| Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:High Street Urban Design - Look and feel of the street scene | |
| Posted by: | Andrew Dakers | |
| Date/Time: | 17/05/07 14:02:00 |
| Duncan - Here's my take on the drivers you mention (a priority to maximise a financial return; wanting a beacon development for image; pressure from LBH)... I would agree with Nigel that financial return is going to be the top priority, as with any company. However as we try and get across in the community vision report there is a strong correlation between return on investment and a high quality (beacon) scheme that responds to local needs. If the design is ill conceived and the retail space sits empty for example as foot fall doesnt increase, then it is not going to be easy for Ballymore (or anyone else) to manage or sell on. Pressure from the council is important in all schemes. I don't think any developers particularly delight at the cost and delay of going to public inquiry. However pressure from the GLA and central gov't planning policy is also a consideration for developers and the council. Nigel - As I said yesterday in an email to the Steering Group mailing list don’t get too wedded to this visual – it is not intended to be a final solution or 100% accurate. However it does give an indication of how a fairly high density development could work around the historical yards and buildings (we know from our economic study of the BTC Ltd scheme the need for more housing if a scheme is going to be viable). There are practical issues around boatyard operation that will need to be worked through in more detail (and that could of course lead to refinement of this illustrative visual). However this visual does clearly indicate the desire to have three operating boatyards in the area and reflects both discussions at the High Street urban design workshop and other recommendations in the report. Considered with the map of underground car parking in the first draft of the Community Vision report (http://www.openplans.org/projects/brentfordhighstreet/brentford-high-street-the-community-vision/brentford-high-street-the-community-vision-may-2007-draft.pdf ) a more complete sense of practicalities/complexities of any viable scheme emerge. I must say I disagree with you that this is "truly ghastly". The next level of design detail - how blocks are broken up to develop an interesting character, street scene and texture - will be vitally important. For that turn to the many photos in the existing draft of the report (I have since received more photos for inclusion in the next draft). This drawing is only really meant to give an indication of *massing* around the yards and historic buildings, which are the major constraints of the community vision. Chris' orignal plan was to leave a flat roofline (as this drawing was simply to indicate massing) but I felt some *indication* of a livelier roofline would give the illustration more life. Perhaps a mistake mixing the two objectives. Perhaps you could feedback specific changes/ammendments to this illustration to Chris and I directly in the next few days so this can be developed a bit further ahead of the next steering group meeting? I think the problem with not going down this route of doing some work on visualisation (as this debate illustrates) is that everyone will read what they want to out of the text of the BAAP and Community Vision document. Best, Andrew |