Occupying Urban Space - Edward Atkins

OCCUPYING URBAN SPACE EDWARD ATKINS WOLFSON COLLEGE

23.04.13 | Essay 4 - Pilot Thesis | 8059 words An essay submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the MPhil examination in Environmental Design in Architecture (Option B) 2012 - 2014

1

TABLE OF CONTENTS Content

Page

Abstract

3

Chapter 01 Introduction

5

Controlling Urban Growth West Midlands Urban Area Birmingham Concept Chapter 02 Densification Literature Review Finding Available Space Birmingham Green Space Birmingham City Centre Transport Infrastructure Chapter 03 Urban Scale The Site Site Plan & Elevation Site Structure Site Characteristics Design Ideas Arch Principles New Urban Structure Chapter 04 Residential Urban or Suburban?

City Centre Typologies Suburban Typologies Historical Typologies Housing Principles Chapter 05 House Form Massing Model Arrangement Houses Design Green Space Key Section Levels/Access

7 9 11 14 16 17 19 22 23 25 30 33 35 37 39 43 44 49 56 57 59 73 89 105 108 109 111 113 121 125 133

Conclusion

135

References Bibliography

138 143

Appendix

150

2

ABSTRACT

The United Kingdom is on the brink of irreversible change to its rural landscape. Rising population levels and a desire for rural living has left the countryside which surrounds our cities, the Green Belt, under threat from development. As residential growth occurs further and further away from the city centre the separation between where people live and work increases. This has resulted in cities devoid of homes and communities, not conducive to a sustainable city.

Using the City of Birmingham as a case study, this design research project examines how the principles and aspirations associated with suburban living can be brought into the city centre in order to mitigate encroachment on the surrounding Green Belt.

Figure 1 - Birmingham, UK

3

4

5

INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER 01

6

CONTROLLING URBAN GROWTH

During the nineteenth century the United Kingdom was experiencing the full effects of the industrial revolution and was growing at an unprecedented rate.1 Rural-urban migration was increasing the population size of towns and cities and the authorities were unprepared for this rapid growth. This led to poorly planned, inadequate housing and people were forced to live in cramped and unsanitary conditions.2 Keen to escape such conditions and emboldened by the expanding rail network, the growing middle classes soon began looking to build even further away from the city centre slums, creating fashionable green estates on the city fringe which became known as suburbs.3 The decline of agriculture meant land on the outskirts of the city was available cheaply and as the crowded city centre grew so too did the suburbs.4 This explosive growth of cities horrified critics and inspired utopian planners who believed that a radical reconstruction of cities could solve both the social and urban crises of the time.5 Most notable were Ebenezer Howard, Raymond Unwin and Patrick Abercrombie. Their work, combined with pressure groups such as the Campaign for the Protection of Rural England (CPRE), laid the foundations of Green Belt policy in the United Kingdom.6 Since becoming national policy in 1955, Green Belts have become arguably one of the most successful planning initiatives of the past half century.7 There are now fourteen Green Belts in England covering over 1.6 million hectares, equating to over 13% of the total land area.8 The intentions of the Green Belt are defined as limiting urban sprawl and preserving the character of the countryside, whilst simultaneously providing recreational space with environmental and ecological benefits near towns and cities.9 It is clear that Green Belt policy has been instrumental in successfully curbing urban sprawl. This has allowed urban areas to remain relatively contained and concentrated (Figure 2). Philip Rode, for example, believes London’s Green Belt has been essential in creating the density necessary to maintain London’s status as a global city. This is in comparison to cities such as New York and Paris which have more physical barriers such as Manhattan Island and Boulevard Périphérique to limit growth.10 It is important to realise that the Green Belt is first and foremost a method of control. The Green Belt is essentially a city wall, based on the belief that the city has to be controlled at the urban fringe or it would ‘invade’ the countryside.11 The severity of such an action is muted because of the aesthetic qualities of the Green Belt; as it is doubtful that a city wall would be regarded with the same levels of affection, though it is capable of achieving the same objectives.

The popularity of Green Belt policy with the public is also important; Martin Elson states that the Green Belt “has a natural faculty for engendering support.”12 It is simple to make the assumption that whilst there was a great level of demand and support for the Green Belt in the nineteenth century by groups such as the CPRE that this continues to be the case today. However, the attitudes of the public have since changed, and rather than a purely aesthetic reaction to industrial growth, the Green Belt today is synonymous with environmental sustainability. This ensures it remains relevant and popular today, making it an almost unique method of controlling city growth.

7

Urban - Less Sparse Urban - Sparse Town & Fringe - Less Sparse Town & Fringe - Sparse Rural - Less Sparse Rural - Sparse

Figure 2 - Map of Rural/Urban areas

8

One example of where Green Belt policy has been particularly effective is in the West Midlands Urban Area (Figure 3). Containing the cities of Birmingham, Coventry and Wolverhampton, it is the largest urban area in the UK after Greater London.13 It is surrounded by the West Midlands Green Belt which has been crucial in ensuring the various elements have not merged to form one enormous conurbation.

Despite this Birmingham City Council latest development plan states that 80,000 new homes are required by 2031, of which only 43,000 are planned in existing urban areas. As a result the council are ‘exploring the release of land from the Green Belt for housing development’ to accommodate the remaining 37,000 dwellings.14 Consequently, the Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA), published

by Birmingham City Council in 2011 highlighted over 534 hectares of Green Belt land as possible sites to build upon (See Appendix).15 This approach is supported by the most recent changes to planning policy in the Government’s National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), published in March 2012. The NPPF promotes, ‘a presumption in favour of sustainable development.’16 This is a statement which many believe is ultimately a lessening of control thus allowing building to occur on Green Belt land.

It is clear that despite Birmingham becoming a post-industrial city, the same patterns of growth formed in the nineteenth century have remained as suburban living continues to be desirable. Now, having reached the edge of its boundary, Birmingham is seeking to expand into the Green Belt. Despite this, it is not exploring new solutions, merely intending to continue low density suburban sprawl.

As mentioned previously, the defining feature of the Green Belt is that of control. It would seem ironic therefore, that when the West Midlands Green Belt is most needed to limit the growth of Birmingham, discussions are being held suggesting its removal. Cases of urban sprawl across the world have shown that cities do need containing and if that control was lost it is difficult to see how it could be regained.

Furthermore, encroaching into the Green Belt would have far reaching cultural, economic and environmental implications.

Already one consequence of Birmingham’s lateral growth is that the city has become more decentralised. Constantly improving transport links allow greater commuter distances between the city and suburbs and as a result the separation between where people live and work is increasing. This has left the city centre devoid of residential dwellings and urban communities.

This study proposes an alternative to further expansion into the Green Belt by reintroducing residential growth back into Birmingham City Centre sufficient to meet its future needs. By understanding public aspirations and creating desirable homes on unoccupied space within the city centre it may be possible to attract communities back, thus strengthening the character of the city.

9

W’hampton

Walsall

Sandwell Dudley

Birmingham

Solihul

Coventry

Figure 3 - West Midlands Urban Area

Figure 4 - West Midlands Green Belt

10

This timeline charts the outward expansion of Birmingham over the 20th Century; the population of the city also grew until 1951 when it peaked. Over the next 20 years the population declined and, as of the 2011 census, has yet to reach the population levels of the 1950s. Consequently, Birmingham has become a paradox of a growing city with a declining population. Nevertheless this shows that Birmingham is capable of raising population density within its existing boundary.

Back to Backs

Inter-war Semi Detached

Note: Red line dentoes city boundary

1890

1920

Popu

1200

Population (thousands)

1000 800 600 400 200 0

1891

1901

1911

Figure 5 - Timeline showing population growth and historic development of Birmingham

1921

1931 11

Post-war Tower Blocks

Modern Suburb

1950

1980

2010

ulation: 1,112,685 Population: 1,073,000

1951

1961

1971

1981

1991

2011 12

“WE HAVE A SPECIAL RESPONSIBILITY TO MAKE LIVING IN CITIES AND UNDER DENSE CIRCUMSTANCES NOT JUST HABITABLE BUT PREFERABLE”

Jacob van Rijs, 2008 17

13

CONCEPT

Figure 6 - Traditional City

Figure 7 - Re-imagined City

Figure 8 - Concept Sketch

14

15

DENSIFICATION

CHAPTER 02

16

LITERATURE REVIEW

The complex issue of densities within cities and urban environments is subject to a wide range of academic discourse and study. It is widely accepted that in order to function successfully cities need to maintain a certain level of density; however the concept of high density is a matter of perception which changes between different countries and cultures.18 As a result, it is important to evaluate sources and studies to ensure they are relevant to the conditions in the United Kingdom.

Much of the contemporary debate surrounding densification in the United Kingdom is concerned with creating sustainable cities and as such it has become both an architectural and environmental issue. Studies have been both numerous and comprehensive. Newman and Kenworthy’s much cited study proved there was a direct correlation between higher density cities and reduced vehicle energy consumption.19 Haughton and Hunter expand on this by explaining how, in compact cities, journey distances are shorter encouraging people to walk or cycle more, whilst public transport systems are also better developed.20 Furthermore, Vicky Cheng outlines how, if a population is concentrated on a smaller area, infrastructure such as roads, drainage and communications are used more efficiently and are therefore more economical.21 Critics of higher density have questioned the application of such theories, for example Marcial Echenique argues that, despite densification, people’s preference for travelling by car puts too much strain on existing infrastructure causing congestion and pollution.22 Cheng admits this is a potential problem and states that planning of high density should be intrinsically linked to the provision of infrastructure.23 This would support the view that there is not a singular architectural approach to densification. Authors such as Breheny, Rockwood, Haughton and Hunter are critical of single urban solutions and policies, instead advocating a tailored approach to individual circumstances.24 Nevertheless, it is important to define what constitutes high density and also recommend appropriate levels. In his report, ‘housing for a compact city,’ Richard Rogers argues for recommended densities of 240 - 435 dwellings per hectare (dph) for central London and between 55 and 275 dph for town centres in outer London.25 The current government targets for new housing is between 30-55 dph, however new housing is currently being built on an average of just 27dph.26 It is clear that inner city densities would need to be significantly higher, around 100-300 dph.

