hrp project initiation document

Annex 1

HRP Project Initiation Document Church Street Housing Renewal Programme – Phase 1 Programme

Author: Tristan Samuels

Owner: Ben Denton (Executive Director of Growth, Planning and Housing)

Version: V7

Classification: Not For Publication

Date: 17th November 2014

Document History and Approval

Version Log

Version Date Summary of Changes Distributed

To

V1 15 January 2014 Initial Draft MW/TSG

V2 17 January 2014 Second Draft TS

V3 23 January 2014 Third Draft BD

V4 11 February 2014 Fourth Draft BD

V5 6TH March 2014 Fifth Draft BD/MW

V6 30th July 2014 Sixth Draft All

V7 17th November 2014 Updated financial table,

finessing wording, clarifying

procurement and sign off

arrangements

Cabinet

Member,

FSG

3

Table of Contents

1. Background

2. Programme Objectives

3. Target Outcomes

4. Measures of Success

5. Controls Management, Governance and Reporting

6. Overall Programme and Project Assumptions

7. Financials

8. Risks and Management

9. Supporting Policies

10. Miscellaneous

11. Appendices

a. Appendix A – Plan of Development Sites and IPR Projects b. Appendix B – How do we measure success proposal c. Appendix C – Risk Matrix d. Appendix D – Church Street – Base Data

4

1. Background

a. In 2010 the City Council published its Housing Renewal Strategy, which identified the Church Street area as an opportunity for housing renewal. This Project Initiation Document (PID) sets out how the City Council will work with local residents, local stakeholders and the private and voluntary sector to deliver the first phase of the Church Street Renewal Programme. The programme covers the whole of the Church Street ward, which is made up of 11,000 residents and 5,000 households.

b. Church Street ward was selected as a renewal area as it has high levels of deprivation compared to other wards in Westminster and scores poorly on indicators of health, income, employment, education and housing (however, there is great variation within the ward). For example:

• The Income Deprivation Affecting Children Index (2010) shows that 78% of children live in income deprived households

• 11% of residents felt they were in bad health compared with a Westminster average of 6%1

• 22% of residents are overcrowded, higher than the Westminster average of 12%2

• 19% of working age residents are unemployed, higher than the Westminster average of 9.3%3

c. With the City Council as the predominant freeholder, owning approximately 80% of the land within the ward (due to the large number of housing estates) the area provides potential for intervention including developing new mixed tenure homes.

d. Pursuant to the Housing Renewal Strategy, the Futures Plan “Masterplan” was developed in 2011 setting out a possible vision and development options for the Church Street area. Alongside this, a steering group was formed including residents, business ward members and external representatives (the Futures Steering Group “FSG”) to help inform the plan. Preferred Options from the Masterplan were taken to Cabinet in May 2011 and endorsed. These were further developed between May 2011 and April 2013 alongside this an Infrastructure and Public Realm Plan (IPRP) was developed in August 2013 (see Appendix A). These were amalgamated into a more definitive set of proposals and residents positively supported the delivery of the Phase 1 renewal area through a public vote in May 2013.

1 Census 2011

2 Census 2011

3 Census 2011

5

2. Programme Objectives

a. The Programme Objectives for the Housing Renewal Strategy are:

• To increase the supply and quality of affordable homes to meet a variety of local needs, including housing for families

• To improve the quality of the local environment with outstanding green and open spaces and housing that promotes low energy consumption and environmental sustainability

• To promote a high quality of life for people of all ages and backgrounds, in safe, cohesive and healthy neighborhoods, supported by a range of high quality housing and excellent community facilities

• To enable people to maximise economic opportunity in Westminster with support for training, employment and enterprise, and housing tenures which help those in work remain in the City

• To create a more distinct sense of neighborhood, ending the physical divide between Westminster’s estates and surrounding local streets.

b. Additionally further objectives for the Church Street Renewal Programme, as voted on by residents, have been identified as follows:

• To improve the health and wellbeing of local residents.

• To help local people stay in the area through local lettings and sales plans.

c. The Programme Objectives also contribute to the City Council’s Better City Better Lives

vision, as follows:

• The new homes will be healthier as they will be more energy efficient and overcrowding problems will be addressed – contributing to a healthier, safer city.

• The employment programme and changes to the Church Street market will contribute to a more enterprising city.

• The co-located health and community services will contribute to a more connected city where everyone in Westminster feels more connected to vital services and information.

