

nce

with

PP

S6

and

links

to re

tail

area

s sh

own

on th

e pr

opos

als

map

.

Are

as o

f Mix

ed U

se

DC

4 W

ITH

IN T

HE

AR

EAS

OF

MIX

ED U

SE, A

S D

EFIN

ED O

N T

HE

SUR

BIT

ON

AN

D T

OLW

OR

TH

INSE

T M

APS

, PR

OPO

SALS

FO

R R

ETA

IL

(CLA

SS A

1), F

INA

NC

IAL

AN

D P

RO

FESS

ION

AL

SER

VIC

ES (C

LASS

A2)

, CO

MM

UN

ITY

AN

D

LEIS

UR

E U

SE A

ND

B1

BU

SIN

ESS

USE

WIL

L N

OR

MA

LLY

BE

AC

CEP

TAB

LE P

RO

VID

ED

THA

T TH

EY C

OM

PLY

WIT

H O

THER

REL

EVA

NT

POLI

CIE

S IN

TH

E PL

AN

.

N

/A

To

be

repl

aced

in

the

deve

lopm

ent

cont

rol

polic

ies

DP

D

i) P

art 1

pol

icie

s pr

ovid

e th

e ce

ntra

l stra

tegy

, in

parti

cula

r po

licie

s S

TR4

Loca

l Eco

nom

y an

d S

TR5

Sho

ppin

g an

d To

wn

Cen

tres

ii) S

uppo

rts th

e co

mm

unity

pla

n ob

ject

ive

to e

nsur

e th

e bo

roug

h’s

dist

rict a

nd lo

cal c

entre

s pl

ay to

thei

r stre

ngth

s,

com

plem

ent e

ach

othe

r and

max

imis

e po

tent

ial.

iii) In

con

form

ity w

ith L

ondo

n P

lan

Pol

icie

s:

2A.5

Tow

n C

entre

bul

let 4

; 3D

.1 S

uppo

rting

Tow

n C

entre

s bu

llet 1

; and

3D

.3 M

aint

aini

ng a

nd Im

prov

ing

Ret

ail F

acilit

ies

bulle

t poi

nt 3

. iv

) N/A

v)

N/A

vi

) The

pol

icy

does

not

repe

at n

atio

nal p

olic

y –

it se

ts o

ut in

sp

atia

l ter

ms

the

visi

on fo

r cer

tain

are

as o

f Sur

bito

n an

d To

lwor

th c

entre

s w

here

mix

ed u

se d

evel

opm

ent,

as o

ppos

ed to

so

lely

reta

il, w

ould

be

appr

opria

te.

Rea

r Ser

vice

Roa

ds

NM

2 TH

E C

OU

NC

IL W

ILL

CO

NTI

NU

E TO

SA

FEG

UA

RD

TH

E LI

NE

OF

THE

REA

R

n/

a

To b

e re

plac

ed in

th

e de

velo

pmen

t co

ntro

l

i) P

art 1

pol

icie

s pr

ovid

e th

e ce

ntra

l stra

tegy

, in

parti

cula

r po

licie

s S

TR4

Loca

l Eco

nom

y an

d S

TR5

Sho

ppin

g an

d To

wn

Cen

tres.

Als

o th

e Lo

cal I

mpl

emen

tatio

n P

lan

Pol

icy

4: th

e co

unci

l will

ens

ure

that

par

king

and

load

ing

arra

ngem

ents

mee

t th

e re

ason

able

nee

ds o

f bus

ines

s.

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

SER

VIC

E R

OA

D S

HO

WN

ON

TH

E IN

SET

MA

P.

po

licie

s D

PD

ii)

Has

rega

rd to

the

Loca

l Eco

nom

y an

d H

ousi

ng O

bjec

tive

of

the

Com

mun

ity S

trate

gy, s

peci

fical

ly c

once

rnin

g ‘a

ppro

pria

te

phys

ical

infra

stru

ctur

e’.

iii) I

n co

nfor

mity

with

Lon

don

Pla

n P

olic

ies

liste

d:

3C.1

7 A

lloca

tion

of S

treet

Spa

ce b

ulle

t 1;

3C.2

2 P

arki

ng S

trate

gy b

ulle

t 5; a

nd

3C.2

4 Fr

eigh

t Stra

tegy

bul

lets

4 a

nd 5

. iv

) N/A

v)

N/A

vi

) The

pol

icy

is c

onsi

sten

t with

PP

G 1

3 pa

ragr

aph

6 bu

llet 1

1;

and

Frei

ght P

arag

raph

46

in re

spec

t of d

eliv

ery

faci

litie

s, a

nd is

a

spec

ifica

lly lo

cal p

olic

y to

add

ress

circ

umst

ance

s in

New

M

alde

n.

D

esig

n an

d Sc

ale

of N

ew D

evel

opm

ent

NM

3 N

EW D

EVEL

OPM

ENT

AN

D R

EDEV

ELO

PMEN

T PR

OPO

SALS

SH

OU

LD R

ESPE

CT

THE

CH

AR

AC

TER

OF

THE

CEN

TRE,

AN

D

NO

RM

ALL

Y IN

VOLV

E:

(A)

THE

RES

TRIC

TIO

N O

F N

EW

DEV

ELO

PMEN

T TO

A P

LOT

RA

TIO

OF

1.5:

1;

(B)

A M

AXI

MU

M H

EIG

HT

OF

THR

EE

STO

REY

S A

LON

G M

AIN

RO

AD

FR

ON

TAG

ES

n/

a

n/a

To

be

repl

aced

in

the

core

st

rate

gy

and/

or

deve

lopm

ent

cont

rol

polic

ies

DP

D

i) U

DP

Pol

icy

STR

6 p

rovi

des

the

clea

r cen

tral s

trate

gy.

ii) T

he c

omm

unity

pla

n sa

ys n

othi

ng s

peci

fic a

bout

des

ign

of th

e bu

ilt e

nviro

nmen

t iii

) In

conf

orm

ity w

ith L

ondo

n P

lan

Pol

icie

s lis

ted:

4B

.1 D

esig

n P

rinci

ples

for a

com

pact

city

; and

3D

.2 T

own

Cen

tre D

evel

opm

ent b

ulle

t 2.

iv) N

/A

v) N

/A

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

AN

D T

WO

STO

REY

S A

LON

G A

NY

RES

IDEN

TIA

L R

OA

DS.

TH

E O

NLY

EXC

EPTI

ON

TO

TH

IS W

ILL

BE

IN T

HE

EVEN

T O

F TH

E R

EDEV

ELO

PMEN

T O

F A

PEX

OR

C I

TOW

ERS

WH

ERE

A M

AXI

MU

M B

UIL

DIN

G H

EIG

HT

OF

FIVE

STO

REY

S W

ILL

BE

PER

MIT

TED

; (C

) A

HIG

H Q

UA

LITY

OF

DES

IGN

AN

D

SUIT

AB

LE F

AC

ING

MA

TER

IALS

, NO

RM

ALL

Y B

RIC

K O

R P

AIN

TED

REN

DER

; AN

D

(D)

THE

SETT

ING

BA

CK

OF

AN

Y N

EW

DEV

ELO

PMEN

TS F

RO

M T

HE

HIG

HW

AY

EDG

E,

PAR

TIC

ULA

RLY

IN T

HE

VIC

INIT

Y O

F 15

-49

HIG

H S

TREE

T A

ND

5-3

1 C

OO

MB

E R

OA

D, S

O

AS

TO E

NA

BLE

LA

ND

SCA

PIN

G T

O T

AK

E PL

AC

E.

vi) T

his

polic

y is

nec

essa

ry to

pro

vide

des

ign

guid

ance

ad

dres

sing

the

spec

ific

circ

umst

ance

s of

New

Mal

den

tow

n ce

ntre

.

Des

ign

and

Scal

e of

New

Dev

elop

men

t SU

R3

NEW

DEV

ELO

PMEN

T A

ND

RED

EVEL

OPM

ENT

PRO

POSA

LS S

HO

ULD

PR

ESER

VE O

R

ENH

AN

CE

THE

PAR

TIC

ULA

R C

HA

RA

CTE

R O

R

APP

EAR

AN

CE

OF

THE

TOW

N C

ENTR

E, A

ND

W

ILL

NO

RM

ALL

Y IN

VOLV

E:-

(A)

A M

AXI

MU

M H

EIG

HT

OF

3 ST

OR

EYS;

(B

) A

PLO

T R

ATI

O N

OT

EXC

EED

ING

1.5

:1;

(C)

RES

PEC

T FO

R T

HE

EXIS

TIN

G

PATT

ERN

OF

NA

RR

OW

PR

OPE

RTY

FR

ON

TAG

ES;

(D)

HIG

H Q

UA

LITY

OF

DES

IGN

AN

D

n/

a

n/a

To

be

repl

aced

in

the

core

st

rate

gy

and/

or

deve

lopm

ent

cont

rol

polic

ies

DP

D

i) U

DP

Pol

icy

STR

6 p

rovi

des

the

cent

ral s

trate

gy.

ii) T

he c

omm

unity

pla

n sa

ys n

othi

ng s

peci

fic a

bout

des

ign

of th

e bu

ilt e

nviro

nmen

t iii)

In c

onfo

rmity

with

Lon

don

Pla

n P

olic

ies:

4B

.1 D

esig

n P

rinci

ples

for a

com

pact

city

; and

3D

.2 T

own

Cen

tre D

evel

opm

ent b

ulle

t 2.

iv) N

/A

v) N

/A

vi) T

his

polic

y is

nec

essa

ry to

pro

vide

des

ign

guid

ance

ad

dres

sing

the

spec

ific

circ

umst

ance

s of

Sur

bito

n to

wn

cent

re.

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

SUIT

AB

LE F

AC

ING

MA

TER

IALS

, NO

RM

ALL

Y B

RIC

K O

R P

AIN

TED

REN

DER

; (E

) TH

E R

ETEN

TIO

N O

F EX

ISTI

NG

VI

CTO

RIA

N S

HO

PFR

ON

TS A

ND

RES

PEC

T FO

R

AN

Y A

DJA

CEN

T SH

OPF

RO

NTS

OR

A

RC

HIT

ECTU

RA

L FE

ATU

RES

; (F

) TH

E IN

CO

RPO

RA

TIO

N O

F FE

ATU

RES

A

ND

DES

IGN

S TH

AT

CO

MPL

EMEN

T TH

E IM

PRO

VEM

ENTS

RES

ULT

ING

FR

OM

AR

EA

REV

ITA

LISA

TIO

N, A

ND

PR

ESER

VE O

R

ENH

AN

CE

THE

CH

AR

AC

TER

OR

A

PPEA

RA

NC

E O

F TH

E C

ON

SER

VATI

ON

A

REA

S A

ND

TH

E SE

TTIN

G O

F LI

STED

B

UIL

DIN

GS

AN

D B

UIL

DIN

GS

OF

TOW

NSC

APE

M

ERIT

. R

ear S

ervi

ce R

oads

SU

R4

THE

CO

UN

CIL

WIL

L C

ON

TIN

UE

TO

SAFE

GU

AR

D T

HE

LIN

E O

F R

EAR

SER

VIC

E R

OA

DS

AS

IND

ICA

TED

ON

TH

E IN

SET

MA

P.

n/

a

To b

e re

plac

ed in

th

e de

velo

pmen

t co

ntro

l po

licie

s D

PD

i) U

DP

Pol

icy

STR

6 p

rovi

des

the

cent

ral s

trate

gy. A

lso

the

Loca

l Im

plem

enta

tion

Pla

n P

olic

y 4:

the

coun

cil w

ill en

sure

that

pa

rkin

g an

d lo

adin

g ar

rang

emen

ts m

eet t

he re

ason

able

nee

ds

of b

usin

ess.

ii)

Has

rega

rd to

the

Loca

l Eco

nom

y an

d H

ousi

ng O

bjec

tive

of

the

Com

mun

ity S

trate

gy, s

peci

fical

ly c

once

rnin

g ‘a

ppro

pria

te

phys

ical

infra

stru

ctur

e’.

iii) I

n co

nfor

mity

with

Lon

don

Pla

n P

olic

ies

liste

d:

3C.1

7 A

lloca

tion

of S

treet

Spa

ce b

ulle

t 1;

3C.2

2 P

arki

ng S

trate

gy b

ulle

t 5; a

nd

3C.2

4 Fr

eigh

t Stra

tegy

bul

lets

4 a

nd 5

.

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

iv) N

/A

v) N

/A

vi) T

he p

olic

y is

con

sist

ent w

ith P

PG

13

para

grap

h 6

bulle

t 11;

an

d Fr

eigh

t Par

agra

ph 4

6 in

resp

ect o

f del

iver

y fa

cilit

ies,

and

is

a sp

ecifi

cally

loca

l pol

icy

to a

ddre

ss c

ircum

stan

ces

in S

urbi

ton.

Des

ign

and

Scal

e of

New

Dev

elop

men

t TO

L3

NEW

DEV

ELO

PMEN

T A

ND

RED

EVEL

OPM

ENT

PRO

POSA

LS S

HO

ULD

CO

NTR

IBU

TE T

O T

HE

ENH

AN

CEM

ENT

OF

THE

CH

AR

AC

TER

OF

TOLW

OR

TH D

ISTR

ICT

CEN

TRE

AN

D

NO

RM

ALL

Y IN

VOLV

E:-

(A)

A P

LOT

RA

TIO

NO

T EX

CEE

DIN

G 1

.5:1

; (B

) A

MA

XIM

UM

HEI

GH

T O

F 3

STO

REY

S O

N M

AIN

RO

AD

FR

ON

TAG

ES A

ND

2 S

TOR

EYS

ON

AN

Y R

ESID

ENTI

AL

RO

AD

FR

ON

TAG

E. T

HE

ON

LY E

XCEP

TIO

N T

O T

HIS

WIL

L B

E IN

TH

E EV

ENT

OF

THE

RED

EVEL

OPM

ENT

OF

TOLW

OR

TH T

OW

ER, W

HER

E A

MA

XIM

UM

B

UIL

DIN

G H

EIG

HT

OF

FIVE

STO

REY

S W

ILL

BE

PER

MIT

TED

; (C

) A

DES

IGN

, AN

D U

SE O

F M

ATE

RIA

LS

WH

ICH

RES

PEC

T A

DJO

ININ

G B

UIL

DIN

GS

AN

D

MA

KE

A P

OSI

TIVE

CO

NTR

IBU

TIO

N T

O T

HE

n/

a

n/a

To

be

repl

aced

in

the

core

st

rate

gy

and/

or

deve

lopm

ent

cont

rol

polic

ies

DP

D

i) U

DP

Pol

icy

STR

6 B

uilt

Env

ironm

ent a

nd o

ther

Par

t 1 p

olic

ies

prov

ide

the

cent

ral s

trate

gy.

ii) T

he c

omm

unity

pla

n sa

ys n

othi

ng s

peci

fic a

bout

des

ign

of th

e bu

ilt e

nviro

nmen

t

iii) I

n co

nfor

mity

with

Lon

don

Pla

n P

olic

ies

liste

d:

4B.1

Des

ign

Prin

cipl

es fo

r a c

ompa

ct c

ity; a

nd

3D.2

Tow

n C

entre

Dev

elop

men

t bul

let 2

. iv

) N/A

v)

N/A

vi

) Thi

s po

licy

is n

eces

sary

to p

rovi

de d

esig

n gu

idan

ce

addr

essi

ng th

e sp

ecifi

c ci

rcum

stan

ces

of T

olw

orth

tow

n ce

ntre

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

ENH

AN

CEM

ENT

OF

INTE

RES

T IN

TH

E ST

REE

T SC

ENE;

(D

) SH

OPF

RO

NTS

AC

HIE

VIN

G

STA

ND

AR

DS

SET

OU

T IN

TH

E SU

PPLE

MEN

TAR

Y PL

AN

NIN

G G

UID

AN

CE:

‘T

OLW

OR

TH B

RO

AD

WA

Y SH

OPF

RO

NT

DES

IGN

GU

IDE’

. B

road

oaks

Rea

r Ser

vice

Roa

d TO

L4

THE

CO

UN

CIL

WIL

L SE

EK T

HE

IMPR

OVE

MEN

T O

F TH

E B

RO

AD

OA

KS

REA

R S

ERVI

CE

RO

AD

IN

CO

NJU

NC

TIO

N W

ITH

AN

Y D

EVEL

OPM

ENT

OF

AD

JAC

ENT

PRO

PER

TIES

AN

D W

ILL

AC

CO

RD

ING

LY E

NTE

R IN

TO A

GR

EEM

ENTS

W

ITH

RET

AIL

ERS

AN

D D

EVEL

OPE

RS,

AS

AN

D

WH

EN A

PPR

OPR

IATE

, IN

OR

DER

TO

AC

HIE

VE

THIS

.

n/

a

To b

e re

plac

ed in

th

e de

velo

pmen

t co

ntro

l po

licie

s D

PD

i) U

DP

Pol

icy

STR

6 p

rovi

des

the

cent

ral s

trate

gy. A

lso

the

Loca

l Im

plem

enta

tion

Pla

n P

olic

y 4:

the

coun

cil w

ill en

sure

that

pa

rkin

g an

d lo

adin

g ar

rang

emen

ts m

eet t

he re

ason

able

nee

ds

of b

usin

ess.

ii)

Has

rega

rd to

the

Loca

l Eco

nom

y an

d H

ousi

ng O

bjec

tive

of

the

Com

mun

ity S

trate

gy, s

peci

fical

ly c

once

rnin

g ‘a

ppro

pria

te

phys

ical

infra

stru

ctur

e’.

iii) I

n co

nfor

mity

with

Lon

don

Pla

n P

olic

ies

liste

d:

3C.1

7 A

lloca

tion

of S

treet

Spa

ce b

ulle

t 1;

3C.2

2 P

arki

ng S

trate

gy b

ulle

t 5; a

nd

3C.2

4 Fr

eigh

t Stra

tegy

bul

lets

4 a

nd 5

. iv

) N/A

v)

N/A

vi

) The

pol

icy

is c

onsi

sten

t with

PP

G 1

3 pa

ragr

aph

6 bu

llet 1

1;

and

Frei

ght P

arag

raph

46

in re

spec

t of d

eliv

ery

faci

litie

s, a

nd is

a

spec

ifica

lly lo

cal p

olic

y to

add

ress

circ

umst

ance

s in

Tol

wor

th.

R

ES1.

Con

trol

of D

evel

opm

ent,

Site

Ass

embl

y,

n/

an/

an/

a

To b

e i)

Par

t 1 p

olic

ies

prov

ide

the

cent

ral s

trate

gy

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

etc

THE

CO

UN

CIL

WIL

L SE

EK T

O IM

PLEM

ENT

THE

PLA

N’S

PO

LIC

IES

AN

D P

RO

POSA

LS B

Y C

ON

TRO

LLIN

G D

EVEL

OPM

ENT

IN

AC

CO

RD

AN

CE

WIT

H T

HE

TOW

N A

ND

C

OU

NTR

Y PL

AN

NIN

G A

CTS

, AN

D IN

A

PPR

OPR

IATE

CA

SES

BY:

(A

) EN

TER

ING

INTO

JO

INT

DEV

ELO

PMEN

T SC

HEM

ES;

(B)

ASS

ISTI

NG

WIT

H S

ITE

ASS

EMB

LY B

Y D

ISPO

SIN

G O

F C

OU

NC

IL-O

WN

ED L

AN

D,

EITH

ER O

N A

LO

NG

LEA

SEH

OLD

OR

FR

EEH

OLD

; (C

) U

SIN

G C

OM

PULS

OR

Y PU

RC

HA

SE

POW

ERS

WH

ERE

ALL

OTH

ER M

EAN

S O

F SI

TE

ASS

EMB

LY O

R A

CQ

UIS

ITIO

N H

AVE

FA

ILED

; (D

) A

RTI

CLE

4 D

IREC

TIO

NS.

TH

E C

OU

NC

IL W

ILL

ENC

OU

RA

GE

STA

TUTO

RY

UN

DER

TAK

ERS

AN

D U

TILI

TY C

OM

PAN

IES

TO

REL

EASE

UN

DER

USE

D S

ITES

FO

R

DEV

ELO

PMEN

T IN

AC

CO

RD

AN

CE

WIT

H

POLI

CIE

S A

ND

PR

OPO

SALS

IN T

HE

PLA

N.

repl

aced

in

the

core

st

rate

gy

ii) N

/A

iii) N

/A

iv) N

/A

v) N

/A

vi) I

t is

cons

ider

ed n

eces

sary

to s

ave

the

chap

ter o

n re

sour

ces

and

impl

emen

tatio

n be

caus

e it

expl

ains

the

mea

ns b

y w

hich

the

plan

will

be im

plem

ente

d. P

olic

y R

ES

1 is

par

t of t

hat

expl

anat

ion.

RES

2. P

lann

ing

Con

ditio

ns a

nd A

gree

men

ts

THE

CO

UN

CIL

WIL

L, IN

APP

RO

PRIA

TE C

ASE

S,

IMPO

SE C

ON

DIT

ION

S O

N P

LAN

NIN

G

PER

MIS

SIO

NS

AN

D E

NTE

R IN

TO P

LAN

NIN

G

AG

REE

MEN

TS W

ITH

DEV

ELO

PER

S U

ND

ER

n/

a

n/a

To

be

repl

aced

in

the

core

st

rate

gy

i) P

art 1

pol

icie

s pr

ovid

e th

e ce

ntra

l stra

tegy

ii)

N/A

iii

) Pol

icy

6A.4

and

6A

.5 re

quire

loca

l aut

horit

ies

to s

et o

ut a

cl

ear f

ram

ewor

k fo

r neg

otia

tions

on

plan

ning

obl

igat

ions

in

UD

P’s

. iv

) N/A

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

SEC

TIO

N 1

06 O

F TH

E TO

WN

AN

D C

OU

NTR

Y PL

AN

NIN

G A

CT

1990

AN

D O

THER

AC

TS, T

O

ENSU

RE

THA

T PA

RTI

CU

LAR

ASP

ECTS

OF

THE

DEV

ELO

PMEN

T A

RE

SEC

UR

ED, T

HA

T TH

E D

EVEL

OPM

ENT

IS C

OM

PLET

ED A

S A

WH

OLE

, TH

AT

THE

INTE

GR

ITY

OF

THE

PLA

N’S

PO

LIC

IES

AR

E M

AIN

TAIN

ED, O

R F

OR

OTH

ER

PLA

NN

ING

PU

RPO

SES.

v) N

/A

vi) T

his

polic

y m

akes

cle

ar th

e C

ounc

il’s in

tent

ion

to u

se

plan

ning

con

ditio

ns a

nd a

gree

men

ts c

larif

ying

a k

ey m

echa

nism

fo

r im

plem

enta

tion

help

ful t

o us

ers

of th

e pl

an.

