July 2011 Archives

At the behest of the great Alex "it was food poisoning, honest guv" Tosetti, we in UKR found ourselves writing a letter of support this week for URS Scott Wilson and Foster & Partners concerning their idea to incorporate a utility network within the proposed HS2 rail corridor. This concept has three positive implications.  First, it could radically (and positively) change the funding mechanism for HS2. Second, it would create socio-economic growth along the corridor route. And third, it could lead the global market for integrated transport and utility networks.
 
This splendid idea supports the fundamental issues of sustainable development whilst dealing with critical infrastructure and future proofing networks. But as Alex is the first to admit, there are many questions that need clarification. 

The idea is to set up a leadership team to take this idea forward in September to get some more meat on the bones in order to present further compelling evidence by November to DfT that this idea is deliverable, before the Secretary of State for Transport's post-consultation announcement.  The intention is to get provision for this included within the parliamentary Bill going forward.  So we all hope that the government agrees with us, that this concept certainly warrants further scrutiny. 

I'm sorry if I went a bit quiet on you all there.  I was stricken with a virus (this makes it sound rather grand but it was only a common cold really.  I'm always suffused with righteous indignation when I catch a cold in July, am I alone here? Just doesn't seem right somehow) which has curbed productivity more than somewhat over the last few days.

 I also now (in common with every working mother of teenagers, I guess) seem to be running a doss house for adolescents and young adults over the summer, meaning I cannot move round my house for tripping over some scantily clad youf under a duvet (and not always one to whom I've been introduced!). This makes gentle-working-from-home-quietly-sipping-vitamin-C-drinks (the normal methodology for keeping up with the in-tray when feeling a bit under the weather) almost impossible.  There is no escape, really.  So I've been dragging myself into the UKR office, whilst blowing hot and cold, as being preferable to staying home and having to survey my wrecked kitchen, with every crock and utensil dirty, and baked beans all over the floor.  
 
Thus I can't pretend I am my normal self really, and I do apologise to you all for being somewhat on the missing list.  I'm also rather busy with UKR Projects Fund as you may imagine, which gives some credence to the old adage that the world is divided into two types of person: those who do things, and those who write about them.  I may fancy myself as superwoman (I'm "the Whirlwind", remember) but this last week I have found it very hard to be both people. 
 

Curtin & Co (the political and community consultation specialists) held an event at the House of Commons a couple of weeks ago, and my very good mate Aonghus Curtin was kind enough to send me the ensuing press release. C&C always do well in attracting good speakers and this occasion was no exception. It had the redoubtable Angela Knight CBE, the chief executive of the British Bankers Association to speak to its client group of property developers and planners. It seems to have been a huge success if, perhaps, neglecting to present much in the way of real solutions.

 Ms Knight was clearly in bullish mode, maintaining that UK banks are in a much stronger position to lend again than in the past three years. She said that banks were operating in a tough market (something of an understatement, I think you'll agree), but the UK's biggest lenders were better placed than their European Counterparts (whew! That's a relief then, given the circs in Greece and Portugal!). Needless to say, senior executives in the housebuilding industry who were present raised their usual concerns (bleats) over the ability of banks to release capital for future development, as well as the difficult mortgage market. And in response, Ms Knight acknowledged the need for greater mortgage lending, stating there were "no immediate answers but that thinking was under way". Addressing the criteria for lending, Ms Knight said that banks would lend at a "fixed percentage of the firesale value", but highlighted the need for closer co-operation between banks and businesses in their quest to secure further finance.

Modesty nearly forbade me from drawing your attention to the article about UKR in the Evening Standard on Friday evening.  But I soon got over it!
 
I was so just pleased! Do take a look and you will laugh.  The great Peter Bill, our own "Reality Check" Peter, has written up our UKR Projects mission, describing the three of us founding partners as "The Whirlwind" (me) "The Brains" (Dr Evans, but of course) and "The Outsider" (Jason Blain).  This has got us pretty well banged to rights and, moreover, as someone said later, "it makes you sound like cartoon super-hero characters," which is completely thrilling and absolutely fits with our self-image as being involved in some sort of old fashioned morality tale in our mission. 
 
Dr Evans said, in his usual phlegmatic way, "I cannot imagine who described me as "The Brains", I am going to get square glasses and a Thunderbird model." And then he sent us all a picture of Brains from "Thunderbirds" (very uncharacteristic this latter, so I think you can take it he was pleased).  Jason wrote a note to Peter Bill saying, "I have always struggled to define my contribution in business!", basically thanking him for giving him this new identity.  And I got a lot of messages of support: Ian Lindsay wrote to say, "Whirlwind, huh! You're more like a tornado in my experience." (Actually, I don't know what the difference is.) And people were generally delighted and entertained.   

