Contact: Timothy Andrew Email: (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Resolved: that the minutes of the meeting held on 18 January be agreed as an accurate record.
1.1 The Chair noted that the Committee had previously discussed the work that had been carried out by Ian Chalk architects on future options for the development of the Broadway theatre.
1.2 Resolved: that the minutes of the meeting held on 18 January be agreed as an accurate record.
2.1 During the course of the meeting the following interests were declared:
· Councillor Walsh declared a personal interest in relation to item six as an employee of South Bank University’s students’ union.
· Councillor Curran declared a personal interest in relation to item eight as the Director of the Baring Hall trust.
· Councillor Ingleby declared a personal interest in relation to item eight as a member of the Grove Park nature reserve.
Responses from Mayor and Cabinet
There are none.
3.1 There were none.
Resolved: the Committee agreed to share its views with Mayor and Cabinet as follows –
· The Committee welcomes the newly developed vision for rail, however it would like to see lobbying for the extension of the Bakerloo line to Hayes become a priority for the Council.
· The Committee recommends that considerations about accessibility be broadened to include a wider range of issues, not just step free access (to include braille signage and support for people with cognitive impairments). The Committee also recommends that support for the provision of accessible public toilets at stations be included in the vision for rail.
· The Committee welcomes the ambition to improve Lewisham’s stations but it recommends that officers should be tasked with undertaking a station by station analysis of options for land that could be safeguarded for future public transport, cycling and pedestrian accessibility.
· The Committee recommends that the proposal for the relocation of Lower Sydenham station be included in the vision.
· The Committee supports the possible future transfer of services from rail operators to TfL and recommends that this be included in the vision for rail.
· The Committee recommends that further consideration be given to the impact of rail changes on different socio-economic groups in the borough, with consideration given to affordable options for Lewisham residents to access their places of work.
· The Committee believes that reference should be made in the vision to the night time economy in the borough, including both the benefits to the economy and the importance of cultural activities.
· The Committee would welcome further information about timelines and potential dates for action and implementation to be included in the vision.
· It was also agreed that, the Committee would ask the transport liaison committee to consider the recent incident at Lewisham station during poor weather during which passengers were forced to walk on the rail tracks.
4.1 Simon Moss (Service Group Manager, Transport and Highways) introduced the report, the following key points were noted:
· It was hoped that the document would draw together ideas that had been raised as the Council responded to various consultations recently.
· The document was still a work in progress and could be added to or amended as things changed.
· The vison drew on the work for the Lewisham interchange study, which would gain increasing significance as the plans for the extension of the Bakerloo line progressed.
· Much of the work used to inform the development of the vison had been drawn from existing sources (such as Transport for London (TfL) and Network Rail) rather than by the Council.
· Lewisham had an expansive rail network but there were questions about the network’s fitness for purpose given the level of development anticipated to take place in the borough.
· Once of the recent key changes officers wanted to capture was the development of the Mayor of London’s transport strategy, which strongly featured Lewisham.
· In the Mayor’s strategy, Lewisham station was highlighted as one of the four key regional interchanges.
· Ambitions for a Brockley interchange were also included in the strategy. This was positive because future plans might lead to a link between the Overground network and the rail network.
· The vison also included a number of goals, including the ambition to: provide better links; ensure sufficient rail capacity; provide rail capacity between all areas of the borough and employment areas; improve rail access to and from growth areas; improve rail connectivity across the borough (especially east/west links); improve the quality and accessibility (particularly relating to step-free access) of stations and to improve connectivity between stations and their local areas.
· The report also included ambitions for rail enhancements, including: potential ‘metroisation’ of services, which might streamline links and improve rail frequencies.
· Ambitions for the Bakerloo line and the potential extension of the Overground to Lewisham were also included.
4.2 Simon Moss responded to questions from the Committee, the following key points were noted:
· Officers had asked TfL to consider the potential for the relocation of Lower Sydenham station (towards Bell Green) in past responses to consultations on the Bakerloo line.
· Officers has drawn on the ‘turning south London Orange’ work to develop the vison, but greater focus was being placed on the potential for ‘metroisation’ of the railway.
· Selections from the Mayor’s transport strategy had been included in the vision, including the Mayor’s ambition to increase capacity on the Overground network by up to 50% through improved signalling and increased frequencies.
· There were some aspects of the ‘turning South London Orange’ work which were a cause for concern, including the threat to the spur of the Overground that extended to New Cross.
· Officers would contact TfL to discuss the options for 24 hour operation of the Docklands Light Railway (DLR).
