The petitions and deputations that have been received for presentation to the meeting are set out in agenda item 5 attached.

PETITIONS

 

5.1.1       Petition re: postal votes

 

Mr. Terry McGrenera addressed the meeting in support of the petition.   Members asked questions of the petitioners and the Lead Member then responded to the issues raised.  

 

DECISION

 

That the petition be referred to the Assistant Chief Executive (Legal Services) for a written response on any outstanding matters with 28 days.

 

(Action by: Isabella Freeman, Assistant Chief Executive (Legal Services)

 

 

5.1.2       Petition re: the future use of Habanos Wine Bar

 

Mr Ian Dick addressed the meeting in support of the petition.  Members asked questions of the petitioners and the Lead Member then responded to the issues raised.  

 

DECISION

 

That the petition be referred to the Corporate Director, Development and Renewal, for a written response on any outstanding matters within 28 days.

 

(Action by: Aman Dalvi, Corporate Director, Development and Renewal)

 

 

5.1.3       Petition re: 2 Jubilee Street

 

Ms. Lynsey Ellard addressed the meeting in support of the petition.  Members asked questions of the petitioners and the Lead Member then responded to the issues raised.  

 

DECISION

 

That the petition be referred to the Corporate Director, Development and Renewal, for a written response on any outstanding matters within 28 days.

 

(Action by: Aman Dalvi, Corporate Director, Development and Renewal)

 

 

DEPUTATIONS

 

5.2.1       Deputation re: resident parking permits for 62-80 Swaton Road

 

Mr. Stephen Foster and Mr. Nurul Amin addressed the meeting in support of the deputation.  Members asked questions of the deputation and the Lead Member then responded to the issues raised.  

 

DECISION

 

That the petition be referred to the Corporate Director, Communities, Localities and Culture for a written response on any outstanding matters within 28 days.

 

(Action by: Stephen Halsey, Corporate Director, Communities, Localities and Culture)

 

 

5.2.2       Deputation re: clamping system for John Smith Mews

 

This deputation was withdrawn.

 

 

5.2.3   Deputation re: Crown Estate

 

This deputation was not heard as the deputation did not attend the meeting.

 

 

PETITIONS

 

5.1.1       Petition regarding postal voting

 

At the invitation of the Mayor, Mr. Terry McGrenera addressed the meeting in support of the petition as set out in the agenda.  Mr McGrenera then responded to questions from Members of the Council. 

 

Councillor Joshua Peck, Deputy Leader of the Council, said that since the elections held in 2006 the government had implemented new Regulations requiring dates of birth and signatures to be registered by electors in advance of the election.  Stringent checks had been put in place by the Elections Team in respect of postal vote applications as they arrive in the office.  All electors who apply are advised in writing that an application has been received.  Checks are also made by the Election Team where the elector has requested that the ballot paper be sent to an alternative address.  When ballot paper packs are returned, the postal voting statement is separated from the ballot paper envelope and 100% are scanned to match signatures and dates of birth before the ballot paper is accepted.  

 

RESOLVED

 

That the petition be referred to the Assistant Chief Executive (Legal Services) for a written response on any outstanding matters with 28 days.

 

 

5.1.2       Petition regarding the future use of Habanos Wine Bar

 

At the invitation of the Mayor, Mr Ian Dick, speaking on behalf of Janet Wade,  addressed the meeting in support of the petition as set out in the agenda.  Mr. Dick then responded to questions from Members of the Council.

 

Councillor Ohid Ahmed, Lead Member for Resources and Performance, thanked Mr. Dick for bringing this matter to his attention.  He was also aware that these concerns had been brought to the attention of the Chief Executive who had provided a detailed response and he assured the petitioner that he was aware of the strength of feeling of the residents in the locality.  The Council was restricted in the interventions available to it and the use was long established in planning terms and was protected from planning enforcement.  He was aware that that a series of conditions were being imposed by the Council which were geared to protecting residential amenity.  He added that he was keen to ensure that this property was brought back into use whilst minimising the detrimental affect on neighbouring residents. 

 

RESOLVED 

 

That the petition be referred to the Corporate Director, Development and Renewal, for a written response on any outstanding matters within 28 days.

 

5.1.3       Petition regarding the use of 2 Jubilee Street, E1 by Turangalila

 

At the invitation of the Mayor, Ms. Lynsey Ellard, on behalf of Ms. Deborah Coughlin, addressed the meeting in support of the petition as set out in the agenda.  Ms. Ellard then responded to questions from Members of the Council.

