Quality of place reserach

a

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Baseline Report

April 2008

For One North East

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments - Baseline Report

Project no: 134011 April 2008

Newcombe House 45 Notting Hill Gate London W11 3PB T 020 7309 7000 E london@cbuchanan.co.uk

Prepared by

Approved by

----------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------

Peter O’Brien, Angela Koch, Tracy Kornblatt

Paul Buchanan

Status: Final

Date: 14 April 2008

Issue no: 2

(C) Copyright Colin Buchanan and Partners Limited. All rights reserved.

This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of the commissioning party and unless otherwise agreed in writing by Colin Buchanan and Partners Limited, no other party may copy, reproduce, distribute, make use of, or rely on the contents of the report. No liability is accepted by Colin Buchanan and Partners Limited for any use of this report, other than for the purposes for which it was originally prepared and provided.

Opinions and information provided in this report are on the basis of Colin Buchanan and Partners Limited using skill, care and diligence in the preparation of the same and no explicit warranty is provided as to their accuracy. It should be noted and is expressly stated that no independent verification of any documents or information supplied to Colin Buchanan and Partners Limited has been made.

Contents

01

Introduction

1

02

Method & Approach

5

03

Case Study 1: mima & Central Square,Middlesborough

7

04

Case Study 2: Darlington Pedestrian Heart

31

05

Case Study 3: NETPark, Sedgefield

45

06

Case Study 4: The Rivergreen Centre, Durham

53

07

Case Study 5: Seven Stories, Newcastle

58

08

Case Study 6: Sunniside Gardens, Sunderland

64

09

Case Study 7: Blyth Market Place, Northumberland

78

010

Case Study 8: Newbiggin Bay

91

011

Reflection on Year 1

98

01

Introduction 1.1 Overview

1.2 Study Objectives

In late July 2007, Colin Buchanan and Tribal Urban Studio1 were commissioned by One NorthEast to undertake a three year longitudinal study to identify and establish the links between quality of place and economic performance. This includes exploring the various approaches and ways in which Quality of Place investments could be captured and tracked over time to both measure and value their impact at different spatial scales.

The primary aim of this study is to establish a sound knowledge and evidence base to inform Quality of Place policy and investment decisions. The specific focus is on Single Programme investments, but the research is also relevant to other regeneration initiatives and policy programmes. We aim to capture investments effects, in particular by exploring the impact on the competitiveness of the region, and its constituent subregions.

In September 2007, a Scoping Report was issued summarising the key regional context data, the relevant literature pertaining to the measurement of Quality of Place investments and a proposed analytical framework for the future phases of the work.

To achieve this the study team has developed an assessment framework, which allows us to trace direct and indirect impacts over time. While this commission is for a three-year period, the framework assumes an extended timeframe, given the time-lag, before many of the impacts manifest themselves.

In the intervening time One NorthEast have commissioned a formal programme-level evaluation of their Quality of Place interventions, which has synergies with this commission. To this end, the two project teams have worked closely together sharing data and information on some common case studies albeit with different foci.

The longitudinal study has focussed on developing the method and approach, and in Year 1 on establishing a baseline against which future performance and change can be assessed. Work to date on this study is the focus of this ‘baseline’ report. The programme evaluation on the other hand has focussed on impacts to date and also on issues of processes and the effectiveness of the investment choices made by One NorthEast. The findings of this evaluation are reported in a separate report: Quality of Place: Programme Evaluation (March, 2008).

The principal findings of the Baseline Report and Evaluation Report are summarised in an Executive Statement: Making the Links: Quality of Place and Economic Performance (April, 2008). This intends to shine a different light on this important policy area, illustrated through a variety of case studies from across the region demonstrating different development trajectories and socio-economic characteristics.

1.3 Purpose of this Baseline Report This report serves as the Year 1 baseline for the “Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments” study. A second report will be issued at the end of year 2, with a final report due at the end of Year 3. As such, the focus of this report is naturally not on conclusions, but focuses primarily on portraying the baseline situation over a wide range of geographies by drawing on an extensive toolkit of indicators. We have, however, done a substantial volume of research and primary data collection in the course of the study to date and consequently have taken the opportunity to reflect on the process to date and, from that draw out lessons for future monitoring phases.

The main research is effectively testing a method which can be rolled out by sub-regional and local partners in relation to the performance monitoring and evaluation of quality of place investments. The simple and accessible database being developed alongside this research represents a good starting point for future projects to use as a template. This database will be populated over the next two years, and will undoubtedly evolve as datasets are added and removed.

The project team would like to extend their gratitude to the various organisations, individuals and steering group members who have consented to take part in this project. They have given freely of their time and provided some very interesting insights into the context, rationale and delivery of these projects, from which we can look to draw many lessons in the future.

1

Urban Studio is Tribal’s new planning and urban design team (formerly of Llewelyn-Davies)

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

1.4 Report Structure This report is structured as follows: 

the remainder of this chapter refreshes some of the key analytical concepts from the Scoping Report (Sept 07, see CD), including our project definition of Quality of Place;



Chapter 2 outlines our method and approach, including an overview of the eight case studies, an introduction to the analytical framework, and summaries of the main methods used for assessing physical place quality in the course of this study;



Chapters 3-10 present the year 1 summary results for each of the selected case studies. These overviews are not intended to be exhaustive, but present the reader with a summary of the most pertinent elements. An exhaustive list of the data collected is held by One NorthEast and includes the database assembled as part of this commission and which will be used to track performance over the course of this study and beyond;



Chapter 11 summarises some of the key issues identified to date, but also takes the opportunity to draw out lessons learnt and early thoughts on how the various impacts from the investments may be impacting at various spatial scales (local, sub-regional/ city-regional, or regional). We also take the opportunity to reflect on some issues, which clearly interrelate, but which are either not possible to assess, or at least not at this juncture.

1.5 Quality of Place For the purpose of this commission, we have adopted the following definition of Quality of Place: “The range of factors, which contribute to the attractiveness and functionality of a locality or region as a place to live, work, invest or visit”.

The theoretical linkages between quality of place dimensions and economic competitiveness are outlined below and explained in some detail in the Scoping Report.

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

1.6 Relating Quality of Place Investments to the North East’s Economy2 The North East’s economy is one which has undergone substantial change over recent years, however significant challenges remain. Recently released statistics (ONS, Dec 2007) indicate that the North East’s GVA growth rate from 2005 to 2006 at 5.5% was only bettered in England by London (5.7%). Despite these positive headlines, average output in the region stands at 81% of the UK average (second from bottom of the UK’s regions.

The North East needs to continue to build upon a potential Quality of Life advantage, as evidenced by a recent EU survey which showed that Newcastle residents were very happy with their overall quality of life – much more so than other UK cities included in the survey, including London (EC 2007). This theoretical advantage was discussed in The Urban Studio’s report for the Northern Way, Residential Futures, which argued that Quality of Life was one of the few drivers of economic competitiveness which the UK regions could control, influence and importantly “sell” to potential investors and residents.

Returning to this report, it is important to focus on the ways in which Quality of Place improvements can be linked – conceptually – to key economic issues for the region. Based on a review of the literature and the relevant policy documents and our understanding of the key drivers of regional economic performance, we identified the following areas, which offer the greatest potential for Quality of Place investments to make a positive contribution to the economic performance of the region:

2. Improving productivity – economic density Agglomeration describes the link between employment density and productivity. The greater the density of employment within a particular area the more productive each of those jobs becomes. Colin Buchanan developed the approach for incorporating agglomeration benefits into transport scheme appraisals and it has important implications for refined economic and planning processes.

3. Increase labour force participation The Scoping Report describes how the North East region’s low productivity appears to stem from lower participation rates rather than lower productivity.

Reducing unemployment and increasing participation could have a significant impact on regional economic performance.

4. Tourism /culture economy The tourism and culture economy provides a growing source of additional income and employment opportunities. The North East has significant heritage and cultural assets and a range of successful events, many a testimony to One NorthEast investment. The region gains significant recognition by a sector that relies on the constant development of new destinations and service offer. Tourism has a particularly important role in those semi-rural, post-industrial contexts, such as the coalfields of County Durham, while culture is an important element in enhancing the Quality of Life offer in the North East’s city regions.

1. Knowledge worker attraction & retention Attracting and retaining more knowledge workers brings in more and higher value jobs and important spillover benefits – both in terms of additional spending, and of knowledge spillovers. Highly skilled employees and entrepreneurs that act as innovative catalysts can generate a trickle down effect where new and improved products, services and processes improve productivity and output.

2

The following represents a revised summary of the wider discussion contained within the Scoping Report (Sept, 2007).

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

1.7 Further Reading The Scoping Report (Sept, 2007) provides greater detail on the economic performance of the North East, detail on the selection process for our eight case studies and the analytical framework which forms the basis of the data to be collected over the course of the commission.

The Quality of Place: Programme Evaluation Report includes many complementary elements to this report looking in greater detail at the management arrangements of the case studies and their overall outputs to date, in addition to exploring the overall impacts of the wider programme.

The Executive Statement: Making the Links: Quality of Place and Economic Performance provides a concise and accessible overview of the North East’s Quality of Place evidence-base and conceptual understanding to date. It demonstrates links with economic performance and points to some key lessons for future monitoring and evaluation of similar projects, intended to assist policy makers, strategists, development professionals and evaluators to prioritise between investments and to ensure that the impacts can be monitored in an accurate, yet cost effective fashion.

The Technical Addendum provides further details on the theoretical evolution of the concepts used, their relevance to Quality of Place investments, and a detailed overview of the various methodologies and datasets used in the course of this research. This will be of interest to evaluators and programme/project developers.

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

02

Method & Approach 2.1 The eight case studies In this chapter we consider the overall approach, including the selection of the eight case studies and the analytical framework employed in this commission, before going on to focus on those approaches that sought to capture the change in physical place quality.

These are the Pedestrian Environment Review System (PERS), developed by Transport Research Lab (TRL), regularly applied by the CB team to assess streetscape environments, and The Urban Studio’s Place Quality Assessments (PQA) which captures the wider Place Quality performance of an area.

In August 2007, sub-regional partners were invited to submit potential case studies for consideration. The 26 submissions were then assessed and ‘scored’ out of a possible 35 marks against a variety of criteria including: 

Consistency with investment priorities (2)



Scale of impact (5)



Value of investment (5)



Project completion (5)



Available information (18)

This scoring system was to ensure that the most appropriate projects were identified for detailed analysis reflecting a range of project typologies, geographies and socio-economic contexts and at different stages in the development process. It was therefore not an exercise to select the ‘best’ projects.

From this eight case studies were selected, illustrated in the table below: Case Study

Sub-region

Investment Type

Brief Description

1

Mima and Central Square, Middlesbrough

Tees Valley

Transformational Quality of Place; Culture; Tourism

New modern art gallery, regional and national focus; transformed public space (Victoria Square)

2

Darlington Pedestrian Heart

Tees Valley

Transformational Quality of Place

Public realm investment in main thoroughfare and adjacent streets (Pedestrianisation, shared space)

3

NETPark, Sedgefield

Durham

Transformational Quality of Place

North East Technology Park –Business incubator spaces, esp. University spin-offs

4

Rivergreen Centre, Durham

Durham

Transformational Quality of Place

Sustainable office accommodation for SMEs applying green building technology

5

Seven Stories, Newcastle

Tyne & Wear

Tourism

Centre for children’s books and children’s books illustrations

6

Sunniside, Sunderland

Tyne & Wear

Transformational Quality of Place

Public realm investment in edge of town centre square and gardens

7

Blyth Market Place

Northumberland

Transformational Quality of Place

Public realm investment in Blyth’s central market square

8

Newbiggin Bay

Northumberland

Transformational Quality of Place; Tourism

Public realm investment in large scale sculpture in the bay of Newbiggin (part of new breakwater and beach)

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

2.2 The Assessment Framework3 The primary aim of this study is to establish a sound knowledge and evidence base to inform investment in One NorthEast’s ‘Quality of Place’ investments. To achieve this requires a robust assessment framework, which will allow us to trace the various impacts of such investments over time. While this commission covers an initial three-year period, the framework may require a longer term timeframe before many of the impacts begin to manifest themselves.

The framework (see overleaf) is designed to be: 

Flexible - enough to accommodate different types of projects, and impacts now and in the future (but still allow comparable analysis between projects);



Comprehensive - at the start it is necessary to collect more data than we think is needed, because the links between projects and local and regional outcomes are not fully understood;



Accessible - the framework is intended to eventually be made available to different users and incorporate the results of their projects and data collection;



Year 5: Interim evaluation



Year 7+: Formative evaluation

It should be noted that the framework needs to be flexible, and it is likely that different typologies of projects will use different elements of the framework

Data Collection The assessment framework utilises the following main sources of data/information: 

Economic change - Detailed labour market data employment, sectoral structure of employment, occupational profile, number of businesses (Sources: Annual Business Enquiry, Validation Office Agency, BETA model data4 ) - Wage levels - Economic activity rates - User numbers, dwell time and visitors by origin and average spend (Sources: ONE, local surveys, VB, destination - origin data) - Student retention rate (HESA data)



Property demand and land values - Rateable values and rents for commercial, residential and retail (Sources: VOA data, Land registry; plot by plot data every 5 years available, annual data on higher level from ONS) - Vacancy rates, disposal time of property and number of Planning applications (Sources: individual local authorities, Land Registry for residential) - Population figures (Sources: ONS, census plus local authority estimates)



Perception change - National and regional perception surveys (ONE,VB, UK Monitor, EU business monitor) - Number of Inward Investment enquires (ONE) - Number of tourism brochures requested (ONE)



Physical quality assessment: - PERS Assessment for streets and public places (survey) - URBAN STUDIO Place Quality Assessment (survey) - Façade Assessment of commercial properties (survey) - BREEAM Assessment

Meaningful - deliver information that is of use to regeneration, strategy and economic development professionals

Due to the nature of Quality of Place investments, there are likely to be different impacts over time and by spatial scale. Early impacts are likely to be highly localised, before spreading to city or sub-regional impacts. The importance of spatial scale and time require statistics that are available on the same basis over time and at all the required spatial levels. It is for this reason, along with the theoretical linkages identified in 1.6 above that the assessment framework makes significant use of labour market data.

In order to capture the full life cycle of project impacts, we suggest the following basic monitoring programme:





Comprehensive baseline assessment over all indicators on various spatial levels



Year 1: Early impact evaluation



Year 3: Medium term evaluation (and forecasts/ scenarios of longer term impacts)

3

A more expansive version of this text is included in Technical Addendum.

4

http://www.betamodel.com/numenu/06_Online - not collected as yet, but a potential source in the future depending on cost.

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

Perception survey data (tourism destination & Place to live & business location), Number of new facilities and services

Perception survey data (quality of tourism destination & place to live:internal and external interviewees & business location)

Employment change with 4 digit sector accuracy, number of businesses by sector, New businesses by origin, visitors by origin and average spend data, rent changes, GDP by sector, wage levels, HESA student figures Employment change with 4 digit sector accuracy, number of businesses by sector, New businesses by origin, visitors by origin and average spend data, rent changes, GDP by sector, wage levels, population, HESA student figures

Middlehaven in Middlesbrough, Science City Newcastle, Digital City Durham

Town/City centre

City region

National/International

Perception survey data (quality of tourism destination & place to live:internal and external interviewees & business location)

PERS/ LDY Design Quality Assessment; Number of new facilities and services

Employment change with 4 digit sector accuracy, number of businesses by sector, New businesses by origin, Visitors by origin and average spend data, rent changes, wage levels, population

Durham City, The Discovery Quarter in Newcastle, Darlington Pedestrian Heart; Grainger Town, Newcastle

Urban Quarter

Region/ National

PERS/ LDY Place Quality Assessment, Number of new facilities and services

Employment change with 4 digit sector accuracy, number of businesses by sector, New businesses by origin, Users and visitors by origin and average spend data, rent changes, wage levels, population

Sunniside: Sunderland Central Park: Darlington (75 acre)

Durham Tees Valley Airport; Beamish Open Air Museum Saltholme International Nature Reserve

PERS/ LDY Place Quality Assessment, Number of new facilities and services

Neighourhood/ ward level

PERS & ONE Design quality system; Number of new facilities and services

PERS & ONE Design quality system; Number of new facilities and services

Employment change with 4 digit sector accuracy, number of businesses by sector, New businesses by origin, Users and visitors by origin and average spend data, rent changes, Employment change with 4 digit sector accuracy, number of businesses by sector, New businesses by origin, Users and visitors by origin and average spend data, rent changes

Quality of Place Assessments

Employment change with 4 digit sector accuracy, number of businesses by sector, New businesses by origin, Users and visitors by origin and average spend data, rent changes, wage levels, population

Quality of Place investment programme:project examples

What we suggest to measure to track economic impacts of Quality of Place investments:

Former cement works in Eastgate, Weardale into a groundbreaking ecovillage

Street / square

Site

Geographical size of intervention area

Table 2.1: Assessment framework (09/07)

Local

Sub - regional

Regional

a) Contribution to reduction of unemployment b) Contribution to productivity gains (local wage levels) c) Contribution to increase of tourism spend from outside the region d) Contribution to reduction of residents traveling outside the region for leisure purposes e) Contribution to population gains - retaining and attracting human resources and skills: fostering innovation for better and new products, services and processes

Which of those indicators are likely to indicate significant contributions to regional growth and productivity gains?

Increase tourism/ culture economy turnover

Increase labour force participation

Improving productivity – economic density

Attracting knowledge worker from outside the region & retention of current stock

Quality of Place projects contributing to positive economic change on regional and city-regional level

2.3 Measuring Physical Place Quality One of the key features of the Colin Buchanan/Urban Studio approach is that it provides an opportunity to capture and track physical place quality in a consistent and quantifiable manner. This allows us, for example, to explore the graded change before and after a given scheme has taken place, or the extent to which an investment in one area may have resulted in additional improvements in surrounding areas.

The two primary methods, which we detail below, are the Pedestrian Environment Review System (PERS) and the Place Quality Assessment (PQA) - the former being more suitable for individual stretches of public realm, such as a streets and squares, whereas the latter allows for comparisons and impacts to be assessed across much larger areas. These comprehensive multidimensional and sophisticated assessment tools were complemented by façade quality assessments, counts of available cycle parking provision, and where appropriate, public transport facilities.

These methods were employed for four of the eight schemes, and we provide below a brief explanation of the method and results to facilitate the reader in interpreting the results.

The Pedestrian Environment Review System (PERS) The pedestrian environment review system (PERS) developed by Transport Research Lab (TRL) and regularly used by Transport for London (TfL) was used to assess the quality of each public realm case study and an average score was calculated to assess the design quality from a pedestrian’s point of view. PERS is a multi-criteria assessment tool designed to assess the quality of the pedestrian environment by placing scores on a number of characteristics, assessing the qualities of a particular street regarding its link or place function.

PERS distinguishes between the ‘link’ and ‘public place’ function of public realm to accommodate the specific role of a space has in terms of moving along and across (link function) and on the other hand as a place to stay and move around within it. PERS - Public Place Assessment lends itself therefore toward an assessment tool for squares, courtyards and parks and the PERS Link assessment is more suitable for streets and multimodal squares.

The PERS Assessment is an expert tool, undertaken by experienced assessor(s), preferably from an urban design background. The following quality aspects were assessed against a set of scores: The PERS Assessments included: the use of a scorecard system providing a series of prompts for each category; a comprehensive list of aspects to be considered in each of these categories; and scenarios for each quality level. A seven point scale between -3 and +3 was used. The box below outlines the scenarios for ‘Quality of Environment’. ‘Quality of the Environment’ concerns the degree to which a link is pleasant to use.

This scoring category is concerned with the general ambience of a link. (TRL 2005) The full set of scenarios are described in the Technical Addendum to this report.

PERS – Link Assessment 

effective width



dropped kerbs/gradient



obstructions



permeability



legibility



lighting



opportunity for activity



personal security



surface quality



user conflict



maintenance



quality of environment

PERS – Public Place Assessment 

moving in the space



interpreting the space



personal safety



feeling comfortable



sense of place



opportunity for activity

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

The PERS Assessments included: the use of a scorecard system providing a series of prompts for each category; a comprehensive list of aspects to be considered in each of these categories; and scenarios for each quality level. A seven point scale between -3 and +3 was used. The box below outlines the scenarios for ‘Quality of Environment’. ‘Quality of the Environment’ concerns the degree to which a link is pleasant to use.

This scoring category is concerned with the general ambience of a link. (TRL 2005) The full set of scenarios are described in the Technical Addendum to this report.

Quality of environment category Overall score: +3 The optimum score would be given where the environment is aesthetically pleasing and efforts have been made to foster a sense of place, by seating, high-quality materials and frontages or soft landscaping, for example, and activity and features to enjoy watching. The link would be quiet and enjoyable to use.

Overall score: 0 An average score for the quality of the environment would be gained by a reasonably well maintained link that used pleasant and durable materials and some good provision of public space. Overall it would not be an unpleasant place to be.

Overall score: -3 A score of -3 would be given where the link has harsh or uncomfortable surroundings. Contributory factors might be decaying buildings, the location of a major traffic corridor, excessive noise or spray. The link would not be pleasant for a pedestrian to spend any length of time in. It would be likely to be noisy or with heavy traffic.

PERS scores weighted according to perceived importance by users, varying design quality and measuring user benefits in monetary terms (£): Colin Buchanan developed a method to measure these user benefits of improved street design in monetary terms (£). This research work is explained in detail in TfL (Design for London): Business case for public realm, 2006 and CABE: Paved with Gold, 2007.

Over 600 interviews, conducted in a previous study for TfL (Design for London), have shown that users value PERS characteristics differently and so not every category is as important as the other. The figures above and overleaf show the importance of each individual category for PERS Link and PERS Public Place categories as derived from the extensive survey work for TfL (Design for London). It is noted that out of the 14 headline categories for PERS Link assessments, CB included 12 into the development of the business case for public realm improvements for pedestrians.

The two categories not considered in the development of monetary values for public realm improvements were ‘tactile information’ and ‘colour contracts’. Both are concerned with the provision for blind and partially sighted pedestrians and it was felt that a wholly separate approach to the survey work would need to be developed to adequately address the provision for those user groups.

