Finalist, Community Inspiration Awards 2015
Ward Champions for Selly Oak, 2014
Comments
View Plans
Planning History
History of Site
Canal Side Developments
Comments on Latest Plans
Survey Results
Template Letter of Objection
Write to the Developers
We welcome comments from all members of the Selly Oak Community either on the proposals put forward by Sainbury's / Harvest or on our position of asking Sainbury's to build a version of the plan for which they have approval. We will pass comments onto Birmingham City Council and the developers. Comments made at the public meeting can be found here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
You only have to look around the UK (let alone our own Brindley Place) to see how such canalside inheritance has been used to good advantage as a draw, and an enhancement of the customer / visitor experience.
ReplyDeleteWhat scope there is here for some imagination - "The Selly Oak Wharf", or "The Battery Wharf", or .............
What ever happens,
ReplyDelete1. The lapal canal must be reinstated
2 Please don't let sainsburys build a petrol station so close to the new traffic island, the traffic here is bad already. The junction would be at a standstill all the time.
3. With these developments green space is always just a few shrubs by car parking spaces. I would favour at least some of the site to be a green space for wildlife.
I agree with FOSOP Huistorian an attractive canal side can be a great benefit.
ReplyDeleteWe also need quality retail and leisure facilities.
A hotel would be really useful as Selly Oak does not have one - and close to the hospital would be beneficial I'm sure.
We also must see high quality well lit walkways connecting the site between the Bristol Road, Bournebrook and Harborne Lane. One of the latest plans has this going through an underground car park. This would be one place I'd avoid as a walkthrough in the evening - doesn't offer safe passage at all.
At the consultation for the Selly Oak Hospital redevelopment all the coomunity groups were of one mind wanting good walkways/cycleways through the site connecting it to the Bristol Road and the rail station to encourage people to walk rather than drive to that area. This site must continue that linkage across because at the other side if the linkage to Selly Oak Park is created well then a safe, pedestrian route is created that opens up huge opportunities for everyone to travel in the neighbourhood.
Given the coverage that the canal has received, my views might be unpopular, but I do think it's about time something deliverable is supported. Selly Oak is on a cusp and this is something that be of huge benefit to our area, putting life and economy back into our neighbourhood. I think the walkway from the park through the scheme is important, and it needs to consider cyclists, but the canal in reality wil be used by very few people and is getting too much emphasis. If the 2007 scheme could have been built and made a profit, it would have. The scheme in for planning is, to me, the best for Selly Oak with most benefits. This new scheme with Life Science doesn't leave much space for anything 'positive' for the community and people working in there are hardly going to be local. Its not just number of jobs, but type of jobs that wil be important too.
ReplyDeleteIts not so much how much the canal will be USED by people, but its more what the canal does FOR people - like ALL water features it draws people, they are attracted to water and what surrounds it. And don't overlook the canal in a wider context - what it might open up for the area, not just in Selly Oak; it could seed substantial benefits, especially if the canal were extended as Lapal Trust envisage. As it was historically, so it could be again if completely opened up, a corridor in the broadest sense of the word, for all kinds of activity, with the benefits that would provide.
DeleteAgree, but don't think the latest plan has much visual amenity use either; hence my thoughts about the current scheme submitted for planning last March providing the most benefit for most people. Where the canal was prominent, it had amenity; in the current plan it's been sidelined. If this new plan was approved, I'd personally prefer to see any monies earmarked for the canal used for something to benefit the wider community - it's only a personal view, but I think too much emphasis on the canal link. Also not sure where the millions would come from to continue the link along it's historical context - it's just not a reality.
DeleteThanks for input. As other canal restorations have demonstrated, the millions come easier once there is something to build on ....... I would hazard a guess that "it's just not a reality" was said at some stage about every rstoration that has taken place.
DeleteThe 2007 plan must be too expensive or else they'd have built it by now. The council must have something against the Feb 2012 plan otherwise they'd have approved it by now. The latest plan looks a bit like the 2007 plan but with more office space at one end and more retail at the other. But its a bad compromise that will do little for Sell Oak. The pedestrian access is hopeless - how do you get from the bus stops on Bristol Rd to Sainsbury's? Also the service access for the retail is just bizarre. The location of Sainsbury's in the 2007 plan created a much better aspect and this, together with a service access via the science park and re-positioned student flats (who wants them anyway), would solve these problems.