Despite the established environmental benefits of increasing density in urban environments, the public in general have a negative perception of high density housing. Al-Kodmany and Ali describe how people view high density housing as a ‘threat’, leading to rising crime and lowering house prices.27 Rogers and Burdett dismiss this argument however, by stating that high density and high value neighbourhoods such as London’s Belgravia are up to ten times more developed than typical urban areas.28 The tendency to associate high density with high-rise is a challenge for architectural thinkers. Richard Rogers believes that high rise in the United Kingdom deserves its reputation, citing the failures of the tower block estates in the 1960s and 1970s as ‘social failures’.29 However,

17

he blames poor design and construction rather than the number of units or people, stating that, ‘different spatial forms [...] have different social impacts on their surroundings and communities.’30 This is a view supported by Bryan Lawson who states that such high rise was often at lower densities than the terraced housing it replaced.31 Michael Jencks suggests that architects should be primarily concerned with the level of acceptability of densities. He argues that increasing density alone is not a solution and ‘high densities may only work if good quality of life is achieved.’32 Paola Sassi is also critical of high density developments where social infrastructure isn’t considered. Sassi advocates smaller, self-sufficient neighbourhoods throughout the city, linked by public transport, which provide amenities such as shops, schools and leisure facilities required by the residents. She claims that this gives the advantages of low car dependency, more leisure time, stronger community feeling and a high quality of life stating, ‘the ultimate aim is to create communities where people will want to live in the longer term.’33 There is much debate about the effects of increased density on social interaction with concerns about overcrowding and increased competitiveness leading to conflict.34 However, Jan Gehl states that in order to create a lively city there needs to be a certain critical mass of people.35 Other benefits can also include greater social interaction and opportunities.36 Furthermore, studies by Elizabeth Burton have shown that although it cannot be said that compact cities promote social equity, they have significant potential to do so, dependant on the form of densification.37 By addressing these issues it becomes clear that whilst increasing density within cities produces positive environmental, social and economic benefits, it is important to manage human aspirations and perceptions if densification is to become accepted. Essential to achieving this is promoting the idea that higher density does not necessarily have to mean high rise developments, whilst increasing the quality of design and construction in high density developments is also critical to creating desirable space.

18

FINDING AVAILABLE SPACE The City of Birmingham covers an area of 26,777 hectares and has a population of 1,073,000.38 Its population density is therefore approximately 40 people per hectare.

The maps in Figures 9 & 10 illustrate how the majority of the land area within the city extents is already built upon.

Figure 9 - Satallite image of Birmingham

19

Figure 10 - Birmingham Figure Ground Map

20

Figure 11 - Birmingham open space

21

Birmingham contains 4,153 hectares of designated Green Belt land within its boundaries, just over 15% of its total area.39 It is in these areas that the city is planning its future development; however there is a remaining 3,237 hectares of less natural, additional open space throughout the city.40

Key Natural Green Space Local Parks Leisure - Public & Private Green Corridor Small Open Spaces Cemetery or Churchyard Green Belt Figure 12 - Birmingham Green Space

22

BIRMINGHAM CITY CENTRE By exploring the city centre in greater detail it will be possible to understand where there are opportunities for development.

Figure 13 - City Centre Figure Ground Map

23

Approx. area: 4.5km2/450 hectares

24

In addition to buildings, transport infrastructure occupies a large percentage of the city with over 2,500km of roads, 56km of canals and three major train stations. Due to the large area such infrastructure covers it can be argued that much of it is underutilised, leaving potential for development.

Figure 14 - City Centre Buildings

Figure 15 - City Centre Roads

Figure 18 - Typical Buildings

Figure 19 - Inner Ring Road (A4400)

25

Figure 16 - City Centre Canals

Figure 17 - City Centre Rail Lines (above ground)

Figure 20 - Birmingham and Fazeley Canal

Figure 21 - Snow Hill Station

In order to mitigate Birmingham’s outward growth into the Green Belt, two key areas have been identified which could be explored to raise residential density; green space and space dedicated to transport infrastructure. This study will continue by exploring the potential of transport infrastructure.

26

“Out of these investigations comes the implicit suggestion that urban throughways and city transportation systems of all kinds should be recognized as a major generator of urban form, as meaningful - even fundamental - elements in urban design�

(Paul Rudolph, 1974)41

Figure 22 - Birmingham railway viaduct

27

28

29

URBAN SCALE

CHAPTER 03

30

Figure 23 - Satellite of Birmingham Snow Hill

31

32

THE SITE

This site illustrates the different characteristics discussed about the city centre. As one of Birmingham’s three main stations, the railway at Snow Hill Station occupies a significant amount of land area, just over 2 hectares. Built in 1852, the lines are elevated on a brick viaduct which cuts through the urban landscape before sloping into a tunnel under the city.

The surrounding area is a mixture of building styles and sizes, dedicated to both offices and industrial uses.

Residential accommodation is limited.

This site provides the opportunity to explore the development of residential dwellings around transport infrastructure in the city centre.

Figures 24 & 25 - Site Photos Figure 26 - Birmingham Snow Hill railway

33

34

The platforms at Snow Hill extend underneath a Multi-Storey Car Park, built in 1987 to replace the original Great Western Railway Building. In addition to the railway lines associated with Snow Hill, the viaduct also contains St Paul’s metro Station and the trams run on the fourth track.

St Paul’s Metro Station

Livery Street

Figure 27 - PLAN +12m

Figure 28 - ELEVATION

35

Multi-Storey Car Park

Snow Hill Station

36

t ta Stree Henriet

Running through the viaduct are several key roads and the Birmingham and Fazeley Canal. Many of the additional openings are used for shops and small businesses.

Livery Street

Figure 29 - PLAN +6m

Figure 30 - Water Street Tunnel The horizontal water runs indicate the structure of the viaduct behind the wall (Figure 31). There are two distinct markers and the typical build up is masonry fill to the first marker and then compact soil above to the second.

Figure 31 - Viaduct Wall

37

A4400

treet Lionel S

Canal

et Stre Water

Parapet

Soil Masonry Fill

Brick Arch

Figure 32 - Section through tunnel

38

SITE CHARACTERISTICS

Figure 33 - Railway platforms and tracks on viaduct

Figure 34 - Livery Street arches

Figure 35 - English bond brickwork

Figure 36 - Brick arch detail

39

Figure 37 - Livery Street

40

Figure 38 - Panoramic above Snow Hill

Figure 39 - Panoramic from patform one

41

42

DESIGN IDEAS

Figure 40 - Design Sketches

43

44

ARCH PRINCIPLES In order to create the most efficient structure it is important to understand the principles of brick arch buildings. Using tools such as eQuilbrium (Figure 42) the effects of position and size of load on the arch can also be explored.

Important findings have shown that placing the load in the centre of the arch creates a steeper arch, whilst placing the load at the extents creates a more rounded arch. Furthermore, the greater the load, the stronger the arch becomes and the most efficient shape is one that can take the thrust vertically down to the base of the arch.

Figure 41 - Thrust diagrams

Figure 42 - eQuilibrium studies

45

“IF YOU SAY TO BRICK ‘LOOK, ARCHES ARE EXPENSIVE, AND I CAN USE A CONCRETE LINTEL OVER YOU. WHAT DO YOU THINK OF THAT?’ BRICK SAYS:...’I LIKE AN ARCH,’ AND IT IS IMPORTANT YOU HONOUR THE MATERIAL YOU USE” Louis Kahn, 1971 42 46

CENTRE LINE 400 4220

1440

1645

1250

605

400

370 425 100

130

RAIL LEVEL

Figure 43 - Minimum train clearance

47

Figure 44 - Train arriving at Snow Hill 48

Figure 45 - New structural arches

The proposed intervention is composed of a series of brick-arched segments creating a structure for a new city layer above. The design for the structure has been heavily influenced by the viaduct. Each segment is aligned with the tunnels running through the viaduct, whilst the location of the arch bases has been determined by the position of the train tracks and the minimum clearance required for the trains to run unimpeded.

The arches are all semi-circular, where height=widthรท2.

This has been shown to be an efficient structural form as it transfers load through to its base without creating much lateral thrust. Furthermore, by creating a set of rules for the structure there is less variation between each arch shape making construction more efficient. The overall height of each segment is determined by the height of largest arch, this has resulted in the rising and falling elevation (Figure 46) which will influence the layer above.

Figure 46 - ELEVATION 49

50

Figure 47 - Enclosed structure

The structure is enclosed by a further brick-arched facade.

The intention is that this will form a continuous facade up to the residential dwellings on the layer above. The arches at ground level allow access to the existing shops and routes through the viaduct whilst a second set of arched openings above allow natural light onto the platforms at Snow Hill.

Figure 48 - ELEVATION 51

52

Figure 49 - PLAN +12m

Brickwork (English Bond) Masonry/Concrete Infill

Brick Arch

Figure 50 - Arch detail

53

Despite the overall scale of the intervention the footprint of the structure is intended to be relatively small with minimal impact on the normal functions of the city. By creating the structure from brick it is making a statement of permanence and solidity, whilst sustaining a contextual relationship with the surrounding urban fabric. Creating a structure of this size with so much brick is unavoidably an expensive and time consuming choice; however, it is considered a high quality material which people have a natural affinity for. These are important factors when designing for high density (see pp. 17-18).