Therefore Figure 2.1 shows the importance of the 12 remaining individuals PERS Link categories from a users’ point of view. Looking at the individual categories the research showed that ‘Quality of the environment’ represents with 24% the most important individual category for pedestrians when using a street.

Figure 2.2 shows the individual importance of PERS Public Place qualities. There are in total six headline categories.

The diagram illustrates that ‘Opportunity for activity’ and ‘Personal safety’ are most important for users of Public places. The research showed that 56% of the value pedestrians put on using a public place can be captured by these two categories.

The TRL handbook states that the degree to which a public space creates opportunity for activity contributes to the vitality and attractiveness of the space. Therefore consideration is given to user diversity and conflict, interaction levels and functionality.

Further it explains that the level of personal safety in a public space affects the quantity and quality of users attracted to that space. Therefore consideration is given to the presence of formal and informal surveillance, lighting, evidence of anti-social behaviour, provision for ‘hazardous’ activities, security presence and the ability to report incidents.

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

Figure 2.1: Importance of PERS Link categories (12)

Figure 2.2: Importance of individual PERS Public Place categories 100%

100%

90% 90%

Quality of environment 24%

Opportunity for activity, 31%

80% 70%

80%

60%

70%

Personal security 13%

50% 40% 30%

60% Permeability 12%

20% 10%

50% User conflict 11%

Personal safety , 25%

0%

Moving in the space , 18%

Feeling comfortable , 14% Interpreting the space , 6% Sense of place, 6%

40% Surface quality 10% 30% Maintenance 9%

20% Lighting 7% Legibility 5% 10%

Dropped kerbs/gradient 4% Obstructions 3%

0%

10

Effective width 2%

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

Having explained the weighting applied for individual categories of PERS, an additional factor needs to be considered in calculating the final weighted average PERS score for a street or square. This factor is the varying design quality along a street or larger square and how to reflect this in an average PERS score.

Essentially, a PERS Assessment is carried out for a part of a street that is characterised by similar quality only. On the ground that means that the first thing a PERS assessor has to do, is to decide how many subsections are required to represent the varying quality thus individual PERS Assessments are then conducted.

Individual scores for subsections of a space are then factored up by the length of each subsection.

The weighting process consists therefore of two elements: the importance of individual elements from a users’ point of view and the varying design quality of a street or square represented proportionally in the average score.

This enables an initial understanding of strengths and weaknesses of the space to inform a design process and can then be applied to assess the quality and performance change post intervention. The change in PERS scores together with visitor numbers and time spent at a location can be used to calculate the additional benefits to users of the space.

The PERS Assessment is complemented by data on cycling parking facilities, public transport waiting areas and commercial façades assessments of the properties framing the public realm improvement scheme.

Place Quality Assessment (PQA) The Place Quality Assessment has been developed by Tribal Urban Studio over a number of years to try and capture in a systematic and quantifiable way many of the elements that make a place function well (at the neighbourhood scale). The assessment focuses on the physical dimensions of Place, rather than on liveability factors such as schools and so on.

There are eight themes which make up the Place Quality Assessment; however, it is important to remember that we are also interested in their collective significance. To arrive at this composite score, weightings have been attached to each theme.

Process The Place Quality Assessment (PQA) is an expert tool, undertaken by trained assessors, preferably from an urban design background. This is important as many of the individual questions require a professional design judgement to be made and scores allocated accordingly. The tool, at this junction of its development, is internally consistent, but requires some additional development to make it consistently replicable by others. It will always require training, and will require a reasonable degree of urban design knowledge to complete.

Assessments are undertaken in teams of 2-3 and involve detailed site visits to the specific locations.

Using more than one individual reduces the risk of inconsistent results. Ideally the same team should be involved throughout an individual study.

The PQA begins by identifying the character areas which form the basis of the analysis. The boundaries are driven first and foremost by common physical urban structure criteria, such as housing types, barriers, sense of the place, distinctive uses or features and so on. For each character area, the approach seeks to understand: a)

The types of development and historical period, and how they contribute to the character of a place;

b) Structure of the urban landscape; c)

The open space provision and quality of individual spaces; and

d) The particular features within each area such

as landmarks, key buildings or building styles, streetscape etc.

PQAs are undertaken for each individual character area, however, an effort is made to ensure that the character areas overlay with output areas (the smallest census geography), to ensure that the physical place quality of a locality can be placed alongside other data, such as valuations, labour market data and so on. However, in some instances this may not be possible, in which case character is linked to approximate boundaries.

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

11

The eight themes (illustrated in the figure below), are considered to be those key elements which are necessary to have a sustainable, quality physical environment. The assessment focuses very much on the built environment, and therefore does seek to make wider judgements about a place, other than to comment on these eight key themes of physical place quality. For the purpose of the survey, these eight themes are all broken up into sub-questions, which are answered by the survey team for each of the character areas identified.

Table 2.2: The nine Place Quality Assessment themes, plus weightings 1. The Basics (Urban Form & Function)        

2. Character & Identity (distinctiveness)   

   

12

12.5%

   

    

12.5%

Facilities and form Vibrancy Vitality Appropriateness of retail provision – providing for local communities Accessibility of services

8. Ability to change – role for the future (adaptability/longevity) 12.5%

15%

Public realm Sense of enclosure Quality of materials Landscaping / Parks / Green Spaces Public art Absence of clutter Detailing of materials Positive range of hard open spaces Accommodating different users

7. Shops, services and places to meet (the quality of local centres)



Maintenance (general local environmental quality, including litter, enviro-crime etc.)

Noise Environmental harmony Air pollution Lighting

5. Safer Place (the role of the built environment in fostering safer places)    

7.5%

        

Strategic connections Movement framework Traffic & congestion Local links Walkability

4. Environmental Quality 

6. Streets and Spaces (the public realm)

Landmarks, vistas and focal points A discernable heart Characterful public realm or built form that engenders a sense of place

3. Getting around (accessibility and connectivity)     

25%

Density & urban fabric Built form Blocks Boundaries Mix of uses Parking Servicing Relationship with adjacent areas

5%

Facilities and form Vibrancy Vitality Appropriateness of retail provision – providing for local communities Accessibility of services

10%

Natural surveillance Legibility Lighting Urban form

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

2.4 Other surveys PERS & PQA – similarities and differences The two place quality assessment tools discussed above share many similarities, but are looking at different spatial levels. PERS is intended to capture the detailed design quality of a street or square, while the PQA is intended to analyse wider localities and also to make a wider assessment about Place, by considering how a wide range of softer factors make a contribution. In both cases, there is of course an element of subjectivity, which was in case of PERS comprehensively tested by the Transport Research Lab and minimised for instances by using scorecards and matching descriptive scenarios to compare the situation observed by the assessor with a benchmark. For PQA it is done by asking a number of checking questions.

Both assessment tools require trained professionals, scoring against a substantial number of set questions, which are applied for each street/area surveyed.

Other Quality Measures for physical environments In some instances, we have used other quality assessments, which have not been undertaken by the project team. This primarily refers to projects where the public realm or physical place quality element was not the main purpose of the project. In these cases, it was typically the quality/sustainability of the architecture that was in question and for this BREEAM has been used as an alternative assessment of the quality of the product.

The limitation of this sort of measure is that it is static, with the tool not designed to assess changes over time.

Commercial properties façade assessment CB developed a simple but easy-to-replicate façade assessment tool for commercial properties which distinguished between attractive, indistinctive and poor facades. These three performance levels were further described with a number of adjectives and exemplar pictures further supporting the assessment. Data was collected and mapped for three case studies.

5

In addition to the design-based assessments of the physical place quality, other assessments were undertaken by the project team, or partners. These often focussed on beneficiaries, ranging from shoppers to businesses. Details of some of the main methods are summarised below.

Shopper/Visitor Survey To facilitate partners in the project, it was agreed to use a common visitor/shopping survey, based on the survey component of the Northumberland Town Centre Performance System. This was undertaken in Blyth Town Centre by Colin Buchanan. In other cases, other methods and approaches have been used by partners and these results can be fed into the assessment framework although a consistent approach over time is critical, while consistency of assessment across locations would be highly desirable.

This appears to be a workable and beneficial approach and One NorthEast should give consideration as to whether such a common approach could be rolled out across the region as a matter of priority. This would assist all the Council’s in terms of meeting their Local Area Agreement monitoring requirements, would support baselines for Core Strategies, Retail Strategies and in the context of this report would provide a consistent and comparable baseline across all of the North East’s significant town centres.

Business Surveys5 Two primary types of business surveys were undertaken. The first was a business occupier survey for locations such as NETPark and the Rivergreen Centre ( to be conducted in 2008). These were facilitated by partners and allowed us to achieve a comprehensive baseline. In the case of NETPark, these were supplemented by a business leader focus group.

The second was a survey of the wider business community within a particular catchment area.

This involved some 520 respondents among local businesses focussed on five of the case studies (mima, Darlington Pedestrian Heart, Sunniside Gardens, Seven Stories, and Newbiggin Bay).

Some of these data were collected for the programme evaluation, but are cross-reported here.

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

13

User and Pedestrian Activity Data on the number of users of a facility or the public realm was collected via pedestrian surveys, data from counters or visitor surveys. Data with varying reliability is currently available for some of the case studies.

For the purpose of assessing the success or change of attractiveness of a place, we would have ideally liked to compare user numbers between the ‘before improvement’ situation with the numbers for the operational phase of a scheme. For various reasons this was only possible for two case studies, namely Blyth market place which is currently undergoing refurbishment and Darlington Pedestrian Heart where pedestrian counter data covering a couple of weeks during the construction period.

Vacant properties (ground floor level) We collected and mapped the number of vacant properties for five case studies areas. Where possible those figures were compared with data collected in previous years. A decline in vacant properties can be considered as one of the early signs of land value and Quality of Place improvements initiated by investment both in local public realm and/or neighbouring premises.

Interviews Interviews were undertaken with a wide body of partners and stakeholders, ranging from project developers, officers within One NorthEast, project partners, business representatives, town centre managers and so on. A variety of proformas were developed relating to the individuals role/perspective on the project.

14

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

2.5 Summary of Primary Research Activities The table below summarises the primary research undertaken as part of this commission for each of the eight case studies as well as data that has or will be made available to the research team in 2008 e.g. regular surveys conducted by the case study partner.

The map presented overleaf provides the geographical spread of the eight case studies over the north east region and their relative location to the town centre.

Table 2.3 Primary research activities Case Study Assessment

Mima, Victoria Square

Darlington Pedestrian Heart

NETPark

Rivergreen Centre

Sunniside Gardens

Seven Stories

Blyth Market Place

Newbiggin Bay

PERS

X

X

N/A

N/A

X

N/A

X

N/A

Place Quality Assessment

X

X

N/A

N/A

X

N/A

X

N/A

X

N/A

N/A

X

N/A

X

N/A

N/A

N/A

possible

X

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

X

X

X

intended

X

X

X

X

Shopper / Visitor survey

N/A

X

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

X

X

Pedestrian/ Visitor Activity data

X

X

N/A

N/A

X

X

X

X

Vacant properties

X

X

N/A

N/A

X

possible

X

X

Interviews

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Faรงade Assessment BREEAM Business Questionnaire I or II

Focus Group

X

intended

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

15

New Biggin Bay

Blyth Market Place

Seven Stories, Newcastle

Sunniside Gardens, Sunderland

Northumberland

New Biggin Bay Blyth Bay

Tyne & Wear

mima, Middlesbrough

Newcastle Sunderland

Durham

County Durham

Sedgefield Middlesborough NETPark, Sedgefield

Darlington

Tees Valley

The Riverside Centre, Durham

16

Darlington Pedestrian Heart

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

03

Case Study 1 mima and Central Square

Name

Short Description

Investment in a new modern art museum and in a substantial new central space for Middlesbrough

Tees Valley

One NorthEast investment type

Transformational Quality of Place / Culture / Tourism

Value of total Investment

MIMA

Sub-region

The first of our case studies is the Middlesbrough Institute of Modern Art (mima) and the associated public realm investment at Centre Square.

£19,200,000 (construction only): £13,883,658 (72,3%)

To develop a new Art Gallery for the Tees Valley, which would act as a catalyst for regeneration.

Employees (Direct)

Completion

Single Programme Investment + other public+ third sector

Private sector Investment

Key Objectives

Northern Rock Foundation £500,000

To enhance the image of Middlesbrough by providing art space and public space to be used for different purposes in the course of a year. In particular to offer something distinctive.

SP £3,500,000 (18,2%) SRB £1,133,000 ERDF £4,8,000 Arts Council £4,500,000 Middlesbrough Council £4,667,000 Christina Foyle Foundation £100,000

Key Outputs

January 2007

Other

Façade assessments

Visitor numbers

1) (year 1 mima estimate: 160,000); representing an increase of 50,000 over initial estimate;

20 full time (self reported) 20 part time (self reported)

contemporary art gallery with café and shop renovated art & public space in total 3,743m2 of nonresidential floorspace

2) Visitors through shopping centre: 12 million (Jan –Oct 07)

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

17 17

3.1 Overview The Middlesbrough Institute of Modern Art (mima) opened its doors in January 2007. The gallery, designed

by Erick van Egeraat (EEA), was built to house the town’s substantial 20th century art collection and to host exhibitions of national and international standing.

In addition to the gallery, a substantial investment was made to transform the adjacent area, Victoria Square, into a contemporary public space. This scheme was also designed by EEA with renowned Dutch landscape architects, West 8. It is hoped that this first development in the wider Central Square space, along with the Central Library and the adjacent Town Hall, will lead to the establishment of a ‘cultural quarter’ for Middlesbrough with good links to the nearby University and design community located there. Further phases will see the remainder of Central Square redeveloped, which should help to continue the momentum of change around this key space.

Indeed, on its current level of visitors, mima is set to become the most popular visitor attraction in the Tees Valley by some margin. Indeed, based on January to August figures for 2007, mima would be the 17th most popular attraction in the North East, and the 8th most popular museum/gallery.

These developments are intended to endorse the town’s role as a key sub-regional centre and will combine to provide an attraction of significant regional and national importance. Early indications are that the scheme has had a positive impact on businesses, with some examples of higher order retail moving into Middlesbrough, with others citing the enhanced status of the town as being a helpful factor in attracting businesses to the sub-region6.

The proposal to realise a new art gallery for the Tees Valley is inextricably linked to the aims of the Regional Economic Strategy, the Tees Valley Strategic Framework, in particular in relation to supporting the renaissance of the Tees Valley’s urban centres. In addition, the proposals are strongly supported by the Arts Council of England for whom the realisation of a new gallery in the Tees Valley is a strategic objective providing a balance of visual arts provision across the region.

In terms of assessing impacts, as with many of the other case studies which follow, it must be remembered that the scheme and the gallery are very much in their infancy and as such the comments which follow should be taken as early observations, and setting a baseline for future years, rather than a definitive assessment.

Detail The gallery, of almost 3750m2, includes five exhibition galleries, two project spaces, education space, a “sound space”, an event space, two collection stores, a conservation studio, a popular café and shop, and a roof terrace and garden, in addition to office accommodation. The building seeks to provide a facility unequalled as far as Gateshead in the North and Leeds in the South. The museum is on course to exceed its year one estimates by 50,000, with a total of 160,000 visitors anticipated in year 17.

18

The surrounding public space containing some 19,000m2 of landscaped open space is one of the largest civic spaces in Europe and contains a 120jet water feature, innovative corten steel walkways and large areas of lawn. The space is intended to host a variety of events for culture and public life in Middlesbrough and the wider city region. Some of these events help to place Middlesbrough on the map, such as the BBC Proms (6,000 visitors; plus national media coverage); and the Music Live festival (20,000 visitors).

The Question Of Fit? Why Invest?

The purpose of Single Programme/SRB and ERDF funding was to help increase the gallery’s potential to operate on a national and international level. The anticipated visitor numbers per annum were originally estimated to be in the region of 110,000, although this figure is likely to be exceeded by some margin. It was estimated that half of the visitors are likely to come from outside of the region, with half of that figure staying overnight in the region.

6

Reference: Interviews with Chamber of Commerce, Programme Evaluation

7

Actual figure for first eight months: 90,742 (One NorthEast: NE Attraction Visitor Numbers, Jan-Oct ‘07)

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

3.2 Economic Performance Snapshot Introduction to the economic performance snapshot This section provides a snapshot of the key economic performance data which has been collected for the purpose of baselining each of the case studies and against which future progress can be monitored and impacts assessed.

This section contains a brief assessment of the indicators collected, with attention to the elements that might show change if a particular project were impacting economic growth.

A summary table of indicators follows, which provides a variety of indicators with relative geographic comparisons. These tables are largely meant to posit the baseline situation – the economic performance of the project’s area now, and this will be used for comparison in future years. A few trends statistics are established, though trend assessment and impacts to date are more the focus of the second piece of research affiliated with this project.

In these tables, not all cells are filled, as each indicator is not available at every geographical level.

Also, data provided at a ‘local’ level is not always the exact same area. For example, some data is available by wards, others by SOA, and yet others by lower level postcodes. Where possible, every effort has been made to create comparable areas for each value in the ‘local’ column. Exact geographies used are designated by the footnotes for each category.

Like most of the region, Middlesbrough is under transition from former heavy industry to a more service based economy. From 2004-2006, employment in financial services and other services increased 18% each. This trend is also evident in the very local area around mima, where employment in financial services dropped an estimated 4%, but jobs in other services increased an estimated 46%.

Key ways in which we expect mima might influence local and regional economic performance are tourism visits and expenditure and image enhancement.

Staging the BBC PROMS in 2007 at Central square attracted an estimated 20,000 people to the centre of Middlesbrough with around 8,000 visitors to mima that day. However, data availability relating to overall tourism or shopper spend in Middlesbrough nor a visitor counter at the square or mima itself is given. It will be crucial to collect this information in 2008 to substantiate the impact. However, at present, there is little data available at any level more local than the Tees Valley, and this make’s mima’s contribution difficult to isolate.

Also, Middlesbrough-wide data on hotel occupancy rates (particularly near mima) and visits to other tourist draws would be helpful to learn mima’s potential secondary impact on wider tourism.

On a sub-regional level (the lowest geographical level of tourism data), it appears that tourists are spending less time in the Tees Valley (in 2006, as compared to 2004), though they are spending more money. As mima opened in 2007, we have no data yet to indicate the change that mima may have caused. We will look carefully at the 2007 Tees Valley tourism statistics, though it will be difficult to know if any change that emerges at that geographical level is because of mima or other reasons.

Mima’s more indirect contribution to local image improvements appears promising but will require longer-term tracking. In our business survey, of the 114 respondents within 5 miles of mima, more than 80% reported that the scheme improved the local image.

However, only 73% of those within a 5 mile radius were aware of the scheme, indicating that marketing and awareness could be improved.

Mima is located in one of the more deprived local areas of Middlesbrough, which itself is the ninth most deprived LAD in England. While the average score on the 2007 Indices of Deprivation among SOAs in Middlesbrough was nearly 39, the average in the local area around mima was 64 (the higher the score, the greater the level of deprivation).

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

19

mima and Central Square Key Economic statistics Year intervention start

2004 (construction began)

Year intervention completed

2007 Local

Residential sales values

Middlesbrough

Tees Valley

North East

England

1

2007 Avg. value - 1 bed

88,100

88,600

144,600

2007 Avg. value - 2 bed

64,700

110,300

166,800

2007 Avg. value - all

65,300

120,918

219,300

5-yr growth in value

4%

68%

1-yr growth in value

4.4%

9.2%

Retail Zone A /commercial ratable values

Local area /

2005 Avg. £/sqm - zone A

873 £ per m2: 311 unit and 12500m2 surveyed (for area see map on data base cd)

Avg./sqm - all retail Vacancy rate - all commercial premises Vacancy rate - retail Avg. rent £/sqm - offices

Town centre

573 £per m2: 311 unit and 12500m2 surveyed (for area see map on data base cd) 55£ per m2 212 unit and 15700m2 surveyed (for area see map on data base cd)

Population 2006 mid-year estimate

138,400

2,555,700

50,762,900

-2.0%

0.6%

2.7%

79,900

1,524,300

30,682,000

67%

71%

74%

5%

5%

4%

27%

24%

21%

N/A N/A -23% -9%

-10% NA -19% 29%

-10% -14% -5% 4%

-3% 2% -7% 5%

5 : Distribution, hotels and restaurants (SIC G,H)

-2%

-2%

2%

-4%

6 : Transport and communications (SIC I)

-8%

-19%

9%

0%

7 : Banking, finance and insurance, etc (SIC J,K)

-4%

13%

15%

7%

18%

-11%

2%

3%

46%

13%

5%

4%

16.5% 19.7%

22.7% 14.3%

27.1% 13.6%

22,338 310

224,334 1,864

4,435,692 98,050

2001-2006 growth Employment

4

2006 working age residents share in employment share unemployed share inactive Growth rates by sector 2004-2006 (by place of employment): 1 2 3 4

: : : :

Agriculture and fishing (SIC A,B) Energy and water (SIC C,E) Manufacturing (SIC D) Construction (SIC F)

8 : Public administration, education & health (SIC L,M,N) 9 : Other services (SIC O,P,Q) Qualifications among residents Number of residents with NVQ 4+ Number of residents with no qualifications Crime All crimes committed (2006/2007) Robberies (2006/2007)

20

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

Year intervention start Year intervention completed

2004 (construction began) 2007 Local Middlesbrough

Deprivation5 2007 IMD average score 2007 IMD rank of average score Graduate recruitment/retention Number of new graduates working in the area 05/06

64 885

Number of new advanced degree graduates working in the area Share of employed NE university graduates working in the area3 percentage point change - 02/03 to 05/06 - in share of employed NE grads in the area Income Mean gross weekly pay (residence-based) Mean gross weekly pay (workplace-based) Local Business Perception Survey (Dec 2007) 0.5 and 5 miles radius Number of respondents Share aware of the scheme

Tees Valley

North

38.94 9 3431

36058

864

9043

6%

60%

1

-3

349.4 371.5

387.9 388.1

31 77%

114 73%

13%

10%

88%

81%

2006 Annual Visit Days

160,000 in 2007 to mima building, estimate)

!Construction period!

