local urban regeneration initiatives: birmingham ‘heartlands’

Cities 1994 11 (1) 48-58

Local urban regeneration initiatives

Birmingham ‘Heartlands’

Colin Wood School of Planning, Faculty of the Built Environment, University of Central England in Birmingham, Perry Barr, Birmingham B42 2SU. Tel: +44 21331.5000. Fax +44 21356 9915.

In order to protect local democratic accountability and meet the needs of local residents, several larger UK urban authorities have helped to promote initiatives which offer an alternative to the Conservative government’s market-led approach to urban regeneration. This paper explores the Birmingham ‘Heartlands’ initiative, setting out when, how, and why it was established, how it operated, what it tried to achieve, what success it enjoyed and what wider lessons it might offer for regeneration initiatives in other UK cities. It charts its transformation into an Urban Development Corporation (UDC), and suggests that one of its main achievements may have been to help to promote a type of agency which can not only call on direct government funding to encourage development and investment, but which has a greater respect and feel for local needs and priorities than the UDCs seen to date.

The 1980s have witnessed a range of urban regeneration initiatives in the UK under three Conservative governments, with more promised following a fourth general election victory in April 1992. Much of government policy towards the inner cities during this period has been informed by a philosophy which has sought to emphasize development and economic interests rather than social concerns; to encourage private investment and restrict public spending; to promote central government involvement at the local level and limit the role of the local authorities in major towns and cities; and to remove what was perceived to be unnecessary regulation and bureaucracy in order to facilitate the operation of market forces. Revamped partnership arrangements have seen a greater role for central government departments and the private sector. Local government departments have increasingly become enabling bodies rather than direct providers of services. Enterprise zones have offered a variety of financial incentives to would-be investors, as well as a simplified planning regime intended to speed new develop-

This is a revised version of a paper presented to AESOP Congress, Stockholm, Sweden, 3-6 June 1992. The author would like to thank Mike Glover for preparing Figures 1 and 3, based on material provided by Heartlands UDA Ltd, Jim Beeston (Heart- lands UDC) and Dick Pratt (UCE) for commenting on earlier drafts of the text.

48

ment. New central government agencies have been created, either to coordinate the activities of other organizations working in the inner city, or to promote development and investment directly through special powers.

In this last category Urban Development Cor- porations (UDCs) probably represent the ‘flagship’ of central government initiatives to tackle the problems of the inner cities. By the end of the 1980s 11 UDCs had been designated. While much has been claimed for them by central government in terms of reclaiming land, encouraging private investment, and creating new homes and jobs, they have also been the target for much criticism. Concern has been expressed that benefits accrue predominantly to ‘outsiders’, developers, financiers and commuters, rather than to the local residents, particularly in the London Docklands area (Brownhill, 1990). On Merseyside, there has been criticism that only limited amounts of private finance have been ‘levered in’ on the back of public investment, and that the initiative has not delivered the value-for-money expected of it (National Audit Office, 1988). Further criticisms suggest that short-term development projects might jeopardize the longer-term interests of the area; that the contribution of other organizations, especially the local authorities, has not been adequately acknowledged by these new corpora-

0264-2751/94/01/0048-11 0 1994 Butterworth-Heinemann Ltd

Local urban regeneration initiatives: C. Wood

tions; and that, because the boards which run the UDCs are appointed by central government rather than locally elected, they are not responsive to local needs and priorities, and are not democratically accountable at the local level (Brookes, 1989; Cen- tre for Local Economic Strategies, 1990, and Parker and Oatley, 1989).

In order to promote urban regeneration but at the same time avoid many of these criticisms, some of the larger urban authorities have experimented with initiatives which are intended to deliver many of the benefits claimed for UDCs while retaining a strong element of local democratic accountability. The Birmingham ‘Heartlands’ initiative represents one of the best known of these local alternatives to centrally-promoted regeneration.

