Memorandum by Groundwork (UWP 32)
THE PROPOSED URBAN WHITE PAPER
This paper is Groundwork's response to the call
for evidence to be submitted to the Committee.
The request from the Committee is very timely.
As we move into a new millennium we have a wealth of experience
and information on which to draw and an excellent opportunity
to look ahead at the challenges facing our urban areas in the
coming century.
The last century has seen immense changes to
the way, as a society and as communities, we live and work and
this rate of change shows no sign of slowing. The Urban Task Force
final report suggests three drivers for change: the technological
revolution, the ecological threat and social transformation. To
these we would add two other important influences: economic globalisation
and the political imperative. We believe that global economic
forces will have an increasing effect on society and the environment.
The effect of these global economic pressures on urban regeneration
will have to be countered by political action through policies
based on the recommendations of the Urban Task Force and others.
THE ISSUES
Many of those commenting on the use of urban
land seem to make the assumption that a renaissance in our towns
and cities is simply a matter of transforming damaged land into
a commercial asset at a reasonable cost. Much of the work of the
regeneration agencies over the past 20 years has been orientated
towards a hard end use for such land on the presumption that a
commercial, job creating owner would automatically follow. Although
this has produced some highly successful results and is still
an important part of the equation, Groundwork suggests that this
view is no longer suited to many urban problems and brownfield
sites. The Final Report of the Urban Task Force details a "patchwork
quilt" of urban regeneration initiatives from the founding
of English Estates in 1936 through Enterprise Zones to Challenge
Funds. Many of these initiatives produced excellent results, particularly
in helping to remove some of the urban blight left behind by the
decline of primary industries that grew from the first industrial
revolution.
However, current economic cycles are bringing
new waves of potential dereliction with increasing frequency.
For example, a factory complex built on post industrial land in
the north east of England in the early 1990s closed after seven
years as a result of the global collapse of the semi-conductor
market. The project originally received substantial funding from
public sources as an incentive for the company to settle at that
location. The local people were delighted that they had again
got jobs having lost previous employment with the demise of traditional
industries. The company had almost regained its entire £400
million investment and the employees thought that they had got
good jobs for life. They were wrong and the factory was closed.
Local people were sympathetically told that this was a global
problem and there was nothing that could be done to avert a closure.
The powers at work within the global market
mean that our current attitudes to urban land use need to be radically
revised. For example, it is no longer necessary to have production
lines located near to design and administrative functions. They
can be separated by continents. Developments in IT and communications
will only increase these trends. Data processing for UK based
operations is increasingly being subcontracted to the Indian sub
continent and the growth in internet services might further remove
banks or retail outlets from accessible high streets. Faced with
such forces the current ideas relating to land use in the UK appear
to be increasingly outdated.
Commentators are currently optimistic about
the UK's economic situation which demonstrates comparative stability
and prosperity. It could be argued, in fact that regeneration
of our urban areas would be best served by market forces. However,
this would be wrong. Economic stability is promoting new development
but society is becoming increasingly polarised. Some provincial
cities languish in urban decay whilst parts of the south east
are collapsing under the pressure of development. Dealing with
high levels of contamination on the Greenwich peninsula does not
present a problem. Trying to regenerate large-scale post industrial
dereliction in the East Midlands or tempt retailers back onto
the high streets of small towns in Lancashire is an altogether
different story. Political intervention to redress these imbalances
is therefore required.
The very existence of the Urban Task Force suggests
that the political will to get to grips with these issues is there.
But how should the much-vaunted renaissance in our towns and cities
be brought about? The final report of the Urban Task Force states
that successful urban regeneration is design-led. We disagree—successful
urban regeneration is people-led. People aggregate into communities
and, as Lord Rogers acknowledges, cities are made up of citizens.
We consider the key to an urban renaissance to be an increased
empowerment of local people to make decisions and take action
about their local environment. Throughout its twenty year history
of working in the UK's most run-down neighbourhoods, Groundwork
has promoted the virtues of greater community involvement and
increased democratisation. In the context of urban regeneration
this dovetails perfectly with the current trend towards devolution,
the establishment of Regional Government and development agencies
and the increasing emphasis on community involvement in local
government.
The final report of the Urban Task Force is
a powerful commentary and summary of the problems facing the urban
fabric in the first quarter of the next century. Time and again
reference is made to the need for a major resource allocation
to be made in order to bring about the desired change. We argue
that this money should be invested not just in the fabric of our
towns and cities but in the people that live and work there.
THE SOLUTIONS
This section draws on the generic issues raised
above and explains Groundwork's views on how these problems might
be dealt with. In order to give structure to the response we have
organised our comments into the headings defined by the Committee.
1. "How should policies for employment,
competitiveness, housing, transport and public services be integrated
to foster urban regeneration?"
