This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/davehillblog/2013/mar/25/regeneration-london-making-bigger-better
The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
Previous version
1
Next version
| Version 0 | Version 1 |
|---|---|
| Regenerating London: making bigger better | Regenerating London: making bigger better |
| (6 months later) | |
| Let's pretend. You're in charge of a London borough and think you've worked out how to get some stuff it needs: more jobs, more homes, better road layouts and public transport links, pleasant new parks and squares; a fine parcel of enhancements for the residents you serve and others too. You can't get these things all on your own – you don't have enough money or power. You can, though, do a deal with another type of money, a different sort of power. | Let's pretend. You're in charge of a London borough and think you've worked out how to get some stuff it needs: more jobs, more homes, better road layouts and public transport links, pleasant new parks and squares; a fine parcel of enhancements for the residents you serve and others too. You can't get these things all on your own – you don't have enough money or power. You can, though, do a deal with another type of money, a different sort of power. |
| You talk to a property developer. Thinking big, you collaborate on a plan to transform a whole neighbourhood, perhaps one that's quite hard up and down at heel. You fashion a programme for regeneration; for seeding tired urban landscapes with flowers of vibrant – it is always, always "vibrant" - big city life. And that is where the trouble starts. | You talk to a property developer. Thinking big, you collaborate on a plan to transform a whole neighbourhood, perhaps one that's quite hard up and down at heel. You fashion a programme for regeneration; for seeding tired urban landscapes with flowers of vibrant – it is always, always "vibrant" - big city life. And that is where the trouble starts. |
| The very word "regeneration" gets people at each other's throats, sparking idealistic visions in some and making others howl with rage. It's right that passions are inflamed because so much can be at stake, but these often throw out far more heat than light. As London evolves and grows with sometimes scorched-earth speed it is light that's needed most. | The very word "regeneration" gets people at each other's throats, sparking idealistic visions in some and making others howl with rage. It's right that passions are inflamed because so much can be at stake, but these often throw out far more heat than light. As London evolves and grows with sometimes scorched-earth speed it is light that's needed most. |
| The first stage of illumination is seeing – really seeing – how complicated, economically, politically and morally, changing parts of London for the better is. The place is getting fuller. Its population is rising at a fierce pace, driven by its birthrate: up by 12% in the past ten years to its present eight million, and projected to reach nine million by 2020. Where will all those people live? How will they find jobs? How will they and everyone else get around the heaving metropolis? | The first stage of illumination is seeing – really seeing – how complicated, economically, politically and morally, changing parts of London for the better is. The place is getting fuller. Its population is rising at a fierce pace, driven by its birthrate: up by 12% in the past ten years to its present eight million, and projected to reach nine million by 2020. Where will all those people live? How will they find jobs? How will they and everyone else get around the heaving metropolis? |
| Smith Institute director Paul Hackett said recently that at current, lagging, rates of progress there will be a housing supply shortfall the size of Greater Manchester's housing stock within Greater London 20 years from now. One in four Londoners aged between 16 and 24 is out of work, including many who are highly qualified. Sir Peter Hendy predicts that when Crossrail opens in 2018 its trains will immediately be full. | Smith Institute director Paul Hackett said recently that at current, lagging, rates of progress there will be a housing supply shortfall the size of Greater Manchester's housing stock within Greater London 20 years from now. One in four Londoners aged between 16 and 24 is out of work, including many who are highly qualified. Sir Peter Hendy predicts that when Crossrail opens in 2018 its trains will immediately be full. |
| So there you are, bossing your borough, your three percent of GLA territory, with its 300,000 residents (or thereabouts), its own, distinctive slice of the housing crisis (under-maintained, under-supplied, over-crowded, over-priced), its stubborn share of breadline living. You decide that your big, friendly property giant friend is your best bet for curing some of those ills. | So there you are, bossing your borough, your three percent of GLA territory, with its 300,000 residents (or thereabouts), its own, distinctive slice of the housing crisis (under-maintained, under-supplied, over-crowded, over-priced), its stubborn share of breadline living. You decide that your big, friendly property giant friend is your best bet for curing some of those ills. |
| As well as homes, offices and shops you can maybe squeeze a school, some "public realm" features and other amenities out of the arrangement too. And what about that post-war, high-rise, system-built 1960s housing estate whose upkeep is pretty costly and everybody you talk to seems to hate? Your developer partner might take that off your hands and build a wholesome, "mixed community" in its place. You, the cash-strapped local authority, could use the cash. So could your friends at TfL, who are fretting about their finances too. The London mayor is unlikely to stand in your way. | As well as homes, offices and shops you can maybe squeeze a school, some "public realm" features and other amenities out of the arrangement too. And what about that post-war, high-rise, system-built 1960s housing estate whose upkeep is pretty costly and everybody you talk to seems to hate? Your developer partner might take that off your hands and build a wholesome, "mixed community" in its place. You, the cash-strapped local authority, could use the cash. So could your friends at TfL, who are fretting about their finances too. The London mayor is unlikely to stand in your way. |
| And here we have it – the basic rationale for just about every major redevelopment scheme that's been set in train in London in recent times, be it the "comprehensive" kind designed for Elephant and Castle and Earls Court, or those centred on replacing housing estates, such as the Carpenters in Stratford and Kidbrooke's Ferrier. | And here we have it – the basic rationale for just about every major redevelopment scheme that's been set in train in London in recent times, be it the "comprehensive" kind designed for Elephant and Castle and Earls Court, or those centred on replacing housing estates, such as the Carpenters in Stratford and Kidbrooke's Ferrier. |
