Agenda and minutes

To agree the procedures for the operation of hybrid meetings.

RESOLVED –

THAT the hybrid meeting procedure set out in the agenda papers be agreed.

Apologies were received from Councillor Nanouche Umeadi and Fatoumata Diallo (Co-opted Member).

There were none.

Broadcast of the meeting

The Chair to announce the following: ‘In addition to the rights by law that the public and press have to record this meeting, I would like to remind everyone that this meeting is being broadcast live by the Council to the Internet and can be viewed on our website for twelve months after the meeting. After that time, webcasts are archived and can be made available upon request.

If you have asked to address the meeting, you are deemed to be consenting to having your contributions recorded and broadcast, including video when switched on, and to the use of those sound recordings and images for webcasting and/or training purposes.’

Any other announcements

Broadcast of the meeting

The Chair announced that the meeting was being broadcast live by the Council to the Internet and could be viewed on the website for twelve months after the meeting. After that time, webcasts were archived and could be made available upon request. Those who had asked to address the meeting were deemed to be consenting to having their contributions recorded and broadcast and to the use of those sound recordings and images for webcasting and/or training purposes.

There were none.

To approve and sign the minutes of the meeting held on 17^th January 2023.

Consideration was given to the minutes of the meeting held on 17^th January 2023.

RESOLVED –

THAT the minutes of the meeting held on 17^th January 2023 be approved and signed as a correct record.

Requests to speak at the Committee on a matter within its terms of reference must be made in writing to the clerk named on the front of this agenda by 5pm two working days before the meeting.

There were none.

Report of the Cabinet Member for New Homes, Jobs and Community Investment.

The New Homes for Small Sites Programme sets out an approach for delivering new homes on under-utilised estate and infill sites across the borough. This report outlines the delivery strategy for a linked package of sites to be progressed as Phase 1 of the programme. 

This report builds on the Cabinet decision made in September 2021,

(SC/2021/23), and seeks budget approval to secure planning consent on sites identified for direct delivery of new affordable homes by the Council and enable the further development and preparation of sites for sale.

Following the previous Cabinet decision, engagement work began with residents and communities on the New Homes for Small Sites Programme. This report updates Cabinet on the findings of the engagement programme and recommends 5 sites are progressed towards the delivery of up to 73 additional genuinely affordable homes on existing estates. 

Consideration was given to the report of the Cabinet Member for New Homes, Jobs and Community Investment, which was presented Councillor Danny Beales, Cabinet Member for New Homes, Jobs and Community Investment, and by Neil Vokes, Director of Development, who both along with Huw Jones, Team Leader Regeneration, gave the following key responses to questions:

·       The new homes for small sites programme offered the opportunity to deliver additional affordable homes on existing estates, without the need to rehouse residents or demolish existing homes. 

·       Officers had been speaking with residents on estates through door knocking and pop-up events. Officers had knocked on doors on estates, multiple times where possible, to increase the reach across estates and contact as many residents as possible.

·       Residents had been offered different ways to contribute to the engagement process which included feedback forms; through the post with a pre-paid return envelope; by completing an online survey; and also by completing surveys with officers at the door or at drop-in events on each estate. Residents were also given a map of their estate with the potential development site highlighted. At drop-in events, residents also gave wider feedback on their estate - what they liked or disliked and other areas they thought could be improved or developed. This information would be pulled together to form the estate improvement programme that would go hand-in-hand with the Small Sites Programme.

·       The Council recognised that there were always a range of views about new development and was mindful of local concerns about disruption and loss of amenities. The approach for the next stage of delivery would include further engagement with residents on a whole range of design issues, as well as discussions on providing meaningful benefits back to affected estate residents.

·       There remain a risk of uncertainty and concern due to lack of communication on estates. Stakeholder engagement had been a key element of the initial phase of this programme and engagement would be maintained through regular feedback with local people, updating them on programme and future works. Ongoing working groups would progress through the construction phases. There was a risk of continued local opposition to new homes being built on estates. To address this would require clear and regular messaging with residents and tailored strategies for individual sites to address specific concerns raised and to work to collaboratively with tenants and residents to alleviate them where possible.

·       Increasing the supply of genuinely affordable homes remained a key Council priority, and the small sites programme provided a community led way to bring back vacant spaces into use through the provision of new homes and community facilities.

·       The small sites programme would not be seeking to use green spaces as part of the vacant spaces being used to deliver the programme. Green spaces were something that local communities wanted to see preserved and enhanced, and the programme would see how this could be achieved through the estates improvement programme part of the scheme.

·       Each specific scheme would have its own estates improvement  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

Report of the Director of Strategy and Policy Design

This report provides an update on the development of the annual State of the Borough report and summit process, explains it purpose and origins, presents the findings of the first iteration of this annual report and seeks input from scrutiny committees, and thereafter the approval of Council to continue to develop this report for the longer term. It is hoped that the State of the Borough report will be a useful tool and source of information for both the Council itself, partners, and Camden’s communities.

