Page 1 of 23

Committee Date: 20/03/2014 Application Number: 2013/09485/PA

Accepted: 27/12/2013 Application Type: Full Planning

Target Date: 28/03/2014

Ward: Nechells

Land bounded by Lawley Middleway, Curzon Street, Pitt Street and Digbeth Branch Canal, Eastside, Birmingham, B4

Development to provide student residential accommodation (Sui Generis), retailing floorspace (Classes A1 and/or A3) and commercial floorspace (Use Class B1) with associated car parking, landscaping, amenity space and highway works Applicant: Alumno Developments (Birmingham) Ltd

c/o Agent Agent: GL Hearn

20 Soho Square, London, W1D 3QW

Recommendation Approve Subject To Conditions 1. Proposal 1.1. This detailed planning application proposes the construction of a multi-storey

building comprising of 625 student bedrooms, 404 sq.m GIA (gross internal area) ground floor retail/restaurant unit (Use Classes A1 and/or A3) and four ancillary B1 business incubation units (208 sq.m GIA). In addition a new service road would be provided and improvements to the canal tow path form part of the current proposals.

BACKGROUND

1.2. The application site forms part of the wider Eastside Locks redevelopment site which

benefits from outline planning consent for various uses (not including student accommodation). The site comprises of plots H and L of the former masterplan, which has consent for a total of 1,600 sq.m (A1-A5 retail); 16,000 sq.m residential and a maximum of 200 parking spaces within a building up to part 5 / part 8 storeys high. Therefore, as the proposed use as student residential differs from the outline consider this application is not reliant upon the existing outline permission. However, consideration has been given to the remainder of the Eastside Locks masterplan in order to deliver a comprehensive and joined up approach.

PROPOSED USE

1.3. Student accommodation would be the primary use of the proposed building with the

625 bedrooms arranged into self-contained cluster units providing the following range of accommodation:

• 32 X 2 bed (non-ensuite) • 12 X 5 bed (including 20 accessible bedrooms)

Page 2 of 23

• 25 X 6 bed (including 7 accessible) • 41 X 7 bed • 8 X 8 bed

1.4. The cluster units would comprise individual ‘standard’ rooms (measuring either

10sq.m where bathrooms are shared or 13 sq.m for ensuite units). All rooms would contain a double bed, wardrobe and desk space, with the ensuite rooms benefitting from dedicated W/C and shower facilities.

1.5. A total of 27 accessible bedrooms would be provided. These rooms would have

level thresholds and accessible bathrooms with the shared cluster facilities also fully accessible with low worktops and appliances at an appropriate height.

1.6. The rooms would be arranged in clusters of between two and eight bedroom groups

with common kitchen, dining and living room facilities provided for each cluster. These shared spaces would primarily be located at the ends of the building and the wings to maximise light and vistas.

1.7. A single student entrance to the building would benefit from a 24/h accessibility with

the supporting Management Plan stating that between 9:00 – 17:00 daily the reception would be manned, with a security guard presence outside of this time.

1.8. The ‘move in’ process will be planned to ensure that all students to not arrive at

once, with a managed appointment system in place. 1.9. A Study of Need accompanies this application which concludes that there is unmet

demand for student housing within the City, with a particular shortfall in the City Centre to provide for the expanding Birmingham City University campus at Eastside.

DESIGN

1.10. The application proposals show a single development block which would present a

cranked frontage to Lawley Middleway spanning from Pitt Street in the north to within 15 metres of Curzon Street to the south forming a crescent shape. The block would be split into three similar sized elements deriving from a largely standardised floor layout throughout the building. These blocks would each have a common circulation corridor providing vertical circulation accessed off a central pedestrian access fronting the canal. The building would be predominantly 9 storeys in height to the Middleway.

1.11. A 17 storey (58.7m) tower would mark the corner of Curzon Street and Lawley

Middleway. 1.12. The rear of the building would be punctuated by three finger-like projections (wings)

to the west also 9 storeys in height. The minimum distance between a rear wing and the canal tow path is 13.5m with the main bulk of the building typically over 20m from the canal.

1.13. Elevationally, a simple palette of two primary materials is proposed. The lower

one/two storeys of the building would be constructed of a dark brick to provide a visual link to the materials used in the canal environment and also to add a human scaled reference to the elevations. Above this a light coloured reconstituted stone would be used. The stone work would be modelled to provide interest with chamfers creating depth. Windows would be full height floor-to-ceiling maximising natural light

Page 3 of 23

and views. Whilst rooms would be air conditioned, windows will be openable to provide natural ventilation and therefore architectural metal grilles will be provided for safety purposes.

1.14. LAYOUT 1.15. Around the crescent shaped building there would be a new bollarded shared surface

access road running parallel to the Digbeth Branch Canal linking the future Pound Square (part of the wider Eastside Locks development) to Curzon Street. This new road would be well landscaped with a small flight of steps and ramp providing direct and convenient access to the canal tow path.

1.16. The retail store would be located at the base of the tower nearest to Curzon Street

with pedestrian access facing Curzon Street. Travelling north the building would provide two incubation units, a refuse store, offices, the main student entrance foyer, the cycle store then two further incubation units. There would be no day-to-day access into the building from the Middleway elevation. The incubation units would provide space for business start-ups by post-graduate students.