RES

4. S

uppl

emen

tary

Pla

nnin

g G

uida

nce

(SPG

) TH

E C

OU

NC

IL W

ILL

PREP

AR

E A

ND

UPD

ATE

PL

AN

NIN

G B

RIE

FS A

ND

SU

PPLE

MEN

TAR

Y PL

AN

NIN

G G

UID

AN

CE

AS

NEC

ESSA

RY

TO

ASS

IST

DEV

ELO

PMEN

T IN

AC

CO

RD

AN

CE

WIT

H T

HE

PLA

N’S

PO

LIC

IES

AN

D

PRO

POSA

LS.

PRIO

RIT

IES

FOR

TH

E PR

EPA

RA

TIO

N O

F SU

CH

MA

TER

IAL

WIL

L B

E R

EVIE

WED

TH

RO

UG

H T

HE

AN

NU

AL

MO

NIT

OR

ING

AN

D R

EVIE

W P

RO

CES

S. (

Cro

ss

refe

renc

e Po

licy

RES

7).

n/

an/

an/

a

To b

e re

plac

ed a

s pa

rt of

the

core

stra

tegy

.

i) P

art 1

pol

icie

s pr

ovid

e th

e ce

ntra

l stra

tegy

ii)

N/A

iii)

N/A

iv

) N/A

v)

N/A

vi

) In

a se

nse

the

polic

y is

out

of d

ate

beca

use

the

Pla

nnin

g an

d C

ompu

lsor

y P

urch

ase

Act

200

4 m

akes

no

prov

isio

n fo

r SP

G.

In

stea

d au

thor

ities

can

now

pre

pare

Sup

plem

enta

ry P

lann

ing

Doc

umen

ts, a

dher

ing

to c

erta

in s

tatu

tory

pro

cess

es in

clud

ing

sust

aina

bilit

y ap

prai

sal a

nd c

omm

unity

invo

lvem

ent.

How

ever

, th

e C

ounc

il ha

s a

num

ber o

f SP

Gs

prep

ared

und

er th

e ol

d sy

stem

that

are

rela

ted

to U

DP

pol

icie

s. R

eten

tion

of P

olic

y R

ES

4 w

ill m

aint

ain

a he

lpfu

l lin

k be

twee

n S

PG

s an

d th

e U

DP

.

RES

5. T

empo

rary

Pla

nnin

g Pe

rmis

sion

s an

d R

enew

al o

f Exp

ired

Perm

issi

ons

THE

CO

UN

CIL

WIL

L H

AVE

REG

AR

D T

O T

HE

PLA

N’S

PO

LIC

IES

AN

D P

RO

POSA

LS W

HEN

n/

an/

an/

a

Rep

lace

men

t w

ill b

e co

nsid

ered

as

part

of th

e

i) P

art 1

pol

icie

s pr

ovid

e th

e ce

ntra

l stra

tegy

ii)

N/A

iii)

N/A

iv

) N/A

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

CO

NSI

DER

ING

APP

LIC

ATI

ON

S FO

R

TEM

POR

AR

Y PL

AN

NIN

G P

ERM

ISSI

ON

AN

D

FOR

TH

E R

ENEW

AL

OF

PLA

NN

ING

PE

RM

ISSI

ON

S TH

AT

HA

VE E

XPIR

ED.

core

stra

tegy

an

d/or

de

velo

pmen

t co

ntro

l pol

icy

DP

D.

v) N

/A

vi) I

t is

cons

ider

ed a

hel

pful

ele

men

t of t

he im

plem

enta

tion

chap

ter t

o re

fer t

o an

d cl

arify

the

way

tem

pora

ry p

lann

ing

appl

icat

ions

and

rene

wal

s of

pla

nnin

g ap

plic

atio

ns w

ill be

tre

ated

.

RES

6. P

rovi

sion

of A

dequ

ate

Infr

astr

uctu

re

PLA

NN

ING

PER

MIS

SIO

N F

OR

NEW

D

EVEL

OPM

ENT

WIL

L O

NLY

BE

GR

AN

TED

W

HER

E A

DEQ

UA

TE IN

FRA

STR

UC

TUR

E A

ND

ES

SEN

TIA

L C

OM

MU

NIT

Y FA

CIL

ITIE

S A

RE

AVA

ILA

BLE

, FIR

MLY

CO

MM

ITTE

D, O

R

PRO

VID

ED A

S PA

RT

OF

THE

DEV

ELO

PMEN

T SC

HEM

E.

n/

a

n/a

R

epla

cem

ent

will

be

cons

ider

ed a

s pa

rt of

the

core

stra

tegy

i) P

art 1

pol

icie

s pr

ovid

e th

e ce

ntra

l stra

tegy

ii)

The

pol

icy

supp

orts

the

com

mun

ity p

lan

prio

rity

to e

nsur

e th

at

peop

le c

an a

cces

s go

od s

ervi

ces

and

com

mun

ity fa

cilit

ies.

iii)

Pol

icy

3A.1

5 st

ates

that

‘ade

quat

e pr

ovis

ion

for [

soci

al

infra

stru

ctur

e an

d co

mm

unity

faci

litie

s] is

par

ticul

arly

impo

rtant

in

maj

or a

reas

of n

ew d

evel

opm

ent a

nd re

gene

ratio

n’ a

nd

requ

ires

UD

P po

licie

s ‘to

ens

ure

that

app

ropr

iate

[com

mun

ity]

faci

litie

s ar

e pr

ovid

ed w

ithin

eas

y re

ach

by w

alki

ng a

nd p

ublic

tra

nspo

rt of

the

popu

latio

n th

at u

se th

em.’

iv) N

/A

v) n

/a

vi) P

rovi

sion

of i

nfra

stru

ctur

e w

ith n

ew d

evel

opm

ent i

s a

criti

cal

mat

ter f

or th

e de

velo

pmen

t pla

n. T

his

polic

y is

key

to e

nsur

e th

at n

eces

sary

infra

stru

ctur

e is

pro

vide

d, a

nd is

use

d al

ongs

ide

Pol

icy

RE

S2

Pla

nnin

g co

nditi

ons

and

agre

emen

ts.

R

ES7.

Mon

itorin

g TH

E C

OU

NC

IL W

ILL

MO

NIT

OR

: (A

)IMPL

EMEN

TATI

ON

OF

THE

PLA

N’S

n/

an/

an/

a

Rep

lace

men

t w

ill b

e co

nsid

ered

as

i) P

art 1

pol

icie

s pr

ovid

e th

e ce

ntra

l stra

tegy

ii)

N/A

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

PRO

POSA

LS;

(B)T

HE

EFFE

CTI

VEN

ESS

OF

THE

PLA

N’S

PO

LIC

IES;

(C

)TH

E C

ON

TIN

UIN

G R

ELEV

AN

CE

OF

THE

PLA

N’S

PO

LIC

IES

AN

D P

RO

POSA

LS A

S C

IRC

UM

STA

NC

ES C

HA

NG

E;

(D)

THE

NEC

ESSI

TY F

OR

TH

E A

DO

PTIO

N

OF

NEW

PO

LIC

IES

AN

D P

RO

POSA

LS T

O

AD

DR

ESS

ISSU

ES W

HIC

H M

AY

AR

ISE

AFT

ER

THE

AD

OPT

ION

OF

THE

PLA

N. A

N A

NN

UA

L M

ON

ITO

RIN

G R

EPO

RT

CO

VER

ING

SU

CH

IS

SUES

WIL

L B

E PR

EPA

RED

AN

D, I

F N

ECES

SAR

Y, T

HE

CO

UN

CIL

WIL

L TH

EN T

AK

E A

PPR

OPR

IATE

STE

PS T

O A

MEN

D O

R R

EVIE

W

THE

PLA

N.

part

of th

e co

re s

trate

gy

iii) N

/A

iv) N

/A

v) N

/A

vi) M

onito

ring

is a

key

ele

men

t of p

lan-

mak

ing

and

a re

fere

nce

to th

is is

con

side

red

impo

rtant

. The

sup

porti

ng te

xt e

xpla

ins

that

th

e 60

indi

cato

rs li

sted

in P

art 1

will

be

mon

itore

d vi

a A

nnua

l M

onito

ring

Rep

orts

. It

ther

efor

e pr

ovid

es a

hel

pful

link

to th

e A

MR

.

RES

8. C

omm

unity

Ben

efit

PLA

NN

ING

CO

ND

ITIO

NS

MA

Y B

E C

ON

SID

ERED

IN O

RD

ER T

O P

RO

VID

E R

ELA

TED

BEN

EFIT

S W

HEN

A P

LAN

NIN

G

APP

LIC

ATI

ON

IS D

ETER

MIN

ED. W

HER

E IT

IS

REA

SON

AB

LE T

O S

EEK

SU

CH

BEN

EFIT

S B

Y W

AY

OF

A P

LAN

NIN

G O

BLI

GA

TIO

N (O

R

OTH

ER A

GR

EEM

ENT)

TH

E EX

ISTE

NC

E O

R

LIK

ELIH

OO

D O

F SU

CH

AN

OB

LIG

ATI

ON

WIL

L B

E M

ATE

RIA

L TO

TH

E G

RA

NTI

NG

OF

PLA

NN

ING

PER

MIS

SIO

N.

n/

a

To b

e re

plac

ed in

th

e co

re

stra

tegy

i) P

art 1

pol

icie

s pr

ovid

e th

e ce

ntra

l stra

tegy

ii)

Pol

icy

RE

S8 p

rovi

des

a to

ol fo

r ach

ievi

ng th

e ov

eral

l ob

ject

ives

for t

he C

omm

unity

Stra

tegy

, spe

cific

ally

in re

latio

n to

he

alth

and

soc

ial c

are,

com

mun

ity s

afet

y, e

duca

tion

and

lifel

ong

lear

ning

, hou

sing

and

tran

spor

t.

iii) P

olic

y 6A

.4 a

nd 6

A.5

requ

ire lo

cal a

utho

ritie

s to

set

out

a

clea

r fra

mew

ork

for n

egot

iatio

ns o

n pl

anni

ng o

blig

atio

ns in

U

DP

’s.

iv) N

/A

v) N

/A

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

vi) P

olic

y R

ES

8 is

crit

ical

to e

nabl

e th

e C

ounc

il to

con

tinue

ne

gotia

ting

S10

6 ag

reem

ents

in a

ccor

danc

e w

ith th

e fo

rms

of

com

mun

ity b

enef

it lis

ted

in th

e su

ppor

ting

text

to th

e po

licy.

P

olic

y R

ES

8 fu

rther

dev

elop

s ov

erar

chin

g ob

ject

ives

of t

he

Lond

on P

lan

and

stat

utor

y A

cts

by p

rovi

ding

the

loca

l con

text

an

d ap

proa

ch to

pla

nnin

g ob

ligat

ions

.

PRO

POSA

L SI

TE: P

S1

Form

er P

ower

Sta

tion,

Ske

rne

Roa

d/ C

anbu

ry

Gar

dens

S

ite in

Kin

gsto

n to

wn

cent

re a

lloca

ted

for

resi

dent

ial,

hote

l and

ass

ocia

ted

uses

.

To

be

repl

aced

in

the

Kin

gsto

n To

wn

Cen

tre

area

act

ion

plan

i) Th

e U

DP

stra

tegi

c po

licie

s pr

ovid

e th

e ce

ntra

l stra

tegy

ii)

Thi

s pr

opos

al s

ite w

ill h

elp

impl

emen

t the

loca

l eco

nom

y an

d ho

usin

g ob

ject

ives

of K

ings

ton’

s C

omm

unity

Pla

n.

iii

) Hot

el a

nd re

side

ntia

l use

s on

this

tow

n ce

ntre

site

are

in

gene

ral c

onfo

rmity

with

Lon

don

Pla

n po

licie

s 2A

.5 a

nd 2

A.6

pr

omot

ing

com

mer

cial

and

hig

her d

ensi

ty re

side

ntia

l de

velo

pmen

t in

subu

rban

tow

n ce

ntre

s.

iv) n

/a

v) T

his

is a

site

allo

catio

n fo

r an

area

of s

igni

fican

t cha

nge.

vi

) Thi

s is

a s

ite a

lloca

tion

that

is n

ot y

et im

plem

ente

d.

This

site

sup

ports

the

key

gove

rnm

ent o

bjec

tives

of p

rom

otin

g ne

w h

ousi

ng e

cono

mic

dev

elop

men

t and

rege

nera

tion

of

Kin

gsto

n To

wn

Cen

tre.

PS

1 w

ill be

inco

rpor

ated

into

the

Kin

gsto

n To

wn

Cen

tre A

rea

Act

ion

Pla

n as

P17

. Unt

il th

e A

AP

is a

dopt

ed P

S1

requ

ires

savi

ng.

Par

t of t

his

site

has

per

mis

sion

for 1

91 re

side

ntia

l uni

ts,

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

an a

pplic

atio

n w

hich

has

not

yet

bee

n im

plem

ente

d.

Ther

e is

a p

lann

ing

brie

f for

this

site

.

Nor

th W

est C

orne

r of F

ife R

oad

PS10

S

ite in

Kin

gsto

n to

wn

cent

re a

lloca

ted

for r

etai

l, re

tail-

rela

ted

(cla

ss A

2&A

3), r

esid

entia

l, bu

sine

ss

use

(cla

ss B

1).

To

be

repl

aced

in

the

Kin

gsto

n To

wn

Cen

tre

area

act

ion

plan

i) Th

e U

DP

stra

tegi

c po

licie

s pr

ovid

e th

e ce

ntra

l stra

tegy

ii)

Thi

s si

te h

elps

del

iver

the

loca

l eco

nom

y an

d ho

usin

g ob

ject

ives

of K

ings

ton’

s C

omm

unity

Pla

n.

iii) T

he d

esig

nate

d ap

prop

riate

use

s fo

r PS

10 a

re in

con

form

ity

with

Lon

don

Pla

n po

licie

s 2A

.5, 2

A.6

, 3D

.1, 3

D.2

and

3D

.3

whi

ch s

eek

to e

nhan

ce th

e ro

le o

f tow

n ce

ntre

s by

enc

oura

ging

a

full

rang

e of

use

s in

clud

ing

resi

dent

ial.

iv) n

/a

v) T

his

is a

site

allo

catio

n fo

r an

area

of s

igni

fican

t cha

nge

vi) T

his

site

allo

catio

n is

not

yet

impl

emen

ted

but t

here

is a

n ou

tsta

ndin

g pe

rmis

sion

on

part

of th

e si

te fo

r 6x2

bed

room

and

2x

1 be

droo

m fl

ats.

Thi

s si

te s

uppo

rts th

e ke

y go

vern

men

t ob

ject

ives

of p

rom

otin

g ne

w h

ousi

ng, e

cono

mic

dev

elop

men

t an

d re

gene

ratio

n of

tow

n ce

ntre

s in

clud

ing

reta

il.

PS

10 w

ill be

inco

rpor

ated

into

the

Kin

gsto

n To

wn

Cen

tre A

rea

Act

ion

Pla

n as

P9.

Unt

il th

e A

AP

is a

dopt

ed P

S10

requ

ires

savi

ng.

107-

163

Cla

renc

e St

reet

/Sta

tion

Bui

ldin

gs, F

ife

Roa

d an

d 58

-66

Fife

Roa

d/30

Cas

tle S

tree

t and

Fo

rmer

Em

pire

Wor

ks

To

be

repl

aced

in

the

Kin

gsto

n

i) Th

e U

DP

stra

tegi

c po

licie

s pr

ovid

e th

e ce

ntra

l stra

tegy

ii)

The

site

hel

ps d

eliv

er th

e lo

cal e

cono

my

and

hous

ing

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

PS11

S

ite in

Kin

gsto

n to

wn

cent

re a

lloca

ted

for r

etai

l, re

tail-

rela

ted

(cla

ss A

2&A

3), r

esid

entia

l, le

isur

e,

busi

ness

use

(cla

ss B

1).

Tow

n C

entre

ar

ea a

ctio

n pl

an

obje

ctiv

es o

f Kin

gsto

n’s

Com

mun

ity P

lan.

iii)

The

des

igna

ted

appr

opria

te u

ses

for P

S11

are

in c

onfo

rmity

w

ith L

ondo

n P

lan

polic

ies

2A.5

, 2A

.6, 3

D.1

, 3D

.2 a

nd 3

D.3

w

hich

see

k to

enh

ance

the

role

of t

own

cent

res

by e

ncou

ragi

ng

a fu

ll ra

nge

of u

ses

incl

udin

g re

side

ntia

l. iv

) n/a

v)

Thi

s is

a s

ite a

lloca

tion

for a

n ar

ea o

f sig

nific

ant c

hang

e vi

) Thi

s si

te s

uppo

rts th

e ke

y go

vern

men

t obj

ectiv

es o

f pr

omot

ing

new

hou

sing

, eco

nom

ic d

evel

opm

ent a

nd

rege

nera

tion

of K

ings

ton

Tow

n C

entre

. Th

is is

a s

ite a

lloca

tion

that

is n

ot y

et im

plem

ente

d. P

S11

will

be

inco

rpor

ated

into

the

Kin

gsto

n To

wn

Cen

tre A

rea

Act

ion

Pla

n as

P

8. U

ntil

the

AA

P is

ado

pted

PS

11 re

quire

s sa

ving

.

55

-83a

Cla

renc

e St

reet

, 4-4

6 Fi

fe R

oad

PS12

S

ite in

Kin

gsto

n to

wn

cent

re a

lloca

ted

for r

etai

l, re

tail-

rela

ted

uses

(cla

ss A

2&A

3), r

esid

entia

l (on

up

per f

loor

s).

To

be

repl

aced

in

the

Kin

gsto

n To

wn

Cen

tre

area

act

ion

plan

i) Th

e U

DP

stra

tegi

c po

licie

s pr

ovid

e th

e ce

ntra

l stra

tegy

for

deliv

erin

g ap

prop

riate

use

s fo

r the

pro

posa

l site

. ii)

The

site

hel

ps d

eliv

er th

e lo

cal e

cono

my

and

hous

ing

obje

ctiv

es o

f Kin

gsto

n’s

Com

mun

ity P

lan.

iii)

The

des

igna

ted

appr

opria

te u

ses

for P

S12

are

in c

onfo

rmity

w

ith L

ondo

n P

lan

polic

ies

2A.5

, 2A

.6, 3

D.1

, 3D

.2 a

nd 3

D.3

w

hich

see

k to

enh

ance

the

role

of t

own

cent

res

by e

ncou

ragi

ng

a fu

ll ra

nge

of u

ses

incl

udin

g re

side

ntia

l.

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

iv) n

/a

v) T

his

is a

site

allo

catio

n fo

r an

area

of s

igni

fican

t cha

nge

vi) T

his

is a

site

allo

catio

n th

at is

not

yet

impl

emen

ted.

Thi

s si

te

supp

orts

the

key

gove

rnm

ent o

bjec

tives

of p

rom

otin

g ne

w

hous

ing,

eco

nom

ic d

evel

opm

ent a

nd re

gene

ratio

n of

tow

n ce

ntre

s in

clud

ing

reta

il.

PS

12 w

ill be

inco

rpor

ated

into

the

Kin

gsto

n To

wn

Cen

tre A

rea

Act

ion

Pla

n as

P1.

Unt

il th

e A

AP

is a

dopt

ed P

S12

requ

ires

savi

ng.

Gui

ldha

ll/B

ath

Pass

age/

St J

ames

’ Roa

d PS

17

Site

in K

ings

ton

tow

n ce

ntre

allo

cate

d fo

r civ

ic

uses

, inc

ludi

ng c

ourts

.

To

be

repl

aced

in

the

Kin

gsto

n To

wn

Cen

tre

area

act

ion

plan

i) Th

e U

DP

stra

tegi

c po

licie

s pr

ovid

e th

e ce

ntra

l stra

tegy

ii)

Thi

s al

loca

tion

cont

ribut

es to

the

deliv

ery

of th

e lo

cal e

cono

my

obje

ctiv

es o

f Kin

gsto

n’s

Com

mun

ity P

lan.

iii

) The

des

igna

ted

appr

opria

te u

ses

for P

S17

are

in g

ener

al

conf

orm

ity w

ith L

ondo

n P

lan

polic

ies

2A.5

, 2A

.6, w

hich

see

k to

en

hanc

e th

e ro

le o

f tow

n ce

ntre

s by

enc

oura

ging

a fu

ll ra

nge

of

uses

in p

artic

ular

in s

ubur

ban

met

ropo

litan

cen

tres.

iv

) n/a

v)

Thi

s is

a s

ite a

lloca

tion

for a

n ar

ea o

f sig

nific

ant c

hang

e vi

) Thi

s is

a s

ite a

lloca

tion

that

is n

ot y

et im

plem

ente

d. T

his

site

su

ppor

ts th

e ke

y go

vern

men

t obj

ectiv

e of

pro

mot

ing

the

econ

omic

dev

elop

men

t and

rege

nera

tion

of K

ings

ton

Tow

n C

entre

.

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

PS

17 w

ill be

inco

rpor

ated

into

the

Kin

gsto

n To

wn

Cen

tre A

rea

Act

ion

Pla

n as

P14

. Th

e A

AP

pro

pose

s no

t to

incl

ude

the

mai

n gu

ildha

ll bu

ildin

g as

a p

ropo

sal s

ite b

ut in

clud

es th

e la

nd to

the

east

of t

he s

ite (G

H1)

. U

ntil

the

AA

P is

ado

pted

PS

14 re

quire

s sa

ving

.

Su

rrey

Cou

nty

Hal

l, Pe

nrhy

n R

oad

PS19

S

ite in

Kin

gsto

n to

wn

cent

re a

lloca

ted

for c

ivic

us

es, e

duca

tion.

To

be

repl

aced

in

the

Kin

gsto

n To

wn

Cen

tre

area

act

ion

plan

i) Th

e U

DP

stra

tegi

c po

licie

s pr

ovid

e th

e ce

ntra

l stra

tegy

ii)

Thi

s al

loca

tion

cont

ribut

es to

the

deliv

ery

of th

e lo

cal e

cono

my

and

educ

atio

n an

d lif

elon

g le

arni

ng o

bjec

tives

of K

ings

ton’

s C

omm

unity

Pla

n.

iii) T

his

prop

osal

site

allo

catio

n is

in g

ener

al c

onfo

rmity

with

Lo

ndon

Pla

n po

licie

s 2A

.5, 2

A.6

, whi

ch s

eek

to e

nhan

ce th

e ro

le

subu

rban

met

ropo

litan

cen

tres

and

also

in c

onfo

rmity

with

Lo

ndon

Pla

n po

licy

3A.2

2 w

hich

requ

ires

boro

ughs

to p

rom

ote

and

supp

ort h

ighe

r edu

catio

n fa

cilit

ies

thro

ugh

deve

lopm

ent

plan

s.

iv) n

/a

v) T

his

is a

site

allo

catio

n fo

r an

area

of s

igni

fican

t cha

nge

vi) T

he s

ite h

as a

n ou

tsta

ndin

g pe

rmis

sion

for a

cha

nge

of u

se

from

civ

ic o

ffice

s to

D1

educ

atio

n, a

nd o

utst

andi

ng p

erm

issi

on

for r

edev

elop

men

t of S

taff

Clu

b an

d te

nnis

cou

rt si

te to

pos

sibl

e th

ree

stor

ey b

uild

ing

for a

cade

mic

/anc

illary

use

s. P

S19

will

be

inco

rpor

ated

into

the

Kin

gsto

n To

wn

Cen

tre A

rea

Act

ion

Pla

n as

P

15.

