Committee Date: 21st May 2009
Application Number: C/00295/09/FUL
Accepted: 23rd January 2009
Target Date: 24th April 2009
Ward : Nechells
123-143 Digbeth, 3-5 Park Street, 81-93 Allison Street,and adjoining
land,Digbeth,Birmingham, B5 6DR
Mixed use development comprising refurbishment of the Digbeth Coldstore building,
135-136 and 137 Digbeth, façade of 138 and 139 Digbeth and construction of three new
blocks including a 27 storey tower to provide shops, offices, restaurant and cafe (A1, A2
and A3), business space (B1), residential (C3) and exhibition space (D1), together with
an energy centre using an aquifer thermal energy storage system (ATES), basement
parking and creation of new landscape areas.
Applicant: Ingleby (1733) Ltd Blenheim House 6 Blenheim Street London W15 1LE
Agent: Alistair Grills Associates 4 Chisholm Road Richmond Surrey TW10 6JH
Recommendation
Defer/Inf Approval
1. Defer 2. Endorse 3. Authorise 4. Endorse
Proposal
The scheme developed envisages the retention of most of the Grade II listed Digbeth Cold
Store and its conversion to an Innovation Centre with business use on upper floors over a
ground floor mix of retail, offices; and/or a restaurant use; and/or business space use;
and/or exhibition space - with no more than 50% of the gross floor area in any one use. The
new entrance to the converted Cold Store will feature a planar glazed front, whilst existing
window openings will be refitted with double glazed units. Glazing to the Digbeth frontage
will feature mullions to echo the buildings historic fenestration pattern whilst that on the
newly exposed Orwell Place frontage will have no mullions. The proposal also includes the
retention and refurbishment of the main front sections of locally listed 135-136 Digbeth
(Grade A) and 137 Digbeth (Grade B) and their conversion from A2 to B1 use with A1 retail
use at ground level.
New Building A, at the corner of Digbeth and Park Street and directly opposite St Martin's
Church, the Bull Ring and the iconic Selfridges department store, comprises a 27 storey
tower with 2 floors of plant space over 24 floors of B1 business use above a ground level
with office lobby, back of house, servicing and retail. A double height arcade provides
pedestrian access from the corner of Park Street and Digbeth through to the newly formed
and publicly accessible Orwell Place beyond. The Digbeth frontage to the building
incorporates the façade of the existing Grade B locally listed building at 138-139 Digbeth.
In terms of materials, Building A is generally clad in a full height glazed curtain wall system
although the ground level and the sky gardens will utilise planar glazing. External
aluminium vertical fins of varying colours will be fixed to the curtain wall system and run the
full height of the building.
New Building B, fronting on to Well Lane, is made up of three elements. The first element,
adjacent to Building A, comprises a 13 storey tower section with 12 storeys of B1 business
space over an office lobby and retail shops at ground level. This element is clad in a
curtain wall system with alternating full height glazed panels and insulated metal panels
finished in a light grey colour. The second 9-storey element (originally 11 storeys), with its
entrance on the corner of Allison Street and Orwell Passage, consists of 8 floors of
business use over a ground floor entrance lobby, retail shops and restaurant. This element
Page 1 of 35
is clad in anodised aluminium rainscreen cladding panels with an aluminium capping piece,
all finished in a bronze colour. The third element faces on to Well Lane and comprises a 15
unit residential element varying in height from 3-5 storeys, which is entered off the corner of
Well Lane and Allison Street. The 15 units include 8 one bedroom flats and 7 two
bedroom flats. Building B also features pre-cast reconstructed stone banding in a mid-grey
colour, aluminium framed windows and aluminium infill panels fitted flush with the glazing,
all finished in dark grey.
New Building C, a 6 storey building on the corner of Allison Street and Digbeth, comprises
5 levels of business space over an entrance lobby and retail use on the ground floor.
Building C is generally finished in a buff facing brick laid in stretcher bond with aluminium
framed windows with extended reveals in a bronze colour. The ground floor features
planar glazing.
Overall the scheme provides approximately 60,000 sqm (gross external floorspace)
comprising:-
* Offices - 48,186sqm
* Retail - 2,394sqm
* Restaurant - 345sqm
* Residential - 1,416sqm
* Basement / plant - 6,971sqm
A full basement connects all new buildings and will accommodate servicing, refuse storage,
plant and parking for 41 cars, 8 motorcycles and up to 70 cycles. Access to the basement
is from Allison Street. A service link is also provided between Well Lane and Park Street.
All buildings, including the Cold Store, will utilise a Combined Heat and Power (CHP)
system and an Aquifer Thermal Energy Storage (ATES) system to optimise energy
efficiency and minimise CO2 emissions. Accommodating plant within the basement allows
extensive green and brown roofs to be provided.
Over 30% of the ground floor is given over to public open space, with 24 hour pedestrian
accessibility through the site. The main external spaces are:-
* Park Street / Digbeth junction - pedestrian crossing to be widened from 2.5m to 5m;
* St Martin's Place - a gateway space for people arriving from the Bull Ring area including a
water feature and green wall;
* St Martin's Passage - a double height arcade with retail spaces and entrances either side;
* Orwell Place - the main public space within the development including a water wall,
terraced steps, seating walls and planters. Between new buildings A and B, the vista on to
Well Lane will be terminated by a remake of the Kennedy Memorial on a new curved wall in
front of the existing multi storey Bull Ring car park;
* Cold Store Court - the historic yard to the Cold Store building that will link Digbeth with
Orwell Place;
* Orwell Passage - the existing road will be pedestrainised in high quality materials to
match other external spaces;
* Well Lane - existing pavements will be made good and if possible tree planting
introduced; and,
* Digbeth frontage - existing pavement to be widened.
Amendments have been submitted with the tower at the corner of Allison Street and Orwell
Place reduced in height from 11 to 9 storeys and the width of the remaining floors reduced.
The upper floor of the residential element facing Well Lane has also been set back. Other
minor amendments include a slight realignment of the passageway between Park Street /
Page 2 of 35
Digbeth and Orwell Place and alterations to Building A above the retained façade of 138-
139 Digbeth and rear elevations of 135-136 Digbeth. A new window has also been inserted
into the north west wall of the Cold Store building.
In support of the scheme the applicant has put forward the following Section 106 Draft
Heads of Terms:-
* 15 affordable housing units (100%);
* 50% of all retail shops and 25% of the units within the converted Digbeth Cold Store
Innovation Centre to be made available at 30% rental reduction;
* local employment and training provisions;
* provision of an archaeological interpretation board;
* inclusion of a remake of the Kennedy mosaic within the scheme with the cost of
installation to be covered by the Snowhill developer but current applicant to meet future
maintenance costs;
* implementation of the lighting strategy;
* provision of new public open space with 24 hour pedestrian only public access through
the site;
* Shopmobility contribution of £25,000;
* offsite highways works estimated at £375,000;
* transportation contribution of £200,000 towards rail, metro and bus improvements;
* phasing of development with Digbeth Cold Store conversion to be included in Phase 1;
* contribution of £50,000 towards the Digbeth-Deritend Highways and Townscape Study,
and;
* contribution to St Martins Church of £10,000 to assist with the running of the café.
In support of the application the following documents have been submitted:-
* Environmental Impact Assessment, Addendum and Non-Technical Summary;
* Planning Statement;
* Transport Assessment and Travel Plan;
* Sustainability Assessment, and;
* Design and Access Statement (and Addendum).
Additionally, listed building consent has been submitted for partial demolition and
alterations to the Cold Store building and conservation area consent for demolition of
buildings within the site. Reports about these applications appear elsewhere on your
Committee's agenda.
Site & Surroundings
The site is located within the Eastside Quarter of Birmingham City Centre and occupies a
prominent corner location adjacent to two major landmark buildings - the futuristic
Selfridges building and the 19th century Grade II* listed St Martin's Church. Park Street
and the Bull Ring bound it to the west, Digbeth (A41) and the city's markets to the south.
Allison Street and Digbeth Police Station to the east and the Bull Ring car park and
refurbished Moor Street Station to the north.
The development site fronts Digbeth, an important arterial route into the city and Park
Street that skirts the Selfridges building. The site covers 0.77 hectare and is currently
occupied by a variety of buildings and surface car parking.
136-140 Digbeth are 3-4 storey narrow thin town properties, a number of which are locally
listed. 138-139, now a double unit has an attractive frontage but has a large modern
Page 3 of 35
extension to its rear. Adjacent to 136 Digbeth is the large Digbeth Cold Stores building (a
former cold storage depot which is currently vacant), which dominates this section of the
Digbeth frontage with its blank brick façade and is Statutorily Listed Grade II. The forecourt
of the depot and related outbuildings lie adjacent to the main cold storage depot on the
Digbeth frontage. Details of the listed Cold Store building are set out in the accompanying
listed building consent application, which appears elsewhere on your Committee's agenda.
On the corner of Digbeth and Park Street is the now vacant Royal George public house.
Adjacent to this, fronting Park Street is a former music hall, which is now vacant. Behind
these buildings is a vacant area of derelict land that is bounded by the Park Street multi
storey Bull Ring car park.
On the corner of Allison Street and Digbeth is a public house of no particular historic or
architectural value, although on the opposing corner of Digbeth and Allison Street is the
locally listed and architecturally imposing neo-Baroque Digbeth Police Station.
The Allison Street frontage currently contains a number of commercial buildings, which are
intersected by Orwell Passage, which leads to the rear of the Cold Stores site. A public car
park fronts onto the corner of Allison Street and Well Lane and on the opposite corner of
Well Lane and Allison Street is the Grade II listed RTP Crisps building, which has been
converted into residential use.
Consultation/PP Responses
Transportation Development - no objections subject to conditions and a legal agreement.
The site is adjacent to the City centre and so benefits from excellent accessibility with links.
A satisfactory Transport Assessment has been submitted, which considers existing
consented uses on the site, committed developments and assumed trips for the
development. With the restricted car parking provision the level of vehicle trips will reduce
by 112 AM and 212 PM so no mitigation for traffic measures are proposed. There is
however potential for vehicles to use the local car park facilities but this distribution would
be across the wider network rather than focused on roads adjacent to the site. In mitigation
various improvements are proposed within the s278 agreement and a s106 contribution
towards public transport.
Within 150m walking distance of the site there is a total capacity for 1623 vehicles to be
parked and within 350m a further capacity for 2758 vehicles. Adjacent to the site is the Bull
Ring Moor Street car park with capacity for 1000 vehicles, and Moat Lane BCC car park is
150m away with capacity for 530 vehicles. Car parks further away include Edgbaston
Street/Indoor Market, Fazeley Street and Freeman Street. BCC car park surveys confirm
that on a typical weekday just under half of these spaces are available. The site is also
within a controlled parking zone with restrictions usually of double yellow lines with limited
loading provision, and public on-street pay and display car parking bays. These restrictions
extend to 400m radius around the site.
