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 Members present to agenda Item 1 as shown on the agenda in respect of filming at this meeting, and Members noted the information contained therein’.

Apologies for lateness were received from Cllr Ibrahim.

The Chair will consider the admission of any late items of urgent business (late items will be considered under the agenda item where they appear. New items will be dealt with as noted below).

No items were received.

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.

None received.

To consider any requests received in accordance with Part 4, Section B, Paragraph 29 of the Council’s Constitution.

None received.

To approve the minutes of the previous meeting held on 13^th October 2015.. 

6.1    The panel noted that the Chair had written to Cllr Sahota and had arranged to meet in December to discuss his work with local high streets and if there were any ways in which scrutiny could assist.  It was noted that there were significant changes happening in respect of the localisation of the business rates, though any work on this would fall within the realms of the main Overview & Scrutiny Committee.

6.2    The tenancy strategy is due to be updated in 2016, and the panel noted that this had been added to the work programme and would be scheduled in before final agreement.

6.3    Subject to a small number of minor typographical corrections (spelling of Lynton Road), the minutes of the 13th October were agreed by the panel.

The Cabinet Member for Regeneration and Housing to attend and respond to questions within this portfolio.

7.1    The Cabinet member for Housing and Regeneration attended to respond to questions within this portfolio.  Prior to this, the Cabinet member highlighted a number national developments which would have a significant impact on local housing and regeneration policies and the way the Council is able to support those in housing need.   Highlights of the panel’s discussion with the cabinet member of these issues are presented below.

7.2    The panel noted that there were a number of provisions within the Housing & Planning Bill which, if implemented, would have a detrimental impact on the supply of affordable housing. The continuation of the Right to Buy discount would see a further reduction in the Council housing stock and the extension of Right to Buy to tenants of housing associations would further reduce the totality of affordable homes available in the borough.

7.3    The forced sale of high value council properties would result in a loss of housing stock, particularly in the west of the borough where property values were higher.  It was suggested that this would inhibit the council’s ability to provide affordable housing in such areas and curtail the ability of the Council to deliver mixed housing communities.  Discussion noted that of the 560 properties that became vacant each last year about 30 could be liable for forced sale.

7.4    The introduction of Pay to Stay, where social tenants on an income of over £40k would be required to pay the market rental value of the property, would be difficult to administer and possibly incentivise Right to Buy. In addition, it was also noted that any surplus rent accrued through this process would be payable to central government and not retained by the Council.

7.5    Acute demand within the housing sector together with changes to Housing Benefit rules has made it difficult for the council to agree and retain contracts with private landlords in the provision of affordable housing with the private rented sector.  This was having an impact on the cost of supporting homeless people through temporary accommodation.

7.6    Provisions with the Housing and Planning Bill require developers to provide Starter Homes, private unit sales at 20% discount.  This requirement will inevitably reduce the amount of money available to provide affordable homes for rent which comes from the same source. It was also questionable how affordable homes for sale at a 20% discount would be to local residents, considering that average house prices (£450-500K) and wages (£26k) were for the borough.

7.7    In addition to provisions in the Housing & Planning Bill, the panel noted that there would be significant changes to welfare support in this parliament that could exacerbate the impact of limited affordable housing.  It was noted that over £12billion of savings needed to be found from the welfare budget over the next five years.

7.8    The panel noted that an engagement exercise was being undertaken with local Registered Housing Providers to ascertain how they planned to respond to provisions within the Housing & Planning Bill, in particular the Right  ...  view the full minutes text for item 33.

To receive an update on the Housing Strategy further to emerging themes from the  consultation which closed on the 18^th October 2015 (presentation).

8.1    A presentation was provided on the Haringey Housing Strategy.  A consultation on this strategy was conducted over two stages: stage 1 which consulted upon the vision and principles for the strategy (end December 2014); stage 2 which consulted upon the actual draft of the Haringey Housing Strategy (end October 2015).

