TrustNews Sep 20
Civic Voice "In Conversation" dialogues - a personal appraisal
In May, Civic Voice began a series of "In Conversation" dialogues through Zoom and Webinar to explore current topics including Planning, Building, Heritage, Conservation and Regeneration, and more, to keep alive important national issues that could no longer be pursued normally due to constraints from COVID-19. These were excellently conducted by Kevin Trickett of Wakefield Civic Society, and lan Harvey and Sarah James of Civic Voice.
I followed over 16 of these, together with another half dozen or so debates entitled High Street Task Force, under the direction of Simon Quinn, which specifically examined the plight of benighted commercial and retail centres within our towns and cities. As l cannot give an account of all, or as fully as l should like, l do urge Members to view the videos on the CV website, which are still available, to help form their own opinions.
Nicholas Boys Smith of Create Streets, and member of the Build Better, Build Beautiful Commission gave a spirited and emotive plea for the importance of their 3 aims to be embedded in planning the culture of future development, especially in this post-COVID climate: Ask for Beauty; Refuse Ugliness; Promote Stewardship; and these can be seen to be fully considered with their 8 priorities stated within their last Report Living with Beauty. This report, which l appreciate can be controversial, is nonetheless a sound working document for our towns and cities to ensure civic pride and purpose, and communal well-being - all too often forgotten or ignored.
The former Chief Planner of Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, Steve Quartermain, explained something of the complexities and intricacies of the existing planning process which, to my mind, proves quite confounding, being legally technical, when considering larger scale developments. He felt, however, Planning should be seen as positive to bring the community together for beneficial purposes but it was argued this seemed to depend upon how local voices might be heard against those of the developers who had contrary objectives. He stressed the importance of Councils keeping the local planning policy framework (LPPF) up-to-date and Neighbourhood Plans should be part of any development plan, and he agreed that permitted development rights (PDRs) needed review especially for utilities within conservation areas. When quizzed about bad planning decisions this was countered by statistics: 450,000 decisions p.a. with less than 2% contrary to local views! Planning is not just aesthetics but to anticipate and meet future needs, and sometimes local restrictions prevent necessary developments. It was acknowledged more communication for disseminating information on planning proposals that lead to discourse and participation could be implemented through media technology - as is now seen as a result of attempting to overcome COVID constraints. Ending on a positive note, he reiterated that Planning is something to bring the community together and to think about the good that comes from planning through its benefits (the controversial “Planning Reform" White Paper published subsequently on the 6th August, suggests we may have to revise this note of optimism).
"Why we need a Healthy Home Act in the light of COVID-19?“ was the question raised by Mary Parsons, Chair of the TCPA and also a member of the BBBB Commission, to draw attention to the erosion of the legacy of the Garden City principle that the built environment ensures healthy living. De-regulation can now permit unsuitable dwelling provision, e.g. PDR deems 12.8m3 (size of a supermarket car space) acceptable and a windowless unit equally so, and as such will stigmatize people's lives. COVID can be seen as a housing disease generated by over-crowded conditions and that the NHS, which was founded for Health not illness, can only be supported by good housing and that good planning should help support this, homes having long-term needs. At one time our planning system was relatively clear, but it has become one of the world's most complex, where developers can argue down better outcomes claiming they meet housing needs, but these must be more than the minimum. The proposal for this Act can be read in more detail on the TCPA website.
The issues outlined here were developed further in the Conversation with Matt Bell of Grosvenor Britain and lreland, which has recently published a new Community Charter that signals a way forward to re-building public trust in planning. Their survey pointed out that only 2% have trust in developers and 7% in local authorities, disconcerting statistics which prompted their Charter for radical improvement. This was to be a two-way process of engagement with community organizations: Listen First; Open Up; Make it Easier; Be Accountable; co-produce a community asset map; invest time and resource in community organizations to play an active and involved role that also enables community self-accountability. On their website, www.grosvenor.com/positivespace one can access their supporting essays that underpin these aspirations. He put it quite bluntly that most developers haven't a clue about community organizations or local needs and Councils should stop using consultants but look instead to harnessing their own communal resources, and to engage the community in on-going management. Even though Grosvenor is London-centric this Charter and method could be applied universally across the UK, and he was also keen that young people become engaged as they would offer freshness to debate and be more open to change (this reminds me of JTP and their SPD workshops on Central Winchester Regeneration which involved local schools and colleges).
