星空传媒

It has been an uphill struggle and the majority view is still not particularly positive. The central involvement of the public sector frequently muddies the waters and increases risk 鈥� anathema to the institutional investor. But there is no real reason why this should be so. It will be encouraging for investors, therefore, to hear Margaret Ford making the right noises about being 鈥渁 better client for financiers鈥� ahead of the creation of Communities England.

One risk the market is presented with is the large costs associated with contending for opportunities, and a much bigger risk is the uncertainty of planning outcomes. Procurement processes that tick boxes can be incredibly wasteful of private sector time and money better spent on regeneration.

From an investor鈥檚 point of view, it is also very hard 鈥� if not counter-productive 鈥� to predict returns at early stages of a regeneration scheme. This is something developers and their investors are often forced to do to clinch a S106 agreement when it is entirely unrealistic to do so. It can all get very messy and frighteningly expensive.

I like David Taylor鈥檚 idea that councils should commit to timescales when they seek development partners and pay compensation for missing deadlines. Some bodies play fast and loose with other people鈥檚 money and have no notion of what that is costing.

Despite all this, regeneration is something Britain is getting much better at, boosted by economic stability and experience 鈥� if only we can package it right. Communities England will need to teach other public sector bodies the ropes. And if you want to see how it can be done, Rotherham council is about to unveil a website that tells the story of how it tackled the packaging of a regeneration project for the market (www.rotherhamwdp.co.uk).

Lee Mallett, editor of the Urban Regeneration Toolbox (www.theurt.com)