MATTHEW    CROOK
Confusing ripples from Urban Splash
Jason Collard of Urban Splash told of his company’s success both commercially and in terms of reputation. But how do the economics work and who really benefits?
Jason Collard’s presentation, entitled ‘The Economics of Regeneration’, was more a slick piece of marketing for Urban Splash than an analysis of the economic challenges of regenerating industrial building complexes whose original purpose have long since disappeared. Nevertheless, Urban Splash is something of a national phenomenon in terms of its ability to take on large and complex projects where the prospect of short-term financial return is either largely absent or not clearly discernible.
Collard recounted the development of the firm from its beginnings as a poster-selling concern to the critical moment when its founders moved into property management in Manchester. That city has led the way in property development in the north of England, completing landmark projects such as Smithfield Buildings and Britannia Basin. Urban Splash has since moved on to new locations, in particular Liverpool and Bradford, whose Matchworks and Manningham Mills look set to make successful large-scale conversion projects. Collard was also anxious to state the highly individual nature of Urban Splash projects. They are designed around the building and its peculiar
features, rather than using a set of standard layouts and specifications that can spell dire consequences for the special interest of any historic building undergoing conversion. Because of its capacity to undertake large capital projects, Urban Splash is increasingly branching out into new-build developments such as Timber Wharf in its home town of Manchester.
We were presented with a cleverly choreographed CAD-generated reconstruction of a Corten steel structure in Bristol, underpinned by a comprehensive landscape plan for the nearby lake. Collard then announced Urban Splash’s most ambitious scheme yet: the renewal of the system-built dystopia of the Park Hill estate in Sheffield. If Urban Splash has identified the management regime as of prime importance in maintaining fabric and spirit, can it develop one here that works, and so provide hope for other such troubled estates? The speaker went on to highlight the success of one of Urban Splash’s early developments at Concert Square in Liverpool. That scheme is impressive in terms of its commercial success, but its growing status as a venue for pressure drinking and alcohol-related street violence hardly qualify it as a family-friendly
Urban Splash’s vision for regenerating the Park Hill Estate, Sheffield (Image: Urban Splash)
CONTEXT 96 : SEPTEMBER 2006
1
Fine paving and heavy stone benches at the Royal William Yard
and resettlement is misguided in its approach – an unsustainable, wantonly destructive process that is replacing soundly-built homes and communities with rootless collections of flats and people.
Urban Splash is also in the forefront of looking at modular building, whereby pre-finished housing modules are slotted into a steel frame. Britain does need a radical housing solution as long as the present high levels of population retention and inward migration are sustained. The statistics of cost and the ability to achieve a high standard of finish in these highly standardised projects are impressive, but the challenges of developing a varied building layout and characterful aspect as required by recent guidance on new housing development are more acute.
In the case of Plymouth’s Royal William Yard, we were given a valuable opportunity to tour the development as part of the conference itinerary. The project looks like being a commercial success, with several units (almost exclusively one or two beds) already snapped up. But by whom? At roughly £300,000 apiece (not to mention costly service charges), the units are wholly out of the range of the ordinary working man and woman (not to mention conservation officers). The majority of flats will largely go to investors and the south-west’s (or south-east’s) property-buying financial elite, although there was mention of installing a student accommodation, and of softening the project’s hard capitalist edge with an arts facility. However, this is overtly regeneration for the sake of property speculation, and the public benefits may extend little beyond the creation of additional new residential units and the retention of the buildings, magnificent and worthy of preservation though they obviously are.
Urban Splash is eager to demonstrate that it wants the positive spin-off from its projects to extend beyond their boundary and into the wider conurbation. Collard plucked figures from the air which told of huge increases in the equity of local property, potentially attributable to the Urban Splash projects nearby. Since those stated properties are then catapulted beyond the affordability of myself and others for whom their local authority salary is their principal income, I would not personally feel inclined to celebrate the fact as regeneration. It is simply financial advantage.
Urban Splash may have pioneered ambitious and architecturally rewarding conversion projects which have breathed new life into some landmark, iconic buildings that may otherwise have become derelict. But we should not forget that the vast majority of the company’s projects have been underpinned by a burgeoning residential property boom, in turn supported by a media-propelled property frenzy and a willingness of banks to lend money well beyond the public’s capacity to repay. Increasing strictures on the development of greenfield sites have created a development premium for companies like Urban Splash that specialise in the conversion of industrial buildings in urban areas.
Regeneration is important for some urban areas, but
environment where an enduring community could take shape.
Majestic industrial structures such as Manningham Mills are often sited in locations that display many of the social and economic ills that accompany the loss of industrial production and its transfer overseas. In order to overcome this, there has often had to be some level of public contribution towards the refurbishment in order to make the projects commercially viable – usually in the form of partnerships with regional development agencies. The lack of a profit is a stumbling block that must be overcome, but the funds do derive from public sources, and we need to be assured that the projects are able to bring tangible public benefits. Where localised problems of anti-social behaviour exist, they have also compelled Urban Splash on at least one occasion to form a gated community, providing an impression of improved security for residents.
Collard referred to the recent loft-style, façadist reconstructions at Langworthy in Salford. He pointed to the thorny issue of VAT that had compelled the company to favour reconstruction over refurbishment and simple re-ordering of the interior (VAT is levied on repairs, whereas reconstructions – classed as new-build – are exempt). The popularity of the scheme (albeit chiefly with investors) demonstrates the enduring popularity of the urban terrace in 21st century Britain, and shows that a little well-aimed inward investment through area-based schemes is all that is often needed to help transform them into worthwhile and attractive homes. This was a reminder that the Pathfinder approach to area clearance prior to redevelopment
CONTEXT 96 : SEPTEMBER 2006