· There were a number of significant capacity improvement proposals for the DLR.
· It was recognised that the document was not a holistic view of public ... view the full minutes text for item 4.
Resolved: that the report be noted. The Committee thanked Kplom Lotsu and his team for their work on the Catford regeneration.
5.1 Kplom Lotsu (Service Group Manager, Capital Programmes) introduced the report, the following key points were noted:
· The tender for a masterplanner for Catford was currently open.
· A recent event had been held for potential masterplanners to visit the borough and to meet with officers. There were around a hundred attendees at the event.
· A timeline for further scrutiny of the masterplanning process had been developed.
· The Commonplace platform was still being used to capture the views of local people. Further targeted engagement activities were taking place to reach younger and older people - as well as people from black and minority ethnic backgrounds.
· A new food market was being launched in Catford. Local businesses were being encouraged to take part.
· A new newsletter had also recently been launched for local businesses.
· The Council was working with Transport for London (TfL) to move forward plans for the realignment of the south circular.
· Topographical surveys had recently been completed, which would enable the next stage of the development to take place.
· It was intended that plans would reach the detailed design stage before the end of the year (the plan was still for work to begin on site in 2021).
· TfL estimated that the cost of the realignment would be £42m (though it was hoped that this would reduce when detailed plans were developed).
· A similar road realignment had cost £22/23m in Stratford.
· The expectation was that half of the cost would be met locally.
· The Council had secured £10m in funding from the Government’s ‘housing infrastructure fund’. The terms of the funding were not yet available.
· Work on the theatre was also continuing. It was anticipated that the conservation management plan would be completed in the near future.
· The conservation plan would underpin bids for heritage lottery funding or applications to other sources of funding.
5.2 Kplom Lotsu responded to questions from the Committee, the following key points were noted:
· The work carried out by Ian Chalk architects had been included in development of plans for the Broadway theatre.
· Officers recognised the high ambitions that the Council and community had for the future of the theatre.
· The intention of the conservation management plan was to ensure that all options for the future of the theatre were explored.
· Widening of the south circular where it crossed the Hayes line was not currently included in plans for the realignment of the road.
· Options were being considered for the development of the Catford stations. There might be the potential to relocate the pedestrian access from the road to enable the widening of the roadway.
· The difficult pinch point on the road in to Catford was where the south circular passed under the Catford (Thameslink) line.
· There were plans for the two stations to be linked and options for the improvement of infrastructure around the stations would be included as part of this work.
· Officers would return to the Committee at regular stages in the masterplanning process to seek further opinions on ... view the full minutes text for item 5.
Resolved: that the work of officers be commended. It was also agreed that the Committee would put forward the new work and skills strategy as an item for scrutiny in the new administration.
The Committee also agreed to refer its views to Mayor and Cabinet as follows:
· The Committee recommends that more resources be made available to enhance the scope and scale of the Council’s work and skills activities online. The Committee believes that a marketing budget should also be made available to support this work.
6.1 Fen Beckman (Head of Economy and Partnerships) introduced the report, the following key points were noted:
· The report provided an annual update on the implementation of the work and skills strategy.
· The employment programme that had been developed with the boroughs of Lambeth and Southwark was nearing completion. Through the programme more than 335 residents had been supported into work (114) from Lewisham.
· The Lewisham Construction hub had been launched.
· A great deal of work had taken place with Lewisham’s partners, including: Phoenix Housing, Lewisham Homes and Job Centre Plus.
· New relationships were being developed with other partners, including South Bank University.
· The apprenticeship programme continued to deliver a range of high quality placements for residents.
· Two years ago the age limit for apprenticeships had been increased to include people over the age of 25. People from this age group now accounted for half of the applications to the programme.
· Links were being developed with Central London Forward, to make the most of the opportunities from the work and health programme.
· One area of key focus in the coming year would be developing the construction hub and integrating its work with partners.
· Work needed to take place to re-establish links with Lewisham College.
· A new work and skills strategy would be developed in the coming year. It was hoped that the Sustainable Development Select Committee (following the election) would consider the draft strategy.
6.2 Fen Beckman, Jake Nembhard (Research and Project Officer) and Denise Atkinson (Local Labour and Business Scheme Programme Manager) responded to questions from the Committee, the following key points were noted:
· Work was taking place to develop a new ‘Lewisham skills providers forum’ – that would enable partners to share information and updates about initiatives taking place in the borough. The forum would also act as a catalogue of information about providers in the borough.
· The Lewisham Construction hub sent out alerts for job opportunities and made use of social media, where this was appropriate.