Parking provision is limited on the site and significantly below the maximum guideline figure
used in the current and previous draft car parking guidelines. The guidelines note a
maximum of 245 spaces for offices (1/200 previous draft) and 818 spaces (1/60 current
draft) where 23 allocated spaces are provided for the offices. Given the site is adjacent to
the City Centre with such a high level of accessibility this is considered acceptable and in
accordance with the principles in PPG13 and the BCC draft car parking policy of setting
maximum levels on car parking and encouraging travel by other modes. It is unlikely staff
who don't have a parking space will attempt to park on the site as this will be managed, and
they will have the choice of parking either on-street or in surrounding public car park
Page 4 of 35
facilities which again are managed but also charged to reduce the amount of long-stay
commuter car parking. The car parking zone around the area is equally well managed and
results in limited numbers of infringements. Additionally, a framework travel plan has been
submitted which is in accordance with PPG13 and best practice that aims to promote travel
by more sustainable means other than the private car.
Conditions should be attached to secure:-
* Proposed highway works to BCC specification at the applicants expense under a s278
agreement;
* Applicant to affiliate to Company Travelwise;
* Cycle and motorcycle parking;
* multi-modal surveys of customers visiting the retail units;
* Service area to remain clear for service vehicles and manoeuvring purposes only and no
external storage;
* Vehicle and pedestrian visibility splays;
* A servicing management plan; and
* Maximum car park vehicle ramp gradients at 1 in 7.
Regulatory Services - no objections subject to safeguarding conditions to secure siting
details and maximum noise levels of plant and machinery, no external sound reproduction,
noise insulation between the residential and commercial elements, details of fume
extraction equipment to the restaurant and restrictions on the opening times of the
restaurant and shops. Further information is sought in response to queries raised by the Air
Quality Team. With regard to land contamination they agree with the conclusions of the
Environmental Statement that no further investigation is required and given the nature of
the development no remediation needs to be undertaken.
Local Services - as there are only 15 residential units in this scheme there are no
implications for public open space requirements.
Housing - the proposal is acceptable, as the applicant has offered 100% of its residential
accommodation for affordable housing being 15 units, exceeding the City Councils
affordable housing policies. More apartments would be welcomed if this proves feasible at
a later date. The accommodation is well proportioned, meets the requirements of Place for
Living, provides 100% parking provision and is intended to meet the Code for Sustainable
Homes Level 4, which is significantly above the current requirement.
Environment Agency - no objections in principle subject to conditions. The current use of
the land has not led to significant contamination of soil or groundwater and the risks to
controlled waters from contamination identified are minimal. However if during development
works further contamination is found, not previously assessed the Environment Agency
must be informed. Conditions should be attached to secure drainage measures,
construction details, dewatering the site during construction and to impermeably surface
the floor of the underground car park and positively drain it the foul sewer.
English Heritage - whilst the main grade II listed Cold Store building is to be retained and
converted, it is disappointing that earlier informal proposals for an exciting new roof have
been restrained back to a rather ordinary roof structure. To make the building function there
is a need to remove lesser structures attached to the main building but this is acceptable
provided the maximum retention of historic fabric elsewhere in the scheme.
To the south east of the Cold Store are the later associated offices and then a jumble of
buildings on the corner with Allison Street. These are not of any great significance, apart
Page 5 of 35
from forming an important set of relationships as the scale of the buildings steps down from
the Cold Store, across the open yard, then rising again to the Police Station on the
opposite side of Allison Street.
The works to 136 Digbeth are welcomed in retaining the very fine façade to Digbeth, but
are less satisfactory when it comes to the insertion of a plate glass window in the rear
elevation, which could be done with a greater degree of elegance. The same applies to 137
Digbeth. At 138 and 139 the interesting façade is to be retained. 140 has been substantially
reconstructed and 141 is the former George Inn with the remnants of a music hall behind it.
The music hall has three walls and the internal remnants of the curved plaster ceiling
attached to the surviving roof structure. Most of the internal structure has been removed
and replaced. The loss of the historic public house with which it was associated has also
devalued it considerably.
Building A steps away from the historic street line and should address the corner in their
historic manner at street level. The arguments for placing a tower of this scale within the
corner of a conservation area need to be very strong. Admittedly, this corner of the site can
be seen as a continuation of the city centre, but even if that is the case the building would
have to be of the very highest quality. Building B rises a long way up at the back of the site
and whilst its effect on the Digbeth frontage maybe acceptable it will tower over the
buildings in Well Lane. Building C - addresses the corner with Allison Street as a six storey
structure, which is a strong contrast to the police station on the opposite corner. Existing
buildings are quite low and the proposed building is too large and bulky for this site part of
the site.
Overall the proposals need to be of the highest quality but seem to have been watered
down through the design process and there is a need to bring the quality back into the
scheme. More detailed design work is needed for the retained historic structures, a
reduction in some elements of the scheme and an improvement in the quality of the new
design before it can be approved.
Council for British Archaeology - this is a comprehensive redevelopment to what is
recognised as archaeologically and historically one of the last surviving remnants of
medieval Birmingham; the Orwell Passage alignment defining the original town ditch, and
the plot boundaries between it and Digbeth, offering a number of burgage plots. The loss
through demolition of the rears to 135/136 and 137, and loss of internal features (locally
listed), and all but the street frontages to 138/139 (locally listed) is therefore regrettable,
though we understand that an attempt to retain the grain of the burgage plots will be
incorporated into the "new built form". We are also concerned at: The alterations to the
listed Cold Store which will see the loss of internal features and alterations to the exterior,
and the boiler house and engine house demolished. The impact of the new tower blocks on
the adjacent St Martin's Church. As the site has been recognised as having the potential
for medieval to present day archaeological remains, we understand that specialist advice
has been taken on this and a scheme of recording specified.
CABE - overall the principles of the proposal demonstrate intelligence and design skill; it is
a well considered and holistic response to multiple complex issues. The buildings are a
bespoke response to this particular place, the townscape analysis is robust and has
informed the design development of the tower. However, the public realm strategy could be
improved and more detail is needed to guarantee a high quality development.
Pleased to see that the restoration of the Cold Store is in the first phase but a detailed
phasing and delivery programme is needed. Support the architects approach to capitalise
on the uniqueness of the site, i.e. the burgage plots and Hershum ditch and the use of
Page 6 of 35
these historic references to give the development a specific character and urban grain.
There is a need to ensure that this idea does not become diluted if market demands
change and lead to alterations to the ground floor layout.
The principle of a tall building in this location is sound and a convincing justification for a
building of this height has been put forward. The long distance views describe the
successful way in which the tall building relates to Selfridges and the listed St Martins
Church. The form and sculptural structural quality of the tall building and the balanced
massing composition of the lower buildings are successful in the scheme. However, the
relationship with the multi storey car park creates awkward pinch points. Also the upper
floors of the tall building encroach upon the 1930's building in an insensitive way and the
proposed building has an overpowering relationship and should be reconsidered. The
design team is capable of meeting the required high standard of design but further detail is
needed.
The permeability through this development and the new public space is the main public
benefit. The strategy to place entrances on all active edges is a good way to deal with
frontages and glimpses of the public space from Park Street, Digbeth and Allision Street
will work well to animate routes through the development and Orwell Place. However, the
treatment of Orwell Place and the public realm around the site has not been fully resolved.
Whilst the public space will be delivered in the second phase, the character of this space
and its treatment should be fully considered and detailed as part of this application.
Centro - support the application that will play a significant part in the ongoing regeneration
of the Digbeth area. The site is well located for access for Birmingham City Centre and to
various public transport opportunities. It also falls within the Passenger Transport
Authorities minimum standards for accessibility by public transport with numerous bus
services operating past this site. There is a need to: -
* Ensure that the development does not have a negative impact upon the future
development of the Phase 2 Rapid Transit Network and in particular the Airport Route;
* Ensure the adoption, monitoring and promotion of the Travel Plan;
* Agree with Centro the specification / location of any new bus infrastructure with all costs
borne by the developer
* Ensure Centro are consulted at an early stage in the development of the "Digbeth-
Deritend Highways and Townscape Study"
* Ensure that the level of contribution towards public transport is sufficient for a scheme of
this scale and nature.
Natural England - no objections as there are no legally protected species likely to be
adversely affected by the proposed development provided the mitigation measures
proposed in the Environmental Statement are implemented in full.
Severn Trent Water - no objections subject to a condition to secure a satisfactory means of
drainage. There is a public sewer crossing the site and unless it is diverted no buildings
should be erected or trees planted within 2.5m of it.
Birmingham International Airport - no objections as the scheme does not conflict with the
safeguarding criteria. Cranes maybe necessary during construction and the applicants
should be made aware of Advice Note 4 "Cranes and Other Construction Issues". To
minimise bird strikes landscaping should exclude berry bearing species and other forms of
bird attractant plant species and landscaping.
Access Committee - "feathered" steps such as installed in Victoria and Chamberlain
Page 7 of 35
Squares and in the Bull Ring should be avoided. Members also proposed a number of
suggestions about the proposed street furniture, appropriate lighting, use of pictorial signs
on routes, wheelchair turning space in the arcade area and provision of disabled driver
parking and public toilets. RNIB "Wayfinder" units to link into the existing city centre
network should be used.
Conservation Heritage Panel - Mr Foster welcomed the repair of the Cold Store roof but
was critical of the extent of demolition proposed for the boiler and engine rooms. He felt
that the reconstruction of the rear elevation should be plainer than the front elevation. The
Victorian Society endorsed these comments. Mr Foster also raised a concern that any
potential above ground survival of 137 Digbeth may affect the scheme but the architect
explained that the scheme included the retention of the building and its internal features.
With regard to a query about archaeology, the applicants confirmed that architectural
interpretation panels would be provided as part of a legal agreement for any approval.
Councillor Sharpe requested that a full architectural report be provided in plain language to
accompany the report to Planning Committee.
In terms of the redevelopment proposals the Panel noted that the scheme did not comply
with the City Council's tall building policy and that St Martin's Church should remain the
gateway for the approach to the city centre along Digbeth. Allowing a tall building in
contravention of the tall building policy would set a precedent for the future. Furthermore,
the there was a presumption in the Digbeth / Deritend Character Appraisal and
Management Plan that development would be restricted to 3-4 storeys.
Mr Foster felt that St. Martin's should be the focus for the area and that the scheme was
completely out of scale to the surrounding buildings. The design had no merit and the
presentation highlighted how painfully the buildings would sit and dominate the area. In
particular, he felt that the cantilever was a very powerful architectural gesture and the
proposal had this feature to two sides of the tower resulting in a dominating and visually
oppressive design.
Victorian Society - object to Building A, the 27 storey tower, which is contrary to the
Digbeth, Deritend and Bordesley High Streets Conservation Area Character Appraisal and
Management Plan. The tower is also outside the areas designated as appropriate locations
for tall buildings, as defined in "High Places' and therefore is unacceptable, particularly as it
is within a conservation area. Do not consider that creating a "destination marker" or that
the tower being of "exceptional design quality", are the necessary exceptional
circumstances to justify a tower in this location. The tower sets an unacceptable precedent
for the redevelopment of a largely industrial area, characterised by buildings of three to four
storeys, which the Digbeth, Deritend and Bordesley High Street Conservation area was
designated in 2000 by the City Council in order to protect. Whilst much thought has gone
into the interpretation of the surviving historic burgage plots on this site, the design of the
tower with its cantilevers will overshadow and dominate the grade II* listed St Martin's
Church and locally listed buildings within the conservation area, is inappropriate. The 13
and 11 storey towers within Building B are also too high for this location.
