Items
No. |
Item |
1. |
FILMING AT MEETINGS
Please note that this meeting will be 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. 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, you are consenting to being
filmed and to the possible use of those images and sound
recordings.
Additional documents:
Minutes:
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’.
|
2. |
Apologies for Absence
Additional documents:
Minutes:
|
3. |
Urgent Business
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).
Additional documents:
Minutes:
|
4. |
Declarations of interest
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.
Additional documents:
Minutes:
|
5. |
Deputations/Petitions/Presentations/Questions
To consider any requests
received in accordance with Part 4, Section B, Paragraph 29 of the
Council’s Constitution.
Additional documents:
Minutes:
The Panel received a deputation from
Sarah Klymkiw and Michael Jones on behalf of a number of
leaseholders in the Noel Park area of Wood Green. It was noted that
a similar deputation had been made to the meeting of the Full
Council on 16th November 2020.
Sarah Klymkiw introduced the deputation
covering the following key points:
- That in September 2020, a number of leaseholders on Gladstone
Avenue in Noel Park were issued with Section 20 Notices for major
works incurring costs of up to £120,000 for some households.
The leaseholders understand that these are the second highest set
of estimates for leaseholder work that have been issued anywhere in
the UK.
- The affected properties are maisonettes in the Noel Park
conservation area. In the early 1970s the Council had installed
temporary prefabricated bathroom ‘pod’ structures to
the rear of the properties which should have been removed 30 years
ago. Sarah Klymkiw said that she understood from comments made by
Cllr Ejiofor at the Full Council meeting on 16th
November 2020 that these structures were now considered to be
unsafe so she queried how long the Council had had concerns about
this and why action had not been taken sooner.
- In the 1970s, residents had been offered the option not to have
a pod at all. However, in 2020 residents were not being given that
option as they were being told that the old pods will be replaced
with new pods despite other options being possible. The
justification for this appeared to be convenience rather than
sustainability or value for money because the change could be made
in a day without the need for residents to be decanted.
- Leaseholders had been told by the Council that the new pods
would last as long as brick built structures, which she said were
claims that simply parroted the manufacturers’ PR. She said
that the 60-year warranty for the pods did not mean that they would
actually last for that long or that the cladding would not need
replacing as it was a risk-based warranty for mortgage
purposes.
- The proposals also involved replacing windows and doors, but no
justification for the need for these works had been given and
tenants were now concerned that these extra works would cause
delays to the work on their bathrooms.
- Detailed individual surveys would be carried out only after the
contracts had been signed which raised concerns about the
impartiality of the surveys in terms of incentives to drive down
costs or determining the works that are necessary.
- In the opinion of residents, communications and consultation had
been handled very poorly by Homes for Haringey (HfH) and many
questions from residents had not been answered.
- Leaseholders agreed that the situation with the pods needed to
be addressed, did not want to prevent tenants from benefitting from
these works and did not expect the money to come from the rent of
tenants. However, the leaseholders had been led to believe that the
costs to leaseholders would ...
view the full minutes text for item 5.
|
6. |
Minutes PDF 295 KB
To approve the minutes of the
previous meeting.
Additional documents:
Minutes:
The minutes of the previous meeting held on
14th September 2020 were approved as an accurate
record.
|
7. |
Cabinet Member Questions - Strategic Regeneration
An opportunity to question the Cabinet Member for
Housing & Estate Renewal, Charles Adje, on developments within his
portfolio.
Additional documents:
Minutes:
Cllr Charles Adje, Cabinet Member for Finance and Strategic
Regeneration, responded to questions from the Panel on regeneration
issues:
- Cllr Yvonne
Say asked about the take up on priority-option purchasing for local
residents at major residential developments at Tottenham Hale. Cllr
Adje said that he did not have that
information to hand and that this matter fell under the Housing
portfolio rather than his Regeneration portfolio. He said that he
would discuss this with officers and arrange for this information
to be provided to the Panel. (ACTION) Cllr Diakides added that these kind of measures were
important factors when the Planning Committee makes its
determinations on planning applications so this information would
be useful to see in order to monitor how effective the measures
have been. Rob Krzyszowski, Head of
Planning Policy, Transport and Infrastructure, informed the Panel
that all the Section 106 (S106) agreements were monitored including
the clauses on priority housing for local residents. The more
detailed monitoring was carried out by the Housing Enabling team.