Unt

il th

e A

AP

is a

dopt

ed P

S19

requ

ires

savi

ng.

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

R

ex M

otor

s, 1

96-1

98 C

ambr

idge

Roa

d, K

ings

ton

PS27

S

ite a

lloca

ted

for g

ener

al in

dust

ry (c

lass

B2)

and

ot

her u

ses

of a

n in

dust

rial n

atur

e.

n/

a

To b

e re

plac

ed in

th

e S

ite

Allo

catio

ns

DP

D.

i) Th

e U

DP

stra

tegi

c po

licie

s pr

ovid

e th

e ce

ntra

l stra

tegy

ii)

The

allo

catio

n is

in a

ccor

danc

e w

ith th

e ob

ject

ives

of t

he lo

cal

econ

omy

them

e of

Kin

gsto

n’s

Com

mun

ity P

lan.

iii

) The

des

igna

ted

appr

opria

te u

ses

for P

S27

are

in g

ener

al

conf

orm

ity w

ith L

ondo

n P

lan

polic

y 3B

.1 w

hich

see

ks to

m

aint

ain

a ra

nge

of b

usin

ess

prem

ises

of d

iffer

ent t

ypes

and

si

zes

in o

rder

to m

eet t

he n

eeds

of d

iffer

ent b

usin

esse

s.

iv) n

/a

v) n

/a

vi) T

his

allo

catio

n is

nec

essa

ry a

s th

e si

te w

ould

ben

efit

from

ra

tiona

lisat

ion,

rede

velo

pmen

t and

env

ironm

enta

l im

prov

emen

ts. T

he s

ite a

lloca

tion

assi

sts

the

key

gove

rnm

ent

obje

ctiv

e of

eco

nom

ic d

evel

opm

ent a

nd re

gene

ratio

n.Th

is s

ite is

in

gen

eral

con

form

ity w

ith P

PG

4.

Kin

gsto

n U

nive

rsity

, Kin

gsto

n H

ill

PS32

S

ite a

lloca

ted

for e

duca

tion.

n/

a

To b

e re

plac

ed in

th

e S

ite

Allo

catio

ns

DP

D.

i) Th

e U

DP

stra

tegi

c po

licie

s pr

ovid

e th

e ce

ntra

l stra

tegy

ii)

Thi

s al

loca

tion

assi

sts

in th

e im

plem

ent t

he o

bjec

tives

of t

he

educ

atio

n an

d lif

elon

g le

arni

ng th

eme

in K

ings

ton’

s C

omm

unity

P

lan.

iii)

Thi

s pr

opos

al s

ite a

lloca

tion

is in

con

form

ity w

ith L

ondo

n P

lan

polic

y 3A

.22

Hig

her a

nd fu

rther

edu

catio

n w

hich

requ

ires

boro

ughs

to p

rom

ote

and

supp

ort h

ighe

r edu

catio

n fa

cilit

ies

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

thro

ugh

deve

lopm

ent p

lans

.

iv) n

/a

v) n

/a

vi) T

his

allo

catio

n is

nec

essa

ry to

hel

p m

anag

e co

-ord

inat

ed

deve

lopm

ent o

n th

is s

ite w

hich

is c

over

ed b

y a

num

ber o

f di

ffere

nt d

esig

natio

ns, b

alan

cing

this

with

the

Uni

vers

ity’s

op

erat

iona

l req

uire

men

ts.

It is

cur

rent

ly u

nim

plem

ente

d an

d ha

s pe

rmis

sion

for t

he

dem

oliti

on o

f exi

stin

g gy

mna

sium

bui

ldin

g an

d er

ectio

n of

3

stor

ey e

xten

sion

to L

earn

ing

Res

ourc

e ce

ntre

with

ass

ocia

ted

land

scap

ing

wor

ks in

clud

ing

chan

ge in

leve

ls.

Ther

e is

a p

lann

ing

brie

f for

this

site

.

Tolw

orth

Mai

n A

llotm

ents

, Sur

bito

n PS

40

Site

allo

cate

d fo

r par

k, s

ports

faci

litie

s, lo

cal n

atur

e re

serv

e, c

omm

unity

faci

litie

s, a

llotm

ents

.

n/

a

To b

e re

plac

ed in

th

e S

ite

Allo

catio

ns

DP

D.

i) Th

e U

DP

stra

tegi

c po

licie

s pr

ovid

e th

e ce

ntra

l stra

tegy

ii)

PS

40 a

ccor

ds w

ith K

ings

ton’

s C

omm

unity

Pla

n an

d he

lps

deliv

er th

e ov

eral

l env

ironm

ent

and

heal

th a

nd s

ocia

l car

e ob

ject

ives

. iii)

Thi

s pr

opos

al s

ite a

lloca

tion

is in

con

form

ity w

ith P

olic

y 3D

.7

of th

e Lo

ndon

Pla

n w

hich

enc

oura

ges

boro

ughs

to re

alis

e th

e po

tent

ial v

alue

of o

pen

spac

e in

clud

ing

the

bene

fits

asso

ciat

ed

with

spo

rt an

d re

crea

tion,

chi

ldre

n’s

play

, bio

dive

rsity

and

the

envi

ronm

ent.

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

iv) n

/a

v) n

/a

vi) T

his

site

allo

catio

n is

nec

essa

ry a

s th

e si

te h

as b

een

iden

tifie

d as

key

opp

ortu

nity

for p

rovi

ding

enh

ance

d op

en s

pace

in

the

loca

lity

alon

g w

ith s

cope

for t

he p

rovi

sion

of n

ew

com

mun

ity fa

cilit

ies.

Per

mis

sion

was

gra

nted

for t

he e

xcav

atio

n an

d en

larg

emen

t of t

he e

xist

ing

pond

.

Land

at K

ings

ton

Roa

d / J

ubile

e W

ay, T

olw

orth

PS

43

Site

allo

cate

d fo

r hot

el (K

ings

ton

Roa

d fro

ntag

e),

recr

eatio

n.

x

n/a

To

be

repl

aced

in

the

Site

Al

loca

tions

D

PD

.

i) Th

e U

DP

stra

tegi

c po

licie

s pr

ovid

e th

e ce

ntra

l stra

tegy

ii)

Thi

s si

te c

ontri

bute

s to

del

iver

ing

the

com

mun

ity p

lan

obje

ctiv

es fo

r the

loca

l eco

nom

y an

d th

e en

viro

nmen

t. It

als

o co

ntrib

utes

to th

e de

liver

y of

the

com

mun

ity p

lan

visi

on to

mak

e K

ings

ton

‘a fo

cus

for t

ouris

m a

nd re

crea

tion’

.

iii) T

he L

ondo

n pl

an s

ugge

st th

at to

wn

cent

re lo

catio

ns a

re

pref

erre

d fo

r hot

el u

se.

iv

) n/a

v)

n/a

vi

) Thi

s al

loca

tion

cont

ribut

es to

mee

ting

an id

entif

ied

need

for

recr

eatio

nal f

acili

ties

in th

e bo

roug

h fo

r whi

ch th

ere

are

no

alte

rnat

ive

site

s id

entif

ied.

The

allo

catio

n ha

s no

t bee

n im

plem

ente

d.

Tolw

orth

Cou

rt F

arm

and

Far

m L

ands

, Tol

wor

th

PS44

S

ite a

lloca

ted

for o

pen

recr

eatio

n.

n/

a

To b

e re

plac

ed in

th

e S

ite

i) Th

e U

DP

stra

tegi

c po

licie

s pr

ovid

e th

e ce

ntra

l stra

tegy

ii)

PS

44 a

ccor

ds w

ith K

ings

ton’

s C

omm

unity

pla

n an

d as

sist

s in

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

Al

loca

tions

D

PD

. de

liver

ing

the

over

all e

nviro

nmen

t and

hea

lth a

nd s

ocia

l car

e ob

ject

ives

. iii)

Thi

s pr

opos

al s

ite a

lloca

tion

is in

con

form

ity w

ith P

olic

y 3D

.7

of th

e Lo

ndon

Pla

n w

hich

enc

oura

ges

boro

ughs

to re

alis

e th

e po

tent

ial v

alue

of o

pen

spac

e in

clud

ing

the

bene

fits

asso

ciat

ed

with

spo

rt an

d re

crea

tion.

iv

) n/a

v)

n/a

vi

) Thi

s si

te fo

rms

part

of th

e H

ogsm

ill V

alle

y M

OL.

The

re is

sc

ope

for r

ecre

atio

n fa

cilit

ies

of c

omm

unity

ben

efit.

The

al

loca

tion

has

not b

een

impl

emen

ted.

Kin

g Ed

war

d’s

Play

ing

Fiel

d an

d La

nd N

orth

of

Cla

yton

Roa

d, H

ook

PS45

S

ite a

lloca

ted

for o

utdo

or s

port

and

recr

eatio

n.

n/

a

To b

e re

plac

ed in

th

e S

ite

Allo

catio

ns

DP

D.

i) Th

e U

DP

stra

tegi

c po

licie

s pr

ovid

e th

e ce

ntra

l stra

tegy

ii)

PS

45 a

ccor

ds w

ith K

ings

ton’

s C

omm

unity

Pla

n an

d he

lps

deliv

er th

e ov

eral

l obj

ectiv

es o

f the

env

ironm

ent a

nd h

ealth

and

so

cial

car

e th

emes

. iii)

Thi

s pr

opos

al s

ite a

lloca

tion

is in

con

form

ity w

ith P

olic

y 3D

.7

of th

e Lo

ndon

Pla

n w

hich

enc

oura

ges

boro

ughs

to re

alis

e th

e po

tent

ial v

alue

of o

pen

spac

e in

clud

ing

the

bene

fits

asso

ciat

ed

with

spo

rt an

d re

crea

tion.

iv

) n/a

v)

n/a

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

vi) T

his

site

pre

sent

s an

opp

ortu

nity

to ra

tiona

lise

and

impr

ove

Gre

en B

elt L

and

that

cur

rent

ly s

uffe

rs fr

om p

oor a

cces

s an

d ap

pear

ance

. The

re is

sco

pe fo

r the

site

to c

ontri

bute

to m

eetin

g an

iden

tifie

d ne

ed fo

r rec

reat

ion

faci

litie

s in

the

boro

ugh.

The

ap

proa

ch c

onfo

rms

with

PP

G17

and

PPG

2.

The

allo

catio

n ha

s no

t bee

n im

plem

ente

d.

C

hurc

hfie

lds

Allo

tmen

ts, C

hurc

h La

ne,

Che

ssin

gton

PS

47

Site

allo

cate

d fo

r rec

reat

ion,

com

mun

ity fa

cilit

ies.

n/

a

To b

e re

plac

ed in

th

e S

ite

Allo

catio

ns

DP

D.

i) Th

e U

DP

stra

tegi

c po

licie

s pr

ovid

e th

e ce

ntra

l stra

tegy

ii)

PS

47 a

ccor

ds w

ith K

ings

ton’

s C

omm

unity

Pla

n an

d as

sist

s in

de

liver

ing

the

obje

ctiv

es o

f the

env

ironm

ent a

nd h

ealth

and

so

cial

car

e th

emes

. iii)

Thi

s pr

opos

al s

ite a

lloca

tion

is in

con

form

ity w

ith P

olic

y 3D

.7

of th

e Lo

ndon

Pla

n w

hich

enc

oura

ges

boro

ughs

to re

alis

e th

e po

tent

ial v

alue

of o

pen

spac

e in

clud

ing

the

bene

fits

asso

ciat

ed

with

spo

rt an

d re

crea

tion.

iv

) n/a

v)

n/a

vi

) Th

is a

lloca

tion

in th

e G

reen

Bel

t ser

ves

a pr

o-ac

tive

role

to

enha

nce

the

qual

ity o

f the

land

scap

e an

d pr

ovid

e re

crea

tion

faci

litie

s w

ith a

ncilla

ry d

evel

opm

ent.

This

allo

catio

n ha

s no

t bee

n im

plem

ente

d.

Che

ssin

gton

Wor

ld o

f Adv

entu

res

PS50

Th

is p

ropo

sals

site

doe

s no

t allo

cate

new

n/

a

To b

e re

plac

ed in

th

e S

ite

i) Th

e U

DP

stra

tegi

c po

licie

s pr

ovid

e th

e ce

ntra

l stra

tegy

ii)

PS

50 a

ccor

ds w

ith K

ings

ton’

s C

omm

unity

Pla

n en

viro

nmen

t

PP

S12

Crit

eria

Polic

y

i ii

iii v

vi


policy

Sup

porti

ng ju

stifi

catio

n

deve

lopm

ent b

ut c

larif

ies

the

stat

us o

f Che

ssin

gton

W

orld

of A

dven

ture

s as

a m

ajor

dev

elop

ed s

ite in

th

e G

reen

Bel

t in

acco

rdan

ce w

ith P

PG

2.

Allo

catio

ns

DP

D.

obje

ctiv

e. It

als

o co

ntrib

utes

to th

e de

liver

y of

the

com

mun

ity

plan

vis

ion

to m

ake

Kin

gsto

n a

‘focu

s fo

r tou

rism

and

re

crea

tion’

.

iii) T

his

prop

osal

site

allo

catio

n is

in g

ener

al c

onfo

rmity

with

the

appr

oach

take

n in

Lon

don

Pla

n po

licy

3D.8

whi

ch re

quire

s bo

roug

hs to

mai

ntai

n an

d pr

otec

t the

Gre

en B

elt w

ith a

gen

eral

pr

esum

ptio

n ag

ains

t ina

ppro

pria

te d

evel

opm

ent.

iv

) n/a

v)

n/a

vi

) Thi

s al

loca

tion

is n

eces

sary

in o

rder

to m

anag

e th

e de

velo

pmen

t of a

maj

or d

evel

oped

site

with

in th

e G

reen

Bel

t.

K1

APPENDIX K Executive, 20 March 2007

NON DOMESTIC RATES – DISCRETIONARY RATE RELIEF Report by the Strategic Director of Finance Leader of the Council

Purpose To advise Members of the powers to award Discretionary Rate Relief and to update the current policy. Action proposed by the Leader of the Council: The Executive is requested to: 1. agree the proposed policy set out in paragraphs 16 to 21 below, including revised

criteria for applying and provision for the ‘Top Up’ relief; and 2. confirm that the Authority will consider all applications on their merit and the revised

policy will be used as a means of securing a consistent approach to individual cases; Reason for proposed action To update the policy on Discretionary Relief addressing recent Ombudsman published reports regarding fettering discretion together with Government advice on restrictive policies.

BACKGROUND 1. Authorities have the discretion to grant rate relief against all or part of the amount of

non-domestic rates payable in respect of properties occupied by:

a) institutions or other organisations whose main objects are philanthropic or religious or concerned with social welfare, science, literature or the fine arts, or

b) club, society or other organisation used for the purposes of recreation.

2. The Council has to fund 25% of the amount of the discretionary relief with the

remaining 75% paid by the Government. 3. In addition to the above relief there is also the ability for local authorities to grant ‘Top

Up’ relief. This relief is also discretionary and applicable where mandatory rate relief awarded to registered charities (80%) has been granted. There is no cost to the Council regarding mandatory relief. The ‘Top Up’ relief can be awarded up to a maximum of 20%. Thus a combined relief of 100% can be allowed. Only 25% of the cost of ‘Top Up’ discretionary relief is met from central government funds. The Council has to meet the remaining 75%. When granting ‘Top Up’ discretionary relief the best interests of the council taxpayers should be considered.

4. A policy for a discretionary power should act in a way which does not ‘fetter’ the

proper exercise of that discretion. The policy must not eliminate the Authority’s consideration of an application for relief. A policy however is required as a means of securing a consistent approach to individual cases. Each case must be considered in the light of the policy but not so that the policy determines the outcome.

K2

CURRENT POSITION 5. The Authority’s policy for administering discretionary rate relief is now 17 years old

and as part of good practice should be reviewed to determine if they still reflect the corporate and community priorities.

6. The Policy and Resources Committee determined on 19 October 1989, that:

a) no ‘Top Up’ discretionary relief in addition to the 80% mandatory entitlement should be granted to charitable organisations, with the exception of eleven organisations (this is now 8) who would be disadvantaged by the new provisions;

b) the nine Lawn Tennis and Bowls Clubs which were currently receiving

discretionary relief be granted 75% from 1 April 1990 (of which 25% falls on the Council rather than the government)

c) the Director of Finance/Head of Financial Services be authorised to determine

new applications in accordance with the approved criteria and that officers were granted delegated powers to grant relief up to a value of £7,000.

d) Discretionary rate relief would be granted to qualifying organisations at 75%

with no organisation being able to achieve 100% relief. 7. Currently the Authority has awarded 75% discretionary rate relief to 27 organisations

with a current cost to the Authority of £75,000. Annex 1 contains a list of those organisations. Top Up relief is currently granted to 8 organisations with a cost to the Authority of £8,000. Annex 2 contains a list of those organisations.

8. The criteria currently used to award the discretionary rate relief is contained in Annex

3. CONCERNS RELATING TO CURRENT POSITION 9. The current ‘policy’ of restricting discretionary rate relief to 75% without the ability for

some organisations to qualify for 100% relief may be considered as fettering our discretion and too restrictive.

10. The current ‘policy’ of not granting ‘Top Up’ relief to any charitable organisation with

the exception of the remaining 8 organisations left from the 1989 Committee resolution may be considered as fettering our discretion and too restrictive.

11. The government has reminded Authorities that the operation of a blanket policy and

failure to take account of all the relevant information could be considered ultra vires and would risk legal challenge. The Government encourages Authorities to make the most constructive use of the discretionary regulations. They do not expect Authorities to adopt unduly restrictive policies. A recent ombudsman case found an Authority guilty of fettering its discretionary powers because its policies were too restrictive.

12. However the granting of relief is discretionary and the final decision in awarding relief

is entirely at the Authority’s discretion. The Local Authority must however, be able to

K3

demonstrate that they do not have fixed or unduly restrictive policies in place and that each case is considered individually.

PROPOSED 13. To expand the criteria for discretionary rate relief to include more emphasis on equal

opportunities and corporate priorities. Annex 4 contains the draft criteria. 14. To allow certain organisations to achieve 100% discretionary rate relief and the full

Top Up relief of 20%. The organisations that have been selected for both the full discretionary relief and the full top up relief are associations for the disabled. The organisations selected for a partial top up relief are Advice and Counselling Organisations and Youth Groups. These were selected on the basis of the priorities in the Community Plan namely health and social care, community safety and education and learning. Annex 5 sets out the relief currently granted and the proposals for discretionary and top up % amounts.

15. It is proposed to keep any amendments to broadly within the current budget of £83,000. The proposals outlined result in an increase in budget of approximately £3,000.

16. The level of discretionary relief granted by officers under delegated powers should be

increased to £15,000. 17. There are specific regulations relating to any changes the local authority makes in

relation to its ‘policy’ on discretionary rate relief. A reduction in discount may only take effect at the end of a financial year and at least one year’s notice must be given. As the criteria (Annex 4) has changed it is not known at this stage which organisations will be affected. Therefore it is proposed that the effective date for all changes relating to this policy is the 1st April 2008. All existing recipients of Discretionary Rate Relief would be sent the revised criteria by the end of March 2007 so that they are given one year’s notice of the change in criteria.

OPTIONS 18. The Authority could change the amount it spends on discretionary relief. Currently

there is a budget provision for relief of approximately £83,000. The proposals have increased the spend to approximately £86,000. Any higher expenditure would have to be funded by increased budget provision. This is not considered viable in the Authority’s current financial position.

19. The Authority could reduce the amount given to sports clubs to say 50% which would result in an approximate annual saving of £25,000. These organisations would then be faced with a higher rates bill. This may encourage sports clubs to register as a Community Amateur Sports Club which would then entitle them to 80% mandatory relief with no cost to the Authority. Not all sports clubs want to go down this route due to the criteria which they would be required to meet. Any reduction in discretionary relief for those organisations may affect the provision of that facility.

20. The Authority could revise the ‘Top Up’ relief for the remaining 8 organisations from the 1989 Committee decision. If ‘Top Up’ relief continues for those organisations this will be inconsistent with the proposed ‘Top Up’ percentages for the related categories.

K4

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS 21. The financial implications in respect of the proposals are set out in Annex 5. LEGAL IMPLICATIONS 22. Section 47 Local Government Finance Act 1988 provides for the discretionary relief

outlined in this report.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS 23. There are no environmental implications.

Background papers : none

Author of Report Mary Tam, 020 8547 5636; e-mail: [email protected]

K5

ANNEX 1

DISCRETIONARY RATE RELIEF CURRENTLY GRANTED Organisation Amount of

discretionary relief

Cost to the Authority

Type of organisation S= sport R= recreation C = cultural

New Malden Tennis, Squash club 12096 3024 S Surbiton Racket and Fitness Club 9953 2488 S Chessington and Hook United Sports and Social club

3685 921 S

Chessington Bowling Club 284 71 S Hook and Southborough Bowling club

337 84 S

Chessington Lawn Tennis Club 600 150 S Thames Sailing Club 2630 657 S Tiffin Boys school & Kingston Rowing Club

7469 1867 S

Surbiton Pet Club 533 133 R Bowls Services (Tolworth) Ltd 10635 2658 S Malden Bowling Club 1526 381 S Colliers Wood United Football Club 1396 349 S Surbiton Croquet Club 1428 357 S Corinthian-Casuals Football Club 2744 686 S Manor Park Bowls Management Assoc

487 121 S

Minima Yacht Club 1591 397 S Coombe Wood Lawn Tennis Club Ltd

2403 600 S

Hook Swim School& Aqua Centre Ltd

2533 633 S

Kingston Innovation Centre (properties) Ltd

6495 1623 C

Trustees of Shiraz Mirza Charitable Trust

588 147

Canbury Community Trust 1087 271 Tolworth Gymnastic Club 10310 2577 Royal British Legion Surbiton Bowling Club

454 113 S

Dinton Field Trust 5520 1380 DC Leisure Management Ltd 49375 12343 S DC Leisure Management Ltd 91579 22894 S DC Leisure Management Ltd 66411 16602 S DC Leisure Management Ltd 7794 1948 S Total 301943 75485

K6

ANNEX 2 TOP UP DISCRETIONARY RATE RELIEF CURRENTLY GRANTED

Organisation Amount of relief Cost to the Authority – 75% of relief

Amount of top up granted %

Type of Organisation M = Medical RE = religious SH = Charity shop

The British Red Cross Society

1147 860 20 M

Princess Alice Hospice Trust Ltd

451 338 10 SH

Kingston and District Welcare Assoc

796 597 20 M

Malden Emergency First Aid Society

1017 762 20 M

Chessington Evangelical Church

5791 4343 20 RE

The St Johns Ambulance Assoc & Brigade

597 447 20 M

Kaleidoscope Project 298 223 10 M Princess Alice Hospice Trust Ltd

649 486 10 SH

TOTAL 10746 8059

K7

ANNEX 3 CURRENT CRITERIA FOR GRANTING DISCRETIONARY RATE RELIEF Membership should be open to all sections of the community and consistent with the principles of open access. Membership rates should not be set at such a high level as to exclude the general community. The benefits, facilities or services provided by the organisation must clearly benefit all, or an identifiable section or group, of the residents of the Royal Borough. Membership encouraged from particular groups of the community such as young people, women, older age groups, person with disabilities and ethnic minorities. Where there are significant bar receipts the main purpose of the organisation will be considered. (In sports clubs, for example, the balance between playing and non-playing members will provide a guide as to whether the main purpose of the club is sporting or social activities.)