17,958,805

2006 Revenue from all tourists

!Construction period!

!Construction period!

535,229,778,187

04-06 growth rate, tourist days

!Construction period!

!Construction period!

-2%

04-06 growth rate, revenue from visitors

!Construction period!

!Construction period!

2%

(of those aware) Share reporting increase in turnover as a result of scheme (of those aware) Share reporting improved local image as a result of scheme Tourism

England

461.3 460.3

1: ‘Local’ residential prices based on sales in postcode TS1; Middlesbrough based on TS postcodes. For more detailed data see CD. 2: Data on regional trends was not available from the same source (though could be estimated with other sources) so is not included 3: Here, England is not provided - UK is substituted 4: local employment data based on mid-layer SOA Middlesbrough 001 5: Local deprivation is based on the constituent lower layer SOAs for mid-layer SOA Middlesbrough 001 (E01012068, E01012069, E01012070, E01012092, E01012093, E01012094)

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

21

3.3 Detailed public realm assessment using PERS After dividing the assessment site into two distinct areas to contrast between the scheme area, and the unrefurbished part of the square, we conducted two sets of PERS Link and Place assessments covering the refurbished, mainly hard landscaped, square in front of mima and the gardens with lake to the east of mima.

The map and pictures below illustrate the nature and extent of the individual survey areas.

As shown in the summary spider diagrams below and overleaf, all four assessments show average weighted scores of above 2.1, whereby the refurbished part of the vast open space scores significantly higher than the park with lake. Having said that, PERS scores above 2 suggest a generally very positive environment for pedestrians.

The refurbished square (A) shows with 2.73 a very high level of Place Quality for pedestrian users. The challenge of making this vast square work has been resolved by using bespoke design features such as the lamps, a large scale and gushing water feature, bespoke two sided benches and the introduction of a primary and secondary footpaths hierarchy.

Middlesbrough: PERS Survey 2007 Figure 3.1: Middlesbrough: PERS Survey 2007

Victoria Square

Victoria Square (A)

Central Central Gardens Gardens (B)

Legend Pedestrian Link Public Space Public Transport Waiting Area Boundary between PERS A & B

22

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

Figure 3.2: Middlesbrough: ��������������� Victoria ���������������������������������������������������������� Square (A) Public Place with weighted average of +2.73 �����

Figure 3.3: Middlesbrough: ��������������� Victoria ������������������������������������������������������������� Square (A) Pedestrian Link with weighted average of +2.42 �����

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

23

Figure 3.4: Middlesbrough: Central Gardens (B) Public Place with weighted average of +2.27

Figure 3.5: Middlesbrough: Central Gardens (B) Pedestrian Link with weighted average of +2.11

24

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

3.4 Place quality assessment (PQA) However during our site inspection a few short comings were identified: the maintenance and state of the trees at Victoria Square is relatively poor, the number of cycle parking facilities is limited and the spaces beside and behind the mima building are disappointing. They provide little assistance in recognising it as gateway to the square. The loading bays and the car park are physically not well connected with the square and/or mima’s main entrance. These issues, particularly the wayfinding and the difficulty to interpret the space ‘behind’ mima properly, ought to be addressed as part of the improvements planned for Central Gardens.

As part of the Place Quality Assessment (PQA) we identified seven character areas representing a signficant chunk of the town centre. The rationale for this was to explore the extent to which the invesment in mima and Central Square may over the course of time have an impact on surrounding areas. In the context of this scheme, it is useful to focus on the difference between Area 1 (mima + Central Square) and the adjacent Area 2 (as yet unrefurbished) .

In general terms, much of the town centre has seen investment in public realm over recent years, which in addition to the generally strong and clear urban structure, results in most character areas achieving relatively high scores.

The mima scheme itself, including the refurbished public realm and space, scores extremely well in terms of the elements the scheme was intended to address.

Where it scores less well is in relation to the area’s ability to change (due to the nature of the very large office buildings), and in some aspects of “The Basics” again relating to the very large plot sizes and the lack of animation/activities on the square itself. Additionally the interaction with Grange Road is not sympathetic, with the back of mima forming something of an aggressive barrier along this boundary.

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

25

Figure 3.6: Character ��������������������� Areas (PQA)

Figure 3.7: PQA scores for Character Areas (PQA)

26

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

Nonetheless, an overall PQA score of 79.4 is positive, and falls a fraction shy of the highest possible category.

This is notable when contrasted with the second half of the square, which has not yet been refurbished.

This area scored least well of all the seven character areas assessed (at 63.1). Were Phase 1 (mima + Central Square) to have achieved a similar score to the remainder of the square (a reasonable assumption), this would imply that the investment resulted in a 16.3 point increase in overall place quality levels. This level of change is quite impressive and suggests that the investment has raised the place quality from a decidedly mediocre space, to a space which exhibits most of the characteristics of a high quality space. The changes in economic values in future years will be assessed to try and capture what the impact of different levels of quality change.

An element of this increase can also be attributed to the physical restructuring which was undertaken at the western end of the square, an element which is not as acute to the eastern end of the square. This suggests that the overall increase may well have been even higher in Area 1.

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

27

28

New gallery building (Area 1)

Unrefurbished half of Central Square (Area 2)

Differential quality between areas 1 and 2

The assessment identifies the interface with Grange Road as poor (Area 1)

Example of high quality street furniture used within area 1

Example of typical public realm palette in use elsewhere in the town centre (Area 3)

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

3.5 Early observations/issues What’s Worked?8 Although on the whole data is not yet available for on most indicators for the time period after mima’s opening, we present early (largely qualitative) reflections on what appears to be working and speculate on the contribution they may be making.

A big bang effect: The scheme, without question, has had a dramatic effect in creating a strong focal point for Middlesbrough. The achieved Quality of Place both measured by PERS and PQA suggest a significant improvement of the square. Most of the land-uses around the square are of civic nature and to not lend themselves easily to economic value generation. Mima itself is free of charge. However the shopping centre to the south and temporary activities such as music events and markets will help to further enhance the Quality of Place “offer” and the image of Middlesbrough and the wider city region. The previous gallery (Linthorpe Road) had approximately 10,000 visitors per annum. Specific events since the Central square and mima have been opened attracted (as estimated by MIMA management): 

20,000 visitors, 5 to 6,000 in museum (Music Live festival)



8,000 visitors, 3,000 in museum (Artfair on square 2007)



6,000 visitors, 3,000 in museum (BBC proms on square)

From a national marketing/branding view point, staging the BBC Proms in 2007, an event of national reach, has been a particular positive achievement in the first year.

So is the Bauhaus exhibition at mima itself which again is of national if not international reach.

In 2007/08 MIMA presented the most significant Bauhaus exhibition in the UK for 30 years, focusing on the ethos of the Bauhaus School between 1919 and 1933. The show included works by Paul Klee, Wassily Kandinsky and Josef Albers, film works by Laszlo Moholy-Nagy, architectural models, design, applied art, furniture and a specially commissioned wall drawing.

Impact on retail / town centre uses: There appears to have been a positive impact on both the arts community and the retail/leisure sectors in Middlesbrough. The way the shopping centre manager is measuring footfall has been changed in Jan 2007 and therefore we rely on the managers initial assessment of the 2007 trading year.

He reported that footfall has increased through the exit from the Mall Shopping Centre, onto Central Square, and a number of higher order retailers have recently opened bringing an enhanced offer to Middlesbrough town centre. Further, there are initiatives to establish a range of leisure related activities (e.g. restaurant/cafés) along the west end of the square. These are the kinds of changes we will be able to monitor in future years against the baseline retail information collected if a pedestrian counting facility as well as a regular shopper surveys are conducted.

Impact on the wider business community: The scheme has resulted in some positive press coverage for Middlesbrough, albeit in a year that it topped one list of Britain’s worst town to live in9. It also provides a focal point within the town and a more diverse “town centre offer” which can help to improve investor confidence.

There was a sense that the enhanced offer, along with the provision of affordable office accommodation, represented a viable alternative to out of town business parks. These are all, of course, early observations, as data does not yet cover the period after mima’s opening. The take-up of, and investment in, Central Middlesbrough office space will be of particular interest to track over the course of this project to quantify any such impacts and , again, our baseline data collection is preparing for such assessments in the future.

Impact on tourism: mima has added something new and distinctive to the sub-regional tourism offer. In response to the enhanced offer, the Council have expanded their tourism team to enhance Middlesbrough’s marketing and tourism capacities.

The scheme appeals to both the business and day tourism sectors. The gallery offers a landmark building which helps to showcase the town, and has raised expectations of residents for the rest of the town.

We do not seek to draw definitive conclusions, but rather make some early observations on some of the successes of the project based on our direct assessments, while also reflecting on stakeholder feedback from the Quality of Place Programme Evaluation.

9 The result of Channel 4’s “Best and Worst Places to live in Britain”. This generated some unwelcome press for Middlesbrough in 2007.

8

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

29

It would be ideal to attempt to quantify this impact, as there is real potential for mima to draw in visitors from outside the region and to have wider impacts on Middlesbrough and the North East. However, data on increases in visits and tourism expenditure and distance travelled are needed to make this link. Improving this localised data collection has been highly recommended, and will be followed in the future years of this study.

Regional versus local level impact: One NorthEast and other partners (e.g. ERDF) made a conscious choice to invest additional funding in the scheme with a view to making the gallery serve more than a purely local function. This factor aims to put mima on the national map and hence attract visitors to the region. In order to assess this, it will be necessary to undertake more comprehensive surveys of visitors than is currently the case. This higher international profile does appear to have realised early tangible benefits with mima securing an additional £1m funding towards its collection10.

Maintenance levels & safer places: There was some very positive feedback on the general maintenance levels and the role of the dedicated wardens, which have helped to keep the public space clean and safe.

Water-feature: Though by no means a conclusive assessment, the water feature was cited as a positive element, despite minor health and safety concerns.

Room For Improvement Visitor numbers and pedestrian counts: Entrance to mima, and its associated facilities is free of charge.

Currently, visitor numbers to the various elements are not being systematically counted and we would strongly recommend that this be addressed in the short term with a system that would more accurately allow mima to track visitor numbers to its various components.

Additionally, we recommend that mima (or ONE NE?) conducts at least one visitor survey annually to provide information on average daily spend, distance travelled, along with customer satisfaction topics. This will be of particular benefit in building a case for future funding and should be considered an essential component of a wider monitoring process.

10

30

Engagement: Concerns were expressed that the level of engagement earlier on in the process and during construction was low, and less effective. It was felt that opportunities had been missed to bring the business community fully on board, so that events, advertising, marketing and so on could have been coordinated in a more systematic manner for greater overall benefit.

It was also felt that an opportunity was missed during the construction phase to engage the general public and the business community, and create a sense of anticipation. A number of stakeholders felt that this situation was improving.

Opening hours: The opening hours were cited by some as being somewhat limited, with no evening opening times and limited Sunday opening times (1200-1600), with the gallery closed between exhibitions, with a suggestion being that some of the gallery could remain open showing elements of the permanent collection.

Corporate Hospitality: There was quite an amount of criticism regarding the provision and cost of corporate hire for the facility, with a sense that the gallery was not initially geared up to cater for this segment. This was felt to be improving, although with further room for improvement possible.

Post-construction issues: The Place Quality Assessment identified some issues with elements of the construction. We understand that most of these elements (e.g. trees and some hard features) still fall under the post-construction warranty and are in hand.

Design Elements: Addressing the currently disappointing southern and eastern frontage of the gallery building and spaces, along with replacing/ repairing the trees/landscape elements could improve the impression of the square.

Friends: The absence of a “friends of mima” scheme was felt to be a missed opportunity to engage the public and the business community.

Overall As with many of the projects which follow, it must be remembered that it is very much early days for the life of this scheme, and as such many of the positives outlined above remain to be tracked and many of the concerns can be ironed out. Mima has certainly created something of a stir and has definitely brought something new and distinctive to the Tees Valley.

The funding was awarded jointly to mima in partnership with The Drawing Centre, New York, by the Art Fund, Britain’s leading independent art charity.

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

04

Case Study 2 Darlington Pedestrian Heart

Name

Short Description

Substantial public realm investment resulting in the pedestrianisation of a significant part of Darlington Town Centre.

Sub-region

Tees Valley

One NorthEast investment type

Transformational Quality of Place

Value of Total Investment

£6,569,000 (initial); £8,400,000 (final) Key Objectives

“To create focal point and physical environment in central Darlington, which would promote the town centre to the widest possible audience for its unique qualities as a location for leisure, investment, shopping and culture, in its own right and as a major sub regional centre.”

Key Outputs

The pedestrianisation of a substantial portion of Darlington Town Centre, along with associated public realm and street furniture enhancements.

Completion

June 2007

Pedestrian counter, (before)

not available

Façade assessments and vacant premises;

Pedestrian counter, (average week; weeks 24 to 43 in 2007 )

Single Programme Investment + other public funding+ third sector

Private sector Investment

DARLINGTON PEDESTRIAN HEART

Other

The second case study is the Darlington Pedestrian Heart scheme, which involved a major transformation of a significant portion of the main elements of Darlington Town Centre.

£100,000

SP £3,500,000 Darlington Borough Council £4.800,000 Local Transport Plan £900,000

High row: 79135 Westrow: 22758 Skinnergate: 57939

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

31

4.1 Overview The Darlington Pedestrian Heart Project was launched in the summer of 2007 following more than two years of work in the town centre. The scheme involved the pedestrianisation of a large part of Darlington Town Centre, stretching from Blackwellgate to the south west, along West Row and High Row, encompassing a small bus only access route from Priestgate Row to Tubwell Row, and ultimately beyond the focal point at Prospect Place over towards Northgate and Bondgate.

The project was designed largely by Gillespies, with some contribution from the artist Michael Pinsky (especially the water feature and the “Life Pulse”).

The Question of Fit? Why Invest?

The project addresses the vision of the Urban White Paper which is championed through the Regional Economic Strategy, in addition to the Tees Valley Strategic Framework.

Figure 4.1: An overview of the Pedestrian Heart Scheme

Detail A focus of the scheme was the reorganisation of movement corridors for different modes within the space. A key concern had been that the centre of Darlington had previously been “choked” by buses. The scheme sought to address this by relocating the buses to Tubwell Row and Prebend Row and expanding the pedestrianised component to include Prospect Place, West Row and Blackwellgate.

The scheme is intended to provide a better retail environment, provide confidence for investors, and enhance the image of Darlington as a place to visit, shop, live and do business. The scheme has also added additional spaces and facilities for temporary events, such as the markets and music events.

Construction of the scheme was inevitably disruptive since it involved repaving all the main shopping streets, and therefore affected access to all shops on these streets at some stage. Moreover, the works to High Row/West Row/Prebend where three levels were changed to two, involved substantial engineering works to change the profile of the cross section.

There were some issues during the construction phase including how businesses were engaged with, with criticism that businesses were unaware of when and how their businesses were likely to be impacted. This particular issue is believed to have been effectively dealt with by the end of the process.

Source: Gillespies 2005

Another substantial factor was the striking of the gas main which led to substantial disruption and cost to the project. The gas main, originally laid in 1900, was far closer to the surface than original plans and radar scans had suggested. The overall direct costs of replacing the main came to approximately £880,000 and resulted in a three month delay to the project, as well as further costs associated with this delay.

32

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

4.2 Economic performance snapshot It is expected that this intervention could contribute to local economic development by increasing retail footfall, expenditure and jobs, and also by boosting the local image and attraction of day tourists.

On a regional level, however, we would expect most of the increase in retail expenditure and day tourists will be largely displacement of expenditure from elsewhere in the North East. We expect the economic impact for Darlington to be positive with impacts of sub-regional significance in the future; however currently we expect the regional impact to be negligible. Pre-construction data for vacant premises, although to be treated with caution suggests, that the number of vacant properties in the town centre is falling since 1999 (fig.4.4).

Discovery Properties Ltd quote the Pedestrian Heart as an important factor in their decision to develop the £90 million ‘The Oval Shopping and Leisure Centre’ due to start on site this year. New owners have bought the 1992 ‘Cornmill Shopping Centre’ and have invested to upgrade it, again citing the Pedestrian Heart as a significant factor in their expectation that Darlington town centre will experience a renaissance. Property agents advertising for a buyer for the freehold of the House of Fraser department store building stated their expectation that the Pedestrian Heart would lead to an increase in rental levels. CTC Marine, a growing world class market leader in sub-sea trenching, is to build its office headquarters in the town centre. DCSF is re-locating, its 480 northern staff into a new building to be built in the town centre. Both have recognised the renaissance of the town centre as favourable to their decisions.

Our baseline data collection is aims at tracking these changes so that can be quantified as thoroughly as possible in future years. Weekly pedestrian counts covering the period of week 24 to 43 of the year 2007 are available (fig.4.3). At the three main spots a total of together 3.2 million visitors to the town centre were counted during this period (this is likely to include double counting). As the project is just now completed, these counts can be used as a baseline, against which future growth can be measured. It is believed that these counts will be continued locally, so that we can track changes in future years. Retail and commercial rateable values will be tracked in future years extended by checking the dynamics in the rental market to estimate changes in expenditure in the project area.

In terms of image, 76% of the 144 businesses within a five mile radius reported that the intervention has improved the local area. However, many respondents also indicated difficulties during the construction process, causing significant loss in trade. We will continue to track this sense of image in future years, when we estimate the image will be improved as the negative impacts during construction are more distant.

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

33

Darlington Pedestrian Heart Key Economic statistics Year intervention start Year intervention completed

2005 (construction began) 2007 Local Darlington

Residential prices 1 2007 Avg. value - 1 bed 89,400 2007 Avg. value - 2 bed 100,700 2007 Avg. value - all 154,800 5-yr growth in value 1-yr growth in value Retail Zone A /commercial rateable value Avg. rent £/sqm - zone A 453 (see map) Avg. rent/sqm - all retail 326 (see map) Number of vacant premises in the town centre 31 (see map) Feb 2007 ( without stalls) Vacancy rate - retail N/A Avg. rent £/sqm - offices 36 Population 2006 mid-year estimate 2001-2006 growth Employment3 2006 working age residents share in employment share unemployed share inactive Growth rates by sector 2004-2006 (by place of employment): 1 : Agriculture and fishing (SIC A,B) N/A 2 : Energy and water (SIC C,E) N/A 3 : Manufacturing (SIC D) -28% 4 : Construction (SIC F) 67% 5 : Distribution, hotels and restaurants (SIC G,H) 1% 6 : Transport and communications (SIC I) 4% 7 : Banking, finance and insurance, etc (SIC -5% J,K) 8 : Public administration, education & health (SIC L,M,N) 9 : Other services (SIC O,P,Q) Qualifications among residents Number of residents with NVQ 4+ Number of residents with no qualifications Crime figures All crimes committed (2006/2007) Robberies (2006/2007)

34

Tees Valley

North East

94,500 104,900 130,302 96% 3.6%

England 2

144,600 166,800 219,300 68% 9.2%

287 223

41

99,300 1.4%

2,555,700 0.6%

50,762,900 2.7%

58,300 76% 3% 21%

1,524,300 71% 5% 24%

30,682,000 74% 4% 21%

-7% -17% -18% 94% -1% 122%

-10% -14% -5% 4% 2% 9%

-3% 2% -7% 5% -4% 0%

-2%

15%

7%

-18%

-9%

2%

3%

6%

11%

5%

4%

27.4% 14.2%

22.7% 14.3%

27.1% 13.6%

10,311 93

224,334 1,864

4,435,692 98,050

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

Year intervention start Year intervention completed

2005 (construction began) 2007 Local Darlington

Deprivation4 2007 IMD average score 2007 IMD rank of average score Graduate recruitment/retention

45.30 4,234

Number of new graduates working in the area 05/06 3

Tees Valley

North East

England

24.10 95

1431

36058

Number of new advanced degree graduates working in the area

332

9043

Share of employed NE university graduates working in the area3

2%

60%

0

-3

410.7

387.9

461.3

412.2

388.1

460.3

percentage point change - 02/03 to 05/06 - in share of employed NE grads in the area Income Mean gross weekly pay (residence-based) Mean gross weekly pay (workplacebased) Local Business Perception Survey (Dec 2007) Number of respondents (0.5 miles and 5 miles) Share aware of the scheme

56

144

80%

88%

(of those aware) Share reporting increase in turnover as a result of scheme

7%

7%

(of those aware) Share reporting improved local image as a result of scheme

78%

76%

Tourism 2006 Annual Visit Days 2006 Revenue from all tourists 04-06 growth rate, tourist days 04-06 growth rate, revenue from visitors 1: 2: 3: 4:

17,958,805 535,229,778,187 -2% 2%

‘Local’ residential values based on postcode DL3 7; Darlington based on DL postcodes. For more detailed data see CD. Data on regional trends was not available from the same source (though could be estimated with other sources) so is not included Local employment data based on SOA Darlington 008 Local deprivation based on the constituent lower layer SOAs within mid-layer SOA Darlington 008 (E01012308, E01012353, E01012354, E01012355)

Figure 4.2: Pedestrian counter data for 3 spots Darlington’s town centre June 07 – Oct 07 (after completion, too early to comment, very seasonal data)

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

35

Figure 4.3: Vacant premises 2007 without stalls - Darlington Pedestrian Heart ( see below data for pre-construction, treat with caution!)

Figure 4.4: Vacant properties: Pre construction data (99 and 03: the actual locations of vacant properties are unkown, treat with caution!)

Figure 4.5: Rateable Values 2005

2005 Rateable value Retail Zone A: 453 £/m2 2005 Rateable value Retail Zone A: 287 £/m ���2

36

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

Figure 4.6: PERS assessments in Darlington town centre

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

37

4.3 Detailed public realm assessment using PERS We conducted two sets of PERS Link and Place assessments in October 2007. They covered the improved streets (B Pedestrian heart) and the adjacent shared space streets (A Skinnergate). The latter had undergone refurbishment in the 1990th. The map and pictures below illustrate the nature and extent of the individual survey areas.

