Decisions

The Sub-Committee reviewed a report on pages 3 to 22 of the supplementary agenda, detailing the Asset Management Strategy proposal. Cllr Lynne Hale, Cabinet Member for Homes, introduced the item. It was noted that the Sub-Committee had initially considered the Asset Management Strategy in February. It was also mentioned that the previous strategy, agreed upon in 2019, failed to fully address the long-term investment needs of the portfolio.

The Chair clarified that during the earlier Homes Scrutiny meeting, the Sub-Committee only considered the guiding principles, not the written strategy itself. The Chair also mentioned that the strategy was intended to be reviewed alongside the Regeneration Framework and asked about the timeline for its development. The officers explained that the framework was still being developed and had been delayed due to the stock condition survey. The officers added that they planned to include a new-build approach and expected completion around autumn 2024.

Sue Hanlon, Interim Director of Housing – Estates & Improvement, gave a presentation outlining the consultation process, key principles of the strategy, key statistics, aims for the next five years, and key year one actions for delivering the strategy.

The first question from the Sub-Committee concerned the progress, prioritisation of stock, findings, and actions from the stock condition survey. The officers reported a 52% completion rate by the end of June and expected to reach 60% by the end of September 2024. The officers explained that they categorised homes into houses, flats, sheltered accommodations, and general needs accommodations and analysed completion percentages for each type.

The officers assured that there were no major concerns about specific stock and used the Health and Safety Rating System for immediate concerns. Then, the Sub-Committee further challenged how the survey ensured that the hardest-to-evaluate properties were not left until the end. The officers explained that initially they focused on easier stock but redirected efforts in February to more challenging properties like flats and maisonettes.

The next question considered the differences between the previous and proposed strategies. The officers explained that both focused on similar areas due to regulatory and statutory requirements. However, the new strategy emphasised more integrated working and alignment with the regeneration framework. It also fostered a culture of cooperation across various housing departments.

When asked how the strategy met the Borough's current needs, officers explained that it was an overarching document, and assured that they were constantly testing assumptions using data, including the stock condition survey, to identify needs and implications more accurately.

A question about a table on page 7 of the supplementary agenda pack and how to interpret the numbers was asked by the Sub-Committee. The officers explained that it outlined the number of checks needed for each action. Compliance areas required regular safety checks, linked to the strategy's pillar of "safe & compliant homes," with a goal of 100% compliance.

Subsequently, the Sub-Committee asked a question on incorporating good practice into the strategy. The officers responded that they worked with other providers and local authorities, considering political changes and government guidance, such as Awaab’s Law. The strategy was designed to be a live and dynamic, allowing for necessary changes. The Sub-Committee inquired further about horizon scanning and preparation for changes in central administration. The officers explained the pre-election pause was beneficial, allowing time to gather more information on the new framework, especially around regeneration, and to make informed investment choices. Another question about investing in properties where people want to live was linked to the Homelessness Strategy and horizon scanning. The officers highlighted the importance of communication with bodies like the Greater London Authority and Department of Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (DLUHC), with plans to present the Housing Revenue Account Business Plan in early 2025.

The next question asked by the Sub-Committee related to the integration of five underlying principles listed in the strategy. The officers confirmed that they were used in option appraisals, ensuring robust decision-making regarding the asset management.

The Sub-Committee also asked a question on performance measurement. The officers responded that this would be covered in operational delivery plans which were in the pipeline. They also explained that the aim of the strategy was setting the vision and direction.

The strategy's interaction with the Housing Revenue Account (HRA) Business Plan was also queried by the Sub-Committee. The officers explained that the strategy set out the Council's goals, with the next HRA Business Plan iteration outlining operational delivery based on insights from the stock condition survey and available grants.

Subsequently, the timeline for moving from reactive to predictive and planned maintenance was discussed. The officers explained that they were expecting significant progress within the strategy's duration. They aimed for a ratio of 65% planned investment works and 35% responsive repairs, ensuring supply chain readiness.

The next question asked by the Sub-Committee considered making the housing portfolio more sustainable. The officers explained that short-term actions like improving EPC ratings through additional insulation were planned, but some investments, including renewable energy, would take longer to be implemented, but were being considered by the Council.

The following question asked by the Sub-Committee related to the satisfaction survey and how many people participated in it. The residents responded that an independent company selected between 600 and 700 residents quarterly. The results were calculated based on the responses from this selected group of residents.

The final question asked by the Sub-Committee considered building information modelling and whether it would be too soon to implement it due to the lack of capacity among Council’s staff. The officers explained that the Council did not have a choice, and this would have to be rolled out due to the building safety agenda. The officers assured that they already had a team working on the building safety. Then, the next step would be to trial it and obtain feedback from the building safety regulators. Subsequently, it would be rolled out to other high-rise buildings.

Actions

Following the discussion of this item, the Sub-Committee agreed the following actions to follow-up after the meeting:

-       The Sub-Committee further challenged the claim that ‘nearly half of the residents participated’, what it meant and how many residents took part in the survey. It was agreed that this will be further checked by the officers and information will be provided.

Conclusions

Following its discussion of this item, the Sub-Committee reached the following conclusions:

-          The Sub-Committee welcomed the shift towards planned investments, viewing it as a positive move away from the reliance on responsive repairs.

-          The Sub-Committee appreciated the increased efforts to ensure greater resident involvement in the planning process.

-          The Sub-Committee commended the strategic document for its clarity and comprehensiveness.

Recommendations

Following its discussion of this item the Sub-Committee agreed to submit the following recommendations for the consideration of the Executive Mayor:

-          The Homes Sub-Committee recommends clarifying before consideration by full Council, how the Asset Management Strategy interlinks with the HRA Business Plan and what mechanisms will be used to inform decision making e.g. the use of options appraisals.

-          The Homes Sub-Committee recommends that, before it is considered by fill Council, that it is acknowledged within the Asset Management Strategy that changes to culture and ways of working are instrumental to the successful delivery of the strategy's objectives.

-          The Homes Sub-Committee recommends, before consideration by full Council, how satisfaction survey data is presented in the Asset Management Strategy is clarified, particularly in relation to the number of residents participating in the survey and how the participants were selected.