Worcestershire 2015. Gone are the mills and old industrial stock. The rolling Malvern hills now provide a backdrop for gleaming hi-tech laboratories. Employment is at an all-time high as the nanotechnology centre draws in PhD students from far and wide. Nothing is made in Worcestershire, but a lot is invented. Tourism is also booming as visitors flock to the region, attracted by the electic mix of rural countryside and hi-tech chic.
At least, that is the council’s vision. Under its Central Technology Belt programme, Worcestershire county council believes that, over the next 20 years, developments on a stretch of land between Birmingham and Malvern in Worcestershire will bring in money from far and wide, providing jobs and a sustainable future for the county. Since 2001, more than £100m of funding has been secured for the area.
But not everyone shares the council’s enthusiasm. Local agents, having nurtured a small industrial base, fear the project could be less a lifeline and more a death knell of the economy. Industrial rents have doubled over the past five years in Worcestershire, reaching a high of £9 per sq ft and demand has soared, with local agents quoting 30,000 sq ft of requirements at the sub-5,000 sq ft end of the market. More industrial land is needed, and agents have been angling for planners to release greenfield sites. But that has not happened. Planners have preferred to angle land use away from industrial and distribution use.
That is not what agents want to hear, and many now believe that the council should concentrate on fostering its industrial strengths rather than chasing an elusive science dollar and competing with more established centres, such as Cambridge and the Thames Valley.
“It is very frustrating,” fumes Lance Turner, director at local firm Harris Lamb. Pointing to major relocations to Worcester over the past two years, such as tractor spares manufacturer Bepco and vacuum cleaner company Vax, he adds: “There is a severe shortage of industrial units. Developers are crying out for land, and occupiers are crying out for prestige buildings, so why are we stifling it with a tech corridor that will take 10 years to develop?”
His pleas seem to be falling on deaf ears. The council has all but ruled out further greenfield land for development. It says the need to protect tourism, which underpins a third of the local economy, would be put off by trucks driving around the region day and night.
Release of land
“The council is trying to turn us into an inland Bournemouth,” says Turner. “It needs to be a bit more realistic with its release of land. I want jobs for my kids in Worcester, and not just at McDonalds and serving in hotels.”
There is little doubt the economy needs some help. With the closure of nearby Longbridge, and the continued brain drain into Birmingham, Worcestershire needs its own identity. Turner admits that science and its industries could provide this, but remains unconvinced that the council’s strategy will get off the ground in a realistic timescale.
Turner points to the proposed Bromsgrove Technology Park, backed by Advantage West Midlands, Bromsgrove district council and Worcestershire county council. The 25-acre site will turn a derelict factory into a state-of-the-art £40m technology park, creating 350,000 sq ft of hi-tech space.
“I haven’t heard anything about it for two years,” says Turner. “Why isn’t anything being done with this site?” How are they going to bring nanotechnology to Worcester? With all the plans that have been talked about, how many people have actually moved out of Malvern Hills Science Park and gone there? None.”
Geoff Palmer, principal economic development officer at Worcestershire county council, admits that there have been “a few hiccups” with the park, including a change of developer after the preferred developer and council were unable to agree on details. Now he says AWM will proceed with the development itself. Planning permission has been submitted for the infrastructure in the park, and the agency will be on site within the year. Agents for the scheme will be appointed imminently.
Traditional manufacturing
Palmer stands by the council’s high technology strategy. “Twenty per cent of our employment comes from traditional manufacturing. We need to diversify away from low paid work.” He wants to prevent a return to the days when towns relied on a single industry, and the CTB is a key plank in this strategy. “We don’t want another Honda, like in Swindon, or a Toyota or a Sony,” he says. “They all bring their own problems. We are building on our strengths.”
But does Worcestershire need another tranche of science park development to achieve its strategy? It has at least four projects on the drawing board, totalling around 100 acres. So would less be more?
Statistics from the UK Science Park Association show that 60% of UK science park tenants originate from within a 30-mile radius. With eight science parks in the West Midlands registered with UKSPA, how many more can the area take before it starts cannibalising existing parks? And with more than 290,000 sq ft of science parks built nationally every year, will Worcestershire struggle to compete with more established centres?