The English bond brickwork was selected from the site and it has also had an effect on the design of the structure. Figure 50 illustrates how the brick has been arranged to deal with two elements of the structure, including arches, intersecting at opposing angles.

54

55

RESIDENTIAL

CHAPTER 04

56

URBAN OR SUBURBAN?

In order to raise density in Birmingham successfully it is necessary to study and understand the characteristics of different residential typologies, both urban and suburban.

Birmingham City Centre currently has a growing population, however residential density across the city centre is relatively low.43 Furthermore, just 10% of households are families.44 In contrast, suburban living is seen as very desirable and 80% of the United Kingdom’s population live in areas classed as suburban.45 Attracting families to an area is particularly vital as it can be argued that family life is essential to creating community life.46 Establishing a strong community is important for nurturing social interaction and shared identity within a place.

It is therefore necessary to understand why people, particularly families, are choosing to live outside of urban areas. It is unclear if this choice is being made due to a lack of appropriate housing in the city centre compared to suburban alternatives, or if it is influenced by factors which cannot be controlled by design. A recent report by the RIBA states that the top three things people look for when moving home is outside space (49%), the size of the rooms (42%), and proximity to local services (42%).47 It is therefore important to evaluate the different typologies against these factors.

Proximity to local services is easily achievable within a city centre context; however it is important to note that reputation of local schools can often be a decisive factor for families when choosing to move. As this is primarily an issue with location and is unrelated to the design of a residential dwelling it is has not been explored further at this stage, though its importance is acknowledged.

In addition to examining modern urban and suburban typologies, it will also be interesting to study historical urban typologies as examples of high density urban housing which remain in use today.

High density environments need to offer desirable housing if they are to flourish and become accepted. Essential to achieving this is identifying what makes an area or typology desirable. By examining the aspirations and principles surrounding such typologies it will be possible to create a design proposal for residential dwellings which can be integrated into the urban structure discussed in the previous chapter.

57

Figure 51 - Birmingham rooftops

58

CITY CENTRE TYPOLOGIES

Figure 52 - Birmingham high-rise

59

60

Figure 53 - Islington Gates, Fleet Street

61

01 CITY CENTRE RESIDENTIAL ISLINGTON GATES Location: 12-16 Fleet Street, B3 1JL Date Completed: 2005 Cost: ÂŁ25 million Floors: 10 Units: 88 residential apartments

Located alongside the Birmingham and Fazeley Canal, Islington Gates is part of a mixed use development comprising of residential apartments located above commercial units.

There is no communal outside space or gardens, however the majority of apartments do have private balconies. The apartments are a mix of one and two bedrooms with one three bedroom penthouse.48 This style of modern development, built using a steel frame, is common in cities across the UK. The floor plans below show one of the larger two bedroom apartments within the development.

Figure 54 - Axonometric Figure 55 - Plan of two bedroom duplex apartment

Balcony

Bedroom

Bedroom

Kitchen/Living Space En-suite

Bathroom

Ground Floor Scale 0 1

2

3

4

5

First Floor Total Floor Area (127m2) 62

Figure 56 - The Cube, Wharfside Street

63

02 CITY CENTRE RESIDENTIAL THE CUBE Location: 196 Wharfside Street, B1 1RN Date Completed: 2010 Cost: £100 million Floors: 23 Units: 244 residential apartments

The Cube, designed by Ken Shuttleworth of MAKE Architects, is the final phase of the Mailbox, Birmingham’s latest flagship development. The Cube contains, offices, apartments, shops, restaurants and a hotel.49 Whilst the cladding defines the building’s cube shape, the interior is a complex geometric form which creates a twisting central courtyard containing terraces for the apartments on each level. The residential units are all either one or two bedroom apartments.

Figure 57 - Axonometric Figure 58 - Plan of two apartments

Terrace

Terrace

Bedroom

Bedroom

Living Space Ensuite Living Space

Kitchen

Bathroom

Kitchen Bedroom

Terrace

Scale 0 1

2

3

4

5

Bedroom

Ensuite

Bathroom

Average Floor Area (79.28m2) 64

Figure 59 - Beetham Tower, Holloway Circus

65

03 CITY CENTRE RESIDENTIAL BEETHAM TOWER Location: 10 Holloway Circus, B1 1BT Cost: £72 Million Date Completed: 2006 Floors: 39 Units: 150 residential apartments

Beetham Tower is Birmingham’s tallest residential building and second tallest building at 121.5 meters high. A 220 room hotel occupies the lower 20 floors whilst the residential part, consisting of one, two and three bedroom apartments, takes up a further 19 floors.

Whilst the penthouses on the highest levels cantilever slightly forward, balconied ‘winter gardens’ are concealed by louvers flush with the rest of the facade on the lower floors.50 The floor plan below shows one of the larger, three bedroom apartments.

Figure 60 - Axonometric Figure 61 - Plan of three bed apartment

Bedroom

Bedroom Bathroom Kitchen

Living Space Bathroom

Dressing

Balcony Bedroom Scale 0 1

2

3

4

5

Total Floor Area (114.8m2) 66

Figure 62 - Upper Parkside, Park Central

67

04 CITY CENTRE RESIDENTIAL UPPER PARKSIDE, PARK CENTRAL Location: Alfred Knight Way, B15 2EY Cost: £9 million (this phase) Date Completed: 2009 Floors: 8 Units: 57 residential apartments

‘Hudson’ in Upper Parkside is just one phase of a £261 million pound mixed use regeneration scheme in a 61 acre site in Birmingham City Centre. The project plans to create 1,600 homes before 2013 in a mix of apartments and freehold houses.51 Hudson comprises of one, two and three bedroom apartments, each with their own balconies over the eight floors. The floor plan below shows an example of a three bedroom duplex apartment, the largest in this phase, and marketed as a penthouse.

Figure 63 - Axonometric Figure 64 - Plan of three bedroom duplex apartment

Balcony

Living Space

Balcony

Bedroom

Kitchen

Bathroom

Ground Floor

Scale 0 1

Bedroom

En-suite

Void

Bedroom

Void

En-suite

First Floor

Internal Floor Area (120.65m2) 2

3

4

5 68

Figure 65 - Derwent Foundry, Mary Ann Street

69

05 CITY CENTRE RESIDENTIAL DERWENT FOUNDRY Location: Mary Ann Street, B3 1LH Cost: ÂŁ23 million Date Completed: 2008 Floors: 4 Units: 98 residential apartments

Derwent Foundry was formerly owned by Taylor and Challen who manufactured presses for the jewellery trade and is a Grade II listed building.52 Old factories like this are common in Birmingham which was once a place of heavy industry and many have found themselves similarly converted.

During the project a contemporary extension was added and the foundry was converted into a range of one and two bedroom apartments. Centred around landscaped courtyards, some of the apartments also benefit from private balconies. The floor plan below illustrates the difference in size between two adjoining apartments in the building.

Figure 66 - Axonometric Figure 67 - Plan of two apartments

Bedroom

Bathroom

Bedroom En-suite

Bathroom Kitchen/Living Space Kitchen/Living Space

Bedroom

Bedroom

Scale 0 1

2

3

4

Balcony

5 70

SUMMARY

Studying residential typologies in Birmingham City Centre has shown that apartments are the most common residential type and are frequently located in high-rise developments. Whilst the appearance of such developments can vary, there is a distinct lack of individuality between the apartments inside.

Size and range of property is limited, the majority of apartments have just one or two bedrooms. Three bedroom apartments are often marketed as penthouses and as a result are more expensive.

This is an obvious restriction for families looking for houses with a number of bedrooms.

A study by CABE in 2006 stated that only 30% of the population of the United Kingdom would choose to live in apartments, suggesting that the main reason they are unpopular is that they are often too small.53 The demand for useable outdoor space is also high, something apartments do not provide. These are certainly common themes in the typologies explored here.

The internal sizes of the apartments are generally quite small; furthermore there is a common approach towards creating open plan living spaces. Such arrangements can generate more space; however this results in reduced privacy.

The amount of outdoor space is definitely inadequate. Private outdoor space is limited to balconies (Figure 68), where the size restricts much of its use. Communal space, gardens or green space is very rare and as such there are little or no opportunities for interaction between the residents.

Many of the apartments are sold as leasehold properties or available to rent; this type of ownership is seen as generating little control for the residents.54 Consequently, this impacts negatively on the chances of creating an urban community.

71

Figure 68 - City Centre Living

72

SUBURBAN TYPOLOGIES

Figure 69 - Suburban housing

73

74

Figure 70 - Detached house

75

01 SUBURBAN TYPOLOGIES DETACHED HOUSE No. of Bedrooms: 5 Date Built: 2006 Floors: 2 Internal Floor Area: 129m2 (excl. garage) Garden Size: 111.4m2 Total Footprint: 238.83m2 The detached house is typical of suburban dwelling. It is often portrayed as the ideal family home as its separation from other houses allows it a greater sense of privacy. The style, size and number of bedrooms vary from house to house; however, many of the features are universal.

There is a large amount of outdoor space, a small garden at the front and a big garden at the back which can also be accessed by a pathway at the side of the house. A garage is provided with additional parking available on the large driveway.

Figure 71 - Axonometric

Figure 72 - Floor Plans

Bedroom

Dining Room

Bedroom

Living Space

Bathroom

Bedroom

Garage Kitchen Bedroom

W.C.

