Professor Paddy Gray University of Ulster

1. Professor Paddy Gray University of Ulster

3. Why Mixed Tenure Briefly • Some debates around Mixed communities • Views from across the isles based on recent discussions I had with CEOs. • Some thoughts for discussion

4. Benefits of Mixed Communities • the intention is that the introduction of better-off households will bring benefits to lower income residents: not just by physical renewal but a better area reputation, more shops and services, less crime, schools with more balanced intakes, aspirational peer groups for young people, and broader social networks for adults. • The belief is that by creating a balanced community through increasing the numbers of better-off, that this will encourage residential stability, and as the area improves, and more economically active people move into the area, so the cycle continues • What is an optimal level of mix? One of the key gaps in the literature is precise information on the level of mix in any dimension that is needed to achieve the perceived benefits. For some mixed income constitutes 20% social housing in an owner occupied area while for other it may be 50%.

5. The creation of a balanced/mixed community Literature on the topic indicates that tenure-mix policy has not been without its problems. • The main concern has been the saleability of such estates. • Developers have been vocal in the past in their opposition to such developments on the basis that people will not want to buy there. • NIMBYism and opposition from existing residents • the physical arrangement of affordable units can affect the long-term viability of a development, clustering low-income households in part of a new mixed community development, although easier to manage, may give rise to the stigma and social problems apparent in some single tenure social housing estates. • Evidence also suggests that a wide gap in incomes may exacerbate tensions in new mixed income developments

6. Views Across the Isles • The best schemes are were where the LA (and RSL) was in a strong negotiating position with developers. In my experience this was rare as developers were always far better resourced and were able to circumvent planning conditions fairly effectively • The Arsenal development was able to achieve a relatively high level of social housing but this was situated in the worst location next to the railway • Good example was in Caterham Surrey where a progressive minded developer worked with local residents to provide a community based hub, support a community development trust and deliver high quality green space and social housing which was indistinct from owner occupied properties (Academics Professor Tony Crook and Tony Manzi) • ‘The main issue we have is that developers tend to site affordable homes next to the tip, railway line etc. Also Developers are nervous as to where the rented housing is located. They tend to be much more relaxed about the shared ownership homes (Sue Locke CEO Wulvern )

7. Views Across the Isles • Mixed tenure has worked in Bradford where it’s built into our estates and not on the edge like a Berlin Wall dividing the two. Where it is built on the edge it hasn’t worked. The best examples are where the housing looks similar and it is difficult to tell the social house from the owner occupied house (Geraldine Howley CEO In Communities) • Good example is former hospital site in Wealdon, East Sussex for 400 homes. Developer contacted Orbit in 2008 and homes developed out over 5 years in manageable phases. The key to the success was that the developer engaged with one RP for all phases bringing consistency and long term commitment. Clustering of affordable homes, spread across the site was crucial • ‘We walk away from bad examples such as Howbury, Centre South London where the LA had such a long list of requirements from a site which they owned, new school, council offices and other S106 requirements that Affordable Housing reduced to just 12% of total. (Paul Tennant Orbit CEO)

8. Views Across the Isles • Outcomes have been disappointing in Scotland according to the Wheatley Group • ‘Developers will generally resist the transfer of land and will want to continually rewrite Section 75s. • In the few cases we have been involved in, the outcome has been legal action to comply with the trigger agreement (x number of houses) of the Section 75 Agreement being breached.’ (Martin Armstrong CEO The Wheatley Group) • The SFHA point to the fact that there is resident opposition where the affordable element has been constructed as the last element of the project – if owners have moved in, the whiff that poor people are going to be living beside them produces the usual prejudicial responses. (Susan Torrance SHFA)

9. Views Across the Isles • Biggest problem in mixed tenure is that the owners are buying by the skin of their teeth - it is a struggle, And they resent the free loaders who get tenancies (as they see it) • Plus the tenants often have children but the owners do not - so play is a problem • The sales staff at associations are often at war with the housing managers - tenants put off prospective buyers • The Packington by Hyde in Islington is held in high regard by many  • Green Man Lane in Ealing by A2 Dominion seems to be coming on well • Wheatley has done up the Ibroxholme block for mid market renters - it seems to be flourishing in an area dominated by less popular homes • The arty students who moved into Poplar Harca’s Balfron block loved it a lot more than the previous tenants and leaseholders • Fertile area for study - it's on the margins of economics and psychology (Alistair McIntosh CEO Housing Quality Network)

10. Views Across the Isles • Tendency for deals to be done with the more affordable purchase homes rather than social. • We are revising Part V at the moment. • It will now be 10% social housing instead of maximum 20% social and affordable purchase. The aim is to have full 10% social provided in each development. • Monetary payment options and off site land are being removed but in limited circumstances the housing can be provided off site. The revised proposals are being put to cabinet in September with amending legislation by the end of the year. (John O’Connor CEO Housing Agency)

11. Views Across the Isles • The protracted nature of the negotiations, • The complexity and interpretation of the relevant sections in the Planning and Development Act, • The ambiguity of the wording (e.g. ‘attributable costs’, ‘equivalent monetary value’), • The lack of resources to progress permissions, • It was too focused on owner occupation to the detriment of other tenures, • Approved housing bodies needed to take on a more prominent role and should have been brought in early on in the process. (DKM Economic Consultants Nov 2012)

12. Some Thoughts • Importance of tenure blind mixed communities and not being able to identify the social housing (poor doors) • The development should not leave the social housing to the end but should be in phases • Avoid the tendency to go for intermediate housing as opposed to Social Housing • Delays in development through disputes must be avoided or the time taken to assess the contribution. Stalled schemes result in no development • What is the optimum level of mix? There may be areas where there is no social need so how is income distributed? • evidence in GB points to the buoyancy of the housing market. While a strong market makes it both easier to agree the original S106 and to deliver the desired affordable output, a downturn in the market presents much greater challenges. • The importance of joined up working amongst all parties from the outset and the ability to properly negotiate appropriate outcomes • The need for Northern Ireland wide strategic thinking to ensure that contributions are providing social and affordable housing where it is needed.