Relocation of Police Head Quarters to Green Street Car Park - Addendum Report - 28 January 2013

Education and Home Affairs Scrutiny Panel

Relocation of Police Head Quarters to Green Street Car Park

Addendum Report Presented to the States on 28th January 2013

S.R.19/2012

CONTENTS

1. Introduction ......................................................................................................... 1
2. Key Findings ........................................................................................................ 2
3. Police Association Consultation ........................................................................ 3
4. Consultation with civilian staff ........................................................................... 8
5. Issues raised in Scrutiny Report ...................................................................... 12 Appendix 1: Police Association.............................................................................. 18 Appendix 2 : Feedback responses from civil service staff .................................. 23 Appendix 3: Minutes of Police drop in session ..................................................... 35

1. Introduction

The proposition of Deputy J. Martin seeking a review of the decision to relocate the States of Jersey Police Headquarters to the Green Street Car park site (S.R.92/2012) was referred to the Education and Home Affairs Scrutiny Panel on 20th November 2012 during the debate on the proposition. This was following the discovery that the Police Association had canvassed police officers on their views and that a significant number of reservations about the proposed new building had been expressed.

The Panel considered whether it would be appropriate to broaden the terms of reference for its review to include the issues relating to planning, traffic and environment which were covered in Deputy Martin's proposition. The Panel also noted a suggestion from Deputy J. Young that consideration should be given to allowing the Minister for Planning and Environment time to produce a development plan for the St Helier Eastern Gateway Area in consultation with stakeholders and residents, as required by the Island Plan 2011.

The Panel decided, however, that these issues were not within their remit and that they would confine themselves to clarifying the operational and welfare issues identified by the Police Association.

The Panel held public hearings on 29th November with representatives of the Police Association and with the Minister for Home Affairs, Assistant Minister for Treasury and Resources and the Deputy Chief Officer of Police.

The Panel also received copies of all the submissions received from members of the Police Association, together with the written response of the Deputy Chief Officer and the formal response of the Police Association to Scrutiny detailing their findings into concerns raised by their members.

The Panel noted that nearly one third of the personnel working at the Police Headquarters were civilian staff and agreed that they should also be given the opportunity to express their views on the proposal before the Panel finalised its report.

All staff also had the opportunity to see the latest plans, meet the architects and project team and seek clarification of issues at a drop in question and answer session arranged by the Police Association on 14th December 2012.

2. Key Findings

The reservations expressed by Police Officers to their Association have been addressed in discussions with the Deputy Chief Officer and Project Team. Many specific concerns can be resolved in the next detailed stage of the design process. The principal outstanding issues around parking provision for police officers and for visitors to the Enquiry Desk remain. These have been acknowledged and work remains to be done by the States of Jersey Police and the Project Team to define a solution.

Feedback from civilian staff raised very similar concerns to those given to the Police Association, the issues of parking for staff and visitors and the lack of expansion possibilities featuring strongly. The Panel believes that in the main the specific concerns expressed by civilian staff can be addressed through appropriate discussion and interchange with management in the same way that police officer concerns have been addressed.

Further detailed refinement of plans for the Police Station will take place at the next stage of the design process and will be able to respond to specific issues raised by staff.

In the Panel's view the figures for police establishment and crime figures over the last ten years appear to give weight to its belief that the Police Station should take account of potential requirements for future expansion in response to developing services.

The Minister believes that there may be a future possibility to expand the building depending on future redevelopment of the existing Green Street Car Park.

The office space within the new building has been designed with an overall expansion flexibility of 10% in theory. This will allow concerns about specific office accommodation to be considered at the next stage of the design process.

Direct consultation with Honorary Police Officers will take place at the next stage of the design process.

3. Police Association Consultation

The Police Association represents police officers of the States of Jersey Police in relation to conditions of service, disciplinary matters and any matters affecting the welfare and efficiency of its members.

The Association was clear that its focus with regard to the proposed relocation was on the latter part of its remit, that is, any matters affecting the welfare and efficiency of its members', and that wider matters, such as public parking, traffic flow and public access, were excluded from comment. The Association also stated: In general, matters relating to operational management were also considered not to be of concern to the Association, but there was a caveat to this, that if it was identified to be an operational failing that could impact on welfare, efficiency or loss of officer morale then it would fall back onto the Association's radar.[1]

The Police Association undertook to survey its members on the proposed relocation of Police Headquarters to Green Street following its AGM which took place on 25th October 2012. Their action was instigated after becoming aware of the Scrutiny Review into this matter.

In its initial contact with the Minister for Home Affairs on 8th October 2012 the Panel had requested the opportunity to hear the views of the Association and to meet with their representatives. The then President of the Association had attended the first meeting with the Minister held on 16th October 2012 and had reported on the previous consultation with staff at Police Headquarters, describing this as extensive and effective, and stating that he was confident that all significant issues raised by officers had been addressed and that he had not received any negative feedback about the latest designs.

At the AGM on 25th October a new President took over the Association and decided it would be appropriate to seek the views of the members. As a consequence 21 written responses were received, representing approximately 10% of the current membership, expressing a variety of concerns.

States members became aware of these concerns at a briefing on the proposed relocation held on 19th November 2012 prior to the States debate on P.92/2012 which led to a request for clarification before proceeding with the debate.

The concerns were forwarded to the States of Jersey Police Project team, the Deputy Chief Officer and Projects and Facilities Manager inviting their response. Several meetings were then held to discuss the content of these concerns. The Police Association described these meetings as an extremely positive and informative process [which] has resulted in nearly all of the issues having been addressed to the satisfaction of the Association and also some minor modifications to the plans being identified'.[2]

The Association's formal response to Scrutiny details their findings following discussion of each specific concern received from their members. In summary the issues were as follows:

• The design of the custody suite, including the requirement for natural light and access in case of panic alarm
• Toilets and canteen facilities
• Interview rooms, meeting rooms, briefing areas and lecture room facilities
• Security of operational areas
• Storage areas for exhibits, property in operational use, archive documentation
• Workstation space allowance
• Pedestrian access to the building
• The perception that the building had been restricted in size
• Off-site location of the forensic garage
• Lack of expansion opportunities
• Location of operations and intelligence wings for the Joint Financial Crimes Unit
• Gym facility
• Difficulties with the Summerland alternative option

The Association was satisfied that the proposed new building met all relevant standards of the Home Office for Police Buildings and exceeded the British Council of Offices standards for office accommodation.