As illustrated in the four summary spider diagrams overleaf the assessments show average weighted scores from 1.14 to 2.5 for the two areas of the town centres. The pedestrian heart scheme herby achieves scores of 2.5 in the PERS Public Place and 2.09 in the PERS Link assessment. A number of lamps appeared not to work at the time of inspection thus the aspect ‘Lighting’ received 0 - the lowest score in the Pedestrian heart scheme. This issues was also identified along Skinnergate and resulted in lower scores for Personal Safety in both assessment areas.

Overall the Pedestrian heart scheme has introduced a very good quality pedestrian environment to Darlington’s town centre. Many of the Place and Link categories received the maximum score of 3. However during our site inspection a few short comings were identified: the maintenance and state of the relatively new benches, in parts gaps in the paving and nonworking light fittings.

38

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

Figure 4.7: Darlington: Pedestrian Heart (B) Public Space with a weighted average of +2.50

Figure 4.8: Darlington: Pedestrian Heart (B) Pedestrian Link with a weighted average of +2.09

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

39

Figure 4.9: Darlington: Skinnergate (A) Public Space with a weighted average of +1.87

Figure 4.10: Darlington: Skinnergate (A) Pedestrian Link with a weighted average of +1.14

40

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

4.4 Place Quality Assessment (PQA) Attractiveness of commercial façades The assessment of the attractiveness of commercial facades in Darlington’s town centre as illustrated in the map below suggests comparing the new and the old part with each other that the refurbished part of the high street shows significantly less facades rated as overall poor (red). We expect to find in our monitoring results for year two and three of the exercise better façade qualities in the town centre particularly along the improved and now very pedestrian friendly environment which shows currently a high number of attractive facades (dark blue) however a substantial number of facades have been rated as indistinctive (light blue) or poor (red).

Figure 4.11: Commercial Façade Assessment

For Darlington Pedestrian Heart, nine charater areas were assessed, the largest of which was the scheme itself (area 7) . The total area assessed roughly corresponds to the town centre of Darlington within the inner ring road, although we included small additional areas of retail to the North (along Northgate) and on Duke Street to the west.

A number of the character areas represent clear opportunities for major redevelopment, some with plans coming to fruition (e.g. area 8), and others which are earlier within the cycle (e.g. area 3). These areas scored very poorly against the PQA. In general the inner ring road has a negative impact on the character of any area which it abutts, while the whole of Darlington town centre suffers from a poor link with the train station. The ring road has a particularly heavy influence over area 4, with the link across to Northgate especially weak.

Areas 1 (Grange Road), 2 (Skinnergate) and 5 (the Market Square) are essentially strong with a positive structure, a good variety of buildings, an appropriate mix of uses. In the case of Skinnergate, though somewhat tired, the general streetscape remains positive on balance in terms of its characteristics. There is an issue with arrival points into Skinnergate, and the public realm could assist here.

The scheme itself (area 7) scores best of all the character areas with an impressive score of 81. This is very much at the upper end of achievable scores and it reflects the fact that the scheme area scored well against all categories. There were some concerns noted regarding the quality of the construction and the, maintenance of certain features such as the benches, however on balance the schemes scores would appear to indicate that it has been successful in creating a quality physical environment.

attractive ( blue) indistinctive (light blue) poor ( red)

Of interest will be the extent to which the enhanced quality physical environment acts as a catalyst for improvements to areas 1 and 2, significant restructuring in 4, and large scale redevelopment of 3. Area 8 is already undergoing redevelopment and so it is difficult to ascertain the extent to which the proposed upgrading of the town centre represented a supportive factor in facilitating this development.

7 In this analysis, the PQA Character Area 7 is the Darlington Pedestrian Heart Scheme itself – this corresponds to the PERS Area “B”, while Area 2 is Skinnergate, which roughly approximates to Area “A” in the PERS assessment

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

41

Figure 4.12: QPA charater areas Darlington town centre

Figure 4.13: QPA - scores for Darlington town centre

42

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

4.5 Early observations/issues What’s Worked?

As with mima, Darlington Pedestrian Heart has only just completed in 2007, therefore, much of the wider data on relevant indicators is not yet available to discuss quantitative impacts. These impacts will be established in future years, using the baseline established here.

In this section we present early, largely qualitative, reflections on what has worked so far.

Transformational change: The scheme was ambitious and showed evidence of a strong design vision, with a clear emphasis on creating a quality environment for pedestrians – shoppers and visitors alike. It sought to achieve an appropriate balance between various modes of travel. One of its key ambitions was to secure Darlington’s role in a wider sub-regional sense and it would appear that this investment has resulted in greater investor confidence in Darlington Town Centre as an investment location. The scheme has been used by the Council and by private investors to actively market Darlington Town Centre as a place to do business and to invest in. The image impact has already been substantiated by business owners in Darlington, 88% of whom recognised the scheme, and 76% of those felt it had made a positive impact on the local image.

Changing shopping patterns: A more attractive environment, combined with changing parking policies, have led to shoppers spending more time in Darlington, with a nine per cent reduction in the proportion of drivers spending less than one hour parked, and a corresponding increase in the 2-3 hour category. There are also signs that turnover is increasing, although it is too early to be conclusive about this element.

Monitoring pedestrian counts on High Row, Skinnergate and West Row will help quantify this impact in future years.

Improving the overall town centre offer: The enhanced public environment has not only improved the quality of the primary retail centre, by creating a safer more attractive environment for all users (young, old and those with reduced mobility have benefited most), it has also provided more space for hosting one-off events and markets. These events have been widely marketed and attracted substantial visitors to the town centre.

Further improvements will be monitored through the beneficiary survey, pedestrian counts, and retail rents.

Impact on the markets: The markets have been in a position to increase the amount of stalls and also the diversity of the offer. From a position prior to the scheme being in place, where 5% of units were lying vacant, now all units have been occupied, including the new provision. Furthermore, there has been an increase in the overall number of enquiries and the quality of new stalls helping to ensure the vitality of the markets, and further adding to the distinctiveness of Darlington as a specialist retail destination. Opening hours have also been increased, further underpinning the viability of the markets and their wider contribution to Darlington, not to mention increasing the overall level of economic activity.

Impact on town centre as a development location: The improved town centre has already led to an increase in developer interest in the town centre, where previously the focus had been on site on the edge of Darlington. Discovery Properties Ltd quote the Pedestrian Heart as an important factor in their decision to develop the £90 million ‘The Oval Shopping and Leisure Centre’ due to start on site this year. New owners have bought the 1992 ‘Cornmill Shopping Centre’ and have invested to upgrade it, again citing the Pedestrian Heart as a significant factor in their expectation that Darlington town centre will experience a renaissance. Property agents advertising for a buyer for the freehold of the House of Fraser department store building stated their expectation that the Pedestrian Heart would lead to an increase in rental levels. CTC Marine, a growing world class market leader in subsea trenching, is to build its office headquarters in the town centre. DCSF is re-locating, its 480 northern staff into a new building to be built in the town centre. Both have recognised the renaissance of the town centre as favourable to their decisions. There is also some suggestions that values have started to rise and the high vacancy rate from during the construction period is falling. This will be substantiated by the next round of monitoring results, through both residential and retail rents.

Responding to challenges – engaging with the business community: Despite teething problems (see below), the employment of a dedicated liaison officer to engage with the business community and to act as a single port of call for issues relating to the project was generally interpreted as being a very positive component of the delivery process.

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

43

Maintenance: Though there are some issues (see below), the intense cleaning regime being undertaken by the Council (reflecting the ten-year maintenance agreement between One NorthEast and the Council), yields impressive results and the area is generally very clean and well maintained. The simple design of the scheme and the street furnishing largely appears to support this cleaning regime.

Water-feature: As with mima, the water feature seems to serve as a positive focal point and generates a lot enjoyment for residents young and old.

PERS: It can be assumed that the overall PERS results have substantially been improved by the intervention.

Comparing old aerials of the area with the current situation was helpful here. Naturally, pedestrianising a high street, in fact any street has major benefits for the pedestrian user. The quality of design achieved is high and provides a heart for the community with numerous opportunities to adapt the space for markets, stage festivals and other temporary events making the area more attractive for a wide range of users including tourists.

Place Quality Assessment: While it is impossible to say definitively, given that there is no directly comparable character area in the town centre, the scheme now scores best amongst the Darlington’s character areas, including the market square itself.

Indeed, the overall score of 81 is the second highest of all 34 character areas assessed as part of this year 1 baseline.

Room For Improvement?

Engagement: Various concerns were expressed regarding the quality, timing and nature of the consultation process. It was felt that the consultation process may have been somewhat unwieldy and unnecessarily long resulting in many of those initially consulted moving on by the time the 18 month process had completed. Others felt that the wider business community and the community had not been well informed with little effort to communicate to them the decisions that had been made or to get them excited about what the project would deliver, echoing the concerns raised in relation to the earlier stages in mima.

The early stages of the construction process were felt by many to be piecemeal and haphazard with very poor communication with businesses. In the worst instances the project is cited as the reason for the closure of a number of businesses in the run up to the Christmas period. It is widely accepted that the Council and contractors made substantial efforts mid-way through the process and that the quality of information coming from the project team improved substantially as time went on.

44

The role of One NorthEast: while One NorthEast’s role was generally believed to have been helpful and positive, there have been some suggestions that the agency (or the sub-regional partnership) could usefully act as a one-stop-shop for expert advice on delivery and implementation.

Design compromises: Due to project overruns, compromises were made in relation to some of the design features (up-lighters, bins etc.), and also a sense that there was a somewhat excessive risk consciousness (guard rails etc) with an adverse effect on the overall simplicity of the design concept.

Post-construction issues: The PERS and Place Quality Assessment identified elements of the construction finish as being problematic and likely to cause some longer term maintenance issues (e.g. materials, especially on the steps, are not flush, and thus are already prone to having cigarette butts stuck in them). In addition, the bins are not wearing well, and there are acknowledged maintenance issues with the wooden benches, which are already starting to look tired and are in urgent need of attention similar to some of the street lamps that were not properly working.

Overall Darlington Pedestrian Heart has succeeded in its main initial outputs and achieved a substantially enhanced pedestrian environment for Darlington’s retail core. To assess the extent to which the scheme will achieve its desired outcomes will require more time to assess, although the early signs are positive. Some factors to look out for are: 

the performance of retailers over the coming years, especially those on or immediately adjacent to the scheme;



the levels of investment by developers and retailers;



new provision of business spaces in the town centre (including non-retail);



dwell time (continued monitoring of car parking times and potentially a shopper surveys etc);



visitor and shopper surveys (where they have come from etc); and



whether the scheme acts as a catalyst for change in other parts of the town centre (enhanced quality of shop fronts, the public realm, derelict/underutilised sites and so on).

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

05

Case Study 3: NETPark

Completion

Direct permanent job creation 07

Single Programme Investment + other public sector

Private Sector

Value of Investment

Subregion

Name

The first of our Durham case studies is NETPark (originally the North East Technology Park), which intends to develop a knowledge-based, science and technology research park of regional, national and international significance.

NETPark

Short Description

Science and Technology Research Park, near Sedgefield, Co. Durham.

Durham

One NorthEast investment type

Transformational Quality of Place

Key Objectives

To inspire growth of science-based knowledge-driven companies; To create a collection of science and technology buildings of exceptionally high quality and design, in a generous, high quality landscape setting, for both indigenous and international businesses.

£4,478,400 (initial Incubator 1, capital + revenue cost up to year 5); Capital cost: £3,726,200

Nil of capital cost.

Income from rents

SP £1,921,045 (51,5%) Durham City Council £ 931,550 ERDF £931,550 Revenue cost covered by DCC

Jobs created at location: 50 by the end of the 2007 of which 85% have university degree.

Key Outputs Businesses accommodated: 11 by the end of the 2007.

50

Phase 1: physical works 2004; Outputs projected by 2007/08

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

45

5.1 Overview NETPark first came into being in 2002. Phase 1 of the scheme included the NETPark Research Institute and the NETPark Incubator. The first tenants were in place from July 2004. Later phases will see PETeC and the Innovation Village. There are currently 11 companies located at NETPark employing a total of 50 employees of which have 85% have a university degree.

NETPark is not seen as being in direct competition with ScienceCity, Newcastle, but rather complementary.

NETPark’s focus is on “hard science” applications and research, whereas Science Central focuses more on life sciences including providing expansion for high tech manufacturing. NETPark is unique in the region in offering a space, where science and technology companies can evolve through a life cycle, from formation in a science and technology environment, through to growth and manufacturing where required.

Detail The concept for NETPark dates back to 1998 and was informed by a number of factors, including a visit by local partners in County Durham to Durham, North Carolina to visit the Research Triangle Park. That year also saw the closure of the hospital in Sedgefield, which resulted in 1.) the land becoming available; and 2.) the loss of more than 2,000 employees. All this is on top of the general restructuring that had been underway for some time in County Durham, with approximately 2,000 manufacturing jobs being lost per annum. Combined, these provided the impetus for the creation of a North East Technology Park, which sought to capitalise on the opportunity represented by the closure of the hospital and the nearby land assets held by public sector bodies.

NETPark is driven by the County Durham Development Company with support from key partners – Durham County Council, Sedgefield Borough Council and One NorthEast. The initial phase involved setting up the NETPark Research Institute, which currently houses two primary research centres – the Centre for Advanced Instrumentation, and the Semiconductor Crystal Growth and Ceramics Group, both of which are part of the Durham University Physics Department.

Next at NETPark was the Incubator, which provides 1,600m2 of space (offices, labs, support services) intended to support fledgling and growing small companies and to assist them through the early stages

46

of their growth in a supportive environment. Currently fully subscribed, phase 2 (is currently being developed, which will double the amount of space available. It was intended that companies would spend no more than three years in the Incubator. The following companies/ organisations are located at the Incubator: 

Durham Scientific Crystals: a spin out from the Durham University Semiconductor Crystal Growth and Ceramics Group at the NETPark Research Institute specialising in the production of compound semiconductors



ANT: Nanotechnology



CELS: Healthcare technology



Cenamps: One NorthEast company – national centre for emerging small scale technologies



deBurca: software development and integration company



Farfield Photonics: photonic technologies



I2B: Supply Chain / Procurement / ERP implementations and business consultancy



Ithaka Life Sciences: consultancy and interim management company providing a range of services to the biotechnology and life sciences community



NeoSensors: biosensing platforms



ROAR Particles: nanotechnology derived particles for forensic, immigration and sports testing applications



Iris Engineering and Technology Ltd: Project & Energy Management, and Design Consultancy and Environmental, Health & Safety and Services

Current projects at NETPark include: 

PETeC (Plastic Electronic Technology Centre): a national prototyping institute for the development and commercialisation of printed electronics. The project seeks to be ahead of the game, in an industry which is estimated to be worth £16bn by 2015. PETeC will be one of only a handful of facilities globally, with the facilities to test design concepts of emerging technologies, such as Thin Film Transistors (TFT), E-paper, Organic Photovoltaic Cells (OPVs) and Solid State Lighting (SSLs).

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

5.2 Economic performance snapshot 

Innovation Village: currently under construction, this development is the first to be undertaken by the preferred development partner, Helios City. The Innovation Village will consist of five R&D “NETPods” targeted at companies which require the flexibility to expand with minimum disruption. The Innovation Village represents an investment of £5m by Helios City.

The Question Of Fit? Why Invest?

NETPark seeks to address a number of the Regional Economic Strategy’s objectives, in particular through the provision of high quality office and business space provision. NETPark is specifically identified as a key site in a strategic location and supports policies which seek to drive the ongoing development of the knowledge economy, especially through linking universities to business start-ups. NETPark will also be the location of regional Centre for Excellence. The facility is a major objective of the County Durham Economic Strategy.

NETPark can be expected to make a local economic contribution by bringing new jobs to the area, particularly high-skilled jobs that attract knowledge workers. Those knowledge workers and high-skilled jobs that otherwise would not locate within the region also represent a contribution to regional economic performance.

HESA data on destination of higher education leavers suggests that County Durham is a relative hotspot for graduates of North East universities. While the region employs 60% of the region’s university graduates, nearly one in six of those is employed in County Durham.

Additionally, while recruitment of the region’s graduates has been on the decline (02/03 to 05/06), recruitment in Durham has increased marginally from 7% of the region’s graduates to 8%. NETpark’s jobs and employment levels would be expected to have contributed positively to this trend, though without more specific data, we cannot be certain nor quantify the scale. More local information on graduates in the future could help to establish NETPark’s recruitment impact. Additionally, qualitative surveys, like the one we’ve conducted, will provide a basis for estimating how many high end workers have been retained only because of NETPark. During our focus group, it has been sited, that the companies at NETpark have demand for professionals and more mature researchers. The amount of training and mentorship required to facilitate the transition of graduates becoming a professional would be difficult to afford for the currently small companies located at NETpark.

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

47

NETPark Key Economic statistics Year intervention start Year intervention completed

2003 2004 (on-going) Local

Residential values

Avg. rent £/sqm - zone A Avg. rent/sqm - all retail Vacancy rate - all commercial premises Vacancy rate - retail Avg. rent £/sqm - offices Population 2006 mid-year estimate 2001-2006 growth Employment 2006 working age residents share in employment share unemployed share inactive Growth rates by sector 2004-2006 (by place of employment): 1 : Agriculture and fishing (SIC A,B) 2 : Energy and water (SIC C,E) 3 : Manufacturing (SIC D) 4 : Construction (SIC F) 5 : Distribution, hotels and restaurants (SIC G,H) 6 : Transport and comunications (SIC I) 7 : Banking, finance and insurance, etc (SIC J,K) 8 : Public administration, education & health (SIC L,M,N) 9 : Other services (SIC O,P,Q) Qualifications among residents Number of residents with NVQ 4+ Number of residents with no qualifications Crime figures All crimes committed (2006/2007) Robberies (2006/2007) Deprivation5 2007 IMD average score 2007 IMD rank of average score Graduate recruitment/retention Number of new graduates working in the area 05/06 3 Number of new advanced degree graduates working in the area Share of employed NE university graduates working in the area3 percentage point change - 02/03 to 05/06 - in share of employed NE grads in the area Income Mean gross weekly pay (residence-based) Mean gross weekly pay (workplace-based)

48

England

1

2007 Avg. value - 1 bed 2007 Avg. value - 2 bed 2007 Avg. value - all 5-yr growth in value 1-yr growth in value Retail Zone A /commercial rateable values

1: 2: 3: 4: 5:

North East

Sedgefield 81,900 121,500 183,900

88,600 110,300 120,918 106% 4.4%

144,600 166,800 219,300 68% 9.2%

N/A see map on CD: Rateable values 0ffice space in North East by MSOA

87,700 0.6%

2,555,700 0.6%

50,762,900 2.7%

52,400 68% 4% 28%

1,524,300 71% 5% 24%

30,682,000 74% 4% 21%

-7% -34% -18% -5% 13% -24% 12% 1% 13%

-10% -14% -5% 4% 2% 9% 15% 2% 5%

-3% 2% -7% 5% -4% 0% 7% 3% 4%

16.4% 17.2%

22.7% 14.3%

27.1% 13.6%

7,012 14

224,334 1,864

4,435,692 98,050

N/A N/A -58% N/A 21% N/A 22% -19% -1%

11.38 22,347

29.05 54 4792 1491 8%

36058 9043 60%

+1

-3

370.5 405.7

387.9 388.1

461.3 460.3

‘Local’ residential prices based on sales in postcode TS21; Sedgefield based on TS postcodes. For more detailed information see CD Data on regional trends was not available from the same source (thought could be estimated HESA data available for counties/UAs - for Sedgefield, Durham county data is used with other sources) so is not Local employment data based on Sedgefield 007 Local deprivation data based on constituent lower layer SOAs of mid layer SOA Sedgefield 007 (E01020796, E01020828, E01020829, E01020830)

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

5.3 Occupancy User Survey and focus group We conducted a survey and held a focus group meeting with four of the 11 companies located at NETPark.

Main reasons to stay/grow at NetPark? (individuals wrote key aspects on cards)

In the following we highlight some key results of these activities:

Location



Out of the current 50 employees at NETPark around 85% have a university degree



The two largest companies employ over 60% of the total and growing fast with increased space requirements



The buildings available on site are fully occupied and the construction of a new building started in autumn 2007



The accessibility by car for employees and the potential to grow the business on site as well as the quality of the office facility were stated as important factors to support investor confidence



Tight links with Durham University were identified by the companies we liaised with as very beneficial, however a greater effort in establishing links with other universities would be valuable in the future.

In the following we present some of the key outputs of our focus group meeting with senior managers of 3 companies and 1 representative from County Durham Development Company.



Excellent Location



Regional Access



All four cited the proximity to Durham University (specialist workforce/technology and



R&D base)



Location of key staff – NE cheaper in cost of living and higher quality of life



Good transport links – A1/A19/Newcastle Airport - national and international

Cost/Opportunity 

Cost vs. other sites and locations (in particular – the South East – Reading and M4



Corridor)



Growth Plans for the site / space to grow – keen to see NetPark follow its long term



vision



Support from ONE – Flagship Scheme that has their backing



Economic Development Zone – financial support available

Figure 5.1: 2006 Employment by Sector

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

49

CDDC Perspective 

Fundamental to the development of knowledge economy in County Durham



Bringing the importance of science to young people (schools)



Will enhance the image of Durham and the region



Will create opportunities for manufacturing jobs in County Durham



Will create high quality jobs for the Sedgefield area

What are your ideas to improve NetPark?

Whilst it was acknowledged that there were effective communication channels in place, it was felt that this happened on a more informal basis between tenants and management rather than regular monthly meetings.

The companies stated that prior to moving into the facilities they had significant input alongside the management in ironing out the initial teething problems and set up of labs. It was felt that being involved in these formative stages had given the companies a sense of ownership and belonging to Netpark. Those present indicated that the project had been a learning curve.

What is the perception of NETPark from both Durham and Newcastle University?

The companies represented at the meeting highlighted that businesses as small as them cannot afford the time or resources to train people ‘fresh’ from university.

It was stated that Graduates needed to go to bigger companies, e.g. Proctor and Gamble, to gain the necessary experience and training.

50

Is there a nearby competitor for NETPark?

