Urban Space Group Meeting
Thursday 26 August 2010
The Renaissance Centre
Part 1 >
RESPONSE TO THE SBC FUTURIST TASK GROUP ON BEHALF OF THE URBAN SPACE GROUP - INTRODUCTION
The Future of the Futurist Site
The potential embodied in the area surrounding the Futurist theatre is of immense importance to the image and future of Scarborough as a destination, as a seaside resort and as a rewarding place to live and work. For this reason, any proposals for the Futurist site must consider the impact on its immediate surroundings, on Scarborough as a whole and on the region.
For the purposes of our discussion, the implied “site” of the Futurist – and the area that should be considered when assessing any proposal for redevelopment and / or improvement – is assumed to be the block bounded by Foreshore Road, Blands Cliff, King Street, the Futurist steps and the existing buildings on Eastborough, plus the gardens, streets and other spaces around and within this block.
This Document
The comments, observations and conclusions presented within this document are a result of several meetings and a workshop held by the Urban Space Group over the last three years.
These are as follows:
Meeting held at the Royal Hotel - Thursday 08 July 2010
Meeting held at the Royal Hotel - Thursday 10 June 2010
Meeting held at the Palm Court Hotel - Thursday 13 September 2007
Workshop held at the Renaissance Office - Saturday 18 August 2007
The Group also drew upon comments made at the following Town Team meetings:
Meeting held at the Royal Hotel - Tuesday 19 June 2007
Meeting held at the Royal Hotel - Tuesday 15 May 2007
The document is a Group submission. Individual contributions have been credited where requested.
Document Presentation
Due to the length of this report the document has been split into five parts. Convenient links to each section can be found under 'USG Report - The Futurist', within the right hand coloumn of this page, or follow the navigation link below:
Part 1 >
Chair – Urban Space Group - Sunday 05 September 2010
11 October 2011
USG Report - The Futurist - Part 1
Urban Space Group Meeting
Thursday 26 August 2010
The Renaissance Centre
< Introduction Part 2 >
RESPONSE TO THE SBC FUTURIST TASK GROUP ON BEHALF OF THE URBAN SPACE GROUP - PART 1
Key Points
1. The Urban Space Group will only be commenting on the development of the current site and surrounding area and will not be make a formal representation as the retention or otherwise of the current theatre. It was felt that this was outside the remit of the Group, and that if there were members of the Group that wished to make such a representation, there were other more suitable forums or groups whereby their opinion on that matter could be made.
2. Accordingly, the Group has chosen to split their response into two parts. The first part ‘General Recommendations’ is a set of recommendations that we feel should be taken into consideration irrespective of whether a theatre is retained on the site or not. The second part ‘Retention of theatre and / or performance space / facility’, constitutes an additional set of recommendations to be applied, should the decision be taken to support the continued presence of some form of theatre or performance space within the defined area.
3. In fact, given the potential difficulties in attempting to assess market conditions in say five years time, it is advisable and perfectly reasonable to draft a development brief that offers potential investors the option of developing the site either with or without a theatre. Any such condition of sale or otherwise would be supported by the outcome and subsequent decisions thereby taken as a result of the current consultation process.
4. The Group wish it to be made known that they deplore the current state of affairs and are extremely saddened that the situation has been allowed to deteriorate to the present circumstances.
5. The Group are concerned that during the recent presentations made at the Futurist Task Group sessions at the Town Hall, that none of the potential options for the site appeared viable given the current economic climate. It is sincerely hoped that as a Renaissance town of some note we can collectively find a way to circumvent these conditions and deliver a sustainable development of real quality and character.
6. We are particularly concerned that the theatre may close at the end of 2010. Irrespective of the future of the theatre, we do not feel it is advisable to leave ourselves with the edifice of a dead and decaying building in such a prominent location on the town’s foreshore. Therefore we would advise that the theatre continue to operate in some form until future development is secured.
7. The Group would again like to emphasise that this site cannot be developed without taking into consideration the wider area, a philosophy set down within the town’s own ‘Kissing Sleeping Beauty’ document outlining its strategy for regeneration. In support of this, commentary made at a Town Team meeting in June 2007 regarding the general Foreshore area of the South Bay, has been included within Appendix B of this document.