3. Target Outcomes

a. In May 2013, residents voted in favour of the renewal plans containing the following proposals (turn-out of 25.5% with 87% voting in positively for the plans). They are far reaching and inter-dependent and complementary to each other and wider council services.

b. Additional and improved housing both private and affordable - four key housing-led developments sites at Luton Street, Cosway Street, Lisson Arches and Lilestone Street, delivering between 275 and 315 new private and affordable homes (59 will be replacement homes). The re-provision of older peoples housing at Penn House. See Appendix B for a list of phase 1 development sites.

c. Retained estates improvements – grounds and block improvements in estates close to the largest development site at Luton Street.

d. Improved community and health facilities – a new play space for children and young people at Luton Street. A modern health and wellbeing one-stop shop hub at Lilestone

6

Street which delivers health, housing management, employment and training advice and a host of other complementary community services.

e. Employment programmes targeted to local people – a package of measures to assist 500 residents into employment through a range of programmes including jobs in construction and retail. A key element is the provision of support and training to enable residents to have appropriate skills to take up opportunities.

f. Street market and enterprise support – improvements to street market management and to the promotion and presentation of the market overall including; a regular programme of market “events”, bringing water and electricity to the market and improving storage. An enterprise centre at Lisson Arches providing a space for business and micro business start-ups.

g. Neighbourhood upkeep and greening programme – to improve safety, cleanliness and maintenance, and community greening and volunteering activities so improvements can be maintained with the help the local communities.

h. District energy system – run on a not for profit basis to contribute to the stability of heating costs for residents and to help the City Council meet carbon targets. The system to connect new developments at Lisson Arches, Penn House and Luton Street and some existing residential blocks.

i. Public realm improvements – a new, green, north-south route including a larger park at Lisson Street, improvements along Church Street to support the street market and retail and general street improvements around the housing development sites

j. Alongside the above investments, the project proposals will include examining how public and voluntary agencies work together within the area with the aim of delivering services in a way, which improve the life outcomes of local residents. For the Council this is likely to include public health, adults, children, housing and community protection. Agencies outside the Council are likely to include local health providers, DWP, schools and businesses.

4. Measures of Success

a. Church Street performs relatively poorly compared to other wards in the City and London across a number of health, well-being and deprivation indicators (see tables in appendix D). The Futures Plan aims to close the gap relatively and absolutely between the local indicators and the London averages. This will benefit all residents and business in the area, contribute to the vibrancy of the surrounding area and help some of the most vulnerable groups in society.

b. Many of the underlying causes of the socio-economic problems and deprivation in the ward are local expressions of wider economic developments, of social policy, the way priority for social housing is identified, an allocations system that prioritises groups with the highest need first, a lack of housing supply and barriers to residents gaining meaningful employment. The solutions to tackle the above challenges lie with a number of public sector organisations and also within the private and voluntary sector. To some extent the causes of poverty and deprivation, even the principal ones - poor skills and worklessness – can (and should according to the Localism Act) be addressed locally and the Housing Renewal programme provides the opportunity to provide funding, resource and focus to deliver positive outcomes for local residents and businesses.

7

c. As set out in the Programme Objectives section, the investment in housing, community facilities, infrastructure, public realm and supporting measures works together to tackle both the physical fabric of the area and the underlying socio-economic challenges. This presents an opportunity to demonstrate how council and public sector services, properly coordinated, can deliver meaningful outcomes that genuinely make people’s lives better and contributes to a better City.

d. A thorough evaluation framework will be developed and 10 indicators will be agreed between the Council and local stakeholders through which success will be evaluated to show the impact of the progamme. These will demonstrate how the City Council and its partners can work even more closely and efficiently – presenting a possible model for public sector reform.

e. These indicators are likely to cover the following areas of activity:

• Employment

• Education, skills and training

• Income

• Health and disability

• Barriers to housing and services

• Living environment

• Crime.

5. Controls Management, Governance and Reporting

a. Controls Management

i. All decisions taken within the Church Street Renewal Programme (Phase 1) will be done so in line with the Councils Corporate and statutory regulations.

ii. All legal, financial and procurement decisions are to be agreed by the relevant heads of services within the Council and subject to the governance and procedures imposed by the Executive Management Team.

iii. The Future Steering Group and all its sub-groups and working groups operate in advisory role to the Council and they have all been made aware of this position. As such they are not liable for any decisions taken by the Council in delivering this programme.

