2014-23 App 4… · Web vie

Annex D

Heritage, Museums and Archives Strategy, 2014-23 Final March 2014Consultation responses to draft strategy September – November 2013

The following table shows the responses received during the consultation, together with response from MKC Officers. Proposed changes to the Strategy are shown in Bold. Where public workshops have been held a summary of the discussion at those events is given rather than responses from individuals.

Respondent/Workshop

Comments and Formal responses MKC officer responseRecommended changes are shown in bold

Changes

Heritage Strategy Workshop A Notes16th Oct 2013Bletchley Park

9 people attended

MK City of Design Programme

1. Where and how do the Universities come into this? Milton Keynes design is its USP and offers research and learning potential. Education is key here. (See 16).

2. How is does this programme interact with people and organisations in the city? Workshops really important.

3. Research – This is vital to understanding what MK's design principles were and what they now should be.

4. Home World and Energy World were fantastic initiatives. What about organising a new 'International Competition' to redress MK's recent dilution of urban quality?

5. Urban design is not best practice and now is very generic. A reissue of principles is required updated for relevance to a distinctive international city - city of innovation

6. Can this help the ‘Plan MK' new spatial strategy

7. Celebrate the unique design of MK. Design 3 or 4 models that residents can be engaged in and look forward to the future.

1. The Universities of Bedfordshire/MK, Hertfordshire and Northamptonshire have been engaged as partners. This will be reflected in the strategy.

2. Workshops will be part of an engagement approach following partner development.

3. Agreed – link to academic and community research is being explored.

4. This has been raised with the Head of urban Design to take forward as part of this programme.

5. This will be part of the exploration in setting up this new programme. It might be that ‘approaches’ rather that ‘principles’ will be required. See responses 46, 74 and 75.

6. Yes. See responses 46, 74 and 75.

7. This idea will be raised as part of this emerging and developing programme.

Yes – add university partners

1

Annex D

2

Annex D

Respondent/Workshop

Comments MKC officer responseRecommended changes are shown in bold

Changes

Heritage Strategy Workshop A Notes16th Oct 2013Bletchley Parkcontd

Characterisation Programme

8. Some New Town buildings are not loved and lacking in ambience (Agora) but are still a part of the history.

9. It is recognised that not all buildings can be kept but there needs to be recognition that heritage factors are important and that heritage is also about innovation and change.

10. Documentation of buildings and their public use should be a requirement if they are to go – S106 funding should make this a requirement from developers. Oral and human history is as important as the physical building.

International Invitation/EU Capital of Culture

11. What are we doing to attract new communities from across the world to our heritage and reflecting their heritage? Should we building links to those countries?

12. We have international USPs. First opportunity is Rugby World Cup (RWC) and we have one of oldest clubs Newport Pagnell – link to the birthplace town of Rugby up the A5?

13. There is overwhelming support for this programme and EU Capital of Culture but we have to be clear what it will cost and that everyone supports it for MK.

14. Transforming the city will be part of this. What about a 'processional mile' on Midsummer Boulevard linking to Station Square and Campbell Park as public centre?

8. Agreed. This programme will help document all buildings.

9. Agreed. This programme is to assist in increasing the profile of heritage factors and how they can contribute to future planning.

10. Agreed. This is an integral part of the Characterisation programme approach.

11. Yes. The strategy will be to co-ordinate initiatives around events, activities and contemporary collections and stories.

12. This is part of the intended heritage ‘Our Sporting Life’ component of the RWC MK cultural programme.

13. Agreed. Establishing the budget will be part of the process. ECoC includes urban regeneration and infrastructure projects.

14. Work is underway as part of the MK Gallery expansion and Central Milton Keynes public art projects.

3

Annex D

Respondent/Workshop


Changes

Heritage Strategy Workshop A Notes16th Oct 2013Bletchley Parkcontd

Post-Workshop Post-it Comments

15. MK City of Design – There should be research and communications into the universities currently working in these city design areas, such as Sheffield Hallam, Almere in the Netherlands and Freiburg in Germany.

16. Access for All – This needs to be a better profiled offer and larger programme than just the 4 days of Heritage Open Days every September. This could be linked to these large free 'Milestone' events such as International Festival (IF), Rugby World Cup, World War I Centenary, Milton Keynes 50th birthday in 2017, etc.

17. Access for All – Not the case that all should be free. Charging provides realism and respect and builds self-reliance in communities and not an expectation that MKC is a financial cushion. Not all minorities are on benefits and many work hard. Their heritage is part of our heritage and we need to engage to understand.

18. Cultural Endowment – A Heritage Trust model outside of the Council would work as MKC is risk averse and has not the resource to continue to fund heritage as a priority. MKC could provide funding and assets to set it up and must be proactive not reactive.

19. Cultural Endowment – The Parks Trust is an ideal model for MKC to follow with its heritage. Income assets such as crematorium or endowment around £2M could work to set up a Heritage Trust model.

15. The university partners will be asked to explore these potential connections, to see what may be feasible and to link in to an existing European New Towns Network.

16. Agreed and this will be explored, but it is important that for these ‘free’ events, our smaller heritage organisations are externally funded to deliver, so that they are not financially disadvantaged by their commitment to a larger programme.

17. This is an important point. Small cost activity has been trialled in Discover Milton Keynes and it is accepted that a variety of choice for both free and paid for activity is offered.

18. The MK Museum Expansion project and the Cultural Endowment work proposed will look at a ‘Heritage Trust Model’, but it is agreed that such a model should be independent from the Council.

19. The Parks Trust is very supportive of a cultural endowment and its help and advice will be part of the development process to establish a cultural endowment.

4

Annex D

Respondent/Workshop


Changes

Heritage Strategy Workshop B Notes21st Oct 2013MK MuseumGroup 1

18 people attended, 9 per group


20. Definition - Heritage Assets description needs to state what it covers as it relates to listed buildings, parks etc, Scheduled Ancient Monuments.

21. Profile - Mapping / Cataloguing of Archaeology needs more profile as does the Heritage in MK list MK and Local assets. Publish lists / mapping etc. Development Corporation. – pick up on their data provide a book about MK Assets listed buildings etc.

22. More information about digs etc – MK Museum and public don’t know so needs better co-ordination and maybe use volunteers creatively.

23. MKHA Heritage map has been reprinted – needs promoting / publicising / interpretation.

24. Material in Buckinghamshire's Archives – how to reclaim MK’s history with specific actions.

25. New Town - has unique Architecture and is coming to a time where work / extension / re-design may need to happen so needs knowledge to get the ground work right and for people to do anything – they need to know what needs doing.

26. Short history of last 50 years is unique. What’s special? Shopping centre – size and design well known. Identify what we want to hold onto and what has to change. Evolution.

20. A formal definition of ‘Heritage Assets’ will be used as part of this programme in accordance with English Heritage definition.

21. Agreed – developing the current heritage communications plan to cover a archaeology is essential as is reinterpreting the existing information in published monographs for a modern audience.