Asked by Cllr Diakides which Cabinet
Member and senior officer was responsible for S106 agreements, Cllr
Adje said that these were Cllr Matt
White (Cabinet Member for Planning and Corporate Services) and Rob
Krzyszowski.
- Cllr
Brabazon asked whether any data was
available on the progression of sales at Tottenham Hale. Cllr
Adje said that he would need to engage
with the Housing Enabling team to obtain that information, which he
would then provide to the Panel. (ACTION)
- Cllr
Brabazon asked for an update on
negotiations with the GLA on funding for the redevelopment at Love
Lane/High Road West. Cllr Adje said
that more information was currently being awaited on this from GLA
on next steps. He indicated that he would be happy to provide a
further written update to the Panel if more information on this
became available. (ACTION). Asked by Cllr Diakides which Cabinet Member and senior officer
was responsible for GLA negotiations, Cllr Adje said that the Regeneration team would usually
lead in this area where he was the responsible Cabinet Member,
supported by Peter O’Brien (Assistant Director for
Regeneration and Economic Development). The Housing department may
also be required to contribute in this area, led by Robbie
Erbmann (Assistant Director for
Housing).
- Cllr Say
asked for an update on the Wood Green Area Action Plan (AAP). Cllr
Adje said that the Plan had been
revised following the last consultation, but the Planning Policy
team were still awaiting a decision to be made on the
Council’s Accommodation Strategy. A number of sites within
the AAP area were currently owned by the Council so the outcome of
the Accommodation Strategy would have a significant bearing on the
allocations and guidance and it would be premature to progress the
AAP before this point. Asked by Cllr Gordon for a possible
timescale on this work, Cllr Adje said
that he could not provide a timescale but an engagement process
with Members on the Accommodation Strategy would be taking place
...
view the full minutes text for item 7.
|
8. |
Housing Delivery Programme update PDF 206 KB
·
Update on Community Benefit Society (CBS)
·
Purchase of 104 & 106 Woodside Avenue – report to
follow
Additional documents:
Minutes:
Introducing this item, Cllr Ruth Gordon
noted that the Panel was already familiar with this programme but
wished to continue monitoring it on an ongoing basis including any
‘red flag’ issues. She noted that the Housing team had
provided a spreadsheet to the Panel listing the housing delivery
sites.
Robbie Erbmann, AD for Housing, said that
good progress had been made on the number of sites on the programme
in the previous couple of months and seven new people had been
recruited to the team. Building work was progressing at Joy Gardner
House on Templeton Road which was the first direct delivery site.
Despite the lockdown, the team was feeling confident about hitting
1,000 starts by March 2022, though it would take quite a lot longer
than originally planned to reach 1,000 completions.
Robbie Erbmann then responded to
questions from Panel Members:
- Asked by Cllr Gunes about the potential impact of Covid or other
adverse factors on the programme, Robbie Erbmann said that there
had been a significant impact on the programme caused by the first
lockdown, such as migration of staff to online working, the pausing
of work on some sites and the shortage of some building supplies.
The impact of Covid was continuing in the second wave with most
sites estimated to be working at only approximately two-thirds of
their normal pace but the same pattern of problems was not being
seen in the second lockdown when compared to the first.
- Askes by Cllr Barnes what a realistic timescale for the 1,000
completions would be, Robbie Erbmann said that the latest estimates
were for May/June 2024, though the timescales for this type of
project does often change.
