Building Resilient Communities

Final Report – April 2017

Contents

Introduction and Background ................................................................. 1

The Pilot Projects .................................................................................. 2

Bradworthy Community Land Trust .................................................... 2

Exeter Local Food .............................................................................. 5

Norton sub Hamdon Community Land Trust ....................................... 7

Queen Camel Community Land Trust .............................................. 10

Red Brick Building ............................................................................ 13

Further projects ................................................................................... 17

Beer Community Land Trust ............................................................. 17

Upper Frome Valley Community Land Trust ..................................... 18

Reimagining the Levels .................................................................... 19

Conclusions from the Project’s Learning Network ............................... 20

Research Conclusions ........................................................................ 23

Recommendations .............................................................................. 27

Annex 1: Executive Summary: The Aspirations & Motivations of Community

Land Trust Volunteers in Somerset, Dorset & Devon

Annex 2: Maps showing Pilot Projects

1

Introduction and Background

The Building Resilient Communities project was conceived in 2014 to build on Wessex

Community Assets’ (WCA’s) work supporting the establishment and development of

Community Benefit Societies (CBSs), Registered Societies and Community Land Trusts

(CLTs). WCA had observed that many community groups chose to set up a Registered

Society/CBS as their legal form as they want the flexibility to provide benefits to the

community in multiple ways through asset ownership. Groups frequently expressed

aspirations to implement further projects after the one for which they were initially constituted

(be that acquiring a building for community use, building affordable homes for local people

or setting up a community shop). They planned to use the vehicle of a Registered Society

to take on and develop other assets that are important to the community they are based in,

with a view to making that community stronger through the model of asset ownership with

community leadership.

Many of the Registered Societies that WCA had worked with to deliver an initial project were

by then in a state of transition. They had successfully set up a legal vehicle (the Registered

Society itself), established a board and recruited local members, achieved one significant

outcome (usually their reason for setting up in the first place – the housing, shop, etc.), gained

confidence and established a track record. The societies were in a strong position to take

on other assets and embark on new projects. Meanwhile the external environment in which

the societies were operating was presenting both challenges and opportunities to the

development of new projects. For example, the reduction of feed in tariffs for renewable

energy projects; the increasing number of communities embarking on neighbourhood plans

to decide on a very local planning policy for their community; and the withdrawal – but later

reinstatement – of affordable homes grants by the Government. In response to the new and

changing situations in which many of these community groups found themselves, WCA felt

it would be useful to conduct action research, supported by the Friends Provident

Foundation, to identify what happens next for Registered Societies & CBSs, whether they

genuinely contribute to community resilience and if so, how can they be supported further.

The action research focussed on researching what motivated individuals to get involved in

community led endeavour (particularly through CLTs – see the report by Dr Tom Moore in

Annex_1) and what support was required by a number of pilot projects, specifically

Registered Societies that had already completed a significant project and were now looking

to take on something new. The project also hosted a peer to peer support and learning

network. This investigated what were the key issues faced by these societies and the

communities in which they were operating, with a focus on the concept of resilience.

• CLTs mobilise deep-seated emotional bonds to place and concern for local environs.

• These bonds manifest into leadership & advocacy for development, rather than resistance or opposition.

• It is often the neighbours of selected sites who are the most enthusiastic.

• Not ‘NIMBY’ – but wanting control and influence over local environment.

2

The Pilot Projects

Bradworthy Community Land Trust

History

Bradworthy CLT, a Registered Society, was established in 2012 by local people in the Devon

village who wished to ensure that development of affordable housing within the community

was appropriate to the needs and wishes of those who lived there, with a strategic vision of

community needs as a whole. The CLT was mentored and assisted by Wessex Community

Assets throughout the process.

An original motivator for setting up the CLT had been a proposed development of affordable

housing by an outside Housing Association in what local people felt was an inappropriate

location in the village, and which would have displaced employment space in the community.

The CLT was set up to provide a credible alternative and to protect the community from

inappropriate future development controlled by those outside of the community. The

community had an independent nature and a mistrust of outside organisations. The principle

influencing the original CLT board members was that of taking back control of assets in the

community. The CLT would enable the community to choose the right site, have more control

of allocations and access funding needed to build the homes. Bradworthy CLT then worked

in partnership with Aster Housing Association to deliver a housing scheme that was in

keeping with community’s needs.

In retrospect, the CLT felt that it should have had a greater involvement with WCA and Aster

in the process of gaining funding for the housing development from the Homes and

Communities Agency (HCA), as the level of funding achieved caused two problems. Firstly,

the original intention had been to include an element of shared housing (two units) on the

development but this was prevented by the level of funding received. Secondly, part way

through the build, the chosen contractor went into liquidation – this contractor’s quotation had

been by far the cheapest received and the only one to tender within the funding budget; they

were also not local to the area and both of these issues should perhaps have been warning

signs. Future projects might learn from this and quotations possibly be requested at an

earlier stage and in parallel so as to inform the application process to HCA. Also that more

effort should be made in remote areas like Bradworthy to specify local contractors with

existing networks, as one of the chosen contractor’s biggest problems was attracting

suppliers and trades with the funding available to support the project due to its remoteness.

Despite the business failure and liquidation of the originally employed contractor, the CLT

delivered a development of 10 affordable rented homes for local people, completing in spring

2015. The CLT owns the freehold of the scheme and Aster Housing Association leases the

houses and manages the rentals. The CLT receives an annual ground rent which will enable

it to meet its running costs and have a small surplus to use to develop new community

projects.

Issues

In the autumn of 2015, Bradworthy CLT joined the Building Resilient Communities Project as

one of the pilots. Although there was not an immediate and specific project which the CLT

had in mind, the group wished to be engaged because it felt a new project would keep people

in the village involved in the CLT following the completion of the housing scheme. An initial

discussion with Wessex identified three potential new projects:

• A residential facility for older people – a care home, sheltered housing or some other

arrangement

3

• A new community woodland to replace the Millennium wood following the expiry of its

lease

• Enterprise workspace.

What happened during the project period

Project Feasibility

The group agreed to explore the feasibility of each option with the support of the Wessex

team.

Residential facility for older people: The Bradworthy Housing Need Survey had identified

a need for housing for older people, to enable them to down-size into smaller, more suitable

accommodation and also to provide different levels of care and support. A council-run

sheltered housing development with a warden had now become market housing. A visit was

arranged to the Harbour House care home in Bridport, run by the West Bay Housing Society,

a Registered Society with exempt charity status. The CLT was able to learn about the

experience of Harbour House in providing housing for 35 older people using a community

led approach.

Community owned

woodland: A millennium

wood was planted in

Bradworthy in 2000 and had

been accessible for amenity

purposes such as dog

walking, but public access

ceased in 2015 when the

lease ended. It was felt that a

woodland project would have

popular appeal and also be

relatively easy to achieve.

There was also an

opportunity to increase use of

the woodland amenity by

locating it nearer to the village

centre.

Enterprise workspace: Bradworthy has a relatively high number of small businesses for a

village with a population of just over 1,000 residents, and the CLT board felt that developing

additional enterprise workspace could be an important element in increasing the local

economic resilience of the parish. In considering developing workspace as a future project

it would be necessary to:

• establish need

• identify buildings that could be refurbished or land that could be purchased to build new

units

• assess the financial viability of the project.

Neighbourhood Plan

Although the CLT had ideas of future projects it felt it needed to get better information from

the community about what local people wanted and it chose to do this through the

neighbourhood planning process. The Bradworthy Neighbourhood Plan (NP) was being

initiated at this same time, and the CLT was represented on the NP Steering Group.

