The population, of Ipswich, is very typical of your average town in Britain. There is a large amount of young adults, around the age of 30, who are able to work. This is why there are large employment opportunities in Ipswich, there are young people who want to work, and there are many small businesses who want to give them work. The amount of children is also high because there are many young men and woman, who want to start families of there own. After all of this the unemployment rate is still 3.5 which is average for the UK, which is disappointing considering of all the advantages of Ipswich.
As the popularity of Ipswich increased, the trade steadily has declined due to the wet dock slowly coming out of service. Despite that Ipswich still handles several million tonnes of cargo each year.
(Figure 1.2) (Figure 1.3)
Here lie the steadying ruins of the Ipswich wet dock. Figure 1.2 is of Ipswich wet dock, as a busy port in 1840, it was able to wield larger ships, but now as it steadily turns into a derelict area; it does not carry the same pride as it once did in figure 1.3 (modern day photo). Reasons for this are due to could be because of competition from neighbouring ports, such as Felixstowe, which is able to wield a much lager amount of cargo. The wet dock is now becoming a sanctuary for modern living, where there are bars and clubs, which are capitalising on the beautiful sea front.
(Figure 1.7) – Map of Ipswich (figure1.8) - map of Ipswich in
The 1800’s
These 2 maps of Ipswich illustrate the land distribution of Ipswich; it has stayed much the same, as it has no need to go beyond its physical boundaries. But as figure 1.9 shows, Ipswich has grown huge amounts in the last century; this is due to the rapid increase in population.
Ipswich was very lucky in that it was not heavily damaged in the war. This is why there were no redevelopment costs that were required, and Ipswich could develop without to much disturbance. Even the Entrepreneur Richard Branson (founder of Virgin groups), believed that Ipswich was a town that was experiencing major growth, and he had major plans to poor money into Ipswich for a major entertainment industry. Sadly this did not work out due to a change of plan.
(Figure 1.9) – Growth of Ipswich in the last 500 years.
BLANK PAGE
Method
For my project I studied a general hypothesis, which is; as you move out of the town, the better the Environmental quality gets. I predict that my graph EQ vs. distance should look like this:
Figure 2.4- prediction graph- I thought that this graph would look like this because of the following factors:
- As you move out of the central business district (CBD) there is more space so houses can be bigger, and better. This results in better houses on the outskirts of a town but worse housing nearer the centre.
- There is less congestions as you move out of the CBD, because there is more space, this attracts people to live away from the town centre.
- You can only live on the outskirts of town if you have a reliable means of commuting, so only people with a higher income can live away from the town centre.
- As people have more Income there is less need to resort to criminal activity, this also increases the environmental quality of the area.
- As there are people with more income on the outskirts of town there is also a better state of repair, because people can afford to repair there houses, whereas this may not necessarily be the case towards the centre of town.
The hypothesis was chosen because it was thought that Ipswich is a very typical town in Britain, and would follow the Peter Mann model, I believed it would follow the Peter Mann model because:
- Ipswich was not bombed extensively during the war, so there wasn’t any need for re-development, so there were not many opportunities for infilling, until just recently. So as the town grew at the phenomenal rate it did, it could not develop inside so it grew out.
- Ipswich has a radial transport system and this often results in a radial housing link, because people need major roads, nearby them so they can get in and out of Ipswich.
To do my project I decided that there would need to be a large quantity of data collection required, and it would have to cover a large percentage of Ipswich, to get a fair result, and to see any real correlation in environmental quality, and the distance from the CBD. To gain the data that was required I needed to try and visit every street in Ipswich, and study its EQ. Overall data was collected from just under 980 streets, this was a large quantity of Ipswich, but it was not all of it, it is not possible to cover all the streets of Ipswich because I am a student, who has limited time, and facilities, to do this project. If I had more time I could have looked into many other things such as, other towns with similar structures to Ipswich, I would also have had a lot more EQ variables, so I could take into account other aspects of the streets.
I judged a street by its average house size, the amount of land, the amount of services, and other major factors affecting the quality of housing (see figure 2.1).
(Figure 2.1)- The survey sheet I used to inspect each sheet. I tried to take into account all the factors that affect the environmental quality.
When the survey sheet was made the survey sheet I decided it would be necessary to give different aspects of environmental quality, if I thought, what the house size was the most important; I would give more points dedicated to that. E.g. my survey sheet says house size is measured out of 15, while I can only give a maximum of 4 for services; I have done this because I felt that house size is much more important than the amount of services, at your disposal. This is called weighting. Inside every aspect of my survey, I have split it up E.g. for house type I have given 12-15 to detached houses, 8-11 for semi detached houses, 5-7 for terraced housing, and anything under that for flats. This gives me flexibility, so if I feel that there is a very small detached house I will give it only 11, but if it is very large I will give it 14 or even 15. This is called flexibility.
When surveying the streets, care needed to be taken, in being fair, and not bias. This was often difficult because if there was a street with good housing, but it was next to a council estate, then it would be marked down. Here are examples of how I marked certain houses:
Figure 2.2- park road
This is a picture of a house on park road; it is a very large detached house, and it is near the town centre, it was built, when Ipswich was growing at a steady pace, and was designed for the upper class of Ipswich, it was built when there was a large amount of land available. But now as Ipswich has grown so tremendously it has become almost the centre of town. These houses are much sought after, and are also very valuable. This would give a very high index score on the EQ sheet
Figure 2.3-Neptune Quay
These flats are examples of stylish living in Ipswich, they are very expensive, because they are in the centre of town, and have many amenities but they never score high index marks, because they have no land space and flats do not get high marks, whereas detached housing does.
Distance had to be measured from the centre of the town, because then only it would be possible to study the correlation between distance and EQ , and there were two options, I could either estimate the distances, as we went along, or I could measure it using a scaled map. I decided the latter, because it would be far more accurate. Then all the data that was colleted would be put on the computer, and studied, from that it was possible to produce graphs, and study the data in further detail. Also a choropleth map was produced, so I could study large areas of Ipswich at a glance.
The Index of all the streets, which I had collected data from is in the appendices, it states the total EQ, and the distance the street is from the CBD. The Index is a reference, which I used, and manipulated, to make graphs, and maps.
(Figure 2.5) Peter Mann model (1905)
The Peter Mann model is a merging of two different models, manipulated to represent the characteristics of a British town. The two models it is based around is the Burgesses’ model which was based on Chicago, and the Hoyt Sector model, which is similar to the burgess’s model but it splits the circular nature of the burgess into sectors, which is more accurate for most towns in America, but not for Britain, this is because of different amenities that the government provide for the unemployed (e.g. council houses). These have to be taken into account when producing the model. The Peter Mann model, splits different houses into different sectors, it shows that there are different types of housing, around the edge, of a British town. As you move into the town it states that the further you move into the town, the more industrial processes increase, this is why there is very less housing inside the town centre. The model also takes care of different anomalies that are only found in Britain such as commuter villages.
BLANK SHEET
Analysis
The hypothesis that environmental quality increases as you move out of town, seems to be quite incorrect, looking at both figure 3.0, and figure 3.1, it looks almost the opposite is happening, this seems very surprising, because the model’s that are produced, are often based on geographical and economical principles, that have been studied over time. But Ipswich seems to have completely ignored these, as my data suggests otherwise, both graphs show negative correlation, this is especially true in the case of figure 3.1, where there is a huge drop, in anything that is not in and around town. This is very interesting as there seems to be no real reason for this. It seems as if there is no real correlation. This could be for a variety of reasons. In figure 3.0 there seems to be a few figures at the top of the graph which indicate high quality housing, very close to the centre of town, this could be because of influences from the houses built in the Victorian era.
Figure 3.2- houses overlooking Christchurch Park in comparison with other streets in the area.
I have chosen streets that are similar in there distance from the town centre, but in completely different areas because I felt that that would give a more accurate and clear example that Christchurch park housing is significantly better than the average housing that distance from the town centre.
Figure 3.3- Christchurch park housing
These streets were originally built, for the upper class who did not want to live near the congestion, but due to the rapid growth Ipswich has experienced over the last 50 years, the houses have become almost the centre of town. The streets are certainly not an average, for that distance away from the town centre, as shown by other streets in a similar distance from the CBD. The value of theses houses are very high because they are very large, and have brilliant services at there disposal.
There are other reasons for relatively high housing quality near the town, such as General improvement areas, or GIA’s, these are areas where the council has decided to add money, and help the owner’s improve there houses. This was done in the 1970’s, there were 19 designated areas these are marked out on figure 3.5, and they were marked out by pebble drives and special lampposts. Even today they increase the Environmental quality of the houses as shown in figure 3.4:
Figure 3.4 - GIA’s (Orford Street)
(Figure 3.12)- This is a picture of a house in a GIA (Bramford Lane), it is significantly better to look at than figure 3.13; this is because of extra money given by the government.
These streets used to be of poor quality, and they were built around an area which had high quality housing, the government decided to designate money to that area because it may have looked a little out of place. But we can still compare it, as there is a little bit of the same area that was not covered by the GIA scheme:
Figure 3.6 – streets near Orford Street, but not in GIA scheme:
As you can see there is a significant difference between th GIA area and the non GIA area even if there is only a 1/200 metre diference between the streets.
(Figure 3.13)- Picture of a house (St Georges Street), but not in a GIA area.
As you can see there is an instant drop in the environmental quality of the housing, when it is not in the GIA scheme, and they are in precisely the same area.
Infilling is another factor that increases, environmental quality, (or decreases it). It is when there is a large demand for such an area, and there is space left, or there are abandoned, derelict houses, in the central area, which could easily be knocked down, and in place of it could go flats. This process is called Gentrification, and has occurred a lot in Ipswich. These flats are for the rich people who want to live in the centre of town, but want to have large spaces to live. These flats have many amenities, for the younger generation, such as bars, nightclubs, and restaurants. This is to attract more young people, to keep the local economy growing as much as it has been doing in the last 30 years. Infilling can also have a negative impact on the environmental quality are, one example of this is Park Road North, originally it was land that had not been used, but as demand for that land grew, it was built on, but sadly they built cheap houses. This is especially the case, because it was built next to some of the best quality housing in Ipswich, it is quite an eyesore, to a relatively nice place.
Figure 3.7- Park Road North
(Park Road north= infilling)
Figure 3.14 (Park road north) Figure 3.15 (Bildeston Gardens)
Figure 3.14 is an example of infilling in Park Road North and 3.15 is a picture of housing just a few hundred yards away, as you can see it is a lot more grotty in 3.14.
Figure 3.8 – gentrification (infilling)
Whatever type of infilling the EQ is never increased by Large amounts because flats can never get high EQ scores even if they have all the best services because flats are never allocated very much land.
There are also areas that bring the EQ down. Examples of the areas are Council estates, which are houses for people who do not have enough money to afford or rent house, on there own. The council pay for the houses, but they are often made on a very low budget, and often are an eyesore. They are always marked very low. The council build them not to far from the town, but they are often built near higher quality housing, which makes the value of the higher quality housing depreciate.
There are also temporary houses that still haven’t been knocked down in Ipswich, they are called prefab housing. These were built before the war, so people could move out of town, and into the country, to keep civilians safe, from the bombs. They were often made of poor quality, as they were expected to be demolished after the war and now they make very low figures on the EQ graph.
Figure 3.10- Humber Doucy lane – prefab housing
This is a typical house on Humber Doucy lane, it is not that pleasant, and built of poor quality, as it was thought that it would be knocked down after the war. This house is not so bad compared to the bungalows on Humber doucy lane which are especially ugly.
