| |
Leeds HMO Lobby
Home
What is a HMO?
The Lobby
Origins
Aims
Constitution
Members
Reports
Publications
Local Action
Developments
Policy Papers
Studentification in Leeds
National Action
Developments
Representations
Use Classes Order
HMO Licensing
Students & Community
National HMO Lobby
Contact
Leeds HMO Lobby
Links
|
|
Studentification
in Leeds in 2013
Evidence presented to
Leeds City Council's Working Group
on Student Accommodation
01 Leeds HMO Lobby, founded in 2000, is a voluntary
association of all the local community associations within the Area
of Housing Mix (designated in Leeds UDP Policy H15), in Inner NW
Leeds. It currently comprises a dozen active organisations: for
details of the Lobby, visit the website
As its name indicates, the Lobby was established to lobby on the
issue of houses in multiple occupation (HMOs) in Leeds, in particular
"to redress their effects on local communities." The Lobby
welcomes the Council's investigation into student accommodation
in the city.
02 Studentification is defined by the National
HMO Lobby (2008) as 'the substitution of a local community by a
student community' (p8). This substitution takes place through the
transfer of mixed housing to a predominantly student occupancy,
especially by conversion of first homes for families into second
homes for students, as HMOs. It is peculiar to the United Kingdom,
due to a culture of 'going away' to university; elsewhere in the
world, the majority of students attend their home university.
03 Studentification in Leeds (and elsewhere) is a three-dimensional
problem. In breadth, studentification impacts upon
the housing supply in the city generally. In depth, it penetrates
the particular neighbourhoods which become the subject of studentification.
And in duration, it is a volatile process, continually fluctuating
and shifting.
04 The first problem presented by studentification in Leeds is
its impact on overall housing supply in the city.
This is not rocket science, it has been developing over two decades,
and was described in process by Rugg in 2000 (who advocated that
"a housing strategy should be integral to the expansion plans
of every HEI" [p34]). Very recently, Savills (2013) have estimated
that "a potential 66,000 properties … could be freed
up for family housing" (p5). It's impossible to be precise
in Leeds, as there is no definitive record of the numbers of student
HMOs, but a guesstimate would put the figure at around 5,000. This
represents a substantial number of houses occupied as second homes
for students, rather than as first homes for families. (Of course,
not all such properties are now suitable for families: but all could
be made available for one or other of the varied groups of resident
citizens who are currently without adequate accommodation.) The
problems are very similar in many ways to those of rural and other
areas where second homes and holiday lets both reduce the number
of properties available to local residents, and also price those
that are available out of their reach.
Recommendation 1: so that the overall number of
students demanding accommodation is reduced (and also to help widen
access locally to higher education), the City should lobby
its universities to prioritise home recruitment.
Recommendation 2: so that student demand does
not reduce the available housing stock by conversion of houses to
what are effectively seasonal second homes, the City should
encourage the development of accommodation purpose-built for students
[but see also Recommendation 5 below].
05 The second problem presented by studentification in Leeds is
its impact on the particular neighbourhoods where
local communities are replaced by student communities. The problems
have long been recognised, by residents, by local government, by
universities, even by student unions, and finally by central government
(see for instance, HeAL 1999, SHCA 1999, Chrisafis 2000, Smith 2002,
UUK 2006, NUS 2007, National HMO Lobby 2008, CLG 2008, CLG Committee
2013, and the changes to the Use Classes Order in 2010). The problems
are social (increased antisocial behaviour, crime), environmental
(squalor, over-intensive development of properties) and economic
(the development of a local 'resort economy'). But most serious
is the damage caused to local social capital: Headingley includes
a hundred streets where students outnumber residents, and was identified
as having the highest anomie (the lowest social cohesion)
in the country, in research by Sheffield University in 2008. The
problems are not specific to students as such, but arise from the
typical characteristics of HMOs, intensive occupation, young adult
occupants (novice householders), un-managed occupancy, and short-term
occupation. In consequence, Headingley is now as well known as 'student-land'
as it is for its sporting associations (and as such, has become
a national venue for stag/hen parties and similar celebrations).
The upshot is huge damage to the quality of life of those residents
who remain.