K8

ANNEX 4 DISCRETIONARY RATE RELIEF - NEW CRITERIA PROPOSALS

Non profit making organisations and charities can claim discretionary rate relief. The award of this relief is a discretionary power available to the Council. There is a financial consideration to any relief awarded in that a proportion has to be met by Council Tax payers so any decision will take this into consideration. The decision of the Council is final but this does not affect the legal right to challenge a decision made by the Council through the Judicial Review process. Registered charities are entitled to 80% relief providing they are occupying premises for charitable purposes. Discretionary relief for charitable organisations, ‘Top Up’ relief, can be awarded up to a further 20%. Each case will be independently assessed however the Council has drawn up guidelines to ensure consistency and fairness. In general terms applications for ‘Top Up’ relief will encouraged from Associations for the Disabled, Advice and Counselling and Youth Organisations. For non profit making organisations to qualify for consideration they must be organisations whose main objectives are philanthropic, religious, concerned with education, social welfare, science, literature or the fine arts or a club, society or other organisation whose property is used for the purpose of recreation. The Council has drawn up guidelines/criteria to ensure consistency and fairness in its approach to awarding discretionary rate relief. These are detailed below. In addition the Council has drawn up a scale of relief for each type of organisation if the criteria are satisfied. These criteria are set out below:

1. Membership should be open to all sections of the community and consistent with the principles of open access. Consideration will be given to:

a. Whether the organisation recognises the diversity of people’s lifestyles, backgrounds and abilities and whether they have an equal opportunities policy. Organisations will be asked to supply a copy of their equal opportunities policy if they have one.

b. Are restrictions placed on membership which relate for example to ability in a particular sport or level of achievement? The organisation must be able to show the criteria by which membership is considered and demonstrate that this is consistent with the principle of open access.

c. Organisations will be required to specify any groups of individuals excluded from membership.

2. Is there a membership fee – if so these should not be set at such a high level as to

exclude the general community. Consideration will be given to: a. Whether there are any concessions to any class of member e.g. young, retired,

unemployed etc. b. Organisations will be asked to provide details of their fees/annual subscriptions

and these will be considered in regard to their general affordability in relation to the general community.

3. The benefits, facilities or services provided by the organisation must clearly benefit all,

or an identifiable section or group, of the residents of the Borough. Consideration will be given to:

K9

a. Whether the facilities are made available to people other than members of the organisation e.g. community groups, local residents etc.

b. Are there schemes for particular groups to develop their skills e.g. young people, disabled, etc in areas such as employment training, counselling etc.

c. Whether membership is drawn from people mainly resident in the Borough. This is important as part of any relief awarded has to be borne by Council taxpayers in the area.

4. Membership encouraged from particular groups of the community such as young

people, women, older age groups, person with disabilities and ethnic minorities or disadvantaged groups.

This refers to particular groups within the community which the Authority considers deserving of support. Examples might include youth groups and organisations supporting long-term unemployed or those with mental health problems or disabilities.

5. Whether the financial situation of the organisation justifies relief. Consideration will be given to:

a. If the organisation is financially supported by the Borough or by self-help schemes?

b. Whether the organisation would be able to continue if relief was not granted.

6. If the organisation runs a bar, it must be incidental to the main purpose of the organisation. Consideration will be given to:

a. Where there are significant bar receipts the main purpose of the organisation will be considered. In sports clubs, for example, the balance between playing and non-playing members will provide a guide as to whether the main purpose of the club is sporting or social activities.

b. The main purpose of the organisation – running a bar in itself will not be a reason for declining relief. A social club whose main interest is drawing local people together with similar interests will not necessarily be denied relief because of the existence of a bar. However a club that is primarily a commercial bar is likely to be excluded.

7. Whether the organisation is affiliated or involved at a local or national level with any organisations. Consideration will be given to:

a. Whether the organisation is involved at both a local and national level at developing its particular interest e.g. competitions, events and exhibitions.

b. Whether the organisation is part of a larger organisation nationally and how this benefits the local residents.

8. A sports club would not qualify for relief if payments were made to playing members. Each application for discretionary rate relief is considered on its own merits and the above criteria is used as guidance in administering that relief to ensure consistency and fairness.

K

10

AN

NEX

5

D

iscr

etio

nary

and

Top

up

relie

f cur

rent

cos

t with

pro

posa

ls in

clud

ing

keep

ing

all c

urre

nt T

op U

p re

lief c

ases

Prop

osed

C

urre

nt £

C

urre

nt £

Pr

opos

ed

Prop

osed

Pr

opos

ed £

C

omm

ents

on

prop

osal

s C

ateg

ory

Cur

rent

ly g

rant

ed

T =

top

up

M=

man

dato

ry- n

o co

st to

the

Aut

horit

y D

= d

iscr

etio

nary

Cos

t to

LA

Cur

rent

ly

25%

of D

iscr

an

d

75%

of T

op u

p

Dis

cret

iona

ry%

Top

Up%

C

ost t

o th

e A

utho

rity

T =

Top

up

D =

dis

cret

iona

ry

Ass

ocia

tions

for t

he

disa

bled

10

0 20

0

New

crit

eria

but

no

curre

nt

appl

ican

ts

Med

ical

/relie

f of s

uffe

ring

46

4,80

4 M

3,

855

T 28

91

T 0*

0

2891

T**

To

p up

gra

nted

to e

xist

ing

reci

pien

ts o

nly

Hou

sing

org

anis

atio

ns

4,25

3

M

0 0

0 0

New

crit

eria

but

no

curre

nt

appl

ican

ts

Adv

ice

and

coun

sellin

g 16

,540

M

0*

5 77

5 T

New

top

up re

lief g

rant

ed

Spo

rts c

lubs

29

3,24

0 D

22

,129

M

73

,310

D

75

0 73

310

D

No

chan

ge to

dis

cret

iona

ry

relie

f %

C

ultu

ral/r

elig

ious

5,

791

T 6,

495

D

60,7

49

M

4343

T

1623

D

75

0 43

43 T

**

2287

D

No

chan

ge to

dis

cret

iona

ry

relie

f %.

Top

up g

rant

ed to

exi

stin

g re

cipi

ents

onl

y

K

11

Pr

opos

ed

Cur

rent

£

Cur

rent

£

Prop

osed

Pr

opos

ed

Prop

osed

£

Com

men

ts o

n pr

opos

als

You

th o

rgan

isat

ions

41

,234

M

0

75%

5

1932

T

Org

anis

atio

ns in

this

gro

up

are

regi

ster

ed c

harit

ies

and

ther

efor

e ve

ry fe

w w

ill qu

alify

for d

iscr

etio

nary

re

lief.

New

Top

Up

relie

f gra

nted

.

Cha

rity

shop

s 1,

100

T

9,38

8 M

82

5 T

0*

0 82

5 T

**

No

chan

ge to

cur

rent

cr

iteria

To

p up

gra

nted

to e

xist

ing

reci

pien

ts o

nly

Edu

catio

nal/a

rts

1,49

4,43

7M

0 0

0 0

No

chan

ge to

cur

rent

cr

iteria

S

ocia

l/com

mun

ity/re

crea

tion

act

iviti

es (o

ther

than

sp

orts

)

1,12

1

D

350,

561

M

280

T 75

0

280

D**

N

o ch

ange

to c

urre

nt

crite

ria

Ass

ocia

tions

for e

x-se

rvic

e m

en/w

omen

25

,488

M

0

0 0

0 N

o ch

ange

to c

urre

nt

crite

ria

Tota

l

83,2

72

86,6

43

*

thes

e or

gani

satio

ns a

re u

sual

ly re

gist

ered

cha

ritie

s re

ceiv

ing

80%

man

dato

ry re

lief.

No

disc

retio

nary

relie

f wou

ld n

orm

ally

be

expe

cted

as

thes

e or

gani

satio

ns s

houl

d be

regi

ster

ed c

harit

ies.

**

ex

istin

g or

gani

satio

ns

APPENDIX L Executive 20 March 2007

COUNCIL TAX LOCAL DISCOUNTS Report by the Strategic Director of Finance Leader of the Council

Purpose

To advise Members of the powers to create local classes of discount and individual discounts under s13A of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 as amended by s76 of the Local Government Act 2003. To recommend a policy on local discounts for Council Tax.

Action proposed by the Leader of the Council: The Executive is requested to:

1. note that the Council has the power to reduce the amount of Council Tax payable either for a locally defined class or for individual cases;

2. delegate to the Strategic Director of Finance authority to consider certain requests for a local discount;

3. to agree to the proposals contained in this report set out in paragraphs 7 to 10 below. Reason for action proposed To ensure there is an administrative policy on local discounts, taking into account recent Ombudsman published reports.

BACKGROUND

1. The Local Government Act 2003 became effective on the 18th November 2003.

2. There were three major changes contained in the Act which allow authorities: a discretion to reduce the discounts applied in respect of second homes; to reduce the discounts for empty homes and the provision for a local discount.

3. The Authority took the opportunity of amending the discounts applied to second homes and empty homes. However it did not at that time draw up a policy or criteria for the administration of local discounts.

4. Other Councils in a similar position to us have been threatened with Judicial Review over their lack of a policy for local discounts and therefore it is considered necessary for the Council to adopt such a policy.

5. Billing Authorities now have the power to reduce the amount of council tax payable in respect of any dwelling in their area – a local discount. The discount can be up to 100% and can apply to either an individual or class of dwelling. The Billing Authority will fund completely any locally defined discount which they create and the loss cannot be passed on to precepting authorities. This discretion allows each authority to take

L2

account of local situations or emergencies. It also allows cases of hardship to be considered which it could not do previously.

6. Authorities may exercise this power in individual cases (eg individual hardship, in cases where the taxpayer is not eligible for council tax benefit or where the dwelling is not their sole or main residence) or they may determine classes/groups in which liability is to be reduced.

PROPOSAL

7. A policy for local discounts should act in a way which does not ‘fetter’ the proper exercise of discretion. The policy must not eliminate the Authority’s consideration of an application or of a class of applicants. A policy however is required as a means of securing a consistent approach to individual cases, each of which is likely to differ from others. Each case must be considered, therefore, in the light of the policy but not so that the policy determines the outcome.

8. It is necessary to establish internal arrangements to deal with requests for a local discount. Such arrangements should identify who will consider the request and how the decision will be made taking into account the relevant law and the proper exercise of the discretion.

9. Under normal circumstances Council Tax is only written off as a bad debt if the tax payer has absconded. A local discount is entirely funded by the Authority’s Council Tax payers and it is effectively a power to write off the charge, it therefore should be limited in its application.

10. Local discounts would only be given in very exceptional circumstances. A policy is attached at Annex 1 which sets out the proposals to administer local discounts. Classes of discounts would be set by the Executive as and when considered appropriate.

OPTIONS

11. Members may consider expanding the policy but need to be mindful that this will have a detrimental affect on the Authority’s finances. This should be considered as a scheme to pick up the very few exceptional cases rather than running an extended second ‘council tax benefit scheme’ to help residents financially. Any extension to local discounts over and above what is proposed in this report will require additional budgets with the cost falling on the remaining Council Tax payers.

12. The Authority has ascertained that the majority of the London Authorities have or are drawing up a similar ‘exceptional hardship ’ criteria without specifying actual details of the type of hardship. The reason for this is that the nature of exceptional hardship is varied and individual. Therefore by being too specific about criteria may be considered as fettering our discretion by being too restrictive.

13. To introduce a class of discount e.g. reduced Council Tax for pensioners, would mean higher Council Tax for everyone else in the borough. In addition there would be an added cost in administering a separate discount scheme which again would fall on the local tax payer. Very few council’s have introduced a separate class of discounts.

L3

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

14. Local discounts will be funded entirely locally. There will, therefore, be a requirement for the billing authority to transfer from its general fund to its collection fund the amount by which the Council Tax has been reduced by local discounts. It is anticipated that, due to the infrequent use of this provision, no separate budget provision is required. Normal budget monitoring would keep under review the level of expenditure incurred.

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS

15. Section 13a local discounts provide for the discretion outlined in this report. Failure to have a mechanism for considering requests for a local discount could make the Authority liable to judicial review.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS 15. There are no environmental implications. Background papers : none Author - Mary Tam, 020 8547 5636; e-mail: [email protected]

L4

ANNEX 1

DISCRETIONARY LOCAL DISCOUNTS SECTION 13A LOCAL GOVERNMENT FINANCE ACT 1992

1. Aim 2. The aim of this document is to set out the circumstances in which a discretionary local

discount may be awarded together with a method of authorising discounts. 3. The aim of discretionary local discount is to grant relief towards the council tax

payable by a claimant who is suffering hardship. 4. This document sets out criteria to use for deciding when a local discretionary discount

should be granted for individuals and classes of people or property. 5. The criteria are not prescriptive and are aimed to guide Officers and Members in

making individual decisions in a fair and consistent manner. 6. Full consideration of any special circumstances of each case should be undertaken in

conjunction with the guidance contained here, so as to determine whether there are exceptional reasons which justify a decision more favourable to the individual claimant.

7. The guidelines contained below must not be used in a way that prevents the proper

consideration of any exceptional circumstances. 8. The methodology for authorising local discounts is designed to ensure that decisions

are properly recorded and evidenced. Internal check is a feature of the authorisation process to avoid decisions being made by a single individual.

9. Receipt of an application for relief will not negate in any way the taxpayer’s

responsibility to pay the council tax as demanded. 10. Individual Discounts 11. The granting of local discounts is wholly discretionary; the only requirement being that

the Council must consider every case on its merits. Guidance to officers exercising this discretion is that reduction or remission of council tax on grounds of hardship should be the exception rather than the rule.

12. Definition of hardship which can be considered for a local discount:

a) the taxpayer is able to satisfy the billing authority that they are not able to meet their full council tax liability or part of their liability.

b) the taxpayer is able to demonstrate that all reasonable steps have been taken

to meet their full council tax liability including applications for alternative lines of credit and benefit

c) the taxpayer can prove that the current circumstances are unlikely to improve in the following 12 months making payment of the council tax impossible.

L5

d) the taxpayer has no visible assets, does not own property, is not in employment and has no other funding except for that available through public funds

e) enforced payment of their full council tax liability would result in severe hardship as defined by insufficient money being available for basic needs such as food or medical prescriptions.

13. A written application is required from the taxpayer in each case for each financial year with a copy of:

a) their income and expenditure;

b) evidence to support their claim. 14. Sufficient information must be obtained to be aware of the taxpayer’s circumstances

especially those of a financial nature both for the current situation and the situation when the Council Tax was payable.

15. Circumstances surrounding the taxpayer’s age, health, finances and parental or filial

responsibility should be considered in each case. This may involve requests for supporting information from third parties.

16. Other criteria can be taken into account provided there is a direct relationship between

the criterion and the payment of Council Tax. 17. Other ways of reducing or remitting the Council Tax must be considered and a

discretionary discount should not be given where other reductions are available.

18. Discounts should not be granted where the amount is outstanding as a result of wilful refusal or culpable neglect on the part of the taxpayer.

19. Relief is not to be granted in order to prevent recovery action being instigated by the

Council or to stop bankruptcy or committal proceedings commenced by the Council or any other body.

20. Priority should be given to cases where the taxpayer has made some payments. 21. All awards must be within the terms of the regulations. 22. Class Defined discounts 23. A written request is required. 24. Requests should be encouraged from taxpayers who may benefit from such a

discount. 25. The effect on other taxpayers, financial or otherwise must be taken into account. 26. Priority should be given to classes which are naturally time limited by circumstances. 27. All awards must be within the terms of the regulations. 28. Priority should be given to situations that are outside the taxpayer’s control. 29. Discounts should not be considered where other reductions are available.

L6

30. Authorisation Process 31. Individual discounts

a) £0 to £1,000 – A written report is required from the Revenue Manager recommending the discount. The recommendation is considered by the Head of Revenue and Benefit Services. Appeals will be considered by the Head of Financial Services.

b) Over £1,000 to £5,000 - A written report is required from the Revenue Manager

recommending the discount and counter signed by the Head of Revenue and Benefit Services and considered by the Head of Financial Services. Appeals will be considered by the Strategic Director of Finance.

c) Over £5,000 - A written report should be submitted to the Strategic Director of

Finance for consideration. Appeals will be considered by the Executive.

d) Over £10,000 - A written report should be submitted to the Executive for consideration. Appeals will be resubmitted to the Executive.

32. Class Defined discounts 33. A written report is submitted to the Executive recommending the classes of discount to

be implemented. 34. Appeal Process 35. Appeals may only be made by the original applicant. An appellant may appoint an

agent to act on their behalf and in such cases the Council will require written authorisation from the appellant before dealing with their agent.

36. Applicants must make an appeal within four weeks of the issue of the letter notifying

them of the Council’s decision. Appeals must be made in writing and must give the reasons why it is believed the decision should be amended. New or additional information may be included, but only if it is relevant to the decision making process.

37. An appeal will be considered by a senior officer who was not involved in the original

decision. 38. The officer deciding the appeal will be subject to the same guidance as above. 39. Each appeal will be considered individually on its merit. 40. All decisions must be in accordance with the regulations. 41. The outcome of the appeal will be final. Submitting an appeal does not affect the

appellant’s legal rights to challenge a decision made by the Council through the Judicial Review process.

APPENDIX MExecutive, 20 March 2007

LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION FUNDING (LIP) 2007- 2008 ALLOCATION OF BIDS Report by the Strategic Director of Environmental Services Executive Member for Transportation and Sustainable Development

Purpose The purpose of this report is to seek the Executive’s approval of the allocation of the Local Implementation Plan (LIP) settlement for 2007 –2008 for works in the Neighbourhoods and Borough-wide. Action proposed by the Executive Member for Transportation and Sustainable Development: The Executive is requested to: approve the allocation of the LIP settlement for 2007 – 2008 for works in the Neighbourhoods and Borough-wide as detailed in Annex 1. Reason for action proposed To allocate funding for the design and implementation of the Neighbourhood and Borough-wide traffic, transportation and road safety schemes. BACKGROUND

1. The Executive at its meeting of 4 July, 2006 approved the Council’s LIP funding and reporting for 2007 – 2008 for submission to Transport for London (TfL). The LIP funding and reporting was delivered to TfL on July 21, 2006.

2. On December 19, 2006, the Mayor for London allocated £3.561m for the 2007 – 2008 LIP settlement to the Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames as shown in TABLE 1 below. The proportion of allocation/bid for 2007 – 2008 i.e. (£3561k/£6198.90k) (57%) was better than 2006 – 2007 i.e. (£3978.3k/£8247.34k) (48%) as shown in TABLE 2 below. The main transport areas covered by this funding are principal road maintenance and bridge strengthening, road safety, walking and cycling, bus stop accessibility, local bus priority schemes, town centre, school travel plan, work travel plan and travel awareness, streets-for-people and local area accessibility.

3. The LIP settlement for the London Authorities for 2007 – 2008 is £160m. This allocation exceeds the record of £159m commitment made by the Mayor in 2006. The LIP funding forms an important component of the TfL investment programme.

4. The LIP funding supports a range of local transport improvements during the next financial year including cycling, walking, school travel plan, work travel plan and travel awareness, road safety, improvement to town centres and road maintenance. The spending in London Boroughs will improve local transport and make neighbourhoods across the capital safer, cleaner, greener and more pleasant.

M2

5. The highlights of the 2007 – 2008 LIP allocations London-wide include: (a) Schemes to improve quality, safety and accessibility of local streets and town

centres. (b) Allocations for the maintenance of principal roads, assessment and strengthening

of bridges, area based schemes (town centres, streets-for-people and station access), road safety and bus priority schemes accounted for around 60% of the total settlement.

TABLE 1

LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2007 -2008 BID & ALLOCATION SUMMARY

TRANSPORT HEADING BID (£k) ALLOCATION (£k)

Principal Road Maintenance 804.00 296.00

Bridge Assessment & Strengthening 1059.00 159.00

Local Safety Scheme 380.00 260.00

20mph Zones 740.00 345.00

Education, Training & Publicity 51.50 70.00

Walking 724.50 230.00

Cycling 715.00 720.00

Bus Stop Accessibility 95.00 95.00

Local Bus Priority 145.00 200.00

Area Based Schemes (Town Centres, Street-for-People & Station Access)

340.00 435.00

School Travel Plans 332.90 308.00

Work Travel Plans 50.00 43.00

Travel Awareness 160.00 150.00

Freight 40.00 20.00

Local Area Accessibility 562.00 230.00

Total 6198.90 3561.00

M3

6. Comparison of yearly allocation and bid

TABLE 2

COMPARISON OF YEARLY ALLOCATION AND BID

2004 - 2005 2005 - 2006 2006 - 2007 2007 - 2008

Allocation (£k) 5583.00 3494.00 3978.30 3561.00

Bid (£k) 15976.50 14594.80 8247.34 6198.90

Allocation/Bid ratio (%) 35 24 48 57

7. The Neighbourhood Committees considered the LIP settlement for 2007 – 2008 at their meetings in February 2007. This report seeks the Executive’s decision to allocate the LIP settlement for 2007 – 2008 for the implementation of the approved Borough-wide and Neighbourhood schemes as indicated in Annex 1. In considering the Borough-wide and Neighbourhoods’ allocation, it should be noted that these schemes have to be completed and all the funds used by the end of the financial year.

8. TfL deals with principal road maintenance slightly differently in that they require the proposed schemes to be based entirely on UKpms condition ratings. This does not allow for Neighbourhood considerations. It should also be noted that TfL has again not allocated any money for the maintenance of non-principal roads.

COMMITTEE RESOLUTIONS 9. At the Kingston Town Neighbourhood Committee meeting on February 7, 2007.

Members agreed their allocation from LIP settlement as set out in Annex 1 but they commented that, as in previous years, Tudor Drive had not received any funding.

10. The Surbiton Neighbourhood Committee and the South of the Borough Committee

meetings were held on February 8, 2007 and February 14, 2007 respectively. Members of these Neighbourhoods agreed their allocations from LIP settlement as set out in Annex 1.