Birth of the ‘Heartlands Development Agency’

Birmingham lies at the heart of the West Midlands conurbation, and has the largest population, at a little under 1 million, of any local authority in England and Wales. In the middle ages Birmingham was an important centre for local cloth and leather industries, but by the 16th century a range of metal- based trades had been established, including nail- making, edge-tool production, and goldsmithing. The fastest period of growth began in the 18th century when some of the great names of the Indust- rial Revolution such as Matthew Boulton, James Watt and William Murdock, helped to make the town ‘the workshop of the world’. As with most other large municipalities, Birmingham embarked on a programme of comprehensive clearance and redevelopment in the 195Os, 1960s and early 1970s which saw large parts of the inner areas transformed from rows of predominantly privately-rented ter- raced housing built in the last century into new estates of local authority dwellings. The economy of the West Midlands suffered severe contraction during the late 1970s and early 1980s with significant job losses in the key sectors of vehicle manufacture, metal goods, metal manufacturing, and mechanical and electrical engineering (Spencer et al, 1986). The City Council set out to rebuild the local economy by promoting Birmingham’s potential as a major centre for the service sector, for tourism and conferences, and by encouraging investment in new technology. The opening of the International Convention Centre and Indoor Arena, new hotel developments to boost the city’s ability to cater for business tourism, major plans to redevelop the ‘Bull Ring’ and improve pedestrian movement within the city centre, are all part of a strategy to enhance the role of Birmingham as a city of national and international repute.

The area covered by the ‘Heartlands’ initiative lies to the east and north of the city centre, and extends over an area of approximately 9.50 hectares (see

Figure 1). It is home to a population of just under 13 000 people, the great majority of whom rent their accommodation from the local authority. There is relatively little home-ownership or private renting in Heartlands. People in the area experience a range of economic, social and environmental difficulties. During the first half of the 198Os, 5 900 redundancies were reported, and over half the jobs in the area were lost during the decade. The contraction of major utility industries in the area, including elec- tricity and gas, compounded the difficulties. Unem- ployment levels are double the city average, up to 70% of children in some of the schools are from one-parent homes, the area records higher inci- dences of notifiable diseases and higher mortality rates than other parts of the city, and Nechells registers in the lowest 10% of all wards in the country on various indices of deprivation.

There has been very little inward investment into the area, and, although there are nearly 300 hectares of vacant land, development opportunities are limited by a lack of major sites, and by contamination from former industries. Communication links within Heartlands are poor and the area suffers from a generally run-down environment and lack of community identity.

At the same time, Heartlands possesses locational and other attributes which could provide the basis for successful regeneration. It lies adjacent to the city centre of Birmingham, and the City Council’s policy has been to try and ensure that jobs created by recent major city centre developments and investment directly benefit the residents of the more depressed parts of the city (see Figure 2). Aston Science Park, run by Birmingham Technology Li- mited, abuts the boundary of the Heartlands area, and provides opportunities for employment in a variety of jobs mainly in the new technology industries. Heartlands is close to the M6, though direct access needs to be provided for the area to benefit from its physical proximity to the motorway network. Birmingham Airport and the National Exhibi- tion Centre (NEC), with their associated job and marketing opportunities for firms and residents of Heartlands, are only three miles away. The area has a large, experienced and skilled labour force. There is considerable potential for environmental improvement and the promotion of leisure and tourist pur- suits based on the network of canals.

There was some speculation in the mid-1980s that central government might be considering the Heart- lands area for designation as a UDC. Concerned to maintain the maximum degree of local democratic control, and mindful of the many criticisms that had been levelled against UDCs elsewhere, the City Council was less than enthusiastic about the idea of a new corporation operating within its own area. It also pointed to the history of cooperation between the City Council and the private sector in tackling

Cities 1094 Volume 11 Number I 49

s C

ity

Cen

tre

3 5 2 3 3 B

Figu

re

1 B

irm

ingh

am

Hea

rtla

nds


Figure 2 One of the main advantages of the Heartlands area is its close proximity to the city centre of Birmingham. However, it suffers from declining industry, environmental degradation, and a housing stock in need of repair and maintenance

urban problems throughout the city, and at the City Council’s track record of conceiving innovative approaches to renewal, both of which suggested there might be a more appropriate alternative to the UDC model. In the event, interest was being expressed by the private sector in promoting investment in the Heartlands area which, because of the advantages referred to above, was seen as having a greater potential for regeneration than many other parts of inner Birmingham. In the summer and autumn of 1986 meetings took place between the Secretary of State for the Environment, Nicholas Ridley, major private sector interests involved in Heartlands, and representatives of the City Council. In July 1987 Mr Ridley gave his support in principle to a development agency arrangement for Heart- lands involving a partnership between the private sector and the local authority, but wished to see the whole area designated as a Simplified Planning Zone (SPZ). Proposals for a modified SPZ covering part of Heartlands have subsequently been drawn up by the City Council.

