Bit of a flap on Edge Lane-or Streets of Shame

If you ain’t from round these ‘ere parts, then you won’t know what has been happening on Edge Lane. It’s a bit of land grab, of Klondyke proportions, in 2001 large chunks of Kensington were deemed to be unsustainable, i.e. the house prices were around the £15,000 mark and falling, the place was described as unused and underused in the CPO (the high court didnt agree with them on this one) so it was decided the best way of saving the situation would be to knock the houses down as part of the government New Heartlands programme, build spiffing new houses and hopefully sell some of them to th displaced residents and attract new people into the area. At the time the rest of the country and most of Liverpool house prices were soaring.

They (Liverpool Land Liverpool City Council, Kensington Regeneration and C7) cleared everyone out, buying and cajoling and finally getting a Compulsory Purchase Order to shift those pesky homeowners.

Two things happened to change the whole scene, firstly the local hosue market recovered so houses very similar to the cpo’ed ones got for £60,000 if they need fixing up to £90,000 to £100,000 if in good nick, and more importantly the suits of LLC ran crash bang into Liz Pascoe. Liz msut have shook them up, they must have thought everyone round here was a dick head, after all you would have to be one to live around here>

Liz stopped them by taking them to the high court and winning, thereby stopping the process.

Now at this point you would have thought they would have had a bit of rethink, as the area would have been sustainable just through the action of market forces, but hell no, when they get an idea in their heads, don’t let common sense get in the way of a quick buck. So instead of maybe renovating the properties as Urban Splash did in Manchester, they ahve decided to try and shift the remaining people by issuing a new CPO on the basis that the area has lots of vacant properties and the area is run down…….I wonder who did that then?

So on Friday I decided to find out how to appeal against the CPO, phoned Liverpool Land, who told me to look at their website, and sure enough there was reply form.

www.edgelane.com/

The reply I got back briefly told me I couldn’t appeal but I could pass any comments on to them. I felt this was bit wrong, so I sussed out a CPO notice, which happened to be stuck to a local lampost. The notice basically states that anyone cen appeal and they need to be sent to the Government Office in Manchester. Confused, well not really as I knew this was the case. So I emailed LLC back asking them who was right them or an inanimate object, and could have definitive answer before I phoned the Radio Merseyside phone in on the Monday. Well this galvanised LLC into action and I was quickly emailed back to be told that they had made a terrible mistake, or rather she had, and she then immediately phoned me up to apologise and on Monday the head of Marketing phoned me to apologise too.

Well I must have touched a raw nerve, and if it was the girl’s fault then I feel sorry for her, but the question is how many other people had she put off in this way.

Anyhow I’ve sent my appeal off printed below if you have the time to read, and if you want to you’ve got until Friday to appeal so get writing.

 

 

KENSINGTONVISION CIC

 

Dear Sir,

 

Re: CPO 21.7 acres of LAND IN Edge Lane West area.

 

I am writing as a local resident and I am also a Director of a local social enterprise/Community Interest Company.

 

I am currently setting up a Community Land Trust to develop another piece of land and will be making application to Futurebuilders, the Charity Bank and the Ecology Building Society to fund the project.

 

I am writing to make an objections and comments regarding the above Compulsory Purchase Order for the scheme on Edge Lane.

 

My main objections centre around proposed demolition of the housing stock along Edge and Royston Street

 

<!–[if !supportLists]–>1. <!–[endif]–>The argument that the area is “unsustainable”

In the early part of the New Deal Programme when the demolitions were first proposed, this action was carried out on the basis that the area had been deemed “unsustainable” in the New Deal development plan, this was due mainly due to the state of the housing market in 2000-2001. House prices in the area were as low as £10,000 for a habitable domicile, but since that time and in line with the rest of the country and city, the housing market in Kensington has risen significantly .

For example houses on Jubilee Drive 50 metres away from the Edge Lane houses cost in excess of £100,000 and the remaining owner occupiers in the CPO are being offered circa £58,000.

 

Given these profound changes in the housing market, the question about whether the area is sustainable is therefore open to question and should be reappraised. .

