Uk Urban Policy Since 1979 Hulme Manchester Flashcards
Background
. 1930s - 130,000 people lived there . Traditional working class area . Very poor housing, including back to backs . Slum clearance 1950s and 1960s . 1960s: redeveloped for 12,000 people – deck-access flats and pedestrian segregation Major problems: . Infestation . Poor heating . Unemployment - 39%
Scheme
Example of urban redevelopment through a partnership scheme, ‘City Challenge Partnership’
City challenge partnerships
. Designed by local authorities to gain funding
. Will address weaknesses of early regeneration
. More organised
. Equal importance to buildings, people and values
. Areas that use it suffer from a low skills base anddeterioation
. In Hulme housing was the focus where as in Liverpool environmenatl improvement was
Why did Hulme need redeveloping?
. Over 60% of the residents claiming benefits
. Residents are 30% more likely to be mugged
. 3 time more likely to be stressed
. Unemploymnet was nearly 40%
. Isolated from Manchester city centre
. Flats suffered pest infestations, poor heating, poor child saftey
. Symbol of 1960s system built housing failures
Hulme city challenge
. £35 mill budget for city challenge + benefited from other UK area based initiatives
. Partnership with AMEC Regeneration
. Hulme Regeneration Limited
Hulme proposals
. Public consultation . Demolish all deck access blocks . Redevelop as an ordinary mixed neighbourhood . Reopen the area to traffic . Higher density redevelopment Sites for employment
How was Hulme redeveloped?
. Recieved over £400 mil in public and private investment since 1997
. £34 mil came from the government as part of the City Challenge Partnership
. Deck access flats were demolished
. Construction of the Hulme Arch Bridge
. New road infrastructure
. Birley Fields - anew business park
. 2000+ new homes
. New parks
. Zion Centre - a flag ship arts and community centre
Hulme achievement
. High quality design of housing
. Environmental improvements
. Integration with the rest of the city
Success?
. Dramatic diversification of housing stock
. New, improved housinf whether socially rented, privately rented etc. proved popular
. Socially rented homes have remained affordable
. Pupulation has increased by 3% (re-urbanisation) compared with 0.2% icrease for the whole city
. 64% of houses still socially rented
. Attracted new high tech industries
. Unemployment levels have declined to 7%
. Level of deprivation has improved compared to the rest of the city
Failure?
. Private home prices have risen faster than city average forcing locals out
. Young proffesionals make up 30% icreasing house price
. Small retailers and entertainment services have not appeared on expected scale
. Unempoyment is still higher than national average
Hulme after city challenge
. More attractive area to live
. Dramatic diversification of housing stock
. New hosuing association homes remain as affordable as council homes
. Price of new private homes has risen far faster than the city as a whole
Overall positives of city challenge schemes
. Competitive bidding encouraged new thinking and imagainative ideas
. Private sector investors were attarcted due to the nature of competittive bidding
. Between 1992 and 1997, 40,000 houses were improved, 53,000 jobs were created, 1,800 hectares of derelict land reclaimed, 3,200 businesses were established and 1.2 million square metres of floor space were created across all City Challenge Partnership projects.
Overall negatives of city challenge schemes
. Bidding process was unfair as money was allocated based on the strengeth of the bid
. Pitched neighbouring areas against each other when they could have worked together
. All successful bids recieved the same sum of money despite the fact some areas were more deprived than others
. Local residents have conflicting priorities than private investors
