Facing up to Hastings’ housing challenge

How big is Hastings’ challenge in the face of the government’s determination to put a rocket under house-building? Nick Terdre spoke to Cllr Glenn Haffenden and head of housing Chris Hancock to find out how Hastings Borough Council is planning to tackle the local housing crisis. Research and graphics by Russell Hall.

HBC has its work cut out on the housing front, what with the expensive business of finding temporary accommodation for families and vulnerable people threatened with homelessness (568 households in temporary accommodation at 30 September and forecast net spending of £7.6m in 2024/25) and the high number of rough sleepers (36 found on a street count in October).

As recently reported in HOT they will receive a government grant of £4.83m to help with these activities in 2024/25.

On top of this comes the house-building challenge set by the Labour government’s declared aim of tackling the country’s housing shortage by building 1.5m new homes during its term of office. That is the same as the previous Conservative government proposed, but Labour has announced a much tougher regime to achieve its aim.

Cllr Glenn Haffenden, the housing lead, and head of housing Chris Hancock are keen to draw on the knowledge and experience of the local community as they seek to draw up a new housing strategy. A survey is soon to be issued, with public meetings to follow.

When an overhaul of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), the set of guidelines governing planning regulations, was announced on 12 December, the mandatory target set for Hastings’ was 710 new dwellings a year, slightly down from 722 previously set during the period of consultation. That represents an increase of 45% on the previous government’s target of 490.

In response to the government consultation Cllr Mark Etherington, who holds the planning portfolio, wrote: “Given our densely built town with the sea on one side and protected landscapes to west, north and east it is not surprising that we cannot meet our current targets, so the new targets are completely out of reach.”

In the three years to 2023/24 Hastings delivered only 28% of the 1,235 dwellings expected of it by the previous government. None of the other East Sussex local authorities hit their target either, though some did better than others: Eastbourne achieved 28% of its 1,880 target, Rother 43% of 1,967, Wealden 80% of 3,249 and Lewes 89% of 1,339.

Hastings’ 348 houses delivered in the period represents an annual average of 116, so to achieve 710, the delivery rate would have to increase by just over 500%.

It fell so far short of its target that the borough became subject to a range of sanctions: having to produce an action plan to show how it will meet its five-year target, a 20% buffer or addition to that target, and presumption in favour of approving all planning applications deemed to be consistent with the local plan.

Hastings is far from the only local authority which during the consultation told the government its target was unrealistic. According to research by the BBC, “…the vast majority of councils expressed concern about the plan, many calling it “unrealistic” and “impossible to achieve.”

Blockers and builders

However this has not deterred the government, which has sought to portray the matter as being between “blockers” and “builders.” It has called on councils to produce local plans identifying development sites capable of permitting the building of enough dwellings to meet the mandatory targets.

Hancock, whose CV includes a stint at homelessness charity Crisis, told HOT: “We’re not an authority that doesn’t want to build. We recognise that we do need new housing supply. We’ve done lots of work trying to find sites where we may be able to build, and it’s hugely challenging, we’re a very densely populated place.”

While the council is one of a minority which has regularly produced a local plan, the current update, which covers the period 2019-38, has proved hard to finalise. It is due to go out for local consultation in the spring after which it will be finalised and presented to the Planning Inspectorate for final approval.

And if it does not identify sites with sufficient capacity to meet the government’s target, Angela Rayner, secretary of state for Housing, Communities and Local Government, has threatened to intervene and make sure it does by using powers under the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 to “prepare or revise” the plan, or “give directions to the authority in relation to the preparation or revision of the document.”

Brownfield sites

Priority, the government says, must go to building on brownfield sites. Hastings is anyway almost totally dependent on brownfield sites for new housing developments.

In a TV interview in November Labour MP Helena Dollimore, who is supportive of the government’s housing policy, stated that “There are so many brownfield sites across Hastings that could be homes for local families.”

According to the draft local plan, Hastings’ brownfield register lists 46 brownfield sites spread across the borough. The register however is clearly out of date, and some of these are already being developed. Some are owned by the council, some privately. Not a few are also small. In the sites yet to be redeveloped, the capacity for new homes is put at 1,202-1,273.

That is well short of the 4,260 homes required to meet the government’s target - 710 each year for five years plus the 20% buffer.

And whereas in other local authorities there is scope for large-scale developments with several hundred homes, Hastings is relatively restricted - most of the larger available areas are already under development.

Land-banking

Simply making it easier for developers to get planning permission is not going to solve the problem, according to Haffenden. “The fact that developers get planning permission doesn't mean they're going to build,” he said. Not infrequently, developers prefer to play at land-banking - leaving the site undeveloped while they wait to sell it on at a tidy profit.

“And currently the council has no powers to stop this. What I would like to see is something radical like, if we give you planning permission and you don’t start building within a certain period, the council can take it off you.”

