Hazel Rounding, shedkm, reflects on the latest Public Realm Expert Panel meeting, exploring the ‘comfort’ of users through climate resilience, security and social justice.

Wow, what a mind-blowing first session to the new public realm cycle that was!

 

We have a really interesting and diverse panel consisting of a balanced collective of continuing and new panelists.  Hats off to the NLA for their ability to conjure up such a mix of industry experts.  From transport and civils, to sustainability and biodiversity, to flexibility in use and community integration, we are tasked with bringing the huge subject of ‘public realm’ and quality of place into a single set of recommendations for the New London Agenda.  

 

The developments from last year’s panel were well received which enabled us to dive straight into dissecting, challenging and developing our thinking following brief introductions from each member.  As the continuing chair, I have to say a big thanks to all contributors as we left last year’s cycle feeling that we’d only just ‘got our teeth’ into the task at hand.  The offerings and debate at this first meeting of the new cycle was seamless to the point that you’d be forgiven for thinking it was a follow-up meeting!

 

Directly continuing from last year’s conclusions, the ‘comfort’ of users through climate resilience, security and social justice were all embraced as fundamental areas to analyse further when it comes to the design and vision for use of the public realm but all under the nagging and highly topical question of funding.  Where can this come from and how does policy need to be challenged to embrace such?

 

We all know that the public realm is London’s glue, seeping between the very valuable debates no doubt continuing across High Street, Housing, Transport, Industrial & Logistics, and Built Environment Technology counterpart NLA panels. but what is the funding solution; for the initial delivery, operation and for maintenance of these vast canvases?

 

We concluded that we need to further our advocacy of successful public realm through analysis of process, with the aim of creating policy change.  Our three pillars of ‘comfort’ are therefore to be studied as success criteria; in order to become measures which should be applied to a number of case studies.  The case studies themselves may well be initiatives rather than physical realisation of public space as the process of initiative and impact become true contributors to the creation of a theoretical aspirational model.

 

We’re all keen to think this model could be tested through a best practice pilot scheme with delivery budget, data collection, operational plan and maintenance strategy - all championing community integration and policy change.

 

It certainly feels like there is much to digest, share and unpick through a few atelier meetings and site visits before we all come back together in a few months!