Abstract
This chapter discusses community participation in the planning process in post-Olympic Hackney Wick. Marrero-Guillamón looks at the groups, interfaces and strategies involved, as well as the democratic implications of the process. The discussion is framed around a campaign for sustainable affordable workspace which took place in the context of the development of the new Local Plan for the area and increased private development pressure. The advocacy work of a local group, The Unit, with both the local authorities and developers, in statutory and non-statutory forums, is discussed. The analysis considers the role of expert knowledge, the production of ‘para-democratic’ structures of participation and the deployment of lobbying by community activists.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
One of the particularities of the Hackney Wick context is that the discussion around affordability does not revolve mainly around housing, as it is most often the case, but around workspace.
- 2.
It is difficult to explain why the development of the Olympic Park hindered, rather that promoted, developers’ interest in Hackney Wick at this early stage. One hypothesis is that developers expected even bigger returns could be achieved after the Park was completed and the area possibly re-zoned. Or perhaps the demand for high-end housing was not strong enough yet to justify the risk.
- 3.
This is the latest in a series of QUANGOs specifically created to manage the urban transformation of the area in relation to the Olympics. The LLDC replaces the Olympic Delivery Authority (ODA) and the Olympic Park Legacy Company (OPLC), and also inherits the functions (and properties) of the London Thames Gateway Development Corporation (LTGDC), an experimental body introduced for the acceleration and coordination of the development of this part of East London.
- 4.
These AAPs were replaced in July 2015 by the LLDC’s Local Plan. The latter, however, was developed in continuity, rather than rupture, with previous planning legislation (LLDC, 2013: 32).
- 5.
Originally his final project for an MA in Architecture at the RCA, Affordable Wick took the form of a 3 m2 cabin, or ‘roaming workspace’, and a website. Through both outlets, current development proposals were made public and explained, as well as Brown’s own proposals for a grassroots model of development based on existing self-build practices in the area.
- 6.
Design for London was an experiment of the Labour GLA, which tried to introduce the idea of strategies and principles of design in the fragmented landscape of urban regeneration in London.
- 7.
I have, on various occasions, heard developers wield variations of this argument, according to which planning restrictions (e.g. maximum height) are directly responsible for the lack of affordable housing provision. The idea of developers spontaneously self-regulating in the interest of the common good seems to me to be, at the very least, implausible.
- 8.
Space Studios, established in 1968, are one of the biggest artist studio providers in London.
- 9.
Section 106 of the 1990 Town and Country Planning Act refers to planning obligations linked to a planning application decision. For instance, it may require a proportion of affordable housing, or a compensation for loss of open space.
- 10.
The London Tenants Federation is an umbrella organisation of social housing tenants associations. It sends delegates and provides support in many planning consultations and examinations (see http://www.londontenants.org/). Just Space ‘is an informal alliance of community groups, campaigns and concerned independent organisations’. Its aim is ‘to improve public participation in planning to ensure that policy is fairer towards communities’ (see http://justspace.org.uk/).
- 11.
The National Planning Policy Framework establishes that to be sound, a Local Plan should be ‘positively prepared’; ‘justified’; ‘effective’ and ‘consistent with national policy’ (DCLG, 2012: 43).
- 12.
ACME Studios and Mother Studios both run artist studio spaces in Hackney Wick. The former was established in 1972 and is one of the largest providers in London, together with Space Studios. Mother Studios is an independent organisation and runs one building in the area since 2001.
- 13.
As a further, if anecdotal, example of this, I had to sit in for The Unit in one of the sessions and found it impossible to actually intervene. After hearing the articulate presentation of a Just Space colleague, in particular, I felt there was nothing I could possibly contribute to the discussion of a rather technical aspect of the Plan.
References
Brown, R. (2012) Made in HWFI: The Live-Work Collectives. London: See Studio.
Brown, R. (2013) Creative Factories: Hackney Wick and Fish Island. London: See Studio.
Brownhill, S. (1999) ‘Turning the East End into the West End: the lessons and legacies of the London Docklands Development Corporation’, in R. Imrie and H. Thomas (eds.), British Urban Policy: An Evaluation of the Urban Development Corporations. London: Sage.
Callon, M. (1986) ‘Some elements of a sociology of translation: domestication of the scallops and the fishermen of St Brieuc Bay’, in J. Law (ed.), Power, Action and Belief: A New Sociology of Knowledge. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Callon, M., Lascoumes, P. and Barthe, Y. (2009) Acting in an Uncertain World: An Essay on Technical Democracy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
Chamberlain, W. (2013) ‘The cultural interest group’, The Wick (3): 18.
