The London Borough of Haringey (Wards Corner Regeneration Project) Compulsory Purchase Order 2016 NCPU/CPO/Y5420/77066 Expert witness report in support of Social Enterprise Latin Corner UK Dr Sara Gonzalez, Associate Professor, School of Geography. University of Leeds. June 2017 “Like a coral reef this multi-layered and multi-faceted community is a fragile form, easily destroyed, yet near impossible to replicate”

Friends of Queens Market, 2005 discussing plans for the demolition and relocation of their market (cited in Dines, 2005: 17).

Presentation 1. My name is Dr Sara Gonzalez and I am Associate Professor at the School of Geography,

University of Leeds since 2006. Previously I worked as a research associate at the School of Architecture, Planning and Landscape at the University of Newcastle. My PhD, awarded by the University of the Basque Country (Spain) in 2003 examined the urban regeneration process in the city of Bilbao. In the last five years I have developed an international research agenda around traditional retail spaces, such as markets. I have a forthcoming edited book titled Contested Markets Contested Cities: Gentrification and urban justice in retail spaces, where we investigate the situation of markets in eight different cities across Europe and Latin America. My own chapter (Annex 1) studied the struggle of three market campaigns in London, including the Seven Sisters Market.

2. My previous publications in the subject of markets have involved a detailed study of the

transformation and future of Leeds Kirkgate Market (Annex 2). Additionally, between 2010 and 2015, I formed part of the campaign Friends of Leeds Kirkgate Market, a group of market customers to protect and promote our market in Leeds. In 2014, I was awarded a “scholar activist” award by the Antipode Foundation to work with various market campaigns across the UK and as a result we published a report titled: Traditional Markets under threat: why it’s happening and what can traders and customers do (Annex 3) Currently, I am waiting to hear from a research funding proposal (with the Economics and Social Research Council) to work with the New Economics Foundation, National Federation of Market Traders, market expert Professor Sophie Watson and Friends of Queens Market on a project titled “Understanding and Enhancing the Community Value of Traditional Retail Markets in UK cities” (See my attached CV for more information- Annex 4).

3. For this Inquiry I am acting as Expert Witness for Social Enterprise Latin Corner UK and hence

my proof for evidence refers mainly to the proposed demolition of Seven Sisters market. This follows an objection I made to the proposed CPO (Objection 041) as occasional visitor and academic expert. I confirm that I have not received any payment to write this statement or to participate in the inquiry at a later stage. The views I present here are my own and they are not representative of those of the University of Leeds.

Methodology 1. My statement is based on (1) academic literature held in the public domain on traditional

markets, urban regeneration and gentrification (2) materials on the redevelopment of Seven

Sisters from Haringey council accessible publically through the council website or provided in the inquiry site (3) materials produced and/or shared with me by Latin Village, Wards Corner Community Coalition and N15Trust (4) policy and think tank reports on traditional markets (5) my own primary research in markets in London, wider UK and internationally and (6) other information found on the internet.

No compelling case to demolish Seven Sisters Market 2. As stated in the Guidance on Compulsory purchase process, a CPO should only be made where

there is compelling case in the public interest enough to justify the interfering with the human rights of those interested in the land that it affects. In order to justify a CPO the Council has to demonstrate the following points:

The proposed Wards Corner development accords with the statutory development plan and national planning policy and guidance

The development would contribute to improvement of the economic, social and environmental well-being of the area

There is no other means of delivering the proposed Development 3. Building on existing academic and policy literature and my own research, my statement focuses

on the failure of the proposed scheme to contribute to improvement of the economic, social and environmental well-being of the area and in particular to its current users. The Statement of Case of behalf of Market traders deals very efficiently with how the proposed development does not fit with existing policy and how there is already an alternative development that will deliver inclusive regeneration.

4. In particular I develop my argumentation by focusing on the following points:

The current community value of Seven Sisters market

Stigmatisation and neglect prior to development

Links between Neglect, stigmatisation and gentrification

Negative effects of relocation for traders

Current and future management of the market

Displacement of customers and market users and “loss of place” Community value of markets 5. Traditional markets in many cases are much more than a retail space for the buying and selling

of goods and services. They are in fact community spaces which can provide benefits to people in the area where they are located and beyond, particularly to vulnerable groups. Haringey’s council assessment of the proposed scheme however has failed to appreciate this complex community value

6. The academic and policy literature on markets identified three aspects of community value:

Economic: markets provide affordable food, products and services as well as creating opportunities for low cost business opportunities, higher employment density than supermarkets adding footfall and vibrancy to high streets (Hallsworth et al, 2015; Just Space, 2016; LA, 2008; NEF, 2005; Portas, 2011; Regeneris Consulting, 2010). 2. Social: markets can act as a platforms for social mobility and the development of community ties and trust leading to better social inclusion thus partly addressing inequalities in cities (Mele et al, 2015; Morales, 2009; PPP, 2003; Watson and Studdert, 2006; Watson, 2009). 3. Cultural: markets are recognised as spaces for experiencing a diversity of cultures and ethnicities through consumption and provide a sense of place for migrants, ethnic minorities and more vulnerable citizens as well as

enhancing local identity in the face of homogenised urban environments (Anderson, 2011; Dines, 2007; Hallsworth et al, 2015; Rivlin and Gonzalez, forthcoming).

