Agenda and minutes

Please note that this meeting may be filmed or recorded by the Council for live or subsequent broadcast via the Council’s internet site or by anyone attending the meeting using any communication method. Although we ask members of the public recording, filming or reporting on the meeting not to include the public seating areas, members of the public attending the meeting should be aware that we cannot guarantee that they will not be filmed or recorded by others attending the meeting. Members of the public participating in the meeting (e.g. making deputations, asking questions, making oral protests) should be aware that they are likely to be filmed, recorded or reported on. 

By entering the meeting room and using the public seating area, you are consenting to being filmed and to the possible use of those images and sound recordings.

The chair of the meeting has the discretion to terminate or suspend filming or recording, if in his or her opinion continuation of the filming, recording or reporting would disrupt or prejudice the proceedings, infringe the rights of any individual or may lead to the breach of a legal obligation by the Council.

The Chair referred to the information as set out in the agenda and advised that the meeting was being filmed.

None.

The Chair will consider the admission of any late items of Urgent Business. (Late items of Urgent Business will be considered under the agenda item where they appear. New items of Urgent Business will be dealt with under Item 21 below. New items of exempt business will be dealt with at Item 27 below).

There were no items of urgent business.

There was late business to be considered in relation to items 9 & 10.  An addendum was been published and circulated to the Cabinet, and made available on the Council’s website. 

At item 9, legal comments were omitted in error from the published report and there is a statutory requirement for the Cabinet to consider these comments when taking a decision.

At item 10, there was additional information that the Cabinet Member will refer to in their introduction to the report.

A Member with a disclosable pecuniary interest or a prejudicial interest in a matter who attends a meeting of the authority at which the matter is considered:

(i) must disclose the interest at the start of the meeting or when the interest becomes apparent, and

(ii) may not participate in any discussion or vote on the matter and must withdraw from the meeting room.

A Member who discloses at a meeting a disclosable pecuniary interest which is not registered in the Register of Members’ Interests or the subject of a pending notification must notify the Monitoring Officer of the interest within 28 days of the disclosure.

Disclosable pecuniary interests, personal interests and prejudicial interests are defined at Paragraphs 5-7 and Appendix A of the Members’ Code of Conduct.

Councillor das Neves declared an interest in respect of item 11 – Bounds Green Low Traffic Neighbourhood, as she lived on a directly affected road. 

Councillors Chandwani and Davies declared an interest in respect of item 12 – St Ann’s Low Traffic Neighbourhood, as they lived on a directly affected road.

On occasions part of the Cabinet meeting will be held in private and will not be open to the public if an item is being considered that is likely to lead to the disclosure of exempt or confidential information. In accordance with the Local Authorities (Executive Arrangements) (Meetings and Access to Information) (England) Regulations 2012 (the “Regulations”), members of the public can make representations about why that part of the meeting should be open to the public.

This agenda contains exempt items as set out at Item 22 : Exclusion of the Press and Public.  No representations with regard to these have been received.

This is the formal 5 clear day notice under the Regulations to confirm that this Cabinet meeting will be partly held in private for the reasons set out in this Agenda.

None received.

To confirm and sign the minutes of the meeting held on 9 November 2021 as a correct record.

RESOLVED that the minutes of the Cabinet meeting held on 9 November 2021 be approved as a correct record.

For Cabinet to note (if any)

None received.

To consider any requests received in accordance with Standing Orders.

Jacob Secker addressed the Cabinet on behalf of the Broadwater Farm Residents Association.  He requested that Cabinet reject the proposals for Broadwater Farm as they would lead to a large increase in rent for new homes which would negatively affect current and potential tenants.  The proposals were likely to disproportionately affect people from BAME backgrounds.  The report adopted a dismissive attitude to those who would not be able to afford the new, more expensive homes and instead argued that they would not have to move into the new homes if they could not afford the rent.  Mr Secker stated that this would expose the Council to challenge under the equality act, as no one should be prevented from renting council housing due to low income. 

Mr Secker referred to the EQIA, which set out that the rent for the new homes could be up to 50% of market rent – which for a 3 bedroom property would be beyond the social rent cap.  Page 179 of the report set out clearly that people from BAME backgrounds could be disproportionately affected by the rent increase, and the mitigations set out were considered by Mr Secker to be absurd.  He added that the proposals for the estate were discriminatory and asked the Council to reconsider the plans, set rents equal to current rents, and, given the inequality of proposals, appoint an independent lawyer with a strong background in equalities and civil rights to oversee the whole process, including the letting of the new homes.