8. Diagrams highlighting the importance of links to the surrounding area, pathways, connections and views can be found in Appendix A. The diagrams also illustrate some potential options for the siting and orientation of any new build.
9. The Group would like to emphasise the potential benefits of opening up the site as the subject of an international design competition. We feel that this would greatly raise the profile of the site on offer, the town, and also help raise the overall standard of design of the subsequent development.
10. The Group would expect the development to be rigorously controlled by a full and proper master plan, and that any proposed changes to any part of the plan are subject to a clear and public change management process.
11. The site has a history of entertainment stretching back over a hundred years. Regardless of the future of the theatre, the site’s identity as a destination for entertainment should not be lost. We would in any eventuality be concerned about the continuing cumulative impact of closing facilities and attractions.
12. To ensure this continued connection, the Group strongly advocates an imaginative and flexible interpretation of the space, as this will be essential in making the project commercially viable and sustainable. We believe the town needs development that can act as an inspiration for all and encourage further investment in high quality projects.
13. We would particularly like to stress the importance of enhancing the site within an overall vision for the South Bay. Its development cannot be viewed in isolation and it is essential that it fits within a cohesive strategy for the whole of the seafront.
14. Further to this, any solution must form an integral part of the town’s overall entertainment, leisure and tourism strategy.
< Introduction Part 2 >
Thursday 26 August 2010
The Renaissance Centre
< Introduction Part 2 >
RESPONSE TO THE SBC FUTURIST TASK GROUP ON BEHALF OF THE URBAN SPACE GROUP - PART 1
Key Points
1. The Urban Space Group will only be commenting on the development of the current site and surrounding area and will not be make a formal representation as the retention or otherwise of the current theatre. It was felt that this was outside the remit of the Group, and that if there were members of the Group that wished to make such a representation, there were other more suitable forums or groups whereby their opinion on that matter could be made.
2. Accordingly, the Group has chosen to split their response into two parts. The first part ‘General Recommendations’ is a set of recommendations that we feel should be taken into consideration irrespective of whether a theatre is retained on the site or not. The second part ‘Retention of theatre and / or performance space / facility’, constitutes an additional set of recommendations to be applied, should the decision be taken to support the continued presence of some form of theatre or performance space within the defined area.
3. In fact, given the potential difficulties in attempting to assess market conditions in say five years time, it is advisable and perfectly reasonable to draft a development brief that offers potential investors the option of developing the site either with or without a theatre. Any such condition of sale or otherwise would be supported by the outcome and subsequent decisions thereby taken as a result of the current consultation process.
4. The Group wish it to be made known that they deplore the current state of affairs and are extremely saddened that the situation has been allowed to deteriorate to the present circumstances.
5. The Group are concerned that during the recent presentations made at the Futurist Task Group sessions at the Town Hall, that none of the potential options for the site appeared viable given the current economic climate. It is sincerely hoped that as a Renaissance town of some note we can collectively find a way to circumvent these conditions and deliver a sustainable development of real quality and character.
6. We are particularly concerned that the theatre may close at the end of 2010. Irrespective of the future of the theatre, we do not feel it is advisable to leave ourselves with the edifice of a dead and decaying building in such a prominent location on the town’s foreshore. Therefore we would advise that the theatre continue to operate in some form until future development is secured.
7. The Group would again like to emphasise that this site cannot be developed without taking into consideration the wider area, a philosophy set down within the town’s own ‘Kissing Sleeping Beauty’ document outlining its strategy for regeneration. In support of this, commentary made at a Town Team meeting in June 2007 regarding the general Foreshore area of the South Bay, has been included within Appendix B of this document.
8. Diagrams highlighting the importance of links to the surrounding area, pathways, connections and views can be found in Appendix A. The diagrams also illustrate some potential options for the siting and orientation of any new build.
9. The Group would like to emphasise the potential benefits of opening up the site as the subject of an international design competition. We feel that this would greatly raise the profile of the site on offer, the town, and also help raise the overall standard of design of the subsequent development.