7. Markets in London have a long tradition of supporting the most vulnerable and marginal people

in our society. In Victorian London street traders “were able to sell smaller amounts of inexpensive goods to customers who could not afford to buy larger amounts of higher-quality produce elsewhere” (Jones (2015, p.71). As today, they were often also stigmatised and undervalued by public authorities (Kelley, 2015; Jones, 2015).

8. Recent policy reports on markets in London (Regeneris, 2010; Cross River Partnership, 2014) still

attest to the relevance of markets for the poorest and most vulnerable communities. There is a clear relationship between the spatial distribution of markets and areas of deprivation in inner and central London; there is also a correlation between the location of markets and those areas with a highest number of Black and minority ethnic (BME) populations, who tend to have lower incomes (Cross River Partnership, 2014). Markets in London also showcase the ethnic and cultural diversity of the city and there has been some research exploring how markets improve communication and understanding between diverse groups (Dines, 2007; Watson, 2009). They also are particularly important for providing access to affordable, accessible fresh food. They also act as ‘meeting places and locations for social exchanges, for learning about food and for engaging in the community. The benefits appear to be particularly important for the elderly.’ (NEF, 2005, p. 54).

9. All of these benefits crystallise in Seven Sisters market. Seven Sisters Market acts as a

community hub, preserves Latin American heritage and culture, and supports children and vulnerable residents in London. This is clearly evidenced in the Market Traders’ “statement of Case”. This social and cultural value of the market has actually been recognised by the Council when it designated the Market as an Asset of Community Value in May 2014.

10. The market is not only a community hub for people in the area but it brings together a wider

community of Latin Americans in London and beyond. Hence it is truly a destination which contradicts the Council’s views that the area has a “poor sense of destination” (paragraph 8.59 Haringey’s Statement of Reasons).

11. However this community value can be put at risk in various ways, particularly when markets

undergo regeneration and redevelopment projects. At the moment, the proposed redevelopment includes the repurposing of the new market but as will be shown from the academic literature, simply providing a new building (even with economic supportive measures) does not guarantee the reproduction of the social, economic and cultural benefits of the original market.

Stigmatisation and neglect prior to development: 12. The state of reason by the council justifies the need for regeneration, because the area is

unattractive and unsafe with comparatively high rates of crime (paragraph 8.59 Haringey’s Statement of Reasons). Given the life-changing impacts for residents and users in the area and its interference with their human rights it is surprising how little examination this reason to justify the proposed scheme is given. To assess whether indeed the proposed scheme would bring social, economic and environmental benefits it is crucial to scrutinise the link between the decline of an area and its regeneration. As I show in the following paragraphs, there is a lot of evidence in the academic literature and from my own research that prior to processes of regeneration, markets and entire urban areas and neighbourhoods are neglected which often leads to their stigmatisation and a spiral of disinvestment and further neglect. Private

developers, landlords and public authorities then present redevelopment as the only solution to this neglect and decline.

13. For example, Kingman Garces and Bedon (forthcoming) analyse how the whole neighbourhood

of San Roque and its prominent market in Quito (Ecuador) has been stigmatised by the local media and authorities linking it to criminal networks even though other areas of the city suffer from higher rates of crime. The hugely vibrant and economically active market and neighbourhood serve as a refuge and space of solidarity for indigenous groups who are generally marginalised in the city. The authors argue that the stigmatisation of the market is linked to its strategic location near the historical and touristic city centre and it serves as a justification to the plans to evict traders and relocate them to a peripheral location. A very similar process has taken place in Sofia, in the case of the Women’s Market, which had been stigmatised for decades by the local media and authorities as an area with criminal activities blamed on the Roma population. This public discourse preceded the redevelopment of the market in the process of which many of the original traders lost their jobs (Eneva, forthcoming).

