Green light for plan to build nearly 500 apartments in Digbeth
A huge 479-home apartment building in Digbeth has been given the go-ahead by councillors – despite a last-minute objection from the Victorian Society.
Councillors voted unanimously to approve plans for the development, which would be a ‘build to rent’ property comprised of a range of one, two and three-bedroom properties.
They did so while disregarding a late objection from the Victorian Society in an attempt to save one of the buildings from demolition – as the building is not from the Victorian era.
Computer-generated imagery of the development shows a huge six to ten-storey building on land bounded by Bradford Street, Birchall Street, Cheapside and the River Rea, with those buildings currently occupying the site due to be demolished to make way.
One of these is at 54 Bradford Street which, although unlisted, the Victorian Society had attempted to save given its historical significance.
However, it was ultimately determined by the committee that the benefits of demolishing the building for the new development outweighed the cons.
A planning officer stated: “We have received a very late objection from the Victorian Society, which said as follows: ‘While we have no objection to the principle of development on this site, we strongly object to the total demolition of building 1, 54 Bradford Street. The building at 54 Bradford Street is worthy of at least local listing and should be retained as part of the development on this site.’
“The objection from the Victorian Society has been looked at by the conservation team and they confirmed that the heritage statement is indeed inaccurate as stated by the applicant and the building is an early 20th century building and not a mid-19th century building.
“That said, the building is unlisted and has not been identified for local listing. The loss of this building must weigh heavy and be balanced against its not insignificant merits.
“The value of this building, which is relatively high for a non designated heritage asset, must therefore be balanced against the benefits of this development.
“The merits are considered to outweigh the loss of this building.”
