News

The Glass-House Debate Series 2011/2012: London

Submitted by Louise Dredge

Our final Glass-House Debate of the 2011/2012 series was held earlier this week with our partner Design Council Cabe providing the venue for a discussion on the topic ‘Community Led Design: what is it and does it work?’. With four dynamic and diverse speakers and an engaged audience the evening took us through the many issues and perspectives involved in any community led process.

Dave Smith of London CITIZENS and East London Community Land Trust (ELCLT) outlined his concept of community led design which he summarised as creation (not placation), ownership and management. The priority of ELCLT is to provide affordable housing the residents of East London, a massive challenge in the context of a major global city.  Agreeing with the difficulties faced by the ELCLT, property developer David Roberts of Igloo Regeneration injected what he declared was a “dose of realism” to proceedings, with the hypothesis that community led design is not viable. Roberts qualified this with an addendum that it cannot be a reality on publicly owned land in London because this is prime land that will always sell quickly (where there is a high return on investment with no long term approach).

Should we be despondent? A slide from Dave Smith's presentation.

Johanna Gibbons, a landscape architect who has long practiced deliberative planning in her work as part of the firm J & L Gibbons, gave numerous examples of green infrastructure projects she has been involved in where communities and their health and wellbeing have been at the heart of the whole process. As a key member of Southwark Council’s Planning Department, Alistair Huggett discussed some of the creative engagement techniques employed by planners, while acknowledging that their approach is largely community responsive design, as opposed to community led design.

Alistair Huggett, Framework & Implementation Manager with Southwark Council

 
Chair and Glass-House Chief Executive Sophia de Sousa was keen to explore the business case for community led design, questioning developer David Roberts and a developer audience member about why it makes good business sense for them to engage with communities in the design and planning process. David Roberts asserted that working with the community generates more value. Igloo Regeneration, according to David Roberts, takes a long term view of their investments and engaging with the community deals issues such as security concerns and identifies the right kind of development to carry out in the first place to ensure a sustainable, viable place emerges from the process.

Thoughts from audience members

The advent of Localism could not help but pervade the entire discussion with one audience member enquiring as to what each speaker hoped or desired from the Localism Act. Unsurprisingly, the issue of funding was raised as a key barrier to real community generated and community led processes. Johanna Gibbons pointed out that while new planning policy demands demonstrable community engagement there is no zone of funding allocated for this to occur, with Alistair giving the example of his own borough, where residents of Camberwell aspire to develop a neighbourhood plan but there are no funds available to support this. David Roberts also cautioned that community led design doesn’t fit the legal processes that we have at present in the UK.

Overall, the theory of Localism was welcomed but as one audience member affirmed, we will need a massive cultural change among local authorities, developers and communities that may take twenty years or more to occur. The following advice seems appropriate:

“As an organizer I start where the world is, as it is, not as I would like it to be. That we accept the world as it is does not in any sense weaken our desire to change it into what we believe it should be — it is necessary to begin where the world is if we are going to change it to what we think it should be.”

(From the book ‘Rules for Radicals’ by Saul Alinsky as quoted by Dave Smith)

Accepting our present reality, how can we collectively transform our future?

Make a Comment

Glass-House Debate - Newcastle

Submitted by Rebecca Maguire

Once again the topic – Community Led Design: what is it and does it work? – was tackled in the latest Glass-House Debate, held on 21^st February. The event was hosted by partners, Northern Architecture, at the Bond Centre in central Newcastle. Sophia de Sousa, Glass-House Chief Executive, introduced the theme and said how glad she was to return to Newcastle, where there is always such a lively response to Glass-House Debates. 

As with all the Glass-House Debates, there were contrasting experiences from speakers of very different backgrounds. The first speaker was David Stewart, of the Allendale Community Housing (ACH), a community company, which is run as if it were a Community Land Trust. He spoke about the process of developing Allen Gardens - 1 family house and 2 apartments - for much needed social housing in Allendale, a small town of 3500 people in Northumberland.

Time, effort and the right skills were contributed at all levels from within the community, from the ACH Board to the developer to those working on all aspects of the project. It was possible to not only create housing with high environmental standards, meaning they cost very little to run for the tenants, but to employ local companies in the construction process too – thus ensuring that financial benefits circulated locally too.