- Asked by Cllr Barnes what a realistic housing completion target
for the next administration might be, Robbie Erbmann said that
there were now sites with capacity for up to 2,000 under active
development so, given the time required to get developments planned
and built on a site, finishing the 1,000 completions and then
getting a further 1,000 starts on site could be a reasonable target
for a 2022-26 administration.
- Asked by Cllr Barnes about demand for different types of home,
Robbie Erbmann said that the existing aim was to build decent sized
homes with outdoor space and he wasn’t sure that the pandemic
had dramatically changed people’s housing needs, but should
make everyone resolute not to deliver bad housing because poor
quality accommodation causes additional problems for people in such
circumstances.
- Asked by Cllr Barnes about the potential impact of Brexit on the
programme, Robbie Erbmann said that this would depend on whether
there was any disruption in the market or on building supplies. The
supply of labour could also be a problem, and while local labour
initiatives and apprenticeships could play a part in encouraging
local people into the industry, the shortage of labour could impact
negatively on timescales for the programme. As this was a national
issue, it would be difficult to mitigate against these problems,
not least because ...
view the full minutes text for item 8.
|
9. |
Cabinet Member Questions - Housing and Estate Renewal
An opportunity to question the Cabinet Member for
Housing & Estate Renewal, Cllr Emine Ibrahim, on developments within her
portfolio.
Additional documents:
Minutes:
Cllr Emine
Ibrahim, Cabinet Member for Housing and Estate Renewal, responded
to questions from the Panel:
- Cllr Gunes asked about the type of
social housing to be delivered through the Housing Delivery
Programme. Cllr Ibrahim said that all of the social rent properties
to be delivered through the programme would be Council homes at
Council rent levels.
- Asked by Cllr Diakides whether she
was confident that the financial problems with ALMOs experienced in
Croydon could not occur in Haringey. Cllr Ibrahim said that a
number of solutions had been put forward by various Councils over
the years to try to meet the challenge of delivering social
housing. Haringey Council had decided to deliver this through the
HRA a couple of years ago, when the HRA borrowing cap was lifted,
so she was confident that Haringey would not end up in the same
situation.
- Cllr Diakides asked about weaknesses
in consultation processes, Cllr Ibrahim said that she was aware of
the issues, which were common across the sector, and expressed
concerns about the problems of engaging with hard to reach groups.
This would be exacerbated by the need to rely on online solutions
in the current circumstances so it would be important to continue
to try to find solutions.
- In relation to the Housing Delivery Programme, Cllr Brabazon asked about the West Indian Cultural
Centre which was marked on the spreadsheet provided to the Council
as ‘direct delivery’, though she said that her
understanding was that it was being delivered through Paul Simon
Magic Homes. Cllr Ibrahim said that, to her knowledge, there was an
ongoing conversation with the Cultural Centre about delivering
something in partnership. Robbie Erbmann added that there was a long leasehold
interest at the Centre, which had an existing relationship with
Paul Simon Magic Homes, but that did not necessary mean that the
Council would need to deliver the new homes through this route. In
response to further questions, he added that there was no current
agreement between the Council as freeholder and the leaseholder
interest to deliver a scheme.
- Cllr Brabazon queried why
Stokely Court and Chettle Court were listed on the Housing Delivery
Programme spreadsheet as she had understood that these were not
being put up for development. Cllr Ibrahim said that, in relation
to Stokely Court, the debate had been
on the type of development and what happened to the existing blocks
and not on whether there would be more homes delivered there. The
Council did intend to deliver something on this site, but a
conclusion had not been reached on what this would look like. She
said that, in relation to Chettle
Court, the development would be on a piece of vacant land. This
would not involve the demolition of the block and residents had
been written letters to reassure them of this.
