Housing and NDCs Key Findings from Phase 1 of the National Evaluation Ian Cole CRESR Sheffield Hallam University

Housing and NDCs Key Findings from Phase 1 of

the National Evaluation

Ian ColeCRESR

Sheffield Hallam University

Presentation to NRU/DLGC9 May 2006

Outline of presentation

The NDC programme Housing and the NDC paradigm... the impact of housing interventions neighbourhood renewal in a differentiated

housing market the crucial role of household mobility outstanding challenges for NDC housing

strategies.. ..and for the next phase of the evaluation.


The Different Emphasis of the NDC programme

Short – term (e.g. SRB typically 3 year schemes) 10 year horizon

Distrusted by local residents Communities at the centre

Overly focused on physical regeneration ‘Holistic’ approach

Divorced from long-term public service providers

Close working with LA and key agencies

Designed

to

produce

Sustainable

renewal

for both

people

and

places


Relative Area Deprivation and NDCs


Housing as the latecomer

Not originally a key outcome area ..but included due to community concerns even if leverage over large scale investment is

limited long lead-in time for housing strategies ..feeding some community frustration number of NDC projects increased by 78 per cent

2001 – 2004 ..but housing projects increased by 115 per cent!


Housing in the NDC paradigm

community-led emphasis often delayed agreement over approach

focus on improving what there was, not creating something new...?

NDC often became local catalyst for debates around stock transfer, new forms of investment, rise of buy to let markets..

..and initially apart from parallel interventions – eg HMR

NDC as an 'inward-looking' not 'outward-looking' initiative?


Inward-looking?:NDC

Outward-looking?:HMR

Emphasis Agency Structure

Focus Existing residentsNeighbourhood

Potential residentsSub-region

Approach to housing stock

Re-invest Remodel

Priorities in housing mgmt

Accessibility/support

'Marketing'/'rebranding'

Nature of links Management-centredInter-departmental

Strategy-centredInter-sectoral

Priority to c'ty involvement

High Low

Strengths Visible impact Market-centred

Vulnerabilities Spill-overDisplacement

C'ty supportDelivery vehicle


Outcomes for Housing and the Physical Environment

improving environment/levels of satisfaction (25) improving housing quality/satisfaction (24) improving appearance of the area (19) green/open spaces (17) reducing proportion of voids (12) reducing rates of out-migration (9) increasing house prices in relative terms (8)

Source: NDC Delivery Plans 2004


Average dwelling price by type in NDC areas

£166,650

£69,500

£98,150

£161,050

£149,050

£64,250

£68,450

£121,350

£0 £40,000 £80,000 £120,000 £160,000 £200,000

Flats

Terraced

Semi-detached

Detached

2001

2004

Source: SDRC


Average dwelling prices: NDC areas with highest and lowest prices 2004

£21,600

£16,150

£26,400

£24,800

£28,250

£167,550

£151,600

£214,900

£231,850

£249,900

£34,300

£36,600

£44,600

£47,050

£47,950

£207,550

£209,150

£218,100

£277,850

£290,650

£0 £40,000 £80,000 £120,000 £160,000 £200,000 £240,000 £280,000 £320,000

Hartlepool

Manchester

Oldham

Bradford

Hull

Brent

Lambeth

Hackney

H'smith & Fulham

Islington

2004

2001

Source: SDRC


Neighbourhood renewal for differentiated housing markets (1)

in London..... affordability dominates all impact on leaseholders risk of 'two tier' markets ..but receipts from land sales offer some

leverage overcrowding more an issue than high void

rates


London: 9 of 10 areas with highest rates of residential overcrowding

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

Bristol N

DC

Hartlepool N

DC

Manchester N

DC

Rochdale N

DC

Sunderland N

DC

Salford N

DC

Doncaster N

DC

Plym

outh ND

C

Southam

pton ND

C

Walsall N

DC

Know

sley ND

C

Middlesbrough N

DC

Liverpool ND

C

Oldham

ND

C

Nottingham

ND

C

Derby N

DC

Norw

ich ND

C

Brighton N

DC

Leicester ND

C

Wolverham

pton ND

C

Birm

ingham K

N N

DC

Hull N

DC

Coventry N

DC

Sandw

ell ND

C

New

castle ND

C

Sheffield N

DC

Luton ND

C

Islington ND

C

Bradford N

DC

Lewisham

ND

C

Ham

mersm

ith & F

ulham N

DC

Lambeth N

DC

Haringey N

DC

Hackney N

DC

Brent N

DC

Birm

ingham A

ND

C

New

ham N

DC

Southw

ark ND

C

Tow

er Ham

lets ND

C

per

cen

tag

e

Over 1.0 persons per room

NDC average


Neighbourhood renewal for differentiated housing markets (2)

in Hartlepool..... 300 properties to be demolished ..but further demolition opposed by residents how to find up to £12 million for refurbishment? concerns about poor management in PRS extensive developable land – why invest in the

NDC area? poverty is 'widespread not concentrated' ..so where are the affluent to help produce the

'mix'?