Heartlands UDA: organization and structure

The Heartlands Development Agency was established in March 1988, and run as a private company. The board comprised nine directors chaired by Sir Reginald Eyre, a prominent local politician and former Member of Parliament. Five representatives from major development interests and three city councillors completed the board. The chief executive of the organization was a director of one of the major construction firms involved with the initiative. The shareholding of the organization was split 65:35

Cities 1994 Volume II Number I

between the private development interests and the City Council, with the Chamber of Commerce hold- ing one share which entitled it to voting rights. The private sector brought finance, financial expertise, and management effort to the partnership, while the City Council delivered non-operational land, certain legal powers (especially compulsory purchase powers for the acquisition of land and property), technical and professional skills and advice, and, important to the philosophy of the exercise, local democratic accountability. It was intended that 10% of the profits accruing to the development consortium should be ploughed back to promote further investment and development, and a system of ‘land pool- ing’ was designed to overcome landownership con- straints which otherwise might prevent the satisfac- tory packaging and marketing of potential development sites. The UDA operated very much as an ‘enabling’ agency, providing the broad framework within which development was expected to take place; making the case for the area to central government; ‘trouble-shooting’; liaising between the City Council and the community; establishing priorities; and trying to ensure that the many public and private bodies operating within the Heartlands area were aware of its objectives, and encouraged to work for rather than against them.

The Heartlands Development Agency model dif- fered from that of a UDC in a number of respects. The agency received no direct funding from central government in the way a UDC does (the Black Country Development Corporation, for example, will benefit from f165 million of direct Treasury assistance over its seven-year lifespan). Heartlands UDA had no ‘end-date’, unlike an Urban Develop- ment Corporation. The remit of the UDA was

51


broader than that of a UDC, dealing not only with the development of land and property (the primary role for most UDCs), but also with a range of social and economic policy areas in a more comprehensive fashion. The organization had a very small direct establishment and its effectiveness depended in no small measure on a limited number of key personnel who had worked in and around the area in different capacities over many years, and who had an intimate local knowledge. Local democratic accountability was safeguarded to the extent that the City Council remained the planning authority for the area, responsible for determining all applications for development within Heartlands. The UDA relied much more than does a UDC on partnership and persuasion to achieve its objectives, lacking many of the direct powers (as well as the additional funding) of a development corporation. Its role - within a complex web of individual construction firms, development consortia, joint venture schemes, partnership arrangements, working parties, City Council committees and subcommittees, etc - was perhaps less obvious and more difficult to comprehend than that of a UDC.

Development strategy and modifications

Shortly after having been established, Heartlands UDA commissioned a leading firm of consultants to prepare a development strategy for the area. The consultation draft of this strategy was published in January 1988 and launched for public consultation in March 1988 (Tym & Partners, 1988). Its overall aims were to attract new economic activity and jobs to Heartlands, and to improve the living conditions of the existing residents. There were four elements to the strategy: a physical element setting out what should be built; a marketing element explaining for whom it would be built; an investment element describing how it would be paid for; and a fourth element highlighting the measures needed to ensure that existing communities benefited from the total package.

The draft physical strategy prepared by the consultants focused on seven main areas (see Figure 3). First, Waterlinks aimed to exploit the opportunities afforded by a canalside location and close proximity to Aston Science Park to create a range of business uses in a high-quality environment. New basins were planned along the Birmingham-Fazeley Canal, with a range of leisure and sports activities planned to complement the commercial development, and increase the attractiveness of the area to younger professional people.

Second, the ‘Star Project’, on the site of the former Nechells Power Station, was intended ‘to be a flagship scheme which will give East Birmingham a national name’ (Tym & Partners, 1988, p. 34). The draft strategy stated that the final composition of

uses on the site would depend in large measure on the opportunities created by the UDA in the early years, and put forward a number of possible options, including a major retail and service complex, a national sports facility, major leisure facility, and a national floral centre.

Third, and in addition to Waterlinks, the development strategy put forward recommendations for mixed improvement and development in existing industrial areas within Heartlands; and new industrial development on two sites near Saltley Viaduct and a site in Washwood Heath sidings.

