Estates Gazette

20/2/2010

Extra time A victory for Everton and Liverpool remains elusive as both clubs see dreams of new stadiums stuck on the bench. By David Quinn

Even by the usually slow standards off complex regeneration projects, the development of new stadiums by Liverpool and Everton football clubs has been remarkably sluggish. And there are few concrete signs that the long wait is coming to an end.

Planning inquiry

Project Kirkby, a £400m retail-led scheme that was to be anchored by Everton and Tesco, was killed off by a government planning inquiry last November, while Liverpool’s financial woes have led to delays to its new stadium and the proposed Anfield Plaza regeneration project.

Football fans and the wider world of property have been left wondering what the future holds for the stadiums and for the regeneration efforts that are bound up with the creation of these new sporting arenas.

Everton adviser Savills argued in a report in October 2008 that Kirkby was the only sensible relocation option for the club, while planning consultant DPP, on behalf of Tesco, ruled out 35 sites around Liverpool and Sefton in November 2007.

Yet Warren Bradley, leader of Liverpool council, says this is no reason to think Everton cannot be accommodated within the city. “You need to have the tenacity on both sides to deliver it, to cut through the bureaucracy and the planning issues, and I think we have that now,” he says.

Bradley orchestrated a meeting between Everton and the council on 11 January and more are scheduled. The details of the discussions are unknown but it is believed that sites in Speke, Switch Island, Edge Lane, Central Docks and Gillmoss could be back on the agenda.

“We are very keen to keep Everton,” says Bradley, who is a season-ticket holder at the club. “When you have a large, successful business with a rich heritage, like Everton, the last thing you want is to see them move out.”

The option of to share a ground is off the agenda for now, although Bradley will not rule it out definitively. “There needs to be common sense. If both clubs struggle to deliver, there should be joint discussions for the good of the city,” he says.

Everton’s decision not to appeal against the Kirkby decision or look at alternative sites in the area is a problem for Knowsley council, which had pinned its hopes on an injection of sporting capital from the Toffees.

Strategy document

Stuart Vendy, partner at Gerald Eve, points out that Knowsley’s recently updated core strategy document “heavily references” the Everton stadium, leaving it with a “big policy void in Kirkby town centre”.

He adds: “The secretary of state has left the door open for a revised proposal, but it looks like Tesco will have to go it alone. The decision not only leaves Kirkby desperately in need of a coherent regeneration strategy but also undermines investment in sites much further afield.”

Knowsley council leader Ron Round is none the less putting on a brave face, pointing out that the regeneration of Kirkby will carry on regardless. “We have had a series of meetings with a variety of partners, including Tesco, government representatives and agencies, and have been encouraged by the support and enthusiasm to develop new proposals,” he says.

Back in Liverpool, positive noises are emanating from Bradley’s Dale Street offices about the chances of early progress on Liverpool’s stadium plans, following discussions with club chief executive Christian Purslow. A start this summer is now considered possible – although fans of the Reds will believe that when they see it.

“There have been lots of false dawns, but we can only take the advice of the chief executive of the football club,” says Bradley.

The key issue is funding. Although assurances have been given that money will soon be available for work to begin on the £400m stadium, Liverpool’s debts total £245m and efforts to find Middle Eastern investors willing to stump up £100m to gain a 25% share of the club have stalled.

A joint venture agreement between the club and the council will be signed once funding is in place. Bradley admits that the club has yet to “clarify the situation” with regard to funding so, for now, the wait continues.

Rice evokes Spirit of Shankly

The Spirit of Shankly supporters’ group shot to prominence in January this year when it successfully campaigned for the resignation of Liverpool FC board member Tom Hicks Jr, after he sent an abusive email to a supporter.

The group’s chairman, Paul Rice, is well known on the property circuit as chief executive of the Liverpool Commercial District Partnership. He is optimistic that Liverpool’s stadium will move forward by the summer – although he retains no faith in the broader direction of the club under owners Tom Hicks Sr and George Gillett.

“I’m inclined to believe [Liverpool chief executive] Christian Purslow and the recent statement that money will be made available for the stadium,” he says.

Spirit of Shankly is named after legendary Reds manager Bill Shankly, and was formed by a gathering of supporters in January 2007. Rice was elected chairman on the suggestion of supporters’ activist Peter Hooton who thought that his professional skills might be useful.

One of Spirit of Shankly’s aims is to work with relevant agencies to ensure that the regeneration of the Anfield area goes ahead.

“The development of the scheme is as crucial to the Anfield area as it is to the football club’s future – the two are inextricably linked,” says Rice. “As a Liverpool fan and as someone working in property in the city, it’s crucial something happens.”

However, the group’s main long-term aim is to take a proportion of the ownership of the club into the hands of supporters.

Rice says: “We’ve said we’ll hold to account whoever the custodians of the club are. We’re not interested in a token seat on the board with no control. If we can get 10% of the club into fan ownership, it can’t be sold above our heads.”

Government funding has fallen short, so how will Blackpool’s regeneration chief Doug Garrett redevelop? By David Quinn

When is a £300m government funding package not a £300m government funding package? The answer can be found in Blackpool, buried in the debris of the government’s abandoned policy on supercasinos.

Scrabble around in the wreckage, and the headline figure of £300m promised by the government in response to the Blackpool Task Force is not all that it seems. For once all the money that has previously been announced by the government is taken out of the equation, Blackpool is actually left with no more than £50m.

That, at least, is the view of Doug Garrett, the highly experienced, straight-talking and – one has to assume – deeply patient chief executive of the ReBlackpool urban regeneration company.

“If you look at the figures, £100m is Building Schools for the Future money, which has already been rolled out nationally. £100m is for transportation – the guts of it to do with the tramway – which had already been announced. £87m is for the sea defence scheme – and that’s been under construction for two years,” he says.

“There is £35m in relation to new housing, which is new and is welcome – but won’t touch the amount that’s needed.”