A hidden element in all our towns and cities is undoubtably our Heritage, because it is something all too often taken for granted and not utilized as a magnet for regeneration. This aspect arose many times in the Conversations and seemed to be a crucial factor for any successful attempt in revitalization, especially now after the COVID-19 effect on economy. I refer here to two enthusiastic contributions, one from Reading and one from Nottingham, and again, please check their Council websites to gain a fuller picture.
Karen Rowland, Councillor and Heritage Champion for Reading, emphasized the need for Heritage Champions to implement Heritage Strategies that would consider both place and building as assets, not to be discriminating, so within the built environment these must work and use such resources to encourage the notion of Heritage, and that the Councils should work together with the local Civic Society, which it does in Reading where its engagement with the community has produced most successful results as a consequence of collaboration. It had been noted, however, Heritage has become recently much more political, especially through ignorance, as reactions often have been wilfully destructive in certain instances and there is a need for balanced thought through intelligent and sympathetic research.
Alice Ullathorne who is the Heritage Strategy Officer for Nottingham City Council, endorses this need for collaboration within the community which enables proactive projects to take place in their 15-year Strategy Vision for the city thereby capitalizing on assets and driving economic vibrancy to celebrate their vision. She told of the difference investment in Heritage makes whether it's tangible artefact or intangible traditional legend (Robin Hood) as all these make up the story of Nottingham and create an important attraction factor for visitors and tourism. It became clear that close collaboration with city organizations was key to the achievements of their strategy panels who worked together as partnerships for evaluation and governance. The relationship with their Civic Society is significant as their contribution is seen as integral to the work of NCO. Progress is evaluated on an on-going basis, reviewed every six months with an overall Review every 5 years. They are having to re-think their Strategy in the light of COVID-19 for regeneration to support economy and the High Street, but she felt all this does not necessarily cost lots of money, i.e. collaboration/cooperation shows that money isn't everything whereas good civic sense generates satisfaction and pride.
The High Street Task Force conversations were themed "From Recovery to Transformation" with many case histories from towns and cities cited as examples of the many and various ways this regeneration may be achieved, and the route-map sets out the framework for this task. The Grimsey Review "Build Back Better" has updated with the COVID-19 Supplement for Town Centres. This document is full of facts and figures that point a way forward for positive regeneration that reflects a cultural shift for the future. It examines the generic nature of the town centre and high street and the reasons for decline (which had begun before Covid) were because many interests were those of absentee landlords whose concerns were hardly civic, that retail and businesses by conglomerates and chains had taken over, footfall was failing because there was little else of cultural or leisure value to attract, and dead shops do not a lively high street make - or a public space to be proud of. Transferring power to communities seems the way forward now since the old established pattern appears obsolete.
Neil Mclnroy, CEO of the Centre for Local Economic Strategies, presents this idea by referring to the High Street as the "canary in the mine" that signals the need to change the economic model with a new paradigm for capitalism that should be reset in the light of Climate Change and COVID. He gives 4 pointers towards this: 1) Dominance of economic ownership needs change for more social and local values; 2) Too much focus on financial values and returns; 3) Local matters - reflect its place, identity, history and culture; 4) Make sure more wealth is recirculated and owned in place. This would lead to Community Wealth Building, i.e. who owns it and who benefits by it - Localize, Socialize, Democratize.
Hastings, Aldershot and Paisley were towns that had suffered considerable neglect and decay and were in a very sad state of decline. Their Councils appeared to be ineffective in creating strategies to combat their centres' wastelands so it became clear the only alternative was for the communities to take action themselves. These three very different towns show how inspired regeneration can be, and achieved, according to local community initiatives. As Jess Steele said of Hastings Council, it was not their job, and that's the reason why city centres suffer, and Gary Kerr of Paisley added that Council and Community have different roles, that Communities remain but Councils do not. Hastings set up their Community Land Trust called Heart of Hastings, Paisley created the Paisley Community Trust and Aldershot Civic Society wrote their Town Centre Vision to meet community needs that seemed to be ignored by their Council. These three very diverse and complex stories are well worth pursuing through their websites:
www.aldershotcivicsociety.org.uk
Arthur Morgan