Fourth, the development strategy also envisaged major improvements to the large .area of local authority housing in Nechells and Bloomsbury. The draft document sought to increase the stock of dwellings and widen the choice of tenure in Heart- lands, and to integrate the housing estates into the wider area. The consultants’ report talked about introducing ‘households with different patterns of expenditure’ as well as improving conditions for existing tenants (Tym & Partners, 1988, p. 38). Proposals were also included to improve community facilities by, for example, opening up some of the local schools for community educational and re- creational use.

Fifth, the draft strategy proposed a major new residential development at Bordesley Village on approximately 40 hectares of vacant land adjoining the Grand Union Canal, close to the stadium of Birmingham City Football Club. Existing local authority housing in the locality was to be retained and improved, with most of the new development to be provided by the private sector or by housing associations. Most of the new housing was planned for owner-occupation, with some shared ownership and social-rented accommodation. Several major housebuilders were expected to be represented in the area, and new property for sale was intended to be affordable to low- and middle-income families.

Sixth, the strategy required major improvements to the existing highway network to overcome the problems of poor communications within Heart- lands, and to facilitate easier access to the motorway system. The key components of the recommended highway strategy envisaged the creation of a new spine road through the area; upgrading the Tyburn and Lichfield Roads to create high quality dual carriageways; and a new cross-link from the Aston Expressway to the proposed new spine road. The spine road was regarded as crucial to the strategy, as it would open up development opportunities in Washwood Heath, enable existing firms to avoid using residential roads, promote new development and investment in Saltley, and relieve congestion on existing roads. The strategy identified the possible introduction of a light rapid transit system as the main opportunity for improving public transport in East Birmingham.

52 Cities 1994 Volume II Number I

....

....

...

Ig'Z

!

L,h

Fi

gure

3

I f

Hea

rtla

nds

deve

lopm

ent

stra

tegy

~ W

ater

links

~ll~

Sta

r Pro

ject

E

Bord

esle

y Villa

ge -

New

Hou

sing

[~

Mai

or R

esid

entia

l impr

ovem

ent

I Ne

w In

dust

rial D

evel

opm

ent

Indu

stria

l Im

prov

emen

t

[~_~

] Br

omfo

rd In

dust

rial A

rea

~ Lo

nger

Ter

m O

ppor

tuni

ties

e~

c~


Finally, the draft strategy emphasized the import- ance of a very high-quality environment to make the area attractive for new investment and new residents. Key elements here would be the exploitation of canals, a landscape framework for the area, an organized pedestrian network, gateway projects, and building facelifts.

The draft strategy was launched in March 1988 and subsequent consultation involved the wide distribution of publicity material, a series of public meetings and business seminars in Heartlands, consultation with relevant committees of the City Coun- cil, statutory undertakers, government departments, and other interested parties. The consultation period ended on 30 June, by which time 79 responses had been received from local residents, business owners, local organizations, and other interested parties (Birmingham City Council, 1988a).

The representations registered general support for the draft strategy, but some concern was expressed by local residents about the effects on individual properties; on the need for jobs and housing to reflect local requirements and circumstances; and on the need for improved local shopping facilities. The ‘technical’ consultees requested a community strategy and local consultation procedures in implementing the strategy; regard for equal opportunities; and effective monitoring systems to measure progress. Adjoining authorities also expressed the view that any retail development on the ‘Star’ site should not undermine investment and threaten the vitality or viability of existing shopping centres.

In the light of these and other comments, the draft strategy was amended to extend Heartlands to include the Bromford industrial area; to explore the idea of setting up a Community Trust to reflect local interests; to reduce the amount of housing proposed at Bordesley and Waterlinks; and to build in retail safeguards on the ‘Star’ site so any development would not threaten existing centres. New mechanisms - including public limited companies and joint venture arrangements, separate from Heartlands UDA but guided by its overall strategy - were subsequently established and put in place to oversee development at Waterlinks, on the ‘Star’ site, at Bordesley, and in the industrial areas. In the first 10 years, at least 500 acres (just over 200 hectares) of land were expected to be developed. Just over 40% of this would be residential, a further 40% industrial, and the remainder mainly flexible business space. Approximately 7 400 jobs were to be created in industry; 5 300 jobs in business; and a number of others in the ‘Star’ project, services, and the construction industry (Birmingham City Council, 1988b).