The project was driven by clear evidence of need within the community, and allowed for lots of engagement and empowerment of the community, with open meetings throughout. There was too, a ‘mysterious ingredient’ – the passion and commitment, which helped the project complete in such a successful way.

Image courtesy: ACH

Carinna Gebhard, of space_architecture, continued the evening with her account of two projects that she had been involved with designing. Both were educational buildings, though for and with very different communities. The first example was the Evenwood Surestart and Community Centre, in a small mining town in County Durham – with high unemployment, especially amongst the young male population, many of whom were also carers. Although Teesdale Surestart was the client, the whole community was recognised as having a stake in the centre and were involved in workshops, organised so that many people could have a say in the whole building, not just the Surestart part of it. Carinna reflected that, although young people became, on completion and opening of the Centre, very proud and protective of the new centre – a higher level of involvement throughout the process could have made for fewer broken windows during the construction phase.

Her second example was a Special Educational Needs school. There was real engagement with all staff, many of the pupils and their families and carers, the medical community and wider community, as well as the client -  Knowesley Council. They listened and learnt from one another and continually reviewed and discussed the design. Collectively, the children, the wider stakeholders, client and designers, were able to come up with a beautiful and successful building designed very specifically for the range of needs of the user group –  the children themselves. 

Image courtesy of space_architecture

Last but not least, Nigel Brewer, of Places for people, talked about the engagement with existing and new communities. As one of the largest property management, development and regeneration companies in the UK – with assets in excess of over £3 billion, Places for People (PfP) still believe that every place requires a unique approach to design, and needs more than just houses to thrive – it needs schools, jobs and training opportunities, shops and leisure facilities too. For each development project they engage with both existing and future stakeholders in neighbourhood  and project planning and design. Mixing aspirations with realism, Nigel felt the process is creative and engaging. But PfP also pride themselves in providing local employment opportunities as a result of the developments  The immense social benefits of community led design, he felt, were greater ownership and respect, which in itself leads to safer communities; the raising of aspirations amongst local people and an enhanced environment for all.

Sadly, our last scheduled speaker Phil Jones from Redcar and Cleveland Borough Council was unable to attend due to poor health, but he contributed his reflections on developing a neighbourhood plan as one of the pilot Front Runners. He felt that whilst it will continue to be challenging, he felt that they had made some good progress and that in genuine partnership and collaborative effort, plans and aspirations could be achieved.

      Image The Glass-House                  

The debate that followed was passionate and heated at times. The audience was unusually ‘professional’ – usually there are many more community members in attendance. We debated the difference of scale that had been highlighted by the speakers and the impact that this had on community involvement; the different types of ‘communities’ that might be involved as users and clients, and indeed the differing nature of involvement and ownership. Once more, the breadth and importance of community involvement in the design process was eloquently emphasised by our speakers and audience.

Make a Comment

The Community Led Design Debate continues in Bristol

Submitted by Louise Dredge

From the concrete jungle on arrival in Bristol to the thriving regenerated docklands and to the home of our hosts and partner Architecture Centre Bristol, we gathered in the ground floor gallery for the second debate of the 2011/2012 Glass-House Debate Series. A tightly packed group of thirty community led design enthusiasts ready to hear and discuss the practice and realities of community led design in the UK today.

The four enlightening presentations had a common heart – people. None more so than Sandra Manson, a Youth Media Coordinator from Knowle West Media Centre who spoke of how a group of young people became the fearless drivers of a new community facility for their local area. Sandra demonstrated to us how the process of community led design brings far more transformative effects than the designed outcome. Her stories revealed that these young people developed a confidence from their engagement in this process that has propelled them in their personal and professional lives, while the wider community developed a pride of place that has had an impact far beyond the boundaries of the new building.

As a design professional Greg White admitted that the designer doesn’t always know best, as he has been shown on many occasions of involvement in community led design projects. Embedding a sense of ownership and pride in one’s area was key to the success of a project and Greg included an evocative example from Glasgow, where two parks were linked by a series of trees, each one planted with a ceremony of its own in memory of a young person who had died in that community.