There were three matters which remain unresolved at the present time; however, the Association was assured that they could be overcome in due course. The outstanding issues were:

• The concern regarding parking for officers recalled to work at short notice (emergencies etc). Whilst there is public parking available in the area at numerous locations, the concern is that spaces may not be available at the relevant times and Officers' response may be delayed as a result.
• Issue identified by Enquiry Desk Officers that there is no direct access from the enquiry desk to the custody suite to facilitate movement of persons arrested at the desk without having to go back outside and around to the custody suite. The Deputy Chief Officer has agreed that this will be addressed at the next detailed planning stage.
• The concern over the lack of dedicated parking for officers. This relates to officer safety in that having to return to private vehicles (especially cars) at the end of a tour of duty (on occasions being in the middle of the night) where they may encounter persons with whom they might have had professional dealings previously. The Association made it clear that it was not seeking to obtain free parking for police officers but would favour some form of dedicated provision ideally within Green Street car park.

The Police Association's ongoing reservations about parking for officers reflect concerns expressed in the Panel's own report. Further discussions with the Minister on this issue are reported below.

The Vice President commented on the outcome of the consultation process undertaken by the Association: Perhaps a lot of the concerns raised were through a lack of knowledge on behalf of the officers who were raising a concern and it is a concern that can easily be addressed by asking the right question and obtaining the answer, and that is what largely the process has been. So, rather than demanding fundamental changes in their concerns, their

concerns have largely been questions through a lack of knowledge on their part and once the answer has been obtained people are satisfied.[3]

The Panel had the opportunity to discuss the above matters with the Association in the public hearing on 27th November. It should be noted that the majority of these issues are already covered in the Scrutiny Report, albeit the level of detail of particular items, such as toilet and canteen facilities, had not been considered by the Panel.

An additional matter covered in the hearings related to the dispatch of police vehicles in response to emergency calls and the potential problems of proceeding through traffic on Route du Fort and in the Tunnel. The Panel was informed that in most cases police vehicles responding to such were already deployed at various areas around the Island. The Police already faced the issue of access through the Tunnel; this would not be something new due to the Green Street location. Furthermore, it was pointed out that traffic congestion on Rouge Bouillon was often more severe than on Route du Fort.

Having circulated their formal response to their members, the Police Association's next step was to arrange for a drop in questions and answers session on the 14th December 2012 in

relation to the proposed plans for the new police headquarters at Green Street. This was a further opportunity for all officers and civilian staff to see the plans and to question the architects and the project team about any aspect of the plans. The report from this meeting, prepared by Taylor Young Architects stated that the overall response from attendees was extremely supportive and positive. Everyone who attended fully supported the proposals and had very few comments[4]. The Police Association also invited their members to respond to their findings with any further queries or clarification. No further comments were received from members of the Association.

Key Finding: The reservations expressed by Police Officers to their Association have been addressed in discussions with the Deputy Chief Officer and Project Team. Many specific concerns can be resolved in the next detailed stage of the design process. The principal outstanding issues around parking provision for police officers and for visitors to the Enquiry Desk remain. These have been acknowledged and work remains to be done by the States of Jersey Police and the Project Team to define a solution.  

4. Consultation with civilian staff

Having discussed the views of police officers on the design details in proposed new building, the Panel considered that it would also be appropriate to hear the views of civilian staff at Police Headquarters. There are 88 civil servants and 9 manual workers, making up nearly one third of the workforce in the building. They are involved in administrative work but also have some involvement in operations, for example in the Police Control Room. Some are former police officers with therefore an understanding of the implications of the building for police work.

Consultation with civilian staff, however, was not as straightforward as with police officers as they do not have a dedicated association to represent their interests in the same way as the Police Association. The civilian staff may belong to the civil service and manual worker associations but these associations only represent a minority proportion of the workforce. Furthermore, these associations were not in a position to enter the kind of detailed discussions with the project team and to provide the feedback to their members as had occurred for police officers.

Nevertheless, the Panel did receive some feedback from nine civilian staff on an anonymous basis. The concerns identified were very similar to those from police officers, the issues of parking and lack of expansion opportunities featuring strongly as well as some particular details relating to specific functions. In summary, the concerns were:

General issues

• Potential for expansion
• Parking provision in the area
• Staff parking
• Safety for staff leaving the building late at night to access distant parking
• Traffic/tunnel congestion
• Parking for visitors to the enquiry desk
• Exit for police vehicles on to Route du Fort
• Offsite parking for oversized vehicles

Specific issues

• Control room facilities
• Air conditioning and air circulation in areas of high computer usage
• Desk sizes
• Centralised printing
• Storage area for files
• Locker provision for staff
• Location of property store
• Facilities for bicycle storage

One respondent highlighted the inadequacies of the current accommodation; three voiced frustration at the delays and urged the States to get on with the new building.

The Panel received a detailed response from the Deputy Chief Officer addressing each of the specific issues raised.[5] A copy of this response has been provided to all those who contacted the Scrutiny Panel.

As previously stated, the civilian staff also had the opportunity to see the plans, meet the architects and project team and seek clarification of issues at the drop in question and answer session arranged by the Police Association on 14th December 2012.

Key Finding: Feedback from civilian staff raised very similar concerns to those given to the Police Association, the issues of parking for staff and visitors and the lack of expansion possibilities featuring strongly. The Panel believes that in the main the specific concerns expressed by civilian staff can be addressed through appropriate discussion and interchange with management in the same way that police officer concerns have been addressed.

Response of States of Jersey Police

The Deputy Chief Officer told the Panel in the public hearing that the additional consultation by the Police Association, although rather late in the day, had been helpful in moving the project along.