11. The Maldens and Coombe Neighbourhood Committee meeting was held on February

15, 2007. Members resolved that the Executive be requested to approve the allocation of the Authority’s LIP settlement for works in the Neighbourhood as shown at Annex 1 to the report, but to note the following concerns of the Committee: (a) that an enquiry should be submitted to TfL as to whether the £45,000 for the A2043 Malden Road/ Plough Parade bus priority measures could be allocated to the Elm Path Walking Scheme, given that only £15,000 had been allocated to the Neighbourhood for (borough-wide) ‘walking’ schemes. (b) that if funding (ref paragraphs 8-10* of the report) is reassigned by the LCN+ Project Manager, the schemes to which the funding is transferred should be submitted to the Committee for approval. [*The text from paragraphs 8-10 of that report is reproduced in Annex 2 to this report.]

M4

OFFICERS’ COMMENTS 12. The Head of Environment and Sustainability has advised as follows in relation to

the Committee’s comments in paragraph 11 above: “Note on (a) 13. The funding for the bus priority scheme at A2043 Malden Road / Plough Parade

was awarded from the TfL Bus Priority Transport Programme in respect of the sub-regional London Bus Priority Network Partnership Funding proposal (made by London Borough of Bromley on behalf of all London Boroughs). This Bus Priority Transport Programme funding is "ring-fenced" separate from the Borough’s individual LIP submissions.

If this scheme is not to be progressed and the funding is surrendered, it will return to TfL Bus Priority. It may be that the Borough could make an additional in year bid for funding under the LIP walking category, but it is highly unlikely that there will be any facility for TfL to switch funding between these funding groups.

Note to (a) 14. The funding for the LCN+ cycling schemes referred to in paragraphs 8-10 of the

report is awarded from the London Cycle Network+ Transport Programme in respect of the sub-regional LCN+ Partnership Funding Proposal (made by London Borough of Camden on behalf of all London Boroughs). This LCN+Transport Programme funding is "ring-fenced" separate from the Borough’s individual LIP submissions.

Application is being made to the LCN+ Project Manager to make the variations in funding to alternative schemes as set out in the report. It is likely that these variations will be approved. Reports on proposals for the alternative schemes would be submitted to the appropriate Neighbourhood Committees as soon as possible to progress the schemes within year."

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS 15. The implementation of schemes under the broad transport headlines will improve

safety and facilities for walking, cycling and public transport as outlined in the Mayor’s transport strategy and they will have beneficial impact on the environment. The environmental implications of the individual schemes will be presented to the relevant Neighbourhood Committees when considering the detail of each scheme.

NETWORK IMPLICATIONS

16. This report has no direct implication on Traffic Management Act 2004. However the LIP proposals, which are likely to affect the Strategic Road Network, will be communicated to this Council’s Traffic Manager for the notification procedure to start on time.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

17. The Executive’s decision has no direct implications on the revenue or capital resources of the Authority. Funding of the individual schemes will be provided by

M5

the LIP settlement for 2007 – 2008. The settlement will be paid in the form of a grant and will only be available to the Authority, if the work is carried out within the financial year.

BACKGROUND PAPERS held by Fred Amoasi 020 8547 5962 author of the report: - 1. LIP Funding and Reporting submission 2007 - 2008 – July 2006. 2. Executive Report – July 4, 2006. 3. Neighbourhood Committee Reports – February, 2007. 4. LIP Funding – December, 2006

M6

AN

NEX

1

NEI

GH

BO

UR

HO

OD

S A

ND

BO

RO

UG

H-W

IDE

ALL

OC

ATI

ON

S A

ND

BID

S FO

R 2

007

– 20

08 (£

k)

(BID

FIG

UR

ES

IN IT

ALI

CS

)

TRA

NSP

OR

T H

EAD

ING

LI

P B

ID P

RO

POSA

LS

BO

RO

UG

H –

W

IDE

/ ST

RA

TEG

IC

CR

OSS

-N

EIG

HB

OU

RH

OO

D

KIN

GST

ON

TO

WN

M

ALD

ENS

AN

D

CO

OM

BE

SOU

TH O

F TH

E B

OR

OU

GH

SUR

BIT

ON

TO

TAL

Prin

cipa

l R

oad

Mai

nten

ance

P

rinci

pal r

oad

mai

nten

ance

29

6

(8

04)

29

6

(804

)

Non

-Prin

cipa

l R

oad

Mai

nten

ance

N

on-p

rinci

pal r

oad

mai

nten

ance

.

Brid

ge

Stre

ngth

enin

g B

ridge

stre

ngth

enin

g 15

9

(

1059

)

159

(10

59)

Loca

l Saf

ety

Sche

mes

Pen

rhyn

Roa

d

75

(75)

75

(

75)

Lond

on R

oad

– Q

ueen

Eliz

abet

h R

oad

to C

oom

be R

oad

80

(60

)

80

(

60)

Que

en E

lizab

eth

Roa

d

75

(75

)

75

(

75)

Surb

iton

and

Sout

h of

the

Bor

ough

A24

0 E

wel

l Roa

d / P

rince

s A

venu

e / E

lgar

Ave

nue

junc

tion

30

(30

)

30

(30

)

Surb

iton

and

Sout

h of

the

Bor

ough

Ew

ell R

oad

/ Kin

g C

harle

s R

oad

/ Len

elby

Roa

d ju

nctio

n

0

(60)

0

(6

0)

Mal

den

Roa

d / B

lake

s La

ne

0

(2

0)

0

(20)

M7

S

outh

Lan

e / S

heep

hous

e W

ay ro

unda

bout

0

(40)

0

(4

0)

20 m

ph Z

ones

V

aria

ble

limits

out

side

Bor

ough

Sch

ools

(Tiff

in G

irls

&

Fern

hill)

0

(20)

0

(20)

Var

iabl

e lim

its o

utsi

de B

orou

gh S

choo

ls (T

iffin

Boy

s &

K

ings

ton

Gra

mm

ar)

0

(4

0)

0

(4

0)

Var

iabl

e lim

its o

utsi

de B

orou

gh S

choo

ls (T

he M

ount

P

rimar

y S

choo

l)

0

(15)

0

(15)

Spe

ed li

mits

in re

side

ntia

l roa

ds –

Tud

or

100

(100

)

100

(1

00)

Spe

ed li

mits

in re

side

ntia

l roa

ds –

Kin

gsto

n R

iver

side

R

oads

Are

a

60

(6

0)

60

(60

)

Kin

gsto

n an

d Su

rbito

n

Low

er M

arsh

Lan

e

0

(1

2.5)

0

(12.

5)

0

(25)

Var

iabl

e sp

eed

limits

out

side

St M

atth

ews

Sch

ool

0

(3

0)

0

(30)

Var

iabl

e sp

eed

limits

out

side

Shr

ewsb

ury

Hou

se S

choo

l

0

(50)

0

(5

0)

War

ren

Driv

e N

orth

0

(50)

0

(5

0)

Par

k R

oad

/ Ber

ryla

nds

Roa

d

0

(25)

0

(2

5)

The

Mal

l and

Sur

bito

n R

iver

side

Roa

ds A

rea

10

0

(100

) 10

0

(100

)

Ash

by /

Filb

y

0

(50)

0

(50)

Roe

buck

Roa

d A

rea

0

(5

0)

0

(5

0)

C

hurc

h R

oad

Rev

iew

45

(

45)

45

(

45)

E

nhan

cem

ents

to e

xist

ing

20 m

ph s

chem

es –

Man

or

Driv

e, M

ount

Ple

asan

t

40

(

40)

40

(

40)

M8

S

outh

Lan

e

£120

k bi

d su

ppor

ted

by M

alde

ns &

Coo

mbe

N

eigh

bour

hood

Com

mitt

ee w

ill b

e m

ade

in tw

o pa

rts.

Th

ere

is £

20k

in 2

007/

08 a

nd £

100k

in 2

008/

09.

0

(2

0)

0

(20)

W

estb

ury

Roa

d ju

nctio

n

£120

k bi

d su

ppor

ted

by M

alde

ns &

Coo

mbe

N

eigh

bour

hood

Com

mitt

ee w

ill b

e m

ade

in tw

o pa

rts.

Th

ere

is £

20k

in 2

007/

08 a

nd £

100k

in 2

008/

09’.

0

(2

0)

0

(20)

Educ

atio

n,

Trai

ning

and

Pu

blic

ity

Occ

upat

iona

l Roa

d R

isk

0

(10

)

0

(10)

Stu

dent

Cou

ncil

for R

oad

Saf

ety

15

(15)

15

(

15)

Rea

chin

g Yo

ung

Driv

ers

5

(5

)

5

(5)

Rea

chin

g ha

rd to

reac

h gr

oup

2

(2

)

2

(2)

Thea

tre in

edu

catio

n fo

r prim

ary

scho

ols

15

(15)

15

(

15)

Mul

ti-lin

gual

leaf

lets

e.g

. sea

t bel

ts /

in-c

ar s

afet

y fo

r et

hnic

min

ority

0

(2

.5)

0

(2.

5)

O

ver 6

0’s

driv

ing

adva

ntag

e ed

ucat

ion

0

(2

)

0

(2)

P

ower

ed 2

Whe

eler

s 33

(0)

33

(0

)

Wal

king

Nor

bito

n E

stat

e (F

easi

bilit

y S

tudy

)

0

(

10)

0

(1

0)

Mod

erni

satio

n of

ATS

– W

heat

field

Way

/Fai

rfiel

d N

orth

0

(75)

0

(75)

Feas

ibili

ty s

tudy

and

impl

emen

tatio

n of

ped

estri

an

phas

ing

at F

airfi

eld

Wes

t/Kni

ght P

ark,

the

Bitt

oms/

Pen

rhyn

Roa

d an

d S

ury

Bas

in/S

even

Kin

gs W

ay

0

(2

0)

0

(2

0)

A24

0 E

wel

l Roa

d / D

itton

Roa

d

0

(3

0)

0

(30)

Surb

iton

and

Sout

h of

the

Bor

ough

Red

Lio

n R

oad

0

(100

)

0

(100

)

M9

Surb

iton

and

Sout

h of

the

Bor

ough

Tolw

orth

Bro

adw

ay -

new

cro

ssin

g an

d re

mov

al o

f su

bway

10

0

(100

)

10

0

(100

)

Elm

Pat

h

0

(50)

0

(5

0)

Eag

le w

harf

river

side

ope

n sp

ace

100

(1

82.5

)

100

(182

.5)

Tham

es s

ide

foot

way

and

ope

n sp

ace

15

(15

)

15

(

15)

Hog

smill

val

ley

wal

k st

rate

gy

0

(51)

0

(51)

Bor

ough

wal

king

rout

e su

rvey

s an

d D

DA

acc

essi

bilit

y im

prov

emen

ts

15

(40)

15

(

40)

Cyc

ling

(Non

-LC

N+)

Cyc

ling

non

LCN

+ -L

CN

Rou

te 4

Can

bury

Gar

dens

–

light

ing

of u

nseg

rega

ted

shar

ed c

ycle

and

ped

estri

an

path

.

25

(25

)

25

(

25)

Cyc

ling

non

LCN

+ in

crea

sed

prov

isio

n of

sec

ure

off s

treet

se

cure

cyc

le p

arki

ng –

Kin

gsto

n To

wn

Cen

tre.

20

(100

)

20

(1

00)

Bor

ough

-wid

e

C

ycle

Tra

inin

g

100

(1

00)

10

0

(100

)

Bor

ough

-wid

e

C

yclin

g M

onito

ring

0

(

10)

0

(1

0)

Bor

ough

-wid

e

C

yclin

g M

aint

enan

ce –

Mai

nten

ance

of n

on L

CN

+ ro

utes

0

(

20)

0

(2

0)

Kin

gsto

n an

d M

alde

ns &

Coo

mbe

LC

N+

Link

121

- R

oute

impr

ovem

ents

ent

ire li

nk.

Feas

ibili

ty a

nd d

esig

n sc

hem

es id

entif

ied

by C

RIS

P s

tudy

(li

nk 1

21).

20

(20

)

20

(20

)

Kin

gsto

n an

d M

alde

ns &

Coo

mbe

LC

N+

Link

122

– R

oute

impr

ovem

ents

ent

ire li

nk.

Impl

emen

tatio

n of

sch

emes

des

igne

d in

200

6 –

2007

. In

clud

es s

ide

road

ent

ry tr

eatm

ents

, jun

ctio

n tre

atm

ents

, an

d re

view

tow

n ce

ntre

and

Kin

gsto

n S

tatio

n ac

cess

ibili

ty.

75

(75

)

75

(75

)

M10

LCN

+ Li

nk 1

23 –

A30

7 H

igh

Stre

et /

Kin

gsto

n H

all R

oad

impr

ovem

ents

to e

xist

ing

roun

dabo

ut. C

ompl

etio

n of

sc

hem

e fro

m 2

006

– 20

07.

20

(50

)

20

(

50)

LCN

+ S

pur f

rom

Lin

k 12

3 –

Kin

gsto

n H

all R

oad

betw

een

A30

7 H

igh

Stre

et a

nd K

ings

ton

Col

lege

. Com

plet

ion

of

sche

me

from

200

6 –

2007

.

20

(20

)

20

(

20)

Kin

gsto

n, S

urbi

ton

and

Sout

h of

the

Bor

ough

LCN

+ Li

nk 1

23 –

Rou

te im

prov

emen

ts e

ntire

link

. Des

ign,

co

nsul

tatio

n &

impl

emen

tatio

n of

mea

sure

s fro

m C

RIS

P

stud

y fo

r Lin

k 12

3. In

clud

es s

igni

ng, s

ide

road

ent

ry

treat

men

ts, j

unct

ion

treat

men

ts, a

nd re

view

acc

ess

to

tow

n ce

ntre

.

30

(30

)

30

(30

)

Kin

gsto

n an

d M

alde

n &

Coo

mbe

LCN

+ Li

nk 1

24 –

Rou

te im

prov

emen

ts e

ntire

link

. S

chem

es id

entif

ied

from

CR

ISP

stu

dy (e

ntire

link

).

20

(20

)

20

(20

)

Kin

gsto

n an

d Su

rbito

n

LCN

+ Li

nk 1

26 –

Rou

te im

prov

emen

ts e

ntire

link

(s

chem

es id

entif

ied

from

par

t of C

RIS

P s

tudy

link

12

2,12

3,12

6,16

3). D

esig

n, c

onsu

ltatio

n &

Impl

emen

tatio

n m

easu

res

iden

tifie

d fro

m C

RIS

P S

tudy

.

50

(30

)

50

(30

)

Mal

dens

& C

oom

be a

nd S

urbi

ton

C

yclin

g no

n LC

N+

Kno

llmea

d/S

heep

hous

e W

ay H

ogsm

ill

Cyc

le B

ridge

feas

ibili

ty

0

(1

5)

0

(15)

C

yclin

g LC

N+

She

epho

use

way

. Fea

sibi

lity

for

segr

egat

ed c

ycle

trac

k an

d re

vise

d pa

rkin

g ar

rang

emen

t to

impr

ove

cycl

ing

to n

earb

y sc

hool

s an

d st

atio

n

0

(2

0)

0

(20)

Su

rbito

n an

d So

uth

of th

e B

orou

gh

C

yclin

g no

n LC

N+

Ew

ell R

oad/

Kin

g C

harle

s R

oad/

Red

Li

on R

oad

– co

ntrib

utio

n to

war

ds im

prov

ed c

ycle

cro

ssin

g fa

cilit

ies

0

(2

0)

0

(20)

Su

rbito

n an

d So

uth

of th

e B

orou

gh

LC

N+

Link

123

– A

243

Hoo

k R

oad

sout

h of

junc

tion

with

K

ings

dow

ne R

d, D

itton

Roa

d, C

otte

rill R

oad,

Tho

rnhi

ll A

venu

e, K

ent W

ay, A

3 su

bway

, Ful

lers

Way

Sou

th,

Hun

ters

Roa

d, G

osbu

ry H

ill, E

lm R

oad

to ju

nctio

n w

ith

A24

3 H

ook

Rd.

Fea

sibi

lity

and

desi

gn o

f sch

emes

id

entif

ied

by C

RIS

P L

ink

123

stud

y.

20

(20

)

20

(20

)

M11

LC

N+

Link

123

– A

243

Upp

er B

right

on R

oad

junc

tion

with

W

alpo

le R

d &

Lov

elac

e R

d. T

ouca

n cr

ossi

ng, b

ased

on

desi

gn fr

om 2

006

– 20

07

70

(70

) 70

(70

)

C

yclin

g no

n LC

N+

Tolw

orth

Cou

rt Fa

rm/F

ootp

ath

15 –

co

mpl

etio

n of

200

6/7

sche

me

15

(15

)

15

(

15)

C

yclin

g no

n LC

N+

Brid

ge R

oad/

Nor

th P

arad

e /M

arst

on

Ave

nue

– co

ntrib

utio

n to

war

ds im

prov

ed c

ycle

cro

ssin

g fa

cilit

ies

15

(15

)

15

(

15)

C

yclin

g no

n LC

N+

Jubi

lee

Way

– c

ompl

etio

n of

feas

ibili

ty

stud

y fo

r seg

rega

ted

cycl

e ro

ute

star

ted

in 2

006

– 20

07

0

(1

0)

0

(1

0)

C

yclin

g no

n LC

N+

A20

43 M

alde

n R

oad

betw

een

Foun

tain

R

ound

abou

t and

A3

Kin

gsto

n by

pass

– c

ycle

faci

lity

feas

ibili

ty s

tudy

.

0

(1

0)

0

(10)

LC

N+

Link

163

– R

oute

impr

ovem

ents

ent

ire li

nk. G

reen

La

ne /

Win

dsor

Ave

nue

treat

men

t to

impr

ove

junc

tion

acce

ss to

and

from

cyc

le tr

ack.

50

(50

)

50

(50

)

LC

N+

Link

124

– A

2043

Kin

gsto

n R

oad/

B28

2 B

urlin

gton

R

oad

exte

nsio

n of

LC

N+

betw

een

Elm

Roa

d an

d A

3/B

urlin

gton

75

(0

)

75

(0

)

LC

N+

Link

122

– A

2043

Mal

den

Roa

d, b

etw

een

Mal

den

Gre

en A

venu

e/Fo

rest

Sid

e an

d W

orce

ster

Par

k S

tatio

n

25

(0)

25

(0)

LC

N+

Link

121

– A

308

Kin

gsto

n H

ill T

ouca

n by

ent

ranc

e to

Kin

gsto

n U

nive

rsity

– K

ings

ton

Hill

Cam

pus

70

(0

)

70

(0

)

Bus

Sto

p A

cces

sibi

lity

K

ings

ton

and

Surb

iton

To

intro

duce

bus

sto

p ac

cess

ibili

ty im

prov

emen

ts o

n va

rious

rout

es. R

oute

s K

1 &

K4

Vill

iers

Roa

d A

rea

55

(55

)

55

(55

)

To

intro

duce

bus

sto

p ac

cess

ibili

ty im

prov

emen

ts o

n va

rious

rout

es. R

oute

371

Par

k R

oad

25

(25

)

25

(

25)

To

intro

duce

bus

sto

p ac

cess

ibili

ty im

prov

emen

ts o

n va

rious

rout

es. K

ings

ton

Tow

n C

entre

Rev

iew

of e

xist

ing.

5

(5)

5

(5)

To

intro

duce

bus

sto

p ac

cess

ibili

ty im

prov

emen

ts o

n va

rious

rout

es. R

oute

65

Rev

iew

5

(5)

5

(5)

M12

K

ings

ton

and

Mal

dens

& C

oom

be

To in

trodu

ce b

us s

top

acce

ssib

ility

impr

ovem

ents

on

vario

us ro

utes

. Rou

te13

1 R

evie

w

5

(

5)

5

(5)

Loca

l Bus

Pr

iorit

y M

easu

res

Ric

hmon

d R

oad

Bus

Lan

e -

exte

nded

from

pea

k ho

urs

to 7

am –

7pm

25

(

25)

25

(25

)

Woo

d S

treet

and

Cla

renc

e S

treet

– b

us o

nly

sect

ion.

R

oad

spac

e al

loca

tion

and

bus

stop

impr

ovem

ents

. Bid

fo

r fea

sibi

lity

wor

k an

d st

atut

ory

unde

rtake

rs e

quip

men

t in

vest

igat

ion

in 2

007/

08

10

(10

)

10

(

10)

A30

8 Lo

ndon

Roa

d / A

lber

t Roa

d ju

nctio

n im

prov

emen

ts.

New

traf

fic s

igna

ls w

ith S

VD

bus

prio

rity

10

(10

)

10

(

10)

Bus

stu

dy to

impr

ove

bus

serv

ice

betw

een

Kin

gsto

n an

d S

urbi

ton

and

bus

term

inus

faci

litie

s in

Kin

gsto

n To

wn

cent

re. I

ntro

duce

bus

lane

s be

twee

n S

urbi

ton

Sta

tion

and

Kin

gsto

n To

wn

cent

re. (

, Map

le R

oad

/ Sur

bito

n C

resc

ent

/ Sur

bito

n tri

angl

e). B

id fo

r fea

sibi

lity

wor

k an

d st

atut

ory

unde

rtake

rs e

quip

men

t inv

estig

atio

n in

200

7/08

10

(10

)

10

(

10)

A24

3 B

right

on R

oad

/ Vic

toria

Roa

d –

To c

ompl

ete

the

junc

tion

impr

ovem

ent s

tudy

and

det

ail d

esig

n. B

id fo

r fe

asib

ility

wor

k an

d st

atut

ory

unde

rtake

rs e

quip

men

t in

vest

igat

ion

in 2

007/

08

40

(10

) 40

(10

)

Cox

Lan

e, C

hess

ingt

on (N

ew b

us g

ate

cam

eras

)

50

(

50)

50

(50

)

A20

43 K

ings

ton

Roa

d / S

t Joh

ns R

oad.

Pro

pose

d si

gnal

isat

ion

of ju

nctio

n w

ith b

us p

riorit

y. B

id fo

r fea

sibi

lity

wor

k an

d st

atut

ory

unde

rtake

rs’ e

quip

men

t inv

estig

atio

n in

200

7/08

. Thi

s w

ould

be

com

plem

enta

ry to

a fe

asib

ility

st

udy

to b

e co

mm

issi

oned

in 2

007/

08 fr

om a

LB

PN

re

tain

ed c

onsu

ltant

(and

, sub

ject

to C

omm

ittee

app

rova

l of

the

initi

al re

sults

, inc

ludi

ng c

onsu

ltatio

n an

d ou

tline

de

taile

d de

sign

pla

ns a

s ap

prop

riate

). T

he s

tudy

wor

k w

ould

be

fund

ed b

y th

e LB

PN

SW

Sec

tor L

eade

r LB

R

ichm

ond

upon

Tha

mes

.

10

(10

)

10

(10

)

M13

A20

43 M

alde

n R

oad

/ Sou

th L

ane.