Concerned at the treatment of the corner to Digbeth and Park Street. The proposal is to set
the building back from the street corner creating an open space partly under a canopy. This
appears cramped, will alter the historic building line of the Digbeth street frontage and
weaken the street corner. This is in contravention of the Conservation Area Management
Plan, which specifies that all new buildings should follow the street frontage line at back of
pavement, without the benefit of an overall view of any future plans for this busy junction in
the context of traffic management or potential new development on the south side of
Digbeth.
Page 8 of 35
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
Prior to submission of the planning application, the applicant undertook discussions with
the City Council, statutory consultees and other interested parties. The plans have evolved
to address the concerns raised. Additionally, a public exhibition was held in January, to
which local businesses, residents and occupiers were invited.
Local businesses and residents, residents associations, amenity societies, local ward
councillors and the M.P. for Ladywood notified. Site and press notices have also been
displayed.
Letter of support from the Birmingham Civic Society - generally supportive of the proposals,
which are to a high standard. Would like to see more detail on the glazing of the tower and
conditions should be attached to ensure the quality of materials, the details and integrity of
the scheme are protected in order to achieved a development of real quality.
Letter of support from a local resident welcoming the development, which will give a boost
to Digbeth's economy and image.
Letter of support from a resident in Walmley commenting that: -
* The design of Building A is quirky and is exactly what is needed for this site, however, the
Well Lane elevation is not as good. Retaining 138-9 Digbeth is unnecessary but helps
minimise the impact of the tower at street level and maintains a traditional streetscape. The
facade needs cleaning and the front doorway is a litter trap. Upper floor windows are very
industrial, outdated and should be replaced. The design of St Martin's Passage is important
and lighting needs to be clear, bright and environmentally friendly. The rear of 135-6
Digbeth needs to be designed so that it does not have a detrimental impact on the central
square. The elevation includes windows but if there is a blank wall public art could be
installed;
* Building B is well designed, particularly some of the small yet effective features used,
such as the overhangs and change in colour on the façade;
* The design of Building C appears out of date, bland and detracts from Digbeth police
station opposite. It appears as an afterthought and the simplicity of the facade contrasts too
heavily with the police station. Whilst the colour compliments the police station, the
brickwork does not. The façade should be more in keeping with the rest of the scheme. On
the north elevation there is a tall blank brick wall that be suitable for public art or should be
reworked so that it is not so ugly;
* The passage through to the Kennedy Memorial is welcomed but the central square may
be too small, in shadow and tree planting may make it feel smaller. Widening the pavement
along Digbeth and tree planting is welcomed, although fewer trees would allow greater
appreciation of the retained buildings.
Letter of support from a resident in Sutton Coldfield, pleased to see the Cold Store being
refurbished and commenting that:-
* It is a credit to Birmingham that confidence remains high in developing in the city centre
with yet another exciting scheme proposed. With nearby schemes including Selfridges, The
Bull Ring and proposed City Park Gate, this site is in need of attention;
* Building A - the 27-storey building will bring another striking tower to Birmingham's
Page 9 of 35
skyline, which is high quality and a perfect neighbour for Selfridges. The location between
New Street Station and Moor Street Station is superb and will offer companies wishing to
locate here access to a huge workforce through the rail network. The step down to the Cold
Store building prevents it from becoming swamped and overwhelmed, showing that the
architect has taken into account the importance of this historical building. The use of glass
for the façade not only adds to the buildings character but also casts light on the
surrounding area. Its simple architectural lines will not clash with St Martins and the two
buildings together could become a symbol of Birmingham;
* Building B - the 13 and 11 storey towers partner the 27 storey building well and give the
city centre a small cluster, adding to the massing of buildings. Stepping down to the 11
storey building is welcomed as is the similar façade colour on Allison Street to that of its
neighbour;
* Building C - is a simple low-rise building sitting nicely between the Cold Store and Digbeth
police station complimenting both structures. The use of a similar faced colour to the police
station and its soft curves make it an ideal neighbour.
Letter of objection commenting that the new building is too close to the iconic Selfridges
development and will prevent people admiring the Bull Ring development to its
full. The tall building will also cast a shadow over the Bull Ring for a significant part of the
day.
Letter of objection from a local resident commenting that a tower in this location would
prevent any future reworking of surrounding roads.
11 letters from owners/occupiers of apartments in the Brolly Works commenting that:-
* Whilst the proposal will be beneficial in the long run during construction it will have an
adverse impact on the apartments from traffic and construction plant entering and leaving
the site, noise, disturbance and loss of parking. If this causes problems in letting
apartments landlords should be compensated;
* Although this development will improve the area, the additional traffic in Allison Street,
noise from the development and loss of parking, are concerns. The tall building may also
spoil views of St Martin's Church. The new landscaped square should be in keeping with
the listed buildings.
* The development will adversely affect light to apartments with windows facing Well Lane.
This development will totally overshadow this side of the Brolly Works and if allowed will
result in a substantial interference/infringement of rights to light. This will affect rental and
resale values.
* Recent case law in Regan v Paul Properties Limited [2006] acts as a warning to
developers who fail to recognise the rights of light of those living around them. However,
there is no mention in the application about loss of light to apartments in Well Lane.
Letter from Drivers Jonas on behalf of the Birmingham Alliance objecting to the proposals
on the following grounds:
Visual and Townscape Impact - the tall building would have a significant adverse visual
impact, negatively affecting key views of the townscape including the setting of key listed
and landmark buildings, within a conservation area. The site is not therefore an appropriate
location for a tall building and is contrary to the City Council's own policy guidance. The
Page 10 of 35
Council should assess whether a tall building would be appropriate for this location against
current adopted policy and not the emerging Big City Plan, which is only at the early stage
of consultation. The applicants have not demonstrated in their evidence exceptional
circumstances exist, which would justify a departure from established planning policy.
Impact on views of listed and landmark buildings - within the vicinity there is the Rotunda,
Selfridges and St Martins Church. The proposed development would block important views
of these buildings and be in direct conflict with the Draft Digbeth, Deritend and Bordesley
High Streets Conservation Area - Draft Character Appraisal and Draft Supplementary
Planning Policies. This document notes the importance of maintaining key views of the
townscape in and out of the conservation area.
Conservation Area Impact - the proposed development has not taken into account the
context of the site and character of the wider area. It would not preserve or enhance the
character of the area due to its massing scale and impact on views of landmark buildings
from the conservation area. As such the proposal would be contrary to PPG15, UDP and
Character Appraisal for the Digbeth, Deritend and Bordesley High Streets Conservation
Area.
Office uses outside the City Centre Core - the proposals would be contrary to PPS6, which
seeks to focus office development within centres and the UDP, which seek to focus office
uses within the city centre core. The purpose of this policy is to control office development
to ensure that it is appropriately located. Providing office space outside the City Centre
Core may create an adverse impact on the viability of permitted schemes within the
established city centre core. The UDP also requires consideration be given monitoring the
supply and demand of office floorspace so that they are kept in step with one another.
Drivers Jonas's figures show that there is currently about 658,000 sqft of Grade A office
space vacant in the city centre core and a further 480,000 sqft coming forward at Great
Charles Street and Natwest Tower.
Traffic and Transport - the City Council needs to be satisfied that the proposals to widen
the pedestrian crossing at the corner of Park Street and Digbeth (next to the entrance to
the Bull Ring Centre car park and delivery area) sufficiently address pedestrian safety and
that no negative impacts would result from the development on the important linkages and
highways connectivity between Digbeth and the Bull Ring.
Prematurity and the Big City Plan - the planning submission refers to the City Council's
aspirations for the area and wider city contained within the Visioning Study (2007) and the
"Big Ideas" contained within the Charter published in February 2008, but does not refer to
the "Work in Progress" document published in December 2008. Planning applications
should be considered in the context of existing planning policies and as the Big City Plan is
only at Issues and Options stage it should only be attributed limited weight. Making
development control decisions on large scale planning applications on the basis of
emerging concepts within a draft-planning document is not a sound basis for effective
spatial planning. The "Work in Progress" document refers to trying to create too much
office space before the market is ready as being counter productive, and that a choice my
need to be made over phasing of development areas so that they do not compete with
each other.
Friends of the Earth - welcome the thermal aquifer energy storage system but the building
is clad in a considerable amount of glass and less glass would reduce air-conditioning
demand and hence the building's energy use. Pleased to see the CHP system but query
whether it is possible to extend it to the surrounding area. The scheme, including the tall
building includes significant green and brown roofs but they may suffer air turbulence from
Page 11 of 35
the tall flat facades of the building. The new public spaces seem to be small and
surrounded by tall buildings, partly covered by buildings and may be unpleasant windy
areas. The route through to the multi storey car park seems to be a service alley rather
than a pleasant pedestrian route. A pedestrian crossing over Park Street should be
provided and Digbeth High Street widened and improved. Concerned about the height and
scale of the new buildings, which will overshadow St Martin's Church and Selfridges.
Appears to be contrary to all local planning policy.
Additional public consultation has taken place on the amendments. Three further letters of
objection have been received from owners of apartments in the Brolly Works, commenting
that notwithstanding the reduction in height in building B, the development will still result in
loss of daylight to their apartments and general disturbance.
A further letter of objection has also been received from Drivers Jonas on behalf of the
Birmingham Alliance reiterating their concerns about the tall building and its impact on
Selfridges. They also raise a concern about traffic and the limited on site parking provision.
They are concerned that a robust case to justify the limited car parking provision has not
been put forward and that the travel plan to encourage alternative modes of transport is
weak. As a consequence the level of parking provided will be inadequate to meet the
additional demand for spaces arising from the development. This will have an adverse
effect on the availability and capacity of car parking facilities associated with the Bull Ring
to accommodate the needs of shoppers and visitors to the city centre at peak times. In
detail, they consider that:-
* The travel plan is weak and provides a limited basis for ensuring that the eventual travel
plan will deliver robust measures to encourage travel by sustainable modes of transport
(potential suggested enhancements to the Travel Plan have been put forward);
* No impact analysis has been submitted relating to off site local car parking facilities; and,
* There is limited evidence to justify the developer's view that the proposal will lead to lower
traffic generation that the existing permitted use.
Planning History
Various applications for small-scale commercial developments including applications for
change of use, extensions and alterations to existing buildings.
In September 2008, the City Council adopted the Digbeth, Deritend and Bordesley High
Streets (Digbeth and Deritend) Conservation Area Character Appraisal and Supplementary
Planning Policies as draft SPD for public consultation. This policy was formally adopted on
20 March 2009.
23 January 2009 Application C/00296/09/LBC. Listed building consent application
submitted for the Digbeth Cold Store. Works include demolition of the engine and boiler
rooms and alterations including roof repairs; opening up bricked up windows, new windows
to all elevations, new elevation to Orwell Place, removal of timber and cork lining to internal
walls, partial removal of floor to levels 1 and 2; insertion of lift, servicing duct, toilets and
stairs. A report about this application appears elsewhere on your Committee's agenda.
23 January 2009 Application C/00297/09/CAC. Conservation area consent application
submitted to demolish all buildings on the site except the Digbeth Cold Store (apart from
the engine and boiler room to the rear), the front sections of 135-136 and 137 Digbeth
(locally listed buildings) and the façade to 138-139 Digbeth (also locally listed). A report
about this application appears elsewhere on your Committee's agenda.
Page 12 of 35
5 March 2009. The current proposals were considered by your Committee report as an
Issues Report.
