16. Apologies, Declarations of Interest or Any Other Communications from Members

Transcription

1 At a meeting of the Housing and Environment Scrutiny Panel held on Monday, 8 February 2016 at 7:00pm at the Council Chamber, Civic Centre, Lampton Road, Hounslow. Present: Councillor Candice Atterton (Chair) Councillor Khulique Malik (Vice-Chair) Councillors Peter Carey, Mel Collins, Sam Hearn, Tina Howe and Hina Mir Also in Attendance: Councillor John Todd Apologies for Absence Councillors Elizabeth Hughes. 16. Apologies, Declarations of Interest or Any Other Communications from Members Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Chatt. 17. Minutes of Meeting Held on 10 November 2015 & Matters Arising The minutes of the meeting held on 10 November 2015 were agreed as a correct record. 18. Prevent Strategy Update See the report of the Lead Member for Communities Agenda Item 3 The Chair welcomed Councillor Sampson (Lead Member for Communities), Joan Conlon (Community Inclusion and Participation Manager -Prevent Lead) and Najeeb Ahmed (Prevent Co-ordinator) to the meeting. Members noted WRAP3 training had been provided prior to the main meeting. It was highlighted that the London Borough of Hounslow was recognised as a Borough with good community cohesion. The Prevent team s work had been exemplified by the Home Office as best practice, especially with regard to its training. The Community Partnerships Unit (CPU) had been successful in running projects that raised awareness of the Prevent Strategy / Duty, enabling the council to be compliant as per the Counter Terrorism & Security Act Members noted the delivery of a very successful Junior Citizenship Scheme in 2015, which saw 2, year olds, take part in a series of resources which provided them with useful skills for their transition from primary to secondary school. The CPU would be running the Junior Citizenship Scheme again this year with approximately 2800 participants taking part. Members would also be invited to attend and take part in the scheme. Mrs Conlon advised that full details of the schemes for this year would be sent out to Members so that they could forward them on to other interested organisations and groups. In response to questions from Members, the panel were advised that the Community Partnerships Unit was very involved with the Duke of Edinburgh scheme and were happy to make contact with any other

2 organisations recommended by Members. 7:15pm: Councillor Mir arrived at the meeting. Najeeb Ahmed reported that Hounslow Council had been awarded the London Sports Award recently for bringing sports to hard to reach communities. He advised that the Council had worked with the Rugby Football Union and engaged with a lot of children within the Somali community to take an interest in Rugby. The Chair advised that there were a lot of children with different backgrounds that could be at risk. She questioned how those children were identified and whether the Prevent strategy was embedded into other safeguarding policies and whether there was partnership working between different departments. Mrs Conlon advised that the Prevent team were very linked in with other Council departments and agencies to ensure that information was shared. Front line staff including Social Workers and Youth Workers had received training on the Prevent Strategy enabling them to recognise vulnerable individuals and the process for accessing support. Members were advised that an annual Prevent report would be produced in September 2016 and a summary report would be provided to Scrutiny in late Action: The Scrutiny Panel to be provided with a flow chart outlining the Channel referral processes between departments and other agencies. Members were advised that work was underway to ensure the Prevent Strategy was embedded within the Corporate Parenting Strategy. Councillor Malik questioned how parents were made aware of the Prevent strategy and changes in behaviours to be aware of. He suggested that breakfast meetings at schools to brief parents of what to be aware of and how to identify different behaviours would be very useful. It was also suggested that the Council could offer free sports activities in the Borough to help steer young people towards sports activities and stay away from extremism. Mrs Conlon agreed that breakfast sessions at schools with parents would be a good mechanism to engage and educate parents about the vulnerabilities that could cause someone to become radicalised. Unfortunately, free sports activities did not fall within the CPU s remit Mrs Conlon advised that the Community Partnerships Unit would be happy to carry out specific intervention works if Members highlighted any organisation/ bodies which were or highlighted areas of concern. The panel requested that the annual report be presented to the scrutiny panel late The Chair thanked Joan Conlon, Najeeb Ahmed and Councillor Sampson for the update on the implementation of the Prevent strategy and closed this item. 7:30pm. 19. Affordable housing delivery See the report of the Lead Member for Housing Agenda Item 4 The Chair welcomed Councillor Dunne (Lead Member for Housing), Peter Matthew (Director of Housing) and Suzannah Taylor (Housing Enabling Officer) and Isabella Rossi (Principal Affordable Housing Supply Manager) to the meeting.

