DOCSLIB.ORG

Birmingham City Council Planning Committee 15 October 2015

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Birmingham City Council Planning Committee 15 October 2015 Birmingham City Council Planning Committee 15 October 2015 I submit for your consideration the attached reports for the North West team. Recommendation Report No. Application No / Location / Proposal Refuse 8 2015/07000/PA 142-144 Heathfield Road Handsworth Birmingham B19 1JF Demolition of existing building and erection of new building for use as MOT testing and vehicle repairs (sui generis) and new boundary treatment. Approve – Conditions 9 2015/05912/PA Land off Daisy Drive, Lakes Road, Parkhouse Drive, Osier Grove Wyrley Birch Birmingham B23 7UD Minor Material Amendment to planning approval 2012/07432/PA to change proposed tenure of 33 dwellings for open market sale to affordable rent so that all remaining 50 units in phase 2 are affordable rent, repositioning of plots 2,3 & 4 on site 7 and new pedestrian gate to park from highway at site 7 Defer 10 2015/02526/PA New Hall Hotel New Hall Drive Sutton Coldfield Birmingham B76 1QX Erection of two storey extension to western elevation to provide 10 additional bedrooms, and alterations to parking to provide 7 additional spaces Page 1 of 2 Director of Planning and Regeneration Refer to DCLG 11 2015/02505/PA New Hall Hotel New Hall Drive Sutton Coldfield Birmingham B76 1QX Listed building consent for the erection of two storey extension to western elevation to provide 10 additional bedrooms, and alterations to parking to provide 7 additional spaces Approve – Conditions 12 2015/06290/PA Little Oak 9 Grounds Road Four Oaks Sutton Coldfield Birmingham B74 4SE Erection of single storey side extension and porch to front Page 2 of 2 Director of Planning and Regeneration Committee Date: 15/10/2015 Application Number: 2015/07000/PA Accepted: 21/08/2015 Application Type: Full Planning Target Date: 16/10/2015 Ward: Lozells and East Handsworth 142-144 Heathfield Road, Handsworth, Birmingham, B19 1JF Demolition of existing building and erection of new building for use as MOT testing and vehicle repairs (sui generis) and new boundary treatment. Applicant: Mr Mohammed Nadeem 182 Crompton Road, Handsworth, Birmingham, B20 3QY Agent: Mr Hanif Ghumra 733 Walsall Road, Great Barr, Birmingham, B42 1EN Recommendation Refuse 1. Proposal 1.1. Consent is sought for the erection of a single storey detached building for use as MOT testing and vehicle repairs and new front boundary treatment. The building would measure 10.3m by 15.7m and 4.6m in overall height. The building would have red facing brickwork and a steel panel roof. 1.2. The building would be located to the rear of the site with the parking on the frontage. 1.3. 4 off road parking spaces would be provided. It is proposed to increase the number of full time employees from 2 to 4. The proposed opening times would be 0900-1800 Monday to Saturday. 1.4. A planning statement has been submitted with the current proposal which includes a petition in support with 28 signatures of neighbouring residents. 1.5. Link to Documents 2. Site & Surroundings 2.1. The application site is located within a mixed residential and commercial area currently used for the parking, washing and servicing of lorries, cars and vans. 2.2. The site has a main frontage to Heathfield Road with the boundary comprising a 3m high metal sheet fence and gate. Adjacent to the site is a two storey public house on the junction with Finch Road. Page 1 of 6 2.3. The site accommodates a single storey building in the north west corner of the site in use as an office and staff room. In the south west corner is a double height structure which is used for the repair of vehicles and includes an inspection pit. Along the western boundary wall are marked out car parking spaces. 2.4. To the east of the site is a modern 3 storey residential terrace. 2.5. Site Location Map 3. Planning History 3.1. 02/06/2015 - 2015/02970/PA - Change of use from car park (Sui Generis) to MOT and vehicle repair (Sui Generis), and erection of a single storey detached building with alterations to boundary treatment at front elevation – Withdrawn. 3.2. 03/07/2014 - 2014/01436/PA - Lawful Development Certificate issued for the use of the site for the parking, washing and servicing of lorries, cars and vans in excess of a period of 10 years. 4. Consultation/PP Responses 4.1. Surrounding occupiers, residents associations, local members and MP notified – No comments received. 