On Tuesday 30 March about 40 people came to a seminar, organised on the initiative of CITY journal, which followed on from Peter Marcuse’s visit last autumn. There was a good discussion on actions surrounding the London Plan and Right to the City actions and organising in the USA. There will be an extended write-up. Meanwhile there is a flyer here and a two-hour sound file.
rttcflyer03_10-3 and the podcast is here
Had to start a discussion today (18 March 2010), at the London Planning and Development Forum, on the UK Conservative Party’s “Green paper” on planning. It’s bad, but i was trying to make light of it. [Later: this text later appeared in Issue 73 of Planning in London Ap-Jun, along with some other, more normal, reviews.] Continue reading “Tory plans for planning”
Went on Wednesday 11th to a seminar at which Mike Ball was presenting a study he led for a (Treasury-inspired?) agency called NHPAU, exploring the variation in time it took for planning permission to be granted for housing schemes. It transpired I had heard it before (at UCL I think) and read the report so I was a bit prepared – as was Duncan Bowie who also took part. We both made critical comments and received some tongue-lashing for our pains. But it is worth discussing as an example of hegemonic discourse having weak underpinnings. Continue reading “Mike Ball on planning delays”
A week with a lot of stimulating events and exchanges, and no time to write them up and digest them. It was a good start when I returned feedback on 45 essays – which had taken me ages to prepare and was a great weight off my mind. I get faster at most things but slower at that.
Then on Monday evening the LSE had a seminar by Ian Gordon – very stimulating and data-rich as usual – in which he was trying to work out why London has such high levels of worklessness. Part of the concentration of worklessness is, of course, an illusion Continue reading “Going too fast…”
Last night the proposers of a major new medical research centre at Brill Place (King’s Cross St Pancras) showed their scheme at a meeting called by Camden Council in Somers Town, the adjoining district. There is huge conflict about this project because the site has long been earmarked for a mix of activty including social housing and community facilities, none of which could be built if the research centre goes ahead. It was a fraught, tense, meeting at times with objectors expressng variously frustration, impotence and rage while the proponents were very civilised and rather peeved to be seen as anything other than battling for the public interest. It tells us a lot about the balance of power in urban decision making, the weakness of the planning system and the transformation of democratic local govenment into a neutered facilitator of the city’s transformation. This is a quick short note to capture some reactions and I may expand it later. Continue reading “Medical research v social housing: UKCMRI”
Story now enters its sixth month. Drainage channel and new tarmac laid. Will it work? Later (20 Feb) NO: smaller but still a puddle. See below.
My brother gave me for christmas Perry Anderson’s The New Old World (Verso 2009) and I have just finished reading it, mostly with huge enjoyment, and have learned a lot. I rarely read 500-page books (the last time was Braudel during a Greek island holiday ten years ago) but this one has grabbed all the time Continue reading “Europe: a ripping good yarn”
The Woodberry Down social housing estate in Hackney, subject of a “regeneration” scheme in which blocks are demolished to make space for private developers to build flats for sale and for a “city academy” school. This sign must be a lawyer’s attempt to prevent anyone claiming that the land is public and thus inhibiting its privatisation. The site is a fine hill top with long views. I sent the picture round the pnuk list as a new year greeting and Peter Marcuse replied, saying he would use it in a lecture in Taiwan (with attribution). Nice.
Later: London Federation of Tenants is campaigning (with others) against the displacement of social rented housing to make way for owner-occupers, legitimated on the grounds of “social mix”. See their submission about the draft London Plan. [Note added June 2011: Dr Suzy Nelson, U of Westminster, is working on a good critical account of this Woodberry Down ‘regeneration’. Watch out for it.]
Debates, discussions and solid work are building up as part of the consulltation process on Boris Johnson’s ‘Draft Replacement London Plan’ with a small but excellent group of UCL students working to support Just Space network of community and voluntary groups. Strong and rapidly-developing set of critiques at http://ucljustspace.wordpress.co The 22 strong submissions by groups in Just Space which came out of all that can be seen at http://justspace2010.wordpress.com
In December there was a seminar at LSE on the London Plan. The main presentations are here. In the mean time this is what I contributed. Continue reading “London Plan: powerful critique, alternatives”
I have just been reading a report by the great and the good, The Future of Housing: rethinking the UK housing system for the twenty-first century, being the result of a 3-day seminar chaired by Richard Best and published by the “Building and Social Housing Foundation” of which I had never heard. It came free in the post (from Coalville) and… Continue reading “UK housing – fixing the leaks without rocking the boat (much)”
michael edwards 