Wednesday December 4th. Agenda Item No:10

 

 

THE LONDON BOROUGH OF CAMDEN

WARDS:

Belsize

Camden Town with Primrose Hill

Cantelowes

Fortune Green

Gospel Oak

Kentish Town

KilburnSwiss Cottage

West Hampstead

 

REPORT TITLE: DEVELOPING A STRATEGY FOR THE REMAINING CAMDEN OWNED SHORT LIFE PROPERTIES WITH WEST HAMPSTEAD HOUSING ASSOCIATION (HO/2002/62)

 

 

 

REPORT OF:        Director of Housing

 

 

FOR SUBMISSION TO:   Executive                        DATE:  4 Dec 2002

 

 

 

SUMMARY OF REPORT:

This report follows up on the decisions taken at Executive on 7 August 2002 to investigate the options of a transfer of the stock to PCHA  and the setting up of a Housing Co-operative.  The report is coming to the Executive as it seeks a decision on the proposed disposal of Council property.

 

Residents have now set up a body to represent them: Camden Residents in Short Life Housing(CRISH). PCHA(Paddington Churches Housing Association, part of Genesis) and CDS (the Co-operative Development Society) have each made bids to the Housing Corporation for Social Housing Grant to buy and refurbish properties for the 30 or so residents households who are eligible for permanent rehousing.

 

The report recommends that the Council support the CDS bid if it is possible to obtain Housing Corporation funding for CDS, and the PCHA bid if it is not; agree the principle of disposal of some properties to CDS or PCHA and make decisions on sales and funding based on a further report which will be issued once Housing Corporation allocations are known and any valuation issues have been resolved.

 

RECOMMENDATIONS:

 

1.                  That 

 

(a)   a decision is taken to discuss with the Housing Corporation which is the most viable of the bids from CDS and PCHA , accepting that both will need further detailed work and that the PCHA bid will need to be reduced to exclude the most expensive properties. 

(b)    If the HC agrees to fund CDS, to support  the bid from CDS for £3.97m of Social Housing Grant to redevelop and refurbish the properties  to provide 99 bedspaces in 28 homes (flats and houses) for management and possible future ownership by a co-operative whose initial members would be residents of the WHHA short life homes who are eligible for permanent rehousing. If the Housing Corporation will not fund at this level the Executive is asked to indicate if it would consider discounting the value to a level that the Housing Corporation can agree to fund (subject to consent of the Secretary of State and further report on details to the Executive).

(c)   If the Housing Corporation will not fund CDS, to work with PCHA and CRISH to develop a viable scheme based initially on rehousing existing long term residents.

(d) that officers in consultation with CRISH – representing eligible households – and CDS or PCHA, finalise the details of which properties in Annex 1 are to be transferred  for development for the rehousing of the eligible households

(e) that the Council carry out an options appraisal of alternatives for the remaining  properties after the eligible households have been rehoused within the scheme. This would include as an option that the Council considers open market sale to benefit from the proposal that 100% of receipts can be recycled in housing properties, as well as one to  support future bids by CDS, or PCHA  for Social Housing Grant to develop additional homes to meet priority housing needs. 

 

2.                  And that subject to

 

·         There being SHG available from the Housing Corporation

·         Agreeing values and a decision on whether discounts can be considered

·         A further report to Executive on these matters

 

That it is agreed in principle

 

2.1 that some of the transferred properties at Annex 1 will be sold to CDS or PCHA at prices agreed by the Head of Property Services for the development of homes for the rehousing of the eligible households, subject to detailed proposals being agreed by the Executive

 

2.2 to agree to consider disposal at a discount if this is required to secure Housing Corporation funding, and subject to further detailed analysis of the benefits to the Council to be submitted to the Executive for consideration

 

 Local Government Act 1972 – Access to Information

 

Report to the Executive  7th August 2002 on “Future options for WHHA short life properties”.

