Design
Collaborating on design quality in Northumberland
Northumberland local authorities and Northumberland National Park
January – June 2005
A contract from Cabe and the Northumberland Strategic Partnership to Northern Architecture to look at how the eight separate planning authorities in Northumberland could collaborate on raising design quality has recently been completed. The study was carried out by architects’ practice Spence and Dower and involved extensive interviews with a range of staff from across the whole county.
The premise of the study was that while the different authorities in Northumberland share many of the same challenges in working to raise design quality, they currently have to tackle these problems individually, and with few resources. The aim of the study was to see whether by working together on specific initiatives or by sharing resources, the effectiveness of all the authorities could be improved, on a county-wide basis. The study recommended a range of possible actions that could be taken at a local, county wide and regional level. The process of the study was almost important as the outcome as Tina Gough, partner in Spence and Dower, relates.
‘The main intention of the first part of the study was, through a series of workshops, to try to create an environment where each Local Authority involved had a chance to ‘open up’ in expressing and discussing the positive issues, problems and concerns they had in trying to achieve quality design in the built environment through the planning system.
The Executive Director of the Northumberland Strategic Partnership, in introducing the overall report, stated that this led to “ a remarkable open sharing of issues and ideas amongst all those who have contributed, and helpful contributions from staff at all levels across Northumberland Authorities.”
Architects Tina Gough and Clare Moyle of Spence and Dower carried out these workshops and were delighted with the warm response they received. Some of the staff, the younger ones in particular, seemed frustrated and submerged by the sheer amount of work they were having to cope with and felt that design issues often seemed to come far down the agenda within the existing planning framework. Our frustrations as architects (and as users of the planning system) were shared with them. We found ourselves understanding and sympathising rather than criticising; a learning experience for us too.
The solid base provided by the workshops allowed the remainder of the study to proceed in a structured way to provide a platform for a way forward to continuing discussion and possible resolution of the issues that they had identified. It proved that participation can be enormously constructive. The whole study has hopefully shown that authorities can help themselves and also work collectively and collaboratively to achieve direct action or lobby for support from outside agencies where necessary.
It is understood that the steering group are already putting the next key stages, as outlined in the report, in place; to hear that further action is in progress is very rewarding.’