4

It was recommended that the NP questionnaire include specific questions relating to the

projects that the CLT had identified to build up an evidence base for developing any or all of

the proposed projects in Bradworthy, and to get an accurate picture of the needs and

aspirations of the community.

The NP has taken the two years of the Building Resilient Communities project to get to the

consultation stage. In this process the policies specifically related to spatial planning can be

taken forward as part of the formal Plan; other issues and proposals which have been

identified during the process can be taken forward through alternative means – e.g. adopted

as part of an Action Plan by the Parish Council or village organisations such as the CLT.

Such complementary actions would have the evidence base and endorsement which the

exhaustive NP process requires.

Bradworthy CLT are now waiting for the final outcome of the NP to help it decide what to do

next. The CLT wishes to feel confident about which projects it should embark on – be it

homes for older people, woodland or enterprise workshops.

Learning

• Engaging in a formal process – controlled externally and by legislation – such as

Neighbourhood Planning, puts a brake on the ability of an independent village

organisation to act quickly. However, it helps give any new project or initiative an

evidence base and popular endorsement.

• Brokered Peer to Peer learning – as shown in the visit made by the Bradworthy

CLT to the Bridport Care Home, and the advice on community woodlands from

someone with direct relevant experience – can play a crucial role in supporting

new developments in communities.

• The nature of Neighbourhood Planning, and its exclusion of non-planning issues,

raises questions about its contribution to resilience in a community. It can and

sometimes does galvanise community led actions about non planning matters.

5

Exeter Local Food

History

Exeter Local Food Ltd (ELF), trading as The Real Food Store, is a Registered Society established in December 2009, to develop a retail business in Exeter (a city of 120,000 people), with the aim of linking local food producers and suppliers to local people who wish to buy food grown and produced locally. It was originally an initiative of Transition Exeter, seeking practical solutions to the questions facing the community of Exeter around issues of sustainability and resilience - creating a ‘food hub’ would be a response to some of these questions. Exeter Local Food needed to raise finance in order to refit the shop and provide working capital to launch the enterprise. The society raised £153k (exceeding their target of £135k) from 303 members to fund the refit of the shop and provide working capital to launch the enterprise. The shop, with a café and bakery, opened on 30 March 2011. Since then Exeter Local Food has become a profitable, member led, socially driven retail business selling locally produced food and goods to local people with a substantial turnover.

Issues

Exeter Local Food joined the Building Resilient Communities project as a pilot at the beginning of 2016.

The key issues which it was facing at this time were:

• The likely need to move premises. From the outset ELF was aware that the projected redevelopment of the neighbourhood of central Exeter where it was located was due for redevelopment. The timing of this redevelopment was uncertain – but the necessary relocation was increasingly on its agenda by 2016.

• Governance and management. The division between the roles of management in terms of staff and board had been a major issue to work through over the last six years. In order to make the business profitable it was felt vital get this balance right and ensure that there is a strong management team, and that the culture was of every person in the organisation feeling empowered and valued.

What happened during the project period

Governance and management

Much thought had to be given to the locus of the day to day management of the organisation,

how much the board would get involved in this, and also how paid workers and volunteers

interacted. Members are crucial to the organisation, helping to guide the Board in making

key decisions for the benefit of the wider community. These issues are common to those

organisations which use a mixture of paid staff and volunteers in their day to day running.

With the support of the Building Resilient Communities project, a facilitated session involving

the six Board members and the three members of the management team took place. This

was used to:

• develop better mutual understanding and identify the core values of organisation - to

help inform the impending move and any other new initiatives as well as supporting

current activities

• determine priorities for the Society

• provide clarity on roles within the organisation (director, staff member, volunteer, and

member).

Exeter Local Food was also keen to examine its economic impact on the local food sector in

Devon and the South West, and worked with Wessex to adapt and implement the “local

6

multiplier” tool as a means of carrying out this impact assessment. This exercise will

demonstrate how effective the business has been in achieving its aim of supporting the local

food economy, and the livelihoods that go with this. It will be a way of both measuring and

communicating this important impact, on an ongoing basis.

Relocation

During 2016 it became clear that it would be sooner rather than later (in all likelihood within

a year) that the Real Food Store would need to relocate within the City, and the board began

actively assessing the risks they were facing in staying (extending the lease for an ongoing

period) and moving, and examining the opportunities in the city for new premises. The

business was trading successfully in its current location, so this reduced the motivation to

move to new premises quickly. A great deal of time and energy were expended in exploring

various properties, some of which were thoroughly considered.

ELF also found that potential financing of a move was a challenge. It had successfully raised

finance via a community share issue in the past, but should it need to raise finance in this

way for new development then there would be a lead in time that would make acting quickly

on securing a new property difficult. It is possible to underwrite/pre-finance a community

share issue, and the Board have investigated this.

Members felt strongly that a City Centre location was needed, and the Board prioritised this,

and considered the option of a smaller city centre outlet as a satellite to ensure a presence

with a larger retail operation based elsewhere. The situation proved volatile – with possible

sites being lost due to the need to move quickly to secure them.

Relocation – as well as a problem – also began to be seen as an opportunity to broaden the

role of ELF, including development of its social and educational role in dealing with issues

relating to food. In early 2017 the Real Food Store was given notice to leave its Paris Street

premises. This necessitated intensifying the effort to find new premises and new premises

have now been identified and are being secured at the time of writing this report. And the

likely new premises – which would mean separate premises for the shop and the café – with

the bakery already relocated to a new site – do indeed offer great opportunities for further

developing the work and impact of Exeter Local Food and the Real Food Store.

Learning

• ELF has shown that by developing its approach to collective management, and

reflecting on its experience, it is better prepared to meet challenges and outside

“shocks” in a constructive way. It has become more adaptable whilst remaining

true to its core values.

• It has combined improving its internal management processes with an outward

looking and engaged approach to the local community, manifest in its work in

enabling the Exeter Food Network. This shows how a Registered Society Board

can effectively support and complement the main trading activities of the Society.

• The use of a “multiplier” impact tool can help measure and reinforce the role of

the shop as the hub of a local food supply web. It is also can contribute useful

material to be incorporated in future share offer documents.

• ELF is demonstrating resilience through improving internal processes and the

fostering of a reflective culture; through strengthening its role as a hub for local

supply chains, and through active engagement and sharing its vision and values

with the wider local community.

http://www.realfoodexeter.co.uk

7

Norton sub Hamdon Community Land Trust

History

Norton sub Hamdon is a village in South Somerset district, situated five miles west of Yeovil.

The village has a population of 743. The adjoining villages of Norton, Chiselborough and the

Chinnocks comprise about 750 households, or a population of around 2,000 people.

Wessex Community Assets began working with the community in Norton sub Hamdon in late

2011, after the Parish Council had carried out the preliminary stages of determining the need

and finding a site for ten affordable homes in Norton at Minchingtons Close. Norton sub

Hamdon CLT was formed in 2012 and a planning application was submitted, with approval

granted in December 2012. There was some opposition to the scheme, but it was clear that

the majority of residents supported the building of affordable housing. Construction started

in October 2013 and the homes were ready for occupation by September 2014.

The CLT’s Board

Members have

always been clear

that, while the

provision of the

affordable homes

was an important first

project, the wider

vision of the CLT

should be to enhance

and sustain the

character of Norton

sub Hamdon – to

help to ensure its

long term economic

and social

sustainability.