4.2. Transportation Development – No objection subject to amendment and conditions relating to the number of working bay to be limited to only one, secure cycle storage to be provided at appropriate location, parking spaces to be formally marked out and parking & vehicle circulation areas not to be used for any other purpose and to be kept free of any obstruction, the existing level of pedestrian visibility splay to be maintained as minimum at the vehicular access. 4.3. Regulatory Services – Recommend refusal based on noise, disturbance and vehicle fumes. 5. Policy Context 5.1. Birmingham Unitary Development Plan (2005), SPG: Places for All (2001), 45 Degree Code, NPPF (2012) and Draft Birmingham Development Plan. 6. Planning Considerations 6.1. The proposal should be assessed against the objectives of the policy context set out above. 6.2. The main issues for consideration are the impact on residential amenity, highway and pedestrian safety and visual amenity. 6.3. Paragraph 123 of the NPPF (2012) states planning policies and decisions should aim to: • Avoid noise from giving rise to significant adverse impacts on health and quality of life as a result of new development. • Mitigate and reduce to a minimum other adverse impacts on health and quality of life arising from noise from new development, including through the use of conditions. Page 2 of 6 • Recognise that development will often create some noise and existing businesses wanting to develop in continuance of their business should not have unreasonable restrictions put on them because of changes in nearby land uses since they were established. • Identify and protect areas of tranquillity which have remained relatively undisturbed by noise and are prized for their recreational and amenity value for this reason. 6.4. Residential amenity Regulatory Services recommend refusal of the proposed development. I concur with this view. Residential dwellings are located directly adjacent to the application site on Heathfield Road. The development is likely to intensify levels of activity on the site which would result in an unacceptable increase in noise nuisance and disturbance to adjoining residents. I also consider that there are no mitigation measures that could be implemented which would overcome these concerns. A noise assessment has not been requested because Regulatory Services consider that it would not overcome their clear objections on noise nuisance grounds. 6.5. The breach of the 45 Degree code in relation to the adjoining dwelling would be no worse than the impact of the existing building on the site therefore it is considered the outlook and overshadowing of 146 Heathfield Road would be no worse than existing. 6.6. Highway and pedestrian safety Transportation Development raise no objection to the proposed development subject to amendment and conditions relating to the number of working bay to be limited to only one, secure cycle storage to be provided at appropriate location, parking spaces to be formally marked out and parking & vehicle circulation areas not to be used for any other purpose and to be kept free of any obstruction and the existing pedestrian visibility splay to be maintained as a minimum at the vehicular access. I concur with this view. 6.7. The application site has an existing footway crossing off Heathfield Road and there are no controls over parking on this part of Heathfield Road, apart from the junction radii. I therefore consider that the levels of traffic and parking demand generated are unlikely to prejudice highway safety. 6.8. Design I consider the alterations to the boundary treatment on the frontage would improve the visual amenity of the site removing the 3m high metal sheet fence and gate and replacing it with a low brick wall with railings and gate. 7. Conclusion 7.1. I recognise that the proposed scheme would facilitate some improvements to the appearance of the site. It would also allow the imposition of planning conditions over the hours of use (the lawful development certificate does not control hours of use). However, I consider that those benefits are outweighed by the intensification of a non-conforming use which would result and the unacceptable increase in levels of noise and disturbance to adjoining residents. For these reasons the proposed development would conflict with the policies and principles contained with the adopted UDP (2005), NPPF (2012) and Places for All. I therefore recommend that this application be refused. Page 3 of 6 8. Recommendation 8.1. That planning permission is refused. Reason