Greater Birmingham - Thread


Brum X

Premium Member Plus
Mar 23, 2011
Birmingham UK
St Paul's Quarter | Northwood Street | Mixed-Use | 5fl | Approved

Plans to transform the four-acre AE Harris industrial site in the Jewellery Quarter into a major residential-led, mixed-use scheme have been given the go ahead by Birmingham City Council.

Joint venture partners Galliard Homes and Apsley House Capital plan to create a new neighbourhood called St Paul’s Quarter.

Designed and master-planned by award-winning Glenn Howells Architects, the £125m scheme, which is bounded by Newhall Street, Graham Street, Brook Street, James Street and Northwood Street, will comprise 305 apartments – including lofts and duplexes – and circa 100,000 sq ft of commercial space, including affordable business and retail space, across 20 buildings, as well as new public realm.

A new pedestrian street will stretch from Newhall Street into the heart of the Jewellery Quarter, improving access from the city centre. Northwood Street, currently partially closed to the public, will be opened to pedestrians for the first time in more than 20 years.
A new public square will be incorporated, in the centre of the scheme, surrounded by commercial and leisure space at ground level.

As part of the developers’ plans, two Grade II listed buildings will be restored to their former glory. 109 Northwood Street, built in 1882 for military ornament makers Brent and Parker and described by Historic England as “internationally significant”, and 199 Newhall Street, a neo-Georgian factory built in the early 20th century, will be repurposed to provide new workspace in the district.

A further two derelict buildings – 123 and 128 Northwood Street – will also be salvaged and transformed into new homes. Although not listed, the joint venture team consider them architecturally significant.

Care has also been taken to respect buildings flanking the site. The previously hidden Grade II listed Arts and Crafts era Squirrel Works on Regent Place, for example, will be exposed and visible the length of the new pedestrian street called Harpers Hill.

Stephen Conway, executive chairman of Galliard Homes, said: “The Jewellery Quarter’s historic buildings give the area its special character. Galliard has a track record of restoring listed buildings across London and we are looking forward to bringing this experience to Birmingham.

“123 and 128 Northwood Street have a familiar typology to the Jewellery Quarter, with street frontages concealing rear factory wings. These two buildings reinforce the grain of the area, running north-south. It’s therefore right that we respect their heritage and preserve them, despite their lack of listed status.”

The new buildings at the site have been designed to be sympathetic to the historic area. These include an Art Deco inspired façade, which wraps around the corner of Northwood Street and James Street; an elegant dark brick and crafted metal marker building at the Newhall street entrance to the scheme – visible from Colmore Row – to house a co-working operation; The Cornerstone, at the crossroads at the heart of the scheme, includes terracotta elements, as does the red brick building on Regency Place, with both providing homes above active ground uses, including shops and businesses.

Robin Norstrom, a director at Apsley House Capital, said: “This development will be the largest within the Jewellery Quarter Conservation Area.

“We have invested more than two years in bringing this highly anticipated scheme forward, working with the local community and with the city’s planning officers to create a new gateway to the Jewellery Quarter and an animated hub – not only a place to live and work but also a destination in itself. The scheme will introduce more than a kilometre of street frontages to explore, with the majority of the public spaces being car free.

“As well as new homes, the scheme’s ground floor commercial space will provide opportunities for up-and-coming independent businesses, whether that’s local heroes or brands new to the city. We are also keen to support jewellers and artists by providing affordable retail and business space.”

Dav Bansal, director at Glenn Howells Architects, said: “The sensitive proposals to reconnect and unlock this site strive to create a fine grain of streets and courts that reflect the intense character of the Jewellery Quarter. The approach has been to carefully restore some existing fabric alongside a new composition of modern buildings which share a considered palette of materials, detailing and proportions.

“The variety in scale, level changes and order of facades bring an interesting streetscape while the choice of brickwork textures and tones add to the distinct quality of each building. We believe this new setting sits sympathetically in its historical context, bringing much needed workspace, amenities and homes to the quarter.”

More than 500 jobs are expected to be created at the scheme, including construction posts and jobs in the food, beverage, retail and office sectors. The development is anticipated to take four years to complete.



Platinum Member
Feb 29, 2016
Not sure why so late in the day, but I have just discovered this thread. Great to keep in touch with boom town Brum. Thanks everyone for posting. Bookmarked now so I will check in more often.