No similar facility that competes on location, price or vision. Major attraction with NETPark is the room for expansion that it offers with regards to possible future industrial manufacturing on site. The Science City initiative in Newcastle raised some debate around the issues of having a facility like NETPark in a city centre location. The representatives of the businesses in NETPark felt there would be issues with accessibility with little room to expand.

It was revealed that most of the workforce in NETPark live within 30 minutes drive. It was felt that should they move, they would lose most of the founding members of staff for each company due to the time and travel logistics. All present felt that the NETPark Incubator has been very effective in bringing companies to a point where they can stand on their own. Malcolm Guy (CDDC) added that the Regional Economic Strategy should provide a regional context and climate that would allow Netpark to gradually grow and follow the vision set out in the original Masterplan for the area. It was highlighted that the scope to expand at NETPark is unique within the North East Region.

What is missing from NETPark?

“Speed” – the businesses present felt that the windows of opportunity within the market are small and that the North East needs to become more entrepreneurial.

The measures outlined in discussions to apply this in NETPark were: 

Needs fresh capital other than the support provided from CDDC

Discussion then followed around the role that One NorthEast has had in attracting knowledge industries to the region. Their role has been viewed as being positive as other high tech activity is good for all those involved in the industry.



Needs more enabling finance possibly through the introduction of venture capital in



the North East



A clear gateway to finance has been absent

Conversation then moved onto the topic of public bodies such as One NorthEast and how they should look into the possibility of having an equity stake in developments such as NETPark, therefore allowing them to obtain more profit from development. Questions were then posed as to whether CDDC could change their business model and, whether they would be willing to be more risk taking in their approach.

Have they been involved with the machinery purchased for the new open access facility?

It was stated that this facility applies to different sectors.

However, it was acknowledged that they will use the open access facility as it has a lot of generic facilities and machinery that they can take advantage of.

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

How many people are you going to employ in 2015? 

Company A has plans in place to have 250 staff in place by 2012



Company B will have 30 staff in place by 2015



Company C have no long term plan in place

Concluding remarks on the key aspects of NETPark: Those present are impressed with the quality of : 

The companies located there



The buildings and office accommodation



The look and feel of the physical environment at NETPark

At the end of the discussion it was stressed that the quality of the facility and appearance of the surroundings at NETPark have been crucial in the formative years of the companies present.

Early observations/issues What’s Worked?

It is worth bearing in mind that in the case of NETPark, it is a constantly evolving scheme with new projects coming on stream in phases. Currently, two substantial buildings are operational on site. By and large, we focus on the early phase of NETPark covering the Research Institute and the Business Incubator.

We expect the best evidence of linkage between NETPARK’s quality of place element and economic development will come through the retention of highend jobs/workers that otherwise would leak outside the region. We are beginning to establish this with the interviews and the questionnaire exercise, and will continue to track this.

Investing in riskier projects: There is a strong logic/ role for Regional Development Agencies in supporting schemes and sectors which offer greater returns to the region, but for a higher risk. One of the most convincing rationales for this style of investment is that RDAs are in a position to put a variety of key risk management and economic development skills in place.

Partnership approach – technology transfer: Establishing the right partners is essential at the outset of a project of this nature. In this case, establishing close ties with Durham University at the outset, and the establishment of the research institute on site adds weight to the academic credibility of the site.

In addition, the appointment of a Scientific Director has also been helpful in creating a solid basis for the activities in NETPark. Likewise, the provision of bespoke facilities allows the development of facilities targeted at niche sectors, identified as having potential. In short, the sorts of dimensions that help NETPark become far more than just another business park.

Regional versus local level impact: The ambitions of NETPark are not only regional, but also national.

This is particularly true of the sectors within the Research Institute, and also later PETeC. The growth plans of some of the companies for the next 5 years are substantial and if realised a significant contribution to the regional economy particular in high tech manufacturing is expected.

Room For Improvement?

Potential importance of larger companies or industry related transition programmes for graduates: One factor which was raised is the inability of smaller companies to take on employees in need of training, as they don’t have the resources. In light of the available land and new lab facilities (currently under construction, 20 million investment) one might suggest to increase the efforts in attracting larger companies to the locate at NETpark to overcome the training and mentoring issues smaller companies cannot afford. However, to retain graduates and supply small companies with the latest research knowledge, a tailormade transition programme would be another aspect of increasing graduate retention in the region.

Incubator: As it currently stands, three firms occupy 50% of the business space and it was stated that there are no further units available. While the circumstances are fully understandable, for the incubator to function properly, it does stress the need for suitable followon space available to growing companies. In this context concepts such as the containercityTM (www. containercity.com) - if developed to a high specificationcould provide the required speed, appeal and flexibility to adapt to demand for office and lab facilities on a relatively small budget.

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

51

Responding swiftly to opportunities: There was some concern that funding agencies were not sufficiently responding to international opportunities for the commercialisation of emerging technologies. If the North East wants to become leader in any given scientific or technology area, there exists a very finite window of opportunity, and delivering infrastructure takes time, so a delay in funding for key initiatives may make them redundant.

Venture Capital: There was a sense from some that there was limited access to growth and venture capital sources and this is something that could be explored further at the regional level.

Local engagement: NETPark is perhaps not as well integrated into Sedgefield as it could be and there is perhaps scope to consider how the NETPark campus could be better integrated in spatial, economic and community terms.

Transport: The location of NETPark makes sustainable modes of travel (walking, cycling and public transport) less viable at this point. As NETPark grows, there is a need to consider how sustainable transport choices such as a bus network can be better integrated into the scheme. In the interim, incentives for those who engage in more sustainable patterns (e.g. car pooling) might be considered.

Overall On balance, NETPark is very much in its infancy, although it can take some credit for facilitating the strong performance of some of the rising stars, such as Durham Scientific Crystals, ANT, or ROAR Particles.

Some very exciting elements are about to come on stream, which will make a substantial contribution to NETPark’s profile.

A challenge moving forward for NETPark and its partners will be to ensure that they have the capacity to respond to key opportunities as they emerge. To this end, they may consider ring-fencing resources at a regional level to respond to priority advances in relevant scientific/technological areas.

An additional consideration might be to establish a NETPark Venture Capital Fund, the logic being that those who have worked with start-ups as they grow, are in a better position to advise the companies on their equity options, and are also better placed to make an assessment of the risks involved. Thus a fund based on exploiting the potential within NETPark companies may help some to access funding where they otherwise may not, thus helping them to grow faster. Ongoing monitoring of the number and nature of employees are among the key indicators which we will monitor in future years.

Physical Place Quality / Collaborative Places: The importance of a high quality environment was cited by some as being important, especially for start-ups who need to establish their credibility with potential clients. Furthermore, as the campus expands, there is much literature on the design of spaces and places, which encourage informal engagement, so that the full agglomeration benefits of co-location can be realised.

Currently few spaces within the campus exist for informal exchange. Making NETpark a place that is pedestrian friendly and encourages cycling are only two aspects of an inclusive design approach encouraging interaction and provides informal meeting opportunities.

52

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

06

Case Study 4: The Rivergreen Centre

Name

Short Description

High quality, sustainable office accommodation. Exemplar scheme

Durham

One NorthEast investment type

Transformational Quality of Place

Value of Investment

THE RIVERGREEN CENTRE

Sub-region

The Rivergreen Centre is an exemplar office development, which seeks to provide high quality office space for small and medium-sized enterprises in Durham City.

To provide an exemplar, sustainable office development, of serviced and self-contained office accommodation;

funding agreement capital cost £5,371,082 Key Objectives

actual cost £6,858,830

To provide and a local and inter-regional conference facility; To deliver one of the most environmentally sustainable commercial buildings in the UK;

Completion

Direct job impacts to date

Single Programme Investment + other public funding+ third sector

Private sector

To exceed BREAAM environmental performance rating of ‘Excellent’ £4,028,311 (75%)

SP £754,650

4,852m2 of accommodation in a two-storey building located on a Regional Strategic Employment Site;

ERDF£835.025 Total:£1,589,675 Key Outputs negligible: mostly displacement or public sector

A demonstration of alternative construction and building services technologies; Capacity building within the North East regarding ecofriendly building technology; BREAAM: Exceeding ‘Excellent’

Occupied since August 2006

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

53

6.1 Overview The Rivergreen Centre is an exemplar sustainable business development located in at Aykley Heads in County Durham. Designed by the award winning architect JDDK Ltd, the Rivergreen Centre has provided 4852 m2 of commercial office and conference space, with a particular emphasis on providing flexible spaces and facilities for small and medium sized enterprises.

Officially opened in February 2006, the centre was designed to have minimal impact on the environment and features a unique roof covered with a living blanket of sedum, thus reducing the amount of rainwater runoff. In fact the whole scheme deals with its own water run-off and it has thus not been necessary to connect the scheme to the main sewer system.

Moreover the building has incorporated many of the latest ICT infrastructure/facilities including a high speed permanent leased line connection, category 6 cabling and a wireless LAN system, minimising the need for wired connections and increasing the flexibility of the building is intended not only to attract advanced technology companies, but also to facilitate the development of e-commerce by companies wishing to embrace new technologies and improve their competitiveness.

Funding from One NorthEast, and from the ERDF, essentially constitutes gap funding, allowing an exemplar quality scheme to be built where otherwise a standard office development may have been more financially viable (in the short term). Providing high quality, flexible office space is an important objective of the Regional Economic Strategy. The Rivergreen Centre’s importance stretches beyond its own immediate impact, but rather is intended to help raise the bar in relation to future office developments in Durham and the wider North East.

Detail The Rivergreen Centre is an advanced naturally ventilated office building aimed at creating a serviced, self-contained office accommodation and conference facility. One of the most environmentally sustainable commercial buildings in the UK, the building is an exemplar of innovation in design, construction and operation, exceeding the BREAAM environmental performance rating of ‘Excellent’.

54

In total, the development has provided 4,852m2 of accommodation in a two-storey building located on an identified Regional Strategic Employment Site. Currently accommodating in the region of 300 employees.

The building has been 100% occupied since day one, with many of the residents decanting from the last Rivergreen Development (which has since been completely re-let). Interestingly, the advanced technologies used in the construction and design of the building have actually allowed the operators to reduce the service charges, as the running costs of the building are so much lower. These savings are arguably of disproportionate importance to small and medium sized enterprises.

The project was led and delivered by Rivergreen, a private sector company, with gap funding coming from One NorthEast, CDEP and ERDF. The amount of funding from ERDF had to be reduced, as a significant proportion of the building was let to CDDC (County Durham Development Company), thus reducing the amount of space available for private sector SMEs. Given that the scheme finished so recently, a full evaluation has not yet occurred, but we understand that this is underway. We would propose reviewing this evaluation in later years. However, we present below some early observations on some of the softer impacts of the scheme.

On balance, the centre has provided office accommodation well in excess of what is currently available in Durham. It may have had an impact on the quality of emerging schemes, with the building manager reporting significant attention from the trade press and also from other developers who have been interested in the design quality achieved, the new technologies, their costs, and the delivery of such schemes.

The manager also reports that the team designing and building the development worked together on other projects which helped to overcome difficult technical and design issues related to innovative projects like this. On balance there seems to have been an upward curve in the provision of specialist skills, not only on the design and construction side, but also in terms of the advanced building management technologies being employed at the centre.

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

A occupants survey (Building Use Standard, BUS) conducted in March 2007 showed high levels of satisfaction over a range of criteria. 11 of the criteria achieved higher than UK average results. However, according to the survey carried out by Arup Research & Development, some occupants complain about excessive glare from the sun and the sky, and give poor rating for control over lighting and daylight. Some occupants expressed their dislike about hot-desking, which some said made them feel uneasy, insecure or nomadic.

The Question Of Fit? Why Invest?

The project achieved one of the fundamental visions of the Regional Economic Strategy (RES): to raise the aspirations and profile of the region by creating a cutting-edge sustainability facility that will be nationally recognised, and also providing quality, flexible business spaces which will support the development of an entrepreneurial, knowledge economy. The project will also help the County Durham Economic Strategy 20022007.

Where the very high quality may have had an impact is on the image of the region, and the publicity associated with the scheme. At this juncture, the benefit of this publicity remains difficult to quantify and trace the wider impacts of this type of benefit. While important in terms of raising the bar of expectations of office design and quality in County Durham, and the North East, the consultants believe that it is currently not possible to trace and capture the sub-regional or regional quantitative benefits of such gap-funding, above and beyond, the benefits that would have accrued were a more “standard� scheme put in place.

This should not be interpreted as a final judgement as to whether the investment represented good value for money. Certainly, the partners involved believe the wider impacts have been very beneficial in terms of positive publicity for the North East, however these benefits are difficult to quantify.

6.2 Economic performance snapshot The Rivergreen Centre is a contemporary and green office building, which is attractive to businesses.

However, without the particular focus on private sector high-skill jobs, it seems unlikely that Rivergreen would attract tenants that would not otherwise locate elsewhere in the North East. In fact, CCDC the public inward investment arm of County Durham, is the largest current tenant, obviously likely to employ elsewhere locally if not at Rivergreen. Therefore, we see little evidence of direct economic impact of regional significance at this point from this intervention, though it does fulfil the goals it indented to reach and might have positive image impacts for County Durham Development Company, CDDC inward investment activities.

We will continue to collect data on Rivergreen and economic performance, both local and wider. However, we have not identified any strong links to regional-level economic growth, particularly with the current high level of public-sector occupancy.

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

55

The Rivergreen Centre Key Economic statistics Year intervention start Year intervention completed

2004 2006 Local

Residential values 2007 Avg. value - 1 bed 2007 Avg. value - 2 bed 2007 Avg. value - all 5-yr growth in value 1-yr growth in value Retail Zone A /commercial rateable values Avg. rent ÂŁ/sqm - zone A Avg. rent/sqm - all retail Vacancy rate - all commercial premises Vacancy rate - retail Avg. rent ÂŁ/sqm - offices Population 2006 mid-year estimate 2001-2006 growth Employment4 2006 working age residents share in employment share unemployed share inactive Growth rates by sector 2004-2006 (by place of employment): 1 : Agriculture and fishing (SIC A,B) 2 : Energy and water (SIC C,E) 3 : Manufacturing (SIC D) 4 : Construction (SIC F) 5 : Distribution, hotels and restaurants (SIC G,H) 6 : Transport and communications (SIC I) 7 : Banking, finance and insurance, etc (SIC J,K) 8 : Public administration, education & health (SIC L,M,N) 9 : Other services (SIC O,P,Q) Qualifications among residents Number of residents with NVQ 4+ Number of residents with no qualifications

Durham LA

2007 IMD rank of average score

England

N/A

N/A. See map on office rents for the North East available on the CD

92,200 5.0%

2,555,700 0.6%

50,762,900 2.7%

300 (2007 in building)

54,800 79% 3% 18%

1,524,300 71% 5% 24%

30,682,000 74% 4% 21%

N/A N/A -22% -8% 28% N/A 26% 74% 23% Local

-11% 13% -33% 15% 20% -3% 21% 18% 10% Durham LA 32.7% 11.9%

-10% -14% -5% 4% 2% 9% 15% 2% 5% North East 22.7% 14.3%

-3% 2% -7% 5% -4% 0% 7% 3% 4% England 27.1% 13.6%

5,603 21

224,334 1,864

4,435,692 98,050

Crime figures All crimes committed (2006/2007) Robberies (2006/2007) Deprivation5 2007 IMD average score

North East

4.64

17.12

30,158

180

Graduate recruitment/retention Number of new graduates working in the area 05/06 3 Number of new advanced degree graduates working in the area Share of employed NE university graduates working in the area3 percentage point change - 02/03 to 05/06 - in share of employed NE grads in the area Income

4792 1491 8%

36058 9043 60%

+1

-3

Mean gross weekly pay (residence-based) Mean gross weekly pay (workplace-based)

441 407.9

387.9 388.1

461.3 460.3

3: HESA data available for counties/Uas - for Durham, Durham county data is used 4: Local employment data based on SOA Durham 008 5: Local deprivation data from constituent lower layer SOAs within mid-layer SOA Durham 008 (E01020684, 01020702, E01020704, E01020712, E01020713)

56

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

6.3 Early observations/issues What’s Worked?

Regional Image: The scheme is reported by the managers of the centre and sub-regional partners to have had a significant impact in terms of the amount of visits and media coverage generated by the Centre.

Though currently difficult to assess the quantifiable benefits, efforts will be made in future years to explore these benefits and how they can better be captured.

Clear Business Plan/Contractual Agreements / Risk Management: This investment is primarily gap funding to enhance the quality of a private sector scheme. The developers, Rivergreen, have a demonstrated track record in delivering high quality schemes across the North East, in particular. They delivered the scheme effectively on time and largely within budget, while dealing with a very complex scheme that required many innovative and bespoke solutions. One NorthEast/CDEP entered into a clear, output driven agreement with limited risk to the funding partners and got a project within agreed parameters, with any risks being largely borne by the private sector partner.

Leading the way: One of the distinct benefits of this scheme is as a demonstrator of new technologies in terms of building design, construction and operation.

It also provides something new within the sub-regional office market, providing flexible and affordable office accommodation for SMEs, with room to grow or contract as appropriate. The scheme helps to inform other developers and raises expectations in the market.

Capacity building: Advanced construction methods are increasingly required and there is an identified national and regional shortage of appropriate skills.

Exemplar projects such as the Rivergreen Centre provide an opportunity to test new technologies and to raise the skills levels of the regional pool of built environment skills capacity.

Room For Improvement?

Scale: The biggest issues from a RDA investment perspective is the question of scale, and in particular whether or not it is appropriate to invest in such small scale projects, especially as it remains very difficult to identify the impact at the regional level, in terms of employment, the economy and so on. It may be that smaller projects require a different method of organisation and evaluation. Were smaller “gap funding”

schemes to be grouped thematically and collectively evaluated, it might prove more feasible to assess their collective impact.

Space for SMEs: Given the purpose of the scheme was to provide high quality office accommodation for SMEs, it seems somewhat unfortunate that a public sector body should take such a high proportion of the space within the centre, especially as it is already 100% occupied.

Spreading the knowledge: We feel it would be beneficial if projects of this nature have a clear educational programme attached to the physical intervention. It has been cited that media attention and the interest from other developers to learn about the applied technologies was significant.

Overall The Rivergreen Centre is undoubtedly a highly successful scheme, and for an out of town office development, is almost as sustainable as a scheme can be. It does provide a high quality environment for companies of different sizes, in a serviced environment, with minimal operating costs for energy and water. It has acted as an exemplar scheme, and tested and demonstrated new construction technologies in the North East.

Its full success will take some time to establish. The scheme needs to “bed down” and ongoing monitoring of the number of visitors, enquiries, school trips and so on, should continue to be systematically recorded .

Occupant surveys will be an important monitoring tool in future years, and could be based on the Business Occupier Survey (BUS) undertaken in 2007.

Given the level of new technologies developed through the development, it might prove beneficial to develop a bespoke educational programme to help further spread the knowledge and practical experience of the building manager in running a highly efficient office building. Part of such an approach would be a seminar programme and building some of the energy saving technology in a way that one can explain the workings of them. Lessons can be learnt from continental examples often co-funded by the EU. Furthermore, as the developer of NETPark (County Durham Development Company) is based at Rivergreen, it would be interesting to see to what extent the new buildings at Netpark compare with the design and energy efficiency standards set by the Rivergreen Centre.

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

57

07

Case Study 5: Seven Stories

Name

Short Description

Centre for Children’s stories.

Museum, plus research and depository facilities

Sub-region

Tyne & Wear

One NorthEast investment type

Culture / Tourism

£6,165,248

Completion

Single Programme Investment + other public sector funding and third sector

Private sector

SEVEN STORIES - THE CENTRE FOR CHILDREN’S BOOKS

Value of Investment

Seven Stories, the only centre for children’s books in the country is a project of local, regional and national significance, which has been an important component of the culture-led regeneration of the Ouseburn Valley in East Newcastle.

58

Northern Rock :£475,000 Walker Books: £195,000 Others: £196,260 Westall Trust:£100,000 Barbour Trust:£255,000 Harper Collins: £50,000 SP:£1,400,000 (22%) Newcastle City Council:£1,375,000 ERDF:£1,236,712 Arts Council England:£550,191 Heritage Economic Reg. Scheme:£167,137 Over the Moon appeal:£6,430 Trusthouse Fund: £100,000 Foyle Foundation: £50,000 Business Link: £8,518

To develop a national centre for Children’s literature; Key Objectives

To create and safeguard jobs in the region To provide lifelong education and training opportunities

Refurbished building (brought back from a state of disrepair) including five galleries, a bookshop, a café, a performance space and a creative discovery centre; Key Outputs

2000 m2 of refurbished floorspace; 10 jobs created and 9 jobs safeguarded.

August 2005

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

7.1 Overview Seven Stories – The Centre for Children’s Books, is the realisation of a long-standing objective of the Centre for Children’s Books (CCB), a registered charity, which has sought to establish a national focal point for children’s books and to recognise the cultural importance and history of this often overlooked branch of literature.

access to a unique national collection of original artwork and manuscripts) and a specialist children’s bookshop and café. In this sense, the project is very much understood as being one which seeks to contribute to the wider cultural offer of NewcastleGateshead, with a facility that is of national cultural significance.

After much searching, CCB decided on Newcastle as the most appropriate location for the new centre and eventually bought the site in the Ouseburn valley in 2001. The building (Grade 2 listed in a conservation area) required substantial renovation and offered the opportunity to provide a major cultural focal point to assist in the wider culture driven regeneration of the Ouseburn Valley. Furthermore, Seven Stories formed a major component of NewcastleGateshead’s bid for the European City of Culture.

The project employs 20 full time staff and provides residencies and contracts on a regular basis, year on year, for individual artists and small cultural businesses.

It has an outreach and education project which is implementing programmes to ensure that people from the region who are excluded for social, cultural or economic reasons are encouraged to participate in the activities of the Centre. It provides formal and informal learning opportunities and activities to increase the diversity of those actively involved in the Centre and to contribute to wider strategies to raise the cultural capacity of the region. Its national collection provides a major new research facility based in the region, linked with Newcastle University’s emerging centre of cultural excellence in literature.

The project has been successful in terms of developing the national centre, with strong linkages being made with the Newcastle University, including the establishment of a formal Chair of Children’s Literature.