for Refusal 1 The proposed development would result in the intensification of a non-conforming use which would adversely affect the amenities of occupiers of dwellings in the vicinity by reason of increased noise and general disturbance. As such the proposal would be contrary to Paragraphs 3.8 and 3.10 of the Birmingham UDP 2005 and the National Planning Policy Framework. Case Officer: Stephanie Salmon Page 4 of 6 Photo(s) Figure 1 – Application site with residential dwellings adjacent. Page 5 of 6 Location Plan 179 24 98 196a 196 2 20 1 27 LB 19 18 4 The Sidings 3 17 16 15 14 12a 171 6 5 15 17 182 CROMPTON ROAD 9 121.3m 11 11 12 13 10 174 12 165 8 5 Myrtle Grove 7 1 1 3 FLADBURY GARDENS 2 5 1 162 7 155b 6 157 158 155a 155 Builder's 140a Yard 153 147a 146 147 140 145 PH 138a 138 TCB 136a 137 136 Games Court Playground Health Centre 123 Games Court FINCH ROAD HEATHFIELD ROAD 113 129 1 107 134 107a 6 Harold Terrace W Garage 124 122 Mayfield 118 Centre 105a Heathfield 105 Primary School 103 59 61 Childrens Centre Lime Tree 127.1m 116 El Sub Sta 50 127 1m This map is reproduced from the Ordnance Survey Material with the permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office © Crown Copyright.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • West Midlands Police and Crime Commissioner Register of Gifts And
    West Midlands Police and Crime Commissioner Register of Gifts and Hospitality - Police and Crime Commissioner and Deputy Police and Crime Commissioner Note: This register contains details of declarations made by the PCC and DPCC and includes details of offers of gifts and hospitality not accepted Name Name of person or organisation Details of Gift or hospitality Estimate of value Date offer received Comments Funeral for Don Jones partner to Cllr Diana refreshments offered after Bob Jones Holl-Allen funeral £10.00 23/11/2012 declined passed to office staff for Bob Jones Harmeet Singh Bhakna Punjabi News Indian Sweets £5.00 23/11/2012 consumption Bob Jones Asian Business Forum Samosas and pakoras offered £7.00 28/11/2012 refreshments consumed Bob Jones Home office PCC welcome Buffet lunch provided £7.00 03/12/2012 refreshments consumed Bob Jones APPG on Polcing meeting Buffett and wine offered £10.00 03/12/2012 buffet consumed, wine declined Bob Jones Connect Public Affairs lunch buffet offered £12.00 04/12/2012 Buffet consumed Annual Karate Awards presentation Bob Jones evening food and drink offered £12.00 07/12/2012 food and drink declined invite to Brisitsh Police Symphony Orchestra BPSO accepted but ticket unavailable on Yvonne Mosquito Steria sponsors Proms night special £21.00 08/12/2012 the evening Gavin Chapman and John Torrie - Steria Invite to supper at Hotel du Vin Yvonne Mosquito sponsors flollowing BPSO Proms £30.00 08/12/2012 declined Christmas lunch and drink offered. Small comemorative food consumed, Alcohol declined, Bob
    [Show full text]
  • Local Environmental Management Plan Birmingham City Council
    High Speed Rail (London-West Midlands) Local Environmental Management Plan Birmingham City Council December 2017 www.gov.uk/hs2 High Speed Two (HS2) Limited has been tasked by the Department for Transport (DfT) with managing the delivery of a new national high speed rail network. It is a non-departmental public body wholly owned by the DfT. High Speed Two (HS2) Limited, Two Snowhill Snow Hill Queensway Birmingham B4 6GA Telephone: 08081 434 434 General email enquiries: [email protected] Website: www.gov.uk/hs2 A report prepared by Lang O'Rourke and Mace on behalf of HS2 Ltd. High Speed Two (HS2) Limited has actively considered the needs of blind and partially sighted people in accessing this document. The text will be made available in full on the HS2 website. The text may be freely downloaded and translated by individuals or organisations for conversion into other accessible formats. If you have other needs in this regard please contact High Speed Two (HS2) Limited. © High Speed Two (HS2) Limited, 2017, except where otherwise stated. Copyright in the typographical arrangement rests with High Speed Two (HS2) Limited. This information is licensed under the Open Government Licence v2.0. To view this licence, visit www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government- licence/ version/2 or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or e-mail: [email protected]. Where we have identified any third-party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. Printed in Great Britain on paper containing at least 75% recycled fibre.