10. The Group would expect the development to be rigorously controlled by a full and proper master plan, and that any proposed changes to any part of the plan are subject to a clear and public change management process.
11. The site has a history of entertainment stretching back over a hundred years. Regardless of the future of the theatre, the site’s identity as a destination for entertainment should not be lost. We would in any eventuality be concerned about the continuing cumulative impact of closing facilities and attractions.
12. To ensure this continued connection, the Group strongly advocates an imaginative and flexible interpretation of the space, as this will be essential in making the project commercially viable and sustainable. We believe the town needs development that can act as an inspiration for all and encourage further investment in high quality projects.
13. We would particularly like to stress the importance of enhancing the site within an overall vision for the South Bay. Its development cannot be viewed in isolation and it is essential that it fits within a cohesive strategy for the whole of the seafront.
14. Further to this, any solution must form an integral part of the town’s overall entertainment, leisure and tourism strategy.
< Introduction Part 2 >
USG Report - The Futurist - Part 2
Urban Space Group Meeting
Thursday 26 August 2010
The Renaissance Centre
< Part 1 Part 3 >
RESPONSE TO THE SBC FUTURIST TASK GROUP ON BEHALF OF THE URBAN SPACE GROUP - PART 2
General Recommendations
1. Any development of the Futurist site as defined above should respect and enhance the existing pattern and character of Scarborough. Situated where it is, between the larger block structure of the Victorian upper town, the expanse of the seafront and the dense, complex pattern of the mediaeval town, the site has the potential to accommodate large buildings, but these must be broken down in scale and punctuated by paths, alleys and small open spaces as seen in the older parts of the town.
2. The block containing the Futurist is flanked by three unique and important spaces – the gardens to the south, the seafront to the east and Blands Cliff to the north – but the existing buildings and walls completely ignore, and are ignored by, these spaces. Indeed, the existing buildings adopt a defensive – even threatening – attitude to their surroundings. Any new buildings or improvements to the existing buildings should open up to, interact with and celebrate these special parts of Scarborough.
3. Hence, a contextual dialogue must be established and active frontages developed to:
- Foreshore Road and the beach
- Gardens to the south
- King Street to the west
- Blands Cliff to the north
4. Related to point 3 above, the block containing the Futurist constitutes a barrier to movement in this part of Scarborough, which contributes to the isolation and threatening nature of its immediate surroundings. There are, however, implied connections between Blands Cliff and the gardens to the rear of the Futurist and between Prospect Place and King Street across the upper part of the site. The completion of these connections – and others – across the site should be a required part of any development in this area.
5. Connectivity is an important concept in modern theories of urban design and it is essential that these routes be established as public thoroughfares; it would defeat the purpose if the routes were established as part of a private, privileged or “gated” development of the site.
6. Hence, increased pedestrian connectivity essential for successful scheme – look at the urban grain of the old town as a precedent.
7. Contributing to the safety, attractiveness and commercial potential of the Futurist site, any new buildings facing the gardens, Foreshore Road and Blands Cliff should be designed to open up to the views as much as possible and present an inviting frontage to passers-by.
8. Of particular importance to the site and to the commercial potential (in depth) of any development will be the south-facing edge facing the Futurist steps. This offers great possibilities for cafes and restaurants positioned to take full advantage of the views across the gardens beyond and the sunny, warm orientation. Any appropriate development of the site could open out onto the gardens.
9. There may be some potential to blur or soften the southern boundary between the site and the gardens, as they are both (together with the steps) controlled by Scarborough council. This could involve a small amount of appropriately designed building extending into the gardens and also part of the gardens by return extending into the site. Perhaps taking the form of an enclosed Winter Garden in conjunction with suitable commercial content, thereby adding appreciably to the bad-weather attractions along the seafront.
10. Any large-scale development along Foreshore Road, whether including the existing Futurist or a new theatre, would create a dark void to the rear, as currently exists between the Futurist and the cliff. This, however, is ideal for any use which does not require daylight or views, such as a multi-screen cinema or possibly even a casino. If indeed such a proposal for a suitable new casino development would gain approval. The roof level of such a development would then create a new, false ground-level above the roofs of buildings on Foreshore Road. This could be an ideal location for a hotel or residential development, as a building or buildings here would enjoy sea views, while not occupying valuable street frontage.
