In defence of Digbeth...
SCRUFFY in parts it may be, but as a living museum of industrial history, Digbeth is unique. Last summer, Brutiful Birmingham was delighted to be consulted about future plans for the area, alongside respected institutions like Historic England, Birmingham’s Victorian and civic societies, and the Canal and River Trust, together with the city’s conservation and design officers.
A revised planning application has been submitted. But sadly, key points that we and others made have been ignored.
What is the point of a consultation exercise if no notice is taken of the concerns expressed?
This does not sit well with the city council’s stated desire to consult over regeneration through the recently launched ‘Our Future City Plan’.
We expressed concern about the impact of tall, oversized new buildings.
How can it possibly be the case, as claimed in the planning application, that the streetscape will remain as it is when existing buildings will be overwhelmed by new ones of greater mass and height?
The area is currently dominated by relatively low-rise buildings with a particularly interesting and unique skyline. Even the Custard Factory, which currently provides a dramatic focal point, will be lost in the welter of new, higher rise buildings.
Demolition of key post-war buildings obliterates a significant part of the history of the area, leaving a gap in the story that Digbeth tells. Digbeth has been settled since the seventh century.
Existing buildings tell a story that runs from 1368 (The Old Crown Inn – grade II listed) to the late 20th century.
The 21st century certainly needs to be part of that story, but not at the expense of the post-war buildings which represent a period of growth and progress in Birmingham.
The planning application claims that “every period of architecture currently represented continues to be represented”.
How can this be the case when approximately 80 per cent of the buildings to be demolished are 20th century?
We are especially concerned about Rea Studios in Floodgate Street, a particularly fine example of Modernist style, and Progress Works, a powerful low-rise building on a prominent site in Heath Mill Lane.
Rea Studios is part of the significant presence of the Wild conglomeration of buildings. That this building is to be demolished to accommodate a new road to be built straight through the middle of the
area seems totally insensitive. Disastrously, it will cut the area in half, dramatically changing its ambience. Retention of just these two buildings would recognise in a small way the part played by post-war architecture in Digbeth’s history.
The relevant Conservation Area Character Appraisal makes plain that retention is to be favoured over demolition.
It states that this applies to buildings that are important in themselves and to ‘‘buildings of contextual or group value’,’ that is buildings which are important within the streetscape or as part of a series of buildings, like the WJ Wild buildings.
Retention is critical environmentally, too, when the embedded energy in the processes of demolition and rebuilding is taken into consideration, as it should be if Birmingham’s stated aim is for carbon neutrality.
The revised planning application has done little to take on board the fast-changing world of work and retail.
Why not capitalise on the romance of old industrial buildings, railway arches, canals and the old workshops highlighted by The Sunday Times when Digbeth came top of its 2020 Best Places to Live in the UK list? Digbeth would be the ideal place to
think in terms of local living, with local working and artisan retail in a context architecturally and historically suited to such a vibrant, 21st century environment.
It is this environment that fosters emerging creative businesses by providing affordable city centre premises and the close community of related trades and enterprises.
Digbeth contains post-war industrial buildings which are worth keeping not just as monuments to our industrial heritage.
They are perfectly sound buildings in which many small businesses have invested their futures.
If such vital points in response to planning applications have little impact, will the city’s consultation on the ‘Our Future City Plan’ make any difference?
The time frame for responding to the first document in the consultation process was remarkably short. ‘Shaping Our City Together’ promotes Digbeth as a ‘‘Cultural Hub … with potential for a destination development with international appeal’’.
There is no acknowledgement of the part Digbeth currently plays in Birmingham’s creative industries. Digbeth is already a cultural hub and has the unique, distinctive character the document is proposing for the central districts of the city.
Ian Ward, leader of the council,
claims that “Birmingham’s future success is a common endeavour”, so it is up to us to make our voices heard.
The significance of Digbeth goes far beyond its value as prime real estate, recently realised with the advent of HS2.
We are delighted that the plans include the opening up of more green space and bringing people back to live in the area, but wholesale regeneration that drives out the existing creative enterprises and demolishes the buildings on which Digbeth’s unique character depends will destroy an area where industrial heritage and creative industries go hand in hand.
Will consultation over Birmingham’s ‘Our Future City Plan’ reverse this trend? We hope so.
■ More information on the ‘Our Future City Plan’ can be found online by searching ‘Official launch of Our Future City Plan - Central Birmingham 2040 | Our Future City Plan | Birmingham City Council.
■ Brutiful Birmingham is happy to announce that this is the 50th column we have written for the Birmingham Post. We should love to hear from you: www.facebook.com/Brutiful-Birmingham, follow us on twitter: twitter.com/brutifulbrum, or email us at: brutiful2015@gmail.com.