- Cllr Say asked about Waltheof
Gardens being listed on the Housing Delivery Programme spreadsheet
as she understood that a conservation area was being extended to
cover this area. Robbie Erbmann
...
view the full minutes text for item 9.
|
10. |
Maintenance Service Level Agreements - Homes for Haringey PDF 218 KB
Additional documents:
Minutes:
Mark Baigent, Interim
Executive Director of Property Services at Homes for Haringey
(HfH) introduced the report for this
item which set out how the communal repairs on Council estates are
carried out by HfH. There were around
9,000 such repairs carried out each year and the report set out how
those works were ordered and the improvements made in this
area.
Mark Baigent responded to
questions from the Panel on the report:
- Cllr Barnes noted the
targets for response times as set out in paragraph 3.1.1 of the
report and asked how often these targets had been missed. Mark
Baigent said that he did not have this
information to hand and would respond on this in writing, noting
that there are monthly performance indicators for the target time
on emergency repairs and for non-urgent repairs. (ACTION) He
explained that the data reported on was for all repairs and not
just those in communal areas. Cllr Barnes said there would be no
need to separate out the communal repairs from the data as she
would prefer to see the data for all repairs in full.
- Asked by Cllr Barnes
how residents report repairs if they do not use the App. Mark
Baigent said that residents can call
the Contact Centre which would report jobs through to the Repairs
team at HfH.
- Cllr Diakides asked whether there was a cyclical
maintenance programme to minimise the long term costs. Mark
Baigent said that HfH was working on a new Asset Management Strategy
which would set out plans for the next five years and was scheduled
to go to Cabinet for approval in January. This would cover all
areas of the programme including cyclical works. Cllr Diakides suggested that the Panel should look at
the Strategy to see if it could make any useful suggestions.
(ACTION)
- Asked by Cllr
Diakides whether there was a sinking
fund for leaseholders to pay in to cover maintenance costs, Mark
Baigent said that he would look into
this and provide a written response to the Panel.
(ACTION)
- Cllr Brabazon said that some communal areas on estates,
such as Broadwater Farm, could
sometimes be poorly lit and asked why improvements to these had not
been carried out. Mark Baigent said
that, as noted in the report, the Haringey Repairs Service will
sometimes identify areas in need of improvement and major works in
the course of carrying out a repair and will then provide a report
to the Asset Management Team with their recommendations. He added
that he would speak to David Sherrington, Director of Broadwater Farm, to see how had been built into
their refurbishment plans for these blocks.
(ACTION)
- Cllr Barnes said that
she was aware of cases when residents reported problems at annual
site inspections and, though these were logged, residents later
reported that the repairs had not been carried out. Mark
Baigent said that the Estate Management
staff who had carried out the inspection would feed the reports
back to the ...
view the full minutes text for item 10.
|
11. |
Work Programme Update PDF 425 KB
To consider potential issues for inclusion within
the Panel’s current work plan for 2020/21.
Additional documents:
Minutes:
Cllr Gordon noted that the additional
special meeting of the Panel on Noel Park would be added to the
Work Programme.
Cllr Gordon proposed that the remaining evidence
sessions for the High Road West scrutiny review, which had been
suspended earlier in the year due to the pandemic, should be held
in long sittings of the Panel, perhaps over two days. Cllr Hare
agreed with this approach and expressed an interest in gathering
further evidence on some of the examples of developments in
Brussels that had been described by Professor Mark Brierley in his
evidence to the Panel.
Cllr Gordon also reported that she had been
approached by the Chair of the Adults & Health scrutiny panel
about the possibility of holding a joint scrutiny meeting on the
subject of sheltered accommodation which could be added to the Work
Programme.
Cllr Diakides suggested
that an item on funding models relating to the General Fund and the
Housing Revenue Account (HRA) and an item on asset disposals be
added to the list of items to be considered by the Panel for future
meetings.
RESOLVED – That the Work Programme for 2020/21 be updated
on the basis of the above discussion and circulated to the
Panel.
|
12. |
Dates of Future Meetings
·
Tues 15th Dec 2020
·
Tues 2nd Mar 2021
Additional documents:
Minutes:
·
15th Dec 2020
·
2nd Mar 2021
|