Community Response

Introduction

“Redevelopment” has been the word on everyone’s lips within the community of the Donegall Road and Village area over the past 20 months. In years past, the community could not agree upon a way forward to improve housing. The Housing Executive then walked away, leaving the area to market forces, but due to a number of factors in recent years, the community have agreed intervention is needed to a greater or lesser extent.

The area has slowly deteriorated over the last 30 years with housing being one of the major issues raised by local residents as needing addressed. The community has voiced its anger and frustration at the lack of action from various government departments to address the range of problems. Slowly but surely these are being addressed with the last element being housing. Living conditions for many within the Village area are deemed to be totally unacceptable, with many of the houses having only two bedrooms and outside toilets. Families have been forced to leave the area, in search of more suitable family–sized dwellings – both social and private housing types; which in turn has led to further deterioration and dereliction.

When the Sandy Row and Village Task force was formed, it set out to address the needs of Protestant working class areas. The report overwhelmingly presented the need for urgent intervention in order to improve the housing conditions in the Village area.

In the Government’s Taskforce Report, page 36, it states: “The development of proposals for more creative and effective housing policies to promote affordable and mixed income communities with a more balanced allocation of tenancies. The introduction of mixed tenure and affordable modern homes should be expanded. In particular, plans for Gainsborough, Mountcolloyer, Glenbryn, the Village, Connswater and other areas should be accelerated. Proposals should address population drift away from PUL communities …” This imbalance is supported in paragraph 2.3.2 of the report, which states: “… many Executive tenants do not see the area as somewhere that they want to stay.”


Consultation

In May 2005, Greater Village Regeneration Trust (GVRT) was given the responsibility of carrying out intensive community consultation on a potential housing redevelopment scheme of the Village area. It was deemed essential that the community and local stakeholders were given the opportunity to voice their opinions on proposed plans.

The Housing Focus Committee, a sub group of GVRT, offered it’s assistance with the consultation. It was agreed that local people may have more confidence in giving their views and information to fellow members of the community, rather than Northern Ireland Housing Executive officers.

The Housing Focus Committee was established as a result of a call for those interested in housing issues to attend a meeting. Over 150 individuals turned up, which demonstrates the level of interest in housing issues in the area. Due to the level of interest, a vote was taken to elect a smaller number of people to represent the community on a committee. The meeting elected fifteen local people who represent both owner-occupiers and social tenants. The committee was given the responsibility of addressing local housing issues.

The group have been active for nearly three years and meet once every month (and quite often more regularly) to discuss issues raised by local residents, to compose letters, to lobby statutory agencies and work to improve housing standards in the area. A lot of the Housing Focus Committee’s work goes un-noticed. However their consultation work was very much noticed as they could be seen knocking doors in the area over a three month period, both during the day and in the evenings.

Prior to the commencement of the consultation, senior Housing Executive staff provided the Housing Focus Committee with extensive training in relation to redevelopment procedures. A pack with six concept plans and information on each option was composed and included very clear information regarding the potential outcome for those who may be included in plans for redevelopment. The Housing Focus committee were given advice by NIHE planners on each of the plans, so they would be able to describe to residents, the layout of each option.

The members of the Housing Focus Committee learned about the operations of vesting orders, compensation available for owner-occupiers, social tenants, private tenants and landlords. The training ensured those who carried out door-to-door consultation would be totally unbiased when discussing the options for each individual household.

The consultation began with a series of public meetings and local stakeholder meetings to announce the consultation process, introduce the information pack and to make certain the community understood all opinions would be heard and acknowledged in the decision-making process.

The actual consultation involved door-to-door surveying of 1,300 households, with a view to identifying the preferred option and reaching community agreement. The Housing Focus Committee called with each household within the proposed redevelopment area up to three times to gage their aspirations for the area, and their opinion as to whether or not redevelopment is the answer to the area’s problems. Housing Executive staff conducted a further two visits to ensure everyone had an opportunity to be involved in the process. The consultation also provided an opportunity to discover the needs of individual households and how they think redevelopment could benefit them.

