MD1650 MRF expenditure on Station Approach and District Energy Network

1.1 The Mayor approved (under cover of MD1092) approval for a programme of delivery through to March 2017, with investment decisions within this timeframe and subsequent to a Stage 2 investment decision being delegated to the Executive Director for Development, Enterprise and Environment. Where projects require funding beyond 2015/16 endorsement is required from Investment Performance Board (IPB) prior to the preparation of a Director’s Decision. Where funding is required beyond 2016/17 changes and approvals are subject to the GLA’s standard decision making process.

1.2 The £28m (£18m Mayors Regeneration Fund (MRF); £10m London Enterprise Fund (LEF), package to align with large scale redevelopment in North Tottenham was approved by IPB in April 2012. This was further supplemented by match funding from the LB of Haringey (£13m). An additional £1.2m has now been secured by the LB Haringey, which brings the total programme value up to £42.2m. The funding is intended to safeguard the £650m investment associated Tottenham Hotspur Football Club (THFC) development. Regeneration in North Tottenham will deliver an estimated 4,800 new homes and 3,850 new jobs.

1.3 Four distinct projects, targeted at supporting large scale estate redevelopment programme in the vicinity are moving forward at different rates. While there has been very good progress on two of these projects, delays to THFC’s stadium, have caused uncertainty around delivery timeframes on others projects. The revised stadium planning application was approved by LB Haringey (LBH) in December 2015 and the Mayor gave final approval in February2016. This increases certainty. However, some uncertainty remains around the timing of delivery of the THFC project.

1.4 In December 2012 £872,000 MRF expenditure for the purchase of key sites was authorised by the Executive Director of Development, Enterprise and Environment under cover of DD938. In 2013/14 £436,447 was utilised to purchase 731 Tottenham High Road.

1.5 In November 2015 £4.8m MRF expenditure for delivery of a renewed White Hart Lane station, improved public realm, and acquisitions was approved Executive Director of Development, Enterprise and Environment under cover of DD1391.

1.6 The two outstanding elements of MRF funding relate to High Road West - Station Approach (3.06m) and District Energy Network (2.5m). It is not possible to allocate this funding in detail until a deliverable development proposition has been established.

1.7 Significant progress has been made on HRW in the last six months. Cabinet approval to commence procurement of a development partner was secured in December 2015. This procurement process will begin in May 2016 and complete in Q1 of 2017/18. In summary:

- LBH will be seeking a development partner to deliver the High Road West Scheme and will use a development agreement to manage development with its partner;

- LBH’s partner will be committed to delivering the approved development in accordance with the development agreement obligations and in accordance with the agreed delivery programme; and

- the development agreement will be structured so that LBH is responsible for securing vacant possession of the site and the development partner is responsible for all infrastructure and development delivery.

1.8 Since December 2015 development of phase 2 Tottenham Housing Zone has been progressing and was formally approved by the Mayor on the 17th of March 2016 (MD1632).

1.9 As part of this process the strategy for spend on the remaining MRF monies has been clarified. It is proposed that the remaining £3.86m for Station Approach and the £2.5m for delivery of District Energy Network be incorporated into the wider Housing Zone funding package in addition to the existing Housing Zone funding allocation. The proposal de-risks the overall project, enables area-wide regeneration and outcomes agreed at stage 2, to be delivered.

1.10 It is anticipated that delivery will be achieved by 2020/21. As this falls beyond the 2016/17 deadline for spend approved under cover of MD1092 IPB approval in principle was secured on 19 April 2016.

See signed version attached

3.1 All projects will be developed and delivered in compliance with relevant Codes of Practice and in line with the public sector equality duty to ensure that the following issues have been considered

i) Design Proposals: All design proposals will be assessed in terms of accessibility to ensure we minimise disadvantages suffered by people who share a protected characteristic. age, disability, gender reassignment, pregnancy and maternity, race, gender, religion or belief, sexual orientation

ii) Documents and publications: all documents produced will comply with Mayor of London branding guidelines, itself based on guidance from the Royal National Institute of Blind People. Where possible documents will be offered in translated and braille formats.

iii) Events: all events will be open to all and, where possible, we will encourage people who share a protected characteristic to participate in any activity in which their participation is disproportionately low.

a) Key Risks and Issues
There is a risk that Housing Zone monies are prioritised over remaining MRF monies by the Borough. In order to manage this risk it is proposed that the remaining £3.8m Station Approach and £2.5m DEN monies are embedded in the wider HZ process in addition to the current Housing Zone allocations. The outputs agreed at stage 2 will remain the same. Monitoring of spend and achievement of outputs will be managed as part of the HZ process.

The approval by LBH and the Mayor provides increased certainty around delivery of the THFC project. However it remains the case that progress on the THFC project is outside of the control of either LBH or the GLA and further delays may occur. Close and regular coordination is in place at the appropriate levels in LBH. Senior officers at the GLA are also fully briefed on progress.

b) Links to Mayoral strategies and priorities
The proposed project is not mentioned in the strategic plan directly, as it is a response to the unforeseen exceptional incidents of August 2011. However, the programme overall, and the individual projects for Tottenham closely link to the Mayor’s priority themes of: improving Londoners’ quality of life; investing in young Londoners and supporting jobs and growth.

