Fellowship Report 2014 - 2015

Smart Growth & Major Changes in Military Populations

Stephen J Barrington-Harness BSc MSc MRTPI

Email: harnessplanningcom@gmail.com

"We shape our buildings; thereafter they shape us." - Winston Churchill

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 2

Acknowledgements: I would like to thank the Winston Churchill Memorial Trust for backing this research and all those who have contributed and given their time and support, in particular: USA: Gerald Gordon, President & Alan Fogg, Vice President of Fairfax County Economic Development Authority. Mark Moffatt previously Fort Belvoir Infrastructure Development Commander, now County of Fairfax Director. Marianne Gardner, Director, Planning Division County of Fairfax. Mark Canale, Project Manager previously BRAC Co-ordinator now County of Fairfax. Tadlock Cowan and Daniel Else of the Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress. Kurt Stout, Exec Vice President, Government Solutions of Colliers International; and Miles Freedman, Director of the Quantico/Belvoir Business Alliance, Inc. Australia: Steve Grzeskowiak, Deputy Secretary Defence Support and Reform, Australian Department of Defence Lt Col Doug Fox, Australian Defence Force Michael Owens and Warren Wilson, PMCA Craig Simpson, Lang O’Rouke John Kerwan, Director of Estate Planning, Australian Department of Defence and his team (Sally, Tim, Matt, Sharon, Anne, Natash and Patrick) and Brett Cox, Assistant Secretary, DS&RG. Robin Renwick & Andrew Borne, Australian Department of Finance and Regulation. Rachel Cumming, Director Metropolitan Delivery; and ChoCho Myint of Planning & Infrastructure Division, New South Wales Government New Zealand: Peter Bollmann, Director Portfolio Management, New Zealand Defence Force Guy Simpson, Manager Property Planning, New Zealand Defence Force Chris Aiken, Chief Executive, Hobsonville Land Company Sonja Bury, Team Leader, Auckland Council Dr David Valler, of Oxford Brookes University for his help in focussing my approach to the research and the various Town Planning Institutes from across the rest of the world who provided information to allow me to select case studies and know a wider international context. Some of the people I met are pictured below.

Note: The observations included below should not necessarily be taken as those of the people interviewed or their organisations. It was not considered appropriate to submit them for checking as that would run contrary to the spirit of the support received. Similarly my views expressed here are entirely my own and not therefore necessarily those of my employer, the Civil Service or MOD. Whilst endorsement for the research was obtained from DIO, they did not fund the research in any way and I used my annual leave for the trip, as such no tax payer funds have been used to undertake this research, but hopefully the results will benefit public projects.

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 3

Contents Executive Summary ..................................................................................................................................................... 5

1. Project Purpose and Background ....................................................................................................................... 7

2. Methodology .............................................................................................................................................................. 8

3. Common themes in changes in military infrastructure ................................................................................. 8

4. Fort Belvoir, Virginia, USA - Consolidation Case Study ............................................................................ 9

5. Fort Munroe, Virginia, USA - Closure Case Study ..................................................................................... 16

7. Moorebank Units Relocation (MUR), New South Wales, Australia – Consolidation Case Study

(Holsworthy and Steele Barracks) ......................................................................................................................... 23

8. North Head, Manly, New South Wales, Australia – Long term closure case study. ......................... 26

9. Hobsonville, Auckland, New Zealand – Closure Case Study ................................................................ 27

10. Overall Conclusions ...................................................................................................................................... 31

Annex 1: Background on the BRAC Process ..................................................................................................... 32

Annex 2: Fort Belvoir – Site Access & Context ................................................................................................. 39

Annex 3: Fort Munroe - History .............................................................................................................................. 41

Annex 4: Annapolis Site Details ............................................................................................................................. 44

Annex 5: Commentary on some of the background documents to the Fort Belvoir Case Study ........ 47

Annex 6: Moorebank Units Relocation – Project, Site Details and Context ............................................... 49

Annex 7: Overall Military Estate Master Planning Principles ......................................................................... 53

Annex 8: Hobsonville, New Zealand Context ..................................................................................................... 55

Abbreviations / Glossary ................................................................................................................................................ 56

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 4

Martin Luther King Jr Memorial Quotation Wall

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 5

Executive Summary

1. This report summarises the Fellowship research findings into the best practice in the consolidation and redevelopment of military sites to deliver smart growth whilst saving public money.

2. Throughout this report there are a number of highlighted challenges (listed overleaf) to point to conclusions which offer opportunities to amend approaches in the UK. There are also a series of observations and conclusions that relate to each of the case studies. There are three strong overall recommendations that tie all the case studies together to ensure schemes for retention, consolidation and redevelopment of military sites are successfully delivered:

a. Master plans of sites need to be prepared based on longer-term 20-40 year timescale, taken forward in a partnership, open and transparent approach with planning and transport authorities in the associated local development frameworks;

b. Master plans need to be based on commonly understood sustainable design principles, focussing on the unique aspects of the site, its history and integration with the surrounding area, whilst supporting diversity of the community and its economic base;

and finally, perhaps most significantly: c. The unique challenges that are faced by planners involved in military bases need to be recognised, not

merely for redevelopment to other uses, but also in the development / consolidation of sites.

Only by increased integration of facilities with the local community can sites be flexible, resilient and adapt to long term changes in demand. Following the general laydown principles shown in figure 1 below and the underlying principles, will help to achieve those aims.

The underlying principles below need to be followed in the delivery of the above recommendations:

Military – civilian Integration maximised

All security standards met or exceeded

Legible to users and visitors alike, with clear definitions for functional areas

Retain existing infrastructure (including roads and trunk services) and vegetation where possible

Retain and enhance positive features and heritage of the existing site

Use existing topography to avoid significant earth works

Where possible separate heavy traffic from general traffic, and secure areas from public / semi-public

Provide shuttle bus (larger sites), bikeways and pedestrian paths linking main gate and units to major facilities; and large main car park with only operational users having parking in the secure areas.

Allow for sustainable low maintenance landscape buffers and sustainable drainage

Provide a framework for future development and expansion

Maximise the use of multi-storey structures to minimise land area impact of buildings

Layouts to allow for sustainably designed buildings (for example solar orientation).

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 6

3. By using the above laydown principles, and testing master plans against the underlying principles and challenges identified below; developments can learn from best practice to deliver schemes that will not only make effective use of the land and resources, but will also make best use of public money whilst delivering smart growth.

Challenges identified for master planners:

. 1. Challenge: Longer-term 20 - 40 year based planning of UK major sites and off-site infrastructure. A plan led

approach to new developments, ensuring that policies are based on sound core principles whilst allowing for flexibility in delivering aims and objectives.

2. Challenge: Establish governance structures involving key authorities, regional planning and biannual high level

property board meetings.

3. Challenge: Adoption of clear commonly understood sustainable design principles such as less than 2,000 linear feet between key facilities, housing and employment areas, 60% parking provision.

4. Challenge: Support on-site sustainability measures by good public transport links including dedicated bus services which serve both sides of the "wire".

5. Challenge: Encourage the increased diversification of the surrounding communities’ economic bases away from dependence on Military institutions.

6. Challenge: Redevelopment authorities need to ensure momentum for change and a positive dynamic is maintained whilst a period of being closed is avoided.

7. Challenge: Review approaches to military base entrances, especially training sites to introduce more welcoming designs and widening access to Wifi and encouraging visitors.

8. Challenge: Review the opportunities for closer liaison on climate change impact assessments with planning authorities.

9. Challenge: Redevelopment master plans should focus more on unique selling points, reflecting and learning from the history of the site.

10. Challenge: Consider wider use of detailed contract signs. Signs that tell you what is being constructed, for whom, the contractor and the value of the contract encourage competition and transparency.

11. Challenge: Require a greater use of small businesses in contracts and promote alliances between businesses working on military sites.

12. Challenge: Review accessibility criteria to off-site housing based on travel times, not distance. Review access to housing for civilian employees.

13. Challenge: Review the approach to on and off-site provision and counter terrorism measures to increase integration where appropriate to reduce threat levels.

14. Challenge: Develop and implement a series of master planning principles that reflect best practice in case studies for the development of new bases and consolidations to guide approaches to all significant developments on the military estate.

15. Challenge: Increase the scope for new projects to be exemplar schemes to lead changes in development approaches.

16. Challenge: Ensure finance models promote an integrated community, efficient and sustainable designs.

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 7

1. Project Purpose and Background

1.1. Great potential exists in many countries for the reduction in the amount of land used for military purposes thereby releasing some of the estate for redevelopment (and sale generating returns and saving public money) as well as allowing for consolidation and conservation of existing facilities and heritage. The UK’s Ministry of Defence, one of the largest landholders in the country, is undertaking a programme of continued rationalisation of its estate.

1.2. As a Town Planner for the UK’s Ministry of Defence, I have gained a lot of experience in my work being responsible for major planning permissions – such as the Defence Technical Training Programme (rationalising 9 training sites onto one at MOD Lyneham) and the Army Basing Plan (consolidating returning military functions from Germany onto existing sites across the UK and developing associated housing – the UK’s largest rebasing since the Second World War). Both these projects have been recognised in the Royal Town Planning Institute’s Planning for Excellence Awards. This project sought to learn from how other countries have undertaken similar rationalisations and identify best practice so that it could be shared with practitioners across the world.

1.3. The drive in the UK for military sites is towards greater integration with the civilian community, but that could heighten the impact of base closures where access to shared facilities is lost, so it is a valuable input to such assessments to see what has happened in other areas. Also, the development and redevelopment of military sites has significant potential to add to wider “Smart Growthi”. Taking the research away from the UK context also means that practitioners may be more willing to view the findings with fresh eyes.

1.4. From a literature review of current studies it appears that academics have spent a lot of time looking at redevelopment approaches, but there has been less focus on the unique challenges faced for military sites ii, and there has been even less focus on the approach to consolidations. Other projects tend to have looked from the outside on the way decisions have been made on which sites to close, quantitative impacts of base closures on regional economies and the problems faced such as remediation. A common theme arising from these studies from the European perspective has been to call for more long-term planningiii, without looking as much in detail on the specific challenges of redeveloping military sites.

1.5. The focus of my Winston Churchill Memorial Trust research is therefore to identify some possible best practice case studies of military sites and try to identify some positive approaches and techniques that could be used in the UK context. Then widen that out to network with other practitioners across the World. Therefore the focus of this report is on the common themes and lessons learnt rather than the detail of the projects themselves. Further information on the wider background is presented in the annexes to this report.

1.6. A combination of approaching national town planning institutes, country practitioners and researchers and online

research was undertaken to identify the countries where considerable experience had been gained in such consolidations. Possible case studies were shortlisted where practitioners had identified what was considered to be good practice projects1. Due to limited time and resources, local concentrations of nominated best practice examples were identified and then that led to the following case studies representing a breath of the type of projects often seen in the UK: USA Case Studies - a) Fort Munroe, Virginia: was closely integrated into the surrounding community, but has now been closed and

redeveloped; b) Fort Belvoir, Virginia: a "receptor" for many new facilities consolidated from other bases; and c) Naval Academy, Annapolis: a long established / retained site.

Australian Case Studies – d) Moorebank Units Relocation (Steele and Holsworthy Barracks), Liverpool, New South Wales: Linked

projects to facilitate the delivery of a new Intermodal Freight Terminal and the consolidation of military activities. e) North Head, Manly, New South Wales: a former military site released for other uses and public access to the

heritage assets.

New Zealand Case Study – f) Hobsonville, Auckland: a former airbase now being redeveloped for a new settlement and marine industry

quarter.

1 There are a great deal of former military airbases across the world which are now used for Civilian airfields. It was decided to exclude these from the case studies as

they present a different range of challenges.

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 8

2. Methodology

2.1 My project was not to look at the process that led to the selections of the sites or wider town planning perspectiveiv; as that had been extensively covered by other research, but how, once decisions have been taken to close or consolidate a site, these have been progressed through to successful delivery. To address the shortfalls I had identified in other research I wanted to hear from the people involved, both in the project teams and those representing the planning authorities, what they thought was particularly effective and therefore perhaps learn some techniques that could be useful in the UK. I also wanted to see both sides of the process - consolidation and closure, but to focus on schemes which have been successfully delivered.

2.2 The first stage was therefore to review in more detail the on-line information about the above selected case studies prior to arranging site visits. These visits and associated meetings were arranged over two years 2014 and 2015 with the latter being to ensure that the projects had progressed to a suitable maturity to facilitate analysis. Care was taken to ensure that meetings were arranged both with the project teams who had delivered the projects and representatives of the Planning Authority, so that both “inside and outside” perspectives on the success of the projects could be examined. In addition, the review of on-line materials identified where there had been opposition during the planning and development process, so this could be discussed in the meetings.

3. Common themes in changes in military infrastructure

3.1 Across the world many countries have been seeking to rationalise their military estate in recent years. Some have

progressed this on a site by site basis in response to changes in requirements (generally the countries with smaller populations), some via that approach but also via a thematic based approach (as in the UK and USA) and more rarely other through a comprehensive change in approach (for example in Slovenia). But in all cases identified the direction has been towards consolidation of sites with the associated disposal and often redevelopment of surplus sites created, often these programmes of consolidation are as a result of strategic defence reviews (as for the USA, UK, Australia and New Zealand).

3.2 Almost certainly the greatest level of change has been in the United States of America by virtue of the size of its military population (over 1 million active personnel). Defence spending as a percentage of GDP2 at 2014 varied significantly between the case study countries, in the USA it highest at 3.5%, in the UK at 2.1% (around 9% of Government spending), in Australia 1.8% and in New Zealand 1.1%. In 2010 the US Department of Defense (US DoD) possessed over 4,200 military bases / installations across the USA, and it has been estimated that it spends 14% of the total US defence budget on this infrastructure (over twice the rate spent in the UK), although that figure has not been verified. Further information on the size of military populations and the associated estate in the UK, Australia and New Zealand is included in the Annexes to this report, but as the majority of consolidation experience has been gained in the USA, this presented the best opportunity to identify some common themes before comparing them with the other countries.

3.3 The US DoD has been pursuing a programme of rationalisation of its site through a process known as Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC). Analysis of online reviews of this process, summarised in Annex 1 below informed the choice of the above US case studies, but the subsequent meetings identified a common theme applicable not only to the USA, but also for the success of all the case studies:

1. Early advance positive planning - looking at the opportunities; 2. Joint working between authorities; and 3. Having previously diversified the local economy away from total reliance on the base.

Whereas the key ingredient to failure was the lack of co-operation between authorities3. Failure doesn't mean that projects don't go ahead, they just take far longer. The obvious presumption that areas with strong economies were more likely to succeed was not correct.

2 Source: http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/MS.MIL.XPND.GD.ZS 3 A similar conclusion found to case studies in the South East Europe Region – see the FATE study in the references at the end of this report.

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 9

4. Fort Belvoir, Virginia, USA - Consolidation Case Study

4.1 I was privileged to have been offered a tour of Fort Belvoir with Mr Christopher Landgraf, the Chief Facilities Planner

for the Department of Public Works (DPW) of US Army Garrison Fort Belvoir. I found his input invaluable and that really showed me why I needed to visit to talk with the people involved face to face and see the facilities first hand. I went away with a totally different impression to that which I had gained on-line.

4.2 In preparing for my research trip I did a lot of background reading on each of the case studies I selected, and most commonly the issues being raised for Fort Belvoir were concerns about the impact of the consolidation on traffic generation on and off the base. But from a European perspective the "pre-BRAC" road network appeared to be very extensive. I was pleased to see good lengths of High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes on the way into Washington, where their use is restricted to two person occupancy vehicles. I don't understand why these aren't extended at peak times. Most of the vehicles I saw on the roads had only one occupant. I don't know if it was a quirk of the days of my visit, but I did notice that the vehicles in the queue to get to the Metro station had generally higher levels of occupancy. Further details on the site, its recent development history and the scale of changes proposed are included in Annex 2.

NEW BEGINNINGS 4.3 Once the Fort had been identified for by BRAC a full Colonel (Col Moffett) was appointed to oversee the plan and

funding was provided to allow specialist consultant planners (Belvoir New Vision Planners) to be commissioned. The level of seniority of this appointment, being the same as the Garrison Commander, was seen as key to the successful delivery of the project.

4.4 The site holds Real Property Planning Board meetings twice a year. These are the focus for collating bids for new property requirements. New proposals are plotted onto the 20 year Master Plan to show how they fit with the long term designs for the site. Fort Belvoir won an American Planning Association award for its 4D Master Plan, as it incorporates the element of time to show how at any stage the site will appear, and also at the end of the plan period. This level of communication and engagement with external authority’s right from the start of BRAC is seen as key to its success. There are a total of 145 agencies now based on the site, so communication has been a key element. The DPW facilities team have 82 people based at the site as subject matter experts who engage contractors to design and undertake the developments. But similarly to the UK, when external authorities want their questions answered they turn to the DPW staff not the contractors.