Policy Context
Local planning policies include:-
* The Birmingham Unitary Development Plan (2005) - saved policies;
* Birmingham LDF Core Strategy - Issues and Options Consultation Paper;
* The Digbeth Millennium Quarter Plan SPG;
* The Eastside Development Framework;
* The Draft Eastside Design & Movement Framework;
* Birmingham Big City Plan - Issues and Options Paper;
* Regeneration through Conservation - Birmingham Conservation Strategy SPG;
* Archaeology Strategy SPG;
* Historic Environment Study - Birmingham Archaeology;
* Digbeth, Deritend, Bordesley High Street Character Appraisal and Management Plan
SPD;
* High Places SPG;
* Lighting Places SPD;
* Shopfronts Design Guidance SPG;
* Development involving Former Public Houses SPG;
* Places for All SPG;
* Places for Living SPG;
* Affordable Housing SPG;
* Access for People with Disabilities SPD;
* Car Park Design Guide SPG; and,
* Draft Car Parking Guidelines.
In addition, the site is within Digbeth, Deritend and Bordesley High Streets Conservation
Area. There are a number of listed buildings within the site including the Grade II listed
Digbeth Cold Stores; Grade A and B locally listed 135-139 Digbeth. Nearby there are the
Grade II* listed St Martin's Church; Grade II listed RTP Crisps Umbrella Factory; and the
Grade A locally listed Digbeth Police Station. There is also a Grade C listed cast iron
bollard on Allison Street. The site is also within and nearby several archaeological sites.
Regional Planning Policies include the Regional Spatial Strategy for the West Midlands
(2004) plus subsequent revisions and Government Office West Midlands (GOWM)
Directions.
The most relevant national planning policies include:-
* PPS1 - Delivering Sustainable Development;
* PPS3 - Housing andCircular 06/98 - Planning and Affordable Housing;
* PPG4 - Industrial and Commercial Development and Small Firms;
* PPS6 - Planning for Town Centres;
* PPG13 - Transport;
* PPG15 - Planning and the Historic Environment;
* PPG16 - Archaeology;
* PPS22 - Renewable Energy;
* PPS23 - Planning and Pollution Control;
* PPG24 - Planning and Noise, and;
* PPS25 - Development and Flood Risk.
Page 13 of 35
Planning Considerations
Land Use Policy
The proposed mixed use development comprising retail, business space, residential and
exhibition space on a previously developed city centre site accords with national
government planning policy including PPS1 - Delivering Sustainable Development, PPS3 -
Housing, PPG4 - Industrial and Commercial Development and Small Firms, PPS6 -
Planning for Town Centres, and PPG13 - Transport, not least because it bolsters the
regeneration of Digbeth - a city centre area, and the local community by providing elements
of affordable housing and affordable business space for small, start-up companies.
The scheme also meets regional policy as set down in the Regional Spatial Strategy for the
West Midlands in that it addresses one of the 4 major challenges for the West Midlands
region - the need for an Urban Renaissance by developing the Major Urban Areas in such
a way that they can increasingly meet their own economic and social needs in order to
counter the unsustainable outward movement of people and jobs facilitated by previous
strategies.
At the local level, whilst there are no specific policies covering the site, the mixed use
proposals are in line with the city centre policies in the UDP, as they include active retail
frontages, a residential component and high office content, accommodate the expansion of
city centre core activities and provide further office activity along Digbeth. Whilst the
scheme complies with the requirement for major mixed-use schemes throughout the area
to include a vital residential element, only 15 units are proposed. I share the views of
Housing that a greater number of apartments would result in a better mix of uses. However,
Building B does allow for a certain degree of flexibility in the future for some of the office
space to be converted into additional residential accommodation.
The scheme also fits well with the UDP's vision of Digbeth as a predominantly Irish Quarter
with lively mixed uses including residential, commercial and cultural uses and its aims to
create an improved environment and promote further industrial and commercial activity in
the area. The proposed land uses are also consistent with the Digbeth Millennium Quarter
Plan as the scheme will help regenerate the area and integrate the city centre core with
Digbeth and Eastside.
With regard to the recently published Birmingham Core Strategy 2026 Issues and Options
Paper, the scheme is in general accordance with the Council's Vision for the City, which
again refers to the need to expand the city centre retail area, as well as providing housing
and increasing the number of job opportunities. It also meets a number of stated key
Objectives including Objective 1 - the promotion of Birmingham's national and international
role as a global city, including by actively developing Birmingham as a culturally diverse
regional centre offering culture, retail and business opportunities for those who visit or live
within the city; and Objective 5 - the promotion of opportunities in Birmingham for
innovation and investment in research as well as employment potential for all, as well as an
attractive location for office accommodation.
The proposals also comply with a number of the Big Ideas set out in Urban Initiatives'
evolving Birmingham Big City Plan (2007-) which is referred to in the Birmingham Core
Strategy 2026 - Issues and Options Paper. With regard to the Centricity concept, the site is
located at the very northern, City Centre end of the area designated for expansion of the
City Centre Core, which is intended to accommodate higher density, mixed-use
development to match the scale and intensity of the existing city centre. In addition, in
respect of the Big City Plan's Street Local concept, the scheme will contribute to ambitions
to bring Digbeth up to the same standard as Broad Street in terms of activity levels and
Page 14 of 35
vibrancy, and will contribute to the setting of the proposed public space to the south of St
Martins Church. Finally, the affordable business and retail units will help encourage new
small businesses to set up in the area - consistent with the Big City Plan's Start Local
concept of fostering new enterprises.
Drivers Jonas on behalf of the Birmingham Alliance have objected to offices on grounds
that the site lies outside the City Centre Core. However, as detailed above, the UDP at
paragraph 4.33 supports office activity in the City Centre, whilst paragraph 4.34
acknowledges that the bulk of additional office development is likely to take place in the
wider City Centre. Paragraphs 4.38 - 4,41 add that the core area has reached its physical
capacity and additional demand for office accommodation can only be met by the physical
expansion of the core to areas contiguous area beyond the Queensway. Office use is also
consistent with the Development Plan, Regional Spatial Strategy and PPS6. The
application site is therefore in a suitable location for offices and I have no objections to this
use or the other uses proposed. Moreover, when your Committee considered the
application as an Issues Report no objections were raised to the land uses proposed.
Tall Building Policy
The concept behind the development is for a series of tower buildings with public spaces in
between them creating a "small city within a city". The towers are arranged with the tallest
at Park Street stepping down in height toward Digbeth. Accordingly, Building A rises to 27
storeys, Building B incorporates two towers stepping down from 13 to 9 storeys, whilst
Building C would be 6 storeys high.
The UDP advises at paragraph 15.22 that buildings heights within the City Centre should
generally be more no than 8 storeys although in some special circumstances high rise
development providing a landmark building of exceptional architectural quality maybe
permitted. In respect of the 27 storey tower the site lies outside the Central Ridge Zone
(CRZ) as set out in High Places SPG, within which tall buildings are considered
appropriate. Outside of the Central Ridge Zone, the SPG notes that proposals for tall
buildings will be considered on their merits. In addition the Digbeth, Deritend, Bordesley
High Streets Conservation Area - Character Appraisal and Management Plan, advises new
buildings should reflect building heights characteristic of the area, i.e. normally 6 industrial /
commercial storeys. The applicants consider there are exceptional reasons why a tall
building should be located within the site:-
* the tower marks the end of the major approach into the city centre from the south east
along the A41 corridor;
* the location of the tower on the south side of Park Street (and the former Queensway
"concrete collar") signifies the spillage of city centre uses (and the building types that
accommodate them) out from the once constricted city centre and into Digbeth;
* the tower is of exceptional design quality;
* the tall tower has been carefully located and designed so as to contrast with the
amorphous mass of the iconic Selfridges department store to the north whilst avoiding the
blockage of views of the Rotunda, St Martins Church and the Digbeth Cold Store looking
north along Digbeth;
* the tower provides an unmissable 3D signpost of the City's only surviving remnant of the
medieval burgage plot system, as the tower accurately reflects the burgage plots in both
plan and elevation;
* the tower is considered to be in accordance with the evolving Birmingham Big City Plan
prepared by Urban Initiatives, which recommends the expansion of the city centre to the
south, to include the site and a relaxing of the current CRZ restrictions on tall buildings; and
* the tower signifies the regeneration of Digbeth and provides a design benchmark for
Page 15 of 35
future development within the Digbeth Millennium Quarter and the wider Eastside Initiative
area.
Objections have been raised to the tall building on grounds that it does not conform with the
UDP, High Places and the Digbeth, Deritend, Bordesley High Streets Conservation Area -
Character Appraisal and Management Plan. However, CABE considers the principle of a
tall building in this location sound and that a convincing justification for a building of this
height has been put forward.
Using long distance views in High Places, it can be seen that the development relates well
in height and extent to the range of buildings on the skyline. The biggest impact on the
skyline is from the Irish Quarter, here it would fill the gap between the Rotunda and the BT
tower but partly obscure the Selfridges building and St Martin's Church Spire. Whilst partial
loss of long distance views of these buildings is regrettable, I consider that the scheme will
add to the overall memorable quality of the city's skyline.
In terms of local views, one of the key impacts is along the approach from Digbeth towards
the city centre. From the junction of Digbeth and Birchall Street, views of Selfridges and
part of the Rotunda would be obscured. However, closer to the city centre, the Rotunda
would be revealed with the buildings framing the view of it. From the top of the public
square at the Bull Ring, the proposed new development will provide an exciting new
feature. Along Park Street, the proposed development will lead the eye away from the multi
storey car park, fill in a gap in the street scene and act as a counterpoint to the Selfridges
building. Drivers Jonas have raised a concern about loss of views, including the iconic
Selfridges building. However, the Bull Ring is the focal point of the view and not Selfridges.
Selfridges presently benefits from partially under developed sites in its immediate vicinity
but this is no reason to compromise the long term regeneration of the area.
When your Committee considered the application as an Issues Report, the issue of a tall
building raised a divergence of views. Whilst the proposed 27 storey tower does not
conform with locational policy set out in High Places, I consider that it is an acceptable
exception to the policy for the reasons set out above. The proposal therefore accords with
policy because it complies with the exceptions contained in the policy and meets the criteria
set out in the policy. There is therefore no departure from the UDP or High Places.
Urban Design and Impact on Conservation Area and Nearby Listed Buildings
The Digbeth Coldstores site is one of the few remaining areas in Birmingham where the
city's historic settlement pattern is still evident today. Remains of the medieval burgage
plots dating back to the foundation of the city in 1166 are discernible in the context of land
parcels and the elevational treatment of existing buildings in the north -west corner of the
site along Digbeth. In addition, the alignment of the ancient Hersum Ditch, an original
boundary between the medieval city and open ground to the east, is marked by the present
day Orwell Passage.
Additionally, the site includes four listed buildings - the late Victorian Grade ll listed Digbeth
Coldstore, the locally-listed Grade A 135-136 Digbeth, the locally listed Grade B 137
Digbeth and the locally listed Grade B 138-139 Digbeth which, together with three new
blocks (A, B & C), are arranged in such a way as to:-
* retain/restore the built edge of the urban block bounded by Digbeth, Park Street, Well
Lane and Allison Street;
* respond to the constraints imposed by the remnants of the original burgage plots, the
Hersum Ditch alignment, the nationally & locally-listed buildings in the immediate vicinity
Page 16 of 35
and the site's conservation area context;
* ensure the visual impact in short, medium and long distance views is appropriate in terms
of the retention of views of major buildings, key vistas and the Birmingham skyline;
* improve pedestrian, cycle and vehicular movement through and around the site; and
* create an attractive, active and publicly-accessible hard-landscaped amenity space,
Orwell Place, at the heart of the development.