He explained that the project was currently at a relatively early stage in the design process which had eleven stages from inception to finalisation. The project was currently only at Stage D, which involved the development of plans and proof of concept to enable them to go forward to seek planning approval. He commented: The level of detail we have gone into thus far is perhaps beyond what would normally happen at stage D. Once the decision is taken by the planning authorities and, for instance, if approval were given, we then move into stage E, and that is normally the very detailed planning about layouts and the internal provision of services within a building, and that is where that would normally take place.'[6]

The reason given for providing the current level of detail in the planning application was to satisfy that the building could meet the user requirement and that it could be built within budget.

Consequently, he said, there was still ample opportunity to refine the very detailed planning about layouts and the internal provision of services within the proposed building and to address legitimate issues raised by staff feedback.

The Deputy Chief Officer said that although there had been considerable consultation about the proposals, including senior managers, middle managers, team meetings and individuals, it had not been possible to speak directly to every member of staff. An extensive consultation process had already led to detailed revision of the original plans: We have talked it through from a police perspective organisationally how we would want to see working practices work, how we can get business improvements from the way in which we operate within the building through co-location and whatever.  We have had individual feedback and team feedback and there have been a number of iterations of these plans - probably 10, 20 maybe - as we have worked things through, taking account of the feedback and trying to get things right. In some cases, you had a total redesign of some of the floors to make sure that works, and that has been really positive The consultation has been extended to the Civil Service manual workers and non-police officers themselves. It has been very extensive really since the inception of the review of the user requirement for this current site and there have been lots of opportunities there. [7]

For the most part, he said, the latest consultation carried out by the Police Association had gone over issues already addressed: Some of the issues that have emerged as a result of the consultation, the most recent consultation for the Police Association, are not new, they have been raised before, and we have addressed those.[8]

He acknowledged, however, that some new issues such as the access from the Enquiry Desk to the Custody Suite had emerged and a solution would be incorporated in the next design stage. The only outstanding still to be resolved for the Police Association was the provision of parking for police officers.[9]

Key Finding: Further detailed refinement of plans for the Police Station will take place at the next stage of the design process and will be able to respond to specific issues raised by staff.

5. Issues raised in Scrutiny Report

The key findings in the Scrutiny report (S.R. 19/2012) related to

• Firstly, the lack of parking provision for police officers and for members of the public who visit the Police Headquarters for a variety of reasons;
• secondly to the lack of opportunity for future expansion of the building in order to accommodate additional services which the Panel believed would be likely to emerge in response to needs in society; and
• thirdly to the apparent lack of consultation with the Honorary Police about their requirements within the new building.

The public hearing with the Minister for Home Affairs and the Assistant Minister for Treasury and Resources was an opportunity for further consideration of these matters.

Options for Staff Parking

The Assistant Minister for Treasury and Resources informed the Panel that it was intended that options for staff parking, including the offer of 40 private parking spaces nearby, would be examined at the next detailed stage in the planning process when a comprehensive travel plan for all users of the building would be developed.

Public access parking

Similarly, there remained an opportunity to revise current plans for public access parking facilities in response to the concerns that had been raised. The Minister for Home Affairs outlined a number of ideas that he already had; others might still emerge. The Scrutiny Panel had suggested that a suitable area of Green Street car park might be designated for this purpose. He described one of his ideas as follows: I have asked officers to explore [an] ambitious approach to that, which we are still very much at the possibility, thinking it would require a redesign, but my idea is basically to have dedicated spaces for visitors in the south-west corner on the first floor (towards the tunnel) with a door with a buzzer there, where people would ring, as you do at prison if you go there, and say: "I am coming into the police station. Could you let me through?" There would need to be a short bridge, because there is a gap between the buildings, and then you would be walking down the roadway, which is pretty well exactly the same height as the first floor, which leads to the front of the building. Now, that creates security issues which we would have to iron out, it creates safety issues in terms of pedestrians and so on, but that is certainly a plan which would radically improve access for members of the public, which we would need to investigate.'[10]

Establishment changes at Police Headquarters

The States of Jersey Police provided the following figures relating to establishment changes since 1995.

The Panel noted that although there had been a reduction in 20 police officer posts since 1995 (down from 247 to 227) there had been an increase of 39 civilian staff (up from 69 to 108) with a further circa 7 posts in the pipeline.

The comments showed that this increase had been necessary due to the growth of financial crime,  the  introduction  of  new  legislation  (in  relation  to  terrorism,  the  regulation  of investigatory powers and sex offences) and the growth in compliance requirements (vetting and IT).

Furthermore, it was noted that this increase in staffing had occurred during a period when crimes levels were falling. The Minister provided figures showing an ongoing drop in crime figures over the past ten years, which he considered to be a sound basis for not expecting any requirement for expansion of the Police force in the foreseeable future.

Crimes figures 2002-12

2002 5,427

2003 5,172

2004 5.589

2005 5,229

2006 5,027

2007 4,665

2008 4,818

2009 4,538

2010 4,564

2011 3,981

2012 3,007 (as of 18.10.12)

Key Finding: In the Panel's view the figures for police establishment and crime figures over the last ten years appear to give weight to its belief that the Police Station should take account of potential requirements for future expansion in response to developing services.

Opportunity for future external expansion

In response to concerns about the lack of expansion possibilities the Minister for Home Affairs pointed out that the lifespan of the existing car park building in Green Street was between seven and seventeen years (up to 2019 or 2029) and that this represented a potential opportunity to expand the Police building if a need had been established. He said: Now, clearly when the point arises at which a decision is made that the building needs to be replaced or extended or whatever, there then is a situation if at that stage it became apparent that additional building would need to take place in relation to this building, which we are not expecting, because as you know on the figures, our current figures are dropping and I am expecting that pattern to continue to occur. But if that then happened, then clearly we have a situation where on the demolition of that site next door, it is possible to insert an extension to the existing building, between the existing building and what will now be the new car park, which is likely, I think, to have more floors that the present one.[11]

Key Finding: The Minister believes that there may be a future possibility to expand the building depending on future redevelopment of the existing Green Street Car Park.

