Greening Huddersfield
1. Introduction
​Greening Huddersfield is a proposal that aims to introduce more greenery in Huddersfield town centre. The initiative considers two different approaches to achieve its goal: thinking green from its productive potential and thinking green from its aesthetic potential. In both approaches, the introduction of vegetation in urban areas can provide a number of other benefits, which will be referred to further. Greening Huddersfield can be considered a general strategy which comprises three different tactical actions: urban agriculture, guerrilla gardening, and depave. Those tactics are some among the range of actions framed within the Temporary/Tactical Urbanism concept (Dovey, 2016; Lydon, Bartman, Garcia, Preston and Woudstra, 2012; Lydon & Garcia, 2015; Bishop & Williams, 2012).
2. Justification
Huddersfield town centre is an area where the presence of vegetation is scarce. And increasingly the importance of greenery within the urban fabric, which can be named as green urban infrastructures (Demuzere et. al., 2014), urban green infrastructures (Matthews, Lo & Byrne, 2015) among others, has been evidenced by researches. Vegetation can be employed both for making cities more sustainable and more resilient. Green urban infrastructures can reduce environmental impact of cities, helping to offset urban emissions by sequestering carbon, for example, or make cities more adapted to the effects of climate change, reducing storm-water run-off, for example.
Through a detailed mapping of Huddersfield town centre, and an analysis of the possibilities given by each mapped spaces, a selection of the most suitable areas for the proposed actions aiming greening Huddersfield was conducted. The selected open spaces range from interstices in the urban structure to the High Street, and can be categorized as overly wide streets, edges, in-between spaces, car parks, and consolidated streets and squares. From the characteristics of each area of intervention, the tactical actions were divided in urban agriculture and guerrilla gardening which, for the purpose of this work, comprises nonproductive gardens. In many situations, both actions can be combined with or be called depave, given that most of the spaces are originally paved.
​
2.1. Urban Agriculture
The area located in the north of the town centre, between Fitzwilliam Street and the ring road, was identified as the area which houses the largest number of residential buildings, when considering just permanent residents (which means excluding student properties) in the town centre. For this reason, it was selected as the target area for urban agriculture interventions.
Currently, urban agriculture has been increasingly addressed in the literature as a means of face the effects of climate change, resources depletion and economic crisis in urban settlements, thus contributing to sustainability and resilience of cities (Barthel & Isendahl, 2013; Mancebo, 2018; Vercauteren, Quist, Van Bueren & Veen, 2013; Petcou & Petrescu, 2015). Many are the potential benefits of urban agriculture, both in relation to environmental, social and economic aspects. Food security is also an aspect that is being considered in the urban agriculture debate (Barthel & Isendahl, 2013). Food production within the urban fabric can mitigate the effects of an eventual collapse in food production based on traditional agriculture or in the distribution systems, providing health food for the community.
Mancebo (2018) embraces environmental, social and economic aspects of urban agriculture when states that “urban agriculture appears as an effective means to address global warming—by reducing the effects of UHIs and reducing flood risks for example—while also fostering urban transitions to sustainability in many ways, such as creating new commons, amenities, ecosystem services, reinventing urbanity and encouraging community building by growing local food, etc.” (Mancebo, 2018, p. 6). Regarding community and social aspects, Barthel & Isendahl (2013) understand that “community and allotment gardens tend to emotionally connect people with local ecosystems” and that “re-ignite urban minds about the close connection between urban people and their life-support systems” is necessary for designing urban resilience (Barthel & Isendahl, 2013, p.232). Following a similar approach, Vercauteren et. al. (2013) speculate that “questions have been raised” about urban agriculture “like whether it has additional benefits for sustainable lifestyles and behavior, and we can understand community gardens from a social practices perspective” (Vercauteren et. al., 2013, p. 327).
Huddersfield is a city where inhabit people from different countries and ethnicities. The Greening Huddersfield proposal understands that urban agriculture, being a matter of collective ownership of the land and a participatory process can foster the integration of the local inhabitants, strengthening the sense of community.
​
2.2. Guerrilla Gardening
The proposed action of guerrilla gardening is planned to be carried out in different types of open spaces identified in the mapping activity. Unlike Urban agriculture, that is proposed to be concentrated in a specific area, due to its characteristics of constant involvement and direct benefits for the surrounding community, actions to create more gardens and plant more trees in Huddersfield will spread throughout the town centre. The spaces included in the proposal are: two edges or in-between spaces which were considered appropriated for intervention, due to their location, visibility and physical characteristics; two overly wide streets, which are a consequence of the ring road, given that those streets were interrupted for its construction, and nowadays present a width that is not compatible with the very reduced traffic there; the high street, comprising John William Street and part of the New street; King Street; and Market Place.
The selection of some of the most key public spaces for the city of Huddersfield - namely John William Street, New street, King Street and Market Place – is indeed due to their importance to the city centre, the large number of people circulating through these spaces every day, and the fact that there is no vegetation in any of these streets neither in Market Place. As will be seen, the presence of vegetation in cities can bring a number of benefits.
