Cities, Vol. 23, No. 5, p. 331–338, 2006

� 2006 Elsevier Ltd.

*Tel.: +4robertm@

All rights reserved.

0264-2751/$ - see front matter

www.elsevier.com/locate/cities

doi:10.1016/j.cities.2006.05.001

From ‘creative city’ to ‘no-go areas’– The expansion of the night-timeeconomy in British town and citycentresMarion Roberts *

Central Cities Institute, University of Westminster, 35 Marylebone Road, London NW15LS, UK

Received 20 October 2005; received in revised form 28 April 2006; accepted 22 May 2006

Available online 7 August 2006

In a time span of 10 years, many English town centres have been transformed from being rel-atively deserted at night to being filled with concentrations of young drunken people out onthe streets until the early hours of the morning. This paper considers this transformation: itsorigins, process, impacts, policy responses and the lessons that may be derived from it. Thefirst section discusses the concept of the creative milieu and its relation to consumption.The second provides the context for the unprecedented expansion of night-time alcoholrelated entertainment in English town and city centres over the last decade. The third partof the paper discusses the impacts of the increase in licensed premises on cultural resources.The fourth section of the paper discusses the mutually contradictory tri-partite policyresponses of the British Government as it tries to reconcile planning policies that promote‘cleaner, safer and greener’ town centres with, on the one hand, free market inspired licensingpolicies and, on the other, ‘tough’ policies towards crime and anti-social behaviour. The fifthsection provides evidence that by contrast, some local practice is ahead of national policy in itsimaginative and integrated approach. Finally, conclusions are drawn with regard to the con-cept of the creative milieu. It is argued that the English experience demonstrates the needfor a clear policy vision that comprehends the differences between creativity, culturalresources and the consumption of alcohol as a primary entertainment activity.� 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Culture, town centres, alcohol, night-time

Introduction: creativity, the cultural milieu andalcohol related entertainment

The importance of cities as centres of creativity isreceiving serious attention in policy and practice.Discussion of what constitutes creativity and its rela-tionship to culture and entertainment has increasedin sophistication in the post-millennium academicliterature (see for example Chatterton, 2000). To ex-plain further, the literature of the early 1990s cele-brated the importance of arts and cultural activitiesas catalysts for urban change and as important fac-

4-207-911-5000x3106; fax: +44-207-911-5171; e-mail:wmin.ac.uk.

331

tors in the growth of the ‘new’ cultural industries,such as digital media. A somewhat fuzzy link wasmade between the support of these new activities,‘creative clusters’, and cultural milieu (Landry andBianchini, 1995). Culture, in the sense of the ‘highculture’ embodied in venues such as theatres andconcert halls, was seen as being supported by hospi-tality and entertainment venues, in the shape of res-taurants, fashionable cafe bars and nightclubs.

The notion of a cultural milieu appears in bothkey texts on the topic of creative cities, Landry’s(2000) The Creative City and Florida’s (2002) TheRise of the Creative Class. There is an interesting dis-tinction that each makes in their concepts of culturalmilieu. Whereas Landry, writing from Britain,

From ‘creative city’ to ‘no-go areas’: M Roberts

emphasises milieu as a series of institutional andeconomic contexts, Florida, by contrast, draws onthe ideas put forward in the literature of the 1990’sof milieu as physical space with meeting places incafes, bars and restaurants. He uses Temple Bar inDublin as a contemporary, planned example.

The story of Temple Bar, its creation as a ‘culturalquarter’ and its descent into a booze sodden destina-tion for stag and hen parties illustrates a transitionthat was taking place precisely at the time that Flor-ida must have been writing his book. It provides aparallel narrative to the research that will be pre-sented in this paper (Roberts et al., 2006). It is astory that has a relatively happy ending for TempleBar itself, because management measures and anew planning framework are re-asserting its originalvision (Howley Harrington Architects, Sherwood &Burger 2004) and the Irish government is making aserious attempt to address alcohol mis-use in theRepublic.

This paper interrogates experiences in Englandand reviews the take up of ‘creative city’ ideas bymany towns and cities. Their transition to ‘no go’areas has been precipitous and the British govern-ment is still coming to terms with it in a legislativesense. Many local authorities in England haveadopted strategies to cope at a local level and thispaper will consider two of the most innovative. Theircapacity to effect local change is limited by conflictsand contradictions in national policies and these is-sues will be highlighted. Finally, the lessons thatmight be drawn from this particularly English pro-cess will be articulated. The evidence is drawn froma wide variety of desk-top sources and will also besupported by the author’s own empirical researchon a three-year project on good practice in the man-agement of the evening and night-time economies.1

The ‘Relentless expansion of nightlife’

The scale of expansion of the ‘night-time econ-omy’ in British major cities, secondary towns andurban sub-centres has been considerable. Accountsof its growth have been put forward by a numberof authors (see for example Chatterton and Hol-lands, 2003; Hobbs et al., 2003; Roberts and Turn-er, 2005). A brief summary will be provided in thefollowing sections, annotated with more recentinformation, to provide context to the discussionof creative milieu and policies towards alcohol re-lated entertainment.