In response to the deputation, Councillor Bevan stated that some of the cost to regenerate would need to be recovered by increased rents.  He asked Mr Secker whether he had an alternative suggestion on how to recover the costs without increasing the rents.  Mr Secker responded that it was not known whether the people in the most housing need would be able to access the new properties due to the higher rents, and that residents were told in 2018 that funds would be available to build all of the new homes.

The Cabinet Member for House Building, Place-Making and Development responded to the deputation.  The proposal was to build 300 homes at 100% Council rents.  The estate currently had 10% family homes, which would increase to 30%.  The EQIA report stated that overall there would be a positive impact on the BAME community.  £100million would be provided by the Housing Revenue Account, and an additional £70million would be invested into refurbishing the remainder of the estate.  Every borough in London used the formula set by the Government to calculate rents.  The Cabinet Member appealed to the residents association to work with the Council to put the proposals in place and improve Broadwater Farm

[Report of the Director of Housing, Regeneration and Planning.  To be introduced by the Cabinet Member for House Building, Place-Making and Development]

The Cabinet Member for House Building, Place-Making and Development introduced the report which provided an update on the partnership work between the Council and the Broadwater Farm Estate community to develop placemaking design proposals.  The report also sought approval of the key principles of the preferred design and ground floor strategy alongside the key commitments to residents which would form part of a Landlord Offer, and approval to proceed to a resident ballot on the Broadwater Farm Estate.

The Cabinet Member responded to questions from Councillor Cawley-Harrison:

-           Residents would be provided with indicative rents before the ballot, however this would be with the caveat that rents would be set according to the formula at the time of letting the properties.

-           There was a ‘no’ vote, a new scheme would have to be started from scratch.  Tangmere and Northolt blocks were due to be demolished for health and safety reasons, and would leave a large space in the estate.

-           There were 28 leasehold properties, with resident leaseholders entitled to the right to return.  Not all were resident leaseholders however, so the maximum number of leaseholders who could return would be 28 but this number may be lower.

RESOLVED that Cabinet

1.         Note and consider the feedback from consultations with residents and the wider community, including those required under Section 105, on the design of the new homes and associated improvements on Broadwater Farm, as described in paragraphs 6.8 to 6.26 and set out in Appendix A.

2.         Approve the following:

a)     The key principles of the Urban Design Framework (UDF) as described in paragraphs 6.27 to 6.35 and the summary draft UDF document in Appendix B

b)     The key principles of the preferred design for new homes, as described in paragraph 6.37 and the summary document in Appendix C, that will be voted on by residents in the ballot referred to in recommendation 3.2 (e)

c)      The commitments of the Broadwater Farm Landlord Offer as set out in paragraph 6.70.

d)     The principles of the proposed Rent Strategy for the new homes on the estate, as set out in paragraphs 6.77 to 6.85.

e)     A ballot be undertaken of eligible current and former Broadwater Farm residents based on the approved design and the Broadwater Farm Landlord Offer, described in paragraphs 6.72 to 6.76.

f)       The inclusion of the Enterprise Centre, Broadwater Farm Medical Centre and the former Moselle School as development sites within the design proposals, as described in paragraphs 6.41 to 6.64. 

3.         Delegate authority to the Director of Housing, Regeneration and Planning, after consultation with the Cabinet Member for Housebuilding, Placemaking and Development, to:

a)     Approve the final ballot materials, including the final Landlord Offer document and the final ballot programme.

b)     Approve the final detailed design and subsequent submission of a full planning application, based on the design principles referred to in recommendation 2(b) and subject to the outcome of the ballot referred to in recommendation 2(e).

Reasons for decision

The demolition of Tangmere  ...  view the full minutes text for item 674.

[Report of the Director of Housing, Regeneration and Planning.  To be introduced by the Cabinet Member for Environment, Transport, and the Climate Emergency and Deputy Leader of the Council]

The Cabinet Member for Environment, Transport and the Climate Emergency and Deputy Leader of the Council introduced the report which sought approval of the principle to implement the Bruce Grove West Green Low Traffic Neighbourhood (Bruce Grove West Green LTN) experimental scheme and a range of complementary measures including new pedestrian crossings, cycle hangars and four trial School Streets. The LTN aimed to reduce or remove non-local motor traffic from residential areas of Bruce Grove and West Green, as well as reduce the number of short trips made by vehicles which could be walked or cycled.  If approved, the proposed Bruce Grove West Green LTN would be implemented on a trial basis for a maximum of 18 months under an experimental traffic management order.