In 2014, Norton sub Hamdon’s only shop (and associated Post Office) was threatened with

closure, as no commercial tenant could be found to replace the retiring owner. Encouraged

by the progress made with the affordable housing project, the board of the CLT decided to

explore the feasibility of taking over the shop and post office. With support from WCA, it

organised a public meeting, undertook surveys and developed a business plan. It was

decided that the business could be viable if run by the community, so a share issue was

undertaken.

An initial sum of £57,000 was required to purchase existing stock and for initial set-up costs.

Around £30,000 was invested by the community. Additional grants were secured, and a six

year initial lease was signed. The Community Shop has been running successfully since

opening in October 2014, with the Post Office being supported financially by the shop.

Issues

In the autumn of 2015, Norton sub Hamdon CLT joined the Building Resilient Communities

project as one of the pilot projects.

• When the CLT purchased the site for affordable housing at Minchingtons Close, the

landowner offered an additional 0.75 acre field at a nominal sum. The CLT agreed, with

the intention that this might become a community woodland or orchard. The latter

8

suggestions had not been widely supported. A suggestion was therefore made to

explore the feasibility of ground-based solar PV installation (a mini “solar farm”).

• Succession. The CLT, like many other community organisations, faced the challenge

of attracting new people as members and Board members to continue and develop its

work.

What happened during the project period

The initial plans for a solar farm were made unviable in late 2015, when the UK government

decided to remove tax reliefs from community renewables share issues and drastically

reduced the Feed in Tariff (FiT) subsidy. However, the CLT, through a newly created sub-

committee, continued to look at options for introducing community owned renewable energy

into the village with the aim of creating a “Solar Village”. This approach had the benefit of

allowing people with skills to be co-opted onto the committee without having to commit to

becoming full directors of the CLT.

The Solar Village concept had three clear aims – to support the viability of the shop and Post

Office, to decrease the carbon footprint of the local community and to provide financial

savings for householders. The CLT sub-committee had an agreed remit with 5 aims:

• To carry out a feasibility study for the provision of a solar array on the land at

Minchingtons Close owned by the CLT, to include:

− Potential partnership working

− Planning application

− Financial feasibility

− Potential for energy produced to be fed to the Community Shop

• To achieve the provision of the said solar array, if proved to be feasible.

• To encourage placement of solar panels on homes owned by Yarlington Housing Group,

particularly those in Minchingtons Close and Little Mead

• To consider ways of encouraging greater take up of renewable energy for other

properties within the area covered by the CLT

• To explore future potential for progressing other forms of renewable energy and other

related projects.

The critical option – to directly provide electricity from the pv array to the shop, thus making

the shop and Post Office more viable and sustainable as a business – was proved to be

impossible. This was because of circumstances beyond the CLT’s control - the inability of

the power supplier to create the necessary micro-grid.

However, the board of the CLT has accepted the sub committee’s recommendation that they

proceed with a planning application for the solar array on the field. It will investigate the

potential for a bond issue to raise the finance required, but will also seek grant finance. It

also wishes to progress action around fuel poverty in the village.

Both the board and the committee have been hampered by lack of capacity recently due to

staffing issues at the post office. Now that this issue has been resolved, it is hoped that more

time can be spent progressing the renewable energy and fuel poverty agendas, in line with

the aspiration of turning Norton into a “solar village”.

Succession

Having the shop as a flagship CLT project has significantly increased the membership of the

CLT. People newly arrived in the village also tend to become shareholders in the shop –

9

which makes them members of the CLT (and they often volunteer to work in the shop). Thus

the shop has become an important recruiting ground for participation in the CLT and

broadened the pool of potential new Board members.

Impact and the community shop and Post Office

Having been introduced to the local multiplier tool through the Building Resilient Communities

Learning Network, the CLT has begun a multiplier exercise for the shop and Post Office to

assess its economic impact and review the shop’s supplier chain. An initial and revealing

finding is that the Post Office is used for banking and other services by over 30 businesses

located within a 3 mile radius.

Learning

• Reflecting its values, the CLT has been attempting to link the environmental aim

of clean energy with the social aim of providing cheaper (or free energy) to both a

social enterprise – the community shop and Post Office – and to tenants of

affordable housing. This ambition is still being pursued despite the obstacles.

• Outside factors – the government decision to cut FIT and tax relief on community

renewable investment – and the inability of the power supplier to create a local

grid connection – have played a critical role in determining the achievability of the

community’s aims. Time and patience – and persistence in the face of adversity

– are necessary attributes to pursue even apparenty modest community

aspirations.

• The pursuit of new plans and projects is frequently interrupted by the challenges

of running community led enterprises – with issues such as staff management, or

struggling with Post Office regulations and bureaucracy – intermittently requiring

a great deal of time and attention.

• The shop and Post Office are having a significant positive impact on local

livelihoods as well as being a locus of social integration and community building.

http://www.nortonclt.btck.co.uk/

10

Queen Camel Community Land Trust

History

Queen Camel is a village in South Somerset, about 7 miles from Yeovil, with a population of

just under 1,000 people. Villagers set up a CLT, in the form of a Registered Society, at the

end of 2011. Its first project was to lead on the development of 20 affordable homes for local

people. The intention of community members in establishing the Trust was that the

Registered Society would be a vehicle capable of taking on other assets, in addition to

housing, that would contribute towards the sustainability of the village.

The factors influencing community members in Queen Camel with regard to sustainability

were ensuring that there was a good, balanced age demographic in the village, and that local

people were able to stay in the community they felt connected to with the resulting social

benefits of proximity to extended family and work. The affordable homes were occupied in

the summer of 2015.

Issues

In the autumn of 2016, Queen Camel CLT joined the Building Resilient Communities project

as one of the pilot projects.

• Governance. Queen Camel CLT, like other Registered Societies that are five or more

years old, had completed a significant project and was investigating whether to embark

on a future project, wished to take some time to reflect upon the experience of the last

six years, and consider whether it was in a good position to take on a new, significant

project.

• The Old School. In the summer of 2016, Countess Gytha Primary School, moved from

the centre of the village where it had been based for the previous 146 years to a new

school built on the southern edge of the village, leaving the old school buildings - a

Victorian grade II listed building, a 1920s building, and additional more modern

extensions and buildings in the grounds – unoccupied. Somerset County Council

prepared to sell the property on the open market. However Queen Camel Parish Council

11

and the CLT decided that it was an asset belonging to the community. They sought the

opportunity to take the school buildings into community ownership and develop them for

community use.

What Happened during the project period

The Old School

The old school was registered as an ‘asset of community value’ with the District Council, and

this gave the community a period of 6 months to assemble a business case to take on the

asset. The CLT worked with the Building Resilient Communities project to draw up a

feasibility study for developing the site into a community enterprise and education centre,

focusing on the promotion of health, wellbeing and creativity – in particular education, small

business/artisan workspace and the provision of village services. The feasibility study, which

is currently being developed into a full business plan, was based on community ownership

and management, operating on a not for profit basis but ensuring that any surplus generated

is reinvested in the centre to support more community activities in the village.

The CLT has led on the development of this study and business plan, with the support of the

Parish Council. A formal request was made to Somerset County Council for a transfer of the

asset or its purchase for less than best consideration (i.e. market value) due to the social and

economic benefits of the centre. At the time of writing this report, the Council had deferred

the request to a later meeting, but informed the CLT that it would only consider below market

purchase and not direct asset transfer.

This presents the CLT with the immediate challenge of raising the £200,000 purchase price

in addition to demonstrating that it can run the centre as a viable enterprise. This will require

a great deal of work to finalise the business plan and raise finance through a mixture of

grants, community shares and loans. The business plan for the centre needs to show how

the project will become financially self-sustaining through its business activities (primarily the

letting of space in the building).

