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.theguardian.com/uk-news/davehillblog/2015/mar/26/andrew-adonis-and-estate-regeneration-some-pros-and-cons

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Andrew Adonis and estate regeneration: some pros and cons Andrew Adonis and estate regeneration: some pros and cons
(about 1 hour later)
In general, people would prefer not to have their homes knocked down. You wouldn’t and neither would I. They would sooner not to be told to pack their bags and move out to make way for the wrecking ball, perhaps to some unfamiliar and quite distant neighbourhood where everyone’s a stranger. Often, they’d rather stay put even if their home is leaky, cold and overcrowded on a council estate that outsiders casually despise and they might not be all that keen on themselves. They might feel that way even if very sincere politicians have promised them a better, brand new replacement home in the same place as the one to be demolished, along with better streets, improved transport and new schools. The thing is, change can be a very risky thing. Who can be sure that it will turn out for the best?In general, people would prefer not to have their homes knocked down. You wouldn’t and neither would I. They would sooner not to be told to pack their bags and move out to make way for the wrecking ball, perhaps to some unfamiliar and quite distant neighbourhood where everyone’s a stranger. Often, they’d rather stay put even if their home is leaky, cold and overcrowded on a council estate that outsiders casually despise and they might not be all that keen on themselves. They might feel that way even if very sincere politicians have promised them a better, brand new replacement home in the same place as the one to be demolished, along with better streets, improved transport and new schools. The thing is, change can be a very risky thing. Who can be sure that it will turn out for the best?
That is item number one on a long, forbidding list of problems with what is variously, sometimes euphemistically, called estate regeneration, rebuilding or renewal. This has now been reframed in the neat coinage of Labour policy thinker Andrew Adonis as the creation of “city villages”. Adonis, a senior policy chief and minister under prime ministers Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, has co-edited a collection of essays on the theme for the Institute for Public Policy Research. He wants building city villages to be “a new urban movement”, which he contends could go a long way to solving the housing shortage, especially in London.That is item number one on a long, forbidding list of problems with what is variously, sometimes euphemistically, called estate regeneration, rebuilding or renewal. This has now been reframed in the neat coinage of Labour policy thinker Andrew Adonis as the creation of “city villages”. Adonis, a senior policy chief and minister under prime ministers Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, has co-edited a collection of essays on the theme for the Institute for Public Policy Research. He wants building city villages to be “a new urban movement”, which he contends could go a long way to solving the housing shortage, especially in London.
Under Adonis’s plans, many hundreds of estates across the capital containing low density housing and high percentages of people who aren’t very well off would be replaced with higher density “socially-mixed, multi-tenure housing” and better amenities which would create “better communities” too. He stresses as key principles that this “densification” or “intensification” should result in no reduction in the amount of social housing on the sites and give existing residents the option to move into one of the new homes. Like London politicians of several shades, he looks across the city and sees precious, local authority-owned, investment-friendly space underused by often shoddy, badly laid out properties cut off from their surrounding neighbourhoods. Redeveloping these along the lines he desires seems to him a clear win-win.Under Adonis’s plans, many hundreds of estates across the capital containing low density housing and high percentages of people who aren’t very well off would be replaced with higher density “socially-mixed, multi-tenure housing” and better amenities which would create “better communities” too. He stresses as key principles that this “densification” or “intensification” should result in no reduction in the amount of social housing on the sites and give existing residents the option to move into one of the new homes. Like London politicians of several shades, he looks across the city and sees precious, local authority-owned, investment-friendly space underused by often shoddy, badly laid out properties cut off from their surrounding neighbourhoods. Redeveloping these along the lines he desires seems to him a clear win-win.
Adonis is no dunce. He’s an impressive man in many ways. In parts, the arguments he marshals are persuasive, but in others they are credulous and incomplete. The pros of estate regeneration are expounded in some detail, complete with case studies from Southwark and Hackney. But though some of the main cons are acknowledged and addressed, they aren’t given enough weight.Adonis is no dunce. He’s an impressive man in many ways. In parts, the arguments he marshals are persuasive, but in others they are credulous and incomplete. The pros of estate regeneration are expounded in some detail, complete with case studies from Southwark and Hackney. But though some of the main cons are acknowledged and addressed, they aren’t given enough weight.
