FOUR years into a ten year New Deal for Communities [NDC] project, an overall masterplan is being finalised to transform the Barton Hill part of Bristol. Here over three quarters of existing social housing is made up of one or two bedroom flats, mostly in high rise blocks. There's a 20% turnover of tenants every year.

Residents are being consulted up to the end of 2004. The process is aimed at building up the capacity for self-management for those who rent from the council. 'For 50 years they have experienced a rather paternalistic council landlord, taking decisions on their behalf,' says the NDC director David Ralph. 'With NDC, opportunities are now rushing in, and key decisions taken now will hugely affect future generations living here.'

Moving towards a more mixed, stable and safe community is a key element of the masterplan. There will be:

• a shift in tenure, with home ownership, including shared ownership, boosted from 50% to 71%
• CCTV in every remaining block (eight blocks after demolition of two)
• 'defensible space' around each block
• tenant management (if wanted) of existing housing association and transferred city council homes
• new build of 160 2/3/4 bedroom homes within 5 years, and up to 200 additional ones in the following 10 years for shared ownership or rent
• two new roads mainly for pedestrians
• a central village green
• a merger of the existing three primary schools into one that becomes a first choice of parents.

Housing or renewal?

'When the Community at Heart NDC was set up, housing was not considered a main theme for residents. The focus was more on social issues such as dealing with fear of crime, community safety, health and schooling,' says Ralph. 'Our original delivery plan in 2001 didn't mention much new build housing. We saw plenty of opportunity to buy up wasted homes lying vacant in the area. However, within 12 months, there were few vacant properties left.' A wider change was taking place led by Bristol-wide property price inflation and a strong city economy. 'Many homes had been bought up by landlords and young professionals were beginning to move into the terraced housing of the Redfield area.' But this demand was not reflected in the local social housing.

A total 1,420 - 44% of households in the NDC area rent from the council, which has a local tenant turnover of 20% and a void rate up to 6%. 'These statistics simply show that lots of people don't want to live here' says local resident Alan McDade, who is employed as the NDC housing co-ordinator. 'We want to change that, and we've realised that the most sustainable communities are mixed tenure'.

He sees the masterplanning process, with increased security and defensible spaces for residents, as putting the community back together. 'The idea is for the area to manage itself. Otherwise less desirable elements will take over. If you've got pride and passion about an area, you don't want it vandalised, or having litter strewn everywhere.'

The role of housing associations

Residents are not always happy with local housing associations. There are 173 NDC area properties owned by seven different housing associations - one with as few as two properties, the biggest with 58. None has a local office where tenants can report repairs etc. Stock rationalisation seems an obvious solution - with fewer operating here. This would make a local management presence more feasible.

In the late 1990s a new estate of 42 houses was built by Bristol Churches housing association and let to a large number of families with multiple needs, mostly from outside the area. High intensive on-site management was needed, but none exists. So there is a lot of local suspicion to overcome before housing associations will be trusted.

Resident Simon Gabriel organised a petition to get a local lettings policy

In September 2002 housing associations were invited to tender for the development and management of new homes in the NDC area. A consortium of Sovereign Housing, which has a lot of regeneration experience, and Solon South West, whose office is right next to the NDC area, won the contract. The original brief included several elements. It was to provide up to 160 houses of which 120 would be for rent and the remainder a mixture of shared ownership and outright ownership. In addition the consortium was required to support and work with local residents and tenants to develop capacity in both tenant/resident involvement in design, and in housing management. That brief has now been expanded. There is a potential for up to 200 additional homes over the next 5-10 years now, moving predominantly into shared ownership, with some outright ownership and a small number for rent.

Eight houses built by Jephson housing association on Morton Street were occupied in October 2004. Seven out of eight tenants are local, with four coming from Barton Hill tower blocks. Four are from a black or ethnic minority background. This local lettings policy, which contrasts strongly with previous housing association lettings policy, is a result of resident campaigning. In December 2003 local residents discovered that most proposed new houses were to go to people from outside the area. In January 2004 NDC resident board member Simon Gabriel organised a petition and discussed lettings policy with the city council. This was agreed in July - a first for the city.