The CLT envisages that the proposed community centre will develop greater resilience within

the village and the wider community. To achieve resilience for the centre itself, the CLT

considers that several key components are required: an effective and business-like

management group, an anchor tenant for the café, tenants for the craft workshops and clients

for the health & wellbeing facilities.

There is a heavy workload to achieve the vision for the school and the bulk of this is currently

being undertaken by a small number of people. However, there is a feeling that once the

building is obtained as a community asset people will come forward to take on roles.

It has been hugely beneficial that the CLT was already constituted and had previously

demonstrated its ability to deliver significant community benefit (the development of 20

affordable homes in 2011). The structure of the housing project – contributing annual ground

rent to the CLT – gives the CLT a degree of financial stability and the ability to build up

reserves which can be used to float a new project. But embarking on a different type of

project has revealed that members of a group initially set up to achieve one objective may

not all feel similarly/as passionately about different types of future projects.

Governance

The Building Resilient Communities project offered to carry out a series of board interviews

as a review of the CLT’s current governance. This review was intended as the basis for the

CLT to plan its future activities and assess its capability to take on new work.

12

The Board would like to develop specific capability in finance and business modelling, ideally

by recruiting someone with these skills onto the Board. It also needs more active members

and volunteers to undertake the significant workload that lies ahead if the group is successful

in obtaining the old school site. The major challenges that the project has faced to date have

been primarily in relation to the membership of the CLT board, with two recent resignations.

Whilst one was due to family commitments, one followed a difficult Parish Meeting at which

objections to the school project were raised. However, the same meeting has galvanised

two people to apply for Board membership- now accepted.

The Board recognises that recruitment of new members to share the workload plus effective

succession planning, particularly for those members holding key roles, is essential for the

CLT to become more resilient in the longer term.

Learning

• At the outset, only a limited number of people come forward to engage actively

with the process of developing and shaping a new project. This early stage makes

great demands on the individuals committed to the project.

• A potential new project can lead to tensions within an organisation as well as

between organisations within a village. This is particularly true where the

organisation was initially set up with a specific objective (in this case, housing)

and subsequently embarks on a new project towards which some members may

not feel the same commitment.

• The scale of the Old School project means that it would have a great social impact

on both Queen Camel and the neighbouring villages; and alongside this it has the

potential to have significant economic impact – providing new livelihoods and

enterprise opportunities.

• The delays in the decision making processes of external organisations can

seriously affect the impetus of and plans for a project – in this case, postponement

of Somerset County Council’s meetings to decide on whether to transfer/sell the

old school site.

http://www.qcclt.co.uk/

13

Red Brick Building

History

In 2008, after eight years of ownership by the South West Regional Development Agency,

the Morlands factory site between Glastonbury and Street in Somerset still lay unused. Three

derelict buildings remained on site, the rest having been demolished.

In the week before Christmas the Regional Development Agency (RDA) announced that they

were going to demolish the Red Brick Building – an iconic end of 19th Century factory built

and owned by Clark Sons and Morland until the final bankruptcy of the business in 1985. It

had been a tannery and sheepskin manufacturing enterprise, in its heyday at the heart of the

mid-Somerset economy.

The reaction to this announcement was an occupation of the building over a very cold

Christmas and New Year – led by a group of young people from the local further education

college, and supported by a number of members of the local community. In the New Year

the RDA backed down in the face of a public meeting with 400 people present and a

moratorium on demolition was agreed.

Community members and the young people who had occupied the building worked together

to plan for the future use of the building, agreeing a broad spectrum of proposed activities

under the titles of Community, Education, Arts and Enterprise (now written above the

entrance). A Registered Society was formed, a business plan agreed, and a community

share issue launched. Negotiations with the RDA finally led to the handover of the building

to the new Registered Society in late 2010. Not long afterwards the RDA was abolished by

the incoming Coalition government.

The business plan showed a requirement of just under half a million pounds for the first stage

of the renovation – to take in just under half the total floor area of the building. Money raised

from the community share issue – from 230 local investors – gave the confidence to a group

of four philanthropic organisations/individuals to offer the balance as a soft loan, by forming

an Investors’ Club.

Renovation got underway and not long into the contract it became apparent that the cost

estimates were too low by a very significant margin. The investment package had to be

increased, and the project was saved by the generous commitment of the Investors’ Club.

Building work resumed, and the renovated part of the building opened for business in

December 2011. The development included a mix of shared and individual workspaces,

events and meeting spaces, and a café/bar/restaurant as anchor tenant. Very soon full

occupancy was achieved and a very effective partnership between the Red Brick Building

and the Bocabar – the anchor tenant – began.

In 2014, with nearly three years of trading as a community business, attention began to focus

on the remaining part of the building. Its accelerating state of dereliction was beginning to

be a major problem – presenting challenges ranging from insurance to the “kerbside”

impression created by its condition. Alongside these problem areas was the potentially huge

opportunity that any development would offer. The view was also held that until the second

stage of development was completed, the operation could not become absolutely

sustainable. This line of thought was that the economies of scale for the subsequent larger

operation would give the Red Brick Building better long term viability.

A successful grant application to the Community Led Buildings Fund meant that a full

feasibility study for the remaining building could be undertaken – with a professional team

led by an architect selected by the Red Brick Building designing and costing four options for

the next stage – from pure renovation to demolition and rebuild. Following public consultation

14

and internal review – a preferred option was adopted – which was an adaption of the

renovation model. It was costed at just under £2. 5 million.

Issues

It was at this stage – in 2015 - that the Red Brick Building became one of the pilots for the

Building Community Resilience project.

With options assessed and costed, the focus moved to looking at how to deliver the

renovation project. What was the grand vision that would enable the raising of the very large

sums of money needed to restore the building to use? Was it more of the same, an extension

of what the Red Brick was already doing, or something new and exciting?

How could the organisation meet the challenges to the governance structure that a more-

than-doubling of the scale of the Red Brick enterprise?

This was also in an environment where cuts to arts funding significantly reduced grant options

to fund events being organised at Red Brick.

What happened during the project period

During the two year period that followed – March 2015 to March 2017 – a great deal of activity

by both Board members and volunteers took place to address the needs of furthering a new

development phase. These included:

• Developing a vision for the use of the new building that was sufficiently inspirational to

trigger the achievement level of funding required

• A search for a suitable anchor tenant/development partner

• A debate about the governance needs relating to any new development – whether the

existing organisational structure was adequate or appropriate

• Approaches to potential funders.

Outside events – and factors outside Red Brick’s control – had a major influence in this

process. The outcome of the Brexit referendum led to the withdrawal from discussions of

the most hopeful potential partner for the development. Escalating building costs were

revealed when, following a decision to try and have a first phase of development to make the

building watertight, tenders were sought for the work.

Also of major significance was the award of a significant grant from Power to Change to the

Red Brick – to be used to strengthen the running of the original enterprise by additional

staffing and internal physical improvements – but not for the new development.

This grant enabled investment in both infrastructure and additional staffing capacity. This

included the recruitment of a highly experienced manager to run the enterprise, apply for

grant funding and work towards increasing regular income.

The following were identified as key factors in making the enterprise more sustainable going

forward:

• A more commercial focus e.g. charging the full rate for room hire wherever this is possible

• Clear separation of management responsibility for developing Building C from that of the

day to day running/development of the existing enterprise

• Giving staff greater job security, by being able to pay them from turn-over rather than

grant funding.