The most alarming thing about City Villages is that Gary Yardley, managing director of property giant Capital and Counties (Capco) is given space to advertise the Earls Court Project, a huge and widely-opposed redevelopment scheme cooked up with the now ousted Conservative administration of Hammersmith and Fulham Council (H&F), the most right wing local authority regime the capital has seen since the days of Shirley Porter and a big favourite of Eric Pickles. David Cameron and Boris Johnson. The project as a whole, whose value Capco puts at £12bn, has already led to the closure of the historic Earls Court exhibition centre and envisages the destruction of 760 homes on two adjoining estates against the wishes of the vast majority of residents. Replacements have been promised but the amount of additional (only relatively) affordable housing pledged is pitifully low. The most alarming thing about City Villages is that Gary Yardley, managing director of property giant Capital and Counties (Capco) is given space to advertise the Earls Court Project, a huge and widely-opposed redevelopment scheme cooked up with the now ousted Conservative administration of Hammersmith and Fulham Council (H&F), the most right wing local authority regime the capital has seen since the days of Shirley Porter and a big favourite of Eric Pickles, David Cameron and Boris Johnson. The project as a whole, whose value Capco puts at £12bn, has already led to the closure of the historic Earls Court exhibition centre and envisages the destruction of 760 homes on two adjoining estates against the wishes of the vast majority of residents. Replacements have been promised but the amount of additional (only relatively) affordable housing pledged is pitifully low.
Among those attending the City Villages launch on Tuesday evening was PR man Chris Rumfitt, a Labour Party member and formerly part of Blair’s Number 10 press office. He has led Capco’s extensive spin operation in support of the Earls Court scheme, which will colonise the area for speculators, drain it of life and should be treated with grave suspicion by every Labour politician. Adonis is supporting fellow former Labour minister Tessa Jowell’s bid to become London’s next mayor. Jowell, who was one of Blair’s most loyal colleagues, is the bookies’ favourite to succeed Boris Johnson in 2016. As H&F’s new Labour leadership is trying to rescue the threatened estates, more than one Labour mayoral hopeful has been the subject of Capco lobbying over Earls Court. It’s all rather worrying. City Villages was launched at the Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) on Tuesday. A visitor to RIBA spotted that evening by opponents of the estates’ possible demolition demonstrating outside was PR man Chris Rumfitt, a Labour Party member and formerly part of Blair’s Number 10 press office. Rumfitt, who was actually attending a separate event at the same venue, has been a significant figure in the Earls Court story. He’s led Capco’s extensive spin operation in support of the scheme, which will colonise the area for speculators, drain it of life and should be treated with grave suspicion by every Labour politician. Adonis is supporting fellow former Labour minister Tessa Jowell’s bid to become London’s next mayor. Jowell, who was one of Blair’s most loyal colleagues, is the bookies’ favourite to succeed Johnson in 2016. As H&F’s new Labour leadership is trying to rescue the threatened estates, more than one Labour mayoral hopeful has been the subject of Capco lobbying over Earls Court. It’s all rather worrying.
On the plus side, City Villages takes on some of the head-bending housing supply issues that much of London’s current, high-profile, oppositional housing activism hasn’t much to say about. Many call for more social housing, but don’t say where it should be built or how it would be paid for (the thing about council-owned land is that it doesn’t have to be bought). They want more money spent on the refurbishment of often poorly constructed estates, but don’t say which other council tenants should get a smaller slice of shrinking council budgets as a result. On the plus side, City Villages takes on some of the head-bending housing supply issues that much of London’s current, high-profile, oppositional housing activism hasn’t much to say about. Many call for more social housing, but don’t say where it should be built or how it would be paid for (the thing about council-owned land is that it doesn’t have to be bought from someone else). They want more money spent on the refurbishment of often poorly constructed estates, but don’t say which other council tenants should get a smaller slice of shrinking council budgets as a result.
They denounce “poor doors” as segregationist, but don’t consider that without those doors the homes behind them wouldn’t exist. Sometimes developers offer cash for larger quantities of “affordable” homes built on a separate site. They are against that too. If people don’t want existing inner London council sites disturbed at all, perhaps they’d sooner cheaper homes were built in the suburbs or out in the Home Counties instead. But, hang on, wouldn’t that be “social cleansing” or “exporting the poor”? They denounce “poor doors” as segregationist, but don’t consider that without those doors the homes behind them wouldn’t exist. Sometimes developers offer cash for larger quantities of “affordable” homes built on a separate site. Activists are against that too. If people don’t want existing inner London council sites disturbed at all, perhaps they’d sooner cheaper homes were built in the suburbs or out in the Home Counties instead. But, hang on, wouldn’t that be “social cleansing” or “exporting the poor”?