Ground Floor Scale 0 1

2

3

4

Bedroom

En-suite

First Floor

5 76

Figure 73 - Semi-detached house

77

02 SUBURBAN TYPOLOGIES SEMI-DETACHED HOUSE No. of Bedrooms: 3 Date Built: 2002 Floors: 2 Internal Floor Area: 76m2 Garden Size: 82.1m2 Total Footprint: 150.43m2 Semi-detached houses are the most common residential type in the UK and, like detached houses, are synonymous with suburban living.55 This typology shares a party wall on one side with a second (usually identical) house.

This house is set back from the street slightly and there is a large garden to the rear, in this case the area of the garden is larger than the internal floor area. Parking is on the drive at the side of the house.

Figure 74 - Axonometric Figure 75 - Floor Plans

Dining Room

Bedroom

Kitchen

Bedroom

Bathroom Living Space

Bedroom W.C.

Scale 0

Ground Floor 1

2

3

4

First Floor

5 78

Figure 76 - Row of modern terraced houses

79

03 SUBURBAN TYPOLOGIES TERRACE HOUSE No. of Bedrooms: 3 Date Built: 2004 Floors: 3 Internal Floor Area: 105.25m2 Garden Size: 58.9m2 Total Footprint: 121.99 Terraced houses are historically associated with inner city, working class housing; however, they have recently become popular in suburban estates as they are cheap to build and raise density.

The mid-terrace house shares a party wall on either side, with a narrow floor plan. The facade is close to the road so additional space has been gained by adding an extra floor. The garden is also narrow and long and can only be accessed through the house. Parking is on the road in front of the house.

Figure 77 - Axonometric Figure 78 - Floor Plans

Bedroom Living Space

En-suite

Bathroom

Bedroom

Kitchen

Bedroom W.C.

Scale 0 1

2

3

4

5

First Floor

Second Floor 80

Figure 79 - Linked houses

81

04 SUBURBAN TYPOLOGIES LINKED HOUSE No. of Bedrooms: 3 Date Built: 2004 Floors: 2 Internal Floor Area: 45.25m2 Garden Size: 32.4m2 Total Footprint: 54.17m2 Linked houses are a cross between detached and semi-detached typologies. Whilst the majority of the house is independent from its neighbour they are linked by the garages.

This gives a greater feeling of separation but also uses less overall area. The small rear garden can be accessed through the side but in some cases it is only through the house, similar to terraced dwellings.

Figure 80 - Axonometric Figure 81 - Floor Plans

Pantry

Bedroom

Kitchen

W.C.

Bedroom

Bathroom

Garage

Living Space

Bedroom En-suite

Scale 0 1

Ground Floor 2

3

4

First Floor

5 82

Figure 82 - Bungalow

83

05 SUBURBAN TYPOLOGIES BUNGALOW No. of Bedrooms: 1 Date Built: 2005 Floors: 1 Internal Floor Area: 62.07m2 (excl. garage) Garden Size: 85.92m2 Total Footprint: 184.67m2 Bungalows contain all the rooms on one, ground floor level and as such they are popular with elderly and disabled families; however, this results in a larger footprint than a building with more than one storey.

They can be either detached or semi detached and it is common to get smaller house sizes, i.e. one or two bedrooms.

This bungalow is relatively large despite having only one bedroom; it contains an integrated garage and has front and back garden.

Figure 83 - Axonometric Figure 84 - Floor Plan

Bathroom

Bedroom

Living Space

Garage

Kitchen/Dining Space

Scale 0 1

2

3

4

5 84

LAND USE ANALYSIS

Figure 85 - Typical suburban arrangement

85

Figure 86 - Buildings

20%

Figure 87 - Roads

19%

Figure 88 - Gardens/Green Space

41%

Figure 89 - Pavement & Parking

20% 86

SUMMARY

Research into modern suburban housing typologies has highlighted several dominant characteristics throughout.

Foremost amongst these is the high provision of outdoor space, which has been shown as the top feature people look for when buying a house.

The desire to create houses with large gardens has often resulted in smaller internal floor areas. Some of the city centre typologies explored previously with the same number of bedrooms have a greater area than the equivalent houses. This has led to the typology of smaller houses with a large rear garden, typical of suburbia. Gardens are perceived to be private space, large enough for children to play in. In reality gardens are often underused with children preferring to play at local parks.

There is a wide range of properties available, enabling potential residents to choose one which suits their particular needs and aspirations. For example, families with children look for detached houses with large gardens, choosing privacy over community.56 Furthermore, where previously it would have been unusual to see terraced houses in suburbs, modern suburban estates have become a mix of styles and housing typologies in an effort to incorporate elements of individuality. As such, suburban houses are available in a wide range of sizes with varying numbers of bedrooms, thus generating attraction for many different groups.

As the study of land use has shown, space is regularly wasted.

Desire for privacy leads to housing being set back from the street by a small garden; however, this is often too small to provide any meaningful space and the benefits gained are negligible.

Furthermore, many houses maintain access to the rear garden via a path alongside the side of the house; paths like this are not regularly used and become wasted space. The high percentage of green space shown often results in suburban developments being hailed as promoting green and sustainable living; however as the majority of this green space is underused and of little ecological value it could be argued that it is particularly unsustainable. In addition, suburbia is still dominated by the car, as this study shows every house has parking available; either in a garage, driveway or on-street. A common issue with suburban design is that these garages are rarely used for parking cars (Figure 90).

This is a further example of wasted space.

87

Figure 90 - Suburban Parking

88

HISTORICAL TYPOLOGIES

Figure 91 - Georgian Terrace

89

90

Figure 92 - Georgian Terrace, Bath

91

01 HISTORIC TYPOLOGIES GEORGIAN TERRACE 01 No. of Bedrooms: 4 Date Built: 1735-1750 Floors: 6 Internal Floor Area: 366.39m2 Garden Size: n/a (courtyard) Total Footprint: 125.4m2 This first example of Georgian terraced housing shows the common layout for this typology; a lower ground floor was designed for the servants of the family who lived in the rest of the house above. The narrow width of the plot meant that in order to achieve a sizeable house numerous floors were required, it is therefore common to have tall, narrow buildings.

This helped create areas of high density in urban environments.

The maximisation of this plot has meant that this building has no outdoor space except for a small courtyard off the lower ground level.

The decline in the use of servants and the need for such large buildings has meant many other houses of this style have been converted to offices or into smaller apartments.

Figure 93 - Axonometric

Figure 94 - Floor Plan

Courtyard & Cellar Ground Floor

First Floor

Second Floor

Third Floor

Lower Ground Floor 92

Figure 95 - Georgian Terrace, London

93

02 HISTORIC TYPOLOGIES GEORGIAN TERRACE 02 No. of Bedrooms: 4 Date Built: 17th Century Floors: 5 Internal Floor Area: 272m2 Garden Size: 93.31m2 (incl. terraces) Total Footprint: 154.34m2 Whilst the materials and facade are different, this terraced house maintains the same principles as the previous example. However, as well as containing a garden, it is common for Georgian terraces such as this to be arranged around a private courtyard square containing a garden for its residents. Houses such as this example, with more green space, have retained their use as family homes longer.

Figure 96 - Axonometric Figure 97 - Floor Plan

First Floor

Second Floor

Third Floor

Ground Floor Lower Ground Floor 94

Figure 98 - Mews House

95

03 HISTORIC TYPOLOGIES MEWS HOUSE No. of Bedrooms: 3 Date Built: 17th Century Floors: 3 Internal Floor Area: 197m2 Garden Size: n/a Total Footprint: 77.65m2 Mews were once rows of stables, located in the back streets behind larger houses. Flats were provided above the stables to accommodate the grooms. The rise of the motor car and decline of large city houses reduced the need for mews and they were converted to residential use.

It is common for many to have an integrated garage, however as it was not originally designed as a house there is no outdoor space provision. There is less uniformity to the facades on these streets when compared to traditional terraced housing.

Figure 99 - Axonometric Figure 100 - Floor Plans

Utility Room

Garage

Bedroom

Kitchen/Dining Room

Ground Floor

Bathroom

Reception Room

Bathroom

Bathroom

Bedroom

First Floor

Second Floor

96

Figure 101 - Victorian detached house

97

04 HISTORIC TYPOLOGIES VICTORIAN DETACHED HOUSE No. of Bedrooms: 6 Date Built: 1840s Floors: 5 Internal Floor Area: 851m2 Garden Size: 85.92m2 Total Footprint: 395.84m2 This is an example of an early Victorian inner city detached dwelling, the ornate facade and bay windows are common features. Intended as a family home, it maintains urban density by remaining close to the buildings surrounding it. The internal layout is similar to that of a Georgian terrace, with a lower ground floor; however there is also a large rear garden.

Due to their size, many of these houses have been converted into apartments.

Figure 102 - Axonometric Figure 103 - Floor Plans

Third Floor

Ground Floor

First Floor

Second Floor

Lower Ground Floor 98

Figure 104 - Victorian end-of-terrace

99

05 HISTORIC TYPOLOGIES VICTORIAN TERRACE No. of Bedrooms: 4 Date Built: 19th Century Floors: 4 (excl. cellar) Internal Floor Area: 265m2 (excl. attic, cellar & garage) Garden Size: 98.15m2 Total Footprint: 271.87m2 Compared to the Georgian examples the Victorian terrace places a greater emphasis on private green space with both a front and back garden. They are also smaller, there is no lower ground level but the house still extends over four floors. A garage has been placed at the end of the garden, taking advantage of the end-ofterrace position.