3 Mr Matthew gave an update on the performance of the Affordable Housing delivery and the corporate Pledge target of delivering 3,000 Affordable Homes in the borough between He referred to the report in the agenda pack and advised that at the end of Quarter /16, a total of 1,268 affordable homes had been secured representing 42% of the overall target. Of those, 159 were new Council home completions. 92 care home units would also be provided and funded through the Housing Revenue Account. The additional 92 extra care home units would reduce the need for placements to be made to expensive residential care homes. Mr Matthew provide a definition of the different types housing that would be provided: Social Rented housing was provided at rents which reflected approximately 40-50% of open market rental values and was often provided by the Local Authority or in some cases registered providers such as housing associations. Affordable Rented homes were provided at rents of up to 80% of market rental or Local Housing Allowance levels, whichever was the lower. Intermediate Housing was defined as homes for sale and rent provided at a cost above social rent, but below market levels. Intermediate housing also included shared ownership (part buy/part rent) and shared equity. Mr Mathew advised that the pending Housing & Planning Bill which was introduced by the Government would result in significant implications on the types of affordable housing that could be delivered by Housing Associations. There would be a move towards Intermediate Housing and the provisions of Starter Homes and Shared Ownership Housing. In response to questions, Members were advised that social rented housing was in short supply due to a range of factors such as a loss of supply through the Right to Buy and a lack of investment in new housebuilding and availability of grant funding. Other factors that would affect the delivery of homes to meet the targets was that the cost of building new homes was increasing which would have a negative impact on the number of homes that could be built. The limited amount of land supply would also be a detrimental factor as the size of land available would affect the size of the affordable homes that could be built. A big challenge ahead would be negotiation with developers to get agreement from them that they would deliver some affordable housing. Mr Matthew advised that if the developers were allowed to continue to use viability as a reason not to provide a certain number of affordable homes as part of their developments there would be real difficulties in securing the number of homes required to meet the target. However, Mr Matthew felt confident that the target to deliver 3000 affordable homes in the borough between would be met. Councillor Collins asked for further details about the future of Nantley House and expressed concern that there was no agreed affordable housing provision for the site. Mr Mathew advised that until a planning application was submitted to the Council for the site it was not clear how much of the site would be used to provide affordable housing. Councillor Dunne advised that a report in relation to proposals for Nantley House were presented to Cabinet in January In response to further questions, Members were advised that 92 extra care units were planned for the Feltham s ex-serviceman s club site. Park Lodge was a site located in Sutton Lane that would provide 36 extra care housing units. Councillor Collins asked for update on when the Garage Review would be completed and

4 when it would be available. He reported that there were a lot of unused and vacant garages across the Borough that could be redeveloped and used as affordable housing or social housing. Mr Mathew advised that the garage review had been undertaken by Hounslow Homes and Hounslow Housing had not taken the review forward to completion. He advised that the delivery of 400 homes in the Borough was not dependant on the completion of the garage review. However, post 2018, it could be possible to look into the potential for surplus garage sites. Councillor Malik commented that there were always overspends on temporary accommodation. Members were provided with an update on the number of households in temporary accommodation. In January 2016 there were 1082 households in temporary accommodation and 140 in Bed and Breakfast accommodation. There had been a drop from 200 households in Bed & Breakfasts to 140 in September There was still an overspend on temporary accommodation, however, the number of households in temporary accommodation were gradually being reduced. In some cases temporary accommodation was an essential supply solution for those people in need of emergency housing. The panel discussed the cost of constructing new homes and whether building homes in the traditional way was the most cost effective way forward. Timber frame homes were considered to be a quicker way to build and a more cost effective alternative. Mr Matthew advised that timber-frame homes were not often built in the UK. He advised that in previous roles he had worked in it was agreed that timber frame homes were considered to be a sustainable solution. Mr Matthew advised that the most sustainable option was to build steel frame homes, however that option was also the most expensive cost. Therefore, it was felt that what was actually considered to be sustainable was debateable. Mr Matthew emphasised that the Local Authority would need to build houses to meet the demand within an affordable budget. Councillor Hearn suggested that sites that were historically considered to be difficult to build on could be released to developers with the caveat that they would need to include an affordable housing provision. Mr Matthew advised that this was not an option that would be ruled out and it was a good suggestion that could be explored further in phase 2. Councillor Todd questioned why new houses were being built in the Borough. He felt it that it would be easier and a quicker way to meet the housing demand by buying existing buildings. Mr Matthew advised that it was cheaper and more cost-effective to build new properties rather than buying existing buildings at the market rate that would need renovation. Members felt that Hounslow Council had not been very effective at bringing empty houses back into use in comparison to other London Boroughs. Councillor Todd advised that the London Borough of Ealing had brought over a 100 properties back into use. A report that was presented to Cabinet in October 2015 had indicated that Hounslow Council had only managed to bring 16 properties back into use. In response, Mr Matthew advised that the West London Alliance grant was used to bring empty properties back into use. Hounslow Council had brought 25 properties back into use and this was considered to be a good result. The panel were advised that the London Borough of Ealing had a larger housing stock and a larger number of empty properties. He advised that at a Cabinet meeting in October 2015 the target number of properties to be brought back into use by Hounslow Council was increased to 50 properties a year. In response to questions about the average cost of a council house, Suzannah Taylor advised that the Council built a mixture of houses that all had different costs and would the exact costs would depend on the type of unit. She advised that the average cost was between 180K- 250K per unit. Members were advised that the costs were usually between per