| A consensus transcending party lines has backed this regeneration recipe, both at borough and London mayoral levels. Each scheme's ingredients vary, as do every politician's, but the core formula is as consistent as the claims made for them by their elected architects. These typically contend that "unlocking land values" attracts new investment and helps create a better urban environment to benefit the whole community. Vibrant, vibrant, vibrant. But for whom? | A consensus transcending party lines has backed this regeneration recipe, both at borough and London mayoral levels. Each scheme's ingredients vary, as do every politician's, but the core formula is as consistent as the claims made for them by their elected architects. These typically contend that "unlocking land values" attracts new investment and helps create a better urban environment to benefit the whole community. Vibrant, vibrant, vibrant. But for whom? |
| Not everybody wins from this improvement formula. The biggest losers can include some of the very local people most needing changes for the better in their lives. Regeneration, sometimes described as state-sponsored gentrification, helps make a location more expensive. Shops get posher. House prices tend to rise despite any downward pressure produced by greater supply, pushing them still further out of reach for local would-be first-time buyers. | Not everybody wins from this improvement formula. The biggest losers can include some of the very local people most needing changes for the better in their lives. Regeneration, sometimes described as state-sponsored gentrification, helps make a location more expensive. Shops get posher. House prices tend to rise despite any downward pressure produced by greater supply, pushing them still further out of reach for local would-be first-time buyers. |
| Rents rise too, both for independent shopkeepers and private sector tenants, requiring them to cough up or pack their bags. Residents of estates lined up for knocking down can feel anxious and pushed around, even if attracted by promises of better accommodation. Disruption caused by demolition and construction can damage existing businesses, residents' quality of life and much of value about a neighbourhood that goes largely unrecognised. | Rents rise too, both for independent shopkeepers and private sector tenants, requiring them to cough up or pack their bags. Residents of estates lined up for knocking down can feel anxious and pushed around, even if attracted by promises of better accommodation. Disruption caused by demolition and construction can damage existing businesses, residents' quality of life and much of value about a neighbourhood that goes largely unrecognised. |
| Are these prices worth paying to secure a greater good? How do you measure what the greater good is? Who gets to do the measuring? Are there better ways of responding to London's getting bigger than the current approach to redeveloping parts of its land? In a recent article, inspired by the debate about Southwark Council's approach to Elephant and Castle, I've received great help from readers with trying to define a set of principles to guide London's politicians and community activists as they seek ways to improve parts of our city. | Are these prices worth paying to secure a greater good? How do you measure what the greater good is? Who gets to do the measuring? Are there better ways of responding to London's getting bigger than the current approach to redeveloping parts of its land? In a recent article, inspired by the debate about Southwark Council's approach to Elephant and Castle, I've received great help from readers with trying to define a set of principles to guide London's politicians and community activists as they seek ways to improve parts of our city. |
| I've stressed that these need to be imaginative yet practical, have the potential to win broad public support and be intellectually solid. They also need to be useable within the existing framework of borough and London mayoral planning and investment powers. Agendas for big policy and legislation changes at national level are, of course, important, but they fall outside the scope of this particular exercise, which has the immediate future very much in mind. | I've stressed that these need to be imaginative yet practical, have the potential to win broad public support and be intellectually solid. They also need to be useable within the existing framework of borough and London mayoral planning and investment powers. Agendas for big policy and legislation changes at national level are, of course, important, but they fall outside the scope of this particular exercise, which has the immediate future very much in mind. |
| That immediate future includes both next year's London borough elections and the next London mayoral contest in 2016, the escalating impact of government benefit reforms on where thousands of poorer Londoners can afford to live, a public spending squeeze that's unlikely to end soon, and that inescapable pressure, set out above, to deal with a spectacular surge in the sheer number of Londoners there are. How can a city that's getting bigger be made better for most of its people too? | That immediate future includes both next year's London borough elections and the next London mayoral contest in 2016, the escalating impact of government benefit reforms on where thousands of poorer Londoners can afford to live, a public spending squeeze that's unlikely to end soon, and that inescapable pressure, set out above, to deal with a spectacular surge in the sheer number of Londoners there are. How can a city that's getting bigger be made better for most of its people too? |
| Defining goals, setting priorities and finding effective means to achieving desirable ends means facing some uncomfortable realities and wrestling with some unforgiving dilemmas. But it's also a way of envisaging the sort of place we want London whole to be. For the rest of this week with, I hope, your continuing help, I'm going to try to plot a course through this difficult urban terrain. By the end of it, with luck, we might even emerge with a bit of a plan for making London a truly good city. | Defining goals, setting priorities and finding effective means to achieving desirable ends means facing some uncomfortable realities and wrestling with some unforgiving dilemmas. But it's also a way of envisaging the sort of place we want London whole to be. For the rest of this week with, I hope, your continuing help, I'm going to try to plot a course through this difficult urban terrain. By the end of it, with luck, we might even emerge with a bit of a plan for making London a truly good city. |
| Tomorrow: to develop, don't destroy | Tomorrow: to develop, don't destroy |
| Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning. |
Previous version
1
Next version