Council Housing and Common Sense – Brent’s reply

 Guest post by Philip Grant in personal capacity

 

Earlier this month I sent a letter to Brent Council’s Leader and Chief Executive headed “Council Housing and Common Sense”, which was published as a guest blog. It set out my view that the Council has become too complicated in the way it seeks to provide the new Council homes that many local people need. 

 

My letter focused on two Cabinet decisions in the past six months. One was to spend at least around £48m of borrowed money to buy 155 leasehold flats in a 26-storey tower block, yet to be built on the former Alperton Bus Garage site. These would not be acquired directly from the developer, Telford Homes, but from an unidentified “Asset Special Purpose Vehicle”.

 

The block in Alperton where the 155 leasehold flats will be built.

 

The second decision was to allow a private developer to buy 152 of the 250 homes that Brent Council will be building on land that it owns at Cecil Avenue in Wembley, and sell them for profit, rather than using all 250 of those homes as affordable housing for local people who need them.

 

What the High Road frontage of Brent’s Cecil Avenue development will look like.

 

I have received a reply to my letter, from Brent Council’s Director of Finance, and this is what he has written:-

 

‘Dear Mr Grant,

 

The Council continues to increase the delivery of affordable housing for our residents through self-delivery, via the use of S106 agreements with developers and working in partnership with Registered Providers. To maximise the delivery, the Council utilises GLA subsidy to support scheme viability but this is becoming increasingly challenging. This means the Council has to explore more complex ways of delivery, one of which has been the Alperton Bus Garage Development.   

 

The development at the Alperton Bus Garage site provides a unique opportunity to purchase the affordable units in the wider development as part of a lease structure. The original proposal contained a tenure mix of 57 shared ownership units and 97 rented. By entering into this lease structure, it allows the Council to convert the shared ownership units into more affordable rented units. In this specific development, without the involvement of the Council a Registered Provider is unlikely to be able to offer the most affordable rented product due to viability limitations so the acquisition will further Brent’s key priority of providing homes that are most affordable. The lease option demonstrates value for money against our average development cost across our New Council Homes Programme of £280k per home, which includes both leasehold and freehold tenures.

 

The acquisition of the homes takes place through a lease structure that includes both the development and lease agreements. These areas of the report are exempt as they contain the following category of exempt information as specified in Paragraph 3, Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972, namely: “Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information)".

 

The Council has undertaken due diligence with regards to the SDLT exemption for the acquisition and assumes the Council will receive the exemption given the Council is deemed to be the relevant housing provider that is controlled by its tenants and the application of GLA grant receipts meets the requirement of a qualifying public subsidy. Until this has been confirmed by HMRC on acquisition, the potential cost needs to be highlighted as a factor of the scheme’s viability. 

 

The Cecil Avenue site is part of a wider development in the Wembley Housing Zones Programme and includes the adjacent site Ujima House. This site is intended to deliver 100% affordable housing and a target of 50% across both sites. The development will also include workspace to support job creation and economic growth, community space, highway and public realm improvements and new publicly accessible open space. The Council needs to ensure the entire programme is financially viable within the GLA grant available hence the requirement for a mixed tenure development in order to subsidise the delivery of the affordable elements. The application of the funding structure available for the Alperton Bus Garage site cannot be applied to improve viability in the Wembley Housing Zone Programme to provide more affordable housing within the existing development.

 

As evidenced, the Council is committed to seek all opportunities to deliver more affordable housing within the financial viability constraints to ensure the optimum housing mix can be provided for our residents.

Regards

 

Minesh Patel

Director of Finance’

 

The main messages in this reply seem to be that the Council has to use more complex methods of funding, in order to make its Council housing schemes viable, but because this involves information relating to the Council’s financial affairs, they don’t have to explain the details to us. So much for openness and transparency!

 

 

The reply does not mention the shadowy “Asset Special Purchase Vehicle” for the Alperton acquisition, simply referring to ‘a lease structure that includes both the development and lease agreements’, which we are not allowed to know about, because that is ‘exempt information’.

 

 

The response over the Cecil Avenue homes may sound familiar. Some of it appears to be from the same source as Cllr. Butt’s recent reply to me. At least one sentence is identical, and must have been “copied and pasted”!

 

 

Parody Brent Council publicity photo for its Cecil Avenue development.

 

I still do not understand why the Cecil Avenue development, on land the Council already owns, can only be viable if just 37 of the 250 homes (just under 15%!) are made available to Council tenants at affordable rents. And why 152 of them (over 60%) have to be for the contractor, who Brent will pay to build them, to purchase for a fixed price and sell at a profit. I will continue to question that, as best I can.

 

 

Philip Grant.

