East Accrington/phoenix projects...

[Graham Jones]

Originally Posted by pendy

Barricade yourself in, Mani. Refuse to move, and get all your neighbours to do the same. Ask for a Judicial Review of the plans - at least that would be a delaying tactic, if you didn't succeed. It is complete madness to knock down houses that people live in and love, when we are already short of housing stock.

If anyone wants to stage a protest at a Council meeting, let me know and I will come up for it.

10 years in the making, 100's of residents meetings. I am surprised Mani has been out of the loop. I would suggest Mani contacts Joan Pilkington of the WARA or attend the Church Area Council. I think they have a meeting coming up soon.

[Graham Jones]

Originally Posted by mani

the region i'm talkin of is steiner st portland st fredrick st - all that area is more likely to get KO'd and the whole monk st area etc

and their idea of regeneration on blackburn rd?

plant a few trees

There's a lot of boarded up, vacancies there and they are part of Phoenix 2 as stated. However things are going to get worse, landlords have been buying aggresively in the area recently from all over the country - which perversly forces up prices. However the Council is bulldozing upto the landlords property - which it legally can do - and letting the market take over after that backed up with a CPO based on the current market value [obviously not as good once the bulldozers have visited]. Its a battle between landlords and speculators and the Council trying to protect public money. HBC s policy has been much firmed up since Blackburn w Darwen offered sound legal and policy advice.

[Graham Jones]

Originally Posted by cashman

my missus has just bin talking to a lady from across the road,who has lived there most of her life,and she learnt last night at the meeting her house is coming down in probably next 5 years,she was most upset near tears, so you are not alone mani.not that its any consolation.thats in the area your on about entwi.

Its sad when people are forced to leave a place they cherish and have no desire to leave. All to often though everyone else is thinking sell up and move out and landlords are move in and life just goes inevitabley downhill regardless - and the value of their property. A lot of terraced houses will come down over 15 years. Everyone was supposed to have been consulted.

[Graham Jones]

Originally Posted by entwisi

It will be compulsory purcahase, Heres 50%(if your lucky) of the value of you house now move along without a fuss there..

Oh, you can't afford anywhere to live, tough!

Do we have a full list of the streets involved? I have relatives in that area and up to now it was only thought to be an investigation. If things have been decided then I need to let people know.

Ian

CPO involves the full market value of a property by law and on top residents are being given sizeable relocation grants. These are to be replaced possibly by equity loan schemes at the cost of inflation with variable options to purchase - bit like RTB. Loan equity schemes solve the problem of the £30k relocation grant not being enough. It would be benficial to identify the streets to be demolished but housing experts think this would help landlords and speculators and result in greater demand on the public purse buying them off landlords later.

[park381]

Graham, did you watch the programme on TV, they set a budget of £18,000(that being the cost to demolish) to refurbish a property that was middle terrace and due for demolition, the project went over budget by £6,000. On completion of the project local residents were invited to view the house, all were impressed by what they saw. If the house had been put up for sale, it would have been priced at the low end, first time buyers. As I previously posted, why demolish and destroy local communities and build the artificial rubbish as they have done on the old wrists wires site. Look round you not in accrington but other areas where old property houses mills etc. have been upgraded to comply with current standards. Is there not a similar project underway in the salford/manchester area at the moment. Even the Housing Minister indicated during the programme that local councils had been told to look at refurbishment as an option.

[Graham Jones]

Originally Posted by Busman747

Over the past year, I have come to love the stone-build terrace houses in Accy. As I drive along Blackburn Road and see the more modern brick homes I almost cringe, they seem so out of place!

In most cases, the outside walls are good even though they are 100 years old and an investment of probably less than £30,000.00 on each would regenerate the houses for decades to come.

On the other hand, if someone with money was to gain them through compulsory purchase, demolish them and build "modern" houses, they could either sell them at premium prices (in excess of 6 figures) or rent them out to those that can afford them for "southern" prices as they will be "in a desirable area!"

In essence, what project Phoenix is doing is to take away the affordable housing available in Accy and replacing it with nondescript housing that is priced out of reach of the average worker in the area.

I presently live in Primrose Street, Accy. and at some point in the past, H.B.C. spent a lot of money rebuilding exterior walls/railings and cleaning stonework and it is a pleasure to drive into my street now even though the houses are close to the age of houses earmarked for demolition just down the road.............