22. MKC will develop its heritage communications plan to cover archaeology and how material deposited at the County Museum might be better used.

23. Agreed, see response 21 above. The map also needs updating.

24. This will be prioritised as part of the Archives Joint Arrangement 2014 – 17.

25 and 26. Agree with both responses. The Characterisation programme will inform and be informed by expert panel advice and public engagement and nominations to enable a responsive approach to Milton Keynes New Town heritage. This could as a ‘local list’ be taken into account for any planning and development control applications as they arise.

5

Annex D

Respondent/Workshop


Changes



27. International USPs - MK Museum – unique artefacts.

28. Identity – what is MK’s identity? It is beyond new town & beyond villages – it is a City in flux.

29. Capture thoughts of MK Development Corporation architects and planners - LA has this.

30. MK Museum - Hoping to build a ‘new city gallery’ – but the budgets we are talking about are tight to make it really cutting edge / exciting / inspiring. It is about History / peoples story - got to come from the people

31. Design of MK is unique – what comes next? We have a 2 speed heritage, Old and modern, new communities and the way they engage/contribute is unique.

32. Public transport is key to developing heritage visitation.

33. A strength of the International city is its diverse population which is amazingly happily diverse – Accidental?

International Invitation/ European Capital of Culture

34. Last 10 years MK has moved away from being unique – what have we got from last 10 years that is really unique? We were a world leader in design. We’ve got the potential but we have to work on it, but also be realistic.

35. Open University is not embedded in this programme and needs to be as they are an international brand.

27. MK Museum is identifying USPs through its own and partner collections as part of the MK Museum expansion.

28. An identity statement will be included in the communications. See response 31.

29. Agreed. The partners will look at how this can be developed.

30. MK Museum is leading on an approach to source further external funding and site phasing. There is also funding for public engagement to enable their full input.

31. Agreed and the blend is its strength which needs to be built on in relation to its constituent parts.

32. MKC Highways will support the strategy.

33. Diversity is vital to the delivery of the strategy and is one of its priority ‘promises’.

34. This is why the MK City of Design programme has been formulated to bring partners together to help a co-ordinated approach to and recognition of design.

35. The Open University will be invited to participate.

Yes - Contact OU.

6

Annex D

Respondent/Workshop


Changes


36. Where’s the young talent? The University is a game changer. Needs to be arts / design / humanities, not business related, so students shaping future of town.

37. Cultural capital could be hard to get. There is however an International element with motor racing – unique.

38. Linking with communities abroad – representing them in the city centre, where is the diversity of MK represented in the centre? The shopping centres need to be on board.

39. Integrated approach where villages are part of the offer so needs transport that works.

40. Transport / education / shopping therefore all key so how do we get them on board? Their ambitions?

41. Encouraging people to mix / sample melting pot of what’s going on in rest of the city.

42. MK not unique anymore – what are our USPs? We are a designed town / city but is that enough? Old parts that have been blended into new town.

43. Benefits of ECoC looking to develop / regenerate spaces and bring in a number of venues and infrastructure. Visibility of culture on the street is part of this. Access point in the city for diversity. International Festival - is it working? What’s the ‘international’ benefit? MK less international than it must be.

44. Musical heritage – Marshalls, Venues for musical theatre / performance / arts with entry level opportunities to prevent loss of talent.

36. University partners are developing course content with this in mind, using New Town Heritage as the vehicle.

37. The motorsports heritage component will be explored through MK Museum and the proposed Aston Martin Museum.

38. Developing the diversity promise across the partner programmes will help with this.

39. See responses 31 and 32.

40. Develop existing projects with them where benefit is both ways.

41. A focus on marketing and profile led by major events and milestones.

42. USPs to be [re]established as part of MK city of Design programme development.

43. Major events milestones will help increase the internationalism, diversity, range and variety of what is on offer and the cultural strategies will together provide the direction of travel.

44. It is hoped that organisations like Marshalls will be part of the ‘MK Story’ and will link to Arts Strategy ‘Music Hubs’ for educational benefit.

Yes – add in Aston Martin.

Yes – add in ‘Music heritage’.

7

Annex D

Respondent/Workshop


Changes

Heritage Strategy Workshop B Notes21st Oct 2013MK MuseumGroup 2 (contd)

45. The Point is a much loved icon of the New Town. It could provide venues, boutiques etc, similar to Affleck’s Palace in Manchester - Let’s not lose The Point but use it. Bletchley Leisure Centre- we lost the heritage through redevelopment.

46. New buildings should be iconic and planning development should demand quality of design. Need to pull architects in and learn from previous mistakes.

Inspirational Parks Programme

47. A City of trees and The Parks Trust (TPT), Unique – developing areas such as the Ouse Valley – living in the country – city in the country and MK officially a forest. Outside spaces to use for culture?

48. Working with TPT to create exciting spaces / diversity / green festival is the way forward. Include food stalls, encourage people to come to MK and have fun outside - venues in parks for performance. Poetry in the Parks Community engagement programme of arts/culture to link parks – link spaces. Just need to manage usage with increase in use/visitors.

49. ECoC – what do we want? Redways are unique and should be well maintained - improving MK for the people that live here.

50. MORE CULTURE! Shouting that heritage is good for business – valuable commodity.

51. Conclusion – where to start. Groundwork to continue to embed and showcase heritage at ECOC level.

45. MKC will take into account the potential to re-use The Point when it considers the currently submitted outline application.

46. This will be part of the MK City of Design approach, which could help inform planning and the ‘Plan MK’.

47. The Parks Trust is a major event co-ordinator and will work closely with partners to enable this to happen.

48. This is part of the Parks Trust ten year plans which is referenced in the strategy and which can take this forward.

49. The Redways are receiving funding and will be recognised in activity programmes.

50. Heritage Means Business brochure launch in early 2014 will help this. The other cultural strategies are also linking to business initiatives.

51. The adoption of this strategy will enable this to happen.

8

Annex D

Respondent/Workshop


Changes



52. City of Design – MK’s USP, grade II shopping centre and other unique buildings. Roundabouts, public art, etc. Needs conferences and major events around this USP re. Placemaking & urban design.

53. Architecture – CMK is criticised for its design. Link to home world/energy world – linking mainstream with independent. Have a new grid square ‘designed’ e.g. Richard Rodgers. We need to drive up the architectural ambitions of developers and planners so that we do get modern good design – it is only happening in part – e.g. Oxley Woods.

54. Tie in the MK Smart Cities into the strategies and ensure MK is leading in energy efficiency / pv – cell technology as it did before as forerunner of BREEAM and celebrating leadership.

International Invitation/ European Capital of Culture

55. ECoC needs a high profile ambassador – Prince Charles or Jude Kelly – an international figure not an MK one. What is the sustainability of the events?

56. How does Vital Signs fit into ECoC?

57. Programmes need to be better coordinated and both bring in new people and grow talent from grass roots adapted and based on real premise as well as involving international brands like Red Bull and Bletchley Park. Can the Heritage Consortium help co-ordinate?