At present a developer can undertake a very minor act such as making a start to clearing the land, and it counts as “starting building,” in the process securing its planning permission in perpetuity, even if no further building takes place.

Before coming to power, Labour party leader Keir Starmer promised, “No more land-bankers sitting comfortably on brownfield sites while rents in their community rise.” However there is no provision to prevent it in the revised NPPF.

Councils already have the power to compulsorily purchase private land, but the process has always been prohibitively long-winded and costly, even for unused land, with compensation paid to developers inflated by 'hope value' based on the prospect of planning permission being granted.

The Levelling-up and Regeneration Act passed into law last year by Rishi Sunak’s government makes it possible to remove the hope value uplift in cases where the land is to be used to build affordable or social housing. Under Angela Rayner, the Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government has now opened a consultation on proposals to make the compulsory purchase process faster and cheaper.

Councils still face the problem posed by Tory governments’ insistence that developers should expect to make a 15-20% profit on their house-building projects. Armed with this expectation developers are able to argue that they should be exempted from provisions requiring a proportion of their developments to consist of less profitable affordable homes - 25% on brownfield sites and 40% on greenfield locations.

Again Labour gave assurances before the general election that it would remedy the situation. “…we will strengthen the rules to prevent developers from wriggling out of their responsibilities and we will speed up the building of new social and affordable housing,” Rayner said.

But there is little in the new NPPF to deter developers resorting to viability arguments to shed their affordable housing obligations.

It is down to social providers - housing associations - to take the lead in building affordable and social rent homes, but with funding in short supply local providers like Southern Housing and Orbit have little to show in the way of new projects.

The council’s current forecast for affordable and social rented housing delivery is 279 units in the five-year period to 2027/28, with a peak of 164 in 2025/26.

Affordability

The question also has to be raised: how affordable is affordable? For private developers it usually means rent at 80% of the market rate. For many people that is not affordable, especially with rents at their current high level, Haffenden said. What is affordable are social rents, capped by social providers at the level of the local housing allowance, which is about 30-40% of market levels.

The council is keen to bring empty homes back into circulation, but as with building affordable housing, it will require funding from central government to get the ball rolling, Haffenden points out. In recent years Homes England has been supportive, providing funding for the council’s acquisition programme of properties for temporary accommodation and contributing towards the cost of the council’s small development behind 419-447 Bexhill Road. However the agency has undergone a shake-up under the new government whose intentions for it are as yet unclear.

Council house-building, which vanished under Margaret Thatcher, is now reviving, and could be boosted by the proposals mentioned above to make the compulsory purchase of unused land by councils easier and cheaper.

Hastings is currently going through a relative boom in house-building, with half a dozen projects that in local terms count as large.

Cliff edge

However, once the current crop is completed, we face a cliff edge, said Haffenden, with few sites which could accommodate larger numbers of dwellings. Potential locations include the old bathing pool site, where an application is expected this year, 125 West Hill Road, both in West St Leonards, and Horntye Park.

Relaxation of the restrictions on council house-building have opened up new possibilities for HBC. It has set the ball rolling with the development behind 419-447 Bexhill Road, all 16 dwellings in which will be affordable.

Under the current rules these would be subject to right-to-buy rules, which many blame for the dearth of social and affordable housing. Although hopes that Labour might scrap the scheme altogether have been dashed, the discounts available to tenants will be reduced and feedback on further proposals, including the exemption of newly built social homes from the scheme, is currently being analysed following a consultation.

Without such changes the council would have to look at transferring the ownership of its properties in order to avoid the right-to-buy. “It wouldn’t make sense for the Council to invest millions of pounds only to have to sell those assets off at a discount,” Hancock said.

The council is also looking for high environmental and sustainability standards on this development. “We’re pushing the developer to achieve EPC level A,” Hancock said. “At the moment we’ve got to B, though it isn’t the easiest of sites.”

Another positive example is Holmhurst St Mary, where all 208 homes have air source heat pumps and are fitted with electric vehicle charging points, and surface water drainage is based on sustainable principles. With the support of Homes England, another laudable feature is that half the homes are affordable - the social provider Southern Housing has capped rents at the local housing rate, a fact welcomed by Haffenden - while the other half are earmarked for shared ownership, which is intended to offer an affordable route for people to buy their house.

Hastings Housing Company

Hastings Housing Company, set up by the council in 2017, might have a role to play in future house-building - so far it has only been a vehicle for renting on the open market and acquiring properties for the temporary accommodation programme. “We have to be realistic about whether it has achieved the aims originally set for it,” said Hancock. “As it stands, it hasn’t. We are currently tendering for someone to come and review what its future options are.”

Meanwhile the council has stepped in to take over management of the homes bought under the acquisition programme, which had previously been put out to a private managing agent.

The future of the housing company is yet to be decided then, and meanwhile the council waits to see the fate of its local plan, once finalised, at the hands of the government.

 

 

Also in: Home Ground

Traffic controls at Queensway Gateway Road junction suspended »