Recommendation 3: in order to protect as far as
possible the quality of life of remaining residents, the
City should (a) support the revival of the Shared
Housing Action Plan begun in 2001 and last revised in 2008,
and
(b) include in the Plan new options which have emerged
since that date, such as (1) Early Morning
Restriction Orders (Licensing Act 2003, section 172A-172E,
brought into force 31 October 2012) in the Headingley/Hyde Park
Cumulative Impact Policy area, and (2) waste
collection charges, by applying the description in the
Controlled Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2012 of "domestic
property used in the course of a business for the provision of self-catering
accommodation" (entry 11 of the table in paragraph 2 of Schedule
1) to waste from businesses that provide self-catering accommodation
to students.
06 The third problem presented by studentification is its inherent
volatility - it is not a static problem. On the
one hand, it is a fluctuating problem - throughout the '90s, student
numbers (in Leeds and nationally) steadily increased, as government
policy expanded higher education (without consideration for the
accommodation implications); for Leeds, the '00s marked a nadir,
as studentification consolidated in and around Headingley; now,
in the '10s, the pressure has begun to ease in some areas, as student
numbers nationally and locally have begun to decline. This has been
for a number of reasons - competition from purpose-built accommodation
has reduced demand fro HMOs; the economic situation has encouraged
many to study from home (or even to reconsider attending HE at all);
national demographics are seeing a 13% decrease in the number of
school-leavers over the decade (these may increase again in the
'20s). On the other hand, studentification is a shifting problem,
geographically. Due largely to the initial accident that the original
University was located on the A660, and the (non-accidental) development
of its halls of residence (from Devonshire Hall onwards) along this
arterial route, Headingley became virtually the only part of Leeds
known to students, and therefore the focus of private rented sector
provision of accommodation (Smith, 2002). However, over the last
five years or so, as research by re'new and Unipol has shown (2012),
the focus has shifted significantly. Leeds Met University and purpose-built
accommodation have developed in and around the city centre, with
the consequence that the centre of gravity of studentification has
shifted in that direction, towards Hyde Park and the Centre itself
(many recent students as a result are unfamiliar with Headingley).
City policy on student accommodation therefore must take account
of these shifts and fluctuations, and must address the different
problems of areas which are newly studentifying, areas which are
currently intensively studentified, and areas (including some 'traditional'
student areas) which are experiencing the double whammy of de-studentification.
Recommendation 4: in order to maintain a record
of the numbers and location of HMOs in Leeds (as well as to protect
the interests of tenants), as many other local housing authorities
have done, the City should reconsider introducing Additional
HMO Licensing.
07 The problem of areas newly studentifying has
been prompted by the recent proposal to develop student accommodation
in Russell Street, in the midst of Leeds' business district. (For
residents of Inner NW Leeds, there is an irony that a threat to
business has prompted a reaction, while 'traditional' residential
student areas have suffered for decades.) The problems noted in
paragraph 05 above have been invoked in relation to Russell Street.
And they are of course a potential threat. But the problems of Leeds
6 have arisen as a result of a complete lack of planning controls,
and hence of very high concentrations of both HMOs and purpose-built
accommodation. As recommended above (R2) purpose-built accommodation
should be encouraged (to liberate housing stock for the city's residents).
But this does not mean that it should be developed willy-nilly:
first of all, none should be allowed in existing areas of studentification;
and secondly, nor should it be allowed to develop as new areas of
high concentration elsewhere (the plight of Little Woodhouse provides
a warning). The development of new purpose-built accommodation can
also, in susceptible areas, bring HMOs in their wake (as they familiarise
students with new areas).
Recommendation 5: so that new concentrations of
student accommodation do not develop, the City should move
promptly to prepare Supplementary Planning Documents to implement
Policy H6 of the Core Strategy, which covers HMOs, purpose-built
student accommodation and flat conversions. Such policy should ensure
that not more than 20% of the local population is temporary (this
figure has been proposed by the National HMO Lobby and also by popular
holiday destinations, rural and coastal [see Collinson 2013]; due
to the high occupancy of HMOs, this translates to 10% of properties).
[Proposals for a Sustainable Communities Policy by Leeds
HMO Lobby are available.]
08 The problems of areas currently intensively studentified
have been outlined in paragraph 05 above. In planning terms, now
that Leeds has an Article 4 Direction, they are largely protected
from further concentration by UDP Policy H15. However, loop-holes
remain, and need to be rectified.