52. Agreed. This is implied as part of the strategy around this programme. The MK Gallery Future City exhibition in December 2013 and the New Towns Conference in March 2014 at MK CDC are trialling how this might develop further.

53. See response 4. Bringing architects and designers from across the world to help shape the future MK is to be part of the programme.

54. This had been picked up already as potentially helping develop the programme through this existing initiative.

55. Both of these points will be picked up as part of developing the programme.

56. An initial and further discussions with the MK Community Foundation will assist in integrating Vital Signs into the ten-year programmes as well as ECoC.

57. Agreed. By bringing projects together into programmes under the strategy umbrella, this will help co-ordination.

Yes – add conferences into the strategy

9

Annex D

Respondent/Workshop


Changes



58. Opportunity for rewarding developers who preserve an aspect of the heritage. Maybe a funding mechanism S106 to make a record of heritage assets and not just physical structure but human stories?

59. Engagement with sites – interpretation boards– local community groups involved. Signage – include and work with rural parish councils too. Place names – people need to understand link to the past eg. Bottledump cemetery.

60. Rural towns – important to build them into the programmes and that they receive help – MK Heritage Association is strong here.

61. SEMLEP Creative Industries group for a regional approach and support for international aspect of MK and its history/heritage – archaeology – best excavated place in 100s of years.

62. LEARNING - Bring in resources – collections can be digital/online. Exhibition – museums (hands on) cases – interactive – memory events - Handling box collection – developed for new curriculum.

63. Heritage gateway and MKi Observatory provide access to information but need profile. What about someone like Dan Snow doing a series on MK?

64. Characterisation – include public art. Developments must capture history of buildings prior to redevelopment.

58. See responses 9 and 10. There are ongoing discussions with MKC Planning colleagues.

59. Discussions within Council and with the Parks Trust have taken place re city-wide wayfinding to review and update important heritage signage. This could involve local communities.

60. Agreed. The ‘rural’ parts of MK can be supported through the MKHA Network and we will support that involvement.

61. This SEMLEP group has been presented with a plan for MK culturally in January 2014 and is supportive of the aspirations.

62. Museum Learning is a key part of the MK Museum and Bletchley Park developments and is being funded by Heritage Lottery Fund projects.

63. Agreed that profile is important. See responses 21 and 22.

64. Percent for art as a planning obligation will continue to be supported.

Yes – refer to % for art.

10

Annex D

Respondent/Workshop


Changes

Organisational Responses by alphabetical order:

28 Nov 13

Arts and Heritage Alliance Milton Keynes

By email

Response 65:

AHA-MK’s Executive was very pleased to be invited by Lucy Bedford and Shane Downer to support the development of MKC’s revised arts and heritage strategies. We welcomed the opportunity of looking at the drafts prepared in advance of beginning the formal consultation and then meeting with Lucy and Shane to discuss them. This was a very useful exercise: certainly the drafts were quite extensively revised before being distributed more widely. We were very impressed with the consultation drafts. They are clear, interesting and well-illustrated, and it was impressive that they were both presented within the same over-arching framework. They demonstrate the quality and ambition necessary to achieve the Corporate Plan’s goal that Milton Keynes will be recognised internationally for its distinctive arts and heritage. The two arts and two heritage workshops that were held within the consultation period were well attended by MK arts and heritage representative organisations. At least one of the AHA-MK groups attended each session and it was good to see that each generated a stimulating discussion. The general tenor of all these discussions was broad support for the strategies, alongside a number of more detailed suggestions.

On behalf of AHA-MK, I am happy to support both the Arts & Public Art Strategy and the Heritage, Museums & Archives Strategy (subject only to detailed points that will no doubt be made in individual responses to the consultation). We commend the process through which the draft strategies have been developed and consulted upon. We recognise the huge stresses that MK Council faces in maintaining appropriate involvement in matters which lie outside statutory responsibilities. The Borough’s arts and heritage communities are appreciative that the Council recognises the relevance of arts and heritage to the Borough’s social and economic well-being and has engaged so effectively with arts and heritage organisations and individual residents to develop an agreed framework for next 10 years.

65. Noted.

MKC welcomes the partnership delivery and scrutiny that AHA-MK continues to bring to this emerging strategy and it looks forward to working with the organisation as the Action Plan is delivered.

11

Annex D

Respondent/Workshop


Changes

Campbell Park Parish Council

8 Nov 2013

By Letter

Response 66:

Dear Sirs

RE: Heritage, Museums & Archive Strategy

The Planning & Policy Committee of Campbell Park Parish Council considered the draft strategy at its meeting on 4th November 2013.

The Committee urged Milton Keynes Council to actively work towards providing a museum and archive facility in Central Milton Keynes [CMK] and actively work to secure and protect buildings of historic and architectural interest within the Parish and Milton Keynes as a whole especially The Point.

Yours faithfullyDominic Warner, Clerk to Council, CPPC

MK Council thanks CPPC for its response.

Independent scoping work on museum and archive provision has been undertaken with those recommendations made and shared through public reports and documentation.MKC has concluded that the best plan for museum provision is to expand the existing MK Museum site to deliver the full museum provision through an experienced independent trust model as this offers a range of benefits and advantages over a CMK based location.

A Stage 1 Heritage Lottery Funded project is underway to build the business case to deliver this provision and meet the aspirations for Milton Keynes. However, it is recognised that a central museum and heritage showcase is vital to signposting the many visitors to CMK to MK Museum and it is proposed the Discover Milton Keynes Showcase is extended and integrated into a combined new Central Library and Archives facility within CMK, alongside other facilities. This project is in development for delivery in this strategy. In regard to actively working to protect buildings of historic and architectural interest within CMK, MKC Conservation and Archaeology will lead on the new high-profile Characterisation Programme within this strategy to ensure this happens with partner and public involvement.

Yes – ensure that CMK facilities are profiled.

12

Annex D

Respondent/Workshop


Changes

MK Cycling Tourists Club

26 Nov 2013

By email

Response 67:

I only found out about the Strategy tonight but I quickly read through it. I fully support it and hope it receives the general support it deserves, especially the necessary funding.

MKCTC has been running Discover Milton Keynes Easy Riders guided cycle rides for nearly 40 years, well before anyone else thought that MK was of interest. So an invite to one of the stakeholder meetings would have been welcome. Likewise we were not asked to participate in the 2012 MK Sport Exhibition, in spite of having a large collection of archive material covering all aspects of cycling. Best wishes for the project.

Philip Ashbourn, MK CYCLISTS TOURING CLUBChartered Surveyor/Town Planner, MKDC 1976-1992

Noted. Extensive local publicity and direct email distribution should have enabled you to pick up on the workshops available.

MKC Highways Transport Policy Department (including Cycling and Walking) supports the HMA Strategy in full, including the Cultural Tourism programme and its trails and Way finding projects, so we would welcome the MKCTC as partners to assist in this area of development. Your email will be added to our distribution list for future correspondence.

