Stephenson Street, Navigation Street, Station Street, Smallbrook Queensway, (land bounded by), New Street Railway Station, Birmingham

Transcription

1 Committee Date: 07/08/2014 Application Number: 2014/02551/PA Accepted: 10/04/2014 Application Type: Minor Material Target Date: 10/07/2014 Amendment Ward: Ladywood Stephenson Street, Navigation Street, Station Street, Smallbrook Queensway, (land bounded by), New Street Railway Station, Birmingham Minor Material Amendment attached to approval 2009/05720/PA for amendments to the western elevation including the western facade, multi-storey car park and car park ramp Applicant: Agent: Recommendation Approve Subject To Conditions Network Rail Infrastructure Ltd Kings Place, 90 York Way, London, N1 9AG Network Rail Infrastructure Ltd Square One, 4 Travis Street, Manchester, M1 2NY 1. Proposal 1.1. As originally submitted this minor material amendment application proposed revisions to the Navigation Street footbridge, western facade and car park ramp, and cladding of the multi storey car park, in connection with reserved matters application 2009/05720/PA for remodelling of New Street Station. The alterations relate to the western section of the emerging development and as originally submitted comprised: retention and extension of the pedestrian footbridge from Navigation Street in its current form (i.e. this would no longer be clad in the stainless steel to match the materials used for the other external facades); removal of the Hill Street Entrance and it s replacement with a retail unit and fire escape; retention of the car park ramp from Hill Street in its current form (i.e. this would only be part no longer be enveloped by stainless steel cladding) and; changes to the geometric layout of the façade panels on the west elevation and reduced cladding to the multi storey car park on the north and east elevations In response to concerns raised by the City Council, Network Rail have submitted amended plans, details of which are set out below Amendments to the West Façade comprising: Page 1 of 14

2 an additional strip of stainless steel cladding that would run continuous with the rest of the façade and wrap around the external staircase at the top of the vehicle access ramp, an additional soffit and side walls in the canopy above the vehicle entrance at the top of the vehicle access ramp that would provide a narrower open area with limited viewing angles to see beyond the cladding. The vehicle entrance would still be left open with views to the atrium sky roof beyond, and enlargement of the ramp cladding to cover more of the existing concrete structure of the ramp itself Multi Storey Car Park amendments have been made to the north elevation from a revised view point, at the top of Pinfold Street and the existing view point at the lower end of Pinfold Street. This is to ensure that only the stainless steel cladding can be viewed from areas of public realm, concealing the car park structure Navigation Street footbridge, Navigation Street entrance and Southern Hub (Hill Street entrance) - removal of the proposals for the Navigation Street footbridge, entrance and southern hub from the application. These elements of the scheme would now stay as originally consented. In the event that Network Rail propose future changes to the Navigation Street footbridge and entrances they have agreed to an independent design review and would seek to involve the City Council in selecting a suitable design panel In support of the application a Planning Statement has been submitted. This report states that the rationale for seeking the minor amendments to the consented scheme is to ensure that the works can be safely erected within the project s timescale. North Elevation West Elevation Visualisations 2. Site & Surroundings 2.1. New Street Station was last redeveloped in the 1960's when the original glass roof was removed and commercial and retail uses above the station were added. The station includes sub-platform, platform and concourse levels. Above the concourse is Grand Central (formerly Pallasades) Shopping Centre, a multi storey car park, the Ladywood House office block and various ancillary uses. Overall the site covers approximately 7.3 ha (with a built area of 4.5 ha) and lies within the heart of Birmingham City Centre Work is well underway on the much-needed redevelopment of New Street Station. The first half of the new station concourse opened in spring 2013 and the project will finally complete in Next year will also see the opening of the new 4 storey 250,000sqft John Lewis department store, which together Grand Central Shopping Centre will provide circa 60 shops and eateries. Page 2 of 14

