TOWNSCAPE HERITAGE INITIATIVE SCHEMES EVALUATION Ten Year Review Report FINAL REPORT TOWNSCAPE HERITAGE RESEARCH UNIT Department of Planning Oxford Brookes University © 2013 TOWNSCAPE HERITAGE INITIATIVE SCHEMES EVALUATION Ten Year Review Report FINAL REPORT Key authors: Dr Alan Reeve, Reader in Planning and Urban Design, Oxford Brookes University Dr Robert Shipley, Associate Professor, University of Waterloo 2013 Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction 1.1 Context of this report 1.2 Setting up the Townscape Heritage Initiative programme 1.3 The purpose and organisation of the THI programme 1.4 Background and rationale of the evaluation 1.5 Structure of the report 2.0 Methodology 2.1 General outline of approach 2.2 Data streams 2.3 Indicators 2.4 The way indicators were used 2.5 The balanced scorecard 3.0 Summary and findings by case 3.1 Introduction 3.2 Burslem 3.3 Bodmin 3.4 Creswell 3.5 Colwyn Bay 3.6 Rope Walks – Liverpool 3.7 Merchant City – Glasgow 3.8 Drapers’ Towns 3.9 West Wemyss 3.10 Newport 3.11 Cleator Moor 3.12 Newry 3.13 Newport Pagnell 3.14 Pembroke Dock 3.15 Wigtown 3.16 Bloxwich 3.17 Middlesbrough 4.0 Review of impacts of the THI by key theme 4.1 Introduction 4.2 Townscape 4.3 Image and confidence 4.4 Economic regeneration 4.5 Quality of life 4.6 Analysis of THI and Common Fund spend and its influence on impacts 4.7 Other considerations THI TEN YEAR REVIEW REPORT 1 5.0 Explanatory factors and key variables 5.1 Introduction 5.2 Key variables 5.3 Factors predicting the success of THI schemes: some reflections 6.0 Conclusions 6.1 Intrinsic and extrinsic factors accounting for success of THI projects 6.2 Lessons 6.3 The economic recession and its impact on the THI THI TEN YEAR REVIEW REPORT 2 1.0 Introduction 1.1 Context of this report In December 1999, the Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF) selected Oxford Brookes University (OBU) to undertake a long-term evaluation of the Townscape Heritage Initiative (THI). THI, set up in 1998, was HLF’s first venture into regeneration funding. The programme took an explicitly conservation-led approach and was designed to help areas that had both heritage merit and a real social and economic need for public investment. One hundred and seventy five towns and cities across the UK have benefited from over £170 million of HLF investment through the THI programme over the past ten years, and HLF’s funding has levered in at least another £170 million from other sources. For the last thirteen years Oxford Brookes researchers have followed the progress of the THI programme, beginning with a detailed Baseline data- recording exercise of 16 selected case studies (from an original sample of 171). The research has now reached a stage where a full picture of what has changed to date in the case study areas can be drawn. This report summarises the findings from Oxford Brookes’ research into the impact of the Townscape Heritage Initiative (THI). It sets out the rationale for the research, the background to the study, and its overall aims in relation to the THI programme. It also presents the key reflections and recommendations from the work. 1.2 Setting up the Townscape Heritage Initiative programme The decline of many historic town centres in the United Kingdom has been the unfortunate result of economic and social forces as varied as the places themselves. Resource depletion, which sees the demise of traditional local enterprises such as mining or fishing, is one example; de-industrialisation and the loss of long-established manufacturing firms have been other common causes. There are other reasons for decline, but the results often follow a similar scenario: the customer base for shops diminishes, offices close, businesses either fail or cannot afford to maintain their premises, property values fall, vandalism and crime increase, and the town begins to lose confidence and vitality. Experience in many places, however, has shown that the buildings and other structures in these towns and city centres can revitalise their economies, if they are saved and restored. Pride in the heritage of towns can be both a result of revitalisation and a motivator for it – but civic pride and confidence are almost always enhanced by physical improvements. There has been major public investment in urban regeneration since 1979, but due to very limited funding for heritage, little progress was made in historic areas, and quality in conservation schemes and public realm works was rarely 1 The ‘Concrete and Community’ THI in Tower Hamlets which was one of the original 17 schemes to be evaluated did not progress beyond being awarded a grant from HLF and so was dropped from the longer term evaluation. THI TEN YEAR REVIEW REPORT 3 INTRODUCTION seen as a priority by regeneration funders. Conservation bodies had been funding historic