Government structures, both local and central,
have historically been heavily compartmentalised. This acts as
a substantial impediment to the delivery of complex projects—especially
those involving an holistic approach to regeneration. The current
process of "joining-up" government, evidenced by the
cross-cutting roles given to DETR ministers, must continue and
be made to stick.
This process must also be re-inforced within
local authorities whose regeneration policies continue to suffer
from the often conflicting interests of different departments—Economic
Development, Planning and Transport, Leisure Services etc.
Groundwork has worked on delivering holistic,
community led regeneration for nearly two decades. The key to
our success has been a commitment to partnership. Groundwork is
itself a partnership between central and local government and
the private sector. Groundwork supports partnerships bringing
together organisations with a wide range of expertise to tackle
the "joined-up problems" of our most deprived areas.
Greater emphasis and greater resources should
be allocated to promoting effective working relationships between
the statutory, voluntary and private sectors. Each of these has
a role to play in setting the regulatory framework, engaging the
support of people and providing the finance to make lasting change
happen.
The key to urban (and, for that matter, rural)
regeneration is the move towards "sustainable communities".
Groundwork is convinced that working to involve local people in
improving their local environment can kick-start major social
and economic improvements, cutting crime and anti-social behaviour,
creating jobs, connecting business with the community, improving
health and building cohesion. There is an urgent need to linkup
policy initiatives from LA21 to small business support in a major
umbrella strategy to create sustainable communities.
Individual policy elements which need to be
better connected include:
— Sustainable enterprise—creating
new jobs and businesses which are based on local delivery of sustainable
lifestyles and technologies and which optimise the local circulation
and distribution of resources.
— Community empowerment—giving
local people a voice and a choice so that they can take greater
control of their housing, health, education, training and issues
of crime, fear of crime and safety, but also by developing local
socio-economic systems such as LETS, credit unions and community
enterprises.
— Greenspace—improving the quality
and accessibility of local landscapes for recreation health, education
and new economic uses such as forestry, local food production
and clean energy generation.
— Education—developing connections
between schools, schoolchildren and community; creating awareness
of sustainability issues through the promotion of community service
learning, citizenship and lifelong learning that offers both life-skills
and work-skills.
Creating sustainable communities is the first
step in bringing about a renaissance in our towns and cities.
2. "What is the future of urban areas suffering
from low demand for housing and social decline."
The engines driving this decline have already
been discussed. Unless large scale investment in education and
land reclamation is initiated and the means found of economically
regenerating these areas then the polarisation of the UK will
continue. The disparity is already huge. Groundwork's early development
was partly in response to the social unrest in Merseyside in the
early 1980s. Such unrest is an inevitable consequence of widespread
hopelessness. As we have stated, the key to turning around urban
areas considered by many to be "beyond redemption" is
investing in the people who have pride in that community and want
to continue living there. This bottom-up, people-centred approach
can produce results.
Cleadon Park Estate in South Shields on Tyneside
suffers problems of unemployment, vandalism and crime with many
people leaving the area. However, a core group of residents has
decided to take action to change the estate's image. Working with
Groundwork and the local authority the Residents Association has
been granted control of a vacant property on the estate which
they are turning into a drop-in advice centre complete with children's
play area and community garden. Resident Amanda Seivewright says
"We do have problems . . . but there's also pride in our
community. As well as the new centre, we'll be providing training
and skills. The design of the estate means back gardens are huge
and difficult to look after so we're introducing gardening classes
and looking at setting up a tool hire service."
The Wrens Nest estate in Dudley in the Black
Country also suffers from a range of "joined-up" problems
including empty properties, environmental decline, high unemployment
and crime levels, inadequate facilities for young people and poor
health among residents. Led by Jack Turner, who had lived on the
estate all his life, the residents formed themselves into a tenants'
association and, with the help of Groundwork Black Country and
Dudley MBC, local people drew up a "shopping list" of
improvements and secured funding through the Single Regeneration
Budget. Since then, properties have been improved, young people
trained through the Environment Task Force option of New Deal,
burglary routes blocked off and a junior gardening club set up
to help elderly and disabled residents and promote healthy eating
among school children. Residents have even "pooled"
their back gardens to create allotments and a community orchard,
including their own vineyard.
3. "What are the consequences for the urban
renaissance of housing and business development on greenfield
sites?"
Restricting development on greenfield sites
has been a major feature of land policy for decades. Generally
speaking greenfield development is equated to green belt development.
The original idea was that Green Belts were protective areas of
farming country preserved intact around the circumference of towns
or conurbations. Their purpose was to limit urban growth and provide
a breathing space.
This concept was pertinent in 1945 when the
UK economy was still largely fed by the original primary industries.
Infrastructure was built to service these industries hence the
growth of canals and railway. However, this old infrastructure
is often not suitable for modern usages and what modern industry
and householders want is quick and easy access to the motorway
network, often best achieved by developing greenfield sites.