Persistent drizzle

An estimated £4m will be added to the coffers as part of separate government “Sea Change” funding for coastal towns, announced earlier this month. Overall, though, the situation remains as frustrating as the persistent drizzle that ruins EG’s spring day trip to Blackpool.

Nonetheless, Belfast-born Garrett is looking on the bright side. “This money isn’t a final offer. It’s a case of saying how the government can work with us further. There are possibilities and positives around new employment. Hazel Blears MP is looking at quarterly reviews.”

Lancashire agents are also staying cautiously positive. “It’s not as gloomy as predictions first suggested at the start of the year and, although government funding may have slowed down, private investment is continuing to roll in,” says Danny Pinkus, partner at Preston-based Robert Pinkus & Co. “The outlook for Blackpool is looking rosy as long as regeneration stays focused.”

The Blackpool Task Force, led by Blears as secretary of state for communities and local government, was formed in March 2007 following the decision of the Casino Advisory Panel two months earlier to recommend Manchester – not Blackpool – for the UK’s sole supercasino.

Garrett now admits that, in hindsight, Blackpool could never have landed the supercasino. The criteria the CAP was given by the government focused on social effects. As the only town in the eight-strong shortlist comprised otherwise of cities, Blackpool did not have a large enough resident population to become a reliable testing ground.

Garrett reveals that, prior to the sudden death last December of Professor Stephen Crow, the planning inspector who chaired the independent panel, Crow admitted as much to him.

“It was flawed legislation and a flawed approach,” Garrett says of the Gambling Act and subsequent supercasino beauty parade. “It was very badly handled, and it has produced a rather ridiculous situation.”

The government’s response to the Blackpool Task Force, of which ReBlackpool was a member, was published in February, on the same day Manchester’s supercasino was finally killed off.

It compensated Blackpool for the botched process and specified the need to improve the resort’s visitor offer, to serve a niche in the conference market and to improve the quality and mix of housing.

ReBlackpool, set up in 2005 in order to attract £1.6bn of investment to the town, shares these aims and remains focused on delivering its own masterplan, originally published in 2003.

One aspect of the plan was the creation of a supercasino, conference and leisure facilities on a 24-acre site that formerly housed the town’s Central Station. Garrett does not believe this focus on gambling renders the plan obsolete, however.

“The masterplan will be adapted, but we won’t be throwing it out and starting again. It’s not the gambling floorspace that’s important. It’s about retail malls and leisure attractions.It was that mix that we saw coming in,” he says.

Leisure quarter

The Central Station site occupies a plum location at the heart of the Golden Mile – a fact that Garrett points out as he weaves his 4×4 through the site’s surface-level car park. Central Station is still earmarked for development as a conference and leisure quarter and, elsewhere in town, a number of other regeneration projects are already taking shape (see panel).

Pinkus believes Central Station is crucial to Blackpool’s future. “One of Blackpool’s main concerns will be how to use the site that was earmarked for the casino,” he says.

“Talk of a new state-of-the-art conference centre will be an excellent and much-needed investment for Blackpool’s future. Quality investment across sectors, including retail, hotel and leisure, is required in order to increase Blackpool’s year-round appeal, and maybe even entice the political conferences back to the promenade.”

Given that Blackpool is home to the Big One – one of the tallest amusement rides in the world – Garrett cannot resist comparing Blackpool’s recent ups and downs with those of a roller coaster. However, he retains a pragmatic approach in the face of Blackpool’s malaise.

“The plans you lay down need to change,” he says. “We had an emphasis on casinos but we have to be flexible. We’ve put up a fight, but now we all need to move on and recognise where our energies need to be channelled.”

Estates Gazette
19/04/2008

Home sweet home LPC Living is targeting first-time buyers and families in Salford with a scheme that offers affordable housing and a shared ownership plan. David Quinn reports

As residential development goes, nothing sums up the gritty romance of the north like a row of terraced houses under glowering skies and no row of terraced houses sums up the gritty romance of Manchester like Coronation Street.

The soap, based in the fictional suburb of Weatherfield, has been a fixture on television screens since 1960 and some say it was the real Coronation Street, in the Ordsall area of Salford, that inspired the drama.

For any residential developer, working in an area that is so rich in history is sure to require a sensitive approach. Luckily for all concerned, LPC Living is leaving the architecture of Coronation Street well alone in its £150m plan to transform Ordsall with a mix of family-orientated, private-sector housing.

LPC – owned by investor Pervaiz Naviede (see box, below) – signed a development agreement with Salford city council to regenerate the whole of Ordsall in May 2006. The deal covers a 180-acre site from the eastern edge of Salford Quays, heading west towards Manchester city centre.

In need of a transformation

Ordsall has missed out on the razzmatazz residential development seen less than a mile away in Manchester. It remains a deprived area thanks to rapid de-industrialisation and consequent high unemployment and social unrest following the closure of Salford docks in the late 20th century.

But despite initial appearances, its edge-of-city-centre location should have proved attractive to developers.

However, LPC faced no rivals in its attempt to work up an agreement with the council and its chairman, 60-year-old Warren Smith, was spurred on to get involved partly through conversations with local residents.

“Old ladies came up to me and asked why we were investing here. They said ‘it’s a wasteland’,” says Smith, who clearly has great personal affection for the area. “But they also said they liked it in Ordsall and wanted to live here. My view is that if they wanted to live here, then why wouldn’t anyone else?”

He adds: “This site is ideal. It’s right between Salford and Manchester, which are two of the biggest economic generators in the North of England.”

As a result of the agreement between LPC Living and Salford council, Ordsall will get £150m of investment, almost all of it coming from LPC in exchange for exclusive development rights.

Community facilities

Some 800 new homes are proposed, as well as new retail facilities and public amenities. The company has also put £2.3m into the construction of a new primary school.

Since signing the deal, LPC has been boosted by Peel Holdings’ MediaCity:UK development at neighbouring Salford Quays, which is expected to bring thousands of new creative sector workers into the area, including 1,500 with BBC.

