New government legislation leads to fears of ‘student ghettoisation’ in York

Laws will prevent students from living in areas like Badger Hill. Photo: Maggie Aslet

Laws will prevent students from living in areas like Badger Hill. Photo: Maggie Aslet

New government legislation plans will require student landlords to obtain planning permission before renovating family homes into student houses in residential York areas, such as Badger Hill.

The new law, implemented on April 6 2010, has caused fears of ghettoisation and student alienation from community areas.

One landlord, who owns several properties in the Badger Hill area, has said that the new planning law will obligate him to publicly declare changes he makes on properties. This has actively discouraged him from renovating any more Badger Hill properties for students in the future because he feels that residents in the area would protest against more student houses being introduced.

He added that the meeting in which these changes were explained was “very rushed”, that “no documents were given”, and that the landlords were “given no guidelines” on how the law would be fully implemented.

This follows outrage over a letter sent out to residents of Badger Hill last month, which protests that York Council, North Yorkshire Police and the University have received an “ever increasing number of complaints from residents regarding serious anti-social behaviour and noise generated by some of the local student population.” The letter adds: “Sadly, Badger Hill is developing a very negative reputation due to all this unnecessary trouble!”

YUSU Democracy and Services Officer, Lewis Bretts, has called the letter a kind of “organised discrimination”, arguing that “if instead of ‘students’ it said ‘blacks’, ‘homosexuals’ or ‘muslims’ it would rightly be illegal.”

The letter continues: “The time has come for owners, landlords and letting agents to take more responsibility for the actions of these inconsiderate individuals and to rectify the condition of some of the student houses and gardens, many of which are in an absolutely
disgraceful state!”

This is despite one member of York Council telling Nouse that he would be “perfectly happy to live in a student area” and that residents have to be adaptable to change due to “socio-economic reasons”.

He concurred with landlord concern over the abruptness of the legislation, adding that it was “rushed through without much literature.” The councillor continued in saying that the new laws could lead to “student ghettoisation” in areas such as Tang Hall, similar to notorious student areas such as Fallowfield in Manchester and Headingley in Leeds.

A second-year English literature student, who lives in Badger Hill, but did not receive the letter, said: “I am offended by what students are accused of in this letter. My housemates and I have always respected the local community, tried to maintain the noise and the cleanliness of our house, and have never caused any trouble to anyone.

“If instead of ‘students’ it said ‘blacks’, ‘homosexuals’ or ‘muslims’ it would rightly be illegal.”

YUSU Democracy and Services Officer
Lewis Bretts

“There is a reason why students choose Badger Hill – it is safe and the houses are well-furnished. This kind of legislation could cause concentrations of students in places where people don’t really want to live, such as Tang Hall.”

This follows reports made by Nouse earlier in the year about students suffering sustained harassment from teenagers in Tang Hall.

Another Badger Hill student resident, Chris Montenaro, said: “I think the kind of perspective that students cause a hassle is quite inward looking, it’s quite parochial. Frankly, students in the nine months that they’re actually living in the places are contributing an extraordinary amount to the local economy.”

James Alexander, YUSU President from 2004-5, and current Labour Parliamentary Candidate for York Outer, has accused the University of not creating enough accommodation on Heslington East during its initial expansion last year, and that they have thus missed an opportunity to prevent family houses being converted to student lets.

Alexander told Nouse: “I think students provide a great and much needed diversity to local communities and I think mixed communities should be maintained, but I think it isn’t beneficial for students or the local community to simply live in a separate area.”

Despite evidence that students contribute to the community, Alexander added: “I would personally like to see more campus accommodation.”

In response to Alexander’s accusations, David Garner, the University Press Officer, said: “The University cannot compel students to live on campus and it cannot exert any direct influence on the open housing market.

“We are, however, committed to providing accommodation to meet the growth in student numbers associated with Heslington East, and in the last three years we have added nearly 1,000 bed spaces.”

The new legislation will now define student houses as a new Use Class, ‘C4 Houses in Multiple Occupation’, whereas they were previously classed under the generic Use Class, ‘C3 Dwellinghouses’, which is what family houses are classed under.

Paul Edward, of York Council, said: “We will implement the new legislation fairly and evenly, and we are now waiting on the government for further clarification.”

6 comments

  1. ““If instead of ‘students’ it said ‘blacks’, ‘homosexuals’ or ‘muslims’ it would rightly be illegal.”

    YUSU Democracy and Services Officer
    Lewis Bretts”

    Maybe as a student body, we should stop being so self indulgent and think of others around us. Whilst arguably the large student body both York and St Johns brings benefits to the local economy, to residential streets students are a nuisance, and it is understandable that they do not want huge streets being dominated by students. Especially considering that a lot of the streets York Uni students live in are relatively middle-upper middle class, wherein some residents may be paying mortgages/working hard to live in such nice surroundings..only to have their sleeping patterns/peace disrupted by students pissed out of their minds on daddy’s £££.

    I can see why it’s being done, and yes it is discrimination. But it’s understandable considering the current situation. It’s hardly comparable to deep routed racial hatred as the others are clearly a byproduct of. Banning Islamic people from a road is pointless, hateful, and accrues no apparent benefits other than the satisfaction of racists? Whereas banning students from dominating ‘nice’ residential areas is beneficial, locals will feel less alienated in their own city/noise reduced/etc.

    Also, wake up. There is SO much student property in York…it’d be a miracle if you managed to make it without finding somewhere to live not vice versa. It’s hardly a harsh ban.

    Reply Report

  2. 5 May ’10 at 3:23 am

    Vincent Price

    What’s the betting these quotes were given casually in conversation before being turned into incriminating/discriminating evidence by the media aka Nouse?!

    Reply Report

  3. Yet again there is no interest in Laura Conner’s boring articals, I for one don’t care about this.

    Reply Report

  4. James Askew – Grow Up

    Reply Report

  5. Also might help if you could spell…

    This is really important legislation. I know some people are only interested in alcohol and sex but this could affect living conditions for students in the future. And has reveals some of the priorities the University has regarding student welfare.

    Reply Report

  6. “if instead of ’students’ it said ‘blacks’, ‘homosexuals’ or ‘muslims’ it would rightly be illegal.”

    First off, no it would not be illegal.

    Second, if you actually look at what the letter says “…anti-social behaviour and noise generated by some of the local student population.” it is not making wild accusations aimed at all students simply based upon the fact that they can be classified thus. Instead it says “some students”, and later refers to “individuals” and again, “some students”.

    Student houses are designated as HMOs rather than Dwellinghouses because that is exactly what they are and such properties usually have a distinct impact on their local community. It is only right that the local council recognises that HMOs, which in essence increase the number of adults per square mile and increase the demand on local services, can change the dynamic of the local community.

    And, as indignant as we students may be, just take a walk through Badger Hill at 10pm any day next week, it will be noisier and messier than it was last year.

    The restriction on HMOs could actually be much better for students, potentially forcing the University to provide more accommodation on campus, whilst also ensuring that there are more smaller – and therefore affordable – housing available for first-time buyers, such as recent graduates

    Reply Report

Leave a comment



Please note our disclaimer relating to comments submitted. Please do not post pretending to be another person. Nouse is not responsible for user-submitted content.