With spring and an important election (in Wales) approaching there is a whiff of regeneration in the air…
Let’s be honest, if you live in Newport or various parts of Gwent and are reasonably familiar with your home community, then over the years you may have noticed that redevelopment / regeneration comes and goes over the years, in many shapes and formats, in any particular community or town at any given time.
Regeneration schemes will have cleaned areas up, built in cycle routes, created transport plans, pedestrianised streets, reopened them to traffic, re-pedestrianised them and (as is the case in Newport and no doubt elsewhere) made certain streets shared space with both cars and pedestrians (which is actually not as crazy an idea as it sounds, and it actually works) and so on.
In Newport we have seen parking has been restricted, created and removed, made free and charged for, we have seen bus lanes created, removed and been given limited and varied hours all within a few tier software local government.
Now this is all well and good and while it may from time to time reflect the latest trend in regeneration and redevelopment, at the end of the day has it made the places where we live, work, socialise and shop and visit actually any better?
The one question that tends not to be asked, and hence not answered is: Has the regeneration process or scheme increased or generated wealth in our communities or provided people with the opportunities to get jobs, to go into business for themselves or generate wealth?
One of the unintended features of redevelopment is that quite often it can be perceived as being driven from the top down i.e. by elected bodies whether they be County Councils or the Senedd or Westminster government.
Regeneration should never simply be a process that merely consults after the plans have been drawn up - thats not consultation thats simply window dressing.
Real and meaningly consultation should take place before, during and after - any process not run this way runs the real risk of becoming deeply flawed.
Local communities and towns and cities of South Wales have over the years has been the recipient of much grant aid, development and redevelopment schemes and initiatives - how can we measure success?
Measuring a regeneration schemes success should be a key factor in any regeneration scheme.
This is the key question that needs to be asked - after the cement and the paint has dried, after the development / redevelopment / regeneration professionals have banked the cheque and moved on - have the various schemes made a real difference to our communities and our lives.
I mean beyond any immediate physical improvements to the environment, have they made a real difference when it comes to wealth generation in the area affected by the regeneration scheme and can the people who live here actually see and benefit from the change?
If the end result is in reality a makeover, and the targeted community is no better off, save for being bereft of the 'regeneration funds' that have been effectively hoovered up by professional regeneration companies - some of whom make a good living out of regeneration - then we should ask is this success?
How do you make regeneration projects work beyond the tick box list of the regeneration schemes managers?
One key component that is often ignored or marginalised during the regeneration process is the communities greatest resource - its people.
If we really want to develop strong sustainable communities, then any regeneration scheme should from the start and at every stage of the process involve the people who are going to live and work in the redeveloped area after the scheme has been completed.
We don’t need regeneration professionals coming into an area and engaging in a largely token consultation process. They should directly talk to land listen to local people (who are an asset to the process) rather than at them, and actually find out what they would like to be done, what they actually want for their community and their town.
If you are reusing or renovating old buildings then any regeneration scheme needs to ensure that old buildings can make a sustainable contribution after the regeneration scheme is finished.
If we do this rather than merely making a token gesture towards public consultation, then any regeneration schemes will, with hard work, really begin to deliver tangible benefits to our communities.
Regeneration schemes and projects should be bottom up rather than the top down.
The bottom line should be when spending public money, it needs to be worked extra hard and every single possible benefit should be squeezed out and we ned to maximise the impact locally of the regeneration process and make every effort to build in local benefits into the tendering process - whether by employing local people, using local resources, local skills and local input.
Now a plea for a more people focused and community driven regeneration is not driven by nostalgia or about living the past - we have to re-image our urban spaces for the 21st century - but not at the expense of the people who live and make their living within them.
As had been said elsewhere, regeneration should be a process rather than a cash extracting event, that delivers unmeasurable success.
No comments:
Post a Comment