    [Show full text]
  • APPENDIX 1 Wards Where FPN's Are Issued Constituency Ward Apr May
    APPENDIX 1 Wards where FPN's are issued Constituency Ward Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Total Edgbaston Bartley Green 0 0 0 0 Edgbaston 0 0 0 0 Harborne 0 0 0 0 Quinton 0 0 0 0 Erdington Erdington 0 1 0 1 Kingstanding 0 1 0 1 Stockland Green 0 0 2 2 Tyburn 0 1 1 2 Hall Green Hall Green 0 1 0 1 Moseley And Kings Heath 2 0 0 2 Sparkbrook 0 1 1 2 Springfield 0 0 0 0 Hodge Hill Bordesley Green 0 0 0 0 Hodge Hill 0 0 0 0 Shard End 1 4 0 5 Washwood Heath 1 0 0 1 Ladywood Aston 0 2 0 2 Ladywood 459 436 256 1,151 Nechells 5 3 0 8 Soho 5 1 0 6 Northfield Kings Norton 0 0 3 3 Longbridge 0 1 0 1 Northfield 2 0 0 2 Weoley 2 0 0 2 Perry Barr Handsworth Wood 0 0 1 1 Lozells And East Handsworth 0 1 1 2 Oscott 0 2 0 2 Perry Barr 1 0 1 2 Selly Oak Billesley 1 1 0 2 Bournville 0 0 1 1 Brandwood 0 0 0 0 Selly Oak 0 0 1 1 Sutton Coldfield Sutton Four Oaks 0 0 0 0 Sutton New Hall 0 0 0 0 Sutton Trinity 0 0 0 0 Sutton Vesey 0 0 0 0 Yardley Acocks Green 6 6 1 13 Sheldon 0 1 0 1 South Yardley 1 2 1 4 Stechford And Yardley North 1 0 0 1 Total 487 465 270 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,222 APPENDIX 2 WARD OF PERSON RECEIVING FIXED PENALTY NOTICES BY CONSTITUENCY/WARD It is not possible to provide this information currently and will be provided in the coming weeks Constituency Ward Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Total Edgbaston BARTLEY GREEN 0 EDGBASTON 0 HARBORNE 0 QUINTON 0 Erdington ERDINGTON 0 KINGSTANDING 0 STOCKLAND GREEN 0 TYBURN 0 Hall Green HALL GREEN 0 MOSELEY AND KINGS HEATH 0 SPARKBROOK 0 SPRINGFIELD 0 Hodge Hill BORDESLEY GREEN
    [Show full text]
  • Birmingham City Council Planning Committee 27 May 2021
    Birmingham City Council Planning Committee 27 May 2021 I submit for your consideration the attached reports for the North West team. Recommendation Report No. Application No / Location / Proposal Approve - Conditions 9 2020/08399/PA Land off Witton Road and Tame Road Witton Birmingham B6 Development of a new Inner City Football Academy, erection of building containing indoor 3G training pitch, changing facilities, parents lounge and ancillary office space, creation of outdoor 3G training pitch, two accesses, two car parks, associated hard and soft landscaping and lighting and resurfacing of staff car park to west of River Tame Approve - Conditions 10 2021/02809/PA Birmingham Alexander Stadium Walsall Road Perry Barr Birmingham B42 2LR Reserved Matters application following 2019/07968/PA for the installation of temporary lighting and catenary structures required to host the Commonwealth Games 2022. Approve - Conditions 11 2021/00528/PA Boldmere Gate Sutton Park Stonehouse Road Sutton Coldfield Birmingham B73 6LH Alterations and refurbishment of existing car park Page 1 of 1 Director, Inclusive Growth (Acting) Committee Date: 27/05/2021 Application Number: 2020/08399/PA Accepted: 23/11/2020 Application Type: Full Planning Target Date: 04/05/2021 Ward: Aston Land off Witton Road and Tame Road, Witton, Birmingham, B6 Development of a new Inner City Football Academy, erection of building containing indoor 3G training pitch, changing facilities, parents lounge and ancillary office space, creation of outdoor 3G training pitch, two accesses, two car parks, associated hard and soft landscaping and lighting and resurfacing of staff car park to west of River Tame Recommendation Approve subject to Conditions 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Birmingham City Council Report of the Acting
    BIRMINGHAM CITY COUNCIL REPORT OF THE ACTING DIRECTOR OF REGULATION AND ENFORCEMENT TO THE LICENSING AND PUBLIC PROTECTION COMMITTEE 20 JUNE 2018 ALL WARDS PROSECUTIONS AND CAUTIONS – MARCH & APRIL 2018 1. Summary 1.1 This report summarises the outcome of legal proceedings taken by Regulation and Enforcement during the months of March and April 2018. 2. Recommendation 2.1 That the report be noted. Contact Officer: Chris Neville, Acting Director of Regulation and Enforcement Telephone: 0121 464 8640 E-Mail: [email protected] 1 3. Results 3.1 During the months of March and April 2018 the following cases were heard at Birmingham Magistrates Court, unless otherwise stated: . Three Licensing cases were finalised resulting in fines of £1,260 and prosecution costs of £1,268. 14 penalty points were issued and a total of 18 months driving disqualifications were imposed. 