LPC has completed residential schemes at Gresham Mill and Quay 5, which pre-dated the agreement with Salford. Since then, it has developed Radclyffe Mews, a development of 34 houses all sold off-plan in November 2006, and has begun work on the 260-unit Hulton Square.

Wandering around Ordsall, it becomes clear that the area is an architectural mish-mash. The Henry Lord-designed New Barracks estate is filled with the kind of tall, red-brick terraces that once dominated the area.

Built between 1900 and 1904 on the site of a former infantry barracks, the estate includes Coronation Street and Salford Lads Club, made famous thanks to an iconic photo on the sleeve of the Smiths’ 1986 album, The Queen is Dead.

But much of Ordsall was razed to the ground in clearance programmes during the 1960s. Grand old terraces were replaced with a mixture of cheap, low-density council houses and a small number of tower blocks. In some places the cleared buildings were not replaced at all, leaving conspicuous open spaces.

Much of Ordsall is dominated by social rented housing. LPC’s masterplan is focused on bringing back more of a mix of tenures by providing housing for owner-occupiers.

“We are in Ordsall for the long-term. We want the houses to be occupied rather than vast swathes left empty,” says LPC’s development and development director Simon Ashdown. “We want the streets to be active and we want Ordsall to benefit.”

As this statement indicates, LPC has a more touchy-feely approach to development than many of housebuilders. The company talks proudly about its commitment to young families and first-time buyers and attracted headlines for its policy of turning away buy-to-let investors at Quay 5. It also offers local people the chance to buy at its schemes some six weeks before the general public.

LPC has pioneered its shared equity scheme called Launchpad, which covers 20% of the units at Hulton Square. This involves LPC offering buyers an interest-free loan on 25% of the value of the property. Buyers secure a standard mortgage on the rest.

Ease for new buyers

Unlike a shared ownership scheme, it means occupiers are not left paying rent on part of their home and no distinction is made between the homes offered within the scheme and the development as a whole, which means Launchpad buyers are spread throughout the development.

Ashdown says take-up for has been good and that making the offer to buyers remains at the company’s discretion.

“We want the right people taking up the offer,” he says. “We want graduates, first-time buyers, local key workers and young families from the M5 postcode.”

Of course, there are sound business reasons for targeting owner-occupiers, especially first-time buyers, as Smith explains. “We’ve always preferred to stay in this market because the buy-to-let market has never been as sustainable, in bulk sales especially,” he says.

“There’s a need to equate house prices with average earnings. First-time buyers have been paying five or six times their annual earnings and that isn’t sustainable. But if there is a downturn, we know there will still be first-time buyers in the market.”

So far, the strategy of appealing to younger, local buyers seems to be working. Of the first phase of Hulton Square, which was launched off-plan last August, 68 of the 73 units have been sold. Of these, 33 went to first-time buyers, while 42 were bought by people under the age of 29. A total of 23 were sold to people already living in Ordsall.

Valuable goodwill

LPC is also closely focused on community initiatives and is taking a lead on a £1m fundraising for the aforementioned Lads club, which has since been renamed Salford Lads’ and Girls’ Club.

Its engagement with the local community extends to environmental and anti-litter campaigns, although again, the purpose is not entirely altruistic. Marketing director Jonathan Drake says such programmes provide valuable goodwill.

They lessen the chances of anti-social behaviour around new developments and promote respect for the company’s schemes among local young people.

It is clear that LPC’s thinking, with its focus on the social aspects of development, is a little outside the ordinary. The company’s emotionally potent formula for success is decidedly more romantic than it is gritty, but remains northern all the same.

And while that might be met with scepticism in some quarters, there’s no doubt that Smith and his team are creating a product that is carefully and cleverly geared towards its unique geography.

Side panels

LPC Living

LPC Living is owned by investor Pervaiz Naviede and his family trust, which is active in the UK, Germany, Switzerland and Dubai. While Naviede – who is ranked 158 in the 2007 EG Rich List with an estimated fortune of £150m – is sometimes involved with the company, the day-to-day running is handled by chairman Warren Smith and his team.

The company was formed in 2003, although Naviede and Smith had been investing in residential property since the mid-1980s through their Legendary Property Company vehicle. Its focus had been on acquiring and refurbishing rundown tower blocks and by 2002 more than a dozen had been completed in the North West.

The move into new-build property came at the start of the decade when four tower blocks were bought in Kirkby on Merseyside. Realising that there was little immediate call for 300 refurbished flats, Smith and Naviede decided two of the blocks should be demolished and replaced with new family homes.

By this time, LPC was already negotiating with Salford council over Ordsall. It secured an exclusivity agreement with Salford for Ordsall’s regeneration in spring 2006. Future plans include Hulton Square in Ordsall, where work is under way on a scheme with 103 townhouses and 157 flats, priced from £80,000 for a one-bed flat to £165,000 for a three-bed house with garage.

Sizing up against new housing targets

Much has been made recently about the size of new housing, particularly schemes aimed at families. English Partnerships drew up new guidelines last year – including a 549 sq ft minimum for one-bed flats and 1,001 sq ft minimum for three-bed units – which many new developments are still failing to meet. LPC stresses that its larger three-bed units exceed these targets, although some other types of units fall a little short. In its defence, Ashdown says LPC’s schemes are “15-20% larger” than those of rival developers, while EP is actually providing funding for part of Hulton Square through its first-time buyers initiative.

Estates Gazette

6/10/2007

Manchester council chief Sir Howard Bernstein is leading a final campaign to convince Gordon Brown that a super-casino is the only way to revive a rundown area of the city. David Quinn reports

After a run of bad luck, Manchester’s hopes of becoming home to the UK’s first super-casino looked dead and buried this summer. Not so, say the city’s council leaders, who are this week launching a fight to secure the £250m entertainment scheme which they believe can – and must – be delivered.

It was in January that the independent Casino Advisory Panel surprised almost everyone by recommending Manchester over favourites Blackpool and the Millennium Dome in east London as the location for the UK’s sole super-casino. But since then, odds against its delivery have lengthened so much that the media have all but written off the development.

