Agenda item

The Board is requested to receive the update on Estate Standards at appendix 1 and raise any questions with the manager in attendance for this item.

JG introduced David Longthorpe (Head of Housing Management, Resources & Housing) to discuss the two recommendations given a monitoring brief by the board.

Recommendation 3 – That the Council introduces the best waste collection solution for individual estates, even if that results in variations across the city

DL discussed the first monitoring brief regarding the refuse service, referring to the issue with the bin rooms for the Wortley blocks being closed off and unusable while repairs were taking place. DL confirmed repairs have been concluded and the chutes and bin room are operational.

DL advised the Refuse Service will be conducting a review of waste strategy, concerning the collection routes taken and new housing built since the previous review 10 years ago, which is estimated to take approximately six months to complete. The Refuse Service are aiming to align their strategy with national guidelines released in December, and are working with WRAP to assess how collection and recycling systems can be changed and/or improved. The standardisation of collection around Leeds with the collection service in other authorities would be beneficial to increase the amount of recyclable waste, and ways to achieve this goal are being considered.

JG raised an issue that waste collection is not tailored to the needs of high rise blocks or individual streets where access can be problematic and would require a more bespoke approach.  DL confirmed there are already some bespoke solutions in place, for example having a kerbside bag collection on streets that are too steep for wheelie bins, but the review will help to solve further issues that are not yet satisfactorily dealt with.

PM pointed out that there used to be stickers on wheelie bins that told residents what kinds of waste may be put in bins and asked if they were still in use. DL answered that the stickers and letters are expensive to produce and distribute to every Leeds household, and the same information can be more cheaply and effectively accessed online. Residents’ awareness of recyclable material can also be increased if new collection services for glass and food for example were introduced in line with existing collections in other authorities.

SB asked if there were bespoke strategies for each high rise block, and suggested solutions might be found by discussing issues with the cleaners. DL clarified the strategy is primarily to deal with the external removal of waste from the blocks and not the internal waste, but chutes are provided, and much work is put in to educate residents about the potential fire hazard and risk of leaving rubbish in corridors and other communal spaces. Regarding external solutions, DL gave examples of some blocks having more frequent collections and others having outside bin storage to keep in line with the needs of the block.

JG asked about the issue of overflowing bins, as if bins are too full or there are large items in them they are not taken by the collections. JG asked if fly tipping was still as big an issue as it had been two years ago. DL replied that following meetings with the Cleaner Neighbourhoods Teams and the introduction of a charge for the collection of large items it was considered that there would be an increase in fly tipping, however the statistics across Leeds show that there has been no significant increase in cases. PM added that in his sheltered housing complex, large items are placed in the bins that are not put there by residents which would not count on fly tipping statistics. DL confirmed these cases do not count towards the statistics, but cleaners who find large items can report them for removal and where possible perpetrators are identified and appropriate action taken.

JG asked if there are still days on which skips are provided for residents to dispose of large items, DL responded there are action days but their purpose is not for disposal of large items, but are to highlight areas in need of action. DL informed the board that the council pick up service should be used, and that those in receipt of benefits can use this service for free.

RESOLVED - Position Status agreed as (4.) Not fully implemented (Progress made acceptable. Continue monitoring)

Recommendation 10 – That Housing Leeds reports back to Tenant Scrutiny Board back on any recommendations and or proposed policy changes following its review of garages.

DL provided an update on an action plan for letting of garages across Leeds, aimed at addressing a significant number of garages that are empty, noting that from February 2018 to January 2019 there were 311 fewer empty lettable garages. DL explained the focus was on using social media to promote the availability of empty garages. DL noted it is difficult to let some garages due to the smaller sizes, designed for the smaller cars of the past, however progress is being made.

Garages deemed fit for refurbishment are improved and re-let where there is demand to do so but there is also an ongoing program of risk assessments which have led to the demolition of 68 garages freeing up land which could be repurposed for new housing, allotments, or other uses.

JG asked by what criteria garages are demolished, DL responded that they are risk assessed, and can be a target for vandalism and arson and so demolishing them can result in less antisocial behaviour or risk to the public. The decision to rebuild garages is based on the requirement for residents, and the council is looking to build more in at least one location.

JG asked if the uptake of garages might be facilitated by a decrease in rent, DL informed the board that a request to maintain the rental price has been put forward but there is also the option to lower and raise the rent per area according to demand. A system is also in place whereby non council tenants can rent garages at a higher rate than for council tenants (standard rent + VAT) to ensure as many garage spaces as possible are occupied, but DL emphasised that priority is given to council tenants. PM asked about those who rent garages and move from the property, or those who use them as storage for household objects rather than for vehicles. DL noted that the garage rents are separate from household rents and therefore a garage could be held by a previous tenant, however the lease should not be passed on to someone else.

RESOLVED - Position Status agreed as (4.) Not fully implemented (Progress made acceptable. Continue monitoring)

JG asked if the process for walkabouts is still in place, DL confirmed they are and provide a way for residents of the area to have an input and get involved. Housing officers should be communicating with residents and inviting them to walkabouts, updating them on the changes as a result of walkabouts, and escalating issues that have not been actioned due to the reliance on other services being involved.

JG questioned if feedback from the walkabouts was being sent to councillors as there had been an occasion when he had heard that it had not been received, which DL assured was an oversight, and that there has been no pattern of reports to say process is not being followed. A question was also asked if councillors themselves were attending these meetings so they can then see any issues first hand. SI added that he is the only person in his area that attends the walkabouts, they are not well advertised, and in one case the housing officer didn’t turn up. There are also ongoing issues in SI’s area that do not seem to be getting resolved. DL noted that the walkabouts should be advertised in more ways than just online, and community notice boards and other means could also be utilised.

DL continued that some issues can be resolved as a priority by certain services, but some issues such as trees that are reported as dangerous may take up to 18 months to be resolved if they are not identified as an emergency. JG raised a question about mapping, and DL explained that though it isn’t a common occurrence, areas that aren’t mapped have to be researched to find out who is responsible for the land which can take time to achieved, and then relevant services called which that might not mark certain issues as a priority, leaving them for weeks or even months before they are resolved.

PM asked what the process is if no residents turn up to a walkabout, and JG added the question of how line managers know if a walkabout was attended by the officer. DL answered that walkabouts are diary items and so if an officer is away they should be covered by a colleague and still go ahead. Similarly if no residents turn up, the walkabout should still go ahead as the officer has a list of inspection criteria to check on any and all site visits, and some residents may want to see the feedback but be unable to attend the walkabout.

JG thanked DL for his attendance.