Agenda item

The Panel received a report which provided an overview of the proposed new Housing Strategy, its context, and the processes through which it had been developed. The draft Housing Strategy 2024-2029 was attached as an appendix to the report.  The report set out the content of the draft Housing Strategy agreed by Cabinet in March 2022, the consultation on that Strategy carried out between September and December 2022, and the changes made to the draft Strategy as a result both of that consultation and of new financial, regulatory, and legislative contexts. The Panel were asked to provide comments on the draft Housing Strategy, in advance of December Cabinet. The report was introduced by Cllr Ruth Gordon, Cabinet Member for Council House Building, Placemaking and Local Economy as set out in the agenda pack at pages 25-138.  Also present for this agenda item were David Joyce, Director Housing and Placemaking; Robbie Erbmann, Assistant Director of Housing; Hannah Adler Head of Housing Strategy and Policy; and Marc Lancaster Housing Policy & Strategy Officer.  The following arose during the discussion of this agenda item:

1. The Panel sought clarification around London Affordable Rent versus formula rent. In response, officers advised that that houses build under the previous grant programme 2016-23, would be built using London Affordable Rent. New Housing schemes built under the current 2021-26 scheme were limited to social rents using the formula. This was set by the Mayor of London’s office and the Council had no control over it. It was noted that there were some limited exceptions such as building using Right to Buy receipts and possible future changes to supported housing, that may allow the Council to use LAR. 
2. A Panel member commented that he would like to see a holistic approach taken to estate improvements, so that the railings were painted at the same time as major works were undertaken. It was suggested that this approach was cheaper and caused less disruption to residents.
3. The Panel also commended officers and the Cabinet Member on the quality of the design of schemes being built in Haringey. It was suggested that members would like to see some of the LBH schemes put forward for awards.
4. A Panel Member commented that by not using LAR, the Council was severely limiting the number of houses that it could build. In response, officers reiterated that the GLA funding for the 2021-26 programme did not allow the Council to use LAR for the current scheme. Officers sought to reassure members that the Mayor was giving Haringey a very large grant settlement, one that was double the previous allocation. The AD for Housing advised that he was happy with the viability of the scheme and that there were around 500 homes in the programme.
5. The Cabinet Member advised that part of the reason that the Mayor’s Office had agreed to give Haringey a substantial settlement was due to the trust that had been built up with them, particularly in terms of the fact that LBH has started 2000 homes on site. The Cabinet Member commented that that the 3k Council homes would be a sizeable proportion of the 15k homes of all tenures needed across the borough.
6. The Chair sought clarification around the new strategic shift on achieving the Decent Homes standard and how this would impact the capacity of the service to undertake a holistic approach to improving existing housing estates. In response, the Panel was advised that the date was being put back and that the key focus was around ensuring that the Council was able to bring all of its homes up to Decent Homes standards. Officers set out that this reflected a recognition about what it was possible to deliver, particularly in the current financial climate, with borrowing costs having effectively doubled.  The Panel agreed to put forward a recommendation that it would like the Council to return to undertaking holistic works when circumstances allowed. The Chair commented that she understood that this may take some time.
7. The Panel sought clarification over the fact that the report set out that there were 3641 tenants who were living in overcrowded accommodation and 3820 tenants who lived in homes that were too big for them. The Panel queried the extent to which these two groups could be switched in order to solve the problem. In response, the Cabinet Member advised that there was a programme in place to provide mentors and financial incentives to get people into smaller properties. The Cabinet Member acknowledged the importance of getting existing tenants who had a larger home that they needed to downsize but commented that it was not easy to do. Officers commented that cash incentives were offered to people to move and that there were officers who worked on supporting those with under-occupation to move on. Officers advised that an under-occupation strategy and an older persons housing strategy would be brought to Cabinet in due course.
8. The Panel sought clarification about whether a secure tenancy was specific to a particular property and the extent to which the Council could oblige people move home. In response, officers advised that a secure tenancy was linked to a particular property and that the residents had the right to continue living there indefinitely. All of Haringey’s tenancies were secure tenancies as that was the policy of the Council. Any move to a fixed term tenancies for new tenants would require a policy change.
9. In relation to the 15k homes needed in the borough, the Panel sought clarification as to where the other 12k was going to come from. In response, the Cabinet Member responded that the Council had a particular focus on prioritising affordable homes, but that the figure of 15k related to homes of all tenures. Officers set out that there had been a number of large scale developments in the borough built by the private sector, such as those at Tottenham Hale. The Council’s planning service processed a record number of planning schemes in the last financial year including permission for 4000 homes in a matter of months, so there was a pipeline of schemes ready to be taken forward. Officers cautioned that the market was responding to rising borrowing costs and that this would inevitably lead to a period of lower output in terms of the number of properties being built going forward.