4.5 Once projects have been sifted they are submitted to the Installations Management Command and sifted again, then onto the Army Budget Board and DoD Budgeting before projects are approved. The Fort has elements from all the services but is seen as an Army site, others can be jointly managed "purple" sites. In a similar approach to the UK's pre 2006 regime the DoD is required (under the National Capital Planning Act) to notify the National Capital Planning Board of new developments - not refurbishments or smaller scale changes. But because the site is not located inside the Beltway, the board does not have a right of veto. It has been rare for the board to reject a scheme, but if they do the site can decide to refer the scheme to the DoD for approval. When schemes are notified a wide range of accompanying documents are also submitted similar to a full planning application in the UK, including an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). When the first BRAC EIS was prepared it included a "bubble" style diagram showing proposed locations for the new facilities. Even after the EIS had been submitted there was still a large amount of relocating these facilities and clarifying the exact requirements. The Fort is required to prepare 5 year plan bid, but these are set in a 10 year funding round and the Master Plan itself covers a 20 year period.

Challenge: Longer-term 20 - 40 year based planning of UK major sites and off-site infrastructure. Challenge: Establish governance structures involving key authorities, regional planning and biannual high level property board meetings.

View across the site from the town centre, past housing and the village

green to the hospital

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 10

MASTER PLAN GENERAL PRINCIPLES:

4.6 The Master Plan has taken a polycentric approach to locating facilities in a village centre type approach in line with New Urbanism principles4. Key to these principles is the idea that houses should be located within 2,000ft of supporting facilities - to promote walking. Support for these principles initially came from the private developers of the site, but was then adopted by the Department of Defense (who must be acutely aware of the cost of getting this wrong each day as employees can take 20 minutes to walk from their parking space at the Pentagon to the front door). Though unlike in the UK where the aim is to move towards a single car family, the approach here is more towards providing double garages; but not on frontages to allow for village greens and shopping streets. The design standards are heavily influenced by the traditional styles of the nearby City of Alexandria.

4.7 I was particularly impressed by the advance planning that had been undertaken into the new commissary and post

exchange (PX) facilities. By the nature of the PX it is always going to be essentially a big shed, but the linking to the retailing facilities and the external detailing meant that it resembled more of a train station than a warehouse. The plans for the building allowed for the adjacent siting of the commissary to allow people to park once and shop twice. This was even down to the level that the canopy at the end of the building had been planned to be the disabled people bus drop-off point for both facilities. Again, all these facilities were within the 2,000ft zone of lots of the adjacent housing.

Challenge: Adoption of clear commonly understood sustainable design principles such as less than 2,000 linear feet between key facilities, housing and employment areas, 60% parking provision. Challenge: Support on-site sustainability measures by good public transport links including dedicated bus services which serve both sides of the "wire".

4 see: www.cnu.org/charter

Town centre Pedestrian / cycle friendly housing and shopping areas

Façade to the PX (train station style) with stand-off

distance planting

Base hotel

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 11

HOUSING 4.8 Postings for the military to the Fort are typically for 2 to 3 years, hence why it’s important to consider not only the

long-term, but interim stages of the Master Plan. Service personnel are entitled to housing provision, though these may not necessarily be on the base as the houses are allocated to serve the whole of the Capital Region (160,000 military population, including retirees). Civilians can only rent houses if the take up rates are low and as the housing is available for all the military population in the National Capital Region it is normally over 95% occupied. Generally a 3% margin is kept to allow for refurbishments and transitions (the UK level is higher). The 2100 houses on the base are managed by a private rental agency - Clark Michaels (the houses remain 51% DoD owned). Clark Michaels are a partnership covering development and management respectively. Previously housing was DoD managed, but only a proportion of the rent was kept for management, now all the rent is available to the private company. Rents would be reduced if houses were not of the highest standard, but all on the base currently meet the code level and only one area which has yet to be refurbished is charged at a lower rate. Unlike in the UK there isn't a prioritisation of housing according to the location of the posting, which is regrettable as that could help to reduce traffic levels onto the base.

4.9 As in the UK housing is allocated according to rank and family size. The main single living areas are close to the village centres developed across the base. Apartments have been provided above the shops and these can be requested regardless of rank. Around 10% of houses are designed to facilitate disabled access. It is questionable how much of this housing needs to be “behind the wire”; not only does that limit the developable land on the base, but also it separates the military and civilian communities.

4.10 In the southern part of the site particular care has been taken to ensure that the designs of new buildings reflect that of the adjacent more historic properties.

4.11 The approach to housing provision was already planned before the BRAC proposals arose for consolidation of

new employment uses onto the site. Previously the average density was around 1 dwelling per acre; now it’s between 6 and 8 dwellings per acre (15 per hectare - still only about half the level of density of new housing in the UK). This is typically a major cultural change for the military posted to the base who tend to come from suburban or rural communities. I was interested to learn that the hotel for the site is run by a private company and military personnel can book in independently of the site.

Higher density housing with footpaths and planting

Village green

New housing, designed to be in keeping with historic

properties

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 12

COMMUNITY FACILITIES AND RETAILING 4.12 As the site was developed over the last century many of the sporting facilities have been available to the local

population as well as the military community. Like in the UK the base works with the local authorities to develop schemes to allow people to get access onto the site.

4.13 All the site’s users are entitled to use the medical and dental facilities. The hospital was a consolidation onto the site as part of BRAC, and due to the sites constraints had to be developed on the former 90 acre Golf Course (there is a Golf Course now on North Site). The new hospital replaces the former base hospital (60 years old) and elements from Bethesda and serves the 160,000 military / dependents / DoD civilians & retired population. Adjacent to the hospital are two "structure parking" areas of 4 and 6 storeys of parking. These are set back from the main building due to Counter Terrorism Measure (CTM) requirements. The hospital areas are colour coded to aid guiding to the correct facility.

4.14 Interestingly the environmental standards of the site have been used to benefit patients. Those staying on the upper floors can look out onto the green roof. At the entrance there is a wide area of low maintenance planting which provides colour and the design of the paving mirrors that of the new Army uniform camouflage. Particular attention was paid to ensuring that traffic noise was mitigated. On the day all I could hear was birdsong, not cars. The porous car parking surface drains off into an area of planting which provides a buffer and wildlife habitat as well as a swale or rain garden as they are called here. Between each wing of the hospital there are pleasant outdoor seating areas. Wood from trees cut down for the development of the site has been used for benches. The layout of the building has been designed to maximise access to natural daylight.

4.15 Adjacent to the hospital is the new United Service Organisations (USO) 244 room Wounded Warriors Battalion

accommodation - at 2,200sqm this is the largest facility in the USA. It has been developed on a campus style layout and there was much debate about whether it was appropriate to develop it to 4 storeys tall, but this is one part of the site where the airfield safeguarding would have allowed it to go higher. The site master planners are proud of the links between this campus and the new Intrepid Spirit 1 centre where soldiers are first assessed before treatment starts, a clear line of site exists between these buildings making the process clearer for those involved. There is also a donated centre to support families with loved ones in hospital and a child development centre. Similarly to UK military projects neither of these facilities were initially identified as part of the BRAC process, but locations had to be found in the Master Plan at the latter stages.

4.16 Next year a new building will be developed adjacent to the hospital campus - another lodging facility with 141

rooms including 8 for VIPs, identified as required here due to its proximity to the facilities as the hospital is also a training centre. This was not identified through the Master Plan process, but by the Pentagon directly. But the site master planners were able to ensure that the adjacent car parking is to be shared. Some of the late items needed to be delivered in very short timescales including two significant buildings such as that for the Office of the Chief of the Army Reserves in less than one year from design to completion.

4.17 In line with the New Urbanism principles retailing provision is also co-located with other facilities where possible. For example at the North Main Post centre there are the following facilities all within the 2,000ft zone:

- Housing (family and single), Religious and Neighbourhood Centres, School - PX/ Commissary - Physical Fitness Centre, Movie Theatre, Pool / Basketball and Tennis Courts.

Hospital, northern façade Hospital, low maintenance planting and

paving in "camouflage" style

Direct line of sight between buildings Inside the PX - shopping centre style Food court

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 13

4.18 There is only one elementary school on the site which has a capacity of 1,300 children and is already

oversubscribed, so nearly 400 children are educated off-site. Numbers based on site do not warrant high school provision, especially as military families tend to have a higher proportion of younger children whilst in the services.

ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS AND EFFECTIVE USE OF SPACE 4.19 In a similar approach to that adopted by the UK’s MOD the Department of Defense requires a higher

environmental standard of its new buildings than would normally be required of developers. All new buildings have to attain at least a LEED silver standard5. The site obtained the USA's first LEED Platinum standard for a community building and the Hospital attained a LEED Gold standard. Green roofs are used across the site where possible.

4.20 As well as the focus on co-location of facilities and housing, there is a network of cycle lanes and footpaths to promote sustainable transport. Whilst this is laudable, the size of the site and the fact that most users have to drive to work due to their housing not being on the base, it is less likely that they will also bring a bike to use on the site and some facilities are distant from the employment areas. There seems to be scope for a "Boris Bike" type scheme on the site, where bicycles are available to borrow and left at stands across the site.

4.21 Considerable attention has been paid across the site to mitigating the impacts of storm surges, including swales

and rainfall collection roofs. On the hospital the sloping roof shown below collects rainfall to irrigate all the surrounding landscaping (the storage tank holds 32,000ltr and is self-cleaning). The base has the largest area of permeable paving of any site in the USA.

4.22 Particular consideration was given to the parking arrangements for the new US Army Legal Services Agency building. The use of the Master Plan 4D approach demonstrated the case for the use of structured parking to free future development space.

5 LEED stands for Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design. It is a series of standards set by the US Green Building Council, a similar

approach to the UK’s BREEAM standards set by the Building Research Establishment.

Main distributor road with cycling and footpath provision

Curved hospital roof for rainwater harvesting Porous paving at the PX car park

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 14

4.23 Among the housing areas and village greens interpretation signs have been used to educate on the

environmental approaches being used. Planting has been designed to encourage butterflies. The site has its own dedicated recycling plant.

HERITAGE. 4.24 The site was the home of William Fairfax in 1738 but the military use commenced during World War 1. It is

surrounded by a number of other historic properties. The layout and heights of buildings including the hospital have been designed to ensure that historic view sheds are not adversely affected. The number of storeys grows gradually to increase the feeling of perspective. The site of the original mansion was identified and is now the focus for a trail through the woods.

4.25 The southern section of the site contains the most historic properties. In this area new buildings have been

designed to reflect the historic character. In the case shown above the facade reflected the historic character, but sides that faced away from the historic area had increasingly modern designs. Many of the original buildings have been preserved. Archaeological investigations are needed prior to new developments these follow a similar approach to that in the UK.

SITE SUMMARY 4.26 The master planners have responded well to the challenges posed and developed an exemplar scheme with

many sustainable development features and approaches that should be followed in other schemes. The choice of putting such a large element of housing behind the wire and not allocating this according to work location is likely to lead to higher levels of traffic generation, counter to the many positive measures to address such impacts.

Office building and structured parking to

reduce land take

Recycling plant

Start of the historic woodland trail

New building with southern façade in traditional style,

and eastern façade in modern style

Historic buildings, retained and restored

Historic chapel Area of older military housing

Butterfly Garden

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 15

5. Fort Munroe, Virginia, USA - Closure Case Study

5.1 When the Fort was closed in 2011 the nearby town of Phoebus was hit hard by the loss of over 3,500 jobs being based locally. Although mostly those jobs only moved 30 miles away, the employees no longer drove through the town or used it as their "gateway community" for their recreation or food. Recently with the recovery at the Fort some new shops and restaurants have opened. As part of BRAC 700 of the 3,500 jobs were located to Kentucky. The rest stayed in the 13 Cities / Counties that make up the Hampshire Roads Region. Perhaps this is the first important lesson from the case study, as mentioned by the congressional researchers perhaps the town had been more significantly affected by the closure as it had not planned ahead and already diversified away from being dependent upon the base. Information about the important history of this base is included in Annex 2. Challenge: Encourage the increase diversification of the surrounding communities’ economic base away

from dependence on Military institutions. 5.2 I was pleased to be able to meet with John Hutcheson, Deputy Executive Director and Jesica Turner Executive

Assistant and Government Relations Co-ordinator for the Fort Munroe Authority. On the announcement of BRAC initially the City of Hampton established a Local Redevelopment Authority (LRA) to take forward the redevelopment of the site. Its first plan focused mostly on the development of condos across the site. That plan received considerable opposition as many people felt it didn't respect the important history of the site. Following lobbying the Governor of Virginia stepping in and stated that the State would exercise its historic rights to take back most of the land as it had included reversionary rights on the 1834 and 1936 deeds when the land was transferred to the DoD stating that if it was no longer needed for Defense purposes it would revert to State ownership. So to accompany that decision the State also established the Fort Munroe Authority. It set three goals for the Authority:

1. Preservation; 2. Telling the story of the base; and 3. Economic independence.

5.3 The original guard post is still in place and that obscures the entrance sign, making it less welcoming. Although

there are signs to the Fort along the surrounding road network, it’s not clear that it is no longer an active military base. This is reinforced by the water tower sign still clearly stating Army. I wonder how many tourists are put off from entering the site due to that fact. I was pleased to learn that the Authority plan to rework the entrance to the base to make it more welcoming and clear. I personally think they should repaint the water tower sign as well to the more welcoming Authority logo.

Historic interpretation sign: Freedom's Fortress

Water tower with

Army logo Leafy boulevards Historic drawing of the Fort

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 16

5.4 There are three roads onto the island. Two converge at the former main gate, and the third runs down the peninsular but has been closed. The latter road runs through federal land which is also now surplus to defence needs. At the main gate the roads diverge again into three different ways; to follow the seafront around past the marina and through former technical and community areas, or towards the historic fort through the very pleasant tree lined boulevard of housing. Having looked at the models in the museum of how the site developed over time these splits have always been in place. I therefore found it strange to be told that the first plan had decided to make a break from this historic pattern. After the state governor intervened, the City of Hampton also made a break from its earlier plans and favoured the creation of jobs over housing.

5.5 The process followed in developing the Master Plan is neatly summarised on the master planner’s website (Sasaki Associates):

"The 560-acre site contains 170 historic structures and several hundred acres of natural resources, including more than seven miles of waterfront and three miles of beaches along the Chesapeake Bay. The National Historic Landmark designation sets aside almost 50% of the property as primarily open space to be managed by the National Park Service. The Master plan sets aside the majority of the waterfront by creating a waterfront trail that forever preserves public access to the Chesapeake Bay, Mill Creek, and the beaches at Fort Monroe. The National Park service will also take over management of the main nature area to the north of the land owned by the Fort Munroe Authority. This area is a significant wildlife reserve with many rare species. On the base there is the northern most stand of Live Oak trees (around 500).

5.6 The Master Plan is the result of a two year process, convened by the Fort Monroe Authority (FMA). The Master

Plan's community engagement strategy featured a comprehensive approach of public meetings, an interactive website, and partnerships with the National Park Service and City of Hampton. The Fort Monroe Authority convened 20 public meetings/workshops which were attended by more than 300 people. A public engagement website generated more than 3,200 visitors and 490 participants, while collecting 440 ideas and 1,415 comments that were instrumental in shaping the Master Plan. Further, the planning process featured a unique partnership of the Fort Monroe Authority, the National Park Service, and the City of Hampton. In parallel with the Fort Monroe Master Plan, the National Park Service initiated a planning effort for the Fort Monroe National Monument, and the City of Hampton updated its plans for adjacent neighbourhoods.

5.7 A wide array of consultants worked on the Master Plan process over the years. Considerable investment (over $700,000) was spent on engaging prestigious international Master Planners to work on the new plan. It’s not clear what difference that made to a more local focus, but the Authority feel it was beneficial, but future stages will be more locally supported.

5.8 In December 2013, the Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell approved the Fort Monroe Master Plan along with over

$35million in state funds to be invested in Fort Monroe over the next few years in operations, infrastructure upgrades, and historic building stabilisation. Following approval of the Master plan, The National Trust for Historic Preservation recognised Fort Monroe as one of its "10 Preservation Wins of 2013," noting that "historic buildings will be put to new, productive uses, and the risk of deterioration, neglect, and vandalism will be significantly reduced..."

5.9 The decision of the National Parks Authority to take on part of the site and some of its buildings will be a significant

boost to the recreational potential and management of the site. But that added layer of regulation will increase bureaucracy. It’s clear from on line campaigns that resulted in this designation, that there is still significant opposition to the Master Plan. Many people want a larger area kept for conservation. But in these days of tighter budgets, I wonder if that is realistic as it would need to be funded from somewhere. Also, as someone who prefers

Latest iteration of the Master plan

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 17

to see historic resources still used and not preserved in aspic, I think the Master Plan offers the best opportunity for wider appreciation and preservation of the assets. This is the main asset of the site, and this can be shown by the success of the nearby historic triangle (Jamestown / Williamsburg and Yorktown). But it should be acknowledged that in any plans the main reason for its designation was its special links to black American history.

5.10 There is also another major opportunity. Virginia's Steam Academy has decided to take over the main 8,300sqm building that looks onto the parade ground and turn it back into a college / residential school - similar to its historic use - and develop accommodation for the students around the building. This will be a not for profit use and the Authority is signing over a lease at virtually no cost, but this recognises the major constraints to other uses of the buildings and that the new use will significantly add to the vitality of the island. Access for other uses into this central area was always going to be an issue due to the narrow entrances. Another opportunity not apparent to the casual visitor is the 600 seat theatre on the island.

