Major Birmingham student flats scheme to be looked at again month after it was rejected
Major proposals to build a student accommodation block on the former site of a city centre pub are to be considered again.
Developers have been seeking permission for a 16-storey building with 263 student bed spaces at the old Golden Eagle site in the heart of the city.
Those behind the scheme have said it would respect the site’s history and provide economic, social and environmental benefits.
But last month, members of Birmingham’s planning committee were troubled by heritage concerns and ultimately voted to refuse the proposals.
The plans are now set to be considered again at an upcoming planning meeting, with a council officer clarifying the heritage impact.
They concluded: “There are enough public benefits to outweigh that [heritage] harm, including a demonstrated need for purpose-build student accommodation.”
They also said the applicant had sought the legal advice of a barrister who advised that the heritage consultant’s judgement of ‘less than substantial’ harm is “entirely appropriate”.
The officer went on to recommend that the planning committee approve the proposals next week.
But they also set out a reason for refusal, based on heritage harm, if the committee decides to go against their recommendation.
‘Benefits outweigh heritage harm’
A report previously acknowledged that the scheme could cause “less than substantial/low level” harm to heritage assets such as the Town Hall and The Former General Post Office.
“The designated heritage assets hold considerable historic significance,” it stated.
“The less than substantial harm which would be caused to their significance by the development is considered by conservation colleagues to reach low levels in all cases.
“In my view, I consider there are enough benefits associated with this proposal to outweigh the heritage harm.”
The chair of the planning committee, Coun Lee Marsham, said last month that those behind the scheme had done “the best they can” and argued there was a “clear need” for purpose-built student accommodation.
A council officer confirmed at the time that the developers had demonstrated a need for student accommodation.
“We have to consider what’s in front of us,” he continued. “We can’t theorise about whether a residential scheme would or wouldn’t be viable.
“This scheme, when it came to us, was 45-storeys tall and the scheme in front of you now is very much led by minimising as much as we possibly can to a point where we still have a viable scheme.
“Yes, there is heritage harm […] and officers have been mindful of that all the way through this.”
The report previously said the scheme would contribute “towards the regeneration aspirations for this part of the city centre” if approved.
Developers also proposed shared internal amenity spaces and “commercial use” at the ground floor.