 

This shift upwards in house prices happened over three years ago so there was a long standing opportunity for all parties involved to reappraise the “sustainability” and the demolition plans for the area. The housing market today is even more healthier than it was three years ago, so the need to offer an alternative to demolition seems even more compelling.

<!–[if !supportLists]–>2. <!–[endif]–>Liverpool Lands current justification for demolition is based on number of voids and condition of houses

The current reasoning for the demolition as stated in the Liverpool Land Leaflet “Edge Lane Project Update” dated July 2007 that “The CPO covers an area running half a mile from Botanic Road to Hall and affects around 370 houses, most of which are empty or in poor condition” When the redevelopment process started in 2001; when the sustainability argument at least notionally held water, but the houses were not in “poor condition” (the remaining occupied houses testify to this fact) and large numbers were not vacant. The Liverpool Land Company are therefore using their own actions as a justification for the current CPO.

In other words, if they hadn’t had started this process of emptying properties, then the area would not be blighted, would not have empty houses or ones in poor condition. What’s more the area’s house prices would have recovered as they have elsewhere in the area. The current justification for demolition is therefore a spurious one.

<!–[if !supportLists]–>3. <!–[endif]–>Too rigid approach to regenerating the housing stock, demolition and rebuild might not be the only choice.

The Liverpool Land Company, Liverpool City Council, The Registered Social Landlords and Kensington Regeneration have all been guilty of not offering a flexible approach to regenerating the housing stock in the area. As the housing market has changed it would have made sense to re-examine the plans for redevelopment. Restoration and regeneration of the housing stock should be one of the options allowed to be considered. The current plan still seems to involve complete demolition and due to the fact that the area has been depopulated consulting the residents as to the type and style of replacement housing seems to have been missed. The redevelopment will be done carried out by the preferred builders Bellway with purely commercial considerations, i.e. smaller houses at the highest achievable prices. It might make sense now to ask a developer such as Urban Splash who are not purely builders to consider the feasibility of restoration of the current properties.

 

<!–[if !supportLists]–>4. <!–[endif]–>Using community empowerment and capacity building to ensure created wealth stays in the Kensington Economic Community.

The current plans for demolition, and rebuilding by Bellway means that any opportunity for the local community to actually control the process and benefit from it, will not happen. A possible option could be to establish a Community Land Trust. (http://www.communitylandtrust.org.uk/) . Using this model the housing stock and land could be given or sold at an affordable price to this new community body, the regeneration would be done with total community engagement and consultation. The houses could then be either sold an an affordable level, with a percentage for rent. Any profits made in this process would be then available for the local community to use the wealth and profit for community benefits. Considering this is a New Deal for Communities area, it is a surprise that Kensington Regeneration have not considered or promoted this type of scheme Firstly it would contribute to the community capacity building and sustainability, secondly the wealth created would stay in the area and thirdly the housing regeneration (either new build or restoration of the current housing stock) would reflect the views of the local community. The proposed plan would build houses people don’t really want, at prices they can’t really afford and the profit created would end up in the pockets of Bellway’s shareholders. This scheme could be funded through the Government’s Futurebuiders scheme and fits in with current Government thinking on communities taking control of many areas in particular affordable and housing.

Recently Ruth Kelly when she was Minister for Communities noted “I am determined that the starting point for our new deal for neighbourhoods must be the people who live there. Whether it is ensuring greater responsiveness to neighbourhood issues or – when people want to – giving greater control to local communities, it makes sense to make sure local people can have a greater say in their areas.”

The latest incumbernt Hazel Blears concurs “I believe that the best experts, advocates and leaders for local communities are local communities themselves. There isn’t a single service or development in Britain which hasn’t been improved by actively involving local people, and there’s more common sense on the average street or estate than in all of the think tanks and seminars put together”

 

I would like to end with a plea for this department to try to understand that the way this has been handled is nothing short of scandalous. It seems that a bunch of highly paid professionals have decided on a course of action which has resulted in many old people, vulnerable and longstanding members of the community being decanted in a process aptly described as “Social Cleansing” by the local MP Jane Kennedy or left to sit and watch their community systematically dismantled

It is not too late for the situation to be recovered and some of the damage repaired and the community to be rebuilt and really regenerated.

Yours Sincerely

 

Stephen Faragher