 

Contact Officer:

Janet Sutherland

Head of Housing Partnerships

Room 413, Bidborough House

20 Mabledon Place WC1

E mail: janet.Sutherland@camden.gov.uk

Telephone no:     020 7974 5524

 

Signed by Director/Assistant Director: .......................…………………………

 

                                                   Date: .......................…………………………

 

 

1.      Executive decision

 

At the Executive meeting on  7th August 2002 it was agreed that :

 

“1…..officers should further explore the two options outlined:

a) undertake negotiations with Genesis (Paddington Churches Housing Association) to establish whether satisfactory heads of terms can be agreed for disposal of the remaining WHHA short life properties to them, and to secure Housing Corporation funding. If it is not possible to reach a satisfactory agreement, then alternative options will be explored and reported to the Executive.

b) explore further the options of forming a Housing Co-operative of existing short life residents and to report back to Executive on the potential viability of this route by November 2002

 

2) to request the Council to rescind the Council resolution of 28 10 98 regarding rehousing of short life residents which is quoted in para 3.1  and to reinstate the original Short Life Strategy objective of accepting that to obtain a viable scheme long term residents will be rehoused back into the scheme where possible, but  cannot expect to return to their existing home. In some individual cases, to achieve a viable scheme, rehousing out of the scheme will be required.”

 

This report relates to  item 1 (a) and (b).

 

2        Developing the options

 

2.1    Following the meeting officers approached Genesis (the group of which Paddington Churches Housing Association (PCHA) and  West Hampstead HA ( WHHA - now called Pathmeads) are members. Negotiations with Genesis led to a bid for Social Housing Grant (SHG) being made to the Housing Corporation by the deadline of 8th November for all the properties in Annex 1.

 

2.2                  Officers also approached CDS (the Co-operative Development  Society) as CDS have extensive experience of setting up co-operatives using Social Housing Grant (SHG) and private finance. CDS have also met with residents and they have advised officers that they consider that a co-operative could be set up based on the eligible residents and some of these properties.

 

2.3                  Discussions with Genesis also continued around the financial state of WHHA and WHHA’s strong desire to end the current arrangements on these short life properties.

 

2.4                  Informal meetings were also held with some residents. Residents have now set up Camden Residents in Shortlife Housing (CRISH)  to represent them in negotiations with the Council and WHHA. It seems that most WHHA short life residents who are eligible for permanent rehousing under the Council’s earlier decisions (‘eligible residents’) are members, and that there are also members of CRISH who do not fall within the Council’s policies for such eligibility or who have already been housed permanently.

 

2.5                  Property Services have now reported on their view of values on the basis of the information available to them and this has been given to PCHA  and CDS on a without prejudice basis so that they can make judgements as to the financial viability of the property. Some properties have high values which would make them difficult for an RSL to buy for development because of the rules about costs for Social Housing Grant funded homes. These preliminary valuations were used as the basis of the bids by CDS and PCHA and for the figures in this report.

 

2.6                  Discussions with PCHA and WHHA staff have led to the view that about 30 of the households are eligible under the Council’s policy based on its earlier decisions for permanent rehousing. Discussions are continuing with WHHA on this. It appears that these households (who are mostly living in and around Lithos Road  (off the Finchley Road) and near Kilburn Station) would be eligible for the following homes:

 

·                         22   I bedroom

·                         7   2 bedroom

·                         1   4 bedroom

 

3.                      152 – 158 Mill Lane (evens)

 

Four houses in Mill Lane are held under Education powers and that these cannot be released, as they need to be held for a potential future school extension. Further discussions are taking place with those residents and WHHA to see what is the most practical way forward for these houses and residents. If possible they should remain in ongoing short life use. It may be that CDS or PCHA could take them on a short life lease and seek Temporary Social Housing Grant from the Housing Corporation to carry out repairs.

 

4.                      Bids to the Housing Corporation

             

4.1         CDS and PCHA have now made bids to the Housing Corporation  for Social Housing Grant (SHG). These bids had to be submitted by 8th November. The Council’s officers are meeting with the Housing Corporation on  6th December alone and on the 10th December for a sub regional meeting with representatives of the other  boroughs to discuss how the Housing Corporation should allocate its Social Housing Grant  in the sub region in 2003-4. These bids are summarised below;

 

 

CDS

PCHA

 

Rehabilitation

New build

Total

Rehabilitation

 Total Costs

  2,383,026

   3,003,083

    5,386,109

    11,114,041

 SHG sought

  1,974,552

   1,997,667

3,972,219

      8,745,842

SHG as % of total cost

83%

67%

74%

79%

Properties in the bid

5

2

7

23

Homes to be provided

10

18

28

52

Bedspaces to be provided

39

60

99

197

 