14. In London, several markets are suffering or have suffered similar processes of neglect and stigmatisation. Queens Market in Newham, similarly to Seven Sisters, was threatened with demolition and relocation by a development led by the private developer St Mowden in partnership with Newham Council. Dines (2007: 15) reports how in the face of this development “the council sought to de-legitimate the market by presenting it as an unsafe and dirty place where prostitution and petty crime took place unabated”. To contest this demolition a strong campaign was formed – Friends of queens Market – who challenged the Council’s views. This campaign acknowledged that “the market in its present state was run down, although it was argued that this was mainly due to years of council neglect and ineffective renovation in the past” (Dines, 2007: 16). “However” Dines (Ibid) continues “campaigners were particularly angry about what they saw as a willful misrepresentation on the part of the council and the developers of what was an extremely popular and vibrant market”.

15. Deliberate neglect has been also recognised as a factor in the deterioration of trading conditions

in Shepherds Bush market, in Hammersmith and Fulham, which used to be owned in part also by Transport for London and which was also faced with a private-led redevelopment. The traders of Shepherd Bush market launched a campaign to highlight this neglect and their local MP, Andy Slaughter, clearly accused TfL of deliberate lack of investment “as an excuse for demolition of the whole site” (Slaughter, 2013, p. 2).

Links between Neglect, stigmatisation and gentrification 16. Neglect and related stigmatisation of markets and more generally urban areas and

neighbourhoods has been linked by academic researchers to processes of redevelopment and gentrification. Gentrification is now a well-known term used not only by academics but by the media amongst communities. In broad terms, using Clark’s (2005, p. 263) definition, it can be understood as ”a process involving a change in the population of land users such that the new users are of a higher socio-economic status than the previous users, together with an associated change in the built environment through a reinvestment in fixed capital. Gentrification has often been associated to residential changes in neighbourhoods but there is now ample evidence to show that it affects retail generally (Schlack and Turnbull, 2016; Zukin et al, 2009) and markets more specifically (Delgadillo, 2016; Gonzalez and Dawson, 2015 and forthcoming; Seale, 2016)

17. Kallin and Slater clearly state that “there are many examples of some form of stigmatisation

occurring prior to gentrification” (Kallin and Slater, 2014p. 1354) and they illustrate this statements from examples of regeneration projects in the UK and North America. In a different

piece Slater (2017: 118) stresses again that “research evidence has revealed an intense and direct relationship between the defamation of a place [the stigma] and the process of gentrification”. It is worth quoting him at length here as he explains in more detail what gentrification means, something that I will later link to the proposed redevelopment of the Wards Corner area. He says “Defamation [of an area] can provide the groundwork and ideological justification for a thorough class transformation of urban space, usually involving housing demolition, land clearance and then the construction of housing and services aimed at a more affluent class of resident” (Ibid: 118).

18. Relatedly, the classic work of Peter Marcuse (1985) makes a direct link between the

abandonment of urban areas, gentrification and the displacement of low income residents. In particular he shows how displacement of residents and services from neighbourhoods take different forms: harassment of landlords, neglect of the properties that renders them inhabitable or rent increase. Further, the work of acclaimed critical geographer Neil Smith makes a similar point when he explains that neglect of the built environment can sometimes be a deliberate strategy by landowners as they wait for the price of the buildings and land to fall to the point where its redevelopment becomes profitable. He adds “buildings are abandoned not because they are unusable, but because they cannot be used profitably” (Smith, 1979: 545).

19. This academic evidence forms a solid background to understand the neglect that Wards Corner

and the Seven Sisters market have been subject to by landowners and managers. Wards Corner Community Coalition (WCCC) have denounced for many years this neglect and disinvestment in their numerous contributions to the planning process of Wards Corner regeneration and wider London Plans. For example, they have claimed that ‘Transport for London has allowed their properties [the market and the buildings] to lie derelict and under-occupied despite interest in the buildings from many businesses’ (WCCC, n.d.). Adding to the neglect by the landlords, the traders have been denouncing the lack of action by the recently appointed market manager to act on repairs of the building and tackle anti-social behaviour in the areas surrounding the market.

Negative effects of relocation for traders 20. The developer Grainger is committed to the re-purposing of the Market but it is very likely that

the character and community benefits of the current market (explained above) will disappear or diminish very significantly. In the following paragraphs I provide evidence from my own research and public academic work that the redevelopment of markets, and more specifically its relocation can lead to the displacement of traders. As it has been pointed out by the Market traders’ Statement of case “there is no reliable means of knowing how successful the new market will be” (paragraph 49) and therefore it makes the evidence from other market relocation examples very relevant

21. There is now ample evidence that markets in the UK and internationally are undergoing a

process of transformation and many are being redeveloped (Gonzalez, forthcoming; Seale, 2016). These processes of redevelopment often involve the relocation of traders to new re-purposed markets or newly developed areas; it also often involves a temporary decant of traders while redevelopment takes places. All of these changes can impact traders negatively but even before they are moved, there is evidence that traders might find their businesses unviable due to uncertainty and hidden costs of redevelopment.