The term the ‘night-time economy’ was coined byHobbs et al. (2003) to describe an expansion in the

1 The project was run by the Civic Trust, see www.civictrust.org.uk/evening/index.shtml and was part-funded by the Office of theDeputy Prime Minister. Its geographical scope therefore coversonly England. The author would like to acknowledge Paul Davisand Hannah Mummery from the Civic Trust for their assistanceand support.

332

numbers of bars and clubs operating with extendedlicenses into the early hours of the morning. Struc-tural changes in the entertainment industry, in com-bination with a relaxation of liquor licensing lawswith regard to numbers of premises and special per-missions to open after 11 p.m., resulted in dramaticincreases in night time entertainment. In some majorcities of England and Wales the numbers and capac-ities of licensed premises more than doubled. Forexample, between 1997 and 1999, there was a243% increase in the capacity of licensed premisesin Manchester city centre. In Nottinghamshire, thecapacity of licensed premises rose from 61,500 in1997, to 105,000 in 2004. In the West End of London,there was a 280% increase in the overall capacity oflate night venues (Elvins and Hadfield, 2003). Pre-mises also increased in size, with capacities of upto 2000.

A significant factor in the background context isan economy that has grown steadily following arecession in the early 1990’s. An increase in publicspending by the Labour Government since 1999has led to an almost full employment, therebyincreasing disposable income. A further driver hascome from a rapid expansion in higher education.Successive Governments since 1989 have adopted astrategy to encourage a higher skill base amongstthe UK workforce in order to locate the UK as aknowledge-intensive nation within the global econ-omy. In the decade 1991–92 to 2001–02 the totalnumber of students in higher education institutionsin the UK increased by over three quarters, from1.2m to 2.01m.2 The majority of licensed premisesin UK high streets are aimed towards a demographic‘ghetto’ of 18–24 year olds with students forming aparticular target for some brands (Mintel, 2004).

The increased numbers of young people attractedto town centres had an impact on the public space ofthe street at night. Streets are filled as people ‘cir-cuit’ from pub to bar to club often in a state of in-creased inebriation as the evening turns into theearly hours of the morning. The numbers are star-tling, for example, 110,000–130,000 revellers are typ-ically found on the streets in Manchester city centrelate night at weekends and 80,000 in the centre ofNewcastle. Even smaller sub-centres, such as Kings-ton upon Thames, a higher income town centre onthe fringe of London, hosts up to 12,0003 people atnight.

Rationale for expansion

Local councils could be criticised for permitting sucha rapid expansion. However, the reasoning behindofficers and members’ permissive attitudes may be

2 see www.planning.ed.ac.uk/Pub/Analyses/stud_growth_91-01.htm.3Figure supplied by Town Centre Manager, Kingston uponThames to author.

From ‘creative city’ to ‘no-go areas’: M Roberts

attributed to a genuine desire to encourage urbanregeneration and to breathe new life in what wereperceived to be ailing town centres. The decline ofmanufacturing industry in the late 1980’s and a plan-ning regime that permitted out of town developmenthad led many town and city centres to be in a seriousstate of decline. When emerging pubco’s (stock ex-change listed chains of pubs, bars and restaurants)offered to turn grand but now redundant civic build-ings into wine bars, the offer was seen as attractive.Not only did it bring old buildings into use, but alsojobs were created, with no call upon the publicpurse. It was, as one senior public official later re-marked ‘regeneration in part, being built on cheapdrinking establishments’.4

Further justification was also provided by a focuson the economic importance of art and entertain-ment. The monetarist values of a Conservative gov-ernment demanded that culture be valued for itseconomic potential. An influential study producedby Myerscough and Bruce (1988) demonstrated thatthe arts and cultural sector contributed significantlyto Britain’s GDP. He pointed out that this figurewas not only based on cultural events and perfor-mances and their supply chain, but in addition, onthe spend that was contributed by the drinks andmeals that theatre goers, cinema audiences and livemusic lovers made on meals and drinks before andafter performances. The encouragement of enter-tainment venues could therefore form part of anoverall strategy to produce a cultural milieu. Intel-lectual underpinning had been given to this idea byurban theorists, such as Worpole, O’Connor andLandry who had emphasised the potential for citiesto re-invent themselves as centres of creativity. Theyalso argued that Britain’s then restrictive licensinglaws and pub culture harked back to a by-goneindustrial era and that flexibility in licensing hoursand the nurturing of a more inclusive cafe culturecould result in lively, engaging city centres in whichhuman interaction and therefore creativity couldflourish (Comedia, 1991). This was the argument ta-ken up by Florida, a decade later.