Figure 105 - Axonometric Figure 106 - Floor Plans

Cellar

Ground Floor

First Floor

Second Floor

Attic 100

LAND USE ANALYSIS

Figure 107 - Typical Georgian street layout

101

Figure 108 - Buildings

41%

Figure 109 - Roads

Figure 110 - Gardens/Green Space

26%

Figure 111 - Pavement

24%

9% 102

SUMMARY

Studying historical urban typologies has been useful as they have remained successful examples of high density urban living, often associated with desirable neighbourhoods. Terraced typologies are the most common historical urban type. Whilst they were built as low cost, high density housing, Georgian terraced houses are now considered the finest urban housing ever produced in the United Kingdom.57 The greatest advantage of historic housing typologies is flexibility.

This is accomplished by maximising space; the floor area to footprint ratio is much greater than in the suburban typologies, resulting in significantly more floors in buildings such as the Georgian Terrace. The room sizes are also much greater, giving potential for a wider range of uses, whilst the circulation routes are clearly defined. This ability to adapt over time has ensured their permanence; this is particularly evident in the transformation of stable mews to homes. It has even become common for Georgian housing to be converted into flats or used as offices.

Garden size can still be an issue; however, the majority of houses do have a garden provided unlike the other city centre typologies explored. Furthermore, as can be seen in the land use analysis, many Georgian terraces are arranged around private garden squares, further increasing the green space provided. By utilising the terrace typology with the building line close to the street, density is much greater and less space is wasted.

The facades of many of the streets are uniform (Figure 112); nevertheless, this creates a sense of collective, rather than individual, identity. Separation from the street is achieved through use of low walls and railings. Cities generally have good public transport systems; therefore, as with the apartment typologies, there is less of a requirement for car parking. Additionally, these buildings were not designed with the car in mind; however they still function as well as areas that have been designed for cars.

103

Figure 112 - Georgian terrace facade

104

HOUSING PRINCIPLES

It is now possible to recognise the principles and aspirations which are important for creating desirable housing. Foremost amongst these is the provision of green space around dwellings.

Private gardens or outside space is preferable; however this can be used in conjunction with public squares and gardens for residents such as in the historical typologies. The amount of outside space associated with each dwelling is dependent on the type of dwelling; for example families would look for a greater amount of garden space than younger couples.

Alongside providing adequate outside space, the size and arrangement of suburban housing is inherently more suitable for families. Single-family dwellings provide a feeling of security and privacy lacking in apartment developments. The arrangement of the suburban street is also significant. Modern suburban streets are arranged in organic, curved patterns, such an arrangement creates smaller pockets of dwellings within the larger suburb area, increasing privacy. In addition the suburbs are quieter than urban environments.

It is also important to realise that people aspire to a particular ideal which suburban housing fulfils. The traditional house form with a front door, individual windows and multiple storeys is representative of people’s aspirations. This is also evident in material choices, with brick remaining the most popular material for houses. Furthermore, as people become more affluent they generally desire larger properties, even if the extra space is not required. Due to this, the number of bedrooms in each dwelling is significant. The UK is unusual in using bedroom numbers to sell properties (as opposed to m2) and as such it is intrinsically linked to how we perceive space in housing.58 Within an area a range of house sizes and typologies are required to create a diverse community. Furthermore, terraced housing is perceived as very desirable whilst creating very high density.

People like to feel control over their living environment; this can be achieved by giving ownership of the space to the residents and allowing the opportunity to change the house layout as they wish. Flexibility within a dwelling provides this and maximises the building’s potential, this can be achieved by having a large floor plan with clear circulation.

In addition, suburbs are desirable because they maintain a connection to the city through transport links; however they remain distinct, allowing people to feel a separation from the city.

Whilst it is difficult to translate this into an inner city environment, the particular nature of the chosen site at Snow Hill means any housing will be elevated above the current urban landscape, helping to create a distinction. Furthermore, as the site is above a city centre train station there are already excellent transport links in place, reducing car dependency.

The following chapter explores how these qualities of low density suburbs can be translated into a high density urban site.

105

KEY DESIGN PRINCIPLES: AMPLE GREEN SPACE SIZE OF HOUSING RANGE OF HOUSING ARRANGEMENT QUALITY OF DESIGN MATERIAL CHOICE FLEXIBILITY COMMUNITY SECURITY & PRIVACY 106

107

HOUSE

FORM

CHAPTER 05

108

Figure 113 - Massing Model

Whilst the position of the structure below has been defined by the characteristics of the site, the housing arrangement above is determined by the position of the structure. The blocks are arranged to allow the efficient transfer of load through the structure to the foundation (Figure 114). This, combined with the fluctuating height of the structural segments has created masses which vary in height and size.

The size and scale of the intervention distinguishes it from rest of the urban environment. There is no relationship between the housing and the surrounding buildings; the sheer and continuous facade acts as a barrier between the city and housing, creating the necessary, desirable separation.

Furthermore, elevating the houses in this way provides a symbolic break from the environmental conditions at ground level in the city. The houses are more exposed to the sun and fresh air, thus creating the perception of a healthier environment.

Figure 114 - Loading diagram

109

110

House Design 04

House Design 03 Figure 115 - PLAN +40m

Figure 116 - ELEVATION

There are 129 single-family dwellings located on the site. This provides a density of just over 60 dph. Whilst this exceeds the recommended government targets it could still be higher, however the intention is not to create an extremely dense environment but one which creates good quality space. Nevertheless, this is almost double the planned dph for sites in Birmingham’s Green Belt (See Appendix) The plan illustrates how the housing footprints vary across the site, creating a range of dwelling sizes. The dominant typology is that of terraced housing. The houses face inwards and have been arranged to create smaller squares and spaces along the length of the site. The number and differing scale of these spaces provide a series of opportunities for social activity and interaction.

The varying building heights and shapes provide the rising and falling elevation (Figure 116), breaking the monotony of the sheer wall and allowing views out across the city.

111

House Design 01 House Design 02

112

HOUSE 01

This house design is based on the basic form of a historic terrace typology and is the largest in the development; extending down into the structure as well as upwards. Due to this it can only be located on the largest segments above the station. Nevertheless, the lower ground floor still has a large arched window providing natural light.

The floor plans show a clear circulation route with a long hallways and large spaces. On the second floor is an enclosed terrace, providing a private outdoor space within the property.

This would be in addition to communal gardens.

Figure 117 - House 01

W.C.

Bedroom

Bathroom

Living Space

Kitchen Terrace

Bedroom

LG Dining Space GF

Bedroom FF

Bedroom SF

113

Figure 118 - Visual 01

114

HOUSE 02

This house design is the smallest in the development and this example is of an end of terrace. The building form is directly associated with that of a traditional house.

There are three floors within the dwelling, the attic space has already been developed to maximise floor area as it is common for homeowners to convert attic space and this typology anticipates that.

This home is intended to providing a cheaper property, suitable for couples or first-time buyers.

Figure 119 - House 02

Bathroom

Kitchen

En-Suite Bedroom Bedroom

Living Space

GF

Bedroom

FF

SF

115

Figure 120 - Visual 02

116

HOUSE 03

This house design is based on a ‘stripped-back’ terrace typology, extending upwards with three floors to maximise floor area. There is a long and thin floor plan to span between the arched segments. Despite this, there is a large amount of flexibility as the staircase acts as a ‘core’ and the rooms are arranged around it, for example the living space on the second floor could become an additional bedroom if required.

This design also contains an enclosed terrace on the second floor providing a private outside space.

Bedroom Kitchen Bathroom

This is dwelling could be suitable for smaller families, especially those that prefer the private outdoor space.

Figure 121 - House 03

Terrace

Living Space

GF

Living Space

Bedroom

FF

SF

117

Figure 122 - Visual 03

118

HOUSE 04

This design for a detached house is used sparingly across the development as they are not conducive to providing high levels of density. They are seen however, as ideal for families of all sizes. Each of these houses would have their own private garden.

Like House 02 the external form is very traditional and the second floor is created by extending into the attic space. This provides an area which could be used for a variety of uses or divided up into different rooms if additional bedrooms are required.

Figure 123 - House 04

Bathroom

W.C Kitchen

GF

Living Space

Bedroom

FF

Bedroom

Bedroom

Living Space SF

119

Figure 124 - Visual 04

120

GREEN SPACE There is a large amount of open and green space surrounding the houses. Some of the dwellings have their own private garden (highlighted in red on Figure 125), however, the majority share communal gardens in addition to any private terraces within the houses. The notion of shared space encourages further interaction between the residents and communities whilst creating a wider sense of ownership beyond the individual houses.

Figure 125 - Green Space Plan

Figure 126 - Sketch of Green Space

121

122

The arched openings in the sheer facade gradually reduce in size before being replaced by traditional windows at the level of housing. The smallest arches create large windows for the lower ground levels found in house type 01

Figure 127 - ELEVATION

123

124

This section illustrates a key junction in the project; where the larger arches spanning the platforms at the station meet the rest of the lower segments. By glazing the upper part of the arch a large arched window is created looking into the station, adding natural light and a visible connection to the housing above.

Due to the trains slowing as they arrive and leave the station there is very little associated noise which could affect the resident’s quality of life above.

Figure 128 - SECTION

125

126

Figure 129 - Train Station

127

128

Floor Finish Insulation and services zone Structural Concrete Deck

Masonry/Concrete Infill

Brickwork

Brickwork Arch Railway Tracks

These sections illustrate the typical build up of the wall at a point along the structure. The thickness of the brick coursing reduces further up the facade before forming the external wall of the house. The solid brickwork here provides thermal mass for the dwellings. Masonry infill is used between the brick work to create additional solidity where is not necessary to continue the brick coursing.

The structure is supported by large pile foundations (Figure 132). These foundations, combined with the size and weight of the structure reduce the chances of any vibrations from the trains affecting the houses above.

