Assess the Extent to Which Regeneration Schemes Have Been Effective in Improving Urban Areas

...

Gentrification is when wealthier people move into a rundown area and regenerate it by improving their housing. Often causes social changes in the area as lower income groups are replaced by more affluent people. Whilst this may not be a scheme in its entirety, regeneration developments can still take place. Examples of this include, Battersea, Clapham and Wandsworth which have all seen a significant transformation over the past 40 years into one of the most sought after housing markets in the capital. Young professionals were drawn to the area (Clapham) when traditionally prime areas of central London became increasingly unaffordable. The popularity of the area has continued as buyers and tenants are drawn to the open green spaces, a range of popular schools, thriving high streets and good connectivity to central London. There are currently two key locations where significant regeneration and development activity is taking place. The largest is around Nine Elms Vauxhall where there are an estimated 13,700 private units in the planning pipeline and two new underground stations. It is expected that 6,400 private units will be delivered by 2019. Second is Wandsworth Town, which includes the development of The Ram Quarter, following the modernisation of Southside Shopping Centre. The benefits of gentrification are seen when the inward migration of the wealthy population leads to a positive multiplier effect, as they spend more as they have more of a disposable income and so businesses benefit and so can expand, creating more jobs. The area has also seen a rapid decrease in the crime rate as a result of gentrification. The area has become more attractive with more green spaces and parks. Education has also improved in the area, with more high quality independent and grammar schools. What once was a slum is now a thriving area, with better service provision and housing than upmarket inner city areas such as Mayfair. Despite this, there is a significant difference between gentrification and the other two schemes mentioned previously. The other two schemes carry significance in the role of decision makers, be it the government, local councils etc, however gentrification does not have this. Rather, the sole decision lies with the individual, and whether or not they should buy housing in certain areas. Because of this, the old population has been forced out of the area, as they cannot afford housing as the wealthy people force prices up. In 2015 the average sale price of a house was £728k compared to the Greater London average of £546k. This shows how the lack of key decision-makers means little is done to help those who have been forced out. In addition, local businesses may also be forced out as their services are not in demand from the new population and as the land prices increase. As a result pubs and chip shops are replaced by artisans and beauty spas, all harming the old population. The benefits are not sustainable, rather only working for the short term for the new residents. Consequently gentrification has helped to tackle urban decline but at a cost, which jeopardizes the standard of living of the original residents. However through local government schemes and educational schemes this has the potential to be greatly reduced, meaning if joined together with the other two schemes, it could work better.

In conclusion, all of the schemes in some way have helped to improve the quality of urban areas, but not without its faults and criticisms. The extent to which the schemes have been effective are often hindered by the fact the schemes do not provide widespread benefits, like gentrification and property-led developments. These case studies provide evidence that urban decline can be combated to an extent but factors such as the whether or not residents are listened to, the money they have to redevelop and the means of redeveloping all affect to what extent these schemes will be successful. As a way forward, it may be more effective to combine gentrification with one of the other two schemes, so as to provide an authoritative voice in decision-making.