Agenda item

 

Question a) from Martin Rutherford to Councillor Ward, Executive Member for Housing and Development:

 

I would like to propose that Islington Council ban all residents allowing the use of Air BnB and similar companies in their properties, but particularly the council estates that have a security gate system.

 

We never know who are using these properties, and whilst the tenant or leaseholder holds responsibility for the strangers on our estates, we do not feel safe that these strangers have access to our security fobs which they can pass around as they like.

There have been numerous reports of people abusing this system to have parties and cause disruption to the residents in neighbouring properties.

 

Security and safety should be paramount in our homes, and with a ‘free for all’ attitude to allow anyone free reign on our secure estates, this is not the case.  Could Islington Council please say whether they would consider this ban?

 

Reply:

 

Thank you for your question. There are two aspects to this. The first is council tenants; tenants are not allowed to sublet their property, if it was found that a tenant was subletting their property, we would investigate and take immediate action. We recovered in the region of 70 properties last year as a result of subletting investigations. The second aspect is leaseholders; leaseholders own their homes and planning permission is required if they wish to let their property for more than 90 days in a calendar year. If they let their property without planning permission, then we are able to take enforcement action. That said, leaseholders are able to let their property so long as it is for fewer than 90 days in a calendar year. But, the council are taking this seriously, and we are establishing a registration scheme, so that any leaseholder who rents out their property on Air BnB is required to register with the council every year.

 

Supplementary question:

 

My question is not about subletting; it is specifically about Air BnB. It doesn’t matter if they are council tenants or leaseholders, they are coming into our estates using security fobs and keys, we don’t know who is in the property. If they are registered or not makes no difference; they let their rooms out and it causes problems on our estates.

 

Reply:

 

Letting your property on Air BnB is a form of subletting. I completely take your point and that is why we want to bring in the registration scheme. It will let us keep an eye on it, if they are operating unlawfully we will take enforcement action. You raise a very important point though; because these short term lets put up rents, and secondly it means there are less properties to let out to people who live in the borough. I think London should look at what Berlin and New York have done and place much heavier restrictions on this practice. The registration scheme is intended to keep a very close eye on the situation, including any nuisance or antisocial behaviour arising from it.

 

Question b) from Marianna Johnson to Councillor Ward, Executive Member for Housing and Development:

 

Can the Executive Member for Planning provide evidence that specifically demonstrates how the winning design for the development of the Finsbury Leisure Centre site has evolved since the public exhibition of 30th June to take into account and reflect all or any of the comments and concerns put forward by the Burnhill House residents and provide a full written rationale as to why they disagree with the points raised?

 

Reply:

 

Thank you for your question. The new Finsbury Centre is planned to deliver 120 new homes, 60 of them will be desperately needed council homes. The proposals include a new centre hosting all the existing leisure services in a brand new building, a new larger home for the City Road Medical Practice which will allow it to expand its patient lists, a community nursery to provide affordable child care for the community, and a new home for an expanded Bunhill Energy Centre, widening our ability to address fuel poverty in the area.

 

The Council is committed to listening to the concerns that are being raised by the local community, in particular, neighbours to the proposed new buildings, like yourself. Since we met with the residents of Burnhill House in late June 2017, there have been three further meetings to discuss the proposals with stakeholders, including a meeting in early October which was dedicated to hearing the concerns of Burnhill House residents. Burnhill House residents were also welcomed at a meeting of the Bunhill Ward Partnership last month.  Further meetings are planned to take place, and residents will be notified directly once dates for these meetings have been agreed.

 

The design process for the new ‘civic centre’ and the residential accommodation, including 60 brand new council homes, is still underway. Residents have asked for a meeting to discuss this and I have of course said yes. I look forward to the meeting.

 

Supplementary question:

 

I have contacted the Director of Property of our neighbours, the Diocese of London, and they have said they know nothing about this development. How can that be?

 

Reply:

 

That is very peculiar and I am surprised to hear that, I will look into that. There have been lots of concerns raised by residents in relation to the scheme, but instead of listing these now, come in and see me and we will have a chat.

 

Question c) from Benali Hamdache to Councillor Hull, Executive Member for Finance, Performance and Community Safety:

 

Residents on Whistler Street have raised concerns about crowding on Arsenal match days in the small passage onto Framfield Road. Residents have had to personally intervene to stop pushing and crushing, whilst stewards haven’t been around to intervene. What is the council doing to ensure fans and residents are safe?