 

 

average

 

SHG per bedspace

       50,630

        33,294

          40,123

            44,395

 

 

4.2         CDS have only bid for the less expensive properties and on current understandings there would need to be a further bid for SHG in 2003 to rehouse all eligible residents. The viability of the co-operative would be enhanced by 10 – 20 additional homes beyond those needed for eligible residents and it is recommended that, subject to good value for money being obtained and this first phase being funded by the Housing Corporation, the Council  consider this option as part of an appraisal for the future options of the remaining properties, and if agreed, support a further bid to the Housing Corporation from CDS to secure this.

 

 

4.3          Although the Housing Corporation have recently indicated that they would  consider allocating funds to some local (i.e. borough) priorities as well as sub regional priorities, there is increasing priority given to more cost effective (i.e. cheaper) projects . Thus funding for schemes located in high cost areas will become more and more difficult to secure. The Housing Corporation have also said that their funding should be used to create new homes, and not to fund schemes involving rehousing.

 

5.                      PCHA’s bid

 

5.1.               PCHA have bid for all the properties and would produce 52 homes for 197 people using £8.75m  of Housing Corporation SHG. The average SHG per person is £44.4k – about 50% higher than the average 2002-3 allocation in Camden. PCHA would pay an undiscounted (but devalued for any risk) price at this level of grant. The receipt to the Council would be £5.4m for all the properties. However even though the Housing Corporation are committed to helping the Genesis Group resolve the outstanding issues with WHHA , they will probably not be able to provide this level of funding and officers anticipate that if the Housing Corporation wish to fund PCHA that the Council will need to provide some funding, through discounted disposal. PCHA’s unit costs (especially grant per bedspace) could be reduced by removing some very high value properties from their bid, while still providing enough homes to rehouse all eligible residents (including those living in such properties). It is being suggested that they devise a proposal more on the lines of the CDS one for a smaller number of properties.

 

5.2.               If the Executive wish to proceed with PCHA (as an option or alone) this reduction will be further investigated by officers with PCHA and if there is a significant improvement in their unit costs this will be reported further. In any event some of the properties in PCHA’s bid are already potentially identified for return to the Council for other housing purposes or are unsuitable (such as flats within blocks managed by the Council or another housing association). Annex 1 shows which are affected in this way.

 

6.                      The CDS bid

 

6.1         The Chief Executive of CDS attended a CRISH meeting, at which two established co-operatives were also present. About 20 residents were present. CRISH have also carried out a survey of about 50 residents, including the eligible residents. 30 replied and 22 indicated a preference for setting up and running a co-operative..

 

 

6.2       CDS (after discussion with CRISH representatives) have bid provisionally on the basis that

 

(a)               the blocks of flats in Lithos Road (Gainsborough and Claremont) would be demolished to provide 6  three bedroom maisonettes and 12 one bedroom flats (subject to planning)

(b)               5 houses in Kilburn (51 & 53 Loveridge Road, 120 & 154 Maygrove and 94 Shoot Up Hill) would be refurbished to provide 10 homes varying in size from 1 bedroom to 3 bedrooms again subject to planning

(c)               These assumptions would be the subject of further discussions with CDS and CRISH in the light of the Council’s and the Housing Corporation’s decisions

(d)               There would be a bid for further funds made in late 2003 for 2004-5 to meet any unmet needs and subject to the options appraisal, to assist the co-operative in becoming larger

 

6.3.               The CDS bid would produce 28 homes for 99 people using £3.97m of Housing Corporation SHG.  Sales receipts (after a valuation reduction) would be £2.31m. Not all properties would be sold to CDS at this stage and the remainder will be considered in an options appraisal and reported to Executive, the main options are either to be the subject of a future scheme or sold to secure capital receipts for the council.

 

7.                      Assessing the proposals

 

7.1.               The preliminary view is that at the open market values  provided by the Head of Property Services as refurbishments these developments could have costs as high as 140% of TCI (Total Cost Indicator). The new build element reduces this. The Housing Corporation will now only fund up to 110% of TCI as a maximum. The cost components of the TCI are the undiscounted purchase value, the cost of buildings works and administration and fees and associated VAT. Of these only the purchase value can be reduced.