Progress with implementation

There is already evidence of considerable physical

development and investment taking place in Heart- lands, with new high-quality office and commercial space in the Waterlinks area, housing and environmental improvements in Nechells and Bloomsbury, new housing at Bordesley, and a start made on new highway construction.

Waterlinks PLC now owns 20 hectares of investment properties and development land. Major work has commenced at Aston Cross involving a f26 million project (attracting f6.2 million in City Grant) to provide business space, a wine bar and shops; and planning permission has been granted for over 1 million square feet of new development along the main canal corridor (see Figure 4).

Housing improvements in Nechells include measures to provide affordable housing for sale and rent to local residents, and to widen the choice of housing type and tenure. Major projects largely funded through Estate Action (government initiative set up in 1985 which aims to improve the quality of life on run-down local authority housing estates) have be- gun or are planned for Duddeston Manor and Bloomsbury, with the refurbishment of a further 176 homes on the Ashcroft Estate. A number of housing associations are involved in new building schemes, and the Bloomsbsury estate has seen the establishment of one of the country’s first Estate Manage- ment Boards. This is designed to devolve much of the responsibility for managing the affairs of the estate to the local residents who live there. Already a major clearance and redevelopment package, worth f10 million, has been agreed.

Phase 1 of the Bordesley Village scheme has already been completed, involving the construction of 118 houses for sale (see Figure 5). A survey by Birmingham Heartlands Ltd (BHL) of the previous addresses of the new occupants of these completed properties revealed that some 80% had come from within a three-mile radius. A major &17 million project (attracting $3.7 million in City Grant) will provide a further 320 flats and houses for sale, rent, and shared equity; while Phase 2 of Bordesley Village is planned to include a village centre, over 70 additional houses and flats, a community centre, shops, and health facilities. Figures produced by BHL suggest that f33 million have been invested in Bordesley to date (Bishop, 1992).

Progress is also claimed elsewhere. The ‘Star’ site is now seen as a flagship project for a mixture of uses including retail offices, hotels, restaurants, and leisure and recreation facilities. A master plan has been drawn up by consultants and approved by the City Council which sets the framework for development.

The route of the proposed spine road, linking the A47 at Nechells Parkway with the A452 at Chester Road near Junction 5 of the M6 Motorway, was approved in late 1989. The programme for compulsory purchase of land, highway design and construc-

54 Cities 1994 Volume 11 Number I


Figure 4 Waterlinks represents a mix of commercial and leisure facilities based on the Birmingham-Fazeley Canal. Much high quality development has taken place, but recent progress has been very slow, mainly due to the recession

tion is said to be on target for completion in 1997. So far, some El00 million of Transport Supplementary Grant support has been committed to the scheme by central government.

By October 1991, over $32 million in City Grant had been delivered to the area, levering in a pro- jected f50 million in private sector investment. Progress has also been made on various other social, educational and employment initiatives, including the formation of an Education Compact between the local authority and local industrialists with the aim of securing jobs for school leavers in Heartlands.

Recent proposals and changes

Recent events could have significant repercussions for the Heartlands area and the various organizations involved in its regeneration. In February 1992, British Rail announced plans for a new mainline railway station in Nechells at an estimated cost of f50 million. This is intended to relieve pressure on Birmingham’s current mainline station at New Street (Birmingham Evening Post, 1992). If this proposal were to go ahead it would mean that Heartlands would be the focus for most inter-city rail traffic

Cities I994 Volume II

Figure 5 Bordesley Village is a major initiative to promote new affordable housing in Heartlands. Over 100 out of a planned 600 new homes have been built, catering mostly for people from the surrounding areas

Number I 55


between the Midlands and other parts of the country, and would provide a substantial boost to the local economy.

Moreover, discussions have taken place since the latter part of 1991 between central government, the City Council, and Birmingham Heartlands Limited regarding the establishment of an Urban Develop- ment Corporation for the Heartlands area. In Janu- ary 1992 the Secretary of State announced his inten- tion to set up a UDC with Sir Reginald Eyre, chair of the UDA, moving across to chair the new body, and Sir Richard Knowles, leader of the City Council, nominated as his deputy. There are five additional City Council members nominated by the city, and five others nominated by the Secretary of State (one of whom is to be a local resident) (Birmingham City Council, 1992).