8.2    The presentation focused on the analysis of the second stage of this consultation of which there were 82 on-line responses and 15 more detailed written responses. The on-line survey indicated that:

• There was strong support for the strategy to focus on those in housing crisis;

• There was strong support that the strategy delivers a social dividend;

• The 3 top priorities for improving the quality of homes and neighbourhoods were:

o Tackling ASB;

o Promote longer tenancies in the private rented sector;

o Assess other ways to build affordable homes (e.g. co-ops).

8.3    The panel discussed the social dividend to development where it was expected that there would be a wider benefit beyond housing provision (e.g. job opportunities, new community facilities and other regeneration goals).  It was accepted that the council needs to do more to define this and how it intends to achieve such objectives.

8.4    It was noted that there were 4 main themes emerging from the second consultation, these being:

• Affordability – that the current definition (defined as 45% of median income) would exclude lowest income households, that young people and those reliant on state benefits would continue to find housing unaffordable;

• Vulnerability and social exclusion – what more can the strategy do to assist those in greatest housing need?;

• Supply, innovation and quality – in particular, the quality of housing in the private rented sector and what actions the council can take to improve provision;

• Council housing – a strong commitment for ongoing provision targeted at those most in need.

8.5    The panel noted that tenant consultation was the key to estate regeneration and site development and should be an ongoing process within regeneration plans.  It was noted that the Council had continued to learn from regeneration projects and applied this as new regeneration plans came on stream.  The importance of tenant engagement was noted to have been critical to successful progress in the regeneration of Love Lane Estate in Tottenham.  In addition, it was hoped to encourage Love Lane residents to share their learning and experiences with other residents from other estates earmarked for regeneration.

8.6    It was noted that the Haringey Housing Strategy may need some further update and revision ahead of final Cabinet approval (March 2016) to reflect any additional changes that emerge from the Housing and Planning Bill as it progresses through parliament. Given the ambitions of the strategy, the panel noted that there would be significant challenges around the deliverability of ambitions within the strategy, and in particular the need to develop partnerships to help achieve these ambitions.

To receive a report on the nature and scale of empty homes and the measures taken to bring these back in to use.

9.1    The managing Director of Homes for Haringey attended to provide a briefing on empty homes and how they are brought back in to use in both the social rented sector (Council) and private owned sector. 

9.2    Where privately owned properties are neglected and fall into disrepair this can become a problem for the local area (eyesore, ASB etc).  In such cases, if the owner cannot be persuaded to improve the dwelling, the last line of intervention is the compulsory purchase order (CPO), a forced sale notice for the property.  Once issued, the Council can then sell the property, recoup an outstanding debts (e.g. Council Tax) and bring the home back in to use.

9.3    CPO’s are a last resort and usually the threat of such action is enough to spur owners into action.  The panel noted however that there were 28 compulsory purchase orders issued in the borough over the past few years, though much fewer had actually progressed through to actual forced sale.  The current state of the housing market which has seen a substantial increase in property values has also meant that it is increasingly rare for people to leave properties vacant and neglected.

9.4    The panel enquired whether there were any penalties that the council could apply to those homes that were left vacant and untended. It was noted that since 2013 the Government has provided local councils with a discretionary power to charge a premium on properties which have been empty and unfurnished for two years or more.  Haringey have set a premium of 50% which means properties that have been empty (unoccupied and unfurnished) for more than 2 years will be subject to a 150% council tax charge.  There are a number of exemptions to this.

9.5    Panel members also enquired through what route they should notify the Council of empty properties in their ward.  It was suggested that members could notify the Managing Director or through the appropriate page on the website (Empty Homes).

9.6    In respect of the Councils own housing stock it was noted that 567 properties became vacant last year, most of which are brought back into use within 21-23 days of tenant vacating the property.  There were however approximately 30 dwellings per quarter which take substantially longer to bring back in to use and these become known as voids. 

