Memorandum by Bolton at Home (EMP 09)
Bolton fully supports the infusion of extra
resources and the potential for new ideas brought about by the
introduction of Housing Market Renewal Pathfinders. The scale
of the problems experienced within our major sub-regional cities—Manchester
and Salford—really do require the high levels of investment
made available through HMRF. Without this intervention the chronic
market collapse experienced in the urban core of these cities
would never be reversed, as unfettered market forces alone have
not, and could not, bring about regeneration on the scale envisaged
by the architects of this initiative.
Taking a sub-regional perspective, it is absolutely
vital for Bolton and other local towns of a similar size to have
vibrant cities on its boundaries. They provide a focus for large
scale investment, a major source of employment, and provide a
cultural centre that attracts people into the sub-region as well
as enriching the lives of the indigenous population. Most importantly,
the diverse demographic make-up of our cities allow for the creation
of a blueprint of community cohesion and respect for diversity
that can be exported throughout the sub-region.
Leaving aside our concerns that Bolton was not
considered to merit HMRF despite our low demand issues closely
mirroring those of Rochdale and Oldham, we have been reasonably
optimistic in believing that the benefits of HMRF to the sub-region
would spread wider than the Pathfinders, percolating across LA
boundaries. At the very least we expected that the six local non-pathfinder
authorities would not actually lose regional allocation in real
terms but that the HMRF would result in a rise in regional resources,
with no top-slicing to our detriment. When the CURS study identified
50% of regional low demand outside the pathfinders our natural
presumption was that Bolton, as one of these areas of low demand,
would still be given priority for allocation as recognised in
the Regional Housing Strategy.
Unfortunately, in reality, there has been an
overall diminution of resources directed towards non-pathfinder
authorities. The Housing Corporation for instance have reduced
ADP within Bolton (for the period 2004-06) by over 90%, a swingeing
cut that ignores the fact that our housing problems continue irrespective
of the need to increase funding into HMRF pathfinders.
In order for non-pathfinder areas such as Bolton,
to seriously tackle low demand and reduce empty properties, the
trend towards starving us of resources needs to be reversed. Increasing
powers and making things more flexible (as championed in the RRO)
are essential elements in tackling the problem but without sufficient
resources to exploit these changes they become irrelevant. The
scale of the problem in mill towns like Bolton is such that only
a fraction of the additional resources given to the HMRF pathfinders
would be required to ensure that our private sector housing areas
are protected against decline. Our concern is that this important
resource requirement is being consistently pushed down the housing
investment priority list at national, regional and sub-regional
levels.
There is no doubting the commitment of ODPM
officers at national and North West regional level to work with
Local Authorities on attempting to identify practical solutions
to the causes, rather than the symptoms, of private sector housing
decline. Bolton, as a Housing Renewal Beacon Authority, greatly
appreciates the inclusive approach now adopted by the ODPM towards
consultation, and their willingness to engage in joint working
with a wide range of stakeholders. We look forward to this continuing
well into the future. The ODPM have a key role to play in bringing
together Local Authorities and other key stakeholders through
a range of national, regional and sub-regional forums. They have
sufficient "clout" to ensure commitment is secured from
so many different sources, so that skills and experience can be
pooled in order to discuss, debate and then finally overcome the
private sector housing problems we face. Finding lasting solutions
in the past has been impossible as organisations and individuals
tended to work in silos. By fully embracing the enabling role
the ODPM can fashion the framework for a multi-dimensional approach
to what is a multi-dimensional issue.
In response to more specific ideas/examples
about how better to reduce the number and impact of empty properties
and, in turn, support weak or failing housing markets the following
is suggested:
1. The Housing Act introduces Empty Property
Management Orders and these seem to provide a useful tool enabling
Councils to take over management of empty properties returning
them occupied to owners only after any costs of improvement and
other charges have been met. The difficulty Bolton and other non
HMRF authorities may have is in meeting the initial costs of taking
over, improving and managing the property (along with the risk).
The assumption is that all costs will be met eventually but this
may happen years after the initial outlay. In view of this, either
some set up grant should be made available and/or the owner should
have to contribute towards the initial costs.
2. One of the major initial barriers experienced
in tackling empties is being able to accurately identify who actually
is the landlord and how can they be contacted. This is particularly
made difficult when lettings are made through a management agency.
There are a number of convoluted means of trying to track them
down (including land register and community tax returns) but these
are not always entirely easy to access nor do they always give
the accurate information sought. Licensing will achieve clarity
in those areas selected and for HIMOs but these measures will
not create a comprehensive picture. To fully address this problem
legislation should be enacted to make it an obligation for owners
simply to register as a landlord (including name and address of
any managing agent) and that this record is made available to
bona fide Council staff, within the constraints laid down through
data protection and other statutory safeguards.
