planningandheritage.files.wordpress.com… · Web view · 2015-10-032015-10-03 · This paper...

JPI - JHEP JOINT PILOT TRANSNATIONAL CALL

for Joint Projects on Cultural Heritage

3rd Briefing Paper of SHUC Project, UKPaul Cowie & John Pendlebury

1. Introduction

As outlined in work-package 2, the three UK case studies vary in terms of their physical appearance, their relationship to the wider city and their socio-cultural history. They have also experienced the recent economic crisis in different ways. This paper seeks to analyse how each city reacted to the changed socio-economic and political changes during the course of the economic crisis and to explore the possibility of learning policy and practice lessons from their experiences.

What all three UK case studies have in common is the challenge of managing private assets, in relation to the physical stock of buildings, whilst at the same time managing the common cultural identity of the historic core. This mixture of public and private goods centred on a specific geographical location has been defined as a ‘club good’ (Buchanan, 1965). A club good sits between pure private goods and pure public goods and offers a valuable framework to approach the management of a city’s historic urban core.i

Historic city centres are faced with challenges presented by the forces of globalisation and neo-liberalism. The fabric of historic buildings is not always suitable for modern commercial practice. They face competition as a retail destination with out-of-town shopping malls and the internet. Buildings maybe difficult to modernise and struggle to conform to the modern imperative to be environmentally sustainable. What they do possess, however, is a strong common socio-cultural identity which can attract visitors and commercial activity if managed in a suitable way.

What research in this field has shown is that the relationship and embeddedness of various institutional actors is crucial to the success or otherwise of the club good. First there needs to be a clear statutory framework which sets the parameters; in the case of the historic core this is provided by the planning system. This is twofold: statutory protection for historic building through the listing system and development management through the hierarchical planning system headed by the National Planning Policy Framework and cascading down to neighbourhood planning via local

1



development plans. This patchwork of laws and plans provides the framework within which the institutional actors must operate.

Within this statutory framework these actors need to work at the local level to effectively manage the club good. The UK case studies offer a number of models for approaching this issue. In Norwich, Norwich HEART is an independent organisation which coordinates the promotion of the city as a tourism destination. It uses a mix of physical development and brand promotion to achieve its aims. An alternative model can be found in Newcastle with the Granger Town Partnership. This was a well-resourced time-limited institution tasked with reinvigorating the historic core of the city though reuse of historic buildings, public realm improvements and destination marketing. In York, the York Conservation Trust is owner of a substantial amount of historic property giving direct control over these historic assets.

The three UK case studies therefore offer an interesting contrast in approach to the problem of managing the historic urban core as a club good. There are opportunities for management of the area through the formal planning process, being involved in developing statutory plans or actively challenging planning decisions as is perhaps most strongly developed in the case of York. The civic institutions in Norwich and especially Newcastle, whilst still active in development issues within their cities, have less formal approaches to management of the historic urban core. They have both used a partnership approach to proactively manage the historic brand of the cities but for different purposes in each case. In Norwich the club good has been used as a means of promoting the city as a tourism destination whilst in Newcastle it has previously been used to further the ideals of an ‘urban renaissance’ approach to regeneration, although a more recent project, ‘Old Newcastle’ is more focused on tourism and heritage interpretation. In both cases there has been physical development to foster a particular cultural identity for the area, usually centred upon public realm works and public art. In addition there have been more intangible efforts to create a brand for the area through events, advertising and other external promotional efforts. In contrast York has adopted more of a ‘conserve it and they will come’ philosophy. Substantial and sustained effort has been directed to preservation of the key historic buildings and activities which create an environment whereby development will take root. There have been direct interventions to redevelop historic areas by the York Conservation Trust, but these seem to have been conducted to further the purposes of the trust with little coordination with wider place based efforts to manage the area. However, in parallel there have been substantial and sustained efforts to improve the public realm led by the City Council, including extensive pedestrianisation.

2



2. Mapping of trajectories in each town.

2a. SWOT analysis

Strengths

York Limited impact from economic crisis – York has weathered the financial crisis much better than other northern cities.

Very strong heritage institutions both in terms of finance and capacity – There are several significant independent heritage institutions in York, including York Civic Trust and York Conservation Trust. York Civic Trust has significant capacity to hold the local authority to account in relation to proposed developments affecting the historic urban core with the Conservation Trust taking a more direct approach to conservation. Both have a degree of financial independence which allows them to employ experts in the field to challenge other bodies on a highly professional and technical level. The financial independence also allows them to maintain a degree of separation with the local authority and challenge them without fear of repercussions.

