Plans for new student blocks in Birmingham’s Gun Quarter have been recommended for approval despite concern over the proposed development’s location. Developers are seeking permission to build two towers, one eight-storey and another 21-storey, to provide 279 bedspaces in Cliveland Street near the canal.
A recently-published council officer’s report said the scheme is able to demonstrate a need for the development and added it would be “very well located” to several city centre campuses. The Canal and River Trust (CRT) objected to the plans however, arguing that the proposed development could create an “overbearing visual impact” and cause harm to the “relatively open” character of the canal corridor near the site.
The report addressed the objection directly and said there are buildings along the canal’s length on both sides. “There is no reason in planning policy terms to protect this site from development in order to preserve the openness to which CRT refers,” it said.
READ MORE: Birmingham Bull Ring Indoor Market plans take huge step forward
“As it passes through the city centre, the canal is typically lined with development. Whilst the heights of buildings proposed now may be greater than in previous times, in my experience a sense of openness is not seen until the canal reaches the suburbs.”
It went on to say that the proposed towers are “appropriately designed” for their location and would be an improvement on much of the existing development lining the canal corridor. The report also acknowledged that the proposals would cause ‘less than substantial harm’ to a number of heritage assets, including Barker Bridge and The Bull pub.
“This harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal,” it continued. “The assets affected are all Grade II Listed and are already impacted by existing modern development and the changing character of their surroundings.”
The report also gave “substantial weight” to the use of a brownfield site to provide housing, which it said there is a “recognised need” for. “I do not consider the harm identified to these heritage assets would be so great as to outweigh the public benefit,” it concluded.
The proposals were therefore recommended for approval, subject to conditions, and will be considered at a planning committee meeting next week on Thursday, January 16.