 

Councillor Ohid Ahmed, Lead Member for Resources and Performance, said that the site was currently being held for the provision of a Centre for Independent Living and was not therefore available.  The Council had submitted a bid to the Department of Health for resources to redevelop 2 Jubilee Street to create new facilities for Adult Social Care services.  The services were currently located at sites that would no long be available for use from 2011/12 onwards. The Council was keen to resolve this issue soon as the bid involved negotiations between the Council, the Department of Health and the Treasury.  The date of the final outcome was not yet known but it would be during the spring of 2011. 

 

RESOVED

 

That the petition be referred to the Corporate Director, Development and Renewal, for a written response on any outstanding matters within 28 days.

 

 

 

DEPUTATIONS

 

5.2.1       Deputation regarding resident parking permits for 62-80 Swaton Road, E3

 

At the invitation of the Mayor, Mr. Stephen Foster and Mr. Nurul Amin addressed the meeting in support of the deputation as set out in the agenda.  Mr. Foster and Mr. Amin then responded to questions from Members of the Council.

 

Councillor Marc Francis, Lead Member for Housing and Development, thanked Mr. Foster and Mr. Amin for bringing the deputation to the Council.  Councillor Francis felt he spoke for everyone in the Chamber in sympathising with the situation that the residents found themselves in and before he responded, he wanted to remind councillors and the public why the Council introduced the Car Free Zone policy.   In the Borough, there were around 20,000 residents parking spaces with an almost equal number of Residents Permit holders.

 

At the December 2009 Full Council meeting, Councillors agreed to make changes to refine the Car Free Zone policy for future planning applications and subject to further legal opinion, intended to implement these changes in the summer.  However the Council could not retrospectively tear up the Section 106 agreements relating to developments that have been given planning permission in previous years and the responsibility for informing potential home owners that the property is subject to a Car Free Zone agreement lies with the developer and the purchaser’s solicitor.

 

In the case of 62-80 Swaton Road, very specific concerns have been raised.  This was a self-build shared ownership scheme by East Thames Housing Association and residents now own the properties outright.  Therefore, while this situation is unlike that in Horseferry Road, the Council may have some responsibility for directing this group of residents to this scheme and he wanted to formally initiate an investigation into the Council’s role and responsibility in residents signing up to this scheme.

 

If the Council was found to have been at fault, it would invite East Thames to submit an application to vary the Section 106 agreement for 62-80 Swaton Road in relation to the Car Free Zone agreement.

 

RESOLVED

 

That the petition be referred to the Corporate Director, Communities, Localities and Culture for a written response on any outstanding matters within 28 days.

 

Change to order of business

 

At this point, Councillor Marc Francis MOVED and Councillor Lutfur Rahman SECONDED – “That under Rule 14.1.3 the order of business be changed to allow motion 11.11 to be considered as the next item of business.”

 

On being put to the vote, the procedural motion was agreed.

 

11.11    Motion proposed by Councillor Rania Khan regarding parking permits for 62-80 Swaton Road

 

Councillor Rania Khan MOVED and Councillor A. A. Sardar SECONDED the motion as printed in the agenda.

 

Councillor Marc Francis MOVED, and Councillor Lutfur Rahman SECONDED an amendment to the motion as follows:-

 

“To add at the end of ‘This Council notes’:-

 

‘However, those residents are tenants of a housing association whose homes were advertised in the Homeseekers section of East End Life, without reference to the fact that they were subject to a Car Free Zone agreement.

 

The residents of 62-80 Swaton Road moved into these properties as part of a self-build shared ownership scheme administered by East Thames Housing Association.

 

Responsibility for informing prospective home owners that the property they are buying is subject to a Car Free Zone agreement lies with the developer and solicitor, not the London Borough of Tower Hamlets.’

 

And to delete text after ‘This Council resolves’ and replace with:-

 

1.                  ‘To investigate Tower Hamlets Council’s role in the referral of Common Housing Register applicants to East Thames’ self-build shared ownership scheme at 62-80 Swaton Road.

 

2.                  That if the Council is found to have been at fault, to invite East Thames to submit an application to vary the Section 106 agreement for 62-80 Swaton Road in relation to the Car Free Zone agreement.

 

3.                  To report back to councillors and residents concerned, the outcome of this investigation within two months of the date of this Full Council meeting’.”

 

After debate, the amendment was put to the vote and was agreed.

 

The substantive motion as amended was then put to the vote and was agreed.  Accordingly it was

 

RESOLVED

 

This Council notes:

 

That the residents of 62-80 Swaton Road have been granted parking permits since 2004.

 

That in 2009 the Council informed residents that the development was a car free zone.

 

That the fact the development is “car free” was not made clear to residents when they moved into the properties.

