Agenda item

The Boards inquiry for 2015/16 municipal year focused on Estate Standards. The report from Tenant Scrutiny Board was agreed to be implemented by Housing Leeds with the Board requesting an update on progress in six months time. This report gives Board members the opportunity to see progress and raise any questions they may have.

The Chair introduced David Longthorpe, Head of Housing Management to go through the progress made by Housing Leeds on recommendations made for the Estate Management inquiry.

 

DL went through the current position on the recommendations and the Board raised various issues as well as giving a position status score.

 

Recommendation 1

The Chair asked if there are currently any Housing Officer shortages? DL noted there are around nine vacancies but these are currently in the process of being recruited to and it is hoped they will be in post around Christmas/New Year time.

 

SB asked what training is given to officers coming into post. DL responded by saying new staff have a full week induction, but clearly this cannot cover everything that could occur in their role. Ongoing training is therefore offered on new procedures and policies which come up. DL gave an example that when the new estate management procedure came in training was given on this to all officers.

 

The Chair noted that often Housing Officers are moved on before they get to know the estates and the tenants – and asked if this is something the department does routinely.  DL responded saying that Housing Leeds don’t set a time limit on how long an officer can remain on an estate, some officers remaining in the same area for many years, but acknowledged that officers leave the Council, are promoted or are moved because of other circumstances. DL also noted that there was recently a situation where there were a number of vacancies in South Leeds and so officers were moved over from other areas to ensure a more even staff resource spread.

 

RESOLVED The Board voted unanimously to agree to position status 2 – Achieved.

 

Recommendation 2

DL advised that standard posters are being used by officers and the walkabouts are advertised on social media. Letters are also sent to interested parties about future walkabouts with reminders a week before. Ward Members and TARAs should also be sent a report of actions even if didn’t attend.

 

DL noted other services do struggle to send staff to all walkabouts Housing Leeds carries out but they will attend walkabouts where a specific issue has been identified to provide support to Housing Officers.

 

The Chair noted that the Board have carried out two follow up walkabouts in September / October to see the new process in action. The Chair raised concerns about work which is being done but the Housing Officer isn’t notified. DL responded by saying given the volume of work this may be difficult to give feedback but he would ask if there was an easy mechanism by which jobs when completed could be reported back on. CG asked why Highway jobs done on a computer system,  DL explained that they used a system which isn’t compatible with the Housing IT system used.

 

JW reported that she felt there had been major improvements with the walkabout process since the harmonisation.

 

RESOLVED The Board voted unanimously to agree to position status 2 – Achieved.

 

Recommendation 3

It was explained that some re-landscaping has been carried out to allow easier access for wheelie bin collections. Where this is not possible then we have been looking at alternative ways. On green recycling bin collection, some areas where recycling rates were very poor or were being contaminated with waste that could not be recycled had the green bins removed and residents had to opt back in to green bin collections.

 

A question was asked if high rise bins are an issue. DL noted this can be an issue due to chutes and people putting things down that are too big which causes blockages which then has a knock on effect for everyone else. CG noted on a recent visit to a high rise block that there were issues with the bins being open and the risk of rats.

 

RESOLVED The Board voted by a majority to give this recommendation a status of 4 – Not fully implemented (Progress made acceptable, continue monitoring)

 

RESOLVED A report of the situation was requested and to be brought back in February.

 

Recommendation 4 (Council provide more bins on estates)

DL gave an update on progress and the Board voted on the position status of this recommendation.

 

RESOLVED The Board voted unanimously to agree to position status 2 – Achieved.

 

Recommendation 4 (Timely removal of full glass banks)

DL gave an update on progress that this is something which waste are always looking at to ensure this is carried out. The Board then voted on the position status of this recommendation.

 

RESOLVED The Board voted unanimously to agree to position status 2 – Achieved.

 

Recommendation 4 (Introduce more clean up days)

DL gave an update on progress to this recommendation. The Chair asked how tenants know these are going on. It was responded that TARAs are notified and the information is also distributed on social media.

 

RESOLVED The Board voted unanimously to agree to position status 2 – Achieved.