1.17. In response to the change in levels across the site, the ground floor level would

change by a storey as you move along the building. 1.18. Two podium level private courtyards would be provided on the canal elevation for

student use. These would be accessible from the internal common rooms. These spaces would provide two distinct experiences, with a ‘social space’ catering for group seating, a games space with the potential for larger congregational spaces facing television screens within the common room. The second ‘personal space’ is intended to provide opportunity for more individual, private and quiet activities and would be divided with chest-height hedging in planters.

1.19. On site parking would be limited to four disabled parking bays and four management

and incubation unit parking spaces accessed off the new shared road along the canal side and a separate 11 space customer car park associated with the ground floor retail unit on the Middleway site frontage. In addition the building would incorporate a secure 156 space cycle store for student use in addition to external visitor cycle racks.

ECONOMIC IMPACT

1.20. The accompanying Economic Benefits Report outlines that the project is estimated

to result in around £11m being spent on labour during the construction phase (which could represent up to £30m worth of investment). It is anticipated that the students would spend almost £3.5m annually, much of which in the local economy. Once operational, the student element of the development is likely to generate around 18 jobs.

SUSTAINABILITY

1.21. The scheme is accompanied by a BREEAM pre-assessment which indicates that

the scheme is likely to achieve a rating of ‘very good’. This is achieved through the use of highly efficient materials in the building’s envelope, utilising passive design measures such as the building’s orientation, maximising the use of natural light, intelligent low energy lighting, connection to the district energy supply for heat and hot water, air source heat pumps to deal with areas of potential excessive solar gain and low-flow fittings and water efficient fixtures.

Page 4 of 23

1.22. In addition, Brown Roofs (which includes crushed stone and masonry) providing a

total of 350 sq.m would be provided. These areas would be located upon the three wings providing both a visual benefit from upper parts of the building and a rich habitat for flora and fauna including invertebrates, bats and birds (including the Black Redstart).

1.23. The supporting Biodiversity Statement recommends that bat boxes, bird nesting

boxes and provision of native planting be incorporated into the proposals as Ecological Enhancement measures.

1.24. The Arboricultural Assessment states that the two Norwegian Maple trees that would

be removed as a consequence of the development are of moderate quality and value (Category B). The proposed planting plan shows a total of 38 new trees, with tree planting concentrated along the canal corridor.

1.25. This application is accompanied by a Planning Statement; Design and Access

Statement; Verified Views; Air Quality Assessment; Consultation Statement; Daylight and Sunlight Statement; Land Contamination Desk Study; Management Plan; Biodiversity Assessment; Economic Benefits Report; Flood Risk Assessment; Heritage Statement; BREEAM Pre-Assessment Statement; Noise Assessment; Wind Microclimate Desk Study; Flood Risk and Drainage Statement; Study of Need; Transport Assessment; Travel Plan and an Arboricultural Survey.

1.26. An Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Screening Opinion was issued at pre-

application stage and it was concluded that the proposed development would not have significant effects on the environment and therefore an EIA is not needed.

Proposed Layout Canal Side Elevation Illustrative Image 2. Site & Surroundings 2.1. The application site comprises of some 7,914 sq.m of land which is currently divided

into two cleared patches of land divided by the head of Belmont Row together with land at Pitt Street and land at the side of the canal. Belmont Row was historically accessed directly from Lawley Middleway but now forms a dead end accessed from the northwest. The site is situated at the south eastern corner of the wider 7.6 hectare Eastside Locks redevelopment area at the junction of Lawley Middleway and Curzon Street. In addition to these roads the site is bounded by the Digbeth Branch Canal/Ashted Locks (to the west) and a further cleared plot of land to the north beyond Pitt Street. The site slopes down towards the south by approximately 5.2 metres over a distance of approximately 130 metres and is currently secured by hoardings/mesh fencing.

2.2. As with Belmont Row, Pitt Street only provides pedestrian access to the Middleway.

An area of the wide highway pavement and highway landscaping is within the site, close to the Middleway’s junction with Curzon Street.

2.3. Within the wider Eastside Locks site there are a number of locally listed

buildings/structures including the extensively fire-damaged Belmont Works (Grade A), Ashted Row Canal locks/basin/tunnel, Lock Keeper’s Cottage (all Grade B) and

Page 5 of 23

the Ashted Row Pumping Station (Grade C). The Warwick Bar Conservation Area runs through the centre/west of the wider site along the Digbeth Branch Canal. In respect of the current application, the canal towpath and small parts of Pitt Street and Belmont Row lie within the Conservation Area. The Grade II listed Moby Dick Public House is situated within the BCU Phase 2 redevelopment to the west.

2.4. The wider area is in a mixture of uses including BCU Phase 1 building (Birmingham

Institute of Art and Design) to the west with Millennium Point beyond. A relatively newly constructed multi-storey car park is situated to the immediate north of the BCU building. The Eastside City Park connects the wider development site with the City Centre, passing in front of Millennium Point. The BCU phase two building is currently under construction on the opposite side of the canal to the west. Student accommodation is located on the opposite side of Curzon Street. There is a mixture of residential (some of which is Grade C locally listed), retail, public house (Grade A locally listed), school and church uses on the opposite side of the Middleway, with largely residential dwellings beyond. The site of the proposed City Centre Station for the new High Speed 2 rail link is situated to the southwest on the opposite side of Curzon Street.