3 2.3. A wide range of buildings and uses surround the station. To the south on the opposite side of Station Street are commercial properties, including a hotel, the Electric Cinema, the Grade II listed Old Repertory Theatre and on the corner with Hill Street, the Crown Public House. Above some of these properties there are residential apartments. West of the application site is Hill Street, with commercial properties on the opposite side, including the Grade A locally listed former futurist Cinema on John Bright Street, a small convenience store, multi storey office blocks and a casino To the north of the station are Navigation Street, Stephenson Street, and New Street. Navigation Street leads past the Grade II listed Signal Box and underneath Suffolk Street Queensway to the Mailbox. Directly opposite the new north-west station entrance is Guild House, a 4 storey block, with commercial uses above ground floor retailing. This building together with commercial properties on the northern side of Stephenson Street, including the Grade II listed Waterstones bookshop, are within the Colmore Row and Environs Conservation Area. To the east of the station is the Bullring and to the south of this Smallbrook Queensway. This key route into city centre is notable for its unusual S shaped four storey buildings with concrete facades. Location Plan Street View 3. Planning History 3.1. In July 2007, outline planning consent was granted (with all matters reserved save for access) in accordance with application 2006/05066/PA for refurbishment and associated redevelopment of New Street Station and adjoining land, in connection with alterations and reconfiguration of station facilities, changes to the Pallasades Shopping Centre, demolition of Stephenson Tower and construction of two tall buildings, associated highway works, public spaces and infrastructure works. The consent was subject to a S106 legal agreement to secure:- affordable housing; public open space / public realm and public art; contributions to Shopmobility and way finding signage; multi-faith prayer rooms and public toilets (to be provided within the Station); provision of CCTV; commitment to local training / employment initiatives; and commitment to a parking study prior to development of the two towers Originally it was envisaged that the whole development as then proposed would be undertaken at the same time. However, the applicant decided to carry out the works to New Street Station as a first phase. Accordingly, on the 1st October 2009, planning consent was granted under Section 73 in accordance with application 2009/03086/PA to vary conditions attached to the above outline planning application to allow the development to be progressed in phases. Additionally, an updated Masterplan was approved with minor changes to the access arrangements to improve circulation and permeability On 4 February 2010, reserved matters were granted in accordance with application 2009/05720/PA for siting, design, external appearance and landscaping in connection with outline planning consent 2009/03086/PA for the redevelopment of Page 3 of 14

4 phase one (comprising redevelopment of New Street Station but excluding Stephenson Tower). With regard to Phase Two the proposals included an "interim" solution whereby following demolition of Stephenson Tower a temporary landscaped area would be created In February 2011, John Lewis agreed to have their new flagship store as part of the wider station redevelopment proposals. This replaced the two towers previously approved under the outline permission and in September 2011, planning consent was granted for the new department store in accordance with application 2011/02869/PA. This application also permitted the construction of two restaurants and five retail units together with demolition work to facilitate construction, provision of drop-off and pick-up areas, extension of the public concourse with a reconfigured access lift and ramp and extension to the public roof top car park December 2013 Application 2013/07960/PA. Planning consent granted for refurbishment of Ladywood House with external alterations to include re-cladding and new windows to the tower. 4. Consultation/PP Responses 4.1. Retail, Southside and Colmore BID s, residents associations, local ward councillors and M.P. notified. Site and press notices displayed. In response to the proposal as originally submitted, 62 letters of objection have been received from residents mainly living within Birmingham. In addition the Colmore BID and City Centre Neighbourhood Forum have objected. The grounds of objection are set out below. Planning Policy and Procedure 4.2. The proposal is contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework which advises that good design is indivisible from good planning and that planning permission should be refused as the application fails to take the opportunities available for improving the character and quality of the area and the way it functions The impact of the changes goes beyond a minor material amendment as they would fundamentally impact detrimentally on the design, character and appearance of the entire proposed western elevation of the building There is a lack of information about the proposals and insufficient public consultation by the applicants and on the planning application. If serious changes are being made to the external appearance, the public should be told on what grounds. This should go before Birmingham City Council s Planning Committee and the people of Birmingham should have a chance to comment on this change. There has been a considerable public investment into this development and it would appear changes are being made without an explanation of the impact on overall costs The technical difficulties of building over live railway lines, cost and delays are not valid planning reasons to justify the proposed development. Changes to the Western Cladding 4.6. The proposed changes to the previously approved application drastically dilute the vision for the station facade in several ways. Whilst the bridge itself is not visible from street level directly by the station, it is visible from the top of Hill Street, an important walking route from Victoria Square, from the hundreds of buses that pass Page 4 of 14