Internal Expansion flexibility

The Assistant Minister for Treasury and Resources told the Panel that the office space within the new building had been designed with an overall expansion flexibility of 10% - the space was designed to be 10% bigger than is required. The Panel was informed that the plans were prepared on the assumption of 236 police officers. The current authorised strength for police officers within the Medium Term Financial Plan is 227.[12]

The Deputy Chief Officer added that there was adequate expansion space within the building for the foreseeable future. In addition to the 10% expansion flexibility for workstation space there was 10% circulation space allowance. It was not simply a matter of cramming more people into the planned office space. There was over-capacity in terms of breakaway places and meeting rooms which could be used as increased expansion of space if needed in the future. While some parts of the building were fixed with solid walls, such as the custody suite, the office accommodation was flexible:  It can be moved about, and it needs to, because policing is a dynamic operation and we need to create different teams at different times and have that flexibility to move things around and space to do that is absolutely essential.[13]

The Deputy Chief Officer acknowledged that the Police Association had identified one of the offices where it appeared that people were crammed in like sardines'. But as I say, that is a stage E issue. We have looked at it again. My colleague and I looked at it again with the

architects and that can be remedied very easily, so we get it back to 6sqm plus 10% plus 10% and we can adjust that.'[14]

Key Finding: The office space within the new building has been designed with an overall expansion flexibility of 10% in theory. This will allow concerns about specific office accommodation to be considered at the next stage of the design process.

Consultation with Honorary Police

The Deputy Chief Officer also informed the Panel that direct consultation with the Honorary Police had been planned for Stage E. However, provision had already been made within the building for Centeniers to have private consultation facilities within the custody suite, where they could read papers in private and charge individuals. Advocates would also require interviews in that area. In addition it was anticipated that the Honorary Police would have access to other parts of the building, in particular the top floor for major incident response and for training facilities. Provision for Honorary Officers parking was also included in the basement.

Key Finding: Direct consultation with Honorary Police Officers will take place at the next stage of the design process.

Project costs

Finally, the Assistant Minister for Treasury and Resources confirmed that the capital budget for the new building remained at £21m. The specifications for the project, however, had been reduced significantly following a review carried out in 2009.

The current expenditure on the pre-application process (including Lime Grove) totalled £660,000 to date.

He said that the maintenance requirements for ongoing occupation of the Rouge Bouillon site would amount to between £900,000 and £1m.

The cost of alternatives to the current proposals at Green Street car park would amount to at least £3m in excess of the current budget.

Appendix 1: Police Association

Formal Response To Concerns Raised By Police Officers In Relation To The Proposed New Police Headquarters At Green Street.

This report details the findings by the Police Association Committee into concerns raised by their members as a result of a canvass of the membership being undertaken by the Police Association.

This action was instigated due to the Police Association being made aware of a possible enquiry by the States Scrutiny Panel seeking the Association membership view on the proposed plans for the new police headquarters.

In late October 2012 all States of Jersey police officers were contacted by email seeking their view either positive or negative, which they had regarding the Green Street plan. It was felt that the only way the membership's view could be given was by asking them for it. In total there were 21 responses, representing approximately 10% of the current membership.

These concerns were forwarded to the SOJP PHQ project team, Deputy Chief Officer Barry TAYLOR and facilities manager, Rob MOY inviting their response and also several meetings were arranged with them to discuss the content of the concerns. This was felt necessary by the Police Association prior to any meeting with Scrutiny, as it was only fair to give them an opportunity to answer the questions asked. This has been an extremely positive and informative process and has resulted in nearly all of the issues having been addressed to the satisfaction of the Association and also some minor modifications to the plans being identified.

It is important to outline the remit of the Police Association during this process. The Association agreed that it was only appropriate that we would address issues relating to the welfare and efficiency of officers, and not the wider management issues such as public parking, traffic flow and public access etc. This being pursuant with our raison d'etre as outlined in the Police Force Jersey Law. In general matters relating to operational management were also considered not to be of concern to the Association, but there was a caveat to this, that if it was identified to be an operational failing that could impact on welfare, efficiency or loss of officer morale then it would fall back onto the Association's radar.

On Tuesday 20th November 2012 the Police Association convened an extraordinary committee meeting, which was attended, by DCO TAYLOR and Rob MOY. The purpose of the meeting was for the committee to assess the answers provided by Mr. TAYLOR. The committee then addressed the members concerns and the answers given one by one and voted on each concern as to whether it had been addressed to satisfaction. This was assisted greatly by the committee being able to ask further questions and to probe the Deputy Chief Officer and Mr. MOY more in depth where necessary.

Now follows the issues that were addressed:

The concern relating to the length of the corridor in custody was raised and the DCO and RM assured the committee that it was designed especially to assist in non-compliant prisoners, holding cells placed along it for violent detainees and that it mirrored best practice in UK. The project team had actually visited UK custody suites and seen it in live time. The majority of the Committee accepted this. (Committee Vote 6 – 1 with one against)

The concern regarding there being sufficient toilets was raised. The DCO stated that those shown on the plans were the minimum amount that would be there and that there were more than legally required. There was likely to be more in final plans. (Committee vote – all satisfied)

The concern regarding insufficient canteen facilities: DCO stated that there was a general canteen with the facility to have a franchise serving limited meals and also canteen eating areas on all floors. (Committee vote – all satisfied)

The concern regarding the lack of interview rooms and the rooms in operational areas being used by the public: The plans show sufficient interview rooms for both detained persons and witness recording and the rooms in operational areas are not for public use but available as meeting and quiet areas for officers. (Committee vote – all satisfied)

Concerns over storage areas for exhibits and property in operational use: There are several areas for these purposes and it was felt that they were ample. (Committee vote – all satisfied)

 The concerns over the lack of meeting rooms, briefing areas and lecture room facilities: The plans show that there are numerous rooms available for these purposes and the DCO explained how the area on the top floor could be separated into different units or used as one room for lecture style presentations similar to the current Henry Le Brocq Hall at Rouge Bouillon, in fact slightly larger than this. (Committee vote – all satisfied)

The concern regarding parking for officers called in to work is an issue that has not been resolved at this time: Whilst there is public parking available in the area at numerous locations, the concern is that they may not be available at the relevant times and the time taken to locate one.