 

7.2       It should be acknowledged that a transfer to an association would be on the basis that,  although the Council has been advised that  residents have no claim to a tenancy against the Council, there is (as reported before) a potential risk of litigation and valuations are being prepared on this basis.

  Residents have made it clear that they would prefer a co-operative option to working with Genesis/PCHA, whom they associate with WHHA.  The views of the Housing Corporation are being sought at present on the potential for funding CDS. As CDS is quite a small organization the HC do have some reservations about their capacity to take on this scheme. The Council has not previously worked with CDS. An appraisal of CDS is being carried out and it appears that, subject to the HC views,  they are an acceptable partner in terms of their previous experience and financial health.

 

7.3                  Risk Management

 

7.3.1            Resident co-operation

 

7.3.1.1      The formation of CRISH has created a good line of communication to all tenants and increased the likelihood of individual tenants co-operating in implementation of the development of permanent homes.

7.3.1.2      PCHA / WHHA / Genesis are not seen as ideal by residents largely because of the WHHA history before WHHA entered the Genesis group and partly because Genesis prioritised other aspects of the WHHA rescue over tackling what residents see as a history of neglect of both the houses and of themselves.

 

7.3.1.3      CDS are seen in a  good light because they have a track record of helping people set up new co-operatives and met with CRISH representatives to discuss their bid before it was made.. CDS acted as agents for Grand Union Housing Co-operative in Bethnal Green in giving similar undertakings and carrying out a similar development for 35 short life residents. 

 

7.3.1.4      By working closely with residents CDS  would seek to identify the permanent unit they are going to occupy when it is completed and would seek to minimise temporary decants and decant periods; CDS consider some temporary decanting will be inevitable.  CDS Co-operatives will need the assistance of Camden or other RSLs to provide temporary decant properties. CDS  have experience in organising a similar programme for Sylhet Co-op in Tower Hamlets.

 

7.3.1.5      CDS Co-operatives has also stated its wish to work closely with CRISH residents in working up its development and design proposals.

 

 

7.4                  Delivering the permanent homes

 

7.4.1            Although on the face of the figures the PCHA and CDS bids look very different it is likely that both would find a new build approach to Gainsborough and Claremont Houses (in Lithos Road) would create more appropriate homes and require less grant per person housed, that the 23 properties in PCHA’s bid would be reduced (see Annex 1 for probable exclusions) and then spread over 2 years (2003-4 and 2004-5), and that CDS would request a further allocation to create a total of about 40 homes for the co-operative.

 

7.4.2            As CDS has not worked in the Borough before more detailed information on the development capacity is set out in Annex 2.

 

7.4.3            PCHA has an extensive record of developing new homes in North West London through new build and refurbishment.

 

7.4.4            Both bids were based on limited information. Works costs were based on other similar properties in London. Possible designs were based on an earlier and more limited survey carried out by the Council itself. To enable residents and the chosen association to proceed with confidence PCHA and CDS have agreed to commission jointly a survey of the most likely buildings on the footing that whichever association receives the SHG allocation would meet the costs. The survey will be of condition and layout and an output will be design options that can be discussed with residents. It will also give preliminary information on planning issues that might affect the proposals. This survey will not be commissioned until the valuation issue below appears to be resolved.

 

 

 

 

7.5                  Funding

 

7.5.1            The assumption that the total costs had to be held within 110% of the TCI (Total Cost Indicator) set by the Housing Corporation) is common to both bids

 

7.5.2            The bids to the Housing Corporation are at the maximum public subsidy level and average £40k (CDS) and  £44.4k (PCHA) of Social Housing Grant per bedspace; it is quite likely that the PCHA figure would reduce if they too were to rebuild Gainsborough & Claremont Houses and to exclude more expensive properties.  

 

7.5.3            If the HC decline to fund at this level officers recommend that the adjusted valuations be the subject of a further discount to top up the Housing Corporation’s allocation of SHG to the lower of the levels of either the bids or the maximum public subsidy for this project If required this will be the subject of further report. 

