Open Workshop Feedback Booklet 01 & 02 February

Shell CentreDialogue

WORKSHOP & EXHIBITION01/02 FEBRUARY 2012

Shell Centre DialogueWorkshop & Exhibition information pack

Pages 01/21

FEEDBACK PACKWORKSHOP & EXHIBITION 01& 02 FEBRUARY 2012

02 INTRODUCTION GENERATING A MASTERPLAN FOR THE SHELL CENTRE SITE

06 WORKSHOP FEEDBACK 01/06 LINKS & MOVEMENT

08 WORKSHOP FEEDBACK 02/06 PUBLIC OPEN SPACE

10 WORKSHOP FEEDBACK 03/06 URBAN LAYOUT

12 WORKSHOP FEEDBACK 04/06 HEIGHT

14 WORKSHOP FEEDBACK 05/06 COMMUNITY & OTHER FACILITIES

16 WORKSHOP FEEDBACK 06/06 AFFORDABLE HOUSING / LOCATION & PROVISION

18 ABOUT YOU YOUR FEEDBACK

04 CONTEXT DEVELOPING A MASTERPLAN FOR THE SHELL CENTRE SITE


INTRODUCTIONGENERATING A MASTERPLAN FOR THE SHELL CENTRE SITE

Page 02/21

What is a masterplan?

A masterplan embraces a wide range of complex, sometimes conflicting issues that must balance potential opportunities and benefits against existing constraints.

The purpose of a masterplan is to : Help develop an area as a whole in

a way that responds to local economic and social needs in a manner that fits well with the existing community; Help identify the potential of the

area for development and then how separate sites within it can be best used; Make better use of under-

developed land; Involve the local community in the

development process and help build consensus about the future of the area; Define proposals that will deliver high

quality, sustainable buildings and public spaces;

Help co-ordinate health, leisure and other services in the area; Make the most of natural assets such

as the landscape, topography and ecology; Define the extent and height of

proposed buildings. Consultation

Throughout the design process consultation and engagement will be a central feature. We have formed a Community Liaison Group constituted of recognised representatives of residents associations and community groups alongside passionate individuals. The Community Liaison Group will be in regular contact with the masterplanning team and will act as both a sounding board, and a means for communicating ideas quickly and efficiently. This group will meet on a bi-monthly basis.

Further workshops are planned in March and April or May to see how the masterplanning team have responded to the desires and ideas expressed in the first workshops, and to carry on the process of co-design. We also plan to hold some feedback sessions, where the masterplanning team and the wider team of project architects will describe their proposals showing how they have taken account of local and wider feedback. We very much hope to see you again at one of these events.

The aim is that the masterplan and detailed design elements will be ready for submission for detailed planning permission at the end of this year.

Steve McAdamSoundings


CONTEXTDEVELOPING A MASTERPLAN FOR THE SHELL CENTRE SITE

Page 04/21

In this booklet we have diagrammatically described options for 6 key masterplanning themes. These are intended to guide and steer discussions and not to limit them. If there are options that are not shown which you think viable, we would be very interested to hear from you.

The six thematic areas that we cover in this booklet are:

Links & movement Public Open Space Urban layout Height Community and other facilities Affordable housing

We hope that through getting workshop-driven and individual feedback on the broad options described within the above areas, we will be able to better understand approaches that would be considered most appropriate, areas in which there is general agreement and others where there is not.

These will provide some ground rules for the masterplanning team.Please study the options contained in this booklet and in considering these, and the wider context described in the exhibition, decide the approach you consider best within each theme.

There will be plenty of time to discuss other issues, aspirations and thoughts in forthcoming workshops. If there are specific areas you would like us to take on, please note them at the end of this booklet.

/21 Shell Centre DialogueWorkshop & Exhibition information pack

Pages 05/21

Bel

vede

re R

oad

York

Roa

d

Chicheley Street

Bel

vede

re R

oad

Belvedere Road

York

Roa

dUpper G

round

Doon Street

Stamford Street

Concert Hall Approach

Jubilee Gardens

Shell Centre site

Waterloo Station

N

* Diagram of Shell Centre site and surrounding area.


Pages 06/21

01/06 WORKSHOP FEEDBACKLINKS & MOVEMENT

We know from initial consultation that there is a great desire to see pedestrian and cycle friendly routes in the Waterloo Station area, especially for east-west connections.