Figure 130 - Section 01

129

External Floor Finish and buildup varies

Pile Cap

Pile Foundations

Note: Refer to page 38 for structure of viaduct Figure 131 - Section 02

130

Figure 132 - Street View

131

132

LEVELS/ACCESS

Proposed Car Park

Entry at Street level

Figure 133 - Access points and levels

Due to the varied heights of the structure below, the ground floor levels along the site also fluctuate, in the majority of situations this is just one or two steps but in certain places it can be meters higher. Despite this, these differences in levels have helped to enhance the building arrangement and the spaces around them. By adding this extra definition, areas can become more identifiable, increasing the possibility of activity and interaction. The different levels are navigated via a series of ramps and stairs.

One of the most significant challenges with this project is accessing the raised platform from street level. The nature of the facade and the line it takes between the existing road and the viaduct leaves very little space to create suitable access points.

Furthermore, it is difficult to break the facade and remove a section for access as it is necessary to support the layers above.

As a result it has been necessary to replace a small number of the houses with dedicated access points (shaded on Figure 135). This allows the street level to be extended under the platform and into the viaduct. These access points contain elevators and stairs which can then be used to allow access onto the housing above.

The houses are then all accessible from their front doors on the raised level.

This method of access would help generate a secure and private environment for the residents by helping to control the people entering the site and reducing random footfall.

Despite being in a city centre location with excellent public transport links, the importance of car ownership in modern society necessitates that car parking must be accommodated for if the proposal is to remain viable and attractive. Figure 134 highlights two existing car parks adjacent to the site, whilst a third is also proposed.

The combined capacity of these areas would provide sufficient levels of space.

Over time, as residents become used to living in urban areas it is possible that car dependency could decrease.

133

Existing Car Park

Entry at Street level Existing Car Park

Access to higher level Access to lower level

Street Level

Figure 134 - Diagram of access point

134

CONCLUSION

Birmingham is typical of many cities in the United Kingdom, having grown to reach the edge of its boundary it is now seeking to expand into the Green Belt. Despite this, Birmingham City Council are not exploring new solutions, merely intending to continue low density suburban sprawl. This study has explored how a negative public perception of urban life and unsuitable typologies in the city centre, contrast with the popularity and desirable characteristics of suburban development. It has then sought to combine the issues to create desirable homes within existing urban areas.

This design proposal has shown that it is possible to translate the principles and aspirations associated with suburban living into an urban environment whilst simultaneously raising density. This approach is intended to change the perception of urban living and, if implemented on a wider scale, could significantly reduce the need for suburban growth and therefore mitigate expansion into the Green Belt.

In a wider context, this study has created an argument regarding the value of good design. Whilst the proposal explored in this study is considered an expensive intervention within the city, it can be argued it is worth the expense if it attracts people back to inner city areas and addresses the social problems and imbalance within a city. The material choices are vital to achieving this, by expressing solidity and permanence and high quality design the intervention becomes a permanent and successful feature of the city. Furthermore, building within an already urban environment is much more sustainable that beginning a new development in the Green Belt.

By proposing to build over the transport network this design is exploiting an essential part of the city’s infrastructure and one which is underutilised relative to the land area it occupies. The limited scope of this study has resulted in a very site specific proposal and any further work could explore the consequences of implementing this particular approach to raising density based on suburban ideology across the wider city, including proposals for derelict and open land too.

135

136

137

REFERENCES

138

REFERENCES

Birmingham City Council, Birmingham Development Plan: Options Consultation (October 2012), p. 16. <http://www. birmingham.gov.uk/plan2031> [accessed 21 December 2012]

1

Gary Hawke, ‘Reinterpretations of the Industrial Revolution’, in The Industrial Revolution and British Society, ed. by Patrick O’Brein and Roland Quinault (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993), pp. 54-78 (p. 56).

14

Jeffrey Williamson, Coping with City Growth during the Industrial Revolution (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990), p. 220.

15

2

Mark Clapson, Invincible Green Suburbs, Brave New Towns: Social Change and Urban Dispersal (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1998), p. 25.

3

Birmingham City Council, Strategic Land Availability Assessment 2011: Appendix 1-14 (2011), pp. 15-16. <http:// www.birmingham.gov.uk/cs/Satellite?c=Page&childpagena me=Development-Planning%2FPageLayout&cid=12233463 97007&pagename=BCC%2FCommon%2FWrapper%2FWra pper> [accessed 15 December 2012] Department for Communities and Local Government, National Planning Policy Framework (London: HMSO, March 2012), p. 4.

16

Stephen Ward, Planning and Urban Change, 2nd edn.

(London: SAGE, 2004), p. 25.

4

Robert Fishman, Urban Utopias in the Twentieth Century (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press 1982) p. 4.

5

Michael Winter, Rural Politics: Policies for Agriculture, Forestry and the Environment (London: Routledge 1996), p.

181.

6

Landscape Institute, Landscape Institute response to Government plans for Green Belt development (2012) <http://www.landscapeinstitute.org/PDF/Contribute/ GreenBeltposition_000.pdf> [accessed 24 November 2012] 7

Department for Communities and Local Government, Local Planning Authority Green Belt Statistics: England 2010/2011 (London: HMSO, April 2011), p. 1.

8

Department for Communities and Local Government, Planning Policy Guidance 2: Green Belts (London: HMSO, January 1995), p. 3.

Darcy Frey, ‘Crowded House’, The Times Magazine 8 June 2008, < http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/08/ magazine/08mvrdv-t.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0> [accessed 5 April 2013] 17

Vicky Cheng, ‘An Understanding of High Density’, in Designing High-density Cities for Social and Environmental Sustainability, ed. by Edward Ng (London: Earthscan, 2010), pp. 3-17 (p. 16).

18

Peter Newman and Jeff Kenworthy, Cities and Automobile Dependence: an International Sourcebook (Aldershot: Gower, 1989) 19

Graham Haughton and Colin Hunter, Sustainable Cities, 2nd edn. (Oxford: Routledge, 2003) p. 11.

20

9

21

Cheng, p. 15.

Marcial Echenique, ‘Forecasting the Sustainability of Alternative Plans: The Cambridge Futures Experience’, in Future Forms and Design for Sustainable Cities, ed. by Michael Jenks and Nicola Dempsey (Oxford: Architectural Press, 2005), pp. 113-134 (p. 116).

22

Philipp Rode, ‘Strategic Planning for London: Integrating City Design and Urban Transportation’, in Megacities: Urban Form, Governance, and Sustainability, ed. by Andre Sorensen and Junichiro Okata (London: Springer, 2011), pp. 195-22 (p.208).

10

23

Nan Fairbrother, New Lives, New Landscapes: Planning for the 21st Century (London: Architectural Press, 1970) p. 213.

Cheng, p. 15.

11

John Cullingworth and Vincent Nadin, Town and Country Planning in the UK, 14th edn. (London: Routledge, 2006) p.

223.

12

Office for National Statistics, Population trends no. 117 Autumn 2004 (Norwich: TSO, 2004), p. 3.

13

Andre Sorensen and others, ‘Towards Sustainable Cities’, in Towards Sustainable Cities: East Asian, North American and European Perspectives on Managing Urban Regions, ed. by Andre Sorensen and others (Hampshire: Ashgate Publishing Ltd., 2004), pp. 3-23 (p. 9).

24

Richard Rogers, Housing for a Compact City (London: GLA, 2003) p. 27.

25

139

Paola Sassi, Strategies for Sustainable Architecture (Oxford: Taylor and Francis, 2006) p. 19.

Birmingham City Council, ‘Cofton Park’ <http://www. birmingham.gov.uk/coftonpark> [accessed 23 December 2012]

26

40

Kheir Al-Kodmany and Mir M. Ali, The Future of the City: Tall Buildings and Urban Design (Southampton: WIT Press, 2012) p. 210.

41

27

Richard Rogers and Richard Burdett, ‘Let’s Cram More into the City’, in Cities for the New Millenium, ed. by Marcial Echenique and Andrew Saint (London: Spon press, 2001), pp.

2-14 (p. 10).

Ulrich Franzen and Paul Rudolph, The Evolving City: Urban Design Proposals (New York: Whitney Library of Design, 1974), p. 52.

28

Hannah Higgins, The Grid Book (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2009), p. 31.

42

Office for National Statistics, ‘What the newly released census data can tell you about your local area’ (2012), <http://www.ocsi.co.uk/news/2012/11/23/what-the-newlyreleased-census-data-can-tell-you-about-your-local-area/> [accessed 4 January 2013] 43

29

Rogers, Housing for a Compact City, p. 21.

30

Rogers, Housing for a Compact City, p. 21.

Bryan Lawson, ‘The Social and Psychological Issue of HighDensity City Space’, in Designing High-density Cities for Social and Environmental Sustainability, ed. by Edward Ng (London: Earthscan, 2010), pp. 285-292 (p. 291).

31

Michael Jenks and Nicola Dempsey, ‘The Language and Meaning of Density’, in Future Forms and Design for Sustainable Cities, ed. by Michael Jenks and Nicola Dempsey (Oxford: Architectural Press, 2005), pp. 287-310 (p. 307).

32

33

Sassi, p. 17.

34

Cheng, p. 16.

Jan Gehl, Cities for People (Washington: Island Press, 2010) p. 68.

Michael Parkinson, The Birmingham City Centre Masterplan: The Visioning Study (Birmingham: Birmingham City Council, 2007), p. 31.

44

Hugh Barton, Reshaping Suburbs (Bristol: University of West England, 2011), p. 3.

45

Cecil Burgess, Architecture, town planning and community, ed. by Donald Wetherell (Alberta: University of Alberta Press, 2005), p. 281.

46

Rebecca Roberts-Hughes, The Case for Space (London: RIBA, 2011), p. 8.