15

Red Brick has had significant economic and social impact in the local area over the past two

years:

• Red Brick itself now employs five staff, a cleaner and a book-keeper

• Bocabar (the anchor tenant) employs 45 (mainly young) people. It prides itself on using

local produce and the details of all the local suppliers are promoted in the restaurant

itself

• Red Brick provides low-cost hot-desk and workshop facilities for small and start-up

businesses

• A new volunteer coordinator tries to find a fulfilling activity for anyone who wants to help,

providing work experience, health benefits and relief from social isolation

• Regular drop-in sessions are being held for people with a range of health and social

issues

• The community garden has been developed on previously contaminated land and now

hosts sessions for people with a range of disabilities

• Red Brick provides an important social venue for young people in the local area.

Governance

The potential new development stimulated a major debate within the organisation about

whether the existing management structure would be adequate to deal with all the issues

arising from such a major expansion – raising and servicing finance, and managing all the

aspects of running such a large building. The Wessex support offered to Red Brick centred

on the governance issues. During the discussions about the challenge to governance

structures posed by the new development, a paper was prepared looking at alternatives. A

meeting was facilitated to examine these alternatives. An initial meeting with a lawyer was

brokered to discuss the implications of these alternatives. Finally a full governance review

was undertaken – interviews with all members undertaken, and a report submitted to the

Board.

With support from Wessex, Red Brick also undertook a review of options for the improvement

of financial performance and maximising income generation from the existing operation.

At the time of writing this report, the Red Brick have successfully raised the finance to employ

someone to manage the process of getting the development of the remaining derelict

buildings to the starting block. This move was made in recognition that for the same staff to

service the development of a major new expansion at the same time as running a substantial

existing enterprise was not possible. However, this process was not without issues as the

Board was not unanimous as to the need for this role, nor the recruitment approach that

should be taken.

In addition, steps have been taken to improve working relationships:

• A volunteer coordinator has been recruited so that the 30+ current volunteers are

managed more effectively and feel that they are making a meaningful contribution to the

enterprise’s development.

• A Staff Support Group has been put in place to resolve issues and improve relations

between staff, volunteers and the Board.

There is more work to be done – the Board recognises that although it knows its ‘holes and

weaknesses’ it needs to carry out a skills audit and specifically that it needs to recruit a

Treasurer and a Secretary. The Board and staff would welcome further support from Wessex

16

in carrying out a Local Multiplier Analysis for Red Brick itself and it will require support for

any future share offers to fund the development of Building C.

Learning

• The competing demands of running an operational organisation whilst developing

a new project with limited capacity is highly problematic and potentially divisive

for the organisation and highly stressful for the individuals involved.

• Times of change and development challenge the workings of a management

structure involving a volunteer Board and paid staff. It is very important to create

means and methods to deal with resolving the issues that arise at such times.

• Enterprising projects with wide-ranging objectives attract volunteers with very

different aspirations and motivations. Managing these at every level (including

Board level) is a time consuming activity in its own right and can both sap and

spark collective energy.

• Balancing an organisation’s community focus (e.g. support for business start-ups

and organisations that are themselves facing funding cuts) with the requirement

to become financially sustainable is challenging - all staff, volunteers and Board

Members must recognise this need and support those who have to make hard

commercial decisions.

https://redbrickbuilding.co.uk/

17

Further projects

Two further projects were initially supported, but did not develop into fully fledged

pilots. Also, a partnership initiative led by RBB and supported by WCA explored

options for the future development of the Somerset Levels.

Beer Community Land Trust

History

Beer CLT was set up in 2013 in response to a shortage of affordable housing for local people

in this historic fishing village on the Devon coastline. The CLT’s first project to provide seven

affordable homes for local people was completed in January 2015. The small development

was called Little Hemphay, and provided three shared equity homes and four homes for

affordable rent. The homes are all occupied by local people and the small development has

fostered a good sense of community amongst the residents. The residents themselves are

responsible for upkeep of the small development in terms of maintaining the grounds

(mowing the lawn, etc.), and this has, to an extent, bonded them together (it is motivating

that if the residents themselves didn’t do this then a service charge would have to be levied).

An additional benefit for the community is that the rental income from the homes provides a

fund that can be used to pay off additional debt (the loan taken out to pay for the building of

the homes) or be used for community benefit.

Issues

The Little Hemphay project was funded by a mixture of local authority loans and grants and

so there was no need to raise equity finance from the community for this project. It was felt

by the Board of the CLT, though, that there was an opportunity for the CLT to reduce its

borrowing by replacing it with equity raised from community shares – which would result in a

better deal for the community in terms of lower cost financing with less risk attached.

What happened during the project period

Since the raising of capital through community shares was not essential to bringing the

project to fruition, or enabling it to operate effectively as time progressed, there was no

impetus to do this until a subsequent project was identified. No subsequent project – either

for further housing or for development of a non-housing aspect – has arisen; so the plan to

raise share capital was put on hold.

Learning

• It is harder to generate motivation to deliver on strategic/financial projects, rather

than actual “bricks and mortar” development.

• The CLT can be seen as an example of a community led organisation that has

successfully deliver one project and would be in a good position to deliver future

ones.

18

Upper Frome Valley Community Land Trust

History

The Upper Frome Valley CLT is a Registered Society set up in 2012 originally to meeting

local housing need by developing a small scheme of 14 affordable homes for local people in

the village of Maiden Newton in West Dorset. The homes were occupied in 2015.

Issues

In 2016 the CLT were offered the opportunity to purchase the Youth and Community Centre

in Maiden Newton for £1 from the County Council as Dorset County Council was part of a

cost saving exercise.

What happened during the project period

Dorset County Council accepted a business case from the CLT to take on ownership of the

land as a suitably resourced legal entity, in turn granting a lease to the Youth Centre trustees.

Grant money from West Dorset District Council has allowed the CLT to have the premises

surveyed and for legal conveyancing. The CLT is now ready to appoint a solicitor for

conveyancing of the land for a nominal £1.

The land sits in the same campus as the village primary school and playing fields, presenting

an opportunity to build a changing room and shower block which will allow the playing fields

to attract much more income through hiring fees. In due course this block could be integrated

into a replacement building such as a sports hall. What has been avoided in the first instance

though, is the loss of part of this green space to housing through the County Council

necessarily maximising its income.

Learning

• A thorough review of the status and condition of an “asset” is essential do make

sure it is not a potential burden.

• Asset acquisition can be part of a longer term development strategy for a

community.

19

Reimagining the Levels

The partners in this project are Red Brick Enterprise – a part of the community owned Red

Brick Building Centre in Glastonbury; Transition Athelney – based in a cluster of villages in

the heart of the Levels, who have initiated many events and local projects; and the Green

Wedmore Group, whose work has likewise resulted in a number of project offshoots,

including a very substantial community owned solar pv farm.

In June 2014 the Reimagining the Levels programme started with a successful Open Space

conference which looked at “A sustainable economic future for the Somerset Levels after the

floods”. This bought together experts from a number of different relevant disciplines and local

community members, and resulted in a range of proposals to be taken forward. These

proposals were underpinned by an approach which was based on principles of environmental

sustainability, citizen engagement, and “triple bottom line” economicsi and which adopted a

holistic approach to the problems facing the fragile environment of the Levels. All this was

seen as a counter to the knee jerk reactions to the extreme flooding of the area in the winter

of 2013/14, and the subsequent polarised responses setting conservation against livelihood.

A Working Group was then formed – drawing on members of the three organisations

mentioned above – with a range of backgrounds, skills and interests. It was decided that

the group would work with a professional researcher and produce a report which addressed

the major challenges to the Levels on all fronts. Wessex –through its charitable trust -

having co-sponsored the initial Open Space event – made a grant available to take forward

this work.