The City Villages essays include contributions from London borough leaders who’ve travelled down Regeneration Road. These are useful, but tend to talk down the problems they’ve run into on the way. The IPPR’s Bill Davies, Adonis’s co-editor, acknowledges important findings of a recent London Assembly report (which I wrote about here). This showed that recent estate regenerations have resulted in significant net losses of social rented homes on individual sites – the opposite of what both Adonis and Jowell say they want. As the Assembly heard from expert witnesses, when private developers are involved in regeneration schemes their progress becomes dependent on the state of the market and at risk from the erosion of original “affordable” commitments when developers plead “viability”. There are examples of that all over town. Adonis sees the problem. How would he solve it, though? The City Villages essays include contributions from London borough leaders who’ve travelled down Regeneration Road. These are useful, but unsurprisingly tend to talk down the problems they’ve run into on the way. The IPPR’s Bill Davies, Adonis’s co-editor, acknowledges important findings of a recent London Assembly report (which I wrote about here). This showed that recent estate regenerations have resulted in significant net losses of social rented homes on individual sites – the opposite of what both Adonis and Jowell say they want. As the Assembly heard from expert witnesses, when private developers are involved in regeneration schemes their progress becomes dependent on the state of the market and at risk from the erosion of original “affordable” commitments when developers plead “viability”. There are examples of that all over town. Adonis sees the problem. How would he solve it, though?
Davies echoes the Assembly in noting major concerns about engagement with estate residents and the vital need for trust and transparency. He recognises too that serious damage can be done by uprooting families and disrupting informal community networks - the very social fabric of a place - and that the financial complexities of redeveloping estates are daunting. A comprehensive snag list, though, would also include the failure of promises made at the start of such schemes to be kept as politicians and policies as well as market conditions change, the exhaustingly long time regenerations with all their associated disruptions can take to complete and a recognition that using planning policy to create “mixed communities” may not produce the social benefits that politicians across the mainstream spectrum seem to so uncritically assume. In some cases, the pursuit of mix has been used to dignify the unacceptable. Again, see Earls Court.Davies echoes the Assembly in noting major concerns about engagement with estate residents and the vital need for trust and transparency. He recognises too that serious damage can be done by uprooting families and disrupting informal community networks - the very social fabric of a place - and that the financial complexities of redeveloping estates are daunting. A comprehensive snag list, though, would also include the failure of promises made at the start of such schemes to be kept as politicians and policies as well as market conditions change, the exhaustingly long time regenerations with all their associated disruptions can take to complete and a recognition that using planning policy to create “mixed communities” may not produce the social benefits that politicians across the mainstream spectrum seem to so uncritically assume. In some cases, the pursuit of mix has been used to dignify the unacceptable. Again, see Earls Court.
The most notable absence from City Villages is the direct perspective of estate residents themselves, the people who would be most profoundly affected if Adonis’s urban movement gathered pace – the ones whose homes would be knocked down as it progressed. Hard line opponents of estate redevelopment tend to romanticise these as seamless, monochrome communities united in resistance, but there is always a spectrum of views. This can include a readiness to accept and even help bring about major change if people believe they have serious power over the process and that they and their friends and families will benefit. Estate regeneration involves complex balance sheet which isn’t only about units and finance. If the wishes of residents aren’t fully represented there, the losses can too easily outweigh the gains. The most notable absence from City Villages is the direct perspective of estate residents themselves, the people who would be most profoundly affected if Adonis’s urban movement gathered pace – the ones whose homes would be knocked down as it progressed. Hard line opponents of estate redevelopment tend to romanticise these as seamless, monochrome communities united in resistance, but there is always a spectrum of views. This can include a readiness to accept and even help bring about major change if people believe they have serious power over the process and that they and their friends and families will benefit. Estate regeneration involves a complex balance sheet which isn’t only about units and finance. If the interests of residents aren’t fully represented there, the losses can too easily outweigh the gains.
Update, 0835: This article originally said that Chris Rumfitt attended the launch of City Villages at RIBA. He has since told me he was attending a separate event at the same venue and I’ve amended the text accordingly.