Agenda, decisions and minutes

1.1  No apologies were received, but it was noted that Cllr Williams would join the meeting late.

Members are invited to consider the guidance which accompanies this agenda and make declarations of interest as appropriate.

2.1  During agenda item 15, Schedule of Local Authority School Governor Appointments, all members of the Cabinet confirmed their associations with the nominated individual.

The Chair will consider the admission of any late items of Urgent Unrestricted Business which will be considered under the agenda item where they appear.

3.1    There was no urgent business for consideration.

On occasions part of the Cabinet meeting will be held in private and will not be open to the public if an item is being considered that is likely to lead to the disclosure of exempt or confidential information. In accordance with the Local Authorities (Executive Arrangements) (Meetings and Access to Information) (England) Regulations 2012 (the “Regulations”), members of the public can make representations about why that part of the meeting should be open to the public.

This agenda contains exempt items as set out at the Exclusion of the Press and Public agenda item.  No representations with regard to these have been received.

This is the formal 5 clear day notice under the Regulations to confirm that this Cabinet meeting will be partly held in private for the reasons set out in this Agenda.

4.1    No representations were received.

5.1  To the Cabinet Member for  Climate Change, Environment and Transport, from Nick de Bunsen

  With the Council’s own July traffic monitoring data for Lordship Park showing almost 1000 vehicles a day driven above the ACPO limit and some in excess of 120mph, how many killed and seriously injured will it take for the Council to take action on dangerous speeding on this residential road?

5.2  To the Cabinet Member for  Climate Change, Environment and Transport, from Joanna Carr

  With traffic volumes on Lordship Park now materially higher than before the Stoke Newington LTN was introduced – from the Council’s July data – when is the Council going to follow through on its plans to engage with residents and implement plans to reduce and calm traffic on Lordship Park?

5.1  To the Cabinet Member for Climate Change, Environment and Transport, from Nick de Bunsen

With the Council’s own July traffic monitoring data for Lordship Park showing almost 1000 vehicles a day driven above the ACPO limit and some in excess of 120mph, how many killed and seriously injured will it take for the Council to take action on dangerous speeding on this residential road?

5.2  In response Cllr Mete Coban, Cabinet Member for Climate Change, Environment and Transport, agreed with the observations relating to speeding and confirmed that the Council was committed to addressing issues of dangerous speeding on residential roads, including Lordship Park.  Cllr Coban also confirmed the upcoming meeting that the Council had arranged for local residents to discuss this issue further, and that the Council would be liaising with the Metropolitan Police to ensure enforcement.

5.3  To the Cabinet Member for Climate Change, Environment and Transport, from Joanna Carr

With traffic volumes on Lordship Park now materially higher than before the Stoke Newington LTN was introduced – from the Council’s July data – when is the Council going to follow through on its plans to engage with residents and implement plans to reduce and calm traffic on Lordship Park?

5.4  Cllr Coban confirmed that as part of the evaluation of the Stoke Newington Church Street scheme the continuous traffic monitor on Lordship Park showed that traffic was down by 8%.  The Council was planning to present these figures to residents ahead of the scheduled meeting, and was looking forward to working with residents to co-produce design proposals.

5.5  In their supplementary question Joanna Carr asked about the proposed introduction of a right hand turn for north bound traffic on Green Lanes at the Manor House and Seven Sisters junction.  In response, Cllr Coban confirmed that the Council had been discussing this issue with Transport for London and the London Boroughs of Islington and Haringey.  The result of these conversations would be communicated to residents.

To confirm the minutes of the previous meeting of Cabinet held on 23 October 2023 as a correct record.

RESOLVED: That the minutes of the previous meeting of the Cabinet held on 23 October 2023 be agreed as a true and accurate record of proceedings.

To note the minutes of the Cabinet Procurement and Insourcing Committee (CPIC) held on 4 September 2023.

RESOLVED: That the minutes of the previous meeting of the Cabinet Procurement Insourcing Committee held on 4 September 2023 be noted.