8

b. Project Governance

c. Project stakeholders with responsibility are the relevant Cabinet Member and/or the

Executive Director where decisions are delegated in accordance with the Councils Scheme of Delegations

d. Project stakeholders and groups with an advisory role:

• Church Street Ward Members

• Cabinet Member for the Community

9

• Church Street Futures Steering Group (terms of reference at annex A) and Working Groups

• Church Street market traders’ association (once formed)

• Public realm board

• Public realm advisory group

• Public realm operations group

• Strategic Street trading group

• Health and wellbeing advisory group.

e. Project stakeholders who are consulted and kept informed:

• Residents

• Front line services and facilities providers

• Businesses

• Street traders.

f. Officer sign-offs

i. This document requires the following sign-offs. Only those officers have been included that chair key groups or are responsible for commissioning a specific element of the IPRP or linked housing renewal programmes:

Name Role Approval Date

Ben Denton

EMT & CLT Member

Executive Director Growth, Planning

and Housing

Accountable for programme delivery

and benefits.

Leith Penny

EMT & CLT Member

Strategic Director City Management

Oversees management of public realm

and activities within it. Joint chair of

Public Realm Board

Tristan Samuels

CLT Member

Head of Major Projects

Manages overall housing renewal

programme

Dick Johnson

Lead Business Partner for Housing,

Finance

Oversees budget

Anthony Oliver

Head of Procurement

Approves strategic procurement issues

Peter Large Head of Legal Services

Approves legal implications

10

g. Delegations and permitted variations

• General - HRA budgets were agreed by Cabinet Member decision in February 2014.

• Contract award decisions are to be made as follows, where capital values are:- o Up to £10k (CLT) o £10k - £100k (CLT) – following Procurement Code Peer Review o £100k - £1.5m (Executive Director) - on recommendation of Procurement Gate

Panel o Over £1.5m (£300k for consultancy agreements) – CABINET MEMBER APPROVAL

ONLY

h. WCC Led Housing projects

When each housing and land sale project or investment is sufficiently defined, the Executive Director will submit a report to the Cabinet Member for Housing, Regeneration, Business and Economic Development seeking approval to enter into defined projects and investment and will be asked to delegate authority to the Executive Director of Growth, Planning and Housing, to negotiate and prepare contracts with design teams, professional advisors, developers and contractors for housing developments in the Church Street renewal area, providing these are subjected to HRP Board and Gate reviews and in line with the agreed HRA and General Fund budgets.

• Where CityWest Homes are employed to lead on projects on behalf of the Council, this will be captured in a letter of appointment, including a schedule of services being carried out and the delegated budgets to be controlled by CWH. Any decisions will not be delegated to CWH and will be undertaken by the relevant Cabinet Member, Executive Director or nominated officer.

i. Public Realm Delivery

• Where public realm projects or investment is sufficiently defined, the Executive Director will submit a report to the Cabinet Member for Housing, Regeneration, Business and Economic Development, and will inform the Cabinet Member for the Built Environment seeking approval to enter into defined projects and investment and will ask that the Cabinet Member delegates to the Executive Director of Growth, Planning and Housing authority to:

Will Noton Senior Development Manager

Responsible for the delivery of the

Proposals

Anna Waterman Strategic Public Health Adviser

Responsible for maximising health

and wellbeing improvement

Eva Hrobonova Deputy Director of Public Health

(Westminster)

Oversees the contribution of the

Renewal Programme to health and

wellbeing

11

o Procure and enter contracts for design and delivery of the public realm schemes in

Church Street o A programme of greening, community gardening, street market and arts and culture. o To prepare a case to apply for major project funding from TFL.

• Providing these are approved by HRP Board and Gate reviews and that the project spend is in line with the available funding and received surplus from the Church Street and Paddington Green projects respectively.

j. Energy Delivery Project

• When energy, project or investment is sufficiently defined, the Executive Director will submit a report to the Cabinet Member for Housing, Regeneration, Business and Economic Development seeking approval to enter into defined projects and investment and will be asked to delegate authority to the Executive Director of Growth, Planning and Housing seeking authority to: o Procure and enter into contracts for the detailed design work of a district energy system

and supporting infrastructure measures including recycling. o Procure the necessary support to create a robust business case for CHP in the area. o Procure and enter into contracts for the development and testing of a neighbourhood

management scheme. o Apply for all necessary grant funding.

