Agenda and minutes

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 28 June 2016.

RESOLVED

That the minutes of the meeting held on 28 June 2016 be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

Apologies for absence had been received from Councillor Iain Cassidy who was attending another Council meeting.

If a Committee member has any prejudicial or personal interest in a particular item they should declare the existence and nature of the interest at the commencement of the consideration of that item or as soon as it becomes apparent.

At meetings where members of the public are allowed to be in attendance and speak, any Councillor with a prejudicial interest may also make representations, give evidence or answer questions about the matter. The Councillor must then withdraw immediately from the meeting before the matter is discussed and any vote taken unless a dispensation has been obtained from the Standards Committee.

Where Members of the public are not allowed to be in attendance, then

the Councillor with a prejudicial interest should withdraw from the meeting whilst the matter is under consideration unless the disability has been removed by the Standards Committee.

There were no declarations of interest.

Claire Rai, Head of Community Safety, explained that the Ending Gang Violence and Exploitation Strategy had been written in response to a change in focus from the Home Office. There was now more interest in tackling exploitation and the Hammersmith and Fulham strategy included that. The strategy was intended to last for 5 years but would be reviewed annually by members of the partnership to ensure that it was working well.

The trend in Hammersmith and Fulham over recent years had been for a significant reduction in youth violence, although the past three years had shown slight increases. Hammersmith and Fulham had an average level of youth crime for a London borough, whilst public perception of youth crime being a significant problem was low.

The strategy had six priorities which were: Prevention, Diversion and Early Intervention; Engagement; Enforcement; Gangs Exit and Resettlement; CSE, Girls and Gangs, and; Information Sharing, Governance and Partnership Working.

Claire Rai explained that the committee’s views on the strategy were welcomed and that after these had been considered and incorporated the Ending Gang Violence and Exploitation Partnership would put the plan into action.

The Chair asked whether the strategy was aligned with the Violence Against Women and Girls Strategy, as the two seemed likely to have significant crossover. Claire Rai said that they did overlap in many ways and appropriate links had been included in the strategies.

The Chair asked whether the council worked with other authorities to provide housing for those fleeing gangs. Jody Grogan, Metropolitan Police, explained that the London Gang Exit Service now provided housing as part of its package.

Councillor Holder felt that the strategy needed to emphasise the positive role of the police more noting that police officers were often the first officials gang members and their families experienced and so it was important that that this was a good one and that the strategy recognised this. Claire Rai agreed to add more information about the role of the police to the strategy; she explained that the four new council funded safer schools officers would be working with Secondary Schools and Pupil Referral Units to try to engage young people likely to be engaged with crime. Jody Grogan explained that the police also worked hard to engage and reassure victims of gang crime.

Councillor Dewhirst asked officers and the police whether the level of gang violence seemed to have risen or fallen over the past few months. Jody Grogan said that there had been a problem with gangs from neighbouring boroughs operating in Hammersmith and Fulham since the early part of 2016; this was continuing to be dealt with by police, for example, by using more high visibility patrols in areas where gangs operated.

The Chair asked whether officers in the safer schools team had a good knowledge of the borough. Jody Grogan said that some of the officers in the team had worked in the borough for many years and so had very good local knowledge and experience. Councillor Fennimore  ...  view the full minutes text for item 14.

Rosemary Petit, Chair of the Air Quality Commission, explained that the Leader of the Council, Councillor Stephen Cowan, had asked her to lead a group of residents to make recommendations on how to improve the borough’s air quality. Other commissioners had been sought and a great team had been assembled. She paid tribute to the hard work of her fellow commissioners: Kate Forbes, David Chamberlain, Andrew Pendleton, Professor Derek Clements-Croome and Natalie Lindsay and explained that many long nights of reading and evidence gathering had been required to build up enough knowledge to make recommendations on the issue. She also thanked Chris Bainbridge, Elisabeth Fonseca and especially Peter Smith who had supported the commission.

Rosemary Petit explained that nearly one in four deaths in Hammersmith and Fulham could be attributed to air pollution. Two hundred and three residents died early each year as a result of poor air quality. The diseases and health problems caused and exacerbated by air pollution were numerous, and scientific research was regularly identifying more conditions caused by air pollution. The commission had decided that it was necessary to drastically improve air quality and looked at a wide range of ways this could be done, receiving briefings from officers, evidence from experts, reading a mass of reports, and also considering over 40 submissions made by residents and experts in response to the commission’s call for evidence.

