Delivering affordable workspace: Perspectives of developers and workspace providers in London

Ferm, Jessica

doi:10.1016/j.progress.2013.05.002

Cited by 17 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…She also documented that "recent pressure from intense residential and office development, including mixed use schemes, has hastened the redevelopment of multiple occupancy workshops and industrial spaces with the loss of many cheaper industrial and office premises" (Foord, 2010: 59). Similar outcomes have been observed in Hackney, where mixed use redevelopment of industrial premises and land has been facilitated by provision of 'affordable workspace'; but employment floorspace lost is not remotely offset by new floorspace within redevelopments (Ferm, 2014).…”

Section: Planners As Champions Of Mixed Use and Sustainabilitysupporting

confidence: 65%

“…Mixed use developments have high levels of ground floor commercial vacancy (Giddings and Craine, 2006;and Evans et al, 2009; both cited in Foord 2010), which persists because commercial space tends to be of relatively poor quality, in the wrong location for employers seeking prime office space, not fit-for-purpose to meet the requirements of small businesses, and unattractive to industrial occupiers due to the proximity of housing (Renaisi, 2003;Ancer Spa, 2006). The commercial space coming forward is often ill thought through by residential-led developers with little expertise in commercial developments and the requirements of business occupiers (Ferm, 2014). In addition to the poor success of mixed use development in delivering successful workspace, Foord (2010) found that businesses in Clerkenwell, on London's City Fringe, saw disadvantages to mixed use, primarily its potential to undermine the critical mass of businesses required for a cluster to thrive.…”

Section: Planners As Champions Of Mixed Use and Sustainabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Mixed-use ‘regeneration’ of employment land in the post-industrial city: challenges and realities in London

Ferm

Jones

2016

European Planning Studies

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article explores the relationships between land use policy, property and economic development, with a focus on the changing attitudes towards employment land in postindustrial cities. Drawing on case study data from two London local authorities, it finds that planning authorities are moving away from protecting employment land to actively promoting the mixed use redevelopment of employment sites, even when there are thriving businesses on these sites and a shortage of supply of employment premises and land, relative to demand. We examine the drivers for changing policy including the national and regional policy contexts, housing targets, the influence of austerity measures, rise of Neighbourhood Planning and changing conceptions of regeneration and the role of housing therein. The article highlights the complex task faced by local planners and the tensions involved in simultaneously finding sites for housing, fostering economic development, and promoting mixed use redevelopment in planning policy and decisions. We find that changes in policy are fuelling speculation for housing development on sites occupied by viable businesses, supporting rather than responding to deindustrialization. This is leading to a gap between aspirations for delivering mixed use environments on hitherto employment sites and realities on the ground.

show abstract

Section: Planners As Champions Of Mixed Use and Sustainabilitysupporting

confidence: 65%

Section: Planners As Champions Of Mixed Use and Sustainabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Mixed-use ‘regeneration’ of employment land in the post-industrial city: challenges and realities in London

Ferm

Jones

2016

European Planning Studies

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Concerns that the reduction in supply and rising cost of workspace was leading to business displacement and/or closure in London date back to the 1990s (Ferm, 2014) but they received more attention after a series of deregulatory changes introduced by the national Coalition and Conservative governments since 2011. While in the 1970s and 1980s both the Labour and Conservative governments and the Greater London Council (GLC) took a protectionist stance towards industry in the inner city, in the 1990s and 2000s industrial areas were seen as ripe for redevelopment for new economic and housing uses (Ferm and Jones, 2015).…”

Section: The Emergence Of London's Workpace Crisismentioning

confidence: 99%

The Role of Traders and Small Businesses in Urban Social Movements: The Case of London's Workspace Struggles

Taylor¹

2020

Int J Urban Regional Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

InTernATIonAl JournAl of urbAn And regIonAl reseArch publIshed by John WIley & sons lTd on behAlf of urbAn reseArch publIcATIons lImITed I would like to thank all those who played a role in the three mobilizations discussed in this article, producing the shared knowledge, resources and action on which it rests. Thanks also to Jenny Robinson and Michael Edwards who supervised this research and my fellow PhD students who supported its development; Sara González, Jane Clossick, Peter North and colleagues for opportunities to share and discuss earlier iterations of this article; two anonymous IJURR reviewers and the handling editor for their productive and careful feedback on the submitted draft; and Deirdre Conlon and Toni Griffiths for their support in finalizing it. All inaccuracies and errors remain mine. The article draws on ESRC-funded doctoral research undertaken at UCL between 2012 and 2017 (Taylor, 2017; award number 1061886). This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

show abstract

“…In order to fund their other business support or charitable work, it is in the interests of these workspace providers to maximize the rental income from their properties. Therefore, they will -like commercial operators -look to capitalize on any demand from higher-value occupiers when the opportunity arises (see Ferm, 2014 for a more in-depth discussion of developers' and workspace providers' perspectives).…”

Section: Perspectives Of Delivery Partnersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Preventing the displacement of small businesses through commercial gentrification: are affordable workspace policies the solution?

Ferm

2016

Planning Practice & Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The displacement of small businesses in cities with rising land values is of increasing concern to local communities and reflected in the literature on commercial or industrial gentrification. This article explores the perception of such gentrification as both a problem and an opportunity, and considers the motivations and implications of state intervention in London, where policies requiring affordable workspace to be delivered within mixed use developments have been introduced. Based on case studies of 13 mixed use developments in London, the findings reveal the limitations and unintended consequences of affordable workspace policies, leading to a call for planners to revisit and strengthen more traditional planning tools.

show abstract

Delivering affordable workspace: Perspectives of developers and workspace providers in London

Cited by 17 publications

References 39 publications

Mixed-use ‘regeneration’ of employment land in the post-industrial city: challenges and realities in London

Mixed-use ‘regeneration’ of employment land in the post-industrial city: challenges and realities in London

The Role of Traders and Small Businesses in Urban Social Movements: The Case of London's Workspace Struggles

Preventing the displacement of small businesses through commercial gentrification: are affordable workspace policies the solution?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About