Alison Benjamin on Britain's first attempt to assess the quality and impact of
urban design
Wednesday February 7, 2001
The Guardian
Is it possible to quantify the benefits of good building design? A new official
report makes a first stab at doing just that, assessing the economic, social and
environmental value of recent development schemes in three big cities.
The report, released yesterday, is part of a government drive to improve the
quality of urban design. It heaps praise on what it concludes is good and spares
few feelings in damning what it sees as bad.
Office block developments accessible only by car, making no attempt to fit in
with the surrounding environment or adding anything to the local community, are
singled out as examples of poor design. Standard Court, in Nottingham, is
branded "a disconnected place that does not welcome people in and offers
them little once they are there".
By contrast, developments that are inviting, make an effort to blend with
surroundings and offer a range of uses score highly on the report's system.
Barbirolli Square, in Manchester, is described as "a gently animated public
space with its own distinct character and sense of place and with a good quality
of enclosure".
The report, The Value of Urban Design, was drawn up by researchers on behalf
of the commission for architecture and the built environment (Cabe), the new
government agency set up to boost building design, and the Department of the
Environment. The study was launched at a conference, in London, held to build on
Cabe's Better Public Buildings report, launched last October by Tony Blair.
The conference highlighted the role of central and local government in
delivering good urban design beyond the regulatory planning process. Andrew
Smith, chief secretary to the Treasury, told delegates that quality design did
not necessarily cost more to deliver, but offered strong competitive advantages.
The new report suggests that good rental returns and enhanced capital values
go hand-in-hand with well-designed schemes. It calls on investors and developers
to take on board the commercial evidence and on tenants to recognise the
increased prestige that high quality, integrated architecture commands with
clients - not to say the favourable impact it has on staff loyalty and health.
Public authorities also benefit, it says, when run-down areas and amenities are
returned to public use and urban centres are revitalised.
Researchers, from the Bartlett school of planning at University College
London, compared pairs of predominantly commercial developments built at roughly
the same time and chosen for their similarity in all respects except urban
design. These were: Standard Court and Castle Wharf in Nottingham; Barbirolli
Square and Exchange Quay in Greater Manchester; Brindleyplace in Birmingham and
the Waterfront business park in nearby Dudley. Each development was gauged
against a range of quantitative and qualitative measures such as rental returns,
energy consumption, traffic generation and assessed vibrancy.
Exchange Quay, a Dallas-style development on the banks of the Manchester Ship
Canal in Salford, is described as "a bland, faceless development with
bland, faceless buildings and spaces" which makes little attempt to connect
itself to its hinterland. "Very heavy security guard presence confirms this
is predominately a private, rather than public, place," says the report.
Whereas Exchange Quay turns it back on its waterfront, Nottingham's Castle
Wharf and Birmingham's Brindleyplace both scored highly for openly embracing
their canal settings, locating pubs and restaurants to maximum effect.
However, according to Esterre Property Management, which manages Exchange
Quay, the very features on which it is marked down are its selling points.
Darren Tyson, estates supervisor, says: "There is only one fence. It is 7ft
[2.1m] high, but there aren't any spikes. There is an estate right next door.
I'm not saying everyone on it is rough, but you only have to speak to the police
to know we have a need for security and our tenants [mainly insurance companies]
demand it. They are paying for security, maintenance and landscaping."
The Manchester branch of Masons law firm moved out of Exchange Quay just over
three years ago - to Barbirolli Square. Comprising two office blocks on one side
of the square, with the Bridgewater concert hall on the other, the development
is praised by the report. "The clever use of levels allows the central
space to step down to a re-established canal basin on to which a new cafe opens
up," it says.
Edward Davies, a partner at Masons, cites expansion as the reason for the
move to Barbirolli and says most clients would have preferred the firm to stay
put. "Exchange Quay was conveniently located just off the motorway, had
surface parking and good security, and the Copthorne hotel was across the road
for lunch. They thought it was wonderful."
While Exchange Quay offers investors returns of just 1% to 3%, Barbirolli
commands the highest rents in Manchester and the office project is now valued at
£60m, compared to its £27.5m cost. Such financial facts back up Cabe's
argument that better design adds economic value. "Good urban design
definitely pays back," says Jon Rouse, Cabe's chief executive.
Many have yet to be convinced. John Gilder, property director of the Mill
Group, which developed part of Nottingham's Standard Court, insists he is
content with his scheme's performance, despite the report's critical appraisal.
Particularly scathing comment is passed by the researchers on the development's
hardly used public arena. Gilder admits that the only people making use of the
arena are skateboarders - and they are doing so illegally - and he concedes that
Standard Court lacks the warmth, closeness and pleasant environment that make
nearby Castle Wharf a "destination location".
Such shortcomings are said to illustrate the crucial role that local
authority planning departments have to play in urban design and delivery of
economic, social and environmental benefits. Departments can and should be
proactive, says the report, and should positively set the design agenda through
clear development plan policies, making funding conditional on good design and
using the leverage offered by ownership of brownfield sites.
Significantly, two of the report's three lower-scoring developments had
minimal local authority input, having come under the remit of either development
corporations or enterprise zones. Cabe intends to work to ensure that the
private/public urban regeneration companies proposed in the urban white paper
learn from such mistakes.
|