3. Bolton has been able to develop a positive
approach to landlords through improving our accreditation package.
We strongly believe that accreditation has a key role to play
in securing well-maintained properties that are well-managed.
Whilst the threat of enforcement acts as a deterrent, accreditation
offers a much more sensitive approach to reaching the same aims.
Over the last few years the numbers of accreditation schemes have
mushroomed across the country. There now needs to be a consolidation
so that what each offers is broadly similar (but allows for local
circumstances). This would ensure that accreditation is creditable
and a reliable indicator of quality for landlords, their tenants,
and the public in general. The ODPM could play a key role here
in establishing a model scheme that can be held up as a best practice
example for everyone—working up something akin to the "Kite
Mark" as an objective indicator of quality.
4. Demolition should not always be the default
for renewal strategies—even given hypothetically infinite
resources—refurbishment should not be discarded or seen
simply as the next best option. Our experience in Bolton has shown
that selective demolition and improvement of remaining terraced
dwellings has proven to be what many of our customers want. The
actual physical renewal solution is secondary to the quality and
depth of customer involvement in the process. Unless ownership
is shared with local communities, within the context of a holistic
programme of regeneration that goes far beyond the "bricks
and mortar", then the underlying causes for decline in areas
of deprivation will not be addressed. Perhaps there is a cautionary
message to HMRF Pathfinders here, in that full community engagement
has to take place before (and in some instances) instead of large
scale demolition programmes being decided. For many people preserving
or creating a quality environment within a supportive community
is more important than wholesale demolition with its inevitable
uprooting and dispersal.
5. The supply of quality staff that have
the skills, experience and training to operate within this challenging
environment is becoming scarce. It is made even more difficult
for us outside the HMRF Pathfinders who have fewer resources to
attract and retain such staff. This situation has resulted in
Bolton becoming a net exporter of skilled staff, that are attracted
by the larger salaries offered within the Pathfinders. We would
advocate the urgent need for the creation of a Regeneration School
for the North West (that could be replicated across the country)
which would provide for everything from basic training to advanced
skills training for seasoned practioners. The opportunity here
arises for academic organisations to collaborate with a range
of council, private sector and other stakeholder interests to
customise learning around specific needs and skill shortages.
Bolton would also advocate the fullest possible involvement of
residents in this learning process. We believe that community
and individual capacity building, through active engagement in
the regeneration process, has been an essential element in our
successes in helping to create sustainable communities. Not only
would this be of benefit to the individual but it would also help
organisations to more easily recruit local people to fill regeneration
staffing shortages—thus creating a "win-win" situation.
6. Bolton can offer some very pertinent
examples of best practice in relation to how we deal with areas
of private sector deprivation that have fragile housing markets,
high numbers of voids and an oversupply of rented properties.
Putting customer engagement at the very top
of our list of priorities, we have developed an Urban Care approach
to regeneration. Linked to community planning processes and using
the physical improvements to dwellings as the focus, we systematically
involve residents in thinking about and then making decisions
on a wide range of issues pertinent to their wider home environment.
This can involve anything from establishing a co-ordinated approach
to tackling dog fouling, through making choices about streetscapes,
onto addressing crime and disorder issues with the police and
others.
Decisions on demolition and/or refurbishment
are made with communities within the context of an understanding
of resource constraints, the limits to what is achievable, and
the possibility of having to compromise on individual views in
respect of achieving a wider community consensus. It makes regeneration
a very creative process where residents are not just beneficiaries
of but are become architects of their own futures. There is no
"one size fits all" solution as we use a tool box of
interventions that allow us to, wherever possible, customise physical
improvements to individual needs and aspirations—whilst
at the same time helping people to maximise their choices by offering
one-to-one advice on financial issues. To overcome some of the
difficulties in engaging people in this process—and to make
things as clear and interesting as possible—we use art and
art-based projects as a consultation tool. In addition we also
use 3D modelling extensively to allow staff and residents to manipulate
the environment in virtual way thus making options easier to understand
and to see how individual choice fits into the wider regeneration.
Consolidating and building on the community
involvement generated by the process described previously Bolton
has developed a number of Urban Care Centres. These differ from
community centres as they are run by local people themselves (with
help from Bolton at Home staff) and provide a range of training,
leisure and outreach facilities—in addition to continuing
the other capacity building began during the physical regeneration
programme. These are inclusive in that they are extensively used
by tenants, landlords, owner-occupiers and local business people—who
make up a comprehensive mix of gender, age and cultural backgrounds.
| 