• Providing these are subjected to housing board and gate reviews and that the project spend is in line with the available funding and received surplus from the Church Street and Paddington Green projects respectively.

k. Health and Wellbeing Advisory Group

• When the plans for the Health and Community Hub are sufficiently defined, the Director of Public Health will submit a report to the Cabinet Member of Adults and Public Health seeking approval, and to the Cabinet Member for Children’s Services, as appropriate.

• The Director of Public Health will provide a regular report for the Cabinet Member of Adults and Public Health presenting the contribution of the Renewal Programme to health and wellbeing in the area. This contribution will not be limited to that of the Health and Wellbeing Hub.

• Through the Director of Public Health, the Health and Wellbeing Advisory Group will

provide a regular report to the Health and Wellbeing Board.

l. Infrastructure and Public Realm Plan (IPRP)

• A joined up approach to scheme design properly integrated with the needs of end users

and maintenance considerations will contribute to objectives for economic growth, health

and environment.

• In the first phase of the Futures Plan the IPRP proposes:

Ø Larger park created by extending Lisson Street Gardens to Broadley Street

Gardens;

Ø New ‘green spine’ reconnecting the neighbourhood north-south across the Luton

Street development;

12

Ø Implementing civic street improvements at the Edgware Road entrance and the

antiques shop section of Church Street to connect with the Penn House

development and new Health & Community Hub;

Ø Supporting measures for greening and community gardening, street market, arts

and culture and looking after the neighbourhood; and

Ø Introducing a new district heating system.

13

6. Overall Programme and Project Assumptions

Table 6 a and b below sets out the indicative programme for the delivery of the Church

Street phase 1 programme.

a. Table 6: Outline Programme in non-public realm activities

Theme

Deliverable and

scope Stage 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18

Housing

developments

and community

facilities

Luton Street

Concept design 1 1 0 0 0

Detailed design 0 1 1 0 0

Implementation 0 0 1 1 1

Cosway Street




Lisson Arches




Lilestone Street




Economy and

culture

Street market supporting

measures

Plan programme 1 1 0 0 0

Implement 0 1 1 1 1

Employment and enterprise

support programmes


Implement 1 1 1 1 1

Arts and culture programme Plan programme 1 1 0 0 0

Implement 0 1 1 1 1

Retained estates Estate grounds and block

improvements




Neighbourhood

upkeep fund and

greening

Neighbourhood upkeep

programme


Implement 0 1 1 1 1

Community gardening

programme


Implement 0 1 1 1 1

Energy and

waste

District energy scheme




Waste and recycling

infrastructure




14

b. Table 6: Outline Programme - public realm activities

0

Deliverable and

scope Stage 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18

Public realm and

landscaping

Church Street (East)




Church Street (West)




Edgware Road crossing




Lisson Grove crossing




Broadley Street/Lisson Street

(North)




Salisbury Street (North)




Fisherton Street (North)




Fisherton Street (South)




Orchardson Street (Central)




Orange Park




Lyons Place




Programme of street

improvements co-ordinated with

development sites




15

7. Financial Information

Table 7.1 below summarises the forecast income and spend across the Church Street phase 1

programme area.

The requirement of the City Council is that the improvements delivered in each area must be funded from the land receipts generated within that area. If land receipts fall below those forecast, or expenditure is forecast to be in excess of the budgets, then Officers and stakeholders will work collaboratively to deliver a scheme within the available budget. Note that the income and costs are as at August 2014 prices. Table 7.1 - Overview of Project Costs & Income

Total Costs

Item

HRA

Project

Costs

£'000

General

Fund Project

Costs

£'000

Gross

income

£'000

Net Income

(Surplus)

/ Deficit

£'000

Planning

Obligation

(delivered by

developer)

£'000

Luton Street development site 4,400 18,200 -13,800 8,600

Penn & Lilestone Street 2,000 18,200 -16,200

Lisson Arches 21,400 7,500 13,900 2,000

Cosway St development (cost incl CWC

purchase) 11,400 6,000 19,800 -2,400 1,700

Tresham 4,600 4,600

Other Regeneration Receipts 5,600 -5,600

Other Public Realm works 5,200

District energy - income from ECO

funding, 5,500 3,500 2,000

Public realm and landscaping - income

projected from TfL Major Schemes bid 1,410 -1,410 1,410

44,700 10,600 74,210 -18,910 18,910

In order to be funded from the available resources, the Public Realm expenditure will need to meet the following criteria;

• If funded by the HRA, meet the criteria for capital expenditure that is associated with an HRA asset

• If non HRA then be capital expenditure that meets the regeneration definition for capital works4

• Be undertaken through a planning obligation

• If it is revenue and can be funded from external grant

• If it is revenue and can be defined as being solely of benefit to HRA tenants then it can be funded from the HRA

4 Regeneration projects – any project for the carrying out of works of activities on any land where;

a) The land or building on the land is vacant, unused contaminated or derelict; and

b) The works or activities are carried out in order to secure that the land or the building will be bought into effective

use.

