.
BEdotCYdotDEdotDKdotESdotFIdotFRdotGRdotHUdotITdotLUdotNLdotPLdotPTdotROdotSEdotUKdot
 
European Urban Knowledge Network
Home eukn.org
 
Home > E-library > Urban Policy > Social inclusion & integration > Community development > Citizens' participation > ...
 
Print pageContactSitemap
-
  • E-library
  • Share your knowledge!
  • Research Services
  • About EUKN
  • News
  • Meetings
-
-
-
-Search site
Zoeken

Advanced search
-
-
Cases

“Urban Herculaneum...Residents vote on ...Rotterdam citizens...more
Hamlet GalleryCitizens' particip...Citizen Channel in...Living Cityspace –...Urban Regeneration...Involving the loca...Guardians of Acces...

Researches
Community engageme...Resident participa...Democratic governa...more
Immigration and Lo...Fostering communit...Social Infrastruct...Community Engageme...Creating a Learnin...Network Support Fu...Searching for Soli...

Policies

Participatory demo...GoldStar Exemplar ...Irish MEP's report...more
How to develop a l...PAN 81: Community ...Closer to peopleihminen@turku - Ci...Local Agenda 21 in...
Networks
URBACT Partecipand...
-
Mainstreaming X-listing for better living environments
Introduction
Buildings that are poorly designed, badly built or derelict not only have a negative impact on people’s sense of well-being but also on the economic vitality of neighbourhoods. This paper advocates mainstreaming ‘X-listing’ in planning as a  fast-track way to repair or replace failing buildings. X-listing allows people to identify the worst places in their neighbourhood, city or country, which they would like to see transformed or demolished. Once a building has been X-listed, the local authority must make sure action is taken to improve the site. Though X-listing is a rather unorthodox and challenging approach, it does give real power to citizens to improve their local environment. The paper gives practical pointers on how X-listing can be mainstreamed in town and city planning.
Description
The built environment affects everyone. Its quality can determine people’s happiness and sense of well-being. Yet while people can change their own homes and maybe even their own street, it is almost impossible for them to take action against the bad buildings and public spaces that blight towns and cities. X-listing gives citizens and their communities the power to improve their local environment by nominating buildings that are poorly designed, badly built or derelict for demolition or redevelopment.
The paper discusses the how and why of X-listing within the context of the British planning framework. It lists the pros and cons of the approach and gives suggestions on the steps that the British government could take to support X-listing, also in terms of financing.
The suggested approach is to let the public nominate buildings they would wish to see on the X-list. These would then be evaluated and decided upon by a jury composed of experts (architects, urban designers, planners, property developers, architectural historians) and representatives from the public. A building will have to meet three strict criteria (small physical, social and economic merit) to get on the X-list. If listed, the local authority and owner draw up an action plan for the site and are responsible for improving or replacing the X-listed building within two years. Financing for X-listing will jointly be provided by the national government, local authorities and developers.
Background information
The paper is part of the ‘Living for the city – a new green agenda for cities’ report. This was published by Policy Exchange, an independent British think-tank.
Conclusions
General recommendations:
  • It is important to keep in mind that X-listing is not just about design or personal taste. Buildings might look ugly, but if they still function and the users and owners are happy with them, then they will not qualify for the X-list.
  • All actors involved in planning need to improve the services they provide and need to take more notice of the views of the people who are affected by their decisions. Strong leadership and vision are essential to turn bad buildings into opportunities.
The author envisages the British central government as the coordinator of the X-listing programme. In other countries, though, it might be more appropriate to manage such a programme on a regional or even local level. The following four recommendations for British government action are given:
  • set up an X-List Jury and Unit, with an initial target of X-listing 20 buildings in the first year — and 50 buildings a year after that. Endorse the X-List and compel local authorities to prepare and take ownership of the X-List Action Plans
  • empower local authorities to sort out X-listed buildings. In some instances, this will mean giving them additional powers and funding to compel and provide incentives for action. This could include giving them more financial freedom to sort out their X-listed buildings
  • reform the planning system to provide incentives to speed up the repair or removal of ugly buildings that are detrimental to their local area
  • review X-listing after two years and formalise it, if it is working. This means making X-listing statutory
Contact info
Policy Exchange
Phone: +44 20 7340 2650
info@policyexchange.org.uk
Publication date
01/11/2006
Researcher
James O’Shaughnessy
Links
Visit the Policy Exchange website

Download ‘Living for the city – a new green agenda for cities’ (PDF, Eng, 544 KB)

Document type
research
Themes
Urban Policy > Social inclusion & integration > Community development
Keywords
Citizens' participation
 


-
Copyright-Masthead-Disclaimer-Privacy-RSS feed-EU-Eurocities-Urbact