Key factors in the super-casino’s downfall were its rejection in the Lords in March (see panel, p87) and, crucially, the apparent antipathy of new prime minister Gordon Brown. When, after finally getting the keys to number 10, the Presbyterian Brown called for a review of the use of super-casinos as a means of delivering regeneration it was seen as the death knell for the initiative. In fact, what Brown had actually said on 11 July was that the project would be “subject to reflection”.

Media commentators suggest that the prime minister is keen to wash his hands of the super-casino because it plays badly in Daily Mail-reading Middle England, which Brown’s strategists are desperate to woo ahead of a possible late-autumn election.

But, with little fanfare, Brown instigated the inter-departmental review he promised. Manchester is a “constructive participant” in the review, which is led by the Department of Communities and Local Government and is expected to declare its findings within weeks. Brown is not expected to make a final decision until after an election, however, for fear of the political fallout.

For Sir Howard Bernstein, chief executive of Manchester city council, the fact that the review is happening at all is evidence that the government has an open mind about the future of the scheme. “There was speculation in the press about what was on the prime minister’s mind [following the July statement] but it’s clear that he wants a period of time to reflect,” says Bernstein.

“There’s no alternative”

The council’s contribution is a renewed drive to claw back the scheme it views as a hard-won prize. Bernstein rejects any suggestion that it should forget the super-casino and put its energies into alternative uses for the site it had prepared for the scheme at Sportcity in east Manchester.

“Manchester remains committed to supporting this scheme, and we’ll work hard with the government to make sure it’s delivered,” says Bernstein.

“Our submission is that there is no alternative strategy and there is no type of development, other than a super-casino, which can deliver the same level of benefit.”
To make its case, the council submitted a dossier, compiled by KPMG, listing a series of possible alternative uses for the cleared Sportcity site – all of which the dossier then pulls apart.

Casino-free leisure schemes are said to be “uneconomic”. Residential development is described as “antithetical to the role and function of the site”. Offices are “not sustainable without very significant public funding support”, while speculative development is described as “not realistic”. But the super-casino-led scheme meets with favour and is described as “wholly consistent with spatial and regeneration strategies”.

According to the dossier: “It is unlikely that there is any alternative use which can achieve the [regeneration] outcomes in east Manchester with no public subsidy, and generate a positive return for further regeneration.”

While this line of argument is open to question by the government in the battle ahead, the need for regeneration in east Manchester is undisputed. The council points out that around 33,000 jobs were lost in the area during the 1970s and 1980s and that more than 90% of the area’s 62,000 residents live in neighbourhoods ranked in England’s worst 10%.

The creation of a 675,000 sq ft mixed-use scheme anchored by a 53,800 sq ft super-casino would form the next phase in the area’s regeneration, creating 3,500 jobs, injecting £250m of capital investment and attracting 1.3m visitors pa, according to the council.

However, questions have been raised from across the political spectrum about whether a giant casino with unlimited-jackpot slot machines is really what this deprived area needs. Pressure groups such as Campaign Against Super-Casino Expansion claim super-casinos create “problem gambling” and will do little to benefit deprived communities. The Archbishop of Canterbury has also voiced concerns about “the sleight of hand by which the whole business of the gambling industry has become coupled with the regeneration theme”.

Bernstein dismisses such concerns, saying a super-casino would not be harmful to the area’s residents. “We are dealing with a casino that will become part of the most regulated section of gambling in the UK,” he says. “The evidence doesn’t support people’s opposition to casinos. These facilities, if done right, can be centres for economic growth.”

Bernstein refers to the recent British Gambling Prevalence Survey 2007, conducted on behalf of the Gambling Commission by the independent National Centre for Social Research. Its key finding was that rates of problem gambling in the UK have not risen since 1999 and remain at 0.6% of the population.

He says this is “surprising” given the massive growth in the multi-million-pound online gambling industry during this period and believes it is therefore unlikely that a single super-casino in Manchester will have any significant effect on problem gambling.

Moreover, Bernstein warns that if the super-casino is not delivered, initiatives promoting responsible gambling will be set back. The council has pledged that section 106 agreements will stipulate that the successful super-casino developer must help fund gambling support groups and other such projects.

Bernstein is clearly up for a fight. “It’s going to be an entertaining process,” he chuckles. “The evidence in our favour is clear but public confidence has to be built up.”


How super-casino ball got rolling

2003 Manchester council opens competition for cleared 18.6-acre site next to City of Manchester stadium at Sportcity

2004 Kerzner International and Ask Developments selected to deliver mixed-use scheme anchored by a super-casino. Subsequently, the Gambling Act says the super-casino should be awarded by public tender, meaning Kerzner/Ask will have to re-bid in competition with other operators

2005 Gambling Act made law. One super-casino with a minimum gaming area of 53,800 sq ft will be built, alongside eight “large” and eight “small” casinos

2006 Casino Advisory Panel considers eight shortlisted locations. Blackpool and the Millennium Dome emerge as favourites

30 January 2007 CAP picks Manchester for the super-casino

28 March House of Lords rejects – by three votes – an order backing CAP’s decision to award Manchester the super-casino

11 July Prime minister Gordon Brown announces review, prompting speculation that the project is dead

6 October Manchester launches fightback as conclusion of review draws near

A staunch Blairite and supporter of the Iraq War, Hazel Blears MP is forthright and enthusiastic about the ongoing regeneration of Salford. David Quinn reports

Salford’s Working Class Movement Library prides itself on ignoring the “conventional history” of “kings, queens, generals and political leaders”. As such, the red-brick building at 51 The Crescent might not necessarily be the kind of place you would expect to find a fervently Blairite cabinet minister.

But Salford MP Hazel Blears, the Blairite in question, has her constituency office there. In the next room, posters, badges and mugs dating from the 1980s miners’ strikes, with slogans such as “Defend Union Rights Picket!” and “Coal Not Dole”, are abundant. Perhaps the fact that this spiky, Old Labour-infused trade union paraphernalia is locked away in a glass case an antique collection of interesting but irrelevant curiosities is significant.