 

Reply:

 

Thank you for your question. Detailed discussions take place between Arsenal, the police and the council before every game and an individual policing and stewarding plan is developed from them.  Council staff monitor the area around the Emirates to ensure that these plans are sufficient.  Whistler Street has not featured as an area where disorder is occurring, however we will ensure that residents’ concerns are fed into the planning meetings and that our staff carry out observations over the next home matches.  If residents are concerned about disorder at any time, they must call 999.  Police teams are in the area and will be able to assist. Meanwhile, let’s hope for a win and no trouble at the Emirates tonight. 

 

Supplementary question:

 

Can Councillor Hull provide details of the mitigating measures in place to deal with disorder, and if these have been implemented? 

 

Reply:

 

A detailed policing and stewarding plan is developed for every game, although as I said, Whistler Street hasn’t previously been featured. I’m happy to review the points you raise, and our staff will be observing levels of anti-social behaviour over the next few homes matches.

 

Question d) from Ernestas Jegorovas to Councillor Ward, Executive Member for Housing and Development:

What has the council done in the last 2 years to improve the environment and security of Islington housing estates?

 

Reply:

 

Thank you for your question. The Council has always been committed to making environmental and security improvements on our housing estates and we have always involved residents with that process. Ideas have been invited from resident groups and been shortlisted by a resident panel annually to the budgets we have made available.

 

Over the last two years the budgets for these improvements have been called the environmental improvement budget and the estate security budget. A combined annual budget of £750,000 has been made available by the council for this work from our landlord account. The improvements carried out have included new playgrounds, multi-use games areas, landscaping, planting, food growing initiatives, surfacing, fencing, estate lighting, door entry systems, CCTV systems, estate signage, notice boards and others.

 

Supplementary:

 

Thank you. The ward improvement budget is being scrapped; I am concerned that decisions on how these funds were spent were formerly made by a resident panel, but are now being made by councillors through ward partnership meetings. What are you going to do to make sure there is transparency and accountability in decision-making? And how are decisions going to be made when some ward partnerships have not met for a while?

 

Reply:

 

Residents will continue to be involved in how these funds are spent. Yes, the scheme is being changed, but by 2020 the core budget of the council will have been cut by 70%. We will continue to carry out improvements to estates through funds received through developer contributions, and residents will continue to have a say through ward partnerships.

 

Question e) from Sebastian Sandys to Councillor Hull, Executive Member for Finance, Performance and Community Safety:

 

What is the total sum, broken down by Executive Member responsibility, of projected revenue not collected in year to date ascribed to delayed decision making?

 

Reply:

 

Mr Sandys, thank you very much for your question.  You asked how much projected revenue has not been collected this year due to delayed decision making by Executive Members, and the answer is none.  The Council plans its budget, including projected income, as carefully as possible and we are clear that one of our responsibilities as members is to facilitate achieving the savings and income we have agreed in the budget by making the necessary decisions at the appropriate times. 

 

We have had to find £194 million in savings over the last six years and we are in the middle of the really difficult process of identifying a further £32 million needed to balance the budget next year.  If the world had been standing still for the last seven years, that would be difficult enough, but the demand for services is rising all the time.

 

We are very transparent about the budget pressures the council is facing and we published information about income which has not been achieved in our budget monitoring report last month.  The same report lists the compensatory savings we are making and gives details of many other budget pressures.  Income is just one element of the budget and the report gives a broad picture of the challenges we face; for example, we are spending an extra £3.7M this year to support vulnerable children and young adults, and that’s just one example of increased demand for services. 

   

The legislation requires us to balance the budget and we are making every effort to support the increasing numbers of vulnerable people in need of assistance and avoid cutting front line services.  As I am sure you can imagine, after six years of government cuts and rising demand for services, there are no easy savings left.  As a result, we are setting really challenging income targets for our services.  We realise and accept that many of these are difficult to achieve, but we will continue to be ambitious and we will continue to do all that we can to ensure that, despite the government cuts, we can provide essential services to all the borough’s residents.

 

Supplementary question:

 

Thank you. A recent budget monitoring item considered by the Policy and Performance Scrutiny Committee did describe an instance of delayed decision making. At the last Policy and Performance meeting it was requested that you meet with myself, Councillor Russell and members of the Green Party, so that we can feed in to your budget setting process. This would save a lot of time as we wouldn’t have to amend absolutely everything that you propose.

 

Reply:

 

If you are asking if we will consider the views of councillors raised through the budget scrutiny process, then of course the answer is yes.

 

Question f) from Charles Humphries to Councillor Ward, Executive Member for Housing and Development:

 

Islington Council is considering a planning application for the extension of the Golden Lane Estate, to include a new 14 storey residential tower block with a single staircase - only four inches wider than the one at Grenfell Tower. Given that single staircase tower blocks are already banned in most other countries, and UK building regulations will be under review, is it right to be making fire safety compromises on new buildings at this time?