The project will support the Mayor’s priority to deliver growth and jobs, including meeting the Mayor’s 200,000 jobs target.

c) Impact assessments and consultations
Since the riots in 2011 LBH has started a dialogue with local residents, businesses and stakeholders to inform and shape the key elements of the overall approach to regeneration in Tottenham. In October 2013, Haringey Council commissioned an independent organisation called Soundings to conduct a thorough five-month consultation exercise called Tottenham’s Future, to gather views from the community on their views and ambitions for the next 20 years. The responses fed into and shaped the council’s Strategic Regeneration Framework (SRF) for Tottenham, which sets out how the local community’s priorities can be achieved. More than 3,700 people contributed to the consultation.

The works outlined in this report all play a direct and significant role in tackling the key concerns identified through consultation by helping to deliver the strategies for success outlined in the SRF. Individual projects will be developed and delivered in compliance with relevant Codes of Practice and in line with the public sector equality duty.

5.1 This report sets out the latest position with regard to the post-riots programme for Tottenham, funded by Mayor’s Regeneration Fund (MRF), London Enterprise Fund (LEF) and LB Haringey and seeks approval to utilise £6.36m on the Station Approach and District Energy projects.

5.2 As detailed within the main body of this report, the MRF/ LEF funding package for this programme totals £28m and comprises of £18m from the Mayor’s Regeneration Fund and £10m Government Funding from the London Enterprise Fund. This is further supported by match funding from the LB of Haringey (£13m) plus a further £1.2m secured by the borough bringing the total programme value up to £42.2m.

5.3 With regards to the proposal to utilise £6.36m; £3.86m allocation in the Station Approach project and £2.5m for the District Energy Network project to be incorporated into the wider phase 2 Housing Zone funding package will be contained within the overall MRF / LEF funding package of £28m.

5.4 As a result of the proposals in this report, the £28m MRF / LEF funding allocated to specific projects within the overall Tottenham programme, (that have secured IPB and /or full approval) will require some budget re-profiling into future years up to the 2020/21 financial-year to cater for the two projects noted above, which will be picked up as part of the Authority’s annual budget setting process.

5.5 Given the complexities of this programme, the individual projects will be monitored closely and any project slippage reported as soon as they become apparent. Any variations to grant agreements that impact on the delivery dates and /or any specific changes to the projects (including budgetary implications) will be subject to further approval via the Authority’s decision-making process. All appropriate budget adjustments will be made.

6.1 The foregoing sections of this report indicate that:

6.1.1 the decisions requested of the director fall within the statutory powers, acting on behalf of the GLA, to do anything which is facilitative of or conducive or incidental to the promotion of economic development and wealth creation in Greater London; and

6.1.2 in formulating the proposals in respect of which a decision is sought officers have complied with the GLA’s related statutory duties to:

(a) pay due regard to the principle that there should be equality of opportunity for all people;
(b) consider how the proposals will promote the improvement of health of persons, health inequalities between persons and to contribute towards the achievement of sustainable development in the United Kingdom; and
(c) consult with appropriate bodies.

6.2 In taking the decisions requested, the director must have due regard to the Public Sector Equality Duty; namely the need to eliminate discrimination, harassment, victimisation and any other conduct prohibited by the Equality Act 2010, and to advance equality of opportunity between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic (race, disability, gender, age, sexual orientation, religion or belief, pregnancy and maternity and gender reassignment) and persons who do not share it and foster good relations between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it (section 149 of the Equality Act 2010). To this end, the director should have particular regard to section 3 (above) of this report.

6.3 Officers have indicated that report that the proposed contribution of funding will amount to the provision of funding and not a payment for services to be provided and must ensure that the proposed funding is disbursed in a fair and transparent manner in accordance with the GLA’s Contracts and Funding Code and a funding agreement is put in place between and executed by the GLA and proposed recipient(s) before any commitment to the funding is made.

6.4 To the extent that it is proposed the funding be awarded as Housing Zones funding, officers must also pay regard to the legal comments provided on MD1632 and legal advice provided in relation to the same and continue to engage with TfL Legal seeking further advice as required.

6.5 Given that the activity and expenditure proposed relates to extends beyond the current mayoral term officers must also observe the principle that an incumbent administration should not unreasonably fetter the discretion of any future administration. Officers must ensure therefore, that the project is managed in a manner, including the inclusion in all relevant agreements of break clauses, which enable the GLA to terminate the same (or elements thereof) at any point for convenience, milestones and payments should be structured so as to minimise the impact of the exercise of such termination rights and no activity is undertaken, including (without limitation) related announcements or communications, which might impact practically impact upon the exercise of the discretion of the next Mayor.