The adoption of the concept of the cultural quarterdrew explicitly on the idea of the linkage between thecreative industries and leisure consumption (Mont-gomery, 2003). However as regeneration policieshave developed in the UK, some cultural quartershave been designated that are predominately basedon consumption, on what Bianchini and Ghilardi

4 John Ashton, North West Public Health Director, speaking at thelaunch of a joint Health unit in Manchester stated; ‘‘We know ourregeneration is, in part, being built on cheap drinking establish-ments. . ..If Manchester wants to be the Barcelona of the north westthen we have to change the culture we socialise and eat and drinkin. You don’t see the scenes in Barcelona that you see inManchester on a Saturday night, they don’t do that there, it’sdifferent, it’s civilised and cultured’’. Reported in ManchesterOnline: Manchester News. ‘City’s deadly binge culture’. Friday 29November 2002. (accessed November 29 2004).

(2004) term ‘cultural resources’, a component ofwhich are cultural, eating, drinking and entertain-ment facilities. Drawing on these arguments in rela-tion to cultural and economic regeneration, furtherexpansion in the numbers and sizes of cafe bars, barsand nightclubs were hard for planning and licensingauthorities to resist.

A dramatic increase in the numbers of eating anddrinking venues can threaten the viability of a cul-tural quarter as Shaw et al. (2004) illustrate in rela-tion to London’s Brick Lane. This neighbourhood,which lies on the fringe of the financial district ofthe City, has become identified with the Bangladeshicommunity first as an ‘informal’ ethnically themedquarter and latterly as part of a ‘planned’ regenera-tion (McCarthy, 2006). Shaw et al. describe how afive fold increase in the number of Indian restau-rants over a period of 10 of years led to severe com-petition between owners. In response, therestaurateurs asked the local council to approve anextension of licensing hours. Following objectionsboth from women from the local Bangladeshi com-munity and white, middle class residents who wereconcerned about the streets being taken over bydrunken (mainly) white men restrictive idea wasdropped and development of additional restaurantswas prevented through changes to the local plan.

Further threats to cultural diversity arise from thestructure of the industry itself. As Hollands andChatterton (2003) have demonstrated, the UK hasan entertainment industry that is dominated by pub-licly quoted companies. These operate traditionalpubs (pubcos), nightclubs, bar chains, ‘chameleonbars’ (cafe bars that operate as bars during the dayand after 8 p.m. effectively turn into bars cum night-clubs with loud music, alcohol and a minimal foodoffer) and restaurants. The different chains of ven-ues appear to offer variety through adopting abranded approach with different styles of interiordecor, drink offer and music. For example, the big-gest nightclub operator Luminar plc operates fivebrands, four of which are late night, in 283 venuesacross the UK (February 2005 figures).5 A formerdoor security man, a ‘bouncer’ started the companyin 1988 and in 2005 its turnover was £375m. Mitch-ells and Butler plc is another major corporation,whose web-site6 claims it as the UK’s ‘leading oper-ator’ of managed pubs, bars and restaurants. Itsspectrum of brands span from the youth orienteddrink-led bar-cum-nightclub sector to the cafe-barand restaurant. In December 2005 the companyhad a net book value of £3.5bn, operated 1858 out-lets and had an annual turnover of £1.662m.

Ownership of brands is constantly changing withthe relentless drive to raise share prices. Thesecompanies can afford specialist firms of lawyers

5 Unbranded venues are included in the 283.6http://www.mbplc.com/.

333

From ‘creative city’ to ‘no-go areas’: M Roberts

who will contest planning and licensing decisionsusing the British planning and legal system, whichis based on flexibility and precedent rather thancodes and land-use plans, to their advantage. Notonly can such decisions lead to unforeseen expan-sion, but they can also undermine less statutorilyenforceable policies, such as designated culturalquarters. For example, elected members in West-minster are unhappy about the appearance of an El-vis impersonation themed bar on Gerrard Street, astreet that the council had themed and marketedas London’s Chinatown in partnership with the localChinese community. In a further example in Lon-don, a consultant’s report (Urban Practitioners,2005) has urged the London Borough of Hackneyto retain the existing building plot sizes in Shore-ditch, which is a neighbourhood that incorporatesartists’ studios, digital media companies and art gal-leries showcasing contemporary ‘Brit art’ as well as agrowing number of ‘fashionable’ bars, clubs and res-taurants. It is hoped that by not allowing plot sizes toincrease, the major chains of entertainment opera-tors with their ‘superpubs’ may be kept out and thatthe smaller, independently owned eating and drink-ing establishments can retain their presence.

Kunzmann (2004) suggests that only a ‘culturalmilitant’ would draw a distinction between cultureand entertainment. The experience of expansion ofalcohol related entertainment in British city centressuggests that such a distinction is useful and lies be-yond ideological dogmatism. The expansion of alco-hol-fuelled activity has led to changes in the way inwhich city centres are used and perceived at night.There are clear differences between the provisionof alcohol related venues as destinations in them-selves and as adjuncts of other cultural or creativeactivity. It is not necessary to be an ideologue todraw this distinction and it is noteworthy that anec-dotal evidence suggests that fear of such a pejorativereading has influenced planning officers and electedmembers in cities such as Brighton, England7 and inDublin in the Republic of Ireland (Central CitiesInstitute, 2002).