Palmer believes the council’s strategy is not a blind attempt to latch onto the Cambridge effect, and will focus on specific areas of nanotechnology related to technology hot spots already in the region. These include advance materials; medical technology, both diagnostic and orthopaedic; telematics; and environmental technology such as fuel cell research.
“Cambridge is well renowned, but we don’t have its high prices. We do have good universities across the region, proven skills in photonics, and the QinetiQ [defence and security] facility in Malvern to tap into.”
Admittedly, the worries that Worcestershire’s agents have about its industrial future are not unique. Government policy on the use of greenfield land constrains councils across the country.
Neil Starkie, director of industrial agency at Savills, says: “It would be nice to have some greenfield land allocated, but it is not PC.” He says Worcestershire is far from rivalling Birmingham’s position in the industrial hierarchy, but has the right demographic profile and good connections to make it attractive to occupiers. But it is facing increased competition from centres, such as Doncaster and Newarkland. “If you could provide the land would occupiers come here? I am sure there are instances of that.”
It is now crunch time for Worcestershire. Will the council’s hi-tech strategy succeed, or will the county end up as a dilapidated inland resort?
|
|
|
There are eight science parks in the region, including Aston science park, founded 1983, 22 acres Owned by Birmingham Technology, a joint venture between Birmingham council, Lloyds TSB and Aston University Units: iBIC 20,000 sq ft, Faraday Wharf 45,800 sq ft, plus a total of 28,000 sq ft in Ventury Way, Enterprise Way, Holt Court, Ashted Lock and Priestly Wharf There are 111 companies on the park. Malvern Hills science park, founded 1999, 10 acres, 3 developed, 95% occupancy The innovation centre provides 23 units from 355 sq ft to 2,000 sq ft. A 35,000 sq ft sustainable energy building is under development There are 15 companies on the park. Staffordshire technology park, 44 acres, 400,000 sq ft built or under construction Owned by Staffordshire county council and Staffordshire University Phase two includes the £4m, 42,000 sq ft Anson Court Business Centre and the 60,000 sq ft Wolesley Court Phase 3 is a speculative development of 25,000 sq ft. Schemes in the pipeline Bromsgrove Technology Park, planned by Advantage West Midlands, Worcestershire county council and Bromsgrove council Construction of the 25-acre, £40m, 350,000 sq ft park is scheduled to start mid-2006. Pebble Mill, planned by Calthorpe estates and AWM, is aimed atblue-chip, medical-based companies A 25-acre with 36,500 sq ft of hi-tech space. Longbridge Technology Park, demolition on the 48-acre site is scheduled to start later this year. A planning application has been submitted for development on40 acres. Queen Elizabeth Hospital, planned by the hospital and the University of Birmingham, is aimed at biomedical spin-out companies Part of the University Hospital Birmingham, due to open 2008. It includes £2m AWM funding for a leukaemia centre. |
|
Is Worcestershire county council guilty of having its cake and eating it? It did respond to developers’ pleas to a degree in April 2002 when it released a 20-acre eyesore for “employment and residential”, including some light industrial units. But the site has problems. The council says the site, known locally as Tolladine Goods Yard, off Wyld’s Lane, is “a wonderful brownfield site right in the middle of Worcester”. It is now on the market, and agent Lambert Smith Hampton reports “a hell of a lot of interest”, with the site going to best and final offers this week. But it has some obvious hurdles to overcome. The site’s single track entrance opens onto a busy road, and its position on a hill overlooked by residential suburbs and nearby a busy supermarket and nursery provide obvious difficulties. Melissa Wase-Rogers, senior surveyor at Lambert Smith Hampton and selling agent for the site, agrees that work needs to be done on the entrance, but adds: “The cost wouldn’t be a huge amount. It is always the case that new access is needed on every development, and we can’t say what the cost might be for that.” Wase-Rogers refuses to name the price, but local property pundits estimate the cost to be in the region of £500,000. Geoff Palmer, principal economic development officer at Worcestershire county council, says this sum will need to be met by the developer rather than from the local transport plan. And he all but closes the door on greenfield land being made available for development. “I’m not sure that distribution is the answer here. Distribution uses a lot of landand employs relatively few people,” he says. |