Working with a very experienced land use consultant – Robert Deane – the group worked

through a wide range of issues and in summer 2016 produced a report – “Reimagining the

Levels – Making the Connections”ii. They then turned to building relationships with

organisations influential in the shaping of the area’s future, holding a further Open Space

conference in November 2016. A strategy was agreed by the group to further its objectives

by combining lobbying and dissemination of ideas with a programme of practical action –

seeing the two as mutually supportive.

A new Community Benefit Society was registered to develop the programme of practical

work – with a focus in its initial period on supporting initiatives for community woodland,

marketing local food, supporting new start enterprises in these areas, and celebrating the

Levels and its catchment through the arts.

Link to the Local Resilience project

Reminagining the Levels – which has been running concurrently with the Local Resilience project, has added significantly to the learning from the latter. It marks the beginning of an alliance of organisations and citizens who share a vision for the future of a distinctive bio-region – the Somerset Levels and their catchment; an understanding of the threats to a fragile environment posed by climate change, damaging land management a future based on participation, collaboration; a commitment to practical actions.

1 http://www.investopedia.com/terms/t/triple-bottom-line.asp 1 http://www.reimaginingthelevels.org.uk/Publications.aspx

20

Conclusions from the Project’s Learning Network

Introduction

As explained previously, funding for the WCA Building Resilient Communities Project came

from the Friends Provident Foundation’s Building Resilient Economies funding programme.

The aim of this funding programme is “to contribute to a more resilient, sustainable and fairer

economic system.1” WCA is being funded to explore how a particular form of social

enterprise – the Community Benefit Society (CBS)2– can support such a shift.

At the core of the WCA project was a participatory action research approach, with associates

from WCA working alongside volunteers and staff from seven CBS’s, as they developed new

approaches in the face of changing circumstances. The Learning Network involved

representatives from five of the projects, and also engaged with other individuals and

organisations involved with community resilience, including Totnes Community Development

Society, St. Ives Town Council’s Neighbourhood Planning Officer, the Frome Foundation,

Learning to Lead and Schumacher College.

Participatory action research (PAR)

This form of research has been defined as “a participatory, democratic process concerned

with developing practical knowing in the pursuit of worthwhile human purposes, grounded in

a participatory worldview….[and bringing] together action and reflection, theory and practice,

in participation with others in the pursuit of practical solutions to issues of pressing concern

to people, and more generally the flourishing of individual persons and communities”.

(Reason & Bradbury, 2001)

PAR is an iterative cycle of research, action and reflection (Kindon et al, 2006). There is an

emphasis on collaboration, with participants and researchers working together to examine a

problematic situation and seek possible solutions or ways forward. Knowledge is generated

through participants’ collective efforts and actions. They ask questions such as ‘What is

happening here?’ and ‘How can we improve the way we are working?’

For the WCA Project a particular focus was ‘how to build community resilience’. This was not

the terminology employed by the groups at the beginning of the process, but was a phrase

explored during the Learning Network meetings and one which became increasingly familiar.

Over time the idea of “building resilience” became better understood and more widely

adopted as a way to describe the challenge of maintaining the purpose and energy of the

groups over time, in the face of challenges both external and internal.

Resilience

A common definition of resilience is “the ability of something to return to its original shape

after it has been pulled, stretched, pressed, bent, etc.”3 This might then be applied in a

community context to mean “how stable is a community in the face of changing

circumstances and challenging dynamics.” However, human societies, of whatever size or

complexion, are never “stable” and in equilibrium. They are complex – there is a constant

weaving together of a large number of “agents” (people, organisations, non-humans, etc.)

and dynamic forces (economic, social, environmental and political). They are also adaptive

– there is a constant process of responsiveness which leads to the emergence of new

patterns, flows and events.

1 http://www.friendsprovidentfoundation.org/programme-overview/

2And “Registered Societies” formerly known as Industrial and Provident Societies for Community Benefit (or “Ben Com’s”) 3 http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/resilience

21

The Friends Provident Foundation commissioned the New Economics Foundation to

undertake a review of the “resilience” literature, and they (Greenham et al, 2013, p.12) come

to a similar conclusion:

The conception emerging from the literature that is particularly applicable to human (socio-

economic) systems in the broadest sense is that of an adaptive or evolutionary process. This

is exemplified in the ability to self-organise, innovate and learn. According to this conception,

the most valuable quality of a system is an ability to adapt to changing external circumstance

or shocks in a way that maintains functionality, including supporting well-being and social

justice outcomes, rather than to merely rebound quickly to its previous state.4

Key questions explored by the Learning Network

If we define resilience as the ability of a system (in this case a community) to adapt to

changing circumstances, then this raises a number of very important questions:

• How does the community benefit society work with the community to define what

adaptations are “desirable” or needed?

• How does it “organise” itself (in terms, e.g., of process, structures and governance) to

be an effectively responsive organisation, supporting adaptation by the community?

• How can it show that there is a need for this kind of catalytic change agent and how can

it demonstrate “impact”?

These are the questions that have been explored by those involved in the five community

benefit societies involved as pilots in the WCA project, “on the ground” and in a series of

Learning Network meetings over the course of the action research.

It can be seen from the table which follows that a number of common themes have emerged:

• The need to find appropriate ways to consult with key stakeholders, such as through

members meetings and neighbourhood planning.

• The need to review governance arrangements, and where necessary put in place new

processes for decision-making and management.

• The importance of demonstrating impact to the community, not just at the initial project

completion stage but over time (e.g. using the Local Multiplier tool) in order to ensure

long term support and engagement.

References

Greenham, T., Cox, E. and Ryan-Collins, J. (2013) Mapping Economic Resilience. York:

Friends Provident Foundation

Kindon, S. L., Pain, R., & Kesby, M. (2007). Participatory action research approaches and

methods: connecting people, participation and place. Routledge studies in human

geography, 22. London: Routledge.

Reason, P., & Bradbury, H. (2001). Handbook of action research: participative inquiry and

practice. London: SAGE

4 http://www.friendsprovidentfoundation.org/wp-content/ uploads/2013/12/nef-Mapping-Economic-Resilience-1-

report.pdf

22

How does the community benefit society work with the community to define what adaptations are “desirable” or needed?

How does it “organise” itself to be an effectively responsive organisation, supporting adaptation by the community?

How can it show that there is a need for this kind of catalytic change agent and how can it demonstrate “impact”?

Bradworthy CLT

The directors of the CLT identified 3 potential projects (community woodland, housing for older people and workspace) but decided that these needed to be included within a wider NP process to test community support.

The board of the CLT overlaps with the Parish Council. In addition the NP process was designed to ensure that community views were responded to.

While local people appreciate the value of the housing created by the CLT, it was felt that the NP process was essential for overcoming potential resistance to any new projects.

Exeter Local Food

The directors consult regularly with members & staff. The former have a real “stake” in the business due to their financial investments & the volunteer time committed. Staff rely on the shop & café for their livelihoods and have also been actively involved in developing the new strategy.

The board of the CBS has taken an active role in identifying possible sites for re-location. They have also undertaken a governance review

The calculation of the Real Food Store’s Local Multiplier value has been a significant tool for demonstrating impact.

Norton CLT

A community is always in a process of equilibrium then disequilibrium then re-equilibrium. There are forces that exist in tension – stability and change. Norton CLT started by focusing on houses for people with local connection, and then found that the shop is the way in-comers get engaged with the local community.