5.11 There are a few other key constraints that should have informed the master plan choices. Firstly, the island

nature of the site means that all designs have to take into account possible sea level changes (and where possible for historic structures, for adaptations such as electricity points). Next, the visual impact of parking structures would clearly be too great given the historic and low level nature of the site. The historic layout of the site is likely to mean residents / businesses cannot always park beside their accommodation. This would be further exacerbated by the fact that some of the surrounding road network can be very congested. Transport onto the island would clearly therefore be a constraint. Also, the fact that most of the current housing stock is duplex (semi-detached), so less detached family houses. Finally, aside from its historic significance sites with views out to sea and near to beaches are not in short supply locally, but ones are which have such a history located adjacent to the marina. The island is also well located to link into the Historic Triangle (Jamestown / Yorktown / Williamsburg) tourism. But it was interesting to hear that the idea was that it could be a draw for its Civil War links and beaches, not its unique black history. I would therefore have expected the Master plan to respond to these challenges and opportunities, to recognise the historic divisions across the island and capitalise from the marina opportunity.

5.12 Having examined the Master Plan I think it has done a good job, but given it includes a 20 year vision it is too

parochial. The links to nearby Phoebis are not strengthened, nor are sustainable transport routes through to the nearby settlements proposed. These could enhance its business as well as residential location draw. I was particularly pleased to see the plans to change the four lane seafront road into two lanes to allow for areas to enjoy the walk along beside the marina.

Parade ground Narrow entrance to the Fort

Road alongside the Marina Marina Building

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 18

5.13 I didn't see any approach being developed for a unique selling point as a business location. Without that the community will become unbalanced over time. It appears to me that the island could draw on its history to attract residents specialising in marine crafts and therefore include designs that cater for a live-work environment. These are also more likely to be able to respond to changing sea levels.

5.14 I remain unclear about what level of investment the Authority plans to make to stimulate a marina / café style

environment. Perhaps that will become clear once the land needed is finally purchased from the Army. Similarly the area around the former officers club and RV Park appears to be a major opportunity subject to some initial investments. Unfortunately these two areas are separate from the fitness centre. Prior to the transfer the Army refurbished the fitness centre spending over $10million, so it is a significant asset. It is currently planned that the YMCA will run the centre. Again, this asset could benefit from more promotion.

5.15 Utilities are always a big issue on former military bases. The site has over 21,000 linear metres of sewer pipes and 27,000 linear metres of water pipes. In this case the Authority has had to deal with many non-standard approaches. Consequently it still runs all the utilities except electricity provision which is provided by a local utility company. The Authority has invested in utilities for example standardising all the fire hydrants.

5.16 I do think that this iteration of the Master plan and its greater reliance on housing and conservation is a better

and more realistic emphasis. The Authority has had a number of "headwinds" but has "changed tack" to successfully keep the momentum. The former hotel, the Historic Chamberlain, is now a home for the retired and keeps about an 85% occupancy rate. It is good that this provides another aspect of the island's population, but I wonder if a new hotel could be developed on the island depending on commercial interest, the Master plan would allow for such a proposal. Apparently the Authority has sought interest from B&B owners, but has decided to convert suitable buildings to apartments instead due to lack of interest, but it may be too early to tell. Once the marina expands and the sea front has been revitalised it may be a more commercial location for hotels and B&Bs.

5.17 It is expected that the eventual population of the island will return to around 3,500 people, but mostly these are

expected to be Hampton residents. But there could be a significant demand in time for the holiday home market which could risk vitality of facilities.

Challenge: Redevelopment master plans should focus more on unique selling points, reflecting and learning from the history of sites. 5.18 So what has been key to these successes, so far? The Authority identified early on, from looking at other BRAC

cases, that it was important to maintain momentum and therefore identified that it was key to keep houses occupied and not to consider it a closure, but a transfer. They successfully agreed with the Army not to just close the base and then hand it over, but to do the largest pre-closure transfer of property in BRAC. Of the 176 units transferred around 90% are currently occupied.

5.19 The Authority did manage to get some occupants early on for its employment properties. Initially these were mostly Government occupiers (Police etc). But also some businesses - architects / hi-tech manufacturing. But there is over 14,000 square metres of such space and nowhere near enough parking to support all its use.

Fitness centre

Fire hydrants, old and new

Historic Chamberlain

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 19

5.20 The authority has been keen to keep the island in the public eye and get new people to visit. Accordingly it still runs a wide array of annual events and has an on-site volunteer band who performs every Thursday. It has established a Fort Munroe foundation, conscious that people could criticise the use of taxpayer money for such events. The foundation has funded some projects such as the Disability Discrimination Act compliant kayak launch.

Challenge: Redevelopment authorities need to ensure momentum for change and a positive dynamic is maintained whilst a period of being closed is avoided. 5.21 Hurricane Sandy had a major impact on the island in 2011, and led to the demolition of many 1940's modular

buildings. One was kept to illustrate that aspect of the history of the island. It is hoped to turn it into a public resource building.

5.22 It has an interesting approach to some of its Second World War historic structures. These are common along the East coast of the USA, so in places it is allowing them to return to nature.

5.23 It has been successful at adapting some historic buildings to new uses whilst some such as the former community buildings easily transfer others need more work, including addressing damp problems and fitting air conditioning units in a historic setting.

5.24 It would be easy to say that Fort Munroe was always destined for success, but it was suggested that I also look

at Fort Hancock. Apparently that is also a BRAC site near to New York. In many ways similar to Fort Munroe and in an economically buoyant area, but high expectations were dashed at the onset of the recession and the progress has stalled since it closed.

SITE SUMMARY 5.25 Overall I think that the Authority should be very proud of its achievements so far, they have set good foundations

for the future reuse of the island and it will be interesting to see it develop over the coming years. The lessons learnt from this case study will be very helpful to other projects. But the Master plan could capitalise more on the site’s unique selling points.

View over the casements showing air-conditioning units Decaying seafront Word War II buildings

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 20

View of the base from across the bay

Entrance to the Naval Academy

6. Naval Academy Annapolis, Maryland, USA (Retention Case Study)

6.1 The centre of Annapolis grew rapidly in the 17th Century but was overtaken by the larger port of Baltimore, and only

had a new injection of growth when the Naval School (now Academy) located here in 1841. It realised its potential to market its history in 1950 when it established the Historic Annapolis Company.

6.2 The centrally located Naval Academy means that cadets can also easily walk out to the shops of Annapolis thereby

improving the links with the City, and the water taxi offers sustainable travel links to the rest of the peninsular. The investment in pedestrian routes supports these links but the City and academy are so clearly intertwined that it is clear that if it ever did close that would have a major impact leaving Annapolis too heavily dependent on tourism. The high quality built environment of the City centre is also reflected at the entrance of the Academy, which has a lovely park and seating for the public under cherry trees. Clearly a decision has been made that having an inclusive and welcoming public space is a more effective form of surveillance than traditional cleared "stand-off" distances followed in the design of military base entrances. The wide availability of Wifi also meant that outside spaces could be used more flexibly. The Naval Academy is open to foreign visitors6, widening access. Further details on the site are included in Annex 4.

Challenge: Review approaches to military base entrances, especially training sites to introduce more welcoming designs and widening access to Wifi and encouraging visitors. 6.3 Like in the UK the authorities here are only just beginning to respond to the challenge of climate change. The

Chesapeake Bay region faces rising sea levels, storm surges and land subsiding (making the area the third most vulnerable to sea level rise in the USA). The State introduced greenhouse gas reduction target of 25% by 2020 and all its capital projects have to consider the above factors. Hurricane Isobel in 2003 hit the region hard. It flooded much of the 137 hectares Naval Academy including basements where electronic equipment was kept affecting the 4,400 midshipmen now based at the site for some of their four years of preparation for commissioning as an officer in either the Navy or Marine Corps. In 2011 and 2012 Hurricane's Irene and Sandy flooded many homes. The US Army Corps of Engineers are working with the local authorities to help predict local sea level rises. The challenges are so great that currently the main responses focus on changes to building codes and restrictions on new development in vulnerable areas, as well as starting projects to protect existing infrastructure and expand buffer zones like forests, wetlands and beaches. It's hardly surprising that the site floods given that much of it is on reclaimed land. The original 1845 Fort Severn site was only 4 hectares.

Challenge: Review the opportunities for closer liaison on climate change impact assessments with Planning Authorities.

6 see http://www.usnabsd.com/for-visitors/tips-for-visitors/

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 21

Works sign showing contractor and

contract details

Challenge: Consider wider use of detailed contract signs. Signs that tell you what is being constructed, for whom, the contractor and the value of the contract encourage competition and transparency.

6.4 Across the base whilst the buildings have been funded by the Navy, many of the fittings and fixtures have been funded by the alumni and classes. The level of investment in the buildings and infrastructure is very clear, as is the importance given to the image of the Academy. The visitor centre is large, with the shop of course being a major section and the Museum is very impressive. The site as a whole reminded me more of Government buildings in Paris, but the steaming ducts remind you that you are on a large complex.

6.5 Housing is available for all active service members, for military retirees and unlike the UK for retired federal civil service employees. Military Family Housing on and surrounding the base is administered by a partnership between the Department of Navy and Lincoln Property Company (a private venture). The housing ranges from two to six bed town-homes and apartments, all within a 5 minute commute.

Challenge: Review accessibility criteria to off-site housing based on travel times, not distance. Review access to housing for civilian employees. SITE SUMMARY 6.6 The challenges that will be faced in the longer term to keep this site suitable in the light of sea level changes will be

significant and should be a major factor in master planning the site. The inclusive and welcoming approach to the site and flexible use of outdoor space is a lesson for other master plans.

Map of the academy and plaque telling when it was

installed following the hurricane.

Monumental / Government style buildings

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 22

7. Moorebank Units Relocation (MUR), New South Wales, Australia – Consolidation Case Study (Holsworthy and Steele Barracks)

7.1 The aim of the Moorebank Units Relocation project was to consolidate two sites (Holsworthy and Steele Barracks)

primarily to free space for a new 200Ha Intermodal Terminal Facility and Rail Spur at Moorebank. This new Intermodal terminal will connect the site to the planned Southern Sydney Freight Line (SSFL) currently under construction. This will deliver provision for 1 million 20ft equivalent units (TEUs) of freight each year; 300,000 square metres of warehouse and distribution facilities and 8,000 square metres of support services. The project means that the two sites needed to be consolidated onto one moving from 198 hectares to 110 hectares of land available to the military. It was the infrastructure / transport need that drove the project, not defence needs. More details on the background to this project and the site are included in Annex 6.

7.2 The new facilities were for the Army School of Military Engineering, Land Warfare Centre, Army Logistics Training

Centre and support units. That included teaching spaces (inside and outside), messes, pool, live in accommodation, offices, security entrance gate, museum, chapel, workshops and quartermasters stores. A total of 850 personnel were to be relocated.

7.3 I was lucky to be shown around the site by the main project team who had been responsible for its delivery on site: Lt Col Doug Fox, Warren Wilson and Michael Owens (PMCA), Craig Simpson (Lang O’Rouke). In Canberra I was also lucky to be told of the national context for such changes from Robin Renwick and Andrew Borne from the Australian Department of Finance and Regulation; Brett Cox, Assistant Secretary, Defence Support and Reform Group; John Kerwan, Director of Estate Planning Branch and his team and Steve Grzekowiak, Deputy Secretary for Defence Support and Reform Group, Department of Defence. The Planning Authority perspective was provided by Rachel Cumming, Director and ChoCho Myint of the Planning & Infrastructure Division of New South Wales Government.

7.4 They told me about the process followed to master plan the site for the 72 new buildings (100,000 square metres of gross internal area) that were required. They had taken a whole site and long term view. Whilst there was scope for some of the units to consolidate with the existing ones on site, it had been found that for many of the buildings there was little scope for their refurbishment due to their age. Also there was a wish to preserve heritage on the site, much of it dating back to Australia’s convict colony days. A heritage management plan was prepared based on recording and enhancement including the mapping of indigenous heritage. So a heritage precinct was designated, with the new museum, church and heritage items being located here close to the entrance. Many of the Vietnam War age buildings were demolished, but examples were refurbished and kept as part of the site’s heritage. A separate planning application was needed for the AU$15million new junction needed to serve the barracks.

Preserved Convict Built Road

Cycle-Pedestrian Superhighway from the

Main facilities

Cycle “Superhighway” to Gym

Native species planting

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 23

7.5 The existing layout of the site lent itself well to zoning for the uses of the project; as did the on-going projects to develop the western end of the site, live in accommodation and create a “Super Mess”. As in the UK the strategic planning and standards for military sites are set at the national level. These follow similar approaches to the UK on matters such as Counter Terrorism Measures. The rebuild could then focus on developing on the existing footprint. Only 11 hectares of previously undeveloped land was used.

7.6 As for other military sites the training / operational day was key to the Master Plan layout, for example the layout ensured that the main new facilities were within 400 metres of the Mess to cut down delays due to walking time. An iterative process was followed, optimising each aspect by elements and interrelated theme, noting that some of these may be mutually exclusive, consulting stakeholders throughout this process through a process of workshops, further review and consultation meetings. Also the project team set a series of planning principles for the Master Plan process (see Annex 6). Users were receptive to co-locating and seeing efficiencies from dual uses, but were seeking enhanced functionality. A precinct approach quickly emerged for the Master Plan separating the following areas:

Entrance precinct, heritage and semi-public area

Physical Fitness precinct

Central car park

Training and Headquarters precinct

School of Military Engineering precinct, and

The existing Mess and Live in Accommodation precincts remaining.

7.7 The above approach allowed the site to be separated into large compounds and to have the light and heavy traffic separated. Again, as for the Belvoir case study, best practice urban design principles were followed. Particular emphasis was placed on promoting walking / cycling and links through to the nearby train station including a new link. The focus was on pathways (superhighways) to the Mess and Gym and ensuring that they were legible to both service personnel and visitors. This spine based approach was the best I have seen on a military base.

7.8 As an on-going site, security had to be maintained throughout the development process alongside the existing on-site development projects. The precinct approach allows for an “air-lock” type approach to be used at the main gate between the public, semi-public and secure areas. Environmentally sustainable designs were sought as part of the layouts, using best practice for SMART infrastructure especially energy and water standards; a key driver being the Department Energy Environment Effluent Resource Management (DEEERM) approach. In addition the base environmental management plan and Environmental Impact Assessment land stewardship was maintained throughout. A long term management plan was developed for the landscaping based on utilisation of run-off. Many of the standards set for the zone plan approach were to accord with the central estate planning branch.

Museum in the semi-public heritage

precinct Shaded cycle racks outside the main

facilities

Use of local stone and native plants

for landscaping / informal areas

Living In Area Parking Garages Below Workshops – Industrial External Style Training - College External Style

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 24

7.9 The building design approach was to aim to visibly separate areas according to their function. The main facilities and training areas having a technical / university feel and the operational areas having a more utilitarian feel. This certainly worked well on site and added to the legibility for visitors.

7.10 The master planners sought to integrate the base into the wider Holsworthy village, and whilst the access will

relieve congestion, the new cycle and pedestrian links will facilitate transport between the two areas; and the heritage area is more accessible, the level of integration appeared to be relatively minimal from the functional perspective. Unlike in the UK there was apparently no options included for the layouts to maximise the scope for the joint use of sports and fitness facilities. This appeared to be a lost opportunity. However, a counterbalance to that matter is the different approach taken in Australia to the provision of Service Families Accommodation and facilities. Partly in a response to terrorism threats, but also through a wish to integrate more with the local communities there is a general preference from the estate planning branch for community facilities and housing to be more widely dispersed and shared. By ensuring that there aren’t areas of concentrated service personnel families it is considered that there will be a lower opportunity of a significant attack. This different approach to security was also apparent in the design of live in (single living) accommodation. These were mainly three storey buildings with parking immediately underneath the main entrance, making much better use of space. As only the service personnel were allowed to park in these locations it was considered that the threat level was low. Most obviously, the approach taken for the Royal Military College in Duntroon to security was totally different to that for most UK military facilities and more akin to a University campus. It is open to the public to access at all times without the need for passes. These point to the need to reconsider how the aims of security and integration can best both be met.

Challenge: Review the approach to on and off-site provision and counter terrorism measures to increase integration where appropriate to reduce threat levels.

SITE SUMMARY 7.11 Overall, the master planning approaches seen in the UK, USA and Australia for the consolidation sites were

remarkably similar and the Holsworthy Barracks team should be proud of what they have achieved in a short timescale. It presents some of the best examples of a consolidation of military bases I have seen and added to the general master planning principles approach included in Annex 7.

Challenge: Develop and implement a series of Master planning principles that reflect best practice in case studies for the development of new bases and consolidations to guide approaches to all significant developments on the military estate.

