Issue - decisions

Matter for Decision: To consider the Affordable Housing Development Programme - Equalities Impact

 

Decision of the Executive Councillor for Housing

 

The Executive Councillor resolved

 

        i.            To agree the Equalities Impact Assessment for the Affordable Housing Development Programme.

 

      ii.            To bring an EQIA on each new scheme considered for redevelopment to Community Services Scrutiny Committee, prior to a final decision being made to go ahead

 

    iii.            To hold a public meeting with residents at each new scheme proposed for redevelopment, at least 1 month prior to the Scrutiny Committee, and to incorporate views into the final report.

 

   iv.            To endorse the composition of the steering group, as set out in paragraph 3.10 of the committee report to include additional membership to that agreed by Council in October 2012.

 

Reason for the Decision:

 

As per the officer report

 

Any alternative options considered and rejected:

 

N/A

 

Scrutiny Considerations:

 

The committee received a report from the Director of Customer and Community Services.

 

The committee made the following comments on the report.

 

i.        It was suggested that the schemes with the most vulnerable residents should not be progressed at the beginning of the program.

 

ii.      The public meetings should provide opportunity to influence the outcome, rather than just supplying information.

 

 

iii.    The report was welcomed and the importance of the steering group to provide human diligence of proposals at the earliest possible stage.

 

iv.     The successful implementation of the 8-year refurbishment programme for sheltered housing was highlighted as good practice.

 

 

v.       It was suggested that in future every effort should be taken to ensure that residents receive all consultation letters, even if they did not agree with the principle or specific proposals and that sufficient time was allowed to respond to the points in the letters. It was also suggested that the letters need to be very clearly written.

 

vi.     Whilst the EQIA was welcomed it was suggested that there should be a detailed assessment of individual residents needs prepared on a house by house basis. The Director of Customer and Community Services confirmed that detailed schedules were prepared as part of the process but didn’t form part of the EQIA.

 

 

vii.   Further information was on the weight assigned to the schooling of children. The Director of Customer and Community Services explained that every effort was made to rehouse appropriately, and that a number of tools were available to the Council to ensure that appropriate housing was found.

 

viii. The difficulty of consulting at the right time was acknowledged in order to give enough notice, but without causing undue concern. It was also highlighted that many elderly and vulnerable residents may have difficulties managing post, and may require additional assistance, and that the absence of a response should not be taken as acknowledgement of receipt or acceptance.

 

ix.     The limitations of the EQIA process were highlighted in providing an assessment of individual needs, as they were focussed differently.

 

x.       The leaseholder representative welcomed the opportunity to attend the consultation events and participated. The concern and distress of residents was highlighted, but that this needed to be balanced against redeveloping the estate.

 

xi.     The importance of the steering group in providing an informal setting for residents to discuss concerns was highlighted.

 

xii.   It was suggested that the EQIA should form the basis of a set of principles for future developments.

 

The committee endorsed the recommendation by 4 votes to 0.

 

The Executive Councillor approved the recommendations.

 

Conflicts of interest declared by the Executive Councillor (and any dispensation granted):

 

N/A