Plans for bungalows on Kings Drive garage site to be decided on Wednesday

The trees behind the garages are in the gardens of Barnhill residents

The car park, eventual access to the bungalows

The 'poor quality' trees on the boundary

3D view of the development, note the absence of the Barnhill garden trees behind the bungalows

Ariel view. Expensive private Barnhill houses on left, Kings Dricve council estate on the right

Site at present with garages

Proposed site plan

I have to state an interest on this issue as I am a resident on the King's Drive/Pilgrims Way estate although not in the immediate vicinity of this planned development. The proposal to build four affordable bungalow homes on the current garage site is part of a Council strategy to find space for new homes on Brent estates on under-utilised or redundant areas. Details of schemes across the borough can be found HERE.

This scheme aroused a lot of opposition on the estate and hence the referral to Planning Committee for their consideration. The issue is one of balancing the need for new affordable homes with potential loss of amenity to current residents. In particular estate residents felt that the garages had been deliberately run down and not marketed for rent which enabled the Council to declare them not needed.  There was also concern at the potential loss of parking spaces and the loss of the trees. The garages form a sort of barrier between the expensive private houses of Barnhill and the council house blocks with the mature trees in the Barnhill gardens screening the view of the blocks.

There was no detailed survey of the Barnhill garden trees but the report, answering concerns about the trees overhanging the bungalows, says that under common law they can be cut back to the boundary.

A parking space will be provided for each bungalow and an additional 25 'communal' parking spaces will be provided. When I visited this evening there were 25 cars parked on the site.

A potential problem is difficulty of access. This is already a problem on the estate's cul-de-sac roads with parked vehicles blocking access to delivery lorries. Residents on Saltcroft Close suffer from many missed blue and grey bin collections because of this issue. They were not collected this week.

Full report HERE

Greens expose unviability of London Mayor's 'viability team' on affordable housing

Sian Berry London Green Party Assembly Member has revealed that the London Mayor’s new ‘team of viability experts’ will consist of only two people, which is not enough to challenge the huge resources of developers.

The new team will be based in City Hall and will examine figures submitted by developers when they fail to meet the Mayor’s targets for affordable homes.

However, in response to a written question from Sian Berry, the Mayor has said the ‘team’ will be made up of just two people.

He also failed to give reassurances that they would be permanent staff and not on short term contracts that allow them to move back and forth between public and commercial work that could bring conflicts of interest.

Sian Berry said:

The Mayor promised a team of experts and Londoners need more than two people in these posts if the Mayor’s goal of challenging developers is to be viable. I am very concerned that two people, however talented, will be stretched beyond capacity and unable to make a real difference.

There’s already too much of a ‘revolving door’ for consultants between big developers and Council regeneration schemes, and it’s vital that these experts do not also have commercial interests while working on behalf of Londoners.

The new team needs to be expanded quickly and this should not be done by hiring in consultants on short term contracts, but by building up a dedicated and permanent expert team that works only in the public interest.

Sadiq Khan is currently consulting on draft Affordable Housing and Viability Supplementary Guidance (consultation ends 28th February 2017) LINK

It is clear from the draft extracts below that more than two experts will be required to give close attention to schemes when developers argue that they will only be 'viable' if less than 50% of housing is 'affordable'.  In truth two people would hardly be adequate for developments taking place just within Brent in Wembley Park, South Kilburn and Alperton. The problem that 'affordable' is not really affordable and Brent  regular backs down in the face of viability assessments has been covered on this blog LINK and reported on Get West London website LINK

VIABILITY ASSESSMENTS

14 The third part of the SPG (Supplementary Planning Guidance) provides detailed guidance on viability assessments, aiming to establish a standardised approach to viability. The SPG clearly sets out what information and assumptions should be included in a viability appraisal. It builds on the London Borough Development Viability Protocol and aims to provide a clear approach that can be consistently applied across London.

15 It sets out the Mayor’s expectations when it comes to the publication of viability information, requiring all information to be made public, including council and third party assessments. Applicants will have the opportunity to argue that limited elements should be kept undisclosed, but the onus is on the applicant to make this case.

16 The SPG is explicit about the Mayor’s preference for using Existing Use Value Plus as the comparable Benchmark Land Value when assessing the viability of a proposal. The premium above Existing Use Value will be based on site by site justification reflecting the circumstances of the site and landowner.

THE MAYOR AND REFERABLE APPLICATIONS

1.16 Given the strategic importance of affordable housing delivery and the significant impact of reduced levels of affordable housing on the delivery of the London Plan, the Mayor will consider directing that he is to be the Local Planning Authority for the purposes of determining an application (often referred to as a ‘call in’) or directing refusal when:

•       he is not satisfied with the viability information submitted by the applicant, the assumptions that underpin the information, or the level of scrutiny given by the LPA; 


•       he considers the viability information submitted may suggest a higher level of affordable housing could reasonably be provided; 


•       the chance of significant contribution to affordable housing could be forgone due to other grounds and the Mayor wants to review the weight the LPA has given to competing planning objectives. 


Brent House development in Wembley High Road given the go ahead

Existing Brent House

The proposal

Brent Planning Committee has approved proposals for the redevelopment of Brent House in the High Road, Wembley.