Pathways linked to existing areas Natural landscaping / Swale Operational area & cycle route

Live In Accommodation at RMC

Duntroon

RMC Duntroon – Aerial Photo c/o Aus DoD

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 25

8. North Head, Manly, New South Wales, Australia – Long term closure case study.

8.1 During my research visits I toured a number of other current and former military bases in the three study countries.

I took notes on each as I visited. I had not intended to add North Head, Manly as a case study, but following my

visit I found it illustrated some issues well as it had a long history of use following its gradual closure as a military

base. This headland site is very important in both Aboriginal and Australian settlement history. It is thought that

this was an important Aboriginal site for ceremonies and rituals and was used by the local Guringai people. Indeed

the western name Manly came from the “confidence and manly behaviour” of the people there as observed by the

Australian colony’s first Governor in 1788. But soon afterwards in 1789 a small pox epidemic meant that by 1830

few Aboriginals were left living in the area. Recorded Aboriginal sites included shelter, midden sites, rock

engravings, open midden sites, shelter cave art and open camp sites. In 1828 the headland was used as a

Quarantine station for ships passenger, many of those buildings still exist.

8.2 In 1936 the military Barracks was established on the headland and in 1946 the School of Artillery was established at the base. It was finally fully vacated in 1998. The Sydney Harbour Federation Trust took over management of the sanctuary in 2001, worked to remediate the site and it opened to the public in 2007.

8.3 The headland is now a National Park and offers 10km of walking tracks, rare flora and fauna (one of the last remaining areas of Eastern Suburbs Banksia Scrub – once abundant in Sydney only 3% remains) and has a visitor centre and café. The prominence of the rare Bandicoot is also obvious to any visitor. Visitors can also tour the World War II gun emplacements or stay in the Luggage Store Hotel or visit its museum.

8.4 The main former Army buildings located around the parade ground are being used for a variety of businesses. Some of the former Quarantine Station (then military) houses are now available for purchase and it appears that new uses are gradually being found across the whole site whilst balancing these with the needs of conservation and visitor access. Only one issue appeared to be missing from the re-use and interpretation being presented of the headland, its Aboriginal heritage. Very little is being presented to tell visitors of its Aboriginal history and none of the new developments appear to reflect that aspect, reinforcing the conclusions reached for the Fort Munroe case study and challenges on Master plans reflecting the unique aspects and history of sites.

Artist Studio in former military

building Gun emplacement View of Sydney from North Head

Former parade ground Memorial Walkway

Plan of the Headland Sanctuary

showing access routes

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 26

9. Hobsonville, Auckland, New Zealand – Closure Case Study

9.1 Around 243 hectares of land at what would eventually become the Hobsonville Airbase site was originally purchased

by the Crown in 1853 and renamed Port Hobsonville. Prior to that it was mostly used for farming and clay pot production. But the local iwi Maori & Pakeha used it for seafood, timber, clay and kauri gum. In 1924 the Royal New Zealand Air Force developed the site as its premium flying boats base including a “wet apron”, hangars and barracks and that continued until 1967 when that use was phased out. In 2001 the Air Force relocated to the nearby RNZAF Auckland Base near Whenaupai (just north of the motorway) which is now the largest airbase in the country with around 1,000 personnel. More details on the context for the project are included in Annex 8.

9.2 The relocation allowed the site to be brought forward for disposal which was formally announced in 2005, but that was after years of planning for the future use. The Department of Defence had been planning for its disposal since a review in 1997. Once it had been declared surplus in line with the public works act sites are offered to other government agencies, local authorities, former owners and iwi claims are resolved, only then can they be put forward for sale. But as in the UK some consents can be sought prior to the sale to increase land values. In 2005 much of the Hobsonville site was bought by the former Waiakere City Council (now Auckland Council) with the intention of bringing it forward as a development site for marine super yachts. That was the focus of the policies for the landv in the 2005 re-zoning planvi, later resource consentvii and 2011, 2012 comprehensive development planviii which identified 20 hectares of land for that purpose. But following the global financial crisis in 2008 the market for this type of use was less buoyant and the lack of housing provision across Auckland increased in prominence as an issue. So the proposal for greater use for housing gradually gained traction in the development plans and by 2012 Auckland City Council identified land for 3,000 dwellings (including 2 schools, shops, offices) and 20 hectares of land hoping to create 2,000 jobs in the Marine Precinct; but also a new Ferry Terminal. Auckland Council Property Limited7 (owned by the Council) were responsible for taking forward the Marine precinct proposals, whereas the remaining 176 hectares for Housing development was taken forward by Housing New Zealand.

9.3 Hobsonville is part of the wider 435 hectares of land in North West Auckland which is being transformed under the Auckland Planix to provide 5,500 homes and 20,000 jobs. Although this vision has changed over time, the new urban extension will still now provide a mix of jobs, recreation, shopping and living areas all linked by much improved transport links locally and into the City. This in an area which previously experienced significant congestion. This plan led approach to the development is a significant positive aspect of this case study which could be replicated in other examples. However, the approach taken to the Marine Precinct is perhaps less worthy of replication. The aspiration to deliver active streets with “town centre” frontages is a worthy, but perhaps too high a goal. The principle of defining the areas to decrease impacts and deliver buffers appears to be appropriate, but its prescriptive nature appears to be less appropriate as it is not flexible to change with the market. A more suitable approach would have been more akin to the UK’s Enterprise Zone model which would be capacity based and informed by visual and environmental impact mitigation. A more flexible approach was delivered in the laterx design guides for the marine precinct.

7 www.yard37.co.nz

Higher density apartments with shops below at the

centre of the new community

New Marine Precinct Industrial Building

Lower density housing with set-back parking areas,

paths and cycle routes

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 27

9.4 The 1995 vision for the Hobsonville site was to be an exemplar Crown / Local Authority partnership project to

develop a new high density settlement outside the main metropolitan area to help to address serious housing shortages whilst also “nudging” a change in attitudes to housing design. This approach has been followed through various iterations of the Master Planxi for the site but the key attributes have remained, but with increased emphasis over time on sustainability and community issuesxii:

Spine road at the centre of the peninsular;

Traditional street layout with houses fronting onto the street;

Mix of types and preservation of the historic setting and marine environment

Recreational land with promotion of the cycling and bus use network. Challenge: Increase the scope for new projects to be exemplar schemes to lead changes in development approaches. 9.5 Initially Housing New Zealand led the project through the local development plan process to seek the allocation of

the site for 3,500 houses, plus associated infrastructure, new transport links, schools and employment areas and was to be developed by Hobsonville Land Company8 (established by the New Zealand Government). There has been consultation over the proposals throughout and there was initially some opposition to social housing provision on the peninsular and perceived traffic impacts. An urban design group was formed, including representation from the Council and Community and that meets very frequently and reviews each house design against an agreed design palette. An interesting approach to developing the plans for the site was put forward the “jazz band” style – ensuring that the basic chords were always kept consistent, but allowing a wider range of notes to be played throughout.

9.6 Support for the development of this project was provided by the Crown via a leveraged model to secure private sector capital. This Crown agency and funding aspect of the project was viewed as crucial by the project team, not only to ensure that partnership organisations including the Council were on board with the vision, but also that the scheme was integrated with the proposed development. The NZ$38m input is expected to realise over NZ$100m in return, this investment is expected to bring forward around NZ$3bn in capital investment. The importance of this leveraged long term investment model is a similar conclusion to that from the South Eastern Europe Case Studies under the FATE projectxiii. This injection of public funding allowed scope for innovation particularly in the areas of typologies and densities (now delivering around 42 dwellings per hectare far higher than the surrounding areas which at most tend to deliver 20 dwellings per hectare). It also allowed designs to be prepared on the basis of urban planning principles such as walkability. Perhaps reflecting that vision, the raft of awards for the project already issued9 made this an obvious case study to target.

9.7 The success of this project can also be seen in its popularity for sales, initially there was a very low market in this part of Auckland for terraced house, with sales starting at 5-15 each month, now that has risen to 40 each month. The development team have a “price based costing model” not a “cost based pricing model”. The housing designs focus on decreasing household utility bills with measures such as rainfall storage and solar gain orientation with insulation meaning that on average the demand for water use is 30% lower, electricity bills are 28% less and overall the houses are 25% cheaper to “run” than the Auckland average. The residents of the first 100 homes were

8 www.hobsonvillepoint.co.uk 9 Including – NZ Planning Institute – Planning Practice Award, Supreme Practice Award – Sunderland Hobsonville

Development; Designers Institute of NZ, Best Design Award 2011; NZ Architecture Awards 2013 – Sunderland

Planning and Urban Design; NZ Institute of Landscape Architects – Landscape Award.

Terraced housing with native

planting and swales running along

the centre of the road

Wide variety of housing types and densities, from live-

work through to retirement homes to ensure a mixed

inclusive community.

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 28

surveyed and 98.5% said it was a great place to live; 85% said the public spaces were very good and 88% said they had no intention of moving. The lessons learnt in developing this area are being shared with local builders to allow them to apply them to wider schemes across Auckland, albeit not achieving the 20% affordability seen on this site, as the wider target is set at only 10%.

Challenge: Ensure finance models promote an integrated community, efficient and sustainable designs. 9.8 Both Auckland Council and its predecessor (Waitakere Council) took a proactive plan led approach to seeking the

redevelopment of the former base. They had a dedicated team for the development with a funding agreement backing this support. An innovative urban design panel was also established to ensure the Council was represented through to that stage. The approach was to seek comprehensive development plans with outline planning permissions setting types and styles. A variety of approaches were taken across the site. Key elements for the successful delivery of the planning were seen as the single land ownership across the development area, the proactive master planning and partnership working through to the monitoring of designs. Particular attention was paid to the preservation of the mangrove swamps around the edge of the peninsular as a rare and rich habitat. This planning aim became a major feature of the public access strategy for the new development.

9.9 The delivery of the new ferry terminal was a key aspect for the sustainable linkages of the peninsular and this was

brought forward by Hobsonville Land Company. The new ferry gives access into Auckland’s Central Business District in around 30 minutes. As in the UK provision of key infrastructure is linked to legal agreements with the Council taking over maintenance in the longer term. Aligned to the new development were longer term plans which delivered the new motorway and ramp in the 1990s linking the Westgate Town Centre to routes to the north of the island. This addressed a significant congestion problem through the peninsular.

9.10 At the time of visiting the site some of the sections had been completed, some were under construction and some were still at the detailed planning stage, so this presented a good range of stages to consider. During the planning process some lessons had been learnt to allow new approaches to be adopted across the peninsular also giving a choice in living environments. Whilst the market aspects as described above were drivers for the project, the exemplar project was keen to show how a new approach to urban design could be delivered in New Zealand. The layouts aimed to be suitable for forms of living less reliant on the car, with a neighbourhood based approach allowing safe areas to play and environmentally sustainable designs. The delivery team were keen to focus on placemaking “it is all about the people, not houses”.

9.11 A residents society was created (canton style) which has become politically influential over time and the HLC prepares a regular newsletter – the latest announcing the start of the build of the new “Early Learning Centre”. The effectiveness of this new society was evident on the day of the visit as Anzac poppies had been placed across the site all made by the local community. The layout reinforced these principles with development off the spine road and a range of types, from apartments to large houses, first time buyer houses to mansions (many of the management company staff, including the chief executive now live on the peninsular). Along this spine there is a village centre area with higher densities over more storeys and shops at the ground floor and some live-work houses, although the success of these is too early to judge. The precincts are developed off the spine with good practice urban design approaches to promote quieter / safer streets. This has also delivered a much higher number of houses. Traditionally the area would have accommodated around 1,000 houses and now it is expected to deliver 3,500 of which 1,000 will be classed as affordable.

9.12 A staged withdrawal from the service families accommodation occupied across the peninsular has been

managed. This meant that the area remained active during the development process (as for the Fort Munroe case study). As in the UK entitlement to service families accommodation is eligibility based with subsidised allowances.

New Ferry Terminal, adjacent

to the bus stop and market

New Primary School adjacent to the

new centre of the community

Public Art linking the centre of the

community to the linear park.

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 29

9.13 Conservation of the heritage was not merely limited to the military history of the peninsular. As part of the

consultation on the development proposals. Particular attention was given to consulting the iwi (Maori) about the proposals, and the also let to the preservation of access to Bomb Point as the most important feature of that part of the peninsula’s heritage. Conservation of the military heritage of the site has not only been limited to the feature buildings (see Annex 8), as is often the case on redevelopments, but also to former military housing and heritage interpretation around the site. Of course alongside the military heritage comes associated historical land quality issues and this marine environment meant particular care had to be given to limit discharges into the surrounding mangrove swamps. The marginal strip of around 20 metres alongside the mean high water line has been vested in the Council to allow them to control it for public access and nature conservation.

SITE SUMMARY 9.14 Overall, this case study presents perhaps the strongest case for a plan led approach to redeveloping former

military sites as well as the role that Government can take in influencing the form to ensure balanced communities, heritage retention and effective use of land to provide sustainable development. But equally it also demonstrates the possible pitfalls of too much reliance on prescriptive plans seeking the “exact notes” and not being willing to adopt a “jazz band” style to developments ensuring the basic chords are right, whilst still allowing flexibility and improvisation.

Challenge: Ensure a plan led approach to new developments, but ensure that these policies are based on sound core principles whilst allowing for flexibility in delivering aims and objectives.

Former military buildings from Officers Mess Accommodation through to historic

hangars and technical buildings preserved for refurbishment and re-use.

Former military houses being refurbished for sale on the open market. Catalina Café – Reuse of Military Building

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 30

10. Overall Conclusions

10.1 The approaches taken to the disposal of former military sites varies significantly between the study countries

and the UK. At one extreme is the Australian example where sites are disposed of directly onto the market, which has the advantage of speed. At the other is the New Zealand example, where the Government took the opportunity of being responsible for a major site to lead the market in new forms of housing and also increased the value of its land ownership. The UK in recent years has been taking a similar approach with the development of Eco-Towns on former military sites, but also seeking best value from its sales. Equally, the role for the community in disposals is very different. Decisions for disposals in all the countries are largely undertaken outside the public domain, albeit once decided some are open for scrutiny. The UK, Australian and New Zealand approaches are all plan led, with the US approach being more centrally determined decreasing the scope for local influence. On balance, a middle ground between benefitting the taxpayer, whilst appropriately planning sites would suggest that the UK and New Zealand approaches is most appropriate.

10.2 The approaches taken to the planning of consolidations varies less. Some common themes have been identified through these case studies, these have been compiled into a set of master planning principles that can be followed in both the layouts of new as well as the gradual change of existing bases as shown below and in more detail in Annex 7.

10.3 In addition, a series of challenges have been identified for master planners of current and former military bases. The results of this research demonstrates the similarity between site planning across countries and therefore the need for planners to share their experiences more widely.

Learning through the Fellowship 10.4 Aside from the obvious findings given above, in doing the Fellowship I've found a new impetus to learn and take

on new skills. In preparing for my Fellowship visit and whilst I was visiting I did a lot of reading online and learned more modern ways to research, I found it good to be able to speak to other researchers and ask for their help. I've learnt new things such as remote accessing and blogging. I’ve found that I am also learning more through presenting the results to other professionals and hope that they benefit from my research.

Stephen Harness MRTPI FWCMT

Child reading a soldier’s history at the Vietnam

War Memorial, Washington DC, USA

Anzac Poppies at the National

Memorial, Canberra

Anzac Poppies (made by the

community) at Hobsonville, NZ

Underlying principles to be followed in layouts:

Military – Civilian Integration maximised

All security standards met or exceeded

Legible to users and visitors alike, with clear definitions for functional areas

Retain existing infrastructure (including roads and trunk services) and vegetation where possible

Retain and enhance positive features and heritage of the existing site

Use existing topography to avoid significant earth works

Where possible separate heavy traffic from general traffic, and secure areas from public / semi-public

Provide shuttle bus (larger sites), bikeways and pedestrian paths linking main gate and units to major facilities; and large main car park with only operational users having parking in the secure areas.

Allow for sustainable low maintenance landscape buffers and sustainable drainage

Provide a framework for future development and expansion

Maximise the use of multi-storey structures to minimise land area impact of buildings

Layouts to allow for sustainably designed buildings (for example solar orientation).

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 31

Annex 1: Background on the BRAC Process

10.5 The BRAC process has, to date, been through five rounds of closures (1988, 1991, 1993, 1995 and 2005), it is understood that the Army are pushing for a new round of closures in 2017. Over 350 military installations have already been closed. Andy Napoli (special assistant for BRAC at the Army) has been quoted as saying the 2005 round was unlike previous rounds as $billions were spent on new facilities and consolidations; the earlier rounds had focused more on improving efficiency and cutting costs. Consolidations have been progressed to use sites more efficiently and avoid them becoming like "Swiss cheese" in the words of Andy Napoli, where there would otherwise have been a "checker board of facilities" that had become mothballed. Some of the lower military-value bases have been closed and some of their functions have been transferred to back fill some empty parts of higher military-value bases.

10.6 Evidence from across the USA indicates that the majority (65%) of redevelopment projects are undertaken via partnerships with Federal Government funding (71%) and local government only providing funding in 35% of former sites and US states in 15%. Informal public, private and non-profit partnerships are present in most (75%) of the most recent round of base closures. But only 18% of redeveloped bases are in the North East of the US and the majority (70%) are urban or suburban. This analysis informed the choice of case studies (as detailed above).