The Housing Focus Committee donated a considerable amount of its time voluntarily to ensuring that no door within the proposed redevelopment area was ‘un-knocked’. Their efforts were remarkable and undertaken in a professional manner.


Survey Results

The respondents voted overwhelmingly for full redevelopment. Many of the surveys gave very precise comments as to how local residents believed the area could be improved. Comments included issues of house size, garden space, car parking, infrastructure, provisions for both young people and the elderly and shopping facilities.

Of all people residing in the Village area, the consultation achieved a 55% response rate. This may be viewed upon as being quite low, but the community view this percentage as being made up by the long term residents of the area. Those who did not reply may be made up of short term residents, for example students or migrant workers, who will only live in the area for a few years and then move on. This particular group of residents do not have a long term stake-hold in the area and were therefore not truly interested in its future regeneration.

With a 74% response favouring full redevelopment, the sentiment of the community is to push for maximum regeneration. Numerous survey responses included comments about how terrible the area has become and if nothing is done, they would be forced to leave. On a regular basis, families leave the area because of the poor housing conditions. Until intervention is actioned the community will be lost and the area will be taken over by property developers and investors. Surveys received from the older generation of the community expressed their concern over the dramatic decline of the area in recent years. They remember an area, with good housing for that time, busy shops and a strong community. It is evident from the consultation that the domicile community and also those who have lived here for a lengthy time want to see the area improved into the thriving community it once used to be.


Wishes of the Community

For a number of years now, GVRT has held numerous planning / visioning days with local residents to engage how they view their area as it is now and how they would like to see it changed. Time and time again, the local people have voiced their wishes for immediate steps to be taken in order to address the housing problems in the area, with the primary aim being to allow families to remain and to save the local community from further discrimination.

The community is disgusted at the blight of derelict properties remaining uninhabited and falling into further disrepair, and the associated effects on adjoining properties. The residents are angered at the level of depravation in the area, and the fact that the locality is one of the last remaining areas in Belfast to be redeveloped.

GVRT has over the past few years organised bus trips for the community to visit other areas of Belfast where redevelopment has taken place. These bus trips visited a number of areas including Tudor in the Shankill, and Connswater on the Newtownards Road. Those who availed of the bus trips were both impressed by the improvements in the areas visited, but also disheartened because their own area had been left to decline.

These local people have seen other areas of Belfast improving and now want the same for their own area. The community have been willing to contribute to the consultation process, have made their views very clear and want immediate action taken. Too long has the community heard the requirements for reports and appraisals; they want positive action.


Community Aspirations for Redevelopment

The Housing Focus Committee held a Planning Day in May 2006 with local residents to put together their views on redevelopment. The following sets out very their aspirations for improving the area -

Vesting and Replacement

All Village houses within the regeneration area to be vested. This includes Donegall Avenue, which the Housing Focus Committee believes can be redeveloped within the framework of the provisions of the Belfast Metropolitan Plan ‘Areas of Townscape Character’ specifications.

House Type and Size

All social housing to be in the form of semi-detached, terraced properties and bungalows. No social apartments to be provided.
Seventy-five percent of all social accommodation to be in the form of three, four and five bedroom houses, bungalows and sheltered accommodation.
All owner-occupier housing to be in the form of semi-detached and terraced properties.
Ninety percent of all owner-occupier accommodation to be in the form of three, four and five bedroom housing. The remaining ten percent can be in the form of two-bedroom houses.
All owner-occupier housing to have space requirements (including internal layout) that are at least equivalent to those applicable to the same type of properties that are being built in the social housing sector.

Disability Needs

All new social and private semi-detached and terraced housing to be built to ‘Lifetime Home Standards’. Bungalows should be provided for those who are severely disabled or the very elderly.

