realisedevelopment.net

Just another WordPress site

The Problems with Buildings…

by

Buildings are expensive things to run.  And these days fewer of us need them as places to go to work.  Or at least we don’t need to go to just one of them.  And we don’t need to pay rent.

Yet there is a vibrant industry driven by developers, politicians and consultants bringing semi derelict buildings, especially in poor communities where regeneration cash is easier to come by, back to life as managed workspaces, incubators and start-up hubs.

When money is being sought to kick these schemes off the business plans always look achievable.  This occupancy rate at these rates per square foot, taking a contribution from the community cafe, with fixed costs of x and variable costs of y, within z months we will be generating a profit and re-investing in the local community.  Money is raised work is done and with hard work and good luck the building is eventually opened.

Except it is rare that members sign up as expected, rents are hard to collect in an economy where most cities have millions of square feet of empty office space.  Fixed costs are usually higher than projected as budgets over-run and interest repayments are higher than anticipated. That break-even point always seems to be ‘just around the corner’ even as social objectives for the building get thrown out the window in pursuit of revenue.

So lots of money, usually intended to help people living in deprived communities, goes into the pockets of consultants and developers and into interest re-payments on loans and the community gets a building that continues to swallow up revenue as the various parties who supported its development and staked their reputation on its success do all that they can to keep it open.  Including setting rents that frequently act as  major barrier to access to local people.

Of course it doesn’t always work out like this.

Some communities can stand the overheads associated with such developments.  Typically they are vibrant, affluent and well-educated, with disposable income to invest in ‘community share issues’ with no real need to generate a financial return. Hardly the intended beneficiaries of regeneration cash.  But even in these communities, building based regeneration is an expensive, risky and demanding endeavour requiring a lot of know-how and goodwill to keep the show on the road.

If we are restoring a building for its own merit then that is fair enough.

But, there is a world of difference between a pretty building and a building that is doing a beautiful job.

 

Towards A Community Advertising Network for Leeds

by

So, here is the idea, developed by Paul Burr of The CAN-Do Project (CAN= Community Advertising Network).

We set up a Leeds community group to run an advertising business.  We put up roadside hoardings on land on some of the prime thoroughfares in our city, having got the permission of land owners and applied for planning permission where necessary.

Advertising on the sites gets sold to:

  • National and multi-national corporations at premium rates
  • Local small businesses at heavily discounted rates – with further discounts available for those that agree to take on a trainee, provide a placement or take on a mentoring role for example (wouldn’t it be nice to see local small businesses advertising on prime sites as well as the big corporates and multi-nationals?)
  • Local social enterprises, charities and other good causes who help to manage the network get to a limited number of adverts free of charge.

Surplus revenues get re-invested back into the local community, for example to fund a micro-enterprise startup or loan fund, or to fund community and youth workers perhaps.

A great way of helping to use assets in the community (roadside land, and passing traffic) to realise community development through:

  • direct income generation
  • affordable advertising for local businesses
  • creating jobs in administration of the scheme, erecting hoardings and posting up adverts
  • building community capacity by encouraging mentoring and other social goods.

Paul’s research suggests that it might be possible to generate several hundreds of thousands of pounds in advertising for local businesses and third sector organisations as well as substantial cash revenues each year.

Who could possibly object?

It seems that there are several major private sector providers of roadside hoardings in Leeds, who pay rent to the council for access to prime sites.  Paul’s proposal could see money retained in the community where the hoardings are placed rather than going to the council, and could see a new competitor to the private sector suppliers.

I am sure too that many will protest against the positioning of further advertising hoardings across the city.  These things are not always easy on the eye – but this would have to be off-set against the benefits.

Next Steps

A group of us, including LS14 Trust and SLATE  have already met to explore the potential of such a Community Advertising Network in Leeds and see enough potential to explore the idea further.  If you would like to join us to discuss the idea further. A meeting will be held between 12 and 2pm on March 5th at a venue to be confirmed.

We would especially love to hear from you if you would like to:

  • get involved in managing the project,
  • become a beneficiary of it
  • provide us with legal advice and guidance
  • offer us, or suggest, some land that we can use for these hoardings.

Whether you love the idea or hate it, please do let us know….

What People Say About Progress School…

by

Because I choose to let it, Progress School forces me to focus on what I need to do to develop my future plans. Attending the sessions makes me focus at least once a month [if I’m lucky enough to escape work to attend] and that focus is nudging me into taking actions that I might ordinarily push to one side ‘until later’.

The only negative side manifests itself in my frustration when my paid job is too demanding to allow that precious time for me to attend. Precious is what Progress School is to me at the present time. Now I need to find ways to ensure my escape in good time every 2nd Thurs of the month.

 

“I’ve always known personal development was important, but rarely actually made any time for it. Progress School changes that. It means that at least once a month I’m forced to think about my own development, and better still it gives me the tools, support and motivation for doing so.”

“Joining a group which is focused on self development has focused me on what I need to do. Knowing that I will be “reporting in” once a month has helped me to find the time to put in the effort to do something in readiness for the next session.”

 

Thank you very much for inviting me to Hull Progress School which I thoroughly enjoyed. I thought that Mike’s presentation /facilitation was excellent. Actually I was able to recall the model verbatim during a conversation over the weekend which either

a) had a lasting and meaningful impact, or

b) means that I am opening my mind as a consultant to new ideas, or

c) makes me sad and I should get out more !

Book On Progress School Here

BSE – Before Social Enterprise

by

Mike in the days before social enterpriseHard to imagine I know, but I was remembering with some old friends the time ‘BSE’, Before Social Enterprise.

I used to work in what was called a ‘Community Home with Education’, similar to an ‘Approved School’.  A residential home for young men with emotional and behavioural ‘difficulties’.  When they reached 16 they would have to leave the home and make their own way in the world.  For many, the next step, after a short spell in the community, would be prison.

However we worked hard to give them the best chance that we could, and this often meant trying to find them work, trying to find employers who would give them a chance.  And, surprisingly it wasn’t as hard as you might think.  Despite their dubious CVs and frequently a complete lack of qualifications, we could usually find an employer who would give them a chance.  These were not ‘social enterprises’ set up specifically to provide vocational training and development for the needy.  They were good old ‘for profit’ businesses who were more than willing to do their bit.  This was the time BSE.

And I don’t think things are that much different now.

While we have a small number of social enterprises specifically setting out to help particular groups with a step on the employment ladder, I reckon that for every one of these there are probably a hundred or so for profits that work with the same client group.  Restaurants and kitchens that employ people struggling with addictions or to stay out of prison.  Building companies employing ex-offenders.   Football clubs giving players with drink driving convictions, anger management problems and occasional inclinations to racist abuse a second chance.

I wonder what impact the rise of the specialist social enterprise might have on the willingness of mainstream for profits to ‘do their bit’. They don’t get the rate rebates, soft loans, grants, PR or additional support of their social enterprise counterparts, so why should they push the boat out.

Or will they all become ‘social enterprises’ and reap the same rewards?