The Homes Agency

Struck am I at the lack of direction the Home and Communities Agency (HCA) places on communities; it seems best economic value is the direction of play and community cohesion is very much off the agenda.

It exists, but only when it’s needed to exemplify a responsibility to communities in a context that already exists, such as the 92 hectares transferred to the Parks Trust in Milton Keynes.

But what about cities that are already squashed and face issues of social exclusion such as Bradford or Birmingham; how do the HCA deal with their needs?

Best economic use is very much at play here; it is the deciding factor in establishing ‘site value’ and plays a huge part in the redevelopment of the local climate.

In Bradford the question of demolishing the landmark Odeon cinema has been raging for a while, Yorkshire Forward (a government QUANGO) purchased the site to redevelop/demolish in 2003 and in 2012 nothing has changed with the HCA now responbile.

Campaigns and local efforts have done little to dissuade the HCA it’s a landmark worth keeping even though the building has a strong and important history predating most of the city’s residents.

Many efforts were made to rescue to building and the Bradford Odeon Rescue Group even presented a £3million cheque and architect plans to Yorkshire Forward in order to buy the cinema.

No vision was established, community efforts were ignored and the question of best economic use remains. The Bradford Odeon lays hidden behind a mask of bureaucracy; quite literally, and while it cannot even be out of sight clearly its wrapping is trying to put it out of mind.

The once beautiful Odeon is adjacent to the £24.4 million Bradford mirror pool/foundations and is complemented by the Bradford Alhambra. It looks tired but what building wouldn’t after many years of neglect and even less attention to exploring its potential.

While I am in favour of best economic use when it represents a wider vision I believe that value has to be attributed to landmarks and those parts of our cities that evoke nostalgia and historical impact/interest. If we’re to have truly cohesive cities then pride needs to be tangible, especially when efforts by its local and regional stakeholders are so strong.

Our national policies may look to creating an influx of investment to cities but that population needs to feel connected to its surroundings and its decision makers; it seems the HCA has trouble committing communities to their process.

Their lack of participation and decisiveness has created a chasm of wasted time for those trying to save the 1930’s landmark with those making the effort probably feeling like nuisances to the cause rather than engaging members of their community.

This lack of participation also stretches to another city beginning with B but in very different circumstances. The Aston Arena (formerly Aston Villa Leisure Centre) sits on something called the Serpentine Site and is part of a wider regeneration plan. Advantage West Midlands (AWM), another QUANGO, bought the site in 2006 and then passed on its asset to the HCA when they were dissolved. AWM wanted to explore leisure possibilities for the site and the council also wanted to invite options regarding an Olympic sized swimming pool.

In March 2012 despite complaints from local/national organisations and residents the Aston, Newtown and Lozells Area Action Plan would not see sport, leisure and community on the agenda and instead B1 uses were established for this and wider site sales. Suggestions of D1 and D2 were proposed, as to incorporate the Olympic pool vision, but planners rejected this varied use option on the Serpentine Site; a site adjacent to a river, a lake, a park, Premiership football club and a community.

Since then the HCA has been looking at options for the Serpentine Site (phase 1) and the other sites around it for future developments, phase 2 and 3.

The story of the Serpentine Site is an interesting one; Asda built a store on the site and in 1980 with Aston Villa FC built the Aston Villa Leisure Centre next to it. When Asda left the site to build a new store in Minworth a maintenance lease remained with them for the exterior of the Aston Villa Leisure Centre and Serpentine Site.

In 2007 AWM took Asda to task on their maintenance liabilities due to a leaking roof and general exterior wear, after two years they finally sent their contractors to do the work but unfortunately poor quality workmanship and a break in the job caused heavy weather to destroy the top floor, squash courts, boxing gym and many second floor rooms.

AWM once again contacted Asda about this issue and a quote was created to deal with the repairs inside the building. Some repairs were done but the top floor was totally ignored with the arena ventilation shut down and vents sealed. These sealed vents did not stay sealed and leaks into the arena were regular. This made the Arena economically strangled but AWM were finally making some headway with Asda.

Since that time the HCA has not worked to keep any of AWM’s promises and has even taken away the Arenas £45,000 income it receives from Aston Villa for matchday parking. It is of course the landlord.

The Aston Arena CIC, the HCA’s ‘caretakers’, have a sitting tenancy within the building and little support from the HCA, Asda or Birmingham City Council on maintaining its damaged interior. While the CIC would happily explore more repairs, for example it has created new rooms in damaged squash courts, it cannot invest heavily or gain any finance or funding due to its sitting tenancy of one month. Their economic prosperity is decreased with a non-working heating system despite efforts from the CIC to explore Birmingham Core Draft on energy sustainability and delivering quotes for heating systems to relevant organisations.

The CIC has sought partnerships with the local Parish Church, a canoe and activity club Freax, the Scouts, Boys Brigade, YOT, West Midlands Police, SportEngland, Birmingham Ballers Project, UK Hockey, two independent schools, local community groups providing support for female education/leisure and youth engagement, Sunni Mosques of Birmingham and the Somali Community; so far these groups are not high on the HCA agenda and any questions on future site use has you directed to the site seller Savills.

Commercially amongst others Ricky Hatton Promotions and SkySports are interested, and it seems the CIC’s desire is to reuse those revenues to provide discounted and gratis facility use to the community.

The possibility of the Aston Arena existing in 20 years is bleak, due to planning regulations that state any facilities should be replaced (it should have stated a new facility should be built), but in the next 10 years surely community cohesion and community assets can go hand in hand?

The HCA has not considered the community benefit such a building has. It’s not pretty but it is extremely versatile providing many function and class rooms, courts, gym spaces and a hall/event room providing a capacity of 4500; or two 7-a-side indoor football pitches and a full sized basketball court.

It is an asset whichever way you look at it, economically sound and versatile it could be a platform for the future AAP to spring from. The area certainly needs it.  Couple that with a community that would benefit from this sized venue especially for weddings, shows, events and gigs it is shocking that the marry of private and public has not been sought before.

But where is the community in HCA? It sits with future developments from unknown companies in a city that has many other sites pushing for redevelopment.

The same can be said for Bradford but at least Bradford has a plan for its future. In either case community ambition is second to development and an intelligent system to redevelopment that can merge both community and economic prosperity is absent.

Short medium and long term has gone, it is one or the other; our leaders should use community ingenuity to form a base to prosper on, not tell us what we need and how we need it.

I hope both sites, and the many others that exist across the country find their balance, otherwise asset stripping will leave our communities with even less ability to engage and influence their future.

Update - 
In both cases listed it seems the Council Regeneration teams will be advising the HCA, this seems like a get out clause for them  engage properly in decisions and simply stick to the best economic use principle.
Why have a team deciding on plans (Planners), another deciding on validity (Regeneration) and then one to pass on these ideas (HCA) to the future auctioneers? Four organisations to make one decision that seems to frustrate communities....baffling, expensive and wasteful.