Pro

pose

d in

trodu

ctio

n of

bus

prio

rity

dete

ctio

n at

the

traffi

c si

gnal

s fo

r bus

pr

iorit

y im

prov

emen

ts to

rout

es 2

13, X

26. B

id fo

r fe

asib

ility

wor

k an

d st

atut

ory

unde

rtake

rs’ e

quip

men

t in

vest

igat

ion

in 2

007/

08. T

his

wou

ld b

e co

mpl

emen

tary

to

a fe

asib

ility

stu

dy to

be

com

mis

sion

ed in

200

7/08

from

a

LBP

N re

tain

ed c

onsu

ltant

(and

, sub

ject

to C

omm

ittee

ap

prov

al o

f the

initi

al re

sults

, inc

ludi

ng c

onsu

ltatio

n an

d ou

tline

det

aile

d de

sign

pla

ns a

s ap

prop

riate

). T

he s

tudy

w

ork

wou

ld b

e fu

nded

by

the

LBP

N S

W S

ecto

r Lea

der L

B

Ric

hmon

d up

on T

ham

es.

0

(3

0)

0

(30)

A20

43 M

alde

n R

oad

/ Plo

ugh

Par

ade.

Pro

pose

d in

trodu

ctio

n of

par

king

bay

s an

d w

aitin

g &

load

ing

rest

rictio

ns to

impr

ove

bus

stop

acc

essi

bilit

y an

d bu

s pr

iorit

y. B

id fo

r fea

sibi

lity

wor

k an

d st

atut

ory

unde

rtake

rs’

equi

pmen

t inv

estig

atio

n in

200

7/08

. Thi

s w

ould

be

com

plem

enta

ry to

a fe

asib

ility

stu

dy to

be

com

mis

sion

ed

in 2

007/

08 fr

om a

LB

PN

reta

ined

con

sulta

nt (a

nd, s

ubje

ct

to C

omm

ittee

app

rova

l of t

he in

itial

resu

lts, i

nclu

ding

co

nsul

tatio

n an

d ou

tline

det

aile

d de

sign

pla

ns a

s ap

prop

riate

). T

he s

tudy

wor

k w

ould

be

fund

ed b

y th

e LB

PN

SW

Sec

tor L

eade

r LB

Ric

hmon

d up

on T

ham

es.

45

(100

)

45

(100

)

Tow

n C

entr

es

N

ew M

alde

n H

igh

Stre

et –

Con

tribu

tion

tow

ards

co

mpl

etio

n of

are

a sc

hem

e

100

(0)

10

0

(0

)

Su

rbito

n an

d So

uth

of th

e B

orou

gh

To

lwor

th B

road

way

Impr

ovem

ent S

chem

e. -

(Pro

visi

onal

A

lloca

tion

for I

mpl

emen

tatio

n) (T

his

is B

SP 2

006

– 20

07

bid

unde

r ‘Tf

L A

rea

Bas

ed S

chem

e fo

r Sta

ge 1

’ ap

prov

al. N

o ne

ed to

re-s

ubm

it in

200

7 –

2008

. Bid

de

tails

kep

t by

TfL

for c

onsi

dera

tion

in 2

007

– 20

08).

10

0

(0

)

10

0

(0

)

Su

rbito

n an

d So

uth

of th

e B

orou

gh

To

lwor

th B

road

way

Impr

ovem

ent S

chem

e. –

(D

evel

opm

ent)

(Thi

s is

BSP

200

6 –

2007

bid

und

er ‘T

fL

Are

a B

ased

Sch

eme

for S

tage

1’ a

ppro

val.

No

need

to

re-s

ubm

it in

200

7 –

2008

. Bid

det

ails

kep

t by

TfL

for

cons

ider

atio

n in

200

7 –

2008

).

20

0

(260

)

20

0

(

260)

Stre

ets-

for-

Peop

le

M14

Bro

wns

Roa

d A

rea

– fe

asib

ility

stu

dy. (

This

is B

SP 2

006

– 20

07 b

id u

nder

‘TfL

Are

a B

ased

Sch

eme

for S

tage

1’

appr

oval

. No

need

to re

-sub

mit

in 2

007

– 20

08. B

id

deta

ils k

ept b

y Tf

L fo

r con

side

ratio

n in

200

7 –

2008

).

0

(3

0)

0

(30)

Sta

tion

Est

ate.

(Thi

s is

BSP

200

6 –

2007

bid

und

er ‘T

fL

Are

a B

ased

Sch

eme

for S

tage

1’ a

ppro

val.

No

need

to

re-s

ubm

it in

200

7 –

2008

. Bid

det

ails

kep

t by

TfL

for

cons

ider

atio

n in

200

7 –

2008

).

35

(50

)

35

(50

)

Scho

ol T

rave

l Pl

ans

(STP

)

B

orou

gh-w

ide

impl

emen

tatio

n of

STP

(Tiff

in B

oys

and

Kin

gsto

n G

ram

mar

Sch

ools

– F

ootw

ay im

prov

emen

ts a

nd

re-a

lignm

ent (

Birk

enhe

ad A

venu

e))

20

(20

)

20

(

20)

B

orou

gh-w

ide

impl

emen

tatio

n of

STP

(Lat

chm

ere

Infa

nt

and

Juni

or S

choo

l

6

(6)

6

(6)

B

orou

gh-w

ide

impl

emen

tatio

n of

STP

(St J

osep

hs –

Fo

otw

ay a

nd p

edes

trian

saf

ety

impr

ovem

ents

in F

airfi

eld

Sou

th a

nd A

lber

t Roa

d)

15

(15

)

15

(

15)

B

orou

gh-w

ide

impl

emen

tatio

n of

STP

(Hol

lyfie

ld S

choo

l)

10

(

10)

10

(

10)

B

orou

gh-w

ide

impl

emen

tatio

n of

STP

(Che

ssin

gton

C

omm

unity

Col

lege

)

40

(

40)

40

(40

)

B

orou

gh-w

ide

impl

emen

tatio

n of

STP

(St P

aul’s

Prim

ary)

20

(

20)

20

(20

)

B

orou

gh-w

ide

impl

emen

tatio

n of

STP

(Sou

thbo

roug

h H

igh

Sch

ool)

30

(30

)

30

(

30)

B

orou

gh-w

ide

deve

lopm

ent o

f STP

(Sur

veys

and

C

onsu

ltatio

n S

uppo

rt)

10

(5)

10

(5)

B

orou

gh-w

ide

deve

lopm

ent o

f STP

(STP

Gra

nt)

10

(10)

10

(

10)

B

orou

gh-w

ide

deve

lopm

ent o

f STP

(Int

erna

l Pro

mot

ion

Mat

eria

ls)

2.5

(2.5

)

2.5

(

2.5)

B

orou

gh-w

ide

impl

emen

tatio

n of

S

TP

(Mon

itorin

g an

d U

pdat

ing)

25

(2

5)

25

(25

)

M15

STP

Offi

cer

0

(18)

0

(18)

Bor

ough

-wid

e de

velo

pmen

t of S

TP (E

ngin

eerin

g fe

asib

ility

and

des

ign)

15

(1

5)

15

(15

)

Bor

ough

-wid

e de

velo

pmen

t of S

TP (S

TP N

etw

ork)

10

(1

0)

10

(10

)

Bor

ough

-wid

e im

plem

enta

tion

of S

TP (S

how

er fa

cilit

ies)

20

(2

0)

20

(20

)

Bor

ough

-wid

e im

plem

enta

tion

of S

TP (C

eleb

ratio

n E

vent

s)

2

(2

)

2

(2)

Bor

ough

-wid

e de

velo

pmen

t of S

TP (S

choo

l sta

ff co

ver)

2.

4

(2

.4)

2.

4

(2.

4)

Bor

ough

-wid

e im

plem

enta

tion

of S

TP (W

alki

ng b

uses

) 2

(2)

2

(

2)

Thea

tre in

edu

catio

n 10

(1

0)

10

(10

)

Bik

e to

sch

ool

0

(2

)

0

(2)

Sur

bito

n C

hild

ren’

Nur

sery

5

(5)

5

(

5)

St A

ndre

w’s

and

St M

arks

Jun

ior S

choo

l / M

aple

Infa

nts

Sch

ool

5

(

5)

5

(

5)

Gra

nd A

venu

e S

choo

l

15

(

15)

15

(

15)

Hol

lyfie

ld S

choo

l (K

ing

Cha

rles

Brid

ge)

20

(20

) 20

(20

)

M

alde

n M

anor

Sch

ool

15

(15

)

15

(15

)

Th

e M

ount

Prim

ary

Sch

ool

3

(

3)

3

(

3)

Trav

el

Awar

enes

s

Bik

e W

eek

5

(10)

5

(10)

Goo

d G

oing

(Dis

play

at F

resh

er’s

Fai

r: K

ings

ton

Col

lege

an

d K

ings

ton

Uni

vers

ity)

3

(3

)

3

(3)

Goo

d G

oing

(Pro

mot

ion

at th

e G

reen

Fai

r 200

7)

2.5

(2.5

)

2.5

(

2.5)

Goo

d G

oing

( Dis

tribu

tion

of n

ewsl

ette

r)

3

(3

)

3

(3)

M16

Goo

d G

oing

(Pro

mot

iona

l mat

eria

l) 7

(7)

7

(

7)

Wal

king

to S

choo

l Cam

paig

n 16

(1

6)

16

(16

)

Goo

d G

oing

Med

ia C

ampa

ign

0

(4

)

0

(4)

Goo

d G

oing

(Wee

k)

16.5

(1

6.5)

16.5

(16

.5)

Per

sona

lised

Tra

vel P

lann

ing

95

(95)

95

(

95)

Tour

de

Fran

ce

3

(3

)

3

(3)

Wor

kpla

ce

Trav

el P

lan

K

ings

ton

Trav

el P

lan

Net

wor

k 2.

5

(2

.5)

2.

5

(2.

5)

A

rea

Trav

el P

lan

– K

ings

ton

Tow

n C

entre

10

(1

5)

10

(15

)

A

rea

Trav

el P

lan

– C

hess

ingt

on In

dust

rial E

stat

e 10

(1

0)

10

(10

)

Tr

avel

Pla

n D

evel

opm

ent A

ssis

tanc

e 10

(1

0)

10

(10

)

W

alk-

to-W

ork

Wee

k 0

(2)

0

(

2)

G

ood

Goi

ng W

eek

2007

– W

orkp

lace

Eve

nt

2

(2

)

2

(2)

D

r Bik

e M

aint

enan

ce S

essi

ons

1.5

(1.5

)

1.5

(

1.5)

W

orkp

lace

Cyc

le T

rain

ing

1

(1

)

1

(1)

C

ycle

50%

Clu

b 6

(6)

6

(

6)

Frei

ght

Che

ssin

gton

Indu

stria

l Est

ate

20

(20

)

20

(

20)

Lorr

y In

trusi

on -

Roa

ds a

djac

ent t

o N

ew M

alde

n H

igh

Stre

et

0

(2

0)

0

(20)

Loca

l Are

a A

cces

sibi

lity

M17

C

oom

be R

oad

25

(60

)

25

(

60)

R

ichm

ond

Roa

d

25

(

32)

25

(32

)

B

erry

land

s R

oad

20

(50

) 20

(50

)

Surb

iton

and

Sout

h of

the

Bor

ough

Tolw

orth

Bro

adw

ay –

sid

e ro

ad e

ntry

trea

tmen

ts

0

(2

5)

0

(25)

Brid

ge R

oad

/ Mar

ston

Ave

nue

junc

tion

0

(5

0)

0

(5

0)

Gar

rison

Lan

e

30

(

30)

30

(30

)

Cre

scen

t Roa

d

30

(35

)

30

(35

)

Kin

gsto

n V

ale,

Plo

ugh

Gre

en &

Gra

smer

e A

venu

e

50

(180

)

50

(180

)

Sou

th L

ane

20

(40

)

20

(40

)

Nor

th P

arad

e

30

(

30)

30

(30

)

Sub-

Tota

l

2745

.4

1480

12

11

725

59

7.5

7238

.9

SWEL

TRA

C

Stat

ion

Acc

ess

K

ings

ton

Sta

tion

????

(

100)

????

(10

0)

GR

AN

D

TOTA

L

2742

650.

45.

4 14

8015

55

59

7.59

7.55

M18

ANNEX 2

EXTRACT FROM APPENDIX E (‘LIP FUNDING 2007-2008 ALLOCATION’)

TO MALDENS AND COOMBE NEIGHBOURHOOD COMMITTEE - 15 FEBRUARY 2007

The following paragraphs 8-10 are extracts from the report at Appendix E to the Maldens and Coombe Neighbourhood Committee held on 15 February 2007 and are referred to in the decision (Minute 59(1) arising from that meeting – please refer to paragraph 11 of this report to Executive:

paragraph 8 - Link 124 - A2043 Kingston Road/B282 Burlington Road extension of LCN+ between Elm Road and A3/Burlington Road. This scheme received funding in error. The Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames will discuss with LCN+ Project Manager to reassign funding to an alternative scheme (A2043 Kingston Road/St John’s Road junction?) within the Neighbourhood on LCN+ Link 124, the strategic cycle route between Kingston Town Centre and destinations towards Wimbledon via New Malden and Raynes Park),

paragraph 9 - Link 122 (Ham Parade to Worcester Park Station via A308 Richmond Road, Kingston Town Centre, Berrylands Station and A2043 Malden Road) - A2043 Malden Road, between Malden Green Avenue/Forest Side & Worcester Park Station. This scheme received funding in error. The Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames will discuss with LCN+ Project Manager to reassign funding to an alternative scheme (A2043 Malden Road/Plough Parade?) within the Neighbourhood on LCN+ Link 122, the strategic cycle route between Kingston Town Centre and destinations towards Sutton via Berrylands and Worcester Park) and

paragraph 10 - Link 121 (A308 London Road/Kingston Hill/Kingston Vale between its junction with A2043 Cambridge Road and A3 Robin Hood Way/Kingston Bypass) A308 Kingston Hill Toucan by entrance to Kingston University - Kingston Hill Campus. This scheme received funding in error. The Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames will RBK to discuss with LCN+ Project Manager to reassign funding to an alternative scheme within the Neighbourhood on LCN+ Link 121, the strategic cycle route between Kingston Town Centre and destinations towards Central London via A308 Kingston Hill/Kingston Vale

APPENDIX N Executive, 20 March 2007

BUDGET MONITORING 2006/07 – MONTH 10 Report by the Strategic Director of Finance Leader of the Council

Purpose

This report details the budget monitoring position for 2006/07 at month 10 (31 January 2007). It indicates that there is now a net underspending of £481,000 projected on General Fund Services. This is in part due to the decision taken by the Council when setting the 2006/07 budget to approve the continuation of restraint on recruitment and other spending. The Strategic Director of Finance advises that this action should continue, partly because of the volatility of some demand and needs-led budgets, to facilitate some service changes approved in setting the 2007/08 budget and also because of the financial challenges facing the Council in 2008/09 and beyond which are detailed in the Medium Term and Financial Strategy “Changing Kingston – Choosing Our Future”. The Council has recalculated its entitlement to Dedicated Schools Grant for 2007/08 to reflect the January 2007 ‘census of pupils’. In the light of this, together with the latest forecast outturn on the Schools Budget for 2006/07, a revised Schools Budget for 2007/08 is proposed. The Council has also been notified that it will receive £733,583 in respect of the Local Authorities Business Growth Incentive Scheme. In the light of the unpredictable nature of this scheme it is suggested that this receipt be regarded as one-off income and transferred to the Invest to Save Reserve.

Action proposed by the Leader of the Council The Executive is requested to: 1. note the position; 2. note the receipt of £733,583 from the Local Authorities Business Growth Incentive

Scheme (LABGI) and approves the transfer of these monies to the Invest to Save Reserve as detailed in paragraph 13;

3. approve the revised Schools Budget for 2007/08 attached at Annex 3; and

4. endorse the action being taken by the Corporate Development Team as detailed in paragraphs 25 to 28 below to ensure that the budget is not overspent, to facilitate service changes approved 2007/08 and to prepare for the financial challenges facing RBK in 2008/09 and beyond.

Reason for action proposed To ensure that the Council’s expenditure remains within the approved budget.

N2

BACKGROUND

1. The Council approved the budget for 2006/07 on 1 March 2006. In doing so, it took account of continuing pressure on some demand and needs-led budgets and increased the budget in those areas for 2006/07 accordingly. The Council also approved the continuation of restraint on recruitment and non-staff expenditure to achieve in year budget savings.

2. On 25 July 2006, the Executive considered an initial summary of the main areas of pressure on the 2006/07 budget. This was informed by the financial/budget risk analysis which formed part of the Director of Finance’s Policy Budget Report (Annex 7). This risk analysis is also used in carrying out the detailed budget monitoring.

3. The initial analysis reported on 25 July, identified pressures totalling approximately £1 million, which were partly offset by additional income of £0.3 million.

4. On 3 October 2006, the Executive reviewed the position at month 4 (31 July 2006). This indicated a potential overspending of £0.611 million. The Executive endorsed the action which the Corporate Development Team was taking to ensure that the overspending was eliminated by the end of the year.

5. On 7 November 2006, the Executive considered the month 6 position (30 September 2006). This indicated that the potential overspending had reduced to £0.534 million. However, the overall reduction occurred despite some increases in demand and needs-led expenditure which continued to cause concern. Consequently, the action previously put in place was continued.

6. On 23 January 2007, the Executive considered the month 8 position (30 November 2006). This indicated that an improvement in some of the demand-led areas, together with the impact of restraint, had eliminated the potential overspending, and a small underspending (£53,000) was forecast. Restraint was continued to prepare for the changes required in the 2007/08 budget.

LATEST POSITION

7. The position at month 10 (31 January 2007) is that a potential underspending of £481,000 is now forecast. This is summarised at Annex 1. There are still some significant overspendings forecast in demand and needs-led budgets. It should be remembered that these budgets are volatile in nature, with small increases in client numbers leading to significant increases in expenditure. The main variations are summarised at Annex 2 and explained in the following paragraphs.

8. Community Services

(i) Homeless families

A sustained increase in demand for temporary accommodation, due to a fall in the number of new lettings, has resulted in a projected overspend of £118,000. The position has worsened since month 8. Officers are working hard to limit the financial impact of this by expanding the Private Leasing Scheme and by making greater use of the Council’s permanent housing stock as temporary accommodation for homeless households. These measures are

N3

now proving successful, with a significant reduction in numbers in the most expensive accommodation.

(ii) Community Care Services

Purchasing Teams – the projected overspend has reduced to £49,000. It has not yet been possible to fully reduce employee expenditure in line with budget reductions in respect of increased vacancy rates. However, given the size of these teams, it is expected that the necessary level of turnover will occur to enable these to be achieved.

Residential Care – overall this budget is anticipated to overspend by £505,000. The projected overspends on Older People’s, Learning Disabilities and Mental Health external placements budgets have reduced to £459,000. These budgets are volatile and demand-led and officers continue to monitor the position closely. RBK’s own Older People’s and Learning Disabilities homes have projected overspends of £46,000. Officers have been able to manage down these variations as a result of increased income.

The anticipated spend takes account of detailed projections based on on-going commitments in respect of current numbers of users, as well as estimated spending arising from anticipated service demands. These budgets can be subject to considerable variation, as a relatively small change in high cost placements can have a significant impact on the budget. The statutory nature of this service means that it is not always possible to fulfil legal obligations towards service users and contain spend within budget. Officers always ensure that residential care is restricted to essential placements and continue to make strenuous efforts to contain spending within budget.

9. Learning and Children’s Services

(i) Children’s Services and Safeguarding

a) External Placements

The previously reported net overspending has now been eliminated. Children in Need is now overspent by £190,900, a slight increase since Month 8 due to increasing costs, the number of placements remaining at 7. This has been more than offset by an increased saving in respect of disabled children, £17,100 down on Month 8 due to revised forecasts relating to 2 children. The overall cost of external placements has been contained at the budgeted level despite the factor mentioned in the next paragraph.

b) Family Placements – the underspending on foster care placements is due to continuing difficulties in recruiting in-Borough foster carers.

c) Unaccompanied Asylum Seeking Children

The previously reported underlying overspending remains but Kingston has now been notified of a Special Circumstances grant by the Home Office in respect of 2005/06, which will deliver a modest overall underspending in the current year.

N4

(ii) Lifelong Learning and Leisure

Libraries (Strategic)

The strategic budget overspend has been reduced by £20,900 due to a vacant post, less overtime than expected to cover absences in acquisitions team, and expenditure restraint on running costs.

(iii) Other General Fund Budgets

SEN Home to School Transport

The previous projection had included insufficient allowance for savings arising from journeys cancelled due to sickness, inset days and other causes. The revised figure shows a £40,000 improvement in the position.

(iv) Direct Revenue Financing of Capital Projects

Following the achievement of savings on the revenue budget, it is proposed to use these resources to address some capital commitments that might otherwise cause other capital projects to be deferred. Two elements are required to complete the implementation of the Authority’s agreed SEN Strategy. A combined scheme has been devised with Latchmere Infants and Junior Schools as part of project ED932. This will provide accommodation to facilitate the proposed amalgamation of the schools, to provide for the needs of autistic pupils and to provide a children’s centre and for community use. This would be funded by a combination of contributions from the school, Sure Start, the Standards Fund and the Borough (£60,000). Similarly, SEN Resourced Provision is required at Tolworth Infants & Junior Schools. It had been hoped to include this accommodation within the resources allocated for project ED938 but an additional £65,000 is required. Finally, to complete the provision of broadband connectivity to schools, additional provision of £68,000 is required to finance project ED759.

(v) Schools Budgets – Incorporation of PLASC

Initial data from the January 2007 Pupil Level Annual School Census (PLASC) became available on 15 February 2007 and this has been used to recalculate Kingston’s entitlement to Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG) from the DfES. The actual pupil numbers recorded in PLASC are generally slightly lower than schools’ forecast numbers. This has had the effect of reducing Kingston’s grant by £273,000 compared to the estimate used in the Schools Funding Consultation Booklet and in reports to the Schools Forum and Executive. However, the Month 10 budget monitoring has revealed additional savings of £200,100, increasing the balance carried forward to 2007/08 to £285,100.

In the light of these developments, it is recommended that the revised Schools Budget attached at Annex 3 be approved. Using the PLASC pupil numbers, this means the headline funding per pupil under 16 going to mainstream schools will be £3,614 (a 6.27% increase over 2006/07) compared to £3,604 implicit in the 13 February report to Executive.

N5

There are two other changes to note. Firstly, using the PLASC figures in the Special Schools formula has reduced the funding requirement by £14,300 and it is recommended that this sum be transferred to the Special Schools (Exceptional Needs) Budget (row 2 to row 5). Secondly, the arrangements in respect of certain new SEN Resourced Provision have now been finalised, allowing the sum of £61,400 to be transferred to the Nursery, Primary and Secondary Schools delegated budgets (row 26 to row 1).

It should be noted that PLASC data are still subject both to local and national checking and the final figures will not be confirmed by the DfES until May 2007. In addition, the Early Years Census was still in progress at the time of writing. Any significant variation will be reported at the meeting. Consequently, the DfES will not be announcing the final cash value of the authority’s DSG until May 2007 and it may subsequently be necessary to propose further changes.