Gardens and Parking

The development of all private and social housing should have manageable gardens to the front or rear, or both front and back.
Parking provision to be mostly ‘in-curtilage’. The remainder of parking to be ‘lay-by’. No communal or direct on street parking.

Owner-Occupation

The provision of sites by the NIHE for affordable owner-occupation development should cater for any Village residents whose homes are vested and who wishes to buy an affordable house. The role of identifying interested Village purchasers of the affordable housing to be carried out by the Village Housing Focus Committee. The Committee will also agree with the NIHE a wider role the Committee intends to play in relation to the affordable housing processes.
Prices of houses should be affordable for local people who wish to purchase a new property and who were decanted as part of the vesting procedures.
Purchasers of affordable houses must be prevented from selling them and making a quick profit. The sale agreement for these properties must include a resale clause requiring the repayment of the difference between the sale price and market value if the property is sold within seven years.
Development Briefs for private housing sites to specify that developers must meet specified time targets e.g. submit planning application, go on site, complete work, etc.
The Housing Focus Committee will play an agreed role in selecting private developer proposals for all private housing development sites.
Affordable housing can only be purchased for owner-occupation.

Housing Put Back

The replacement of the existing Village houses with the maximum amount of put back and higher density levels with a balance of housing types, mix and size. The balance between the two sectors will be determined by the full assessment of housing need carried out immediately following vesting.
Preference should be given to long term residents, particularly those residents who displayed their confidence in the area by remaining during the troubles. These people suffered greatly and should be rewarded for their dedication to their community.

Neighbourhood Layout / Community Safety

All new housing developments to be built to ‘Secure by Design’ standards.
All new housing developments to have a traditional gridiron type layout.
No cul-de-sacs to be provided or ‘rat runs’ created.
Donegall Avenue to be retained as a thoroughfare.
Traffic calming measures to be included at the planning stage of each social and private housing development.
Future designs should take into account local features. Buildings will use high quality materials, be simple and respect local distinctiveness.

Donegall Avenue

Donegall Avenue to be redeveloped in the form of two and a half storey terraced housing.
Any new dwellings should have vibrations from railway line taken into consideration during the planning process.

Open Space

Provision of adequate, well-managed play space to cater for the needs of local children and youths. This play space would be centrally located.
Provision of public open space (over and above play areas)

Redevelopment Completion

To be completed at the earliest opportune date and all interested departments and agencies should ensure there are no unnecessary hold-ups or delays.
The redevelopment should be carried out in phasing and all residents should be notified as to timescales, including start date and completion date.
During the process, residents decanted from their properties should be transferred into adequate accommodation in the Village area.


Impacts if Large Scale Redevelopment does not happen

It is important that the decision taken on the size and future redevelopment of the Village is not based on purely economic factors. The consultation carried out would be pointless if the views of local people were out-weighed by financial restraints. This would have a seriously detrimental effect on any work being done in the area in terms of reviving the community. Their confidence in the public sector would be totally quashed and the outcome would be insulting to those who spent many hours of work completing the consultation.

The frustration being experienced throughout the community would have a detrimental affect on the proposed future direction of Neighbourhood Renewal in the area. It has taken a number of years to get the community engaged or animated to be involved with the future plans for their own community.

A lack of coherent response by the Northern Ireland Housing Executive and associated government departments would create anger and resentment, and cause a withdrawal of community involvement from a large number of projects and initiatives.

An additional negative impact of non-intervention by Northern Ireland Housing Executive would be more than just the urban physical redevelopment; there would be a knock-on effect on all aspects of regeneration within the community. The sense of ‘no-one listens’ or ‘no-one wants to listen’ to this community would be entrenched throughout the area.