Further plans for expansion of Seven Stories, including enhanced archive and research facilities, are in hand.

Detail In 2002 the CCB project purchased a semi-derelict, seven storey, listed building and an adjacent single storey warehouse at 30-34 Lime Street in the Ouseburn Valley regeneration area. 30 Lime Street is a grade 2 listed building and is located in a designated conservation area. Together, 30-34 Lime Street has been redesigned and converted to create the Centre for the Children’s Books (CCB), a new cultural business with local, regional and national significance. Prior to opening in the Ouseburn, the Centre achieved favourable press for its extensive and innovative consultation approach, which very much saw Seven Stories as an asset for the wider Tyne & Wear conurbation, and part of its attempts to place Culture at the heart of its economy.

In the first three quarters of 2007, Seven Stories attracted a total of 54,060 visitors, compared with a figure of 80,000 in the full year 2006.

The Question Of Fit? Why Invest?

The project fits with and contributes to the delivery of key objectives within the Tyne and Wear Partnership Action Plan 2002-2005, Tyne and Wear Economic Strategy, Regional Economic Strategy and the Regional Cultural Strategy. At the time of the investment, Seven Stories was part of a coordinated range of investments in NewcastleGateshead, which sought to support its bid to become the European City of Culture, 2008.

The Centre is designed to be a key cultural attraction, embedded in the community of the East End of Newcastle, a designated Neighbourhood Renewal Area, to attract visitors to the Ouseburn Valley from across the region and beyond. Its focus is the art of modern children’s literature and picture books and its facilities include two galleries, arts and education studio, an interactive discovery centre, digital facilities (providing

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

59

7.2 Economic performance snapshot Seven stories can be expected to have a local economic impact in job creation and regional image and perception.

Visits attracted from outside the region, however, can also have an impact on the North East’s economy, and these visits and expenditure will be tracked to determine potential regional impacts.

Figure 7.2 presents a breakdown of visitors by residents.

This survey suggests that the share of visitors from outside the region (above the green line) halved from more than 20% in 2006 (July) to less than 10% in 2007 (February).

This data needs to be treated with caution since it is seasonally biased. A review of data from 2008 and 2009 will substantiated a trend and impact assessment.

Data on total number of visits are unavailable, but this would help to substantiate the trends in actual visitor numbers – whether visits from outside the region have remained the same and visits inside the region have doubled, or whether total visitor numbers have remained about constant, with far fewer visitors from outside the North East. This trend is worth establishing and following to capture the impact Seven Stories may be having on the regional economy. It would further useful to count the paying customers and the number of members (mostly local and regular visitors).

We further suggest that visitor counts become more specific for Seven Stories, and that surveys of visitors elicit responses about the length of the visitor’s trip to Newcastle (and associated expenditure), and any secondary impact that Seven Stories may have on encouraging visitors that spend the night, go shopping, eat at local restaurants, and therefore, induce more expenditure into the region.

There also is potential the Seven Stories feeds into a wider image change that is emerging in Newcastle/Gateshead as new cultural facilities, like the BALTIC Centre gather momentum. It will be difficult to tease out what role Seven Stories may be playing in this broader image enhancement, but the beneficiary surveys will help indicate local awareness and perceptions, as well as change in these elements over time.

60

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

Seven Stories Key Economic statistics Year intervention start Year intervention completed

2002 - building bought 2005 – opened Local Newcastle

Residential values 1 2007 Avg. value - 1 bed 2007 Avg.value - 2 bed 2007 Avg. value - all 5-yr growth in value 1-yr growth in value Retail Zone A /commercial rateable values Avg. rent £/sqm - zone A Avg. rent/sqm - all retail Vacancy rate - all commercial premises Vacancy rate - retail Avg. rent £/sqm - offices Population 2006 mid-year estimate 2001-2006 growth Employment 2006 working age residents share in employment share unemployed

124,800 180,400 214,900

percentage point change - 02/03 to 05/06 - in share of employed NE grads in the area

96,200 117,400 146,848 92% 4.2%

North East

England 144,600 166,800 219,300 68% 9.2%

2

N/A

19 (in centre)

share inactive Growth rates by sector 2004-2006 (by place of employment): 1 : Agriculture and fishing (SIC A,B) 2 : Energy and water (SIC C,E) 3 : Manufacturing (SIC D) 4 : Construction (SIC F) 5 : Distribution, hotels and restaurants (SIC G,H) 6 : Transport and communications (SIC I) 7 : Banking, finance and insurance, etc (SIC J,K) 8 : Public administration,education & health (SIC L,M,N) 9 : Other services (SIC O,P,Q) Qualifications among residents Number of residents with NVQ 4+ Number of residents with no qualifications Crime figures All crimes committed (2006/2007) Robberies (2006/2007) Deprivation5 2007 IMD average score 2007 IMD rank of average score Graduate recruitment/retention3 Number of new graduates working in the area 05/06 3 Number of new advanced degree graduates working in the area Share of employed NE university graduates working in the area3

Tyne & Wear

N/A N/A 274% 15% 20% 5% 28% 21% -75%

29.94 9187

270,500 1.6%

2,555,700 0.6%

50,762,900 2.7%

165,200 66% 6%

1,524,300 71% 5%

30,682,000 74% 4%

29%

24%

21%

-29% -62% -2% -5% 4% 18% 11% 13% -5%

-10% -14% -5% 4% 2% 9% 15% 2% 5%

-3% 2% -7% 5% -4% 0% 7% 3% 4%

27.5% 12.5%

22.7% 14.3%

27.1% 13.6%

29,220 406

224,334 1,864

4,435,692 98,050

31.36 37 19896

36058

9043

9043

32%

60%

-5

-3

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

61

Year intervention start Year intervention completed Income Mean gross weekly pay (residence-based) Mean gross weekly pay (workplace-based) Local Business Perception Survey (Dec 2007) Number of respondents (0.5 and 5 miles) Share aware of the scheme

2002 - building bought 2005 – opened Local Newcastle 384.2 415 19 68%

85 56%

(of those aware) Share reporting increase in turnover as a result of scheme

15%

13%

(of those aware) Share reporting improved local image as a result of scheme

92%

79%

Tourism 2006 Annual Visit Days 2006 Revenue from all tourists 04-06 growth rate, tourist days 04-06 growth rate, revenue from visitors

Tyne & Wear

North East 387.9 388.1

England 461.3 460.3

44,111,375 1,695,126,307,146 1% 1%

1: ‘Local’ residential prices based on sales in postcode NE1; Newcastle based on NE postcodes. For more detail see CD. 2: Data on regional trends was not available from the same source (thought could be estimated with other sources) so is not included 3: HESA data available for counties/Uas - for Newcastle, Tyne and Wear data is used 4: Local employment based on SOA Newcastle 023 5: Local deprivation based on constituent lower layer SOAs in mid-layer SOA Newcastle 023 (E01008406, E01008407, E01008408, E01008410, E01008412, E01008413)

62

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

7.3 Early observations/issues What’s Worked?

Distinctive offer: By providing a facility which is unique in the UK, and one of only few such locations worldwide, Seven Stories creates a destination which has the potential to attract visitors and researchers from outside the region. It thus makes and important contribution to the region’s cultural and tourism infrastructure.

Establishing key linkages: Seven Stories has been very successful as a scheme at identifying and maximising key linkages, such as the partnership established with Newcastle University to capitalise of the presence of such a nationally significant resource.

Culture as a catalyst for regeneration: NewcastleGateshead is an oft-cited example of culture being used as a catalyst for regeneration activities.

In the case of Seven Stories, this has involved the physical regeneration of a historical building, as well as associated works, which have had a major impact on this part of East Newcastle. It has also involved, the Centre’s ongoing involvement in local community activities, and support to small culture-led businesses.

visitor attraction and work will continue to enhance its role as a national depository and research centre.

That being said, visitor numbers are modest, and the Centre will need to continue to innovate and refresh its content and activities in order to maintain and grow beyond current visitor numbers.

The opening, marketing and staffing of the planned online-bookshop is a great, if so far unrealised, opportunity and should have priority for CCB in making the fabulous selection of children’s books available to a wider public. This will, if well marketed, significantly contribute to the economic well-being of the CCB with a potential large customer base from even outside the UK. Figure 7.1: Seven Stories, Share of Visitors by Residence Data ����� from Audiences North East Survey, 2007.

Making use of synergies and joint -up approach with in a long term regeneration horizon and good governance: The regeneration of the Ouseburn started back in th e70th and won particular momentum in the 90th when the Ouseburn Trust secured substantial funding. A final three year regeneration project for 2005 to 2008, funded by One North East and called ‘Completing Regeneration’, aims to prepare the valley for the end of public sector funding, encouraging further regeneration by the private sector. Activities include further grant schemes, including the Round Theatre, Brickworks artists studios, a project to improve legibility, environmental improvements, mcphees Car Park and planning and feasibility studies helping to bring forward remaining sites with development potential.

Overall Seven Stories has made a significant contribution to the Ouseburn Valley by acting as a key focal point for cultural activity, supporting other cultural activities and drawing visitors into the Ouseburn. Its national role offers the potential to draw visitors from beyond the region and it makes a substantial contribution to the sub-regional cultural offer. The Centre is more than a

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

63

08

Case Study 6: Sunniside Gardens, Sunderland

Name

SUNNISIDE GDNS, SUNDERLAND

Short Description

Substantial public realm investment and landscaping of Sunniside Gardens at the heart of the Sunniside regeneration area.

Sub-region

Tyne & Wear

One NorthEast investment type

Transformational Quality of Place

Value of total Investment

Sunniside Gardens is a major public realm scheme which sought to transform one of the few public open spaces in this part of Sunderland into a safe, attractive, contemporary open space.

£2,150,000 To provide a quality open space at the heart of the Sunniside regeneration area.

Completion

Single Programme Investment + other public+ third sector

Private sector Investment

Key Objectives

64

To facilitate the extension of city centre activities eastwards

Nil £

SP£1,400,000

Environmental improvements of 6,367m2 of open space

£ EP 600.000 City of Sunderland £150,000

Key Outputs

7 temporary construction jobs Enhanced open space hosting range of informal and formal leisure activities

Total : £2,150,000

December 2006

To enhance the image of the wider Sunniside area.

Other

Façade assessments Vacant properties

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

8.1 Overview Sunniside Gardens is the only area of green, open space within Sunniside, an area to the east of Sunderland City Centre, with the Gardens forming the historical focus for Sunniside. The Gardens had however become substantially run down and Sunniside Partnership identified the project as a key investment to signal the change happening in the wider area and raise perceptions and confidence in the area.

Figure 8.1: Proposal map

Detail The opportunity in Sunniside is to accelerate a process of investment in an area which had undergone significant decline from its 18th/19th century heyday when it was originally laid out as attractive middleclass urban housing quarter. Over time, much of this stock was lost to a variety of commercial and industrial uses. This resulted in city centre uses gradually moving westwards with Fawcett Street largely serving as the edge of city centre uses. West Sunniside has largely established itself as the location in Sunderland for professional services. Though positive, it had become clear that the area was in decline and in need of significant attention. This resulted in the formation of Sunniside Partnership in 2003.

Source: Robinson Landscape Design

Sunniside Partnership is supported by Sunderland arc, City of Sunderland, English Partnerships and One NorthEast. The Partnership has prepared a business plan, which envisages a 14 year timeframe. The plan has a number objectives: 

the diversification of land uses



secure appropriate development



improve the public realm and environment



improve access and car parking



accelerate business development



raise awareness and interest

Sunniside Gardens has emerged as one of the key elements of the 2005-08 Sunniside Scheme Delivery Plan, which provides an opportunity to accelerate this longer term Sunniside Area Regeneration Initiative. The Gardens complement and build upon other projects under way, most notably the refurbishment of the Post Office and Coral buildings for residential use by Gentoo Ventures, and also investment under the Townscape Heritage Initiative, which has seen £1.2m being invested to secure the repair and restoration of historic uses and brining back into use vacant or underused floor space.

A key element of the wider process has been the willingness of the City of Sunderland to intervene in the land assembly process, so as to ensure that the partners can exert some control over the development process. This fits alongside wider investment by Gentoo (formerly Sunderland Housing Group) in the Sunniside area.

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

65

8.2 Economic performance snapshot The actual design of the scheme was arrived at following a two-stage design competition.

Consultancies were invited to submit recommendations based on a number of identified requirements and aspirations. In particular the brief sought to ensure a high quality design was achieved, which took into account the wider regeneration ambitions and which was sustainable in the long term. The winning design was submitted by Robinson Landscape Design.

The scheme was completed in 2006, and though there were some criticisms levelled regarding the speed of delivery, these were largely as having been addressed, with the latter portions of the scheme being delivered far quicker than earlier phases.

The completed improvements have had a clear impact on the level of business and investor interest in Sunnisde, with a number of new businesses opening on and around the Gardens, such as Argent House, Thai Manor Restaurant and the Ground Floor CafĂŠ.

It is envisaged that further investment in public realm and the quality of the built environment should see this trend continuing. The longer term objective is to encourage city centre users to the heart of Sunniside.

The Question Of Fit? Why Invest?

The project responds to key elements of regional, sub-regional and local economic and regeneration strategies, including the Regional Economic Strategy, the TyneWear Action Plan, the Sunderland UDP and the business plan for the renaissance of the Sunniside.

66

Sunderland is undergoing industrial change, with decline in traditional manufacturing and significant increases in financial services. In the particular neighbourhood of Sunniside, the increase in business and financial services employment is substantial – nearly 35% 2004-2006, though this appears to be growth from a very small base.

Sunniside appears to be a contributor to this process in the neighbourhood, with an improved image helping to drive change indicated by a drastically reduced vacancy rates (97 in 2004 total area) around the square, a restaurant and a new cultural centre due to open in 2008.

The vision and goals for Sunniside appear to be about local, neighbourhood-level change. Perceptions among local businesses were very positive, with 96% respectively 86% of those aware of the scheme believing, that it has had a positive impact on image. It has been reported that crime around the Gardens has decreased, though data available on local crime contains inconsistencies at present, and wider data would also be needed to understand if any crime leaving Sunniside has simply relocated to a neighbouring community. We would encourage Sunniside to collect quality local and wider crime data in order to substantiate a potential link between the project and reduced crime.

It does not appear that Sunniside Gardens would be contributing to economic growth of regional significance, as we do not consider the type of jobs and investment coming in would not occur elsewhere in the North East, if Sunniside were not regenerated.

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

Sunniside Gardens, Sunderland Key Economic statistics Year intervention start Year intervention completed

2004 2006 Local

Residential values 1 2007 Avg. value – 1 bed 2007 Avg.value – 2 bed 2007 Avg. value – all 5-yr growth in value 1-yr growth in value Retail Zone A /commercial rateable values Avg. Rent £/sqm – zone A Avg. rent/sqm – all retail Vacancy rate – all commercial premises Vacancy rate – retail Avg. rent £/sqm – offices Population 2006 mid-year estimate 2001-2006 growth Employment 2006 working age residents share in employment share unemployed share inactive Year intervention start Year intervention completed Growth rates by sector 2004-2006 (by place of employment):4 1 : Agriculture and fishing (SIC A,B) 2 : Energy and water (SIC C,E) 3 : Manufacturing (SIC D) 4 : Construction (SIC F) 5 : Distribution, hotels and restaurants (SIC G,H) 6 : Transport and communications (SIC I) 7 : Banking, finance and insurance, etc (SIC J,K) 8 : Public administration, education & health (SIC L,M,N) 9 : Other services (SIC O,P,Q) Qualifications among residents Number of residents with NVQ 4+ Number of residents with no qualifications Crime figures All crimes committed (2006/2007) Robberies (2006/2007) Deprivation5 2007 IMD average score 2007 IMD rank of average score Graduate recruitment/retention Number of new graduates working in the area 05/06 3 Number of new advanced degree graduates working in the area Share of employed NE university graduates working in the area3 percentage point change - 02/03 to 05/06 - in share of employed NE grads in the area

Sunderland 103,600 125,500 141,900

North East

England

83,700 102,500 109,705 99% 4.4%

2

144,600 166,800 219,300 68% 9.2%

280,600 -1.4%

2,555,700 0.6%

50,762,900 2.7%

170,000 69% 5% 26%

1,524,300 71% 5% 24%

30,682,000 74% 4% 21%

-8% 27% -7% 14% 0% 8% 23% 5% -15%

-10% -14% -5% 4% 2% 9% 15% 2% 5%

-3% 2% -7% 5% -4% 0% 7% 3% 4%

19.3% 15.9%

22.7% 14.3%

27.1% 13.6%

25,323 213

224,334 1,864

4,435,692 98,050

181 150 97 in 2004 (see map) N/A 51

2004 2006 N/A N/A 11% 39% -1% 12% 34% -10% -5%

53.97 2573

31.79 35 19896 9043 32%

36058 9043 60%

-5

-3

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

67

Year intervention start Year intervention completed

2004 2006 Local

Income Mean gross weekly pay (residence-based) Mean gross weekly pay (workplace-based) Local Business Perception Survey (Dec 2007) Number of respondents (within 0.5 and 5 miles) Share aware of the scheme

Sunderland

North East

370.4 388.3 33 70%

120 72%

(of those aware) Share reporting increase in turnover as a result of scheme

22%

12%

(of those aware) Share reporting improved local image as a result of scheme

96%

86%

387.9 388.1

1: ‘Local’ residential prices based on sales in postcode SR1; Sunderland based on SR postcodes. For more detailed data see CD. 2: Data on regional trends was not available from the same source (thought could be estimated with other sources) so is not included 3: HESA data available for counties/Uas - for Sunderland, Tyne and Wear data is used 4: Local employment data based on middle layer SOAs Sunderland 013 + Sunderland 016 - Data from ABI 5: Local deprivation data is based on the constituent Lower layer SOAs within mid-layer SOAs Sunderland 013 and Sunderland 016 (E0100870, E01008703, E01008705, E01008831, E01008834, E01008702, E01008735, E01008736, E01008737, E01008738, E01008836)

68

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

England 461.3 460.3

Figure 8.2: Employment by sector, 2006

Figure 8.3: Sunniside vacant properties 2004

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

69

8.3 Detailed public realm assessment using PERS We conducted two sets of PERS Link and Place assessments in October 2007. They covered the improved square and the adjacent streets that are scheduled to undergo refurbishment over the next couple of years. The map and pictures overleaf illustrate the nature and extent of the individual survey areas.

As illustrated in the summary spider diagrams overleaf the assessments show average weighted scores from 2.28 to 2.41 for the refurbished square area. The assessment of the Place qualities achieves hereby a score of 2.28.

70

Overall the scheme has introduced a very pleasant pedestrian environment that invites people to rest and play on the square. Many of the Place and Link categories received the maximum scores of 3. The absence of maps and other wayfinding elements, the poor use of signage and lack of provision for mobility and sensory impaired people resulted however in a low score for ‘Interpreting space’ in the PERS Place assessment.

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

PERS Link and Place Summary results for Sunniside

Figure 8.4: Sunniside ����������������������������������������������������������� Public Space of whole area with weighted area of +2.28 �����

Figure 8.5: Sunniside ������������������������������������������������������������� Gardens Pedestrian Link C with weighted average of +2.41 �����

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

71

72

The pictures below illustrate the appearance of Sunniside Gardens before and after the intervention took place. The ‘old’ Sunniside Gardens square was dominated by mature trees, thus over shaded and, assuming a low density of public lights, it can be assumed to have been a relatively uncomfortable part of Sunderland particularly at night time. Also, a large proportion of the green was fenced off and provided only limited amount of opportunities for activities. Being located so close to the town centre we assume further that a significant proportion of the remaining space has been taken up by parking.

From the picture it appears that the number of primary and secondary seating and crossing opportunities were limited as well. In essence, we can assume an average PERS score of around -0.8 to -1.2 for the ‘before intervention’ situation.

Before

After

Moving from such a negative PERS score to 2.26 is a significant improvement and will hopefully act as a model for the remainder of the streets in the neighbourhood and other parts of Sunderland. The average PERS Link scores for the un-refurbished streets in Sunniside are between -0.5 to 0.5, and thus show great potential for improvement.

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

8.4 Place Quality Assessment (PQA) For the purpose of the Sunniside Place Quality Assessment, we chose the wider Sunnisde regeneration area as our boundary. The map below compares our approach with Sunniside Partnership areas. In total 7 character areas were identified, with Sunniside Gardens (Area 1) roughly at the centre .

In general the Sunniside Garden scheme (Area 1) scores very well against most criteria, achieving a very positive score of 83. The retail offer was felt to be in a period of flux or transition and it is imagined that this will improve even further in coming years, resulting in an improved overall score.

The investment in the Gardens is the first significant physical public realm investment and as such was meant to be a catalyst for change not just on the square itself, but also for the whole of Sunniside. In particular, it is part of a process which seeks to change residents’ and visitors’ perceptions of the extent of Sunderland city centre.

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

73

On balance most areas within Sunniside score poorly, despite having an essentially positive structure and much on which to build. Areas 4,5 and 7 are especially weak and so it will be interesting to monitor in future years how the other character areas respond over time, although we must be conscious of not attributing all benefit to the Gardens, as many other regeneration investments will occur over time. However, we can monitor adjacent areas with a view to understanding the wider catalytic benefits in the coming years. Substantial new build will have to take sensitive account of existing historical and structural assets in order to achieve the maximum potential of these areas.

74

Areas 2 and 6 are far stronger and it is especially in 6 where the pulling power of the Gardens might be anticipated to have a positive knock-on effect, however this may be reflected in property prices more so than in changes in overall quality levels. We would anticipate that targeted investment in environmental quality and an improving retail offer may well see higher scores here.

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

75

8.5 Early observations/issues What’s Worked?

Partnership arrangements: the roles of the various partners involved in this project appear to have been very positive, with most respondents praising the role of the main partners involved. This appears to have been based largely on a strong agreed vision for the area, as well as the recognition of both the potential within the area, and the strategic importance of the regeneration of Sunniside for the wider Sunderland City Centre offer.