8.1  Deputy Mayor Anntoinette Bramble, Cabinet Member for Education, Young People and Children’s Social Care, welcomed the newly elected leaders of the Hackney Youth Parliament (HYP) who were in attendance to represent their manifesto priorities to the Cabinet.  In their presentation the HYP highlighted their requests, including;

·  increased work experience opportunities and an annual careers event;

·  the opportunity to use spaces within the Town Hall;

·  the production of a financial literacy teaching resource pack;

·  a commitment to not reduce front line services for young people;

·  support for young people undertaking exams and improved SEND services;

8.2  Mayor Caroline Woodley thanked the HYP leaders and welcomed their presentation.  Cllr Bramble, Cllr Coban, Cllr Guy Nicholson, Deputy Mayor for Delivery, Inclusive Economy and Regeneration, and Cllr Susan Fajana-Thomas, Cabinet Member for Community Safety and Regulatory Services, all spoke in response to the priorities that were raised in the presentation and, along with the Mayor, confirmed their support to the work of the Hackney Youth Parliament.

Cllr Williams joined the meeting.

RESOLVED:

1.  That the CIL Revenue scheme summarised below and set out in section 11 be approved:

2.  That the s106 Capital scheme summarised below and set out in section 11 be approved:

3.  That the re-profiling of the budgets as set out in Appendix 1 and summarised below be approved:

4.  That the re-profiling of the budgets as set out in Appendix 1 and summarised below be approved:

5.  That the capital adjustments of the budgets as set out in Appendix 1 and summarised below be approved:

6.  That the Quarter 2 Capital Monitoring in section 13 be noted.

7.  To note the Council has secured additional grant funding (DELUCH LAHF 2) which will enable the budget increase of the Council’s Temporary Accommodation investment by £1.55m to £5.75m.

8.  To authorise the sale of the freehold of 234-238 Mare Street London E8 1HE, (as described for information purposes only in Appendix 2).

9.  To delegate authority to the Interim Group Director of Finance to agree all commercial terms of the transaction.

10.To delegate authority to the Acting Director of Legal, Democratic and Electoral Services to settle, agree and enter into all documentation necessary for this transaction.

REASONS FOR DECISION

The decisions required are necessary in order that the schemes within the Council’s approved Capital programme can be delivered and to approve the property proposals as set out in this report.

In most cases, resources have already been allocated to the schemes as part of the budget setting exercise but spending approval is required in order for the scheme to proceed. Where, however, resources have not previously been allocated, resource approval is requested in this report.

To facilitate financial management and control of the Council's finances.

Proposed Disposal of 234-238 Mare Street, London, E8 1HE: The property is in need of significant investment and to facilitate that the Council obtained a planning permission for the partial extension, partial demolition and partial refurbishment of the premises.

It is not financially feasible for the Council to undertake direct development, and such an approach would require resources that could be applied more productively to other schemes to be diverted to this and carries with it significant risks for little gain.

Similarly procuring a developer would be problematic for a development of this size and very likely a futile course of action, without lowering the risk profile to the Council significantly.

Due to the risk of squatting the property is costing the Council approximately £160,000 pa on security charges and  ...  view the full decision text for item 9.

9.1  Mayor Woodley reconfirmed the Council’s commitment to investing in Hackney to make the Borough a safer, fairer, and greener place for every child to grow up in, and invited Cllr Robert Chapman, Cabinet Member for Finance, Insourcing and Customer Service, to introduce the report.

9.2  Cllr Chapman highlighted the £123k of CIL and S106 funding that had been allocated to start the planning for the 2024 Hackney Carnival; the allocation of £500k for the development of the Woodberry Down Cultural Plan; and proposed disposal of 234-238 Mare Street.

9.3  Deputy Mayor Bramble and Cllr Nicholson both spoke in support of the report, and in particular focused on the anticipated benefits for the Woodberry Down neighbourhood from the proposed cultural investment.

9.4  Mayor Woodley, using her discretion as Chair of Cabinet, allowed a question without notice from an attending resident.

  To the Cabinet Member for Climate Change, Environment and Transport, from Joanna Carr

  Is the £4.3million budgeted for Pembury Circus being transferred to 2024/25 , or cut; what is the total resulting redesign budget (including Levelling Up allocation); and will this deliver a holistic redesign of the entire junction, or changes to Amhurst Road (from Pembury Circus-Mare Street) and Pembury Road only?

9.5  In response, Cllr Coban acknowledged the issues at Pembury Circus, confirmed that this is a priority location for the Council, and explained the historical issues related to funding, before confirming that a report on Hackney Central and Pembury Circus was scheduled to be on the agenda of the next Cabinet meeting.

