Thank you so much for your letters of 8th October and 13th January in response to my concerns about progress in redeveloping the site of Cherry Knowle Hospital in Sunderland. I have hesitated to bother you too much on this issue, and on the wider one of the disposal of one hundred N.H.S. hospital sites, but I feel now is the time to return to the fray!
It is now over a year since we visited the site together to look at the work undertaken by my Foundation and other key partners at the "Enquiry by Design" held in November 2003. You were, I think, enthusiastic about the holistic and integrated nature of the plan produced to drive forward an N.H.S.-led regeneration of not just the Cherry Knowle site, but the entire village of Ryhope.
I hope you will forgive my persistence on this issue but, despite your helpful updates, the log-jam to which I referred in my letter of last August shows little sign of alleviation and it saddens me greatly to think that the immense progress and collective enthusiasm gathered twelve months ago is now in danger of being lost.
The continuing hiatus seems to be due in no small part to the protracted negotiations being undertaken as part of the residual estate transfer to the O.D.P.M. I am sure that the issues surrounding the transfer must be incredibly complex and fraught with all kinds legal and financial questions. However, the project seems to have made no real progress in the last year in addressing any of the key outputs contained within the Strategic Frameworld Plan produced by the EbD.
A vital feature of that plan was that it should be capable of delivery by the N.H.S. as custodian of the overall vision. It is this principle that has made the EbD plan such an innovative one and also one which has pointed the way to so many other N.H.S. Trusts during the last twelve months. As I wrote in my previous letter, I can't help thinking that transferring this task to another Government Department risks the introduction of further complexities and delays and will inevitably undermine the health vision as other priorities take precedence over time.
I would be so grateful for your thoughts about this situation, and particularly whether there is any prospect of the site remaining within the N.H.S. in the hands of the local South of Tyne and Wearside N.H.S. trust? Alternatively, is there any way of ensuring that the transfer of the site to English Partnerships is accompanied by a commitment to go forward with the mixed-use, integrated plan that emerged with such promise from the EbD? I am concerned that an estate transfer might result in the splitting of the hospital site from other development sites in a way that would undermine the overall vision we have worked so hard together to achieve.
Meanwhile, I do appreciate your kind words about my Foundation for the Built Environment and the contribution it has been able to make in this field. When back in November 2001 I shared a platform with the then Secretary of State at a conference co-hosted by N.H.S. Estates and my Foundation, I was pleased to launch what I think has been a very positive collaboration in promoting an integrated approach to design quality in healthcare buildings and the way we treat redundant hospitals. Cherry Knowle was, of course, one of five national pilot projects and I gather that the N.H.S. has encouragingly referred to the work done at the EbD there as a model for best practice. I am confident that valuable lessons will be distilled from the further testing of the model in North Merseyside which will have wider applicability to other brownfield sites. We are, however, faced with a potentially problematic discontinuity as N.H.S. Estates is wound up in a few months time...
Please forgive me, therefore, for repeating my growing anxiety that those responsible for the N.H.S.'s residual estates in future will be able to maintain the links that have been forged with the Foundation and take advantage not only of its enquiry methods, but also its growing network of practitioners with practical experience of making these developments work. I would be so glad of your reassurance that connections will not be lost as personnel and responsibilities change in the coming months? I would also be glad to know about the progress of the masterplanning for the sites which are to be transferred: could there be scope here for a broader partnership with my Foundation?
I think you will know by now - to your cost! - that these are matters about which I care deeply - chiefly because I have witnessed so many failed opportunities to create imaginative, and innovative heritage-led regeneration initiatives which can maximise the asset value of the historic site and result in genuinely mixed-use, mixed-income communities. In order to create truly sustainable communities and avoid the mistakes of the past, I hope you will agree that we need to take a long-term view, think in innovative ways and take heed of mounting evidence from around the world about the true cost, in both financial and human terms, of bad development. I fear that if the estates are transferred now without proper consideration, various chickens will come home to roost in your own department in coming years as the physical and mental well-being of future communities is affected - not least the key N.H.S. workers who may be living in them...
At the risk of being a complete bore about this, I do pray that we could discuss these matters more fully before irrevocable decisions are taken which could sacrifice the long-term value to be gained from the most sympathetic and "integrated" use of the assets. All I can say is that my Foundation for the Built Environment is ready to help in any way it can.