 

7.6                  Other options

 

7.6.1            As previously reported WHHA were keen to hand back these properties to the Council. The agreement with the Council requires that they be vacant at that point. WHHA and Genesis would certainly be involved in litigation to get vacant possession and residents would not have any great influence over their future homes. The litigation might be lengthy although the Council has received advice that residents do not have any ability to claim a tenancy. The Council does not itself have funds within the Capital programme to refurbish these properties and the council would consider selling the properties to secure capital receipts, on which potential changes may enable the Council to recycle 100% in the future

 

7.6.2            Not tackling the issues leave the residents substantially underoccupying properties in poor condition. WHHA say that the absence of a long term solution exposes them to further litigation and financial losses.

 

7.6.3             Camden has sought to bring Housing Corporation investment into its short life strategy since 1994 and to provide permanent homes for long term short life residents. However in at least one London Borough (Islington) a decision has been taken to take back all the properties after making one offer only to residents, followed by legal action to gain possession if the offer was not accepted.. The potential change to recycling capital receipts mean that this option could create substantial receipts to the Council, but it would be a departure from the short life strategy and many of the residents have been in their homes for a very long time.

 

8.                      Legal comments

 

These are incorporated in the report

 

9.                      Finance comments

 

A full financial appraisal of the options will be presented to the Executive in a subsequent report when more detailed proposals are available.

 

 

 

 

10.                  Comments of the Controller of Financial Services

 

The Controller of Financial Services has been consulted during the drafting of this report and has nothing further to add.

 

11.                  Comments of the Assistant Director of Environment (Planning)

 

The Council’s adopted Unitary Development Plan (UDP) encourages the creation of new and improved affordable housing units. However, a number of the suggested alterations and works will require planning permission and these should be identified and discussed with planning officers at an early stage so that the appropriate statutory consents can be sought.

 

12.                   Comments of the Head of Property Services

 

12.1.           The Head of Property Services has provided valuations for all but 3 of the properties listed in the annex to this report. (These 3 are not likely to be included in any package). Virtually all of the properties are in a poor state of repair and condition surveys provided by consultants appointed by the Director of Housing have been used to reflect this disrepair in the valuations. In a number of cases access was not possible, and so the valuations are based on the best information currently available. The valuations provided are for the freehold interest (or 125 year leases for individual flats) assuming vacant possession on completion.

 

12.2.            The total aggregated valuation with vacant possession of all but the 3 above of the properties contained in the PCHA bid is £8.52m, and for the smaller CDS bid it is £3.9m.

 

12.3.            It is recognised that most of the properties are fully occupied by residents, and if they were secure tenants the open market valuations would need to reflect this and would be substantially lower. However, the legal advice to the Council is that the residents have no claim to tenancies against either the Council or WHHA. The Director of Housing has obtained further legal advice to quantify the risk that vacant possession may not be obtained in all cases, and the costs and delays associated with the process. It will be possible to reflect this in lower open market valuations which reflect the true position on the ground. This will help in reducing the total cost of schemes being submitted to the Housing Corporation so long as this position does not change prior to transfer of the properties.

 

13.                  Conclusion

 

Subject to further report to The Executive

(a)                   officers in consultation with CRISH and the Housing Corpration being satisfied that CDS can deliver their programme

(b)                   CRISH continuing to being involved in the strategy and detail of the programme

(c)                   The costs issue being resolved by reviewing values in the context of risks to the new owner

(d)                   There being SHG available at the maximum public subsidy level, preferably wholly from the The Housing Corporation

 

the CDS proposal to work with CRISH for CDS to take over ownership and promote a housing co-operative – initially for management, but with a longer term view of taking over ownership (the latter being subject to the agreement of the Council and approval of the Housing Corporation) – has a very good chance of successfully resolving this situation which is so unsatisfactory for all the parties – residents,  the Council, WHHA / Genesis and the Housing Corporation.

 

If the Housing Corporation cannot fund CDS, then further work will be carried out with

PCHA  working with CRISH to develop a viable scheme

 

If Housing Corporation funding cannot be secured at this level, the Executive is asked to indicate if it is prepared to consider disposal at a discount to allow the scheme to proceed  (subject to the approval of the Secretary of State). Details would be subject to a further report.

