Written by:
Sophia de Sousa
In our second Chat of this series, our theme was Should we build less and reuse more? We began our conversation with a question that emerged from our 2014 Glass-House Debate on the same theme: why are we not doing more to reuse and retrofit buildings? A decade on and in the midst of a global climate emergency, we were keen to use this Chat as a space to explore the conditions for scaling up the practice of reuse and retrofit. We were joined by some extremely knowledgeable professionals and community activists who had a lot to contribute.
Key Themes
Early on in our conversation, one of our Chat participants made the observation that it is noticeable that the effort to drive forward the retrofit agenda is largely operating at the grass-roots level. That sparked interest within our group in unpicking why that was, and trying to identify some key actionable changes to policy, practice and education that might shift things. We quickly fell into talking about who holds power in placemaking, and the financial drivers associated with it, however quite quickly moved on to more nuanced discussion of three key areas. The first was the scale at which development happens, and how this might influence the role of reuse and retrofit in the big picture of regeneration and development. We went on to talk about the cyclical nature of policy and practice, and how this can influence, or stifle progress. And finally, this led to the importance of education, training and sharing skills and experiences across generations, places and sectors.
A National Culture of Large-scale Development
For some time, local authorities and the building industry have been responding to ambitious housing targets, with financial models that prioritise quick turnaround and profit. To make development an attractive and viable proposition for both commissioning clients and development teams, there has been a propensity for large-scale development, which
tends to favour new build rather than retrofit. Starting from a blank canvas, even if it means demolishing something to make way for it, is generally seen as more attractive to most developers than retrofit, and is favoured financially by exemption from VAT. The larger the site, the easier it is to build in cost efficiencies and profits. For local authorities, large-scale development can also more easily build in and cross-subsidise the provision of infrastructure such as streetscapes, public realm and local facilities.
We noted that reuse and retrofit is not without real and perceived challenges in the current socio-political landscape and can require a larger short-term investment than new build. Working on what are often much smaller, more complicated sites, using appropriate building materials and adding VAT onto costs can be daunting. Listed buildings are also subject to certain restrictions and additional planning approvals.
However, we know that we also need to look at investment, sustainability and impact in the long term. As well as playing an important role in tackling the climate emergency, reuse and retrofit can have a powerful placemaking function in revitalising buildings that are woven into the historic fabric and cultural heritage of our towns and cities. There are empty properties around the country that could help contribute to various placemaking goals and targets, particularly within town and city centres. These things combined make a strong case for reuse and retrofit. Perhaps we all need to do more to shift the culture and matrices around the targets driving development, and the dominance of large-scale new-build development in this country. Bigger is not always better.
The Cyclical Nature of Trends in the Built Environment
Our Chat benefitted from the presence of experienced built environment professionals and community activists who have been working over several decades and could look across various political, economic and cultural cycles. They also had a collective knowledge of projects and initiatives in different parts of the country. This made our group able to reflect on the impact that changes to political agendas and policies can make both nationally and within a specific area.
We reflected that these shifting political agendas can bring radical changes to the infrastructures supporting placemaking, such as the dissolution of the regional development agencies in 2010. This can lead to a lack of continuity in developing and embedding strategies, new practices and technologies, and can compromise movements such as reuse and retrofit.
Most people agree that everything is cyclical and we have seen trends in placemaking come and go. While it may seem that some agendas have disappeared, they very often pop up again with time. However, if the gaps in between their presence in the placemaking landscape are too long, knowledge and experience can disappear and we find ourselves starting from scratch when the next cycle begins.
Building Skills & Sharing Learning
Our conversation inevitably came round to the importance of building skills and sharing learning. Given shifts in leadership, agendas, socio-economic circumstances and the cyclical nature of placemaking, capturing and sharing what we learn is crucial to any practice or movement building and maintaining momentum.
We discussed the importance of sharing learning not only across places, communities, disciplines and departments, but also the enormous value of learning across generations. When people leave their communities or professions, they take an enormous wealth of experience and valuable stories with them, and it is essential to create opportunities for younger generations to benefit from the experience their elders By the same token, as a new generation steps into practice and roles of community leadership, with new vigour, enthusiasm and new areas of expertise, they too have a lot to offer those older than them. One of our Chat participants spoke of the importance of learning through doing together, and what she called “intergenerational practice”. We also discussed the importance of an apprenticeship approach to learning and to valuing all of the trades as well as the white-collar professions in placemaking.
Valuing and building skills around reuse and retrofit was seen as both an imperative and a huge employability opportunity for the UK, particularly following the impact of Brexit on the construction industry workforce. We should be training a whole wave of people from diverse backgrounds and communities to deliver a more ambitious agenda and programme of reuse and retrofit. This could help empower communities to lead more reuse projects, and to demand them from the public and private sectors.
A call to action
Reflecting on the conversation has already sown some seeds for thought and calls for action within our Chat group. Above all, it helped us think about the role we could each play in inviting more people into the conversation about reuse and retrofit, how we could reach a broader spectrum of people, and how we could help capture, share and connect learning. It was a hugely stimulating conversation, which we hope will challenge and inspire others to be more proactive in championing reuse and retrofit as well.