5 down Hill Street each day, from nearby offices and apartments and from the station itself Whereas before the new façade flowed elegantly down to the platform level, it now ends abruptly at the bridge line and looks clumsy in comparison to the original proposal. The images in the revised planning application show how the current bridge design jars with the stainless steel cladding proposed for the rest of the station. Further, no mention is given to the treatment of the concrete pillars which are still visible in the renders. These are over 40 years old and look dirty, stained brown from diesel fumes much like the bridge link which is proposed to be kept The hole in the façade accommodating access to the shopping centre service area, at the top of the access ramp, is incongruous to the rest of the facade, breaking up the design and again looks like an afterthought/cost cutting measure to leave this open, whereas in the previous approved design this was covered. This is highly visible from all aspects west looking towards the station and would show a service yard with extractors and old brown brick building, this would detract from what should have been one of the more visually interesting parts of the west façade, with varying geometry for the station and car park. Navigation Street Footbridge and Entrance 4.9. The existing bridge is poorly thought out from an aesthetic point of view, in respect of a working train station with live diesel engines. Sections of the current bridge are filthy with brown and black streaks and the glass is thick with dirt, the bridge is visible from many vantage points west of the station, as well as being the first thing people see of the station structure on arrival from all points south and south west into the station The current cladding looks cheap and dirty, cleaning it and extending it in the same white/cream materials would exacerbate the current problem and could provide a jumbled visual entrance to the station for passengers with a bridge that would become dirty again very quickly and the new stainless steel above. Additionally, the bridge will be reflected in the stainless steel of the western façade. Hill Street Entrance (Southern Hub) The Birmingham UDP shows Hill Street as a primary pedestrian corridor and so there should be a higher standard of integration of the door into the streetscape to reflect its importance as a pedestrian route. The proposed treatment of the Hill Street Entrance sets the bridge apart as other to the general station design and it is unclear if this entrance is just a fire escape or a working exit/entrance. Changing the Hill Street entrance to a fire escape only would have a negative impact on businesses and the regeneration of the developing John Bright Street area The new design for the end of the footbridge on Hill Street looks significantly less attractive than the previous one. The previous one had a glass frontage that matches that currently being built on the other side of the access road underneath John Lewis, whereas the new one has a much smaller glazed area, making it feel less open, less welcoming and eliminating the 'wow factor' from the design. Negative Perception of Birmingham The proposed design looks nothing like the coherent design for the rest of the station, the original design integrated Hill Street into the station it now appears an Page 5 of 14

6 afterthought. It is in the public interest to seek a better resolution to the bridge, the entrance on Hill Street and the changes to the geometry of cladding to the western elevation in light of the dramatic impact these proposed changes have on the overall aesthetics of the new station Not cladding the existing bridge structure cheapens the overall design and gives visitors the impression that Birmingham and New Street Station itself is stuck in the past. The designers should have realised that cladding the bridge would mean disruption to the rail network and plans could have been made to work around this, instead a cheap, backwards alternative has been proposed The delay in timescale is not a valid reason for making the proposed change. It also goes against the architectural intent. New Street Station is the first impression of the city that visitors and residents receive when using the station, a half-finished project is a poor impression to make - more so when the reason behind the incomplete architectural vision is time constraints. It is better to wait a bit longer to have a station that looks right rather than one left unfinished When the station opens the eyes of the whole country will be on the city. The helicopter views of the new station on the TV would, at the moment, be expected to show a beautiful and consistent new building in the heart of the city. If this amendment is approved, those views will not be nearly as impressive and the wider public's impression of Birmingham will be less than what it should be Most people see and use the station from street level, not from above. The entrances and exits are therefore very important in establishing the feel of the area, people's first impressions of Birmingham and, by consequence, some of the regeneration benefits of the New Street scheme. The Hill Street side of the scheme is particularly important for this as this side of the station perhaps has the most scope for improvement If Birmingham truly aspires to throw of its reputation for poor design then it needs to ensure that aspirational designs are carried through and not cost/value engineered to give second rate buildings, poor finishes and expedient solutions for contractors and developers In respect of the revised plans, a site notice has been displayed and all those who commented on the application as originally submitted have been re-consulted. Seven letters of objection to the amended plans have been received commenting that:- If the Planning Committee allow this amendment to go through they are doing a disservice to City of Birmingham. Network Rail should not be allowed to compromise the design of the Station for future generations; The revised plans are a slight improvement, but it looks unfinished and still appears to be a poor design that is not integrated into the main design. Given the lack of inconvenience so far and in order to deliver a cohesive result, the public would be accepting of delays relating to completion of the scheme; The original costings included all the costings for the bridge must have budgeted for. All they are trying to do is cut costs because their original budgets must have Page 6 of 14