Furthermore, urban brownfield land once damaged
by industry can, as a result of its low levels of fertility, also
be ecologically richer than many farm areas which are controlled
by agro-chemicals to the point that only a mono-culture remains.
Whilst we are not at this point recommending
any relaxation of Green Belt legislation, it can be argued that,
under certain circumstances, it would be better to give up well-served
greenfield sites to new businesses and housing in exchange for
bio-diverse reclaimed or naturally regenerated brownfield sites.
This would have the effect of enabling businesses and residents
to benefit from the advantages of a greenfield location whilst
effectively re-using urban brownfield sites as green amenities,
providing a huge range of benefits for local communities.
4. "How should planning authorities be encouraged
to bring about the speedy release of brownfield sites and foster
creative urban designs?"
It is difficult to see how a planning authority
can directly facilitate the speedy release of land. The planning
system is good at creating a framework of control but is relatively
ineffectual at bringing about actual change. Without the benefit
of a section 106 agreement planning authorities can only react
to planning infringements through the legal system. The speeding
up of dealing with brownfield sites is an economic matter. If
land is held in the public domain it can be speedily released
at the will of the owner. The impediment to development is more
usually a lack of funding. If society wishes to deal with this
blight it must be prepared to foot the bill. The issue then is
who is best placed to promote this work and act as a long term
steward? Groundwork has been working on this problem for some
time.
Given the argument that the use of land for
commercial development may sometimes be questionable, Groundwork
would argue that communities should be involved in deciding the
future use of such land. Reclaiming brownfield land for green
amenity purposes may sometimes represent the best and most popular
solution. Groundwork's experience over the last 20 years has shown
that involving local people in the planning and implementation
of new landscapes and streetscapes can result in surprisingly
innovative and creative designs.
5. "What policies should be examined that
are relevant to towns and suburbs as well as cities and their
boundaries?"
In terms of policy we would like to see a consistent
and committed approach to promoting community involvement strategies.
This approach is as relevant in highly unbanised inner city locations
as it is on the urban fringe and in rural communities. Groundwork
supports communities in all of these locations and, over the past
20 years, has found that the same approach and the same mechanisms
can bring huge dividends.
6. "What should be the role of historic
parks and buildings in urban regeneration?"
These elements are socially vital in providing
communities with cultural links to their environment. These need
not, however, always be historic buildings. Fine edifices are
not necessary for providing cultural anchors. Indeed such objects
do not necessarily hold meaning for many members of a community.
We should learn from others the value and relevance of the full
spectrum of our heritage. In the Ruhr of Germany, for example,
the silent blast furnaces, pit head gear and bunkers have been
preserved as testaments to an industrial history.
In terms of urban parks there appears to be
little, if any, funding available to take care of these precious
resources in the long term. Again we recommend that the experience
of Groundwork should be utilised in helping to provide urban green
spaces that are both ecologically informed and delivered and maintained
with community participation.
Parks, urban commons, public gardens and trails
are not merely places for rest and relaxation. They can also be
the engine for a whole range of social and economic improvements
in our urban areas. The Environment Task Force option of New Deal
is illustrating that the generation, improvement and maintenance
of urban green spaces can create new training and employment opportunities.
Establishing local Friends Groups can build social cohesion and
provide new routes to community stewardship of local environments
and establishing new green amenities can result in real benefits
for public health.
7. "What added value should a Government
white paper provide in addition to other Government announcements
on urban policy?"
The Government should consider Groundwork's
proposals for the establishment of a UK Trust for the Restoration
of Derelict Land. This was first suggested by Professor John Handley,
of Manchester University in the report The Post Industrial
Landscape (Handley 1996). Further details have now been published
by Groundwork in The UK Trust for the Restoration of Derelict
Land—an Interim Status Report (Groundwork 1999).
8. "Which of the recommendations of the
Report of the Urban Task Force should be a priority for implementation?"
All the recommendations of the Urban Task Force
are commended to the Committee. However, in order to be fully
effective, many of the recommendations require major, long-term
investment in our urban areas underpinned by changes in legislation
and the establishment of new bodies. Some of these major initiatives
would take years to come to fruition. This risks breeding frustration
and dissatisfaction among the communities most affected by the
range of problems identified.
We think immediate action is required to maintain
a sense of momentum and convince communities that the Task Force's
report will lead to positive change. The immediate establishment
of a Renaissance fund, aimed at repairing "the small gashes
in the fabric of our urban areas" would offer an excellent
opportunity to engage local people in the regeneration process
at the earliest opportunity. A network of statutory bodies and
voluntary organisations already exists which could administer
this fund and deliver valuable improvements to the quality of
life in thousands of run-down neighbourhoods across the country.
Groundwork's experience shows that such small-scale improvements
can immediately capture the attention of local people and often
act as a catalyst for greater community involvement and much larger,
holistic regeneration initiatives.
Graham Duxbury
January 2000
| 