The Cabinet Member referred to the information provided in the late business addendum:

“As part of the work to prepare for the implementation of the Bruce Grove and West Green Low Traffic Neighbourhood, the Council will carry out further engagement with residents on Broadwater Farm and the surrounding streets, the Emergency Services, including the local police team and the Council’s Community Safety, Highways and Transport officers. This engagement will explore concerns including those which relate to the impact of the proposals on resident safety and crime and consideration will be given to making amendments in response.”

The Cabinet Member responded to questions from the Cabinet:

-           The implementation of a scheme like this was an unprecedented move in many ways.  A detailed and expansive engagement process had been carried out, which included a survey for disabled users, resulting in the inclusion of an exemption scheme.  This showed a good example of where officers had worked hard to make sure is the scheme was as inclusive as possible.

-           All issues raised by residents and organisations would be taken seriously.  Officers had carried out 11 months of engagement, and would look to improve engagement where possible based on lessons learned.

Cabinet Members spoke in support of the scheme and highlighted the importance ensuring the schemes were inclusive for all.

The Cabinet Member responded to questions from Councillor Cawley-Harrison:

-       One key aim of the scheme was to reduce overall volume of traffic, which would improve journey times.  There would be an exemption for special dispensations and the team would work with Childrens and Adults services to identify where exemption / dispensations were required.

RESOLVED that Cabinet

1.         Notes the responses received to the proposed Bruce Grove West Green Low Traffic Neighbourhood (LTN) as part of Engagement Stage 1 (Early Engagement), Engagement Stage 2 (Community Design Workshops) and Engagement Stage 3 (Public Consultation) as set out in Appendices E and K;

2.         Approves the making of an experimental traffic management order to implement the Bruce Grove West Green LTN experimental scheme, as set out on the plan in Appendix L, subject to funding, and provided that any changes to the plan in Appendix L are reported back to the Leader, Cabinet or an individual Cabinet member  ...  view the full minutes text for item 675.

[Report of the Director of Housing, Regeneration and Planning.  To be introduced by the Cabinet Member for Environment, Transport, and the Climate Emergency and Deputy Leader of the Council]

Clerks note:  Councillor das Neves left the meeting for the consideration of this item.

The Cabinet Member for Environment, Transport and the Climate Emergency and Deputy Leader of the Council introduced the report which sought approval of the principle to implement the Bounds Green Low Traffic Neighbourhood (Bounds Green LTN) experimental scheme and a range of complementary measures including new pedestrian crossings, cycle hangars and four trial School Streets. The LTN aimed to reduce or remove non-local motor traffic from residential areas of Bounds Green, as well as reduce the number of short trips made by vehicles which could be walked or cycled.  If approved, the proposed Bounds Green LTN would be implemented on a trial basis for a maximum of 18 months under an experimental traffic management order.

The Cabinet Member responded to questions from the Cabinet:

-           If approved, the aim would be to implement the scheme as soon as possible in the new year.

The Cabinet Member and Officers responded to questions from Councillor Cawley-Harrison:

-           Signage for the schemes would be absolutely clear for drivers entering into the areas.  It was common for fines to be high at the introduction of new schemes, but these petered out once drivers were used to the new measures.

-           Officers would be monitoring traffic volumes carefully across the borough to improve the information on traffic across the borough.  The report packs contained the high-level traffic assessment and would help to inform where mitigations may or may not be necessary.

Councillor Cawley-Harrison added that the Alexandra Ward Councillors strongly supported the proposals.

RESOLVED that Cabinet

1.         Notes the responses received to the proposed Bounds Green Low Traffic Neighbourhood (LTN) as part of Engagement Stage 1 (Early Engagement), Engagement Stage 2 (Community Design Workshops) and Engagement Stage 3 (Public Consultation) as set out in Appendices E and K including the petition submitted by residents living within the proposed area C of the Bounds Green LTN (Appendix L);

2.         Approves the making of an experimental traffic management order to implement the Bounds Green LTN experimental scheme, as set out on the plan in Appendix M, subject to compliance with relevant statutory requirements and detailed engineering drawings to implement the traffic control measures shown on the plan;

3.         Approves the making of an experimental traffic management order to implement the School Streets, as set out on the plan in Appendix M, subject to compliance with relevant statutory requirements and detailed engineering drawings to implement the traffic control measures shown on the plan;

4.         Approves the implementation of bike hangars, as set out on the plan in Appendix M, subject to compliance with relevant statutory requirements and detailed engineering drawings;

5.         Approve the implementation of pedestrian crossings, as set out on the plan in Appendix M, subject to compliance with relevant statutory requirements and detailed engineering drawings;

6.         In relation to the LTN only, approve the exemption of:

a.      Blue Badge holders living within the LTN or on its immediate boundary;

b.      Special  ...  view the full minutes text for item 676.