10. The Panel sought assurances around the extent that these houses were addressing local need, given that an estimated 100k to 300k people moved to London each year. In response, it was acknowledged that there had been a large population increase in London since the 1980s and that had a significant impact on house prices and demand for housing. The Cabinet Member emphasised that need for the Council to build family homes in order to encourage families to move to Haringey as it directly impacted school funding formulas.
11. In relation to Strategic Objective three – Improving the quality of private rented sector housing, the Panel sought assurances about broadening the licensing scheme for private rented sector housing and the extent to which the Council was enforcing against bad landlords. In response, officers advised that Selective Licensing required certain conditions to be met in each ward in order for the scheme to be approved by the Secretary Of State. A lot of work was done in Haringey to build an evidence base and the evidence base showed that Haringey would not get government approval for a Selective Licensing scheme across the whole borough.
12. The Panel queried what could be done to support private owners to retro-fit their homes to make them more energy efficient, particularly in terms of those in conservations areas and whether there was any capacity to amend conservation area regulations. In response, officers advised that there was a legal duty on councils to preserve and enhance the character of conservation areas and that this was an issue that needed to be dealt with at the national level, particularly as the UK had some of the least energy efficient housing stock in Europe. The Council could provide information and advice to homeowners in terms of what they could do within the rules. In response to a follow up, officers advised that there was a degree of leeway in how it interpreted preserving and enhancing the character, but that external cladding on a brick built conservation area, for example, was clearly a breach of planning regulations.
13. In response to a question, the Cabinet Member advised that the provision of social housing was fundamental to the strategy and how the administration sought to build 15k new homes across all tenures. The extent to which the number of new social housing developments could be increased, beyond 3000, was an ongoing conversation.
14. The Panel sought assurances around the fact that the new homes the Council was building would be properly maintained. In response, officers advised that the homes were being built to a very high standard that no major works should be required for at least ten years. As the new homes were being built budgets were being made available to maintain the properties in the future. It was anticipated that the Council would be looking at a period of 20-30 years before significant maintenance was required. The Director added that it was also anticipated that the planned investment in existing homes would lead to reduction in maintenance costs and the example of the Noel Park pods was given, as this had seen a dramatic improvement on repair costs for those units that had been completed.
15. The Panel sought assurances around what levers were available to the Council to support people from being pushed out of the local housing market. In response, officers advised that the Housing Strategy gives a clear view of what the required mix of housing needed in the borough was, in addition to that which the Council was building itself. The strategy set out the need for housing for rent and housing for low cost rent, especially in terms of family homes. The strategy set a clear tone around what the Council expected from developers in the borough for building low cost housing. Officers also emphasised the role the Council played in relation to acquisition of existing stock through the HCBS. The Council also had one of the best homelessness prevention teams in London. Officers also set out that there was a financial inclusion in Housing Management who work with residents who may be in financial arrears and signposted them to a range of support services.
16. The Panel commented on the fact that the Council had not had a cyclical maintenance programme for its estates for 20 years and suggested that this was something they would like to see reinstated.
17. In relation to Panel members expressing a degree of scepticism about repairs being carried out in future, officers provided reassurance that there was a financial model in place, through the 30 year HRA plan, that was capable of delivering what was needed. Officers acknowledged that in the past capacity and capability had been an issue, but that just as the Council had not built any new homes for 30 years and was now doing so, repairs and maintenance would become something that the Council did well. The work being done to make these improvements was set out in the Housing Improvement Plan.
18. The Panel commented that they would like to put forward a recommendation to Cabinet around giving leaseholders 6 months’ notice of payments before any major works was carried out, rather than the current 30 days’ notice. Officers clarified that the 30 day notice for leaseholders on Noel Park estate was a section 20 notice, rather than a bill. This was required so that the Council could begin contracting for works. It was suggested than leaseholders had not received a bill for one to two years after the notice. Officers acknowledged that part of the problems with the works at Noel Park was that the letters were unhelpfully worded and it made the notices seem like a bill. The Panel suggested that putting forward a recommendation on this would provide additional assurances to leaseholders.

RESOLVED

     I.        That the update was noted.

    II.        That the above recommendations in relation the draft Housing Strategy be put forward to Cabinet.