Location Street View 3. Planning History 3.1. 05.12.2008 - 2008/02942/PA – Mixed-use redevelopment of land at Eastside Locks

for up to 143,350 sq. m new floorspace comprising offices (including technology and Small-Medium Enterprises) (Classes B1(a) and B1(b)), residential with under croft parking (Class C3), hotel with ancillary bar/restaurant, fitness suite and conferencing facilities (Class C1), retail/offices/restaurants/bars (Classes A1, A2, A3, A4 and A5), multi-storey car park (sui generis) creating a total of 1,653 car parking spaces within the development as a whole. Approved.

3.2. 05.12.2008 – 2008/05242/PA – Demolition of buildings, walls and structures (either

in part or in whole) within the Warwick Bar Conservation area within Eastside Locks, including the demolition of 76 and 78 Belmont Row, and north light shed sub-station building, walls and other minor demolitions at the former CWS engineering building (Co-op) Belmont Row and alterations and minor demolitions to the main building, in connection with outline application for mixed-use redevelopment of land for up to 143,350 sq.m of new floorspace (C/02942/08/OUT) . Approved.

3.3. 19.01.2009 – 2008/05241/PA - Reserved matters application for Plot B, regarding

appearance, landscaping, layout and scale, in connection with the erection of a new hotel, the refurbishment/re-use of the Co-op building for Use Classes A1-A5, B1(a) and B1(b), (retail; financial and professional services; restaurants and cafes; drinking establishments; hot food takeaways; business) associated internal courtyard and boundary railings/gates. Approved.

3.4. 05.05.2009 - 2009/ 00308/PA – Section 73 application for variation of conditions B1,

B3-5, B7-9, B11, B12, B14-17, C6, C7, C9, C10, C13, C16-19; and deletion of conditions B2, B6 and C3 attached to planning application C/02942/08/OUT. Approved.

3.5. 05.05.2009 – 2009/00307/PA – Variation of conditions B1-B3 and deletion of

condition C4 of permission C/05242/08/CAC. Approved.

Page 6 of 23

3.6. 07.02.2014 - 2013/08194/PA - Reserved Matters (Plot C) application for the erection

of of a five storey office building (B1a) with associated basement car parking and a ground floor restaurant/cafe (A3) together with associated landscaping pursuant to outline application 2009/00308/PA.

3.7. 07.02.2014 – 2013/08196/PA - Reserved Matters (Plot C) application for the

erection of a four storey office building (B1a) with associated basement car parking and landscaping pursuant to outline application 2009/00308/PA.

4. Consultation/PP Responses 4.1. Transportation Development – No objection. Recommends conditions be attached

requiring a S278 agreement, that the service road is completed prior to occupation of the building, a term time car park management plan, affiliation to Travelwise and that cycle parking is provided prior to occupation. The stopping up of Belmont Row is also required and therefore a resolution to carry out these works is required.

4.2. Regulatory Services – No objection subject to conditions requiring an intrusive

contamination study and remediation as necessary, the development is occupied by students only, ventilation from the rear of the building only, high-level extraction for commercial kitchens, noise control for plant and equipment and delivery hours for commercial operations.

4.3. In light of the air quality issues along Lawley Middleway they recommend that

windows on this road’s frontage and the northern and southern ends of the building are non-openable, to be secured by a condition.

4.4. High Speed 2 Ltd (HS2 ltd) – No objection subject to a condition requiring the detail

of works within the sightlines and construction boundaries to be approved prior to the commencement of the development. They also request an informative which advises that part of the site falls within land required to construct/operate the high speed rail line and the application site, or part of it, may be compulsory purchased.

4.5. English Heritage – Recommends that a more detailed Heritage Assessment and a

detailed schedule of the works to the canal and associated features are provided prior to determining this application. Further information has been received and any further comments will be reported.

4.6. Environment Agency - No objection subject to a condition requiring an intrusive

contamination study and remediation as necessary in order to protect controlled waters beneath the site.

4.7. Severn Trent – No objection subject to a condition requiring the prior approval of a

surface water and foul sewage drainage scheme. 4.8. Canal and River Trust – Raise concerns regarding the scale of the development and

its impact upon the canal Conservation Area and are concerned that the development could create a canyon edge to the canal and have an overbearing impact upon the waterway. Considers that the scheme works well at ground level, with the proposed street arrangement providing a good connection between Curzon Street and the tow path. Recommends conditions requiring: an alternative planting species to achieve an enhancement to the canal corridor’s biodiversity; a further contamination study considering risks to the canal; a survey of the canal wall and strategy for its repair and details of drainage. They also recommend informatives

Page 7 of 23

stating that the development should comply with Trust’s Code of Practice and that no right of structural support is offered to the development.

4.9. West Midlands Police – Confirm that they have been involved with the project at

design stage and that the safety and security of the end users has been carefully considered. Therefore they fully support this proposal.

4.10. Centro – Welcomes the inclusion of significant cycle storage and notes that the

location of the site is accessible by public transport. They encourage the developer to explore including real time information displays for buses within the scheme. They add that the cycle storage should be safe and secure and that pedestrian and cycle links should be direct, convenient, well lit, well signed and of a safe and secure design.

4.11. Birmingham City University (BCU) – The proposed scheme will provide the type and

mix of much needed accommodation that would appeal to BCU students. Considers the scheme an excellent design which they have been consulted on during recent months. They very much welcome this proposal as it offers the quality of accommodation together with the appropriate supporting services that the University would directly or indirectly recommend to its students.

