6718 Living Places Final Report AW LR

8/6/2019 6718 Living Places Final Report AW LR

1/66

Prior

ity

place

s

outputsand

outcomes

living places year 3 evaluation report

April 2011

contents

1


2/66

Whats in ourfinal report

43-52

30-42

53-6517

-29

4-16

Co

rbypriorityplace

Pe

nnineLancash

ireprioritypla

ce

Th

eSouthWestp

riorityplace

PU

SHpriorityplace

Th

amesGatewaypriorityplace

contents

22


3/66

An Evaluation of Year 3 of the Living Places Programme has been carried out

on behalf of the living places Partners by DC Research Ltd. The purpose of

the Year 3 Evaluation was to build on Year 1 and Year 2 living places

Evaluations, with particular focus to be given to capturing learning from the

living places priority places in relation to the partnerships and successes ofthe programme.

living placesemphasises the use o culture and sport to support local distinctiveness

and quality o place and promotes the advantage o cultural bodies working together

to support local services or communities and individuals, particularly in areas that

are experiencing housing led growth and regeneration. The aims o theliving places

programme are to:

nAlign investment rom the sporting and cultural sector across organisational boundaries

so it can be used more efciently or people and places.

nProvide inormation, advice and support on the use o culture and sport in sustainable

communities to people working in local government, housing, property development,

planning and a host o other felds who take the day-to-day decisions that shape

communities o the uture.

nBuild the capacity o communities themselves so people can be empowered

to bring cultural and sporting activity and inrastructure to their communities.

Fivepriority places(Corby, Pennine Lancashire, Partnership or Urban South Hampshire

(PUSH), Thames Gateway and The South West) were chosen as the key element o the

Programme as they were all places experiencing signifcant change, whether through

regeneration or growth, demonstrated ambition and/or good practice in terms o the

role o culture and sport in this change, and were sufciently dierent to allow the learning

to be o broad application.

Part o the remit o the Year 3 Evaluation was to provide a summary o the achievements in

each o thepriority places, ocusing on the impact and added value that the programme

has achieved in each place, the conditions and actors that have helped to achieve these

impacts and added value, and building on this to identiy the lessons or other places that

can be learned rom these experiences.contents

33


4/66

Corby

priority

place

4

contents


5/66

Corbyprio

rityplaceCorby priority place

Corby had a population o 53,174 in the 2001 census and fgures released in 2010 revealed

it had the astest growing population o a local authority in England and Wales. The Borough

o Corby is part o the wider county o Northamptonshire (which also includes Daventry

District Council, East Northamptonshire District Council, Kettering Borough Council,

Northampton Borough Council, South Northamptonshire District Council and the

Borough Council o Wellingborough).

5

contents


6/66

Corbyprio

rityplace

Impact and added valueThe key impacts and added value that Corby has achieved as a priority place include:

Inuencing policy

A key achievement in terms o

inuencing policy in Corby has been

the work commissioned either directly

through the living places programme

or via partners working to promote therole o culture and sport in regeneration

and development schemes (such as

Our Corby work, studies by Jura, work

on Public Realm and the development

o strategies such as North Northants

Cultural Investment Plan and theNorthants Cultural Strategy or

Children and Young People).

These, in conjunction with previous

studies have helped to both inorm the

uture direction o policy making in Corby and enhance the evidence base available or

culture and sport based decision making. The North Northamptonshire Mapping Overviewo Cultural Assets: Cultural Investment Plan (Tom Fleming Creative Consultancy) and

the Community Archives and the Sustainable Communities Agenda (Jura Consultants) studies

in particular, outlined lessons learned and outcomes that have clearly inuenced how partners

in Corby approach uture projects, or instance:

nThe cultural mapping work taught living places partners that it is important to drill

down to low levels o geography to get below averages (with ward levels being ideal).nCommunity archives work gave pointers as to how interventions are best directed

and how communities are engaged.

6

contents


7/66

Corbypriorityplace

In addition to the studies inuencing and providing uture lessons or development within

Corby, the act that the North Northants Joint Policy Unit (NNJPU) is ully signed up to promoting

the role o culture and sport has meant that these eatures have been integrated into the North

Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy, both in terms o design stipulations and consultation

practice. Corby has beneftted rom close working with the NNJPU in bringing orward sportand cultural issues in such strategies and the resulting policy has underpinned the prominence

o sport and culture within the development o Corby.

living places work in Corby has inuenced the Local Development Framework and it has

better positioned culture, using mapping and the CSPT recommendations on standard charges

or culture in setting and negotiating North Northamptonshires developer contributions.

Developing evidence

The cultural mapping study was originally commissioned to inorm the business and planning

processes or the Corby Cube, however it has also helped to provide an evidence base or

uture cultural policy. Other studies have also contributed to the groundwork or culturalpolicy and extended the evidence base available (such as the Community Archives and

the Sustainable Communities Agenda and theAudiences and Participation Research)1.

Such studies have helped to inorm decision makers about the current status o cultural assets

and participation, and the suggestions or uture development have helped to inuence the

involvement o culture and sport in planning policy.

living places work in Corby has inuencedthe Local Development Framework it has better

positioned culture in setting and negotiating NorthNorthamptonshires developer contributions.

7

contents

1.Commissioned by the Living Places Partnership, carried out by Tom Fleming Creative Consultancy (2009).


8/66

Corbypriorityplace

Attracting additional investment and support

As a result o the Year 1 Community Archives research, extra unding was secured rom HLFand Arts Council or the Our Corby arts and archives project. This extra unding or delivery

can also be viewed as a tangible beneft linked to the status o Corby as a priority place.

Partners in Corby also eel that the living places programme has assisted with raising the

prole of Corby with potential funding bodies. As a result o culture having a raised

profle and being incorporated in policy, Section 106 unds have been secured (in projects

such as Rockingham Forest near Corby) and there has been successul leveraging unding or

community cultural activity through Landfll Tax and WREN.2

8

contents

2.http://www.wren.org.uk/


9/66

Corbypriorityplace

Improving engagement betweenculture and sport, planning and development

Corby can be said to have beneftted

rom a close engagement with the

NNJPU prior to living places however,

consultations suggest that there was

little collaborative working between

cultural and regeneration partners

prior toliving places. Despite this,

the engagement between Corby and

NNJPU has improved this joint working,taking into account Corbys living places

priorities. This has consequently allowed

or a better integration o these actors

into development and regeneration

schemes and policy in the wider North

Northamptonshire area. Additionally, such

engagement has promoted better working

on areas such as economic development,

culture, sport, development and planning,

with particularly strong engagement

emerging rom the North Northants

Development Company (NNDC).

9

contents


10/66

Conditions and factors that enabled impactand added valueThere are a number o actors and conditions that have supported and enabled the

impacts and added value that Corby has achieved as a priority place. The key enablingactors have included:

Priority place profle

Corby as a priority place is communicable to partners, and a number o consultees have

viewed this status as an enabler in attracting development interest. For instance, many East

Midlands partners argue that cultural agencies now target activity at Corby that they may well

not have done so had the town not been given its priority place status.

Consultees urther suggested that the priority place status has instilled a sense o confdence

in terms o ability to deliver built on strong relationships and there has been a continued

ocus on renewal (in physical terms) in the town centre and on key landmark developments

on the back o the living places philosophy. Another tangible beneft o Corbys priority

place status has been improvements in resident perceptions o the town as a place to live

(something locally regarded as more signifcant than progress against the cultural

National Indicators).

Corbypriorityplace

10

contents


11/66

Corbypriorityplace

Partnership arrangements

The Corby Priority Place Partnership (and more generally cultural networks in Corby were

considered by consultees to be well established and defned. The strong establishment isthought to be the direct consequence o it being nested into already well dened boundaries

and organisational roles. The priority place meetings in Corby have been on an annual

basis, with supplementary communication being carried out by telephone, email, meetings

and other means in between meetings, at varying levels o requency.

