Committee : DEVELOPMENT CONTROL SUB COMMITTEE
Date : 22 AUGUST 2006
Title
: P/01728/05 - TCP/27277/A - REQUEST
FOR AMENDMENTS TO APPROVED SCHEME, TRANSPORT INTERCHANGE, THE ESPLANADE, RYDE
REPORT OF THE DEVELOPMENT CONTROL MANAGER
SUMMARY
The
purpose of this report is to outline proposed changes to the approved scheme
for the transport interchange and to seek members’ approval as acceptable amendments. Planning Officers are of the view that the
changes sought are beyond those which can be dealt with by them as ‘minor
amendments’ and are therefore seeking a Member decision in accordance with the
requirements of Condition 2 of the planning permission for the interchange.
BACKGROUND
1. In
November 2005 Members granted planning permission for “Demolition of buildings
in connection with the development of a new transport interchange including
associated canopies, ancillary facilities, and a restaurant and railway
footbridge.” In addition they granted conservation area consent for the demolition
of the existing buildings on site.
2. The
design concept was that of a series of elegant leaves with their central vein
forming the ‘ridge’ of each roof section. The structures were to be supported
on tree like columns with the major structures enclosed with glass for the most
part making a very light and transparent development.
3. Planning
permission was issued dated 1st December 2005 and was subject to 22
conditions, of which condition 2 reads as follows – “The development shall not be carried out other than in strict
accordance with the drawings hereby approved without prior consent of the Local
Planning Authority.” The reason for that condition is – “To ensure that the
external appearance of the buildings is satisfactory in compliance with Policy D1
(Standards of Design) of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.”
4. Following
a ‘value engineering’ exercise, amendments to the scheme are being requested
which show reductions in the number and size of the structures and the alteration
and omission of some elements. The amendments reflect the need to reduce build
costs and are in line with comments previously expressed with regard to size
and impact of the original design. It is also likely that the materials noted
on the previously approved drawings will be the subject of change as a result
of this exercise. Condition 3 of the approval requires submission and prior approval
of samples of external finishes prior to commencement in addition to condition
2 which requires strict adherence to the approved scheme.
The
changes are summarised in the following table:
|
Element |
As approved |
Amendment sought |
|
Materials |
Metallic standing seam
roof with glazed ridge; colour golden sand. Structure ; white painted
steel. Café + concourse walls ;
glass. Station building + civic
space; timber rainscreen cladding to south elevation; white rendered upper
level; silver cladding to lower level. |
Metallic standing seam
roof with glazed skylights; colour golden sand. Structure ; white painted
steel. Concourse walls ; glass. Station building; timber or metal rainscreen cladding to
south elevation; rendered pre-cast concrete panels to north elevation. |
|
Potential
future restaurant |
Parking at ground level
with restaurant above. Art wall to down platform (future aspiration). |
To
remain as a future aspiration. |
|
Platform
canopy |
One of the ‘leaves’
supported on light columns. |
Omitted
as a leaf with reduced canopy attached to station building. |
|
Station
building |
The secondary ‘leaf’
containing plant, toilets, facilities for bus operators, ticket counters, the
main platform access, tourist information and travel shop at ground floor and
offices, storage and a ‘civic space’ at first floor. |
The dominant structure (containing
plant, toilets, security, facilities for bus operators, ticket counters, the
main platform access, tourist information and shop at ground floor) reduced.
The upper floor space is left blank. |
|
Concourse
pavilion |
The primary ‘leaf’
containing a coffee shop, newsagent, the main concourse and access to the
ticket counters etc. The overhanging roof also covered the pick-up / drop off
point and access to busses and taxis as well as seating areas at ground floor
with a void above with views to information screens at higher level. |
Now the secondary
structure containing waiting space and access to ticket counters. This is now
a single storey structure. |
|
Island
concourse |
2 further ‘leaves’ on
supports protecting access to further bus stands and seating. |
Simple
shelter (to replace leaves) |
|
Shelter |
Providing a covered walkway
and protecting access to further bus stands and stands cycle parking. |
Omitted.
Replaced
in part with combined car and boat hire facility + cycle storage noted as
‘cycle hut’. |
|
Bike
shop |
No
detail provided |
Omitted but see above. |
POLICY
IMPLICATIONS
The
Unitary Development Plan policies which apply were referred to in the committee
report. They remain the same and the report is attached for reference.
FINANCIAL
IMPLICATIONS
None as a direct result of this report
in terms of the Local Planning Authority.
OPTIONS
|
a)
To note and accept
the changes as amendments to the approved scheme. b)
To request that the
applicant reconsiders the amendments and resubmits them for consideration. |
EVALUATION
The
proposed amendments reduce the size of buildings, canopy and impact of the approved
scheme. The impact of the built form on the townscape, the conservation area
and the setting of the nearby listed buildings will be less. However, in reducing and omitting much of
the approved structures, a greater area of hard surfacing and vehicles will be
exposed. In townscape terms this will lead to a reduced impact from the mass
and scale of the building. It also provides a reduced facility for the users
and operators of the transport interchange. The decision needs to be made as to
whether this amendment / reduction is acceptable in terms of the design of the
whole scheme as presented and consulted upon originally and as approved by
Committee.
Having acknowledged a net reduction in size
and scale of the development, outlined in the amendments, officers are of the
view that the building remains a contemporary, quality designed architectural building. It will result in an improved high quality
transport interchange facility. Its
reduced size is sympathetic to the scale of the surrounding area. It nevertheless remains a distinctive and
attractive building. There would still
be a significant improvement to the public realm and accessibility to the
different modes of public transport.
HUMAN
RIGHTS
The
human rights issues were set out in the original committee report a copy of
which is attached for reference.
RECOMMENDATION
a) To
note and accept the changes as amendments to the approved scheme.
Contact
Details : Phil Salmon, Development
Team Manager
( (01983) 823552 e mail [email protected]
ANDREW PEGRAM
Development Control Manager