It certainly presents a contrast with Blears’ unflinching and unapologetic New Labour persona, which is seen and heard so often on TV and radio. A staunch defender of the war in Iraq and the government’s controversial anti-terror legislation, she can accurately be described as an arch-loyalist of the government.

As she explains to EG, Blears is keen to put local communities at the heart of regeneration efforts especially regarding the vast changes taking place in her own constituency.

Blears is minister without portfolio, a role previously held by such heavyweights as Peter Mandelson, Charles Clarke and John Reid. In person, she is both relentlessly upbeat and also, on occasion, disarmingly forthright. Her enthusiasm for the ongoing regeneration of Salford is obvious, but it is clear that not every aspect of the process gets her seal of approval.

“Regeneration is always about a lot more than bricks and mortar,” says Blears. “If you look at the Ladywell flats in Salford, they were redeveloped four times, but after each time they went back to being a horrible place to live. Physical regeneration can be important, but you need to tackle crime and anti-social behaviour, otherwise you are wasting your money.”

Changing perceptions

With a background at the Home Office that included community safety, policing and anti-social behaviour briefs, Blears’ standpoint is understandable. She is happy to acknowledge the “impact on people’s confidence” when their neighbourhoods are transformed by physical regeneration. But she pauses a little awkwardly when asked about the benefits to the community of Salford Quays, with its modern office blocks, half-million pound luxury apartments and, latterly, the Lowry arts centre.

“It’s been hugely important for our image outside Salford. It’s helped to shift perceptions enormously,” she begins, before opting for a change of tack. “I was concerned that the Lowry would really just be for middle-class people from Cheshire but that’s not the case. People in Salford are quite proud of the Lowry, and the Triathlon World Cup event has brought in thousands of people. So it’s perhaps not brought about the social division people may have been concerned about.”

One might, then, describe development at the Quays as having a positive “trickle-down” effect on local communities. But Blears frowns at this wording and, as if reminded of the political legacy that led to the slogan-filled relics in the next room, says she “hates that phrase” because “it’s very Thatcherite”. Instead, she says she prefers to look at the development of Salford Quays, and physical regeneration in general, as a “virtuous circle”.

“Developers are more likely to want to come into other parts of Salford because of the success of Salford Quays,” she explains.

The Quays is earmarked for a major relocation by the BBC in 2010, as part of Peel Holdings’ MediaCity:UK scheme, which is being championed by local urban regeneration company Central Salford. But the BBC is saying the move may not happen unless it can get a 1.8% rise above inflation in the licence fee settlement something to which the Department of Culture, Media & Sport has yet to agree.

Blears is, of course, keen to see the move happen, and says she is “lobbying intensively” on the issue. Her front-line government role gives her an inside track on the negotiations over the licence fee, although she stresses that she will make no formal intervention, other than as a local MP.

She makes it clear she is unimpressed with the BBC’s prevarication over the licence fee settlement and its attempts to use Salford as a bargaining chip in the negotiations. “It is entirely inappropriate,” she says. “The BBC said they would come here. The proposal we put to them is a fantastic opportunity for them and for us. They should fulfil the commitment they have made. It’s essential that
the scheme as envisaged happens in full. MediaCity is not just about the BBC coming here, that’s just one part. The scheme as a whole needs to have that integrity. It’s not sensible to pare it back.”

The MP is full of praise for the Central Salford URC, which, as well as wooing the BBC to Salford, has begun a series of proposals for the regeneration of Salford’s historic city core (see p182). The regeneration of the A6 Chapel Street, to reinforce links with central Manchester, is central to the URC’s proposals, and Blears approves.

“The A6 corridor is key,” she says. “It’s important we get the best high-quality development along Chapel Street. But we need to progress quickly because the contrast between the A6 and Manchester city centre is dramatic.”

Blears does not believe it is necessary for Salford to ape the offer of central Manchester. She notes that when she was growing up in Salford, a trip “into town” meant Manchester, rather than Salford.

“The URC’s approach, of ‘making Salford beautiful’ is the right way to go,” says Blears. “We are different,
we have lots of green space and yet we are close to a major metropolitan centre. You play to your strengths, rather than becoming a mirror image of a bustling city centre.”

Warning shot

She compares the relationship between Manchester and Salford with that between Minneapolis and St Paul in the US, joking that it sounds “romantic”.

The interview concludes with what Blears happily labels a “warning shot” to property developers about the role of local communities in regeneration. She confesses that EG is not her “usual reading material” but is clearly keen to ram home her agenda to those for whom it is.

“Throughout all the regeneration in Salford, the thing that’s made it successful and sustainable is the involvement of local people. You can’t regenerate just by building great buildings,” she says. “If you invest in local people you get better results and transformational, long-term change.”

Despite financial pressures, Grosvenor’s massive £1bn redevelopment of Liverpool city centre is beginning to become visible. David Quinn reports

From a nearby roof top, the last few empty buildings on Paradise Street are dwarfed by the white, dusty presence of one of the largest building sites in Europe.

But Grosvenor’s £1bn redevelopment of central Liverpool’s retail core has recently been making headlines, and not because of its physical scale. Instead, all the talk has been about the financial burden it has created for its developer.

It was revealed last month that Grosvenor is to set aside between £50m and £90m in its annual accounts to support the development, which will eat directly into profits. Meanwhile, in Preston, fears are growing that the size of Liverpool One has reduced the company’s capacity to develop its proposed £450m Tithebarn scheme.

Grosvenor says it will absorb the financial hit in Liverpool itself, leaving the consortium of backers which include Hermes and Middle Eastern clients of Arlington Securities unscathed.

But with the scheme so much at the heart of Liverpool’s rejuvenation, and timed to coincide with the city’s coronation as Capital of Culture in 2008, the announcement has raised eyebrows locally.