5 square metre. There was a demand for housing across all bedroom type properties within the housing stock available. It was acknowledged that there were often mismatches of properties that were allocated such as, single people had been allocated 3 bedroom houses and in other cases families were overcrowded into smaller properties. It would be essential to incentivise people living in properties larger than they required to downsize. Members were advised that proposals to incentivise residents with the right housing packages were being developed. Some residents could benefit from a shared ownership package and that could be a useful incentive to give up a large property. For an elderly person it would be essential to think about the long-term plans and consider whether in the future the elderly person would require sheltered accommodation when creating a package of incentives. Incentives for landlords to bring vacant properties back into use could be to offer to provide better property maintenance services. In response to questions, Members were advised that a house swap scheme was operated by the Council, however it was only effective for use with specific house choices or locations. Members were advised that a report would be presented to Cabinet in April that would consider the issue of freeing up housing stock. A further paper would be prepared for Cabinet that would consider incentives for residents to free up mismatched properties. Councillor Dunne advised that the Council would always investigate different ways to improve services and sometimes improvements to services could have an impact on the budget even after the budgets had been set and agreed. The panel agreed that the delivery of affordable housing was a very important issue that required further discussion and scrutiny. It was agreed that the panel would need to consider the reports that were due to be presented to Cabinet in due course. The Chair thanked Councillor Dunne, Peter Matthew, Suzannah Taylor and Isabella Rossi for presenting the affordable housing delivery update. 8:25pm: Councillor Mir left the meeting. 20. Urgent Business Garage Review Councillor Collins advised that a huge piece of work had been undertaken to carry out the Garage Review by Hounslow Homes. He stated that the Council was responsible for the garages and how they were used. It was agreed by the panel that where there were garages that were empty and not in use that they should be brought back into use by the Council. In some cases the garages could be suitable to build small pockets of housing. Members acknowledged that the Council was also losing out on revenue in terms of rents for the garages. Councillor Collins requested that the Housing & Environment Scrutiny Panel resurrect the Garage Review. Action: The Chair to write to the Lead Member for Housing to request an update on the current status of the Garage Review. Following receipt of the update the scrutiny panel would

6 decide on the next steps. Adapted Properties Councillor Collins expressed concern about the allocations policy on adapted properties. He advised that in several cases able-bodied people had been allocated adapted properties before people that were waiting specifically for an adapted property due to a disability. 8:40pm: Cllr Mir re-joined the meeting. The Chair agreed that this was a complex issue and suggested that the scrutiny panel could request to see the policy on adapted properties. Action: The Chair of the Housing and Environment Scrutiny Panel to write to the Lead Member for Housing to request the policy and to get further information about how properties for people with disabilities were allocated properties and why able-bodied people were being allocated adapted properties. St Catherine s House The Housing and Environment Scrutiny Panel requested more information about what the St Catherine s House site was being used for and by whom. Work Plan Ian Duke, Head of Scrutiny, advised the panel that the items that remained on the work plan for discussion were an update on the Serco parking contract and a briefing on CPZs within the Borough. Members agreed to proceed with discussions on the two remaining items on the work plan at the next meeting. 21. Date of next meeting - Tuesday 22 March 2016 The date of the next meeting was noted. The meeting finished at 8:59 pm. The minute taker at this meeting was Chaspal Sandhu