The willingness of the City of Sunderland to act as the primary project developer (e.g. through land assembly) is important, but there appears to be a clear benefit to having the Partnership in place to provide focus and to encourage progress in a collaborative, rather than competitive sense. This clear focus and partnership has allowed partners (such as One NorthEast) to have a relatively modest level of involvement, safe in the knowledge that the partnership arrangement allowed for sufficient checks and balances to be in place.

For example, though the City of Sunderland are the responsible agency, the project also involves input from Sunderland arc, of which Sunniside Partnership is part, from English Partnerships and from One NorthEast (with the TyneWear Partnership).

Catalytic effect: Much of the logic behind investment in Transformational Quality of Place projects is that they enhance investor confidence, change perceptions and signal to other partners (public and private) that the public sector is committed to change in a given area. Certainly, in the case of Sunniside, the early indications are positive and there is some suggestion that the impact of the Gardens may well be triggering investor interest in the wider Sunniside area, and tracking residential and retail rents will capture this. The number of vacant properties in the area was 97and has particular dropped significantly around the square and a few voids are being bought and developed mainly as housing sites. We will conduct a another full survey in Year 3 including a detailed analysis into the number of Planning applications submitted and realised. However, we must be cautious in attributing too much credit to the Gardens in isolation, given the variety of other activities currently underway. Initially, we intended to use CCTV or pedestrian counts at Sunniside Gardens to capture the increased attractiveness of the square for town centre visitors. However, after further

76

consideration, we concluded that the massive changes in land-uses in the regeneration area - likely to occur in the next 2 to 3 years and beyond - will not allow us to isolate the link between an increase in city centre user numbers and the quality achieved. The pedestrian numbers are likely to increase significantly mainly because the developers are building and refurbishing derelict buildings in Sunniside thus people are moving into the area, which is clearly an intended and positive impact, but isn’t really directly linked with the high quality of refurbished square. We suggest monitoring the number of dwellings refurbished and newly built via information available in submitted Planning applications Tackling Stigma: related to the above point, there was a consistent suggestion that the transformational nature of the investment had been successful in beginning to tackle the substantial stigma that is associated with Sunniside. As mentioned above the credit for this is down to the quality levels achieved and arguably a sense that “things are changing in Sunniside”, with other schemes such as “The Place” have given the area a sense of energy and change. The more these various activities can be brought together and sold to the community the wider the impact will be. Local figures for crime are inconsistencies at present.

Consultation: The business community reported some positive opportunities to engage with the project team and to influence the final design of the project.

Building confidence in the public sector: there was some suggestion that through this positive partnership, that the perceived success of the project had made it more likely for future projects to occur as there was now greater confidence in the delivery mechanisms to achieve its stated goals. This is especially important in an environment where maintaining the momentum of change is especially important. Indeed, this pace appears to be continuing with One NorthEast recently announcing funding of £2.2 million to support the City Council in upgrading the next phase of the public realm enhancements. In addition, just shy of £500,000 has been awarded to continue the Sunniside Commercial Property Grant Scheme for 2008.

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

Focus on quality: The scheme was explicit in its desire to achieve a quality local environment and public realm for Sunniside. This has clearly been achieved, with the Gardens achieving very high scores in the both of the quality assessments, and with the Gardens recently achieving a “Highly Commended” result at the Landscape Institute Awards.

Room For Improvement?

Gaining wider buy-in: While generally positive, there was some concern expressed regarding missed potential related to the activities of other arms of the Council/wider public sector. For example, there was some criticism that there was a failure to “spread the word” about the changes that have already taken place in Sunniside among some elements of the Council. In particular, it was felt that Sunniside and the gardens were not yet perceived as being suitable for city centre activities and that this needed to change. It was also felt that more could be done to engage with other potential partners, public and private to ensure the maximum impacts and sympathetic timing from the various schemes which are being progressed in the area.

Overall In physical terms, Sunniside is a clear success with the Gardens achieving very positive scores for both the PERS assessment and the Place Quality Assessment and. Early indications are largely positive though it will inevitably take some time for the impacts to bed down.

On balance this appears to have been a well conceived, well targeted project, which has been delivered largely on time and within budget. There are of course lessons, which can be (and in most cases have been) learnt, with the glitches during the construction period being cited by many. Of more concern was the view expressed by some, that elements within the Council are not as yet fully exploiting the enhanced offer, which the Gardens now bring to Sunniside. With “The Place” about to come on stream, the partners who have worked so well together on this project, local businesses and the community would do well to come together with a view to grasping the opportunity with a series of events which mark the changing Sunniside. The challenge in the case of Sunniside will be to keep the momentum going and to ensure that future projects are implemented to an equally high standard.

Construction lessons: As with many of the other schemes above, there were some concerns regarding the length of time it took to construct the scheme, and the resultant impact on businesses. It appears that these construction issues were resolved and that the second part of the scheme progressed far more quickly. It does seem that this is too often the case and the impact of construction and the related project management issues need to be more carefully thought through in advance of the project.

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

77

09

Case Study 7: Blyth Market Place,Northumberland

Name

Short Description

Northumberland

One NorthEast investment type

Transformational Quality of Place

Key Objectives

To rejuvenate the town centre; To maximise the potential of the market place by providing a flexible platform to allow for a performance space, enhanced market stalls, and an environment which will encourage people to linger and relax; To enhance Quality of Life and the local economy, by creating a high quality physical environment.

Key Outputs

Rejuvenated public realm and enhanced local environmental quality; New economic activity; New events venue, integrated into events programme for Blyth; Improved visitor numbers attracted by vibrant market and events, improved footfall & increased pride and confidence within local communities.

Other

Façade assessments; Vacant premises, Visitor/Shopper Survey

Completion

Single Programme Investment + other public funding+ third sector

Private sector

Value of Investment

BLYTH MARKET PLACE

A transformation of Blyth’s central Market Place, through investment in the public realm, including the upgrading of the market facilities and the provision of a performance space

Sub-region

Our seventh case study focuses on Blyth Market Place, a public realm and environmental improvement investment, and the only one of our case studies which is currently under construction.

78

£2,931,000

Nil £

SP £1,450,000 (49,5%) Blyth Valley Borough Council £613,700 + £367,300 (maintenance) Northumberland County Council + LTP funding £500,000

End-2008

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

9.1 Overview The business case for Blyth Town Centre and Quayside recognises the importance of the Market Place as the key focal point in Blyth. It further acknowledges that substantial investment will be required to allow it to realise its full potential. To this end, Blyth Valley Borough Council, SENNTRi (the South East Northumberland and North Tyneside Regeneration initiative), along with Northumberland County Council, One NorthEast and English Partnerships, have agreed a vision which sees the rejuvenation of the Market Place as one of series of inter-connected projects. This can be seen in light with Blyths’ role as leading location for renewable energy (NAREC) and related the economic opportunities for the region.

It is acknowledged that the current functionality and aesthetics of the square are not allowing the market to achieve its full potential ( see also shopper survey fig.

9.2). The scheme is intended to enhance the longterm viability of Blyth’s retail offer, with the market a distinctive component of that offer.

Detail The investment in Blyth Market Place is the first in a series of investments planned, as part of a comprehensive regeneration of Blyth Town Centre, including the Quayside and The Links areas. The scheme aims to reinstate a sense of pride in Blyth by creating a strong sense of place, with a vibrant market which will retain locals and attract those from the wider sub-region.

The scheme has been produced in association with SLR Insite Environmental Consultants. Designed to be safe, accessible spaces that will encourage people to linger and make greater use of the market space and the facilities of Blyth Town Centre. The market will contain a new paved, tree lined boulevard, a water feature, public art, enhanced provision for the markets and a generally refreshed public realm. The enhanced markets provision will include new market stalls, with lighting and power available to each stall.

For the longitudinal study, the Blyth Market Place case study is a very exciting one, as it is the only project where we are able to undertake a complete baseline, including the quality assessments, before work had begun. Now underway, we will be able to track the changes in quality and their (presumed) resultant impacts on other elements (such as rents, values etc.).

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

79

9.2 Economic performance snapshot As mentioned above, the scheme is intended to fit alongside other regeneration initiatives, which are planned for the town centre. These include: relocating the bus depot; refurbishing the bus station; the Townscape Heritage Initiative, along with public realm upgrading along key routes. The success of the market place project is likely to have an impact on the viability and thus likelihood of these projects going ahead, as it will demonstrate to both public funders and private sector investors that change is happening in Blyth, safe in the knowledge that the necessary works can be delivered to the required quality levels.

In addition to enhancing investor confidence, the project will result in a number of other benefits for the local economy and the community at large. These include a programme of events for Blyth, which will be linked into activities at the Quayside and The Links and should result in greater numbers of people visiting the town centre and staying there longer. This increase in visitors and dwell time should have a resultant impact on local businesses and ultimately employment levels and property values.

As this intervention is under way, we have collected data solely to serve as a baseline for comparing future trends and changes.

Blyth Market appears to target a local impact, rather than a regional one. Our shopper surveys established baseline perceptions and shopping habits, which will be monitored for local impact in years to come. The façade and vacancy survey established to current condition of the facades. We can report that the overall performance of the town centre is low with many facades showing an ‘indistinctive’ character (see fig.

9.6) but only a few retail premises are vacant. The pedestrian counts over three days showed the impact and importance of the markets on footfall (see fig. 9.5).

Regional impact will be derived by measuring visits from outside the region, and induced expenditure.

However at this point, it seems that increases in spending in Blyth would likely be offset by reductions in neighbouring towns, as a mostly local clientele grows in Blyth. This would not provide an impact of regional significance.

Though not specific to Blyth, it has been pointed out that there will be increased maintenance costs associated with the new square, largely borne by the Council. These higher levels of maintenance protect the investment of the Council and its partners. These levels are governed by the 10 year maintenance agreement, drawn up between One NorthEast (through Northumberland Strategic Partnership) and Blyth Valley Borough Council.

The scheme is now under construction, with the appointed contractors, Barton Civil Engineering, going onsite on January 7th, 2008.

The Question Of Fit? Why Invest?

The scheme responds to the transformational interventions themes of the Regional Economic Strategy, The SENNTRi Business Plan, the City Region Investment Priorities and the NSP Draft Investment Plan. These emphasise investment in Place, or the economic hearts of the region, of which Blyth is one.

80

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

Blyth Market Place, Northumberland Key Economic statistics Year intervention start Year intervention completed

2008 2008 Local

Blyth Valley

North East

England

2

144,600 166,800 219,300 68% 9.2%

81,200 -0.1%

2,555,700 0.6%

50,762,900 2.7%

51,400 72% 5% 22%

1,524,300 71% 5% 24%

30,682,000 74% 4% 21%

-4% -18% 1% -22% 15% 22% 23% -1% 10%

-10% -14% -5% 4% 2% 9% 15% 2% 5%

-3% 2% -7% 5% -4% 0% 7% 3% 4%

22.8% 11.5%

22.7% 14.3%

27.1% 13.6%

Residential values 1 2007 Avg. value - 1 bed 2007 Avg.value - 2 bed 2007 Avg. value - all 5-yr growth in value 1-yr growth in value Retail Zone A /commercial rateable values Avg. rent £/sqm - zone A Avg. rent/sqm - all retail Vacancy rate - all commercial premises Vacancy rate - retail Avg. rent £/sqm - offices Population 2006 mid-year estimate 2001-2006 growth Employment 2006 working age residents share in employment share unemployed share inactive Growth rates by sector 2004-2006 (by place of employment): 1 : Agriculture and fishing (SIC A,B) 2 : Energy and water (SIC C,E) 3 : Manufacturing (SIC D) 4 : Construction (SIC F) 5 : Distribution, hotels and restaurants (SIC G,H) 6 : Transport and communications (SIC I) 7 : Banking, finance and insurance, etc (SIC J,K) 8 : Public administration,education & health (SIC L,M,N) 9 : Other services (SIC O,P,Q)

67,600 89,000 122,200 92% 4.2% 256 183

25

N/A N/A 166% 9% -1% N/A -13% -5% -24%

Qualifications among residents Number of residents with NVQ 4+ Number of residents with no qualifications Crime figures All crimes committed (2006/2007)

5,315

Robberies (2006/2007)

34

Deprivation5 2007 IMD average score 2007 IMD rank of average score Graduate recruitment/retention Number of new graduates working in the area 05/06 3

33.16 7805

224,334 1,864

98,050

25.36 80 2172

36058

Number of new advanced degree graduates working in the area

679

9043

Share of employed NE university graduates working in the area3

3%

60%

percentage point change - 02/03 to 05/06 - in share of employed NE grads in the area

-1

-3

372.4 351.2

387.9 388.1

Income Mean gross weekly pay (residence-based) Mean gross weekly pay (workplace-based)

4,435,692

461.3 460.3

1: ‘Local’ residential prices based on sales in postcode NE24; For more detailed data see CD. 2: Data on regional trends was not available from the same source (thought could be estimated with other sources) so is not included 3: HESA data available for counties/Uas - for Blythe Valley, Northumberland county data is used 4: Local employment data based on Blyth Valley 002 5: Local deprivation data based on constituent lower layer SOAs in mid-layer SOA Blyth Valley 002 (E01027414, E01027415, E01027431, E01027441, E01027442)

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

81

Figure 9.1: Survey response: State of the Town Centre

Figure 9.2: Survey response: Frequency of Visit

82

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

Figure 9.3: Pedestrian counts: Thursday (non market day)

Figure 9.4: Pedestrian counts: Saturday (similar to Friday and market day)

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

83

Figure 9.5 Faรงade Assessment

84

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

9.3 Detailed public realm assessment using PERS We conducted a series of PERS Link, Place and public transport related assessments covering the square and adjacent streets. The map and pictures below illustrate the nature and extent of the individual survey areas.

As illustrated in the summary spider diagrams below the assessments show for the Market Place itself an average weighted scores of -0.83 for the Place Assessment and -0.75 for the PERS Link Assessment.

These scores reflect the quality of the pedestrian environment before the works in Blyth started (measured with PERS). There are wide range of performance issues were identified by our assessor.

The very low scores for permeability, obstructions, quality of the environment, surface quality, lighting and maintenance and related personal security suggest that Blyth Market Place is/was indeed in urgent need of investment.

Figure 9.6: PERS Assessments undertaken for Blyth Market Place

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

85

Figure 9.7: Blyth �������������������������������������������������������������� Market Place Public Space with weighted average of -0.83

Figure 9.8: Blyth Market Place Public Space with weighted average of -0.75

86

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

We were able to obtain PERS values for the ‘before intervention’ situation at Blyth Market Place; count pedestrians entering the square over three days in November 2007; and use an assumed average dwell time of around 10 minutes which enables us to calculate a monetary value stemming from user benefits generated by an improved quality of environment for pedestrians at Blyth Market Place.

For example, if we now assume an average PERS score of 2.0 achieved after completion of the refurbishment works, we can provisionally calculate that this would generate an annual user benefit of around £ 250,000 (only looking at PERS Link) or £100,000 (only looking at PERS public Place). This figure does not reflect likely increases in average dwell time or user numbers over time nor the duration the space will maintain this quality (potentially 10 years or longer). For a business case scenario, CB would multiply the calculated annual user benefit by 10 years resulting in a substantial proportion of the overall investment. In essence, improving the quality of Blyth Market Square to an average 2.0 PERS score would generate around 96% (for public space) and 112% (for links) higher user benefits compared to the ‘before intervention’ situations.

9.3 Place Quality Assessment (PQA) In the case of our analysis centred on the Blyth Market Place (Area 1) , we decided to look at an area covering a large part of the town centre, stretching down to the Quayside. In total 11 characer areas were identified.

A number of groups of quality can be identified. Among the best quality exists over towards the Quayside (esp.

Areas 8, 9, 10), where investment has already occurred and where there is in places an attractive and wellstructured built environment (such as Area 10). The next cluster is focussed on the market place (Area 1), which itself achieves among the higher scores in the town (70).

Interestingly, one of the areas where the market place does not score well is under the heading of “streets and spaces”, an area the forthcoming scheme will seek to address. It is worth noting that the unrefurbished Blyth Market Place performs substantially less well than the other locations where investment has occurred (ca. 10 points lower). It will be interesting to track the change in place quality scores, once the investment has been completed.

Surrounding the market place, there are a number of moderate quality zones where “The Basics” are largely positive, but where the public realm and services let the areas down. Outside of these areas, there are a number of character areas, where the physical place quality is low (Areas 4, 5, 6, 11). The bus station is of particular concern bearing in mind its important gateway function, while Area 11 is currently undergoing substantial change, which should result in enhanced scores in the near future.

The NAREC site to the northeast of the market square has a difficult interface with the town centre with its boundary representing something of a physical and visual barrier.

Blyth is of particular interest for this project as it is the only one of the case studies which had not yet gone on site at the time of the year 1 PQA. This allows us to compare pre- and post- scheme results, which will allow us to understand the direct change in quality levels achieved by the scheme itself. Furthermore in future years, it will allow us to assess the extent to which the scheme has acted as a wider catalyst for change for the rest of the town centre.

A smaller area was used for the PERS “Market Place Area” than the PQA Area 1 and so the results are not directly comparable.

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

87

16 A smaller area was used for the PERS “Market Place Area� than the PQA Area 1 and so the results are not directly comparable.

88

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

89

9.4 Early observations/issues What’s Worked?

Room For Improvement?

Agreeing evaluation criteria up front: Blyth Valley Borough Council have committed to collecting a wide evidence base, including rent levels, earnings, visitor surveys and with a view to tracking the local impact of the scheme. While it was too early in the process for us to access these data, their availability in future years will be of particular benefit to this project.

Making the most of the construction phase: The construction phase obviously represents some significant disruption to the daily lives of businesses, here particularly the market traders and residents.

However, if marketed properly, it offers an opportunity to get businesses and the community on board. Letting people know how the project is progressing, attractive and informative billboards, a website with a construction log and images of what people can expect, along with simple measures such as “windows” through hoardings allow people feel like they can see progress occurring and thus start to feel ownership over the changes taking place.

Protecting investments – agreeing maintenance service level agreements up front: One NorthEast/ Northumberland Strategic Partnership have agreed a comprehensive 10-year maintenance agreement with Blyth Valley Borough Council. Agreements of this type are important to protect the value of the investment for all partners. They are an invaluable planning tool for those at the delivery and maintenance end, to ensure that adequate resources have been identified to maintain the enhanced public realm, with associated elements, in particular lighting, planters, public art and water features.

Investing as part of a coordinated strategy: The investment in Blyth does not sit in isolation, and is rather a coordinated attempt to transform the wider town centre into a popular destination for local/subregional retail and also as a location in which to invest and do business. Maintaining this momentum following the initial investment and delivering on the softer elements, such as the events programme will be important factors in building investment confidence in Blyth.

Building confidence: As alluded to above, the scheme offers the potential to inspire private as well as public sector investment in Blyth. An assessment by GVA Grimley for the Business Case suggested that somewhere in the region of 350 net additional jobs could be created by the regeneration of Blyth town centre, stemming from proposals including projects such as the Morrison’s extension, Commissioner’s Quay and Ballast Hill. The investment in the public realm helps to raise private sector confidence that the public sector is willing to invest and thus that footfall levels etc will rise in line with expectations. Furthermore, effective delivery of the first of a series of other projects gives the private sector confidence about future investment levels, which may enhance the likelihood of speculative investments.

Informing businesses: Drawing on lessons from the other completed Quality of Place investments, one of the most commonly cited complaints related to the availability of suitable project contacts and project information relating to when individual businesses would experience disruption and for how long. Obviously, it is too early to draw any conclusions at this juncture, however, the absence of (for example) a dedicated website for the project and minimal information on the Council website, suggests that more could be made of the publicity potential of the project.

Overall As mentioned in the introduction, Blyth Market Place is an important one in terms of this project, in that it is the only case study we can track before, during and after.

This allows us to explore many dimensions which would otherwise not be possible, such as temporary effects (incl. benefits). Perhaps more importantly it allows us to accurately assess the numeric change in physical place quality levels, so that we can begin to unpick the impact of a change in place quality levels alongside other factors such as rent levels, employment, footfall and so on.

We do not seek to draw definitive conclusions, but rather make some early observations on some of the successes of the project based on our direct assessments, while also reflecting on stakeholder feedback from the Quality of Place Programme Evaluation.

90

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

010 Case Study 8: Newbiggin Bay

Value of Investment

Sub-region

Name

The final case study focuses on Newbiggin Bay, essentially a large coastal defence infrastructure project. There, a range of local, sub-regional and regional partners came together to fund a number of sympathetic investments which capitalised upon the opportunity presented by the new breakwater and upgraded beach.

NEWBIGGIN BAY

Short Description

New coastal defence infrastructure (breakwater), affording an opportunity for a new beach and art work “Couple” to be installed.

Associated environmental improvements will also be completed.

Northumberland

One NorthEast investment type

Transformational Quality of Place; Tourism To provide for enhanced coastal defence and to halt the erosion of the bay (DEFRA)

Key Objectives

£10,681,000

To enhance Newbiggin Bay as a location for the visitor economy To commission a public art sculpture for the bay To undertake environmental improvements to the promenade

Completion

Single Programme Investment + other public funding+ third sector

Priv. sector

Iconic public art installed Key Outputs

Nil £

Raising the profile of Newbiggin Bay Increase visitor numbers (10%) (Self reported ) Reduce void retail units by 20% (self reported)

SP£285,000 (2,88%) DEFRA £9,931,000 (break water) DEFRA £170,000 (Envi.

Enh.) DEFRA £ 80,000 (Public Art) Wansbeck Life £185,000 Environment Ag £30,000

November 2007

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

91

10.1 Overview The One NorthEast investment in Newbiggin Bay is something of an oddity. It is one of those opportunities that only emerges as a result of a peculiar set of circumstances, afforded by a major piece of coastal defence infrastructure. It is in this somewhat opportunistic vein that various partners, Wansbeck District Council, Northumberland Strategic Partnership, One NorthEast and Northumberland County Council came together to fund a number of distinct complementary elements. This built on the larger investment in coastal defences, which was being funded by DEFRA, in partnership with the District Council.

As far back as the late nineties, Wansbeck District Council had identified the need for urgent intervention in Newbiggin Bay to halt the damage being done to the bay as a result of accelerating coastal erosion.