The board has recognised that for new projects to succeed, it would need to recruit new directors and also create sub-committees focused on particular areas such as the shop, renewable energy or new housing proposals. This would help to ensure that directors could focus on their areas of interest and not be over-whelmed by other considerations.

The CLT has assessed the impact of the Post Office by showing how many small businesses rely on the services provided. It will also undertake a Local Multiplier analysis.

Queen Camel CLT

CLT directors identified a potential workspace project (through conversion of the old school in the village).

Working on the school project highlighted weaknesses in the governance of the organisation. But – strong loyalty has kept people engaged

The CLT board have undertaken a rigorous process of building a business case for taking on the new workspace project, in order to win support from the local authority and potential funders.

Red Brick Building

The CBS has a strong link to the local community, through membership, financial commitments and volunteer support. The board represents this community and seeks to reflect this local commitment in its decision-making.

There are some differences of opinion about future direction within the board, but an acknowledgement that decision making must be re-assessed. Reviewing governance has been challenging but people have stayed engaged because they believe in community agency.

The CBS has a strong website and an effective volunteering base. In addition, a Local Multiplier analysis has provided an important quantification of impact.

23

Research Conclusions

Community Resilience

• Having a measure of inner resilience as an individual or a group is key factor for getting

involved in a community benefit society at the outset. This is because projects make

great demands on individuals and organisations and so they need strong inner

motivation combined with good social relationships with their colleagues to make

anything happen. Essentially the resilience of an individual, or group of individuals, is

reinforced by an appropriate legal structure and strong community involvement.

• Different things motivate different individuals. For some, meeting environmental

challenges is a key motivator (such as colleagues at Transition Athelney and Green

Wedmore), for others it is issues of local food production (the Real Food Store), whereas

for others it is issues of social justice or community preservation (the CLTs).

• Economic resilience is drawn from the twin foundations of social and environmental

resilience. This was evident from the Local Multiplier studies of economic impact carried

out with the Real Food Store and Norton sub Hamdon CLT.

• Community resilience is perceived in different ways. Some communities perceive

resilience in terms of the facilities they have (e.g. number of shops, doctors’ surgeries,

local businesses, school, etc.). Members of Bradworthy CLT see their community as

very resilient as there are many services and sources of employment in the village.

There is a wish to retain this level of provision and promote inclusivity through the

development of more services to meet the needs of the community – such as community

woodland (some of which was lost), homes for older people and workspace for different

types of business activity.

• Entering into trading activities can begin to deliver measurable economic impact if

undertaken with core social and environmental values (Real Food; Red Brick; Norton

shop; potentially Queen Camel community workspace)

• An adapted version of Local Multiplier 3 (LM3) is a useful tool for measuring local

economic impact, identifying local supply chains and jobs both supported and created

(3 tests of this have been undertaken – Bocabar at Red Brick, Real Food, and Norton

shop). In the case of Norton, there was no specific objective to source local produce

and the resulting analysis surprised the group in terms of the amount actually spent

locally by its suppliers and tradespeople.

• Local people clearly have skills and confidence, but many reported lacking ‘manpower’

so are very concerned with issues of board succession, engaging more local people,

and encouraging volunteering. Many report that local people are not engaged, are

apathetic, or only self-interested. A question for all community organisations is how to

overcome these hurdles – it could be through new projects (Queen Camel; Norton sub

Hamdon; Bradworthy). In Norton, a new sub-committee was established to progress

work around renewable energy and fuel poverty. This allowed the board to co-opt people

who did not have to become full directors, but the existing directors who joined this sub-

committee still spent most of their time dealing with other CLT issues.

• Care needs to be taken that further projects are financially viable. Many CLTs are being

offered ‘assets’ by local authorities and need help to determine whether the asset will

actually become a liability to them (Maiden Newton; Bradworthy).

24

Peer network

• In terms of creating an enduring peer network, there are two complementary needs for

individuals and groups – for a “community of minds” sharing of ideas, stimulation, mutual

support; and for practical exchange of skills, processes, contacts etc.

• There is a clearly identified role for peer networking for those involved in Registered

Societies/CBSs, particularly face to face rather than via online platforms. Open Space

or semi-structured conferences at a regional or sub-regional level are good opportunities

for sharing ideas and providing mutual support (this was evident in the two ‘Re-imagining

the Levels’ Open Space events), and can provide full accounts of the work the CBSs

have been involved in. There needs to be a more organised way to find out about and

‘connect’ with other groups: probably not a ‘public’ network, but a community of interest.

Online platforms do have a place, but cannot replace personal interaction. Societies

have benefitted from informal partnerships and mutual learning to date.

• There is a need for a continual, trusted network that can help to develop the confidence

and resilience of community organisations, and this network could also act as a catalyst

for, and support to, future projects.

• It was clear that WCA is seen as a trusted broker of information, contacts etc. In addition

to providing support, WCA personnel have been seen to provide independent

assessment, professional scrutiny and a valuable challenge to plans and assumptions.

• Less formal structures can also offer similar gains for example Green Wedmore, which

holds markets and has developed community woodland and a solar farm; Transition

Athelney which is involved in community apple juicing, community woodland, solar pv

installations on public buildings in the village; and also Feed Avalon, which provides

community resilience training & support around cooking and growing food.

• The presence of a CLT can, but does not of necessity, lead to further projects. Some

CLTs have not gone on to take on other assets or lead on other projects – yet.

External influences and shocks – and their impact

• Decisions outside the control of the societies can clearly cause severe shocks e.g. a

change in housing policy in 2015 caused major problems for WCA’s support of CLTs

due to the withdrawal of the affordable homes grant (this grant has since been

reinstated). This period of public sector austerity has brought about cuts to arts funding,

which has affected enterprises such as the Red Brick Building. Changes to national

policy with regard to renewables and the feed in tariff temporarily undermined the viability

of community projects, such as the solar pv project at Norton sub Hamdon. The state of

the wider economy is also a threat as housing projects find that builders contracted to

working with them are more frequently becoming insolvent.

• Local threats can also create challenges for community enterprises, for example the

ending the Real Food Store’s lease. These are a challenge but can strengthen

organisations, and demonstrate the necessity for organisations to become well

networked locally with organisations such as the Local Authority. There may be a time

when societies need the help of partners.

• External shocks can damage organisations’ ability to meet their objectives, but there are

means of achieving aims which are less vulnerable to these external problems.

Becoming financially sustainable through a mix of different enterprises is one way to

reduce this vulnerability, having a broad network can also help, as can the support of a

wide membership base.

25

• Neighbourhood planning could be considered as a diversion for some groups, for

example there were delays in diversification for Queen Camel CLT, Bradworthy CLT and

delay for Ashcott’s community housing because of neighbourhood planning (though this

planning may contribute positively to the quality of future proposals). But neighbourhood

planning can also be seen to strengthen community organisations, as in the case of St

Ives, which produced a neighbourhood plan that was very sensitively constructed to

meet local people’s aspirations.

Neighbourhood Planning can be seen in some communities as local people trying to find a

way to combat external threats such as inappropriate development, but the process is long

and the work is arduous. In North Devon and Torridge, communities are made anxious by

the fact that the local authority cannot demonstrate a five year land supply and so

developers cannot easily be refused planning permission. This also drives up the price of

land as opportunistic landowners apply for outline planning permission on their land and

feel confident that it will be granted as there is no development boundary in the village.

• Dealing with external influences can drain the energy from those involved in community

led endeavour and divert them from their primary goals. This can lead to ‘mission drift’

and cause stress to those involved. But they can also galvanise groups, and bring about

innovation.