ReplyDeleteDevelopers are driven by the profit motive - maximise income, externalise costs wherever possible, etc. It is for community groups to lobby for the best deal possible. Canal restoration is a legitimate aspiration, and I for one support it. Come on Sainsbury's - do the honourable thing and facilitate this much desired amenity.
ReplyDeletecp4so's proposals DIRELY need a sketch plan. It does not need to be drawn by an architect's office. The list does not add up unless an example can be given of how it all could be fitted on the site - particularly (1) the fronting of retail outlets on the Bristol Road, (2) linking of SO Park and the Laval boatway to the W&B canal AND the buildings, and (3) the walkway from Gribbens Road to the Station fitted around all that. A tracing of the boundaries of the Feb 2012 plan that includes all of B Rd to Chapel Lane would be a good start.
ReplyDeleteWe don't feel we need to draw a plan as everything we are asking for is in the 2007 plan. Plus with less housing that plan would have more room for other features (eg extra retail / car park). Note we are asking that Sainsbury's should face the Bristol Rd with easy access from it not front directly onto it.
DeleteUnless we show something we believe could work, the harking back to the 2007 old plan which was not viable is not going to help our case - but demonstrates our inability to be positive. The Science Centre has obviously been a big political push and seriously limits what can be done on the remaining site. The components that work for the developer are drawn on the latest plans (Sainsbury's, student flats and retail/restuarants); use them but move them around to free the canal and walkway.
DeleteWas in Lancaster Circus this morning and bumped into a number of the local planners who were not very positive-to put it mildly- about the reinstatement of the Dudley Number 2 Canal. Went along the lines of:
ReplyDelete•Why should we spend all that money from the 106 to reinstate 700mtres of canal that goes nowhere, when we could spend it more effectively elsewhere
•The cost of moving the gas main is prohibitive
They didn’t seems to know about CRT’s objection to the potential future new junction.
Harvest have lodged their revised proposals however from what was said there is no improvement in the orientation of the new store to the Bristol Rd, little or no improvement in pedestrian access or reinstatement of the Canal.
Sainsbury’s can build their bloody supermarket but I will never darken its doors, they hold local people and our heritage in complete contempt.
Perhaps the planners - who are public servants - should reflect on the fact that 85% of the local residents (verified by post code) who attended the public meeting on the 18th would like the canal reinstated. And also on the fact that their own Local Area Plan calls for its reinstatement. Also it does not go nowhere it goes to a very nice public park with an active scout group that can benefit directly from water access. Finally it only goes nowhere until its finished, but it has to start somewhere.
DeleteJust checked - Harvest have not yet submitted their revised plan; the last submission was March 2012. On this basis, it would be unprofessional for 'planners' to make such comments when all is not resolved.
DeleteThe Monday meeting was great. Re plans, if we take the Life Science park as a given, your proposal for the site beats the December 2012 Harvest plan hands down. The high-level connection between the new store and Bristol Rd is brilliant. We all need to get behind this one when the Harvest plan is submitted.
ReplyDeleteWith the right orientation and a proper connection to Bristol Rd, the new Sainsbury's can be part of a new 'heart' for Selly Oak based on the station and the canal (or canals). This could include the Dingle area, the land round the library, and a redevelopment of Bristol Rd (narrowed to single carriageway) up to Oak Tree Lane. If access to the station car park was via a bridge from Elliott Rd, the railway land closest to Bristol Rd could be brought into the scheme. Better still, make Bristol Rd bus-and-taxi only from Heeley Rd up to Elliott Rd.
It would be an absolute travesty if the canal was not re-instated within the Sainsbury redevelopment project. Without a new Lapal Canal connection with the Worcester Birmingham canal the rest of the restoration and all the heritage that goes with it will never happen. THIS CONNECTION IS THAT IMPORTANT. Given the size of this project, and all the soil movement that will need to take place, putting a short bit of canal in place looks miniscule. Go on Sainsbury's. Give us a development we can still be proud of in 100 years or more!
ReplyDeleteHas anyone been able to find out exactly what the 'Life Sciences' element of the proposal actually involves? I have deep concerns that it may be similar to 'Huntingdon Life Sciences' - ie vivisection and needless animal cruelty.
ReplyDeleteWe're quite rightly focused on the Sainsbury's part of the site but the Life Sciences part really doesn't offer much to locals apart from paths that go around the outside of the huge building. There is no public space or useful connections- surely more could be made of the design proposed by Council.
ReplyDeleteHas anyone any news on what will happen to the triangle once Sainsburys have moved. Can never get an answer and it affects us greatly. Also the BB land, is it clear of toxic material?
ReplyDelete