As well as being key actors in the planning and management of the historic urban core York Civic Trust plays a significant role in physically maintain the building in the city. The York Conservation Trust owns a significant proportion of the historic buildings (currently 85 properties generating £1.9M in income) in the city and continues to be active in their conservation and future use.

Well established culture heritage brand – York has layers and layers of history woven into its historic core. There are a significant number of key buildings and areas within York, the Minster, the Shambles and the Roman Walls which are world famous. York also benefits from having excellent rail connections and a significant population within the wider region as potential tourists and shoppers, including the major city of Leeds.

Newcastle Partnership Working - There is a history of successful partnership working to generate sustainable development within the historic core of the city.

Regional Centre –Newcastle has a function as the regional capital for the surrounding area. This gives Newcastle a critical mass in terms of development as it is the obvious location for certain retail and commercial activity, albeit the regional

3



economy is relatively weak.

Norwich Regional Centre – Norwich has a function as the regional capital for the surrounding area. This gives Norwich a critical mass in terms of development as it is the obvious location for certain retail and commercial activity.

Established Civic Institutions - Norwich, like York has a range of active civic institutions devoted to the preservation and development of the historic urban core.

Common Independent civic institutions – The independent institutions in all three case studies, although slightly different in terms of their constitution and financial strength, offer a solid base on which to develop the future strategy for the historic urban cores.

Weaknesses

York Changing shopping patterns – The retail core of the city is being undermined by continuing out-of-town retail development and congestion problems for people seeking to shop and visit in the city centre.

Coordination of action – There is a lack of cooperation in the approach of the various institutional actors with an interest in the historic urban core. Whilst the system operates well through a system of checks and balances in relation to the formal planning process there is potential for more pro-active cooperation to manage the area holistically.

Newcastle Scope of Influence The historic core of the city is only a minor element in the overall built area of the city. There are several separate areas of historical interest within the city so a unified approach is not always possible. There is a chance the voice of the historic core is lost in the various competing discourses on the future of the city.

Weakness of NE economy: The NE economy continues to lag behind the rest of England. Whilst this does reduce development pressure it also does put historic buildings at risk through neglect and underuse.

Norwich Disconnected from National Economy – Whilst Norwich acts as a strong regional centre it is disconnected from the wider south east. This means it may lose out further to Greater London as London continues to expand.

Common Ability to have an impact - In all three case studies, to varying degrees, the fragmented ownership and control over the historic urban core means address future challenges requires significant

4



partnership working. The public realm often provides the focus for this partnership action.

All three cities have been affected by austerity measures, but this is most pronounced in Newcastle.

Opportunities

York Affordable property – The lack of private sector investment in property has provided an opportunity for both the Council and Heritage Institutions to acquire property at a reasonable price. This further consolidates physical control over the build fabric of the city by the public and third sectors.

Strong heritage brand – York has a wealth of world renowned heritage assets which attracts both visitors and residents to the city. It is also compact and well connected in terms of transport infrastructure which also enhances its prospects.

Newcastle Strong retail identity – Newcastle city core has retained and enhanced its role as a retail destination. This has been helped by improvements to the public realm within the historic areas within Grainger Town.

Business Improvement District status – The area has now been granted BID status and whilst at the present time there is not a great deal of focus on the historic fabric of the area this could be changed in the future.

Temporary use of vacant buildings – Projects such as the Late Shows and the Tyneside Cinema’s pop-up cinema school has diversified the culture activity within the core by temporarily using vacant properties.

Norwich Focus on culture and arts based regeneration The regeneration of the historic urban core has been linked to opportunities to develop a cultural and arts based economy in these areas. There are synergies between the two aspects of the historic urban core.

Developing alternative funding strategies: Norwich HEART is a good example of a cultural heritage organisation that has been able to adapt to the new climate of austerity. It has tapped into new funding streams directly by taking over the running of a café and supplying services to the Local University. It has also been able to tap into alternative grant funding, for example the UK Treasury’s ‘Invest to save’ program to continue their heritage preservation and promotion work.