‘Cool Britannia’ and ‘no-go areas’

In the late 1980’s British city centres were per-ceived as suffering from the ‘lagerlout’ phenome-non, whereby drunken youths dominated largelyempty town centres after dark. To revitalise theircentres, city councils adopted cultural strategiesand 24-hour city policies (Heath, 1997). Cities suchas Manchester, inner areas of London, Glasgowand Swansea enjoyed an urban renaissance witha flourishing of their music ‘scenes’, an influx of

7 A local councillor in Brighton, a former Chair of the LicensingCommittee, told the author at a seminar that the Committee hadbeen concerned about being seen as old-fashioned by refusingapplications for late licenses (26 January 2005).

334

new residents and the emergence of new creativeindustries based on digital media. The newlyelected Labour Prime Minister was able to capturethis mood of creative expansion in the phrase ‘coolBritannia’.

By 2000, the tide was turning. In 2004 the nationalpress started to publish articles about the state ofBritish town centres after 9 p.m. at night. In January2005 this blossomed into a full blown ‘moral panic’with the country’s leading popular daily newspaper,the Daily Mail, mounting a campaign against ‘bingedrinking’ Britain.

Underlying the hyperbole of newspaper head-lines and the sensationalist reportage of TVdocumentaries, a serious issue was being raised.Alcohol consumption has risen amongst young peo-ple and particularly young women. A survey under-taken in 1999/1998 revealed that 39% of 18–24 yearolds were classified as ‘binge drinkers’, that is theyexpect to get ‘very drunk’ at least once a month(Richardson et al., 2003). 13,000 violent incidentsoccur in and around licensed premises every weekin Britain and an estimated 47% of violent crimesare committed whist the perpetrator was ‘in-drink’(Budd, 2003). Local authorities are also reportingproblems with anti-social behaviour, such as publicurination, shouting and swearing (Roberts, 2005).There is evidence that the transformation of towncentres has led to them becoming more segregated,with people aged 30 or more either not coming intothe centre at all at night or avoiding the ‘drinkingstreets’ (Thomas and Bromley, 2000; Bromleyet al., 2001).

The impact on town centres has been that certainmicro-districts have been dubbed ‘no-go areas’. Thephrase has now become so common-place that in arecent submission to a Home Office ParliamentarySelect Committee on anti-social behaviour, theAssociation of Chief Police Officers discussed polic-ing tactics in ‘a typical no-go areas in a town centreat night’ (House of Commons, 2004). The currenttransformation of British town and city centres pre-sents a series of policy and management issues tocentral and local government and it is to these thatwe shall turn next.

National policy responses

Liquor licensing reform

Nationally the Government’s stance towards alcoholrelated entertainment has been contradictory. Twomutually opposing approaches have informed policyformulation. The first is drawn from neo-liberalismand seeks to expand economic growth and to pro-mote competition and the operation of a free mar-ket. The second is regulatory and draws on theconcepts of liveability and sustainability as appliedto the urban environment. Policies are currentlythe responsibility of three different ministries: the

From ‘creative city’ to ‘no-go areas’: M Roberts

Department of Culture, Media and Sport, which is incharge of reform to liquor licensing legislation, theHome Office which controls local police forces andthe Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, whichhas broad responsibility for local government andthe built environment. In addition, the Departmentof Transport is implicated, as is DEFRA, theDepartment for Food and Rural Affairs, which hasan interest in waste management.

Current DCMS reform of the liquor licensing leg-islation places an emphasis on loosening controls.Prior to reform, British licensing legislation wascomplicated, with the magistrates’ courts havingcontrol over the granting of licenses and imposingconditions and local planning authorities also havingcontrol over whether land-uses that included li-censed premises could be permitted and, confus-ingly, also being able to impose certain conditions.Local authorities also had powers to allow licensesand extensions to licenses for music and dancing.The Licensing Act 2003 removed this split inresponsibility and placed licensing for alcohol andentertainment within the control of local authorities.In doing this, it also removed one of the key featuresof the British system, the concept of ‘permittedhours’ in which a licensee is permitted to sell alco-hol. The reasoning that the DCMS used to justifythese changes draws on ideas about the culture ofmainland Europe, where, it is argued, terminalhours are less regulated. The DCMS is keen to sup-port the economic benefits of an expansion in thenight-time economy, with the alcoholic drinks mar-ket estimated as contributing £7bn a year to theExchequer in Excise duties and employing approxi-mately one million workers (Cabinet Office, PrimeMinister’s Strategy Unit, 2004). The Act thereforeincorporates a presumption for the approval of li-quor licences.