In terms of conservation policy, the design is at variance with two recommendations in the
Guidance, namely:-
* the catch all requirement for new development to reflect the building heights characteristic
of the locality - this would normally limit new buildings heights to 6 industrial / commercial
storeys; and,
* the requirement to build to the back of existing pavement throughout the conservation
area.
In terms of the former point, the Digbeth, Deritend, Bordesley High Streets Conservation
Area - adopted Character Appraisal and Management Plan, includes a plan (Map 3) setting
out landmarks, views and vistas. The proposed development would block the view down
Digbeth of the Police Station and partially block glimpses of the city centre from the within
the conservation, including the Rotunda and spire of St Martin's Church. However, overall
the proposed development would not have a significant impact on the identified landmarks,
views and vistas, into or out of the Conservation Area. Additionally, as noted by English
Heritage, the corner of Park Street and Digbeth can be seen as a continuation of the City
Centre. My Conservation Officer notes that the tower is opposite the futuristic Selfridges
building and St Martin's Church and is at the City end of the conservation area; an
argument could therefore be made that this development responds to the cities commercial
pressures. The height of the tower at the corner of Allison Street and Orwell Passage has
been reduced and the upper floor of the residential element facing Well Lane has been set
back (to improve day lighting to the apartments in the Brolly Works) but these changes also
help address concerns of my Conservation Officer about the height of this part of the
development.
In terms of the second point, whilst this approach generally represents best practice in
urban design terms, other factors come into play in respect of the corner of Digbeth and
Park Street where it is proposed to provide a traffic calmed space between the
Bullring/Selfridges, St Martins Church and the proposed development to help integration of
the city centre with Digbeth. My Conservation Officer has commented that the development
at this point needs a focal entrance and provided it is to a high quality an exception to the
general rule that building should be to back of pavement could be made.
CABE consider the scheme to be well considered and holistic response to multiple complex
issues. They like the architect's approach to capitalize on the uniqueness of the site to give
the development a special character and urban grain. Whilst concerns have been raised
about the scale and massing of the buildings CABE consider that the form and sculptural
quality of the tall building and the balanced massing composition of the lower buildings are
successful. Furthermore whilst English Heritage raised concerns about Building C, CABE
consider the proposed buildings with Allison Street, the police station, Orwell Place and the
Cold Store on Digbeth is particularly successful. I consider that a 6 storey building fronting
onto Digbeth is acceptable as this reflects the general scale of buildings along this frontage
and complies with Digbeth, Deritend and Bordesley High Streets Conservation Area
Character Appraisal and Management Plan, which advises new development should reflect
building heights characteristic of the locality - normally 6 commercial storeys.
Page 17 of 35
Both CABE and English Heritage have highlighted the need to ensure quality is not watered
down. Key to the success of this scheme is therefore ensuring that the buildings and
landscape are well detailed. Conditions are therefore attached to secure details of the
proposed buildings. A condition is also attached to secure details of the landscaping
scheme in advance of any development. This will help ensure that the public realm is
carefully considered as an integral part of the development.
Listed Building and Demolition Works
The Grade II listed Digbeth Coldstore was built in 1899 and comprises 3 elements - the
main Cold Store, an engine house and a boiler house. These three elements are treated
separately in the list description. The plans for the building show that the three storey cold
store and single storey engine room were separate structures with only a single door
between them. Thus the engine room and boiler house were always ancillary to the main
building. The three-storey Cold Store building is also a major local landmark but the same
cannot be said of the engine house and boiler room. Whilst the Conservation Heritage
Panel and Victorian Society object to the loss of the boiler and engine rooms, English
Heritage, consider that loss of these lesser structures inevitable to allow reuse of the main
building. Furthermore my Conservation Officer considers that demolition of the engine and
boiler house allows a better central public open space to be provided within the
development than would otherwise be the case.
Other works to the Cold Store building include re-roofing, making good the external walls,
opening up bricked up windows to the Digbeth elevation, a new elevation to Orwell Place
and new windows to all elevations. Internally, the works involve removing timber and cork
linings to walls, partial removal of floors to levels 1 and 2 and insertion of new lifts, service
ducts, toilets and stairs. These works will help bring the building back into beneficial use. In
response to concerns raised by English Heritage and your Committee when the application
was considered as an Issues Report, conditions are attached to secure further details of
the proposed works, in particular, the glazing specification.
Locally listed buildings within the application site include the Grade A, George Makepeace
building at 135 -136 Digbeth and Grade B 137 Digbeth. The main front sections of these
buildings are to be retained and refurbished. In addition 138-139 Digbeth is Grade B locally
listed and it is proposed to retain and refurbish the façade of this building. The retention of
these buildings has been universally welcomed in principle. The passage from the corner of
Park Street / Digbeth to Orwell Place has also been realigned and the rear elevation to
135-136 Digbeth modified and a new window inserted in the north west wall of the Cold
Store. Furthermore to address concerns raised by CABE the applicant has revised the
scheme to improve the relationship between the retained façade of 138-139 Digbeth and
Building A.
The whole site is within the Digbeth, Deritend and Bordesley High Streets Conservation
Area and the proposed demolition of all the other buildings within the application requires
Conservation Area Consent. This issue is addressed in the report for Conservation Area
Consent, which appears elsewhere on your Committee's agenda.
Archaeology
The archaeological features on the site consist of the 12th century burgage plot boundaries
and the line of a boundary ditch and belowground archaeological remains. The City's
Archaeologist fully supports the way the proposed development respects, reflects and
accentuates the burgage plot divisions and the line of the boundary ditch. The impact of the
proposed development on belowground archaeological remains is assessed in the
Page 18 of 35
Environmental Assessment and an archaeological desk-based assessment concluded the
likelihood of important environmental and industrial archaeological deposits surviving on the
site was high. An archaeological evaluation consisting of excavated trenches revealed well-
preserved archaeological remains of medieval and post-medieval date, mainly relating to
industrial processes. In addition, organic deposits predating the boundary ditch were found
providing information on the surrounding landscape in the early medieval period or earlier.
The Environmental Statement puts forward a mitigation strategy consisting of
archaeological excavation in advance of commencement of development, followed by
analysis and publication of the results. Conditions are recommended to secure
implementation of the mitigation strategy. As requested by the Conservation Heritage Panel
attached as an appendix is a note about archaeology of this site.
Access
The application site is located close to Birmingham City Centre, less than 700m from Moor
Street and New Street railway stations, and Digbeth Coach station. It is also served by
numerous bus services. The site is therefore ideally located to maximise sustainable
accessibility.
In terms of traffic generation, the Transportation Assessment submitted calculates that the
existing site could generate 7,818 trips per day (two way) whereas the proposed
development could generate 13,758 person trips (two way). However, the Transport
Assessment demonstrates that the proposal would result in a reduction in daily vehicle trips
of 3054 trips (two-way). This is mainly due to a greater number of persons using public
transport, walking or cycling, not least due to the constrained number of parking spaces on
the site. Consequently, the applicant is not proposing any traffic mitigation measures.
As more people are likely to walk, cycle and use public transport to gain access to the
development a number of measures are proposed including :-
* widening the pavement along Digbeth frontage;
* wider crossings areas at the Digbeth and Park Street pedestrian;
* new pedestrian routes through the site linking Park Street with Allison Street;
* improved lighting on Allison Street, Orwell Passage and Well Lane;
* resurfacing of Orwell Passage;
* provision of secure cycle stores within the building;
* new bus shelters on Digbeth;
* a financial contribution of £200,000 toward public transport; and
* development of green travel plan.
Transportation Development have commented that the Transport Assessment is
acceptable. They add that there is potential for vehicles to use the local car park facilities
but this distribution would be across the wider network rather than focused on roads
adjacent to the site. In mitigation various improvements measures are proposed within the
s278 agreement and there is a s106 financial contribution toward public transport.
I note the concerns from Drivers Jonas about the limited car parking and weaknesses in the
Travel Plan. However, Transportation Development are satisfied with the parking levels
proposed. They also consider that the framework travel plan that has been submitted is in
accordance with PPG13 and best practice that aims to promote travel by more sustainable
means other than the private car. Conditions are attached to secure a full Travel Plan and
multi modal traffic survey. Measures include some of the alterations proposed via the s278
and s106 such as the widening of Digbeth footway, pedestrian routes and crossing
alterations and `pooled` public transport contribution. Other measures noted are cycle
Page 19 of 35
parking and cycling measures (repairs, information), car sharing and working practice
measures ie flexible hours, teleworking. Enhancements to the Travel Plan as suggested by
Drivers Jonas will be discussed with the developer when discharging Travel Plan condition.
Car Parking and Servicing
Within 150m walking distance of the site there is a total capacity for 1623 vehicles to be
parked and within 350m a further capacity for 2758 vehicles. Adjacent to the site is the Bull
Ring Moor Street car park with capacity for 1000 vehicles, and Moat Lane BCC car park is
150m away with capacity for 530 vehicles. There are car parks further away from this site
including Edgbaston Street/Indoor Market, Fazeley Street and Freeman Street. BCC car
park surveys confirm that on a typical weekday just under half of these spaces are
available. Also the site is within a controlled parking zone with restrictions usually of double
yellow lines with limited loading provision, and public on-street pay and display car parking
bays. These restrictions extend to 400m radius around the site.
Parking provision is limited on the site and significantly below the maximum guideline figure
used in the current and previous draft car parking guidelines. The guidelines note a
maximum of 245 spaces (1/200 previous draft) and 818 spaces (1/60 current draft) where
23 allocated spaces are provided for the offices. Given the site is adjacent to the City
Centre with such a high level of accessibility Transportation Development consider this is
acceptable and in accordance with the principles noted in PPG13 and the BCC draft car
parking policy of setting maximum levels on car parking and encouraging travel by other
modes. It is unlikely staff who don't have a parking space will attempt to park on the site as
this will be managed, and then will have the choice of parking either on-street or in
surrounding public car park facilities which again are managed but also charged to reduce
the amount of long-stay commuter car parking. The car parking zone around the area is
equally well managed and results in limited numbers of infringements.
When assessed against the draft cycle parking standards 134 cycle and 134 motorcycle
spaces would be required. A cycle store is proposed within the basement, for residents,
office workers and staff at the retail and restaurant units, which can accommodate up to 70
cycles. There are also cycle stands provided at surface level for customers to the retail and
restaurant units. With regard to motorcycle parking, the applicant considers the requirement
for 134 spaces is likely to be substantial over provision. Space is available in the basement
for 8 motorcycles for residents, office workers and staff from the retail and restaurant units.
The low level of parking was raised as a concern when the application was considered by
your Committee as an Issues Report. However, Transportation Development have raised
no objection to the level of car parking subject to conditions to secure on site management
of the parking facilities (including cycle and motorcycling spaces), a travel plan to reduce
the number of car borne trips to and from the development and multi modal surveys of
customers visiting the retail units to inform the on-going monitoring of the travel plan.