Concern over light tubes and no natural light: DCO stated that the light tubes do in fact provide natural light and that they are home office compliant. He has documentation to that effect. Jon Breeze asked for a copy of that documentation and this was agreed by DCO. (Committee vote – all satisfied) Documentation since received and appears to comply with Home Office requirements and an email from the Home Office appears to verify this. This would seem to be a good use of the latest technology available.

Concerns over office space for staff: RM stated that the plans allowed for 6msq per unit as opposed to the regulations of 4.3msq. The committee accepts that if this exceeds the British Council of Offices standard, which it appears to, then we are content with this. (Committee vote – all satisfied)

Concern that the new station has got smaller than the original plans: The plans clearly show this not to be the case and that the station has in fact increased in size with the new layout. (Committee vote – all satisfied)

Concern of the lack of secondary pedestrian access: The plans clearly show various points of pedestrian access areas for staff. (Committee vote – all satisfied)

Issue identified that there is no direct access from the enquiry desk to custody to facilitate movement of persons arrested at the desk without going outside: The committee agreed that this was not acceptable and this was also agreed by DCO. RM to look to address this issue. The committee feel that this must be rectified as it represents an officer safety issue if they were to have to escort a person detained at the front office back out the front door and down the side of the building next to moving vehicles, also would force the handcuffing of detainees for this purpose whereas that might be avoided if they are escorted in through the front of the building as at present. There are a quantifiable amount of persons arrested under these circumstances at present.

Concern over the location of the forensic garage and it not being on site: DCO stated that CSI department had been consulted and that they were happy with the proposed area for their examination area. Committee could see no issue with it being off site. (Committee vote – all satisfied)

Concern that there was not enough storage for documentation and archives: The area at La Collette provides more than sufficient areas for storage and Kevin McKerrell who is responsible for this area has checked this. It is also intended to start using a scanning process to reduce the amount of storage required. (Committee vote – all satisfied)

There is a lot of concern over the lack of parking for officers: The concern is for officer safety, them having to return to vehicles during night time, away from PHQ and coming across aggressive persons they have just dealt with in the street. Whilst there is no dedicated officer parking, there will be an additional 50 spaces for pedal cycles and 50 spaces for motorcycles opposite the police station, which is greatly welcomed. RM has also agreed to speak with TTS as part of the travel plan to explore the idea from Jon Breeze that officers be given free bus travel when to and from work. This will also encourage more officers onto buses where possible, added security for public travelers, driver also having an identified officer on the bus. Would have no impact on bus fare takings given small amount of officers involved and is a concession, which UK officers receive. This subject remains a concern.

Concerns over the lack of expansion opportunities: The DCO states that there will be opportunities to expand and the committee agreed that this was an issue for management and not the members. However was noted at recent States presentation meeting it was muted that there was potential that if expansion was needed then maybe when Green Street car park was demolished then opportunity there. Also it is accepted that due to the nature of policing at present we are reducing as opposed to expanding. (Committee vote – all satisfied)

Concern that operations and intelligence wings in JFCU need to be separate: DCO agreed and this is already in the plans. (Committee vote – all satisfied)

Query as to why we can't revert back to the Summerland option: DCO stated that this has already been signed over to housing and also raised the issue over a part of the land needed only being available at huge expense (ransom strip). (Committee vote – all satisfied) Concern over the size of the gym: DCO stated that whilst members can use the gym its primary function is for the fitness tests and officer safety and it is fit for purpose for that. Committee agreed that officers who felt it was not suitable for their needs could get a gym membership somewhere. (Committee vote – all satisfied)

Concerns regarding the public having access to upstairs areas amongst operations: DCO confirmed that this would not be the case and that the intention was always to ensure maximum security in operational areas. (Committee vote – all satisfied)

Concern over officers attending panic alarms into custody having to go through so many doors: When compared from the plans to current practice, there appear to be no difference and would be standard in most UK police stations. (Committee vote and 6 – 1 one against)

Having covered all the areas of concern, a general discussion took place about the way forward.

DCO raised a concern that he had about the fact that a member had stated in their concern that the architects were not qualified or experienced to carry out the plans for the station. The DCO stated that this is certainly not the case. Jon Breeze apologised on behalf of the unnamed and misinformed officer. (Jon Breeze has since researched the architects and they are clearly more than qualified). The President is happy to apologise on record in public to the architects, Taylor Young of Bury, who clearly have a history of designing public buildings and in particular police buildings.

This concludes the issues that were addressed and a potential drop in day for all officer's to come and question the project team and the architects about the proposed plans has been scheduled for the 12th December 2012 at Rouge Bouillon.

Submitted respectfully on and behalf of the States of Jersey Police Association. Jon Breeze, President States of Jersey Police Association

Appendix 2: Feedback responses from civil service staff

Introduction

Nine comments were received from civilian staff at Police HQ on an anonymous basis. The concerns identified were very similar to those from police officers, the issues of parking and lack of expansion opportunities featuring strongly as well as some particular details relating to specific functions. This paper contains

• a summary of the concerns
• full comments received from civilian staff (names removed)
• response from the Deputy Chief Officer to issues raised

Summary: In summary, the concerns were: General issues

• No room for expansion
• Congested parking provision in the area
• Lack of parking for staff
• Safety for staff leaving the building late at night to access distant parking
• Traffic/tunnel congestion – emergency response may be delayed
• Inadequate parking for visitors to the enquiry desk
• Unsuitable exit for police vehicles on to Route du Fort
• Offsite parking for oversized vehicles

Specific issues

• Control room – inadequate size for current CCTV equipment, lack of windows and inadequate kitchen & rest room facilities
• Air conditioning and air circulation in areas of high computer usage
• Desk sizes: Workstation area too small; insufficient number of desks for needs of unit
• Centralised printing
• Storage area for files
• Limited locker provision for staff
• Location of property store

• Inadequate facilities for bicycle storage concern over security

One respondent highlighted the inadequacies of the current accommodation; three voiced frustration at the delays and urged the States to get on with the new building.