22. My own research in the redevelopment of Leeds Kirkgate Market has shown that even before

the move of traders took place in 2015/6, many long term traders had been leaving the market

as a result of mismanagement, lack of trust and uncertainties in the redevelopment process (Gonzalez and Waley, 2013) (See various blog posts Friends of Leeds Kirkgate Market). As the planned redeveloped market envisions less stalls than the number of existing market traders, managers did not make any efforts to retain long term traders.

23. This trend of displacement before a redevelopment project takes place has also been reported

in the case of the “trend-setting” market reforms in Barcelona; many traders cannot afford the costs of modernisation plans and the disruption of the temporary moves and so they leave their stalls (and Hernandez Cordero and Eneva, 2016). In an interview that I conducted with the Head of Markets in Barcelona in 2012, he explained that this loss of long terms traders was in fact a welcome outcome as the displaced traders were the most vulnerable who would anyway struggle to survive in the new modernised and upmarket marketplace with higher rents. This evidences that regeneration of markets aims to price out “survival of the fittest” strategy suits the gentrification of markets which is apparent in many cities across the world (Gonzalez, forthcoming).

24. Blackburn market is another example where long term traders were displaced when it relocated

to a shopping mall in 2011. In newspaper reports, long terms traders explained that by the time of the move many traders had already left and that many of them were not moving because the new promised stalls were not the right size and the rents were much higher (Cruces, 2011). Significantly, a market trader who had worked in the Blackburn old market for over 50 years in his family butcher established in the 1860s said he could not afford the 162% rent rise at the new repurposed market (BBC News, 2001). It is worth noting that the relocation of traders to a new market was managed by the company Quarterbridge, whose managing director is Jonathan Owen, current market manager of Seven Sisters.

25. In The Shepherds Bush market legal challenge mentioned by the Market Traders Statement of

case the displacement of traders and gentrification of the market became an important reason to overturn a CPO. According to Solicitors Leigh Day “The fear was that the Market would be gentrified, destroying the well-loved character which had survived for over 100 years. The CPO was put in place in February 2015 after Mr Pickles overturned the recommendation of an independent senior inspector following a Public Inquiry in 2014. The Inspector, Ava Wood, had recommended that the CPO should be refused because the proposed development of Shepherd’s Bush Market did not offer sufficient guarantees and financial safeguards for the special character of the market and the long-standing market traders.” “She also stated that the development would threaten the ethnic diversity, independence and small scale retailing environment that is central to the appeal of the area.” (https://www.leighday.co.uk/News/News-2016/August-2016/Victory-for-Shepherds-Bush-Market)

26. Sheffield Moor market is a further example of a market that was relocated into a new privately-

managed shopping area in 2013. As it moved into a new area, it has lost customers and the council, who owns the market, has had to extent the initial rent reduction that traders were offered even after four years after its re-opening (Jackson, 2017). The new market has not been the success that the council had predicted even after a very significant investment in the infrastructure, an initial rent free period for traders and discounted rents for years (Lynch, 2014; The Star, 2013)

27. This review of markets that have undergone redevelopment has shown that their success cannot

be taken for granted and more importantly that long term traders often do not make it to the re-

purposed buildings despite rent reductions. This evidence sheds light into the potential future of the proposed new Seven Sisters Market and poses questions over the Council’s statement that the new market “will be viable in the long term” and that the package of measures in the S106 agreement will “help ensure the successful future of the Market” (paragraph 8.22)

28. However this success is very far from being guaranteed. The CPO Equalities Impact Assessment

carried by AECOM identified very significant negative effects of the market relocation. A consultation carried in 2012 cited in the Equalities Impact Assessment (Appendix 2), 40% of surveyed businesses in the CPO area said they were very confident that their business would not be able to operate in the new development and 40% said that they were uncertain (AECON, 2016: 54).The consultation of the proposed mitigating measured included in the S106 Heads of Terms carried in 2012 “revealed a significant level of skepticism/pessimism or uncertainty, regarding these measures supporting their business to continue” (AECON, 2016: p.54). Therefore there is mounting evidence that the S106 measures will not mitigate against the identified negative effects of the CPO.

29. In summary, evidence from academic research and existing case studies of markets that have

been relocated have clearly shown that success should not be taken for granted even if traders are offered financial help. This evidence is reinforced by the existing fears of the current traders in the proposed CPO land that they will not be able to survive in the new market due to rent increases.

