We need a cunning plan…
On Wednesday I attended a ‘scoping day’ hosted by MADE at Newhall Square and involving the Prince’s Foundation, local groups and (mainly creative) businesses. The question we discussed was: ‘What does the JQ need to ensure a desirable, sustainable future that conserves the essential nature of the JQ?’ Actually that’s my interpretation of what the question was. That’s certainly what was discussed. Ostensibly the day was about Neighbourhood Plans, and whether the JQ should go for one, but that question is contingent on knowing whether we – the people who live and work here – can agree on a way forward. The planning vehicle we use to get there is secondary.
Here’s the big surprise (to me at least): there was a remarkable degree of consensus about the way forward. For those of you who don’t know, planning and development in the JQ are governed largely by a couple of planning instruments: Jewellery Quarter Conservation Area Design Guide (2005) and Jewellery Quarter Conservation Management Plan (2002)*. The latter zones the JQ into areas where certain kinds of development are allowed and others are not. It seems, from those who have been around a while and were involved in the original drafting of that document, that the time has come to review some of the more stringent conditions, particularly around the zones called The Golden Triangle and The Industrial Middle, where no residential development is permitted (except maybe live/work studios). An example (there are many) in the case for review is Vittoria Street, where good-looking buildings have been empty for years and are deteriorating all the time.
It’s easy to blame Birmingham City Council for some of this and, it’s true, they are the planning authority and some of the empty and derelict buildings belong to them. But University College Birmingham is also a significant landlord here and have bought buildings in more cash-rich times with a view to expanding their campus at some point. Well that point has arrived with their development in the George Street area, so their intentions with these other ‘Cinderella buildings’ aren’t clear. You’ll have seen the results of their apparent indecision in Legge Lane and Ludgate Hill (two of the last three buildings before you cross the red footbridge into the Colmore area are theirs). So part of the way forward is less about master-planning and more about getting building owners to decide what they want to do with their buildings, be it development, refurbishment, sale or asset transfer to a community organisation. Sitting on them while they crumble into the ground isn’t an option.
I was asked ‘what do the residents think?’ That seems a reasonable question to ask the Chairman of the JQ Neighbourhood Forum, but I replied that I’d consider myself extremely arrogant to say that I know what nearly 5000 people think. Which is where you, dear blog reader, come in. The JQNF has no real traction without feedback from residents. Get in touch through this website or through @JQNF and tell us what you want the JQ to be like. I continued my reply to that reasonable question by saying I knew of no-one who wants the JQ to be preserved in aspic as some relic of Birmingham’s bygone manufacturing past (and less of the ‘bygone’ please). Neither did I know of anyone who wants to live in a residential dormitory estate of thousands of cheap, nasty flats, with a blue plaque somewhere saying ‘this used to be Birmingham’s Jewellery Quarter.’ Our path seems to lie along more subtle, nuanced lines. The trouble with subtle, nuanced lines is that they’re not easy to find, and the more people standing around the map the harder the process is. But that just serves to make the search more rewarding. You can be a part of that search; you can help decide how the JQ develops in the next few years and beyond. Previous attempts at ‘top-down’ planning have had mixed success and the Localism Act (and here for those of us without a law degree) gives us – the people who actually live and work here – the chance to shape the JQ’s destiny, and along with it, our own. The Prince’s Foundation needs a forum to document the process that started on Wednesday and I volunteered this site and by implication, the JQNF, to help with that. Keep checking back here, follow us on Twitter, join the email list, just stay in touch with the forces shaping the world around you.
* (The files on the BCC website have two extensions, .pdf and .gif. You need to delete the .gif extension to make it work. I wouldn’t like to think how much that website cost us…)
[mappress mapid=”155″]
5 Comments
Leave a Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.
hi
i moved to the jq because of the lovely buildings and the mix of industry and residential properties, i’m sad that so many great buildings are not being used and are crumbling so we definetely need to bring the quarter to life. we need a mix in the type of residential property too many of the flats are designed (or sold) as buy to lets and if we want to create a community here there has to be a mix that encourages a wider residential basis. over the 4 years i’ve been here the area has become more vibrant attracting people to visit for work and play, a more relaxed part of the city but within easy (walking) distance of the heart of town. I think the provision of more public space, deyus sq and the golden triangle will assist this but we do need to tip the balance a little further in utilising gorgeous empty buildings
Thanks for your help and contributions on the day. I thought it was a very genuine response all round from everyone there. It was honest and what you saw was what you get but there was a real feel of being together and wanting to go forward. There is no lack of ideas or opportunity but the journey is about being upbeat and staying united behind the JQDT; positives only please. We will have enough difficulty without beating ourselves up!
I think think this is quite complex, and a number of issues overlap. The Industrial Revolution was not only born here: it died here as well, and residents live with this legacy on a daily basis. There is a case for celebrating and asserting the value of the Quarter as heritage, and I think this is entirely compatible with the types of new businesses that are coming into the Quarter. Without those, and the residents who make a long term commitment to the area, the gains of the past few years will be lost. It will work best as an urban (urbane?) village, and this will mean compromise to squeeze in the best modern life has to offer, together with our rich heritage. When I visit World Heritage Sites in other countries, I am struck by the importance of newness to the whole enterprise.
It is time that there is new guidance in place with a clear mission statement; something along the lines of ‘preserving the industrial heritage and built environment whilst providing an attractive place to work, live and play.’ It could be subtitled ‘The importance of the jewellery manufacturing and retail industries is paramount, and the key to the JQ’s success is a mix of industries, and provision for Birmingham’s first true urban village’.
Then we need to ask some fundamental questions of all stakeholders (jewellery, other businesses, residents, visitors): What needs to happen to keep you here? What will make you prosper? Where do you want to be located? Why are you here in the first place?
That way we can find out whether, say, listed/conserved buildings are preventing new precious metals factories from opening. Or we might find out that pressure from residents’ needs for food & drink means that jewellery shops are being priced out of the market. Or maybe that the city council and education establishments need to yield their property portfolio. Or that the current path is OK but it needs a helping hand to get it off the ground…
[…] may recall I blogged about the Jewellery Quarter’s future and the Neighbourhood Planning process back in December. That post generated some articulate and […]