Agenda and minutes

Cabinet - Monday 11 July 2016 7.00 pm

Venue: Karibu Education Centre, 7 Gresham Road, London, SW9 7PH

Contact: David Rose, Democratic Services Officer, Tel: 020 7926 1037 Email: drose@lambeth.gov.uk 

Items
No. Item

1.

Declarations of Pecuniary Interest

Under Cabinet Rule 1.5.2, where any Cabinet Member has a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest (as defined in the Members’ Code of Conduct (para. 4)) in any matter to be considered at a meeting of the Council, a committee, sub-committee or joint committee, they must withdraw from the meeting room during the whole of the consideration of that matter and must not participate in any vote on that matter unless a dispensation has been obtained from the Monitoring Officer.

Minutes:

There were none.

2.

Minutes of Previous Meeting pdf icon PDF 177 KB

To agree the minutes of the last meeting held on 6 June 2016.

Minutes:

RESOLVED: That the minutes of the previous meeting held on 6th June 2016 be approved and signed by the Chair as a correct record of the proceedings.

4.

Lambeth’s Older People’s Housing Programme-2016 Review pdf icon PDF 294 KB

    Report 263/16-17

     

    Key decision

    All Wards

     

    Strategic Director, Neighbourhoods and Growth: Sue Foster; and, Strategic Director; and, Children Adults and Health: Helen Charlesworth May

    Cabinet Member for Adults’ Social Care: Councillor Jackie Meldrum

     

    Contact: David Worrall, Lead Commissioner, Neighbourhoods and Growth 020 7926 9978, dworrall@lambeth,gov.uk

     

     

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    The report was introduced by the Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care, Councillor Jackie Meldrum, the Lead Commissioner and Strategic Director for Adults and Health, who highlighted that:

    • Lambeth was a relatively young borough with the older population likely to increase by 25% in the next 10 years.
    • The main goal of the Older People’s Housing Programme was to increase the choice and quality of housing for older people throughout the borough, and the review was undertaken closely with those affected.
    • The work carried out to date represented a positive outcome for users as many of the homes in sheltered housing schemes have been updated.
    • Cheviot Gardens, a new extra care housing scheme developed in partnership with Notting Hill Housing was opened in the last few weeks.
    • Where schemes were being closed, officers ensured that friends and groups of tenants could move together if they wish.  Consideration was given to the details that our older residents consider to be important.
    • The newly refurbished communal areas have desktop computers and it was recognised some additional support and training for the residents was needed in this area.

     

    Paul Minyo, Vice Chair of the Sheltered Tenants’ forum and Queenswood Court tenant informed the meeting that:

    • The residents were very grateful for the investment made by the Council to improve their homes over the last 2 years and was pleased with the cooperative approach of the review.
    • This approach of improving schemes where possible was welcomed as many older residents were more attached to their properties.
    • There was clear evidence that the Council listened to the residents which resulted in some of the schemes remaining open.
    • Overall those affected were pleased with the approach and the outcome of the review.

     

    The Cabinet Member for Healthier and Stronger Communities, Councillor Jim Dickson, advised the meeting that he was pleased with the way the review was carried out. He noted that a huge amount of work on the specifications and focusing on the best outcomes were the main considerations while working on this review. He further noted some learning points, mainly that people affected should have been informed in a more timely manner whether their scheme was to be closed or not.

     

    Cabinet Members made the following comments:

    • The work carried out showed that the Council was responsive to the needs of its residents and that the older persons programme could be tailored to specific requirements if needed.
    • The improvements to communal areas was very positive and encouraged more of a community feel.
    • The Council needed to explore how the Digibuddies scheme could help train sheltered housing residents in use of the computers provided.

     

    The Leader of the Council, Councillor Lib Peck, was pleased with the work on the review and expressed her appreciation to officers and those affected for their positive contributions.

     

    RESOLVED:

     

    1) That the proposed update to the Lambeth Older People’s Housing Programme, including the additional funding requirement be approved.

