Second opinion - Kettering, Northamptonshire

Robert Schmidt, the UK head of urban design for Halcrow, Regeneration & Renewal, 3 October 2008

Published: June 2008.

Produced by: Kettering Borough Council, with support from a team of consultants, including Savills, Drivers Jonas and Alan Baxter and Associates.

Scope/purpose: Kettering is in the Milton Keynes-South Midlands growth area, with around 13,100 homes proposed to be built in the borough by 2021. This plan aims to meet this growth and fulfil three interrelated goals: to improve the town centre; to boost the town's education and training offer; and to create a greater number of high-quality jobs.

Robert Schmidt comments: Thriving towns need thriving town centres and this plan is designed to achieve that. Kettering's street names - including Sheep Street, Market Place and Meadow Road - tell a familiar tale of a traditional market town struggling to evolve into a new role and identity.

The area action plan is based on a clear and realistic assessment of the challenges. The restructuring of the urban fabric and redevelopment of the major sites mean that the overall vision will not be realised for more than ten years. The plan also recognises that merely redeveloping the town centre will be insufficient as "any 'new' development will soon be eclipsed by a newer one elsewhere". For a market town to compete, it must offer something extra. The prescription is a familiar mix of early wins, including the development of a number of smaller sites, the provision of public realm improvements in key areas, such as Market Place, combined with longer term, more aspirational ingredients, such as the development of an Employment Quarter next to the railway station. The ubiquitous Cultural Quarter makes an appearance, alongside a Restaurant Quarter, a Socialising and Craft Quarter and other common regeneration parlance.

It is reassuring that Kettering's planned growth will take place within such a well-considered and attractively presented design framework. The main criticism is that the plan is vague on implementation. It does contain some broad-brush cost estimates of the key elements of required public realm improvements. The shortfall in committed funding will be sought from section 106 agreements. But this still reveals a big hole in the sums, which is expected to be filled by "windfall" development. There is also no detailed guidance in the plan on the level of affordable housing, open space or flood management measures that may be required. Instead, it states that "negotiations will progress on a case-by-case basis". This sort of flexibility may have been acceptable when the market was buoyant and authorities could negotiate from a position of strength, but in today's climate it is worryingly vague.

In summary, the drawings clearly identify the various quarters and sites for public realm improvements. Missing, though, is a clear hierarchy showing how the public spaces and development sites fit into the overall regeneration strategy, an issue further complicated by the somewhat scattershot approach to phasing.