47

35

Michael Jenks and Colin Jones, ‘Issues and Concepts’, in Dimensions of the Sustainable City 2, ed. by Michael Jenks and Colin Jones (London: Springer, 2010) p. 9.

36

‘House Design Awards: Flair for sophistication and style’, Birmingham Post (2004) <http://www.thefreelibrary.com/ House+Design+Awards%3A+Flair+for+sophistication+and +style.-a0122968267> [accessed 21 December 2012] 48

MAKE Architects, ‘The Cube’, (n.d.) <http://www. makearchitects.com/#/projects/0012/> [accessed 21 December 2012] 49

Elizabeth Burton, ‘The Potential of the Compact City for Promoting Social Equity’, in Achieving Sustainable Urban Form, ed. by Katie Williams and others (London: Spon Press, 2001), pp. 19-28 (p. 28).

37

Birmingham City Council, ‘Census 2011’ (2011) <http:// www.birmingham.gov.uk/2011-census> [accessed 02 January 2012] 38

Birmingham City Council, Birmingham Development Plan: Green Belt Options Appendix (October 2012), p. 2. <http:// www.birmingham.gov.uk/plan2031> [accessed 21 December 2012] 39

Ian Simpson Architects, ‘Holloway Circus, Birmingham’ (n.d.) <http://www.iansimpsonarchitects.com/ISAL/project/ internation-place-holder/> [accessed 21 December 2012] 50

Park Central, ‘Park Central: The story so far...’, (2007) <http:// www.parkcentral.co.uk/News/NewsArticle.aspx?Id=627> [accessed 21 December 2012] 51

MCD, ‘Derwent Foundry’ (n.d.) <http://www.mcdproperty. com/derwent-foundry-birmingham/> [accessed 21 December 2012] 52

140

REFERENCES CONTINUED

Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment, What homebuyers want: Attitudes and decision making amongst consumers (2005), p. 14. <http:/www.cabe.org.uk/ files/what-home-buyers-want.pdf> [accessed 28 December 2012] 53

Johnston Birchall, Building Communities: The Co-Operative Way (London: Routledge, 1988), p. 190.

54

Frances Heywood, Money Well Spent: The Effectiveness and Value of Housing Adaptations (Bristol: The Policy Press, 2001), p. 5.

55

Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment, p. 14.

56

The Architects Handbook, ed. by Quentin Pickard (London: Blackwell, 2002), p. 155.

57

58

Roberts-Hughes, p. 17

141

142

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Al-Kodmany, Kheir and M. Ali, Mir, The Future of the City: Tall Buildings and Urban Design (Southampton: WIT Press, 2012) Barton, Hugh, Reshaping Suburbs (Bristol: University of West England, 2011) Birchall, Johnston, Building Communities: The Co-Operative Way (London: Routledge, 1988) Birmingham City Council, Birmingham Development Plan: Options Consultation (October 2012), <http://www.birmingham.gov. uk/plan2031> [accessed 21 December 2012] Strategic Land Availability Assessment 2011: Appendix 1-14 (2011), <http://www.birmingham.gov.uk/cs/Satellite?c=P age&childpagename=Development-Planning%2FPageLayout&cid=1223346397007&pagename=BCC%2FCommon%2FWrap per%2FWrapper> [accessed 15 December 2012] ‘Census 2011’ (2011) <http://www.birmingham.gov.uk/2011-census> [accessed 02 January 2012] Birmingham Development Plan: Green Belt Options Appendix (October 2012), p. 2. <http://www.birmingham.gov.uk/ plan2031> [accessed 21 December 2012] ‘Cofton Park’ <http://www.birmingham.gov.uk/coftonpark> [accessed 23 December 2012] Burgess, Cecil, Architecture, town planning and community, ed. by Wetherell, Donald (Alberta: University of Alberta Press, 2005) Burton, Elizabeth, ‘The Potential of the Compact City for Promoting Social Equity’, in Achieving Sustainable Urban Form, ed. by Williams, Katie and others (London: Spon Press, 2001), 19-28 Cheng, Vicky ‘An Understanding of High Density’, in Designing High-density Cities for Social and Environmental Sustainability, ed. by Ng, Edward, (London: Earthscan, 2010), 3-17 Clapson, Mark, Invincible Green Suburbs, Brave New Towns: Social Change and Urban Dispersal (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1998) Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment, What homebuyers want: Attitudes and decision making amongst consumers (2005) <http:/www.cabe.org.uk/files/what-home-buyers-want.pdf> [accessed 28 December 2012] Cullingworth, John and Nadin, Vincent, Town and Country Planning in the UK, 14th edn. (London: Routledge, 2006) Department for Communities and Local Government, Local Planning Authority Green Belt Statistics: England 2010/2011 (London: HMSO, April 2011) Planning Policy Guidance 2: Green Belts (London: HMSO, January 1995) National Planning Policy Framework (London: HMSO, March 2012) Echenique, Marcial, ‘Forecasting the Sustainability of Alternative Plans: The Cambridge Futures Experience’, in Future Forms and Design for Sustainable Cities, ed. by Jenks, Michael, and Dempsey, Nicola, (Oxford: Architectural Press, 2005), 113-134 Fairbrother, Nan, New Lives, New Landscapes: Planning for the 21st Century (London: Architectural Press, 1970) Fishman, Robert, Urban Utopias in the Twentieth Century (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press 1982) Franzen, Ulrich and Rudolph, Paul, The Evolving City: Urban Design Proposals (New York: Whitney Library of Design, 1974)

143

Frey, Darcy, ‘Crowded House’, The Times Magazine 8 June 2008, < http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/08/magazine/08mvrdv-t. html?pagewanted=all&_r=0> [accessed 5 April 2013] Gehl, Jan, Cities for People (Washington: Island Press, 2010) Haughton, Graham and Hunter, Colin, Sustainable Cities, 2nd edn. (Oxford: Routledge, 2003) Hawke, Gary, ‘Reinterpretations of the Industrial Revolution’, in The Industrial Revolution and British Society, ed. by O’Brein, Patrick and Quinault, Roland (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993), 54-78 Heywood, Frances, Money Well Spent: The Effectiveness and Value of Housing Adaptations (Bristol: The Policy Press, 2001) Higgins, Hannah, The Grid Book (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2009) ‘House Design Awards: Flair for sophistication and style’, Birmingham Post (2004) <http://www.thefreelibrary.com/ House+Design+Awards%3A+Flair +for+sophistication+and+style.-a0122968267> [accessed 21 December 2012] Ian Simpson Architects, ‘Holloway Circus, Birmingham’ (n.d.) <http://www.iansimpsonarchitects.com/ISAL/project/internationplace-holder/> [accessed 21 December 2012] Jenks, Michael, and Dempsey, Nicola, ‘The Language and Meaning of Density’, in Future Forms and Design for Sustainable Cities, ed. by Jenks, Michael, and Dempsey, Nicola, (Oxford: Architectural Press, 2005), 287-310 Jenks, Michael, and Jones, Colin, ‘Issues and Concepts’, in Dimensions of the Sustainable City 2, ed. by Jenks, Michael, and Jones, Colin, (London: Springer, 2010) Landscape Institute, Landscape Institute response to Government plans for Green Belt development (2012) <http://www. landscapeinstitute.org/PDF/Contribute/GreenBeltposition_000.pdf> [accessed 24 November 2012] Lawson, Bryan, ‘The Social and Psychological Issue of High-Density City Space’, in Designing High-density Cities for Social and Environmental Sustainability, ed. by Ng, Edward, (London: Earthscan, 2010) 285-292 MAKE Architects, ‘The Cube’, (n.d.) <http://www.makearchitects.com/#/projects/0012/> [accessed 21 December 2012] MCD, ‘Derwent Foundry’ (n.d.) <http://www.mcdproperty.com/derwent-foundry-birmingham/> [accessed 21 December 2012] Newman, Peter and Kenworthy, Jeff, Cities and Automobile Dependence: an International Sourcebook (Aldershot: Gower, 1989) Office for National Statistics, Population trends no. 117 Autumn 2004 (Norwich: TSO, 2004) ‘What the newly released census data can tell you about your local area’ (2012), <http://www.ocsi.co.uk/news/2012/11/23/ what-the-newly-released-census-data-can-tell-you-about-your-local-area/> [accessed 4 January 2013] Park Central, ‘Park Central: The story so far...’, (2007) <http://www.parkcentral.co.uk/News/NewsArticle.aspx?Id=627> [accessed 21 December 2012] Parkinson, Michael, The Birmingham City Centre Masterplan: The Visioning Study (Birmingham: Birmingham City Council, 2007) Roberts-Hughes, Rebecca, The Case for Space (London: RIBA, 2011)

144

BIBLIOGRAPHY CONTINUED

Rode, Philipp, ‘Strategic Planning for London: Integrating City Design and Urban Transportation’, in Megacities: Urban Form, Governance, and Sustainability, ed. by Sorensen, Andre, and Okata, Junichiro, (London: Springer, 2011), 195-22 Rogers, Richard, Housing for a Compact City (London: GLA, 2003) Rogers, Richard, and Burdett, Richard, ‘Let’s Cram More into the City’, in Cities for the New Millenium, ed. by Echenique, Marcial, and Saint, Andrew, (London: Spon press, 2001) 2-14 Sassi, Paola, Strategies for Sustainable Architecture (Oxford: Taylor and Francis, 2006) Sorensen, Andre, and others, ‘Towards Sustainable Cities’, in Towards Sustainable Cities: East Asian, North American and European Perspectives on Managing Urban Regions, ed. by Sorensen, Andre, and others (Hampshire: Ashgate Publishing Ltd., 2004), 3-23 The Architects Handbook, ed. by Pickard, Quentin (London: Blackwell, 2002) Ward, Stephen, Planning and Urban Change, 2nd edn. (London: SAGE, 2004) Williamson, Jeffrey, Coping with City Growth during the Industrial Revolution (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990) Winter, Michael, Rural Politics: Policies for Agriculture, Forestry and the Environment (London: Routledge 1996)

