Council and democracy

Agenda item

Model of Housing

Minutes:

 

The report was presented by Ryan Farmer.

 

In regards to affordability, the Vice-Chair asked whether the Council worked with an agency to set a criteria for affordability. Ryan Farmer referred to paragraph 3.3 and highlighted that this was what the affordable rate was benchmarked at for Thurrock. He said that the Council had its own agency but it needed to be financially viable to ensure that homes could be maintained and not just provided. He explained that affordability was a broader piece of work that the service was working on with other departments.

 

The Vice-Chair asked what work had been undertaken in terms of the type of housing needed in Thurrock based on the demographics of Thurrock. Sean Nethercott answered that the service had been waiting on the South Essex Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) and a draft of this had just been received. The service aimed to publish this in the new year but the service was also awaiting on guidance from the government on the standard method for affordable housing. The Vice-Chair asked if an update could be brought back to the Task Force before the end of the municipal year.

 

The Chair asked if residents were involved or informed about the SHMA process. She referred to 95% mortgages on page 103 and pointed out that most people were still unable to afford this deposit. Sean Nethercott said that the consultants for the scheme could be invited to the next meeting to provide more information.

 

Councillor Watson commented that the housing strategy needed to consider the homes needed within a development and said that the planning applications she had seen proposed mostly 4 bedroom homes. She queried the number of 1 and 2 bedroom homes needed over the next 5 years. She also asked what type of homes were needed and how this could be highlighted for planning and development. Ryan Farmer explained that everyone had a housing need and that each need was not the same. He said that the housing waiting list showed the biggest need for 2 bed homes but there were also families that needed 4 or 5 bed homes and that the service worked with social housing providers on housing need. In regards to the type of homes needed, he said that an increase in social affordable housing was needed and to attract other social housing providers to Thurrock or encourage the ones currently in Thurrock increase their stocks.

 

The Task Force further discussed the need for 1 and 2 bedroom homes and also the need for 4 bedroom homes for larger families. The Task Force highlighted the issue of high density flats and the need for gardens and green spaces in these builds. Ryan Farmer explained that the Housing Strategy and the Local Plan set out the plans for the types and number of homes needed which looked to cater for small families too. The Housing Strategy also looked at affordability which was needed but he added that there were reasons other than affordability for why people were on the housing waiting list. He said that the Housing Strategy had seen the importance of green spaces and that the current consultation on the Housing Strategy would identify other factors that were important to residents.

 

Councillor Watson mentioned that she had seen low rise developments in London with communal spaces that had developed well which was difficult to plan for in Thurrock due to the number of homes needed. She said that the Housing Strategy needed to cater for all age groups. She also raised concerns over decanting properties as to where residents would be placed. Ryan Farmer answered that there had been recent flatted developments that had set a standard for this such as Beaconsfield Way in Chadwell St Mary and Claudian Way which recognised the value of space. In regards to decanting, he said that an appropriate plan was in place for this which would be undertaken in a sensitive manner.

 

Councillor Watson asked if 35% affordable housing could be allocated to the Council to manage the nomination rights. Ryan Farmer explained that this was dependent on whether the 35% could be achieved and what type of affordable housing was being provided such as shared ownership or affordable rent. If it was affordable rent, the Council would have nomination rights and could allocate to people on the housing list but the property would not be managed by the Council. If it was a shared ownership, there was a regional register for this.

Supporting documents: