Upper Grounds Pub.

[pauliewalnuts]

If the Aston Tavern is to be renovated next to a new industrial unit, there might be a fair bit of lunchtime business to justify its revival. But demolishing the King Edward will be a big mistake. Aston has lost enough of its historic buildings, yet the disgraceful Birmingham City Council appear to be hell bent on destroying the city in order to fill their own coffers. These idiots have got all the vision of a cross-eyed a mole in a shoebox.

In terms of Aston, that's a bit unfair, in terms of the city, it is totally incorect.

If it gets demolished it'll be to make way for a large industrial scheme employing lots of people, in a deprived area. You can argue pro and con that on the basis of whether the pub offers more to the area socially, or on the grounds of architectural merit, but I can't see how you can seriously argue they're doing it to fill their own coffers.

[Dave Clark Five]

The Demolition of the Church Tavern was scandalous but, if the King Eddy is to go, it will take away a major landmark.

[bertlambshank]

The problem with that area is the canal.
I bet they would love to shove a new road where it is.

[Jimbo]

If the Aston Tavern is to be renovated next to a new industrial unit, there might be a fair bit of lunchtime business to justify its revival. But demolishing the King Edward will be a big mistake. Aston has lost enough of its historic buildings, yet the disgraceful Birmingham City Council appear to be hell bent on destroying the city in order to fill their own coffers. These idiots have got all the vision of a cross-eyed a mole in a shoebox.

In terms of Aston, that's a bit unfair, in terms of the city, it is totally incorect.

If it gets demolished it'll be to make way for a large industrial scheme employing lots of people, in a deprived area. You can argue pro and con that on the basis of whether the pub offers more to the area socially, or on the grounds of architectural merit, but I can't see how you can seriously argue they're doing it to fill their own coffers.

I'm not so sure. What was the motivation for demolishing Island House? Why are they determined to demolish the wholesale markets - would the proposed Travelodge, offices and retail units that are to replace them really be for the greater good of the city? Birmingham is gradually reinventing itself as a food destination, yet all the major chefs / restaurateurs in the city say that the closure of the markets would be a damaging to this movement. If anything, Birmingham needs more markets, not fewer.

And does anyone really believe that the proposed demolition of the Central Library is for aesthetic reasons? It's to clear the site for new offices and retail outlets, which will be in great demand because of the location, flow of people, etc. Yet there's already thousands of sq feet of empty office space in the city, as well as plenty of empty retail outlets.

Chamberlain square should be a civic space. It already has the Town Hall and BMAG. With a bit of imagination and vision the Central Library building could be turned into a museum of modern art and design - a tourist attraction. But no, let's have offices, they bring in money short term.

And so we come back to the King Edward. There's a lot of space for regeneration in this area, does any new development really need to encroach upon a 100-year-old pub that occupies a small tip of land between a fork in the road? Can't the council think up an alternative?

 

[Brend'Watkins]

And so we come back to the King Edward. There's a lot of space for regeneration in this area, does any new development really need to encroach upon a 100-year-old pub that occupies a small tip of land between a fork in the road? Can't the council think up an alternative?

With you all the way on that.  Any development could incorporate the Edward.  It shouldn't even be up for debate. 

[pauliewalnuts]

If the Aston Tavern is to be renovated next to a new industrial unit, there might be a fair bit of lunchtime business to justify its revival. But demolishing the King Edward will be a big mistake. Aston has lost enough of its historic buildings, yet the disgraceful Birmingham City Council appear to be hell bent on destroying the city in order to fill their own coffers. These idiots have got all the vision of a cross-eyed a mole in a shoebox.

In terms of Aston, that's a bit unfair, in terms of the city, it is totally incorect.

If it gets demolished it'll be to make way for a large industrial scheme employing lots of people, in a deprived area. You can argue pro and con that on the basis of whether the pub offers more to the area socially, or on the grounds of architectural merit, but I can't see how you can seriously argue they're doing it to fill their own coffers.

I'm not so sure. What was the motivation for demolishing Island House? Why are they determined to demolish the wholesale markets - would the proposed Travelodge, offices and retail units that are to replace them really be for the greater good of the city? Birmingham is gradually reinventing itself as a food destination, yet all the major chefs / restaurateurs in the city say that the closure of the markets would be a damaging to this movement. If anything, Birmingham needs more markets, not fewer.

And does anyone really believe that the proposed demolition of the Central Library is for aesthetic reasons? It's to clear the site for new offices and retail outlets, which will be in great demand because of the location, flow of people, etc. Yet there's already thousands of sq feet of empty office space in the city, as well as plenty of empty retail outlets.

Chamberlain square should be a civic space. It already has the Town Hall and BMAG. With a bit of imagination and vision the Central Library building could be turned into a museum of modern art and design - a tourist attraction. But no, let's have offices, they bring in money short term.

And so we come back to the King Edward. There's a lot of space for regeneration in this area, does any new development really need to encroach upon a 100-year-old pub that occupies a small tip of land between a fork in the road? Can't the council think up an alternative?
 