11. Buildings along King Street could have commercial uses at ground level with other uses above, but should also be designed to act as a welcoming “gateway” to all other uses on the site, with ease of access from the top of the cliff down to the seafront being designed into the complex as a whole.
12. In fact, a creative approach to changing levels within the site – possibly linking a series of small spaces stepping down within the development and filled with interest and invitation, would add to its unique potential.
13. Servicing of any development on this site will be a critical part of any proposal. While small-scale servicing of low-intensity uses may be possible from King Street. If site requires more substantial servicing elements, the service zone needs to be accessed via Foreshore Road. However, this does not necessarily lead to a bleak service door blighting part of the seafront, as temporary and moveable uses, such as stalls, café tables and street-performers, can occupy the space at all other times.
14. It is recommended that as part of any development, careful consideration be given to the transport links and pathways down to Foreshore Road. Including, Valley Road, the Aquarium Top Car Park, St. Nicholas Cliff, Blands Cliff, Eastborough, Sandside, and in front of the terracing under the Grand Hotel. Ensuring proper provision is made for people wishing to visit the area, whether by foot, car, coach or bicycle.
15. Leisure activities will form the main activity on the site. Some prestige apartments and incorporation of other visitor attractions such as a cinema, casino or skating rink, are also probably essential in order to insure the commercial viability of the development.
16. There would be many of these facilities which would not require frontage; for example, a multiplex cinema, casino, or ice rink. These could be situated in the natural void between the footprint of the current theatre and the King Street area.
17. Other uses that could be incorporated within the site, other than a theatre, to aid its commercial viability and enhance the quality of the area as a whole, may include:
Introverted / Subterranean Uses:
- Casino
- Cinema
Culturally Related / Kinetic Expression:
- Family entertainment
- Cafés / restaurants / bars
- Workshops / dance studios
- Art galleries / art studios
High Value / 24 Hour Life on Site:
- Residential high quality apartments
- Prime location holiday apartments
18. Please also refer to Appendix A – orientation, views, links & connections.
< Part 1 Part 3 >
Thursday 26 August 2010
The Renaissance Centre
< Part 1 Part 3 >
RESPONSE TO THE SBC FUTURIST TASK GROUP ON BEHALF OF THE URBAN SPACE GROUP - PART 2
General Recommendations
1. Any development of the Futurist site as defined above should respect and enhance the existing pattern and character of Scarborough. Situated where it is, between the larger block structure of the Victorian upper town, the expanse of the seafront and the dense, complex pattern of the mediaeval town, the site has the potential to accommodate large buildings, but these must be broken down in scale and punctuated by paths, alleys and small open spaces as seen in the older parts of the town.
2. The block containing the Futurist is flanked by three unique and important spaces – the gardens to the south, the seafront to the east and Blands Cliff to the north – but the existing buildings and walls completely ignore, and are ignored by, these spaces. Indeed, the existing buildings adopt a defensive – even threatening – attitude to their surroundings. Any new buildings or improvements to the existing buildings should open up to, interact with and celebrate these special parts of Scarborough.
3. Hence, a contextual dialogue must be established and active frontages developed to:
- Foreshore Road and the beach
- Gardens to the south
- King Street to the west
- Blands Cliff to the north
4. Related to point 3 above, the block containing the Futurist constitutes a barrier to movement in this part of Scarborough, which contributes to the isolation and threatening nature of its immediate surroundings. There are, however, implied connections between Blands Cliff and the gardens to the rear of the Futurist and between Prospect Place and King Street across the upper part of the site. The completion of these connections – and others – across the site should be a required part of any development in this area.
5. Connectivity is an important concept in modern theories of urban design and it is essential that these routes be established as public thoroughfares; it would defeat the purpose if the routes were established as part of a private, privileged or “gated” development of the site.
6. Hence, increased pedestrian connectivity essential for successful scheme – look at the urban grain of the old town as a precedent.