Common Positive demographic trends – growing populations in all three cities offer opportunities to repurpose historic buildings

5



for residential use as exemplified by the homes over shops programme in York.

Localism agenda - Whilst not perfect, the localism provisions in planning do offer opportunities for innovative planning solutions to some of the problems facing the historic urban core

Links with Higher Education - In all three case study cities Higher Education Institutions play a significant role in the cultural and economic life of the city. These institutions have the potential to repurpose historic buildings in a sympathetic way. There is also the potential for HE institutions to help in providing intellectual support to the institutions involved in the historic urban core.

Threats

York Out of town development - The role of the city centre as a shopping destination is being undermined by retail development around the city edge. This is likely to weaken the resilience of the city centre as it becomes more reliant on the tourism sector to generate growth.

Overconsumption of historic assets – As the economy recovers increased visitor pressure on the historic core is likely. This may harm other functions of the city such as it retail or commercial function.

Newcastle Devolution weakens the prominence of the historic urban core – As the devolution agenda gathers pace regional spatial strategies may establish priorities that are challenging for the historic core.

Norwich Vulnerability of civic institutions- Institutions such as HEART rely on grant funding on an ongoing basis. In times of austerity this may not always be avaiable. Other civic institutions such as Norwich Preservation Trust have a model of recycling funds from the development and resale of historic properties. This is very much dependent on the state of the property market.

Common Continuing development pressures - With the election of a majority conservative government it is likely the development pressures will intensify. The previously governments ‘Plan for Growth’ (HM Treasury/BIS, 2011) give local Councils a clear agenda which stated that “local planning authorities and other bodies involved in granting development consents should prioritise growth and jobs.” (2011: 43). This drive for growth and jobs is only likely to intensify under the present government.

6



Continuing austerity - Coupled with the pressure to facilitate development outlined above local authorities are also faced with continuing austerity and funding cuts. This increases the pressure on Councils to capitalise on their land holdings as a means of generating income on the one hand and has reduced capacity to manage heritage assets through the planning system on the other.

Technological and societal changes – All three cities act, to varying degrees, as retail and service centres within their locality. This could be under threat from further development in online shopping and service delivery.

Fragmented approach to cultural assets: As local authorities face continued budget cuts staff responsible for the build cultural heritage are often those facing the biggest cuts. As management of the historic core cuts across a number of departments loss of this capacity not has direct effects it also has secondary affects in terms of coordination of effort between the various silos.

2b. Future policy trajectory

In the UK there are two dominant macro-political discourses which arguably will have a significant impact in the management of the historic urban core. The first is the continuing austerity drive from the current Conservative government. Local Authorities are likely to bear a significant proportion of the budget cuts over the next 5 years. The impact of this is likely to be a further pressure to manage local authority assets to generate income or capital. It has also reduced the number of planning officers within local authorities dedicated to heritage assets. This reduces capacity to take a proactive approach and has a knock on affect on the ability to influence other areas of the local authority, for example highways and economic development, which are likely to play a role in the management of the historic urban core and weakens their ability to effectively administer core statutory regulation functions.

There is also likely to be a continuation of the drive for growth and jobs. One way this is to be achieved is through continued relaxation on planning restrictions. The Governments 2011 ‘Plan for Growth’ outlined their plans in this area. Planning was highlighted as one of the significant barriers to growth:

“The restrictiveness of the planning system also overly restricts the supply of land, increasing costs to individuals and businesses. …..For example, planning costs imposed on business are nearly ten times larger in the West End of

7



London than in Brussels and more than double those in Paris” (HM Treasury/BIS, 2011: 43)

With a Conservative majority government this direction of travel is likely to continue as well as their insistence that:

“…the default answer to development and growth should be ‘yes’, except where this would compromise the key sustainable development principles set out in national planning policy.” (ibid: 44)

At the present time it is not clear how far this development-orientated approach to planning will impact on the management of the historic environment.

The second major policy discourse is that around the devolution of powers away from central government down to the regional and local level. This offers a number of opportunities for those seeking to manage the historic urban core. The devolution of economic development powers and finance could allow a much more strategic approach to managing historic areas. It was clear from the Norwich case study that the initial stability of funding through the former regional development agency for Norwich HEART was crucial to its initial success. The new devolved model may again allow longer term stability in projects of this type.

