Agenda and minutes

The Chairman will announce details of the arrangements in case of fire or other events that might require the meeting room or building’s evacuation.

The Chairman gave details of the arrangements in case of fire or other event that might require the evacuation of the meeting room or building.

There were no apologies for absence from Members.

Apologies were received from Patrick Keyes, Head of Regulatory Services (Martyn Thomas substituting) and from Wendy Gough, Committee Officer (Anthony Clements substituting).

Members are invited to disclose any interest in any of the items on the agenda at this point of the meeting.

Members may still disclose any interest in an item at any time prior to the consideration of the matter.

There were no disclosures of interests.

To approve as a correct record the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 13 April 2016 and to authorise the Chairman to sign them.

The minutes of the meeting of the Working Party held on 13 April 2016 were agreed a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

The Working Party will receive an update on the education provision.

The school organisation manager explained the anticipated child yield given the number of units due to be built in the housing zone area. The figures also allowed for a 5% surplus in the capacity of school places that would be required. People living outside the borough who sent their children to Havering schools were not included but the use of the distance admission criterion would avoid this in any case.

There was a very high need for primary school places in the Rainham area. Primary places were expected to run out by 2017/18 and local schools would therefore need to expand even before the new primary school opened. Positive discussions with local schools were currently in progress with existing schools re options for expansion.

Given the need for expansion, consideration was being given to opening the new school a year earlier than planned, in September 2019. The school had now been confirmed as being on a site in Beam Park and a three form entry had been requested. It had not proved possible to obtain a site for the school in the centre of the development.

Officers explained that several school kitchens had been expanded as the schools overall had expanded in line with DfE guidance. The kitchen at Engayne School had been expanded and officers were unaware of children not receiving a lunchtime meal, even if lunches were staggered for different classes. The school organisation manager agreed to investigate reports of cooked lunches running out at Parsonage Farm school and children having to be given sandwiches instead.

Air quality issues and their impact on schools had been included in the environment scoping for the project.

If it was found that there were more children than anticipated requiring primary school places, bulge classes would need to be opened as had already been seen in Harold Hill. Some Members were concerned that residential properties may be being built without the schools to support them and that the underlying assumptions about the number of children likely to be in the area may be incorrect.  

The Working Party will receive an update on the Land Acquisition Strategy.

Work was now commencing to acquire sites along the A1306. All businesses on the road had now been contacted in order to ascertain if relocation was feasible. The first Head of Terms had now been agreed for the site at 173, New Road.

Negotiations were in progress with other sites and work was also ongoing to move towards Compulsory Purchase Orders although this was a complex process. The Orders were covered by clear cost estimates of entitlements and it was not possible that the Council could be held to ransom in any way.  Officers were also identifying priority businesses that they would like to relocate within the local area. Members thanked the officers for their good work on this part of the project and felt that the development of the industrial area to the south of the railway line could allow employees to walk to work if they lived in the Housing Zone developments.

It was confirmed by officers that there was no possibility of the prison proposal being revived as the relevant land had been sold.   

Three planning applications had been received for the riverside area and officers felt there was positive potential to relocate businesses to this area. Discussions were in progress with TfL regarding getting bus services into this area which officers felt was a key priority. It was hoped that bus services would start before the redevelopment of the sector.

The Working Party will receive a presentation from officers on the A1306 Beam Parkway Programme.

Steer Davies Gleave (SDG), a transport consultancy firm, had won the tender for provision of support for the Beam Parkway project and would give further updates to the Working Party as the project progressed.

Step 1 of the process had been successfully completed in 2015 and had resulted in the release of funding from Transport for London (TfL) to develop step 2 of the process. The final step 2 document was due to be presented to TfL in late 2017 and, if accepted, would allow for implementation from 2018 onwards.

Stakeholder engagement had been undertaken in step 1 that looked at movement issues including traffic modelling. Work in step 2 would build on this in more detail. SDG were working closely with the Council to progress the scheme and covered areas such as transport, highways, developing the project business case and stakeholder engagement.

Current work was focussing on project initiation with a view to developing the business case for the scheme in 2017. A design and risk workshop had been held in the last week including representatives of the Council, TfL, the Greater London Authority and local developers. Meetings were also planned with TfL and Countryside and Circle who were developing nearby sites.

Informal consultation would take place throughout the process but formal public consultation on the scheme was scheduled for late 2017. Data collection was currently taking place looking at traffic modelling for the scheme area.

Detailed design work would be carried out between October 2016 and June 2017 with a design review carried out with TfL in early 2017. This would allow submission of the final project to TfL for approval by December 2017. 

Implementation works would need to be phased and would be scheduled to interface with adjoining development sites and work on the Barking & Dagenham sections. Any ‘quick wins’ that could be identified in the project would be sought to be completed at an earlier stage.

The project would seek to use local suppliers where possible, establish a public art programme and seek to engage with local schools and colleges. It was also hoped that work experience placements with the project teams could be offered to local students.

Some Members felt that the predicted figures for traffic movements were not accurate and that the planned boulevards would not work. Cabinet Members felt that, whilst the boulevards issue could be considered, it was important to move ahead with the project as a whole. Officers added that a majority of residents who had responded had supported these changes during consultation and that traffic modelling of these issues would be extensive. All Members on the Working Party supported the scheme as a whole but it was noted that issues such as the boulevards should be fully considered.

It was emphasised that step 1 had been a vigorous process and concluded that the scheme could work provided that people’s use of the A1306 could be reduced or disincentivised. It had not yet been decided how this would be done.  

Officers  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

It was clarified that the reference in the minutes to ‘closures on the Barking line’ referred to coinciding work with the planned closure of the Barking rail line for an unrelated expansion.

Meetings had been held with Circle Housing and concerns expressed over the condition of properties on the Orchard Village site. The Council’s Head of Housing had discussed this with an Executive Director at Circle. It was acknowledged that problems were continuing in Orchard Village and that there was genuine concern about Circle. The Cabinet Member pointed out that a tendering process could not be influenced but that sub-standard work could be addressed by the Council through building regulations.

The Wag Bennett site referred to in the minutes was confirmed as being opposite the Somerfield site.

An assessment of the strategic flood risk had been completed for the area and had concluded that the sites were not at excessive risk of flooding.