In the meantime, however, the 42-acre development is moving forward at speed. The development site is scattered with 15 cranes, and the former bustle of Paradise Street has been replaced by a wide, open pathway populated by JCBs.

The core of what will be an Odeon cinema is taking shape. And the structures of John Lewis and Debenhams are in place.

It is certainly a complex project. Rather than slapping a big-box shopping mall on the site, Grosvenor is working with the existing streetscape.

In total, there are 30 new buildings at Liverpool One designed by 20 architects. “The idea from day one has been to create not a shopping mall but a series of buildings with their own character and architecture,” says Rod Holmes, project director at Grosvenor.

While some of the buildings have been completed, details of the majority of the scheme’s retail and leisure elements, and how they fit together, has sometimes been difficult to fathom.

Traditional shopping

Holmes says people in Liverpool have never really had a problem getting to grips with the design and layout, but others have.

“People locally realise that we are rebuilding a chunk of the city centre and that it fits in with the street pattern. It only becomes difficult when we start talking to people in the property industry who are used to dealing with traditional shopping centres,” he says.

The open-air nature of the scheme has had an upside, however. “Certain retailers welcome the fact that this is not ‘another shopping centre’. Some retailers who never take space in traditional shopping centres are interested, because it’s more like a high street,” says Holmes.

In fact, the scheme has five key retail elements (see map, p215) and is broken up into zones, which cater for different tastes and wallets.

John Lewis and Debenhams anchor the two western points of a triangle, which tapers towards the existing Marks & Spencer and the junction of Hanover Street with Church Street. South John Street and Paradise Street form linear retail pitches north to south, while Hanover Street, with more stores, forms the eastern barrier of the project. All this means the retail floorspace of central Liverpool will more than double.

“The different zones are based around real streets in Liverpool and so we have appropriate rents to reflect that,” explains Neil Barber, head of leasing at Grosvenor.

“For example, Hanover Street will be pitched at perhaps a third of the level of South John Street. We realise that different retailers can afford to pay different levels of rent, and we aren’t going to put in a couple of hundred shops at £300 per sq ft zone A. We want a different mix we don’t want a clone town.”

John Lewis, which has had a presence in Liverpool since 1940 and operates from a cramped outlet on Church Street, will be central to Liverpool One’s offer. Ann Humphries, director of retail development, says she is enthusiastic by the trading potential of the new store. “This store will be part of the biggest change to the centre of a city that we have been involved with,” she says.

“We’ve stayed committed to Liverpool. It’s fantastic that we are now getting a new critical mass of retailers as a magnet to bring people back into the city.”

So far, around 60% of the retail element of the scheme is let, with several high street names already confirmed and others rumoured (see box, p215). The next announcement on retailers is programmed for November, and this is likely to include several restaurant names. Holmes anticipates a further flurry of lettings activity next spring, after retailers have evaluated the Christmas 2006 trading figures.

Like the retail areas, the leisure offer will be broken down into zones. The park area will feature what Barber calls “fine dining”, with some of the units appearing to slot into the side of the sloping open parkland, with views of the River Mersey.

More casual dining will also feature here. No deals have yet been signed, but Wagamama, Strada and Gourmet Burger Kitchen are tipped to take space. North West-based ventures are likely to be strongly supported, with Manchester-based Croma and Sam’s Chop House, both favourites among property types, believed to be contenders for units.

Family dining

“These lettings tend to be the stuff you do in the last 12 months so that you can get the right mix and the latest thing, but we are now really beginning to crack into it,” says Barber. “Our advantage is that there aren’t many places in the UK where you can overlook a large park in the centre of a city.”

Other catering offers at the scheme will be family dining, especially close to the cinema, although Barber stresses this will not be a “food court”. The remaining offer will be “dotted around”, with a mix of “coffee stops tailored to particular districts”.

The retail element of the scheme will be completed in the first half of 2008, with some other sections, including 300 flats, being completed at the start of 2009. Holmes says discussions with potential development partners for the flats have been aborted, and Grosvenor will now finance and develop this element on its own.

In less than two years, if all goes to plan, Grosvenor’s complex scheme will push Liverpool firmly into the UK’s top-10 retail destinations. But for now, the clutch of cranes, the diggers and the dust remain.

Liverpool One composition

Paradise Street

Described as a “slick European boulevard”, the 82ft-wide street will be uncovered and have a similar volume and size to Church Street. It will feature a mix of trendy, urban fashion retailers. John Lewis anchors the street at the southern end.

Typical target retailers: Urban Outfitters, USC

Architects: BDP (London), Allies & Morrison, John McAslan, Glenn Howells, Haworth Tompkins

South John Street

The street linking Debenhams and John Lewis will be partly covered by a glass canopy and feature family-oriented multiples. The top level of the street will back on to the open park on the western side.

Typical target retailers: Borders

Architects: Groupe Six, BDP (Liverpool)

Peters Lane

Arguably the most architecturally surprising element of the scheme, Peters Lane will punch through from Church Street via a new entrance created by opening up the existing HMV store. The scheme’s only fully covered section, it will offer aspirational branded fashion and upmarket names.

Typical target retailers: Jigsaw, Space NK

Architects: Dixon Jones, Grieg & Stephenson, Stephenson Bell

Hanover Street

This zone at the eastern edge of the development features a number of larger shops aimed at homeware brands, partly to capitalise on the boom in residential development at nearby Ropewalks. Rents will be lower than those in the prime South John Street pitch. Hanover Street also houses the new BBC studios and landmark “Bling” building.

Typical target retailers: Habitat, Heal’s

Architects: CZWF, Page & Park, Brock Carmichael, Austin:Smith Lord, Owen Ellis

The Park

The hub of the development’s restaurant and catering offer, the 5-acre park will feature a series of terraces overlooking the River Mersey, with 2,000 car-parking spaces concealed beneath. The southern edge is flanked by the Cesar Pelli-designed flats and hotel blocks.