In Corby, living places meetings have oten been attended by regional representatives rom

cultural agencies, as well as Milton Keynes South Midlands (MKSM), North NorthamptonshireJoint Policy Unit (NNJPU) and North Northamptonshire Development Corporation (NNDC),

providing a strong mix of culture, local authority, development and planning representation.

Meetings are planned to continue beyond the end oliving places based on continuing

demand to coordinate activity and momentum.

As well as regional representatives, the Terms o Reerence also indicates that specifc

member organisations are: Corby Borough Council, Northamptonshire County Counciland the cultural and regeneration agencies in the East Midlands: MLA East Midlands, Arts

Council England, English Heritage, Sport England, Culture East Midlands, Milton Keynes

South Midlands Culture Partnership and Regeneration East Midlands.

Whilst the meetings are inrequent, the survey responses indicated that the partners also

meet as part o other Steering Group meetings, meaning that it is more difcult to defne

specifc priority place meetings. Despite this, the responses did suggest that the partnershipmeet around specifc living places tasks, when necessary.

At the local level, it is elt that the Partnership has identied opportunities to inuence

policy and programme design through the Cultural Strategy reresh and the North

Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy. However, there is acknowledgement that there

have been no opportunities at the national level or the Partnership to inuence the design

o policies or programmes.

11

contents


12/66

Corbypriorityplace

Evolution o partnership arrangements

Priority place meetings in Corby have evolved into meetings where mainstream activity

around theliving placesagenda is discussed and coordinated. For example, the meetingin November 2010 had a ocus on LEPs, and how best to ensure that culture and sport

could inuence LEP development. This suggests that living places has been successul

in embedding culture and sport in development, regeneration and place shaping, and the

activity between partners is ongoing on a number o ronts.

The main elements o policy and programme design that have changed since the Partnership

started have been around the changes in structure and priorities o regional cultural agencies,LAA developments, Corby and Northamptonshire county cultural strategy developments and

national policy developments. With the exception o the reresh o the Corby Cultural Strategy,

it is not elt that any o these changes have been the direct result o the work o the Partnership

however, this reresh o the cultural strategy was inuenced by the research and baseline data

commissioned by the Priority Place Partnership.

Mainstreaming o activity

The mainstreaming oliving places activity has assisted with the promotion o culture and

sport priorities and whilst the Partnership meets inrequently, there is much evidence o

living places activity ongoing on a regular basis. The well established partnerships have

also developed the sense o purpose and role o culture and sport in the development and

regeneration aspects o the area. The act that many o the Priority Place Partnerships

member organisations meet as part o other activities has helped to better integrate

living places ideas into other felds to the extent that the particular impact o the

programme is more difcult to defne.

12

contents


13/66

Corbypriorityplace

Pre-existing support and arrangements

In correspondence with the mainstreaming o activity, pre-existing support or sport and

culture is also evident within Corby. For instance, Corby is regarded by a number o partnersas having benefted rom the long term engagement o planning with culture, with an ability

to ully understand what works in their communities.

Critically, it can be argued that there was demand or culture and sport based place shaping

in Corby, and that living places was able to help meet that demand. Such demand (and

knowledge o what communities actually want) can also be said to have helped living places

support and align local priorities with a policy ocus, consequently increasing the chanceso success.

Additionally, culture is represented on NNJPUs Major Applications Group, and ACE and

CABE have unded the Design Action Programme and a Design Action Manager role which

ensures major applications meet Core Strategy objectives and are o high design quality.

Whilst this role pre-dates living places, and covers a larger area than Corby, there are clear

synergies that have added value to developments via high quality design and strong cultureand sport inputs.

Scale o Corby as a priority place

Being an already defned Local Authority area, Corby beneftted rom pre-existing partnershipsworking within particular boundaries. This assisted with the continuation o previous work and

integrating living places priorities into multiple areas and agendas particularly where partners

worked together on dierent Steering Groups.

13

contents


14/66

Corbypriorityplace

In terms o the lessons rom the Corby priority place or other places that aspire to achieve

similar aims and objectives to living places, the ollowing aspects are the main learningpoints and lessons:

nEnsure that there is strong local understanding and recognition o the role that culture andsport can play in creating sustainable communities is an important actor in promoting such

priorities (particularly amongst key individuals and organisations).

nEnsure that key partners and sectors work together on a number o ronts to assist with

the level o communication, integration and mainstreaming o culture and sport and other

shared priorities.

nDevelop the local areas evidence base through scoping and mapping studies

in order to eectively inorm and provide groundwork or uture policy and

development direction.

nIntegrate consultation and design quality priorities into culture and sport policies

in order to acilitate local support and promote the area as a better place to live,

work and visit.

nCapitalise on pre-existing support or culture and sport (where existent) by promoting

joint working and engagement as well as sharing knowledge o what works in the local

community to increase the chances success or projects.

nIntegrate culture and sport issues into Local Development Frameworks and Section

106 agreements to improve the level o awareness and unding or such areas.

Lessons from Corby (for other places)

14

contents


15/66

Corbypriorityplace

Corbybenetted frompre-existing partnerships

working within particular

boundaries.

15

contents


16/66

CorbypriorityplaceName of Document Status Geography

Covered

Produced by partner/Commissioned

Name of

Company/

Partner who

Produced it

Strength of

Culture and

Sport Reference

Plan or Culture2010 to 2014

ResearchReport

Milton Keynesand SouthMidlands

Commissioned by Future City,C Network, MKSM

BOP Consulting XXX

The Cultural Strategy

or Children and YoungPeople

Research

Report

Northamptonshire Commissioned by

Northamptonshire CountyCouncil and Arts Council

Tom Fleming

Creative Consultancy

XXX

North NorthamptonshireMapping Overview oCultural Assets: CulturalInvestment Plan, Feb 2010.

MappingReport

NorthNorthamptonshire

Commissioned by Arts Council,Northamptonshire County Counciland Corby Borough Council,North Northants DevelopmentCompany, Joint Planning Unitand WNDC

Tom FlemingCreative Consultancy

XX

Excellence and Innova-tion in Nor thamptonshiresPublic Realm: Reviewand Recommendations,Apr 2010.

ResearchReport

Northamptonshire Commissioned by Arts Council,Northamptonshire County Counciland Corby Borough Council,North Northants DevelopmentCompany, Joint Planning Unitand WNDC


XX

Community Archivesand the SustainableCommunities Agenda

ResearchReport

Corby Commissioned by MLA Council Jura Consultants XX

A Cultural InvestmentPlan or NorthNorthamptonshire,Feb 2010.

ResearchReport


Commissioned by Arts Council,Northamptonshire County Counciland Corby Borough Council,North Northants Development

Company, Joint Planning Unitand WNDC


XXX

Name of Document Status Geography

Covered

Name of Company/Partner

who produced document

Strength of

Culture and

Sport Reference

North Northamptonshire LocalDevelopment Plan

PlanningDocument


North Northamptonshire JointPlanning Unit.

X

North Northamptonshire DraftSupplementary Planning Document: Devel-oper Contributions

PlanningDocument


North Northamptonshire JointPlanning Unit.

XX

The tables below highlight the range o activity and inuence that Corby has had as a priority

place in terms o studies and research reports that have been commissioned, and those that

have been inuenced by living places and the Priority Place Partnership in Corby.