The first point to be highlighted, because of its connection to the selection criteria for intervention areas, is the individual’s perception: many of the people who circulate in Huddersfield town centre have probably already realized that there is few green in that part of the city. People feel good when contemplating vegetation. In this regard, Krebs (2005) writes that “psychological aspects related to the use of vegetation in the built environment are object of academic studies, and results point to several benefits in this sense, be it through the use of foliage, shrubs, grass, flowers or trees” (Krebs, 2005, p. 47).
As was argued when talking about urban agriculture, the examples of green urban infrastructure proposed in this work likewise have the potential to contribute to urban sustainability and urban resilience. Demuzere et al. (2014) analyze the potential benefits of green urban infrastructure at different scales and point to a number of possibilities, such as their contribution to offsetting urban carbon emissions and the impact of green interventions on thermal comfort in a wider urban area. Following the same line of reasoning, Matthews, Lo & Byrne (2015) write that “scholars recognize that green infra-structure can potentially improve residents’ health and wellbeing, provide food, lower wind speeds, reduce storm-water run-off, modulate ambient temperatures, reduce energy use and sequester carbon, among other ‘ecosystem service benefits’, although the extent of these benefits remains somewhat contested” (Matthews, Lo & Byrne, 2015, p.156).
Combining aesthetic and environmental aspects is the aim of the proposed guerrilla gardening actions. This can generate psychological benefits and leverage collective concern about the environment.
​
​3. Feasibility
For all the actions considered in Greening Huddersfield, the community is the main stakeholder. The initiatives must be fostered within local residents, arousing the interest of people in being part of the process, through a participatory philosophy. Other mandatory participants in the process are professionals (architects, urban designers, artists) and local authorities. Public organizations and civic stakeholders can also be part of the proposal.
As advocated by R-Urban, “a framework for bottom-up resilient urban regeneration” (Petcou & Petrescu, 2018), the idea in Greening Huddersfield is also that “architects and planners take an active role as initiators, facilitators, mediators and consultants in various civic partnerships” (Petcou & Petrescu, 2015, p. 61). Thus, all the interventions are intended to be the result of discussions between the community, professionals and local authorities. Despite guerrilla gardening give the idea of an unsanctioned action, in this case the proposal is that the tactics, after being discussed by the stakeholders involved in the emergence and development of the idea, be submitted to the city council for consideration. It can’t be different, considering that the intervention area is the heart of Huddersfield.
Greening Huddersfield is a low-cost initiative. Both the planning and the implementation phases are simple and do not require much investment. The process of development of the idea and all the necessary participation are intended to be voluntary. For the execution phase, considering the significance of the interventions and also the interest of local authorities in improving the city and meet the wishes of the population, public investment can be negotiated, as part of the urban development policy. This applies for the maintenance of the green urban infrastructures as well. For urban agriculture interventions, of course, the maintenance is borne by the residents.
​
​4. Expectations
This proposal is conceived not only for the immediate outcomes that it will generate, like improvements in urban landscape and good quality food supply for those who are involved in urban agriculture actions. Taking advantage of the other potential benefits of the proposed actions explained in this document, Greening Huddersfield aims also to contribute to the resilience and sustainability of the city, while strengthening the sense of community among those participating in the process.
References
Dovey, K. (2016). Urban design thinking: A conceptual toolkit. Bloomsbury Publishing.
​
Lydon, M., Bartman, D., Garcia, T., Preston, R., Woudstra, R. (2012). Tactical Urbanism Vol. 2 – Short-term action / Long-term change. Street Plans. Miami, New York.
​
Lydon, M., & Garcia, A. (2015). Tactical urbanism: Short-term action for long-term change. London: Island Press.
​
Bishop, P. & Williams, L. (2012). The temporary City. Routledge.
​
Matthews, T., Lo, A. Y. and Byrne, J. A. (2015). Reconceptualizing green infrastructure for climate change adaptation: Barriers to adoption and drivers for uptake by spatial planners.
​
Demuzere, M., Orru, K., Heidrich, O., Olazabal, E., Geneletti, D., Orru, H., Bhave, A. G., Mittal, N., Feliu, E. and Faehnle, M. (2014). Mitigating and adapting to climate change: Multi-functional and multi-scale assessment of green urban infrastructure. Journal of Environmental Management, V. 146, p. 107-115.
​
Barthel, S. & Isendahl, C. (2013). Urban gardens, agriculture, and water management: Sources of resilience for long-term food security in cities.
​
Mancebo, F. (2018). Gardening the City: Addressing Sustainability and Adapting to Global warming through Urban Agriculture.
​
Vercauteren, C., Quist, J., Van Bueren, E., Veen, E. (2013). Community gardens as learning spaces for sustainable food practices. SCORAI Europe Workshop Proceedings.
​
Petcou, C. & Petrescu, D. (2015). R-URBAN or how to co-produce a resilient city. ephemera 15(1), February 2015.
​
KREBS, L. F. (2005). Coberturas Vivas extensivas: Análise da Utilização em Projetos na Região Metropolitana de Porto Alegre e Serra Gaúcha (master’s thesis). Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil.
​
Petcou, C. & Petrescu, D. (2018). Co-produced Urban Resilience. A Framework for Bottom-Up Regeneration.