Affordable Housing

East London

Affordable housing on church land

Whilst the Innovation Fund Project in Chelmsford diocese is far from complete, it is an inspiring story of what is possible when churches are supported by local authorities to release surplus land for affordable housing at the same time as redeveloping their own facilities. The story of St John’s Church, Hoxton, whilst sharing some themes, particularly illuminates some of the barriers facing churches wishing to develop their land assets for affordable housing.

Newham Deanery & Chelmsford Diocese: The Innovation Fund

The Diocese of Chelmsford, East London, is working in partnership with the Greater London Authority to redevelop 12-16 church sites (in the London boroughs of Waltham Forest, Barking & Dagenham, Redbridge and Havering) into c. 600 units of affordable housing priced at London Living Rent, aiming for around 65% market rental value. The developments will provide a host of new church facilities, which will be of benefit to not only church congregations, but to the wider community.

The scheme began in 2016, when Newham Deanery realised that many of its churches which had been built in the 1950s and 1960s had fallen into disrepair, with their maintenance becoming a large burden for parishes.  At the same time, the cost of housing in the areas was becoming excessive for church workers – and families in the Deanery more widely – who were being priced out of the area.

Initially the option of working with a Housing Association or Private Developer was explored by the Reverend Jeremy Fraser, the Area Dean of Newham. However, it was decided against because it relied upon third parties making a surplus profit and would not have allowed the diocese to have agency or autonomy in shaping the developments.

At this time, Bishop Peter encountered someone from the Greater London Authority (GLA) at a colloquium hosted by Housing Justice. At this colloquium, the GLA were presenting the Innovation Fund – part of the Mayor of London’s ‘Affordable Homes Strategy’ 2016-21 – which encourages providers who want to deliver affordable housing using GLA investment in an innovative way. The GLA were specifically interested in faith groups applying. As such, they encouraged Newham Deanery to bid for the Innovation Fund, also projecting what might happen across the four other boroughs Waltham Forest, Barking & Dagenham, Redbridge and Havering, who were not involved at this point. A key part of the proposed plans were Deanery Alms-houses, with the formation of a charitable foundation within the diocese that would both hold some of the financial risk on the developments and act as a body to manage the rental properties when they are built.

Since the successful bid for the Innovation Fund Reverend Jeremy has led the scheme, supported by the Bishop and a number of senior staff within the diocese. All the churches in the four boroughs have been invited by the Bishop to have a feasibility study conducted, paid for by a charitable fund ‘London Over the Border’. Following this, the PCCs of churches have been invited to meet with a range of community architects. An Oversight body has now been established at a diocesan level to advise the Bishop’s Council further as the scheme progresses.

St John’s Hoxton

Reverend Graham Hunter, Vicar of St John’s Hoxton in East London, has been engaged in a struggle for several years to build affordable housing units on a car park adjacent to the church.

Hoxton is in one of the most deprived wards and parishes in London. It’s diverse and multi-ethnic community feels the housing crisis particularly acutely. House prices in Hackney Borough as a whole have risen by 71 per cent in the past five years (now at 17 times the average annual income) and 12,000 people are on the waiting list for social housing. Faced with a raft of housing issues amongst his parish and congregation members, including high rates of rent arrears, temporary accommodation and a lack of affordability, Reverend Graham decided to explore the possibility of the church’s land providing permanently affordable housing for the rented sector.

He decided against working with a private developer, which he felt would have exacerbated the crisis because not all the homes would have been affordable, despite the money raised from the sale being greater. He is open to working with a charity, the council, or even the church running the scheme itself. An architect drew up an initial plan for thirty-six units of one- and two-bedroom accommodation in a pro bono capacity.

The church subsequently submitted a pre-application in 2016 to Hackney Council, which was rejected by the council’s Conservation Officer based on their interpretation of ‘harm’ caused to a heritage asset as set out in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF fig 194a). Graham describes being  ‘perplexed and baffled’  by the decision, given the social benefit of providing affordable housing in an area of such housing need and his view that ‘this was the church offering to take a financial hit on the sale of its land for the greater good of the community’.