We had a great UKR Breakfast Briefing last week with the lovely Peter Bishop and Rachel Fisher of the Design Council.   Following the Government's decision to merge CABE as a charitable body (rather than a quango) within the Design Council, the host together with CLG have commissioned Peter (now man-at-large of course, having recently escaped from the LDA) to undertake a wide ranging review of CABE's activities.  Rather crucial this, given that it will have around a tenth of its previous capacity, in terms of both people and money.

CLG have only underwritten funding for CABE for another two years so Peter is to report by the end of July and decisions will need to be made quickly as to the future, if implementation is to kick in by October. Rachel and Peter have undergone an extensive round of consultation meetings throughout the country and are ploughing through large numbers of written submissions.  And seem to be having quite a laugh in the process.

The essential remit for CABE when it was set up was to secure a better built environment than there might have been, without its intervention and support.  And Peter reports that the emerging findings support a strong feeling that CABE, in some form or other, is still needed. As we have rehearsed here ad nauseam, the battle to secure widespread improvement in the quality of development has not yet been won.  Peter was clear that some new approaches must be deployed now though, going well beyond publication of case studies to sharper quantification of the benefits. Everything must be simplified and better focused. As Pierre pointed out so sagaciously "CABE could never have tackled the issue of building design across the country on its own, even with more than 100 staff. It clearly could not do so with fewer than 20".

We've now had the transcripts of the final hearing of the Select Committee on Regeneration last week. Needless to say we've pored over every syllable and we're very happy. Clive Betts has done an admirable job as Committee Chair, in what could have been all doom and gloom. We ended on a very upbeat note.

This is what Grant Shapps said about UKR (ooooh I am so proud): "On Friday we saw a very significant announcement from UK Regeneration of a pilot scheme of £150m, backed by Barclays Capital, which will go to help to regenerate. This is absolutely the kind of thing that we want to see. It is a very exciting development, and very timely considering the work that you are doing."
 
Well, call me a toady if you like, peeps, but gawd bless that minister! I'll touch the hem of his garment any day.  He went on to say: "UK Regeneration have a network, they help to promote the lessons learned. They publish a very good bi-weekly newsletter that you should all get hold of.  And they are saying that they have the potential to regenerate 20,000 homes by 2020."
 

There was a very damning piece by Simon Jenkins on localism in last night's Evening Standard.  He thinks it is "hokum".  Well, I'm not sure that I agree with him, at least in a regeneration context, where localism has, it would seem to me, at least begun to take root in hearts and minds.  
 
Having said that, the notion of the "Big Society" seems to have gone away somewhat.  I guess localism is a rare example of an ideology totally shared by both parties in the Coalition, whereas "Big Society" is ...er...a little more whimsical and abstruse in nature.  [Is it true that on Newsnight some months ago, one of the interviewees, when asked what Big Society is, replied "Is it obesity?".  Oh I do hope it is true; it is priceless, if so.]
 
Big Society was also a casualty of the cuts in the earlier part of this year.  It was a complete gift for those grandstanders against government cutbacks in the wake of the Budget (for example, the likes of Suzie Leather "on behalf of" the voluntary sector, Cllr Joe Anderson of Liverpool City Council, Merseyside television producer Phil Redmond, Dame Elisabeth Hoodless of the Community Service Volunteers, not forgetting most of the opposition front bench).  These folk quickly got the shtick of "Big Society is merely a smoke screen for cuts" down to a fine art.  This was a most unholy alliance and they all missed the point (some of them on purpose).  It was a shame.  The cuts should have been decisively de-coupled from Big Society. I guess there are only so many hours in the day.  

Every so often (well, about half a dozen times a month) something rather terrifying happens: a Bright Young Thing comes to interview me for their university dissertation or thesis. It is seriously alarming; I am the antithesis of a theoretical person, of course (however you would characterise that), and I don't know what these people think I might know. (My strong advice to any youngster seeking a career in urban regeneration would be: run away, run away in the other direction, as quickly and as decisively as you can.) I guess it is rather flattering, but terrifying all the same.
 
Yesterday was no exception as a ferociously bright young man from Newcastle University came in to interview me on the subject of tax increment finance.  I did my best to put him off: I said I was by no means a "true believer" in TIF, tried to fob him off onto Dr Evans (who wasn't having any), pointed to the excess of negative, nay curmudgeonly, commentary on TIF that I'd made in this very blog, sent him to speak to other, more knowledgeable, folk in the industry (aka Cecily Davis of DLA Piper, back from maternity leave and sharper than ever!), said I didn't know anything, and so on and so forth.  But still he wanted to come.  He said he wanted a "dissenting voice." Well, I said, I was certainly that, alright.
 
And the Bright Young Thing was inordinately bright and very charming.  So we had a nice chat.  And I tried to be constructive.  He's doing a PhD next year on regeneration financing (going to Chicago and everything!) and I was suitably enthusiastic for him.  But I am who I am, so I told him that for his UK conclusions he should blank TIFs and LEPs and (the new) EZs (the old ones are worth a look, of course) and instead look closely at the evolving general power of competence for local authorities, and the potential spin-offs in areas such as prudential borrowing. Well I would, wouldn't I?
 