Island House is right in the middle of the eastside development. 

The wholesale markets are on incredibly valuable land next to the bull ring. They're not going to be flattened to build a Travelodge, either. In fact, they're not going to be relocated at all for the next three years. They're talking about relocating the markets, not doing away with them - there's a big difference.

The reasons the library is going are numerous, chief among them, the fact it doesn't work as a library, is falling to pieces, is a truly horrible building to behold, and in terms of location cuts the city centre in two. Don't forget, when it was built, there wasn't much city centre to speak of the Broad St side of the library. Look at it now.

The city council's job is to assist in the economic growth of the city, and make it a better place for the citizens to live in, and that's what they're trying to do.

It is nothing to do with filling their own coffers. For starters, if that were the case, they wouldn't have bothered spending hundreds of millions of pounds on a new library in the first place.

[Jimbo]

If the Aston Tavern is to be renovated next to a new industrial unit, there might be a fair bit of lunchtime business to justify its revival. But demolishing the King Edward will be a big mistake. Aston has lost enough of its historic buildings, yet the disgraceful Birmingham City Council appear to be hell bent on destroying the city in order to fill their own coffers. These idiots have got all the vision of a cross-eyed a mole in a shoebox.

In terms of Aston, that's a bit unfair, in terms of the city, it is totally incorect.

If it gets demolished it'll be to make way for a large industrial scheme employing lots of people, in a deprived area. You can argue pro and con that on the basis of whether the pub offers more to the area socially, or on the grounds of architectural merit, but I can't see how you can seriously argue they're doing it to fill their own coffers.

I'm not so sure. What was the motivation for demolishing Island House? Why are they determined to demolish the wholesale markets - would the proposed Travelodge, offices and retail units that are to replace them really be for the greater good of the city? Birmingham is gradually reinventing itself as a food destination, yet all the major chefs / restaurateurs in the city say that the closure of the markets would be a damaging to this movement. If anything, Birmingham needs more markets, not fewer.

And does anyone really believe that the proposed demolition of the Central Library is for aesthetic reasons? It's to clear the site for new offices and retail outlets, which will be in great demand because of the location, flow of people, etc. Yet there's already thousands of sq feet of empty office space in the city, as well as plenty of empty retail outlets.

Chamberlain square should be a civic space. It already has the Town Hall and BMAG. With a bit of imagination and vision the Central Library building could be turned into a museum of modern art and design - a tourist attraction. But no, let's have offices, they bring in money short term.

And so we come back to the King Edward. There's a lot of space for regeneration in this area, does any new development really need to encroach upon a 100-year-old pub that occupies a small tip of land between a fork in the road? Can't the council think up an alternative?
 

Island House is right in the middle of the eastside development. 

The wholesale markets are on incredibly valuable land next to the bull ring. They're not going to be flattened to build a Travelodge, either. In fact, they're not going to be relocated at all for the next three years. They're talking about relocating the markets, not doing away with them - there's a big difference.

The reasons the library is going are numerous, chief among them, the fact it doesn't work as a library, is falling to pieces, is a truly horrible building to behold, and in terms of location cuts the city centre in two. Don't forget, when it was built, there wasn't much city centre to speak of the Broad St side of the library. Look at it now.

The city council's job is to assist in the economic growth of the city, and make it a better place for the citizens to live in, and that's what they're trying to do.

It is nothing to do with filling their own coffers. For starters, if that were the case, they wouldn't have bothered spending hundreds of millions of pounds on a new library in the first place.

Why couldn't Island House be incorporated into the Eastside development?

According to the business birmingham website, this is what's proposed for the Wholesale Markets site:

"Type of real estate: Mixed-use scheme including a 210-bed Travelodge, a 340-bed, three -star plus Maldron conference hotel, 18,000 sq ft of retail units and 10,000 sq ft of offices, restaurants and bars."

Is the library really falling to pieces? And if they're demolishing it because its horrible to behold, there must surely be hundreds of other buildings in the city awaiting the same fate. Perhaps with a bit of creative thinking, the flow between Broad Street and Paradise Circus could be improved without demolishing the library? They're revamping New Street by putting cladding on it, so couldn't the same be done for the library to improve it aesthetically? I'm sorry, I don't buy it. The library's going because the new office space will bring in money. Meanwhile, the city is badly in need of attractions. With all the artefacts we have stashed away in a warehouse in Nechells, we could fill two museums. But no, we need more offices, apparently, despite all the empty ones we already have.

Look at the so called Big City Plan for Birmingham. It's claimed that they want to build more residential units for up to 5000 families in the city centre. Why? There are empty residential units all over the city, from the Jewellery Quarter to the canals.

Could all this development have something to do with the relationships between certain councillors and contractors, and all the money in between?

   

[LeeB]

Absolutely Jimbo.

