Meeting of Town Council Officers with Livin

Report by Leader of the Town Council Bob Fleming

At the Council meeting on 25th April 2018 (Minute 125 (i)) it was resolved that :-

“Durham County Council and ‘Livin’ be asked to talk to the Town Council and Residents to gather information and facts needed before sending a letter to the Minister for Housing and Local Government pointing out the facts and the need for a judicial review”.

A meeting was held with Livin on Wednesday 30th May 2018. At the meeting were myself; Councillor Malcolm Iveson, Deputy Leader; and Council officers; Chrissy Walton, Corporate and Planning Officer and Dan Austin, Finance Manager.

The representatives from Livin were Colin Steel, Chief Executive; Alan Boddy, Executive Director of Operations; Helen Darby, Business Development Manager; Vicky Miller, Regeneration Manager and Lauren Thompson, Press and PR Officer.

I think it would be fair to say that the meeting had a bit of a frosty start with everyone being a little defensive and unclear on the motives and intentions of each party.

However, it was quickly cleared up that the Town Council had requested the meeting to hear the facts on the proposed regeneration of the West Ward directly from Livin, and also to seek answers to a number of questions that had arisen from the Council Meeting on 25th April, both from councillors and the 150-180 members of the public who attended, many of whom were anxious and in some cases angry that the Town Council could not answer their questions.

Livin explained it was their policy not to attend public meetings and preferred consulting with residents on a one to one basis.

Livin went on to express concern at some of what they perceived to be incorrect information being published in the local media and distributed to local residents, which they felt was undermining their consultation and muddying the waters.

Livin have spent at least 5 weeks fire-fighting these rumours which has put the whole time-line for the proposed regeneration back and has caused unnecessary uncertainty for many residents.

Livin stressed that the regeneration was not about ‘social engineering’, but improving and regenerating the area in line with what residents want, in order to improve housing, deal with estate design issues and reduce anti-social behaviour.

Livin confirmed that their preferred option was option 3 but within that option were a number of subsequent options that could be considered and this would depend on the outcome of the consultation and residents’ needs.

They also confirmed the regeneration would be phased and would take place over a number of years. It was unlikely that any physical work would start before 2020 and only then if there was community support for the proposal.

The consultation that is ongoing at the present time would inform the development of a Regeneration Master-plan for the area and this would be underpinned by a Residents’ Charter which would be consulted upon and would set out exactly what will happen, when, and what individual residents can expect.

Ultimately, the scheme would only go ahead if the Master-plan and Residents’ Charter were adopted by the majority of residents following a formal independent ballot.

There was a debate regarding time-frames, the original bid to the government and the level of DCC involvement up to now. The bid to the government had been in 2016 and was for funding for consultation and Master-planning. To complete the bid it was necessary to outline indicative ideas for the project. The numbers stated were not fixed and would depend on the actual requirements of the residents, as informed by the consultation.

For example, if a total of 250 residents wanted to come back to the estate in rented social housing accommodation then that is what would be provided for in the final scheme. Similarly the numbers of shared equity homes would be informed by actual demand from residents.

If the proposed regeneration project does go ahead it will be done in phases enabling residents to be rehoused temporarily elsewhere in Aycliffe e.g. in empty properties on the Agnew estates, as through phasing it would only involve manageable numbers and not hundreds of people in one go.

Livin stressed that every resident would have the opportunity to return to the estate if they wish to do so unless there were eviction proceedings already underway. They also will try and keep neighbours together and accommodate requests from families and friends to live closer to each other.

In relation to the issue of compensation for tenants, private landlords and homeowners, this information has already been publicly disclosed and is available on the Livin website.

I asked specific questions about rent increases and the uncertainty for those residents who had purchased their homes so did not have any rent or mortgage costs in their retirement. It was acknowledged that social housing rents would increase in future years even if regeneration did not take place. Following regeneration, there could be small increases in rent and new houses may be in a higher Council tax band, at the moment the houses are in Band A and in the future may be in Band B. However, this depends on the size and design of the houses, which again will be part of the Master-planning process.

Those residents who have purchased their houses will be offered a number of options, one of which would be shared equity i.e. they will be able to move back onto the estate to a new build property. It was confirmed that it is Livin’s intention that they will have no additional rent to pay nor mortgage to take out to purchase the property outright through shared equity arrangements that Livin would try to put in place.

The value of their current house will be offset against the value of the new property and used to calculate the shared equity value i.e. the residents’ stake in the value of the house. It was pointed out that the equity in the property would be more likely to increase following the regeneration as housing values should increase rather than stagnate and decrease as is the case now.

Livin would own the remaining share of the property.

If the property was sold in the future, the proceeds would be shared between Livin and the resident based on the shared equity. The proceeds would form part of the estate should the resident die.

We discussed the requirements of the neighbourhood plan and the fact that any proposal would need to be compliant and if they were planning to build on green spaces we would object. It was agreed that should the project move to a Master-plan stage the Town Council would be closely involved to make sure there were no issues once a planning application was submitted.

Livin questioned whether the Council would expect all green open space to be protected and left exactly as it is now, or whether it would be acceptable to retain the same percentage of green open space but with the opportunity to re-design the estate to deal with specific anti-social behaviour issues. GATC will need to consider this at the Master-planning stage.

Finally it was clarified that Livin remains, first and foremost, a charitable not for profit social housing provider. The development arm of Livin is not currently operational and the intention in the future would be to use this company to build properties for sale to raise resources to invest in the core business of social housing.

In closing the meeting we were thanked for attending and clarifying the Town Council’s position and we were assured that Livin wants to work with the Council moving forward to deliver a successful project.

We look forward in anticipation to working with Livin on the Master-plan and Residents’ Charter.