Platinum Member
Feb 29, 2016
100 Broad Street | Residential | 61fl | 193m | Prop

I have listed the below for people who are interested in the really big projects planned for Birmingham. Well all I can say is at least it isn't a blanket NO for this proposal as I am sure the recommendations below can be sorted out, Oh and of course our BHX ;)

17 October 2019
Submitted via email
Mrs Jo Todd
Birmingham City Council Planning and Regeneration 1 Lancaster Circus Birmingham
B4 7DJ
Dear Jo
The above planning application was validated and registered by your authority, and commenced its statutory consultation period, on 29 July 2019.
During this time, statutory consultees and other parties have provided comments on the proposed development.
This letter has been prepared to respond specifically to the comments of the council’s Environmental Protection Unit (EPU). Officers requested further information relating to: noise; ventilation / overheating; extraction details; sound insulation; noise from plant and machinery; and air quality.
The initial comments from officers on noise required information on the audio recordings. The matter has been resolved in an email to officers on 7 October 2019.
Follow up comments from officers were received on 11 October 2019. We were advised that the EPU is recommending refusal (or any decision to be delayed until further information is received).
EPU officers have stated that the accompanying Noise Assessment provides options for mitigation, rather than a recommended scheme. Glazing specifications and mechanical ventilation have been clearly specified within the Noise Assessment. No further information is considered to be necessary at this stage.
EPU officers have asked for detailed acoustic performance data and any other relevant information to determine necessary mitigation. This would require information from manufacturers. These detailed design points will be confirmed upon instruction of a contractor. The information provided within the Noise Assessment specifies mitigation measures (glazing and mechanical ventilation specifications) that enable all internal noise criteria to be met, and is more than sufficient to determine this planning application. The applicant’s noise consultants have confirmed that there is suitable rated glazing available to achieve the level of specification required.
Officers have also raised the issue of non-openable windows and the possibility of the building overheating. This is addressed in further detail below.
The applicant’s appointed noise consultant considers that the Noise Assessment provides sufficient information for the purposes of determining this application and we find there is no reasonable reason to recommend refusal on noise grounds (subject to the imposition of appropriate planning conditions).
Ventilation / Overheating
The proposed development proposes a sealed façade on the building. EPU officers have advised that they do not normally support applications for residential use with non-openable windows where the noise is not due to transportation sources. Non-openable windows form part of the design philosophy of the proposed development. The philosophy seeks to provide a pure vertical glass ‘blade’ onto the Broad Street elevation. The introduction of opening lights with the associated window framing was deemed to compromise this aesthetic. It has been agreed in principle with city council planning officers that a building of this status should hold a civic contemporary appearance and not look overly domestic. Future residents will be able to access external amenity space via the pavilion roof terrace, allowing private access to outside conditions.
Officers go on to state that, where windows will need to be kept closed, an alternative ventilation system will need to be provided along with an overheating assessment to demonstrate that acceptable indoor temperature can be achieved.
Each apartment and internal amenity space within the proposed development will be provided with a full ‘whole house’ Mechanical Ventilation Heat Recovery (MVHR) systems. These will be designed to deliver the recommended minimum 4no. air changes per hour in accordance with Building Regulations Part F for purge ventilation. This provides a comfortable residential environment, good acoustic and air quality performance for apartments and an efficient performance of the thermal envelope.
Due to the large expanses of glass required to provide quality internal environments and achieve a high- quality external appearance, the building will be fully comfort cooled to prevent overheating issues. Purge ventilation is controlled and performed via MVHR units in each apartment. Opening lights to comply with purge requirements for Part F building regulations are unfeasible on apartments of this size and at up to 61-storeys in height, and would require mechanical supplementation. Opening windows are limited to 100mm only on multi-storey residences. This would have no effect to residents on a building of this height, particularly with the applied wind forces demonstrated in the wind modelling analysis.
Finally, we can confirm that compliance with the TM59 Overheating Assessment method for dwellings will be provided throughout the delivery of the project (post-determination) to ensure that suitable design strategies are incorporated where necessary to mitigate overheating.
Extraction details
The supporting Flue and Extraction Report states that the commercial units at ground floor level will be responsible for their own extraction systems and discharge will be at low level. There is no provision for high level discharge.