The proposed development would be between the new Elizabeth House and Ark Elvin Academy, which is due to be re-developed LINK, and will stretch back towards the playing fields and St Joseph's Primary school.

It will consist of tw building sof between 8 and 10 storeys with retail/commercial space on the groubnd floot. The 248 dwellings will consist of 84 one bedroomed flats (although that might be reconsidered), 108 2 bedroom, 49 3 bedroom and 7 4 bedroom.

30% will be affordable rather than the 50% figure in Brent's strategic Plan. Henley Homes argued that above 30% would not be viable in terms of the return to the builders and Capita confirmed this figures.

It is projected that there will be 104 children in the development and play space is planned for, although the total amount of utdoor space is less than would be expected for this scale of development. Planners were told that this was constrained by the nature of the site and its quality compensated for the lower figure.

TfL will need to review bus transport in the area due to the additional population.

The mature trees, a feature of the site, (see top picture) will be lost in the redevelopment.

Wembley Central councillors submitted no comments on the proposal.

The plan - High Road at the top

Why I am standing for the Greens in the Kenton by-election

Michaela Lichten

Brent Green Party has selected Michaela Lichten to contest the Kenton by-election

Michaela said:

I have been a Kenton resident for 19 years (and a Brent resident for 38).

Having raised my children in local schools and taught basic literacy skills to adults, I am particularly interested in education within the borough and advocating equal educational opportunities for all.

I am at present time a carer for my husband who has Alzheimer’s and so have an interest in elderly care delivery which at present is, worryingly, earmarked for cuts. Many of the people who will be affected by these cuts are in the difficult position of increasingly needing help whilst being decreasingly able to access that help.

Being lucky enough to live in  Brent with the wonderful resource of our many parks and Fryent Country Park, I’d like to focus on the issue of fly tipping and litter which affects everyone's enjoyment of these open spaces and blights the streets where we live. This can only get worse with the introduction of selective payment for rubbish removal and proposed cuts in residential street sweeping.  The cost of removing illegally dumped rubbish will far exceed the revenue raised and makes no sense.

As a Brent parent I’m anxious to see opportunities for young people to get into employment. New approaches have to be made to help them, we have to see that it is an asset to us all for our children to make the transition from education to the workplace as productively as possible. Apprenticeships, continuing education and help to set up their own businesses are ways in which this can be achieved.

I support the building of affordable homes which are truly affordable. I would like to see the estimated 3000 empty houses in Brent brought back into use and and an end of the Right to Buy scheme which further depletes the housing stock.

As we all become more budget conscious under austerity most of us are becoming greener through necessity, but being green has a relevance to our lives in the wider world and it’s my understanding that it is only The Green Party that has put the individual at the centre of their policies and is committed to a fairer society.  That is why I’m standing as The Green Party candidate in this by-election.

Shelter publishes updated housing statistics for Brent

Shelter today published its detailed housing figures for the fourth quarter of 2012  LINK a selection of which are printed in the table below. The situation will become much worse as a result of benefit changes introduced from this month.

Some figures from 2011 are also relevant. Brent's working age unemployment rate in 2011 was 12.10% compared with a London average of 9.3%. In 2011 Brent had 2,370 vacant properties registered for council tax purposes. In 2011-12, 850 affordable homes were built in Brent (London 17,260)

Average weekly council rents in 2011-12 were £95.43 in Brent and £89.17 across London. In 2011 weekly housing association rents in Brent were £101.46 (London £97.46) and are set to rise towards the private level. The average price of a home in Brent in Q4 2012 was £325,000 compared with £315,000 in Q3 2011 (London average £305,000).

The home price to annual income ratio for the lower quartile of house prices and income in 2011 was Brent 11.75 and London 8.96. For all incomes and house prices  the average ratio was 10.79 Brent and 8.54 London. The annual average gross income in 2012 was £28,703 Brent and £32,509 London.

Category	Area	Q4 2011	Q4 2012
Families with children accepted as homeless	London	2398	3118
	Brent	107	120
Households accepted as homeless	London	3460	4213
	Brent	136	154
Households in temporary accommodation	London	35920	38856
	Brent	3078	3220
Households on council waiting list	London	366613	380301
	Brent	14443	16735
Households with dependent children in temporary accommodation	London	27855	28393
	Brent	2620	2704
Number of children in temporary accommodation	London	54200	5490
	Brent	5930	5934
Possession claims by landlords	London	10260	12163
	Brent	415	589
Possession claims granted to landlords	London	6580	7780
	Brent	350	477
Housing benefit claimants council and housing assn	Brent	20000	20430 (Q3 2012)
-ditto- private tenants	Brent	16820	17290 (Q3 2012)
Mean private rents	London	£1281	£1369
	Brent	£1287	£1364
Median private rents	London	£1100	£1196
	Brent	£1200	£1250

Brent housing crisis hits the headlines

Wembley and Willesden Observer 10.3.13