Within a few days of each other, there appeared in this paper two front-page stories that illustrate the contrasting and conflicting challenges of the built environment.
One theme has been the need to ensure Birmingham has enduring, stunning buildings. Universally-revered cities - think Rome, Paris, St Petersburg - are identified by the sheer number of inspiring buildings, works of art in their own right, built through the ages and handed down, cared for and loved, from one generation to the next.
Some cities are characterised by an architectural unity where a singularly beautiful style dominated public buildings for a period of time, defining the city forever as in Venice or Bath. The responsibility for the future inhabitants is to preserve and maintain as a priority. This is never going to be Birmingham but other cities have grown organically and have spectacular buildings representing each phase of the city's history - such as London.
Birmingham has some features of this later category. I have never taken anyone to Victoria Square without hearing them exclaim that it's as attractive a public space as any in continental Europe. The problem is the major reservations about the building of the second half of the 20th century here.
Birmingham, like many other UK cities, has a Victorian heart that has endured incredibly well. The tragedy, I would say, is that you have to crane your neck to see it. The first two floors of buildings have been ripped out to produce modern identikit shop fronts and only by looking above that do you see the splendour of the Victorian architecture.
Maintenance of the best of what a city has should be a priority, not just in public areas but in housing areas. It is eye-catching for politicians to say they have built 500 new homes and less headline-grabbing to say they have put new bathrooms and damp courses in 500 existing properties.
That is what the second built environment front-page story was, in a sense, about. The UK statistics released last week showed a horrifying difference in the life expectancy in different parts of the UK and the Birmingham Post regionalised this for its readers, highlighting the ten-year difference in life expectancy between those living in Ladywood and those in Sutton Coldfield. One reason given was poor housing conditions.
Architecture can be ugly, brutal and people-unfriendly but buildings can also be shoddy, damp, cold and uncared for, with public spaces litter and graffiti-infested and green space eroded. It is here that everyone, not just central and local decision-makers, have a responsibility. Big hitters coined the phrase NIMBY (not in my back yard), to ridicule those little individuals who dared to stand up and protest about a small, loved area under threat by some grand scheme. But once you move away from iconic buildings, it is only through NIMBYism that we can hope to maintain what is good in our environment.
We want beautiful, grand public buildings from the past and the present but we also want safe, healthy, well-maintained housing environments that lift our spirits every day not just when we go into the city centre.