 

Recommendation 4 (Education campaign)

DL noted that we continue to do this in a variety of ways with partners. All Housing Officers are trained by waste management to help them in their role.

 

RESOLVED The Board voted unanimously to agree to position status 2 – Achieved.

 

Recommendation 5

DL noted this recommendation and explained it does take time for Housing Officers to work through the processes associated with messy gardens and it is not always immediately obvious anything is being done, however action will be ongoing.

 

RESOLVED The Board voted unanimously to agree to position status 2 – Achieved.

 

Recommendation 6

DL explained there is a slight delay with this but it is currently being piloted in the Armley area. When we have assessed that pilot and its effectiveness, Housing Leeds will decide whether to roll this out across the city.

 

RESOLVED The Board voted unanimously to agree to position status 2 – Achieved.

 

Recommendation 7

DL explained a number of toolbanks have been set up historically and haven’t been sustainable for a number of reasons.

 

The Love Your Garden project in Middleton have looked to flip this idea on its head, as they had experience of it not working in the past. Part of the problem is people not having transport so it is difficult to take and return equipment.  As such they now have volunteers who take equipment to peoples gardens and do this work for them, or do the work to a point in which they can do it themselves in future.

 

They still need a van and volunteers so these are challenges to the project. They have one keen volunteer who is happy to do a lot of the work at the one in Middleton. DL noted that volunteers are often enthusiastic in summer but not so much in winter.

 

Current feedback on the toolbank has been positive. They have looked to do gardens for people who may have mental health problems as well who see the garden as a challenge but if it’s its worked on to a point they can pick it up from it is better for them.

 

Housing Leeds would look to do something similar but not run a toolbank as we don’t have capacity to run these. A standard toolbank in some locations may work but others may need this different approach outlined above. Housing Leeds would help with funding through various approaches as required to help them get going.

 

The Chair asked if any private organisations do this that could provide advice as he is aware that organisations in the South that run these who could help. DL was not aware of any but would look to benchmark and find out why it works there but not in Leeds. The Chair mentioned this was being done in Cottingley and while the uptake has been slow, it is working, but is this may be because Cottingley is more compact whereas Middleton is spread out in a wider area.

 

RESOLVED The Board voted unanimously to agree to position status 2 – Achieved.

 

Recommendation 8

DL distributed a leaflet round to members that Parks had produced. This helps residents understand what can and can’t be done as part of the grounds maintenance contract. It can be used by Housing Officers on walkabouts for example and why issues arise such as cars parking on grass which means is cannot be done. The Board complimented the department on the leaflets produced.

 

RESOLVED The Board voted unanimously to agree to position status 2 – Achieved.

 

Recommendation 9

DL explained that often places are on the map but have not been maintained to a standard. Some reasons can be flytipping, no access for Continental to get into to. DL stressed the importance of weekly reports of which parts haven’t been cut and then we can look to resolve this. If we don’t get these reports we don’t know about it and so this has been stressed to Continental.  If there are reports of non-mapped areas we will investigate also to identify if this is Council land as we will not maintain private land.

 

SB asked about Leaseholders and how this affects them. DL explained it is difficult without prior knowledge of the area, but usually where it is a leaseholder who has a grass verge in the street its usually Council land, but where it’s within their own property boundary they would be responsible.  Within a block of flats usually the Council will do this as it is on contract and they will then recharge a percentage of the costs back to the leaseholder.

 

RESOLVED The Board voted unanimously to agree to position status 2 – Achieved.

 

Recommendation 10

DL explained that all garage sites have bene inspected. All have been rated in terms of their sustainability on criteria of: are they a good site, how many are currently let, the number empty and their condition. Where sites are sustainable we continue to repair and let. Sites deemed unsustainable, Housing Leeds are looking at option appraisal, and what the land can be used for. Some may be useful for development but this is a large piece of work and some sites may be unsustainable but difficult to develop on due to access issues and so we would then need to decide what to do in the future with the site.

 

RESOLVED The Board voted unanimously to give this recommendation a status of 4 – Not fully implemented (Progress made acceptable, continue monitoring).

 

RESOLVED The Board requested a further progress report on garages for the February meeting.