37 simple cautions were administered as set out in Appendix 1. 127 Environmental Health cases resulted in fines of £292,196. Prosecution costs of £43,959 were awarded. 9 months imprisonment suspended for 2 years, 12 months disqualification from driving and forfeiture of a vehicle. 4 months imprisonment suspended for 2 years, 4 months tagged curfew and 6 months disqualification from driving. Compensation for clean-up costs in the sum of £1,644 was awarded. One simple caution was administered as set out in Appendix 2. Three Trading Standards cases were finalised resulting in fines of £37,760 and prosecution costs of £12,316. Compensation in the sum of £7,577 was awarded. No simple cautions were administered as set out in Appendix 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Local Government Boundary Commission for England Report No
    Local Government Boundary Commission For England Report No. 5 2 Principal Area Boundary Review CITY of BIRMINGHAM and the METROPOLITAN BOROUGH of SOUHULL LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOH ENGLAND REPORT NO. LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOR ENGLAND CHAIRMAN Mr G J Ellerton CMC MBE DEPUTY CHAIRMAN Mr J G Powell FRIGS FSVA MEMBERS Lady Ackner Mr G R Prentice Professor G E Cherry Mr K J L Newell Mr B Scholes QBE THE RT. HON. NICHOLAS RIDLEY MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE ENVIRONMENT INTRODUCTION 1. In a letter dated 31 December 1979, Birmingham City Council requested us to undertake a review of their boundary with Solihull Metropolitaneorough in the vicinity of Kingsleigh Drive, Castle. Bromwich. The request resulted from a petition to the City Council from residents of the Birmingham part of Kingsleigh Drive requesting the Council to apply to us to move the Birmingham boundary to the A452, thereby bringing the whole of Kingsleigh Drive into Solihull. 2. We ascertained that the West Midlands County Council supported Birmingham City Council's request for a review in this area. Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council fully supported the review and felt that the boundary should'-be- moved to the M6 Motorway, the north-bound exit road at Junction 5 and the Newport Road, which they considered was the most obvious boundary between the two districts. 3. We examined the City Council's request in the light of section 48(5) of the T-T:II Government Act 1972. We concluded that although all three councils had agreed upon the need for a review it was desirable to have an agreed scheme from the two district authorities, if possible.
    [Show full text]
  • Wolverhampton City Council OPEN EXECUTIVE DECISION ITEM (AMBER)
    Agenda Item: 5 Wolverhampton City Council OPEN EXECUTIVE DECISION ITEM (AMBER) SPECIAL ADVISORY GROUP Date: 28 October 2011 Portfolio(s) ALL Originating Service Group(s) DELIVERY Contact Officer(s)/ SUSAN KEMBREY KEY DECISION: YES Telephone Number(s) 4300 IN FORWARD PLAN: YES Title BOUNDARY COMMISSION REVIEW OF PARLIAMENTARY CONSTITUENCIES – WEST MIDLANDS REGION CONSULTATION ON INITIAL PROPOSALS Recommendation (a) That the initial proposals of the Boundary Commission for England for the review of Parliamentary Constituencies in the West Midland region England as detailed in Sections 2 and 3 of the report be noted (b) That the Special Advisory Group recommend Cabinet to invite the three political groups to formulate their individual views on the proposals set out in the consultation paper for submission to the Boundary Commission direct. 1 1.0 PURPOSE 1.1 To advise of the consultation exercise on the initial proposals of the Boundary Commission for the review of Parliamentary Constituencies in the West Midland region and the date to respond to the consultation. 2.0 BACKGROUND 2.1 The Boundary Commission for England (BCE) is an independent and impartial non- departmental public body which is responsible for reviewing Parliamentary constituency boundaries in England. The BCE conduct a review of all the constituencies in England every five years. Their role is to make recommendations to Parliament for new constituency boundaries. The BCE is currently conducting a review of all Parliamentary constituency boundaries in England based on new rules laid down by Parliament. These rules involve a reduction in the number of constituencies in England (from 533 to 502) and stipulate that every constituency, apart from two specific exemptions, must have an electorate no smaller than 72,810 and no larger than 80,473.