[Report of the Director of Housing, Regeneration and Planning.  To be introduced by the Cabinet Member for Environment, Transport, and the Climate Emergency and Deputy Leader of the Council]

Clerks note:  Councillors Chandwani and Davies left the meeting for the consideration of this item.

The Cabinet Member for Environment, Transport and the Climate Emergency and Deputy Leader of the Council introduced the report which sought approval of the principle to implement the St Ann’s Low Traffic Neighbourhood (St Ann’s LTN) experimental scheme and a range of complementary measures including new pedestrian crossings, cycle hangars and four trial School Streets. The LTN aimed to reduce or remove non-local motor traffic from residential areas of St Ann’s, as well as reduce the number of short trips made by vehicles which could be walked or cycled.  If approved, the proposed Bounds Green LTN would be implemented on a trial basis for a maximum of 18 months under an experimental traffic management order.

The Cabinet Member and Officers responded to questions from Councillor Cawley-Harrison:

-           Engagement had been an issue with this scheme, with majority of people responding to the consultation were car owners and therefore felt that the scheme would negatively impact them.  It was important that non-car owners were engaged with to gain additional views on the scheme.

-           In terms of the impact on Green Lanes, there was a separate study which would look at how the movement of public transport and active travel could be facilitated.  Paragraph 6.93 of the report provided further information.

-           Once the trials had been implemented, there were delegated powers for officers to make changes to the scheme to improve the flow of traffic where there were issues in particular areas.

RESOLVED that Cabinet

1.         Notes the responses received to the proposed St Ann’s Low Traffic Neighbourhood (LTN) as part of Engagement Stage 1 (Early Engagement), Engagement Stage 2 (Community Design Workshops) and Engagement Stage 3 (Public Consultation) as set out in Appendices E and K;

2.         Approves the making of the experimental traffic management order to implement the St Ann’s LTN experimental scheme, as set out on the plan in Appendix L, subject to funding, and provided that any changes to the plan in Appendix L are reported back to the Leader, Cabinet or an individual Cabinet member for approval before being implemented; 

3.         Approves the making of an experimental traffic management order to implement the School Streets, as set out on the plan in Appendix L, subject to compliance with relevant statutory requirements and detailed engineering drawings to implement the traffic control measures show on the plan;

4.         Approves the bike hangars, as set out on the plan in Appendix L, subject to compliance with relevant statutory requirements and detailed engineering drawings;

5.         Approves the pedestrian crossings, as set out on the plan in Appendix L, subject to compliance with relevant statutory requirements and detailed engineering drawings;

6.         In relation to the LTN only, approve the exemption of:

a.      Blue Badge holders living within the LTN or on its immediate boundary;

b.      Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) transport; and

c.      Essential Haringey Council services catering for people with a disability  ...  view the full minutes text for item 677.

[Report of the Director of Housing, Regeneration and Planning.  To be introduced by the Cabinet Member for Employment, Skills and Corporate Services]

The Cabinet Member for Employment, Skills and Corporate Services introduced the report which set out the proposal to insource Homes For Haringey, provided the results of an 8-week resident consultation process, and sought approval to delegate detailed implementation to Council officers. 

The Cabinet Member responded to questions from the Cabinet:

-           There was a cross-party working group which had met twice, with engagement from both parties.  A meeting had also been held with a residents group to seek residents opinions on how the insourcing would take place and how future tenant and leaseholder involvement would look post-insourcing.

-           If approved, there would be a systematic project plan with informal and formal legal processes in terms of contracts and staff transfer.

The Cabinet Member responded to questions from Councillor Cawley-Harrison:

-           It was not possible to confirm whether the residents’ scrutiny panel or housing board would continue in the current form as discussions were taking place on what the resident’s voice would look like in the future.  Different models were being reviewed to look at the best way to engage with residents.

-           Bringing services together should enable better service delivery and ensure that delivery is streamlined.  This would achieve savings however it was not yet quantified what those savings would be.  There would be costs involved with the transfer and it was hoped over time that savings would be achieved to cover those costs and provide re-investment into services in the future.