10. Environmental Services

(i) Parking Services

As previously reported the agreed strategy for managing the parking services budget is to use additional in-year surpluses from the on-street account to offset the underlying budget pressure in the off-street business.

The Off Street parking position at month 10 has improved by £52,000, primarily due to new season ticket sales. A corresponding reduction has been made in the contribution from the On Street Parking Account.

(ii) Street Lighting and Signs Energy

As previously reported, there was a significant increase in energy prices affecting the street lighting and signs budget from October 2006. A detailed review of the energy payments for street lighting and signs by the service manager indicates that this budget will be overspent by £110,000 after taking into account the price rise.

(iii) Waste Management and Recycling.

The net underspend on Waste Management is now forecast at £277,000 based on month 10 figures, an increase of £20,000 from the position reported at month 8. An assessment of the Council’s potential Landfill Allowance Trading Scheme (LATS) liability for 2006/07 has also been made based on the third quarter’s waste data. Assuming a level of waste going to landfill for the fourth quarter which is consistent with last year, it is anticipated that the Council will meet its LATS target, although the position will be tight. The Council does, however, have unused permits brought forward from 2005/06.

11. Central Services

(i) Local Land Charges Income – based upon the activity to month 8, there is still a projected income shortfall of £45,000. This is due to a reduction in searches and an increasing proportion of personal searches.

N6

(ii) Energy costs – Guildhall Complex – based upon present consumption, the impact of recent price increases in electricity means that there is a potential overspending of £25,000.

(iii) Interest and capital financing – due to the ongoing impact of some debt restructuring towards the end of 2005/06, and the recent increase in interest rates, together with continuing strong cash flow, a net underspending (additional income) of £1,000,000 is now forecast.

(iv) Housing Benefits Subsidy – as previously reported, the final accounts for 2005/06 had to be completed before the benefit subsidy claim could be complied. Now the audit has been finalised, and the claim total is £95,000 more than was allowed for in the 2005/06 accounts. This will provide one-off additional income in 2006/07.

(v) Housing Benefits Overpayments – due to changes in regulations (issued by the Government), annual “reviews” of benefit claims are no longer required. Instead, the Council undertakes “targeted interventions”, which means that in specified cases officers contact the claimant to find out whether his/her circumstances have changed since the claim was made. Over a prolonged period, all claims will be checked via this process. In the intervening period, the onus is on the claimant to notify the Council of any changes in his/her circumstances (eg increase in income etc). The requirements for benefits are different from those for tax credits and this has led (nationally) to an increase in overpayments of benefit being identified when the “intervention” occurs. This affects Councils’ benefit subsidy position. RBK’s experience is similar to that of other local authorities and the estimated impact in 2006/07 is a net cost of £100,000. In the longer term, the overpayments will be recovered, but as in many cases the claimant continues to receive benefit (albeit at a lower rate), the speed at which the overpayment can be recovered is limited to that prescribed by the regulations.

(vi) Local Public Service Agreement (LPSA) Reward Grant – in setting the 2006/07 budget, income in respect of the first revenue tranche of LPSA reward grant (£600,000) was anticipated. Based upon the Council’s performance against its “stretch” targets, it is now estimated that only £450,000 will be received.

12. Neighbourhood Committees

(i) The Neighbourhood Committees received detailed budget monitoring reports at their meetings in February 2007. In view of the provisions of the Neighbourhood Budgeting Code of Practice (in which the Neighbourhoods are required to contain their own overspends and are permitted to carry forward underspendings), a net variation of zero (excluding Libraries) is reported here.

(ii) The position regarding Branch Libraries (overspending of £120,000) is as previously reported. The causes of this overspending are common in most cases. The Hook Centre opened on 20 January 2007, and it is anticipated that in addition to the additional costs of the library service (£32,500), that there will be a net additional cost of £31,000 in respect of the Centre and Recording Studio, as it is anticipated that there will be a bedding in period before income is sufficient to cover the direct running expenses of these facilities. It should be noted that the full year cost of the Hook Centre has been

N7

provided for in the 2007/08 budget. The South of the Borough Neighbourhood Committee received a detailed report in September. It is suggested that Neighbourhood Committees bear the libraries situation in mind when considering the allocation of any underspendings and discretionary spending.

13. Local Authorities Business Growth Incentive Scheme (LABGI)

(i) On 28 February 2007, the Council was notified by the Department for Communities and Local Government that it will receive £733,583 from the LABGI scheme for 2006. This represents a proportion of the additional business rate income arising from a growth in rateable value in 2006. The scheme is complex, volatile and unpredictable, as demonstrated by the following analysis.

(ii) In 2005, 14 of the London Boroughs (including RBK) received nothing from the scheme. For 2006, 9 of these will receive amounts ranging from £27,000 to £1.2 million. Three London Boroughs which received amounts between £36,000 and £835,000 in 2005 will receive nothing in 2006. Some Boroughs’ receipts vary hugely from 2005 to 2006. Wandsworth receives £0.3 million less in 2006 than in 2005, while Ealing receives £5.2 million more.

(iii) In the light of these figures, it is not appropriate to budget on the basis that RBK will receive significant sums from LABGI year on year. The payment for 2006 will be received in March 2007, and is General Fund income. It is suggested that this be transferred to the Invest to Save Reserve, to meet some of the one-off costs which will be required as RBK implements the future phases of its medium term service and financial plan, Changing Kingston – Choosing our Future.

14. Housing Revenue Account

The 2006/07 projected outturn shows a net contribution to reserves of £113,000. This is summarised at Annex 4. The major expenditure and income variances are as follows:

reduced employee costs (£451,000) as result of staff vacancies;

a transfer of £186,000 which is no longer required for rent rebates to debt charges to finance additional capital expenditure in 2006/07;

the completion of earlier years’ external decorations programme, shown as capital spending of £400,000 financed from reserves;

underspending on supplies and services as a result of £250,000 set aside for one off costs of restructuring not being required in 2006/07 – this amount will be carried forward as a specific reserve.

INCOME

15. It is now considered best practice under the Use of Resources Assessment to report the position in respect of the Council’s income to the Executive. This is addressed in the following paragraphs.

N8

16. General Fund – major income budgets form part of the budget risk analysis considered each year as part of the process for setting the Council’s budget and determining the appropriate level of reserves. Variations in respect of these income budgets are reported above, in accordance with previous practice.

17. Housing Rents and Service Charges the position on rent income is reported as part of the Housing Revenue Account monitoring process.

18. Council Tax – this is accounted for within the Collection Fund. The collectable debit for 2006/07 (ie after allowing for benefits, discounts and exemptions) is £81.8 million. As at 31 January 2007, 94.5% of this had been collected, compared with 93.7% for the same period in 2005/06. This improvement indicates that the Council’s target in respect of the Best Value Performance Indicator (BVPI9) of 97.2% in year collection should be achieved or exceeded. Action to collect the outstanding debts will continue in 2007/08.

19. Collection of previous years’ arrears has also improved in 2006/07. As at 31 January, arrears had reduced by 34%, compared with 27.6% in the same period in 2005/06.

20. The improved collection performance was reflected in the Collection Fund surplus which formed part of the calculation for setting the 2007/08 council tax.

21. National Non-Domestic Rates (NNDR) – these are collected by RBK and paid over to the Government for redistribution via the Forma Grant system. The collectable debit in 2006/07 is £68.1 million (after allowing for voids, exemptions etc). As at 31 January 2007, 96.1% of this had been collected, compared with 95.3% last year. This improvement again indicates that the Council’s target for in-year collection (BVPI10) of 99% should be achieved. Again, any outstanding debts will be pursued in 2007/08 and beyond.

22. Collection of previous years’ arrears has also improved. As at 31 January 2007, arrears had reduced by 23.5%, compared with 16.9% in the same period in 2005/06.

23. These improvements in collection of council tax and NNDR are a contributing factor to the strengths of the Council’s cash flow, which in turn has produced additional income from interest receipts (see para 11(iii) above).

SUMMARY

24. The above items indicate that there is a potential net underspending of £481,000. In the context of the Council’s overall expenditure (£318.4 million gross, £103.6 million net) this is a small variation.

25. There are a number of emerging pressures which are likely to have an on-going and increasing impact in 2007/08 and future years. An example of this is energy where the significant recent rises in prices will increase in effect as the Council’s existing price supply contracts expire. These were allowed for in the 2007/08 budget and will continue to be addressed as part of the Council’s Medium Term Financial Planning work.

26. The position will continue to be monitored closely by Directors. Tight financial control is being exercised with all budgets being managed by “cost centre managers” (budget holders). All expenditure is properly scrutinised.

N9

27. Additionally, taking into account the 2007/08 outlook and the medium term position, in setting the budget for 2006/07, the Council on 1 March 2006 approved the continuation of restraint on recruitment and also non-staff expenditure. This restraint will facilitate opportunities for reducing expenditure further, as well as providing flexibility for 2007/08 onwards.

28. Finally, Directors and Chief Officers have been reminded again of their responsibilities for budget management (ie to ensure that the budget is not overspent). The CDT has a programme for reviewing in detail the areas of budget pressure and for continuing scrutiny of the overall position.

TIMESCALES

29. It is good practice for the Executive to receive regular and timely updates on the Council’s actual expenditure against budget. This is the latest of those reports for 2006/07.


30. There are no direct environmental implications arising from this report. The increased expenditure on energy arises solely from rises in the price of fuel, rather than changes in consumption. However, if it proves possible to reduce the consumption of energy to offset these price rises, that would have some environmental benefit.

Background papers: held by Jeremy Randall (author of report), 020 8547 5572; e-mail: [email protected] 1. Revenue budget 2006/07 2. Report to Executive – 22 February 2006 – Appendix A 3. Report to Executive – 20 June 2006 – Appendix A 4. Report to Executive – 25 July 2006 – Appendix F 5. Report to Executive – 3 October 2006 – Appendix C 6. Report to Executive – 7 November 2006 – Appendix G 7. Report to Executive – 23 January 2007 – Appendix G 8. Changing Kingston – Choosing our Future – Medium Term Service and Financial

Plan 2007-11. 9. email from The Department for Communities & Local Government 28 February 2007

(LABGI).

N10

AN

NEX

1

BU

DG

ET M

ON

ITO

RIN

G 2

006/

07 -

TO M

ON

TH 1

0 (3

1 JA

NU

AR

Y 20

07)

(A)

(B)

(C)

(D)

(E)

(A +

B)

(D -

C)

App

rove

dLa

test

Com

mitt

ee/S

ervi

ce A

rea

Orig

inal

Sup

plem

enta

ryA

ppro

ved

Fore

cast

Est

imat

eE

stim

ates

Est

imat

eO

uttu

rnV

aria

tion

2006

/07

& V

irem

ents

2006

/07

2006

/07

£ooo

£ooo

£ooo

£ooo

£ooo

Tota

l - N

eigh

bour

hood

s6,

341

284

6,62

56,

776

151

Lear

ning

and

Chi

ldre

n's

Ser

vice

s34

,616

034

,616

34,7

5013

4

Com

mun

ity S

ervi

ces

45,6

750

45,6

7545

,931

256

Env

ironm

enta

l Ser

vice

s24

,555

024

,555

24,4

08-1

47

Cen

tral S

ervi

ces

-7,6

180

-7,6

18-8

,493

-875

TOTA

L10

3,56

928

410

3,85

310

3,37

2-4

81

add:

Sup

plem

enta

ry E

stim

ates

(allo

cate

d in

col

. B)

Nei

ghbo

urho

od u

nder

spen

ding

s fro

m 2

005/

06 c

arrie

dfo

rwar

d to

be

spen

t in

2006

/07

284

Tota

l app

rove

d bu

dget

103,

853

N1B

udge

tMon

itorin

gX1b

mon

0607

m10

0.xl

sjp

r/ 12

/03/

07

Exe

cutiv

e - 2

0 M

arch

200

7

N11 ANNEX 2

£ooo £ooo £ooo £ooo £ooo £ooo £ooo £ooo

1 Learning & Children's ServicesChildren & Families - external placements 92 66 13 0 - Family placements 0 -100 -130 -183 - Day Care sponsorships 0 73 41 41 - Unaccompanied Asylum Seeking Children 70 70 70 -15Libraries (Strategic) 34 34 41 20Social Inclusion Service -35 -106 -2 6SEN Home to School Transport 45 58 95 55Use of Revenue to meet capital overspendings 0 0 0 193Other Minor Variations (net) 60 82 10 17

266 177 138 134

2 Community ServicesHomeless families 114 113 97 118Community Care - purchasing costs 88 70 70 49 - domiciliary care 105 -5 5 -18 - residential care 445 692 628 505 - other -9 -180 -234 -276Other Minor Variations (net) -172 -76 -142 -122

571 614 424 256

3 Environmental ServicesOff street parking income and energy 349 401 116 64On street parking income -246 -246 -131 -77Street Lighting & Signs - energy 110 110 110 110Waste management & recycling -177 -177 -257 -277Other Minor Variations (net) 70 40 -9 33

106 128 -171 -147

4 Central ServicesLand Charges - reduced income 60 50 45 45Interest & capital financing -400 -600 -750 -1,000HB Subsidy 2005/06 -115 -115 -115 -95HB overpayments (net of subsidy) 0 100 100 100LPSA Reward Grant 0 0 100 150Other Minor Variations (net) 25 25 25 -75

-430 -540 -595 -875

5 NeighbourhoodsBranch Libraries 98 124 120 120Hook Centre (South of the Borough) 0 31 31 31Other Minor Variations (net) 0 0 0 0

98 155 151 151

611 534 -53 -481

BUDGET MONITORING 2006/07 TO 31 JANUARY 2007 ( MONTH 10 )

LIST OF MAJOR VARIATIONS

MONTH 4 MONTH 6 MONTH 8 MONTH 10

N2BudgetMonitoringX20.xls12/03/07

Executive - 20 March 2007

N12 ANNEX 3

LEARNING AND CHILDREN'S SERVICES REVENUE ESTIMATES2007/08

SCHOOLS BUDGET

Approved Budget 2006/07

Projected Outturn 2006/07

February Budget 2007/08

March Budget 2007/08 Changes

£ £ £ £ £SCHOOLS' DELEGATED BUDGETS

1 Surbiton Children's Centre Nursery, Primary and Secondary Schools 74,268,100 74,438,100 78,778,500 78,767,000 11,500cr2 Special Schools 4,291,500 4,291,500 4,708,500 4,694,200 14,300cr

3 INDIVIDUAL SCHOOLS BUDGET (ISB) 78,559,600 78,729,600 83,487,000 83,461,200 25,800cr

SPECIAL NEEDS BUDGETSSupport for SEN pupils in RBK Schools

RBK Pupils in mainstream schools4 Early Intervention 254,000 208,900 262,800 262,800 - 5 RBK Pupils in Special Schools (Exceptional Needs) 40,000 51,100 96,700 111,000 14,300 6 Other Local Authorities Pupils in Special Schools - 62,600 55,100 55,100 - 7 Service for Sensory Impairment 83,900 83,900 87,000 87,000 -

Payments to Other Local Authorities - 8 Places in SEN Schools 871,000 908,700 1,168,500 1,168,500 - 9 SEN support to RBK pupils in mainstream schools 168,000 196,300 247,000 247,000 -

10 Hospital Tuition 32,000 32,000 32,000 32,000 - 11 Places in independent and voluntary SEN schools 3,147,000 3,187,700 3,288,200 3,288,200 -

13 4,595,900 4,731,200 5,237,300 5,251,600 14,300 Income

Payments from Other Local Authorities14 Places in RBK Special Schools 992,000cr 1,131,200cr 1,239,800cr 1,239,800cr - 15 SEN support to pupils in RBK Mainstream Schools 210,000cr 275,200cr 282,900cr 282,900cr -

16 1,202,000cr 275,200cr 1,522,700cr 1,522,700cr -

16 Net Expenditure 3,393,900 3,324,800 3,714,600 3,728,900 14,300

OTHER SCHOOL RELATED BUDGETS17 Provision for additional full time education for excluded pupils - - 26,000 26,000 - 18 Non-maintained Nursery Provision 1,340,000 1,245,300 1,372,000 1,372,000 - 19 Boarding School Places for Children in Need - 82,500 86,600 86,600 - 20 Practical Learning Options 113,000 113,000 199,000 199,000 - 21 Invest to Save' Borrowing (St Philip's) 193,000 91,000 185,300 185,300 - 22 Combined Services towards Every Child Matters agenda 75,000 75,000 150,000 150,000 - 23 Match Funding for Broadband Connectivity 14,000 14,000 15,000 15,000 - 24 School meals service (St Philips and Dysart) 56,800 59,800 63,900 63,900 -

School specific contingencies - 25 Additional SEN Matrix Allocations 201,600 315,900 300,000 300,000 - 26 SEN Resourced Provision 131,000 106,000 290,000 228,600 61,400cr27 Other Contingencies 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 - 28 Union Duty Cover 33,000 39,000 40,200 40,200 - 29 Standards Fund Expenditure (Schools Budget element) 4,994,700 5,154,000 5,241,800 5,241,800 - 30 School Standards Grant Expenditure 2,664,100 3,081,300 3,876,200 3,876,200 -

31 Net Expenditure 9,916,200 10,476,800 11,946,000 11,884,600 61,400cr

DIRECTORATE BUDGETS32 Provision for statemented pupils 85,800 91,800 86,700 86,700 - 33 Provision for non-statemented pupils with SEN 193,300 193,300 201,300 201,300 - 34 Support for inclusion 16,900 38,000 18,400 18,400 - 35 Pupil Referral Units 472,000 446,800 489,500 489,500 - 36 Behaviour Support Services 178,800 119,700 185,400 185,400 - 37 Education out of school 139,800 80,800 153,800 153,800 - 38 Early Years Service 205,800 204,700 214,100 214,100 - 39 School Meals & Milk 26,100 28,400 30,900 30,900 - 40 School admissions 225,800 230,400 239,700 239,700 - 41 Servicing of schools forums 9,000 7,400 9,700 9,700 -

42 Net Expenditure 1,553,300 1,441,300 1,629,500 1,629,500 -

43 CENTRAL EXPENDITURE 14,863,400 15,242,900 17,290,100 17,243,000 47,100cr

44 SCHOOLS BUDGET 93,423,000 93,972,500 100,777,100 100,704,200 72,900cr-

FINANCED BY45 Dedicated Schools Grant 73,561,000cr 73,799,000cr 78,549,000cr 78,276,000cr 273,000 46 Standards Fund Grant (Schools Budget element) 4,994,700cr 5,154,000cr 5,241,800cr 5,241,800cr - 47 School Standards Grant 2,664,100cr 3,081,300cr 3,876,200cr 3,876,200cr - 48 Learning and Skills Council - Post 16 provision in schools 11,449,200cr 11,469,300cr 12,247,200cr 12,247,200cr - 49 Learning and Skills Council - Post 16 SEN provision 754,000cr 754,000cr 777,900cr 777,900cr - 50 Balance Brought Forward - - 85,000cr 285,100cr 200,100cr

51 93,423,000cr 94,257,600cr 100,777,100cr 100,704,200cr 72,900

52 Surplus (cr) or Deficit to be reallocated or carried forward - 285,100cr - - -

N13 Annex 4

HOUSING REVENUE ACCOUNT BUDGET MONITORING 2006/07 - Month 10

AdjustedBudget Projected Variation2006/07 Outturn 2006/07

£ £ £EXPENDITURE

Employees 6,388,000 5,948,000 -440,000PremisesRunning Expenses 1,266,000 1,184,000 -82,000Repairs & Maintenance* 2,857,000 2,957,000 100,000

Transport 195,000 197,000 2,000Supplies & Services 1,664,000 1,471,000 -193,000Rent Rebates 186,000 0 -186,000Bad Debt Provision 163,000 163,000 0Recharges to/from other accounts 1,676,000 1,704,000 28,000HRA Subsidy Payment 4,904,000 4,939,000 35,000Capital Financing* 4,534,000 5,120,000 586,000

TOTAL EXPENDITURE 23,833,000 23,683,000 -150,000

INCOMERents, less Voids 20,304,000 20,279,000 -25,000Service Charges 3,410,000 3,380,000 -30,000Other 72,000 90,000 18,000Interest 47,000 47,000 0

TOTAL INCOME 23,833,000 23,796,000 -37,000

Net surplus 0 -113,000 -113,000

N4BudgetMonitoringX40.xls Executive - 20 March 2007

APPENDIX O Executive, 20 March 2007

IRRECOVERABLE DEBTS FOR WRITE OFF Report by the Strategic Director of Finance Leader of the Council

Purpose

The Council’s standing orders require the Executive’s approval for the write-off of individual debts of more than £11,000 where these are irrecoverable. This report provides details of nine debts for write-off in the 2006/07 financial year. They relate to debts for which all possible routes to seek recovery have been pursued.

Action proposed by the Leader of the Council: The Executive is requested to approve that the following debts be written off as irrecoverable: 1. National Non-Domestic Rates totalling £413,451.39 as listed in paragraph 3 of this

report; and

2. Housing Rents of £13,166.68 as detailed in paragraph 6 of this report.

Reason for action proposed To remove the items from the list of outstanding debts in readiness for preparing the 2006/07 final accounts.

BACKGROUND

1. Collection of income is carried out by various Council departments. There are detailed written procedures for recovery of these debts in the event of non-payment. Inevitably there are occasions when individual debts prove to be irrecoverable. The procedures provide for the way in which these are written off. The write off of amounts up to £11,000 is delegated to Officers. Irrecoverable items of more than £11,000 require the approval of the Executive. The debts submitted for write-off in this report fall into two categories, national non-domestic rates and housing rents.

NATIONAL NON-DOMESTIC RATES

2. In each of the cases shown below, exhaustive attempts were made to recover the debts. These have proved unsuccessful. All of the cases relate to companies which are bankrupt, in Liquidation or Administration, or which have been dissolved.

3. Case details are shown in Annex 1 which is set out in the exempt section of the agenda. The individual cases and amounts to be written off are summarised below:

O2

Account No Amount £ £ (i) 1330926 21,573.41

(ii) 1332996 99,447.63

(iii) 1341855 54,602.94 1341863 10,937.90 65,540.84

(iv) 1318292 36,673.57

(v) 1303546 1,354.34 1303554 129,545.68 1339460 831.01 131,731.03

(vi) 1333372 33,295.10

(vii) 1274066 11,183.33

(viii) 1308912 14,006.48

413,451.39

4. The NNDR collected by the Council is paid into the national pool and redistributed among local authorities as Government grant. If NNDR debts are written off as irrecoverable, then these reduce the council’s contribution to the national pool by the same amount. There are, therefore, no direct financial implications for RBK arising from this matter.

HOUSING RENTS

5. The Rent Income Recovery Strategy was approved by the Executive on 30 August 2005. It sets out in detail the procedures to be followed in cases where tenants fall into arrears.