Displacement of customers and market users and loss of place. 30. The relocation and redevelopment of markets and the associated displacement of traders leads

to the displacement of customers and markets users and sense of loss of place. My own research into the redevelopment of Shepherds Bush, Queens Market in London and Kirkgate Market in Leeds has highlighted this negative impact on market users. This can take place in several ways.

31. First, users of ‘traditional’ markets often travel there for specific products that are difficult to

find elsewhere at low prices, such as particular foods, or speciality fabrics. This is even more likely for ethnic minorities for whom markets cater for. If traders selling these products are displaced or if they no longer find it sustainable to sell them because the customer base is changing towards wealthier, whiter residents, then these customers stop going to the market, and are themselves displaced.

32. Customers and market users might also be displaced when the market no longer seems a

welcoming space or it has significantly changed. This is discussed by Shaw and Hagemans (2015) in the case of gentrifying neighbourhoods. In particular, they point out the importance of shops as “neighbourhood resources that enable people to feel a sense of place or, conversely, out-of-placeness.” (p. 326). They refer to research that has equated the loss of familiar surroundings in changing and gentrifying neighbourhoods as “grieving for a lost home”. This is particularly a problem for low income residents. They go on to argue that “If the sources of the familiar––shops, services, meeting places, other people in the neighbourhood, the nature of local social order and governance––become unfamiliar, low-income people may lose their sense of place without the capacity to find a new one” (p. 326).

33. Similarly, Valli (2015) for the case of New York notes how long term residents have felt alienated

and out of place in their own neighbourhood due to the arrival of new more affluent and whiter residents and the replacement of traditional stores with upmarket cafes and supermarkets. The planned construction of 196 residential units in the Order Scheme none of which will be affordable will inevitably bring new affluent residents and new services, such as the proposed

new retail units likely to be high-street chains. The new arrival of affluent residents into low income neighbourhoods with high rates of non-white population has been evidenced in other places to create frictions with long term residents and traders feeling out of place and left behind (Monroe Sullivan and Shaw, 2011).

34. Hence, there is a very clear risk that even if the market is re-located, the loss of Latin American

and other ethnic minority traders will impact on the atmosphere and sense of place and comfort of this community hub, in turn driving away its current users. The characteristics that made a market such as Seven Sisters a vibrant, socially integrative and a second home for so many vulnerable adults and children can quickly be eroded. Market users will also be displaced by potentially higher prices that traders might be forced to charge to pay the higher rents. This gentrification process will not only displace ethnic minority customers but also those on low income.

35. The Council has not considered the issue of the displacement of market users in depth and no

research seems to have been conducted on the potential negative effects of the CPO for the customers and users of the market who are not only residents in the area but might come for further afield to seek specialty produce and the very special social atmosphere of the market.

36. The issue of the displacement of market customers and users is partly dealt with in the CPO EIA when it refers to the negative impacts of the CPO on community cohesion. It is clearly identified that the CPO poses ”a potential threat to the cultural connections of the Latin American community employed at and visiting the market, given the evidence that the market provides a social hub for social interaction as well as commercial interaction for this group” (EIA, 2016: p.20). This issue also extends to the negative impact on “interaction between different racial groups […] which contribute to community cohesion” (EIA, 2016: 21) and no clear mitigating measures are proposed against this.

Current and future management of the market

37. All of these previous points are aggravated by a further circumstance that must be reviewed in

the light of this proposed scheme as it is intimately related: that is, the current and future management of the market. At the moment, a large number of traders believe that the current management of the market is poor and has contributed to the neglect of the property. As a result, these traders have lost confidence in the current manager (see annex 5 traders photo collage). Under these conditions it is very unlikely that a smooth relocation process can be negotiated and that the market will be viable in the long term, as the Council’s Statement of Reason’s suggests. In the following paragraphs I explain in detail the interconnected factors that make the current and future management of the market a crucial issue in the context of this CPO inquiry.

38. Seven Sisters market is owned by Transport for London. The market was set up in 1984 and was

operated by an individual and his wife with whom the traders generally report to have had a good relationship.

39. In October 2012 Haringey Council announced that a partnership had been established between

the Council, Grainger PLC and a company named Quarterbridge Project Management “to work with existing traders to design the new Market Hall and help with the temporary relocation whilst the Seven Sisters Regeneration project is underway. Quarterbridge, […] has been brought on board to ensure the new market’s success. It will consult with all existing stallholders to work

up the layout and stall design, and will help current traders to move into a temporary location and retain customers and trade while the market is being revamped (http://www.haringey.gov.uk/news/specialist-support-seven-sisters-market). Mr Jonathan Owen, is quoted in this website as “Projects Director of Quarterbridge”

40. In September, 2015 the lease of the market was taken by Market Asset Management Seven

Sisters (MAMSS), a company created in February of the same year which is a subsidiary of Market Asset Management Company. Mr Jonathan Owen is Director of all three companies according to Company’s House. (https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/officers/dPyAOsvglA22nJCOc1xyqI6MCIA/appointments).