Yes – raise the profile of this area where present.

MK Forum

29 Nov 2013

By email

Response 68:

1. We welcome the update of the Strategy and the focus that it gives upon working towards a bid for the European City of Culture in 2023. We particularly support the establishment of a Local List.

2. There seems to be an overlap with the Arts and Public Art Strategy (APAS) regarding the treatment of Public Art. We suggest that this does not form part of the HMAS. Incorporation of public art in both strategies will lead to confusion and a lack of clarity.

68.

1. Noted.

2. It is recognised there are anomalies to address but there are some public art projects which are heritage owned/led (e.g. older ‘pieces’ that are regarded as of heritage collection importance, which do belong in the HMAS.

Yes – further review the joint areas of delivery for clarity

13

Annex D

Respondent/Workshop


Changes

MK Forum

29 Nov 2013

By email(contd)

Response 68 (contd):

3. Some of the policies seem to be nebulous and lacking in specific detail e.g. Aim A i) c) Securing, protecting and bringing back into re-use and public access Milton Keynes formal Heritage Assets. What, precisely, does this mean? In isolation it is non-controver-sial but without context (i.e. what are the city’s formal Heritage As-sets?) it is meaningless. We suggest that each policy is carefully examined so that clear, measureable outputs can be identified.

4. We suggest that it is wrong to consider part of the transport net-work (the redways) as a heritage asset. If they are then the grid roads should be treated likewise.

5. We have following specific comments on the proposed policies:

a. Aim B: Place i) b) We welcome the proposal for a new Mu-seum of Milton Keynes but there is no indication upon size, location, budget and how it is to relate to the existing Mu-seum at Stacey Bushes. The timescale seems unrealistic.

b. Aim B: Place ii) a) The Bedford to MK Canal (which does not exist) seems a curious heritage project. We support the canal but this strategy is not an appropriate home for it.

c. Aim B: Place ii) f) Similarly any developments at Willen Lake are not part of the HMAS.

68.

3. Many of the new programmes are at an early exploratory stage and direction and a clear way forward will be defined, once partner and stakeholder involvement has taken place. ‘Heritage Asset’ is a formal definition

4. See 3 above. The right approach will be developed in 2014. It is accepted that use of the formal word ‘asset’ may be unhelpful and so ‘of historic character’ will be used, until these important parts of our urban design are assessed.

5. Noted.

a. This project is currently undergoing development through HLF Stage 1 funding which will determine size and scope but it will be at the current MK Museum site. Public and further stakeholder’s consultation is scheduled for 2014.

b. There is a lot of historic background heritage activity around this project by the main Trust involved.

c. This will be reviewed in line with this comment.

Yes – ensure that ‘heritage asset’ is formally defined.

Yes – change wording to show current plans.

As a. above.

As a. above.

14

Annex D

Respondent/Workshop


Changes

MK Forum

29 Nov 2013

By email(contd)

Response 68 (contd):

d. Aim B: Place. We support the principle of City Of Design and feel that the HMAS should recognise that the Council has to take the lead with this and put design at the heart of the commissioning process for new buildings and infra-structure.

e. Aim B: Place iii) b): This seems a confusing objective and we do not understand either what it means or how it is to be accomplished.

f. Aim B: Place iii) c): This is more properly part of the APAS

g. Aim D: Learning) i): Ditto

h. Aim D: Learning iii): These are all leisure projects rather than heritage ones

i. Aim E: Events iii) c): This ought to be brought forward to Years 1 – 3 given that the city’s fiftieth birthday is in 2017.

68.

d. This is a new programme which MKC Urban Design have now agreed to lead on whilst partners approach and direction are established. However, the HMAS is not the right document for specifying a commissioning process for new buildings and infrastructure.

e. This will be reviewed in line with the comment and clarified.

f. See 68.2 above.

g. See 68.2 above.

h. Trails development has arisen through the primary objective to raise profile of heritage venues and the historic environment. It is therefore a heritage-led project with associated leisure benefits.

i. The timescale will be reviewed in line with the comment.

Yes – specify MKC lead

Yes – clarify wording

As above

As above

Agreed – change dates

Respondent/ Comments MKC officer response Changes

15

Annex D

Workshop Recommended changes are shown in boldMK Heritage Association (MKHA)

19 Dec 2013

Meeting held with MKHA Chair and Vice-Chair

The voluntary nature of the MKHA meant the meeting took place on 19 Dec 2013. But was based on prior discussions at MKHA Executive meetings prior to the consultation deadline.

Response 69:

a. MKHA thanked MKC for the grant aid funding it received, stating that this made a real difference at the grassroots level supporting volunteer work amongst the local history, heritage and archaeology societies.

b. MKHA supported the new strategy and was committed to continue to deliver the Online Heritage portal and support the other programmes for which it was a stated partner. It requested support in developing its forward plan for 2014-17 to take account of the changing heritage, museum and archive delivery and its role within that delivery.

c. MKHA had fundraised for the Discover Milton Keynes and Young Heritage Hunters programmes and was keen to continue to support heritage learning across young people and older generations. It was looking to make an applica-tion to Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF) to ensure important archive material across the individual members was se-cured and made accessible.

Response 69:

a. Noted. MKC is committed to funding the MKHA at the current level until 2017.

b. Noted. MKC would support the MKHA to develop its forward plan accordingly.

c. The MKHA fundraising was vital to ensuring these programmes continued to reach target audiences that would not otherwise engage in heritage learning. MKC would continue to support MKHA applications to HLF.

MK Heritage Consortium

(Bletchley Park; Cowper & Newton Museum; Living Archive; MK CDC, MK Museum)

26 Sep; 26 Nov 2013; 21 Jan 2014

Response 70:Following meetings in 2013 and individual director attendance at work-shops, the Heritage Consortium partners agreed this joint response at its January 2014 meeting:The Heritage Consortium and its individual organisations have worked extensively in partnership with MK Council to support the previous Heritage Strategy and develop the current proposed Heritage, Museums and Archives Strategy. It is committed to actively working with the Council to deliver the projects and programmes for which it is responsible within the draft delivery plan and endorses the strategic approach for the next 10 years.

Response 70:Noted. MKC is committed to supporting the Consortium to enable excellent high quality heritage delivery to residents and visitors, opportunities for learners and volunteers and securing important collections.

Respondent/ Comments MKC officer response Changes

16

Annex D

Workshop Recommended changes are shown in boldUniversity of Hert-fordshire Public His-tory DepartmentDe Havilland Cam-pusHatfieldHertfordshireAL10 9AB

Response 71:

Apologies for the delay in replying to this. I am writing to confirm the Uni-versity of Hertfordshire's support for the draft heritage strategy and your future plans as expressed through the recent consultation. I was pleased to see that the New Towns Network featured in the draft strategy (Aim F Communications iii. Regional Networks), and hope that the University can continue to be a partner in future projects. This includes the 'New Town Heritage Hub' bid that we recently submitted to the Arts and Humanities Research Council in partnership with Milton Keynes Council, and other appropriate future work in partnership with the Universities of Bedford-shire and Northampton. It is hoped that together we can create a strong cross regional partnership which will serve to boost local heritage educa-tion and conservation, particularly focusing on the history of garden cities and new towns. Obviously, the University of Hertfordshire's geographical position - as home to both Garden Cities (Letchworth and Stevenage), the first postwar new town (Stevenage), and the highest concentration of Brit-ish new towns, gives this subject particular relevance to the University's broader strategic plans for research and teaching.