[pauliewalnuts]

They're doing far more than putting cladding on it to revamp New Street, Jimbo.

it isn't just the library that interrupts that flow of people, either, look at the rest of the complex that is going, too.

I also don't really see "there are lots of other ugly buildings" as much of an argument to save the library, either. Good point about stuff in storage in Nechells. That's one other reason why the central library wasn't doing its job - the layout was so poorly designed for a library, there wasn't that much room for actual books.

The thing re the use of the markets site - even reading that description, it's obviously not just "to build a Travelodge", as you put it, is it?

Plus, that is only a "type" of development - ie a mix of hotel, office, retail - pretty much what you'd expect.

Once again, the discussion isn't about doing away with the wholesale markets, it is about relocating them. There's a big difference in that. Any responsible city council would wonder whether such valuable land should really be used as market space, which doesn't have to be in that exact spot.

[Jimbo]

Obviously, I'm aware that New Street is getting more than just cladding, Paulie. Nevertheless, they're using cladding to 'improve' the facade. I used this example to suggest that the admittedly ugly library could have something similar.

I agree, the central library shouldn't be a library any more. Keep it and make it into a museum, a public building, instead of offices, or private buildings.

I didn't say the Wholesale Markets are to be demolished just to build a Travelodge. I said: "proposed Travelodge, offices and retail units." I know it's Monday morning, but please read what I wrote.

Can you tell me where exactly the council are planning to relocate the wholesale markets? Will it improve the markets and the relationship it has with the city? Because I'm thinking of the Aston Manor Transport Museum that was relocated from Aston, near the city centre, to an industrial unit in Aldridge. The council could have devised a city museum ticket, where people pay a small fee to be transported to various museums / attractions around the central Birmingham area. This could have brought more visitors to the Transport Museum. Now it's in Aldridge. Good work.   

[pauliewalnuts]

They've not said where they're going to relocate it. One place they looked at was Witton, but the deal fell through. They now reckon it'll be at least 3 and possibly 5 years until it shifts anywhere.

Why does it have to continue to be that exact place? Surely so long as it is easily accessible and somewhere in or around the city centre, it can still do its job?

re the library space, I'll reserve judgement till we see the detailed plans for it. I'd imagine that some of the revenue from redeveloping the old library space will have - or will in future -  contributed to the building of the new library.

Were they to keep the current library and covert it into a museum, I imagine the council tax payers wouldn't be too chuffed about paying for it. It also would no doubt take a lot more than cladding it to switch purposes, too.

One thing which is worth remembering is that anything that gets built on that site now is going to have to be way more sympathetic to the proximity to the town hall, which is grade 1 listed, than they were when they built the current library.

[Jimbo]

This is the problem with relocating the wholesale markets. Where are they going to put them? They could just leave it alone, and celebrate it as the largest integrated wholesale market in the UK. Incorporate it into food tours of the city. Make Birmingham a destination for food tourists. Build a culture around it. Or they could look at sticking it out in the suburbs and making money from a short term plan for hotels, offices and shops that we probably don't need instead.

As far as the library goes, we have an opportunity to build a museum quarter for the city. I appreciate the current building would need altering, and that it would cost a fair whack, but there are ways to raise funding for such projects. The citizens of Manchester seem to welcome museums in their city, why should Birmingham be any different? And I've seen the current proposals for the site - they're utterly uninspiring, insipid and lacking in vision. At least the current monstrosity has character and some architectural significance. Let's use it, turn it to our advantage and create something exciting around it.

[pauliewalnuts]

I'm really not sure the wholesale markets being where they are is going to turn Birmingham into any more of a food destination than it already is.

Can you even go into them now? Can Joe Bloggs off the street go in at 6am and start taking photos? Would he even want to? It's a wholesale market in a run down building. Who would want to go and see that other than the people buying from there?

Birmingham has some good museums already - i don't really see how shoehorning another one into that building is going to improve things. Surely if it were a viable location (in terms of the building itself) for a museum, it would have got more attention already?

I'd much rather the council used the money from the redevelopment of that piece of land to fund things like getting the main traffic on Gt Charles Street entirely in a tunnel and doing something to better join the jewellery quarter to the city centre. That'd have much more of a long term positive impact that saving Central Library, surely?

[PeterWithesShin]

From a personal point of view i'd be against the markets leaving the city center. Once or twice a month when i'm town on a Saturday i'll pop down to them for a mooch and a few bits and pieces as they are so close and easy to get to. If they were moved outside the center I doubt i'd bother.

Obviously my few quid here and there makes no difference but I wonder how many are and would be like me?

[pauliewalnuts]

From a personal point of view i'd be against the markets leaving the city center. Once or twice a month when i'm town on a Saturday i'll pop down to them for a mooch and a few bits and pieces as they are so close and easy to get to. If they were moved outside the center I doubt i'd bother.

Obviously my few quid here and there makes no difference but I wonder how many are and would be like me?

Which markets are you referring to, though?

This is the wholesale market. Not the market down by the bull ring at the moment.