The new UDC will have similar powers to other Urban Development Corporations, and will act as the local planning authority for planning applications and development control. The post of chief executive was advertised in May, and the successful applicant was the former Director of Birmingham Heartlands Ltd. It is expected that most services will be provided by departments run by the City Council. In particular, it is envisaged that the Director of Planning and Architecture will ‘operate as the UDC’s Planning Officer, and will report to the UDC on all applications and other planning matters’ within Heartlands (Birmingham City Council, 1992, p. 2). However, Heartlands UDC will make the development control decisions. More than f50 million of additional financial resources to assist in the regeneration programme was anticipated from central government over the next five years as a con- sequence of the UDC designation, although this sum was subseqently reduced as a result of the Chancel- lor of the Exchequer’s 1992 Autumn Statement.

It is anticipated that the new UDC will take on board the strategy and much of the philosophy of its predecessor, and that the relationships and mechanisms created and fostered by the BHL will remain largely intact. More emphasis is expected to be directed towards marketing and promoting the area, and the five-year timescale of the Development Corporation could help to restimulate activity. It remains to be seen whether the additional monies and new organizational arrangements will concen- trate energies on development initiatives at the expense of wider community needs and social priorities.

Discussion

The Heartlands initiative is an example of inner city regeneration which seeks to harness the skills and resources of the private sector while retaining a strong element of local democratic accountability, within a development framework consistent with

wider planning objectives. The UDA’s role has been that of a facilitating and enabling agency, liaising with the many public, private, and individual interests, to encourage all parties to adapt their policies and working practices for the good of the Heartlands area. The aim has been to make the whole more than the sum of individual decisions and actions, and in that sense exemplifies many of the features associated with other ‘partnership’ (Haughton and Whitney, 1989, and Whitney and Haughton, 1990).

There is already evidence of considerable progress in implementing the development strategy drawn up in 1988. Waterlink now boasts several well designed commercial buildings in a high quality environment alongside the Birmingham-Fazeley Canal at Aston Cross, with the promise of substantially more to follow. New housing development is proceeding apace at Bordesley Village, with well over 100 of the planned 600 homes having been completed. Major improvements are taking place in the local authority estates at Bloomsbury and Nechells which include refurbishments to existing dwellings; structural modifications (including ‘top-lopping’) to transform un- popular ‘walk-up’ flats and maisonettes into two- storey dwellings) to make accommodation more attractive and habitable; the provision of new homes for sale, rent and shared-equity; environmental improvements and landscaping; and new management arrangements to involve the residents in decision- making processes.

So far there has been relatively little public opposition to the plans and activities of the UDA. Early fears about the extent to which development proposals would benefit the local residents seem largely to have evaporated (Hoyland, 1989).

There can be little doubt that the UDA has done much to raise the profile of this part of Birmingham, with key personnel making regular contributions to conferences and seminars, and features on Heart- lands appearing in trade journals, national and local newspapers, and in the academic press. It seems likely that the Heartlands initiative has proved help- ful in committing central government funding through Estate Action for housing improvements, and through the City Council’s Transport Policies and Programmes (TPP) for major highways construction.

Moreover, the approach of Heartlands has been to work with the wider planning framework rather than against it. The strategy was conceived around the same time as the Secretary of State’s strategic guidance was being prepared for the West Midlands conurbation (Department of the Environment, 1988), and Birmingham City Council’s Unitary De- velopment Plan takes on board much of Heartland’s development proposals (Birmingham City Council, 1991). The City Council retained development control powers under the UDA arrangements, and has

56 Cities 1994 Volume II Number 1


the inner city? Could the City Council have spent some of the money expended on prestigious city centre projects in places like Heartlands instead, and if so would this have benefited the residents more directly? (Loftman and Nevin, 1992).

More than anything, the Heartlands initiative demonstrates the difficulty of achieving significant inward investment and regeneration without substantial additional public funding. In finally accept- ing a UDC for the area, the City Council has shown that it may be prepared to forego an element of local control in exchange for the extra government monies that UDC designation will bring. At the same time, the new UDC, with its greater level of City Council involvement than previous corporations, may provide a more democratic version of the model used to date, and reflect growing central government recog- nition that local political acceptability and accountability is necessary for urban regeneration to be successfully attempted.