 

As Mr Humphries was not present, the following written response was sent subsequent to the meeting:

 

Fire safety is an absolute priority for this Council. Fire safety and evacuation routes are an essential part of all planning applications. The Council also has on-going Fire Risk Assessments programmes for all of its properties to ensure that the fire safety measures are in good order.

 

A single staircase serving a 14 storey block of flats is compliant with Building Regulation standards (Regulation B1) providing the appropriate fire safety protections are in place for flats, common stair, and the fire brigade has access to the upper floors.

 

As the building includes a floor more than 30 metres from the ground, a sprinkler system will also be required to meet Building Regulations standards.

 

The Council will respond to any changes in Building Regulations approved by the Government. At present, the Government has not yet approved any changes but the Council is monitoring the situation very closely.

 

It is not for the regulatory authority to specify specific or additional measures that go beyond current standards as there is no legal mechanism to do so, even in anticipation of future changes to Building Regulations.

 

The local planning authority seeks input from the London Fire Brigade as part of the planning application process when it is assessing planning applications for all buildings, in particular taller buildings. In some instances a planning condition has been imposed to seek a fire safety evacuation strategy before works begin on the site.

 

The LFB has responded to this particular application to say they are satisfied, providing the building complies with Building Regulations (specifically Approved Document B5).

 

A Fire Safety Strategy File note was submitted by the applicant in June 2017 which stated:

o          Non-combustible insulation is to be used.

o          The single stair is to also utilise extensive compartmentation, balcony approaches and ventilation to the firefighting lobby and stair.

o          Inclusion of a fire fighting lift shaft.

o          Inclusion of Automatic Water Fire Suppression system.

 

This means the proposals set out a fire evacuation strategy complies with Building Regulations. If the application is approved, the condition would also be required to be applied to the school and nursery so they meet LFB requirements.

 

As there was time remaining of the thirty minutes allocated for public questions, the Mayor accepted questions from the floor:

 

Question from Rosalind Tyler to Councillor Ward, Executive Member for Housing and Development:

 

I would like to know why council tenants are being allowed to build extensions on their properties. Surely this affects the fabric of the property, and potentially devalues Islington Council’s assets.

 

Reply:

 

Thanks for your question. I am somewhat perplexed by your question; it would be very rare for us to authorise a council tenant to extend their home. Anybody can apply for planning permission, but whether or not we would grant permission as the landlord is another question. It would be very usual. I am concerned by this and will be looking into it. If it is found that works have been carried out without the necessary permissions, then we will take action.

 

Question from a member of the public to Councillor Ward, Executive Member for Housing and Development:

 

We have submitted a petition with over 2,000 signatures asking to keep Sotheby Mews open. Will the council hold a debate on this topic?

 

Reply:

 

Thank you for your question. Myself and Councillor Burgess came to Sotheby Mews last week and met a number of service users. We want to make sure that the services offered at Sotheby Mews are protected; I know there are concerns that not all of the services will be accommodated at the new centre, so we want to keep on working with you on that.

 

The Mayor advised that a debate would be held as the petition had received the requisite number of signatures.

 

Question from Tim Sykes to Councillor Ward, Executive Member for Housing and Development:

 

Why is Norman Street not referenced on documentation related to the redevelopment of the Finsbury Leisure Centre?

 

Reply:

 

I am very sorry; I will take this up with the Planning team.

 

Question from a member of the public to Councillor Hull, Executive Member for Finance, Performance and Community Safety:

 

Now that the Sainsbury’s planning application on Blackstock Road has been rejected, what is next for the site?

 

Reply:

 

We welcome the decision of the Planning Inspector. In terms of what’s next, that’s up to the building owner. If they need to apply for planning permission, then residents will be able to have their say.

 

Question from a member of the public to Councillor Ward, Executive Member for Housing and Development:

 

Can Councillor Ward provide an update on the future of the Holloway Prison site?

 

Reply:

 

I want to thank all the residents of this borough who have campaigned alongside the council for the Holloway Prison site to have as much genuinely affordable housing as possible. We have had a range of responses from local people, but the vast majority want as much genuinely affordable social housing as possible. That is something this borough should be very proud of. We have asked the Ministry of Justice for 50% genuinely affordable housing; 70% of that should be for social rent, the remaining 30% should be some sort of intermediate housing option. We also want community facilities, including a women’s centre on site. There is no justice without housing justice, and I hope the Ministry takes account of that.