10.7 In looking at case studies in Britain, Germany and Jordan, Bagaeen (2006) concluded that the incentive of job creation and economic development was the spur that drove local authorities into taking on the risks involved in the redevelopment of military bases. He also identified that public participation was a key critical building block to delivering new sustainable development, as well as avoiding traffic and ecological impacts.

10.8 In Economic Development Assistance for Communities Affected by Employment Changes Due to Military Base Closures (BRAC) Oscar R. Gonzales Analyst in Economic Development Policy June 16, 2009 concluded: "The 2005 BRAC round includes the closure or realignment of 837 facilities and involves an additional 160 facilities that will gain missions or resources, for a total of 997 changes nationwide. Most of these changes are on a smaller scale, each involving fewer than 300 direct job losses or gains, including military, civilian, and contractor jobs. Unlike previous rounds, the 2005 BRAC round is focused on creating the infrastructure needed to support a transformed, expeditionary armed force—concentrated more on shifting forces and installation assets to promote the centralization of units in places from which they can be deployed rapidly. Thus, the 2005 BRAC round is characterized much more by realignment than closure. In 20 communities, an estimated increase of 170,000 workers is expected".

10.9 Since the 1970's the US congress has to approve base closures, so they became a political process, leading to

no base closures between 1977 and 1988. But the end of the Cold War meant the US military needed to realign and consolidate across the globe. This led to the first BRAC independent, bipartisan commission in 1988, and four subsequent commissions. The primary aims were to:

1. Transform the force to meet new threats; 2. Rationalise to eliminate excess physical capacity and base infrastructure; 3. Maximise capabilities and efficiencies; and 4. Examine joint use between services.

All the realignments and closures must have generated net savings by 2011. 10.10 One of the biggest changes in planning in the USA has been the move towards high density, and often high rise

town centres and the development of rapid transit routes. It's clear that the money being spent by the American Government to stimulate a recovery of the economy is now delivering massive amounts of new infrastructure in the Washington Area. As well as the High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes, I've seen many more long distance routes for the Metro and its clear more are planned. As well as the old Town of Annapolis, there are a number of new centres. These have recently been mixed use developments as encouraged by the Obama administration's sustainability policies. Observing these off-site changes also set the context for the on-site changes I saw in the case studies.

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 32

The National Picture - Congressional Research 10.11 I was very grateful to have the chance to quiz two of the USA's foremost authorities on the BRAC process,

Tadlock Cowan and Daniel Else of the Congressional Research Service. Daniel specialises in implementation issues and Tadlock on economic issues. They have both produced numerous authoritative reports on the process. We began by talking about whether it was possible to identify generalisations over factors for success or failure of consolidations or closure/redevelopments. We discussed a wide range of examples from across the USA which clearly indicated that no one factor could be seen as key. It was clear that areas with stronger economies which had previously diversified so were less dependent upon the base would be more able to respond to the challenges. But equally there were many examples where those conditions were in place, but yet the redevelopment had not progressed well. We quickly identified three areas key to successful responses to BRAC challenges, be it consolidations or closures, these were:

4. Early advance positive planning - looking at the opportunities; 5. Joint working between authorities; and 6. Having previously diversified the local economy away from total reliance on the base.

Whereas the key ingredient to failure was the lack of co-operation between authorities. Failure doesn't mean that projects don't go ahead, they just take far longer. The obvious presumption that areas with strong economies were more likely to succeed was not correct.

10.12 The nature of the moves was also seen as key to assessing the impacts. For example, where a base had a

highly skilled workforce working on issues such as technology which had obvious links to outside industry, they tended to be linked to ancillary clusters of businesses. So when they closed, the local impact was less as it was for the staff themselves as they were often able to find jobs locally. Where bases were reliant on lower skill jobs the obverse was true.

10.13 In the UK there is a strong drive towards integrating the bases into the local economy. It was felt that in the US

where that was the case the impact of base closures had been increased, in particular the increased impact on local rental collapses and dramatic impacts on school populations. However, the circumstances in the US are significantly different from the UK. States are highly dependent upon their ability to raise taxes from properties. As DoD bases are federal property they don't pay tax to the States, but they do pay impact payments in lieu of taxes where the sites are 70-80% of the local economy. As base domestic properties (but not the land itself) have been privatised any improvements do become liable to tax.

10.14 The US Office of Economic Adjustment had established a series of Local Redevelopment Authorities and this approach had been developed in response to earlier base closures in the 1960's. They were established to help local economies undertake Economic Planning and were supported by DoD including by grants, but were not Government bodies. Members are the communities themselves, and an Association of Defence Communities has been established to provide a planning focus and to enhance the relationship between the community and bases, similar to the military covenants being developed across the UK, but with an increased planning funding focus.

10.15 We also discussed the issue of the escalating costs associated with BRAC. As for the UK rationalizations, often

other programmes were integrated with the BRAC projects, so the true costs of consolidations were increasingly obscured. It is currently being argued that there is a case for another round of BRAC as the rationalisations in the last round were estimated to cost $6bn, but are delivering $2bn in savings each year.

10.16 We discussed issues that had not been realised fully as part of BRAC. There are less instances of the development of Joint bases. Significant delay had also occurred in the BRAC process which had 6 years to implement, but took 4 years to agree on common standards, often these went to the common highest level increasing costs.

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 33

10.17 The approach to addressing land contamination has also been key to the BRAC process. Sites have often been

parcelled depending upon the level of contamination, with the lower contaminated sites being handed back to LRA's first. The highest contaminated sites are frequently never released and instead are used as wildlife conservation areas. Under the BRAC process the DoD act as the disposal agency (as does Defence Infrastructure Organisation for the Ministry of Defence in the UK). As in the UK the DoD can dispose of a site on a lower cost basis on a public benefit basis. But the LRA has to have an adopted plan for the site for creating jobs on the site itself, and not just through the sale of the site. The LRA has 7 years to implement that plan. Sites can also be transferred to the State or put up for public auction. But before it is transferred, as in the UK the other Federal Agencies have first choice, and also specific priorities for future use are set in statute, for example for provision of low income housing / accommodation for the homeless.

10.18 Each BRAC site is eligible for Tax incentives and subsidies, for example Federal Buildings and Economic

Development Zones. This is a valuable marketing tool for the sites.

Planning and Project Management: Fairfax County, BRAC Coordinators and Base Commanders 10.19 A key element of my Fort Belvoir case study was to meet with representatives from all sides of the Planning

process, so I was especially grateful when Gerald Gordon President and CEO of the Fairfax County Economic Development Authority (EDA) and his PA arranged a co-ordinated meeting with Marianne Gardner (Director of Planning), Mark Canale (now Rail PM but formerly BRAC Co-ordinator for Fort Belvoir), Col Mark Moffatt (Ret) (Former Base Infrastructure Development Commander now Director for Fairfax) and Alan Fogg FCEDA Vice President.

10.20 The message I got from all the participants was that right from the start they had all taken a positive attitude to

the BRAC proposals and sought to use the changes to the best advantage of the County and the Base. The EDA was established long before the BRAC process and it should be recognised that Counties are heavily dependent upon their ability to raise money from the Real Estate Tax Base, so there is a renewed impetus to get new contractors to locate in the area and therefore contribute to the local economy. Following the BRAC announcement an assessment of the suitability of existing available office space found that around 8 to 10 million square feet of new office space would be required. This was later revised to around 5 to 6 million square feet. Now the County has a high amount of vacant office space but rental values have remained stable indicating levels of demand. The proposals to improve Route 1 will add to this demand.

10.21 Col Moffatt came into post in 2007 when proposals were still merely on paper. When the proposals at Fort Belvoir were announced it was the largest financial investment in the USA BRAC process, and second only in terms of the amount of space needed to Fort Bliss (Texas) where totally new provision for an Army division was required. The reconfiguring of three hospitals into one (from the existing site hospital, Walter Reed and Bethesda) meant the relocation onto the base of 2,000 new medical professionals to add to the existing 1,000. This combined

Monumental columns at the entrance to the

Library of Congress (and a person for scale)

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 34

with the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency site relocation from Warrington meant that additional land was required. The Marks Centre was purchased from a private owner and this process was handled by the Corps of Engineers who evaluated a number of sites before choosing the final location.

10.22 At the start of the process there were a large number of public hearings all parties took part in these and anyone could be in attendance. All those in attendance in the meeting agreed that the openness and transparency of the process had been key to its success. At the start there were a number of concerns, with the review of the Local Plan (NEPR) by the County the neighbouring area of Alexandria was concerned that it already had a large amount of vacant office space. New Federal developments would be taken off the tax roll and there would be no new funding for school places (as in the UK military families tend to be larger than general housing areas as they have a higher proportion of younger families). The site previously had 2 elementary schools and 1 high school, but prior to BRAC the higher level of officers based on the site meant that had reduced to 1 elementary school. Now the area needs 2 new elementary schools to provide for the base. Some of the local representatives and residents focused on the downside of the proposals.

10.23 The BRAC grants allowed for the employment of dedicated project managers, but the County used its existing staff. Mark took on the post of BRAC Co-ordinator for Fort Belvoir in 2005, he was already familiar with the site and County and had worked for the Department of Transport and been in the Army. He acted as the single point of contact (SPOC) for the 13 County agencies. Each site organisation also had a lead SPOC who also attended the meetings with the County. Again, everyone agreed that having such a single point of contact was key to the success. As BRAC co-ordinator he acted as the grant manager for the DoD funding ($6million over 5 years) and this paid for 6 full time positions in addition to the work and planning needed. A joint planning process was commenced. Having a commander at the same level as the Base Commander (full Colonel) and being solely responsible for BRAC was seen as key to successful negotiations. A dialogue was commenced early in the process ensuring co-operation not antagonistic. A single board was established to foster open dialogue and to allow concerns to be raised. These were all public meetings and were visionary and held initially 4 times a year, then over time that reduced to twice a year. These also shared key information such as land availability and school requirements. The BRAC co-ordinator was also able to secure transparency from the County for their requirements. A “no surprises” approach was taken and sharing of all documentation (sharing both good and bad news openly). Such an approach also meant joint responses could be given to issues raised such as the disbursement of deer from the northern site into nearby gardens.

10.24 Early on in the process it was clear that $650million of infrastructure was required to be delivered. There were also significant spin off developments for the local industries. The DoD moves mostly involved civilians: full time workers and associated contractors. It was estimated that for each BRAC job relocated another 1-3 dependent contractor jobs were impacted. The Virginia Governor issued an Executive order to establish the board and give focus to the Regional Planning approach. The Working Group was set up to have representatives from Local Government / State and Citizens from affected communities and businesses, but also US House of Representatives on an ex officio basis. Military representatives from affected installations were also invited as advisers only. Four working groups were established - the Northern Virginia Working Group covered Fort Belvoir. The order also identified $125,000 of funding for these groups, but that representatives would attend on a voluntary basis. The Virginia Department of Transport identified $403million of road improvement and investigations funding to support Fort Belvoir alone as a result of BRAC.

10.25 Prior to BRAC improvements had been focused inside the wire. The board identified a number of opportunities that arose from BRAC on top of the grant funding including the link to the existing road programme. When BRAC was announced the County was in the middle of its planning round. The difference in the planning approach before and afterwards was "night and day". Prior to BRAC the Fort Belvoir Master plan approach had identified a growth of 25,000 but the County was not consulted until the plan had final approval from the Army. Post BRAC draft EIS comments were sought and the County submitted 25 pages of comments to the board and broadly these were carried forward.

10.26 The change in planning approach towards "new urbanism" came partly from the Garrison Commander, but also from DoD guidelines. This was seeking increased walkability / sustainability / permeability / increased use of parking structures and together these were to deliver a higher quality of environment for the personnel. The DoD had also set a target for only 60% capacity for parking, meaning a lower reliance on single occupancy vehicles and greater use of public transport would be required.

10.27 The County was seeking to introduce LEED certification across its activity areas, being able to point to how the Army has delivered such projects on Fort Belvoir is seen as a significant wider spin off benefit of BRAC.

10.28 The 2010 Development Capacity Study by Belvoir New Vision Planners for the Installation Management

Command looking at the National Capital Region - District was managed by the US Army Corps of Engineers. This

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 35

establishes a 40 year plan including programmed and non-programmed elements and maps alternatives and leads to population changes and transport impacts and improvements needed. This records the existing position at 8,430 residential / 22,467 employment rising on 8,945 / 40,912 at phase 1 and 9,025 / 69,945 at phase 3. The associated infrastructure needed at phase 1 is transport related to reduce trips by 15% using HOV lanes and parking provision. At phase 3 road improvements and parking linked to a transport corridor, park and ride and I95 access are identified.

Fairfax County (January 2008) Guide to the 2008 BRAC Area Plans Review 10.29 Following the release in 2007 of the final Environmental Impact Statement and Record of Decision regarding

the BRAC moves to Fort Belvoir a review of the County's Comprehensive Land Use Plan was undertaken and that started in January 2008, primarily to assess the land use changes needed to meet the demands of BRAC. The County supported the dedicated BRAC staff including 1 County BRAC Co-ordinator, 3 Land Use Planners and 2 Transportation Planners.

10.30 Only the areas affected by the BRAC process were subject to nomination for proposals to amend the Comprehensive Area Plan (8 areas in total), all in the southern part of the County and along two transport corridors (rt1/I-95 and Richmond Highway). Those areas were selected as being closest to the base and most appropriate to accommodate growth. Nominations were entered into the planning process and were subject to extensive public engagement.

10.31 A number of other groups were established including a Planning Board of Advisers (to solicit community inputs); Transportation Working Group; Coordinating Committee; and Intergovernmental Coordination.

10.32 The Area Plan had been seeking to focus development in its activity centres, a "no sprawl" approach. So the response to BRAC was to focus development at the closest centres (3 of the 9 centres). The areas were asked to their proposals and all came back with ambitious development plans. The plan aims to balance residential and employment development. A major opportunity is the Springfield Business Centre and its links to the Metro which previously was a declining area due to the national economic slump. There are also considerable spin off potential developments from areas such as retailing / hotels and restaurants, but the most significant is thought to be medical research. The growth in personally tailored medicine and links to medical devices are specialisms which the area now has and therefore industry is locating in this area to link to this knowledge base.

10.33 Whilst General Services Staff (Civil Servants) do get financial support for moves, new employees and those promoted into new posts don't. The Army did an analysis of its employee’s locations by zip code to seek to predict how many would relocate, and who would commute. This was the first time such analysis had been possible. The results of this analysis were that the change would be less people commuting northwards (commuting southwards being easier). The number of houses on the base is capped at 2100, so new provision is off site. Over 4,000 units have been developed in the area and the market is still strong.

10.34 A key achievement of the partnership approach has been the development of the bus service. The security approved driver checks passes as people board the bus, so it can easily pass through the gate. Significant transport improvements (Route 1 / I95 and Fairfax County Parkway 2 miles of road) completed and planned are significant achievements of the partnership with the Commonwealth-County-Army who worked together to secure $180million of funding from the federal government. Such plans meant that in 2007 provision was made for plans which will only be implemented in 2016 such as the $40million wider road bridge (not the 120 but 178feet, joint designed at a time when there was no funding for the Rt1 improvements).

10.35 Although the participants were too modest to say in my meeting, it was clear to me that personalities of those involved was also key to the success. Having a modest and respectful team who focus on the outcomes, not on self-advancement must have been key.

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 36

Economic Development & Commercial Property: Colliers International / Quantico / Belvoir Regional Business Alliance, Inc / Fairfax County Economic Development Authority. 10.36 Whilst a lot is written about the military drivers for BRAC and economic consequences for local businesses,

employment and local populations, less is mentioned about its impacts on the wider property market. At the same time as the 2005 BRAC announcements were being made the DoD was starting to implement the 2003 new security standards (DoD Minimum Anti-terrorism Standards for Buildings). These standards are broadly the same as in the UK. But the big difference was the level of leased properties "outside the wire" that the DoD had in 2005. This change was partly in response to the 1983 Beirut barracks bombing in which 241 US servicemen were killed, but also to the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing where the building collapsed due to the failure of a single girder.

10.37 These 22 specific standards relate to certain criteria which could not be easily met by retrofitting buildings. Such as a 25 metre stand-off distance (half that of the UK) from the controlled perimeter typically where vehicles could access; to prevent progressive collapse of the building, protective glazing, ventilation of the mail room and emergency shutdown of ventilation systems and parking control.

10.38 These therefore meant that virtually no leased office / other space would meet these standards at the time. That was a significant property issue for the Washington DC Region, especially in Arlington County. It was estimated that around 400 to 700 thousand square metres of leased space was affected. It was planned to move 23,000 DoD employees from leased space in Northern Virginia to "behind the wire" properties in the greater Washington metropolitan area vacating about 400,000 square metres of office space (or about 4 Canary Wharf buildings) across about 100 leased buildings with a rental income of an estimated $217 million, 90% of which did not or could not meet the new standards. Nearly half this space was in the Crystal City part of Washington (just south of the Pentagon) most in buildings over 20 years old. In addition many private contractor firms were expected to follow the moves, but many would stay in their offices.