Typical target occupiers: Gourmet Burger Company, Strada, Wagamama

Architects: Cesar Pelli, BDP (Liverpool)

Developers Langtree and David McLean are plotting one of the biggest garden makeovers ever. David Quinn reports on plans to revamp Liverpool’s Garden Festival site as a major mixed-use waterfront park

Passing through the huge iron gates into the site of Liverpool’s 1984 International Garden Festival is like wandering into the movie Planet of the Apes. What were once expertly manicured gardens are now rough and overgrown. Odd architectural features from two decades ago are barely visible beneath overgrown bushes.

Everything – the Chinese pavilion, the Festival Hall, the giant Tarmacked car park – has been left as it was, but is coated in a thick film of abandonment and decay.

If the outstretched, torch-bearing arm of the Statue of Liberty were to poke from the surface of the ornamental pond, in homage to the 1968 film, it wouldn’t come as a surprise.

Despite several proposals to unlock the Garden Festival site for development, and despite part being sold for housing in the 1990s, 88 acres has remained unused since the conclusion of festivities 21 years ago.

But all this is set to change.

Regional waterfront park

In September, developers Langtree and David McLean will submit an application to return civilisation to this ragged wilderness. They plan to develop the site as a “regional waterfront park”, the vast majority of which will be, for the first time since October 1984, open to the public.

The spectacular, yet crumbling, Festival Hall will be demolished to make way for 1,372 homes on a 20-acre plot at the western end of the site. A number of “fringe blocks” overlooking the Mersey, and an element of commercial accommodation, such as local shopping and community facilities, also form part of the plans.

A further 30 acres will be given over to the restoration of the ornamental gardens, parts of which were donated by the Chinese government in the 1980s and which, through subsequent neglect, have become a minor diplomatic embarrassment.

The remainder will be left as open grassland, with a “grand axis” and a route leading from the main entrance of the park to the banks of the Mersey.

After a tour of the dilapidated site, John Downes, managing director of Langtree, and Richard Dean, his counterpart at David McLean Developments, convene at an on-site Portakabin. It overlooks what will one day be the entrance to the new scheme. For the moment, the view consists of a couple of stagnant water features.

Several false starts

The two of them will have to do a lot to convince locals that the jv’s plans will be deliverable. There have, after all, been several false starts, with unviable proposals ranging from a 90-storey skyscraper to a theme park (see box, left). Downes says that, in order to deliver, it’s important to get the balance right.

“We knew about the aspirations of Liverpool city council and we knew we needed to present deliverable proposals,” he explains.

“We must shoulder a lot of responsibility. There’s a fine line between respecting the history of the site and generating enough revenue to make our scheme viable.”

That balance has been achieved by opening up around 70% of the site for public use – the council’s key aim — while developing a money-spinning residential element.

“The development agreement with the council took some working out,” says Downes. “The council was constructive — but wanted assurances that the gardens would be maintained.”

Although Liverpool city council remains the freeholder, Langtree-McLean – now established as a limited company, has a 150-year leasehold on the site.

Earlier this year, the joint venture paid £4.9m for the lease to Planestation, formerly known as Wiggins Group, which itself went into administration this week.

Langtree had been looking at the site for some time, but McLean bought into the project only after Langtree secured its preferred developer position in 2004.

Agreement on joint venture

McLean managing director Dean says: “We looked at the site in the past, as it was something we had an interest in. We had a good relationship with Langtree and, partly through a chance meeting, we discussed and agreed on a joint venture.”

He agrees with Downes that gaining the right to develop the site brings other responsibilities.

“At the moment, the site is ‘defensive’ against the river,” says Dean. “We need to open up the gardens to the wider world in order to secure them for the future.”

But while Planestation’s plans were blighted by a lack of enthusiasm from planners, Downes doesn’t expect problems on that front.

“We’ve worked in full consultation with the council, and it is fully aware of what we are trying to do,” he says.

Dean adds: “Liverpool’s being awarded Capital of Culture status in 2008 is a catalyst to get the scheme delivered. We and the council want the development to be open by then.”

For now, though, the site is being left to nature. The only work happening is a study of the local wildlife. As the scheme progresses, six ecologists will be checking that the local fauna and flora are not disturbed. This means that, for the moment, the gardens can retain their otherworldly appearance.

Two years ago Oldham was ravaged by race riots and it appears that previous “ghetto-creating” regeneration must bear part of the blame. David Quinn looks at how a new regeneration initiative will be handled this time

It began as a brawl between two youths outside a chip shop, the type of teenage scuffle that occurs in towns across the country every weekend. But this encounter was to have a far more serious outcome.

Following a mobile phone call by the mother of one of the youths – one of whom was white, one of whom was Asian – two taxis arrived at the scene in the Glodwick area of Oldham. Ten white men emerged and proceeded to smash the windows of Asian homes and businesses, in supposed retribution for an Asian attack on a white youth. It was 8pm, twilight, on Saturday 26 May 2001 and some of the worst racial violence seen in the UK had begun.

Oldham is a town of 217,000 people, bordering Manchester, Ashton-under-Lyne and Rochdale on the edge of the Pennines. Although often described as part of Greater Manchester, it is historically a Lancashire mill town. Like many of the UK’s former manufacturing strongholds, production activity has fallen away, creating high unemployment. But this wasn’t the cause of the violence.

Nor is the fact that Oldham’s Asian and Asian-British population stands at just under 12% of the town’s total, compared with a national average of 4.6%. The major triggers of the rioting of two years ago was racial self-segregation. The resident Asian population of Oldham is not evenly dispersed. Instead, it is centred on deprived areas close to the town centre.

In the ward of Werneth, for example (see map p26), the Asian and Asian-British population is 55% of the total. In St Mary’s, which includes Glodwick, where violence broke out, the Asian and Asian-British population is 38%. These areas have become virtual ghettos, fuelling what community leaders describe as the “myth” of “no-go areas” for white residents of the town.

On that May evening, the fighting escalated. Rumours of police violence against Asians quickly circulated. As an angry mob grew to 500, police contained it around Waterloo Street and Glodwick Road. Cars were overturned and set alight.