 

That many of those living in this development rely on their cars for their livelihoods and may well not have moved there if they had been informed about its car-free status.

 

That the development in question does not suffer from excessive pressure on car-parking spaces.

 

That a similar case was brought to the attention of the Council in January in a petition from residents of Horseferry Road, Shadwell who have experienced similar problems. 

 

However, those residents are tenants of a housing association whose homes were advertised in the Homeseekers section of East End Life, without reference to the fact that they were subject to a Car Free Zone agreement.

 

The residents of 62-80 Swaton Road moved into these properties as part of a self-build shared ownership scheme administered by East Thames Housing Association.

 

Responsibility for informing prospective home owners that the property they are buying is subject to a Car Free Zone agreement lies with the developer and solicitor, not the London Borough of Tower Hamlets

 

This Council resolves:

 

1.                  To investigate Tower Hamlets Council’s role in the referral of Common Housing Register applicants to East Thames’ self-build shared ownership scheme at 62-80 Swaton Road.

 

2.                  That if the Council is found to have been at fault, to invite East Thames to submit an application to vary the Section 106 agreement for 62-80 Swaton Road in relation to the Car Free Zone agreement.

 

3.         To report back to councillors and residents concerned, the outcome of this investigation within two months of the date of this Full Council meeting.

 

 

5.2.2       Deputation re: clamping system for John Smith Mews

 

This deputation was withdrawn.

 

 

5.2.3   Deputation re: Crown Estate

 

This deputation was not heard as the deputation did not attend the meeting.

 

 

Change to order of business

 

At this point, Councillor Joshua Peck MOVED and Councillor Lutfur Rahman SECONDED – “That under Rule 14.1.3 the order of business be changed to allow motion 11.8 to be considered as next business.”

 

On being put to the vote, the procedural motion was agreed.

 

11.8         Motion proposed by Councillor Joshua Peck regarding Crown Estate residents

 

Councillor Joshua Peck MOVED and Councillor Lutfur Rahman SECONDED the motion as printed in the agenda.

 

After debate, Councillor Abjol Miah MOVED an amendment that items 3a and 3b of Councillor Dulal Uddin’s motion on the same subject as printed in the agenda at item 11.10 be added to the motion under consideration. 

 

Councillor Joshua Peck indicated that he would not accept the amendment as proposed but with the agreement of the meeting he altered the resolution to his motion to read as follows:-

 

“To oppose any sale that isn't on the basis of a positive outcome of a ballot of residents; doesn't legally guarantee all of the rights and safeguards of tenants' current tenancies, including security of tenure and levels of rents; and that doesn't also guarantee continuing provision of affordable and key working housing at current levels - and to write to Government ministers to ask them to make representations to this effect to Crown Estate commissioners.”

 

The motion as altered by Councillor Peck was then put to the vote and was agreed.  Accordingly it was:

 

RESOLVED

 

This Council notes that:

 

• The Crown Estate announced on 25 January its intention to sell the freeholds of 1,300 properties on the Victoria Park Estate in Tower Hamlets and Hackney, and the Millbank, Cumberland Market and Lee Green estates in other London Boroughs
• Tenants of these homes include people who have lived there for over 60 years, young families and key workers
• Many residents are on shorthold tenancies which could be ended with as little as two months’ notice 
• The Crown Estate has given residents an eight-week consultation period but has refused to tell residents whether it is proposing selling the properties to a Registered Social Housing Provider or a commercial landlord; or to give them any guarantees about their security of tenure or levels of rent; or to make any commitment to the homes staying as affordable and key worker housing in the future.

 

This Council further notes that:

 

• In advance of this announcement the Crown Estate had temporarily stopped housing key workers, leading many to believe that they expect any new owner to cease providing key worker housing on the estates altogether
• In meetings with residents and Meg Hillier MP, and in response to inquiries from Tower Hamlets Council, the Crown Estate has refused to give any more details of its plans, or give any commitments about the protection of residents’ tenancies or the future provision of affordable and key worker housing and has been unable to point to any positive benefits for residents.
• As a result, many residents are extremely worried about what will happen to their homes and whether they will find themselves evicted or priced out.

 

This Council believes:

 

• That as a public body the Crown Estate has, in failing to give residents any details of the proposed sale or any reassurance about their futures, has fallen far short of the standard it should uphold.

 

This Council resolves:

 

• To oppose any sale that isn't on the basis of a positive outcome of a ballot of residents; doesn't legally guarantee all of the rights and safeguards of tenants' current tenancies, including security of tenure and levels of rents; and that doesn't also guarantee continuing provision of affordable and key working housing at current levels - and to write to Government ministers to ask them to make representations to this effect to Crown Estate commissioners.