· Officers understood that there were a variety of ways for residents to be engaged in opportunities for work.
· One example was a project managed by the team in Lewisham Shopping centre, which was a joint initiative between the Council, the shopping centre and job centre plus to help young people learn customer service skills, access advice and gain job opportunities.
· Officers were working with university partners, including Goldsmiths, to ensure that there were opportunities for students and that the construction hub was being supported.
6.3 In Committee discussions, the following key points were also noted:
· The Committee commended the volume and high quality of work being carried out by Fen Beckman and her team.
· There were differing opinions in the Committee about the value of using the Lewisham Council to target jobs and employment initiatives at people looking for work.
· Some work was needed to ensure that people could access the right advice, training and skills opportunities to ensure that they could make the most of opportunities in the labour market. ... view the full minutes text for item 6.
Resolved: the Committee agreed that it would share its views with Mayor and Cabinet, as follows –
· The Committee recognises the potential to offset health and social care costs though a focus on fuel poverty. The Committee recommends that the Council corporately seeks funding (either from health, or elsewhere) for a designated fuel poverty officer.
7.1 Martin O’Brien (Climate Resilience Manager) introduced the report, the following key points were noted:
· Local authorities were in a unique position to work on fuel poverty. This was particularly important given that there was very limited central government funding for work on fuel poverty.
· There were many people living in homes with sub-standard (or none existent) heating.
· The Council had the ability to work with housing, social care, public health and partners in the community to improve residents’ lives.
· Many local authorities had given up on carrying out work in this area.
· The home energy conservation act was the only statutory requirement on local authorities in this area of work. It required local authorities to produce a statement every two years about the work that they were carrying out, but it did not prescribe what that work should be.
· Funding for fuel poverty had been a challenge in Lewisham, however this had recently begun to change, partly as a result of work by the Greater London Authority (GLA).
· Lewisham was leading a partnership of London boroughs and community partners to deliver an advice and referral partnership across the south east. Officers had also been able to access funding for vulnerable residents from the GLA and combine it with funding from the energy company obligation to provide up to £7000 for households in fuel poverty (for heating, insulation and support services).
· Work was also taking place with the GLA and Veolia to progress a heat network from the South East London Combined Heat and Power Plant (SELCHP).
· A community energy fund would be launched to provide small grants and funding for local groups to run localised initiatives and install renewable energy.
· Work was taking place to engage with vulnerable residents in order to ensure that they could access the available funding.
7.2 Martin O’Brien responded to questions from the Committee, the following key points were noted:
· There was one officer working full time on home energy conservation.
· There was good news about the amount of investment that had been accessed for residents.
· Carbon emissions had reduced in Lewisham since 2005. The figures were produced by central government and covered a range of activities. The Council could not claim that it was responsible for the reduction in emissions – but it had contributed to the decrease.
· There was lots of work taking place across the country to develop local authority led energy suppliers or supply deals. This was challenging for local authorities to do well.
· There had been huge growth in the number of small energy suppliers.
· The implementation of smart meters should help people on pre-payment to control their energy costs.
· Previously, energy company obligation funding had only been targeted at people on benefits. The government had introduced flexible eligibility and given local authorities a role in designating vulnerable households.
· The Council had made 50 declarations (for Lewisham, Greenwich and Bexley) using data to identify the types of property that would benefit from the funding and aligning this with people ... view the full minutes text for item 7.
Resolved: that the Committee’s suggestions be put forward to the work programme for the next municipal year.
8.1 The Committee discussed the work programme for 2018-19 and put forward the following suggestions:
· The assets of community value process, with a specific focus on the Baring Hall hotel and preserving local pubs.
· Beckenham Place Park.
· The Catford town centre regeneration (including the forthcoming conservation assessment for the Broadway theatre).
· The development of the local implementation plan.
· Work and skills strategy.
8.2 In the Committee’s discussion, concerns were also raised about the Baring Hall hotel’s asset of community value status. It was noted that a recent decision had removed a portion of the Baring Hall Hotel’s site from listing as a community asset, which, it was believed, might threaten the status of the pub business on the site.
8.3 Resolved: that the Committee’s suggestions be put forward to the work programme for the next municipal year.
Items to be referred to Mayor and Cabinet
Resolved: that the Committee’s views on: the vision for rail; work and skills and home energy conservation be referred to Mayor and Cabinet.
9.1 Resolved: that the Committee’s views on: the vision for rail; work and skills and home energy conservation be referred to Mayor and Cabinet.