7 been underestimated. That is their fault and Network Rail should be made to complete the scheme as originally agreed; Still concerned that reflections from the mirror cladding will cause phantom aspects and aspect washout to the signals at platform level with the consequential operational and safety implications therein; and, The Hill Street entrance & exit from the Navigation Street footbridge should be provided to meet the needs of passengers and for the wider benefit of this part of the city. The impact of the proposed revisions will be detrimental to the overall appearance and user experience. The end result risks being a major disappointment and not of the calibre expected of a major international city. 5. Policy Context 5.1. Key planning policies include the UDP Alterations 2005 Saved Policies, Draft Birmingham Plan 2031, Places for All SPG, Big City Plan and National Planning Policy Framework Additionally to the north of the site is the Colmore Row and Environs Conservation Area. Nearby listed buildings include the Grade II listed 128 (Waterstones) New Street, Old Repertory Theatre, New Street Station Signal Box, The Rotunda and Grade A listed former Futurist Cinema John Bright Street. 6. Planning Considerations Background and Policy Context 6.1. This minor material application in its amended form seeks approval for revisions to the western façade, car park ramp, and cladding of the multi storey car park, in connection with reserved matters consent 2009/05720/PA for remodelling of New Street Station. For this type of application Government advice is that Local Planning Authorities should focus their attention on national or local policies or other material considerations that may have changed significantly since the original grant of permission, as well as the changes sought Since the reserved matters were granted consent in 2010, there have been changes in both national and local planning policy with the introduction of the National Planning Policy Framework and publication of the Draft Birmingham Development Plan At a national level paragraph 17 of the NPPF states that decision takers should always seek to secure high quality design. Paragraph 63 adds that in determining applications, great weight should be given to outstanding or innovative designs which help raise the standard of design more generally in the area. Furthermore paragraph 64 states that permission should be refused for development of poor design that fails to take the opportunities available for improving the character and quality of an area and the way it functions The Draft Birmingham Development Plan 2031, states at paragraph 4.16 that schemes such as the redevelopment of New Street Station, the new Library of Birmingham, major regeneration at Longbridge and ongoing expansion at Page 7 of 14

8 Birmingham Airport will be central to the City s future success. Further paragraph 4.19 advises that the quality of development and the ability to create well designed places will be central to how Birmingham is perceived and functions as a City in the future. For the City to compete in the international arena and secure investment, attention needs to be focussed on the design, quality and function of places. Policy PG3 therefore states that all new development will be expected to be designed to the highest possible standards, contributing to a strong sense of place Before turning to the proposed changes it is worthwhile highlighting paragraph 3.8 of the Birmingham Unitary Development Pan 2005, which advises that the environment strategy is based on two principles:- the need to protect what is good in the City s environment, and to improve what is less good; and, the need to recognise the key relationship between environmental quality and levels of economic activity In addition paragraph 3.10 states that proposals which would have an adverse effect on the quality of the built environment will not normally be allowed, whilst paragraph 3.11 adds that positive action to improve the quality of the environment will also be required. Furthermore paragraph 3.14 notes that a high standard of design is essential to the continued improvement of Birmingham as a desirable place to live, work and visit. More detailed design guidance is set out in Places for All, which has been adopted as Supplementary Planning Guidance. Navigation Street Footbridge and Entrance 6.7. Originally it was proposed to retain the existing Navigation Street footbridge and entrance in its current form, with omission of the stainless steel cladding and only minor cosmetic alterations. This element of the proposal is particularly contentious. In particular, the existing bridge (especially the rooftop kites ) is readily visible from many points to the west of the station and is one of the first things people see of the station when arriving from this direction. The existing bridge is dirty and the cladding looks poor and as originally proposed extending it in similar materials would only exacerbate its poor appearance, especially when seen against the new stainless steel cladding above. Additionally, not cladding the footbridge or its entrance in the same material as the rest of the station affects legibility and makes it unclear as to whether or not this is an actual entrance to the station In light of the City Council s concerns the applicant has decided to omit this element from the current application. In the event that Network Rail proposes future changes to the Navigation Street footbridge and entrances (which woul form part of a separate planning application) they have agreed to an independent design review and would seek to involve the City Council in selecting a suitable design panel I am of the view that in this is an acceptable approach to deal with any future changes to the design of the Navigation Street footbridge and entrance.. Hill Street Entrance (Southern Hub) As originally submitted it was proposed not to clad the southern hub in stainless steel and to reduce the extent of glazing by introducing two ATM s. Additionally, the change of use of the building from a station entrance to retail resulted in the proposed fire escape from the footbridge opening out directly onto the street. Page 8 of 14