    [Show full text]
  • Sutton Coldfield Town Council Referendum Group
    Pascoe, Mark From: Ken Rushton Sent: 27 September 2015 10:56 To: reviews; Pascoe, Mark Cc: Subject: RE: Birmingham Ward Boundaries - Sutton Coldfield Residents' Submission Hello Mark, Many thanks for the work you are doing. As you can see below and attached, Paul Long has been co-ordinating the formal response of our group. We are a wide group comprising all of the Sutton Forums and Resident Groups and individuals, This covers a large area of Sutton which has a long history as a Town going back before HenryV111 made Sutton a Royal Town because of his contacts here and his hunting in the park. Sutton has recently taken up Government Localism Legislation we have worked closely with the DCLG, and we have been granted Town Status which is currently being legalised. We have attended all of your public meetings, we realise that you have a job to do, and indeed we support your general aims. May I just say that because we are a very close community If we have a red line it is to maintain our existing Royal Sutton Coldfield borders. That has come to us very clearly from our public meetings with residents. Our consultations have brought forward a variance in views, and we would also like to refer you to the comment of Nick Corbett, and Tracy Cattell, who are both within our group and have placed forward valuable comment. I know that all have very much tried to remain within your aims and guidelines. Also we have worked very closely with Councillor Rob Pocock who works closely with us and is very knowledgeable of the general area.
    [Show full text]
  • Birmingham City Council
    BIRMINGHAM CITY COUNCIL ERDINGTON DISTRICT COMMITTEE TUESDAY 24 NOVEMBER 2015 MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE ERDINGTON DISTRICT COMMITTEE HELD ON TUESDAY 24 NOVEMBER 2015 AT 1400 HOURS IN COMMITTEE ROOM 2, THE COUNCIL HOUSE, BIRMINGHAM PRESENT : - Councillor Josh Jones in the Chair; Councillors Robert Alden, Bob Beauchamp, Mick Brown, Lynda Clinton, Des Hughes, Mick Finnegan, Penny Holbrook, Gareth Moore, Gary Sambrook, Mike Sharpe and Ron Storer. ALSO PRESENT :- Mike Davis – District Head (Erdington) John Mole – Ward Support Officer Sarah Stride – Committee Manager ************************************ 301 The Chairman welcomed all those in attendance and advised that this was the first session of District Neighbourhood Challenge and that the issue to be discussed at the meeting was ‘Clean and Green’ as was previously agreed at an all Members meeting. _________________________________________________________________ NOTICE OF RECORDING 302 The Chairman advised that the meeting will be webcast for live or subsequent broadcast via the Council’s internet site (www.birminghamnewsroom.com) and that members of the press / public may record and take photographs. The whole of the meeting will be filmed except where there are confidential or exempt items. _________________________________________________________________ APOLOGIES 303 Apologies were submitted on behalf of Superintendent Brandon Langley, West Midlands Police for his inability to attend the meeting. Apologies for lateness were submitted on behalf of Councillors Robert Alden and Gareth
    [Show full text]
  • 110 Digbeth 10 St Martin-In-The-Bull Ring 11 Moor Street Station 12
    This guided walk explores an often- forgotten corner of Birmingham, Digbeth, charting its transformation from open fields to being one of Britain's industrial powerhouses. Once on the outskirts of a rural market town surrounded by orchards and water meadows, Digbeth developed into a slum in the 19th century with the highest population density the city has ever seen. Today the area is changing again as work gets underway for the new HS2 rail network. Time 1 of hour walk MOLA Headland Start your journey at St Bartholomew's Infrastructure exploring Chapel, follow the map to explore the Birmingham's heritage for HS2 area's lesser-known historical delights. 1 6 St Bartholomew's Chapel River Rea Aqueduct St Bartholomew’s was built in 1749 as The River Rea has long been used as a the chapel of ease for St-Martin-in-the- source of power for watermills rather than Bull Ring and could seat 1800 people. a transport route, it was straightened and Heavily damaged by bombing in World narrowed through the city to increase its War Two it was pulled down in 1943. The power. This aqueduct was designed to Clayton Hotel now stands on the site of safely carry the canal over the river. the chapel. 7 Heath Watermill 2 It's hard to imagine that most of this land Curzon Street Station was undeveloped water meadows in the Built in 1838 it was the end of the London Middles Ages, with a broad river winding to Birmingham Railway and the Grand through it. The Heath watermill was Junction Railway which ran to Liverpool.
