Issue - meetings

Report of the Director for Neighbourhoods

The Chair, Councillor Combellack, introduced the item as the Group’s main scrutiny topic and explained that the discussion should focus on whether the current approach to shared ownership and other affordable housing products was achieving the best outcomes for residents and whether there were opportunities to improve delivery.

The Strategic Housing Manager presented the report, providing an overview of the affordable housing products delivered in Rushcliffe, how they were secured and monitored, and the evidence base informing the Council’s approach. Members were advised that the 2024 Housing Needs Assessment identified a need for 507 affordable homes per year, comprising 477 rented and 30 affordable home ownership properties. Delivery had increased in recent years, and rented homes remained most closely aligned to evidenced need. Shared ownership delivery had grown substantially, while First Homes and discounted market sale products remained limited, although discounted market sale had recently supported progress on a stalled site.

The Strategic Housing Manager emphasised the Council’s main influence through planning policy, Section 106 negotiations and compliance, and monitoring. Matters such as marketing, allocation, service charges and resale arrangements for home ownership products sat with developers and Registered Providers. Policy 8 of the Local Plan, the Affordable Housing SPD and the Housing Needs Assessment shaped the Council’s negotiating position, with a clear preference for rented homes where viable. Officers noted that viability and Registered Provider capacity could constrain what was deliverable, necessitating alternative tenures in some cases.

Councillor Calvert referred to the tables comparing identified need and actual delivery and asked how the two related. Officers explained that the Needs Assessment formed the evidence base for negotiation, while delivery figures reflected what had been secured on individual sites, influenced by viability, site?specific issues, Registered Provider interest and site phasing. It was acknowledged that the Council could not meet the full level of assessed need through new supply alone.

Councillor Calvert also queried whether the Council was able to secure sufficient social and affordable rented homes, as need appeared strongly weighted towards rented provision. Officers advised that the Council’s starting point was always to negotiate rented units, but that viability pressures, constraints or the need to unlock stalled sites could lead to changes in tenure mix. Rented homes were typically the most difficult and costly to deliver.

He further referenced the Council’s previous decision not to pursue direct council house building, noting that this left the authority reliant on Section 106 delivery and Registered Providers. Officers confirmed that this had been a political decision supported by an independent review and highlighted the resource implications for a stock?transfer authority with a small team.

Councillor Chaplain queried the apparent mismatch between the relatively low need for affordable home ownership and the higher proportion of shared ownership in recent delivery, particularly in 2024/25. Officers stressed that need and delivery did not correlate directly year?by?year, as delivery reflected historic permissions, earlier policy assumptions and phasing. A more detailed breakdown of recent figures could be provided.

The Principal Planning  ...  view the full minutes text for item 11