4.12. Their City Centre campus at Eastside is expanding and by September 2015 BCU

expects over 10,000 students studying at this campus who will require accommodation. As such BCU consider that the application is well timed and wholly complements the University’s own development.

4.13. Site and Press Notices displayed. Local occupiers, Ward Members, the MP and

Residents’ Associations consulted with the following responses received. 4.14. One letter of objection has been made by a local occupier who considers that the

design turns its back on the City Centre and does not adequately address Curzon Street and that the City should be raising its expectations in terms of the proposed use of this prime site.

4.15. Two letters from City Centre occupiers have been submitted stating that there is a

shortage of private residential accommodation and therefore the proposal should not be student accommodation.

4.16. A submission in support of the application has been received from a local occupier

who considers the proposed design is a significant improvement on the existing Curzon Gateway scheme and particularly welcomes how parts of the canal are opened up.

4.17. Finally, the Birmingham City Centre neighbourhood Forum welcome the scheme

and the relocation of BCU into the City Centre. They consider that the proposal would enhance the appearance, social and community standards of the area.

5. Policy Context 5.1. Birmingham Unitary Development Plan 2005 (UDP); the draft Birmingham

Development Plan (BDP); ‘Places for All’ (2001) SPG; ‘Residential Uses (Specific Needs)’ SPG (1992); ‘Shop Fronts Design Guide’ (1995) SPG; ‘High Places’ (2002) SPG; ‘City Centre Canal Corridor Development Framework’ (2002) SPD; ‘Warwick Bar Conservation Area Character Appraisal and Supplementary Planning Policies’ (2008) SPD; ‘Car Parking Guidelines’ (2012) SPD and the National Planning Policy

Page 8 of 23

Framework (NPPF) 2012. The site is one of 26 designated sites within the City Centre’s Enterprise Zone.

6. Planning Considerations

BACKGROUND 6.1. The current detailed proposals show a different primary use of the site in addition to

a revised building massing and scale to that previously approved in outline. Therefore the key considerations for this application are the principle of the uses, heritage impact, design, amenity, highway matters, flooding and planning obligations.

POLICY

6.2. Policy 4.13 of the UDP outlines the importance of releasing Birmingham’s full

potential with Policy 4.55 adding that the improvement and expansion of the City’s three Universities will be encouraged.

6.3. The draft Birmingham Development Plan which is at consultation draft stage and

therefore carries some weight, states that on campus purpose built facilities will be supported in principle subject to: there being a demonstrated need for the development; that the location of the development is appropriate in relation to the educational establishment which it intends to serve; the development not having unacceptable amenity implications for nearby dwellings; the scale, massing and architecture are appropriate; the design and layout of the accommodation and associated facilities will provide a positive living experience.

6.4. Chapter 3 of the UDP emphasises the importance of responding to context and high

quality design, with more detailed guidance provided within Places for All, Places for Living and the NPPF.

6.5. High Places adds specific design guidance for buildings in excess of 15 storeys

including where in the City Centre they may be appropriate. It also identifies key views of the City Centre skyline against which tall buildings should be assessed.

6.6. The Conservation Area Character Appraisal and City Centre Canal Corridor

Development Framework require development to respond to the canal side environment maximising linkages onto the network. They also state that careful consideration should be given to the scale of new built form along the canal corridor with the Character Appraisal stating that new development will only be granted where it preserves or enhances the character of the Conservation Area.

6.7. The Residential Uses SPG sets out minimum space guidelines for student

bedrooms. 6.8. The non-statutory Big City Plan (BCP) sets land use aspirations for each of the City

Centre’s seven localities. The BCP acknowledges Eastside’s role in the knowledge economy, including the establishment of Birmingham City University’s (BCU) new campus adjacent to the application site.

6.9. The non-statutory Eastside Masterplan (2011) breaks down the Eastside district to

provide site specific redevelopment principles which should guide the ongoing transformation of this part of the City.

Page 9 of 23

6.10. The Draft Curzon Masterplan identifies Eastside Locks and the BCU campus as a part of the City Centre where Learning and Research with an educational focus will be encouraged. It adds that landmark redevelopment opportunities exist on the Ring Road.

PRINCIPLE

6.11. The applicant’s Study of Need analyses the current provision of student

accommodation, accounting for committed developments, and compares this with the current number of fulltime students. Allowing for a typical number of students who would stay at home, an estimation of demand for accommodation is generated for the City and for the City Centre in particular. Key points from this report are:

- Numbers of full time students has been rising rapidly (58%), with Birmingham

outpacing the national average 45% (since 2000). - Students are not currently equally spaced throughout the City, with proximity to

place of study strongly dictating where students choose to live. - BCU has the most significant shortage of accommodation, with only 29% housed

in purpose built accommodation (including private sector halls). - Across the 3 City Centre Universities, more than 3,500 first year students are not

housed in purpose built accommodation (excluding those living with their parents) - The relocation of teaching from the Perry Barr area means that BCU’s halls of

residence are situated far from its new City Centre campus. - The development is well sited to meet accommodation needs of the 3 City Centre

Universities. - BCU has a clear need for this development, and support the scheme. - Notes the potential loss of the Unite Curzon Gateway accommodation in the

event of HS2 progressing (over 700 beds) of which approximately 350 students attend BCU.