The legislation that introduces these reforms, theLicensing Act 2003, passed onto the statute bookin July 2003 and was amplified by Guidance pub-lished in October 2004 (DCMS, 2004). The Guid-ance made some concessions to the Act’s critics,who argued that the over expansion of licensed pre-mises was fuelling crime and disorder. The Guidancetherefore permits local authorities to declare ‘Spe-cial Policy Areas’ where if an increase in crime, dis-order and nuisance can be evidenced, specialcontrols and conditions will be placed on eachlicensing application, provided each case is consid-ered on its merits. The Act was only fully imple-mented on 24th November 2005.

8 Reported by BBC news, 14 March 2004 15.51 GMT. [Online]Available: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news.

‘Joined-up thinking?’

While the Act was passing into legislation, concernsabout night-time alcohol related disorder were givenprominence in the national media. In March 2004 anational newspaper leaked a letter written by theHome Secretary to the Prime Minister that claimed

that British town centres were ‘out of control’ atnight.8 The Prime Minister responded by issuing apolicy document directly from his Cabinet OfficeStrategy Unit, the Alcohol Harm Reduction Strat-egy for England (Cabinet Office, Prime Minister’sStrategy Unit, 2004). This document was criticisedby health experts for being weak in terms of healthpolicy (Drummond, 2004). Following on from thepublication of the Strategy, the Home Office insti-tuted three alcohol mis-use enforcement campaignsin the summer and Christmas periods that tookstrong action to enforce existing legislation with re-gard to crime, disorder and under-age drinking.New legislation also reached the statute book tocontrol public drunkenness.

The ODPM, who despite having overall responsi-bility for town centres, has so far played a minor rolein policy terms. An ODPM Parliamentary Selectcommittee was set up during the passage of theLicensing Act to investigate the night-time economyand the urban renaissance. This committee’s reportdrew attention to the issue of alcohol related disor-der having an adverse impact on the Government’soverall objective of revitalising town and city centres(House of Commons, 2003a). The committee ap-peared to have had little impact on the LicensingAct itself, but it welcomed a change to planning leg-islation that removed a statute that allowed a restau-rant to become a cafe bar or a bar without having toseek planning permission for change of use. Thisprovision reached the statute book in April 2004.

The ODPM resisted any attempts to place anupper capacity of the numbers of licensed premisesin any one area. Instead it placed a reliance on plan-ning policy guidance that urged local planningauthorities to take regard of the ‘cumulative impact’that could ensue from having too great a concentra-tion of licensed premises in one area (DoE, 1996).The same policy guidance note also recommendedthat in larger city centres, a leisure or entertainmentdistrict might be specifically designated. Guidancedocuments were published that highlighted goodpractice in the management of the evening andnight-time economy (Roberts, 2004; ODPM, 2005)as part of the ministry’s ‘cleaner, safer, greener’ pro-gramme to promote liveability and sustainability.

Central government policy is therefore frag-mented and internally contradictory. The DCMSview is that only ‘light touch’ regulation was neededto control the licensed trade and that it should bevalued for its contribution to economic performanceand to tourism. Home Office research provided evi-dence that there were serious and significant prob-lems associated with alcohol consumption in towncentres at night. The ODPM view appeared to bethat town centres were experiencing some problems

335

From ‘creative city’ to ‘no-go areas’: M Roberts

at night, but that these could be managed. Followingthe media highlighting of alcohol mis-use in January2005, which also raised fears about the imminentimplementation of the new Licensing Act, the Gov-ernment issued a policy discussion document(DCMS, The Home Office & ODPM, 2005). TheHome Office view appeared to have prevailed asthe document opined that:

So we must no longer focus simply on containing ormanaging the disorder so often associated with exces-sive drinking but seek to eradicate it. (p. 3)

The contradictions in the Government’s attitudetowards alcohol were summed up by a journalistwho writes for the liberal press:

On the one hand, Ministers encourage ever moreaccess to booze by extending pub hours, while on

the other they lecture us on the perils of binge drink-ing. Jack Straw, when he was at the Home Office,said long pub hours were meant to cater for ‘‘menwho can take their drink’’, while Tessa Jowell posed

for the press pulling pints. Yet they fret and fumethat our town centres are turning into war zones,impossible to control or stop. (Alibhai-Brown,

2005, p. 15)

9 See www.citycentresafe.com for further details.10 Information supplied to Civic Trust by Leeds Town Centremanagement team.

Integrated local policy responses

At local level, councils have attempted to respond tothe problems generated by an expansion of alcohol-based nightlife. Responses to these issues involve awide variety of agencies and local organisations.These include land-use planners, the police, licens-ing officers, environmental protection, economicdevelopment and waste management officers fromthe local councils and local licensees, local residentsand transport providers. In this respect, local prac-tice is ahead of national policy in its formation ofcross-departmental committees that draw in a num-ber of public agencies and private businesses. Thereare a number of examples of area based managerialapproaches that have been formulated throughcollaboration between the different stakeholders in-volved. These initiatives have been both collabora-tive and imaginative.