10.39 Such massive changes were therefore expected to have major implications for the office property market locally. The final moves out are only occurring now. Whilst it is understood that the changes were to respond to threats, the link between that aspiration and the four main aims of the BRAC process (as listed above) is not so clear. This appears to be distinct difference between the UK and US experiences. In the UK rationalisations have tended to be more clearly linked to the transformation, rationalisation and efficiency objectives. Issues such as meeting new standards are only addressed when new buildings are proposed, less so for existing provision, perhaps reflecting the difference in budgets available.

10.40 The Obama administration has recently reviewed the need to meet these standards for all such office space not "behind the wire" as it is now recognised that they conflict with sustainability aspirations in many cases.

Business “Spin-Off” 10.41 The spin off for local businesses of military development is often discussed. So it was good to meet with Miles

Freedman to learn about the experience of the business alliance he leads. It was launched in April 2008 primarily to respond to the opportunities available for local businesses from the consolidations onto Fort Belvoir and Marine Base Quantico. Miles, an Economic Development consultant was approached by the Northern Virginia Community College Provost who wanted to respond to the opportunities. The first approach was to ask the local Business Community what they needed. A series of 7 focus group meetings were held with 150 businesses. Overwhelmingly these identified that lack of information was the big issue. The challenge was that real estate was in increased demand, but the business community didn't know if it had the right skills to respond. What was needed was one group who could act as a one stop shop for local businesses on BRAC and who could liaise with the bases directly and act as a steer to the appropriate contacts.

10.42 In April 2008 a not for profit business advisory board was established supported by 22 businesses who each contributed $1,500. That summer a series of events were run on the opportunities for example construction. Whilst the big construction companies (mostly just 3 companies) had already won the contracts to provide the new office space on base, there were significant opportunities for sub-contractors. Unlike in the UK the Federal Contracts specify a specific percentage of work has to be undertaken by small / minority / women owned businesses. The big contractors know they score more points to win contracts when they meet these requirements. In the UK a similar approach is taken on encouraging such practises and scoring bids, but not so specific requirements. The board also won contracts from the Federal Government but remained contract staff to minimise overheads and relied on around 6 to 10 volunteers and not being sole clients. Support for the alliance was in various forms. For example, the Community College provided free training space, and members often

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 37

sponsored the events. Some limited Government grants were used, but the alliance kept away from taking these to support its basis and instead used them for specific programmes or needs.

10.43 It took around a year for the alliance to become trusted and known as the source for information and referrals from the bases. Referrals increased when results were shown such as the number of trainees graduating with certifications through alliance training. As this grew the initial members who were construction focused, were joined by all the local educational institutions, the local government community and hospitality industry.

10.44 The alliance is unique as it covers all of Northern Virginia, so avoids the issue of competition between Counties. Now 6 years on it has 80 members (no military representation is sought). New members are initially given free advice then encouraged to join to participate in one of its specialist committees. In Maryland the State subsidises such alliances (up to $100,000 each year).

10.45 Looking back the key to the success of establishing the alliance was consistency of the positive message, planning ahead and the relationship building. This was identified as being very helpful by the base commanders. It is envisaged that the alliance will still be needed post BRAC implementation. But it is interesting to note that it is considered that the level of long term spin off for new businesses is expected to be less in this area as it is already very diverse and was previously very reliant on Federal / defense work.

Challenge: Require a greater use of small businesses in contracts and promote alliances between businesses working on military sites.

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 38

Main (Tulley) gate

Annex 2: Fort Belvoir – Site Access & Context ACCESS TO THE SITE 10.46 Fort Belvoir is clearly signposted off the main Washington "Beltway" and on the US1 south the signs straddle

all four lanes of the road. There are bus routes along this road. Apparently even at the possible Fort Belvoir population at 2030, the site would not have sufficient levels of users to warrant its own Metro station. As part of the infrastructure needed to support the increased numbers of people that would be working on the base as part of the BRAC relocations it was agreed to turn the existing two-lane Pohick Road into four lanes. The Fort has three main entrance gates, but the main entrance is Tulley Gate (as shown below). As for the UK the security checkpoint is set back from the main junction to ensure queueing traffic does not block the junction. Every day there are around 77,000 vehicles who pass into the site through these gates.

10.47 In addition to the above road improvement, Fairfax County successfully lobbied for additional Department of

Defense funding to allow it to complete the rest of the Parkway past the former Engineer Proving Grounds which were then developed for the National Geospatial Centre. The scheme had already been developed and been proposed for many years by the Virginia State Department of Rail and Public Transportation. Even after the BRAC consolidations onto the base, it only accounts for 32% of peak hour traffic on the adjacent network. DoD funding for highways improvements would normally only be triggered if the base accounted for over 50% of the traffic.

10.48 Fort Belvoir has over 8,500 acres of land and over 50,000 people work on the base, it’s currently envisaged that by 2030 the population could double. The Department of Defense classes sites according to their size and/or the number of people based upon them and due to the latter Fort Belvoir is a Class A site. The Fort can be divided into three areas:

2. Northern Area (former proving grounds); 3. North Main Post (north of Route 1); and 4. South Main Post (south of Route 1).

10.49 The Northern Area was mainly developed as part of the previous BRAC round for the Defense Logistics Agency. Initially it was planned to base over 17,000 people on this site, but that was reduced to 8,500 then later to 6,400 and some were based at another site. The site was developed by contractors for the Corps of Engineers. Designs for a new HOV ramp to the Interstate 95 are being developed to ensure that the site is ready to accommodate another 7,500 people in a new Campus style development. This is seen as a suitable site as it is close to the Franconia-Springfield Metro and a bus will be provided to link to the site. Fairfax County already fund two bus lines to the site.

Map of the Fairfax Parkway road improvements

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 39

10.50 The Main Post is 7,700 acres and bisected by Route 1. The bridge that was developed to join the two sections was designed in cooperation with the County funded BRAC co-ordinators. This ensured that the design also catered for the County's long term plans including the widening of Route 1 to 6 lanes which should commence next year following the completion of its public hearing stage - this was a congress proposed scheme, but is on DoD land. It will include a 32ft wide rapid transit corridor. The "future proofing" of the bridge was one of the examples seen as evidence of the success of close liaison and communication between the authorities.

CONSTRAINTS 10.51 Although it has over 7,700 acres of land much of this is heavily constrained due to the presence of the Airfield

and the need to safeguard the glide path. Not only does that in effect sterilise part of the site from development, but it also means that building heights are limited in other parts of the site. This was therefore a key consideration in the original Master Plan for the site. In addition large areas are wooded and have protected species (including the Bald Eagle) and are required for storm water runoff mitigation. These have a good network of paths for nature trails (though marked with warning signs about unexploded ordinance). Similarly to the UK, Counter terrorism measures (CTM) also constrain design approaches and areas that can be developed these limitations are often misunderstood by the local authorities.

Start of the Nature Trail and Warnings

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 40

Annex 3: Fort Munroe - History 10.52 Along the seafront there is a row of houses designed to impress as ships passed to the Naval base. The former

hotel and Marina was located at the end of what was the rail line (now closed). Again, this social sector of the base was in place in earlier stages of the base.

10.53 At every opportunity the Fort Munroe Authority include the history into any presentation they give. I had chosen

the site as a case study partly as I felt that it related to many similar sites in the UK, partly as I knew some of the history and also because from what I read on line it was being reported as a success. But I hadn't gathered how key the site was to what America is today. It was clear to me that this should have been a key driver to any re-use plan, as is now happening.

10.54 The island was the first place in America that the British expeditionary force landed in 1607. They subsequently went further to establish the colony at Jamestown, but came back in 1609 to fortify the island to defend against Spanish attack from the sea. Then in 1619 the first documented Africans landed in America, this association with black American history is I came to realise what really is the unique feature of the island. A Dutch ship traded "20 odd" slaves captured from the Spanish for foodstuffs. Some of the slaves went on to serve the base commander but it’s not known if they were treated as slaves or servants. It’s also likely that the first black baby in America was born in nearby Hampton. Again, during the Civil War the base was to become key to the approach to slavery for the whole of America.

10.55 Fort Munroe was the first in a series of forts that were built to protect the entrance of the Chesapeake Bay from sea attacks. In 1802 the lighthouse was constructed on the fort, now the oldest remaining building on the site. Following the war of 1812 when the British had inflicted considerable damage from the sea, congress established the Board of Engineers for Fortifications and appointed General Simon Bernard its chief. Bernard had

Seafront houses

Sign recording the site where the first African's arrived in

the US.

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 41

previously been an aide to Napoleon who of course had constructed a network of forts around France, and that perhaps explains why it looks very similar to a Vauban designed fort in France. Congress decided to do the same along the eastern coast of America and Fort Munroe was the first to start construction in 1819. In addition the port became the forerunner of the nearby Norfolk Naval Shipyard (the largest in the USA). The fort was completed in 1834. During that time General Robert E Lee, was based here in charge of construction. His home from that time is now one of the key landmarks of the base. During the Civil war of course General Lee left the base to become leader of the confederate Army. Fort Munroe, although being in Virginia, so part of the Confederacy never fell to the south. It is felt that as General Lee was based here he knew that it would be too costly to attack. Interestingly President Lincoln visited the base during the Civil war in 1862 and stayed in what is now the Authorities headquarters building. Whilst he was staying the Unionist Army attacked and captured Norfolk. The base was used for the headquarters of the Artillery School from 1868 until 1898 then the Coastal Artillery School. In this context the presence of the 1940's Electronic Mines Control Tower is an important aspect of the history of the island.

10.56 I think the Authority could gain a lot by establishing a network with similar historic forts around the world. It is

the largest stone fort in the USA and the only one with an enclosed moat.

10.57 Whilst most of the history told about the base focuses on these aspects, for me its uniqueness lies in its links to the abolition of slavery. More could be done to explain and tell that story. There are signs and a section of the Museum, but I suspect most visitors could leave unaware. The Authority is considering using the "strapline" - Cornerstone of Freedom, which I think is a good idea.

HQ of the Authority (soon to be handed over to the

National Park so it can be restored to allow people to visit

the "White House President's Bedroom")

1950's Electronic mine watchtower overlooking the moat

and out to the bay

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 42

10.58 In 1861 during the Civil War three slaves rowed across from nearby Confederate Norfolk to appeal for sanctuary in this Unionist stronghold. The commander of the base at that time was Benjamin Butler who was a 2* General but had trained as a lawyer. He knew of Congress' decision that allowed him to confiscate "contraband of war", as Virginia had declared itself a sovereign nation it was not subject to the laws of the south. As he'd learnt that the slaves were being used to construct fortifications he rejected the emissary of their former "owner's" appeal for their return. By 1865 over 10,000 former slaves had sought sanctuary at the base. It became the start of the Underground Railroad for slaves to flee to the north, but not all wanted to go as their partners and children were often still slaves in the south. Butler petitioned congress to allow him to set the former slaves free and that was subsequently granted, and that decision was therefore key to the approach from both sides to slavery during the Civil war. Lincoln had not wanted to make the war about slavery but that decision led to the 13th amendment of the constitution. The fort became known as "Freedom Fort" and it is that label I think should be at the entrance and on the tower so everyone knows its history. That history should have also informed the design of the Master plan options for the site. During the Civil War the fort became the base first Coloured sections of the Unionist Army (Cavalry and Light Artillery) and the headquarters for the "Freedmen's Bureau".

10.59 In the 1800's the island was known as a resort, with people sailing from New York on steamers to the island, then later when passenger railroad developed using that as well. The Chesapeake - Richmond Railroad arrived in 1882 and the link was to provide access to the deep-water bay. In 1956 a significant amount of land reclamation was commenced extending the island and northwards and developing a sea wall. The Authority has plans to change this sea wall away from a hard structure to seek a lower impact on the environment. This process will also expand the already popular sandy beaches.

10.60 After my meeting and a tour of the base to see the areas we'd discussed Jesica introduced me to Robert Kelly who is responsible for heritage issues for the Authority. He gave me a tour of the Casemate Museum taking me through 400 years of history in half an hour. I was also lucky to meet with Robin Reed Director of the Museum.

10.61 The Casemate Museum was handed over from the Military, unusually with all its artefacts. It is very unusual as it’s built into the walls of the fort. The Master plan does not seem to treat the Museum as an opportunity, just as a fact. If the island is to have history at its heart, the Museum needs more prominence and integration into the Master plan. It's lucky that the Museum is close to other key historic features and has a significant history itself including the prison cell for Confederate President Jefferson Davies, so I would have expected the Master plan to seek to develop a historic quarter focus (linking to Lincoln's bedroom / Gen Lee's House and the underground railroad / Benjamin Butler connections / Tiffany Windows in the ecumenical Chapel etc). This could follow the Jamestown approach of living history to really draw visitors. There is a danger that if this isn't incorporated early into the plans, the mix of uses could prevent it developing over time. It was interesting to hear that even the Museum is only just now adding to its knowledge about the black history connections of the island.

10.62 Across the island there are already a series of helpful signs which aid interpretation of the history.

Casement Museum exhibit on the black history of the Fort

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 43

Annex 4: Annapolis Site Details 10.63 The site is dominated by the Bancroft Hall home to 1,700 midshipmen. When the Academy opened in 1845 it

was home to only 50 midshipmen. The site contains the vast Rotunda, Memorial hall and 2,500 seat chapel. There is a separate 410 seat Jewish chapel though the 35,000 square foot building has multi faith areas. There is a separate events hall. The Alumni hall seats up to 5,710 for concerts, athletic events, lectures and plays.

Model of the original layout of the Fort at Annapolis

Inside the 2,500 seat chapel

View to the rotunda

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 44

Events hall

10.64 Separate blocks contain mathematics and science, engineering, electrical, computing and weapons departments. The site contains the Nimitz library. The Naval Academy museum is contained within Preble Hall10. Naval Support Activity Annapolis provides common base support functions and reports to the Commandant, Naval District Washington in the Commander Naval Installations Command.

Museum exhibit showing alumni involved in space exploration

10.65 The site contains a health clinic which provides support to both military personnel and their families, but the dental clinic is only available to military personnel, a similar approach to that adopted in the UK. The class of 2016 is comprised of 15,781 men and 4,820 women; similar proportions are given offers of appointment (1,394 in total). There is a wide range of ethnicities with whites (777) being the largest group; Hispanic (142) second; African American (120) and Asian American (127) next but only 8 of American Indian background. A large proportion comes from preparatory programmes (373).

10.66 The site entrance has a visitor centre including an 84 seat theatre, galley and 4,500 square foot gift shop. The Naval Academy Athletic Association is based at the sites Ricketts Hall and the 80,000 square foot Halsey Field House contains the admissions block and physical training facilities. The swimming pool and weight training block is separate. There are also two outdoor pools. The site has a 150 seat restaurant and the members club also has a restaurant; although the main (impressive) Academy stadium is outside the Town centre, as is the Golf course.

10 (see http://www.usna.edu/Museum/).