7. Contributing to the safety, attractiveness and commercial potential of the Futurist site, any new buildings facing the gardens, Foreshore Road and Blands Cliff should be designed to open up to the views as much as possible and present an inviting frontage to passers-by.
8. Of particular importance to the site and to the commercial potential (in depth) of any development will be the south-facing edge facing the Futurist steps. This offers great possibilities for cafes and restaurants positioned to take full advantage of the views across the gardens beyond and the sunny, warm orientation. Any appropriate development of the site could open out onto the gardens.
9. There may be some potential to blur or soften the southern boundary between the site and the gardens, as they are both (together with the steps) controlled by Scarborough council. This could involve a small amount of appropriately designed building extending into the gardens and also part of the gardens by return extending into the site. Perhaps taking the form of an enclosed Winter Garden in conjunction with suitable commercial content, thereby adding appreciably to the bad-weather attractions along the seafront.
10. Any large-scale development along Foreshore Road, whether including the existing Futurist or a new theatre, would create a dark void to the rear, as currently exists between the Futurist and the cliff. This, however, is ideal for any use which does not require daylight or views, such as a multi-screen cinema or possibly even a casino. If indeed such a proposal for a suitable new casino development would gain approval. The roof level of such a development would then create a new, false ground-level above the roofs of buildings on Foreshore Road. This could be an ideal location for a hotel or residential development, as a building or buildings here would enjoy sea views, while not occupying valuable street frontage.
11. Buildings along King Street could have commercial uses at ground level with other uses above, but should also be designed to act as a welcoming “gateway” to all other uses on the site, with ease of access from the top of the cliff down to the seafront being designed into the complex as a whole.
12. In fact, a creative approach to changing levels within the site – possibly linking a series of small spaces stepping down within the development and filled with interest and invitation, would add to its unique potential.
13. Servicing of any development on this site will be a critical part of any proposal. While small-scale servicing of low-intensity uses may be possible from King Street. If site requires more substantial servicing elements, the service zone needs to be accessed via Foreshore Road. However, this does not necessarily lead to a bleak service door blighting part of the seafront, as temporary and moveable uses, such as stalls, café tables and street-performers, can occupy the space at all other times.
14. It is recommended that as part of any development, careful consideration be given to the transport links and pathways down to Foreshore Road. Including, Valley Road, the Aquarium Top Car Park, St. Nicholas Cliff, Blands Cliff, Eastborough, Sandside, and in front of the terracing under the Grand Hotel. Ensuring proper provision is made for people wishing to visit the area, whether by foot, car, coach or bicycle.
15. Leisure activities will form the main activity on the site. Some prestige apartments and incorporation of other visitor attractions such as a cinema, casino or skating rink, are also probably essential in order to insure the commercial viability of the development.
16. There would be many of these facilities which would not require frontage; for example, a multiplex cinema, casino, or ice rink. These could be situated in the natural void between the footprint of the current theatre and the King Street area.
17. Other uses that could be incorporated within the site, other than a theatre, to aid its commercial viability and enhance the quality of the area as a whole, may include:
Introverted / Subterranean Uses:
- Casino
- Cinema
Culturally Related / Kinetic Expression:
- Family entertainment
- Cafés / restaurants / bars
- Workshops / dance studios
- Art galleries / art studios
High Value / 24 Hour Life on Site:
- Residential high quality apartments
- Prime location holiday apartments
18. Please also refer to Appendix A – orientation, views, links & connections.
< Part 1 Part 3 >
USG Report - The Futurist - Part 3
Urban Space Group Meeting
Thursday 26 August 2010
The Renaissance Centre
< Part 2 Appendix A >
RESPONSE TO THE SBC FUTURIST TASK GROUP ON BEHALF OF THE URBAN SPACE GROUP - PART 3
Retention of theatre and / or performance space / facility
1. Should the decision be reached that the Futurist theatre be retained on this site, either in the form of the existing 2,000+ seat auditorium and stage (as distinct from the external shell of the existing building) or as a new 2,000 seat theatre to be constructed as an integral part of any redevelopment of the site. The development brief to be prepared for this site should ensure that the theatre – whether retained or new – is one of the first parts of any development to be completed.
