Rock’s off Whether Bristol needs an arena is less of a question than where it should be and who will fund it. Nadia Elghamry sets the stage
It has been on, off, then on again. It has been labelled a disgrace, an embarrassment and just plain bonkers. Bristol arena, the sequel, is about to begin.
Less than two years after Bristol city council and the South West Regional Development Agency abandoned plans to put an arena on a site next to Temple Meads station, proposals are being floated to build it next to a new Bristol City Football Club stadium at Ashton Vale.
In the eyes of the council and the SWRDA, this drew a line under hopes that plans would be revisited at Temple Meads, and the agency has been drafting proposals for an office scheme (see below).
But not everyone had the same idea. Just days after local politicians voiced the Ashton Vale plan, local reports emerged of rival firms battling to develop on one of a number of sites, including Temple Meads.
The council and site owner SWRDA flatly deny that arena plans are being dusted off at the city centre site. Yet the story that Temple Meads was a potential location grew legs, and ran and ran.
Over the following few weeks, various reports emerged in several different arms of the local press claiming that the Temple Meads site was still an option, and asking residents for their opinions.
With so many conflicting reports, even local property players involved with the sites are confused about what is happening. It has reopened the debate over just where the arena should go, how it can be delivered, or even if Bristol really needs a separate arena at all.
SWRDA first floated the idea of a 10,000-seat arena at Temple Meads in 2004. But, three years later, faced with a bill of £86m and only the public purse to fund it, its backers were forced to ditch the idea.
Most Bristolians seem disappointed, with many still believing the arena belongs in the city centre – a more sustainable location than the out-of-town Ashton Vale.
However, even mentioning the Temple Meads site and “former arena” in the same sentence elicits a sharp intake of breath from its owner. “You’ve got to avoid calling it the arena site – it’s the old diesel depot site,” winces Peter Holloway, development manager at SWRDA. “We did try and get an arena on it but that’s in the past.”
The council is equally adamant. “Temple Meads is going in another direction, it is in private hands and they are going for offices,” says a spokeswoman.
Plans to put the arena at Ashton Vale are in their “infancy – embryonic even,” she adds. “On where it would go, who would build it, what it is, there’s been nothing. It would take someone coming forward with an application, and then the council’s involvement would be subject to a debate.”
In the minds of many local residents, the debate is open again. One of the most vocal is George Ferguson, a former Royal Institute of British Architects president. In a stinging letter to Bristol’s Evening Post, Ferguson said that the city badly needed an arena, but one that is accessible to all. “Stuffing it out on the edge of the city may be OK for Bristol City FC and its supporters,” he wrote, “but it is not the answer for a venue that belongs to us all.”
He cited his bitter disappointment at the failure of the Temple Meads site. “Just because an almighty cock-up was made of the previous plan, it does not mean it was not right in principle and cannot be achieved at reasonable cost,” he said.
Solid reasoning
Perception-wise, Ferguson may not be the most unbiased critic, having drawn up his own plans for an arena at Temple Meads, but his reasoning has solid foundations.
SWRDA looked at Ashton Vale when it first considered the arena. It was discounted because, as Holloway says, “for the full economic benefits of the scheme to happen, it benefited from being in the city centre”.
However, he quickly adds: “There are valid economic reasons to have the arena out in the suburbs.”
The arena debate has reignited old arguments in Bristol. And while SWRDA and the council are adamant that Temple Meads is out of the equation, their voting public may yet push the issue.
But there is another growing contingent that wonders, with politicians backing the stadium at Ashton Vale, whether an arena is even needed at all. Mark Brunsdon at GVA Grimley asks: “You can and do hold concerts in a stadium – I saw the Rolling Stones at Ashton Gate, and I anticipated the new stadium would double up for concert events.”
He adds: “I’m not convinced that, with us having a new state-of-the-art stadium, an arena is needed. At the end of the day, the stadium will provide a venue for concerts – and that’s what Bristolians want.”
SWRDA energises plans for former depot
Plans for the 9-acre, former diesel depot site close to Temple Meads station, which was to house the arena, are moving ahead.
The South West Regional Development Agency has spent millions of pounds remediating the land, and is promoting the site for employment-led mixed-use, which development manager Peter Holloway says could be home to something “less institutional-led” – akin to the Paintworks, which is used to house smaller digital industries.
A development brief will be ready by spring next year with a view to selling the land to a private sector partner. Then, says Holloway: “It becomes a question of timing. If there is no market, then we will let the brief sit there for months, or even a year.”
The site is literally on the wrong side of the tracks and needs road access. SWRDA has submitted a planning application for a road bridge and hopes to have an answer from planners by Christmas, but it would expect any developer to foot the estimated £10m bill.
Property players are sceptical, however. “Effectively, the cost of the bridge will obliterate any residual land value,” says Mark Brunsdon at GVA Grimley.
Holloway says that the agency has some leeway. “We sometimes sell sites for £1. As long as we achieve the regeneration aims, it is worth it. If this site is worth £10m because of the economy, we can be flexible. We are not going to kid ourselves that it can do things it can’t.”
Analysis for SWRDA, carried out by Savills, allows for 600,000 sq ft of space and 600 residential apartments. This, says associate Dan Haines, could value the site at £5m unconditionally, without planning permission for the bridge. With consent in place, the price could be nearer to £8m-£10m.
This would be dependent on the end scheme, says Haines. “It would be a struggle to build speculatively,” he adds. “A few people might be interested [in the site] come spring or summer next year, but it is still cash buyers who are most likely to purchase it.”