Needless to say, Milton Keynes is an extremely important partner due to its unique position as the last and largest British new town, and our good track record of joint project work. Having already achieved one successful AHRC funded project on 'New Town Heritage' in 2012-2013, I hope that the University will be able to continue to work with MK Council in access-ing a wider range of funding, including from academic sources, and devel-oping cross sector partnerships in the region, and beyond. This includes future work with EU partners and the development of new Museum and Archive facilities that tell this important story for the first time while it is still reasonably fresh in the public mind. I would like to wish you the best of luck with your heritage strategy, and look forward to future partnership work, Best wishes,

Christine Garwood, Senior Lecturer in Public History

71. Noted.

MKC welcomes the University of Hertfordshire response and will continue to work with it and other universities on developing Partnership Networks for New Towns to support heritage education, academic and community research, collections and major heritage programmes in this area such as the MK City of Design and Characterisation Programmes.

Yes – add in as a partner to MK City of Design

Respondent/Workshop


Changes

17

Annex D

University of NorthamptonCollaborative Centre for the Built Environment.

Response 72:

Many thanks for sending me the links, I looked at them and also filled in briefly the survey. It is truly impressive how many activities and programmes are already underway and planned for the future. This must be clearly visible for people who live in Milton Keynes, but I think it still needs wider national and international visibility.

The CCBE would certainly consider being a partner in developing any of the programmes, am not sure exactly where but I am particularly interested in the Heritage aspect of the New Town legacy, which I think has enormous potential.

I am an outsider and not completely in the know about MK, but I think in order to put MK more on a national and international map an ambitious museums programme might be worth considering, both architecturally and conceptually. I am thinking of the Museum Mile in Frankfurt/Main or the Museums Island in Berlin… How about establishing a National Architecture Museum (similar to the Deutsches Architekturmuseum in Frankfurt) or a National Architecture and Town Planning Museum? Certainly a National New Town Museum might be a good start - it could then attract other museums... The founding of a high profile arts school at university level might also be an idea – a la Glasgow: Milton Keynes School of Art, to go with a great piece of Architecture and a milestone for a wider Design School – City of Design?

This is all just blue sky thinking, not sure whether it is original and/or useful… Do let me know, I am certainly interested to explore these ideas further – so put us down as a potential partner.

Sabine Coady Schäbitz, Director.

72. Noted.

MKC welcomes the University of Northamptonshire response and will continue to work with it and other universities on developing Partnership Networks for New Towns to support heritage education, academic and community research, collections and major heritage programmes in this area such as the MK City of Design and Characterisation Programes.

Yes – add in as a partner to MK City of Design

18

Annex D

Respondent/Workshop


Changes

Westbury Arts Centre

7 Oct 2013

By email

Response 73:

Hi Shane, Westbury Board of Trustees considered the strategy at their meeting on Friday, in the context of the recent discussions relating to Hazeley Academy, the Young Roots Application, and the developing vision for the Westbury site.

Given that there could be a Heritage Grant application at some future stage, it would be very helpful if the Strategy could refer to the fact that Westbury Farm is an undeveloped Heritage Site, and that the restoration of the asset for Community benefit, is an outcome that MKC would wish to see.

Could you please copy this to Marie also? Thank You, Tony Bates,Chair, Westbury Arts Centre

73. Noted.

The Heritage, Museum and Archives strategy is being developed very closely with the Arts and Public Arts Strategy and it is the latter strategy where Westbury Arts Centre is being given the highest profile.

MKC would support the development of a Heritage Lottery Fund ‘Heritage Grant’ application to secure and protect the heritage of the Westbury site, but this will need support from the owners [Milton Keynes Development Partnership] and the other major land holder in the area [The Parks Trust] to ensure the optimum benefits for the organisation and its local community.

Yes – ensure wording in the Arts and Public Art Strategy reflects the very important historic nature of the site.

19

Annex D

Respondent/Workshop


Changes

MK CouncilOfficer response 1:5 Oct 2013

Head of Urban Design and Head of Conservation and Archaeology

2 people attended.

A Meeting was held followed up by email submissions.

Response 74:

I think an additional output could be policy in the new Plan: MK that reflects the unique design principles/approach and approach to innovation. Furthermore having spoken to planning colleagues, it is not entirely clear yet, but ‘Topic’ Papers will be written for Plan: MK, one which will likely focus on Placemaking related issues which could cut across the major outcomes you have listed under ‘Major outcomes’. Conversely, delivery of this programme and understanding of the unique design principles and lessons learnt could help with Plan: MK. So which ever leads (Heritage Strategy or Plan: MK, this piece of research needs to be done). Obviously in terms of having planning weight and influencing future development being located in Plan: MK would have more weight – hence the suggestion around a policy in Plan: MK as an output.

Interestingly, the 1970 plans for MK don’t focus very much on design principles – they outline 6 goals for MK but focus more on principles around land use disposition rather than design. It would be interesting to do a transect through MK (from the edge where the new developments are located through to the donut estates and CMK) to understand how different design principles over different decades have shaped identity, although I am not sure if there were always clear design principles for the rationale for layout of different estates.

I think much of the focus will be on the architecture / energy efficient materials and construction rather than urban design. The focus is probably more on a unique layout than necessarily unique design principles – urban design principles are certainly generic – it is their interpretation on the ground which leads to a sense of place or identity. How does this sound – does it help??

Neil Sainsbury (MKC Head of Urban Design)

74. Noted with thanks.

It is agreed that we are at the early stages of developing a new MK City of Design Programme which must balance the historic design approach previously used to deliver the ‘New Town’ Milton Keynes with the current and future plans to develop Milton Keynes an ‘International City’ of high quality urban design, architecture, places and spaces.

It has been agreed that MKC Urban Design will lead on this programme (which is also within the Arts and Public Art Strategy) and work with partners across a number of areas to develop an approach which ensures Milton Keynes retains a ‘unique feel and identity’.

It may be that the Programme evolves and covers a wider remit than either of the strategies, but this should not matter if the right approach is reached and the strategies can still help the respective arts and heritage sectors engage with that programme.

Review wording in line with this response, add an R&D project and ensure brought up at initial start-up meeting.

20

Annex D

Respondent/Workshop


Changes

Follow up to Response 72.

Response 75:

Shane,

I used the word approach, and on reflection although it is maybe semantics, I think the text in the ‘major outcomes’ column should rather read, “International recognition of the unique design approach of MK ……” because principles are a little too specific and I can’t seem to find principles per say in the original plans. If we do an assessment of the design approach it will show pro’s and con’s as well as lessons that can be learnt. I don’t think a heritage strategy is the right place however to do this assessment – this would be useful in my view for the evidence base for the ‘placemaking’ topic paper in Plan: MK. Happy to discuss further

I was also thinking that you could potentially as an additional output/ project include “Transformation of Midsummer Boulevard East into a high quality pedestrian environment to better integrate different elements of the Primary Shopping Area as well as Campbell Park”? What do you think? I don’t believe I have any further comments.

Finally, I support the Strategic Priority : Enhance Identity (Place) and MK: City of Design not just to recognise the unique design approaches in MK but also how this can contribute to wider Placemaking attributes as part of Plan:MK

Neil Sainsbury (MKC Head of Urban Design)


See Response 74 above.

As above.Add proposed project into plan.

21

Annex D

Respondent/Workshop


Changes

MK CouncilOfficer response 2:

Projects Officer Public Realm

A phone call meeting was held followed by an email submission:

Response 76:

Can you include this [Newport Pagnell Civil War] project within your future strategic heritage projects for MK?

I still need to fettle this [project proposal] document but wanted to get it in to you as I believe the deadline is today.

Phill Snell, Projects Officer, Public Realm


This project will be added to the strategy as it meets the requirements in terms of a high-profile project that will have widespread benefits for communities living in and visitors to Milton Keynes. We will work towards ensuring that the project is supported and potentially adopted by Newport Pagnell Town Council to take forward as part of their ‘Town Plan’.

Yes – add this new project to the draft HMAS.

MK CouncilOfficer response 3:5 Nov 2013

Senior Tariff Manager/Growth Co-ordination Manager

2 people attended.Meeting was held followed up by an email submission.

Response 77:

At the meeting a focus on learning for the future generation was expressed and how heritage learning might better be used to benefit university, colleges and schools. Using heritage to help new communities adapt and integrate into Milton Keynes was discussed, as was assisting with quality of life programmes (volunteering, etc.).Both officers agreed that although perceptions were changing, more focus was needed on how heritage helps business creation. See table below for the comments of Planning & Transport to the public consultation. This has been compiled by Darren Gray from the Infrastructure Coordination and Delivery Service. References and comments (below) have been kept in the original format.

77. Noted.

The strategy is keen to see partners develop heritage learning for universities, colleges and schools and a number of major programmes will seek to do this.

Volunteering was an existing priority which will be continued and business development is also a priority in a number of programmes.

Individual responses follow:

Yes – raise the profile of learning and of volunteer projects where present in current action plan.

Ref Page Comment MKC Officer Response ChangesH1 3 Introduction & Long-term Vision: - this is a fuller introduction than the

other two strategies and seems to be more retrospective in this sec-tion than the other two strategies.

Noted None.

H2 3 Introduction & Long-term Vision: Comment – presentation of strategy date as 2014 – 23 is not consistent with the other two strategies and also looks a little awkward within the structure of the sentence. Sug-gest amendment to “2014-2023” ideally or “2014/23”.

This anomaly will be reviewed in line with the other strategies.

Review dates format.

22

Annex D

Ref Page Comment MKC Officer Response ChangesH3 5 1.2 Strategic Position – comment – well written and demonstrates

awareness of political agendas and need to reflect the priorities of partners.

Noted with thanks.

H4 5 1.3 Promise – ref to meeting the aspirations of current residents, visit-ors and growing communities is very good and the list of bullet points is strong in presenting the opportunities to expand inward investment within cultural sectors.

Noted with thanks.

H5 6 2. Strategic Priorities – the structure of the Sport and Active Com-munities Strategy seems to sum up the structure of the strategy in a better way and should be considered for use here.

Review the Sports and Active Communities structure for potential use.

Review section structure.

H6 6 & 7 2. Strategic Priority One: Aim A and Aim B and Strategic Priority Two: Aim C and Aim D and Strategic Priority Three: Aim E and Aim F could use a fuller introduction to outcomes as presented in the other two strategies. Having three outcomes under each aim A-F is a good style presentation – lettering a) to c) should be used in other two strategies.

Review of the other strategies to ensure ad-option of a similar structure is achieved.

Review section structure.

H7 6 2. Strategic Priority One: Aim B bullet b) – the capital programme ref-erenced must match the presentation in the LIP. It may be helpful to reference the LIP here. Suggestion that changed to: “ b) Delivering a capital programme, with priorities presented in the Local Investment Plan, for a range of heritage historic sites which will contribute to MK becoming an international city.”

Review the HMAS in line with adopting the wording suggested as more encompassing of the Local Investment Plan.

Review wording.

H8 7 2.2 Strategic Priority Two: Increase Opportunities – Aim C: People: - this is a good section bringing in the commercial sector and also touching on the possibilities of digital technologies and probably should be made more of in the Arts and Public Art Strategy.

Noted with thanks. Comment re APAS will be picked up by that strategy.

H9 7 2.2 Strategic Priority Two: Increase Opportunities – Aim D: Learning – possible include ref to interpretation in bullet point a). It would also be useful to see ref to UCMK – if they have a role to play. Suggestion that changed to: “a) Secure the significant heritage collections of MK mak-ing them publicly accessible, both physically and through excellent in-terpretation, making them internationally recognised.

Review the HMAS in line with adopting the wording suggested and referencing UCMK.

Review wording.

23

Annex D

Ref Page Comment MKC Officer Response ChangesH10 7 2.3 Strategic Priority Three: Actively Celebrate – Aim E: Events: - I ap-

preciate that the aims link to the delivery tables that follow but in isola-tion here the wording seems very non-specific and non-committal. Wording that makes the statement firmer would help. Suggestion that it is changed to: “a) Establish a year-long programme of events, a cul-mination of the Strategy, celebrating MKs ultimate arrival as an Inter-national City welcoming the world to its cultural vitality.”

Review the HMAS in line with adopting the wording suggested.

Review wording.

H11 7 2.3 Strategic Priority Three: Actively Celebrate – Aim F: Communica-tions: - the title ‘communications’ is missing.

Replace title. Replace title.

H12 8 3. Delivery – 2nd para – add programme management to the list. Sug-gestion that changed to “Officers take responsibility for delivering this strategy including project, programme, contract and budget manage-ment…”

Add word suggested. Review wording.

H13 General There is a lot of switching in text between ‘Milton Keynes Council’, ‘MK Council’ and ‘MKC’. A more consistent approach would be helpful.

Adopt consistency of Milton Keynes Council on first reference and ‘MKC’ thereafter.

Review wording.

H14 8 3.1 Programme Plan and 3.2 Annual Review Monitoring: this is the only one of the three strategies to contain these headings. The text for both is good, though a little wordy. This approach could be used for the other two strategies.

Noted with thanks. Review of the other strategies at Board to ensure adoption of a similar structure is achieved.

H15 8 3.2 Annual Review Monitoring: ref could also be made to the Local In-vestment Plan Programme Management Board monitoring process.

Review HMAS to reference LIP PMB. Review wording.

H16 9 Strategic Priority 1: Enhance Identity – Aim A: People a) – ‘typo’ on second line of ‘Major Outcomes’ column – separate ‘ofour’.

Make typo change. Change.

H17 9 Strategic Priority 1: Enhance Identity – Aim A: People – ii) – the pro-gramme group should include the Sports Board. Suggestion – add “Sports Board”.

Review HMAS to reference Sports Board. Review wording.

H18 9 Strategic Priority 1: Enhance Identity – Aim A: People – iii) – having a focus on Heritage North West may not be the best approach and could alienate other parties / areas.

Wording will be reviewed but this area of MK has particular heritage resonance and was in previous strategy.

Review wording.

24

Annex D

Ref Page Comment MKC Officer Response ChangesH19 10 Strategic Priority 1: Enhance Identity – Aim B: Place: not all projects

line up with the LIP for instance there is no reference to the ‘CMK Su-perlibrary’ though there is expenditure profiled for the Archive from 2020/21.

The wording shows a development change combining Central Library and City Archive. The LIP will be updated at its next refresh.

H20 10 Strategic Priority 1: Enhance Identity – Aim B: Place: the Waterway (canal) will be a new feature linking to historic waterways in MK there-fore it may not be best placed in this strategy.

Review the comment in line with comment also from above. See comment 68.5b.

H21 10 Strategic Priority 1: Enhance Identity – Aim B: Place: there is a lot of overlap with the other two strategies though not all projects are listed consistently for example the Architecture and Urban Design Festival is only titled Architecture Festival in the Arts and Public Arts Strategy. The programme titles in both Arts and Heritage Strategies are the same but listed in different orders, and these are different programme titles to sport. Is the intention to go for consistency throughout?

Review wording in line with other strategies to ensure clarity over what is joint pro-gramme and what is distinct.

Review wording.

H22 12 Strategic Priority 1: Enhance Identity – Aim D: learning: please make sure that all capital projects relating to increasing population (growth) are notified to ICDS for consideration for inclusion in the Local Invest-ment Plan particularly Campbell Park Sculpture Park, Blue Lagoon Park and New Parks for New Communities.

Noted.

H23 Overall The strategy is laid out well and shows real ambition. The relationship to Plan:MK in terms of stating the spatial planning future for the Bor-ough and how land and key infrastructure is determined that can sup-port heritage needs to be well considered and possibly articulated a little more clearly. The relationship with Local Investment Plan, which draws together and presents the key items of infrastructure for the Borough and helps identify funding schemes and prioritise projects for funding / delivery, should also be considered and where appropriate the Local Investment Plan should be referenced. The strategy makes some connection.

Review HMAs wording to reference clearly both Plan MK and the Local Investment Plan.

Review wording.

25

Annex D

Respondent/Workshop


Changes

MK CouncilHousing and Select Committee

10 Dec 2013

Strategies were presented by Cultural Services Manager Marie Kirbyshaw

Response 78: Cllr Robin Bradburn

Who will say that we are ‘World Class’? Will not being a city prevent applying for European Capital of Culture?

Response 79: Cllr Hannah O’Neal

Congratulations – this is all positive stuff. It is good to recognise heritage and thanks for bringing it – it is ‘brilliant’.

Response 80: Cllr Margaret Burk

Within the Public Realm in Oldbrook there is one of the original Play slides. How do we preserve it as a heritage asset?

78. World Class achievement will be from external ratification (through press, PR, formal documentation) plus successful completion of the strategy projects and programmes over the next ten years. The rules for applying for European Capital of Culture do not specifically state that only cities can apply. However, consideration is being given to making another bid for city status as part of marking the fiftieth anniversary in 2017.

79. Noted. As with the previous strategy, having an adopted document brings profile, advocacy and delivery in partnership and levers in external funding for Milton Keynes.

80. As part of the Characterisation programme, members of the public will be able to put forward items from the 'New Town' era for a panel to assess whether that item is 'of historic character' or even a 'heritage asset'. This will then form part of a local list that will help identify options for preservation.


26

Annex D

Respondent/Workshop


Changes

University of Hertfordshire Connected Communities ‘Mini charrette’ for arts, culture and heritage in Milton Keynes

25 Oct 2013

Joint Workshop with MK Council held at Bradwell Abbey.

50 people drawn from interpreters and translators from the MKC Community Language Service representative of (rather than representing) the diverse communities of Milton Keynes.

The Workshop had 4 groups were each asked five questions, namely:

1. How do arts, culture, sports & heritage contribute to MK's identity?

2. What are the critical buildings, spaces & places for arts & heritage?

3. Are there particular arts, sports & heritage issues for ethnic minorities in Milton Keynes?

4. What are the opportunities for regenerating and celebrating Milton Keynes' arts and heritage in future?

5. What would make Milton Keynes more internationally recognised in terms of arts, heritage & sport?

A full response report is available as a separate document, which goes into detail the responses from each group. However, a summary was presented at the end of the session by each group and this has formed he key responses from this workshop (continuing the responses numbering from above):

81. Celebrate the original pioneering uniqueness of Milton Keynes and its 'can do' attitude.

82. Internationalism will mean a range of festivals and events with people actively involved.

83. The right buildings, places and spaces are needed for people to congregate – the city centre is predominantly private-owned.

84. Public transport is a problem – how do we make it easier for people to get around? Other ways are needed than just the car.

The University of Hertfordshire worked with MK Council to agree the wording of the questions which were then presented to each of the 4 groups by independent facilitators.

The responses within the full document of which the responses below are a summary have been taken into account in reviewing the strategy and action plan.

81. This is intended as part of MK City of Design and Characterisation programmes.

82. This has and will be reflected in the action plan for Events delivery.

83. This will be factored into planning to ensure spaces can be opened up for celebrating events.

84. See reponse 67 above.


Respondent/ Comments MKC officer response Changes27

Annex D

Workshop Recommended changes are shown in bold

University of Hertfordshire Connected communities

‘Mini charrette’ for arts, culture and heritage in Milton Keynes

25 Oct 2013

Joint Workshop with MK Council held at Bradwell Abbey.

(contd)

85. Importance of information and communication – knowing where to do things and advertise events more.

86. Promote the 'gems' of Milton Keynes better, which have world class renown including 'plaques' which let people know why they are important.

87. A cultural information centre is needed where people can find out what is going on.

88. A specific request that the Point building be kept.

89. There should be celebrations of [diverse] culture such as Polish or Tamil evenings [events and festivals] that all communities are invited to promote learning about each other.

90. People who live in Milton Keynes think it is brilliant and this positiveness is a huge factor.

91. Built form is important and Milton Keynes has a landscape which is highly valued.

92. Arts and cultural heritage will come from the small as well as the big and well known.

93. Some assets are under known and under-interpreted and that the twentieth century heritage of Milton Keynes is important.

85. Agreed. This has led to Communication being a key area of the strategy to develop.

86. See response 85 above. Signage and wayfinding is one of the areas being looked at strategically across public realm.

87. Destination Milton Keynes has this aim within their proposed Business Plan.

88. See response 45 above.

89. Increasing the diversity of the strategy in terms of activity, audiences, learning, collections, etc, is a major promise that MKC is committed to delivering.

90. Agreed. Active participation is regarded as vital to the strategy’s success.

91. Agreed. To be picked up by the programmes within the ‘Place’ Aim.

92. Agreed. The strategy will help to support small as well as major projects.

93. Agreed and this is an important area that the strategy will look to resolve.


Arts and Heritage Strategies Online Survey

28

Annex D

IntroductionDuring the summer and early Autumn of 2013, an online survey was conducted, which elicited 68 responses, 10 of which were from outside the borough. Re-spondents were 55% female and 45% male with 12% under 30 years old, 63% aged 31 – 60 and 25% over 60 years old. The results in response, specifically to heritage were as follows:

Question: Do you regularly visit :In Milton Keynes Elsewhere in UK Outside the UK Don't Use

Historic Sites? 60.3% (41) 86.8% (59) 54.4% (37) 4.4% (3)Museums? 50.0% (34) 95.6% (65) 57.4% (39) 0.0% (0)Archives [including Local & Family Studies]? 34.5% (19) 40.0% (22) 12.7% (7) 43.6% (24)

This shows a positive response to usage of historic sites and museums, though local usage has room to improve, which may be an issue of profile rather than not wishing to use sites. There is a lack of profile for Archives that will need to be addressed during this strategy and the plan for a City Archive will assist this.

Question: What type of activities do you engage with?Regularly Rarely Never

Exhibitions? 73.8% (48) 21.5% (14) 4.6% (3)Historic Themed Events? 35.4% (23) 52.3% (34) 12.3% (8)Workshops & Classes? 29.2% (19) 50.8% (33) 20.0% (13)Member of an Arts/Heritage Group? 55.4% (36) 18.5% (12) 26.2% (17)Volunteer in Arts/Heritage organisations? 45.3% (29) 26.6% (17) 28.1% (18)Other (please specify): Write history books; Sky Ride; Concrete Cow Beer Festival; Guide in Historical Loca-tions.

This shows the popularity of exhibitions, membership and volunteering across the arts and heritage sectors and this strategy will build on this support with her-itage volunteering a continued priority. Historic themed events are an emerging activity which this strategy will develop and again more profile and marketing is required for events, workshops and classes.

29

Annex D

Question: Do you think Milton Keynes is distinctive for its Arts and Heritage?Yes No Don’t Know/Other53% 37% 10%

(Figures adjusted to nearest %)

There was a wide range of responses to this question from the very positive to the needing to do more and querying what there was which was distinctive. The question is derived from the 2012-16 Corporate Plan and does show that those ‘USPs’ that Milton Keynes has such as Bletchley Park, historic and nation-ally important collections, unique urban design, linear parks, etc need to be better understood and profiled. Workshops have also shown that there are even more important items within local communities which need to be profiled and celebrated.

Question: Could Milton Keynes be an ‘International Cultural Destination’ known for its arts and heritage offer?Yes No Don’t Know/Other57% 34% 9%

(Figures adjusted to nearest %)

Again there was a wide range of responses with responses understanding that there are many venues with potential to attract international visitors such as Bletchley Park. The focus here is to look at a strategic approach, led by Destination Milton Keynes and its Destination Management Plan that positions and packages what is on offer currently and what will emerge to attract the international market.

Question: Do you have any ‘big ideas’ for arts or heritage in Milton Keynes?

This question saw a number of creative ideas come forward, but a number of strands in particular. There was a call for a specific focus on enhancing the cur-rent heritage and cultural activity in the city centre as this was the ‘shop window’ and the area of highest footfall and potential engagement. Using digital and new technologies for better interactivity was seen as part of this offer so that new and more audiences would be engaged. Better marketing and profile of the total offer as a package also came through as did ensuring high quality and original activity to show that MK has a different offer. The International Festival was welcomed and a request for more major events being programmed, but still ensuring free and affordable activity was maintained.

These comments have been fed directly into the strategy and will be shared with Programme Partners when new programmes are initiated.

30

Annex D

Final Summary of Heritage Development Officer:

The number, quality and breadth of responses that have been formally received as part of this consultation underlies the strong resonance that heritage has within Milton Keynes in spite (or because of?) it’s ‘New Town’ past. Indeed, preserving the character, buildings, public realm, places and spaces of the New Town period is now very much coming under scrutiny from the public and from people who are passionate about Milton Keynes given that designation occurred on this day 47 years ago. What is now being perceived as ‘historic fabric’ and potential ‘heritage asset’ is showing its age and it is right that those places and spaces that do merit conserving and the signage and interpretation that goes with them are updated for a modern Milton Keynes and that we ensure there is a right balance struck between keeping things as they are and updating places for a modern and economically highly developed city.

There is a realisation by the public that they are no longer living in a ‘New Town’ but a regional city with aspirations to become an international one. An overwhelming percentage of the public response has been around this subject and around the new proposed programmes centred on MK City of Design and the Characterisation of MK. These new programmes will require further consultation and discussion around scope, approach, principles and practical delivery that bring out the uniqueness of Milton Keynes as well as contributing to its becoming world class.

This is understood by MKC and those departments with expertise in areas of public realm, wayfinding, urban design, conservation and listed buildings and archaeology will assist in supporting these programmes. As these officers roles are very closely tied to planning and development, the Heritage Development Officer will be crucial to co-ordinating and ensuring that these officers are supported to grow these programmes, engage with partners and external funders and enable communications and profile to happen. It is therefore proposed that a new Heritage Strategy Officers Group is set up within the Council, with the ‘Heritage Champion’ (currently Cllr Peter Geary) also attending.

This focus on the New Town, which is important, should not take away from the other priority programmes, many of which have been brought over from the preceding strategy and still require completion. As well as major capital projects for museum, archive and heritage provision to complete, there are structural changes underway both in terms of organisation and also in terms of land, property and cultural endowment. In focusing on making Milton Keynes ‘more international’ through major Events and Activity Programmes, we must also ensure that a sound infrastructure continues to develop to underpin this delivery, so that existing, distinctive heritage and future innovative development blend seamlessly together rather than opposing in conflict.

We should also reflect that many of the original 35 partners from the first strategy are fully integrated into the direction of travel and are still committed to the long term strategy for heritage and its joining up of programme, communications and resources, whether or not they have responded formally to the recent process. They will continue to provide learning, volunteering and collections access opportunities and to develop a broader, joined up heritage base, from which the proposed major events can be delivered and from which the move to international city will come.

23 Jan 2014

END OF HMAS PUBLIC RESPONSE DOCUMENT

31

Documents

2014-23 App 4… · Web vie