9.6  In response to the supplementary question seeking confirmation of how much money would be allocated to the Pembury Circus redesign, Cllr Nicholson confirmed that c£9-10m of Levelling-Up funding would be allocated, but this would not be the total figure that would be invested into the area.

RESOLVED:

1.  That the CIL Revenue scheme summarised below and set out in section 11 be approved:

2.  That the s106 Capital scheme summarised below and set out in section 11 be approved:

3.  That the re-profiling of the budgets as set out in Appendix 1 and summarised below be approved:

4.  That the re-profiling of the budgets as set out in Appendix 1 and summarised below be approved:

5.  That the capital adjustments of the budgets as set out in Appendix 1 and summarised below be approved:

6.  That the Quarter 2 Capital Monitoring in section 13 be noted.

7.  To note the Council has secured additional grant funding (DELUCH LAHF 2) which will enable the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

RESOLVED:

1.  To approve the 2024-25 Local London Business Rates Pool recommendations set out in Appendix 1.

2.  To note the overall financial position of the Council as at September 2023 as set out in this report.

REASONS FOR DECISION

To facilitate financial management and control of the Council's finances and to approve the localised pool proposal as set out in Appendix 1.

DETAILS OF ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS CONSIDERED AND REJECTED

This budget monitoring report is primarily an update on the Council’s financial position. With regards to the Pooling proposal we either enter into it or we don’t, and if we don’t we will forgo a significant amount of income in 2024-25.

10.1  Mayor Woodley confirmed that both herself and Cllr Chapman had written to the Chancellor of the Exchequer ahead of the Government’s 2023 Autumn Statement, seeking a sustainable deal for local councils.  Although there was some relaxation around local housing allowances, there was no additional support for the Council’s service.

10.2  In his introduction to the report, Cllr Chapman reconfirmed that the Council had lost £150m in real term funding since 2010, which illustrated the financial issues that had to be tackled, and that there was a current overspend of over £9m forecast for 2023/2024, but that this was being managed by Officers.

RESOLVED:

1.  To approve the 2024-25 Local London Business Rates Pool recommendations set out in Appendix 1.

2.  To note the overall financial position of the Council as at September 2023 as set out in this report.

REASONS FOR DECISION

To facilitate financial management and control of the Council's finances and to approve the localised pool proposal as set out in Appendix 1.

DETAILS OF ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS CONSIDERED AND REJECTED

This budget monitoring report is primarily an update on the Council’s financial position. With regards to the Pooling proposal we either enter into it or we don’t, and if we don’t we will forgo a significant amount of income in 2024-25.

RESOLVED:

That Cabinet approves the Hackney Hate Crime Strategy 2023/26.

REASONS FOR DECISION

A Cabinet decision is required as the Hackney Hate Crime Strategy affects the entire borough, is a key decision  and is one of the main community safety priorities under the Community Safety Plan 2023/26.

DETAILS OF ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS CONSIDERED AND REJECTED

Not applicable.

11.1  Mayor Woodley stated that Hackney was proud to be a diverse, inclusive, and welcoming borough that would never allow its shared values to be eroded by prejudice and discrimination, noted that some of Hackney’s communities had faced increased anxiety in recent weeks about racism and hate, and confirmed that the Council found all forms of racism to be completely unacceptable.

11.2  Introducing the report, Cllr Fajana-Thomas explained that the prevention of hate crime in Hackney was one of the Council’s main priorities, and that there was a commitment to work with communities and partners to ensure that the Borough was no place for hate.  The strategy laid out how victims would be supported; how it would be easier to report hate crimes; the response to those reports; and how community trust would be built and strengthened.

RESOLVED:

That Cabinet approves the Hackney Hate Crime Strategy 2023/26.

REASONS FOR DECISION

A Cabinet decision is required as the Hackney Hate Crime Strategy affects the entire borough, is a key decision  and is one of the main community safety priorities under the Community Safety Plan 2023/26.

DETAILS OF ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS CONSIDERED AND REJECTED

Not applicable.