A draft Service Management Strategy has been submitted with the application. The
principle is for all deliveries / servicing and refuse collection to be via the basement
accessed from Allison Street. Each of the three new buildings has access to a dedicated
turning and loading area within the basement. The only building that would not have
deliveries from the basement would be the existing Cold Store, which would continue to be
serviced from Digbeth. The applicant is proposing an on site Management Company who
would in turn appoint a Service Manager to oversee deliveries and collections.
Transportation Development have no objections to the proposed servicing arrangements
subject to conditions to ensuring suitable pedestrian visibility splays, the service area being
used only for service vehicles and a service management plan.
Page 20 of 35
Impact Upon Adjoining Occupiers
In addition to concerns about parking, residents within the Brolly Works have objected to
the proposed development on grounds that construction work will cause a noise and
disturbance nuisance and will result in loss of light to apartments.
It is inevitable that a development of the scale proposed will give rise to noise and vibration
during construction, especially from piling. Construction and vibration works will therefore
need to be controlled to reduce the impact upon these residents. A condition is therefore
attached to secure a Construction Environmental Management Plan to control noise and
vibration nuisance.
Independent consultants for the City Council have been appointed to assess impact of the
scheme upon day lighting, sunlight and overshadowing of the nearby residential properties,
in particular, the Brolly Works. They advise that the requirements governing day lighting to
existing residential buildings are set out in Building and Research Establishment (BRE)
Guidance 1991. The amount of light available to a window depends upon the amount of
unobstructed sky that can be seen from the centre of the window. The amount of visible sky
is assessed by calculating the vertical sky component (VSC). A 27% VSC constitutes
adequacy but where this value cannot be achieved a reduction of up to 20% of the former
value would not be noticeable. The VSC calculation measures potential light reaching the
window and depending on the room and window, the room may still be adequately lit with a
lesser VSC value. Appendix C of the BRE Guide sets out more detailed tests to assess
interior daylight conditions of rooms, including the average daylight factors (ADF). The ADF
value determines the level of interior illumination that can be compared with the British
Standard.
From reviewing the Environmental Impact Assessment the independent consultants note
that there is a substantial reduction in the VSC values from over 30% to between 4% and
14%, resulting in a significant loss of light to rooms within the Brolly Works facing the
development. Whilst for the ADF assessment 11 windows do not meet the minimum
standard.
When assessing developments of this nature, the independent consultants advise that it is
necessary to take into account all of the methods of calculating daylight and luminance.
Nevertheless, the proposed daylight condition (ADF) and whether or not the residential
habitable rooms will be adequately lit (rather than how much light is being taken away) is
the most important. They consider that if an argument for loss of daylight is made on
grounds of Average Daylight Factor then these minimum criteria should be achieved and
conclude that the 11 windows that do not meet the minimum standard and would result in
light levels within the rooms appearing gloomy.
The applicant has revised the plans to reduce the height of the tower at the corner of
Allison Street and Orwell Passage from 11 to 9 storeys and also set back the upper level of
the residential element facing Well Lane. These amendments improve the amount of light
to the affected windows, such that 4 of the windows now meet the ADF day lighting test.
Light to the remaining 7 windows has also improved, with 4 of the windows approaching the
pass level. The 3 worst affected windows are to a first floor living / dining room and a
second floor bedroom window, which fail the ADF test by approximately 30% and 25%
respectively. For these windows to pass the ADF test most of both towers within Building B
would need to be removed, changing the character of the development and affecting its
viability.
Residents in the Brolly Works fronting Well Lane currently enjoy high levels of daylight and
Page 21 of 35
sunlight as there currently is a surface car park on the opposite side of Well Lane.
However, it must be accepted that in order to regenerate the city centre, areas of used land
are likely to be developed with high density schemes. Furthermore in order to develop sites
to high densities it may not be possible to achieve the same guidelines and amenity
standards as within low level suburban areas.
The proposed development involves building to back of pavement along Allison Street and
Well Lane. This is part of the character of the area and consistent with the advice in the
Digbeth, Deritend, Bordesley High Streets Conservation Area - Character Appraisal and
Management Plan. Moreover, it is consistent with the 1970-78 OS plan, which shows
warehouses to back of pavement along Well Lane. I have no details of building heights for
these warehouses but the proposed building heights opposite the Brolly Works are not
excessive for a city centre development. Opposite the original part of the Brolly Works the
development is 3 and 4 storeys with set backs stepping up to 5 and 6 storeys. To the
western end of Well Lane is a 13 storey tower, which overlaps the last 4 metres of the
extended Brolly Works. Along Allison Street, over 30m from the Brolly Works is a smaller 9
storey tower. Between these two towers is a gap of over 20m that provides daylight for the
apartments in the Brolly Works facing the development.
On balance, I consider that the revisions to the scheme are acceptable given the sites city
centre location. Lighting levels to 43 of the 50 windows in the Well Lane frontage to the
Brolly Works now meet the ADF test and lighting levels to the remaining windows have
improved.
The shadowing analysis in the ES indicates that the tower will create a shadow over St
Martin's Church early in the morning moving over the Bull Ring and along Park Street. It will
then cast most of its shadow on the multi-storey car park to the north from midday
onwards. Building B will cast an afternoon shadow over the residential properties in Well
Lane. The requirement for the protection of sunlight to existing residential buildings around
a development are also set out in the 1991 BRE Guide. It advises that there is a
requirement to assess windows of surrounding properties where the main windows face
east, south or west. In this case the only building with windows that face due south is the
Brolly Works. The independent consultants note that the most significant reductions will be
to the winter annual probable sunlight hours (APSH) due to the fact that the proposed
development is close to the Brolly Works. With regards to summer sunshine, the majority of
windows will receive adequate levels with the exception of those to the northwest of the
building. Although the losses in sunlight would result in losses far in excess of those
recommended by the BRE Guidelines, it is more important to look at what levels of sunlight
they are left with and whether this is acceptable within an urban environment. They
conclude that the proposed levels of APSH of this nature would be consistent with an inner
city development.
In terms of night light, the applicant has appointed lighting specialists to develop a lighting
strategy, which involves:-
* sympathetic lighting to retained facades of the Cold Store building;
* high level lighting of the tower to create a crown effect that feathers as it drops down the
building;
* general ambient lighting to the new public spaces;
* up lighting new trees;
* integrated lighting and benches;
* lighting water features and public art;
* lighting integrated into steps; and
* lighting historic burgage plot boundaries and the line of the old Hersum Ditch.
Page 22 of 35
These proposals are consistent with your Committee's recently adopted policy - Lighting
Places. A condition is attached to secure details of the lighting scheme, which will also
ensure effects on nearby residents are minimised. A condition is also attached to mitigate
against the loss of TV reception.
Overall the scheme complies with the principles set out in Places for All and Places for
Living. In terms of distance separation guidelines, between the front of the Brolly Works
and proposed apartments on the opposite side of Well Lane, there would be a minimum of
8m. This is considerably less than your Committee's normal distance separation guidelines.
However, Places for Living advises that these guidelines can be relaxed to the fronts of
houses. The surrounding area is also characterised by buildings to back of pavement and
the Digbeth, Deritend, Bordesley High Streets Conservation Area - Character Appraisal and
Management Plan advises that buildings should generally be built to back of pavement.
Setting back the upper floor facing Well Lane also reduces the impact of overlooking. I
therefore consider that there are good reasons for relaxing the guidance in this instance.
Ecology
An ecological assessment has been undertaken, based on an extended Phase 1 Habitat
survey and bat surveys. The site is dominated by buildings and hardstanding with limited
space for vegetation but there is some potential for roosting bats and "urban" bird species.
Detailed bat surveys found no evidence of roosting bats, although there are buildings on
site with moderate/low potential and bat activity has been recorded in the vicinity. Mitigation
measures are therefore required to address potential impacts on bats and nesting birds -
eg disturbance to/loss of roosting/nesting habitat. A range of measures are set out in the
ecological assessment and accompanying appendices; these measures are sufficient to
adequately address any adverse impacts and to secure habitat enhancement. Conditions
are attached to secure these mitigation measures.
Planning Obligations
The UDP at paragraphs 8.1 - 8.54 sets out the City Council's policy toward Planning
Obligations. In addition, the City Council's affordable housing policy applies as the number
of apartments exceeds the threshold. The City Council's Public Open Space in New
Residential Development does not apply as less than 20 dwellings are proposed;
nevertheless the applicant is proposing a new public square within the site. Overall the
value (excluding the annual cost of the affordable retail and business units) of the S106
package is over £2.5m and comprises the following.
Affordable housing - whereas affordable housing policy requires a minimum 35% provision,
the applicant is proposing to provide all 15 units as affordable housing consisting of shared
ownership and intermediate market rent at a discount of 50% Each apartment would also
have an allocated car parking space - approximate cost £1m.
Affordable retail and business units - the applicant is proposing that 50% of the retail units
and 25% of the gross external floorspace of the Digbeth Cold Store building, be offered to
independent retailers and start up business at a discount of 30% below market rent. I
welcome this initiative that will help independent and start up businesses. However, the
developer wishes to restrict the occupiers to a specified industry / sector and I would wish
to ensure that this is not too restrictive - approximate cost £75,000 per annum.
Local employment and training - in accordance with figure 8.1 of the UDP - Examples of
Planning Obligations which may be sought - the developer is willing to enter an obligation
to promote local employment and training.
Page 23 of 35
Archaeology - in accordance with the policy 3.32 of the UDP and the Archaeology Strategy
SPG the applicant is willing to provide an archaeological interpretation board of the
archaeological excavation works that will be required as a condition - approximate cost
£3,000.
Public art and lighting - as the UDP seeks the provision of public art and lighting as a part
of major new developments, the applicant is willing for a remake of the JFK Memorial
mosaic (formerly at Snowhill) to be installed within the development, although the cost of
installation will be met by the Snowhill developer, as per the legal agreement entered into
for that scheme. If, for any reason, this is not feasible, then the applicant is proposing to
display within the development site public work(s) of art owned by the City Council. With
regard to lighting, the applicant has commissioned a firm of lighting specialists to prepare
an imaginative lighting strategy and this will be conditioned to ensure it is implemented as
part of the overall development. The cost of the public art and lighting scheme would be in
the region of £450,000.
Public open space - within the development, about 30% of the site is open space,
comprising new routes through the site linking Park Street with Allison Street and a new
central space Orwell Place. In addition, the developer is willing to allow 24 hour pedestrian
public access through the site. The cost of these works is in the region of £500,000.
Shopmobility - given the mix of commercial uses, sloping nature of the site and proximity to
the Bull Ring, the developer is willing to contribute £25,000. These monies would be paid in
two equal amounts with the first payment being made prior to first occupation of any part of
the development and the second payment 12 months after.
Off site highway works - detailed plans of the proposed Section 278 scheme have been
submitted to Transportation Development. The cost of these works, which includes Digbeth
pavement widening, relocation / replacement bus stops and junction improvements, is in
the region of £375,000. These works will be secured via a condition rather than through the
S106 legal agreement.
Transportation contribution - given the city centre location of the development and its
proximity to train stations, Digbeth Coach station and numerous nearby bus services, in
accordance with the UDP, I consider that it is appropriate to seek a financial contribution
toward public transport. There is no policy formula for calculating the level of contribution
but the applicant is willing to contribute £200,000.