Manchester, for example, was one of the pioneersof the new approach when the Greater ManchesterPolice joined with the City Council to form Man-chester City Safe. The City Safe partnership hasachieved a number of actions that have reducedcrime and disorder. Its licensing forum, which drawsin representatives of the licensed businesses in thecity, the police and the city council, is regarded asexemplary by one of the major nightclub insurers.The partnership pioneered, amongst other actions,a radio net scheme to link up local taxi drivers, ven-ues, the police and the city council. Litter bins havebeen introduced that cannot be upended. Drinks

336

companies have been persuaded to give an annualaward to best run bar.9 The City Council subsidisedthe Greater Manchester Transport Executive to runnew night bus routes for six months, until the servicecould become self-supporting. The buses were madesafe for travellers by police controlling the queues.

Leeds is an example of a city that has adopted amore explicitly cultural approach. Its city centrehas been revitalised since 1993 when it became oneof the first British centres to adopt 24-hour city pol-icies. In the 10 years that followed its restaurant, barand nightclub sector has increased by 274% incapacity, there has been a 120% increase in studentnumbers in its two universities and its city centrepopulation has increased by approximately 1000 to5200 in 2002.10 Efforts have been made to animateLeeds at night, through the construction of new pub-lic spaces such as Millennium Square and a lightingstrategy. A programme of ‘cultural animation’, thatis holding open air festivals and events in the citycentre has been pursued and now the City CentreManagement Board runs a programme of eventsthroughout the year. The Town Centre Managertold a House of Commons committee:

We have a large new outdoor venue in Leeds, a largesquare, and what we have tried to do over the lasttwo or three years since that has been opened is to

put on events deliberately designed to attract familiesand older people into the city centre. . .we have hadyoung children in the city centre at 10.00 or 11.00

at night. . .and we have never had any trouble. Ithas been very successful. But it is not mixed in thesense that you have got people of all ages out at

12.00 and 1.00 at night, no absolutely not. (Houseof Commons, 2003b: Ev7-8: 42)

The Leeds City Centre Management Board, whichis a multi-agency partnership, is also adopting otherpolicies such as encouraging ‘twilight’ shopping andpavement cafes. They hope that this will provide acritical mass that will encourage other facilities tostay open later into the evening, such as museums,galleries and libraries (House of Commons, 2003a).Progress is difficult and recent reportage suggeststhat it is still late night drinking for 18–35 year oldsthat dominates the city centre at night (Bennett,2006).

Whilst many British towns and cities, such as Not-tingham, Cheltenham, Leicester and Romford havealso adopted a pro-active response to the recenttransformations in the night-time economy, theiractivities are being formulated against a backdropof resource constraint. The opportunities to subsi-dise cultural institutions to open in the evening arevirtually non-existent in a fiscal environment where

From ‘creative city’ to ‘no-go areas’: M Roberts

central government has strong controls over localspending. Reports written by parliamentary commit-tees and consultancies (Urban Practitioners, 2005;House of Commons, 2003a) demand a greater diver-sity in the evening and night-time economy, but aresilent on the means to achieve it. There is a viciouscircle whereby ‘older people’, that is those over 35are deterred from going out at night by alcohol re-lated disorder, yet their absence means that thetypes of cultural activities that they would tend tosupport, such as gallery, library and museum visitsdo not attract sufficient people to enable them toopen for longer hours.

Local authorities are also impeded by the slowimplementation of policy changes, such as thechange in the planning use classes order, that willhelp them to regulate and control the nature and dis-position of entertainment venues in the future. Theyhave no powers to influence the numbers and size ofthe licensed premises already in existence. The pow-ers that will be given to local authorities under theLicensing Act 2003 to declare special policy areaswhere further expansion in provision or late hoursmight be limited are as yet untested. The impactsof the Licensing Act 2003 are still unknown, withcontroversy surrounding the latest Home Office fig-ures that claim reduced levels of violence (Instituteof Alcohol Studies, 2006). These limitations suggestthat although much effort is being put in to makespecific quarters of British town centres safe andcleaner at night, their transformation from ‘no go’areas for older people has yet to be attempted.

11An earlier version of this paper was delivered at the Associationof European Schools of Planning Conference, The Dream of aGreater Europe, Vienna, 13–17 July 2005. The author is gratefulfor the comments made.12i.e. drinking standing up.

Concluding comments

The lessons that can be gleaned from this particu-larly English transformation are many. Firstly it isimportant to return to the observations made atthe beginning of this paper by re-emphasising thedistinction that needs to be made between the con-cept of the ‘creative milieu’ as envisaged by Florida(2002) and the alcohol dominated entertainment dis-trict or drinking streets now prevalent in many Brit-ish town centres. Florida describes the type of ‘cross-over’ neighbourhood that Montgomery (2003)champions, where cultural producers can rub shoul-ders in the same pubs, clubs and bars as students,visitors and local residents.