Lessons for elsewhere?

The Heartlands model of regenerating an older industrial area offers a number of pointers for municipalities faced with problems similar to those inher- ited by Birmingham. First, the choice often presented between investing in prestigious city centre redevelopment and ‘civic boosterism’, or concentrat- ing scarce resources on run-down inner-city areas, may largely be a false one. Birmingham’s approach to urban revitalization has tried to encompass both approaches. The hope and expectation has been that an attractive, economically healthy, and vibrant ‘down-town’ area will bring important job opportunities to inner-city residents and the wider region and bring in additional resources which can then be used to tackle the problems of the poorer neighbourhoods. At the same time, initiatives such as those in Heartlands and Ladywood (Birmingham City Coun- cil, undated) indicate that direct targeting of poorer neighbourhoods is essential, and reliance on ‘trickle- down’ benefits is not enough.

Second, Heartlands challenges the notion that urban regeneration is solely a matter of encouraging private sector development and redevelopment, almost at any cost. It is true that strong emphasis has been placed on a physical development strategy which the private sector is expected to play a key role in implementing, but the initiative gives due weight, also, to a wide range of initiatives geared towards improving educational and employment opportunities; strengthening the social infrastruc- ture; and involving residents more in the decision- making processes of the area. A wide range of public and quasi-public, as well as private agencies, are responsible for delivering a comprehensive programme for economic, social and environmental regeneration.

been able to moderate the UDA’s development emphasis with concern about the wider distribution- al and planning consequences.

At the same time the organizational arrangements underpinning the Heartlands initiative do not lend themselves to ready understanding, with a variety of industrial concerns, development consortia, public limited companies, joint ventures, and working groups all involved in planning and implementation, and the draft strategy document alone going to 18 separate committees and subcommittees of the City Council for comments prior to adoption.

Nor is it easy to assimilate the details of what has ,happened since Birmingham Heartlands Limited was established, and to ascertain precisely how much can be attributed to this organization. Despite the concern for systematic monitoring of progress expressed by several respondents during consultation on the draft strategy, it is difficult to get information other than on a general, aggregated basis; and there appears to be no detailed breakdown of, for example, how many jobs have been created, the nature of those jobs, and whether they are genuine additions or transfers from elsewhere.

Although new development and environmental improvements clearly have taken place, the suspi- cion remains that, four years into the programme, job creation and private investment fall well short of what might have been expected based on an appor- tionment of the (possibly ambitious) lo-year targets contained in the development strategy.

At the same time, it has to be recognized that the economic climate changed dramatically during BHL’s lifetime, and the authors of the development strategy would doubtless have modified their projec- tions for land development, investment and job creation, had they been able to foresee the effects of the recession.

The concern to demonstrate private sector interest and early achievement ‘on the ground’ may also have meant opportunities being missed which, had they been realized, may have been to the longer- term benefit of Heartlands and the City of Birming- ham. While the draft Waterlinks strategy envisaged an element of housing development alongside commercial and leisure activities adjacent to the Fazeley Canal, development to date has concentrated on uses which may have been expected to yield more remunerative financial returns. Concerns expressed by some local residents and City officers about ‘yuppie development’, and problems with contamin- ated land, also worked against the introduction of new housing in the Waterlinks area.

The approach in Heartlands also raises issues of a wider nature. To what extent, for example, have Birmingham City Council’s ‘mainstream’ service budgets been ‘bent’ to favour the area in accordance with the Council’s intentions? If they have, to what extent has this been at the expense of other parts of

Cities 1994 Volume II Number I 57


Third, Heartlands demonstrates that there is an important and continuing role for local government in managing urban change. Since the end of the 1970s the prevailing belief among senior ministers in the UK has been that local government bureaucra- cies too often stifle private sector enterprise and limit investment opportunities. The Heartlands UDA was very much a partnership between major private sector interests and the City Council which sought to tackle the problems of one part of the city in a way which was consistent with, and helped to reinforce, the wider strategies for the city as a whole. The City Council retained responsibility for key land use and development decisions, and has sought to ensure that the wider interests of the city will be safeguarded following the designation of the UDC.

