Agenda item

Cabinet Portfolio: Housing

Strategic Directorate: Adult Care, Housing and Public Health

The Chair noted that Ian Spicer, Strategic Director of Adult Care, Housing and Public Health and Paul Walsh, Interim Assistant Director Housing and Jane Davies, Head of Strategic Housing and Development in attendance.

This report details progress made against the Council’s Housing Development Programme and proposed new projects for 2022/23.  There are a number of schemes that have previously been presented to Cabinet and renewed approvals are being sought for sites in East Herringthorpe, Thrybergh, Wingfield, Eastwood, Kiveton Park, Thurcroft, and West Melton amongst others not listed.  The two new sites proposed for development are Carver Close, Harthill and Warden Street in Canklow.

The Head of Strategic Housing and Development explained that the annual report set out the performance to date against the Council’s ambitious housing development programme along with seeking further approvals to continue to deliver Council homes.  The report gives an overview of progress against previously approved schemes.  The report set out the number of homes the Council had already delivered or committed to delivering.  Since January 2018 to end of June 2022 the Council had built or committed to build 608 homes, comprising of 350 homes for council rent,133 for council shared ownership, 125 homes for sale to allow cross subsidisation of receipts to allow further development of council homes.

The report also noted the number of homes the Council had enabled to be built.  Not the council’s own delivery but through its strategic enabling role the Council made significant contribution to hitting Rotherham’s overall housing requirements.  Since 2018 the Council had enabled more than 500 homes to be delivered.  

A survey of customers of new council homes had been introduced to learn from their experiences, repeat what’s working well, consider how developments may need to be changed to meet needs, along with working with colleagues in Public Health to consider ways the longer-term outcomes for communities from the homes being delivered could be evaluated.

The report noted the various risks associated with new housing development, specifically, rapidly increasing costs, which makes it challenging to deliver.  The report also proposed some new schemes. 

The following was raised/responded to during discussions:

·       Further information on the number of bungalows built would be provided outside of the meeting.

·       The majority of the council homes were for council rent with a smaller number becoming shared ownership homes.

·       A wide range of sites were considered across the borough with consideration being given to the demographics of the ward.  Work was also undertaken with developers to influence the nature of the homes being provided.

·       It was clarified that detailed assessments and business cases were carried out for each site considered.

·       Social value information was captured.

·       The programme was diverse encompassing both smaller and larger sites.

·       It was understood that further engagement with communities and ward members could be undertaken with the Neighbourhoods team to increase the current engagement levels.

·       Members providing information on potential sites was welcomed.

·       The management of waste from the sites was controlled through the contract and information regarding the carbon impacts of a site was considered on a scheme-by-scheme basis.

·       It was felt that carbon impact information should be known in advance and presented up front.

·       Regarding incorporating less fossil fuel usage in development going forward it was explained that work was being undertaken with a focus on future proofing.

·       Mixed ownership was welcomed but what was the commitment for larger developments to get a cross section of mixed ownership.  It was clarified that mixed acquisitions helped to address this.  There was a focus on rent for smaller sites however mix of sites and types were considered to create mixed diversity.

·       There were lots of small developments within the programme and the Council worked closely with planners to ensure the schemes were appropriate for the area.

·       The delays had impacted the costs for some sites being developed but had not impacted the quality of the developments.

·       The allocation policy ensures that homes are allocated to people from the housing register.

·       The majority of sites were included in the Local Plan with the exception of some of the smaller sites.

·       The team worked collaboratively across the Council regarding housing development including working closely with colleagues from Adult Care, Housing and Public Health Directorate ensuring consideration is given to any specific requirements or adaptations.

·       A wider Council approach is adopted for all schemes with robust business cases giving consideration to all available data.

·       The Council’s existing housing stock is brought up to the required standards and any adaptations would be tailored to the needs of the resident.

The Cabinet Member for Housing expressed support for the Council’s Housing Development Programme and confirmed that the Council was in control of its housing stock.

Resolved: That the Overview and Scrutiny Management Board agreed:

1.    That Cabinet be advised that the recommendations be supported.

2.    That further work be undertaken to characterise the environmental impacts of construction projects including waste management within the Carbon Impact Assessments.