The average EQ score for Ipswich is 24, out of the designated 40, this is reasonably high. The average score for the CBD is 17 which are reasonably high for the central part of town, because the centre of town is meant to have the lowest quality housing, as it is very expensive to buy, so many can only afford small amounts of land. The higher figure is probably due to the infilling and gentrification of Ipswich. Looking at other parts of Ipswich most of the major housing estates such as Chantry, Maiddenhall, and California, stick to the average very closely, but all of them are at different distances to the town centre. This is interesting, because all of these areas have council estates in them, but this has not affected the total EQ figure very much at all. North East Ipswich had a very high EQ average of 36. This is tremendously high, but it is understandable when you look at the Hoyt sector model, which states there is always one strip of very high quality housing, whatever distance away from the town centre, this strip only increase in size as you move out of the town, but the quality of the housing stays the same. There is a similar example which is Castle Hill; this is an area with a very low average of just 14. This is low, because it is mainly a council estate, and the housing is very cheap in this area. This area is also described in the Hoyt sector model, as the model says that there is a strip of land not to far away form the town centre, that will have poor quality housing, it extends much further than it should, explained in the Burgess Zone model. But as you reach the outskirts of town even this area turns into an area of medium quality housing. This is quite clear in the case of Castle Hill.
Looking at figure 3.11, we can see that the Peter Mann model, works quite effectively for the case of Ipswich. Chantry and Castle Hill cannot be easily distinguished though, because they are council estates mixed in with normal housing, and it is not possible to give an easy letter to represent its place in the Peter Mann model, but it does clearly represent how British towns work, as it has worked reasonably well for the case of Ipswich.
Looking at figure 3.0 (EQ vs. Distance) and figure 3.1 (averages bar chart) we see very little correlation in EQ and distance, it almost seems as if there is a negative correlation, this is especially the case in figure 3.0. But when I studied the indexes with more care, a pattern started to emerge; it showed that EQ is also affected in its positioning from the town centre. This is shown very clearly in figure 3.11. Figure 3.9 (age of buildings map), is interesting but of little use to us.
So to conclude the analysis of my project I have learned that towns are very dynamic, and you cannot easily be generalised into a set model, however we can use these models, to find similarities and differences between them, and real town’s.
BLANK PAGE
Conclusion
To conclude this experiment I found out that there is no real correlation between distance and EQ. This was concluded from my main graph and of the averages bar chart. But as I analysed the data tables further, and produced choropleth map’s and compared the tables to geographical models such as the Peter Mann model I began to see a correlation. From everything I have learnt I can conclude that Environmental quality is rarely affected by distance, there is a strong correlation in EQ and the area that you live in rather than the distance you are form the centre of town. This is because of the factors and complexities that affect British towns; it is not possible to see a simple correlation between EQ and distance.
I think the project went well, the data collection was done smoothly and affectively, there was never any trouble, and I managed to keep safe, using my risk assessment form. I have a few regrets, due to the enormity of the task of getting an EQ figure for 90+% of Ipswich, I had to keep my EQ assessment form simple, so I wouldn’t use up to many pages, and it wouldn’t be too difficult to survey. Due to this I could only take into account the most important factors of EQ, and could not take into account minor factors such as road width, garden size, and the amount of cars. I think that the Index did not go so well, because it was difficult to organise, and hard to find specific data at a glance, but this was made simpler by producing a choropleth map, as this was a visual representation of EQ versus distance. If I were to extend the project I would consider doing another town, similar in size to Ipswich, to see if more towns have similar factor’s that affect there EQ
Ipswich as I have said is an up and coming town with many exciting new developments occurring such as SnoAsis (a huge indoor ski centre with real snow, similar to Milton Keynes), and the new University, there are also major plans to redevelop the Odeon, an ex cinema, into a huge entertainment centre, in the town centre. All of this is being done to attract more young people to Ipswich. This is all in the future bid to make Ipswich the first city in Suffolk. There is a lot of Future for Ipswich, and it would be interesting to see if the EQ results that were obtained are similar to the results that would be obtained in 10-20 year’s time.
Figure 4.1- concept of the SnoAsis building, a major new future development in Ipswich’s future. It will provide an Indoor ski facility, a games area, restaurants and bars, and conference facilities, that previously had not been readily available in Ipswich.
“A £300m winter sports resort, with a 100m high snow slope”
(Taken from BBC website).
Figure 4.2- Could this derelict closed cinema, just outside the town centre be a future venue, for a huge entertainment facility in Ipswich?
Appendix