The commission had decided not to limit its recommendations, but to give everyone from the government right down to individual residents something to do to improve air quality.

The key recommendations for government were: to ban the sale of new, and importation of all, diesel cars and to take measures to encourage drivers to scrap existing diesels; to introduce nitrogen oxides (NOx) and particulate matter (PM10) testing as part of the MOT, and; to introduce no drive days in major cities during episodes of very high pollution.

The commission recommended that the GLA and Mayor of London: review the London Plan to prioritise air quality; give Hammersmith and Fulham a low emission neighbourhood; replace diesel and petrol buses with electric ones; launch an anti-idling campaign; hold car free days in inner London; smooth traffic flows; monitor grass, hedge and tree cover across London; and amend the Climate Change and Energy Strategy to stop promoting combined heat and power installations above air quality neutral technology.

The council had a very large number of recommendations and the commission felt that it could, by implementing them, lead by example. The recommendations included:

-       The Local Plan and other planning policy documents to be amended to: require developments to be assessed for their impact on air quality; include Walkability, and; strengthen and increase the prominence of greening and arboricultural policies.

-       The WELL being standard to be adopted for new developments and prefabrication of buildings encouraged.

-       A freight consolidation scheme for West London.

-       To work towards using only low emission vehicles, and make sure contractors met low emissions targets.

-       The  ...  view the full minutes text for item 15.

Matt Butler, Head of Policy & Spatial Planning, explained that the purpose of the report was to highlight the ways in which planning policy promoted the council’s aim to become the greenest borough.

In 2014 the new administration had asked officers to review the local plan to place more of a focus on green issues. The local plan was the main planning policy document which the council used to control development and reduce its negative impacts. A new policy on air quality had been introduced as well as a strengthening policies around carbon dioxide emissions, flood prevention and SUDS, cycle parking, and car free developments. The revised local plan was being consulted on from Friday 16 September 2016 to Friday 28 October 2016.

As well as improving policies officers had tried to engage developers at an earlier stage to allow officers to influence their plans and encourage them to think about the environmental impact of their proposals from the outset. Once the application had been submitted officers would assess proposals against policies and residents could have their say on the scheme. If planning permission was granted appropriate conditions would be added to make sure developers fully implemented the environmental aspects of their schemes. Officers would then monitor progress to ensure that these were met.

The council was working with Imperial College to get funding for a scheme to test how effective various green measures were. This information could then be used to persuade developers of the benefits of such measures and also to shape planning policies.

Residents were also now more able to engage in the planning process, having been given speaking rights at planning meetings, being represented on design review panels which gave advice to developers, and being included in policy formation.

The Chair asked whether planning policy sufficiently addressed particulate matter pollution. Matt Butler explained that Policy CC10 – Air Quality was a new policy and that it had been drafted to ensure that developers assessed the impact of their developments on air quality and conversely the impact of air pollution on their developments. The policy required developers to implement mitigation measures to deal with either of these eventualities. Many of the other environmental policies, for example, those affecting transport and controlling industrial uses also addressed particulate matter pollution. Paul Baker, Lead Environmental Policy Officer, noted that combined heat and power systems could cause air pollution, although they were promoted by the London Plan. In respect of carbon reduction, the policies in the new local plan would force developers to assess the impact of such systems. Matt Butler added that where carbon reduction policy targets could not be met, ‘lieu-payments’ from developers to the council should be made to spend on CO2 reduction  measures in the borough.

Councillor Hamilton felt that parking permit free developments were difficult for some residents, saying that there were many residents who did not use their cars for driving in London but needed them for longer journeys. Matt Butler explained that car free developments  ...  view the full minutes text for item 16.

The Committee is asked to consider the work programme of future items and suggest any additional items for discussion.

The Committee is also asked to note that as a result of a decision by borough council on 20 July 2016 the meeting originally scheduled for 4 April 2017 will now be held on 24 April 2017.

Councillor Hamilton asked whether the changes to Controlled Parking Zone D would be brought to the PAC. Councillor Culhane explained that the committee did not generally hold meetings about changes to individual parking zones and so the report was not on the work programme.

Members noted the work programme and that the next meeting would be held on 16 November 2016.