Verbal Update
Minutes:
Cllr Ibrahim, Cabinet Member for Housing and Estate Renewal gave a short update to the Committee around her portfolio. Sean McLaughlin, MD Homes for Haringey and Alan Benson, AD for Housing were also present. The following key points were noted:
a. In relation to the Housing Delivery Programme; 350 Council homes had received Planning Permission and 331 of those homes had started on site. Of the £62.8m grant from the GLA’s Building Council Homes for Londoners programme, the Council has drawn down £11.9m for the homes started.
b. Cabinet had agreed 27 sites of Council-owned land to put into the programme. It was anticipated that by the autumn, a site would be identified in every ward in the borough. Cabinet will be asked to approve seven new sites at its upcoming meeting in June, which included Kerswell Close.
c. The Cabinet Member advised that there had been an inevitable impact on the Housing Delivery Programme caused by Covid-19 as work on six active sites as well as procurement, consultation and planning decisions had all effectively ceased due to Covid. Work ceased entirely on four of the six sites, whilst Melbourne and Ashley Road remained open but with limited work taking place. The Cabinet Member advised that work had subsequently resumed on five of the six sites but with reduced on-site capacity. It was anticipated that work on the Red House would not resume until September at the earliest, due to the existing building being used for Temporary Accommodation.
d. External capacity remained a significant challenge, tender deadlines had to be extended as firms had furloughed staff and disruptions to supply chains prevented them from costing bids. Delays had also occurred with undertaking site surveys.
e. In response to the Covid crisis, a number of sites had been opened as temporary homeless hostels. These included the Travelodge on the border with Islington which had 104 rooms, 24/7 staff on site, all units were self-contained and residents were receiving daily food deliveries. All residents and staff had been tested at the Travelodge and there was also a mobile library and arts initiative on site. At Pramwood there were 30 residents living in self-contained rooms and all residents had been tested. The Red House had 40 self-contained rooms and Covid-19 testing was booked to take place this week. Other sites included the Shelton hotel and the Green Rooms.
f. The Cabinet Member advised that due to the huge demand on Homelessness and Temporary Accommodation, there were still some people being housed out of borough, such as 30 people at the Ramada in Barnet.
g. The Committee was advised that current level of families presenting as homeless was lower due to the stopping of evictions but new cases were still happening due to domestic violence and temporary arrangements with friends or family coming to an end, for example. In response to an increase in calls related to domestic abuse, the Cabinet Member set out that additional capacity had been put into Hearthstone.
The following was noted in discussion of the Cabinet Member for Housing and Estate renewal’s verbal update:
a. The Chair sought assurances around the Firs House fire and what was being done in relation to concerns around the roof design and impact on the spread of fire. The Chair also requested assurance around what was being done to assure residents who lived in buildings with a similar roof design. In response, the Cabinet Member acknowledged these concerns and advised that the building in question was scheduled to be part of an existing fire safety investigation programme, which would have involved intrusive inspections due to the need to inspect roof spaces. The building in question had a pitched roof added to it in 2002.
b. Sean McLaughlin advised the Committee that the cause of the fire was still being investigated by the emergency services. The MD HfH advised that in relation to the fire, it was contained within one dwelling and from that point of view the structural integrity of the building held up. The MD HfH reassured the Committee that they were aware of the potential fire risk from fire travelling between roof spaces and as a landlord they were carrying out a programme of fire safety inspections. The programme was due to complete at the end of this calendar year to identify those roof spaces where fire breaks needed to be installed. This programme had been delayed due to the intrusive nature of those inspections, as well as a shortage of qualified people able to carry out inspections. The MD HfH advised that an assessment would need to be made when lockdown measures were eased to examine how quickly HfH could get back on track with completing the programme of fire safety inspections.
c. The Committee sought further clarification on how the timetable for the delivery of 1000 new Council homes would be effected. In response, the Cabinet Member acknowledged that there would inevitably be a delay due to Covid-19. The Council was on target to achieve delivery of a certain number of homes by the end of the administration, but Covid had resulted in a number of Housing Delivery Programme changes. The Cabinet Member set out that the administration was hoping to get the programme up and running again as soon as possible. The AD for Housing commented that work on the six schemes that were underway had stopped and were in the process of being resumed, however due to ongoing social distancing the delivery of these sites would be slower that they would have been. The AD for Housing advised that it was difficult to know the impact on delivery and overall the number of houses that would be delivered at this stage. It was hoped that another 25 sites would be started this year, however this could be undermined if there was a second spike in Covid infections.
d. The AD for Housing advised the Committee that it was not envisaged that there would be an impact on GLA funding as no other housing association or local authority were able to meet delivery timetables either so everyone was in the same situation. The GLA were speaking to the government about revising the timescales/dates that organisations could draw down the money.
e. In response to a query about the number of completed housing units delivered, the Cabinet Member advised that no new builds had been completed, but clarified that the whole process took around 18-24 months and that the Council had to build up its entire housing building capacity from scratch. The Council had however purchased 92 units from IBSA that were in place and being used for housing but these were not new builds. The Cabinet Member reiterated that 350 homes had started on site but none of those homes were ever projected to have been completed by now. Most of the new homes built as part of the housing delivery programme were due to be completed within the last six months of the four-year term of the administration because of effectively starting from scratch and the fact that there was a long process involved in designing, acquiring planning permission and building new homes.
f. In response to a follow-up question, officers advised that a number of new homes should be delivered by the end of the administration, but that it would not be 1000 as per the manifesto commitment.
g. In response to questions around the ongoing housing of rough sleepers, the Cabinet Member acknowledged that the government’s decision to house all rough sleepers had resulted in significant improvements in relation to the welfare of rough sleepers and their individual health and wellbeing. The Cabinet Member reassured the Committee some form of housing would need to continue especially until there was a vaccine in place. The Council was working closely with other boroughs on how to move this forward. There was a pan-London steering group to deal with rough sleepers which was responsible for organising health checks etcetera. The group was led by the London boroughs collectively and there was agreement that that homelessness provision could not go back to how it was before the crisis.
h. In relation to funding, the Committee was advised that the government had announced £160m in funding for housing rough sleepers but there was no information yet on how to bid for the funding. Similarly, there was a lack of clarity about how this would affect those with no recourse to public funds. The Chair commented that she would like to follow up on this issue going forwards. (Action: Clerk).
i. In relation to further questions around fire safety inspections and how much progress had been made with the programme, the MD HfH advised that 9 packages of capital works were issued in 2018 on fire safety works and a good deal of those did involve compartmentation issues both in roof spaces and in-between buildings. The MD HfH advised that with compartmentation issues it was much easier to identify the problem than it was to fix and for timber framed buildings this involved a three stage process. HfH had recently had a report on 28 blocks which would be brought forward for Cabinet approval to release capital funding for improvement works. The Committee was advised that the fire brigade were particular keen to prosecute compartmentation breeches of regulations and had a specific team to do this. It was noted that the fire regulations were that a building was legal as long as it met the fire regulations in place at the time of construction. HfH advised that they were proceeding on the basis that they wanted to identify any gaps in compartmentation and would be producing a plan to rectify any fire risks that existed in those properties.
j. In response to a question around the number of people still sleeping on the streets in Haringey, the Cabinet Member advised that there were 13 people currently on the streets and each one had an active offer of accommodation and they were informed of this offer on a daily basis.