Recommendation 6: in order to improve the protection
of studentified areas in the Area of Housing Mix, the City
should adopt further planning measures, such as -
(a) a policy which prevents conversion to HMO of
properties falling within all uses other than Class C3;
(b) a policy which excludes all HMOs, C4 or sui
generis, from permitted development rights intended for householders
(as adopted by a number of other local planning authorities) [HMOs
are excluded from the proposals noted in R7b below]; and
(c) consideration of a local occupancy clause for
properties in the Area of Housing Mix.
(d) Notwithstanding the above constraints, exceptions should be
considered for householders trapped in studentified areas, who find
it impossible to sell to other householders (due to the deterioration
of the neighbourhood) or to landlords (due to the prohibition on
HMOs).
09 The problem of de-studentification compounds
the problems of those areas that have been studentified. They have
suffered social problems, environmental problems and economic problems,
and most profoundly, loss of social capital. Now their damaged neighbourhoods
face de-population altogether. Their reputation and appearance discourages
resettlement by long-term residents. Ill-advised new landlords,
with large mortgages to service, find it difficult to sell or let.
Parts of Kirkstall for instance face a vicious circle of decline.
These problems have been the subject of informal debate (re'new/unipol,
2013) and of some ill-considered recommendations (re'new/unipol,
2012).
Recommendation 7: in order to encourage the return
of long-term residents into the Area of Housing Mix, the
City should develop appropriate policies, such as
(a) offering landlords permission for change of use from
Class C4 to Class C3, without losing the right to revert
to C4 use, for (say) five years;
(b) allowing change of use of all properties in the Area
of Housing Mix to Class C3 as permitted development (permitted
development of shops to Class C3 is proposed in a current consultation
by the government); and
(c) adopting a policy on S106 affordable housing
whereby (1) under S106 Agreements, commuted sums are provided by
all housing developments in the Area of Housing Mix, and by all
student- and HE-related developments in the city, and (2) a special
purpose vehicle is established, with local Housing Associations,
to use such sums to acquire surplus student HMOs off-site for use
as affordable housing.
Recommendation 8: in order to ensure a coherent
planning approach, the City (through the local Area Committee)
should ensure that all relevant policies recommended above are included
in Neighbourhood Plans developed in Inner NW Leeds.
10 It is a tragedy that though our students should be an asset
to the city of Leeds, their housing has become a liability. Leeds
HMO Lobby hopes that the Working Group investigation will begin
to heal some of the damage that has been done, and restore the student
population as an asset (see Tyler 2012).
Dr Richard Tyler, Co-ordinator, Leeds HMO Lobby, August 2013
Documents Available
Leeds City Council, Shared Housing Group, Shared Housing Action
Plan Update 2008
Leeds HMO Lobby, Sustainable Communities Policy, 2013
References
Chrisafis, Angelique, 'Two
square miles of housing hell' The Guardian, 24 October
2000
Collinson, Patrick,
'The finances and morality of buying a holiday home to let',
Guardian: Money, 3 August 2013, pp1, 5
CLG, Evidence
Gathering - Housing in Multiple Occupation and possible planning
responses 2008
CLG Committee, The
Private Rented Sector, 2013
Headingley Against Landlordism (HeAL), Headingley in Crisis:
a survey of the views of long-term residents, 1999
Leeds HMO Lobby website
National HMO Lobby, Balanced
Communities & Studentification, 2008
NUS (National Union of Students), Students in the Community:
Working together to achieve harmony, 2007
re'new/unipol, Assessment of housing market conditions and demand
trends in Inner North West Leeds, 2012
re'new/unipol, Workshop on Housing Issues in Headingley, Hyde
Park and Woodhouse, 1 March 2013
Rugg, Julie, et al, The nature & impact of student demand
on housing markets, 2000
Savills, Spotlight:
UK Student Housing, Summer 2013
Sheffield University, Changing
UK: the way we live now, 2008
Smith, Darren, Processes of Studentification in Leeds,
University of Leeds, 2002
South Headingley Community Association, Headingley, heading
where? public meeting, 12 October 1999
Tyler, Richard, 'The View from the Local Community' (pp20-23) in
NUS, The Future of Student Housing, 2012
Universities UK, Studentification:
a guide to opportunities, challenges and practice 2006
Leeds HMO Lobby
email: hmolobby@hotmail.com
website: www.hmolobby.org.uk/leeds
|