Introduction
How to use this guide
This guide aims to illuminate the new and continuing challenges to successful estate regeneration. The four practices behind it each has over 45 years’ experience of working with communities to improve social housing estates, and we have used that knowledge to set out recommendations for successful estate regeneration and to illustrate our guidance with case studies. It is aimed at a broad audience: central and local government; housing associations and housebuilders; contractors and other industry colleagues; architecture and planning professionals and students. Some may have a particular interest in one or more of the themes. Others may be primarily interested in the case studies. The document design aims to make it easy to dip in, although we aspire, of course, for you to read from cover to cover. Either way, we hope you take away some positive and useful messages, and that you continue to debate and practice successful estate regeneration. For readers who are new to estate regeneration, we recommend looking at the original 2016 edition of Altered Estates for a broader understanding of the background and best practice – as well as the various national and regional government publications mentioned below. Altered Estates – whose estate is it anyway? Our 2016 report Altered Estates – How to reconcile competing interests in estate regeneration opened with the controversial question ‘whose estate is it anyway?’ We wrote: ‘’There has always been tension between the priority to be given to the wishes of existing residents and the potential of estates to provide a greater range of housing opportunity for the wider population, but now this has become politicised and polarised into two fiercely opposed positions.’’ We declared, and still believe, that estate regeneration, approached with care, patience and respect, can both improve the lives of existing residents and also help solve the housing crisis by making more effective use of public land. Our report was launched in June 2016 at the Housing Forum National Conference, the Chartered Institute of Housing in Manchester, and various other events. Soon afterwards what was then the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) published its Estate Regeneration National Strategy (December 2016), closely followed by the (rather modest) Estate Regeneration Fund to kickstart improvements to 100 estates. In London, the Greater London Authority (GLA) published Better homes for local people, The Mayor’s Good Practice Guide to Estate Regeneration (adopted in July 2018). This included the mandatory requirement for community ballots. Both these policy initiatives contained broadly similar advice to the guidance in Altered Estates. From 2016 to 2021 one of our authors Andy von Bradsky moved to the MHCLG, and until recently held the post of Head of Architecture at the ministry, where he continued to use his extensive hands-on experience of estate regeneration to influence government policy, including measures to rebuild trust in the local community following the Grenfell Tower disaster. Consequently, it seemed there was a broad consensus in central and local government and within the housing, planning and development movements, around best practice in estate regeneration. Why then does it remain so controversial and so difficult? Why do some communities continue to feel that regeneration is something imposed on them, and why does the media constantly challenge the motives behind it, conflating ‘regeneration’ with ‘gentrification’ and ‘social cleansing’? What has changed in six years? The challenges and solutions set out in the original Altered Estates remain just as relevant today, and all of our recommendations still stand. However, there have been significant changes of priority since 2016, in part triggered by momentous events: the Grenfell disaster in June 2017; exiting the European Union in January 2020, closely followed by the global pandemic; climate change awareness and activism, including the Extinction Rebellion protests from November 2018; and increasing public disquiet around diversity and social division, including the Black Lives Matter movement, which gained global traction in 2020. Most recently, we are seeing steep increases in energy prices, which will hit most residents of estates hard, and general increases in construction costs, which will affect the viability of all regeneration schemes. Meanwhile, the government continues to press for a long-overdue rebalancing of opportunity towards ‘left behind’ parts of the country, including disadvantaged housing estates in the Midlands and North of England. MHCLG has been rebranded as the Department of Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (DLUHC) and the Levelling Up White Paper was published in February 2022. Altered Estates 2 aims to set estate regeneration in today’s context by exploring the following key themes. Planning for social value The relatively new phrase ‘social value’ promotes a well-established, but sometimes neglected, principle of estate regeneration: that it is not just about physical change and providing better homes, but about a holistic and interwoven range of desired outcomes: a sense of belonging, health and wellbeing, education, and economic security and opportunity. We look at the wider planning context for estate regeneration and the criteria for considering intervention in a particular estate. We consider how the National Design Guide and the National Model Design Code can help direct regeneration agencies towards successful outcomes. Building community support The question ‘whose estate is it anyway?’ seems to have been clearly answered by central and regional government with the recommendation (and in London, a mandatory requirement) for community ballots before major regeneration initiatives can proceed. Policy now firmly puts the needs and wishes of existing residents first. We look at whether and how ballots are proving to be successful, in endorsing the wishes of the people and diffusing tensions. We also show how the pandemic has accelerated the move towards digital democracy in estate regeneration and away from traditional face-to-face engagement, and we promote learning from post occupancy evaluation to keep on improving the outcome for residents. Supporting lifetime neighbourhoods A ‘lifetime neighbourhood’ is a place where people can stay and thrive throughout their lives, and where young and old are equally at home. We consider the balance between social mobility and social cohesion on housing estates, and we make the case for supporting existing communities while also widening diversity by attracting incomers to the neighbourhood. Some politicians and commentators like to assert a division between ‘people from somewhere’ and ‘people from anywhere’: when it comes to estate regeneration, both are important and both should be valued. We look at demographic changes, shaped by those who stay in their neighbourhood and those who move in, who are often more affluent than existing residents. We consider the special contribution of young people and our ageing population, and we show how good design and management can accommodate change and diversity. Giving pride to place Our original report showed how a combination of housing targets, planning policies and funding mechanisms was dramatically increasing the density of regenerated estates and fuelling resistance from existing communities. We show how, in many places, this trend has continued, while in others there has been a strong shift away from comprehensive redevelopment towards infill and remodelling. The placemaking agenda focuses on public open space, and especially green space, and it intersects with other important trends: public appreciation of good quality local open space demonstrated during lockdown; biodiversity and urban greening as a response to climate change; long-term changes in movement patterns, including homeworking, reductions in car ownership and promotion of walking and cycling. Addressing climate change Central and local governments are introducing radical measures to combat climate change, including a change of direction in energy provision and distribution, and a stronger focus on embodied carbon. We look at how these may impact on estate regeneration, and the residents of housing estates, differently from other forms of housing. The high level of embodied carbon in new buildings has given birth to the RetroFirst campaign, promoted by the Architects’ Journal, and endorsed by many professionals, which insists that retention of existing buildings should be first choice. This trend provides further encouragement to estate infill and remodelling, as opposed to redevelopment. We compare examples of all three strategies and aim to cut through the confusion around embodied carbon and lifetime costs. Delivering responsible regeneration Lessons in safety: The Grenfell fire has had a seismic impact on the housing movement and construction industry. It has exposed deep-seated flaws in the prevailing ways of designing, procuring, constructing, regulating, and managing housing. Government has responded with multiple measures including tighter Building Regulations, endorsement of the ‘Golden Thread’ of responsibility promoted by the Hackitt Review, and publication of the Construction Playbook. We look at the special circumstances of estate regeneration, including the vulnerable nature of many residents, and ask to what extent new and emerging measures are helping or hindering the process of providing robust and safe homes and places. Viability and funding: Our original report highlighted progressive reductions in grant funding, and increased reliance on cross-subsidy from homes for sale, as a major cause of extreme densification and consequent community unrest. We urged a rethink of public investment and more sensitive local application of policies like Right to Buy and the (now defunct) Starter Homes Initiative. Since 2016 we have seen an increase in targeted subsidy, and greater encouragement of local authorities to engage in direct development, partly funded through borrowing and the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL). We look at current and potential funding models and their implications for the design, construction, and management of estate regeneration projects. Case studies The report features 12 new case studies to illustrate the themes above. These cover a wide range of interventions: remodelling and renovation of existing buildings; infill development and extensions; demolition and redevelopment. They include high density urban projects and lower density suburban estates. For our Endpiece, we feature the 30-year regeneration story of the Gorbals in Glasgow. A call for more targeted funding The case studies include projects in Rochdale and Milton Keynes, and we conclude with a commentary on the Gorbals in Glasgow, one of the longest running estate regeneration programmes in Britain. However, many of our case studies are in, or close to, London, and this in part reflects the limitations of the prevailing cross-subsidy model of estate regeneration, which relies on market sale values to fund replacement and additional affordable housing, with strictly limited input of subsidy. Projects in less prosperous areas, where property prices are low, struggle to achieve viability. The development appraisals in more affluent areas are also coming under increasing pressure from construction cost inflation. Even in the context of the post-pandemic national debt and the many competing claims on government funding, there is a need for more investment in housing and to rebalance reliance on cross-subsidy from the market. Without more injection of public funds – a return to truly ‘mixed’ funding – it is hard to see how the admirable promise of levelling up can be matched by action. In higher value areas we will continue to see redevelopment, infill and radical remodelling funded largely through cross-subsidy from private market housing supplemented by local authority borrowing. We urge that these projects take note of our recommendations to balance respect for existing communities with sustainable densification. Lower value areas will need substantial subsidy to achieve lasting improvement. We need to avoid squandering limited funds on isolated short-term improvements to poor quality building stock. Instead, we need to combine funds allocated to single issues, such as fire safety, energy poverty, social problems, health and education, and plan for holistic and lasting regeneration. For example, fuel poverty is going to be a growing priority: there is an opportunity here to implement long-term solutions to a wider range of environmental issues, embracing affordable warmth and healthy homes. |
Altered Estates report 2022 click here to download
Contents of the report
Foreword, Andy von Bradsky Introduction Recommendations Themes Planning for social value Building community support Supporting lifetime neighbourhoods Giving pride to place Addressing climate change Delivering responsible regeneration Viewpoint, Brendan Sarsfield Case studies Review - 30 years of regeneration in the Gorbals About the authors Credits and references |