DCLG. (2012) National Planning Policy Framework. London: Department for Communities and Local Government.
Design for London and LLDC. (2013) Stitching the Fringe: Working Around the Olympic Park. London: London Mayors Office.
Dillon, D. and Fanning, B. (2011) Lessons for the Big Society: Planning, Regeneration and the Politics of Community Participation. Farnham: Ashgate.
Dinham, A. (2005) ‘Empowered or over-Powered? The Real Experiences of Local Participation in the UK’s New Deal for Communities.’ Community Development Journal 40(3): 301–12.
Fussey, P., Coaffee, J., Armstrong, G. and Hobbs, R. (2011) Securing and Sustaining the Olympic City: Reconfiguring London for 2012 and Beyond. Aldershot: Ashgate.
Gill, S. (2007) Archaeology in Reverse. London: Nobody.
Hancock, L., Mooney, G. and Neal, S. (2012) ‘Crisis social policy and the resilience of the concept of community’, Critical Social Policy 32(3): 343–364.
Harman, G. (2014) Bruno Latour: Reassembling the Political. London: Pluto Press.
LBH [London Borough of Hackney]. (2012) Hackney Wick Area Action Plan. London: LB Hackney.
LBTH [London Borough of Tower Hamlets]. (2012) Fish Island Action Area Plan. London: LB of Tower Hamlets.
LLDC. (2013) Local Plan: Draft Version. London: LLDC.
LLDC. (2014) Local Plan: Publication Version. London: LLDC.
LLDC. (2015) Local Plan: 2015–2031. London: LLDC. http://queenelizabetholympicpark.co.uk/~/media/lldc/local%20plan/adoption%20july%202015/lldc_localplan_2015_interactive100dpi%20(4).pdf
Maginn, P. J. (2004) Urban Regeneration, Community Power, and the (In)significance of ‘Race’. Hants and Burlington: Ashgate.
Marrero-Guillamón, I. (2012) ‘Olympic state of exception’, in H. Powell and I. Marrero-Guillamón (eds.), The Art of Dissent: Adventures in London’s Olympic State. London: Marshgate Press.
Marres, N. (2007) ‘The issues deserve more credit: pragmatist contributions to the study of public involvement in controversy’, Social Studies of Science 37(5): 759–780.
Martin, D. G. (2003) ‘Enacting neighborhood’, Urban Geography 24(5): 361–385.
muf architecture/art. (2009) Creative Potential: Hackney Wick and Fish Island. London: Muf publications.
Pratt, A. C. (2009) ‘Urban regeneration: from the arts “feel good” factor to the cultural economy: a case study of Hoxton, London’, Urban Studies 46(5–6): 1041–1061.
Raco, M. (2003) ‘Remaking place and securitising space: urban regeneration and the strategies, tactics and practices of policing in the UK’, Urban Studies 40(9): 1869–1887.
Raco, M. (2012) ‘The privatisation of urban development and the London Olympics 2012ʹ, City 16(4): 452–460.
Raco, M. (2015) ‘Sustainable city-building and the new politics of the possible: reflections on the governance of the London Olympics 2012’, Area 47(2): 124–131.
Raco, M. and Flint, J. (2001) ‘Communities, places and institutional relations: assessing the role of area-based community representation in local governance.’ Political Geography 20(5): 585–612.
Rancière, J. (2014) Hatred of Democracy. London: Verso.
Smith, N. (1987) ‘Gentrification and the rent gap’, Annals of the Association of American Geographers 77(3): 462–465.
Sturzaker, J. and Shaw, D. (2015) ‘Localism in practice: lessons from a pioneer Neighbourhood Plan in England’, Town Planning Review 86(5): 587–609.
Tironi, M. (2015) ‘Modes of Technification: Expertise, Urban Controversies and the Radicalness of Radical Planning.’ Planning Theory 14(1): 70–89.
Wallace, A. (2010) ‘New neighbourhoods, new citizens: challenging “community” as a framework for moral and social regeneration under New Labour’, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 34(4): 806–819.
Weizman, E. (2007) Hollow Land: Israel’s Architecture of Occupation. London: Verso.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2017 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Marrero-Guillamón, I. (2017). Expert Knowledge and Community Participation in Urban Planning: the Case of Post-Olympic Hackney Wick. In: Cohen, P., Watt, P. (eds) London 2012 and the Post-Olympics City. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-48947-0_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-48947-0_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-137-48946-3
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-48947-0
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)