Agenda item

To Consider the Scrutiny Panel Review on The Future of the Seven Sisters Market Site (Wards Corner)’ and the Response to Scrutiny Recommendations

The Scrutiny Review will be presented by the Chair of the Housing, Regeneration Scrutiny Panel.

The Cabinet response will be presented by the Cabinet Member for Council House-Building, Placemaking, and Development.

Cllr White, Chair of the Housing and Regeneration Scrutiny Panel, introduced the Scrutiny Review on The Future of the Seven Sisters Market Site (Wards Corner), thanking fellow Panel members and co-opted members for their support and participation in the review. He welcomed the fact that all eight recommendations of the Panel were recommended for approval but wanted to clarify some of the recommendations.

In relation to Recommendation 1, it was stated that there did not seem to be a response about the request to actively engage with all parties and be part of any future governance arrangements in the immediate and long term. In relation to Recommendation 2, Cllr White asked that Cabinet sought assurances that the long term leaseholder on the site would bring different groups of traders together.

In relation to Recommendation 3, it was noted that the recommendations requested that the terms of the lease would prohibit the lease being transferred to a party that is neither a community organisations nor a public body. It was also asking the Council to actively engage with TfL to seek assurances and it was queried whether this was identified in the Cabinet response. In relation to Recommendation 5, it was queried whether there may have been some misunderstanding about the definition of public ownership. It was noted that this was defined in the report and that the Panel recommended that the site remained in public ownership.

The Cabinet Member for Council House-Building, Placemaking, and Development welcomed the report and set out the Cabinet response to the scrutiny recommendations, highlighting the following:

-       The Council had a long term strategic interest in the site and the area and it was intended to engage with the site and relevant parties in the immediate, medium, and long term.

-       The Council would work with whoever obtained the long term lease of the site.

-       In relation to Recommendation 2, it was noted that the independent Chair of the Partnership Board was due to be appointed shortly. This Chair would need to sign off on the terms of reference for the Partnership Board and it was expected that their ability to bring different groups together would be tested as part of the assessment criteria.

-       In relation to Recommendation 3, it was explained that the Council worked closely with TfL but that it was not possible to direct the terms of the lease.

-       In relation to Recommendation 5, it was understood that TfL would retain the freehold ownership of the land. It was added that the Council supported the site remaining as a community asset.

In response to questions from Cllr Barnes, the following responses were provided:

-       In relation to community relationships, it was acknowledged that there had been a long running campaign for the site which involved a number of parties and it was inevitable that there had been some challenges. The Cabinet Member noted that this was a positive opportunity to transform the site and the area and that it was aimed to bring people together.

-       It was clarified that the Council would not experience a loss in accounting terms from the end of the development agreement with Grainger. It was noted that there likely would have been some costs in terms of officer time but that this was not calculable. It was added that further detail on the proposed acquisition was provided in the Wards Corner: Acquisitions Programme report later in the agenda.

-       In relation to the equalities impact, the Cabinet Member stated that the proposal would provide an opportunity to cater for the community, in particular the Latin American community.

RESOLVED

1.    To consider the recommendations of the Housing and Regeneration Scrutiny Panel (HRSP) attached at Appendix 1.

2.    To agree the response to these recommendations attached at Appendix 2.

Reasons for decision

In September 2021, Housing and Regeneration Scrutiny Panel (HRSP) started a review of the future of the Seven Sisters Market Site following long time developer announcing their withdrawal from the development at Wards Corner.

This report provides a response to the 8 recommendations made by HRSP in their May 2022 Report: The Future of the Seven Sisters Market (Wards Corner).

Alternative options considered

None.