6.12. I consider that the Study of Need demonstrates an unmet demand for student

accommodation in this part of the City Centre, which the application proposals are well placed to help meet. BCU’s growing City Centre presence is significant, with the resultant growing City Centre student population likely to exacerbate the current shortfall. The proposed development incorporates a variety of cluster sizes in order to provide choice to students. I therefore raise no objection to the principle of a 625 bedroom student development in this location.

6.13. The proposed retail unit would help provide activity at the ground floor of the building

and would be consistent with the mix of uses to be provided across the Eastside Locks development. It is noted that the current outline consent permits four times the level of retail space currently proposed on this site.

6.14. The ancillary B1 units would be used by post-graduate students for a variety of

business related activities and have been developed following positive pre-application dialogue with BCU and are a welcome addition.

Page 10 of 23

6.15. My Planning Strategy colleagues raise no objection I concur with this conclusion and raise no objection to the principle of the proposed uses.

DESIGN

Scale and Massing

6.16. The site is not within the central ridge zone set out in High Places, which sets out

parts of the City Centre most suited to accommodating a tall building. The SPG states that proposals outside of these locations will be determined on their merits. Since the SPG was written much has changed within the vicinity of the site including the completion of new buildings across Eastside and the High Speed 2 project has been announced.

6.17. The more recent Eastside Masterplan states that the site provides the opportunity

for a tall building up to 25 storeys in height in order to terminate long views eastwards along the park’s promenade route.

6.18. The supporting Verified Views demonstrate how the building would be successfully

integrated into the existing City Centre skyline from key views around the City as identified by the High Places SPG.

6.19. I consider that the site is a gateway into the City that signals your arrival at the City

Centre from the east when approaching from the Middleway and when viewed from the elevated rail network. As such, the scale and massing of the building is appropriate in this context. The scheme was considered at Design Review Panel who supported the principle of a tall building in this location considering that it created a visually distinctive element that would draw the eye beyond the BCU building and towards the Eastside Locks destination. My Design Advisor, concurs with this conclusion and concludes that through negotiation we have secured a quality design.

Appearance

6.20. The elevations are broken down into sections with a simple but considered use of

two primary materials for the proposed building is appropriate. The use of dark brickwork for the lower part of the building is guided by materials used for the canal infrastructure and therefore responds to the context set by the Conservation Area. The use of a light coloured reconstituted stone material for the remainder of the building is appropriate and, in conjunction with the modelled elevation (utilising offset chamfers), would provide a subtly contemporary use of this traditional material. This approach would also respond to the lighter materials used on the BCU building, the locally listed public house on Lawley Middleway and the proposed Building 6 office block within Eastside Locks.

6.21. I recommend a condition requiring the prior approval of the shop front design to

ensure that an appropriate level of activity is provided and maintained.

Layout 6.22. The principal pedestrian entrance to the student accommodation is announced by a

double height foyer fronting the canal at the centre of the building. The retail use at the southern corner provides activity onto Lawley Middleway and Curzon Street. The creation of high-level private amenity spaces for student use is acceptable and will

Page 11 of 23

help to activate the canal-side elevation of the building given the views into/out of these spaces.

6.23. Every opportunity has been taken to create activity along the canal elevation, with

both the uses and the shape of the building providing activity and visual interest. 6.24. Limiting vehicular access through the scheme, keeping the majority of vehicular

traffic at the Curzon Street/Lawley Middleway end of the site, is welcomed as this will help raise the quality of the pedestrian environment adjacent to the Conservation Area.

6.25. In accordance with my Landscape Officer’s advice, I consider that further

improvements to the landscaping of the wider site could be made in order to achieve the high quality pedestrian environment in and around the site required of a location adjacent to a Conservation Area and within one of the City’s key regeneration areas. Amendments to plant species could also maximise the ecological benefits of the proposed landscaping. I therefore recommend a condition requiring an amended landscaping scheme.

HERITAGE IMPACT

6.26. The accompanying Heritage Statement concludes that the proposal would reinforce

the historically built up character of the area and reinstate a frontage along Lawley Middleway. The report adds that the proposals would improve connectivity between the historic canal network and the site improving the environment alongside the canal and enhancing the sense of place. Historic canal structures will be retained and late 20th century walling would be removed. Finally the report concludes that no further archaeological work is recommended.

6.27. The scheme was presented to the Conservation Heritage Panel at pre-application

stage and they were generally in favour of the scheme. They commented that consideration needs to be given to materials and integrating the scheme with the retained Lock Keeper’s cottage. They also added that the landscaped space will need to be carefully considered and a high quality scheme is essential.

6.28. My Conservation Officer added that he has no further comments in addition to the

endorsement of the scheme by CHP and officers at pre app stage. 6.29. English Heritage’s comments are noted. An updated Heritage Appraisal has been

provided and I consider that the impact of the development upon heritage assets within the vicinity is adequately assessed. I consider that sufficient information has been provided in order to reach this conclusion, including details of physical works proposed to the canal wall, subject to the imposition of suitable safeguarding conditions.

6.30. The existing outline planning consent allows for development of buildings up to 28m

and 34m and an unbroken development footprint which runs from Pitt Street to the back of pavement on Curzon Street. The proposed scheme incorporates a 58.7m tower (at its tallest), with the bulk of the building 32.8m tall. The current proposal, allowing for the future HS2 development, has a smaller development footprint than the previous approval with a setback from Curzon Street of between 12.5m and 40m.