There is a clear distinction between this type ofdistrict that acts as a support to a creative economyand/or the performing arts and a neighbourhoodthat is focused on the consumption of alcohol as aprimary activity. Temple Bar provides an exampleof how a neighbourhood can segue from one stateto another in a matter of years.

Perhaps because he is writing from a British con-text, Landry’s (2000) discussion of milieu is more re-fined and hence more helpful. He highlights milieunot as ‘cool bars’ and fashionable restaurants, butas a series of institutional and economic contexts.

Particular stress is placed on the need for a ‘softinfrastructure’ of innovative institutional supportsand networks. These human connections and prac-tices are nurtured and supported through the provi-sion of a well-cared for public realm in city centresand semi-public spaces where people can meet.These are described as a multiplicity of places andtemporary events, such as debating clubs and salonsas well as bars and restaurants. Consumption is abackdrop to these ‘deeply embedded’ infrastructuresand not their primary purpose.

Secondly, the aggressive expansion of the publiclylisted entertainment companies in the British highstreet needs to be noted, particularly if an Anglo-Sax-on neo-liberal approach to economic development isadopted in Europe. Local breweries and local entre-preneurs might not survive competition with the ma-jor pubcos and nightclub operators. Although it iscommonplace to ascribe excessive alcohol consump-tion to a peculiarly British mentality, the problemsexperienced in Great Britain provide an extremeincidence of changing patterns of consumption thatare being experienced in many developed countries.The failure of English policy makers to anticipatethe detrimental effects of a well-meaning relaxationof controls over licensed premises should be used asa warning for European cities where third parties,such as airlines and tour companies are engaged inmarketing their centres as ‘party cities’.

The reluctance of English local authorities to turnaway night-time entertainment is coupled with alack of willingness to expose the problems that havebeen caused. This too has resonances in other partsof Europe, such as the Greek islands, where theauthorities fear adverse publicity.11 The understand-able reluctance of local councils and national gov-ernment to admit to problems inhibits researchand new policy directions.

The expansion of the night-time economy in Brit-ain has been described as ‘regeneration on thecheap’. Clearly the incidence of crime and disorderand the burdens that it places on public agenciessuggest that it is, in fact, rather expensive. A wayforward for town centre management groups mightbe to compare the costs of subsidising the late open-ing of public cultural institutions such as art galler-ies, libraries and museums with the clean-up andpolicing costs of the late night economy.

The English experience demonstrates the need fora clear policy vision that encourages vitality and diver-sity and provides controls over the dominance ofthe most profitable forms of entertainment, which inthe English case, is youth based ‘vertical’ 12 drinking.

337

From ‘creative city’ to ‘no-go areas’: M Roberts

The importance of providing a vision for, and an ade-quate planning and environmental framework tomanage, the night-time economy has been underlinedby reference to the examples discussed. Planners andpolicy makers can no longer assume that all that isrequired is revitalisation for the evening and night-time hours, drawing on private sector alcohol relatedentertainment such as cafes, bars and nightclubs.Planning for a town centre at night requires a morerefined understanding of the differences between cre-ativity, cultural resources and, to coin a British phrase,getting ‘wrecked’.

Acknowledgement

The author would like to thank Adam Eldridge ofthe Central Cities Institute for his assistance.

References

Alibhai-Brown, Y (2005). The mixed messages that lost ‘the waron drugs’, Evening Standard, Wednesday 6 July, p. 15.

Bianchini, F and Ghilardi, L (2004). The culture of neighbour-hoods: a European perspective. In D Bell and M Jayne (Eds.),City of Quarters: Urban Villages in the Contemporary City.pp. 237–247. Ashgate, Aldershot.

Bromley, R et al. (2001) Exploring safety concerns in the night-time city. Town Planning Review 71(1), 71–96.

Bennett, E (2006). Empty bottle, empty city. Building Design,February 24, p. 8.

Budd, T (2003). Alcohol-related assault: findings from the BritishCrime Survey, Home Office Online Report 35/03 [Online].Available: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/alcohol1.html.

Cabinet Office, Prime Minister’s Strategy Unit (2004). AlcoholHarm Reduction Strategy for England. Strategy Unit, London.[Online] Available: www.strategy.gov.uk.

Central Cities Institute (2002). Licensing Reform: A Cross-Cultural Comparison of Rights, Responsibilities and Regulation[Online]. Available: http://www.ias.org.uk.

Chatterton, P (2000) Will the real Creative City please stand up?City 4(3), 390–397.

Chatterton, P and Hollands, R (2003) Urban Nightscapes: YouthCultures, Pleasure Spaces and Corporate Power. Routledge,London.

Comedia in association with the Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation(1991) Out of Hours: A Study of Economic, Social andCultural Life in Twelve Town Centres across the UK. Comedia,London.

DCMS (Department of Culture, Media and Sport). Draft Guid-ance issued under Section 182 of the Licensing Act 2003.Tabled Before Parliament on 23 March 2004. DCMS, London.[Online] Available: www.dcms.gov.uk.