2. Closure of the building is inevitable, even for refurbishment. It is therefore essential to attempt to mitigate any such disruption to the provision of entertainment or other leisure activities in the area.
3. The site has a history of entertainment stretching back over a hundred years. An imaginative and flexible interpretation of the space will be essential to make the project commercially viable and sustainable, thereby ensuring its continued existence.
4. Much of the debate regarding the future of a theatre on this site has concentrated on whether the facility should be designed for an audience of either 1,000 or 2,000 people. This lacks ambition and misses the obvious potential of a performance venue in this location.
5. For example, any theatre-related activity facing onto Foreshore Road could take full advantage of the expanse of sand in front of the site to include the possibility of an outdoor stage at high level (first or second floor) facing the beach. The debate should therefore be about whether a performance might attract 2,000 people (in the internal theatre) or 5,000+ people on the beach.
6. As has been demonstrated by many successful outdoor events held in Scarborough, the boost to all local businesses could be substantial. This would offer a significantly different performance space to that of the Open Air Theatre, thereby adding to and complimenting the current existing facilities available in the town.
7. Perhaps this appears a little farfetched, but the principal is to encourage the exploration of all potential solutions. Whether it is the development of an indoor space that can be adjusted to suit different forms of performance and audience, or as previously suggested, taking advantage of the potential for creating an outdoor amphitheatre. This might be for a few thousand on the beach, or a couple of hundred in the gardens or on the pavement in front of the theatre itself.
8. Any solution should form an integral part of the town’s overall entertainment, leisure and tourism strategy.
9. The delivery of large scenery items to the theatre would be most possible from Foreshore Road - Please also refer to General Recommendations - Point 13
10. To reiterate the previous points, the wider site context must be developed as a whole as opposed to simply approaching the theatre in isolation.
11. If developed, The Futurist should become an iconic urban landmark and employ a ‘seaside’ philosophy of creativity, endeavour and adventure.
< Part 2 Appendix A >
Thursday 26 August 2010
The Renaissance Centre
< Part 2 Appendix A >
RESPONSE TO THE SBC FUTURIST TASK GROUP ON BEHALF OF THE URBAN SPACE GROUP - PART 3
Retention of theatre and / or performance space / facility
1. Should the decision be reached that the Futurist theatre be retained on this site, either in the form of the existing 2,000+ seat auditorium and stage (as distinct from the external shell of the existing building) or as a new 2,000 seat theatre to be constructed as an integral part of any redevelopment of the site. The development brief to be prepared for this site should ensure that the theatre – whether retained or new – is one of the first parts of any development to be completed.
2. Closure of the building is inevitable, even for refurbishment. It is therefore essential to attempt to mitigate any such disruption to the provision of entertainment or other leisure activities in the area.
3. The site has a history of entertainment stretching back over a hundred years. An imaginative and flexible interpretation of the space will be essential to make the project commercially viable and sustainable, thereby ensuring its continued existence.
4. Much of the debate regarding the future of a theatre on this site has concentrated on whether the facility should be designed for an audience of either 1,000 or 2,000 people. This lacks ambition and misses the obvious potential of a performance venue in this location.
5. For example, any theatre-related activity facing onto Foreshore Road could take full advantage of the expanse of sand in front of the site to include the possibility of an outdoor stage at high level (first or second floor) facing the beach. The debate should therefore be about whether a performance might attract 2,000 people (in the internal theatre) or 5,000+ people on the beach.
6. As has been demonstrated by many successful outdoor events held in Scarborough, the boost to all local businesses could be substantial. This would offer a significantly different performance space to that of the Open Air Theatre, thereby adding to and complimenting the current existing facilities available in the town.
7. Perhaps this appears a little farfetched, but the principal is to encourage the exploration of all potential solutions. Whether it is the development of an indoor space that can be adjusted to suit different forms of performance and audience, or as previously suggested, taking advantage of the potential for creating an outdoor amphitheatre. This might be for a few thousand on the beach, or a couple of hundred in the gardens or on the pavement in front of the theatre itself.