Another facet of greater devolution can be found in neighbourhood planning. This hyper-local form of statutory planning offers opportunities to create institutional structures that combine the public, private and third sectors in the management of historic urban areas. They are the first form of statutory planning which allows businesses and other none governmental institutions to participate directly in the development of local plans. Other research has found that this type of local planning process builds local civic capacity and understanding between often competing local interests (Cowie et al, 2015). This type of local civic capacity can be difficult to create and even harder to maintain.

The UK case studies have demonstrated three different approaches to this problem of civic capacity. In Newcastle the management was through partnership working; in Norwich and York civic capacity was provided by third sector organisations although the two models have some differences. In York civic institutions act as a counterbalance to the local authority by directly controlling property in one case and through advocacy and political pressure in another. This can be contrasted with the Norwich model of partnership working on a project by project basis. As outlined in the SWOT analysis in section 2a each of these approaches has their benefits and downsides. All three case studies had institutions which played a strong role in managing the historic core. However

8



what each of them lacked is long term capacity and strategic governance ability. It could be possible to achieve this long term strategic governance through the opportunities afforded by neighbourhood planning; i.e. a neighbourhood plan or neighbourhood development order. In all the UK case study examples there has been a lack of coordinated action over the longer term. In the case of Norwich and Newcastle initiatives were time-limited whilst in the case of York there was long term civic capacity but it was not always coordinated with other initiatives. In the longer term the issues facing historic areas need long term and coordinated strategic governance.

Strong strategic planning is needed as there needs to be a clear understanding of what the role of the historic urban core should fulfil in the future. There are a number of options available as demonstrated by the case studies. One strategy for cities with a high value historic environment has been to promote growth through tourism. This may work well for cities which are dominated by their urban core but less well for cities within which the core represents only a small part of the overall built environment. A second role for these cities is as a service centre, in relation to either retail and business services, local government or education, often a combination of all three. These service centre roles for the historic city are bound up with the wider regional economy and their relationship to other urban and rural areas.

Finally the historic core pays a role in the housing market. As has often been mentioned the UK, more particularly England, is in the midst of a housing crisis. Not enough housing is being developed to satisfy the growing demand for housing. One of the ways this is being tackled is through relaxation in the planning rules which allow commercial premises to be converted to residential property. This could further increase the availability of residential property within the historic urban core but could pose conservation problems as developers seek to adapt buildings to their new use. In the case of Norwich and Newcastle some of the demand for housing is being driven by the student market. Students are perhaps the ideal urban residents and the student economy is relatively protected from wider economic downturn so using the historic urban care for student accommodation seems a sensible step.

All three of these potential future functions of the historic urban core need a coordinated approach to the management of the place as a ‘club good’. That is a coordinated and strategic management approach to the private property, public space, infrastructure serving the core and the cultural identity of the place. This needs to be undertaken not in isolation but coordination with wider socio-economic development in the locality and region. An example of this in practice

9



is in the Irish example, the Built Heritage Jobs Leverage Scheme. As educational budgets are likely to be devolved to regional governance institutions there is a need for these types of schemes to be pushed up the agenda. Otherwise the dominant discourse of skills for a knowledge economy may continue to dominate the policy agenda at the expense of skills and training needed to support the historic environment.

The next section builds on the findings of this section to outline policy ideas that may be applicable more widely in the management of the historic urban core.

3. Policy transfer assessment Developing a strong and inclusive local governance structure

As has been highlighted in the SWOT analysis above the fragmented planning and landownership structure of historic urban cores requires strong partnership working. Each of the three case study cities offer an alternative model for how this can be managed. York, with its strong civic institutions has the City Council taking the lead on strategic planning. Its decisions are then held to account by the civic institutions who have the necessary expertise to do so. In Newcastle the situation has been more reactive. Partnerships have been formed to respond to specific challenges. The Grainger Town Partnership was established to tackle the problem of reusing historic building in the city centre as well as the poor quality public realm. The issue with this model is the lack of continuity, once the problem has been ‘solved’ the partnership dissolves and the social and human capital is lost. Norwich has similarities to both Newcastle and York. In common with York the historic core dominates the city and as such features prominently in strategic planning documents. However it also shares Newcastle’s slightly fragile institutional pattern. For example, HEART is a largely self-financing institution and as such is vulnerable to the continuing austerity in the public sector.

Ensure the needs of historic urban cores are recognised in regional strategies.