Perhaps one of the problems stems from the fact that H.B.C. have always been unable to control the lack of interest from landlords who "unofficially" rent out their premises without regard for the law of the land. There are many safeguards in place, but in Accy, action is seldom taken, therefore properties deteriorate..........

What Accy needs is "guts leadership!"

1) Invest money into every house in ****** street,

2) Put pressure on landlords to maintain their houses to a reasonable condition,

3) If a "tenant" fails to look after the property he/she is in, pressurise the landlord to kick them out, give the landlord financial backing to do this!

4) If a landlord shows no interest, GET A COMPULSORY PURCHASE ORDER! and be able to buy out the landlord (at present compulsory purchace prices)

5) Make it illegal to privately arrange a tenants agreement...........go through the legal requirements...or don't rent!

Accy could be good again, but it needs councillors that are prepared to force home the legal requirements of home owning and to kick out those who regard Accy as an "easy target"

Spend 2 years getting rid of the "undesirables" and relish in the admiration of the true Acciers!!!!!!

You want my vote, and countless others, Thats THE WAY TO GET IT!

Accy does need guts leadership. Unfortunately unpopular decisions are unpopular.

The 2004 Housing Act is a big stick at landlords and introduces licensing and Env. Health standards. The major problem is Salford and Manchester are already implementing this aggressively so bad landlords are looking elsewhere in the region to invest their money. Theree is speculation that some of this is comming to Hyndburn and that also families from manchester may be relocated in Hyndburn by landlords.

However only excellent [5/5] like Blackburn or good [4/5] councils like Burnly can implement the scheme. Hyndburn is average [3/5] and cant. The Hynd. Labour Party will try and get the scheme implemented fully in association with one of these two authorities as we are aware of what is happening.

Poor developments are a blight the Govt is insisting Councils work with CABE to prevent this. £30k is about right but there is an oversupply of terraced houses by about 5000. Obviously this type of investment is needed and will take place in all other cases but not through grants but loan equity schemes and some percentage grant, though this has all yet to be decided by the Conservatives.

Most of your suggestions are contained within 2004 Housing Act which comes into force this autumn. Landlords whose property is unfit may have it taken from them for upto 5 years and works carried out by the licensing authority [the council] and charged back to the landlord. The scheme is self financing and Manchester are charging landlords for each property £120 approx per year in licensing and enforcement costs. The worry is poor landlords moveout to places like here for an easy ride.

Drug dens can now be shut without any defence objection or appeal and taken into management based on police & residents cumulative complaints.

As for who will implement this, thats a political decision. You will have to decide who is tougher locally, Labour, Conservative or Liberal Democrat. I think the answer is obvious though.

[park381]

Graham, I think on the subject of Landlords, HBC should get off its b** and enforce the resistration of all landlords within the hyndburn area.

[Graham Jones]

Originally Posted by park381

It's all down to Central Gov, they determine what the grants are to be used for, and in this case its demolish and rebuild, if they decided the grants were for the refurbishment of property then thats what it would be.

All schemes are locally decided and propositions put together for the ELEVATE board. It presents these to local govt. Differences exist across East Lancs. Blackburn are using loan equity on top of CPO monies residents recieve. Hyndburn is usuing 100% relocation grants up to £30k on top of CPO value [independent market value]. Blackburn are using Housing Act CPO's and Hyndburn is using Town and Country Planning Act CPOs. The pathfinder title as implied is the Govt telling local authorities to find the best path. All demolition refurbishment in Hyndburn is organised through HBCs strategic housing manager and his team in consultation with other agencies and residents.

To the person who said we need affordable housing on Project Phoenix not expensive middle class houses. The bulk of housing is built by Space New Living, an affordable housing association and bungalows make up many of the houses as they are in shortest supply in the borough. A large health centre will also occupy the site as some open public green space.

[Graham Jones]

Originally Posted by WillowTheWhisp

The problem seems to be "unofficial landlords" (somebody just buys an extra house and then rents it out to whoever) who don't give a hoot about maintaining property. The house next to me has been owned by various different "landlords" and rented out to various different tennants some of whom have looked after it and some of whom have trashed it. At one stage the back wall was falling down and a real danger to anyone passing but the owner didn't want to do anything about it. There develops a sort of apathy where the landlord doesn't want to do anything because the tennants won't care for the property and the tennants won't care for the property because the landlords won't do repairs.

It should be possible for the council to force them to do the necessary repairs and to have the ability to evict the tennants who don't look after it.