The development of a State of the Borough report was agreed as part of the approval of the We Make Camden (WMC) strategy by Cabinet in March 2022. The State of the Borough report is a summary of data and evidence which tells us about life in the borough, with an emphasis on resident and community wellbeing. It is part of wider work to deepen the WMC strategy and support its delivery. The report is aligned to the ambitions and outcomes of WMC and the emerging Good Life Camden measurement framework. The report and associated measurement framework form a key part of the Council’s approach to insight and accountability linked to We Make Camden.

It is intended that the report will support a range of council functions, including but not limited to being a key source of evidence to inform the work of Scrutiny Committees, and as an evidence base and reference point for the Leaders annual statement.

Consideration was given to the report of the Director of Strategy and Policy Design, which was introduced by Michal Shinwell, Strategic and Evidence Lead, and she along with Gavin Haynes, Director of Property Management, gave the following key responses to questions:

·       Officers would send members the link to the response to the complaint’s data available on the Council’s website, along with developing proposals for a housing summit to take place later this year.

ACTION BY: Director of Property Management/Director of Housing

·       Officers would give further consideration in future reports regarding issues around black children’s attendance and food affordability (cheap easy accessible food, against the need to eat healthy but more costly food).

ACTION BY: Director of Strategy and Policy

RESOLVED –

THAT the contents of the report be noted and the final version of the report be referred to Council for consideration.

Report of the Cabinet Advisor on Supporting Rough Sleepers.

This report explores and sets out recommendations on supporting rough sleepers through a public health approach, with a particular focus on those with long-term health conditions, mental health conditions and struggling with substance misuse.

Consideration was given to the report of the Cabinet Adviser on Supporting Rough Sleepers, which was introduced by Councillor Richard Cotton, Cabinet Adviser on Supporting Rough Sleepers, and he gave the following key responses to questions:

·       The response to helping Rough Sleepers during the Covid Pandemic had shown how the issue could be dealt with when resources were fully available. Here the Council had used the Britannia Hotel in Hampstead as a Covid-protect site to accommodate up to 107 single homeless residents. The project was supervised by a multi-disciplinary team  (MDT) comprising the Housing charity, Single Homeless Project; UCLH (University College London Hospital) discharge nurses who were triaging residents; a Camden and Islington Focus Homeless team undertaking mental health assessments; Camden’s Substance Misuse Service who were providing drug and alcohol assessments; the Camden Health Improvement Practice (CHIP) GP practice conducted video and face to face assessments; a Local Authority Move on Coordinator, to help people move on to more suitable accommodation and reconnecting people to home areas; a UCLH Find and Treat Team to undertake Covid testing as well as HIV, Hepatitis and TB screening and a Pharmacist delivering methadone on site to those not in treatment with Camden & Islington NHS Trust. The project was a near total success with only one person from the whole cohort becoming infected. A new national and London wide approach was required, which needed the funding levels provided during the Covid Pandemic.

·       Faith groups and the voluntary sector played an important role in seeking to help rough sleepers and all public agencies involved had to work together to get the best outcome for individuals.

·       Most rough sleepers did not chose this life style and it was noticeable that most people living on the streets had suffered some sort of personal trauma that had led them to where they were now. The impact of personal trauma was something that had to be considered as part of any future programme of support.

·       Rough sleepers suffered abuse, mental health issues, hygiene poverty and these issues also needed to be taken into account in seeking to help them.

RESOLVED –

THAT the report be noted and that the recommendations outlined by the Cabinet Adviser on Supporting Rough Sleepers, which would be reported to Cabinet by the Cabinet Member as set out below, be endorsed by the scrutiny committee:

·       Noting the success of the approach adopted in the pandemic, to continue to press central government for the necessary levels of funding to eliminate rough sleeping for good;

·       Supporting preventing homelessness before individuals get to the point where they must rough sleep. This included increasing awareness among communities as to who they could go to if they felt they may be made homelessness so that early intervention could take place;

·       Explore ways to address hidden homelessness across the borough;

·       To continue to drive forward the Homeless System Transformation, bringing system partners together to deliver a more integrated approach for rough sleepers, working alongside the Housing Service Transformation;

·       Ensure that all  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.

Report of the Cabinet Adviser on the Estates Mission. 

The report provides the committee with a report on the work of the Cabinet Adviser on the Estates Mission. 

Consideration was given to the report of the Cabinet Adviser on Estates Mission, which was introduced by Councillor Eddie Hanson, Cabinet Adviser on Estates Mission, and he along with Ododo Dafe, Head of Innovation and Improvement, and Marcus Shukla, Portfolio Lead, gave the following key responses to questions:

·       Tenant and Resident Associations (TRAs) played a valuable leadership role in the local community but they also needed to be more open to change, reflect the local community, and be willing to listen to views being expressed by all members (including young people). Where necessary appropriate training should be offered to TRA chairs to enable them to fully undertaken their role.

·       TRAs were fully aware of the support that was available through the Council’s Tenant Participation Team, though further work could be about sharing information to other tenants and residents, especially for estates where there was no TRA.