Source: DC Research 2011


Table 1: Research Studies and Plans commissioned by Corby as a priority place (as lead or as partners)

(x= some contribution, xx=signifcant contribution, xxx= critical contribution)

Table 2: priority place Strategies and Plans inuenced by Corby as a priority place


16

contents

P


17/66

PennineLancashireprio

rityplac

e

17

contents


18/66

PennineLan

cashirepriorityplac

e

Pennine Lancashire priority place

Pennine Lancashire has a population o over 522,000 and comprises: Blackburn with

Darwen Borough Council, Burnley Borough Council, Hyndburn Borough Council, Lancashire

County Council, Pendle Borough Council, Ribble Valley Borough Council and RossendaleBorough Council.

18

contents


19/66

PennineLan

cashirepriorityplac

e

Inuencing policy

A key achievement in terms o

inuencing policy has been the high

level recognition o the role o culture

and sport in regeneration and

development or Pennine Lancashirethrough the inclusion of the priority

place in the Multi Area Agreement

for Pennine Lancashire. The MAA

specifcally mentions Pennine Lancashire

as a priority place, with an Action within

the MAA1 being or: Pennine Lancashire

partners to workwith Government tomaximise its status as a priority place.

Inclusion within the MAA has also

supported engagement within Pennine

Lancashire between culture and sport

and planners/economic development

(outlined in more detail below).

A second achievement in Pennine Lancashire that is providing ongoing (and mainstreamed)

support in enabling policy inuence has been the establishment of a culture, leisure and

sport sub-group of the Pennine Lancashire PLACE joint committee (a ully constituted

Joint Committee with representation by Leaders rom each local authority). The Culture,

Sport and Leisure subgroup is chaired by a local authority chie executive, has local

government engagement, and has living places as part o the groups Terms o Reerence.

This is regarded as a key achievement in both the recognition o the role o culture and

sport in Pennine Lancashire as well as a way in which the role o culture and sport has been

mainstreamed into key local government arrangements.

1.http://www.penninelancsplace.org/Shared%20Documents/09240_MAA_Document_Final_with_App.pd

Impact and added valueThe key impacts and added value that Corby has achieved as a priority place include:

19

contents


20/66

PennineLan

cashirepriorityplac

e

Developing evidence

In Pennine Lancashire, the key primary piece o research that the Priority Place Partnership

supported was the Mapping the Cultural Sector in Pennine Lancashire by Jura Consultants.

The study added, and continues to add, value in a number o ways. For example, the fndingso the research were launched by the then Culture Secretary, helping to reinorce the national

profle o Pennine Lancashire as a priority place, and supporting and enabling the engagement

o key local government partners.

Another example o local policy inuence within Pennine Lancashire relates to the current use

by planners within Pennine Lancashire of the Mapping the Cultural Sector in Pennine

Lancashire research2 (commissioned by the Pennine Lancashire Priority Place Partnership),

as a key source o evidence to help inorm the development o new local planning documents

and policies.

Finally, the PLACE Culture, Leisure and Sport sub-group, working with the Pennine Lancashire

living places Manager, has recently completed the Pennine Lancashire Cultural Plan 2011-

2014 along with an Action Plan, with engagement rom the leaders and chie executives o the

Pennine Lancashire authorities being achieved as part o this process.

2.http://living-places.org.uk/fleadmin/user_upload/downloads/Mapping_the_Cultural_Sector_in_Pennine_Lancashire.pd

20

contents


21/66

Improving engagement betweenculture and sport, planning and development

Pennine Lancashire is benefting rom improved engagement with planning and economic

development as a result o the Culture, Leisure, and Sport subgroup o PLACE. The creation

o a PLACE subgroup specifcally dedicated to culture and sport, and chaired by a local

authority chie executive is thought to have added weight and recognition to the role o

culture and sport within the sub-region by economic development, planning and other

core local government services.

PennineLan

cashirepriorityplac

e


Due to its designation as a priority place, Pennine Lancashire was part o the Our Place Empty

Shops project that took place in 2010 in both Blackburn and Taunton. A total o 100,000unding rom BIS Skills Learning Revolution Transormation Fund was used to support

the project, and it is recognised that this unding support or the project was due to Pennine

Lancashire being part o the living places programme and being a designated priority place.

In addition, the establishment o the living places manager post has provided additional

capacity and capability to enable culture and sport to be even better engaged and inuential

in key local government and place shaping agendas across Pennine Lancashire, helping tomaintain and build upon living places activity, and ensure that living places becomes

integrated into the agendas o the local authorities. The unding or this post has been

provided through a combination o sources including Regenerate Pennine Lancashire,

local authority support and support rom MLA Council and Arts Council England.

21

contents


22/66

Conditions and factors that enabled impactand added value

There are a number o actors and conditions that have supported and enabled theimpacts and added value that Corby has achieved as a priority place. The key

enabling actors have included:

Local leadership

The importance o the drive and engagement of key individuals in the living places

agenda has been a key supporting actor or the achievements within Pennine Lancashire.

In the case o Pennine Lancashire (as with the other successul priority places),

keypartnerships and key individuals have grasped living places as a high profle

opportunity to better deliver existing culture, sport and place aspirations.

The act that key individuals understand, recognise, and buy into the role that culture and

sport can play in creating sustainable communities has been an important actor that has

underpinned many o the achievements within Pennine Lancashire.

The enthusiasm and drive o these key individuals who get the vision o the living places

Programme has also enabled the commitment o time and (where possible resources to

supporting the priority place.

PennineLan

cashirepriorityplac

e

A current enabler to improved engagement with planning and economic development has

occurred as a result o the recent Culture and Sport Planning Toolkit workshops organised

by the Town and Country Planning Association (TCPA). These workshops, which have taken

place to engage planners and cultural ofcers within Pennine Lancashire in the reresh o the

CSPT, have provided a very useul opportunity or engagement and communication betweenplanners rom the Pennine Lancashire local authorities and their cultural counterparts.

22

contents


23/66


A key supporting actor that underpinned many o the impacts achieved has been the prole

that Pennine Lancashire has received due to the designation of being a priority place.

This profle has maniested itsel in a variety o ways, including Ministerial Visits (e.g. Andy

Burnham (when Secretary o State or Culture Media and Sport) launched the cultural sector

mapping research commissioned by Pennine Lancashire, whilst Baroness Andrews has also

visited) alongside the visit rom Roy Clare (Chie Executive o MLA). Such visits are thought

to have helped to increase the awareness o Pennine Lancashire as a priority placeamongst

local authority chie executives and other key local partners. The designation o PennineLancashire as a priority placehas thereore provided national profle and recognition which

has been useul in a variety o inuencing aspects.

Those with a leadership role at the priority place level are clear that living placeshas

resulted in high level dialogue and contact that would otherwise have been very difcult

to secure. This has enabled places to raise their profle at the regional and national levels

in terms o culture, sport and place shaping.

PennineLan

cashirepriorityplac

e

23

contents


24/66


Partnership remains a core success actor in terms o what has been achieved across

all o the priority places, including Pennine Lancashire.

From the outset, the eectiveness o the partnership working within Pennine Lancashire

was supported by a range o actors and conditions, including:

nPennine Lancashire being a Housing Market Renewal Area. The Housing MarketRenewal (Elevate/Regenerate Pennine Lancashire) was recognised as an active

advocate o the role o culture in housing renewal/growth and made contributions

(in kind and in cash) towards the empowerment o the Priority Place Partnership.

nThe well established pre-existing partnership working within Pennine Lancashire,

including such groups as PLACE, as well as Elevate/Regenerate, and the Pennine

Lancashire Multi Area Agreement (MAA). The MAA process in particular served

to drive orward the collaborative agenda.

nPre-existing acceptance of Pennine Lancashire as a well-dened area, and a

cohesive market which is thereore an appropriate spatial level to address key

issues such as housing market, wider economy, and visitor economy.

nThe pre-existing joint working between the cultural agencies also helped

and supported the eectiveness o the Partnership.

nThe resources provided by various partners have also helped which allowed the

Partnership to have extra capacity in a variety o ways (including the living places

Manager post).

nThe development of Terms of Reference for the Partnership at the outset ensured

clarity about key aspects such as membership, level o representation, principles

and values, specifcation about what members must be able to do and so on.