145

FURTHER READING

Abercrombie, Patrick, Greater London Plan 1944 (London: HMSO, 1945) Alexander, Anthony, Britain’s New Towns: Garden Cities to Sustainable Communities (London: Routledge 2009) Barker, Kate, Barker Review of Land Use Planning: Final Report – Recommendations (London: HMSO, 2006) Cullingworth, John, Problems of an Urban Society: The Social Framework of Planning (London: Routledge 2007) Greater London Regional Planning Committee, Second Report of the Greater London Regional Planning Committee (London: Knapp, Drewett & Sons Ltd., 1933) Hall, Peter ‘The Containment of Urban England’, The Geographical Journal, 140 (October 1974), 386-408 Howard, Ebenezer, Garden Cities of To-morrow, ed. by Osborn, Frederic (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1965) Krier, Leon, The Architecture of Community (Washington: Island Press, 2009) Mumford, Lewis and Turnery, Bryan, The Culture of Cities (New York: Harcourt, 1938 repr. London: Routledge, 1997) MVRDV, FARMAX: Excursions on Density, ed. by Maas, Winy and van Rijs, Jacob (Rotterdam: 010 Publishers, 2006) Urban Task Force, Towards an Urban Renaissance, ed. by Rogers, Richard (London: Taylor & Francis Group, 1999) Rogers, Richard, Cities for a small planet (London: Faber and Faber Ltd., 1997) Rowley, Trevor, The English Landscape in the Twentieth Century (London: Hambledon Continuum, 2006) Saler, Michael, The Avent-Garde in Interwar England (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999) Thomas, David, ‘London’s Green Belt: The Evolution of an Idea’, The Geographical Journal, 129 (March 1963), 14-24 Tystan Edwards, Arthur, ‘A Further Criticism of the Garden City Movement’, The Town Planning Review, 4 (January 1914), 312318

146

FIGURE REFERENCES

Figure

Page

Front Cover - Snow Hill Station [Photograph] Author: E. Brown (2011) <http://www.flickr.com/photos/ell-r-brown/6009759738/> [accessed 2 April 2013]

-

Figure 1 - Birmingham, United Kingdom [Photograph] Author: B. Abel (2011) <http://www.flickr.com/photos/benbobjr/6731843419/> [accessed 8 January 2013]

4

Figure 11 - Birmingham open space [Photograph] Author: J. Bunting (2008) <http://www.flickr.com/photos/cmdrgravy/2443450674/> [accessed 2 January 2013]

21

Figure 22 - Birmingham railway viaduct [Photograph] Author: G. Daley (2008) <http://www.flickr.com/photos/gdaley/2281849519/> [accessed 3 April 2013]

27

Figure 38 - Panoramic above Snow Hill [Photograph] Author unknown (2012) <http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ad/Birmingham_skyline_from_2_ snowhill.jpg> [accessed 1 January 2013]

41

Figure 51 - Birmingham rooftops [Photograph] Author: R. Oakes (2011) <http://www.flickr.com/photos/liverpoolsuburbia/6069185056/> [accessed 11 April 2013]

58

Figure 52 - Birmingham high-rise [Photograph] Author: unknown (2010) <http://www.flickr.com/photos/lamentables/4478655994/> [accessed 3 Janurary 2013]

59

Figure 56 - The Cube, Wharfside Street [Photograph] Author: E. Brown (2010) <http://www.flickr.com/photos/ell-r-brown/4757974345/> [accessed 3 January 2013]

63

Figure 59 - Beetham Tower, Holloway Circus [Photograph] Author: M. Thorpe (2006) <http://www.flickr.com/photos/mattingham/291248022/> [accessed 21 December 2012]

65

Figure 62 - Upper Parkside, Park Central [Photograph] Author: E. Brown (2012) <http://www.flickr.com/photos/ell-r-brown/6931193853/> [accessed 21 December 2012]

67

Figure 65 - Derwent Foundry, Mary Ann Street [Photograph] Author: unknown (2010) <http://www.flickr.com/photos/crugg/5458340756/> [accessed 21 December 2012]

69

Figure 69 - Suburban housing [Photograph] Author: unknown (n.d.) <http://assets.barratthomes.co.uk/webimage/celum/DWH_Hero_Middle/75231.jpg> [accessed 26 December 2012]

73

Figure 70 - Detached house [Photograph] Author: unknown (n.d.) <http://images.spicerhaart.co.uk/propimage/hires/0302/HRT030202414_01.jpg> [accessed 4 January 2013]

75

Figure 73 - Semi detached house [Google Street View] Google Maps (2009) <http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=grange+road,+newark&ll=53.06083,-0.82049&spn=0.0 00562,0.001635&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&hnear=Grange+Rd,+Newark,+United+Kingdo m&gl=uk&t=h&z=20&layer=c&cbll=53.06083,-0.820746&panoid=925ebWkm4T9rmaLoGs Wgnw&cbp=12,111.44,,0,-3.6> [accessed 5 January 2013]

77

147

Figure

Page

Figure 76 - Row of modern terraced houses [Photograph] Author: unkown (n.d.) <http://images.spicerhaart.co.uk/propimage/hires/0335/HRT033500229_01.jpg> [accessedco.638451,0.297892&panoid=G9CvKNG042WG7_uSapchQ&cbp=12,316.9,,0,0.68> [accessed 6 January 2013]

79

Figure 82 - Bungalow [Google Street View] Google Maps (2009) <http://maps.google.co.uk/s?ll=51.638451,0.297891&spn=0.000523,0.00327&gl =uk&t=k&z=19&layer=c&cbll=51.638451,0.297892&panoid=G9CvKNG042WG7_ AuSapchQ&cbp=12,316.9,,0,0.68> [accessed 6 January 2013]

83

Figure 91 - Georgian terraced housing [Photograph] Author: B. Snelson (2008) <http://www.flickr.com/photos/exfordy/2716563221/> [accessed 5 January 2013]

89

Figure 92 - Georgian terrace, Bath [Photograph] Author: unknown (n.d.) <http://search.knightfrank.co.uk/bth120118> [accessed 7 January 2013]

91

Figure 95 - Georgian terrace, London [Photograph] Author: unknown (n.d.) <http://search.savills.com/property-detail/gbsshsslh120062> [accessed 7 January 2013]

93

Figure 98 - Mews House [Photograph] Author: unknown (n.d.) <http://r.yhd.net/w/1280/1347973930/chpk0233250-1.jpg> [accessed 7 January 2013]

95

Figure 101 - Victorian detached house [Photograph] Author: unknown (n.d.) <http://search.knightfrank.co.uk/ken100053> [accessed 7 January 2013]

97

Figure 104 - Victorian end-of-terrace [Photograph] Author: unknown (n.d.) <http://search.knightfrank.com/wnd110038> [accessed 7 January 2013]

99

Figure 112 - Georgian terrace facade [Photograph] Author: unknown (n.d.) <http://search.knightfrank.com/sla120242> [accessed 7 January 2013]

104

Please Note: All Satellite images courtesy of Google Maps (All manipulated by author) All Maps courtesy of Edina Digimap (All manipulated by author) All other figures created by author unless stated above

148

149

A P P E N D I X

150

Figure 17 - Land at Wheatmore Farm

Source: Birmingham City Council, Strategic Land Availability Assessment 2011: Appendix 1-14 (2011), pp. 15-16.

1

151

01 GREEN BELT SUBMISSION NORTH BIRMINGHAM Location: Wheatmore Farm, Sutton Coldfield Area (hectares): 110.7 Developer: Framptons Date Submitted: 2011 Number of dwellings (estimated): 3,200

9 sites covering 257.22 hectares have been selected as potential areas for development in the Green Belt to the North of Birmingham.1 The land around Wheatmore Farm is typical of the West Midlands Green Belt in this area; consisting mainly of agricultural land and woodland, some of which is designated as sites of interest for nature conservation. To the West is the largely residential, urban area and the M6 is to the East.

It is estimated that this site could consist of 3,200 dwellings at a density of 30 dph.

Figure 19 - Map of North Birmingham Green Belt Sites

Figure 18 - Satellite of Wheatmore Farm

Key Nature Conservation Sites Agricultural Land Grade 3a Agricultural Land Grade 2 Green Belt Submissions

152

Figure 20 - Land at Webster Way

Source: Birmingham City Council, Strategic Land Availability Assessment 2011: Appendix 1-14 (2011), pp. 15-16.

2

153

02 GREEN BELT SUBMISSION NORTH EAST BIRMINGHAM Location: Webster Way, Walmley Area (hectares): 58.2 Developer: William Davis Date Submitted: 2011 Number of dwellings (estimated): 1,660

6 sites covering 266.06 hectares have been selected as potential areas for development in the Green Belt to the North East of Birmingham.2 Webster Way lies to the North East of Birmingham and is predominantly agricultural land, a proportion of which is classified as 3a, which is good quality agricultural land, capable of producing high quality yields. The Green Belt is intersected by the Sutton Coldfield bypass.

It is estimated that this site could consist of 1,660 dwellings at a density of 30 dph.

Figure 21 - Satellite of Webster Way

Figure 22 - Map of North East Birmingham Green Belt Sites

Key Nature Conservation Sites Agricultural Land Grade 3a Agricultural Land Grade 2 Green Belt Submissions

154

155