Phasing - it is proposed to build out the development in 3 phases, with the listed Digbeth
Coldstore element being within Phase 1 to ensure its early refurbishment. In addition each
phase of the development includes part of the public realm ensuring that it is delivered in a
timely way. I would however, suggest a clause be added in the legal agreement to ensure
that each phase of the public realm is substantially completed before any part of that phase
can be occupied.
Digbeth-Deritend Study - the City Council has commissioned a Highways and Urban
Design Study for Digbeth - Deritend, which the developer is willing to contribute £50,000
towards, subject to the applicants consultants being involved in the study.
St Martin's Church - to support the development the applicant is willing to contribute
£10,000 towards the running of the café, which is a valued local asset.
When the application was considered by your Committee as an Issues Report, your
Committee were supportive of the S106 offer, in particular, the provision of 100% affordable
Page 24 of 35
housing and the remake of the JFK Memorial mosaic. If it is not possible to remake the JKK
Memorial mosaic, your Committee referred to the possibility of accommodating the statue
of George Dawson, the 19th century nonconformist minister, which was previously in
Victoria Square. The S106 Heads of Terms makes provision for this. Overall, I consider that
the S106 offer is comprehensive and meets all the policy requirements.
Sustainability
The proposed development is a positive move toward sustainability. The proposals involve
redevelopment of an under used, highly accessible city centre site, with a high density
mixed use development. The proposal will bring the redundant listed Cold Store building
back into beneficial use. The scheme includes retention and refurbishment of the front
sections of 135-136 Digbeth and the façade of 138-139 Digbeth.
The development will be provided with heating and cooling by an Aquifer Thermal Energy
Storage (ATES), which relies on heat exchange between the groundwater beneath the site,
and heating and cooling demands of the development. This is a completely renewable
energy resource, which, in conjunction with the Combined Heat and Power (CHP) plant,
provides the development with an energy efficient system with a large renewable energy
component. Additionally, the scheme includes extensive green and brown roof.
It is the intention of the developer that the office aspects of the development will achieve a
BREEAM rating of "excellent" and that the residential units will achieve Code for
Sustainable Homes Level 4 standard.
Conclusion
The Regional Spatial Strategy seeks to continue to develop Birmingham's role as a major
Regional capital of European and international standing by providing future development
opportunities and supporting infrastructure. The current policy framework at the local level
promotes the expansion of City Centre uses beyond the traditional core through
appropriate developments. The proposed redevelopment of this site is in principle
supported as it contributes to the expansion of City Centre uses beyond the traditional core
and opens up areas to the south. Such an approach is in line with current and future
ambitions for the city.
Turning to the tall building policy, paragraph 15.22 advises within the City Centre that
buildings should be no more than up to 8 storeys but that in some special circumstances
high rise development providing a landmark building of exceptional architectural quality
may be appropriate. The site lies outside the Central Ridge Zone as set out in High Places
SPG, in which case the SPG advises that proposals for tall buildings should be considered
on their own merits. Conservation Area policy also advises that building heights should
normally be restricted to 6 storeys. However, I consider that the proposed tower marks the
end of a major approach into the city centre along the A41 corridor, the tower is of
exceptional design quality and it is an unmissable 3D signpost of the City's only surviving
remnant of the medieval burgage plot system. I am therefore of the view that the proposal
accords with the UDP policy and High Places because it complies with the exceptions
contained in the policies and meets the criteria set out in the policy. There is therefore no
departure from the UDP or High Places SPG.
The design of the scheme includes significant sustainable features including an Aquifer
Thermal Energy Storage system and Combined Heat and Power. The scheme also
includes extensive green and brown roofs. These features will assist in making the scheme
a one of the most sustainable developments within the city and a benchmark for other
developments.
Page 25 of 35
Whilst objections have been received to the design of the scheme, in particular, is scale
and massing, I concur with the views of CABE that the scheme to be well considered and
an holistic response to multiple complex issues. In particular, CABE consider that the form
and sculptural quality of the tall building and the balanced massing composition of the lower
buildings are successful. Subject to a condition to secure further details to ensure a high
quality scheme, I consider that the proposed development will preserve and enhance the
Conservation area and setting on nearby listed buildings.
I share of the views of English Heritage that the engine and boiler rooms are lesser
structures and that there demolition will allow reuse of the main listed Cold Store building.
The retention of the Cold Store and the incorporation of the locally listed buildings in the
scheme is a positive contribution to retaining parts of Birmingham's historic character.
Furthermore, I consider that subject to a condition to secure further details, I consider that
the proposed works to the Cold Store will preserve and enhance both the building and its
setting.
The site benefits from excellent accessibility being close to the City Centre, New Street and
Moor Street railway stations, Digbeth Coach station and numerous bus services.
Transportation Development concur with the applicants Transportation Assessment, which
concludes that the scheme is not likely to generate additional traffic as people are likely to
walk, cycle and use public transport to gain access to the site. A number of measures are
therefore proposed to improve accessibility, which will be secured via conditions and legal
agreement.
Concern has been raised about the low levels of on site parking, however, the level of
parking is in accordance with current and previous draft parking guidelines, which set
maximum car parking levels. In addition, within walking distance of the site there are a
considerable number of car parking spaces, which BCC car parking surveys confirm that on
a typical weekday, just under half of these spaces are available. I therefore consider that
the level of parking is acceptable.
Objections have been raised to the scheme from owners / occupiers of the Brolly Works on
the opposite side of Well Lane. I note their concerns and amendments have been received
that improves light to these windows. Whilst the distance separation between the proposed
elevation facing Well Lane and the opposing façade of the Brolly Works is well below your
Committee's guidelines, Places for Living does advise that this should be more strictly
applied to the rear of properties. Furthermore, the Digbeth, Deritend, Bordesley High Street
Character Appraisal and Management Plan, advises that buildings should be built to back
of pavement throughout the conservation area. Conditions are attached to safeguard the
amenities of local residents from construction nuisance and light pollution.
In support of the application a comprehensive S106 package of benefits has been
negotiated, which meets your Committee's policy requirements. It is therefore
recommended that this application be approved subject to completion a satisfactory legal
agreement and the Department for Communities and Local Government not intervening in
the listed building consent application for the Cold Store building.
Recommendation
Deferral
I. That consideration of application no. C/00295/09/FUL be deferred pending the
completion of a section 106 planning obligation to secure the following:
Page 26 of 35
a) 15 affordable housing units consisting of shared ownership and / or intermediate market
rent at a discount of 50%, or such other figure as shall be agreed in writing between the
parties (and Chief Housing Officer) provided that any revised figure has been approved by
the Council's Planning Committee. Each apartment to have an allocated car parking space;
b) 50% of all the A1 retail units and 25% of the gross external floorspace of the Digbeth
Cold Store building, be offered to independent retailers and start up business at a discount
of 30% below market rent;
c) Local employment and training provisions;
d) Provision of an archaeological interpretation board;
e) Inclusion of a remake of the Kennedy Memorial within the scheme (with the cost of
installation to be covered by the Snowhill developer) and its future maintenance. If for any
reason this is not feasible then to display within the development site public work(s) of art
owned by the City Council;
f) Provision of new public open space with 24 hour pedestrian only public access through
the site;
g) A financial contribution of £25,000 to be paid in two equal instalments with the first
payment being made prior to first occupation of any part of the development and the
second payment 12 months after (index linked to construction costs from the date of the
committee resolution to the date on which payment is made) towards the provision and/or
improvement of Shopmobility (and the maintenance thereof) or to be spent on any other
purpose that shall be agreed in writing between the Council and the party responsible for
paying the sum provided that any alternative spend purpose has been approved by the
Council's Planning Committee.
h) A financial contribution of £200,000 to be paid in three equal instalments upon
implementation of each of the three phases of the development (index linked to
construction costs from the date of the committee resolution to the date on which payment
is made) towards the provision and/or improvement of public transport (and the
maintenance thereof), or to be spent on any other purpose that shall be agreed in writing
between the Council and the party responsible for paying the sum provided that any
alternative spend purpose has been approved by the Council's Planning Committee.
i) Phasing of the development;
j) A financial contribution of £50,000 to be paid upon the grant of planning consent or final
determination of any legal challenge, whichever is the later, (index linked to construction
costs from the date of the committee resolution to the date on which payment is made)
towards the Digbeth-Deritend Highways and Townscape Study (subject to the applicants'
approved consultants undertaking part of the wider study to the sum of £50,000), or to be
spent on any other purpose that shall be agreed in writing between the Council and the
party responsible for paying the sum provided that any alternative spend purpose has been
approved by the Council's Planning Committee.
k) A financial contribution of £10,000 to be paid upon implementation (index linked to
construction costs from the date of the committee resolution to the date on which payment
is made) towards the running of St Martin's Church cafe, or to be spent on any other
purpose that shall be agreed in writing between the Council and the party responsible for
Page 27 of 35
paying the sum provided that any alternative spend purpose has been approved by the
Council's Planning Committee.
II. In the absence of the planning obligation being completed to the satisfaction of the Local
Planning Authority within a period of 3 months from the date of this resolution planning
permission be REFUSED for the following reason [s];
a) In the absence of a legal agreement to secure affordable housing, the proposal conflicts
with policy 5.37 of the adopted Unitary Development Plan and Affordable Housing SPG.
b) In the absence of a legal agreement to secure an archaeological interpretation board,
the proposal conflicts with policy 3.32 of the adopted Unitary Development Plan and
Conservation and Archaeological SPG's.
c) In the absence of a legal agreement to secure public art, the proposal conflicts with
policy 3.15 of the adopted Unitary Development Plan.
d) In the absence of a legal agreement to secure public transport improvements, the
proposal conflicts with policy 6.20A of the adopted Unitary Development Plan.
III. That the Corporate Director of Governance be authorised to prepare, seal and
complete the planning obligation.
IV. That in the event of the planning obligation being completed to the satisfaction of the
Local Planning Authority within 3 months of the date of this resolution and the approval of
listed building consent application no. C/00296/09/LBC , favourable consideration be given
to this application, subject to the conditions listed below:
1
PLHBEFORE
Nonstandard Condition To Be Met Heading On Decision
Document
2
PLA209R68
Sightline/Safetraf
3
PLA219R8
Accesall/Disabacc
4
PLA302R20
Samplemat/Safelook
5
PLA401R20
Planting/Safelook
6
PLA606R1
Lighting/Satisite
7
PLA999
Non-Standard
Drainage and construction details, incorporating sustainable drainage principles
and an assessment of the hydrological and hydrogeological context of the
development.
REASON:
To ensure that the development is provided with a satisfactory means of drainage
as well as to reduce the risk of creating or exacerbating a flooding problem and to
minimize the risk of pollution.
8
PLA999
Non-Standard
The details of any scheme for dewatering the site during construction should be
submitted to the Planning Authority. The scheme shall be carried out in
accordance with the details as approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
REASON:
To protect groundwater and prevent potential impact on neighbouring properties.
9
PLA999
Non-Standard
Details of the new buildings at 1:20 scale (or at a scale to be first agreed in writing
Page 28 of 35
with the Local Planning Authority) showing:-
* the fins and how they integrate with Building A;
* drainage channels;
* curtain walling;
* abutment of the glass to the ground / curtain walling / brickwork;
* winter gardens;
* external columns;
* parapet walls;
* corner junctions;
* balustrading;
* underside of the passage way through Building A;
* staircores (where they are externally visible);
* rear façade of the retained locally listed buildings at 135-136 and 137 Digbeth;
* interface between the retained locally listed buildings and new building A.