Tenure in NDC areas

11

10

40

55

47

34

10

10

42

57

47

32

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60

Comparator

NDC

Comparator

NDC

Comparator

NDC

Priv

ate

rent

erS

ocia

l sec

tor

rent

erO

wne

r oc

cupi

ed

Percentage

2002

2004

Base: All Source: MORI/NOP


..but big changes on the horizon..?

Southwark:

projected proportion of home owners (2011) 8% Delivery Plan objective (2011) 50%

Brent:

projected proportion of home owners 17% Delivery Plan objective 38%

Newcastle

projected proportion of home owners 14%

Delivery Plan objective 40-50%


Impact of housing interventions...

too soon to tell..? disruption for many communities but intensive management has been

selectively introduced market change and mobility more telling

than specific interventions?


Additionality of NDC expenditure and outputs

Housing and Environment (£333) 8,000 Homes

improved or built

Education (£244) 9,500 adults obtaining

qualifications

Crime and disorder (£164) 70,000 young people involved in diversion

activities

17,000 received job training

104 new or improvedhealth facilities

Worklessness (£154)

Health (£149)

Per capita NDC spend 2000/01 to 2003/4

.52

.64

.82

.82

.85

Additionality RatioExample output


Perceptions of the area are improving (2002-2004)

1

-9

6

-14

-20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10

Satisfied with area

Area worse than 2 years ago(a)

Percentage point change

NDC

Comparator


Limited impact on satisfaction with accommodation, repair and landlords

71

67

77

71

88

82

70

65

77

69

87

81

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Comparator

NDC

Comparator

NDC

Comparator

NDC

Sat

isfie

d w

ith la

ndlo

rd (

b)S

atis

fied

with

sat

e of

repa

ir of

hom

e (a

)S

atis

fied

with

acco

mm

odat

ion

(a)

Percentage

2002

2004

Base: (a)All; (b)All tenants, including shared ownership; NDC Aggregate 2002 (13,222), 2004 (12,883); Comparator 2002 (1,052), 2004 (2,109)Source: MORI/NOP


..but the impact of inward and outward mobility is significant

78

31

18

48

61

29

41

16

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Economically Active

NVQ4+

16-24

Owner Occupiers

Percentage

Inmovers

Outmovers


the circumstances of outmovers from NDC after 2002

31

48

41

38

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Social sector renter

Owner occupier

Percentage

2002

2004


the impact of mobility.... does it show latent demand for affordable

home ownership locally... or is it a sign of getting on, by getting out?


Housing in Phase 1 of NDC evaluation

discernible shift from environmental uplifts and housing management focus to investment, restructuring and tenure change..

synthesis emerging between 'inward' and 'outward' approaches?

more 'market aware' approaches being developed .. ..but transformational change will depend on

patterns of mobility as much as quality of interventions


and some outstanding 'challenges'..

scale of investment required for transformational change

while managing local expectations the development of intermediate housing options.. the potential threats to community cohesion in

segmented housing markets partnership approach with LAs, RSLs, HMR, RHBs

EP etc is essential for NDCs ... ..but not a meeting of equals? and clashing time frames for delivery.. is 10 years long enough?


and challenges for Phase 2 of the evaluation...

use 2006 and 2008 MORI household surveys to map changing profile of in-migrants

..but cannot follow out-movers six case study NDCs will offer detailed monitoring

in different market contexts need to explore changing circumstances of

particular communities over time success of new residential developments is key but inevitable time lag between changing the

landscape ....and changing the image.

Housing and NDCs Key Findings from Phase 1 of

the National Evaluation

Ian ColeCRESR

Sheffield Hallam University

Documents

Housing and NDCs Key Findings from Phase 1 of the National Evaluation Ian Cole CRESR Sheffield Hallam University