Academy stadium (out of the town centre)

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 45

Academy Stadium (outside the Town Centre)

Visitor Centre

Visitor Centre Shop

Visitor centre

Visitor centre shop

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 46

Annex 5: Commentary on some of the background documents to the Fort Belvoir Case Study

Fahrney Tom (1 February 2011) Virginia Department of Transport BRAC Successes and Remaining Issues - Commonwealth BRAC Coordinator I-95/395 Serves the Quantico, Fort Belvoir to Pentagon Corridor which together will employ 85,000 people. Funded roadway improvements include Fairfax County Parkway Extension $188million and I-95 lane widening $123million. But still problems identified at I-95/Fairfax interchange; Fairfax-Franconia/Springfield interchange; I-395 at Seminary Road and US Route 1. Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board (30 June 2012) BRAC Impact Analysis Travel Monitoring Report Looked at 15 employment sites around the Washington region that were impacted by BRAC. Nearly 95K vehicles carrying over 111K people entered these sites between 5am and 10am and the average occupancy was 1.18 people per vehicle (1.21 during peak hours). All the sites had a Transportation Management Plan (TMP) seeking to improve access. United States Government Accountability Office GAO-09-750 (September 2009) Report to Congressional Committees - Military Base Realignments and Closures, Transportation Impact of Personnel Increases will be significant but Long-Term costs are uncertain and direct federal support is limited. The title of this report makes its finding plain. Traffic impacts at Fort Belvoir were important in DoD's decision to acquire an additional site for Fort Belvoir at a cost of $1.2billion. Dedicated federal funds were not available. The timescale of completion by 2011 conflicted with the normal 9 to 19 years needed normally for major transport schemes. Whilst local authorities were responding by prioritising local schemes to support BRAC it is interesting to note that this report found similar issues to the Fort Belvoir case study from across the USA BRAC projects. United States Government Accountability Office GAO-13-436 (May 2013) Report to Congressional Committees - Defense Infrastructure, Communities need additional guidance and information to improve their ability to adjust to DoD installation closure or growth. The 21 communities surrounding the 23 DoD installations closed in the 2005 BRAC round have used strategies such as forming a local redevelopment authority and seeking federal grants to deal with the closures. GAO found that 52% had unemployment rates lower than the national average for the period. The 23 installations which have experienced population increases together of about 191K military and civilian personnel (36% increase) have communities which have used several strategies to accommodate this growth, including forming a regional working group comprised of representatives from affected areas. Community representatives stated that the DoD's Office of Economic Adjustment provided good support to communities facing closure and growth, but some said that facilities were not maintained at a level to allow reuse. Clarity on expectations and requirements was sought. Additional aggregate information on home locations of service personnel was sought by communities. The SPOC approach was helpful. Northern Virginia Regional Commission (1 December 2005) Report of the Northern Virginia BRAC Working Group, Submitted to Virginia Governor Mark R Warner and the Virginia Commission on Military Bases. This report recommended transport improvements primarily in areas facing increased traffic such as Fairfax, Prince William and Stafford Counties, and transportation infrastructure improvements primarily in Alexandria and Arlington where economic development and revitalisation was needed following the loss of jobs. The region had the greatest job loss as well as the greatest gain areas proposed in BRAC. George Mason University estimated that 22,700 employees would vacate leased office space in Northern Virginia and 15,000 contractors would also follow. They also estimated that 11,800 federal employees would be added to Fort Belvoir and 7,500 contractors would follow to the area. A huge shift to outside the Beltway. They predicted large rental falls in 2010 to 2013 period in the Northern Virginia area. Impact on the housing market was felt to be negligible. Increases on sections of route 1 were predicted to be between 94 and 7 1%. Even with $10billion of investment the corridor was predicted to be operating at unacceptable levels in 2030. The recommendations identified $258million of immediate transportation improvements that were needed to support BRAC at Fort Belvoir and Quantico ($253million

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 47

over the following 3 years; $628million in the next 3 years; and $1.43billion beyond 6 years) Economic assistance commitments of $10million to Northern Virginia were identified; a $18million transition fund and a $8.6million workforce centre development / small business fund as well as tax incentives for location a number of smaller scale initiatives. The Planning Policy recommendations included requiring joint planning with the DoD and local governments; equitable assistance to both inside and outside the wire properties; sharing of home zip code information and a review of force protection standards. Fort Belvoir Community Profile December 2007 At the start of the implementation phase of the BRAC process at Fort Belvoir (end 2007) the BRAC co-ordinator Mark Canale prepared the an assessment of the community profile. Set out below is some of the information from this assessment. The area affected by the BRAC Fort Belvoir growth proposals included Fairfax County and Prince William County, Virginia. The latest population for that area was 1,399million. This was predicted to grow to 1.483million by 2011 (the end of the BRAC process). Fort Belvoir was 8,670 acres and had:

Existing (2005) Projected (post BRAC) Change

Military Personnel 5,646 12,171 6,525

Dependents 5,490 7,323 1,833

Civilian Personnel 12,019 24,854 12,835

Contractors 3,772 10,486 6,714

It is presumed that all these staff are working on the base. In addition there was expected to be a large number of contractors who might relocate to the area. At the time unemployment in the area was less than 2.5%. Fort Belvoir was already the largest single employer in the area, predicted to grow from 23,000 to over 47,000 (excluding dependents). DoD personnel were due to vacate leased space from Alexandria, Arlington County and the Bailey Crossroads area of Fairfax County, relocating 22,000 jobs. The majority coming to Fort Belvoir were from Northern Virginia leased space, Walter Reed Army Medical Centre in Washington DC, and the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency in Bethesda, Maryland (all within the National Capital Region - a key fact which allowed for regional planning to assist with the success of this project).

Military Base Closures: Role and Costs of Environmental Clean-up

Congressional Research Service Report for Congress David M. Bearden Analyst in Environmental Policy Resources, Science, and Industry Division Congressional Research Service, The Library of Congress April 2005 Section 120(h) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA, commonly referred to as Superfund) generally requires the United States (in this case, DOD) to clean up closed bases prior to transfer out of federal ownership.3 Property on a closed base is typically transferred to a local redevelopment authority (LRA) responsible for implementing a plan for civilian reuse. However, the community's ability to attain its preferred use is constrained, as the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act does not require DOD to dispose of property on a closed base for a particular land use, nor within a certain time frame. Fort Monroe, Virginia estimated clean-up costs to completion $201,165,000

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 48

Annex 6: Moorebank Units Relocation – Project, Site Details and Context The Australian Government has been undertaking a programme of rationalisation of its sitesxiv. Since 1973 there have been 35 significant reviews of Australia’s Defence. But the aim in this latest review is a holistic end to end review and it is said that is only the third such review since 1973. It seeks an integrated one defence solution, joint capability. Under the Corporate and Military enablers section the review seeks full consolidation and standardisation in estate provision. It is identified that there is insufficient maintenance funding available for its current estate. “Through the 2013 Future Defence Estate Report, Defence has already identified 17 sites (out of 75 major bases) for closure or dispersal”…”the net present value of dispersal over 30 years is AU$1.4bn property sales at AU$570million (AU$210 in the first 10 years) including the cost of remediation. However, this assessment was criticised as having been developed in isolation without consideration of commercial opportunities or consultation with other potential interested parties (p46). The metropolitan sites potential was also seen as not being realised. Work is also on-going to secure long leases to private operators, for example Garden Island, Naval yards in Sydney. Relative to the size of its Army it has a much larger land ownership than the other study countries – over 3million hectares of environmental stewardship land11, 394 Commonwealth owned properties (25,000 buildings) including 75 major bases and 355 domestic and 200 overseas leases. It has been valued recently at AU$20.2bn with a replacement cost of AU$68bn12. The Australian population in 2015 is estimated to be 24 million and it has around 55,000 Armed Forces Personnel and spends around 2.4% of its GDP on Defence (US$27bn in 2015)13. Over the last 15 years 280 properties (nearly 25%) of defence estate has been disposed of since 1997xv. Of the sites identified for closure in 2009 few have been brought forward, but work is on-going in Melbourne, Adelaide and Perth in particular. Perhaps the fact that money from closures returns to central funds, and maximum site values are not obtained limits the incentives for these to be brought forward. As this has recently changed, so time will tell. As I arrived in Australia the Government was just announcing the closure of Bulimba Barracksxvi in Brisbane, one of 6 being taken forward to Government on a case by case basis for proposed closure. The audit of the defence estate identified that these efficiencies had been through “rationalisation and consolidation rather than strategic realignment of force posture”xvii and sought “positive planning to involve frequent consultation and engagement including state and local authorities as soon as possible to allow long term planning” and changes over a 25-30 year period. The aims being set for the 2015 White Paper was to deliver AU$20bn savings over 10 years to 2019 and decrease in annual estate maintenance budget by AU$5bn. Each state and territory in Australia holds the responsibility for land use planning in its areaxviii, including its own legislation. In New South Wales State legislation empowers local governments to administer planning and land use regulations. Some allocation of sites occurs at the National level, often these are for heritage or environmental matters. The New South Wales Planning Act established the process of plan preparation. Some executive controls remain with the State including the control of public land, in this case defence related land holdings. However, as Holsworthy is Commonwealth land the state planning legislation is not applicable, so this risks a lack of co-ordination between plans so becomes more reactive than proactive planning. But proposed road improvements outside the Commonwealth land are subject to the State legislation. The Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 requires Defence to identify, conserve and protect its heritage assets. In line with that legislation defence developments are required to prepare Heritage Impact Assessments and Environmental Impact screening. The Infrastructure and Estate Planning functions for the military are centralised under the Australian Defence Support and Reform Group which has an AU$3bn budget (current undergoing a reorganisation of its 2100 civilian and 550 military staff), as is the Defence Support Operations which handles facilities management. Following a review of housing in 2001, all Defence Housing was outsourced off-base (around 20,000 in total) through a land purchase arrangement, around 25% were retained and the rest sold. Provision for those entitled to housing is sought within 30km / 45 minutes travel time (much further than both the UK and USA). The Holsworthy Barracks was developed in World War II as a settled training area. Steele Barracks was established in 1940. Both sites are Commonwealth owned. The Intermodal Terminal Facility will use 220Ha of Commonwealth land at Steele Barracks to create a new Terminal and Rail Spur to connect the site to the planned Southern Sydney Freight Line (SSFL) currently under construction. The site will be redeveloped to accommodate 1 million 20ft Equivalent Units (TEUs) of freight each year. Around 300,000 square metres of warehouse and distribution facilities and 8,000 square

11 UK MOD: owns 230,000 hectares of land plus rights over another 200,000Ha (1.8% of UK land area). Since 2012 this

has decreased by 1,100 hectares. The land is valued at £25bn. Properties are also across Germany, Cyprus, Falkands,

Gibraltar, Ascencion, Belize, Brunai, Nepal, Singapore and USA with training areas in Canada, Cyprus, Germany,

Norway, Poland and Kenya. It has 846 Listed Buildings and 769 Scheduled Ancient Monuments and 309 Scheduled

Nature Conservation Sites – Source: DIO Corporate Report 2014. 12 Source: 2015 First Principles Review 13 Source: Nationmaster.com

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 49

metres of support services space will be created. This project did not focus on this aspect as the site has yet to be redeveloped. However, the context is useful for considering the Holsworthy consolidation. Holsworthy is one of the Army’s major barracks in New South Wales located in South-West Sydney. Home to the headquarters of the 6th Brigade, 6th Aviation Regiment and 17th Signals Regiment, the 1st Support Battalion and 2nd Commando Regiment. It had already been the focus of other consolidations and ongoing projects and had been identified as a long term basexix. Under the New South Wales’ plan for growing Sydney policies outlined the need to protect infrastructure of Metropolitan significance including freight corridors and intermodal terminals14 and direction 1.5 was to enhance capacity at Sydney’s gateways and freight networks. The Moorebank site is within the Western Sydney policy area, South West sub-region – the fastest growing sub-region in Sydney. The plan states that Badgery’s Creek Airport will be a catalyst for development and investment in infrastructure and jobs. It also identifies the MUR project area south of the Liverpool City Enterprise Corridor and Regional City Centre and the nearby South West Growth Centre. Rail network expansion routes and light rail corridors are identified in for the longer term, but the Intermodal Terminal at Moorebank is to address current needs. Parliamentary approval was granted on 19th September 2012 for the upgrade of the barracksxx. Under the Public Works Act 1969, Base Infrastructure Project Base Security Improvement Programme; around AU$203million of enhancements to 16 bases were planned in response to a review undertaken in 2009. These works were to “reduce risk to Defence personnel of the possibility of terrorist attack”. It was also stated that “defence is working closely with local planning authorities as well as relevant road and traffic authorities to ensure that any disruptions during construction are minimised”…it was…”scheduled to begin early 2012 and planned to be completed by mid-2015”. It was stated that the “MUR project proposes…to achieve an efficient consolidated facility at Holsworthy Barracks”. In addition a new intersection on Heathcote Road approximately 500m to the east of the current intersection configuration was proposed. That aimed to address traffic congestion in the existing location by separating Holsworthy Barracks from the Holsworthy Railway Station and residential accesses. There was however considerable local opposition to the Intermodal Terminal aspect of the proposals. As this was not the focus of the case study, this was not considered in depth, but it is useful context. The City of Liverpool Council led the oppositionxxi suggesting that the Terminal should be co-located with the newly identified Badgery’s Creek Airport. It suggested that the vacated Steele Barracks site should have been used for premium residential benefitting from its river location – they suggested an 83Ha site could deliver 12,000 dwellings and 20Ha for Commercial development. They also suggested that the infrastructure was inadequate to support the proposal, especially the roads and rail citing the traffic, noise, vibration, air quality, health risk impacts. Having visited the site and read the proposals and objections it is clear that it would have been a suitable residential site (once remediated) that is hardly without question. Equally the concerns raised by the opponents are valid matters that will have to be addressed in any application. But it appears that some of the major issues have not been considered or addressed, namely the viability of the proposed use and reality of the benefits it is expected to deliver, that would be key to challenging the State Significance of the proposal, not the proposed alternative use. The deliverability of the proposed alternative Intermodal option does not appear to have been fully addressed in the response. As well as diverting trucks from the road onto rail locally from the Sydney Port, the aim is to have an Intermodal facility for longer trips: Sydney – Melbourne – Brisbane. General freight is around 3% of all freight on the rail. As a rule of thumb, if within a 14 hour time zone, the freight will tend to be delivered by road. The majority of rail freight is minerals transportation. Alternative proposals were also developed for the other part of the Moorebank site by a consortium of businesses, but the main shortfall of that proposal was the lack of a suitable rail access point as trains up to 1800m would need to use the Terminal. The Port Shuttle is a significant commercial proposition, but the Intermodal elements is seen as a wider State facility and benefit so less commercial. A private sector company – Moorebank Intermodal Company (MICA) was established in December 2013 (Government owned, but legally separate with the aim of transferring risk) to deliver this AU$2bn project. The Commonwealth Infrastructure Fund covered the costs of the relocation and new Defence development at Holsworthy (AU$800m). The cost benefit analysis undertaken for the whole project wouldn’t cover the significant costs of remediation of the Moorebank site. With the benefits of the Terminal facility being listed as increased productivity, environmental and decreased congestion in particular. Particular concern arises on the need for associated road upgrades. The planning process involves both Commonwealth and State land, so both sets of approvals are needed. The need for more Intermodal Terminals around Sydney has already been identified even when Moorebank is delivered. In the detailed business case put forward to the Parliamentary Standing committee two on-site options were considered for the Holsworthy base. The first a Greenfield site (south of the existing Gallipoli lines) and two Brownfield sites both on the existing Gallipoli lines. The Greenfield option was rejected as it would “require clearing of approximately 50Ha

14 NSW Government, Dec 2014: A plan for growing Sydney p129.

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 50

of native bushland which has been identified as critically endangered Canberland Plain Woodland” – that would therefore be a “controlled action” under the EPBC Act requiring an Environmental Assessment to be undertaken and therefore delay the release of the Moorebank site and increase the risk of achieving environmental offsets. The brownfield options meant less infrastructure needed as they were adjacent to existing roads and the site had been freed due to the relocation of 17 Const Sqn. The central location within the barracks meant there was increased scope for shared facilities, higher proximity meant lower movement delays between facilities and core areas. But there was a significant amount of demolition needed (21 and 17 Const Sqn and ADF Cadets buildings). The works required that were identified were:

New Entry Precinct o Separating the semi-public areas from security sensitive functions

New sig nalised intersection New chapel 300 capacity multi-denominational Engineering Heritage and Learning Centre Offices for Defence Support and Cadets Community Facility Transport Yard Stores

School of Military Engineering o Head Quarters SME o Instructional Facility o Training Wing & Classrooms o Dogs Section o Stores o Workshops o Support Functions o Live in Areas

Mess Precinct

Physical Fitness Precinct

Training Precinct The options considered included:

Replicating the existing Moorebank = too many standalone facilities so little shared Consolidation of buildings / support Maximisation of external training areas adjacent Surge capacity buildings Standardisation of building forms Re-use Shared pathways to encourage walking / cycling.

The assessment was supported by Regional and Economic Impact Assessments. Only after that detailed business casexxii approval stage could any works be undertaken to commence the development of the Holsworthy site. Similar to the UK approach the Australian Government has a 5% Stage (Options / Future Use / Current Use) a 30% and 50% design milestone approval process (the latter focussing more on Capital Facilities and Infrastructure). This process takes around 6 months to complete. The draft Master plan Feasibility Review (MPFR) was prepared for the 5% milestone report. Only after the approval of the Public Works Committee of the Federal Parliament can the delivery phase commence with the preparation of the detailed design, trade package documentation, procurement of trade sub-contractors; and construction commence. The project meant that the School of Military Engineering and 12 other units were to be moved from Steele barracks into new purpose built facilities at Holsworthy – an AU$870million project. This was Australia’s largest single defence capital works project since the World War II. The new facilities were for the Army School of Military Engineering, Land Warfare Centre, Army Logistics Training Centre and Support Units. That included teaching spaces (inside and outside), messes, pool, live in accommodation, offices, security entrance gate, museum, chapel, workshops and quartermasters stores. This was not the only planned project for the site. Part of the site was being used for Special Forces and that is increasing in capacity and another stage of the project will follow in 5-10 years. In addition, a live in accommodation (known as Single Living Accommodation in the UK) project was underway on site, as was a project to create a super Mess releasing 13 existing messes. The need for an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA or EIS in the Australian context) was screened out under the EPBC Act 1999 (Commonwealth). A great deal of work was undertaken to ensure that there wasn’t a need for an EIS,

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 51

not only for the environmental benefits realised, but also to cut the delay that its preparation would mean (cutting about 9 months off the programme). The traffic assessment indicated a requirement for a new entry point at Heathcote Road, this addressed existing congestion at that junction largely linked to the nearby railway station which was developed after the barracks. A public consultation is a formal requirement of the process needed to support the development proposal alongside the Government appraisal. The benefits of the project were identified as addressing the maintenance backlog, consolidation, enhanced facilities and jobs being retained in the area. The project team were very helpful about how they had followed a consultation iterative process of developing the Master plan. Options were explored, reviewed at workshops and then developed for further review. In addition a number of consultation meeting were held with key Stakeholders to enable the project team to develop a clearer understanding of the key issues that would influence the Master plan. The project team engaged in the following activities during the preparation of the Master plan Feasibility Review:

User stakeholder consultation conducted at their respective unit locations

Consultation with Base Representatives

Inspection of existing facilities and sites

Consultation with representatives from related projects

Start up and risk workshops highlighting key considerations

Environmental sustainability blue sky design workshop

Internal and stakeholder precinct planning workshops

Weekly design management meetings Development at Holsworthy Barracks needed to comply with a number of Defence Planning and Development Control documents. These include the following:

Zone Plan – The Directorate of Land Planning and Spatial Information is responsible for the preparation and implementation of Defence Zone Plans

Base Environmental Management Plan – informed by the EIA

Heritage Management Plan

Landscape Management Plan

Security Master Plan and Threat Assessment As in the UK, Defence developments need to comply with building standards which are equivalent to those for other types of developments. The MUR project adopted a set of planning principles which guided the development of all project elements, these were:

Retain existing infrastructure (including roads and trunk services) and vegetation where possible

Plan large compounds and external training areas to suit existing topography and avoid significant earth works

Where possible separate heavy traffic from general barracks traffic

Provide shaded bikeways and pedestrian paths linking units to major facilities

Provide a planning framework which is clearly legible to users and visitors alike, including: o Providing address points to major units, and clear definitions of unit lines o Separate non unit traffic from general movements

Maintain setbacks from roads and allow for landscape buffers

Provide a framework for future development and expansion, building on positive features of the existing barracks

Maximise the use of multi-storey structures to minimise land area impact of buildings

All facilities should be designed to provide appropriate solar orientation and prevailing winds (solar collection pre-heat with gas boost)

Provide large central car parks for private vehicle parking, located in easy walking distance to adjacent units.