41. Hence Mr Jonathan Owen currently manages Seven Sisters Market as well being in a partnership

with the Council and the developer Grainger in the future plans for the demolition and relocation of the same market. This situation has led market traders to believe that Mr Jonathan Owen has a vested interest in ensuring the success of a CPO application in line with the interests of the developer Grainger, rather than supporting the current traders with proper management of the existing market in the last 2 years.

42. These concerns were expressed in a letter dated November 2016 (See Annex 6 and 7) presented

by trader representatives shortly after a Steering Group had been set up by Grainger to discuss the relocation process. In this letter, traders state their view that before they go on to discuss the relocation plans and the design of the new market several issues concerning the current management of the market need to be addressed. They mentioned the lack of maintenance by the management such as out of order toilets, leaking roof, dirty floors and the appearance of pests. They also expressed frustration at the personal management style of Mr Jonathan Owen describing it as “top down” ”ruling by fear” and “verbally abusive”.

43. In particular, traders have raised concerns with the management and logged these with police

(Annex 8), TFL, MP David Lammy and local councillors regarding the safety of the Market and several violent incidents have been recorded, in particular in the car park. Traders have expressed frustration that the management has not taken action in response to several of their health and safety concerns and are starting to believe that this is part of a strategy of deliberate neglect of the market which will justify Grainger’s proposed development. As explained earlier from the academic literature, deliberate neglect and abandonment by landlords and managers of properties are common issues when a market and/or an area is being developed.

44. All of these problems with Mr Jonathan Owen’s management style towards the Seven Sisters

Market have been officially investigated by Transport for London in March 2017 at the request by Bindmans Solicitors in a letter dated 23rd February on behalf of the West Green Road / Seven Sisters Development Trust. The report of the investigation (Annex 9 and 10) shows that Mr Jonathan Owen used offensive language in meetings and in personal conversations with traders and threatened traders telling those present at a meeting 13th February that “If I wanted to, I could get rid of 90% of the traders here” (Transport for London, 2017: Part 1, page 8). As a result of this investigation Mr Jonathan Owen accepted that he had caused offence and apologised (Transport for London, 2017: Part 1, page 1).

45. However, these problems have persisted and more recently another trader, Mr Fabián Cataño

Cadavid, has also had major difficulties with Mr Jonathan Owen. Objector Mr Fabián Cataño Cadavid has suffered out of the ordinary increases in the rates he pays for electricity, gas and water which he cannot afford and as a result has been issued with a notice to leave on the 1st of July 2017 (see Mr Cataño Cadavid Proof of Evidence). He believes, as well as other traders, that

these are discriminatory tactics from the management to displace him from the market prior to the redevelopment. As I explained above from evidence of academic research, it is not uncommon from traders and residents to be evicted or feel displacement pressure prior to redevelopment processes as this makes the future relocation easier.

46. The Transport for London investigation provides an insight into the trader/management

relations at Seven Sisters and shows the lack of trust that numerous traders have in the management. It is therefore fair to assume that this relationship will not improve and more likely will deteriorate if the CPO is confirmed and the demolition/relocation process starts with the added stress from all parts. This factor casts a very significant doubt over the Council’s assertion that the current proposal will make the market viable and successful in the long term, at least for its current traders. If Mr Jonathan Owen continues then to be the market operator in the new premises similar issues to now could continue. In fact, it has been recognised by the national government that “one of the key issues that has been identified as crucial to the viability and success of the market is the way in which the market is managed” (DCLG, 2010: 4).

47. Unfortunately, issues of conflict of interest and trader/management mistrust have arisen in

other markets where Jonathan Owen has been involved. For example, in Leeds, Queens Market, Brixton and Colchester. Friends of Queens Market were concerned that Jonathan Owen had been brought into their market while negotiations took place between the Council and the developer St Mowdens over the demolition and relocation of their market: “to convince the market traders to capitulate to their will. Apparently he is currently engaged in a little divide and rule.” (http://www.friendsofqueensmarket.org.uk/19512/2427.html). Councillor Ben Locker said in his blog “What worries me is that Colchester appointed a company to undertake a consultation on our market and our street traders which also has a track record in managing markets” (http://www.benlocker.org.uk/2015/09/15/colchester-market-the-story-behind-the-consultation/). This exact concern was also raised by Friends of Leeds Kirkgate Market in their blog (https://kirkgatemarket.wordpress.com/2011/11/06/independent-consultants-conflict-of-interest/). More recently according to the BBC, traders in Brixton Market expressed difficulties with Jonathan Owen’s company Quaterbridge over the redevelopment of their market: “Stuart Horwood, from the Brixton Market Traders Federation, said relations between the council and stallholders started off well but soured when retail consultants Quarterbridge drew up plans for the market (http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/brixton-market-traders-anger-at-1m-gazebo-plan-a3153561.html)