PennineLan

cashirepriorityplac

e

24

contents

E l ti t hi t


25/66


Prior to the launch o the living places

Programme and the designation o

Pennine Lancashire as a priority place,

there had been a range o activities relevant

to living places already occurring in

Pennine Lancashire. This included work

commissioned by the housing marketrenewal (HMR) Programme (e.g. the

Wilson-Livesey report Dreaming o

Pennine Lancashire) which emphasised

the importance o branding and image or

the area, and linked to this is the emphasis

that the HMR Programme gave to the wider

aspects o housing market renewal. The roleo culture in regeneration was a key part o

this, especially in addressing the lack o a

positive image or the area.


During the course o the living places programme, the partnership arrangements evolved

and developed to ensure that they continued to be ft or purpose and were appropriately

aligned to emerging wider agendas. From the original partnership structure, which had

regional and subregional partners represented on a Pennine Lancashire specifc partnership,

in April 2010 there was a shit to a regional partnership or the cultural agencies and other key

regional partners (covering Pennine Lancashire as well as other priority (MAA) areas in the

Northwest region). This change occurred at the time o the development o the sub regional

group the Culture, Sport and Leisure subgroup o PLACE. These arrangements helped to

increase the eectiveness o the partnership working, as well as support the mainstreamingo the living places agenda, and the engagement o senior level local government ofcers

and members.

PennineLancashirepriorityplac

e

25

contents

P


26/66

Scale o Pennine Lancashire as a priority place

For Pennine Lancashire (as well as other key priority places) the evaluation evidence also

identifed that those priority places operating at a sub regional (or smaller) level beneftted in

terms o place defnition and the clarity o vision and purpose.

PennineLancashirepriorityplac

e

Role o the living places manager

Finally, the additional capacity and capability provided through the establishment o the

living places Manager role is thought to have made an important contribution across

many o the achievements and added value that the Pennine Lancashire priority place

has brought.

Additionally, there was pre-existing joint working between the regional cultural agencies or

example, the ormal arrangements in place or joint working around the development o Local

Area Agreements. Within Pennine Lancashire the pre-existing partnership working between

the local authorities has also been a key contributory actor or what has been achieved there.

Pennine Lancashire priority place is thought to have beneftted rom being nested within/well linked to an established regeneration partnership with a wider agenda that includes

regeneration, growth and MAA development.

Pennine Lancashire priority place isthought to have beneftted rom being nestedwithin/well linked to an established regeneration

partnership with a wider agenda

26

contents

P


27/66

In terms o the lessons rom the Pennine Lancashirepriority placeor other places thataspire to achieve similar aims and objectives toliving places, the ollowing aspectsare the main learning points and lessons:

nEnsure that there is strong local leadership, commitment, drive and engagement

rom key individuals to support the agenda o culture and sport within

sustainable communities.

n

Maximise the profle o the place through the positive exploitation o opportunitiesto raise the profle o the place at the national and regional levels (such as ministerial visits).

nEnsure that the spatial scale o working is appropriate and eective building on, and

linking to, appropriate pre-existing partnership working arrangements and experience.

nEnsure that the spatial scale o working aligns to accepted, pre-defned spatial areas

related to, and appropriate or, the aims being pursued.

nDevelop eective local government engagement through linking to, or being

embedded within relevant, wider partnership arrangements.

nProvide core resources to ensure there is sufcient capacity and capability to help

local leaders achieve the vision, aims and objectives being addressed.

nBe willing and prepared to evolve the partnership arrangements to ensure alignment

with changing policy context and government/governance structures.

PennineLancashirepriorityplace

Lessons from Pennine Lancashire(for other places)

27

contents

P


28/66


During the course o the livingplaces Programme, the partnershiparrangements evolved and developed

to ensure that they continued to be ftor purpose and were appropriatelyaligned to emerging wider agendas

28

contents

P

P i L hi t bl


29/66


Key Document Geography

Covered

Status of

Document

Commissioned/Writtenby Partner?

Author Strength of

Culture and

Sport Reference

Pennine LancashireCultural Plan 2011-2014

Pennine Lancashire DevelopmentDocument

Written by partner Pennine Lancashire XXX

Pennine Lancashire

Cultural Plan 2011-2014

Pennine Lancashire Development

Document


An Integrated EconomicStrategy or PennineLancashire


Written by partner Pennine Lancashire XX

Multi Area Agreementor Pennine Lancashire



Mapping the CulturalSector in PennineLancashire

Pennine Lancashire DevelopmentDocument Commissioned byliving places Jura consultants XX

The table below highlights the range o activity and inuence

that Pennine Lancashire has had as a priority place in terms

o documents that have been inuenced by living places.

Pennine Lancashire table


Table 1: Research Studies and Plans commissioned by Corby as a priority place (as lead or as par tners)(x= some contribution, xx=signifcant contribution, xxx= critical contribution)

29

contents

PU


30/66

USHp

riorityp

lace

30

contents

PU


31/66

PUSH priority place

PUSH is a partnership o unitary authorities including Portsmouth and Southampton;

Hampshire County Council and district authorities o Eastleigh, East Hampshire, Fareham,

Gosport, Havant, New Forest, Test Valley and Winchester. The Partnership is estimated to

cover a population o over 1.5 million people. PUSH is linked to the Solent LEP, and hasrecently been joined by Isle o Wight Council.

Impact and added value

The key impacts and added value that PUSH has achieved as a priority place include:

USHpriorityplace

31

contents

Inuencing policyPU


32/66

Inuencing policy

In planning terms, there is strong qualitative evidence to suggest that the development o

culture and sport through living places has inuenced planning and economic developmentpolicy in PUSH. Currently, the PUSH Economic Development Strategy, South East Regional

Spatial Strategy for South Hampshire and the PUSH Design Charter all contain a ocus

on cultural and sporting developments. While living places cannot be said to be wholly

responsible or this inclusion, it can be seen to have assisted with the promotion o culture

and sport issues in development policy. There have also been positive living places

developments within the PUSH area, including:

nJoint unding (50% living places partners, 50% Hampshire County Council)

o a PUSH Cultural Coordinator to increase capacity and take orward the

agenda o the Quality Places theme group rom July 2009.

nCommissioning o research on Providing for Cultural Infrastructure in

the PUSH area: the role of spatial planning and developer contributions.

nCommissioning oThe South Hampshire and Hampshire Cultural Infrastructure Audit,

which suggested appropriate ways in which to: secure cultural and sporting inrastructure

through developer contributions; increase the profle o planning or cultural inrastructure

in the PUSH area and; suggestions as to how the Culture and Sport Planning Toolkit

could be used to help secure appropriate cultural and sporting inrastructure through

developer contributions.

nHelping to provide an evidence base or studies such as Spatial Planning and the

Provision of Cultural and Sporting Infrastructure in the PUSH area.

The Design Charter1 launched by the Quality Places Panel represents another product

developed by PUSH that can be seen both as an outcome in the living places sense, and

an approach that could be adopted and adapted or use in other places. The Charter recognises

the importance o high quality design in adding social and economic value to an area and

it aims to set a standard or such design to ensure that developments within the whole area

covered by PUSH are contributing to the overall plans.

USHpriorityplace

1.http://www.push.gov.uk/quality_places_charter.pd

32

contents

PUAdditionally, PUSHs Multi Area Agreement now has dedicated chapter or single conversation


33/66

USHpriorityplace

document by the Homes and Communities Association. Whilst PUSHs MAA will not result in

additional unding or place shaping, it does keep councillors ocused on quality places as

being something PUSH is trying to achieve.