6.31. Whilst the tower element is in excess of the currently approved parameters, the

current scheme is in accordance with more recent City Centre policy guidance in

Page 12 of 23

Eastside, provides a landmark feature to demarcate the entrance to Eastside from the Ring Road. The remainder of the building is largely in accordance with the previously approved parameters, aside for a 4.8m breach on parts of the building occupying what was originally Plot H.

6.32. The NPPF requires an assessment of the significance of heritage assets which

needs to be taken into account when assessing the impacts of a proposal up those assets. No designated heritage assets would be lost or substantially harmed as a consequence of the development, only the setting of those assets would change as a consequence of the development. The increased activity brought about by the proposed use together with the creation of a new convenient access to the tow path will improve the pedestrian experience of the canal. I consider that this would enhance the character of the Conservation Area.

6.33. The NPPF adds that where a development proposal will lead to less than substantial

harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal, including securing its optimal use. I consider that the public benefits associated with scheme, which includes economic, social and environmental impacts, to be significant.

6.34. I therefore conclude that the proposal would enhance the setting of nearby listed

and locally listed buildings together with the character of the Warwick Bar Conservation Area.

6.35. The concerns expressed by the Canal and River Trust regarding the scale of the

proposals and its impact upon the canal environment, which is a Conservation Area are noted. However, as above, I conclude that the impact upon the Conservation Area is acceptable.

6.36. Archaeological works have been undertaken within the wider Eastside Locks

development site; however the current application site has not been identified in either the past or present applications as being likely to have any archaeological interest. The City’s Archaeologist raises no objection and I concur with this conclusion.

HIGHWAY MATTERS

6.37. The existing outline consent permits a maximum of 200 parking spaces on this site,

in conjunction with a largely residential development. The current proposal limits parking levels to four disabled parking bays, four management and incubation unit parking spaces and an 11 space (retail) customer car park. In addition, in accordance with the Car Parking Guidelines SPD, the building will incorporate a secure 156 space cycle store.

6.38. The Transport Assessment notes that the site is within a highly accessible location

within easy reach of train, metro, bus and cycle networks. Pedestrian connections with the City Centre are excellent, with Eastside City Park providing a safe and convenient route to amenities. The site is also in close proximity to two City Centre universities, Aston and BCU.

6.39. The Car Parking Guidelines SPD generates a maximum parking standard of 91

spaces for this site. Transportation Development is satisfied that the opportunities for student parking within the vicinity are limited and that the dedicated car parking for the retail use is of sufficient size. I note that the student accommodation is expected to require only 18 employees and therefore parking demand would be low.

Page 13 of 23

6.40. The site is in close proximity to the multi-storey car park adjacent to Millennium

Point. It should be noted that the management of on-street parking across the wider Eastside Locks development is currently being considered as is likely to form part of a dedicated infrastructure application.

6.41. Changes to the tow path boundary, in the form of a new access and steps would

improve access to the canal network thereby improving opportunities for sustainable travel. The new access road would be controlled at both ends with bollards to ensure that the comfort of the pedestrian environment is safeguarded.

6.42. The Management Plan states that vehicles will be managed during student ‘move

days’ with a lay-by provided to the front of the building for timed student drop off/pick ups. The Plan also states that the tenancy agreements will reinforce the reliance on sustainable transport with a ban on students bringing motor vehicles to the site.

6.43. Therefore, Transportation Development raises no objection on highway grounds

subject to suitable conditions and I concur with this recommendation.

High Speed 2 6.44. The application site is outside of the Safeguarding Boundary, although part of the

site is located within the limits of land to be acquired or used by HS2 ltd. The area required is a limited section of the site at the corner of Curzon Street and Lawley Middleway which is needed in association with alterations to the junction, with the latest design proposing that the current roundabout being changed to a signalised crossroads arrangement. This requires more land to accommodate these changes, including an appropriate visibility splay.

6.45. During pre-application discussions between the City, developer and HS2 ltd the

scheme has been amended to ensure that the building is outside of the land required in connection with the new junction. Access to the retail store’s car park may be disrupted temporarily whilst the alterations to the junction are taking place, however the scheme has been designed so that there are no permanent implications of the HS2 scheme.

6.46. The condition recommended by HS2 ltd has been attached to ensure that the

detailed design of this frontage area is compatible with their future highway changes.

AMENITY Noise 6.47. A Noise Assessment has been submitted in support of this application. The report

assesses the local noise environment and recommends various glazing specifications across the building to achieve a satisfactory residential environment. On-site noise monitoring has taken place and future impacts such as HS2 are taken into account, however the principal source of noise is vehicular traffic on the Lawley Middleway. I therefore recommend a condition requiring glazing to be installed to the standards specified within the report to secure a satisfactory standard of amenity for future residents. An appropriate condition is attached and Regulatory Services concur with this conclusion.

Page 14 of 23

6.48. Further conditions to prevent transmission of noise between commercial and residential parts of the building and plant noise from the proposed development, in accordance with the supporting Noise Assessment, are attached.

6.49. Given the City Centre location adjacent to the future HS2 station I do not consider

conditions limiting delivery hours or the operating hours of A3 uses reasonable.

Contamination 6.50. In respect of ground contamination, a Phase 1 Geo Environmental Assessment has

been undertaken and recommends that, in light of the previous uses of the site, further intrusive investigations are undertaken prior to the development of the site. Regulatory Services concur with this recommendation and appropriate conditions are attached. This approach is also consistent with the Environment Agency’s conclusions.