16

Table 7.2 below sets out the budget estimates for the works to deliver the public realm

improvements within the Church Street Phase 1 programme. In order to release each area of

spend , a business case will be prepared making the case for the investment, and the benefits, and

how the investment contributes to the delivery of the Programme Objectives.

The allocation of budget to programme areas is indicative. Officers and the Steering Group may

propose virements of budgets between headings to the Cabinet Member, as appropriate.

Table 7.2 Summary of Public Realm Works & Costs

Summary of Public Realm Developer works

£'000

Retain estates block and grounds improvements 2,400

Lisson & Penn Public Realm 2,000

Waste and Recycling Infrastructure 500

Economy and culture programme 1,500

Neighbourhood upkeep fund 2,000

Public realm and landscaping - income projected from TfL Major Schemes bid 1,410

Lisson & Broadly Parks Projects & Green Spine Works 3,425

Church Street East (inc Lisson Grove junction) 2,700

Extension of Green Spine 2,975

18,910

Table 7.3 below sets out the notes and assumptions relating to each of the areas of spend and

income set out in Tables 7.1 and 7.2 above.

17

Table 7.3 Notes on Project Costs & Income

ITEM NOTES

INCOME EXPENDITURE

Luton Street Development

Site

Income is based on the Developer Bid subject to CM approval

Costs are purchasing of 14 Capland St properties and project costs to date (incl. Enabling and contingency).

Penn and Lilestone

Street

Income based on the sale of 19 private for sale units and income from the GF in line with the MTP for the construction of the NHS Health Hub/Community Centre.

Enabling costs based on current estimates. Residential sales values

based on the market today, and these should improve when this scheme is

delivered in 2018/19

Lisson Arches

Mini-competition now launched. Income based on 14 private sale units.

Construction costs based on current estimates, mini-competition now

launched.

Cosway St development (cost incl CWC purchase)

Capital receipts will be split between HRA (£12.1m) and the GF (£6m). Income is likely

to improve and a revaluation is to take place in anticipation of Secretary of State’s

consent to dispose of site.

Tresham

Costs are for relocating Children’s and Adults Services from Luton Street to new buildings at Tresham Crescent.

Other Regeneration

Receipts

Recent HRA capital receipts earmarked for Phase 1 such as the disposal of 92 St

John’s Wood Terrace & 20d Talbot Road.

Financial Overview

• Each individual development project has an agreed and approved budget, which is part of the overarching HRA Business Plan last approved in February 2014. An updated HRA Business Plan is due to be submitted to Cabinet for approval in December 2014.

• The Church Street development schemes are currently anticipated to deliver a surplus land value of c£18.9m, which would be ring-fenced and utilised to deliver the Infrastructure and Public Realm Project (IPRP) and other benefits in the local area over the course of the next 5 years. As the surplus will not be achieved instantly, programme’s will be developed and delivered incrementally as and when funding becomes available. The council will forward fund where surpluses are imminent but only when the relevant authority has been given.

• Public Realm Improvements within the immediate vicinity of development plots will form a contractual obligation to be undertaken by the relevant site developers via a S278 agreement with the City Council. As this is a cost borne by developers it is not considered part of the IPRP budget. However the Council reserves the right to manage these works directly should it see fit to do so.

• Schemes will be funded against the headline programme budget in table 7.1. In addition, there will be further bids for external funding.

18

Additional Financial Information

Assumptions

• All costs and values are stated at August 2014 prices

• Land sale proceeds are based on residual appraisals (cost & values) undertaken by external independent consultants (various dates), and are subject to final land sales achieved via contracts for development

• All Lisson Arches construction costs are estimates against pre-planning designs and are subject to final award of design & build contract

• All infrastructure and public realm costs are based on the cost plan produced by Davis Langdon in August 2013

• Costs reflect the Council’s actual costs to date and committed costs to secure Vacant Possession, including contingency.

• Programme timescales are based on delivery assumptions made by Council officers.