8. Any solution should form an integral part of the town’s overall entertainment, leisure and tourism strategy.
9. The delivery of large scenery items to the theatre would be most possible from Foreshore Road - Please also refer to General Recommendations - Point 13
10. To reiterate the previous points, the wider site context must be developed as a whole as opposed to simply approaching the theatre in isolation.
11. If developed, The Futurist should become an iconic urban landmark and employ a ‘seaside’ philosophy of creativity, endeavour and adventure.
< Part 2 Appendix A >
USG Report - The Futurist - Appendix A
Urban Space Group Meeting
Thursday 26 August 2010
The Renaissance Centre
< Part 3 Appendix B >
RESPONSE TO THE SBC FUTURIST TASK GROUP ON BEHALF OF THE URBAN SPACE GROUP - APPENDIX A
Appendix A – Orientation, views, links & connections
© Stefanie Stead - click images to enlarge -
< Part 3 Appendix B >
Thursday 26 August 2010
The Renaissance Centre
< Part 3 Appendix B >
RESPONSE TO THE SBC FUTURIST TASK GROUP ON BEHALF OF THE URBAN SPACE GROUP - APPENDIX A
Appendix A – Orientation, views, links & connections
< Part 3 Appendix B >
USG Report - The Futurist - Appendix B
Urban Space Group Meeting
Thursday 26 August 2010
The Renaissance Centre
< Appendix A
RESPONSE TO THE SBC FUTURIST TASK GROUP ON BEHALF OF THE URBAN SPACE GROUP - APPENDIX B
Appendix B - Foreshore Road
Town Team Meeting - Tuesday 15 May 2007
This Group looked at the future of Foreshore Road which is Scarborough’s “shop window”. Compared with the improving Sandside, the appearance of Foreshore Road leaves something to be desired. The most recent Lonely Planet Guide to Britain said that Scarborough was a nice place except for the Foreshore Road which was tatty and dated. Positive action is needed to bring this area up to modern expectations. Significant improvements are needed to the image and appearance of the area, to the road, buildings and facilities offered.
1. Roads and Paving
We should remove the central reservation, reduce the width of the road, reduce the number of on-street parking spaces and widen the pavements. Pedestrians should be given greater priority in redesigning the “floorscape”.
Subject to technical investigations by professionals, we think that the road and pavements should be raised to improve sea defences rather than the introduction of an unsightly sea wall.
The unsightly railings and barriers around the traffic lights at the junction with Eastborough should be removed, create a better environment as has had been done in Kensington High Street.
The quality and standard of public lighting in the area should be improved.
We need more seating for the public, more “cafe culture” with outside tables on widened pavements.
2. Buildings
The underground Aquarium Top car park is in poor condition and, because of that, it is little used. However, it is well located and is an important asset. Public or private sector investment must be made to bring this car park back into use because it can provide parking space for beach users and hotel guests at the Grand Hotel and St Nicholas Hotel. Developers of the Futurist site could be asked to invest in the car park because it would be of benefit to them, should there be a new casino, theatre or cinema on the Futurist site.
We need an information centre at the Rotunda.
We need to preserve and enhance the shelters on Foreshore Road next to St Nicholas Gardens and retain seating on the roof of this shelter.
The West Pier should be the visible focal point of the Foreshore and a major attraction to all visitors. The West Pier area could be developed with some attractive new buildings and still retain the space and buildings needed for the fishing industry.
The Olympia site should be redeveloped together with the undeveloped terrace below the Grand Hotel. St. Thomas Hospital needs a new use and the derelict land to the rear of the building tidied up. The shop fronts in St. Thomas Hospital and indeed along the Foreshore generally, need improvement.
There is scope for redeveloping or rebuilding some of the poor buildings along the Foreshore Road but there should be no tower blocks and any redevelopment in this area should maintain views of the old town and castle.
We need to find a way of introducing residential occupation to the first floors above shops.
3. The Beach
We need to support activities on the beach, for example providing better facilities for surfers such as changing rooms and showers at the Aquarium Top end. The beach itself should be kept fairly free of clutter and the quality of the existing beach franchises should be improved.