     

    2) That the sheltered housing schemes at 269 Leigham Court Road  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

3.

Investing in better neighbourhoods and building the homes we need to house the people of Lambeth – Fenwick Estate pdf icon PDF 513 KB

    Report 260/16-17

     

    Key decision

    Larkhall Ward

     

    Strategic Director for Neighbourhoods and Growth: Sue Foster

    Cabinet Member for Housing: Councillor Matthew Bennett

     

    Contact: Neil Vokes, Assistant Director, Housing Regeneration, 020 7926 3068,

    NVokes@lambeth.gov.uk

     

     

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    The report was introduced by the Cabinet Member for Housing, Councillor Matthew Bennett, who noted that:

    ·         This programme was part of a significant investment in housing across the borough and the Administration were tackling the housing crisis head on despite cuts and reduced funding from central government.

    ·         This particular programme would see an increase of between 50 and 100 social housing properties (in addition to the 55 homes to be delivered in Phase 1 by Transport for London (TfL)), that all existing tenants would be guaranteed a property on the re-developed estate, and would provide options to allow leaseholders to remain on the estate.

    ·         It was recognised that there would be disruption and heightened anxiety due to the re-development but the Council were committed to supporting those affected and ensuring the programme was delivered.

     

    The Ward Councillors, Andy Wilson, Tina Valcarcel and Marsha de Cordova addressed Cabinet and advised of the following:

    ·         There have been a number of events and workshops to raise awareness and share information about the programme.

    ·         There was a strong Resident Engagement Panel, which worked well and was chaired by a local resident.

    ·         They were pleased to see the strong levels of engagement as set out in paragraph 1.18 of the report (page 17).

    ·         The same level on engagement needed to be retained going forward and specific plans needed to be made for the underground car park which needed to be fed back to residents and Councillors.

    ·         They were pleased to see that the Council had listened in regard to the odd-numbered properties along Willington Road and removed these from the scheme.

     

    The Leader of the Council, Councillor Lib Peck, asked for one resident at the meeting to address Cabinet on behalf of those in attendance, even though they had not registered in advance. The resident representative advised that:

    ·         There was uncertainty on the change in tenancy, rents, service charges and loss of right to buy.

    ·         It was unclear what the financial implications were for leaseholders and what support would be available to assist, such as with re-mortgage applications.

    ·         The ward Councillors did not represent the entire estate and they only engaged with a minority.

    ·         The Council had previously said they would invest in the estate through new kitchens and bathrooms which was not carried out.

    ·         Any questions raised by leaseholders such as service charge levels were deferred, and so it was unclear how a decision could be made without clear evidence or information.

     

    The Programme Director for Capital Programmes and the Director of Strategy and Commissioning Housing and Communities responded to some of the points raised and advised that:

    ·         The equalities impact assessment would be built into the work programme going forward.

    ·         That a small change to the Equalities Impact assessment was suggested by the Equalities Impact Assessment Panel (i.e. remove sentence “The outcome of the proposals would positively benefit these households” on page 254 of the agenda pack).

    ·         More consultation on the key guarantees would be undertaken.

    ·         They acknowledged that more work needed  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.

5.

Events Strategy 2015-18 pdf icon PDF 374 KB

    Report 153/15-16

     

    Key decision

    All Wards

     

    Chief Executive: Sean Harriss

    Cabinet Member for Regeneration, Business and Culture: Councillor Jack Hopkins

     

    Contact: Julian Ellerby, Director Policy & Communication. 0207 926 1273, JEllerby@lambeth.gov.uk; and, Lee Fiorentino, Events & Film Services. 0207 926 7088, LFiorentino@lambeth.gov.uk

     

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Guillotine

     

    During the discussion of this item, the guillotine fell at 9.00pm.

     

    MOVED by the Chair, and:

     

    RESOLVED: That in accordance with Council and Committee Procedures  9.5 – 9.7 set out in the constitution, the meeting continue for a further period of up to half an hour.