As well as commissioning studies and inuencing local policy, PUSH has also increased thepotential or priority place activity to inuence national policy through initiating a joint letter to

the DCMS Permanent Secretary, ollowing the meeting o Chie Executives and other senior

partners rom each o the priority places. The meeting ocused on commonalities and a

shared desire to put culture and sport at the heart o regeneration and beyond and this shared

consensus was viewed as an opportunity to collaborate to promote living places collectively

and inuence policy.

Developing evidence

In PUSH there have been a range o studies and research exercises completed, ocussing on

culture and sport evidence, design guidance and creative industries research. For example,

PUSH has commissioned and developed the Spatial Planning and the Provision of Cultural

and Sporting Infrastructure2 research, which can be used as evidence to support provision

or culture in Section 106 and Community Inrastructure Levy (CIL) agreements. This work

has led to proposals currently being considered by PUSH to top slice CIL and S106 unding

or strategic culture projects, and has provided the evidence base that allows planners to be

confdent in asking or aordable developer contributions.

PUSH has also been involved in work commissioned by SEEDA that includes:

nDeveloping a typology o art acilities that match CIL developer contributions.

nEstimating catchment areas or place shaping based on survey data.

nUndertaking condition audits o acilities.

nCurrent and uture modelling (inward investment and demand).

Such studies have helped in promoting planner confdence in the culture and sport evidence

base, and can be regarded as an outcome in terms o the living places Evaluation Framework,with S06 and CIL contributions being the related impacts.

2.www.push.gov.uk/spatial_planning_and_the_provision_o_cultural_and_sporting_inrastructure_in_the_push_area.pd

33

contents

Attracting additional investment and supportPU


34/66


The ypaper eect3 has resulted in the PUSH receiving investment rom NDPBs (Non

Departmental Government Bodies) over and above what might otherwise have been

expected in particular projects- one example being unding or the Heritage at Risk work.

This demonstrates that cultural and non cultural investors have increased their confdence

in the ability o the successul priority places to deliver results.

In total, it is estimated that PUSH attracted 306,000 in additional revenue unding

over the lietime o the living places, which directly leveraged just under 2m in

capital investment.

As well as securing increased investment or studies to be carried out, a number o

consultees also made the connection around the benefts that high quality investment in

cultural and sporting infrastructure has on the ability to market quality of life aspects

of a place to an external investment market. Consultees in PUSH particularly noted the

investor perception benefts o being able to showcase acilities such as the Theatre Royal

(in Portsmouth) and the new arts centre in Southampton.

USHpriorityplace

Improving engagement between

culture and sport, planning and development

In year one o the programme, representation or living places on the Quality Places theme

group was ormalised and it became the main point o contact between PUSH and its CreatingQuality Places theme. Linking these elements together, living places is now strategically

placed to both increase engagement between the cultural sector and the wider PUSH remit,

and to inuence policy within this wider planning and development scope.

Whilst this engagement and inclusion obviously provides a major beneft or living places,

consultations also demonstrated that rustrations arose (particularly in Year 1 o the

programme), resulting rom perceptions that living places branded some existing PUSH

Quality Places activity as its own.

3.The ypaper eect in the context o Living Places reers to activity and support/resources highlighted and observed through

consultation where Priority Places have received additional investment as a result o their profle as a Priority Place.

34

contents

Conditions and factors that enabled impactPU


35/66

Conditions and factors that enabled impactand added valueThere are a number o actors and conditions that have supported and enabled the

impacts and added value that Corby has achieved as a priority place. The keyenabling actors have included:

Local leadership

The early identifcation o the importance o culture and place shaping to PUSH, and the

opportunity provided by living places were signifcant actors, as was the agenda being

led at the Chie Executive level.

It is clear that up until the appointment o the Cultural Coordinator, PUSH lacked capacity to

comply with the evaluation requirements oliving places. The role, which was unded by a

mix o local and living places resources, has proven to be increasingly successul at making

connections and linking activities and projects together. For example urther CSPT/design

guidance related work has been delivered and the Quality Places work plan has included

engagement with the Portsmouth Harbour redevelopment, and the new Southampton

arts centre.

Consultees suggested that the having a Cultural Coordinator not only helped to promote

and acilitate good networks between dierent sectors and with other priority places,

but also assisted with securing additional investment through the capacity and expertise

provided by the role. Whilst the Coordinator post added value, it is also important to

recognise the pre-existing ability and capacity o members o the Quality Places Panel

to deliver signifcant projects by themselves.

USHpriorityplace

35

contents


36/66


Those with a leadership role at the priority place level are clear that living places has

resulted in high level dialogue and contact that would otherwise have been very difcult to

secure. Having priority places status has enabled places to raise their profle at the regional and

national levels in terms o culture, sport and place shaping, and has created good networks

between Corby, PUSH and Pennine Lancashire in particular.

Furthermore, early consultations suggested that both the planning research and additional

capacity (in the orm o the Cultural Coordinator) were unlikely to have happened in PUSH, in

the short to medium term at least, without the support o the living places partners and the

status o PUSH as a priority place.

36

contents

PUSPartnership arrangements


37/66

SHpriorityplace

t p g t

It is important to remember that the

Partnership or Urban South Hampshire

was created beore living places and has

a wider agenda than living places alone.

This partnership (like Corby) already placed

signifcant emphasis on culture and sport in

its development and regeneration agenda

prior to the programme, and so it is difcult

to attribute the successes o culture andsport development to living places alone.

As a partnership, PUSH is well established,

with the Quality Places Panel (one o fve

PUSH programmes) ulflling the unction o

the Priority Place Partnership. PUSH has provided living places with clear evidence o place

shaping working in a wider context, although this may provide cultural agencies with only apartial view o activity.

Nevertheless the cultural agencies are well engaged, as are Tourism South East

(highlighting the symbiotic nature o the tourism economy and culture in the South East).

In PUSH, the Quality Places Panel meets on a quarterly basis and has been actively engaged

with other PUSH Panels regarding the ocus o economic development activities, especially

around the relative priority o the creative industries sector. This engagement is indicativeo the increasing reach o the Quality Places Panel, which has also taken on PUSH lead or

tourism and retail activity.

37

contents

PUS


38/66


In Year 3 o the living places programme, the PUSH Quality Places Panel has widened its

remit in to include tourism, retail and creative industries sector in addition to culture and

sport. Engagement also includes a ocus on higher education, economic development and

planning, and a range o thematic representatives reecting the sectors engaged. In contrast

to Corby, the engagement o the cultural agencies has become more inrequent in the past

12 months in comparison to the frst two years o the living places programme.

Despite this decline in engagement requency, the PUSH partnership has recently been

engaging in debates about (LEP) structures. For example, PUSH partners are looking

at developing their partnership into an LEP, and the existence o priority places means that

living places thinking will be well-placed to exert inuence. The challenge or living

places activity thereore, is frstly to ensure prominence on the LEP agenda, and secondly

how to continue to support the capacity and expertise that living places partners have

provided to PUSH.

SHpriorityplace

In PUSH, the Quality Places Panelmeets on a quarterly basis and hasbeen actively engaged with other PUSHPanels regarding the ocus o economicdevelopment activities

38

contents

PUSMainstreaming o activity


39/66


The living places programme in the PUSH area benefts rom being nested into a well

established regeneration partnership with a wider agenda. It can also be argued that there

was a demand or culture and sport based place shaping in PUSH, and that living places

was able to help meet that demand.

While living places may have enhanced the credibility and strength o engagement

between cultural and development sectors, it cannot be said to be responsible or its creation.

PUSH was already a well recognised as an established mechanism or sub regional priority

setting and collaborative working, with the Quality Places Panel increasingly taking on

responsibility on the basis o sub regional local government efciency in terms o place

and culture, promoting better joint working in areas such as tourism, museums and heritage,

and being seen as the most appropriate place to engage in such debates. The pre-existing

partnership working between the authorities can thereore be seen as a key contributory

actor or what has been achieved there.

