(if any) - receive.

Apologies were received from Councillors Mandy Anderson (Councillor Jane Keane substituting) Philippa Crowder and Philip Ruck.

Members are invited to disclose any interest in any of the items on the agenda at this point of the meeting.

Members may still disclose any interest in an item at any time prior to the consideration of the matter.

There were no disclosures of interest.

Report and documentation attached (exempt appendices not available to press or public).

Members were concerned about the seemingly poor balance sheet of the National Housing Group and that three directors has recently left the company. Officers responded that the company had already built a similar scheme in Havering. Cabinet had approved the lease for Chesham House but the risk remained with the company. Further due diligence would also be undertaken. There were no grants associated with the scheme and the majority of costs would be met from housing benefit funds.

Previous planning applications for the site had been turned down for a variety of reasons including a noise survey being conducted at the wrong times and section drawings not being done. The National Housing Group would address these areas and carry out three further noise surveys.

Officers advised that the scheme would save the Council money compared to the cost of putting homeless people in hotels. The final plans were still under discussion with National Housing Group but homeless people currently living in Royal Jubilee Court had been consulted. The development would meet the immediate needs of homeless people who wanted more settled accommodation. It was hoped to mitigate noise issues in the final design. Members remained concerned that the area may not be a suitable place for people to live.

It was noted that the Board was not considering a planning decision but a decision to enter into a lease agreement. All works at the site would be subject to a planning application and building control assent. There was also a danger that the owners would sell the building to another borough if the Havering scheme did not go ahead.

Members raised what would be the position for the Council at the end of the 10 year period but officers felt that the agreement represented a good deal for the Council. This would counter the issue of landlords flipping properties into the premium market for Local Authorities and the average cost of accommodation therefore increasing. Parameters had been set for what the Council was willing to pay which was less than other boroughs.

Officers wished to stop housing people in chain hotels where price points were also increasing but more supply of accommodation was needed. A Member felt that there should be a closer relationship between the housing and planning departments.

Members were advised by officers that the development would be solely for use by Havering residents. There was an option to offer void properties to other Council but this was not the intention. It was however unlikely that there would be any voids at the development for a number of years.

Quality issues at the development would be worked on closely with the aim ti match the quality seen at Royal Jubilee Court. It was clarified that the Council would manage the scheme. Reception services would be provided by the Council’s hostels team. As regards allocation of the properties, the allocations policy had been approved by Cabinet and would be implemented in April 2025. A transparent points system of allocations  ...  view the full minutes text for item 22.