Oona Goldsworthy, CEO of Bristol Community Housing Federation gave her reflections on community led design after over thirty years of being involved in such processes. She insisted that honesty, feedback, respect and listening be at the heart of any process, while she cautioned design professionals to be cognisant of scale and function, to ensure that the smallest details are considered and that every space designed has a function (the latter point relating to ongoing issues of management which cause problems long after the built project is completed).

Cleo Newcombe-Jones from Bath & North East Somerset Council revealed the changing nature of community engagement by local authorities, which has seen planners become involved more and more in enabling work. And the tide is turning for the local action groups as Cleo revealed how groups once set up to oppose the decisions of the local authority were now working in partnership with them, and with other groups who they may have been (or still are!) ideologically opposed to.

This theme of shared support pervaded the experience of all of the speakers and many of the audience members who discussed their own experiences of community engagement in the built environment. Community led design is a collective responsibility – to be inclusive, accessible, to communicate clearly and constantly. As put simply by Oona Goldsworthy, “It’s not ‘other’, it’s us”.

A clear definition of ‘community led design’ may once again have eluded us in Bristol but it was an audience member who reminded us of our ultimate responsibility to all in society - to inspire.

Make a Comment

The Glass-House Debate Series 2011/12: Glasgow

Submitted by Louise Dredge

'What is Community Led Design and does it work?'

Yesterday evening, on a crisp October evening in Glasgow over 40 guests gathered at The Lighthouse venue (a former newspaper office designed by Glasgow’s master architect Charles Rennie Mackintosh), to explore the mixed perceptions of community led design and what it really means in practice. Four distinct stakeholders  - a resident, a design professional, a local authority planner and a developer - presented their own personal views and experiences of community engagement in the design and planning process.

Speaking as a resident, Anna Stuart, Chair of Cassiltoun Trust, charted decades of community engagement in urban regeneration, outlining the path from protest against, to collaboration with, the local authorities. Anna discussed the transformation of a community asset, Castlemilk Stables, an inspiring example of how community led projects can deliver the best in design quality and bring about economic and social regeneration.

Matt Bridgestock, an architect, planner and urban designer (55 North Architecture Ltd) shared much of his practical experience of working with communities in the design of places and spaces, emphasising the need for the community to participate as an equal stakeholder (something which planners can ensure) and as an expert in their own right. Transparency is key and as one Tweeter observed, communication must be delivered in a language that communities can understand and respond to.

All of the speakers were convinced of the need for community engagement in the design and planning process, with Ron Smith of Glasgow City Council unpicking the degrees of engagement from the point of view of the local authority. Ron’s presentation showed the disparate attitudes of different local authorities to community engagement in design and planning processes, highlighting the lack of leadership on community engagement in local, regional and national planning policy.

Jonathan Strassberg of the Ethical Property Company pointed to a lack of understanding among developers of what community led design is, admitting his own ignorance of its practice until relatively recently. He highlighted the realities of the developer’s priorities and the financial risk and unpredictability wrought by community involvement (in the minds of financiers). Jonathan referred with disdain to the developer’s view that they can bring ‘community’ to their development, as if they were delivering a pizza, which raised the question of how to engage with communities where there are none?

While none of the speakers directly answered the question, ‘What is Community Led Design?’ it was already clear when Chair, Glass-House Chief Executive Sophia de Sousa asked the audience to think about the three words that made up the theme of the debate – ‘Community’, ‘Led’ and ‘Design’ – that they were each loaded with meaning and that reaching consensus on their definitions is a challenge in itself.

Perhaps Anna’s reminder to us that buildings and the spaces around them are to be used and enjoyed was what left most of us convinced of the importance of the active and full participation of communities in the design process to deliver the needs of local people.

Plenty of food for thought!

We invite you to continue this discussion and share your views and experiences with us below.

* The Glass-House Debate Series 2011/12 continues in Bristol in November, and in Newcastle and London in the New Year. Click here to find out more.

Make a Comment

Upcoming events

Submitted by Jaina Tochia

The Glass-House and partner organisations are holding a series of lively and informative events all exploring the built environment from various perspectives. Below is a bitesize overview of each one with link to book your place. 

The Glass-House and Architecture Centre Network (ACN):

Community Engagement: Quality Design or Design Compromise?