Violence continued for several nights, though not on the scale of the Saturday. The repercussions were massive and prompted much soul-searching on the part of Oldham council, as well as a government inquiry.

Strategic and organisational changes are under way at the council and urban renewal is seen as crucial to easing the town’s problems. Here, EG reports on the council’s approach, finds out about a new “Vision” for the town led by urban regeneration specialist URBED and King Sturge, and gauges community leaders’ views of the plans.

What went wrong

Regeneration has been criticised as one of the causes of division in Oldham.

In April of this year, an all-party committee of MPs concluded that the distribution of single regeneration budget (SRB) funds may have been one of the factors behind the racial disturbances in Oldham, Burnley and Bradford in 2001. “The competition for recoveries [of funds] between communities had exacerbated divisions in areas where there was a strong correlation between wards and different ethnic groups,” said the report by the Housing, Planning and Local Government and the Regions Committee.

The findings echoed two other key reports. Published at the end of 2001, the Ritchie report into the Oldham riots of May 2001, carried out by the civil servant David Ritchie, concluded that the segregation of Asian and white communities was “deep seated” in Oldham, creating “ignorance, misunderstanding and fear”. This situation was heavily to blame for the riots, it concluded.
Ritchie also berated Oldham council for its failure to act sooner, accusing it of institutional racism.

A year later, the Audit Commission identified management weaknesses at the council, criticised its apparently meaningless use of the slogan “Oldham Together”, and highlighted the fact that just 2.6% of council employees were from ethnic minorities, compared with 14% of the town’s population.

The council accepted that work remained to be done but pointed out that some changes in organisation and approach were already under way. The criticism of its management appears to have hit home last month it appointed five new chief officers.

The council: ‘We must seek to unite’

Regeneration is the key to Oldham council’s overhaul of the town and its own battered image. But this time round, the plan must tackle the divisiveness of the town’s segregated, inward-looking communities.

Andrew Fletcher, assistant chief executive of Oldham council, is not keen to dwell on the past. Nonetheless, he acknowledges the impact of May 2001 on the council’s thinking.

From his office overlooking the concrete jungle of the town’s brutalist 1960s civic centre, he says that the council has reassessed its approach to regeneration following the riots of 2001. He agrees with the MPs’ committee that “ringfencing” specific areas for regeneration can lead to resentment and, eventually, violence.

“We had a radical rethink of the way to approach regeneration and our view now is that it should be a process by which we implement a comprehensive strategy,” he says.

“This contrasts with the previous approach of defining specific areas to regenerate, for example with SRB funding. It is important to start from a borough-wide perspective.”

The King Sturge/URBED Vision team is to carry out a borough-wide study to help it come up with three “demonstrator” plans. These will not be a starting point for regeneration, but will show the ways in which it could be accomplished. One of the demonstrator plans is likely to focus on Werneth, which is a “pathfinder” area, and will obtain money from the designated-housing renewal fund, and is therefore eligible for central government funding too.

In this way, it might look as though focusing on Werneth constitutes the type of ring fencing from which Oldham is trying to escape. Not so, according to Fletcher, who says the masterplanning exercise will work from the outside in, and that funding will not be applied to isolated areas. The £300,000 Vision masterplan (see over) will be published in January 2004, although the housing renewal plan will need to be finished by November to attract funding.

The Vision: Regeneration thinking stresses integration

The URBED consortium is firming up its Vision masterplan for Oldham, which will be published in January. The objective laid down by the council is the creation of a single, non-stratified population. But while looking at the whole town, the Vision proposals will feature three “demonstrator” plans, as examples of how regeneration could be carried forward in the rest of the borough.

“The idea is to get a feel for how the whole borough works, to get an idea of its contours. Then policies can be developed for each of the contour bands,” explains David Rudlin of URBED, who is the Vision team leader.

Rudlin stresses that it can be much harder to put things right in towns, rather than cities because of economic factors. “In towns suffering decline such as Oldham, there are no jobs for people to transfer to. Unemployment has risen and so has resentment between sections of the community,” he says.

Overcoming this insularity is crucial to the Vision strategy because the town’s ethnic diversity could be transformed from an apparent “negative” into a positive, Rudlin explains. “Social research finds that people are attracted to places that are diverse, and the most successful towns in the future will be the most ethnically diverse,” he says.

The involvement of King Sturge, still wrongly regarded in some quarters as shed shifters, may strike some as surprising. Yet urban regeneration partner Gordon Hood is a former director of the Central Manchester Development Corporation, and so is more than qualified to take a leading role in Vision masterplanning.

Hood echoes Rudlin’s optimism about Oldham’s potential but focuses on its infrastructure. “Oldham has positive features,” he says. “The Metrolink tram system is coming, and it has easy access to the M60 and M62.”

Hood argues that major cities have successfully reinvented themselves and that it is now the turn of smaller towns. “It’s up to places like Oldham to create active, vibrant town centres,” he says.
The proximity of Oldham to a newly regenerated Manchester less than 9 miles is clearly a plus point for the town.

“Land prices have shot up in Manchester. That’s squeezing out people from the cultural and creative industries. Oldham could attract these businesses from the end of a 20-minute Metrolink ride. It’s about finding the opportunities and capitalising on them,” says Hood.

Two of URBED’s three demonstrator plans for the town centre and for Werneth and Freehold are defined. The third area is up for consultation. Both Hood and Rudlin suggest this third plan could involve the regeneration of Oldham’s redbrick mills, such as the iconic Hartford Mill in Werneth, many of which have fallen into disrepair.

“One of the reasons for the town’s difficulties is the decline of these mills and it makes sense to ask if we can turn liabilities into assets,” says Rudlin.

If this course of action is agreed, Oldham’s mills could perhaps be the most obvious physical evidence of regeneration. However, things will not stop there. As well as new housing, the masterplan is likely to advocate the creation of new public buildings in central Oldham and an upgrading of many of the borough’s public open spaces.