-           One of the reasons for the transfer was to strengthen the Council’s ability to respond to the regulations coming forward from the Government 2020 White Paper, and the Council will need to make sure that performance and value for money information was made available to the Regulator and residents.

RESOLVED that the Cabinet

1.         Note and consider the results of the consultation with tenants and leaseholders on the proposal to insource services from Homes for Haringey (see Appendix A), as well as the submission from the Board of Homes for Haringey (see Appendix B).

2.         Approve the insourcing of services from Homes for Haringey, based on the rationales set out in the report, with the detailed implementation process delegated to Council officers, including service of a notice to terminate the Management Agreement, finalising the organisational structure for incoming staff and services, staff consultation and transfer under TUPE regulations, transferring budgets and financial processes, and resolving legal issues such as contract novation, ongoing management of leases, support to the Haringey Community Benefit Society, etc. as set out in section 6.7 of the report.

3.         Approve co-design and co-production of new resident engagement arrangements, including involvement in policy, operational oversight and scrutiny, with detailed proposals to be brought back for final approval during 2022, as set out in section 6.6 of the report.

4.         Approve a virement of £565,000 for the year 2021/22 and note  an additional sum of £550,000 required next year, 2022/23, to meet the one-off expenditure needed to complete the transfer processes, as set out in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 678.

[Report of the Director of Finance.  To be introduced by the Cabinet Member for Finance and Transformation]

The Cabinet Member for Finance and Transformation introduced the report which set out the position at Quarter 2 (Period 6) of the 2021/22 financial year including General Fund (GF) Revenue, Capital, Housing Revenue Account (HRA) and Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG) budgets. The report focused on significant budget variances including those arising as a result of the forecast non-achievement of approved MTFS savings as well as the best estimates of the ongoing impact of the Covid-19 pandemic (C19) on the Council’s financial plans.  The Cabinet Member highlighted that the overall general fund revenue position had worsened from the first quarter of the financial year, largely due to the ongoing impacts of Covid on our demand led services.  Pandemic related pressures, had stabilised, and it was anticipated that the in-year impact of the pandemic would be offset by various government funding streams.  The Council would continue to monitor and report on this throughout the year.

The Cabinet Member and Officers responded to questions from Councillor Cawley-Harrison:

-               Officers were working to establish the drivers behind the variances – over half of variances related to the direct consequences from Covid, and majority of those would be met in form of emergency grants from the government.  The net gap forecasting caused directly by Covid was around £1million.  It was worth noting that none of the primary factors around the variances were particular to Haringey.  Officers were looking to identify any measures which might go towards responding to the funding gap.

-               Court income – the ability to pursue liabilities owed to Authority through the legal system had been impaired by court closures.  It was still difficult to get a case before the courts, and this reflected on the Council’s ability to recover arrears and court cost income.

RESOLVED that Cabinet

1.         Note the forecast base budget revenue outturn for the General Fund of £10.2m and that Directors are seeking actions to bring the forecast down before the end of the year. (Section 6, Tables 1a and 1b, and Appendix 1).

2.         Note that the £12.87m forecast Covid pressure on the GF is expected to be offset by Government funding (Section 6 and Table 1a).

3.         Note the net Housing Revenue Account (HRA) forecast of £1.0m overspend (Section 6 and Appendices 1 and 2).

4.         Note the net DSG forecast of £6.98m overspend. (Section 6 and Appendix 1).

5.         Note the forecast budget savings position in 2021/22 which indicates that £5.8m (55%) may not be achieved. (Section 6 and Appendix 3).  This is incorporated in the GF budget pressures addressed in recommendations 3.1 and 3.2 above.

6.         Approve the proposed budget adjustments and virements to the capital programme as set out in Table 2 and Appendix 6.

7.         Note the forecast expenditure of £287m in 2021/22 which equates to 62% of the revised capital budget (Section 8 and Appendix 4). 

8.         To approve the revenue budget virements and receipt of grants as set out in Appendix 6.

9.         To note the debt write-offs approved by  ...  view the full minutes text for item 679.

[Report of the Director of Finance.  To be introduced by the Cabinet Member for Finance and Transformation]

The Cabinet Member for Finance and Transformation introduced the report which set out the Fees & Charges (F&Cs) that are proposed to be applied to services from the start of 2022/23.  The report also sought approval to increase the fee or charge rate to those services where an increase is proposed in line with inflation, and Member’s agreement where an alternative approach is being proposed.