48. Finally, having looked at several reports by Quarterbridge where they have advised Local

authorities over redevelopment and management of markets, I have seen little evidence that his company values the community aspect of markets, which is so significant in the case of Seven Sisters. This was evident in the statement that he made in front of MPs at the 2009 Parliamentary Inquiry of markets where he was talking about the priorities of private market operators such as his company:

Q185 John Cummings: Are you saying that the private operators focus more on short-term financial gain rather than on the wider community benefits of markets?

Mr Owen: I would say that is almost inevitable, yes. The first priority of any private market operator is to secure a reasonable return to enable him to pay the rent or the partnership fee or whatever to the local authority. The second tranche of his income he would be prepared to share with the local authority. The issues of social provision, of having relatively low rents for the stalls in order to attract more traders, are of less importance to him than actual cashflow

(Parliamentary Inquiry, q. 185 Tuesday 31st march, 2009 https://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmselect/cmcomloc/308/9033103.htm).

Conclusion

49. In conclusion, there is no compelling case in the public interest enough to justify the interfering with the human rights of those interested in the land that this CPO affects. As an academic expert on market, my statement has demonstrated how the proposed scheme will not deliver economic and social wellbeing for the users and traders of Seven Sisters. I have shown how the Council’s justification for the scheme that there area is neglected and unsafe is flawed. I have also argued that the market will get gentrified with current traders priced out by unaffordable rents and customers of users displaced by affordable produce, lack of atmosphere and community feel. There is little to suggest that the market will be a success for the current traders working there, particularly given damaged relationship between traders and management. Finally, as shown in the Statement of Case on behalf of the Market Traders, there is already a Community Plan, with planning permission, for the same land, which wold deliver inclusive and participative regeneration protecting and enhancing the cultural and social heritage of Wards Corner and delivering economic regeneration.

References

BBC News (2011) Blackburn market butcher packs up stall after 53 years, BBC News, 10th January 2011 http://news.bbc.co.uk/local/lancashire/hi/people_and_places/newsid_9354000/9354147.stm

Cross River Partnership (CRP) (2014) Sustainable Urban Markets: An Action Plan for London. London: Cross River Partnership. Available from: http://crossriverpartnership.org/media/2014/12/Sustainable-Urban-Markets-An-Action-Plan-for-London3.pdf

Cruces, E. (2011) Traders pack up at Blackburn market - ready for new home, Lancashire Telegraph, 29th May 2011. http://www.thisislancashire.co.uk/news/9055157.Traders_pack_up_at_Blackburn_market___ready_for_new_home/

DCLG (2010) Retail Markets: management models. Department for Communities and Local

Government, High streets and town centres, 13 September 2010. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/retail-markets-management-models

Dines, N. (2007). The Experience of Diversity in an Era of Urban Regeneration: The Case of Queens Market, East London. In: EURODIV Conference Diversity in cities: Visible and invisible walls, 11-12 September 2007, London. Available from: http://ebos.com.cy/susdiv/uploadfiles/ED2007-048.pdf

Gonzalez and Dawson, (2015) Traditional Markets under threat. Why it’s happening and what can traders and campaigners do Public Report. http://tradmarketresearch.weebly.com/uploads/4/5/6/7/45677825/traditional_markets_under_threat-_full.pdf

Gonzalez, S. (forthcoming 2017) (Ed) Contested Markets Contested Cities. Retail gentrification and social justice in urban retail spaces. Routledge

Gonzalez, S. and Waley, P. (2013). Traditional Retail Markets: The New Gentrification Frontier? Antipode, 45(4), 965-983.

Jackson, S. (2017) Reduced rent for Moor Market traders to continue despite rise in visitors. 4 January 2017. http://www.thestar.co.uk/news/reduced-rent-for-moor-market-traders-to-continue-despite-rise-in-visitors-1-8317112

Jones, P.T. (2016). Redressing Reform Narratives: Victorian London's Street Markets and the

Informal Supply Lines of Urban Modernity. The London Journal, 41(1), 60-81.