In addition to this, PUSH has beneftted rom having individuals that have grasped

living places as a high profle opportunity to better deliver existing culture, sport

and place aspirations. This has helped to bring orward living places ideas and

promote the priorities o sport and culture.

SHpriorityplaces

g y

Currently, PUSH living places consultees fnd it increasingly difcult to distinguish between

living places activity and mainstream activity in their area, and this is something that they

expect to increase going orward. In particular however, the principle o cooperation

established by living places through PUSH is something that is not currently part o the

mainstream and the partnership would ultimately like to make it so. By 2011, the contribution

o the cultural coordinator role will potentially be evidenced and supported by a two year

track record, and at this point PUSH may decide to mainstream the post.

39

contents

PUSH


40/66

In terms o the lessons rom the Pennine Lancashirepriority placeor other places thataspire to achieve similar aims and objectives to living places, the ollowing aspectsare the main learning points and lessons:

nEnsure there is a strong local commitment, drive and engagement rom key

individuals to support the agenda o culture and sport.

nIncorporateliving places into pre-existing programmes and structures to increasethe integration o culture and sport priorities into mainstream policy and ensure the

spatial scale is eective and appropriate.

nAppoint a leader orliving places(such as a cultural coordinator) to provide greatercapacity and expertise to secure additional investment and to link activities and

projects together.

nMaximise the profle o the place through the positive exploitation o successul

projects and encourage investment through promoting the positive aspects o

the area.

nBe willing to evolve the partnerships, ocus and programmes to ensure alignment

with changing policy context and local demand.

nDevelop a strong evidence base rom which to inorm policy direction

and increase learning.

Hpriorityplace

Lessons from PUSH (for other places)

40

contents

PUSHIn Year 3 o the living places


41/66

Hpriority

place

In Year 3 o the living placesprogramme, the PUSH QualityPlaces Panel has widened its remit

in toinclude tourism, retail andcreative industries sector

41

contents

PUSH

The tables below highlight the range o activity and inuence that PUSH has had as

a priority place in terms o studies and research reports that have been commissioned


42/66


Covered



Strength of

Culture and

Sport Reference

A Framework or CreativeIndustries Development inSouth Hampshire, (2009)

PortsmouthandSouthampton

DevelopmentDocument

Southampton City Council andPortsmouth City Council

XXX

PUSH EconomicDevelopment Strategy

PUSH EconomicDevelopmentDocument

PUSH -

South East Regional SpatialStrategy: South Hampshire

SouthHampshire

PlanningDocument

South East Regional Govern-ment

XXX

PUSH Design Charter PUSH DevelopmentDocument PUSH XX

PUSH Business Plan 2009-2011 PUSH DevelopmentDocument

PUSH XXX


Covered

Produced by partner/Commissioned

Name of

Company/Partner

who Produced it

Strength of

Culture and

Sport Reference

A Framework or CreativeIndustries Development inSouth Hampshire, (2009)t

SouthHampshire

DevelopmentDocument

Written by partner PUSH X

The South Hampshireand Hampshire CulturalInrastructure Audit, (2010)

SouthHampshire

DevelopmentDocument

Commissioned by PUSH Audience South/Cultural Consulting/Proessor M. Elson/Charles Freeman

XX

PUSH Cultural Strategy PUSH DevelopmentDocument

Commissioned by PUSH Agenda UK Ltd XXX

Spatial Planning and theProvision o Cultural andSporting Inrastructure inthe PUSH area.

PUSH DevelopmentDocument

Commissioned byliving places and the PUSHQuality o Lie Delivery Panel

Martin J Elson XX

PUSH Design InrastructureReview, (2008). PUSH DevelopmentDocument Commissioned by PUSH Tibbalds Planningand Urban Design X

Hpriority

place

a priority place in terms o studies and research reports that have been commissioned,

and those that have been inuenced by living places and the priority place

Partnership in PUSH.

Table 2:priority place Strategies and Plans inuenced by PUSH as apriority place




Table 1: Research Studies and Plans commissioned by Corby as a priority place (as lead or as partners)


42

contents

The


43/66

SouthWestpriorityp

lace

43

contents

TheS


44/66

The South West priority place

The South West covers the whole o the region as a priority place. This region-wide

approach was intended to build upon the Cultural Inrastructure Strategy or the South West

(People, Places, Spaces) developed in 2007. However, due to the dispersed nature o the

South West as a region and the previous ocus on cultural provision, living places oundit difcult to both create a regionally coherent approach and to demonstrate any added

value to the region as a whole. As a result, Year 3 o the evaluation ocussed specifcally

on the town oTaunton as this was recognised as an area within the South West where

there had been a degree o impact at a place-based level rom the living places programme.

Taunton itsel is a county town o Somerset, and the 2001 census estimated that the area had

a population o 61,400. In 2006, Taunton Deane council revealed regeneration plans which

it called Project Taunton aiming to stimulate change and development in the area.

Because it is the South West as a whole that orms a priority place, this summary will

be looking at both the South West as a region, and Taunton at the place-based level.

SouthWe

stpriorityplace

44

contents

TheS



45/66

Developing evidenceIn the South West, a place shaping seminar was held with local authorities to build on the

CSPT seminars and provide a orum or engagement with the cultural agencies. Extending

the coverage o these seminars also helped to expand the knowledge base or living places

priorities and encourage engagement and communication with key local partners.

Locally, the Our Place, Your Place: Taunton Empty Shops project was commissioned inTaunton as part o the living places programme, with the aim o bringing local residents

together to share memories, thoughts and pictures o the town as well as to learn about how

Taunton is changing. These activities were designed to enhance community engagement and

communication around heritage services and create discussion around the role o culture and

creativity in tackling barriers and improving community cohesion. This project was important

during the economic downturn to maintain awareness oliving places issues, gather

inormation on local opinion and gain community support during a time where little cultural

and sporting developments were able to take place.

SouthWe

stpriorityplace


In the South West, consultees highlighted and observed that additional investment was

secured or projects such as the Our Places Empty Shops work in Taunton as a result o the

South Wests priority place profle. The provision o additional resources helped areas such as

Taunton to develop their evidence base and promote the benefts and issues surrounding the

living places programme to the local community.


45

contents

TheSo

In addition to the Empty Shops work, support was also secured rom the Arts Council

England to help establish and develop the Taunton Cultural Partnership. Such support was


46/66



In supporting the CSPT seminars, the additional place shaping seminar and working directly

with the People Places Spaces Joint Implementation Group (PPS JIG) living places can be

seen to have assisted with developing the engagement between the culture, sport, planning

and development sectors in the South West. While the level o engagement in the region

has been mixed or a variety o reasons, living places has been able to encourage such

engagement through these events.

As well as supporting events and partnerships, living places partners are also working

through the South West Culture Executive Board (the South West regional cultural partnership)to address cross agency challenges as part o the People Places Spaces reresh (a process

which includes examining the context or place shaping in the region, and determining how

agencies can best move orward).

Furthermore, living places has been able to improve the level o engagement in specifc

areas such as Taunton, through supporting the development o the Taunton Cultural

Partnership. This partnership now includes the Project Taunton, and is well placed to improvethe engagement o cultural partners in regeneration and development schemes. In addition,

discussions also emerged between the SWRDA (South West Regional Development Agency)

and HCA (Housing and Communities Agency) in terms o areas o interest and engagement.

outhWe

stpriorityplace

secured through the enhanced profle, reputation and engagement with other arts, sport and

culture related project activity in Taunton, attracting a higher level o interest and backing or

cultural developments.