The Cabinet Member and Officers responded to questions from Councillor Cawley-Harrison:

-           New River Leisure was included in the report this year due to the decision taken by Cabinet this year.

-           There would be no charges to the public for the use of tennis courts in the coming years.

-           This report only dealt with fees and charges increases for the forthcoming year.

Following consideration of exempt information,

RESOLVED that the Cabinet

1.         Agree the proposed non-statutory fees and charges to be levied by the Council with effect from 1 April 2022, unless otherwise stated, and as detailed in Section 8 and Appendices I – XIII taking into account the findings of equalities assessments as set out in section 10 of the report.

2.         Note the statutory fees and charges to be levied by the Council with effect from 1 April 2022.

3.         Authorise Officers to proceed to statutory notification or consultation on implementation of proposed changes to parking charges

4.         Note that the Council’s draft 2022/23 Budget and Medium Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) 2022/23-2026/27 assumes that the changes to Fees & Charges set out in this report are agreed.

Reasons for Decision

It is a requirement to review fees and charges as a minimum annually. The financial position of the Council supports the view that levels of fees and charges should be maximised where possible, taking into account all relevant factors including the effect on service users and any consequent demand for services.

Alternative options considered

This report summarises the conclusions after consideration of a range of alternative approaches dependent on particular services and relevant factors. As such a range of alternative options ranging from no increase to differentiated rates of increases or decreases have been considered and reflected in this report

[Report of the Director of Finance.  To be introduced by the Cabinet Member for Finance and Transformation]

The Cabinet Member for Finance and Transformation introduced the report which set out details of the draft General Fund (GF) Budget for 2022/23 and Medium Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) 2022/27, including estimated income (funding) and expenditure adjustments and new and revised capital proposals at a Priority level. The report recommended that budget proposals be released for public consultation and Scrutiny consideration.

The Cabinet Member and Officers responded to questions from the Cabinet:

-           The backdrop for this budget was different to previous years – the Government have made some three-year declarations in terms of fundings.  The report does point out that there is a short-term improvement in the resourcing of the Authority from the Government.  The major increase year on year on resources comes from Council Tax and not from government grants. The local government financial settlement was due soon and the position may change to the information set out in the report.

-           Temporary accommodation was one of the main challenges for the council.  There had been lower than normal collection rates due to the difficulties in maintaining the direct relationship with the families concerned, which could affect ensuring that benefit claims and universal credit claims were in place.  Officers were working on a piece of work to catch up with current and future years position.

-           There was no further information available on how the national capital allocation would be distributed for Special Needs support.

The Cabinet Member and Officers responded to questions from Councillor Cawley-Harrison:

-           Whenever the Council took on loans, the cost of the loan was factored into the new accounts, along with any other income and outgoings.

-           This budget was very different to those of recent years as no new savings were being put forward for consultation.  However, there were some level of material savings to be put in place that had been agreed in previous budgets.  The medium to longer term financial situation would require some new solutions, which would take time over the next year to be thought through and developed.

RESOLVED that Cabinet

1.         Note the initial General Fund revenue and capital budget proposals and financial planning assumptions set out in this report and note that they will be refined and updated after the final Local Government Finance Settlement is received in January 2022 and also to incorporate further budget changes as required;

2.         Note the Draft General Fund 2022/23 Budget and MTFS (2022-27) detailed in this report and Appendix 1;

3.         Note the Draft revenue and capital budget growth proposals summarised in Sections 7 and 8 and Appendices 2 and 5;

4.         Note the Draft General Fund Capital Programme for 2022/23 to 2026/27 as set out in Appendix 4;

5.         Note the Draft Housing Revenue Account (HRA) revenue and Capital Programme proposals and HRA Business Plan as set out in Section 9;

6.         Note the 2022/23 Draft Dedicated Schools Budget (DSB) and update on the DSG reserve position set out in Section 10;

7.         Note that the detailed proposals  ...  view the full minutes text for item 681.

[Report of the Director of Housing, Regeneration and Planning.  To be introduced by the Cabinet Member for Environment, Transport, and the Climate Emergency and Deputy Leader of the Council]

The Cabinet Member for Environment, Transport and the Climate Emergency and Deputy Leader of the Council introduced the report which sought approval of the Outline Business Cases for both the Tottenham Hale and Wood Green Decentralised Energy Network (DEN) projects and to accept and release Government funding to progress enabling works and develop the Full Business Case (FBC) which would be brought back to Cabinet in late 2022.