9 6.11. This entrance is perhaps the least important exit / entrance in the original proposals but since increasing permeability through and around the station was one of the key drivers of the project, loss of this entrance and its impact on access to and from this part of the city and consequent effects on businesses in the John Bright Street area needs careful consideration Loss of this entrance is not addressed in the applicant s Planning Statement and whilst it may be acceptable a clear justification needs to be provided. Additionally, as originally submitted its design is less good than the consented scheme. I am therefore pleased that this element of the scheme has been omitted. Should Network Rail wish to alter the design of this element, then as with the Navigation Street footbridge and entrance, it would be subject an independent design review process and form part of a future planning application. Hill Street Car Park Ramp In its original form, not enveloping the ramp interrupted the continuity of the façade leaving an unsightly gap in the stainless steel cladding. This is highly visible from the west looking toward the station and from some vantage points would have allowed views of the internal walls at the top the ramp, the service yard and upper deck of the car park Revised plans have been submitted with an additional strip of stainless steel cladding running continuous with the rest of the façade, an additional soffit and side walls in the canopy at the top of the vehicle access ramp and enlargement of the ramp cladding In its revised form I am of the view my earlier concerns have been addressed. The additional stainless steel cladding helps to retain the continuity of the façade, the aperture at the top of the ramp has been reduced and more of the existing concrete structure, including the supporting columns of the ramp itself are covered. Western and Multi Storey Car Park Facades As originally submitted it was no longer proposed to clad the eastern elevation of the car park, only the upper part of the northern elevation would be clad, and the cladding to the west elevation would not cantilever as far out Amendments have been made to the north elevation to ensure that only the stainless steel cladding can be viewed from areas of public realm, concealing the car park structure I have no objections to reducing the extent that the stainless steel cladding extends out as it does not affect the design integrity of the scheme and would make it simpler to build. It is disappointing that the entirety of the car park structure is no longer to be clad in stainless steel. However, I am satisfied that the stainless steel cladding would cover the car park structure where it is visible from the public realm. This would still leave elements of the car park structure visible from nearby tall building, but on balance I consider that this is acceptable. Procedural Matters Objections have been raised on grounds that the alterations go beyond an amendment and that insufficient public consultation has taken place. Page 9 of 14

10 6.20. There is no statutory definition of a minor material amendment but Governments guidance in Greater Flexibility for Planning Permissions states that they consider a that a minor material amendment is one whose scale and nature results in a development which is not substantially different from the one which has been approved. Given the scale and nature of the application I am satisfied that the application is not substantially different and can be dealt with by way of the minor material amendment procedure With regard to public consultation, the above guidance advises that a proportionate approach should be adopted, taking into account that there will have been full consultation when the original permission was granted, and that the variation may have an impact only on limited groups. Taking this advice into account I am satisfied that appropriate consultation has taken place on the application Attached to the 2009 reserved matters consent were a number of conditions to secure details of parapet walls, security bollards, CCTV cameras, the taxi pick up shelter, external glazed curtain walling, a landscape maintenance strategy and a revised cycling strategy. These details were submitted and the conditions cleared. However, it is necessary to attach conditions to ensure that the development is implemented in accordance with these approved details. 7. Conclusion 7.1. I am mindful of the difficulties in progressing from a concept design to a technical design solution. However, I do not consider that this justifies approving a scheme that is significantly less good than the approved design. In particular, I have serious concerns about the original proposals for the Navigation Street footbridge and both the Navigation and Hill Street entrances. These elements have subsequently been omitted from the current application. In the event that Network Rail proposes future changes to the Navigation Street footbridge and entrances, they have agreed to an independent design review and would seek to involve the City Council in selecting a suitable design panel. This would then form a separate future planning application The revisions to the Hill Street car park ramp are a significant improvement on the scheme as originally submitted and retain the integrity of the new station design. Whilst cladding less of the multi storey car park is disappointing I am satisfied that the stainless steel cladding would cover the car park structure when viewed from the public realm. I am therefore of the view that in its revised form the application is acceptable subject to safeguarding conditions. 8. Recommendation 8.1. That planning permission be granted subject to safeguarding conditions. 1 Requires the scheme to be in accordance with the listed approved plans 2 Requires the development to be implemented in accordance with approved details for the parapet wall strategy 3 Requires the development to be implemented in accordance with approved details for the security bollards and CCTV Page 10 of 14

11 4 Requires the development to be implemented in accordance with approved details for the taxi pick up shelter 5 Requires the development to be implemented in accordance with approved details for landscape maintenance, cycle strategy and external glazing Case Officer: David Wells Page 11 of 14

12 Photo(s) View from Navigation Street and Hill Street junction Page 12 of 14

13 View from Pinfold Street and Stephenson Street junction Page 13 of 14

14 Location Plan This map is reproduced from the Ordnance Survey Material with the permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office Crown Copyright. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings. Birmingham City Council. Licence No , 2010 Page 14 of 14