Officers have stated they are unable to support any kitchen extract systems that discharge below residential windows due to a risk to residential amenity from odour.
As confirmed above, the proposed development does not propose openable windows. Accordingly, there are no concerns relating to odour and the principle of extraction systems and discharge at low level is acceptable. Moreover, it would be impractical (and potentially unfeasible) to propose ductwork through a 61 storey building to the roof. The financial implications and the logistics in managing such a system would not be viable.
Sound insulation
EPU officers are seeking to impose a condition to control sound insulation between residential and commercial uses. This is stated as follows:
No development shall take place until a scheme of noise insulation between the commercial and residential premises has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details prior to the occupation of the building and thereafter maintained.
Reason: In order to secure the satisfactory development of the application site and safeguard the amenities of occupiers of premises/dwellings in the vicinity in accordance with Paragraphs 3.8 and 3.10 of the Birmingham UDP 2005 and the NPPF.
The accompanying Noise Assessment provides information on sound insulation between commercial and residential units at paragraphs 6.15 – 6.17 and in Table 9 (page 20). Accordingly, we consider that this condition is not necessary.
Noise from plant and machinery
EPU officers are seeking to impose a condition to control noise from plant and machinery. This is stated as follows:
ENVL12 - Noise Levels for Plant and Machinery Text Protected: Y Limits the noise levels for Plant and Machinery The rating levels for cumulative noise from all plant and machinery shall not exceed 5dB below the existing LA90 background levels and 10dB below the existing LAeq at any noise sensitive premises as assessed in accordance with British Standard 4142 (1997) or any subsequent guidance or legislation amending, revoking and/or re-enacting BS4142 with or without modification.
This condition would require that cumulative noise from all plant and machinery shall not exceed 5dB below the existing LA90 background levels and 10dB below the existing LAeq ambient level at any noise sensitive premises.
The submitted Noise Assessment has specified a plant noise limit in accordance with the city council’s own noise guidance – ‘EPU Response to Planning Consultation Note – 1 Noise & Vibration’. The note provides guidance to the city council’s EPU officers when reviewing planning applications and making recommendations.
The guidance states that the Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Level for commercial noise would be equal to the LA90 background level. However, the rating levels for noise within the suggested condition (above) do not reflect this guidance.

Accordingly, we request that the recommended planning condition should be amended to reflect the requirements of the city council’s own guidance.
Air Quality
EPU officers considered that the Air Quality Assessment (which was submitted in support of the planning application on 24 July 2019) provided insufficient information on site suitability, levels of air pollution and was missing the results of the dispersion modelling.
A revised Air Quality Assessment was formally submitted to the city council on 18 August 2019. The revised report concludes that pollutant concentrations were predicted to be below the relevant air quality objectives, and therefore the site is considered to be suitable for the proposed use.
The information set out in this letter provides a robust and comprehensive response to all of the matters raised in objection by the Environmental Protection Unit.
Yours sincerely
Ben Williams
Senior Planner

I really do hope this one gets built. We need a 600 footer!


Platinum Member
Feb 29, 2016
It has been a very mixed news week for Eastside development wise.

Bad news: we have lost our 46 storey tower at Exchange Square which has been replaced by two towers of 34 and 30 storeys plus a 14-storey Premier Inn. There are currently only basic drawings of this but they look very poor. The hotel element has very few windows. Hopefully this is not the final design that will be in the application, which we should see soon.

Good news: Some outline planning for the Martineau Galleries masterplan has also been submitted and it provides for buildings with a maximum of 50 storeys in height, so this could potentially be the focal point height wise for people arriving on HS2 instead of Exchange Square 2 as we thought at first.

Not so good news: the target completion date is in the 2030s!
My top job will be head of planning and regeneration at Birmingham City Council. Believe me, if I were in that position there are no circumstances that such a good scheme would become such a poor one.

Of course the Head of Planning post at the airport has been advertised......


Platinum Member
Feb 29, 2016
I am still not sure about the final product. It needs another 100 feet or so to avoid being too stumpy.

However amazing to see such a tall office block being built outside of the City of London and Westminster. When was the last 100% office block that tall built in the region's? 1970's probably.

Confidence in the city in bundles. Big pre-let on the cards.

Ray Finkle

Staff member
Apr 22, 2012
Just had a look and it's been approved, the article also suggests a Q1 start :)



Well-Known Member
Dec 11, 2018
Just had a look and it's been approved, the article also suggests a Q1 start :)

That looks very interesting. I used to go past this area all the time during my University days, so I am definitely interested in seeing how this will look once it’s built, in addition to seeing Curzon Street station built.

Always interesting to follow these posts about the development of Birmingham, it really is evolving and I can’t wait to see how it will all look in 10-20 years time.
Top Bottom