Standard of Accommodation

6.51. The proposed bedroom sizes are in excess of SPG guidelines. Typical room layouts

have been provided that demonstrate that the rooms would provide space for all of the necessary furniture.

6.52. Communal areas are large and would provide a comfortable living/’cooking/dining

space for each cluster. These rooms have been located to make the most of views and access to natural light where possible.

6.53. I therefore conclude that the accommodation would offer the positive living

experience envisaged by the draft BDP.

Air Quality 6.54. The Air Quality report submitted in support of this application concludes that, due to

the high level of vehicular traffic, the quality of the air along the Lawley Middleway frontage is close to exceeding guideline annual thresholds for residential accommodation. By way of mitigation all student rooms will be ventilated by extraction that would source cleaner air from the rear of the building.

6.55. The applicants have provided supplemental information based upon BCC monitoring

data which helps to demonstrate that the assumptions made in their report are correct and that the source air to the rear will meet the required standard. Regulatory Services accept this conclusion; however they recommend a condition requiring all windows on the effected frontage to be non-openable.

6.56. The applicant is keen that whilst all rooms are mechanically ventilated, residents

have the opportunity to open the windows for fresh air such as on a hot day. I consider that this request is reasonable and that it would be down to the occupier to determine whether the air quality is acceptable. I also note that student accommodation is more transient that typical residential accommodation (which has been approved in principle on this plot as per the outline consent). The applicant has been made aware of the obligation upon them to ensure that students resident in these affected rooms know the potential air quality issues. I therefore raise no objection on air quality grounds.

Light

Page 15 of 23

6.57. A Daylight and Sunlight Impact Assessment has been undertaken. This report concludes that the impact on access to daylight and sunlight for surrounding existing and proposed residential dwellings would be acceptable, with only minor breaches of the BRE Guidelines which are typical within a built up urban environment. The report also analyses the level of light within the proposed development concluding that habitable rooms would have access to adequate levels of daylight and sunlight in accordance with BRE guidelines.

6.58. The impact of overshadowing of the canal and associated towpath areas has also

been examined. The levels of sunlight far exceed BRE guidance and demonstrate that the canal area will have access to uninterrupted sunlight for the majority of the day.

6.59. I therefore concur with the conclusions of the report that the proposed development

would not have a material impact upon dwellings within the vicinity, that the development would have access to adequate daylight and sunlight and that the canal would not be overshadowed to an unacceptable degree.

FLOODING

6.60. The Flood Risk and Drainage Statement concludes that the site is at a low level of

Flood Risk and no specific mitigation measures are required. In respect of reducing the impacts of surface run-off the report identifies potential mitigation measures (depending upon prevailing site conditions) such as oversized pipe work, cellular storage or porous paving solutions. I recommend a condition requiring details of these measures.

SUSTAINABILITY

6.61. The City Ecologist raises no objection subject to conditions requiring details of bird

and bat boxes, the method of eradication of Japanese Knotweed from the site, securing details of and a minimum level of brown roof provision and requiring a further survey for Black Redstarts. Appropriate conditions are recommended below.

SECTION 106

6.62. Given the scale, location and nature of the proposed development a contribution of

£29,000 (enough to provide three totems) to the City Centre’s Wayfinding initiative (Interconnect) is considered appropriate. I consider that the proposed contribution is necessary as it would both improve the quality of the public realm in the area to the benefit of students and visitors to the development and will aid travel around the city on foot. Wayfinding would be particularly useful for new students as they are likely to be less familiar with the layout of the city centre. Additionally, I consider that the level of contribution is reasonable in the context of the scale of proposals.

6.63. In addition, a requirement for the developer to make the best opportunities for

utilising local workers during the construction stage of the development is proposed. This will help to maximise the economic benefits of the proposal for the City.

6.64. Members may recall that there is a Development Agreement relating to the

redevelopment of this site between the City, Goodman and Advantage West Midlands (AWM) as part of the wider Eastside Locks development. As part of this arrangement a funding agreement was signed by the City Council and AWM on the 30th March 2007 in which AWM agreed to provide a sum of up to £3,000,000 in order to financially assist the regeneration and development of land at Eastside.

Page 16 of 23

Given the receipt of £3,000,000 from AWM, the City Council can only request further financial S.106 contributions for a number of items that are detailed in the Agreement (“Accepted Matters”) without the City having to reimburse AWM (now Homes and Communities Agency). Given the nature of the development I consider that a contribution towards Wayfinding and a Local Employment Clause are reasonable and necessary and met the CIL tests.

6.65. In order to constitute “Accepted Matters” the contribution must be utilised within the

broad Eastside Locks locality and constitute the provision of public realm. I consider that Wayfinding totems are legitimate features in the street and go beyond standard highway specification furniture. Therefore, I conclude that the contribution would be put towards the provision of public realm and the City would not be required to reimburse the HCA.

6.66. The City currently holds the freehold to the site. The City cannot enter into a Section

106 Agreement with itself, i.e. as Local Planning Authority and Land Owner. Additionally, the current applicants may not implement the scheme. Finally the land is to be leased and not sold. Therefore, the obligation cannot run with the sale of the land and therefore a Section 111 would also not be appropriate in this instance.

