Following a meeting of the Urban Space Group, held on Thursday 13 March 2008 at the Royal Hotel, Scarborough; the following comments are submitted for the consideration of the Council’s Planning & Development Committee, the Planning Department and the project's developers Benchmark, with respect to the aforementioned application:
Legoland Discovery Centre
The complex comprises the Legoland building (including additional leisure facilities as yet unnamed) and a multi-storey car park with apartment fringe on the opposite side of Burniston Road.
General Statement
The USG heartily welcomed Legoland as a proposal. It was generally agreed that the advent of the brand poses a fantastic opportunity for the town and the Legoland facility will be a great addition to the area, able to be enjoyed by both visitors and locals alike.
Legoland / Leisure Building:
1. The members attending were quite happy with the Legoland building in terms of its appearance, architecture design, layout and so on. There were concerns raised, however, about the proposed building’s juxtaposition against The Sands apartments (currently under construction on The Corner Café site) in terms of a mismatch of scales. To clarify, the Legoland building is proposed to be a comparatively low building at only 2 storeys in height against the much higher residential building adjacent to it and it was felt by those present that a more sympathetic treatment of this transition might be needed to ease the visual impact of the change in scale. The USG, however, is pleased to note such concerns have apparently already been taken in hand and it is anticipated that the tower detail, situated to the seaward end of the Legoland site, will be extended in height to mediate the difference in levels.
2. It was also stressed that the USG would be very keen to see the employment of a high level of design detailing and good quality materials to ensure that the finished building would be an outstanding, high class product which made best possible use of this opportunity to create a significant new addition to the town’s built fabric.
Multi-storey car-park & apartments:
1. The USG were less happy about the implementation of the car park and apartment block. There was particular concern shown towards the Burniston Road elevation. The ‘living wall’ proposed for this aspect (though a very welcome and interesting idea) is, we understand now, in jeopardy as a design possibility on account of the relatively harsh coastal climate, and it is unclear what might be proposed in its place to disguise the car park’s sheer facade. Possible substitutions have included a ‘waved’ elevation, or possibly attaching panels or louvres to the façade, or even an alternative ‘living’ façade using projected images.
2. In response to the first point, it was proposed that the residential apartment ‘curtain’ might be extended (i.e. wrapped around the corner) to soften the Burniston Road elevation, thereby also creating an interesting dialogue with the curved element of the Legoland façade on the site opposite.
3. Further concern was raised regarding the expanse of open car parking area (i.e. the roof of the multi-storey car park) which is proposed to extend from Ryndale Drive. It was questioned whether some sort of screening could be achieved through vegetation etc. to reduce the impact of this expanse from the drive itself and from the hotels and so on looking out over it.
4. It was considered that the apartments posed a flat, uninteresting roof-line and were of a repetitive, relatively uninteresting, ‘ungrounded’ design, and was hoped that more time spent might be spent on improving the appearance to achieve a high-quality aesthetic and make more of the sloping site.
Updated Submission
Following the withdrawal of Legoland from the proposal and subsequent modifications to the application, the following amended commentary was submitted:
Further to our previous commentary and subsequent review of the revised application at our meeting of Thursday 12 June 2008; the Urban Space Group now feel moved to object to the proposed development on the grounds that the design is inappropriate for Peasholm.
1. The multi-storey car park
Whilst the meeting accepted that there may well be some justification for a multi-storey car park at this location, it was felt that the architects had not succeeded sufficiently in blending the building into the site. It was seen as just a large block dominating the area. It was noted that the developers had not responded to our previous comments and there were still doubts outstanding concerning the green-wall and the design of the wall of apartments. It was also noted that the choice of vegetation for the wall would be crucial; and further to this, there were still no firm details available regarding a suitable alternative, should ultimately the green-wall be deemed impracticable. We also found it strange that the Borough Council may subsequently take responsibility for the up-keep of said green-wall; we find this unacceptable.
2. Commercial leisure building
With the benefit of more time for further consideration, we are now of the opinion that this building is also inappropriate. Although it could be said that there is nothing particularly wrong with its appearance, indeed some members commented positively on the inter-locking rectangular forms of the elevation to Peasholm Gap, it was felt on balance that it was now shorn of character following the withdrawal of Legoland. Indeed, it was thought difficult to imagine how the design could ultimately reflect the purpose of the building, given that the ultimate function, be it cinema, casino, retail leisure or otherwise, was unknown. The general forms, layout and look of the entire scheme just seem isolated and ill-suited to the site. We are also concerned that its height and nearness to the public highway have created an aspect that is too dominant and urban in character, and consequently not in keeping with this area of Scarborough.
3. Link between the two buildings
The development itself is cut through by a main road. Anyone arriving by car to visit the facilities will have to use the car park and then cross over the road. We do not feel that this has been given adequate consideration. We also note that there is no mention as to how the use of the car park relates to the other attractions that comprise The Sands Development, Peasholm Gap and Peasholm Park itself. It seems that no thought whatsoever has been given to how people will move around the area and interact with the environment. For example, the commercial leisure building terminates abruptly at its western end, without sufficient importance or definition at a point where people will be passing by. This sends out contradictory messages regarding statement of presence and the desire for human scale.
4. Summary
We accept that this is a challenging site, we accept the presence of some form of commercial leisure activity at Peasholm Gap (although a water park would always be preferred), and we accept that there may well be a need for an extended car park. However, as with some other elements proposed for The Sands, we feel that this proposal does not respond appropriately to its location and the lack of an overall approach to landscaping is evident. It provides only a box where commercial activity can take place. It does nothing to enhance the experience of either local or visitor and contributes nothing to the character of Scarborough. It is therefore with regret that we cannot support the scheme as presented.
Full details of the application can be found by following the links at:
Current Planning Applications Under Review