RESOLVED:

1.  Approve the Statutory Transfer Scheme for the transfer of Planning Powers from the London Legacy Development Corporation to Hackney (appendix 1)

2.  Note the supporting documents that have been established to support the Statutory Transfer Scheme including: Joint working protocol for Development Management and Enforcement (appendix 2), Protocol for transfer of LLDC CIL and S106 monies (appendix 3), a Data Transfer Scheme (appendix 4), and MOU for Staff (appendix 5)

3.  Delegate any subsequent amendments to the Statutory Transfer Scheme and supporting documents to the Group Director, Climate, Homes and Economy

REASONS FOR DECISION

A Cabinet decision is needed to approve the Statutory Transfer Scheme which sets out details of matters to be transferred such as planning records, live planning applications, enforcement cases and appeals and Section 106 legal agreements and Community Infrastructure Levy Funding.

DETAILS OF ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS CONSIDERED AND REJECTED

None. A Cabinet decision on the Statutory Transfer Scheme is required to support the transfer of planning powers from the London Legacy Development Corporation to Hackney

12.1  Mayor Woodley, highlighting the success of the legacy of the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games, welcomed the new opportunities that the proposed return of planning decision making powers back to Hackney would create.

12.2  Cllr Nicholson spoke of his pride in the achievements of the Council in Hackney Wick over the last 24 years, since the very first conversations about a possible bid for the 2012 Games took place.  The return of the planning powers and authority would ensure they would again be subject to local democracy, local decision making, and local control.

RESOLVED:

1.  Approve the Statutory Transfer Scheme for the transfer of Planning Powers from the London Legacy Development Corporation to Hackney (appendix 1)

2.  Note the supporting documents that have been established to support the Statutory Transfer Scheme including: Joint working protocol for Development Management and Enforcement (appendix 2), Protocol for transfer of LLDC CIL and S106 monies (appendix 3), a Data Transfer Scheme (appendix 4), and MOU for Staff (appendix 5)

3.  Delegate any subsequent amendments to the Statutory Transfer Scheme and supporting documents to the Group Director, Climate, Homes and Economy

REASONS FOR DECISION

A Cabinet decision is needed to approve the Statutory Transfer Scheme which sets out details of matters to be transferred such as planning records, live planning applications, enforcement cases and appeals and Section 106 legal agreements and Community Infrastructure Levy Funding.

DETAILS OF ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS CONSIDERED AND REJECTED

None. A Cabinet decision on the Statutory Transfer Scheme is required to support the transfer of planning powers from the London Legacy Development Corporation to Hackney

RESOLVED:

1.  Approve the adoption of the Underwood Street Conservation Area Appraisal and Management Plan (Appendix A)

2.  Approve the revised Underwood Street Conservation Area Boundary map (Appendix B)

REASONS FOR DECISION

This decision is required in order to ensure that the area’s heritage is recognised and a full and up to date conservation area appraisal clearly sets out the area’s qualities and identifies threats, weaknesses and opportunities for enhancement of the historic built environment.

This decision is required in order to ensure that guidance for development proposals and alterations to existing buildings is in place in the form of a management plan that provides ways to address weaknesses and manage change in the conservation area while preserving and enhancing its special interest and character.

This decision is required in order to ensure that the conservation area boundary accurately reflects the special architectural character and heritage context of the area and ensures that appropriate policy protections are in place.

DETAILS OF ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS CONSIDERED AND REJECTED

Consideration was given to including other sites close to the existing conservation area boundary. However, following a thorough site visit of sites bordering the boundary, no further areas meeting the tests for inclusion were identified.

The option of doing nothing was rejected as the buildings’ heritage significance is currently not recognised adequately. Moreover, there has been no appraisal or management plan since its designation. Historic England advice is that each Conservation Area be reviewed at least every five years.

13.1   Introducing both the Review of Underwood Street Conservation Area report and the Review of Hoxton Street Conservation Area report, at agenda item 14, Cllr Nicholson confirmed that both the Underwood Street and Hoxton Street conservation areas had undergone extensive reassessment, which had included studies and analysis of the relevant townscapes. The result of that work would ensure that new developments would have to conform to a quality of design that was equal and complimentary to the existing sense of place and design present in both locations. 

RESOLVED:

1.  Approve the adoption of the Underwood Street Conservation Area Appraisal and Management Plan (Appendix A)

2.  Approve the revised Underwood Street Conservation Area Boundary map (Appendix B)

REASONS FOR DECISION

This decision is required in order to ensure that the area’s heritage is recognised and a full and up to date conservation area appraisal clearly sets out the area’s qualities and identifies threats, weaknesses and opportunities for enhancement of the historic built environment.