6.67. Therefore to ensure that the correct Developer enters into and is bound by the

Agreement, as part of the property deal there will be an obligation upon the body taking out the lease (developer) to enter into the Section 106 Agreement as part of the terms of the land transaction. As part of the contract a draft Section 106 Agreement will be annexed to the contractual documentation and as a consequence its completion will be a contractual precondition requiring the completion of the Section 106 Agreement simultaneously with the completion of the land deal; at that point the purchaser will have land ownership and can enter into the Section 106 Agreement legally. I have recommended a condition to require the completion of the agreement prior to the commencement of the development.

7. Conclusion 7.1. The proposed development is in accordance with the city’s aspiration to support the

development of the knowledge-based economy in this part of the City Centre. The application demonstrates the need for the proposed accommodation in this locality. These detailed proposals show a scheme that would offer a high quality residential environment for students in addition to significant improvements to the public realm including around the canal environment which is part of a Conservation Area.

7.2. The design of the proposed building is well considered and is of an appropriate

scale and design quality to mark the gateway into Eastside. The application also demonstrates how the proposal is an evolution of the approved masterplan and how the building would satisfactorily integrate into the wider Eastside Locks development.

7.3. I therefore recommend that this application be supported subject to safeguarding

conditions including a condition requiring the completion of an appropriate Section 106 Legal Agreement.

8. Recommendation 8.1 Approve application number 2013/09485/PA subject to the conditions listed below

and a Section 106 Legal Agreement to secure the following:

Page 17 of 23

a) The payment of £29,000 (index linked to construction costs from 20th March 2014 to the date on which payment is made) towards the delivery of the public Wayfinding initiative in the Eastside locality or to be spent on public realm improvements in the Eastside locality.

b) Commitment by the developer to secure local employment opportunities. c) Payment of a monitoring and administration fee associated with the legal agreement

subject to a maximum contribution of £1,500 which is due at the point of completion of the agreement.

In the absence of a Section 106 legal agreement to secure a financial contribution towards the delivery of the public Wayfinding initiative and a commitment to local employment opportunities, the proposed development conflicts with Policies 6.45 and 8.51 of the Birmingham UDP 2005 and the NPPF. 8.2 Such obligations being secured by the inclusion of a contractual prerequisite in any

property-related documents for the lease of the land requiring the completion of a Section 106 Agreement simultaneously with the completion of the land transaction between Birmingham City Council and the lessee of the land and that such agreement shall be completed prior to commencement of the development hereby approved, being the land edged by a thin red line and referred to as the "Alumno Red Line" on drawing number A-L-100 Revision 09 submitted in connection with planning application 2013/09485/PA".

8.3 That the Director of Legal and Democratic Services be authorised to prepare, seal

and complete the appropriate planning obligation. 8.4 That no objection be raised to the stopping up of Pitt Street and Belmont Row with a

realigned highway layout, and that the Department for Transport (DFT) be requested to make an Order in accordance with the provisions of Section 247 of the Town and Country Planning Act.

1 Prior to commencement a Section 106 Legal Agreement be completed

2 Requires the prior submission of contamination remediation scheme on a phased

basis

3 Requires the phased submission of a contaminated land verification report

4 Requires the prior submission of a drainage scheme on a phased basis

5 Requires the prior submission of a method statement for the removal of invasive weeds

6 Requires the prior submission of details of bird and bat boxes

7 Requires the prior submission of extraction and odour control details

8 Requires the prior submission of hard and soft landscape details

9 Requires the prior submission of an amended landscaping scheme

10 Requires the prior submission of boundary treatment details

Page 18 of 23

11 Requires the prior submission of earthworks details in a phased manner

12 Requires the prior approval of details of brown roofing providing a minimum area of

350 sq.m

13 Requires the prior submission of an additional ecological survey

14 Requires the prior submission of sample materials

15 Requires the prior submission of details that could impact upon the future HS2 road junction

16 Requires the prior submission of surface water drainage attenuation details.

17 Requires the prior appoval of the shop front design

18 Requires the prior submission of noise insulation details between residential and commercial premises.

19 Requires the prior approval of plant and equipment

20 Requires the prior submission and completion of works for the S278/TRO Agreement

21 Requires the prior submission of a lighting scheme

22 Requires the prior submission of a parking management strategy

23 Requires residential ventilation to be from the canal facing side of the building

24 Sets minimum standards for the acoustic performance of glazing to living areas

25 Requires the provision of cycle parking prior to occupation

26 Requires the applicants to join Travelwise

27 Requires highway infrastructure to be in place prior to the first occupation of the development.

28 Limits the noise levels for Plant and Machinery

29 Requires the residential accommodation only to be occupied by students in full time education.

30 Requires the scheme to be in accordance with the listed approved plans

31 Prevents the incubation units changing from the use class B1

32 Removes PD rights for telecom equipment

33 Prevents storage except in authorised area

34 Limits the approval to 3 years (Full)

Page 19 of 23

Case Officer: Nicholas Jackson

Page 20 of 23

Photo(s)

Fig. 1 – View of the wider Eastside Locks site with application site in the distance either side of the lock keeper’s cottage (Cardigan St. in the foreground)

Page 21 of 23

Fig. 2 – View of application site from canal tow path

Page 22 of 23

Fig. 3 – View of Belmont Row (to be stopped up)

Page 23 of 23

Location Plan

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. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings. Birmingham City Council. Licence No.100021326, 2010