So...the Financial Times on Saturday has had (yet another) pop at Mary Portas, saying: "Big chains' response to what shoppers want will dictate high streets' future - not Mary Portas's review."  The FT's companies editor says that commercial reaction to the way people want to shop will have more power than any overhaul of planning laws.

The newspaper goes on to say that "some chains have taken the hint. Boots, for example, has added surgeries in 13 stores and banks are trying to make branches friendlier".  Well strike a light!  The main thesis of the piece could hardly be construed as a revelation!  And what meagre examples these are to offer us as proof that retail chains are evolving!  I don't know how certain journalists can possibly think that some of these desultory observations in any way constitute a story. But hey - what do I know?  
 
More ominously, though (and of more real news value), Ernst & Young has warned that the cost of stocking stores for Christmas together with (looming quarter-day?) rent bills could force several retailers to collapse, saying that the vulnerable chains were those that had been "hanging on in there" since the recession.
 

I'm not clear at all as to how to report back on the Reg Ward Memorial event held in the West Wintergarden of Canary Wharf the other evening, hosted by Howard Dawber of the Canary Wharf Development Company.  It was quite quite extraordinary and, actually, if the truth be known, I still haven't quite recovered.  I feel rather overwhelmed about it all.
 
They were ALL there, you know: Lords, Ladies, Knights of the Realm, ex-cabinet ministers, mayors, ex-staffers, community leaders, journalists, assorted mad people, Sue Brown and all her devoted girls, Mrs Mop, Uncle Tom Cobbly and all.  And it was all so very fitting, given what an inclusive man Reg was, given his sweet nature, and his lovely manners.  They were all there.  And they all paid tribute.  One of the organisers later described the proceedings as a "Regfest", and that is exactly what it was, really.
 
Here are some snaps of me at the event. In the first picture I'm with the MC for the evening, David Donoghue, ex-head of corporate communications for the LDDC (and my mucker of 25 years). In the second shot I'm with Lorraine, the former LDDC receptionist (and a proper East-Ender) and Carl Hopkins, the man who launched over a thousand CPO orders in the Royal Docks to do the land assembly. (Was it legal? I asked Carl. He said he - a lawyer - and Reg had never bothered to find out!)  Carl is also a mucker and he later helped me with CPO advice at Kent Thameside.


 

It was the final hearing of the Select Committee on Regeneration so we all bowled around to Portcullis House again last night. Pat Ritchie and Richard Hill of the Homes and Communities Agency (HCA) were giving evidence and there was a fascinating exchange between them and the committee on the issues of "market value" of land being put into the regeneration pot. This almost exactly mirrored a discussion (you might even go so far as to call it a spat) that me and Dr Evans had been having in the morning, which was a little spooky. And this discussion is not yet resolved: either between me and Dr Evans, or between the HCA and their various masters (huffs she portentously).

The value of the land, the REAL value of the land - the value to real people, that is, not what the RICS would say - is the single pivot around which flows a multitude of forces in regeneration activity. Naturelment.

I've been a bit overwhelmed by the response I've had to the announcement that we pushed out at the end of last week on UKR projects. And the response has been universally supportive. I knew I had a lot of mates in the industry, but I am truly blown away by the level of kind interest and offers of help that I've received in the last 72 hours. And I would like to thank you all - you all know who you are - for helping. And for having faith in me. And, most importantly, for wanting to help regeneration activity evolve and endure.
 
And the trade press (bless 'em all) have also shown immense interest, and have proven very well informed, and have been hugely supportive.
 
Most journalists really wanted to know what was new about what we were proposing. And I had to retort, well, not very much at all, or at least not in terms of the approach to building things (although there is a very new and sparkly dimension to our appealing direct to consumers by developing a unique brand). We have merely aggregated a series of beneficial interventions in the development process.

I'm trembling a bit this afternoon. It's all very well sitting in wine bars with the likes of Eric Sorensen and Ian Lindsay and Jackie Harding and Paul Warren and [enough already-Ed] saying you're going to change the world but it's quite another thing to find yourself actually trying to do it. We (UK Regeneration) have gone out today to launch our programme of collaboration on new regeneration projects across the UK.  
 
I guess it had to happen. I guess it is all part of the journey. 
 
Our aim is simple: we are seeking to deliver 20,000 new homes by 2020. And a shed load of jobs. And we want to kick-start regeneration. Doesn't sound too difficult when you say it quickly. We're being wonderfully supported by Brenda Jarvis's team over at Barclays Capital and we're working with a big team of strategic partners - in the first phase it is Jones Lang LaSalle, Eversheds, Workspace, Red Box Design Group, and Willmott Dixon, although there is no shortage of opportunities for people to become partners in future phases and they could come on stream very quickly if all goes well.