Comments received in full

Purely from a practical point of view my concerns are as follows:

1. The building will barely be big enough and will leave no room for expansion. I can see that after a few years the premises will be far too small.
2. Parking for visitors will be a problem. I have heard a number of proposed solutions but none that are likely to be very successful.
3. During peak times the Green Street roundabout is gridlocked with traffic from all directions so emergency calls will be problematic. Admittedly emergency vehicles have to negotiate this area at the moment when proceeding east but if the Station is situated there they will have a problem every time they leave the station during peak hours.

I fully agree that a new Police HQ is long overdue and is needed as a matter of urgency but I do not believe that the Green Street is the right location.

********************************************************************************************************

[ ] I was asked to look at the plans for the new control room. Where I was asked to,

and gave my opinion, that this is also too small for its purpose, I felt I was being fobbed off.

On the plans it did not make provision for all the equipment that we currently use and did not have enough socket points. Plans are to have all the CCTV equipment within the control room on one wall instead of in a separate room, where it is at the moment. This is due to the noise and having to keep this equipment at a low temperature for cooling purposes.

There are only small high level windows that we won't be able to see out of. There are no kitchen facilities to make tea, coffee, or light snacks. When asked about this I was told they would put in a vending machine, bearing in mind that we sit at our desks usually for 10 hours at a time and often have to eat at our desks this is unacceptable. The control room is

manned 24 hours, there should always be 3 persons working in the control room and at weekends an extra civilian works in the CCTV room. This is not always possible and staff cannot leave the control room for any length of time in order to go down the corridor to the proposed rest room they have on the plans.

Regarding the parking, it's not just the fact that there will be none for police vehicles or staff, the area for the custody bay is inadequate, both in space and regarding cross contamination issues between suspects and victims. It is not suitable for vehicles to exit the premise going code 1, straight out onto a roundabout in busy traffic.

I believe all the vans and some of the patrol cars are to be parked down at La Collette as there is no space at the new HQ, how can officers provide a fast response when they have to be transported to their vehicles first. There is also no space for members of the public to park when they come to the enquiry desk with a query, or to provide officers with statements, which can take some considerable time.

As to myself, I [ ] will have to walk in the dark to wherever I have been able to park my car at all hours of the night on my own.

If a female prisoner is released from cells at 3 o'clock in the morning they are transported home for safety, yet I'll be left on my own to walk to my car. They are reducing parking in Green St car park by 92 spaces; all the adjacent roads are residents parking, which means I will probably have to park a considerable distance away from the new HQ.

********************************************************************************************************

I was a serving Police officer for over 16 years prior to just becoming a civilian! so feel I can comment on the location from the point of view of someone who has had to drive rapid response through traffic. The proposed location is not suitable; it is too close to the tunnel and the wrong side. The traffic in that area comes to a standstill both ends of day, which would make it very difficult to head west in a hurry and difficult to head north, plus the tunnel is closed during the night on occasions.

There is no room for expansion.

No/limited parking for enquiries plus upset those that park in that area already!!

Notwithstanding the above, I live in [ ], a mile from the nearest bus stop (my choice I know) so I have no choice but to drive in, plus the bus times are dreadful. The current parking facilities behind the Ambulance station are poor, but free for those that use it. I myself have had to rent a space as I have child care issues and therefore need to be able to get to my car, which the current car park does not allow, becoming completely jammed up unless you're parked before 0630!!! The thought of having to canvas another parking space and getting through the traffic to the other side of town is not a pleasant one.

For what it's worth, I think it's a stupid location, move Ambo to the PHQ office building, build the Police Station on the Ambo site, then build new office buildings on the current Summerland site (instead of more housing). Rebuild the PHQ office building. All emergency services stay in the same location? All happy, but that's too simple.

********************************************************************************************************

[ ] I have attended the first meeting for our work area with the planning team, it was event that they had been given a brief to work to, the plan showed our office area with 600cm wide desks ( like a call centre), this being far too small for the nature of work carried out . They were told this and shown our work areas.

However the plan did not have sufficient desks for all staff within the office and appeared to be short by over 10 desks. A new unit had been added to our team but was not shown in the head count. I am unsure if the new plan takes these in to account as I have not seen them. I had not been asked back to further meetings.

We explained that we needed storage areas for files and were told this would take place off site, where/ how to access etc.

The plan was for us to have a printing room which may well be on a different floor, we tried to explain the problems we could see with this but had been told this is a states wide plan to cut down on printing. That we should be working to a paperless system, this at present is not possible as to the way we and more importantly others work.

The matter of public parking at the station, I cannot see how you can have a police station for the public to attend to without parking.

There are various reasons why people will drive to the station. The disabled person matter has already been flagged up.

If a person has been required to produce their driving documents and to have a defect check to have been fixed on their vehicle, would an officer then have to go with this person to the public car park to view the vehicle.

A person bringing or collecting found/lost property. Bail reporting.

Those people attending the station, children/probation officers, appropriate adults, legal advisers, parents collecting detained children, etc.

Witness requested to attend to give statement, where do you park for how long and to the cost of whom, if you can't find any parking and are late how much officers time is lost waiting.

Taxi drivers who have a problem with a fare drive right to the station for help; this could not take place any more.

You have had your vehicle broken into /or damaged and wish to report it , where do you go and how is your vehicle viewed/ the damage recorded or examined, at present this takes place in the yard or covered areas at the station. There is talk of these examinations taking place at another location?

2 parking spaces at snow hill might help but then how do you police these..

There is talk that the public desk would be closed (unsure within what times) with only a phone on the wall..is this why you will not need public parking.

The fact that large vehicles cannot be fitted in the garage was a point I brought up on the first meeting as this has been a problem when we had other sites for the new station. On an operational point if you have to store the crew bus etc off site then how can it attend at the station to collect officers who would be at the station, or would these officers have to be briefed and deployed from the vehicles store rather than the police station

There is no staff parking so where do all these extra parking spaces come from in an already over used car parking areas. (at present there are parking spaces for management will these still remain in the new station plan?)

We were told that there would be a locker for every staff member questioned this as to size ie to put a crash helmet in if you used a motor cycle, do not think this will be possible in the smaller station and if no locker where do you put such clothing?