REASON:
In order to secure the satisfactory development of the application site.
10
PLA999
Non-Standard
Details of the Cold Store building at 1:20 scale (or at a scale to be first agreed in
writing with the Local Planning Authority) showing:-
* the proposed glazing;
* the proposed abutment of the glass to the ground and brickwork;
* the proposed roof lights.
REASON:
In order to secure the satisfactory development of the application site.
11
PLA999
Non-Standard
No development (including demolition) shall take place until an additional bat
survey and black redstart survey has been undertaken by a suitably qualified
ecologist and a report has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local
Planning Authority. The scope of the survey shall be in line with the details set out
in the Environmental Statement (Section 12, Ecology and Nature Conservation,
prepared by Ecology Consulting). The survey report shall include details of any
necessary mitigation measures, and the development (including demolition) shall
be implemented in accordance with these mitigation measures unless otherwise
approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
REASON:
In order to safeguard protected species.
12
PLA999
Non-Standard
Details of bird nesting structures and bat roost structures, including number,
design, location and post-installation monitoring arrangements.
REASON:
In order to safeguard protected species.
13
PLA999
Non-Standard
Proposed highway works to be carried out to BCC specification at the applicants
expense under a s278 agreement subject to acceptable detailed design and safety
audit. The highway works shall include Traffic Regulation Order provision and
modification, widening the Digbeth footway fronting the site, widening pedestrian
crossing provision within the existing Digbeth/Park Street signal junction, new
access points provided and redundant access points removed, replacement bus
infrastructure, signage and lighting alterations. The development shall not be
occupied until the above package of measures have been agreed in writing by the
Page 29 of 35
City Council and all necessary consents, licences, permits and agreements have
been substantially completed or obtained and all such measures have been
substantially completed in accordance with the approved details.
REASON:
In order to secure the satisfactory development of the application site.
14
PLA999
Non-Standard
The buildings hereby approved shall not be brought into use until a parking and
servicing management strategy has been submitted and approved by the Local
Planning Authority. The use of the building shall cease if either the car park or
servicing is not being operated in accordance with that strategy.
REASON:
In order to prevent the interference with the free flow of traffic in the adjoining
highway(s).
15
PLA999
Non-Standard
Details of the proposed green and brown roofs and roof gardens.
REASON:
In order to secure the satisfactory development of the application site.
16
PLA999
Non-Standard
Details of a Construction Environmental Management Plan to include provisions
for controlling noise nuisance.
REASON:
In order to safeguard the amenities of the occupiers of premises / dwellings in the
vicinity.
17
PLA999
Non-Standard
A full repairs schedule including cleaning method for the retained elements of the
locally listed buildings at 135-136, 137 and 138-139 Digbeth.
REASON:
In order to safeguard the appearance of locally listed buildings.
18
PLA999
Non-Standard
A methodology for assessing television reception and other telecommunications
services in the area both before and upon substantial completion of the buildings.
An assessment of television reception and other telecommunications services in
the area prior to the construction of the buildings shall be carried out in accordance
with the approved methodology and submitted to and approved by the local
planning authority prior to the commencement of the development. An assessment
of television reception and other telecommunications services shall
be carried out upon substantial completion of the buildings in accordance with the
approved methodology and submitted for the approval of the local planning
authority with details of any measures necessary to mitigate loss of reception, prior
to the occupation of the buildings. The applicant prior to first occupation of the
buildings shall implement any mitigation measures submitted to and approved by
the Council.
REASON:
In order to prevent interference with television and other telecommunications
services in the area.
19
PLA999
Non-Standard
No development shall take place until details of the public realm for the whole site
Page 30 of 35
have been agreed, including (where appropriate) details of the hard and soft
landscaping, boundaries, living wall, water feature(s), public art, finishes /
materials, levels and surfacing.
REASON:
In order to secure the satisfactory development of the application site.
20
PLA999
Non-Standard
No development shall commence until the applicants or their agent or successors
in title have secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work,
including excavation, post-excavation analysis and publication of a report, in
accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted to
and approved in writing by the local planning authority.
REASON:
The site is of known archaeological significance and it is important that
archaeological remains are appropriately recorded prior to their damage or
destruction by the development, in accordance with PPG 16 and the Archaeology
Strategy SPG.
21
PLB202R20
Roofbuild/Safelook
22
PLB230R9
Cyclemtn/Cyclefac
23
PLB403R3
Plans Schedule
24
PLB406R20
Storeout/Safelook
25
PLB414R65
Onlycars/Trafflow
26
PLB605R21
Machsite/Safeprem
27
PLB704R21
Reproamp/Safeprem
28
PLB914R206
Travwise / Transport
29
PLB999
Non-Standard
Public sewers cross the site and no buildings shall be erected or trees planted
within 2.5 metres of them.
REASON:
To maintain essential access for maintenance, repair, renewal and to protect the
structural integrity of the public sewerage system.
30
PLB999
Non-Standard
The floor of the underground car park shall be impermeably surfaced and
positively drained to the foul sewer.
REASON:
To protect groundwater quality.
31
PLB999
Non-Standard
A scheme of noise insulation between the commercial and residential premises
shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and
implemented prior to the occupation of the building.
REASON:
In order to secure the satisfactory development of the application site.
32
PLB999
Non-Standard
The rating levels for cumulative noise from all plant and machinery shall not
exceed 10 dB(A) below the existing LA90 at any noise sensitive premises to the
proposed development as assessed in accordance with British Standard 4142
(1997). Alternative levels and monitoring locations may be used subject to the prior
approval of the Local Planning Authority
REASON:
In order to safeguard the amenities of the occupiers of premises / dwelling (s) in
Page 31 of 35
the vicinity.
33
PLB999
Non-Standard
The A3 use hereby permitted shall not be commenced until details of the extract
ventilation system and odour control equipment, including details of any noise
levels and external ducting, have been submitted to and approved by the Local
Planning Authority, and the equipment so approved has been installed. The
extract ventilation system equipment and odour control equipment shall be
operated at all times when cooking is carried out and maintained in accordance
with the manufacturer's instructions. The external ducting shall be removed as
soon as possible when no longer required.
REASON:
In order to safeguard the amenities of the occupiers of premises / dwelling (s) in
the vicinity.
34
PLB999
Non-Standard
The A1 premises shall only be open be for business and there shall only be
deliveries or collections of goods to or from the premises on any day between
07:00 hours and 22:00 hours.
REASON:
In order to safeguard the amenities of the occupiers of premises / dwelling (s) in
the vicinity.
35
PLB999
Non-Standard
The A3 use hereby permitted shall only be open to customers between 07:00
hours until midnight daily.
REASON:
In order to safeguard the amenities of the occupiers of premises / dwelling (s) in
the vicinity.
36
PLB999
Non-Standard
The maximum amount of gross external floorspace falling within class A1 of the
Schedule of the Town and Country Planning Use Classes Order 1987, (or any
order revoking or re-enacting that Order, with or without modification) shall not
exceed 2,500 square metres.
REASON:
In order to define this permission.
37
PLB999
Non-Standard
No more than 50% of the proposed ground floor of the Cold Store building shall be
used for any single one of the following Use Classes authorised by this consent,
namely; A1 retail, A2 financial and professional services, A3 restaurants and cafes,
B1 business space and D1 non-residential institutions.
REASON:
In order to ensure a satisfactory mix of uses is delivered in this development.
38
PLB999
Non-Standard
The car park ramp shall be a maximum gradient of 1 in 7.
REASON:
In order to secure the satisfactory development of the application site.
39
PLB999
Non-Standard
Within one year of first occupation of the first retail units the developer shall
Page 32 of 35
undertake a multi-modal survey of staff and customers visiting the office and retail
units. Details of the proposed surveys, duration and frequency are to be agreed in
writing with the Local Planning Authority before any survey is undertaken.
REASON:
In order to assess the achievement of targets contained within the West Midlands
Local Transport Plan and to inform the on-going monitoring of the Travel Plan.
40
PLD12R54
Tlimit-3/Durat
Reason(s) for Approval
Birmingham City Council grants Planning Permission subject to the condition(s) listed below
(if appropriate). The reason for granting permission is because the development is in
accordance with:
* PPS1 - Delivering Sustainable Development;
* PPS3 - Housing and Circular 06/98 - Planning and Affordable Housing;
* PPG4 - Industrial and Commercial Development and Small Firms;
* PPS6 - Planning for Town Centres;
* PPG13 - Transport;
* PPG15 - Planning and the Historic Environment;
* PPG16 - Archaeology;
* PPS22 - Renewable Energy;
* PPS23 - Planning and Pollution Control;
* PPG24 - Planning and Noise;
* PPS25 - Development and Flood Risk;
* Regional Planning Guidance.
Policies 3.25, 4.33 - 4.35, 4.38 - 4.45, 5.7-5.40 and 7.13-7.20 of the Birmingham Unitary
Development Plan 2005; and the Digbeth Millennium Quarter Plan; The Eastside
Development Framework; Regeneration through Conservation - Birmingham Conservation
Strategy; Archaeology Strategy; Digbeth, Deritend and Bordesley High Streets Character
Appraisal and Management Plan; Places for All; Places for Living; High Places; Lighting
Places; Development involving Former Public Houses; Affordable Housing; Access for
People with Disabilities; Car Park Design Guide which have been adopted as
Supplementary Planning Guidance or Documents.
Redevelopment of this highly accessible underused city site for a high density mixed use
development is consistent with the Regional Spatial Strategy and saved land use policies
contained within the Birmingham Unitary Development Plan. Whilst this site is not identified
as a suitable location for a tall building, a justification has been put forward to meet the
exceptions test and the scheme therefore complies with local policies. Although objections
have been raised to the design of the scheme, it includes significant sustainability measures
and is to a high standard. It will therefore preserve and enhance the character of the
Conservation Area and setting of nearby listed buildings.
The site benefits from excellent accessibility and is unlikely to generate additional traffic as
people are likely to walk, cycle and use public transport. Parking levels are in accordance
with PPG13 and City Council parking standards and there are a considerable number of car
parking spaces available nearby. A number of measures are proposed to improve
accessibility and encourage use of sustainable transport, which are secured through
conditions and S106 legal agreement.
Careful consideration has been given to the impact of the development on the amenities of
nearby residents, particularly within the Brolly Works. Whilst amended plans have been
Page 33 of 35
received to improve daylight to them, a small number of existing windows would still not
meet minimum daylight guidelines. However, high density development is appropriate in the
City Centre and on balance the benefits of developing the site outweigh the loss of light to a
small number of apartments.
An comprehensive S106 package of benefits has been negotiated including affordable
housing and business space, local employment provisions, an archaeological interpretation
board and public art, public open space and monies toward public transport, a highways and
townscape study and local facilities.
Case Officer: David Wells
Ocella_ref
C/00295/09/FUL
Ocella_recipient_name
Alistair Grills Associates
Ocella_recipient_address1
4 Chisholm Road
Ocella_recipient_address2
Richmond
Ocella_recipient_Postcode
TW10 6JH
Ocella_sent
13/05/2009
Page 34 of 35
C/00295/09/FUL
123-143 DIGBETH, 3-5 PARK
STREET, 81-93 ALLISON
STREET,AND ADJOINING
LAND,DIGBETH,BIRMINGHAM, B5
6DR
Page 35 of 35