Kallin, H., & Slater, T. (2014). Activating territorial stigma: gentrifying marginality on Edinburgh's periphery. Environment and Planning A, 46(6), 1351-1368.

Kelley, V. (2016). The streets for the people: London's street markets 1850– 1939. Urban History,

43(3), 391-411

Lynch, M. (2014) Traders fear for Sheffield Moor market. 1st April 2014. Read more at: http://www.thestar.co.uk/business/traders-fear-for-sheffield-moor-market-1-6533276

Marcuse, P. (1985). Gentrification, abandonment, and displacement: Connections, causes, and policy responses in New York City. Wash. UJ Urb. & Contemp. L., 28, 195.

Mele, C., Ng, M. and Chim, M.B., 2015. Urban markets as a ‘corrective’ to advanced urbanism: The social space of wet markets in contemporary Singapore. Urban Studies, 52(1), pp.103-120.

Monroe Sullivan, D. and Shaw, S.C., 2011. Retail gentrification and race: The case of Alberta Street in Portland, Oregon. Urban Affairs Review, 47(3), pp.413-432.

Morales, A. (2009). Public Markets as Community Development Tools. Journal of Planning Education and Research. 28, 426-440. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0739456X08329471

NEF (2005) Trading Places: The Local and Economic Impact of Street Produce and Farmer’s Markets. London: NEF.

NEF (2006). The World on a Plate: Queens Market: The Economic and Social Value of London’s Most Ethnically Diverse Street Market. London: NEF. Available from: http://b.3cdn.net/nefoundation/31f21886832eb6ba1a_15m6ba8x3.pdf

Pottie-Sherman, Y. (2011) “Markets and Diversity”: An Overview. Working Paper Series Series editor: Linda Sheldon, SFU; Krishna Pendakur, SFU and Daniel Hiebert, UBC, Co-directors No. 11 - 01 January 2011. http://mbc.metropolis.net/assets/uploads/files/wp/2011/WP11-01.pdf

Project for Public Spaces (PPP) (2003). Public Markets as a Vehicle for Social Integration and Upward Mobility. New York: The Ford Foundation. Available from: http://www.pps.org/pdf/Ford_Report.pdf

Regeneris Consulting (2010). London’s Retail Street Markets. Draft Final Report. London: Regeneris Consulting Ltd. Available from: https://www.london.gov.uk/file/8012/download?token=Wt9HoCMq

Rivlin, P. and Gonzalez, S. (forthcoming) Sociability, dioversity and gentrification in a public market in Gonzalez (Ed) Contested Markets Contested Cities. London, Routledge.

Portas, M. (2011). The Portas Review: An Independent Review Into The Future Of Our High Streets. London: Department for Business, Innovation and Skills. Available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/6292/2081646.pdf

Schappo, P. and van Melik, R., (2016). Meeting on the marketplace: on the integrative potential of The Hague Market. Journal of Urbanism: International Research on Placemaking and Urban Sustainability, Online first http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17549175.2016.1223741

Shaw, K.S. and Hagemans, I.W. (2015). ‘Gentrification Without Displacement' and the Consequent Loss of Place: The Effects of Class Transition on Low‐income Residents of Secure Housing in Gentrifying Areas. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 39(2), 323-341

Slater, T., (2017). Territorial stigmatization: Symbolic defamation and the contemporary metropolis. In J. Hannigan and G. Richards (Ed.). The Sage Handbook of New Urban Studies. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Smith et al. (2014). The traditional food market and place: new insights into fresh food provisioning in England. Area, 46(2), 122-128. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/area.12083

Smith, N. (1979). Toward a theory of gentrification a back to the city movement by capital, not people. Journal of the American Planning Association, 45(4), 538-548.

The Star (2013) Traders stall over Sheffield market relocation, 23 February, Read more at: http://www.thestar.co.uk/news/traders-stall-over-sheffield-market-relocation-1-5439393

Valli, C. (2015), A Sense of Displacement: Long-time Residents' Feelings of Displacement in Gentrifying Bushwick, New York . Int J Urban Regional, 39: 1191–1208. doi:10.1111/1468-2427.12340

Watson, S and Studdert, D (2006). Markets as Sites of Social Interaction. Spaces of Diversity. York: The Joseph Rowntree Foundation. Available from: https://www.jrf.org.uk/sites/default/files/jrf/migrated/files/1940-markets-social-interaction.pdf

Watson, S. (2009). The Magic of the Marketplace: Sociality in a Neglected Public Space. Urban Studies. 46(8), 1577–1591.

Zukin, S., Kasinitz, P. and Chen, X. (2016) Global Cities, Local Streets: Everyday Diversity from New York to Shanghai. New York: Routledge.