Wednesday, January 05, 2005
Pier Head plans
Update from Nick Storer, sent to all interested parties (supporters and objectors).
Following the rejection of our previous plans, and hopefully as an alternative to appealing them, we have worked over Christmas to amend the design to address many of the principal concerns of Local Residents and Councillors; we are convinced the Planning Officers will appreciate the merits of the improved scheme.
* There has been a substantial reduction in the scale and massing of the building on the Pier corner of the site in order to ensure views of The Rookery remain completely unaffected on three sides.
* The detailing and form of the building has been rethought and improved in order to reinforce the stand-alone qualities of the design.
* Greater focus has been given to the context and setting, picking up themes, materials and the diversity of the area, whilst remaining essentially contemporary, exciting and sustainable.
* Although unapparent from the elevations, the building features curved frontages, extensive tinted glazing and a predominantly copper roof instead of slate. The apartment layout remains much as before with a living area above shop/offices, and bedrooms in the roof. Each of the 14 units gets a garage and car space.
Your questions, comments and suggestions are eagerly awaited, prior to further negotiations with Purbeck District Council.
Nick Storer [nickstorer @ pierhead.plus.com]
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
5 comments:
I have only some preliminary elevations ready at present, but if anyone wishes to have a look contact me and I will e-mail them to you.
plans2005@pierhead.plus.com
Great to read that you are pressing ahead on the development of this key site in Swanage. I am observing this process from my new home in Australia but when it is complete as I am sure it will eventually be, it will be worth our paying a visit to this precious area of Dorset. Good luck Nick.
Tommy Thomas
There has been much criticism in the press that the planners seem unwilling to approve anything for the Pier Head site. Surely, plans were approved in 1995 (ref:6/94/675) and I understand they were not far away from approving plans in 1999 (ref:6/1999/0404) although this application was deemed to have been withdrawn in early 2003. I suggest an application is submitted along the lines of these earlier plans as I believe this would receive a favourable response.
The 1995/6 approval was for solely catering, it had a provisional full on license using the existing building, with the flat roof covered to form a first floor. I still had hope of a marina and the speedy regeneration of Swanage tourism in those days. The project would be totally uneconomic now. It was an example of appeasing the Planning Officers to such an extent that you are left with permission for something you don't want.
Mercifully, and similarly, a later application using David Morgan as architect was turned down. This involved two blocks of accommodation set in parkland and would have wasted the site for Swanage if built.
The 2003 application was for holiday flats along the front, with a restaurant nearest the Pier. When it became obvious these would not be economic to build, we sought a change to residential use. However this required a fresh application.
We are determined to develop the site with something architecturally impressive that will contribute to the economic revival of the Pier area. I don’t want a few retirement flats with no car parking, or a café only open a few months a year. I also don’t want to scale the current application down in order to gain permission in a piece meal fashion, much as Quayside Court got another storey.
We remain at complete odds with the Planning Officers on this. It seems to me that we have loads of Public open places with the seafront improvements and Prince Albert Gardens, but what the area needs is some all year around visitors. Current proposals are at www.pierhead.plus.com/2005.html
Any thoughts or suggestions would be most welcome.
Matter was raised at monthly Town Council meeting on 31st January (by, I think Pat Wisley - my apologies if name wrong). She asked for more explanation on why plans rejected that she believed many in town would like to go ahead.
To paraphrase responses, as I understood them:
Mayor said ...we can't just approve a plan because a site is an eyesore. developer has approval for less intensive scheme..this too big..developer can talk to Planners at PDC to see what acceptable..we can't be blamed if he chooses not to develop the plans he has approval for..
Julie Wheeldon said ..quite liked the design....not 'terrible' or anything ...trouble was this just too big ..bulk too great..needed 'air'..mustn't block (listed) Rookery ..problem is there are roads on each side
Colin Bright said..quite liked design on paper..bulk too great ...came right to the edge of the roads..
(Posted by Mike Hadley)
Post a Comment