The Cabinet Member and Officers responded to questions from Councillor Cawley-Harrison:

-           The general principles of the DEN were set out at paragraph 6.39, and it was important to recognise that customers would get significant benefits from this supply, which was benchmarked against the higher carbon alternative.  The expectation from all of the modelling and work carried out, which included sensitivities in terms of fluctuations in prices, was that this option would still remain affordable.

-           There were issues with the Southwark DEN, but there were also lots of positive learnings from other DENs.  In developing the full business case, all analysis would be taken into account to design the full implementation in Haringey.

Following consideration of exempt information,

RESOLVED that Cabinet

1.         Notes the progress to date of the Council’s DEN to deliver a significant decarbonisation of the borough’s developments as outlined in section 6 of this report

Recommendations related to Tottenham Hale DEN Project

2.         Approves the Outline Business Case at Appendix 2 in respect of the Tottenham   Hale DEN, including a link to Broadwater Farm, in order to progress the proposal to FBC

3.         Subject to recommendation 2, approves the acceptance of Heat Network Investment Partnership (HNIP) funding (subject to approval of the Funding Agreements at 11 below):

a.    £1.2m for commercialisation grant funding to develop the proposal to FBC;

b.    £3.4m of construction grant funding; and

c.    £12.65m of construction loan to be used to construct the DEN, subject first to approval of the FBC

4.         Approves entry by the Council into an Adoption Agreement with Argent LLP for the installation of heat network infrastructure at sites in Tottenham Hale as further described in paragraphs 6.24 to 6.26 of the report and gives delegated authority to the Director of Housing, Regeneration and Planning to finalise the terms of the Adoption Agreement for it to be entered into

Recommendations related to Wood Green DEN Project

5.         Subject to recommendation 2 (approval of the Tottenham Hale scheme) approves the Outline Business Case at Appendix 2 in respect of the Wood Green DEN and the extension of the link from Broadwater Farm, in order to progress the proposal to FBC

6.         Subject to recommendation 5, approves the acceptance of HNIP funding (subject to approval of the Funding Agreements at 11 below):

a.    £0.85m for commercialisation grant funding in order to develop the proposal to FBC; 

b.   £7.18m of construction grant funding; and

c.   £2.56m construction loan to be used to construct the DEN, subject first to approval of the FBC

Recommendations related to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 682.

[Report of the Director of Environment and Neighbourhoods.  To be introduced by the Cabinet Member for Customer Service, Welfare and the Public Realm]

The Cabinet Member for Customer Service, Welfare and the Public Realm introduced the report which sought approval for the adoption of the Blue Badge (Disabled Parking) Enforcement Policy.

RESOLVED that Cabinet

1.         Adopts the Blue Badge (Disabled Parking) Enforcement Policy, attached as Appendix 1 to the report.

Reasons for decision

The Department for Transport (DfT) is responsible for the legislation that sets out the framework for the National Blue Badge (Disabled Parking) Scheme including, amongst other things, the eligibility criteria, maximum fee, design of the badge and the manner in which it should be displayed. The DfT also issues non-statutory guidance in order to share good practice.

Local authorities are responsible for managing local delivery of the scheme. This involves the day-to-day administration of policies and procedures, supporting the assessment process, local provisions, and enforcement of the scheme.

The benefits of undertaking enforcement action against the fraudulent use of Blue Badges are varied and far-reaching. They include:

·      More space for those legitimately accessing the scheme: kerb space is limited, so parking spaces must be made available for those with severe disabilities to support them in accessing local facilities, maintaining independence and being active members of their communities.

·      Better management of the kerbside: as people are discouraged from using prime locations as long-stay parking, this means a greater turnover of visitors to high streets.

·      Improved traffic management and better air quality: for many, fraudulent use of the Blue Badge makes driving and parking a car affordable. By taking this advantage away, they may be forced to switch to public transport and active travel, reducing the number of vehicles on the road.

A formal policy will provide clarity for residents and officers regarding action the Council will take in dealing with abuse of the Blue Badge (Disabled Parking) Scheme.

Alternative options considered

Do nothing. The Council has undertaken ad-hoc enforcement of abuse of the Blue Badge (Disabled Parking) Scheme for several years. This informal arrangement has helped develop knowledge and understanding of the practicalities of enforcing relevant legislation. It has also helped build relationships with key partners and shape the proposed policy. A failure to adopt a formal policy will leave residents uninformed of the actions the Council will take to prevent and deal with abuse of the Scheme. It would also likely result in no prosecutions and no strong deterrent(s) to continued misuse.