The draft Supplementary Planning Document (2011) (SPD) for Waterloo indicates areas where connections would be beneficial, including the ‘milk passage’ tunnel underneath Waterloo Station, connecting from Lower Marsh through to the old lobby area for Waterloo International, where retail uses are currently being explored. The high level connection that once linked across York Road to connect the River with Waterloo station no longer crosses the Shell Centre site, and is likely to be replaced by a ground level link route.

Links shown in the SPD appear to be based on the retention of the existing Shell Centre and the development of the podium block. This needs to be rethought with the redevelopment now anticipated.

Connecting Waterloo Station andthe South Bank along the viaduct

This option offers a direct link between Waterloo Station and the river. It would require access to be continued through Hungerford car park to reach the river, and would need the cooperation of other landowners. This route could stimulate better use of the viaduct arches were the owners in approval

Diagonally through the site

This link opens up a diagonal line of movement from the north-east corner of the site to the river. It could tie in with the existing London Underground entrance, given LUL approval, and could permit a direct link from the ticket hall to the river. This link could form a new route of arrival to the London Eye.

* Please indicate your preferred option only.

Central route either to the north or south of the tower

This option suggests a central link through the site passing on one side or other of the Tower, which is to be retained. The link could pick up the desire line described by the ‘milk passage’ and the design proposals for Elizabeth House, which anticipate an access route to Waterloo Station and some new shops in the area as previously described.

Viaduct

Bel

vede

re R

oad

York

Roa

d

Chicheley Street

Viaduct

Bel

vede

reRo

ad

York

Road

Chicheley Street

Viaduct

Bel

vede

reRo

ad

York

Road

Chicheley Street

a

b

OPTION A OPTION COPTION B


Pages 07/21

Connecting to the Eye

The line of movement here responds to a direct approach route to the London Eye which could possibly be tied to a specific sight line. It recognises that the route could connect both back to Waterloo Station and to a cluster of 3 hotels near Park Plaza (including the new Premier Inn adjacent the old ‘Lying In Hospital currently on site).

Comments & suggestions

If you have any comments or any suggestions please note them in the box bellow.

OPTION D NAME & TABLE NUMBER

COMMENTSViaduct

Bel

vede

reRo

ad

York

Road

Chicheley Street


Pages 08/21

02/06 WORKSHOP FEEDBACKPUBLIC OPEN SPACE

Much has been said about the need for public open space during the preliminary consultation period. Jubilee Gardens will be a great asset for the area, and will be completed this summer.

There are also a number of ideas for the improvement of the public realm around Waterloo Station, including improvements to the space adjacent the Victory Arch entrance, a new public space on York Road as part of the Elizabeth House proposals and studies for a peninsularised ‘Waterloo City Square’, easing pedestrian movement across the Waterloo ‘Imax’ roundabout. There will be scope to include some public open space within the Shell Centre site. The nature of this space will obviously depend on its location and surroundings and the wider iniatives outlined above.

Along the viaduct

The first option arranges the public space along the viaduct. This assumes that the eastern viaduct arches would be put to use as restaurants, cafés, bars or shops, given the owner’s approval.

Central space

This option proposes a central square in the heart of the scheme. It could, potentially, be designed to accommodate access to and egress from London Underground.


Facing Jubilee Gardens

The third option suggests that the public space is arranged to face the completed Jubilee Gardens. This would offer the potential of maximizing the impact of the open space in the area through collecting it all together. However, it would preclude the delivery of any other type of public space.

Viaduct

Bel

vede

reRo

ad

York

Road

Chicheley Street

Viaduct

Bel

vede

reRo

ad

York

Road

Chicheley Street

Viaduct

Bel

vede

reRo

ad

York

Road

Chicheley Street



Pages 09/21



OPTION D

Along Chicheley Street

In this option the public space is arranged along the route leading to the London Eye. Given the association with the ‘Eye’, this layout may suggest that the space may be mostly used by visitors and tourists in the area.

Viaduct

Bel

vede

reRo

ad

York

Road

Chicheley Street

NAME & TABLE NUMBER

COMMENTS


Pages 10/21

03/06 WORKSHOP FEEDBACKURBAN LAYOUT

The layout of the scheme will in part be driven by preferences for the public realm layout and the preferred linkages but it will also be important to establish a legible and coherent arrangement of building blocks. There are three very broad options for the scheme, and these are illustrated by the diagrams below.