A debate which discusses and explores the different approaches to ensuring design quality, and the importance of listening to responding to the community voice. There will be presentations from:

• The Glass-House
• The Building Exploratory
• The Prince's Foundation for the Built Environment

with a chance to discuss key points and raise your queries after the presentations.

Where: The Gallery, 77 Cowcross St, London, EC1M 6EL

When: Tuesday 21 June 2011

Time: Refreshments from 6.30pm, debate 7-8pm

Cost: £5/£3 for students inc a glass of wine

More info: Event flyer

To book: www.eventelephant.com/communityengagement21june

A Planning in London Conference in association with The Glass-House

Community and Planning, The New Relationship

Communities are being empowered to shape and direct the future of their neighbourhoods. How will property and built environment professionals, local authorities work with communities to achieve the best outcomes?

This special one-day conference is designed to create opportunities for debate and discussion about how communities and professionals can engage collaboratively with neighbourhood planning, to create new Neighbourhood Plans.

Join us to debate the key issues with developers, architects, planners, local government authorities, politicians and community organisations.

Where: The Royal College of Medicine, 1 Wimpole Street, London W1G 0AE

When: Thursday 7 July 2011

Time: 8.30 to 5.30pm with evening drinks reception

Cost: Standard ticket price £239.00 + VAT

NEW: If you are part of a community group/ organisation cost per person £20.00

More info: Programme

To book: Community and Planning, The New Relationship website 

The Glass-House and Design Council CABE  

Design Planning Workshop - Community Engagement

The Localism Bill presents a new role for urban planners as facilitators of neighbourhood plans. This half-day workshop will highlight the challenges and opportunities for planners and communities to prioritise design in the new planning system. The session will discuss the links to core strategies as well as local practical projects. Speakers will present a series of approaches to community planning through inspiring case studies. A practical exercise will help you develop a new approach to talking to local communities about the value of good design in the context of neighbourhood plans.

The workshop will be an opportunity for you to question our expert panel, who have years of experience on community planning projects. We will also encourage you to discuss your experiences with other local authorities, to discuss common problems and solutions.

Confirmed speakers:

• Paul Watson – Paul, Strategic Director for Regeneration and Development
• Shankari Raj – Shankari is a community activist from Bristol
• Sophia de Sousa – Sophia, Chief Executive of The Glass-House

Where: Design Council CABE, 34 Bow Street, London WC2E 7DL

When: Wednesday 13 July 2011

Who: Local authority planners

Time: 10am-1pm followed by lunch

Cost: Free

More info and to book: Design in Planning booking info and booking  

Make a Comment

London debate, the final in our Sustainable Community Building series

Submitted by Jaina Patel

We recently finished our Sustainable Community: Refurbishment vs New Build debate series at The Abbey Centre in London on 15 March 2011. We were delighted with the panellists presentations and thought provoking discussion from the audience.

Throughout the series audiences have focussed on everything from capacity building to the political, social and economic implications of the Big Society and Localism Bill. There was clearly great concern over the expectations being placed on communities to provide services for local people and to take on greater responsibility for the community buildings that can host them. While there is a great emphasis on the importance and potential for partnership working, it is clear that finding strong and confident partners in the current climate is challenging. Particular concern was expressed over the role of local authorities. The decisions they make around the disposal of assets currently in or potentially for community use and their relationship with community partners will be a key factor. But many have argued that new relationships, new models and more creative approaches are crucial, and that we must have the courage to see opportunities in the changing landscape.

The Sustainable Community Building debate series raised a number of issues that bear further investigation.  We welcome your comments and questions on our blog, and invite you to continue to bring us your experiences, learning and recommendations.

More detailed outlines of the key themes from each debate are available on our website at www.theglasshouse.org.uk

Make a Comment

The Sustainable Community Building: Refurbishment vs New Build, Newcastle Debate

Submitted by Jaina Patel

The third debate in our lively  series took place in Newcastle on Tuesday 22 March at Northern Stage, we were fortunate to once again have a diverse and interesting panel of speakers who shared their thoughts and experiences on the subject.

Our panel of speakers were Christine Morrison, North East Coordinator, Community Matters, Tim Mosedale, Director, Mosedale Gillatt Architects, Tom Johnston, Trust Director, Glendale Gateway Trust and John Dawson, Treasurer and Trustee, Lemington Community Centre.