Now 50% of new properties are allocated to people with priority needs, first from the Barton Hill tower blocks, then from the whole NDC area, then the common Bristol register of people who've requested Barton Hill. The next 40% are allocated to families currently in the NDC area with the highest points. Ten per cent go to people whom the council have statutory obligations to house.

'We've also just agreed a good neighbours charter which we expect all new tenants to sign up to,' says Simon Gabriel. 'It's full of common sense things really, like not running your washing machine in the middle of the night if it will disturb your neighbours'

The process so far

Housing co-ordinator Alan McDade overlooking shops that will be redeveloped into housing

• March 2002 Stage one report produced by Shepheard Epstein Hunter as basis for masterplan
• July 2002 City council approves £1.95 million contribution to original masterplan. This includes demolition of three blocks of flats, construction of up to 160 mainly family homes via housing associations and CCTV in seven of eight tower blocks
• August 2002 Community-led New Deal for Communities board endorses masterplan, but exclude demolition of one block of flats and CCTV (until tenants have agreed to pay up to £5 per week service charge)
• Summer 2002 Funding of £10,000 obtained from ODPM and the Housing Corporation to carry out an options study on tenant management of remaining social housing in the NDC area
• September 2002 Tender pack produced for housing associations to bid for new build of up to 160 new houses/flats dispersed through the whole NDC area including a part of the riverside Temple Quays area scheduled for major new private housing development. Aim to spread development in small locations across whole area and concentrate all management within one housing association consortium. Consortium also required to build resident/tenant capacity
• November 2002 Sovereign and Solon housing associations appointed to develop new homes. Extensive discussions and consultations go on. NDC agrees to fund tenants' CCTV service costs for duration of NDC programme
• June 2003 Sovereign Housing funds resident participation officer for Barton Hill, for one year, to support resident input into design aspects of new build parts of masterplan.
• November 2003 NDC board approves amended masterplan, involving investment of around £12 million spend on 160 future family homes, improving access, providing safer walking routes and traffic calming, giving natural surveillance to provide greater safety and reduced CCTV for all eight remaining blocks
• December 2003 NDC board calls in masterplan, partly in response to some tenant objections. Neighbourhood renewal adviser Steven Hill supports board to clarify what they have and haven't agreed to
• February 2004 Chetwood and Hartland low rise blocks totalling 59 flats are demolished
• June 2004 Masterplan re-confirmed by board
• June 2004 Frank Brady, long standing city council neighbourhood housing officer based in Barton Hill, is appointed consultation co-ordinator for the block security project
• June 2004 Bristol City council cabinet approves Barton Hill new masterplan, with an aspirational 'option 3' to include redevelopment of new shops into housing and relocating shops, totalling up to £19 million, dependent on any funding gaps being bridged by NDC
• July 2004 Local lettings policy agreed with council. Residents' charter agreed with Sovereign and Solon
• July 2004 City Council cabinet approves masterplan 'option 3' which will deliver over 95 more homes than other options previously considered. The NDC has outlined a commitment of £6,591,000 to this project
• Summer 2004 NDC persuades Sovereign to employ an officer to source local labour, supplies etc for construction works, to be recruited November/December 2004. Joint funding from Sovereign and Bovis Homes who will be building the homes
• Summer/autumn 2004 Housing Transformation Plan for 2005-2015 is prepared by NDC housing coordinator Alan McDade supported by planning consultants Capital Action. Their work is to be informed by the results of masterplanning consultation
• September 2004 Work on 60 new two and three bedroom houses starts

The challenges

Roads are emerging as a contentious issue. Fifty years ago Barton Hill had a street-based layout. This was bulldozed when the blocks of flats were built, but remains a strong memory for older residents. It is felt that pedestrian-friendly streets will help connect the community, so two new roads are part of the masterplan. Although they will have barriers to keep traffic speed to below 10 mph, not all residents are happy. They are still worried that cars will race up and down the roads.