9.7    The panel understood that there could be a multitude of reasons which contribute to the void status of a dwelling these include:

• Problem with pest control;

• Dwelling left in very poor condition by previous tenants;

• Structural problems;

• Repairs in excess of £40k;

• Requirement for adaptations (e.g. for a disabled tenant);

• Legal action or processes involving the tenant.

9.8    The Chair thanked officers for attending to discuss this item.

1)    Panel report back on the site visit to the Tottenham regeneration area.

2)    Progress report on the Tottenham Regeneration corporate programme:

·         Consultation

·         Delivering the social dividend

10.1  The panel, accompanied by other local councillors, undertook a visit to Tottenham on the 12th November 2015 to visit the main regeneration sites in the area which included:

• High Road West Regeneration;

• Tottenham Hotspur FC redevelopment;

• Northumberland Park.

10.2  The panel found the visit very informative as it helped members to understand the scale of proposed regeneration plans and the challenges and opportunities that each individual site presents.  Members expressed their thanks to the Tottenham Programme Director and the Area Regeneration Manager who accompanied them on the visit. Panel members discussed a number of issues arising from the visit and which are summarised below. 

10.3  Firstly, members were keen to understand how regeneration plans intended to balance local needs for housing with local employment opportunities, particularly as the parts of the areas earmarked for development may result in the loss of some sites which were currently used for light industrial purposes (e.g. Peacock Industrial Estate).

10.4            It was noted that consultation with the Tottenham Traders Association would be ongoing throughout the regeneration process to ensure that the views of local businesses were incorporated in to such development plans.   Whilst the Area Action Plan sets out those areas identified for change, the council clearly wants to retain business sites in the area to ensure that the area continues to provide employment opportunities in addition to new homes.

10.5  The panel discussed how best the Council can continue to meaningful engage and involve local people in regeneration plans, particularly when the area plan may span the next 10-20 years and it would be at least 3-4 years before any ground is broken on development sites.  The panel noted that a difficult balance needed to be struck in getting the level of consultation right and whilst the community needed to feel involved and part of regeneration projects there was a danger of consultation fatigue.

10.6  The panel heard that the housing market continues to be very challenging, particularly in relation to those factors that contribute to viability of regeneration schemes, and which would ultimately affect the delivery of new affordable homes. Costs continued to rise within the sector which would impact on deliverability of affordable homes and other regeneration ambitions.

10.7  The development of Tottenham High Road was discussed by the panel, particularly in relation to the commercial offer.  It was noted from panel discussions that:

• Consultations had shown that people wanted more skilled jobs and more developed access to local training opportunities;

• Local people wanted to spend in Tottenham High Road, but needed a different mix of commercial premises and retail outlets to encourage and support this;

• The size of current retail units should be more varied to encourage different business opportunities (current makeup is too restrictive);

• The diversity of local retail opportunities would be critical to help develop the identity of the area.

10.8  The panel noted that there had been some areas of considerable investment which would contribute to the improvement in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 36.

To receive an update on the ‘scrutiny in a day’ project on the Community Infrastructure Levy scheduled for 3^rd December 2015.

11.1  The panel were updated on plans for the scrutiny in a day event being planned for the 3rd December 2015.  It was noted that an external expert from the Planning Officers Society would attend to give evidence, as to would representatives from local developers and Neighbourhood Forums.

11.2  Evidence gathering was expected to be completed on the day with any additional evidence gathered through a ‘mopping up’ meeting. It was hoped that a draft of the report with the panel’s recommendations will be brought to the next meeting of the panel for approval.

To review work programme.

12.1  An update of the work programme was noted by the panel.  The next scrutiny in a day exercise would consider ‘Housing Viability’ and would be planned for February 2016.

To consider any items admitted at item 3 above.

None.

18^th January 2016 at 18.30

3^rd March 2016 at 18.30

These were noted by the panel.