An options appraisal will be carried out for the properties which are not required as part of a scheme to rehouse existing long term residents.  This will include the option of open market sale as well as seeking additional Housing Corporation funding, and it will be reported to Executive.

 

Annex 1

 

List of properties and proposals by PCHA and CDS

(These are all subject to survey).

 

 

PCHA bid

CDS Bid           

 

address

1b

2b

3b

4b

5+b

1b

2b

3b

4b

5+b

 

41 Broomsleigh St

 

 

1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*

16a Camden Road

 

1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

**

27 Dynham Rd

 

 

1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*

29 Fordwych Rd

1

 

1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

144 Grafton Rd

 

 

1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*

3 Lithos Rd

2

 

1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

9 Lithos Rd

3

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

51 Loveridge Rd

 

 

1

 

 

 

 

3

 

 

5

 

 

1

 

 

1

 

 

53 Loveridge Rd

 

 

 

1

 

 

 

120 Maygrove Rd

2

 

 

 

 

 

 

154 Maygrove Rd

1

 

 

 

 

 

 

88 Messina Ave

 

2

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*

27 Minster Rd

1

1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

62 Minster Rd

1

1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

***

25 Westbere Rd

3

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*

153a Goldhurst Terrace

2

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

+

43a Goldhurst Terrace

1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

+

52 Grafton Rd

1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

82a Parkhill Rd

 

 

1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

+

45 Primrose Gdns

1

 

2

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

94 Shoot-Up-Hill

2

 

 

1

 

Included in above

 

Gainsboro' Hse        

2

3

 

3

 

6

 

3

 

 

 

Claremont Hse  

 

 

 

6

1

6

 

3

 

 

 

23 properties

                  23

                    8

                    9

                  11

                    1

 

15

 

5

 

7

 

1

 

 

+ this property may not be suitable as it is a flat within a larger building

* this property is or may be required for other housing purposes

** this property is no longer available and is being used for other housing purposes

*** this property is being considered for other housing purposes

shaded properties are considered certainly available.

Bold addresses have not been included in the valuation

If all these shown as *, **, *** or + are excluded, there are still enough properties to create 35-40  homes with a suitable mix of sizes of home.

 

This property was referred to in the August report but is not currently mentioned in any bid.

17 St Augustines        

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

+

 

Annex 2

 

Information on CDS co-operatives’ development history

 

1.      CDS Co-operatives’ proposals contain a small element of refurbishment and it is worth noting that CDS Co-operatives took over a portfolio of listed buildings in Stepney owned by Sylhet Housing Co-operative and successfully completed these works in collaboration with members of the co-operative.

 

2.      CDS Co-operatives remains an active developing association, although it has restricted development activity in recent years because of declining grant rates. 

 

3.      It currently has three developments on site, a new build scheme of 12 homes in Dartford, and two conversion/rehabilitation projects that will provide 15 flats for young single people in the Folkestone Town Centre regeneration zone.

 

4.      In the recent past CDS Co-operatives has managed a significant development programme, being a principal partner in the Kent Housing Partnership through which it produced 430 new-build homes over a 4 year period in a programme with a total value of £25 million.  CDS Co-operatives also has successfully delivered complex projects, notably the £5 million rescue and conversion of St. George’s Church Camberwell. 

 

5.      CDS Co-operatives is also currently acting as lead development consultant carrying out the capital feasibility study into the reprovisioning of Croydon Council’s residential care provision for the elderly and the development of Croydon Care Co-operative which it is intended will provide elderly care services under contract with the Council.  CDS Co-operatives has also commissioned the New Economics Foundation to research the development of limited equity co-operatives for key workers.

 

6.      In order to maximise its development capacity now that social housing grant rates are easing enabling developments to be undertaken with less additional subsidy, CDS Co-operatives Board of Management has commissioned financial consultants,  Beha Williams Norman, to review its business plan and to advise how to lever development resources from CDS Co-operatives assets and borrowing arrangements.  This review, which will include a development risk and capacity assessment, will be completed by March 2003.

 

7.      CDS Co-operatives also has the in house development expertise to carry out new-build and refurbishment project.  It development team is led by Steven McIntosh, as qualified town planner with over 12 years experience of housing association development, including 2 years as development manager of an inner London housing association.