areas since the late 1970s through ‘Town Schemes’ and later – in England only – the Conservation Area Partnership Scheme (CAPS). After its establishment in 1994, HLF provided informal townscape grants from 1996 and then began to contribute to the English Heritage CAP Scheme. There were no equivalent schemes in Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland so there was a greater need for conservation-based funding in the rest of the UK than in England. But it was not until new powers introduced under the National Heritage Act 1997 that HLF was in a position to establish a dedicated conservation-led regeneration programme. Until 1997, eligibility for the receipt of HLF grants had been confined to charitable trusts, non-profit-distributing organisations and public bodies. The Act changed this definition of eligibility so that anyone, including private individuals and commercial concerns, could apply and receive a grant. At the same time, revenue costs became eligible for support as well as capital costs. The passing of the Act meant that HLF, for the first time, was able to distribute grants to third parties, including private individuals and businesses. Now, there was clearly both a need and an opportunity for HLF to put conservation into the heart of regeneration schemes. The Townscape Heritage Initiative was set up in 1998 with this potential in mind. 1.3 The purpose and organisation of the THI programme The THI programme was intended to help communities in areas having both heritage merit and demonstrable social and economic need for public investment. It has aimed to enable partnerships of local, regional and national interests to preserve and enhance the distinctive character of historic areas by: Repairing the fabric Restoring authentic details and materials Securing the continued use of historic buildings Bringing vacant floor space in historic buildings back into use Facilitating a high standard of design and materials in public realm works and filling gap sites in key frontages Schemes are intended to contribute to the economy, sustainability, vitality and confidence of the community concerned, and they are often part of a wider strategy for regeneration. The essence of all THI schemes is that members of a partnership develop a clear strategy to address the problems of a historic area, involving or including physical works. Eligible properties, eligible works and the level of grant aid – normally a fixed percentage of eligible costs – are defined at the outset of the scheme. Grant levels must be set so that any private gain is minimal and outweighed by the benefit of the scheme to the public at large. Schemes must aim to resolve the major problems of an area by initiating and encouraging action by all concerned, normally including the planning authority, whose statutory powers are likely to be crucial to success. Partners included the Regional Development Agencies and English Partners up until the closure of those agencies and the transfer of their business to the Homes and Communities Agency. Support from the European Regional Development Fund still plays an important role, as does funding via the Welsh Assembly, Historic THI TEN YEAR REVIEW REPORT 4 INTRODUCTION Scotland and the Scottish Government. In England, however, there has been a reduction in the number of other partners that contribute to the Common Fund and it has been increasing frequent for schemes to only have the local authority as partner. Schemes that are based on reacting only to those who choose to apply for grants have not been supported. The combination of HLF, local authority and other funding makes up what is termed the ‘Common Fund’. THI schemes run for a period of five years from the signing of the contract. Partnerships must make offers to third parties and contract direct works within the first three years, and are supposed to settle all claims for payment within five years. They are responsible for making offers from the Common Fund to properties and for purposes agreed at the outset, and must retain staff or consultants appropriately qualified to manage the scheme, which is monitored on behalf of HLF. Only the partnership has a direct contractual relationship with HLF. The contract includes conditions to be included in third-party contracts, such as circumstances in which a grant would have to be repaid. The THI programme’s overall aims have not changed over the years, but HLF has taken feedback on board to make the programme and individual THI schemes more effective. Over time, the THI programme has undoubtedly become more people focussed. The importance of community engagement and participation has been more widely recognised and is now a requirement for all THI schemes, with HLF allowing up to 5% of the Common Fund to be used for activities to support learning, engagement and training.