Jump to content

Farmers Bridge a new development?


Featured Posts

The Flapper is closed so will now be redeveloped as flats resulting in the removal of boats from Cambrian Wharf. Last time I was in Brum the Prince of Wales was a shadow of its former self. The magical Ickneild Port loop is turning into a housing estate. Brum is very sadly lost so only two options, spend a night there on the way to the Great Western in Wolverhampton, or go round the Coventry Canal for a few pints at the Greyhound.

 

.............Dave (born in Brum but now realise that sadly there are better places to go boating)

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well some interesting comments

 

and some that deserve a response

 

t seems there are those developers who are covid19 free and are using their time to dream up new schemes to change the canalside of Birmingham. This time it is in Scotland Street at what is or was the Groundwork building recently advertised to be let.
AND?

SO THEY ARE PROPOSING A SMALL CHANGE TO THE GROUNDWORKS BUILDING BY ALTERING THE ROOF STRUCTURE.

 

This former converted Victorian building is set for a change if the developers of London get their way, for more residential property.

SO ACTUALLY YOUR OBJECTION APPEARS TO BE ABOUT LONDON DEVELOPERS AND THEM NOT BEING LOCAL. 
OR PERHAPS YOU WOULD RATHER IT GOING TO RUIN INSTEAD OF BEING USED FOR MUCH NEEDED RESIDENTIAL USE.

 

The artist impression ignores the former toll house and even the lock, in what is an insult to those interested in canal history or even waterways.

NO THEY DON'T! THE ARTISTS IMPRESSION IS OF THE AREA BEYOND THE TOLL HOUSE, AND IT DOES SHOW A RUDIMENTARY LOCK.
IT ALSO SUGGESTS THAT YOU HAVEN'T BOTHERED TO READ THE PLANNING APPLICATION BUT HAVE JUMPED TO A CONCLUSION.

 

(1) I  have yet to make some comments about the original Groundworks building at 5 Scotland Street, but my initial comments were about what the artist showed and not whether they were good or bad

 

(2) That the building may be adapted for residential use is a common practice and has been for many years, yet as with the Flapper, there seems to be a policy by some developers to maximise their profits by creating as many properties as possible within the space. However the original comment was simply a neutral one, which is the conversion for residential use. There was no derogatory implication even if one person has thought this to be the case.

 

(3) What lead to this thread being posted was the reading of the planning explanation, which I could have posted, but now has been posted by another member . A principal reason for the post was the artist viewpoint. So many of these views favour a particular theme. In this case the canal is incidental and is shown to pass to the right. This "Rudimentary Lock" has little to show it as such. whilst the roving bridge is difficult to relate to.

 

May be the view that THE ARTISTS IMPRESSION IS OF THE AREA BEYOND THE TOLL HOUSE, AND IT DOES SHOW A RUDIMENTARY LOCK is the opinion of somebody who supports such applications.

 

Certain developers have their ways with dealing with canal side properties. In this area there are many new buildings which have transformed the canalside.

 

How many readers are in favour of the way the developers have built those properties along and over the lock pounds further down the flight

How many readers are in favour of what is planned for the Flapper, and a development that will affect Cambrian Basin

How many readers are concerned about the two cranes- one which fell down and has been mentioned in a previous post

How many readers are concerned about what happened to the Toll House, whose foundations were undermined by a contractor leading to structural damage that had to be put right

How many readers have noted the transformation on the the Oozells Loop, recently at Sherborne Wharf and are they for the best ?

 

This is a list that can go on and on with opinions for and against. There is nothing wrong in re-using property for other purposes and such re-use can often preserve heritage structures. The danger comes from those that are only interested in profit and exploit structures to make something completely different and may be retaining a facade to placate the planning authority.

 

In the original post, the observation made was about what the artist has shown and the basis behind it. One additional residential development may not make much difference to the canal side, but how it will be done must be a matter of concern as is how it will affect the canal users.

 

 

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, dmr said:

The Flapper is closed so will now be redeveloped as flats resulting in the removal of boats from Cambrian Wharf. Last time I was in Brum the Prince of Wales was a shadow of its former self. The magical Ickneild Port loop is turning into a housing estate. Brum is very sadly lost so only two options, spend a night there on the way to the Great Western in Wolverhampton, or go round the Coventry Canal for a few pints at the Greyhound.

 

.............Dave (born in Brum but now realise that sadly there are better places to go boating)

Obviously there's more to a city than just pubs (especially right now), but there are some lovely pubs in Birmingham, maybe you just need to go and find them?

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, doratheexplorer said:

Obviously there's more to a city than just pubs (especially right now), but there are some lovely pubs in Birmingham, maybe you just need to go and find them?

The Flapper was (very) dog friendly, there are not too many dog friendly pubs in central Birmingham. The Prince of Wales blows hot and cold on the issue I have found.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, frahkn said:

The Flapper was (very) dog friendly, there are not too many dog friendly pubs in central Birmingham. The Prince of Wales blows hot and cold on the issue I have found.

Our Lurcher has done several saturday nights at the Flapper when its full on heavy metal night. What she does not like is folky stuff and tin whistles ?.

 

I think the owners of the PoW are dog friendly (they have spaniels?) but the head barmaid does not like dogs, so its a bit of a lottery. Ours lies under the table so is usually ok but our friends got a bit of trouble.....but they did put their dog on the table. ?.

 

Dogs are allowed in Ma Pardoes.

 

..............Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With regards to the artists impression, and to some extent the application, there is a suggestion that the existing structure might be replaced. Whilst progress is important and there would seem on the face of it, this is a former warehouse of little importance. BUT, and there is a BIG BUT, there is the Heritage aspect.

 

These buildings in later times appear to have had multiple occupancy  and had changed with time. They were called the Scotland Works and this is shown by the large scale Ordnance Survey of the late 1880's.

 

ScotW2.jpg

 

 

 

This site was at one time occupied by John Moffat, whose premises had the Royal Appointment plaque. He made candle sticks and his works had a reputation for that product.

 

 

ScotW1.jpg

Edited by Heartland
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any comments on the development should include the fact that this is where the post-war redevelopment of canals started, with Peter White, BW's architect, based here. As such, modern development could be encouraged, but only if it is a high quality, and reflects the benefits of a canalside site. That said, it always worries me that sometimes historic buildings are left as token structure, often devoid of their original connection to the canal. In view of this area's importance to post-war redevelopment nationally, local planners do need to ensure that something suitable is done with the site.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Pluto said:

>>local planners do need to ensure that something suitable is done with the site.

 

Planners can only allow (with conditions) or refuse (for valid reasons) planning applications.  They cannot judge the business model of a building's owner.

 

Nobody is going to do anything with an building unless it makes money (and that, I suggest, was why this particular building was put up in the first place).

 

Of course, there are always some who would rather see an architecturally important building rot away than have it used for something.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Pluto said:

Any comments on the development should include the fact that this is where the post-war redevelopment of canals started, with Peter White, BW's architect, based here. 

When he designed the redevelopment of the Farmers Bridge area, Peter was working for Birmingham City Council's architects department. The success of the scheme can also be part-credited to the visionary Sir Frank Price, who had been the chairman of Birmingham's Public Works Committee. In 1968 Frank became chairman of British Waterways and offered Peter the job of architect at BW.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.