DCMS, The Home Office & ODPM (2005). Drinking Responsi-bly: the Government’s Proposals [Online]. Available: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/crime/alcoholrelatedcrime/index.html.

DoE (Department of the Environment) (1996) Revised PlanningPolicy Guidance Note 6: Town Centres and Retail Develop-ment. Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, London.

Drummond, C C (2004) An alcohol strategy for England: The good,the bad and the ugly. Alcohol and Alcoholism 39(5), 377–379.

Elvins, M and Hadfield, P (2003) West End ‘Stress Area’ NightTime Economy Profiling: A Demonstration Project. Universityof Durham, Durham.

Florida, R (2002) The Rise of the Creative Class: And How It isTransforming Work, Leisure, Community and Everyday Life.Basic Books, New York.

Heath, T (1997) The twenty-four hour city concept – a review ofinitiatives in British Cities. Journal of Urban Design 2(2), 193–204.

338

Hobbs, D et al. (2003) Bouncers: Violence and Governance in theNight-time Economy. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Hollands, R and Chatterton, P (2003) Producing Nightlife in theNew Urban Entertainment Economy: Corporatization, Brand-ing and Market Segmentation. International Journal of Urbanand Regional Research 27(2), 361–385.

House of Commons (2003a). ODPM: Housing, Planning, LocalGovernment and the Regions Committee. The Evening Economyand the Urban Renaissance, Twelfth Report of Session 2002-3,HC396-1. The Stationery Office, London.

House of Commons (2003b). ODPM: Housing, Planning, LocalGovernment and the Regions Committee. The Evening Economyand the Urban Renaissance, Memoranda submitted to the UrbanAffairs Sub-Committee, HC396-II. The Stationery Office, London.

House of Commons (2004) Home Affairs Committee, Anti-SocialBehaviour: Written Evidence, HC 80-II. The Stationery Office,London [Online]. Available: http://www.publications.parlia-ment.uk/pa/cm/cmhaff.htm.

Howley Harrington Architects Sherwood, A and Burger, D (2004)A Future for Temple Bar: Urban Framework Plan 2004. TempleBar Properties Ltd, Dublin [Online]. Available http://www.temple-bar.ie/property_urban_environment_ufp.asp .

Institute of Alcohol Studies (2006). Press releases/Comment:Government uses statistical sleight of hand to ‘prove’ LicensingAct cuts crime, Friday 10th February 2006. Available: http://www.ias.org.uk/pressreleases.html.

Kunzmann, K R (2004) Culture, creativity and spatial planning.Town Planning Review 75(4), 383–404.

Landry, C and Bianchini, F (1995) The Creative City. Demos,London.

Landry, C (2000) The Creative City: A Toolkit for UrbanInnovators. Earthscan, London.

McCarthy, J (2006) The application of policy for cultural cluster-ing: current practice in Scotland. European Planning Studies14(3), 397–408.

Mintel (2004) High Street Pubs and Bars – UK – April 2004,Mintel Group see www.reports.mintel.com/index.html.

Montgomery, J (2003) Cultural quarters as mechanisms for urbanregeneration. Part 1: Conceptualising cultural quarters. Plan-ning, Practice and Research 18(4), 293–306.

Myerscough, J and Bruce, A (1988) The Economic Importance ofthe Arts in Britain. Policy Studies Institute, London.

ODPM (Office of the Deputy Prime Minister) (2005) How toManage Town Centres. ODPM, London.

Richardson, A et al. (2003). Findings. drinking, crime anddisorder. Home Office Research Report 185. The Home Office.London [Online]. Available: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/alcohol1.html.

Roberts, M (2005). Transformations in the night-time economy inEnglish town centres: challenges to management, in: Kungaloset al. (Eds.), Sustainable Planning and Development 2005, vol.2, pp. 1567–1577.

Roberts, M (2004) Good Practice in Managing the Evening and Night-time Economies: A Literature Review from an EnvironmentalPerspective. Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, London.

Roberts, M and Turner, C (2005) Conflicts of liveability in the 24-hour city: learning from 48 hours in the life of London’s Soho.Journal of Urban Design 10(2), 171–193.

Roberts, M, Turner, C, Osborn, G and Greenfield, S (2006) Acontinental ambience? Lessons in managing alcohol-relatedevening and night-time entertainment from four Europeancapitals. Urban Studies 43(7), 1–21.

Shaw, S, Bagwell, S and Karmowska, J (2004) Ethnoscopes asspectacle: reimaging multicultural districts as new destinationsfor leisure and tourism consumption. Urban Studies 41(10),1983–2000.

Thomas, C and Bromley, R (2000) City-centre revitalisation:problems of fragmentation and fear in the evening and night-time economy. Urban Studies 37, 1403–1429.

Urban Practitioners (2005). Hackney Night-Time Economy, Evi-dence Based Study: Shoreditch Report (with Gillespies), forLondon Borough of Hackney. http://www.hackney.gov.uk/ep-planning-evening-economy-report.pdf.