     

     

    The report was introduced by the Cabinet Member for Regeneration, Business and Culture, Councillor Jack Hopkins, who noted that:

    • A key principle of the strategy was to increase charges to commercial operators and reinvest funds into host parks. Local groups would continue to receive discounted rates for the use of parks.
    • The Parks Investment Levy (PIL) had been increased, replacing the Environmental Impact Levy.
    • The free Lambeth Country Show was funded directly by the income generated from events held in Lambeth parks.
    • The number of major events held in larger parks would be limited.
    • The definition of a ‘major event’ was related to the number of people relative to the capacity of a given park.
    • The proposed rise in noise levels from 70dB to 75dB would be a maximum potential decibel level.
    • The strategy would help to ensure that events and park venues were appropriately suited.
    • The strategy would make event organisers more accountable to the Council and to community groups. Ward Councillors and park management committees would be involved at the early stages of the event planning process and officers would work alongside commercial operators to address any community concerns.
    • The strategy would continue to develop to ensure that community concerns could be registered and addressed throughout the process. The Council would work collaboratively with local residents to solidify appropriate governance processes allowing for commercial operators to be held to account.

     

    Marcus Hope, Chair of the Friends of Clapham Common (FCC), addressed the committee and explained that:

    ·         The FCC membership agreed that it would be acceptable to hold eight major events on Clapham Common per year.

    ·         The length of occupation of the events site was a serious concern for local residents. Event organisers should be charged more for set-up and take-down days, and required to repair any damage.

    ·         Members of the FCC would prefer small, locally driven, family-oriented events on the site.

    ·         Lambeth Council needed to provide better consultation and greater transparency on financial returns. An alternative (bidding) model should also be considered.

    ·         The FCC welcomed new arrangements for the discussion of events at an early stage in the planning process.

    ·         The Council could not afford to continue hosting the free Lambeth Country Show.

    ·         Lambeth should seek permission from the Secretary of State before approving the erection of temporary structures on metropolitan commons.

     

    Simon Millson, Chair of the Clapham Common Management Advisory Committee (CCMAC), addressed the committee and explained that:

    ·         The report made no reference to the legal distinction between parks and commons. Commons were regulated by the Commons Act which enshrined that common land was unenclosed. Events caused the enclosure of parts of Clapham Common.

    ·         The Commons Act limited the amount of commercial activity that could take place on Clapham  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

6.

Local Application Requirements Review pdf icon PDF 217 KB

7.

Article 4 Directions for change of use from office to residential pdf icon PDF 166 KB

    Report 259/16-17

     

    Key decision

    Clapham Town / Coldharbour / Ferndale / Gipsy Hill / Larkhall / Oval / Prince’s / Vassall Wards

     

    Strategic Director Neighbourhoods and Growth: Sue Foster

    Cabinet Member for Regeneration, Business and Culture: Councillor Jack Hopkins

     

    Contact: Catherine Carpenter, Interim Planning Policy Manager, Neighbourhoods and Growth, 020 7926 1251, ccarpenter@lambeth.gov.uk

     

     

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    RESOLVED:

     

    1)    That the Council as Local Planning Authority make a non-immediate Article 4 direction with an intended coming into force date of 15 September 2017 to remove permitted development rights for change of use from office (use class B1(a)) to residential (use class C3), to cover Brixton town centre, parts of Clapham and ten Key Industrial and Business Areas (whole or part), in the terms set out in Appendix 1.

     

    2)    That Cabinet delegates to the Programme Director of Planning, Transport & Development the preparation of the Article 4 direction and instructs officers to carry out all necessary consequential arrangements to give effect to the terms of Recommendation 1 which shall include publishing the making of the direction, notifying affected property owners/occupiers and the Secretary of State and seeking representations on the making of the direction.

8.

Performance Q4 pdf icon PDF 383 KB