    [Show full text]
  • Metro Extension Proposals
    N G R L B G ICK L R Museum T O W ARDW W H ON RD. S A A T D O OAD WOLVE R D H HARDWICK R RHAM E W O LITTLE PTO S H L S W O N ST. T E A A T A I U LH Y O E .P F OU D H R SE A H . R N D N Walsall U R O O L IC AD A D S L R A W T L S L L KEY O Art Galery BR LINC H T ID U O L A STREETLY R . GE N R S A N R D T T N S . B S O O A Walsall I O E L T O A D B E RID E D A OA GEM . N O R AN W Y ST. CHUCKERY D W OLE WALSALL E F L P Metro proposed extension L B C A H R T S U I S . N N Great Barr RouteE C W T TOWN T K K . S C D S T ER ROA . Y E Y S E T R ‘The Grange’ OL N CENTRE D F E Alignment under review/ S . D C A E S B A K V H U P A L IN Theatre TON Blue Coat E T D U L R L A Q N S IL D . H . R O R E R I R O ON Z A subject to change Bracebridge N D A M L C O D Y S D A L C R School G T.
    [Show full text]
  • Birmingham City Council Report to Cabinet 16Th March 2021
    Birmingham City Council Report to Cabinet 16th March 2021 Subject: Future Parks Accelerator (FPA) Programme – Notification of Extension Report of: Director of Neighbourhoods (Acting) Relevant Cabinet Cllr John O’Shea – Street Scene and Parks Member: Councillor Tristan Chatfield – Finance and Resources Relevant O &S Cllr Penny Holbrook – Housing and Neighbourhoods Chair(s): Report author: Hamira Sultan, Consultant in Public Health and FPA Director Tel. 07595090451 Email: [email protected] Are specific wards affected? ☐ Yes ☒ No – All wards If yes, name(s) of ward(s): affected Through testing phase, specific wards of Druids Heath & Monyhull, Brandwood & Kings Heath, Ward End, Perry Common are impacted Is this a key decision? ☒ Yes ☐ No If relevant, add Forward Plan Reference: 008329/2021 Is the decision eligible for call-in? ☒ Yes ☐ No Does the report contain confidential or exempt information? ☐ Yes ☒ No If relevant, provide exempt information paragraph number or reason if confidential : 1 Executive Summary 1.1 The Future Parks Accelerator (FPA) programme has been running in earnest since December 2019, testing key proposals to help the wider Council better see the value of our green spaces. Due to Covid 19, it has been a challenge to implement as much Future Parks Accelerator (FPA) Programme – Notification of Extension Page 1 of 5 of our learning as anticipated. We have an opportunity to extend our funded programme, originally due to finish in May 2021, to March 2022. 2 Recommendations 2.1 That Cabinet approves extension of the programme by accepting additional funding of £204,000. 2.2 That Cabinet notes that Cabinet Members with specific portfolios will take on a leadership role within the five frameworks (see 3.4).
    [Show full text]