The Heartlands initiative also offers some support for those who feel that the health and vitality of cities are not entirely pre-determined by wider economic forces; that there is some room for manoeuvre for local agencies providing they approach the task with sufficient commitment and energy. Having said that, it became increasingly clear at the turn of the decade that the private sector was unable or unwilling to invest the resources needed to effec- tively tackle the area’s problems in a reasonable timescale at a time of general economic uncertainty. Without substantial public investment, or effective mechanisms to limit the amount of private sector ‘leakage’ to more economically buoyant areas, therefore, this room for manoeuvre may be signifi- cantly constrained especially during a period of economic recession.

While there may be some broader lessons arising from the Heartland’s experience, we should, never- theless, be cautious about trying to transplant the Heartland’s mechanisms and approaches to other urban situations, in the expectation that they will offer equally appropriate solutions elsewhere. Heartlands grew out of an institutional and political environment which was probably unique to Birming- ham, and which could not easily be replicated in other cities. Each city has its own cultural and political identity. Robson has referred to the different attitudes and approaches to urban regeneration adopted by the city councils of Manchester and Salford in the early and mid-1980s (Robson, 1988). Both were (and are) Labour-controlled authorities, but the latter was much more ready than the former to seek an accommodation with central government on planning and housing policies if this meant additional financial resources.

Birmingham has experienced more frequent changes of political control than many major cities in the UK. It has a tradition of civic independence and

innovation, and has tended to adopt a pragmatic approach in its dealings with central government. Heartlands may offer inspiration and ideas for other municipalities faced with similar problems, but city authorities elsewhere may be better advised to con- centrate on identifying and developing those net- works which are responsive to their own particular set of local circumstances rather than blindly recon- structing the Heartlands model in their areas.

References

Birmingham City Council (1988a) East Birmingham Development Agency - adoption of revised development strategy, Report of Director of Development, July Birmingham City Council (1988b) East Birmingham Urban De- velopment Agency: a development, marketing and investment strategy for East Birmingham, Report of Director of Develop- ment, April Birmingham City Council (1991) Birmingham unitary development plan: revised draft for public deposit, Department of Plan- ning and Architecture, April Birmingham City Council (1992) Proposed Birmingham Heart- lands Urban Development Corporation, Report of the Chief Executive, 27 January Birmingham City Council (undated) Ladywood regeneration framework Birmingham Evening Post (1992) ‘50m station will put city at hub of nation’, 12 February p. 3 Bishop, A. (1992) Birmingham Heartlands Limited.. progress over four years, unpublished Brookes, J. (1989) ‘Cardiff Bav renewal strategy- another hole in the democratic system’, The Planner, 75(l), January pp. 38-40 Brownhill. S. (1990) Develovina London’s Docklands: another great planning disaster?, Paul Chapman Publishing, London Centre for Local Economic Strategies (CLES) (1990) Inner city regeneration: a Local Authority perspective, First Year Report of the CLES Monitoring Project on Urban Development Corpora- tions, October Department of the Environment (1988) Strategic planning guidance for the West Midlands, HMSO, London Haughton, G. and Whitney, D. (1989) ‘Equal urban partners?‘, The Planner, 15 December Hoyland, P. (1989) ‘Protests hit 600m pound inner-city regeneration’, The Guardian, 16 February Loftman, P. and Nevin, B. (1992) Urban regeneration and social equity - a case study of Birmingham 19861992, Faculty of the Built Environment, UCE Birmingham National Audit Office (1988) Department of the Environment, urban development corporations, HMSO, London Parker, G. and Oatley, N. (1989) ‘The case against the proposed Urban Development Corporation for Bristol’, The Planner, 75(l), January, pp. 32-35 Robson, B. (1988) Those inner cities: reconciling the social and economic aims of urban policy, Clarendon Press, Oxford Spencer, K., Taylor, A., Smith, B., Mawson, J., Flynn, N. and Batley, R. (1986) Crisis in the industrial heartland: a study of the West Midlands, Clarendon Press, Oxford Tym R. and Partners (1988) Birmingham heartlands: development strategy for East Birmingham, Final Report, January Whitney, D. and Haughton, G. (1990) ‘Structures for development partnerships in the 1990s: practice in West Yorkshire’, The Planner, 1 July

58 Cities 1994 Volume I1 Number I

local urban regeneration initiatives: birmingham ‘heartlands’

Documents