Having seen the view of the site entrance way I can see people drive up to the off road pull in area to the barrier and then wait to be dealt with , this would then block the route in for any other vehicles or do you get them to back out on to a busy road way.

Bottom line it looks too small and is in the wrong place.

 ********************************************************************************************************

I have two concerns, one general and one specific. My general concern is that the site is not big enough and the force will outgrow the station within a matter of years.

My specific concern relates to the property store. In the plans which I have been shown the main property store will be located on the very top floor and will be serviced by a goods lift in order to transport property from the transit store up to the main store. However, it seems very impractical that the property staff will be based on the top floor, so far from the enquiry desk, given that they are constantly being called to the enquiry desk to return property and deal with property queries. It is also questionable whether the space that has been allowed for property, both in the main store and the temporary store, is big enough given that the intention is to merge all current stores into one.

In fact, the whole layout of the proposed station seems, to me, to be very disjointed and not thought through.

 ********************************************************************************************************

In my personal opinion I do not feel that the Proposed New Police HQ at Green Street is a viable option. My reasons for this being that this is a very traffic congested area with not only holiday makers but also local people finding the roundabout at the end of the tunnel rather confusing. I have doubts as to whether the size of the building would cater for the whole of

the States of Jersey Police. There is also the issue of vehicle parking where would all the emergency vehicles be parked and also there is the prospect that people visiting & employees would have very limited places.

In regards to when there is emergencies for the police, should they take the tunnel route which appears to be congested most of the time due to the roundabout there is no option for cars to pull up and let them through.

A possible viable option would be to obtain Rouge Bouillon School and extend the local police headquarters as they are now, with the prospect of moving rouge bouillon school into the old girls college site at the bottom of La Pouquelaye which would cater for their purpose as this specific site is already built for a schools purpose.

 ********************************************************************************************************

I work in an office separate to the rest of High Tech Crime due to the nature of their work. My office contains a lot of computer equipment and generates a lot of heat. I need to have sufficient air conditioning and air circulation, not just for my comfort but also to keep the equipment working. Too much difference in temperature can cause condensation to form in the demultiplexer and computers to fail.

Also my job is going to be shared so there will be two people using the office starting from January 2013. I am concerned about being stuck in a tiny room with no sunlight or room for manoeuvre. I sometimes have to dismantle DVRs (Digital Video Recorders, about the size of desktop computers).

I cycle to work every day and I am concerned about where bikes will be kept. There are a lot of cyclists in SOJP and even with the current situation I sometimes have to lock my bike to railings as there are insufficient bike stands. With my job I have seen what happens to bikes left in public car parks and I would not like this to happen to my main mode of transport. Will there bike racks at the new premises, and if so, will there be sufficient in number? The current style of bike rack used by SOJP does not work very well so a different design would be better.

****************************************************************************************************** I have had sight of the new plans for the station and a few points have come up.

At the very first meeting to talk through the plans it was said all staff would have a locker, this would have been very nice, however as I would expect now operations officers will have a locker. It was said at the viewing of these new plans that there MIGHT be some small lockers, when asked if you could put a crash helmet or the like in that size, no.

I have in the past cycled to work but if there is no locker space or the like where could one keep any clothing/wash things.

At present like a number of other staff members I use a motor cycle to come to work, without standing as to where I could park when I get to work, the next problem is where to put your helmet and wet weather gear. I have been told there is a drying room for the whole building and that this could be used, but question if this could deal with number of staff who would need to use it.

Our desk size has been reduced I think to be able to fit the required number of staff in a department, by the nature of the work it is not like a call centre or such and you do need the space to work at your desk with paper file, I have been told we have smaller desks as we do not need large desks as we will not have the computer on the desk only the screen

I was told on viewing the new plans that further public parking MIGHT be forth coming in snow hill car park, however this still fails to address those matter where people come to the station with their car, to report damage, have it examined by soco, produce it to confirm defect is corrected, etc.

Still think it is too small and in the wrong place however it appears there is a drive for it was the buildings we are in are not right size upkeep etc, fine but let's not rush into something else which will still not be right

**************************************************************************************************** Regarding the new PHQ. Yes, please build it! Ha-ha! ***************************************************************************************************

I have responsibility for Custody and criminal justice functions and therefore manage staff in the old arsenal building and Summerland. Both sites are completely unfit for purpose and create a number of barriers to working efficiently and effectively. In Summerland the roof leaks and we have to negotiate a selection of buckets and bins to get to our desks. The air conditioning unit is defunct and the office is either too hot or too cold. Some offices have no natural light having been created originally as store cupboards. The open plan nature of the office space impacts upon the service we give to witnesses and victims.

The toilet facilities are sub-standard and the cubicles themselves are too small for pregnant ladies to fit into. There are no facilities for nursing mothers and I know that some have been discouraged from continuing to breast feed due to a lack of refrigeration facilities and a sanitary place to express.

I employ a person who requires the use of a guide dog. He is therefore completely unable to access the Summerland facility for health and safety reasons including traffic, slippery surfaces, unsafe stairways and inadequate toilet facilities. This impacts on team building and inclusion across my department. There is no lift and injured staff who would otherwise be able to work require further certificated sick leave until they can negotiate the stairs and the heavy outside door without the aid of crutches.

The custody building is a disgrace and has been declared so on many occasions by various agencies. It is an un-healthy environment for both staff and detained persons. The geography of the building does not facilitate the safer detention of prisoners and staff are obliged to work in cramped conditions with poor heating and lighting for long periods. At times, we are required to detain children who have committed serious offences and the facilities are totally unfit for this purpose. Equally, for staff and detainees with limited mobility or disability, there are no facilities to meet their access needs.

A new building will mitigate all the risks highlighted above. The States of Jersey has a duty to provide the standard of facilities that public servants have a right to expect in the 21st Century. In addition to creating a healthier physical environment, modern facilities will significantly raise morale and enable managers to maximise the potential of their teams to be more efficient and effective which will provide better service to the public.

To sum up in a few words: Utter frustration - just get on and build it !!! ***************************************************************************************************

Having been at States of Jersey Police for 14 years, I am probably well placed to comment on the fact that we have gone from one false dawn to another with regards to new accommodation.

