Wednesday, June 13, 2007
Ye Olde Pier Head Drawings
Just for fun here are a few of the older plans put before the planning officers in Wareham. They span about 20 years. I think you can enlarge the images by clicking on them (NB use your back button to return the the blog if you do). None were deemed to be suitable for the Pier Head site.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
30 comments:
When Oceana is completed on De Moulhem Road, and gleaming across the bay, you'll find it easier to get what you want Nick!
Interesting to see these, and thanks for posting them. They are not very inspiring, are they, and maybe we should we grateful that they were rejected. However, I rather liked the most recent (not reproduced here) scheme, so please persevere, Nick. I'm all for a 'landmark' design and I'm sure that Nick will produce one.
With such damning evidence, i.e. the drawings above and the more recent plans/proposals, there is obviously grounds to initiate an action of ‘misfeasance in public office’ against our Planning Officers who are blatantly failing to carry out their duty as ‘planners.
Alternatively, another way of getting rid of them would be to place two identical meals equal distance away from them causing them to die of starvation.
R
We can see why this application is a regular fixture. Each time it comes up the planning panel say it is too big, try again with something smaller, and each time the applicant comes back with something just as big under the mistaken impression that its some sort of architectural beauty contest. I don't know why the planning panel are being blamed for making consistent decisions.
I do not see how the planners can be criticised for doing their job. They produced a district plan which was consulted on for ages and was subject to a public inquiry to hear objections. It shows this area as an important open bit, not as built on. The plan is there for all to see in the reference library. If the planners had accepted an application that went against the plan you could say they had not done their duty but its a bit rich to complain when they have done their jobs properly.
Whether any of the architects who drew up plans are culpable for failing to point out that the exercise was futile we do not know. Perhaps they were instructed to proceed regardless. Its a bit like a child who demands a cake and thinks if they go on asking for it long enough they will be given one.
At least this applicant is honest with his intentions unlike say what happened in front of the Royal Victoria Hotel. Important open space to start. Plan to be developed with cottages. Then a three storey square block is passed. Then add a fourth storey. Well done planners.
10.23 the problem is in your response. You say "shows this area as an important open bit, not (I think you wanted to say) to be built on" and "try again with something smaller". So if it's not to be built on why is there any discussion? or can it only be built on a bit? Or what?
Because when the last but one application was rejected the planners said that despite the site being outside the developed area as it had a building on it they would go along with something of about the same footprint. I expect they said this each time and each time they have been presented with a plan for something just as big. Meanwhile the old building has been left to deteriorate, a common enough tactic used to put pressure on planners.
I can only respect your view that the site should not be redeveloped. I believe that a landmark building on the Pier Head would send a signal to the world that Swanage wants to be a little more like Padstow and a little less like Eastbourne.
Just about every person i have spoken to in theis Town ahs a storey about the beurocracy, crazy decision making, stupidity, obstinance or lack of vision ferom Purbeck Planners.
is the use of storey a tad freudian, or ...
When will we see a landmark design instead of a block of flats or a boring terrace of houses?
You could probably fit a couple of Huff houses like at Studland on the site. I believe they will be sold for several million pound each.
If you take a look at the 4th one down you will see two sets of two apartments set in parkland. There is a Victorian style conservatory and tea garden. The tatty drawing shown does little justice to the full scheme. This was done by the architect who did the Swanage Sailing Club building. It was (perhaps mercifully) rejected at both Swanage and Purbeck. Minimalism has been tried. Any of you budding architects who would like to sketch something at A4, let me have it and I’ll post it up here for comments!
I would vote for a tower, with a viewing platform.
Spinacre Tower style or something taller?
Don't know. How tall is the spinnaker tower? I suppose it would need to be high enough to see into Durlston Bay so it would let you see a reasonable amount of jurassic coast.
some local could get off their arse and run boat trips instead.
557 feet by the by
I will have to get my trusty OS map out and check heights. 500 feet should give you a view from the Solent to Portland. Think of the howls of horror if this idea was taken seriously! On a very clear day you can see the chimneys or whatever they are on the oil refinery at Fawley, wonder how high they are.
The Spinnaker is £6.20 for adults and a fiver for kids with a bit off for locals so it generates a fair amount of income. There is a doscount for groups. The advantage over boat trips is that it is all weather and all year. Don't know why we are asked about boat trips as they already operate. Shooting from the hip perhaps?
Ok I'm a French Tourist arriving in Swanage today. I want a bed and breakfast recommended say by Which? or better, I want to eat in a restaurant with at least one Mitchellin star, and I want to take my family on the sea to see the Jurasssic coast. I a'nt the Count of Monty Cristo so I want this lain on for me. Where do i start?
Forget it. Buy an ice cream and piss off is the Swanage tourism answer.
a joke's a joke, perhaps... but can I remind people to be careful not to slander or libel others on this site
Fascinating to see these previous designs - thanks for posting them.
I like the most recent scheme also, so here's to a landmark building (eventually) on this site and giving Swanage something to celebrate.
Made it into the London daily's today:
http://www.metro.co.uk/news/article.html?in_article_id=53964&in_page_id=34
In this weeks Advertiser letters page Paddy Mac questians when the Pier Head was built. I'm not sure. Can anyone help?
Paddy suggest it was already here in the 1930s confounding reports that it was built after World War 2 by Canadian troops awaiting repatriation. He suggests perhaps 1918 but the style is wrong. Someone must have a photo that would clear this up. We do know the army offered to build a harbour in the late 1940s but the council thought this would lower the tone of the place. Maybe it was the thought of all those sweaty dockers.
Thanks to Antonia Phillips for the post card showing the elms intact in 1931. See:
http://www.snackbarswanage.co.uk/ph1931page.htm
(you will need to cut and paste the link to your browser)
The OS map of 1938 also shows no Pier Head building:
http://www.snackbarswanage.co.uk/swanage1938page.htm
(again i'm afraid you will need to copy and paste the link)
I know it was on a technicality but it seems odd that Shore House old people’s home at the other end of the beach just got 24 flats passed without any hassle or infrastructure tax (should have been about £200,000), without any social housing (should have been 25%) and without any flood risk assessment despite the fact that the car park is below the level of the road.
Outline permission was granted in 1999, detailed permission in 2002. The latest application is for a "reserved matter" from the 2002 approval, in other words some aspect that was not dealt with in the original application or most likely to extend the five years within which an approval specifies work has to start.
Just like the Huff Houses in Studland. How many more of these unacceptable sleeping applications are in the pipeline?
Post a Comment