Agenda and minutes

In accordance with Minute No. 109 of 24^th November, 2008, the Director of Housing and Neighbourhood Services reported on the consultation process undertaken in relation to developing Selective Licensing for private rented properties.

Consultation in Eastwood Village had consisted of survey questionnaires sent to every home, business and landlord in the area or having interest in the area.  Officers from the Community Protection Unit, Neighbourhood Investment Team and Area Assembly had visited properties to support the consultation, provide information and ensure propriety.

Out of 900, 180 completed questionnaires were returned from tenants and residents, 8 from businesses and 7 from landlords and managing agents.  This was a disappointing return given the intensity of staff commitment.  The return for tenants and residents was 73.3% owner occupiers, Council and RSL tenants who were exempt from the provisions of Selective Licensing.  Consequently, long term residents who expected to remain in the Village in the medium to long term (80%) were over represented.  Unfortunately, this sample was unrepresentative of the overall tenure of the Village which had high levels of private rented properties with approximately 15% Council/RSL stock.  In general, Selective Licensing was supported by all respondents not directly affected by it and opposed by those who were, especially if cost was anticipated.  The make up of the returned sample made it unlikely to be acceptable to the Secretary of State as adequate consultation.

Though many of the issues raised within Eastwood Village were similar to those identified when Selective Licensing was proposed as a potential solution, evidence showed that the extent and severity had changed.  The changing issues within the Village required constant re-appraisal of available multi-agency interventions.

The proposed consultation on the Selective Licensing area in Dinnington had been postponed due to the experience gained at Eastwood and uncertainty regarding Neighbourhood Renewal plans for redeveloping.

To date, only 11 areas of Selective Licensing had been authorised with authorities reporting that the process was time consuming and there was a very slow “turnround time” with the Secretary of State.  The Government had launched a further period of consultation to address the concerns regarding the process.

Resolved:-  (1)  That Selective Licensing be not approved as an appropriate intervention for Eastwood Village at this time.

(2)  That continued focussed activity of partners in the Eastwood Village area be supported, which had proven to deliver tangible improvements for residents over the last year.

(3)  That the possibility of applying for consent to adopt Selective Licensing for specified areas of private rented properties in the Borough be kept under review.  Any application would be dependent upon developing sufficient, relevant, multi-agency intelligence to successfully support such an application to the appropriate national authority (Secretary of State).

Resolved:-  That, under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in those paragraphs indicated below of Part I of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972.

Resolved:-  That, under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in those paragraphs indicated below of Part I of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972.

(Exempt under Paragraph 3 of the Act – (information relating to the financial or business affairs of any person (including the Council))

Further to Minute No. 23(2) of 16^th June, 2008, the Director of Housing and Neighbourhood Services reported on the progress made with the strategic acquisition and demolition of acquired properties on Oldgate Lane, Thrybergh.

Approval was sought to rehouse the occupant of No. 78 Oldgate Lane, the strategic acquisition of the identified remaining property interests in the redevelopment area, approval of the demolition contract tender and the demolition of the properties identified in the report to support resident redevelopment.

Resolved:-  (1)  That the next stage of the demolition programme, as set out in the report submitted, be approved.

(2)  That the tender submitted by TKL Earthworks Ltd., in the sum of £115,480.00, together with associated costs in the region of £22,500.00, to deliver the first phase of demolition be approved.

(3)  That rehousing priority be granted to the tenant of No. 78 Oldgate Lane, Thrybergh, to facilitate timely relocation.

(4)  That, subject to further negotiation with regard to the value of the premises, the strategic acquisition and demolition of the convenience store premises at Nos. 130/132 Oldgate Lane and the fish and chip shop at Nos. 134/136 Oldgate Lane, Thrybergh, be approved.

(Exempt under Paragraph 3 of the Act - information relating to the financial/business affairs of any person (including the Council))

(Exempt under Paragraph 2 of the Act – information which is likely to reveal the identity of an individual)

The Director of Housing and Neighbourhood Services reported receipt by 2010 Rotherham Ltd. of 2 petitions from residents in Treeton regarding the behaviour of a tenant.  The petitioners alleged that the tenant in question displayed anti-social and criminal behaviour and requested that action be taken to remove him from the property.

The Neighbourhood Champion had interviewed all petitioners and the alleged perpetrator where it was found that some of the allegations could not be evidenced.  Liaison had also taken place with the Police and the Safer Neighbourhood Team.

A referral had been made to 2010 Rotherham Ltd.’s Tenancy Support Officer who was currently supporting the tenant.

Letters had been sent to the petitioners outlining their complaints, informing them that 2010 had no evidence to support their allegations and that no action, therefore, could be taken.  However, steps were now being taken to support the tenant.

Resolved:-  That the action taken by 2010 Rotherham Ltd. and other organisations involved be noted.

(Exempt under Paragraph 2 of the Act - information likely to reveal the identity of an individual)

(Exempt under Paragraph 3 of the Act – (information relating to the financial or business affairs of any person (including the Council))

The Director of Housing and Neighbourhood Services submitted an update on the progress being made on the Wood Street Street/School Street site at Thrybergh which was the successful scheme from a Round 1 bid to build new Council housing.

The report also set out the progress being made to submit a bid to build more new Council housing in Rotherham under Round 2, the final date for submissions for which was 30^th October.  It was proposed to put forward 10 sites owned by the Council as part of the bid to deliver 127 new homes across the Borough.

Discussion ensued on the report including the priority ranking of sites and the Housing Revenue Account.

It was noted that the Cabinet was to consider the report at its meeting on 4^th November, 2009.

Resolved:-  (1)  That the progress made on building new Council housing be noted.

(2)  That expenditure on fees and charges be approved, at risk, up to a value of £35,000.

(3)  That the selection of the 10 sites to be released for Council housing building at nil value be supported.

(4)  That the bid application to the HCA for the 10 sites for grant funding estimated at £8.3M be approved.

(5)  That it be noted that the prudential borrowing required by the Council would need to be subsidised by the Housing Revenue Account until year 16.

(Exempt under Paragraph 3 of the Act - information relating to the financial/business affairs of any person (including the Council))

(Exempt under Paragraph 2 of the Act – information which is likely to reveal the identity of an individual)

Further to the joint meeting held on 22^nd July with the Cabinet Member for Streetpride (Minute No. 39 refers), and the Complaints Panel held on 17^th June, 2009, it was noted that the Panel had reconvened to consider the issue of compensation to the complainant.

The Panel had recommended that compensation be awarded to the complainant in the sum of £2,771.00, to be met from the Environment and Development Services and Neighbourhoods and Adult Services’ budgets.

Resolved:-  That the report be noted and the compensation approved.

(Exempt under Paragraph 2 of the Act - information likely to reveal the identity of an individual)