Anyone can walk around the blocks of flats day or night. And that can lead to hardly anyone doing so, as they don't feel safe. The masterplan involves both infilling some of the gaps with a few new houses, and creating 'defensible space'. The green open spaces around blocks will be fenced, with a reduced number of entrances. Tenants can then decide if they want flower gardens, children's play areas, more parking or something else inside what they will see as their area.

Some are worried about where people currently using this space and being seen as behaving in an anti-social way will go - mainly young men. There is currently no youth club for them to go to, and just one youth café. Local residents Simon Gabriel and Alan McDade both have concerns that there may be a displacement of anti social behaviour from one 'defended' block to those remaining, if there is nothing else provided for young people to do.

Another controversial part of the masterplan is to put some houses up between the blocks, to create a presence for 'natural surveillance' of the community by the community. Before being bulldozed in the 1960s, the area was made up of terraced homes where people were aware of what was happening outside their front door. 'They're taking away our green spaces' is the reaction of some residents to this proposal. 'Let's get back to the days when we all looked out for each other' is the response. From a survey carried out in 2001, with a 60% response rate, 64% of those responding supported the idea of building between the blocks. McDade comments: 'Natural surveillance means bringing back to people a feeling of security when they are walking around. There's always a door you could knock on, which you can't with high rise flats.'

Demolition choices

In a housing and community safety ballot in 2001 tenants identified high-rise Barton House and low rise Chetwood and Hartland Houses as suitable for demolition. People thought they'd then get houses. But not everyone displaced will qualify.

The ballot in Barton House was 71% in favour of demolition, but at an NDC board meeting a further group of residents asked for the decision to be reversed. The minority who wanted retention had formed into a more cohesive group within the Barton House tenant group. After fuller debate some people decided to change their mind. So the board agreed to retain.

The economics also changed. Analysis of future costs and benefits then indicated demolition might not be economic. David Ralph comments: 'There wasn't the information on any cost-benefit over the next ten years. In fact there isn't necessarily a justification to do the demolition when you look at the figures. We relied upon the views of the local community to guide the masterplan, but this has to be supported by real facts. Otherwise the masterplan can be at the whim of whoever gets mobilised to claim a better home.' So Barton House currently remains.

Resident management

Bristol city council owns 1,420 homes here. In December 2004 it will decide with tenants who will manage them. A third of the council housing in the city is currently below the decent homes standard, doubtless including many NDC area properties. Whoever ends up managing the homes must bring them up to this standard by 2010.

There are a number of ways this could be achieved:

• by bringing in a new organisation to manage council stock
• by using council resources, which implies spending/service cuts elsewhere
• by transferring homes to a housing association

But there's another option, says NDC housing co-ordinator Alan McDade: tenant management. 'If residents want to see the community continue to improve and grow after NDC has finished, then now is the time to set up a locally-based housing company or association to own and manage homes here.'

When the single thing you're most worried about is what your rent's going to be in the next few months, it's not so easy to make an informed decision about long term management and ownership issues. But that's what Barton Hill tenants are being asked to do by the end of 2004. The masterplanning process is having to get to grips with decisions not only about buildings and the built environment, but about who manages that environment. There are momentous decisions to be made.

Starting small and building on success seems the key. 'In the Lawrence Hill area we're aiming to pilot neighbourhood management,' says McDade. We're aiming to make the place clean, green and safe. We need to initially concentrate on a few delivery functions such as green spaces, then expand as it has a proven success.' The potential, he believes, is to use this experience to prepare for housing management - as one of a number of services that can and should be locally responsive. 'If the best way to achieve this responsiveness is have residents running their own service, so be it.'