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 52

Annex 7: Overall Military Estate Master Planning Principles Illustrated in figure 1 below are a series of general principles identified through the case study consolidations combined with experience from UK examples. These principles are intended to form a guide to the master planning of both existing and new sites. Key to these conclusions is the decision to site non-operational facilities such as housing, welfare, recreation and long term storage off-site. Not only does this mean the military community is better integrated with the wider population, but lower concentrations of such facilities means that they are viewed as less obvious military targets. This approach also means that the valuable military land can be reserved for secure and operational / emergency facilities. The semi-public areas are also less costly to secure and more adaptable to change. Set out in figure 2 below is a worked theoretical example showing how these principles could be applied delivering wider benefits.

Underlying Principles:

Military – Civilian Integration maximised

All security standards met or exceeded

Legible to users and visitors alike, with clear definitions for functional areas

Retain existing infrastructure (including roads and trunk services) and vegetation where possible

Retain and enhance positive features and heritage of the existing site

Use existing topography to avoid significant earth works

Where possible separate heavy traffic from general traffic, and secure areas from public / semi-public

Provide shuttle bus (larger sites), bikeways and pedestrian paths linking main gate and units to major facilities; and large main car park with only operational users having parking in the secure areas.

Allow for sustainable low maintenance landscape buffers and sustainable drainage

Provide a framework for future development and expansion

Maximise the use of multi-storey structures to minimise land area impact of buildings

Layouts to allow for sustainably designed buildings (for example solar orientation)

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 53

Aside from the military-civilian integration and security benefits described above, the approach also delivers wider scope for increased effective use of the site and environmental benefits as follows. By separating the secure from the semi-public areas, private vehicle drivers can be diverted to a central car park. Many staff would then be able to walk to the admin offices avoiding the need to experience delays going through the main security gate. Onward travel would be via shuttle bus, walking or cycling. As shown on the diagram below the bus that serves the local community would enter via the same route as private cars, with the driver checking passes on entry so the bus could quickly pass through the main gate. Passengers could then alight near their main place of work. There would then be a higher incentive to catch the bus from within the local community area. Having only one main distributor road saves considerable space which would otherwise be used for car parking / roads on the main secure area. Ensuring that non-emergency / operational / secure facilities are provided off-site not limits delays at the main gate, but also frees on-site capacity. Only limited (daytime) support facilities are needed to be provided on-site, again freeing capacity.

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 54

Annex 8: Hobsonville, New Zealand Context Prior to the European Settlement starting in 1840 the indigenous Maori people inhabited the islands focussing mostly on the coastal margins, lakes and volcanoes; but in response to the climate there was a greater concentration on the North Island. The Waitangi Treaty set the principles of governance and law as well as guarantees for the maintenance of Maori tights to their land, water, forestry and fisheries. But due to the lack of honouring that agreement grievances built up to the 1970s, since then the Government has been gradually agreeing on a tribe (iwi) by tribe basis to compensation. Around 40% of the indigenous land cover remains. The north island now has around three quarters of the 4.5million New Zealand population and Auckland has a population of over 1.3 million and is growing rapidly. Planning controlxxiii is undertaken at three main levels, National (Central Government – Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries; Energy; National Development including the military; Transport, Environment, Conservation), Regional Councils (Policy Statements) and an optional level of Local Territories – City and District levels (District Plan). Unlike the UK landowners also have a separate right to vote in elections. There are also some unitary authorities for example Auckland. Planning for the Marine / Port areas has a separate arrangement jointly - Minister of Conservation, Regional Council and Local Authorities. The main legislation which seeks to ensure that effects on the environment are mitigated is the 1991 Resource Management Act – an effects based approach. Land use Planning commenced in a structured manner in 1923 and was then codified in the 1953 Town Planning Act now “Resource Consents” are needed unless permitted development is in accordance with the District Plan. There is a planning “cascade” of determination firstly the issues, then the objectives and applicable policies, then the methods to be used. Methods can be non-regulatory (for example economic incentives) or regulatory (for example rules) and anticipated environmental results (AERs) are specified. Plans cover a 10 year period and are undertaken every 5 years. This results in developments being classed as either permitted activity, controlled, restricted, or discretionary. All participants in the process may appeal. In 2014 the New Zealand Defence Force has around 8,900 uniformed personnel and 2,800 civilian staff. The 81,000Ha estate, including 5,000 buildings including 9 major camps and 2 major training areas has a replacement value of NZ$2.8bnxxiv. Around the Auckland area, there are two major bases – the Whenuapai Airbase and Devonport Naval base. Other regional facilities and bases are spread across the North and South islands. The Defence Property Group has centralised property management and strategic planning functions. It prepares a Defence Estate Plan which is refreshed every 2-3 years. This includes camp and base long term development frameworks and individual camp and base development plans. As in other countries the 2010 New Zealand Defence White Paper provided for a smaller, modernised and upgraded Defence estate. In 2014 the New Zealand Government Cabinet agreed nine strategic planning principles for the estate, four of which were key to estate rationalisation:

1. Maintain a substantial presence in its current major locations. 2. Operational units to be relocated to best place for whole of NZ. 3. Investment primarily in 6 core locations where NZDF accommodates its deployable forces. 4. Rationalisation opportunities to be pursued at all locations.

The military heritage of the Hobsonville site is significant for New Zealand. This includes the retained historic seaplane hangar (used for Catalinas in World War II). This is currently being used for the Farmers Market, but its location adjacent to the new ferry terminal should mean it lends itself to a wide variety of future uses. An excellent example of re-use of a building is the Catalina Café which is a hub for the new community developed by refurbishing the former RNZAF Admin Hub building whilst preserving the military heritage of its former use. This built heritage is also complemented in the coastal linear park which provides a 4km loop of pathways around the peninsular. Public sculptures are a feature of this park as is the amount of public open space. At Bomb Point around 11Ha of land is available for recreation. This new loop of pathways also gives the public access to the intertidal zone. Homes on the site are currently selling for around NZ$825,000 and apartments for NZ$537,000 and terraced properties for NZ$635,000. These are at a higher density than in the rest of suburban Auckland. The site developed a “small home test lab” with houses having between 40 and 90 sqm per floor. Three houses in this format were constructed and used to consult the public on this new format15 for New Zealand. At least 20% of the houses to be provided will be classed as affordable having a cap on the price of NZ$485,000.

15 www.oxisseries.co.nz/lab

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 55

Abbreviations / Glossary

BRAC – Base Realignment and Closure Process CTM – Counter Terrorism Measures DIO – UK’s Defence Infrastructure Organisation DoD – United States’ Department of Defense DPW – Department of Public Works EDA – Economic Development Authority EIS – Environmental Impact Statement HLC – Hobsonville Land Company HOV – High Occupancy Vehicle LEED – Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (US Green Building Council) Standard LRA – Local Redevelopment Authority MOD – UK’s Ministry of Defence New Urbanism – A series of Town Planning Principles see: www.cnu.org/charter PX – Post Exchange Smart Growth – See the fuller explanation of the theory in the references below. SPOC – Single Point of Contact USE – United Service Organisation

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 56

Some useful references (in addition to those included within the text and Annexes above) and commentary on their relevance:

i Smart Growth is a Town Planning and Transport theory. In the military site context the term is more useful than other

widely used approaches such as New Urbanism which tend to imply that they only are applicable to urban sites as often military sites are more remote. The Smart Growth idea is around concentrating development around walkable, bicycle friendly, public transport nodes. It incorporates long-term sustainability goals into short-term projects to preserve and enhance natural and cultural resources and promote public health. It seeks the widening of transport, employment and housing choices whilst equitably distributing the costs and benefits of development. Often the approach is only applied to housing schemes, but it should be applied to the full range of developments.

ii United States Environmental Protection Agency (Jan 2006) Turning Bases Into Great Places: New Life for Closed

Military Facilities – this is one of the examples of research into the specific issues arising for military bases. iii European Union - Urbact, 2011, REPAIR: Realising the Potential of Abandoned Military Sites as an Integral part of

Sustainable Urban Community Regeneration: http://urbact.eu/en/projects/urban-renewal/repair/homepage/ This was an extensive European Union backed study which looked at the redevelopment of 61 case study sites from across Europe. Whilst its recommendations did include the call for more long-term integrated policy for sustainable urban development (recommendation 10) it focussed less on the specific challenges faced by those redeveloping military sites, the conclusions were more applicable to all forms of redevelopment.

iv In my separate blog (see harnessplanningcom.blogspot.co.uk) I include wider observations on approaches to planning

across the United States. v Waiketere City Council (June 2007) Proposed Plan Change 13, Hobsonville Peninsular Urban Concept Plan: This

specified precinct classifications and densities, school sites and open space plus strategic road linkages and mixed use areas. Plus a concept plan identified features such as the marine buffer, cycle and bus routes, notable buildings and open space. This approach was followed in the subsequent plan changes and then in the Auckland Plan’s northern growth area. The adjacent plan change area 14 is the Hobsonville Corridor which is primarily for residential and light industrial and plan change area 15 is for the Westgate compact town centre (large format retail and mixed use and apartment precincts) as well as an employment zone.

vi Waitakere Plan – Hobsonville Base Special Area – this set the initial policy backing with rules and limited discharging

activities and working environment rules alongside the neighbouring retail precinct and motorway interchange. But it was very prescriptive, detailed and internally focussed, so did not set a constructive vision.

vii Waitakere Council 9 Aug 2010 – Notification of Resource Consent LUC 2009-1555 for the Comprehensive

Development Plan (2005 Urban Concept Plan, Plan Change 13 Area) Marine / Landing / Village – 20 hectares.

viii Waitakere Prop Ltd / Architectus, March 2011: Hobsonville Marine Industry Precinct Vol 2 – Urban Design Rules and Design Guidelines vT.3: This document was prepared to accompany the 2009 application by Waitakere Properties Ltd for a Comprehensive Development Plan for the Hobsonville Marine Industry Special Area. It was in line with Plan Change 13 of the Waitakere District Plan. It focussed on making use of the unique deep water channel resource and adjacent flat land; integration with the housing development, a flexible urban design and preservation of the regionally significant coastal area. Conditions included the provision of the launch road (to access the Ferry Terminal) and a Design Review Panel including representatives from Auckland Council and an Independent Architect. The document is divided into three main parts – design concepts / vision; rules and guidance / landscaping. The vision set was for a World Class Centre for Excellence for the Marine Industry – Super Yacht Focus (Gold) not accepting silver. The approach was area defined to decrease the impact on the coastal area and houses (buffer), to extend Hobsonville Park Road to connect it to the deep water, public transport access and a height plan.

ix Auckland Council, June 2012, Auckland Plan Development Strategy: Hobsonville is identified in the area of significant

change. x Jasmax Nov 2013: Hobsonville Marine Industry Precinct Comprehensive Development Plan Design Rules and

Guidelines (now superseded): Follows the grant of permission in 2011 and the variation in 2012 of a 10Ha boundary and 10Ha future potential area for the development. It is more focussed on viability has increased flexibility and focus on neighbouring impacts and access by large boats and has a height and buffer based approach. But it still seeks the “Town Centre” frontages and not a genuine marine industrial feel so appears to be a timid approach to planning for this employment area.

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 57

xi Hobsonville Land Company (August 2009) Buckley Hobsonville Comprehensive Development Plan – Revised and

Final: Seeks provision for 2,000 jobs and 3000 homes, secondary school and community facilities with coastal walkway along the entire coastal edge. The designs seek low impact infrastructure, including storm water and energy efficient building designs. Provision of broadband connections and a new Ferry Terminal are specified. The Plan is for a 10-15 year staged development. The approach to developing the Master plan is based on the World Health Organisation’s Master planning principles (H.Bark 1996). The façade treatment is much of the focus with solid/void relationships, diversity, scale and hierarchy principles. Landmark / intersection focus points are identified with a maximum of 130m long blocks being planned. Designs ensure frontages are overlooked and rear access lanes with many shared surfaces. Group car parking is provided for the apartment areas. Very detailed layouts are included (intended to be developer led) for townhouses, apartments, gardens, terraces, courtyards, villas and traditional houses. Road designs seek to ensure tree lined streets, swales, indented parking and set back areas.

xii Isthmus Construkt JV (April 2013) Sunderland, Hobsonville Point Comprehensive Development Plan, Appendix A –

This takes a similar approach to the 2009 CDP but has an increased emphasis on solar and environmental issues, access by lorries and provision of homezones. It also addresses the refurbishment of the Catalina Barracks and considers its possible change of use to a restaurant. The refurbishment of the cottages is also outlined. The non statutory design review process is specified with the Design Review Panel empowered to streamline the consenting process, provide quality assurance and includes provision for independent reviewers.

xiii Antibui Sfiligoj et al, 2011, FATE – From Army to Entrepreneurship: Sharing Regional Development Practices. xivxiv 2015 April First Principles Review – Creating One Defence – Australian Department of Defence xv 2009 Defence Estate Consolidation Project. xvi 2015/03/20 Parliamentary Secretary to DoD Announcement: Bulimba Barracks in Brisbane (Morningside) 20Ha site

fronting onto the Brisbane River to be sold. The full-time personnel with relocate to RAAF Base Amberley in 2015. The aim is to decrease the cost of maintenance. A direct sale to local government can be considered. The future use will be determined by the new owner in consultation with the local and State Planning Authorities. Environmental site assessments are underway. www.defence.gov.au/id/PropertyDisposals

xvii www.anao.gov.au/Publications/Audit-Reports/2010-2011/Maintenance-of-the-Defence-Estate/Audit-brochure xviii Goodman R, March A (2005) summary of Planning Legislation in Australia for RTPI. xix Department of Defence, May 2005 Statement of Evidence to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works

– Special Operations Working Accommodation & Base Redevelopment Stage 1 – Holsworthy Barracks, NSW: Covers the Tobruck Lines consolidation for part of the barracks and states that the Barracks will “remain a cr itical base in the Army’s Long Term Plan until at least the year 2025”

xx 19/9/2012 Public Works Committee – Approval of Works – House Debates – Gary Gray – Australia Labour Party

Minister for the Public Service and Integrity www.openaustralia.org.au xxi 12/12/2014 – Toni Averay – Director of Planning and Growth, Liverpool City Council, Letter to Andrew Beattie

Department of Planning and Environment, NSW: Response to public exhibition of State Significant Development Application and EIA (SSD5066). Supported by the Peer Review of the application by CARDNO Consultants.

xxii May 2012 MUR Statement of Evidence to Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works: Australian

Government Department of Defence. Andrej Pogacnik in ECTP-CEU, 2013, A Centenary of Spatial Planning in Europe: 100 Years of Spatial Planning in

Slovenia (p171). The Academy of Urbanism, Spring 2013, Space Place Life Here and Now Urbanism Beyond Boundaries. The Academy of Urbanism, 2013, The Freiburg Charter for Sustainable Urbanism – Learning from Place Oxford Martin School, 2013, Oxford Martin Commission for Future Generations Report – Now for the Long Term Urban Futures Team 2012, Designing Resilient Cities – A guide to good practice – BRE Press.

2014 Churchill Fellowship Report – Stephen J Barrington-Harness Page 58

Mojca Svigelj Cernigoj – in Cobraman WP3-PP9 Case Study 2: Nove Poljane – In 1988 the competition for the

reconstruction of this City site was part of a wider approach to move the military out of the urbanised inner-city area. This arose following the Federal Armed Forces left Slovenia in 1991. The scheme delivered in 2001 a total of 48,000sqm of space mostly for housing (440 flats), but also some business and park space – contact mojca.svigelj@guest.arnes.si.

xxiii Fookes T, Crawford J (2006) New Zealand Planning System report for the RTPI. xxiv Defence Property Group, 2014, New Zealand, Defence Estate Plan 2015-2030