What's the future for Birmingham?

To be perfectly honest the future for Birmingham looks decidedly mixed. The council's masterplanning exercise is very encouraging but the suspicion remains that there is no real leadership to follow any of the 'big ideas' through. Characters such as council leader Mike Whitby and head of regeneration Clive Dutton have repeatedly shown themselves to be ill-informed about issues relating to design quality. It was disturbing, for instance, that Mike Whitby showed such enthusiasm for the catatrophically bad 'Vertiplex' proposals. In a similar vein, Clive Dutton, head of regeneration, has repeatedly desribed the central library as having no architectural merit, when most architectural commentators regard it as probably Birmingham's best post-war building.

Meanwhile, new developments of almost unrelenting banality are springing up across the city. It is difficult to think of a single new building in the city from the past ten years that really stands up as 'world class' or even simply 'okay'. Crosby Homes' Orion building is arguably one of the worst city centre housing developments any where in the country and yet the council's marketing people would have us believe we are living through a golden age.

This is not necessarily Whitby and Dutton's fault. The fact that they personally don't have the knowledge to make informed comments or decisions could be remedied if there were experienced and talented advisors around them. But where are these people?

The problem for me remains this - the distance between Birmingham's perception of itself and the actual reality. Birmingham is not a 'global city' any more than Sheffield or Leeds. It is frankly a laughing stock on the architectural stage (read any report on the city in the architectural press) and - according to recent reports in the Birmingham Post - it is haemorrhaging jobs in the media industry. None of this adds up with the image that the council tries to portray.

Can I propose more and better quality public art - specifically works that celebrate individuals or great historical events. I think a statue of the recently deceased Sir Richard Knowles should be commissioned. He, more than any one else has contributed to the rebirth of this city over the past 20 years. And let's have a decent sculptor! How about Ian Rank-Broadley?

http://www.ianrank-broadley.co.uk/

Stef,

I was interested to see that you did not respond to issue of design quality that I raised in my first post. This is frankly the elephant in the room when it comes to any building project in Birmingham.

The quality of architecture in the city has been catastrophically poor since at least the 1950s and repeated waves of regeneration have tended to repeat the mistakes of the past. The same applies to much of what is going on today. The new Bullring shopping centre is an attrocious piece of architecture, but the city makes out that is some kind of triumph. Meanwhile, new catastrophes, such as the V Building are proposed.

I sense you are reluctant to address this issue head on. Perhaps because you have your own business interests within the city and do not want to offend any one. This is fair enough. But until senior leadership figures within the city are able to address the chronic design standards that seem to afflict Birmingham, then I fear that nothing will fundamentally change, and Birmingham will remain the butt of jokes for generations to come.

As to that last point, Birmingham may have convinced itself that it is a cutting edge European capital of culture (or whatever), but no one else is very convinced. Research shows that Manchester is consistently regarded as being the UK's 2nd city, despite being much smaller. It is also regarded as cooler, more innovative and more design conscious. The same may soon apply to that former basket case, Liverpool, which is rebuilding its city centre using some of the very best architects in the UK. Where is the architectural talent in Birmingham? Practically invisible!

The City Council essentially stuck up two fingers to Richard Rogers when they sacked him from the Eastside Library. He has since pledged never to work in the city again. Does the council imagine that someone of Rogers' standing does not speak to other architects and that this does not impact perceptions of the city?

There is one big question at the heart the regeneration debate in this city - and that is how do we get quality?

Until we address this issue - and stop ignoring it - we aren't going to progress very far.

The whole library saga is deeply depressing.

Although there are good arguments for getting rid of the current central library, it is dispiriting to hear senior council figures showing no appreciation for what is actually a very interesting building.

The original proposal to move the library to Eastside had some logic, as it would have acted as a massive aid to the regeneration efforts down there. Currently, the area remains something of a wasteland and it remains unclear exactly what is going to convince people to go there.

The current proposals to build the new library on Centenary Square simply add to an existing cluster of cultural uses and misses the opportunity to use the library in a strategic way to regenerate a new part of the city. When Symphony Hall was built, Broad Street was a backwater, but strategic planning led to Brindleyplace and all the rest. It is difficult to see the benefit of placing the new library adjacent to this already rejuvinated area.

It seems highly likely that this ill thought through plan will to come to nothing. Perhaps this is not a bad thing, as the current talk is that the new library will be substantially smaller than the existing building (with a lot less books)and that it will cost a lot more than the previous Eastside proposals (£200m as opposed to £180m).