As with our previous debates in Edinburgh and Cardiff, the community representatives (John Dawson and Tom Johnston) provided frank and insightful accounts of their experiences when taking on the owenership of a refurbished and new build community building and talked about how trying to incorporate sustainable concepts were not as easy as they had anticipated. 

Tim Mosedale (architect) shed light on the various issues architects face when taking on the development of a community building. Its often seen as a 'them' and 'us' process and Tim was able to explore this area in more detail, explaining that this preconception is far from his way of working with community groups. 

Christine Morrison, Community Matters presented her views on the subject from a political perspective, exploring how the Coalition's Big Society agenda, Localism Bill and cuts to local budgets will have a direct impact on the future of the community building.

There is a dedicated page on the Glass-House Sustainable Community Building page where you can download the key themes from the event.

Make a Comment

Cardiff debate - The Sustainable Community Building: Refurbishment vs New Build

Submitted by Jaina Patel

The second debate in our series took place at Chapter in Cardiff on Thursday 25 November 2010. Once again the panellists and audience members raised and discussed a range of issues relating to the sustainability of the community building in the contexts of new builds and refurbishments.

Our panel of speakers in Cardiff were David Tyler, Chief Executive of Community Matters, Alan Gillard, Principal, Gillard Associates Architecture and Design, Kelvin Jones, Chief Executive, Gorseinon Development Trust and Marco Gil-Cervantes, Chief Executive, ProMo-Cymru.

Marco and Kelvin provided honest and frank accounts of their own experiences of taking ownership of a community building and highlighted the challenges and opportunities that they encountered. They each showcased their journey and the effect their community buildings have had on the local people and neighbourhood. While their experience and the buildings themselves were quite different, Marco and Kelvin's stories demonstrated how important sustainability is not only for the local environment but also to reduce running costs. They were also able to give clear example of the impact of design decisions on the way the buildings are used, managed and enjoyed. Alan was able to explain the challenges faced by architects when taking on a community development project and how important it is to work collaboratively with local people throughout the design process. He was also able to point to both the opportunities and challenges of both new build and refurbishment projects, making it clear that it is essential to assess each project individually. David discussed the importance and value of community assets in the current climate and the impact the current Big Society agenda and emerging Localism Bill could have on local communities and community buildings.

There is a dedicated page on The Glass-House website which captured the points from the presentations and discussion. 

Make a Comment

Edinburgh debate: The Sustainable Community Building: Refurbishment vs New Build

Submitted by Jaina Patel

On Thursday 21st October 2010 The Glass-House and partner organisations held a lively and interactive debate in Edinburgh looking the sustainability of the community building in the contexts of new builds and refurbishments. The debate was the first in series of 4 taking place across the UK over the coming months.

Our panel of speakers included David Tyler, Chief Exec of Community Matters, Charles Strang, Principal of Charles Alexander Strang Associates, Rob Hoon, Co-ordinator of Out of the  Blue Arts & Education Trust (a community centre which went through the process of a refurbishment) and Catherine Martin, Development Manager of Croy Miners' Welfare Charitable Society (for which a new community centre was built).  The debate welcomed a mixed audience which included design professionals, community organisations, local authority officers, funding bodies, academics and students who contributed to a lively discussion.

The discussion highlight the importance of the community buildings for local communities and explored some of the key opportunities and challenges that buildings bring with them. It also highlighted that community centres generally cater for a number of different interest groups and communities who have both shared and conflicting needs. Getting the building right for for those existing and future needs is crucial. There is a dedicated page to the themes raised from Thursdays debate which can be found at: 

Some questions that emerged in the discussion with the audience include:

• How can we ensure that the design process involves a broad section of the community yet gives the design team a clear and representative client with whom to engage?
• How can you keep communities engaged and interested during the design and build process when it takes an average of 7 years from inception to completion? 
• How can we improve the relationship between the local council and people, who we believe want many of the same things but are not sure how to engage with each other?
• Is it a good idea to produce new community centres using a kit/ modular approach? Would this produce centres that are appropriate for the local context and that are sustainable in the long term? 

1 Comment(s)