Perimeter blocks

The first option proposes the use of a perimeter block. This could echo the current scheme and therefore offers the potential to fit in contextually although it may restrict permeability and send out a ‘fortress like’ image.

Slab blocks

The second arrangement suggests the use of blocks laid out on an east-west axis. This offers the potential for enhanced permeability but, if not well handled, it could be a little repetitive.


Mixed blocks

The third option offers the potential for enhanced permeability, and the provision of varied spaces and building forms though, if not well handled, the composition could be confusing.

Viaduct

Bel

vede

reRo

ad

York

Road

Chicheley Street

Viaduct

Bel

vede

reRo

ad

York

Road

Chicheley Street

Viaduct

Bel

vede

reRo

ad

York

Road

Chicheley Street



Pages 11/21



NAME & TABLE NUMBER

COMMENTS


Pages 12/21

04/06 WORKSHOP FEEDBACKHEIGHT

The location of tall buildings will have to be carefully considered to maximize the degree of exposure Jubilee Gardens will enjoy from the sun, to minimise the disruption of daylight to surrounding residential blocks, to work within the wider roofscape including the retained Shell Centre tower, and to conform with the London Mayors protected views.

We have shown six highly diagrammatic options for the arrangement of the taller buildings. A conceptual grid is shown within which the letter indicates whether the building in this area should be ‘High’, ‘Medium’ or ‘Low’. These are general measures but it should be considered that the existing tower is likely to establish a datum for the taller buildings (around 27 floors) while the County Hall pavilion suggests the lower threshold (around 8-9 floors).


Highest towards the viaduct & lowest towards Chicheley Street

Stepping up in height from Chicheley Street to the rail viaduct. This would provide a gentle transition up in scale from Chicheley Street but could cramp any public route arranged along the viaduct and impact notably on the silhouette as seen from the Whitehouse.

Highest towards Chicheley Street & lowest towards the viaduct

Stepping up in height from the rail viaduct to Chicheley Street. This would support the creation of a more ‘open’ feel to any public space arranged beside the viaduct but it would cast pronounced shadows over Jubliee Gardens until mid-day or later and may interrupt views of the Tower from strategic vantage points.

Highest towards York Road & lowest towards Belvedere Road

Stepping up in height from Jubilee Gardens toward York Road. This would provide a gentle gradation from Jubilee Gardens and would work well with sun path considerations but it could overwhelm York Road, and create a ‘cramped’ street environment.


H H H

M M

MM

M

LL

LH

H

H

H

M

M

MML

L

LHH

HMM

MM M

L L L


Pages 13/21

NAME & TABLE NUMBER

COMMENTS

OPTION D OPTION FOPTION E

H

H

H

M

M

M

M L

L

L

LH

HH

M

MM

M ML L LH H

H

MM

M

M

M

LL

L

Highest towards Belvedere Road & lowest towards York Road

Stepping up in height from York Road to Jubilee Gardens. This would offer an array of grander buildings facing the Thames, which could offer an appropriate scale but it would not work well in sun path terms, and would cast pronounced shadows over Jubliee Gardens until mid-day or later.

Increasing in height diagonally towards York Road / viaduct

Stepping up in height ‘diagonally’ across the site from Chicheley Street to the north-east corner of the site. This would probably work best with the Elizabeth House proposals, and minimises shadow casting over Jubilee Gardens but could impact on the setting of York Road.

Increasing in height diaginally towards Belvedere Road / Chicheley Street

Stepping up in height ‘diagonally’ across the site from the north-east corner of the site to Chicheley Street. This would soften the arrangement to York Road, but would cast pronounced shadows over Jubliee Gardens until mid-day or later and may interrupt views of the Tower from strategic vantage points.


Pages 14/21

05/06 WORKSHOP FEEDBACKCOMMUNITY & OTHER FACILITIES

The ‘feeling’ of the scheme will depend to some extent on what uses are accommodated on the site – particularly at ground floor level.

There are four very broad options for the location of facilities such as shops, bars, cafés, restaurants, leisure facilities and the like. These are illustrated by the diagrams below.

Along the viaduct

This option suggests that the facilities are laid out in a manner that could complement the public or commercial use of the rail viaduct arches to create a busy thoroughfare.

As stated before, this would need the agreement of the owners of the viaduct, so far as the use of the arches is concerned.

Along York Road

The second layout proposes that the facilities are arranged along York Road, to bring the street ‘back to life’.