Constraints

• Co-ordination of projects and infrastructure implementation

• Planning consents required

• Market forces will effect cost and value estimates

• Traffic order changes required

• Practicable and affordable management, maintenance and operating models

• Delivery of schemes in co-ordination with management changes in contracts

• Changes to ECO funding would undermine case to deliver district heating scheme

• Failure to secure external public realm funding could undermine outcomes.

External Funding Strategy

• It is proposed that an external funding strategy be followed to match-fund the City Council’s

housing land surplus contribution from phase 1.

• The external funding plan involves:

Ø Bidding to TfL Major Schemes programme;

Ø Exploring GLA or other EU opportunities that emerge. For example, Church Street

is being used as a case study in the current URBACT EU markets project which

raises the profile and potential for funding from GLA town centre programmes;

Ø Continuing to encourage TfL to invest on its road network surrounding Church

Street ward (Edgware Road and Marylebone Road). A traffic study is being taken

forward by TfL to inform such options which also supports plans for new enterprise

developments at the Edgware Road and Marylebone Flyover;

Ø Helping Housing Renewal cash-flow during the design phase by loaning or using

end of year underspend from WCC’s Local Implementation Programme;

Ø Linking IPRP schemes to s106 and the forth coming Community Infrastructure Levy;

and

Ø Pursuing opportunities for contributions to a district energy scheme.

19

8. Risk and Risk Management

See appendix C for the scheme specific Risk and Mitigation table. The most significant

risks and mitigations are:

• If planning consent is not granted. Designs will be compliant with planning policy and

extensive pre-application discussions with WCC planners will be held;

• If costs increase, the programme may go over budget. Sound financial planning and

minimal change to scope will help manage costs down, with a sensible contingency in

place for emerging issues;

• If the surplus land value is not realised, the project scope maybe reduced;

• The multiple strands of the development programme pose a high risk to the delivery

schedule due to multiple interdependencies. The Senior Development Manager will

take overall responsibility for ensuring the individual work streams stay on track. He will

be supported by a Programme Manager and Project Manager, whilst the Head of Major

Projects will ensure that the HRP Board are kept informed.

The Senior Development Manager will be responsible for the ownership of the risk register

and will report to the Head of Major Projects in the first instance, who will then decide

whether the identified risk and actions to mitigate need to be escalated at a more senior

level.

9. Supporting Policies

Below is are a list of relevant policies that are connected to the phase 1 proposals at

Church Street, with others that will follow as and when required:

a. Westminster Housing Renewal Strategy March 2010 b. The Church Street & Paddington Green Masterplan Cabinet Member Report June

2010 c. The Church Street Futures Plan 2011 d. Better Care, Closer to Home: Our strategy for co-ordinated, high quality out of

hospital care 2012 – 2015, NHS Central London Clinical Commissioning Group e. Better City, Better Lives 2012 f. The Church Street Renewal Area Vote Cabinet Member Report January 2013 g. Church Street Local Lettings and Sales Policy (draft) 2014 h. The Future of your Neighbourhood Vote Booklet May 2013 i. Westminster’s Core Strategy January 2011 j. City Plan November 2013

20

10. Further information and contacts

For further information please contact:

Will Noton

Senior Development Manager

Major Project Team, Housing Regeneration and Property

020 7641 5439

[email protected]

or

Tristan Samuels

Head of Major Projects, Housing Regeneration and Property

020 7641 7349

[email protected]

The Church Street Working Groups & Work streams

Group Name Lead WCC Officer Chair

Futures Steering Group Marco Torquati Chair: Joe Hegarty

Arts and Culture

working groupMartin Whittles Chair: Emma Blau

Communications Sub

Group

Chair: Rotating

Cosway Street Working

GroupWill Noton Rotating

Demonstration Homes

Working groupWestminster Community

Homes

Rotating

Finance and Viability

Sub Group

Marco Torquati Chair: Joe Hegarty

Lilestone Street working

group

Chris Genner Chair: Rotating

Lisson Arches Working

GroupChris Genner Rotating

Luton Street Working

GroupWill Noton Carole Spedding

Market and Retail

Working Group

Martin Whittles Nick Kasic, Mary

Atkinson

Public Realm Working

Group

Martin Whittles Chair: Achim Von

Malotki

Enterprise and

Employment Working

Group

Gez Kellaghan

Chair: Chris Joseph

In order to ensure that the Health and Wellbeing workstream is appropriately informed by the Futures

Steering Group, it was agreed at their October meeting that a Health and Wellbeing Working Group might

be established. Proposal to be taken to the November meeting.

hrp project initiation document

Documents