Graham then pursued an application for a Lottery Heritage Fund (HLF) grant. Emphasising the social and public good that would justify any ‘harm’ to the building, he included necessary maintenance and refurbishment of the church building itself as part of the bid. Although successful in winning a Resilient Heritage grant from the HLF, which covered the cost of employing a project manager and an architect to revise plans for a second pre-planning application amongst other things, in March 2018 their application to the HLF was rejected based on ‘planning risk’, a decision which cited the previous response of Hackney Council.

Never deterred, the church has redrawn plans to avoid these concerns, using some of the adjacent church school’s land (which has fewer restrictions on it) for the affordable housing, on top of a new school hall. The school would gain the church’s carpark as a new playing field. The response to this pragmatic approach has been positive, and the church hopes to submit a formal planning application soon.

Requirements

Finances

A challenge faced by both initiatives has been prohibitive planning costs and barriers. In the case of the Innovation Fund Project, the GLA’s support was conditional upon a significant amount of initial groundwork being done by the deanery and diocese – including feasibility studies (paid for by the London Over the Border fund and costing c.£1 million in total) and pre-planning meetings. The diocese has had to cover the cost of all pre-planning advice, between £2000 and £9000 per site, a cost that an individual church would find ‘very difficult to bear’. For St John’s, it’s become increasingly clear that things are more difficult without a slush fund, as even small things such as pre-applications can cost a lot, requiring a ‘whip-round’ in the congregation.

Partnerships

In terms of what has been key to the success of the Innovation Fund project in particular, the partnership between the diocese of Chelmsford and the GLA, have been key to the project’s success thus far. ‘The GLA are walking with us, they’ve been really supportive’, Jeremy said. Marianne Danielewicz, North East London Area Manager for the Housing & Land team at the GLA, described the process of working with the church as ‘really lovely’. It was her view that ‘churches have a mission to do something positive with land, where the primary motive is not profit’. She was also optimistic that the precedent set by Chelmsford Diocese could provide a template for other church and community groups to follow in the future.  Bishop Peter also felt that this relationship had been strengthened by the Church of England’s reputation, saying: ‘the GLA knows they are dealing with a credible organisation with integrity, resources, serious intent and history’.

Personnel

Equally important has been the support and endorsement of the Bishop and the wider backing of the diocese, which Reverend Jeremy said has been ‘amazing’ and has enabled him to invest his time in the project. On the contrary, for Reverend Graham, who has lead the work at St John’s without significant wider support, in addition to his already overstretched responsibilities and capacity as parish vicar, this has been a real challenge. He explained that: ‘Our development plan has been dependent on me driving this and learning as I go along…it’s a huge amount of time and energy’.  When asked about the role of the congregation, Graham said: ‘It’s not that they don’t support it, they’re really behind it… but those in our congregation who might have the resources to contribute are typically already in demanding jobs’.

For both Reverend Jeremy Fraser and Reverend Graham Hunter, their own particular expertise cultivated in previous careers – Jeremy in his time at Southwark Council and Graham’s involvement in a previous church redevelopment scheme – and their relational networks with industry professionals in accessing pro bono support, have helped their respective initiatives.

Tips

The Innovation Fund project demonstrates that meeting local need and achieving long-term financial sustainability need not be mutually exclusive. Once the loans on the buildings are paid off, the rental income generated will provide surplus revenue that can then be used to pay for the upkeep of the church and its mission – in addition to maintaining the properties themselves. This contrasts with an approach which sells off church land assets to private developers, which in Jeremy’s view ‘salami-slices landholdings, decimates church assets and leaves future generations with the same problem’, as well as being unaffordable for people in an area of huge housing need. He said: ‘we want to be a church that is missionally part of the solution for housing for people in London’.

This kind of approach nonetheless is not without challenge nor risk. The diocese has had to borrow a sum which significantly exceeds its annual turnover, money that a professional developer may not be concerned about, but that represents a significantly greater risk for a diocese to take. Bishop Peter was honest about the fact that the project was still at a stage where it could fail, with not a single site built yet, but reasoned: ‘we’ve got to learn how to be more entrepreneurial. Are we going to put our money and resources where our mouth is or not? We should be in the business of missional risk’.

Reverend Graham warned that the conservation and heritage priorities within the NPPF are currently set in a way that makes it difficult for any church with a listed status, of which there are many in urban areas of housing need, to release any of their own land for affordable housing. He suggested that this should be a key consideration for churches engaging in this sort of work.