The arrangement would have to work together with the proposals for Elizabeth House, to ensure a united and coherent response.


Along Chicheley Street

Chicheley Street is proposed as the third option. This responds to the cafés and bars that are located opposite and to the possibility that the route here would cater for visitors to the ‘Eye’ and other local tourist attractions.

Viaduct

Bel

vede

reRo

ad

York

Road

Chicheley Street

Viaduct

Bel

vede

reRo

ad

York

Road

Chicheley Street

Viaduct

Bel

vede

reRo

ad

York

Road

Chicheley Street


Main uses

Shell will return to the site when the development is completed, howerever, there is capacity to build further accomodation either for office or residential use. If you have a preference as to which use, please indicate this below.

Additional office

Residential

No preference

* Please tick your preferred option only.

Other uses

Aside from the location of these facilities, we would also like you to consider what they might be. Please chose your top two priorities from the list below:

Retail Bars, restaurants, cafes Cultural use

Leisure Sport Health facility

* Please indicate your first and second preference by placing a number against the use selected.


Pages 15/21




COMMENTS

Mall style through the site

The final option suggests a ‘mall arrangement’ of some kind, passing through the site, possibly offering a degree of protection from the elements and linking with a reconfigured ticket office giving access to the London Underground from York Road and the river. This would require the support of other parties.

Viaduct

Bel

vede

reRo

ad

York

Road

Chicheley Street


Pages 16/21

06/06 WORKSHOP FEEDBACKAFFORDABLE HOUSING / LOCATION & PROVISION

Though there are no concrete plans as regards the residential offer, if it is brought forward, ‘affordable housing’ will have to be considered.

The following four options define suggested locations for affordable housing and consider how they could be implemented.

All in one cluster

This option suggests that the affordable housing is located in one building and delivered in one stage. The phasing may depend to some extent on the market and negotiations with the council. It is unlikely that it would be offered in any initial phase.

Along viaduct and phased

The second layout proposes that the affordable housing is arranged along the viaduct, and brought forward in a number of phases. This gives flexibility to the masterplanner and allows for changing market conditions to be tackled, suggesting that some of the affordable housing could be provided in an early development phase.


Scattered and phased

The third option, for ‘scattered and phased’ provision would be the most difficult to be provided and may run against the needs of Housing Associations who generally want clear ‘blocks’ to manage. However, it could help to provide a mixed and balanced community.

Viaduct

Bel

vede

re

Road

York

Road

Chicheley Street

Viaduct

Bel

vede

re

Ro

ad

York

Road

Chicheley Street

Viaduct

Bel

vede

re

Road

York

Road

Chicheley Street



Pages 17/21




COMMENTS

Some or all off site

Though there is no formal planning option covering off-site provision, in whole or in part, today’s economic realities are challenging this. The advantages of off-site provision are that, given the right land values, far more affordable homes can be built elsewhere. However, this can be considered discriminatory.

Some

All

Viaduct

Bel

vede

reRo

ad

York

Road

Chicheley Street


Page 18/21

FEEDBACK SHEETABOUT YOU

Please take the time to complete the feedback form below. Please hand your complete booklet to one of the Soundings team before you leave.

Many thanks for your help.

Name

Organisation (If any)

Address

Post code

Telephone

Age Gender

Please complete you personal information below :

Please tell us if you belong in one or more of the groups listed below :

Local residentLocal businessCommunity serviceCultural organisationFaith groupLocal clubResident AssociationGeneral public

Permissions

Have you been involved in the consultation process so far? If so, have you :

Completed a Canvass CardTaken part in a Walk & TalkAttended the Community Liaison Group meeting

I hereby give my permission for Soundings to file and database my details and feedback in connection with the Shell Centre project.

I hereby give my permission for Soundings to uses my photograph and quotations from my feedback in consultation reports, newsletters, website and exhibition boards.

Workshop & Exhibition

Did you find the exhibition useful and informative?

Yes No

Workshop & Exhibition

Did you find the workshop useful and informative?

Yes No


Pages 20/21

OTHER COMMENTSFOR THE SHELL CENTRE DIALOGUE TEAM

Do you have any other comments for the Shell Centre Dialogue team?

NOTES


Pages 21/21

NOTES

SOUNDINGS148 CURTAIN ROADLONDON EC2A 3AT

Open Workshop Feedback Booklet 01 & 02 February

Documents

Transcript of Open Workshop Feedback Booklet 01 & 02 February