From: | Chris Church <cjchurch@geo2.poptel.org.uk> |
Date: | Mon, 26 Jul 1999 10:07:42 -0700 (PDT) |
Reply: | cpeo-brownfields |
Subject: | Re: The UK experience |
As a Long-time UK member of this list, I am glad that the Uk stuf from the Urban Task Force is attracting some interest. A note of caution: this has been a remarkably centralised/ top-down programme so far. There are a huge number of ciommunity-based programmes in such areas which people like Lord Rogers always find very hard to focus on.... Brown fields is to become a much bigger issue here over the next few years because of increasing government curbs on building housing on gren field sites, and there is intense pressure for new housing in the South-east of England. As one of the reprots pointe dout, there is good housing going begging in some parts of the north-east and north-west. This is likely to involve several contentious points, probably all too familiar to people in the US: * One developer's 'brown field site' may be the local comunity's informal green space; * This is likely to put increased pressure on already over-stretched public transport and other facilities in urben areas; * People in brown-field site surrounding areas too often (not always) have little say in how sich sites should be developed. There is also the issue (any ideas welcome on this) about the problem areas where no-one wants to live. The classic line is that create jobs in the area and people will move in. With increased mobility (people driving fifty mile or more to work) this is no longer the case. Regernation programmes have been going on here in such areas for many years, and the importance of public oparticipation is now being recognised in the Givernment guidelines for funding. The first programmes tended to focus on replacing the worst housing, swiftly mving on to bring in jobs. The lack of s akilled work-force then became veyr clear and training and skills work is now heavily funded. This has led to research showing an unfortunate trend: A training programme is set up in a deprived area; The people who take the training tend to be actual or potential community activists; The training empowers them and gives them some control over their lives and maybe a job; At that point they look around and say "why am I living in this sh*t-heap?" amd try to move; This thus weakens the community since the people who might make a difference are empowered to move away....... Community development and community pride are important here, as is crime, environment and quality of life. Regeneration needs to be genuinely sustainable development - a key target for our developing Sustainable Communities Agencies Network. One aspect where maybe people can help is the issue of community pride.The Government's recent sustainable development strategy rightly identifies this as a key issue. It is interesting however that they have been unable to identofy a clear simple measurable indicator for this, which is an area which I am working on: is anyone,especially in deprived areas working on how we assess 'community pride' or anything like it? I'd be interested to hear from you. Thanks Chris Church Advisor to the Community Development Foundation | |
Prev by Date: The UK Urban Task Force Next by Date: 10 Communities Awarded Superfund Redevelopment Initiative Grants | |
Prev by Thread: The UK Urban Task Force Next by Thread: 10 Communities Awarded Superfund Redevelopment Initiative Grants |