My main question to Scrutiny would be – if they decide that the proposed site is too cramped, doesn't have adequate parking or scope for future expansion, presumably the implication is that the Force will need a larger site and a larger building. Are they going to recommend that the States spends more on a new headquarters if they go against the current proposal?

Police Station relocation: civilian staff feedback – response from Deputy Chief Officer, dated 10th January 2013

Thank you for providing copies of comments provided to the Scrutiny Panel by members of SoJP staff following a further opportunity for civil servants to contribute to the consultation process. I note a common theme around the comments in respect of the suitability of the proposed location for the PHQ at Green Street, parking issues and the like to which we have already provided a substantive response to the panel. There is no need to repeat these as they remain unchanged.

A number of new points have been raised however to which l provide comment below:

Lockers. Locker sizes for police officers and civilian staff do vary in size. Given the quantity of PPE and equipment on personal issue to officers, their lockers are larger than for civilian staff who will have standard lockers. I am advised that they will store a motor cycle helmet.

Desk sizes. Desk sizes do vary dependent upon the type of work being undertaken and amount of computer equipment required. General purpose desks are slightly smaller than some other computer workstations but comply with British Office Standards.

CCTV Equipment – Control Room. The installation of a multi-flat screen video wall in the Force Control Room is a new innovation for SoJP. Many UK police control rooms now incorporate video walls in order to assist visually in the command and control of incidents being managed. This arrangement also takes up considerably less space. There is no noise pollution.

Air Conditioning. M&E Engineers Hoare Lee have developed the heating and ventilation systems for the building which is based on the VRV (Variable Refrigerant Volume) principle which ensures an even and balanced temperature flow and control throughout the whole building.

Centralised Printing. The move to a self-contained single building provides many business opportunities and benefits for more efficient working through co-location. Given the number of existing buildings occupied by the SoJP and the office configurations, a large number of printers are in use. During the CSR process, the numbers of printers were significantly rationalised, however, this can go further in the proposed building with shared printing facilities on each floor. Indeed, this is a policy which has already been widely adopted by the States of Jersey and one which the SoJP will adopt.

Bicycle Storage. This comment relates to the storage of recovered lost and stolen bicycles that come into police possession rather than arrangements for staff cycles. A new approach has been adopted over recent months with regards to the storage and disposal of recovered bicycles which has led to very few now being retained and either returned directly to the owner or disposed of by a third party company under contract. There will be provision for such storage in the basement at the PHQ.

You will be aware that a further drop-in' meeting was arranged for staff to meet with Taylor Young architects on Friday 14th December 2012. This was quite well attended and was very

positive and supportive. Issues raised included the following:

• Location of the building
• To understand how car parking worked for operational vehicles
• Document storage, and
• Expansion space.

Comments about the custody facility and how it would work were very positive – staff were impressed by the layout and its relationship to other operational areas. A suggestion was made (previously commented upon) to provide a connection / access into custody from the general enquiry desk area. This is fully supported and can be accommodated.

There was also a query about the separation of the operational and intelligence function in the JFCU area. This was explained and clarified as previously reported.

Note: further clarification was received from the Projects Manager on two particular issues:

• Control Room: concern about lack of windows and inadequate kitchen & rest room facilities: There are glazed windows to the East, South and West aspect of the FCR, whilst the North aspect has High level windows to provide natural light into this area, throughout the design stage we have sought input and updated information from Ham Associates – who are the leading ergonomics that work closely with the Home Office. There is a Kitchen Facility directly outside of FCR (OH&S reasons) not in the working area. The Silver Command room that is situated next to FCR can be utilised a rest room for FCR staff (when not required for Operational reasons), also a canteen will be provided for all staff on the first floor.
• Bicycle Storage: concern about security for staff bicycles left in an exposed area: The bicycles will be in a purpose built bike rack that will have locking and security facilities whilst being overseen by CCTV.

Appendix 3: Minutes of Police drop in Session, dated 14th December 2012

Prepared by IBI Taylor Young, Architects

Present: R. Moy, SOJ Police, M. Richardson & R. Mallinson, IBI Taylor Young

Apologies: B. Taylor , SOJ Police

Overall response from attendees to the workshop regarding the current planning proposals appeared extremely supportive and positive. Everyone who attended fully supported the proposals and had very few comments.

Typically we explained and gave an over view on the buildings rational and inter relationships between floors/Departments

NOTE: Names of attendees have been redacted Police Association SM

• Advised that she works in JFC
• Main comment - nothing wrong with the building design but wrong location.
• Wanted to understand how car parking worked.
• Feels office area should be split into 2 teams for confidentiality
• She wanted to understand how document storage would work in the area – discussions took place re electronic file storage systems.

PPU SW, AG, AB

• All happy with proposals

CJD JC, GC, ED

• All wanted to understand how custody worked
• They were impressed by the general layout of the custody suite and its relationship to key operational areas above.

• Wanted a connection between the general enquiry desk and charge area for when people walk-in for self arrest.
• We explained the integrated security management system, they were keen that all the technical possibilities of suit a system are fully exploited.

Legals GE, AM, SS

• Would prefer doors onto office due to confidentiality issues.
• Concern at no expansion space, increased jurisdiction may cause a problem
• Legal secretaries – as much natural light as possible

Crime Management / CJD TF, TS

• Feels wrong site and should be carparking for staff.

FIB RM

• Happy with proposals

[1] Formal response to Scrutiny, see appendix one for full text

[2] Ibid

[3] Public hearing dated 27th November 2012

[4] The report of this meeting is attached at Appendix 3.

[5] A copy of this response is available together with the full comments from civilian staff at appendix two.

[6] Public hearing dated 27th November 2012

[7] Ibid

[8] Ibid

[9] The full response of the Deputy Chief Officer is available on the Scrutiny website

[10] Public hearing dated 27th November 2012

[11] Ibid

[12] The actual numbers of police officers fluctuates according to factors such as retirement and recruitment and stands as at November 2012 at 221.

[13] Public hearing dated 27th November 2012

[14] Ibid