During the consultation, the Housing Focus Committee came across a high number of cases of individuals living in accommodation unsuitable to their health and physical well-being. The one issue which repeats itself in the area is the problem of residents being unable to use their stairs and having to live and sleep in their living room or kitchen area of their home. Another detrimental factor for people with illnesses, disabilities and generally poor health is having their WC outside in their back yards. In the winter especially, this is not ideal in this day and age. Large scale redevelopment will eliminate such problems if bungalows or sheltered accommodation is built. The Housing Focus Committee would be very much interested in the development of lifetime home standards, to ensure units can facilitate a variety of different households, with various needs.

The sustainability of the community and the area has been highlighted time and time again through various documents and reports. If large scale redevelopment does not take place, the sustainability of the community will be lost and the rapid decline in the population, as evidenced over the last 10 years, will continue on a downward spiral.

Many owner-occupiers and home-owners in the area would be unable to bring their houses up to modern standards and would be forced out of the area allowing the private sector to invest – meaning the local community could eventually be lost. This would then result in the closure of schools and local facilities and the area would be totally unsuitable for family and community living.

Very few individuals are eligible for these grants and many do not apply because of the lengthy and difficult process involved.

If the area is not redeveloped, the community is increasingly questioning why this area has been selected for non-intervention. There is a feeling throughout the community this is part of a larger strategy to depopulate the area that would have a Unionist affiliation. It is very hard to argue against people with that viewpoint, as to date there has only been minor redevelopment in comparison with other areas within the city of Belfast of indeed within Northern Ireland.

The lack of urgent progress on this issue is encouraging people to look at other areas that has suitable housing fit for their needs and purposes.

If large scale intervention does not take place, people could question it is a proper use of public funds to just keep patching up what is already there. There is documented evidence that after refurbishment of properties, they need to be revisited again within a 25 year period. The community would ask the question is this financially viable to spend a large sum of money on rehabilitation for a lifespan of 25 years, when a new build would cost only slightly more, but would be expected to have a lifespan of 100 years. The community see no sense in a sticking plaster approach to housing in this area.

It is very evident that the community is becoming more militant in seeking to encourage more grant support and intervention and the lack of urgency shown by government departments would reinforce that more militant approach.

The Housing Executive could be accused of increasing the financial implications of redevelopment in the delays they have caused to the process.

Not only will the regeneration of the area benefit local people, but will have a knock on positive effect on Belfast as a whole. Belfast’s population has continued to decline in recent years, while populations have grown in many similar cities. Since 2000, the population of Belfast has decreased by 4.24%.

The type of available housing in the city is an important determinant of residential desirability. As stated previously, many families have been forced to move because of the lack of suitable housing. Commuting is a favoured option because better quality, affordable housing can be found outside the city. Reversing the poor housing conditions in the Village area, should in turn increase the number of residents in the area, resulting in the increase in the population of the city of Belfast.

Greater Village Regeneration Trust will continue to back the community as it strives towards full redevelopment of the area.

Principles and Objectives for Redevelopment

Principles for Village Redevelopment

All existing residents rehoused in area/vicinity, if they wish to be;
No one worse off financially;
Redevelopment will offer options to satisfy all existing demand in the area for social housing, private housing and private rented housing;
Retain the positive physical aspects and community character of the area;
Achieve a sustainable community through an appropriate demographic mix and type of tenure;
Improve the physical environment;
Improve access to some services/facilities;
Retain some small business/retail;
Redevelopment must make economic sense weighting the financial and social context.




Objectives for Village Redevelopment

To accommodate all existing social and private housing demand in the area by 2015;
Eradicate housing unfitness in the area by 2015;
Ensure that 100% of social housing in the area meets current standards in terms of energy consumption, space, maintenance, etc., by 2015;
Facilitate the development of a sustainable community in the Village area by
Providing an appropriate mix of housing types;
Enabling a wide demographic range to be housed, including families, singles and older people;
Consolidate small business activity in the area so that primary local needs in respect of accessible retail and other services are met;
Maintain the positive physical characteristics of the area in line with BMAP requirements in relation to an Area of Townscape Character;