Agenda item

Report of the Director of Community and Children’s Services.

Members received a report of the Director of Community and Children’s Services introducing the five-year draft Housing Strategy which had been approved for consultation by the Community and Children’s Services Committee in December 2013 and which would be monitored by this Sub Committee.

Members discussed the strategy in detail, and raised a number of points including:

·         The use of the private rented sector – officers advised that the Strategy was about all types of housing across the City, including high cost private rental properties, which meet the housing needs of high income residents and workers who would not qualify for social rented properties. The Strategy makes reference to ensuring there is an adequate supply of this type of housing to meet the needs, for example, of City workers whose main home is elsewhere.

Officers also reported that the use of the private rented sector (PRS) can be used as an alternative to social rented. This was always an option for people waiting to be housed and would be covered in housing advice. Members noted that the Central Government now allowed (and actively encouraged) Local Authorities to use the PRS to house homeless people. Currently the City Corporation made little use of private rented properties, except as temporary accommodation whilst waiting for one of our own properties to become available. Officers stated that the Strategy envisioned carrying on in this way, building homes with a view to housing people ourselves, though this depended on the amount of homeless applications received in the future. If these increased there might be little choice but to make greater use of the PRS. For this reason the City Corporation was interested in making sure that the PRS is regulated, through schemes like the Real Lettings Scheme, to ensure that private rented accommodation for vulnerable homeless people meets high standards.

·         What the full range of housing options available were – Officers advised that they were: home ownership, shared ownership, social rented, ‘affordable’ rented (i.e. lower than market rent but higher than social rent) and private rent. It was noted that there were variations of these, which would be explored with anyone seeking housing advice to find what best met their needs.

·         Whether the Housing Asset Management Strategy was complete, and for more detail to be provided concerning the schedule of work for Golden Lane Estate – Officers reported that the Asset Management Strategy was being drafted and would be brought to the next meeting of the Sub Committee. 

Officers advised that Golden Lane presented more challenges than any other estate; the complexities (and high cost) of meeting listed building guidelines was one issue, another was the high percentage of leasehold properties on Golden Lane which can make it difficult (and time consuming) to get agreement on projects as homeowners were, naturally, concerned about the cost to themselves.

A 5-year major projects programme was in place and millions of pounds are being spent on Golden Lane on Great Arthur House and the replacement of concrete panels at Cullum Welch. This would be shared with residents at the first Open Meeting in February 2014. With regard to a specific point about windows, officers were waiting for a specification for Great Arthur House which meets listed building guidelines; once this was in place it could be used to replace windows on the rest of the estate.

·         Governance of the Strategy – Officers advised that, as this was a strategy that covers more than just existing housing stock, it has to be owned by Community & Children’s Services Committee, but Housing Management & Almshouses Sub Committee would be the main Committee for monitoring purposes.

·         Nomination agreements – Officers reported that when the City built homes in another Borough (e.g. the new homes being built on Avondale, in Southwark) the host Borough has the right to be able to ‘nominate’ people from their waiting list to have a certain number of tenancies, and the City negotiates the number of homes to which they have nomination rights. Once nominated the tenants are ours and all their rent comes to us.

·         What is meant by use of “innovative public and private sector working”? Officers reported that this was not PFI or anything similar. Instead it referred to development agreements that allow the City to improve existing properties and build new ones by working with private developers on mixed development.  Existing stock was aging and the City Corporation was unable to fund renovations as quickly as they were needed. New ways were therefore needed to find ways of levering in funding, using the advantage of land value in the City.  

·         Order of priority for works – Officers advised that Portsoken gets the profile because of its demographics, but there should not be a focus on one ward to the detriment of others. The Head of Barbican and Estates advised that work was underway to look at how the One Portsoken model might be rolled out to other wards.  In the meantime, it was suggested a reference be added in to Cripplegate as the City’s other most residential ward.

·         Who attended the meeting about housing strategy mentioned and what were the outcomes? Officers reported that this was a seminar hosted by the Chairman of the Policy Committee and involving the GLA to discuss how the City might take a lead in encouraging more private rented homes to be built across London by investment. Community & Children’s Service Officers were in attendance, but the seminar was not about social housing at all. Some further work was discussed but in the end it was felt that there was insufficient benefit to the City to take it any further. 

Officers reported that amendments would now be made to the report to reflect Members’ views before being circulated for more general consultation.