Item no 9 Report no Public Realm: The Grassmarket and Rose Street Planning Committee 4 October 2012 1 Purpose of report 1.1 To report back on the review of the Grassmarket Public Realm Project and to provide a progress report on proposals to enhance Rose Street. 2 Summary 2.1 A before-and-after review of the impact of public realm work in the Grassmarket has been carried out by consultants. This concluded that the project has delivered economic and placemaking benefits and identified a number of lessons that could be learned and applied to future public realm projects. 2.2 A framework for bringing forward public realm enhancements along Rose Street has been coordinated by Essential Edinburgh (EE). This aims to reinforce Rose Street as a destination, providing an enhanced pedestrian environment that will encourage pedestrian priority, improved linkages and increase activity. 3 Main report The Grassmarket 3.1 In 2007, as part of the Council’s Capital Streets programme, Scottish Enterprise and the City of Edinburgh Council commissioned consultants to carry out a baseline survey of the Grassmarket before any improvement work was carried out. The construction works were completed in April 2009. A follow up study was commissioned in 2011 which has allowed before-and-after comparisons. 3.2 As well as looking at hard information including the number of retail units, the study looked at the perceptions of businesses and visitors to see how people’s views of the Grassmarket have changed over time. It also assessed the impact of a calendar of events that was put in place following the completion of the works. 1 3.3 Copies of the study are available in the Group rooms. The key findings are as follows. The Physical Environment 3.4 There is no doubt the physical environment has improved significantly. This was recognised by the 2010 Scottish Awards for Quality in Planning where the Grassmarket won the Development on the Ground category. The shift in the balance from a car to a pedestrian dominated space has had a significant impact in realising the potential of the Grassmarket as a key historic space in the city centre. It was, however, considered that, in some areas of the Grassmarket, greater attention could be given to reducing the amount of street clutter e.g. poles, signs, commercial waste containers. The Business Base 3.5 When the baseline survey was carried out the retail businesses in the Grassmarket were in a fragile state with about a quarter reporting they were less profitable than they had been three years before. About 20% expected to move or cease trading by the start of 2010. The follow up survey shows there has been little change in the overall number of units (132 in 2006 and 131 in 2011) but there has been a change in status or occupancy of over a third of the business premises. The number leaving or ceasing trading has been roughly in line with their predictions but the number of occupied premises has also remained the same, suggesting that demand for retail space in the Grassmarket is steady. There has been a small but noticeable shift from shops to restaurants over the period. The results of the post completion business survey show high levels of confidence and optimism – markedly higher than in 2006. A large majority expect some business growth in the next three years and that they will remain in the area. This finding is all the more positive when viewed against the background of the current economic climate. Residents and Visitors 3.6 A survey of residents and visitors produced generally positive results although concerns remain among residents that issues of anti-social behaviour have not been addressed or improved by the project. It was recognised that the project could not directly address all anti-social behaviour issues but, by extending the hours of table and chair licenses into the evenings, the worse excesses of anti- social behaviour have been pushed back to later hours. There is strong agreement that the Grassmarket is a more attractive space and that it is cleaner and better managed. There is a feeling that the area could offer more for families and children. 3.7 An events programme ran for 14 months during 2009/2010. Its purpose was to demonstrate the potential of the newly created public space. This received generally positive responses from businesses and residents. Some businesses reported that the events had made a significant contribution to their business and most residents thought the programme was good and that the events had improved the image of the Grassmarket. A sharp reduction in the number of events following the conclusion of the programme means the Grassmarket is 2 still not an established events venue in the city and the economic benefits are unlikely to have been sustained. 3.8 The programme of events did not have the opportunity to become established resulting in a delay in the generation of sustainable, long term economic impacts. The report recommends that action be taken to reinforce the success of the Grassmarket. This should include the development of a further programme of events; possibly managed or coordinated by the proposed Grassmarket Business Improvement District (BID). 3.9 An assessment of the economic value of the improvements was one of the tasks asked of the consultants. While the benefits are difficult to quantify, it is possible to estimate the gross value added (GVA) per employee in the sectors represented in the Grassmarket. By comparing the present situation to one where nothing was done, it is estimated that the gross impact of the project is £1.4 - £4million. If additionality and displacement are taken into consideration, this comes down to £250,000 - £500,000 per year. It was anticipated that many benefits would result from establishing the Grassmarket as a significant events space. Lessons Learned 3.10 While recognising that the Grassmarket has been a successful project, the report identifies a number of lessons that can be learned from the process. These are: • The case for any new public realm projects should always encompass environmental, community and economic benefits; • The Council should engage with residents and stakeholders at every stage of the process; • Before work begins on designing a scheme, clear aims and objectives should be set, underpinned by a performance framework; • The impact of the construction phase should be minimised through discussion and agreement with contractors and all stakeholders including residents and businesses; • The real work starts when construction is finished and this should be reflected in an implementation plan; • There should be agreed arrangements to ensure the legacy and benefits are sustained. 3.11 In response to this, subsequent projects that the Council has initiated in the Old Town such as the Royal Mile project and the City Centre Southern Arc have adopted a process of targeted community engagement prior to the development of any particular proposals. It is intended that potential future projects in St Andrew Square, George Street and Leith Walk should recognise these issues. 3.12 Finally, the report reinforces the significance of the public realm as an asset for Edinburgh. It points to a compelling case for enhancing the city’s image and reputation through improved public realm. 3 Rose Street 3.13 This report also seeks to update Committee on ongoing improvements and the development of a public realm framework for Rose Street. 3.14 Essential Edinburgh (EE) has made a commitment to its BID members that they will set an agenda for improving Rose Street: an important part of Craig’s New Town plan but one which has suffered from lack of investment over the past 30 years. 3.15 The Council has an approved Public Realm Strategy (3 December 2009) which sets out priorities for public realm enhancement in the city centre, with Rose Street and the lanes as a priority for city centre connections. 3.16 In 2011 EE appointed The Prince’s Foundation for Building Community (formally The Prince’s Foundation for the Built Environment) to assist in developing a strategy for improving Rose Street. The aim was to focus on improving the pedestrian environment and overall public realm quality for the area as well as making Rose Street a focus for activities. This included the introduction of measures to reduce dead frontages and reinforcing the unique identity of the street thereby making Rose Street more of a destination. 3.17 A Steering Group comprising EE, the City of Edinburgh Council, The Prince’s Foundation for Building Community, Edinburgh World Heritage and other stakeholders was established. It sought to develop a public realm framework for Rose Street and, at the same time, develop and deliver projects relating to key themes such as lighting and traffic management. 3.18 A detailed assessment concluded that Rose Street, as a key city centre thoroughfare, offers an alternative to Princes Street and George Street including a place to drink and eat, a place of historical interest and character and a place for boutique and speciality shops. The vision and approach for the design would be to reinforce Rose Street’s bohemian character with cultural activities for locals and visitors. The study developed the findings of the study by Gehl Architects in 2010, which set out opportunities and ideas for improving entrances into, and crossings between, the sections of Rose Street; as well as tackling servicing and traffic management arrangements. 3.19 The findings of this study formed the basis of a consultation exercise with BID members with an interest in Rose Street. The consultation, which took place in November 2011, aimed to establish a common view of the issues affecting Rose Street and to agree a number of key objectives that EE and the Council could take forward.