46

contents

TheSo



47/66


The South West had a ocus on culture and sport in development prior to the living places

programme and had set up People Places Spaces Joint Implementation Group (PPS JIG)

to oversee the implementation o the PPS strategy. The existence o this pre-existing group

meant that living places could work alongside it on regional development and the policies

o this group also already had links to the objectives oliving places. Linking living places

with the PPS JIP promoted better inclusion and strengthened the partnership with SWRDA,South West Screen, Chie Cultural and Leisure Ofcers Association (CCLOA), BIG Lottery,

Heritage Lottery Fund, South West Tourism, local authority representation and the South

West Regional Assembly.

As a result o this pre-existing arrangement, living places aced challenges relating to the

regional preerence or cultural policy autonomy and in articulating the added value o the

programme to the local partners. This is largely due to the act that culture and sport is well

established in the South West and Tauntons development schemes (demonstrated by the levelo reerence to culture and sport in or example, the Taunton Regeneration Masterplan, written

in 2005). The prior mainstreaming o such activity as well as the level o local awareness and

support (whilst causing issues in determining added value) has nonetheless contributed to

the development oliving places priorities in the South West region.

outhWe

stpriorityplace

Place-based ocus

Following changes in regional agency collaborative working as a result o national level issues,

links developed with key policy makers outside the partnership both locally and regionally.

Locally, there was an agreement in Taunton to pilot living places at a community level as

a lack o geographical ocus or the South West meant that little progress was made

in living places activity by year 2 o the programme.

The role o culture and sport is now well recognised within Taunton in a variety o ways.living places priorities and issues are eatured within the key strategies or the area,

as well as via Project Taunton.

and added value

47

contents

TheSo


48/66


Securing priority place profle has attracted additional investment in all o the priority areas

to some extent. In the South West, additional resources were secured or the Our Place,

Your Place: Empty Shops work in Taunton. Having a priority place status also assisted with

developing links to key national cultural partners, increasing engagement and securing widersupport. Support rom the Arts Council England, or instance helped to establish and develop

the Taunton Cultural Partnership, allowing or the development o an evidence base and

expertise as well as increasing the awareness o cultural issues.

outhWe

stpriorityplace

48

contents

Partnership arrangementsTheSo


49/66

The living places South West pilot working group is run through the People, Places, Spaces

Joint Implementation Group and the group meets ormally every quarter, with communication

by telephone, post, email and other meetings taking place in between the ormal meetings.

This partnership is assisted by the existing strong cultural partnership working in the South

West region and aligning living places with this has helped to widen communications to

regional partners.

Place shaping has also ormed a major ocus or the South West Cultural Ofcers Group,

where CABE and SWRDA are regular attendees in additional to cultural agencies. Consultees

have suggested that the inuence that living places has had on developing these partnerships

is negligible, however the programme has beneftted in terms o engagement rom the pre-

existing partnerships.

Nevertheless, even in Taunton, the cultural agencies were ound to be less engaged in year 3

o the programme than previously, however this is thought to be the result o a lack o unding

within the cultural agencies in the current unding climate. Despite this, work is expected to

continue in areas such as Taunton in the short to medium term at least, as culture is seen as a

priority in terms o place-shaping and such engagement is seen as important in contributing

to the wider goals o regeneration.

outhWe

stpriorityplace

In Taunton, the cultural agencies wereound to be less engaged in year 3 o the

programme than previously

49

contents

TheSo


50/66

In terms o the lessons rom the Pennine Lancashirepriority placeor other places thataspire to achieve similar aims and objectives toliving places, the ollowing aspects

are the main learning points and lessons:nRegional partnership arrangements should be exible enough to allow

partnerships to deliver and take opportunities.

nAllowing or place-based ocus areas can enhance the ability o

cultural and sporting issues to be integrated into local development

and regeneration schemes.

nHaving a region-wide partnership can result in a lack o clarity o the role

oliving placesin regional arrangements and a lack o area-ocus ordevelopments to take place.

nWorking alongside pre-existing partnerships can assist with integration o

living placesissues into a wider remit and enhance both communicationand understanding amongst key partners.

nEnsure that key individuals understand, recognise and buy into the role

that culture and sport can play in creating sustainable communities.

uthWe

stpriorityplace

Lessons from South West and Taunton(for other places)

50

contents

Place shaping has also ormeda major ocus or the South West

TheSou


51/66

a major ocus or the South WestCultural Ofcers Group

uthWe

stpriorityplace

51

contents

TheSou

The South West table


52/66


Covered



Strength of

Culture and

Sport Reference

Local Development Framework PlanningDocument

Taunton Deane Taunton Deane Borough Council XXX

Taunton Town Centre AreaAction Plan

PlanningDocument

Taunton Deane Taunton Deane Borough Council XXX

The Taunton Vision: TauntonUrban Design Framework,(2004)

DevelopmentDocument

Taunton Deanet Terence ORourke XX

A New Economic DevelopmentStrategy or Taunton Deane:Grow and Green, (2010)

EconomicDevelopmentDocument

Taunton Deane Taunton Deane Borough Counciland Geo Economics

XX

Economic Development ServiceDelivery Plan 2011 and 2012

EconomicDevelopmentDocument

Taunton Deane Taunton Deane Borough Council XX

Somerset Cultural Strategy DevelopmentDocument

Somerset Somerset County Council XX

Project Taunton: Bring YourBusiness to Taunton

DevelopmentDocument

Taunton Deane Project Taunton XXX

Taunton RegenerationMasterplan, (2005)

DevelopmentDocument

Taunton Deane Terence ORourke XX

uthWe

stpriorityplace

The table below highlights the recognition o the role o culture and sport in regeneration

and development policy within Taunton. Given the previous ocus on culture and sport

development (as evidenced by some o the work pre-dating living places), it would be

difcult to directly attribute this ocus to living places activity, however, it does demonstrate

the extent to which the programmes priorities (i.e. integrating culture and sport) are being

taken into account in policy.

Table 1: Priority place Strategies and Plans inuenced by South West as a priority place (x= some contribution,xx=signifcant contribution, xxx= critical contribution)


52

contents

Tham


53/66

me

sGatewa

ypriorityplace

53

contents

Thames Gateway as a priority placeThames


54/66

Thames Gateway is a pan-regional partnership covering the three smaller regions o;

Thames Gateway North Kent, Thames Gateway London and Thames Gateway South Essex.

During the living places programme it emerged that the three areas showed marked

diversity, not only in terms o governance and partnership structure, but also in terms o

topography and geography, creating barriers and challenges that transcend living places

as a programme. The overall evaluations and consultations have suggested that regional

and pan regional approaches to place-based development are not appropriate given the

level o variance within these areas. Despite these challenges however, smaller areas such

as Canning Town in Thames Gateway London and Southend-on-Sea in South Essex have seena concentration o investment and activity through living places. As a result, this summary

will be ocussing on the achievements o Canning Town and Southend-on-Sea as well as the

Thames Gateway as a whole.

Canning Town is an area o East London within the London Borough o Newham. Newham

is an area experiencing considerable growth in population and in 2001 the population was

estimated at 243,737. Despite this growth and major developments in the neighbouringDocklands, Canning Town remains in the 5% most deprived areas in the UK. Southend-on-Sea

is a smaller, unitary authority area with an estimated population o 164,300 (in 2001), and is

well known as a tourist destination. Recent declines in tourism levels have led to regeneration

strategies aiming to address this.

Gatewaypriorityplace

54

contents

Thames




55/66

Inuencing policy

Thames Gateway London beneftted rom

three years o a Cultural Coordinator post

which enabled a ocus on living places

priorities and the development o a Cultural

Strategy to emerge. This post also allowed

living places to inuence Thames Gateway

London local planning frameworks and

master planning approaches across the

10 London Boroughs. Being directly involved

in the development o such planning and

development policy helped to integrate

cultural and sporting issues into uture plansand promote the priorities oliving places

rom the outset o development growth.