Or maybe all rented property needs to be "vetted" and all landlords have to be licenced or something. It only takes one "dump" to start the ball rolling and before you know it whole areas have gone downhill.

Hi Will, your right. The new Housing Act answers many of your issues and is coming into force elsewhere as we speak. See previous posts on new landlord licencing but it covers what you are saying.

[park381]

Originally Posted by Graham Jones

Hi Will, your right. The new Housing Act answers many of your issues and is coming into force elsewhere as we speak. See previous posts on new landlord licencing but it covers what you are saying.

So what are HBC doing about it Graham

[Graham Jones]

Originally Posted by park381

HBC do run a scheme for vetting private landlords but it's voluntary they need to come forward and register
http://www.hyndburnbc.gov.uk/Your_Co...pages/hals.asp
Perhaps would be a lot better if HBC could enforce the scheme to ensure all private landlords were registered, but that could be in the future from reading the information.

The HALS is voluntary and good landlords have registered and bad landlords havent. The govt has introduced legislation to licence landlords 2004 Housing Act. Whether the Conservatives will manage to implement this see previous posts for complications and issues...

[park381]

Originally Posted by Graham Jones

The HALS is voluntary and good landlords have registered and bad landlords havent. The govt has introduced legislation to licence landlords 2004 Housing Act. Whether the Conservatives will manage to implement this see previous posts for complications and issues...

Don't think this is about "party" graham, if it is gov. legislation then the professional officers of HBC should ensure that it's implemented, as with any legislation.

[Graham Jones]

Originally Posted by park381

Had to post this. Anyone watch the Trevor McDonald programme to-night straight after Cori st. The task to refurbish a terraced house in Liverpool on a budget of £18,000 which was the cost of demolishing it later in the year. The results of the refurbishment carried out in 4 weeks was stunning to say the least, the project went a little over budget and finished at £24,3++. I think the whole programme should be burnt to CD and copies sent to all councils that are planning to demolish terraced houses, saying "think again before you act" The show presenter visited the housing minister with photos of the refurbished property, the reply was oh we have asked local authorities to look at refurbishment before demolishing property.

Don't think HBC have been informed of that fact.

This is a good point. However there are 2000 empty properties, mostly terraced. And the oversupply problem is worse because some people in terraced cant get into their desired type, bungalows and semis due to lack of supply. Refurbishment should always be the first option. However 15000 terraced houses in low demand areas times £24k is a lot of taxpayers money. Private property developers only want to build houses that they can sell and much of the regen money will have to come from the private sector. ie the cost of demolition and rebuild is passed on to the new house owner with some public subsidy.

It is also thought that the town centre would benefit from houses where a greater disposable income exists and this type of development will help to reduce the negative preception about desireability of inner urban areas. [and take pressure of the green belt] Again CABE are at the heart of this and HBC is going to choose just one private developer to 'work in partnership' to ensure profit is only one motive amongst many.

[Graham Jones]

Originally Posted by lindsay ormerod

Sadly even if HBC had been informed of it they would have a] ignored the info b]not understood it or c] carried on regardless. We are dealing with a different species here and they do not understand reason,logic,common sense or economy!

Things have been extremely slow I agree and the deaparture of Mr Rix and bringing in of BwD in November has helped accelerate progress. Many Labour Councillors, active informed RA's are equally quizzical/disapointed at the way the scheme has been handled.

[Graham Jones]

Originally Posted by park381

I accept your point linsay, but this programme was not just about HBC it was a nationwide thing showing the plight of the many thousands of families who's home are due for demolition at the govs instruction, regeneration they call it, I call it destroying local communities, communities that have been in existance for many years. The programme producers deserve a medal for highlighting the problem on national TV. All it needs is designers with a little flair, the houses no matter how long they have been empty, could be upgraded to meet all current regulations etc, at a portion of the cost of demolition and rebuild. Thus saving the gov, and us tax payers a vast sum of money

A high profile example of this was in Nelson where heritage lawyers were brought in to defend residents and which they subsequently won and demolition was averted. Having said that anyone suggesting Lonsdale St should not be demolished would be chased out of town by the beleagured residents who have campaigned for demolition and Project Phoenix for years. Often CPO and demolition is cheaper given sell on values of large brownfield sites reducing the cost to the taxpayer. CABE are at the heart of the scheme under ODPM instructions to ensure quality designs and build and prevent past failures repeating themselves.