Agenda item

To recommend to Council that the Interim Housing Strategy be approved.

That it be RECOMMENDED TO COUNCIL that the Interim Housing Strategy be APPROVED.

85.1          The report of the Acting Housing Services Manager, circulated at Pages No. 135-215, presented an Interim Housing Strategy for 2021/22 which Members were asked to recommend to Council for approval.

85.2          The Committee was advised that the current Housing Strategy 2017/21 was due for renewal in April 2021 and due to the COVID-19 pandemic, in consultation with the Lead Member for Housing, the decision had been taken to defer the production of a full new four year strategy document until April 2022. Officers were mindful of the recent publication of the Local Housing Needs Assessment, the emerging Domestic Abuse Bill and changes to planning approaches that would inform the future strategy. A strategy refresh would ensure the Council had an interim strategy in place for one year for guidance and monitoring and would also enable the production of a more robust document the following year. The refreshed strategy brought the document up to date in terms of legislative changes and housekeeping and was not fundamentally different to the original strategy in terms of substance. That approach had been endorsed by the Overview and Scrutiny Committee. Some important changes had been identified which had been discussed with the Lead Member including: at Page No. 186, Paragraph 2.1, the Committee was advised that the differences of affordability would remain but the specific areas would be removed; and in the Environmental Health section of the action plan, the wording would be amended to make it more accessible to all.

85.3          During the discussion which ensued, a Member expressed the view that, whilst the document was excellent, she did not feel it went far enough on rural affordable housing.  There were a lot of barriers put in the way to achieving affordable housing and she felt those needed to be included in the strategy as well as tying in the importance of more affordable homes within rural locations and the importance of improving the vitality of rural settlements. She also referred to the key challenges at Page No. 164 and expressed the view that this should also list the fact that the Council had issues with its Housing Needs Survey and with finding suitable land for rural affordable housing. The Head of Community Services indicated that he understood the points being made and advised that there was a standalone document that went into more depth on affordable housing but, as part of the wider review of the strategy, this would be better reflected within the document. The Member also referred to the commuted sums which the Council currently held and questioned when they would be spent to start delivering affordable homes. The Head of Community Services confirmed that the Council was in discussions over the spending of money and there was a relatively large sum that had been requested and would go to Executive Committee for decision later in the year.

85.4          A Member liked the layout of the documents and felt it was clear to see the changes from one version to the other which was helpful. He referred to Page No. 162 and, whilst he understood the Gloucestershire Going the Extra Mile (GEM) project had been removed, he questioned whether there would be anything to replace it. He also referred to Page No. 164, Paragraph 4.2, and questioned why the Council was no longer aiming to achieve the gold standard in homelessness and homeless prevention. In response the Acting Housing Services Manager advised that he would investigate any replacement for the GEM project and ensure it was added if there was anything. In terms of the gold standard achievement, this had been a national standard and the project had now ceased – the Council would of course still be striving for excellence. In terms of any mentions of Severn Vale Housing within the document, the Acting Housing Services Manager undertook to check it through and if there were any references out of context they would be removed.

85.5          Accordingly, it was