This damage was exacerbated by the effects of the redundant mine-workings which were continuing to sink causing the bay to sink and the sand to erode. It was 2005 before DEFRA identified funding to proceed with suitable coastal defences for Newbiggin Bay. This focussed on sea defences and coastal recharge work.

To achieve this end the partners proposed two primary forms of intervention. This first was the public art commission, which resulted in the UK’s first permanent, offshore art installation. Entitled “Couple”, this piece of public art, designed by Sean Henry, stands some 12.5 metres above the breakwater and comprises a couple standing side-by-side, facing out to sea. This feature has attracted much media attention, not just within the trade press, but also among national TV providing Newbiggin with a level of media attention it would otherwise have struggled to achieve. A miniature version of “Couple” has been installed in Vernon Place.

INSPIRE (the South East Northumberland Public Art & Design Inititiative) was to the fore in convincing other partners the potential of a significant public art project as part of the overall investment. Furthermore, INSPIRE ensured that the project benefited from a dedicated PR consultant, which resulted Couple receiving a high level of regional and national press attention.

Before

After

Detail

92

This primary investment allowed some funding for a public art project, and it was here that the District Council, Northumberland Strategic Partnership, Northumberland County Council and SENNTRi saw an opportunity to use the changes occurring in the bay as a catalyst for the wider regeneration of Newbiggin Bay. This built on earlier consultant reports which identified the Bay as a key priority for the regeneration of Newbiggin as a whole. The vision for Newbiggin is to create a “village by the sea”.

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

The second main element of investment was a series of environmental and public realm improvements, which were intended to capitalise on the opportunity afforded by the renewed beach, first by ensuring that the public would have appropriate access to the beach, and second to upgrade the wider promenade area to provide an upgraded environment more sympathetic to the enhanced offer in the Bay area.

The combined impact is intended to support the regeneration of Newbiggin by providing it with a bay that becomes a destination thus supporting the businesses in the village, which rely on the tourism sector.

An additional beneficial impact of the scheme was the level of visitors attracted to the scheme to watch the various elements falling into place, whether the breakwater itself, the beach, or the public art components. More generally, as alluded to above, the scheme seems to be one which has captured the public imagination.

10.2 Economic performance snapshot Newbiggin Bay’s improvements can be expected to increase local tourism and investment and to have wider local benefits through improved image. Our business surveys reflect this, with 22% of respondents within 5 miles reporting an increase in business as a result of the scheme and 97% of responses indicating that the scheme has improved local image (this was the highest such rating of the five interventions surveyed).

Wider regional benefits seem less likely, as we consider increased tourism and expenditure at Newbiggin Bay is likely displaced from other beaches/town centres in the North East. Measures to survey visitors to find those from outside the region that would not have come to the North East if not for the improvements at Newbiggin could detect if there is any such regional impact.

Newbiggin Bay conducts in August a visitor survey which will provide this study with vital data on spend and origins of visitors.

The Question Of Fit? Why Invest?

The scheme responds to and builds upon a range of primarily local strategies and initiatives, ranging from the Seaside Strategy, 2004 to the LEGI team which are seeking to develop the local economy. In addition the scheme is a substantial element of the vision of the Newbiggin LIFE programme, which seeks to tackle the social and physical regeneration of the town. At the regional level, the investment responds to various streams of the Regional Economic Strategy - especially those relating to Place, and also to One NorthEast’s Tourism Strategy.

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

93

Newbiggin Bay Key Economic statistics Year intervention start Year intervention completed

2005/6 2007 Local

Residential values 1 2007 Avg. value - 1 bed 2007 Avg.value - 2 bed 2007 Avg. value - all 5-yr growth in value 1-yr growth in value Retail Zone A /commercial rateable values Avg. rent £/sqm - zone A Avg. rent/sqm - all retail Number of vacant premises (commercial premises) Vacancy rate - retail Avg. rent £/sqm - offices Population 2006 mid-year estimate 2001-2006 growth Employment 2006 working age residents share in employment share unemployed share inactive

Wansbeck 53,100 82,600 97,900 92% 4.2%

Northumberland

North East

England 144,600 166,800 219,300 68% 9.2%

53 47 To be confirmed N/A 34 61,700 1.0%

2,555,700 0.6%

50,762,900 2.7%

37,400 74% 6% 19%

1,524,300 71% 5% 24%

30,682,000 74% 4% 21%

Growth rates by sector 2004-2006 (by place of employment): 1 2 3 4 5 6

: : : : : :

Agriculture and fishing (SIC A,B) Energy and water (SIC C,E) Manufacturing (SIC D) Construction (SIC F) Distribution, hotels and restaurants (SIC G,H) Transport and communications (SIC I)

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

0% N/A -11% -2% -2% -26%

-10% -14% -5% 4% 2% 9%

-3% 2% -7% 5% -4% 0%

7 : Banking, finance and insurance, etc (SIC J,K)

N/A

66%

15%

7%

8 : Public administration, education & health (SIC L,M,N)

N/A

2%

2%

3%

9 : Other services (SIC O,P,Q)

N/A

-4%

5%

4%

Number of residents with NVQ 4+

21.4%

22.7%

27.1%

Number of residents with no qualifications

13.4%

14.3%

13.6%

Qualifications among residents

94

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

Year intervention start Year intervention completed

2005/6 2007 Local

Northumberland

North East

England

Crime figures All crimes committed (2006/2007) Robberies (2006/2007) Deprivation5 2007 IMD average score 2007 IMD rank of average score Graduate recruitment/retention

41.02 5402

5,069

224,334

4,435,692

25

1,864

98,050

29.89 46

Number of new graduates working in the area 05/06 3 Number of new advanced degree graduates working in the area Share of employed NE university graduates working in the area3 percentage point change - 02/03 to 05/06 - in share of employed NE grads in the area Income Mean gross weekly pay (residence-based) Mean gross weekly pay (workplace-based) Local Business Perception Survey (Dec 2007)

36058

679

9043

3%

60%

-1

-3

419.4 355.7

Number of respondants (within 0.5 and 5 miles)

!Sample to small!

44

Share aware of the scheme (of those aware) Share reporting increase in turnover as a result of scheme

!Sample to small!

84%

!Sample to small!

22%

!Sample to small!

97%

(of those aware) Share reporting improved local image as a result of scheme Tourism 2006 Annual Visit Days 2006 Revenue from all tourists 04-06 growth rate, tourist days 04-06 growth rate, revenue from visitors

2172

Survey Survey Survey Survey

data data data data

for for for for

2008 2008 2008 2008

Aug Aug Aug Aug

387.9 388.1

461.3 460.3

14,601,131 621,364,913,288 0% 0%

1: ‘Local’ residential prices based on sales in postcode NE64; For more detailed data see CD. 2: Data on regional trends was not available from the same source (thought could be estimated with other sources) so is not included 3: HESA data available for counties/Uas - for Wansbeck, Northumberland county data is used 4: Local employment data was ascertained for Wansbeck 001; figures too small to be accurately reported 5: Local deprivation data based on the constituent lower level SOAs within mid-layer SOA Wansbeck 001 (E01027541, E01027542, E01027543, E01027544)

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

95

10.3 Early observations/issues What’s Worked?

Room For Improvement?

Embracing opportunity: This investment in some ways is arguably not a classic, programmed investment, but in a sense one which responded to an unusual set of circumstances. Very much a one-off opportunity, it is entirely appropriate that the public sector partners responded positively to this opportunity. Furthermore, while some may argue that the scheme is not a perfect fit with regional investment priorities and is too small an investment for the regional tier to consider, we would argue that there remains a case for some funding to be made available to sub-regional partners (in this case that would be the Northumberland Strategic Partnership), to help fund opportunistic projects, which individual authorities might find very difficult to finance.

With the changes occurring within local Government, this may be a role larger unitaries, in future, are capable of undertaking themselves.

Making the most of the construction phase – linking in local businesses: It was suggested that there was a disappointing level of response from businesses in the Village, for example by failing to extend opening hours to respond to the levels of interest being shown during the construction phase and additional demand generated by construction workers. Though informal efforts were made to raise a greater awareness of the potential generated by the additional attention, it suggests that there may be a role for a more formal interaction with local business to make sure that they gain the most from such opportunities. This need not be through the lead regeneration organisation, but may require input from additional economic development partners.

Linking large capital projects into social, economic and regeneration objectives: Large capital projects for various purposes (coastal defence, environmental protection, sewerage, transportation and so on) can in some instances offer opportunities to link in with local and sub-regional social and economic priorities. Where this is possible, this can represent a distinct value-add and should be embraced as in the case of Newbiggin.

Marketing and dissemination – making the most of the construction phase: The level of information dissemination during the construction phase was impressive, with a clear and accessible website in place, which contained a frequently updated website, with project information, a construction diary, and a gallery. This generated much public interest and was a great shop window for the project, both for the local community and further afield.

Monitoring the temporary impacts: Newbiggin Bay is but one example, but there is a tendency to focus on longer term impacts at the expense of shorter term, or temporary impacts. While the relative importance of long term impacts is obvious, many overlook the importance of monitoring the impacts of the temporary effects. In this case for example, a significant amount of interest was generated during the construction phase.

It would be helpful to gauge the impact of these, and similar one-off elements, such as events and so on.

Overall Newbiggin Bay is an unusual project, and one which represented a lot of willingness from a wide range of partners to capitalise on the major infrastructure works that were required to ensure a wider regenerative benefit to Newbiggin. This is commendable and the visual impacts of the results are significant. It will be interesting to track what happens to businesses in the village, and property prices overlooking the bay and the visitor numbers collected in August. The longer term impacts will depend to no small extent on the ability of local partners (including the LEGI) to capitalise on the enhanced offer, by generating higher levels of business formation and survival and continuing to upgrade the offer to meet the needs of a highly seasonal mainly day trip tourism economy. A complementary investment in the public ream of the village centre would strike as an obvious next step.

18 We do not seek to draw definitive conclusions, but rather make some early observations on some of the successes of the project based on our direct assessments, while also reflecting on stakeholder feedback from the Quality of Place Programme Evaluation.

96

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

Figure 10.1: Newbiggin bay webpage

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

97

011

Reflection on Year 1

At the end of year 1, we pause to consider some of the earlier lessons stemming from our initial investigation of the case studies. We consider some early findings, observations, gaps, opportunities and challenges for year 2 and beyond.

vacant units and the number and nature of planning applications around the projects seems to be a robust and easy-to-track local indicator for improved confidence and entrepreneurial activity. The number of planning applications will form part of our Year 3 data collection programme. However, the study also needs to be careful in disentangling these effects: where public sector investment generates additional private sector investment that is a good thing, but the study needs to determine that there has been an increase in overall investment and understand whether that investment is additional not just locally but regionally;

11.1 Impacts The primary purpose of this study is to look at how to measure the impacts of Quality of Place projects over time, focussing on impacts on local and regional economic performance. Due to the nature of the projects, most of the impacts take some time to emerge, but there are some that happen early in the process. Most of these are local and relate to softer impacts, with the harder impacts taking longer to emerge. Examples of the sorts of early impacts which we can point to are: 

Enhanced image and perception of an area/town, resulting in increased levels of investor interest and business confidence. This is interesting, as there is often a nervousness among delivery agencies that year 1 analyses tend to pick up mostly on construction related negativity from businesses and the general public;



Distinctiveness or Unique Selling Point in marketing terms makes a substantial difference to raising the profile of cultural attraction and tourism potential.

Investment appears to be advisable where partners target a clearly distinctive regional, pan-regional or national role. Mima and Seven Stories represent good examples where the vision was to establish a facility which would attract visitors from outside the region, achieved by creating an “offer” that was distinctive across the North and in the case of Seven Stories, nationally. This suggests that in addition to the focus on the scale of developments, that there is a strong argument for looking carefully at the content of schemes with some uses and functions more likely to generate impacts of regional significance, by virtue of their distinctiveness.



98

Stimulating further investment from both the public and private sectors. In many of the cases, there are clear examples where the initial investment has enhanced the willingness of public sector funders to reinvest. This is particularly true when there is a clear overarching strategy, with a number of distinct elements, in place. Reduced numbers of



The bigger the better? Large scale interventions are likely to reach further, both in terms of the range and scale of impacts, thus they are more likely to be of sub-regional or regional significance.

They are therefore easier and quicker to detect in mainstream statistics. However they require fewer but more significant, thus riskier, investment decisions. Temporary job impacts - and if the market and entrepreneurial skill allow it - permanent job growth and step changes in perceived image, are easier to achieve with large scale projects or in fact a range of phased smaller projects in the same location. However, it is not to say that smaller, very specialised interventions with a Unique Selling Point (UPS) are not able to add significant value to the profile of a region over time. This study will seek to determine whether one large project is more effective (and cost effective) than five smaller ones with the same overall cost and what the risks are associated with those choices are;



Design Quality really does matter, and One NorthEast’s investments are having a clear and measurable impact on the quality of the physical environment. An outstanding design quality is particularly important where it is intended to achieve transformational change, alter perceptions, tackle stigma, raise design aspirations and contribute to improved investor confidence. The study will test whether it is possible to measure changes in design quality spreading out over time i.e. an initial public sector investment inspiring much more widespread increases in design quality ( PERS, Façade assessments, PQA);

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

11.2 Monitoring & Evaluation 

Business responses – in most of the transformational Quality of Place projects, there has been a noticeable effect on particular sorts of businesses, with a renewed focus on quality places having a disproportionate benefit for the leisure industries, in particular cafés and restaurants, with new businesses forming and existing ones expanding, in particular by having outdoor seating.

This summarises the initial impacts which have been identified at this juncture. Most of the impacts are local, albeit with some sub-regional or regional implications. By the third year of this project, we should be able to identify more quantitative impacts particular contribution of local economic impacts and regional competitiveness. However, but it must be remembered that for large parts of the North East, changing perceptions and improving confidence in the North’s places is an important objective in enhancing the competitive position of towns and cities which have been tarred with a heavy stigma over recent years. The transformation in perception of NewcastleGateshead is now often cited as an exemplar as to the impact of place investments in improving the economic potential of a post-industrial conurbation (see CD to this report for UK cities monitor 06/07 and Index of Deprivation 04/07) It is expected that by year three to be able to start seeing some clear changes to the property values, vacancy rates, rents levels, employment levels, business formation and survival rates, although others, such as sectoral change are likely to take longer to bed down in most cases and we have experienced some difficulties in the collection of reliable local data under this heading.

By year 3 we will also be looking to clearly differentiate between investments that have delivered local gains but largely at the expense of other parts of the region (distributional impacts) and those that increase overall regional economic performance.

The systematic collection of appropriate data for monitoring and evaluating key investments of this type, are somewhat onerous and as a result can be partial, and in worst cases haphazard. Too little is understood by some project partners about the likely impacts, and therefore what information should be collected to demonstrate the impact of the projects. Additionally, some of the ideal data sources such as the Betamodel data are costly and difficult for individual projects to purchase, and then to analyse.

We would propose a major review of the North East’s data holdings with a view to holding the best data required, at the most sensible spatial level. The role of observatories to facilitate this work could be explored.

To reduce the pressure on local partnerships and delivery vehicles, we would suggest that the regional and sub-regional levels take over responsibility for large portions of the data holdings and data generation, leaving the projects to deliver the most local level primary data, such as visitor surveys, pedestrian counts, quality assessments, user surveys, business formations and so on. This would allow the best data to be collected by those with enough experience of working with it, in a cost effective and time efficient manner, while reducing the pressure on projects and ensuring that regional resources are used most efficiently. Furthermore, it would ensure that evaluators are getting the best data from one consistent source and getting specific local data from the projects.

Projects would also benefit from annual reports of key data produced at the regional or sub-regional tier based on an agreed set of indicators, perhaps drawn from a regional suite and matched to individual projects based on the project typology.

We would also propose that the precise data to be collected be agreed with project developers at the outset, and be specifically linked to funding.

It is also worth bearing in mind that among the selected Quality of Place investments, they fall roughly into three different sorts of categories, namely public realm, culture/tourism, and business space provision. This study is likely to produce very different results for each type of investment and to propose variations on how each should be monitored. This is a topic which we propose focussing on in greater detail in later years.

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

99

11.3 One NorthEast’s role

11.4 Multiple cases for intervention

We support One NorthEast’s current moves towards focussing mostly on larger projects with a higher potential and hence risk, while devolving responsibility for smaller projects to sub-regional partnerships and local authorities as appropriate. We suppose this is where the Agency adds most value. Being involved in smaller projects the Agency risks spreading itself too thin, and at worst becoming a distraction (i.e. no involvement is possibly better than a small or only very minor involvement).

There are clearly multiple reasons for investing in Quality of Place projects, including economic, social and environmental objectives. This study is focused on the hard economic indicators at both local and regional levels. Social inclusion and environmental gains play no significant part in our analysis. This study will not provide a simple prioritisation of possible interventions for One NorthEast but will provide guidance on what types and locations of investments appear to have the greatest impacts on regional economic performance.

One NorthEast, in partnership with sub-regional partnerships, could consider acting as, or establishing, regional or sub-regional centres of excellence relating to the delivery of substantial investments. There was a sense from some of the projects that in relation to specific areas of expertise there was nowhere to turn to for assistance, when the delivery organisation lacked sufficient internal skills.

If One NorthEast’s single objective were to increase the size of the regional cake (i.e. pure economic growth), rather than the spread of wealth, then they may adopt a completely contrary set of regional objectives, concentrating on a very small number of primary settlements, although such a series of policies is likely to be less politically acceptable. This study will explore the implications of that trade-off in largely economic terms.

One NorthEast could also consider setting up a fund to respond to unanticipated opportunities. This might be used for a variety of purposes, whether it is another Newbiggin Bay, or NETPark, which would allow elements of the Agency to respond flexibly, and quickly to specific opportunities, or needs as they emerge.

As an alternative, or perhaps complementary to the above, One NorthEast may examine ways of accelerating the approval process for larger funding applications.

One NorthEast has begun to mainstream 10 year maintenance agreements as part of its Transformational Quality of Place projects – this is very welcome and we have seen some very positive examples of this in both contract form, and on the ground.

Those projects that appear to be most successful are those which do not sit in isolation, but rather are part of a coordinated series of interventions, sitting under a clear strategy and vision. One NorthEast should prioritise projects, which sit within such a clear vision, and when the next project(s) has already been thought about.

100

11.5 The role of image Image and perception have emerged again and again in the course of this work. From theory to project objectives, to beneficiary interviews, business survey, and so on, all recognise the implicit and explicit importance of these projects in raising the image, profile and perception of individual local areas, whole towns or sub-regions, or indeed the NorthEast as a whole. Indeed, the NorthEast, possibly more than any other English region, has recognised the importance of enhancing the region’s image and this major re-branding exercise shows positive results for NewcastleGateshead and other parts of the region.

Image clearly relates to local regeneration objectives, and is important in attracting inward investment, tourists and key workers – all elements which were identified at the outset as being important, and thus areas which we would wish to know more about and, ideally, be in a position to monitor and evaluate our schemes’ impact upon them.

These relationships are difficult to trace beyond the local, and virtually impossible to link to individual projects. While there is some hope that one could examine the impact of the collective shift in Newcastle Gateshead’s overall cultural transformation (e.g. via UK cities monitor), this is going to be almost impossible for an individual component, such as Seven Stories, or (say) mima.

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

So, while we recognise the important role that these projects have on image and perception, locally and beyond, we are going to have to rely on theoretical connections and experience to explain their importance.

Where possible, the business surveys, and some anecdotal evidence can be used to help inform the extent to which there is awareness of a given project and whether individuals perceive an increase in local civic pride etc. The wider (regional) impact remains elusive.

11.6 Local awareness/marketing The business survey (undertaken primarily for the programme evaluation project, but also reported here), aimed to reach 500 respondents, all within five miles of one of five selected interventions. Calls were placed only to businesses within five miles of one of the interventions.

Although each respondent was asked (by name) only about the intervention near their location, and a prompting description of the intervention was provided, around 25% of respondees were not aware of the programme/project in question (figure below).

More work can be done in these local areas to understand this finding, but on the surface, local awareness is lower than expected.

With some projects, such as Seven Stories, it may be likely that a business owner is not aware of the intervention at all. With others, such as Darlington

Pedestrian Heart, it seems unlikely that a local business would not be aware of all the construction, but it is possible that locals would just be aware of the nuisance and think it was maintenance, rather than an improvement targeted at changing the quality of the town centre.

The benefits of communicating this kind of message should be examined. There appears to be room for improvement as around one in four local businesses were not aware of their local intervention.

11.7 �������������������������� Local vs. regional impacts Early impressions suggest that a vast majority of the interventions target local impacts and change. Most provide local image improvements, potential for increased tourism, and some local employment impact.

For many of the programmes, employment and tourism benefits are likely to displace expenditure and tourism elsewhere in the region, and therefore provide no impact on regional economic performance.

There are a few areas of potential regional economic impact that have emerged: 

Mima – the scale and prestige of this intervention may draw visitors from throughout Britain and abroad. Resulting expenditure provides a boost to regional economic performance.



Seven Stories – this unique centre also is drawing audiences from outside the region, indicating regional impact potential.



Netpark – the ability of this development to draw in high-skilled employers, that may otherwise have not chosen to locate in the North East, presents a potential for significant regional economic impact.

We will monitor this potential for regional economic impact, and continue to watch all of the projects closely for other forms of regional economic impact, in the coming years.

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

101

11.8 Moving Forward As mentioned above, this report represents a comprehensive assessment of year 1 of a three year project. Years 2 and 3 are more intended to update the data for 2008 and 2009 and fill gaps such as the Planning Application numbers per area etc.

Our view is that there may be more value gained by looking in more detail at a reduced number of case studies in 2008. This would allow for more in depth analysis with less resource being spent on general data collection.

This element remains open for discussion and needs to be agreed with the client team resulting in a costed monitoring programme for Year 2 and Year 3. The first draft of this costed programme has been submitted to the clientteam in April 2008.

102

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

103

104

Capturing the Impacts of Quality of Place Investments Colin Buchanan / Tribal Urban Studio

a

london bristol cardiff edinburgh glasgow manchester newbury belfast dublin galway china madrid

Colin Buchanan Design Studio 2008

Colin Buchanan Newcombe House 45 Notting Hill Gate London W11 3PB