The consultation dilemma

Consulting is always important for any neighbourhood's renewal and/or its reprofiling. But short term choices made by current residents may not always reflect what is best for a community in the future. If it is felt to be important to create a more economically active community and to break down concentrations of welfare dependency/lack of role models, who should be consulted? How can the needs of future generations and potential incomers be considered? David Ralph: 'We feel that by addressing the stigma that the NDC area has and by raising the profile of the area, it will become more desirable - particularly if we provide the necessary services that residents in paid work require.

'Apart from consulting local residents and supporting them into employment, we will engage with business partners that are planning to - or are already - located near the NDC area. We will attempt to provide housing for those workers. At the same time we will also looking at government initiatives such as key worker homes. The answers won't be simple as we will have to engage with many different stakeholders, from government to residents.'

'We want somewhere where my kids can be born,' says Alan McDade. 'Somewhere they can go to school, get a job, live when they're married and have children, then be looked after when they get old.' And that's the key. There is no one-size-fits-all solution and it's not just housing that's involved when you are trying to create a place like that. Schools, health services, places for young people to hang out safely, transport and employment opportunities all need to be included to help make the area somewhere people from many backgrounds want to live.

What different people want will vary. One important factor for masterplanning to incorporate is for often-excluded groups who tend not to come to meetings to be heard. Young people, disabled people, the elderly, ethnic minorities and others should have their views sought effectively. The loudest voices should not dominate. It is also important to seek the views of the working residents. Those who work often do not engage in consultation, especially when meetings etc are held during the day. In the evening they may not want to go to meetings either. Yet their views - as the kind of people the area needs in greater number are critical. They can bring/keep spending power into the area and provide good role models to those whose prospects are not raised if they only see adults living on benefit or active in crime etc. Ralph sees the benefits of increasing the number of home owners: 'There is anecdotal evidence that those who own their own homes and those involved in the design process are more likely to have a stake in their neighbourhood and less likely to accept crime and anti social behaviour as the norm.'

It is clear that local people want change, but many are strongly attached to the areas as they know it. Fear of change is not unusual in the these circumstances. For some it can signal less chance to rely on welfare, a possible forcing out to live elsewhere, even fewer opportunities to pursue crime. Or it can signal a change that will make those with little money feel stigmatised in their own neighbourhood, if the feel of the area changes. Some of these are legitimate concerns that need careful handling. Others are important tests of a community's commitment to improved prospects and a living environment.

At a masterplanning consultation event outside Ashmead House in July 2004 where 60 people turned up to a marquee event there were varying opinions. Resident Sue Taylor: 'We should keep it how it is. Just improve the green areas. We don't want any new roads, no new houses being built. I don't want to look down into people's houses. It would be nice if we had these consultation meetings before decisions were made.' Adam, another Ashmead House resident, had a different perspective: 'As it is mostly families, gardens would be ideal. I think the plan is a good idea.'

But Alan McDade isn't disheartened. He's in for the long term, for himself, his family of four and potentially his grandchildren. 'In this job, you have to have the enthusiasm of a child but the cunning of a fox.'

The impact of neighbouring property markets

Right next to the NDC area is a redevelopment of Temple Quay. Here around 550 private homes will be built. Plans include start-up live/work units and three high-spec residential towers on the waterfront, next to Bristol Temple Meads station (the key commuter point for Bristol). A planning agreement is providing 30 homes for shared ownership and 16 for rent. Will these new homes and their amenities help connect the NDC residents to the rest of the city centre, which is increasingly prosperous? Or will they act as a further barrier?

David Ralph sees many positive aspects: 'In my opinion the redevelopment of Temple Quay 2 will have a major impact on the adjacent Dings area and will help tackle the isolation we face there. The services and facilities provided through the redevelopment will be accessible to all residents in the area, including some from within the NDC boundary. Residents will be sending their children to the same schools and building personal relationships - this will help the two communities connect with each other.'

Challenges remain, however, he says: 'We will still have to deal with the way the Spine Road splits the area apart. But I don't feel that the redevelopment will hinder this. It could help, as residents will have more reasons to go to that area than they do now, to access new services and facilities.'