·       A number of estates had a community hall that was being managed by the TRA and further work could be done regarding improving the way that they managed these premises to ensure that they maximised the community benefit.

·       The Estates Mission programme being run by the Council would be looking at how community assets (including tenant’s halls) were being used, along with how the process could be made more streamlined and user friendly regarding participatory budgeting. Further information on this initiative could be considered by the scrutiny committee at a future meeting.

·       As part of the audit of garages and shed consideration could be given to use vacant ones as bike racks or storage areas.

·       TRAs could consider how unused space on the estate could be used to benefit the local community.

·       The Council was seeking to provide tenants and residents with best practice examples of how TRA’s should be run, and how they could make use of local budgets to enhance their community.      

RESOLVED –

THAT the report be noted and that the recommendations set out below as outlined by the Cabinet Adviser on Estates Mission, be endorsed by the scrutiny committee:

·       Consider an audit on the garages and sheds we have on estates. Some residents wait for a long time, but then report there are abandoned sheds they could be using on their estates. The Council can allocate them to be used and even start collecting rent for them. As part of this process consideration should be given to vacant garages and sheds to be used as bike racks or storage spaces.

·       Engage with and listen to local businesses on the high street, not just the big businesses. This was what I heard from the majority of the businesses I spoke with.

·       Be honest, fair and consistent with residents. The Council need not prejudge residents, so that residents will feel confident to have a trusted relationship with the Council. Enhanced staff training should be offered on respecting and treating residents on estates with dignity and not on a prejudicial basis. Officers should not use their powers to penalise residents who disagree with  ...  view the full minutes text for item 11.

Report of the Cabinet Member for Better Homes.

To consider the annual report of the Cabinet Member for Better Homes. This year’s report includes key timely updates from relevant teams in the portfolio who serve our residents and Camden communities, along with any other information useful to the Committee for the portfolio area.

Consideration was given to the report of the Cabinet Member Better Homes, which was presented by Councillor Meric Apak, Cabinet Member Better Homes, and he along with Gavin Haynes, Director of Property Management and Danny Waite, Head of Repairs & Operations, gave the following key responses to questions:

·       The Council was aware of the concerns regarding the misuse of blue badges on the Maiden Lane Estate from people not living on the estate and officers would be publicising the effective enforcement that was being undertaken. Local tenants and residents who concerns about who was parking on the estate should contact the respective team who would investigate any suspicious activity.

·       There had need a small number of cases where the misdiagnosing of a water leak had occurred, and officers had put in place further processes to ensure that such occurrences were kept to a minimum.

·       The Council was aware of the impact that a leak could have on a tenant and resident on their home, along with if it was left undealt with to the structure of the building, and the approach being undertaken to deal with damp and mould would also include how leaks should be addressed.

·       The Repairs Service had recently gone through a restructure that would now lead to the setting up of team that would seek to tackle all types of leaks. The Council would be seeking to revise its approach to dealing with what it the past was considered a containable leak. This would mean that the timeframe for dealing with them was reprioritised. This would lead to urgent priority (genuine emergency e.g. causing damage to electrical or immediate structural issues) being dealt with quickly and anything else would then be identified to the new leak hub, which would mean that they would be dealt with within 3-4 days.

·       The Council had taken a very proactive approach to seeking to address damp and mould issues for all tenants and residents. In December, all tenants and residents were advised to contact the Council regarding whether these issues were impacting them. The Council had achieved 84% response rate to all cases within 10 working days, and the information arising from the reported cases were that 82% of them were deemed as low risk mild cases. Also, this information provided the Council with a very good picture of where damp and mould was across all its homes, which meant that a plan could be put in place to seek to tackle this over before the autumn/winter seasons start along with, medium to longer term solutions if necessary. Initially the plan would focus on properties with highest risk and levels of mould. On very limited occasions, a tenant may need to be moved out of their home to enable the work to be done.

·       The Council now had all the damp and mould repair issues being serviced by an in-house team of operatives, though on occasion’s specialist surveyors contractors have had to be used. The resources over the last year used  ...  view the full minutes text for item 12.

Report of the Director of Housing

This report provides an update on the Committee’s work programme for 2022/23 and provides an update on action requested at previous meetings of the Committee. 

Consideration was given to the report of the Director of Housing

The meeting had identified that they wished to see an update provided in six months’ time regarding the Small Sites Programme.

Yet to be programmed

·       Allocations Policy (Policy review and serviceredesign)

·       Leaseholder services

·       Landlord Licensing Schemeupdate

·       Camden Housing Strategy

·       Small Sites Programme update (six months’ time)

RESOLVED –

THAT the report work programme be revised as outlined above.

There were none.

Proposed resolution:

THAT the press and public be excluded from the proceedings of the Housing Scrutiny Committee on 21^st February 2023 during consideration of the respective item on the agenda on the grounds that it is likely, in view of the nature of the business to be transacted, that were members of the public to be present, there would be disclosure of exempt information as defined in Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972.

Specifically -

Publicity in respect of the item would be likely to lead to the disclosure of information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information) in accordance with paragraph 3 of schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972 and the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.