In all three case studies the historic urban core is reliant on its surrounding city and the wider region to support its economy. This is particularly the case with York and Norwich where the historic urban core represents the greater part of the urban environment. This is less pronounced in the case of Newcastle. However in all three case studies the historic urban cores have developed strategies that rely on them being centres of commercial and cultural activity.

As devolution once again gains ground in England there is a risk that these strategies could be subsumed within wider regional spatial policy which has a

10



different set of agendas. An example of this is the focus on smart specialisation and the knowledge economy in many emerging regional strategies. This type of strategy privileges technological innovation and the growth agenda. Whilst it is possible this policy direction could offer opportunities to the historic urban core it could also put it at a disadvantage when competing for investment and support.

4. Conclusions

As the case study cities continue to recover from the economic downturn they are facing a new reality. Local government is much weaker than before the recession. Civic institutions in two out of the three case study cities are less resilient than they were. With the economic recovery come the return of development pressures within the historic urban core. The challenge is how to ensure the development does not degrade the historic environment at a time when there is less institutional capacity to monitor and challenge development proposals.

York is perhaps the best placed to do this. It survived the downturn relatively unscathed. It also has strong and independent civic institutions able to hold the planning authority and developers to account. Newcastle and Norwich have similar civic institutions but they lack similar levels of capacity.

One possible solution for these historic urban cores is to manage them as ‘club goods’. This would provide a framework around which a vision for the future can be built. Norwich has in effect created something similar through HEART and programs such as ‘Norwich 12’ which sought to create a unified brand from a slightly disparate set of buildings and the Norwich 2035 report (The Norwich Society 2014). Creating a club good requires the historic core’s to establish what their principle purpose is and place in the wider city and region. Do they act as tourist honeypots? Or are they seeking to be the primary retail and commercial centres for their hinterland? How can the cultural capital possessed by the historic urban cores be utilised in the delivery of such a vision? How can they connect with and develop strong relationships with other civic institutions in their area such as local Universities?

11



References

Bowen, S. (2011) The Importance of Place: Re-Territorialising Embededdness. Sociologia Ruralis Vol. 51(4) 325-348

Buchanan, J. M. (1965). An economic theory of clubs. Economica, Vol 32(125). 1-14.

Cowie, P., Vigar, G., Davoudi, S. & Madanipour, A. (2015) Hyper-local planning: territorial governance at the neighbourhood scale. In eds. Schmitt, P. & Van-Well, L. Territorial Governance across Europe – Pathways, Practices and Prospects. Routledge: London (In press)

HM Treasury/ Department for Business Innovation and Skills (2011) The Plan for Growth London: HMSO

The Norwich Society (2014) Norwich 2035: A strategy for the City Centre. [Available from http://www.thenorwichsociety.co.uk/pdfs/City%20centre%20strategy%20final%20(rev%203.10)%20.pdf] (Date accessed 24.7.15)

Torre, A. (2006) Collective action, governance structure and organizational trust in localized systems of production. The case of the AOC organization of small producers. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development Vol.18(1) 55-72

12

http://www.thenorwichsociety.co.uk/pdfs/City%20centre%20strategy%20final%20(rev%203.10)%20.pdf

http://www.thenorwichsociety.co.uk/pdfs/City%20centre%20strategy%20final%20(rev%203.10)%20.pdf

i A good example of a club good being managed in a similar way to a historic urban core is the Appellation d’Origine Contrôlée (AOCs, Designation of Controlled Origin). These are statutory designations for an area of production. Within the AOC private producers collaborate with each other and state institutions to manage a particular good (Torre, 2006). In the case of AOCs there is a legislative foundation that sets out the broad governance arrangements for AOCs in general with the specific rules and practices for each individual AOC being established within the local networks within the geographical location. Primarily these designations protect a particular product and its brand name, the best known examples being Champagne or Comte cheese (Bowen, 2011). As well as a particular brand name, these rules often also seek to protect the particular socio-cultural traits of the product, the methods, scale and location of production, as a means of challenging the dominant agenda of globalisation and neo-liberalism (Bowen, 2011).

planningandheritage.files.wordpress.com… · Web view · 2015-10-032015-10-03 · This paper...

Documents

Transcript of planningandheritage.files.wordpress.com… · Web view · 2015-10-032015-10-03 · This paper...