Milton Keynes Broadband Action Group

Each comment is structured into a reason for making the comment, and a summary. Those of my comments that I think are relevant to the BB group, and the knowledge economy generally, are below:

As a synopsis, my comment JB1 is about deliberately ensuring we build homes for the people and families we aim to attract, which specifically includes skilled people in the "knowledge industries". JB3 is about facilitating home working (by BB facilities and home design) as a tool to reduce travel, congestion and pollution. JB7 is likewise about the use of technology to reduce travel. JB8 is about supporting home-based businesses, particularly at the point they want to hire the first non-family employee. JB9 is about recognising executive bed-sits (in HiMOs - Houses in Multiple Occupancy) as an important part of the housing mix, with high-tech contractors and similar being one of the typical categories of people using these big house-share rentals.

If there is any theme to these comments, it's this: MK Council is focussed on providing Broadband to the low-income areas of MK, as part of the government's "information poverty" agenda, which is important but not sufficient. My point is that Broadband - and professional, economic, shopping and leisure activities that flow from it - should be a mainstream aspect of how we manage the future of MK if we are serious about moving this area more and more into the knowledge economy.

As always, I'm happy to get any feedback as personal emails, as well as responses posted to the entire group.

Kind regards

John Bint (Cllr)
john.bint@ukonline.co.uk

Reasons for comment:
“There needs to be recognition within the document that the house-building programme should contribute towards the transition to a knowledge economy, by creating the types and mix of homes to attract firms and their employees. This will not be achieved by the current "more of the same" building mix. Similarly, any key gaps in the social housing availability should be addressed whenever these are identified: the currently identified gaps are for large family social rented accommodation and for smaller, easy-to-manage accommodation for MK's impending "grey boom".”

Summary
“I recommend additional text to be inserted into the vision, as follows:
"The mix and design of new homes will contribute to the transition to a knowledge economy, as well as meeting all identified needs of the existing population demographics"”

Your Reference JB1

Reasons for comment:
“The interdependencies between some items should be made explicit. For example, the creation of a knowledge-based economy depends on getting the housing mix right and could reduce car use by increasing home-based working.

Managing Our Impact is currently missing some major potential contributions - reducing the total journey distances for everything we buy/use (especially food); reducing work-based journeys by encouraging home-based working; reducing packaging; reducing car travel to commuter destinations (particularly London) by encouraging sufficient fast train availability.
...

Summary
“Various comments/suggestions for Table 3.1”

Your Reference JB3

Reasons for comment:
“See earlier comments - there is greater scope to address total travel impact by reducing the carbon output of every personal journey - e.g. hybrids, powered golf-buggies types of vehicles - than by any plausible shift away from personal transport.

We can remove the total number of journeys in various ways: promoting home working (if we build homes with personal offices and adequate broadband connectivity); promoting home shopping (one delivery van instead of dozens of shoppers' cars); promoting telephone, email and webcam access to Council services and other services instead of personal visits; promoting internet banking instead of visits to banks and post offices; promoting locally sourced food and other goods (reduces lorry movements); promotion of community-based leisure activities to avoid people travelling to larger, more distant events.

We can also promote staggered working arrangements so that (a) each individual could travel to suit the bus timetable instead of needing to go by car to fit in with company working hours and (b) even if the journey is done by car, the roads will be less congested and therefore consume less fuel.

We can recognise the valued contribution of commuters to the national and local economy, and provide a better travel solution than driving into London. For some people, this means a fast timely service into London and sensible parking arrangements at the station (hopefully with incentives for low-fuel vehicles). For others, it could mean a commuter-oriented bus service: probably lots of fast mini-bus-like vehicles (hopefully running on electricity or bio-fuel) running direct from middle-income areas direct to the railway station, at commuter hours (early in the morning and late into the evening)”

Summary
“MI 7 : Additional suggested policy directions: promote low-impact powered personal vehicles for personal journeys. promote alternatives to making the journey at all. Promote a door-to-door car-free solution for commuting to London.”

Your Reference JB7

Reasons for comment:
“I disagree that the preferred policy direction is sufficient: much more is needed, including:

We need to identify and deliver the housing mix that will appeal to the industries, firms and staff that we want to attract.

We need to ensure MK is a credible, attractive base for business and home for employees. This has objective components to be put in place, like leading edge internet connectivity and fast transport links to relevant destinations. It also has a subjective, perception/image component that needs to be put in place (once the objective components have been resolved).

We need to recognise the role of micro-businesses (< 5 employees) as well as small and medium firms, and to facilitate all these categories. One obvious need is for a home-based solo business to take its first expansion step, with employees from outside the family: our planning policies may need to be reviewed accordingly.

We need to ensure a wide range of skill-level needs in the local economy, to provide employment opportunities at all points on the skills spectrum: it is not sufficient to have two well-separate work types and no career opportunities in between.

We need to raise the educational attainment of local schools at least to the national average, if children of existing residents are to have full access to future local job opportunities. This is only a first step in producing a first-class local education system.”

Summary
“We need to do more than ESRR1 says: we need to match the housing mix to the target employees; better business infrastructure and image; better support for home-based and other micro-businesses; an economy that needs a spectrum of skills; and a local education system that improves at least to the national average as quickly as possible.

This is cross-cutting but it needs to start here, with the economic aspirations for the area.”
Your Reference JB8


Reasons for comment:
“I think HiMOs serve two important niches within the housing mix. These should be recognised and HiMOs to serve both niches should be build as purpose-designed buildings in the new areas.

HiMOs can be affordable (in the everyday sense of low-price, easily affordable), meeting a key need for usually young, usually single people on low income or entirely living on benefits. Many HiMOs in MK charge rent that is within Housing Benefit levels (and is thus "affordable" by any claimant). Rather than leaving such provision to the whims of private investors who may choose unsuitable locations, we could include such "social HiMOs" in the development brief for relevant new communities - particularly near community amenities, bus routes etc in recognition of the low disposable income of the likely occupants.

A second, entirely different category of HiMOs exists, serving the young, professional, usually temporary residents of MK - business managers working in the region for a while, trainee airline pilots working at Cranfield, visiting post-grad students at the OU, IT contractors on assignment, etc. For such people, a HiMO offers an instant network of social contacts in a place they don't know, and a pleasant temporary home with more flexibility than purchasing or renting an entire house or flat. Such occupants may be asset-poor but they usually have adequate disposable income (and in virtually all cases, they will have a car). Clearly this group will have very different expectations - and very different budgets - for their accommodation.

Purpose-built HiMOs for this second category of occupant would have very different characteristics in terms of size, location and amenities (especially car-parking provisions). HiMOs in this second category should also be included within the housing mix for new areas.”

Summary
“HiMOs are a good idea, and we should include them in the new-build mix (cross-cutting - economy, new communities, existing communities). We should recognise different categories of HiMOs (the "low-cost" and the "executive" HiMO, perhaps)”

Your Reference JB-11