Governance

• After a few years of operation, some organisations felt they benefited greatly from a

governance review. This can allow a greater level of reflection and can help groups to

see if the work they are doing is contributing to the objects of the organisations, and see

if there are ways to improve good practice if embarking on a new project.

• There were tensions between paid staff, volunteers and boards. These tensions take

time and energy to resolve, but if left unattended to can cause significant problems.

• Tensions and conflicts of interest can also arise where there is overlap in membership

of the governing bodies of the CLT and other interested groups e.g. Parish Councils,

groups that use the venue etc. This issue is more prevalent in small communities where

often the same people are involved in several different organisations – as they are

interested in local issues. Although the process of managing conflict of interest is widely

understood, these conflicts can sometimes be hard to recognise in practice.

• There are examples of groups being galvanised/energised by both internal and external

conflict – one group reported being ‘energised by a kicking from the Parish Council’ and

another reported ‘energised fighting’ within the board.

Impact

• The work of societies such as Norton sub Hamdon CLT, the Real Food Store, and the

Bocabar restaurant at the Red Brick Building has clearly made a positive economic

impact in terms of local employment and supply chains (all three have analysed this

impact through the LM3 exercise). Wedmore Solar Farm has regularly generated a

surplus which has been made available as pump-priming grants for other initiatives. Other

groups wish to use renewable energy to help to reduce costs and make the society more

sustainable and able to support other activities (e.g. Norton sub Hamdon CLT).

• Community led housing projects contribute towards community resilience in terms of

enabling local people to live in the communities where they have families and

employment. One CLT reported that an employee of the local garage was able to

26

relocate back to the village and also that younger people were able to gain independence

from their parents.

• For some societies, environmental considerations are a primary objective (e.g.

generation of renewable energy, sale of locally produced food, etc.) and also a secondary

benefit of other activities that some societies engage in (e.g. providing affordable homes

for local people means that people can live near to their employment and family, reducing

the miles they travel in cars).

• Social cohesion is essential to underpin any community project that will have economic

impact – until people are engaged they won’t become involved and then committed.

• Registered Societies, like Exeter Local Food and the Red Brick Building, have provided

facilities for other local networks such as local food and arts networks. Their existence

and strength have an impact on lots of other connected organisations and individuals.

• Even small-scale projects can have a real impact on developing social cohesion and

wellbeing, such as juicing in Athelney.

27

Recommendations

Detailed eligibility criteria for support would need to be determined – but we would propose

to limit this support to registered CLTs, Registered Societies and CBSs working in the three

counties of Devon, Dorset and Somerset. The support would not be for initial housing

projects for CLTs, which are already covered by other Wessex programmes.

1. Two peer network meetings a year

The peer network meetings which have taken place during the life of the project –

arranged to explore specific themes which are of topical interest to the participants –

have proved popular and effective tool for sharing information and enabling mutual

support between projects with shared interests.

We propose holding two such meetings annually, hosted by a CLT or CBS. Issues or

recurrent interest include governance, management of workspace, renewable energy,

recording and communicating impact, relationships between Societies and local

government, and raising finance for future projects (including via community share

issue).

2. Facilitating brokerage of information and support using website/members pages

During the project, WCA has brokered contacts, professional advisers and individual

peer learning opportunities for the pilot projects – including legal advice, feasibility and

business planning, governance reviews and visits to exemplar projects.

We propose running a members’ page on our website, backed by a telephone response

service, based on a continuously maintained database of contacts and sources of

support.

3. A fast-track fund for discretionary spending

The five pilot projects have had access to a small discretionary fund to help with early

stage development of specific new projects. This has supported feasibility work on a

new community building, a review of business options, a governance review with Board

and staff, and planning costs for a pv array.

This flexible and responsive support has proved very effective. We propose that a fund

be secured which can make awards within a month of application with a small committee

for adjudication of funding to include representative of grant making Trusts – modelled

on the CLT Fund.

28

Annex 1: Executive Summary: The Aspirations & Motivations of

Community Land Trust Volunteers in Somerset, Dorset & Devon

Background to the Study

This research was commissioned by Wessex Community Assets to discover more about the

factors that are fundamental to the success of community land trusts (CLTs) from the

perspectives of CLT volunteers. The study explored the motivations, reflections and future

aspirations of volunteers involved in CLT projects in Somerset, Dorset and Devon. Six CLTs

participated in the study, each at different stages of development, and six board members

from each CLT were interviewed.

The study also surveyed the reflections and experiences of local, regional and national

stakeholders that have supported CLT development. The CLTs in the study initially formed

to tackle the localised effects of the rural housing crisis, namely large discrepancies between

house prices and incomes, and an insufficient supply of affordable homes. The lack of

affordable homes was thought to be detrimental to the local community, affecting its social

sustainability, use amenities and services, and causing it to be demographically unbalanced.

As such, CLTs commonly sought to provide homes for local young people who needed to

live locally for reasons of work or familial relationships, but were priced out of housing in their

villages. CLTs were typically, but not exclusively, retired individuals from professional

backgrounds. They were often people of long residency in communities and were motivated

to volunteer for CLTs in order to maintain and enhance important aspects of their

communities.

Findings

The project identified the following key findings:

The CLTs in this study mobilised deep-seated emotional attachments to place. Whereas

such bonds might normally express themselves as fear of change or opposition to

development, through the CLTs they were channelled into leadership and advocacy.

Such determined support for new homes rarely characterises other forms of housing

development - quite the opposite. Counter-intuitively, it was sometimes even the neighbours

of selected sites who were the most enthusiastic and active members of the CLTs; the very

people who might otherwise be cast as ‘NIMBYs’.

CLTs were seen as trusted vehicles for the disposal of land by local landowners. These

landowners shared the CLTs’ concerns over local housing issues and wished to ensure their

land would expressly benefit the local community. The community-led nature and local focus

of CLTs meant that sites for housing development could be acquired that would have

otherwise been unavailable; sometimes on better terms than could be obtained by a housing

association or developer.

Often, the most valuable communication between a CLT and the wider community is

informal. Day-to-day conversations immeasurably enrich the set-piece consultations that

take place in halls and newsletters, serving both to explain and take soundings, to discuss

and debate. In this way CLTs address local sensitivities around issues such as aesthetics,

environmental impact and eligibility for the homes; gradually building local acceptance and

refining the ‘fit’ of new homes to the communities which might otherwise oppose them.

Technical support was integral to the success of all schemes. Continuation of this support

from the Wessex Community Land Trust Project (WCLTP) will be fundamental to increases

in the scale, activities, and number of CLTs in Somerset, Devon and Dorset.

29

The involvement of housing associations was fundamental to the efficient and successful

delivery of CLT housing, absorbing and defraying the development risks to which the CLTs

would otherwise have been exposed.

Volunteers contributed a huge amount of time, energy and expertise to the initial housing

scheme - all without any personal financial reward. Nonetheless, volunteers were keen to

build on their success. Two of the CLTs in this study have completed shop or post office

projects and all are exploring the acquisition or development of additional community assets

and/or devising ways to distribute their ground rent for local benefit. A CLT may also inspire

new and overlapping interest groups to pursue new activities, promoting further volunteerism

in their local communities and providing broader community benefit beyond the individual

occupants of their homes.

For Full Report: http://wessexca.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/3016725-Wessex-Report.pdf

30

Annex 2: Maps showing Pilot Projects

Bradworthy

Real Food Store, Exeter

31

Norton sub Hamdon

Queen Camel

32

Red Brick Building, Glastonbury

33