4. Access to the Foreshore Area
The park and ride service should drop visitors somewhere close to the Foreshore so that it will encourage people to use the proposed park and ride facility.
In town, there needs to be comfortable sheltered waiting areas for park and ride buses.
There needs to be a taxi rank close to the Foreshore Road / Sandside area and a convenient coach pick up and drop off point.
The pedestrian links from the town centre “above” and the Foreshore “below” need to be improved and made more obvious. The appearance of Blands Cliff needs to be improved as it has the potential to be an attractive way down to the beach. The unsightly steps down the side of the Futurist should be closed and people directed down through the gardens or through a future redevelopment of the Futurist site.
< Appendix A
Thursday 26 August 2010
The Renaissance Centre
< Appendix A
RESPONSE TO THE SBC FUTURIST TASK GROUP ON BEHALF OF THE URBAN SPACE GROUP - APPENDIX B
Appendix B - Foreshore Road
Town Team Meeting - Tuesday 15 May 2007
This Group looked at the future of Foreshore Road which is Scarborough’s “shop window”. Compared with the improving Sandside, the appearance of Foreshore Road leaves something to be desired. The most recent Lonely Planet Guide to Britain said that Scarborough was a nice place except for the Foreshore Road which was tatty and dated. Positive action is needed to bring this area up to modern expectations. Significant improvements are needed to the image and appearance of the area, to the road, buildings and facilities offered.
1. Roads and Paving
We should remove the central reservation, reduce the width of the road, reduce the number of on-street parking spaces and widen the pavements. Pedestrians should be given greater priority in redesigning the “floorscape”.
Subject to technical investigations by professionals, we think that the road and pavements should be raised to improve sea defences rather than the introduction of an unsightly sea wall.
The unsightly railings and barriers around the traffic lights at the junction with Eastborough should be removed, create a better environment as has had been done in Kensington High Street.
The quality and standard of public lighting in the area should be improved.
We need more seating for the public, more “cafe culture” with outside tables on widened pavements.
2. Buildings
The underground Aquarium Top car park is in poor condition and, because of that, it is little used. However, it is well located and is an important asset. Public or private sector investment must be made to bring this car park back into use because it can provide parking space for beach users and hotel guests at the Grand Hotel and St Nicholas Hotel. Developers of the Futurist site could be asked to invest in the car park because it would be of benefit to them, should there be a new casino, theatre or cinema on the Futurist site.
We need an information centre at the Rotunda.
We need to preserve and enhance the shelters on Foreshore Road next to St Nicholas Gardens and retain seating on the roof of this shelter.
The West Pier should be the visible focal point of the Foreshore and a major attraction to all visitors. The West Pier area could be developed with some attractive new buildings and still retain the space and buildings needed for the fishing industry.
The Olympia site should be redeveloped together with the undeveloped terrace below the Grand Hotel. St. Thomas Hospital needs a new use and the derelict land to the rear of the building tidied up. The shop fronts in St. Thomas Hospital and indeed along the Foreshore generally, need improvement.
There is scope for redeveloping or rebuilding some of the poor buildings along the Foreshore Road but there should be no tower blocks and any redevelopment in this area should maintain views of the old town and castle.
We need to find a way of introducing residential occupation to the first floors above shops.
3. The Beach
We need to support activities on the beach, for example providing better facilities for surfers such as changing rooms and showers at the Aquarium Top end. The beach itself should be kept fairly free of clutter and the quality of the existing beach franchises should be improved.
4. Access to the Foreshore Area
The park and ride service should drop visitors somewhere close to the Foreshore so that it will encourage people to use the proposed park and ride facility.
In town, there needs to be comfortable sheltered waiting areas for park and ride buses.
There needs to be a taxi rank close to the Foreshore Road / Sandside area and a convenient coach pick up and drop off point.
The pedestrian links from the town centre “above” and the Foreshore “below” need to be improved and made more obvious. The appearance of Blands Cliff needs to be improved as it has the potential to be an attractive way down to the beach. The unsightly steps down the side of the Futurist should be closed and people directed down through the gardens or through a future redevelopment of the Futurist site.
< Appendix A
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)