In Thames Gateway South Essex, living

places ound it difcult to inuence region-

wide policy, given the autonomous nature

o the local authorities. On the local scalehowever, there is strong qualitative evidence to suggest that living places was able to

inuence planning and economic development policy in areas such as Southend-on-Sea.

This does not mean that cultural agencies have been unsuccessul in engagement, but that

some local authorities (such as Southend) have been more eager to engage in specifc place

shaping discussions than others. As a result, whilst there are local authorities that benefted

rom cultural agencies investment, advocacy and brokerage, it is not reasonable to attribute

this investment and activity to living places partnership activity.


55

contents

ThamesG

In addition to directly inuencing policy and strategy development, the added ocus on

cultural developments in Southend-on-Sea led to an increased interest rom other cultural

agencies, resulting in the MLA or example, commissioning a library content strategy to


56/66

Developing evidence

The Newham Community Infrastructure Study: Culture and Regeneration (2010) looks at

good practice in culture-led regeneration schemes in order to identiy areas o potential uture

growth. It highlights that the introduction oliving places led to a coordination o eortin place-shaping and cultural schemes, creating joint policy making and helped along by

the Culture and Sport Planning Toolkit.


support library development in the area.

In Canning Town, theCanning Town and Customs House Cultural Framework

was produced

in partnership with living places and outlines its overall aim as creating a place where

people wish to live and work and promoting participation in local lie to help achieve this

goal. The work was also designed to add value to existing activity and expand the knowledge

o the role that culture can play in the physical transormation o Canning Town. Producing

this ramework has helped to inuence local development plans, taking into account the

importance o including cultural and sports developments.

In Canning Town, the Canning Townand Customs House Cultural Framework was

produced in partnership with living places

56

contents

Attracting additional investment and supportThamesG


57/66

living places has provided additional unding or a number o projects in the Thames

Gateway region. For example, in Canning Town, 10,000 was given to support the master

planning process, cultural Section 106 provision and to work with regeneration proessionals.

living places also provided additional support and unding or events aiming to get

communities involved and used to cultural activity at the sites scheduled or development.

In South Essex, Southend-on-Sea secured additional funding and support for a range

of activities from MLA and ACE through its ocus on developing cultural assets, actively

supported by living places Partners. This additional unding supported a joint approach

to library and museum provision and this increased interest in the area also led to thedevelopment o a modern library, museums, arts and creative acilities. In addition to acilities,

support was improved through the provision o substantial ofcer time (rom living places

Partners), the attraction and development o the second (ater Liverpool) Metal1 development,

and Chalkwell Hall (a signifcant development in terms o culture led place making).

living places itsel has also gained additional investment and support in the Thames

Gateway rom the Ofce o the London Mayor and the Thames Gateway Partnership. Thecultural strategy or Thames Gateway London was developed jointly between living places

and the Mayors Ofce who had a budget o 10,000 to support the development o the

area. Through securing this support, living places was ideally placed to inuence any

subsequent policy.

As well as attracting additional support and unding or particular projects, consultations

suggested that the added value will also lie in the increased ability to attract new inwardinvestment, given that sport and cultural developments will now orm part o the attraction

and the act that the concept o Thames Gateway will be easier to articulate given this

improved identity.


1.Metal is an ar tistic laboratory to champion the need or continual investment in artistic investigation and the development o innovative ideas

that could shit the thinking in the UK cultural sector. Metal provides innovative, multi-disciplinary residency space or artists rom the UK and

overseas in Liverpool and Southend on Sea. www.metalculture.com 57

contents

ThamesG


58/66



The development o the Canning Town and Customs House Cultural Framework involved the

networking o the London Borough o Newhams regeneration team with cultural partnerships

both locally and across London. This cross-networking increased the opportunities or quick

wins (such as the Growing PlacE16 at Clarkson Road) and improved engagement anddiscussion regarding the role o cultural acilities in being a core element in the long

term regeneration o the area.

The work at Canning Town has included the engagement o a number o social enterprise

and third sector groups in utilising meanwhile space2 in the period between site clearance

and development or a range o activities and events. This has included work on community

allotments, temporary BMX tracks and providing a range o cultural oers. In the short term,the use o meanwhile space has been regarded as a positive use o development space and

it has resulted in positive outcomes, not only in bringing together development and cultural

partners (such as LB Newham, London living places Partnership, Core Arts, University o

East London (UEL), Groundwork and a range o community groups), but it has also improved

community engagement and participation in cultural developments within Canning Town.

On the wider scale, the involvement oliving places in the development o the London Planincreased the level o engagement between planning and cultural partners and assisted with

the integration oliving places priorities within the Thames Gateway development.


2.http://www.meanwhile.org.uk/showcase/growing-place16-canning-town-london

58

contents

ThamesG



59/66


Policy created prior to living places is

demonstrative o the pre-existing support

or cultural and sporting developments

within the Thames Gateway regions

Southend-on-Sea, or example outlined

plans or the development o a culturalhub in 2007. Additionally, it can be said

that support or cultural and sporting

developments in Southend-on Sea pre-dated

living places as the profle o these sectors

in the Borough Council is well established,

with culture and sport being priorities in the

Sustainable Community Strategy. Indeed the

Council has had Culture and Sport portolio

holder in the cabinet or a considerable

period o time, and the Borough Council

has a vision or Southend to be the Cultural

Capital o the east o England (a position

reinorced by a recent bid to become theUK City o Culture or 2013). There is a clear

ambition to build on the tourism history o

the area, and to use leisure and culture to

drive regeneration to support increased

economic benefts and job creation.


59

contents

ThamesG

This pre-existing support undoubtedly made it easier or living places priorities to be

realised in some areas. Given the scale o the Thames Gateway however, this was not the

case across the board. In the North Kent Thames Gateway region, the level o pre-existing

k d t t th t it dif lt th t d t t dditi l


60/66

Area growth and Olympic profle

The Thames Gateway pan-regional area is currently experiencing major growth, increased

investment and attention due to the act that the Olympic Games are to be hosted by many

o the areas involved. Such increased interest in development in the area has provided

opportunity or living places to inuence this, particularly in relation to the sporting

and leisure developments that will be required to both host the Games and the resulting

tourist trade.

As well as the acilities required, there is a strong desire rom many local authorities to

capitalise on this development growth and indeed, the Newham Sustainable Community

Strategy aims to maximise the potential or tourism both during and (as a result o improved

acilities) ater the Games.


Cultural co-ordinator

As mentioned earlier, having the role o a Cultural Coordinator in Thames Gateway London

not only assisted with the development o the cultural strategy and London Plan, but it also

increased the ofcer capacity or living places in the Thames Gateway, consequently

helping to promote discussion and integration o the programmes priorities into policy.

work and support meant that it was difcult or the programme to demonstrate any additional

beneft. As a result, consultations rom this area suggested that a number o London Boroughs

struggled with the concept o the programme and have engaged better with individual

cultural agencies.

60

contents

ThamesG


61/66


The pre-existing partnership arrangements assisted with the promotion oliving places

activity and the act that a Cultural Coordinator was able to work in partnership with the

Mayors Ofce on policy development signifcantly improved the chances oliving places

priorities being taken into account. Furthermore, the tendency or partnerships such as

the London Partnership to support places at the masterplanning level, helped with the

achievements made in areas such as Canning Town. While living places was unable to

have an impact on pan-regional partnerships (or the reasons discussed earlier), workingwith specifc local areas and development ofces helped in its achievements.

Additionally, the act that many o these local partnerships already contained a strong ocus on

culture and sport and had key individuals to help drive this was certainly a supporting actor.

Gatew

aypriorityplace

6

6718 Living Places Final Report AW LR

Documents

Transcript of 6718 Living Places Final Report AW LR