[Report of the Director of Housing, Regeneration and Planning.  To be introduced by the Cabinet Member for Finance and Transformation]

The Cabinet Member for House Building, Place-Making and Development introduced the report which sought approval for the acquisition of the leasehold interest in the site at 78-92 Stamford Road.  The site sat within the creative enterprise zone and could be an opportunity to form part of the strategy to improve the workspace in that particular area.

The Cabinet Member and Officers responded to questions from Councillor Cawley-Harrison:

-           It expected that the acquisition would be cost-neutral to the Council.  A feasibility study had been undertaken and the recommendation was in part informed by that study.

Following the consideration of exempt information,

RESOLVED that Cabinet agree

1.         To the acquisition of the leasehold interest in the site at 78 – 92 Stamford Road for General Fund purposes (as per the red line plan in Appendix A) from G. Colletta and Sons for the amount as set out in Part B of this report and as set out in the heads of terms in Appendix A of Part B.

2.         To the total transaction costs of acquisition as shown in 6.8 of Part B.

3.         That delegated authority is granted to agree final terms and final documentation to the Director of Housing, Regeneration and Planning after consultation with the Cabinet Member for Finance and Transformation and the Cabinet Member for House Building, Place-Making and Development.

4.         To the site objectives for the proposed workspace development of a placemaking approach, delivering a good economy with climate change and sustainability at its heart, as described in in 6.6.

5.         That £2m SIP funding and £50,000 Future High Streets funding is allocated to this project as described in 6.14 and 6.16

6.         To the next steps as described in 6.20-6.22 including the development of a detailed business case and financial appraisals to be brought back to Cabinet for approval

Reasons for decision

78-92 Stamford Road falls within the STEA and has not been operating for some time, is now derelict and has attracted squatters and antisocial behaviour.

The site, equidistant from Tottenham Hale and Seven Sisters tube station, is within the South Tottenham Designated Employment Area (DEA 14). Stamford Road forms part of Site Allocation TH13 ‘Constable Crescent’ in the Tottenham Area Action Plan (AAP). Policy AAP4 of the AAP outlines that the Council will “facilitate the regeneration and renewal of selected DEAs through a reconfiguration of the local employment offer in order to intensify land uses and maximise the amount of business floor space”.

The acquisition of the leasehold interest will provide an opportunity to upgrade this dilapidated site, which has become a visual blight within the local neighbourhood, and enable the council to deliver a new, long term employment use that will benefit local people and businesses.

Alternative options considered

The alternative option would be not to acquire the leasehold interest in the site.

By not acquiring the leasehold interest, this would mean the opportunity for the Council to deliver a new high-quality workspace-only scheme would be lost. Not acquiring the leasehold  ...  view the full minutes text for item 684.

To note the minutes of the following:

Cabinet Member Signing:

9 November 2021

11 November 2021

15 November 2021

Urgent Decisions:

17 November 2021

RESOLVED

To note the minutes of the following:

Cabinet Member Signing:

9 November 2021

11 November 2021

15 November 2021

Urgent Decisions:

17 November 2021

To consider any items admitted at Item 3 above.

None

Note from the Democratic Services and Scrutiny Manager

Items 23 to 27 allow for consideration of exempt information in relation to items 6, 15, 17 and 19

.

TO RESOLVE

That the press and public be excluded from the remainder of the meeting as the items below, contain exempt information, as defined under paragraphs 3 and 5, Part 1, schedule 12A of the Local Government Act:

Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information).

Information in respect of which a claim to legal professional privilege could be maintained in legal proceedings

RESOLVED

That the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the consideration of agenda items 23-27 as they contain exempt information as defined in Section 100a of the Local Government Act 1972; Paragraph 3 – information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information; Paragraph 5 – information in respect of which a claim to legal professional privilege could be maintained in legal proceedings.

As per item 15.

The Cabinet noted the exempt information and resolutions were agreed as per minutes 680.

As per item 17.

The Cabinet noted the exempt information and resolutions were agreed as per minutes 682.

As per item 19.

The Cabinet noted the exempt information and resolutions were agreed as per minutes 684.

To approve the exempt minutes of the Cabinet meeting held on 9 November 2021.

RESOLVED that the exempt minutes of the Cabinet meeting held on 9 November 2021 be approved as a correct record.

To consider any items admitted at Item 2 above.

None.