6. The case submitted for write-off pre-dates the Strategy. A money judgement was obtained from the Courts and the tenants were evicted in 2000. Attempts to trace them and enforce the debt have proved unsuccessful. The Head of Legal Services advises that the judgement for enforcement of the debt is now “out of time”. It is therefore proposed that the amount summarised below be written off as irrecoverable.

Miss D and Mr T Account No 62050609 £13,166.68

7. The property is within the Private Leasing Scheme, which is a General Fund budget. However, the write-off can be met from the bad debt provision, which is set aside to address cases of this type.

O3

TIMESCALE

8. The write-off needs to be approved by 31 March 2007 to be reflected in the Council’s accounts for 2006/07.


9. None. Background papers : held by Jeremy Randall (author of report), 020 8547 5572; e-mail: [email protected] 1. Recovery and Write Off Procedures 2. NNDR case files (exempt) 3. Housing Rents case details (exempt)

APPENDIX P Executive, 20 March 2007

RETIREMENT AND STAFFING REDUCTIONS POLICIES Report by Strategic Director of Finance and Head of Human Resources Leader of the Council Purpose New legislation and regulations require changes to the Council’s policies and provisions for retirements and redundancy payments. Age Discrimination legislation and Local Government Pension Scheme changes have created more flexibility around when staff can retire and receive benefits. There are also changes to the compensation which can be paid on redundancy – the powers of Local Authorities to award Compensatory Added Years to pensions have been removed, and there are new discretions to award lump sum payments. As well as the legislative requirements, at a time of organisational change with the Changing Kingston – Choosing our Future agenda, it is timely to consider our retirement and severance arrangements to ensure robust and fair policies are in place which support RBK’s future direction as well as presenting value for money. Action proposed by Leader of Council: The Executive is requested to: 1. Note the operation of the Staffing Reductions and Early Retirement policies from

November 2005 to February 2007 (Annex 1), and endorse the continued use of the schemes to 31 March 2007.

2. Endorse a revised retirement policy for non-teaching staff (Annex 2). 3. Approve a revised scheme for Redundancy Severance Payments from 1 April 2007 as

set out in paragraph 17. Reason for the action proposed To respond to legislative and regulation changes in retirement and redundancy severance payment provisions and ensure revised policies are in place for the future. OPERATION OF STAFFING REDUCTIONS AND EARLY RETIREMENT POLICIES 1. In line with Audit Commission guidance there is an annual review of the operation of

the staffing reductions and early retirement policies which is considered by the Executive. The Staffing Reductions Policy provides a framework for managing the staffing implications of organisational change which complies with legal requirements and best practice. The policy provides for severance payments on redundancy. Potentially redundant staff who are over age 50 may apply for Voluntary Early Retirement (VER) as an alternative to redundancy. However, the Staffing Reductions Policy is explicit that ‘in view of the costs involved VER will be used as a last resort after other measures have been explored’. Over recent years the budget process has required minimal deletions of filled posts and therefore a low level of use of the staffing reductions provisions has been necessary. During the period currently under review (November 2005 to February 2007) there has been some use of Staffing Reductions and Early Retirement policies as a result of organisational changes and agreed early

P2

retirements. Annex 1, which is set out in the Exempt section of the agenda, details the position. Outside schools there were 8 instances of redundancy and 6 instances of retirement in the interests of the efficiency of the service. In Schools in the same period where there were 2 redundancies and 2 instances of early retirement. The continued operation of existing schemes for staffing reductions is recommended to 31 March 2007.

RETIREMENT ARRANGEMENTS 2. The normal retirement age for staff is age 65. However retirement can take effect with

the employer’s agreement either beyond age 65, or earlier than age 65, in accordance with provisions in the Age Discrimination Regulations (effective from October 2006) and early retirement provisions of the Local Government Pension Scheme (LGPS). The range of retirement options and conditions has been brought together into a retirement policy at Annex 2. The policy summarises the retirement provisions which exist, sets out responsibilities for the operation of the provisions and, where appropriate, specifies how the employer will use discretionary powers.

3. The use of the provisions for flexibilities around retirement age are important as part of

the Council’s approach to maintaining our position as an employer of choice as well as being part of the range of measures for implementing organisational change. For example the flexible retirement options, which were introduced as part of the LGPS in April 2006, provide for eligible employees over 50, to receive immediate pension benefits when they reduce their hours or change to a lower graded position. Benefits would generally be paid at a reduced rate and therefore there would be no cost to the pension fund. For some staff this will be an attractive way of winding down to or delaying retirement, and for the organisation it is a way of retaining valuable skills with the potential to reduce salary costs.

4. However, the costs of early retirement, or extensions of service can be significant and

accordingly, particularly at a time of on-going financial restraint, the full costs need to be considered in making decisions on employee retirement applications. The proposed policy at Annex 2 requires any costs of a retirement application to be balanced by a robust business case.

VOLUNTARY EARLY RETIREMENT 5. As stated above RBK’s Voluntary Early Retirement (VER) Scheme is currently

available for eligible LGPS members as an alternative to redundancy. This is generally an attractive option financially. The scheme provides for immediate payment of pension benefits to eligible staff over 50 with the provision of added years. There is a sliding scale (agreed in 1998) of between 1 and 10 added years based on length of RBK service. There are significant financial implications in the operation of VER particularly in relation to staff who are high earners, in their early 50s and who have long RBK service. The capitalised costs of VER have made it prohibitive in recent years to select those with eligibility for VER as redundant where the objective has been to achieve budget reductions. The VER scheme has been based on provisions in the LGPS to award compensatory added years. However, the relevant regulation has now been removed and new compensation powers have been introduced. Accordingly there is a need to decide on a scheme for redundancy severance compensation for RBK for the future. (see paragraph 9 below).

P3

REDUNDANCY 6. There is a statutory scheme of Redundancy Payments for staff whose posts cease or

diminish. The payments are based on age, length of service and the value of a week’s pay. There is a statutory minimum of a week’s pay (currently £290 per week) and a statutory maximum of the total number of years of service which can be recognised of 20 years service (this would create a maximum redundancy payment of 30 weeks’ pay for those who are over age 61).

7. At RBK staff who are made redundant receive redundancy payments based on age,

salary and length of continuous local government service. RBK’s Staffing Reductions policy provides for redundancy payments to be based on actual weeks’ pay rather than the statutory minimum. The statutory maximum number of years service recognised for calculating redundancy payments is applied at RBK. There was also some scope for enhancing redundancy payments for staff dependent on the individual circumstances. This provision was introduced in the 1990s after the North Tyneside case which led to the withdrawal of redundancy payments schemes. However, no use has been made of the provision for enhancing redundancy payments over recent years.

8. Staff who are over 50 who decide not to apply for VER benefits as an alternative to

redundancy remain entitled to receive a redundancy payment as set out above and are eligible to receive under the LGPS immediate (unenhanced) payment of their pension benefits in addition to a redundancy payment. Staff who are nearing normal retirement age and who are near to accruing their maximum pension benefits would be more likely to opt for a redundancy payment over VER.

NEW COMPENSATION REGULATIONS 9. After a lengthy period of consultation and a significant delay the Department for

Communities and Local Government (DCLG) has issued a statutory instrument which impacts on the compensation payments which can be awarded to an employee whose contract ends on the grounds of redundancy or efficiency. The facility for Local Authorities to pay compensatory added years to pensions as in the Council’s VER scheme has been removed. The new Regulations provide local government employers with powers to consider making a one off lump sum payment to an employee which must not exceed 104 weeks’ pay. (Although the new Regulations no longer provide for the award of compensatory added years, it is still possible to augment a member’s pension by virtue of regulation 52 of the 1997 regulations. Normally augmentation will allow for only up to 6 2/3 years to be added to pensions.)

10. The new Regulations came into force on 29 November 2006 and had a retrospective

effect from 1 October 2006. The regulations contain transitional provisions which RBK is using allowing for the earlier regulations to continue to the end of March 2007. This means that an employer may make an award of compensatory added years to any employee whose employment terminates before April 2007. Accordingly all staff affected by the 2007/08 budget process whose employment will terminate on 31 March 2007 will receive the entitlements based on the current schemes.

PROPOSALS 11. In the light of the revised compensation regulations, some options for the future

(Annex 3) have been developed for consultation. The consultation included:

P4

• Consultation Paper with proposals sent to Staff Side Secretary – December

2006

• Consideration by Directorate Management Teams during January 2007

• Consideration at all Directorate Consultative Groups during January/February 2007

• Consultation paper available on HR intranet site from January 2007

• Staff Update items – December 2006 and January 2007 editions

• Staff Consultative Committee consideration – 1 February 2007Discussions at Monthly Meeting with Staff Side representatives – 25 January and 19 February 2007

12. The provision in the LGPS for the immediate payment of benefits to scheme members

made redundant creates a significant difference in the total level of compensation receivable between staff over 50 and those under 50. The current VER scheme where added years are awarded to those with long RBK service further benefited staff over 50 whereas gave no benefit to those under 50. Accordingly when reviewing the way forward for compensation payments some consideration has been given towards equalising the benefits between those under and over age 50.

13. Option 1 provides for a scheme of compensation benefits which replicates as far as

possible existing arrangements. As the value of the added years under the VER scheme is so significant (the equivalent of 138 weeks’ pay for 10 added years based on a maximum of 30 years RBK services) this would require awarding eligible staff on redundancy up to the maximum under the new compensation regulations of 104 weeks’ pay. As an alternative RBK could exercise its discretion to augment pensions and provide for up to 62/3 added years based on length of RBK service. Under option 1 staff aged under 50 would receive a statutory redundancy payment based on actual earnings, in line with the existing arrangements. Based on a weighted sample of 100 redundancies the cost of compensation payments under option 1 would be an estimated £1.64M.

14. Option 2 provides for a scheme of compensation benefits which would be the most

cost efficient to the Council with the payment of statutory redundancy payments based on actual earnings to all staff. This would provide up to a maximum of 30 weeks’ pay as a redundancy payment. In addition eligible staff over age 50 would be able to receive immediate payment of pension benefits on redundancy. Based on a weighted sample of 100 redundancies the cost of compensation payments under option 2 would be an estimated £1.17M.

15. Option 3 provides for a scheme of compensation benefits which provides for some

equalisation of benefits between staff over and under age 50. Redundancy payments would be based on 2 weeks’ pay for each year of RBK service up to a maximum of 40 weeks’ pay. In addition eligible staff over age 50 would be able to receive immediate payment of pension benefits on redundancy. Based on a weighted sample of 100 redundancies the cost of compensation payments under option 3 would be an estimated £1.45M.

16. There has been a low level of response to the consultation from staff in Directorate

Consultative Groups and individually. From the few responses made (largely from

P5

staff over age 50) there is support for Option 1. Staff Side have made representations at the monthly meeting with the Chief Executive and Head of Human Resources, and at Staff Consultative Committee, that the preferred way forward would be option 1. Management teams in reviewing the options for the future have been particularly mindful of the costs of redundancy payments. In view of the financial outlook for the Council, and the likelihood of a higher level of staffing reductions for the future it is considered that Option 1 is unaffordable and would lead to a higher level of staff reductions in order to meet the cost of redundancy payments than the other options.

RECOMMENDATION 17. In the light of the Council’s budget outlook and the significant costs of the redundancy

/ severance payments proposals it is recommended that the redundancy severance compensation should be made on the basis set out below. This is an amalgamation of options 2 and 3. The estimated cost of the recommendation based on a weighted sample of 100 redundancies is £1.35M. The proposal recognises the benefit to LGPS members of immediate payment of pension benefits on redundancy and goes some way to equalising the position with those under age 50. In all the circumstances it is considered to be a workable, affordable and reasonable proposal.

It is recommended that RBK’s policy on the operation of its discretion under the 2006 Discretionary Payment Regulations effective from 1 April 2007 should be: 1. Staff who are members of the Local Government Pension Scheme and who are eligible to

receive immediate pension benefits on redundancy (currently staff who are over age 50)

• Statutory redundancy payment based on actual pay 2. Staff who are ineligible for the immediate payment of pension benefits on redundancy (ie

who are under age 50 or who are not members of the Pension scheme)

• Enhanced redundancy payment based on actual pay and 2 years pay for each year of continuous RBK service up to a maximum of 40 weeks pay.

MONITORING AND REVIEW The operation of RBK’s policies in relation to redundancy severance payments and early retirements will be monitored and will be reported annually to the Executive, in accordance with good practice and Audit Commission Guidance. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS None arising from this report Background Papers: held by Sheila West (author of report), 020 8547 5153; e-mail: [email protected]

• RBK’s Staffing Reductions Policy • LGPS Regulations • Age discrimination regulations and guidance

P6

ANNEX 2

Retirement Policy

Purpose It is a requirement of the London Government Pension Scheme (LGPS) that policies on early retirement are set out. We make a considerable investment in our Human Resources policies to enable our staff to make the best possible contribution to meeting our organisational goals. This means having policies which recognise and reflect legislative changes which impact upon our current practices. There are two new pieces of legislation which have resulted in changes to the Local Government Pension Scheme and the Discretionary Compensation Regulations - The Finance Act 2004 and The Employment Equality (Age) Regulations 2006. In light of this it is timely to consider the Council retirement arrangements to ensure that we have robust, fair and value for money policies and practices which support our future direction. This policy outlines the various retirement options which take into consideration the Council’s Work-life Balance Strategy and aim to clarify and provide equity for all Council staff. Scope This policy applies to all non-teaching Council staff. This policy will be adapted for teaching staff in light of the changes to the Teachers’ Pension Scheme anticipated over the next year. Responsibilities Employees

• To adhere to the relevant procedures in place when considering and applying for particular retirement options.

Heads of Service • To ensure fair consideration is given to all requests for early retirement in accordance

with the relevant policies and procedures. Head of Human Resources

• To provide policy guidance and advice on retirement arrangements to staff, in conjunction with Pension Services.

• To fairly authorise all applications for flexible retirement taking into consideration all relevant factors.

• To make recommendations to the Chief Executive and Strategic Director of Finance on the retirement provisions and early payment of pension benefits as specified within this policy.

Chief Executive/Strategic Director of Finance • To consider fairly recommendations and make appropriate decisions on retirement

applications and early payment of pension benefits as specified within this policy.

P7

Local Government Pension Scheme Provisions (LGPS) Members of the pension scheme at age 65 are entitled to retirement benefits calculated in accordance with the LGPS Regulations. In addition members will receive a tax free cash lump sum of three times their pension. The calculation will be adjusted if members are, or have worked, part-time. Members of the pension scheme may retire at any age from 60 onwards and receive pension benefits, but they may be actuarially reduced.

Retirement Options at 65 Fair retirement under the Age Regulations The normal retirement age is 65, however in light of the recent changes there is now provision for those who stay in employment beyond age 65 to remain members of the Local Government Pension Scheme (LGPS) to age 75. The Age Regulations in place from October 2006 provide for employees who wish, subject to the permission of the employer, to remain at work beyond normal retirement age. The decision to allow members of staff to carry on working beyond retirement age is determined by Heads of Service. General criteria which managers will consider when looking at a request to carry on working is whether the post is still needed within the service or whether there are any plans for a restructure which may affect the current post. Also whether there is any sickness absence, capability or conduct issues with the staff member concerned. Full details on the Regulations can be found on the Human Resources Homepage under ‘Guidance on the Employment Equality (Age) Regulations 2006’. Flexible Retirement at age 65 Flexible retirement is an option introduced into the Pension Scheme from 6 April 2006 allowing members of staff to retire and take their pension benefits and continue working on a reduced hours basis or in a lower graded job. These provisions are available to staff age 50 and over subject to the agreement of the employer. Employees who reduce their hours must usually do so by half of the usual hours they work or by at least 25% of their total hours. For staff aged 65 or over who take advantage of flexible retirement pensions are paid without reduction. Employee requests are considered and authorised by the Head of Service in the light of the needs of the service. Agreement to flexible retirement requests may create a part time vacancy or allow a reasonable cost saving for the service. This is in line with the Council’s Work-life Balance Strategy.

Early Retirement There are several circumstances where retirement benefits can be paid before age 65: Flexible retirement Flexible retirement is an option for eligible employees age 50 and over and will be available to staff subject to the above conditions. For staff under between age 50 and 65 pension benefits payable would be actuarially reduced to take into account early payment. The Council has the discretion to waive all or part of the reduction. In exercising its discretion account will be taken of individual circumstances and any supporting business case

P8

presented by the employee and endorsed by Heads of Service. The decision to agree the payment of unreduced benefits lies with the Head of Human Resources having received recommendations from Pension Services and taking into consideration any cost to the Pension Fund. Ill Health Retirement For an employee to be ill health retired an independently registered medical practitioner needs to certify that an employee is permanently incapable of discharging efficiently the duties of that employment because of ill health. If an independent medical adviser certifies that the member of staff is permanently unfit to do their job or a comparable job because of ill health, the employee is entitled to immediate payment of their pension benefits. The staff member will be requested to sign their agreement to the termination of their employment on ill health grounds. Retirement benefits may be enhanced for members of the Scheme in accordance with the LGPS Regulations. Over the years the regulation has become tighter and there have been a reduced number of cases which qualify for retirement on ill health grounds. For non-teaching employees in the LGPS the certificate of permanent ill health will qualify them for ill health retirement. Retirement on Compassionate Grounds There are provisions in the LGPS allowing members aged over 50 to retire on compassionate grounds with immediate benefits, at the discretion of the employer. These benefits may be subject to reduction. When an employee applies for retirement on compassionate grounds, the Council will consider the case on its merits, taking into account any cost to the Pension Fund. The Council will not consider retirement on compassionate grounds for anyone who is not a current employee of the Council, if there is a cost to the Pension Fund. Requests for retirement on compassionate grounds are considered on their individual merits and authorised by the Chief Executive and Strategic Director of Finance on the recommendation of the Head of Human Resources. It is intended that requests for retirement on compassionate grounds will only to be agreed where there is a sound business case to support the application which can justify any costs. Retirement in the Interests of Efficiency (RIES) If an employee is age 50 years or over and is retired in the interests of efficiency they will be entitled to immediate payment of their pension benefits. It is intended that Retirement in the Interests of the Efficiency of the Service will continue to be available to a small number of cases annually with each application being considered on its merits. In reaching decisions consideration will be given to the robustness of the business case presented and supported by senior management, and, importantly the costs of the retirement. To grant early retirement, the Council has to have grounds for considering that agreeing to it will improve the efficiency of the service. Requests for RIES are authorised by the Chief Executive and Strategic Director of Finance on the recommendation of the Head of Human Resources. Requests for RIES will only to be agreed where there is a sound business case to support the application which can justify any costs.

P9

Augmentation of Service for Pension Purposes There is provision within the LGPS to augment a member’s pension of up to 6 2/3 added years. This will be considered on an exceptional basis in the light of the individual circumstances of the case and any potential organisational benefits. Any such cases would be authorised by the Chief Executive and Strategic Director of Finance on the recommendation of the Head of Human Resources in the light of the business case and the costs incurred.. 85-Year Rule Under the 85 year rule members could retire age 50 or over and receive immediate payment of unreduced benefits if their age plus membership equalled at least 85. The Employer’s consent was required for those retiring under age 60. The 85 year rule was removed from October 2006. However those members who joined the Pension Scheme before 1 October 2006 have some protection. The consent of the employer to requests for retirement under the 85 year rule from protected employees under age 60 will continue to be required. Any such requests to retire under the 85 year rule before age 60 will be considered in the same way as requests for Retirement in the Interests of the Efficiency of the Service, as set out above. Re-employment of Pensioners Statement of Policy Concerning Abatement of Retirement Pensions in New Employment Where a pensioner enters new employment with a Scheme employer other than one in which he/she is eligible to join a teacher’s scheme, the amount of his pension will be subject to review according to the level of earning in his/her employment. The amount of any reduction in his/her pension shall be calculated according to paragraphs 2 and 5 of schedule D5 to the LGPS 1995 in force immediately before the LGPS 1997. Paragraphs 5 and 6 of Schedule D5 shall also apply during the new employment. In Schedule D5, where reference is made to annual rate of pension, this shall be the annual pension before any conversion between lump sums and pensions under regulation 58 and 59 or under regulation 20(3A) of the LGPS 1997 as amended. The amount will not be subject to review where the new employment commenced after the pensioner reached age 65. Conclusion Guidance on all these options is available on the Intranet and/or advice can be sought from the Human Resources Department and Pension Services. This policy will be monitored and reviewed regularly in accordance with any legislative changes which impact upon the Local Government Pension Scheme. March 2007

P10

ANNEX 3 Redundancy / Severance Payment Options Option 1 – As similar as possible to existing arrangements

• For Over 50s - Immediate access to pension benefits plus, either, a lump sum severance payment of a maximum of 104 weeks pay (although the maximum value of 10 added years equates to 138 weeks pay), or, augmentation of pension up to 6 2/3 added years (which equates to a maximum of 90 weeks pay)

• Under 50s - Retain redundancy payment based on statutory scheme(1 weeks’ pay

for each year of local government service under age 41 and 1 ½ weeks’ pay for each year of service age 41+) based on actual pay, up to a maximum of 20 years service which equates to a possible maximum payment of 30 weeks’ pay.

Advantages

o Although over 50s with long RBK service would be worse off than with current VER arrangements, provisions are the nearest possible to existing position.

o For those who opted for the pension enhancement termination of employment

would be by mutual agreement Disadvantages

o Against the spirit of the legislation, which has specifically removed the added years provision, and therefore it may be open to challenge

o Expensive option with significant on-going costs for over 50s.

o Disproportionate compensation to over 50s who already benefit by immediate

payment of pension benefits Option 2 – Most cost efficient to the Council

• Over 50s – Immediate access to pension benefits for eligible employees (but no option for any added years) together with payment of statutory redundancy payment based on actual pay

• Under 50s – Retain statutory redundancy payment based on actual pay (as

described in option 1)

P11

Advantages

o Option with maximum financial benefits for the Council o Fewer redundancies would be required to meet budget savings targets

o No change for under 50s

Disadvantages

o Loss of expectation by existing RBK staff of option of enhanced pension benefits on redundancy and over age 50

o No improvement in compensatory benefits for under 50s

Option 3 – Some equalisation of benefits between under and over 50s

• Over 50s – Immediate access to pension benefits for eligible employees (but no option for any added years) plus payment of a redundancy payment based on 2 weeks’ payment for each year of RBK service up to a maximum of 20 years service ie 40 weeks pay. (Previous local government service would be recognised as in option 2.)

• Under 50s – Redundancy payment based on 2 weeks’ payment for each year of

RBK service as in over 50s above. Advantages

o Rewards RBK service o Keeps costs reasonably contained as maximum payment would be based on

statutory maximum ie 40 weeks actual pay

o Some equalisation of benefits between under and over age 50 Disadvantages

o Additional costs overall from option 2 leading to potential for greater number of staff to be made redundant to achieve any budget saving

o Increases in costs over current arrangements of making staff under age 50

redundant.

020 8547 5125) e.mail: [email protected] ...

Documents

Transcript of 020 8547 5125) e.mail: [email protected] ...