This decision is required in order to ensure that guidance for development proposals and alterations to existing buildings is in place in the form of a management plan that provides ways to address weaknesses and manage change in the conservation area while preserving and enhancing its special interest and character.

This decision is required in order to ensure that the conservation area boundary accurately reflects the special architectural character and heritage context of the area and ensures that appropriate policy protections are in place.

DETAILS OF ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS CONSIDERED AND REJECTED

Consideration was given to including other sites close to the existing conservation area boundary. However, following a thorough site visit of sites bordering the boundary, no further areas meeting the tests for inclusion were identified.

The option of doing nothing was rejected as the buildings’ heritage significance is currently not recognised adequately. Moreover, there has been no appraisal or management plan since its designation. Historic England advice is that each Conservation Area be reviewed at least every five years.

RESOLVED:

1.  Approve the adoption of the Hoxton Street Conservation Area Appraisal and Management Plan (Appendix A)

2.  Approve the revised Hoxton Street Conservation Area Boundary map (Appendix B)

REASONS FOR DECISION

This decision is required in order to ensure that the area’s heritage is recognised and a full Conservation Area Appraisal is adopted. The Appraisal assesses the area’s qualities and identifies threats, weaknesses and opportunities for conservation and enhancement of the historic built environment.

This decision is required in order to ensure that guidance for development proposals and alterations to existing buildings is in place. This is provided in the Management Plan that sets out guidance to preserve and enhance the special interest and character of the area.

This decision is required in order to ensure that the conservation area boundary accurately reflects the special character and heritage context of the area and ensures that appropriate policy protections are in place.

DETAILS OF ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS CONSIDERED AND REJECTED

Consideration was given to including other sites close to the existing conservation area boundary. However, following a thorough site visit of sites bordering the boundary, no further areas meeting the tests for inclusion were identified.

The option of doing nothing was rejected as the heritage significance of the Hoxton Street Conservation Area is not adequately recognised at present. The lack of an Appraisal or Management Plan for the area was identified as a weakness in the 2017 Conservation Area Review programme, which this proposal seeks to remedy.

RESOLVED:

1.  Approve the adoption of the Hoxton Street Conservation Area Appraisal and Management Plan (Appendix A)

2.  Approve the revised Hoxton Street Conservation Area Boundary map (Appendix B)

REASONS FOR DECISION

This decision is required in order to ensure that the area’s heritage is recognised and a full Conservation Area Appraisal is adopted. The Appraisal assesses the area’s qualities and identifies threats, weaknesses and opportunities for conservation and enhancement of the historic built environment.

This decision is required in order to ensure that guidance for development proposals and alterations to existing buildings is in place. This is provided in the Management Plan that sets out guidance to preserve and enhance the special interest and character of the area.

This decision is required in order to ensure that the conservation area boundary accurately reflects the special character and heritage context of the area and ensures that appropriate policy protections are in place.

DETAILS OF ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS CONSIDERED AND REJECTED

Consideration was given to including other sites close to the existing conservation area boundary. However, following a thorough site visit of sites bordering the boundary, no further areas meeting the tests for inclusion were identified.

The option of doing nothing was rejected as the heritage significance of the Hoxton Street Conservation Area is not adequately recognised at present. The lack of an Appraisal or Management Plan for the area was identified as a weakness in the 2017 Conservation Area Review programme, which this proposal seeks to remedy.

RESOLVED:

Cabinet is recommended to approve the following nominations as set out below:

15.1  Deputy Mayor Bramble highlighted that in her recent capacity as Acting Executive Mayor, an extension had been granted to the nominee’s term of office to allow Cabinet the opportunity to formally consider the nomination at this meeting.

RESOLVED:

Cabinet is recommended to approve the following nominations as set out below:

Note from the Governance Team Leader:

Items 17 allow for the consideration of exempt information.

Proposed resolution:

That the press and public be excluded during discussion of the remaining items on the agenda, on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972.

RESOLVED: THAT the press and public be excluded from the proceedings of the Cabinet during consideration of Exempt item 17 on the agenda on the grounds that it is likely, in the view of the nature of the business to be transacted, that were members of the public to be present, there would be disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraphs 1 and 2 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972 as amended.

The Chair will consider the admission of any late items of Urgent Exempt Business

17.1  There were no new exempt items for consideration.