Shell Centre Dialogue
Welcome to our Open Exhibition: let’s get talking Help shape the plans
Redevelopment of Shell’s offices, and more
Shell Centre Dialogue is the process of community engagement with all those who have an interest in the site and its surroundings. It seeks to establish an open, dynamic and ongoing dialogue, to help shape the plans as they emerge over the months ahead.
The developers lo ter Wa
Braeburn Estates Limited Partnership (Braeburn Estates) is a recently formed joint venture partnership between Canary Wharf Group and Qatari Diar, with the aim of redeveloping the Shell Centre site.
rid oB ge
Contributing to a rich and varied area
Dialogue and design
In this exhibition we show a snapshot of the aspirations, likes and dislikes of those we have met who live, work, visit and use the area surrounding the Shell Centre.
o Gr
Royal Festival Hall D
t dS or f am St
Co nce r
all Ap pro ach
et re
BFI IMAX
Popping up at Waterloo station
Shell Centre Site
Belv ede re R oad
Jubilee Gardens
Development proposals are being drawn up for this site on the South Bank, for mixed use which is likely to include offices, residential and retail. We hope that the workshops will help us to identify some of the uses that would best meet community needs.
Yor k
Ro ad
London Eye
tH
Development proposals likely to include office, residential and retail in a mixed-use scheme
t ee Str n oo
Chic hele y
County Hall
Stre
Waterloo Station
et
Le ak eS
Re-establishing Shell’s London Headquarters
tre et
Shell have signed an agreement with the developers to lease a new building as part of the redevelopment. This and the retained tower will allow staff to return to the South Bank to re-establish Shell’s London HQ.
York Roa d
It is the developer’s hope that the Shell Centre redevelopment will add to this and build upon the good work that has already taken place by neighbouring institutions as well as smaller groups and individuals.
r pe Up
Belve dere Road
The South Bank is London’s premier cultural destination, as well as being a busy transport hub. Over the past two to three decades the area has seen the return of residential communities, living cheek by jowel with major cultural institutions and a range of businesses. This makes the experience of living, working and visiting the area extremely rich and varied.
National Theatre d un
Westminster Bridge
N
Soundings
The Shell Centre sits between Waterloo station and the South Bank Walk & Talks around the area
We also describe options for approaches to the masterplan across a number of themes, which are illustrated in this exhibition and which we seek your feedback on, either as a visitor to the drop-in exhibitions or as a workshop participant. We will collate all the feedback received on preferred design approaches and prepare a report that we will share with the masterplanning team, and place on the website.
Soundings is an independent consultancy which has delivered successful community engagement and consultation programmes on a number of high profile developments in London, including the Olympic and Olympic Legacy masterplans, Kings Cross Central and Chelsea Barracks. A key part of our work is drawing together the Statement of Community Involvement (SCI). This SCI is a planning application document that lays out the process, who said what, and how these exchanges impacted on the masterplan and design of the Shell Centre redevelopment.
The South Bank is London’s premier cultural destination
All of our work with the community in the area will be transparently documented in the SCI and will be publicly accessible.
Shell Centre Dialogue
Consultation activity: understanding the neighbourhood Getting to know the area Over the past three months we have staged a number of events, from pop-ups on the South Bank, to Walk & Talks around the area with local residents, businesses, cultural and tourist organisations, to try to understand what makes this area ‘tick’.
Linking up with local groups and individuals 2
To date we have held one-to-one interviews with 17 key organisations in the area:
5
Pop-ups - street consultation
In December 2011 and January 2012 you may have seen us on the South Bank, next to the Shell Centre, on Lower Marsh or in Waterloo Station. At these locations we captured people’s thoughts on the Shell Centre today, their priorities for the masterplan, their favourite ‘thing’, and aspects of the area that need to change.
6
Shell Centre site
7 3
Community Outreach
4
Residents Walk & Talk #1 Tourist Operator Walk & Talk
1
Businesses Walk & Talk
Walk & Talks in the area
We invited local businesses and residents to show us around the area. We have now been on six walk and talk visits; two with resident groups, two with cultural organisations and one each with businesses and tourist operators. These walks allow us to understand the place from a local perspective.
Cultural Organisations Walk & Talk Residents Walk & Talk #2 Pop-Up Events
Community outreach map - this shows all of the pop-up events and ‘walk & talks’ we have carried out to date.
Walk & Talk feedback
Our outreach in numbers In this first phase of outreach we have collected many views and comments from people who live, work in and visit the area.
ITV
National Theatre
Coin Street Community Builders King’s College
Southbank Centre
Forming the Community Liaison Group
Whitehouse Apartments Waterloo Festival
Shell Centre site The Young Vic
London Eye
Network Rail London Duck Tours
South Bank Employers’ Group
BRBR
Peabody
London Film Museum WCDG
Guild of Registered Tourist Guides
The Old Vic Tunnels
CHORA Skyline Films
The Old Vic
Waterloo Quarter BID SE1 United
Marriott County Hall
Bankside Open Spaces Trust
The Park Plaza Johanna Primary School
China Walk TRA
Guy’s & St. Thomas’ NHS Trust
6 6 17
270
Florence Nightingale Museum
Oasis Centre
Stakeholder Outreach Liaison Group member Engaged in process
Do let us know if you represent a group that we have not yet identified. We expect this group to grow over time.
Pop-up event: South Bank
Canvass Card sessions
BFI
The Community Liaison Group draws together representatives of residential areas, businesses, cultural institutions and tourist operators. It will be a key body for the consultation process and will act as a sounding board for the masterplan as it evolves. The group will be attended by senior representatives of the developer team and the masterplanners to offer an effective and efficient means of generating a shared vision for the site. It will also seek to ensure that local schools, youth groups, faith groups, crime prevention agencies and health agencies are represented.
• Waterloo Community Development Group • South Bank Employers Group • South Bank Centre • Association of Waterloo Groups • County Hall Residents’ Association • White House Residents’ Association • Waterloo Quarter Business Alliance • Johanna Primary School • Bankside Open Spaces Trust • British Railway Board (Residuary) • London SE1 (community website) • King’s College • Guy’s & St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust • Network Rail • The London Eye • Shell • Coin Street Community Builders
Contacted by Soundings One to one meeting Consultation Boundary
Stakeholder outreach map - this shows all of the organisations we have met with to date.
2685 7500
Pop-Up events Walk & Talks 1 to 1 meetings with local stakeholders
Walk & Talk: Millennium Green
Completed Canvass Cards Comments collected from canvas cards and the Walk & Talk events Introductory letter sent out to the Southbank area First Community Liaison Group meeting
Shell Centre Dialogue
Shell Centre Stories: memories, likes and dislikes Your impressions
Favourite stories
We asked people what their impressions of the Shell Centre were today, and if they had a favourite story or memory of the site or the surrounding area.
Many people shared their happy memories of the Shell Centre and the surrounding area. Memories related to work, leisure, living in the area and moving around and through the site were mentioned frequently. We have picked out some stories from the 73 we collected.
“I like the building it’s epic”
“Looks derelict and a bit of a mess”
“Iconic building. I like it. Different. The one opposite is horrible”
“Very ugly building”
The Shell Centre The Shell Centre building is loved, hated and ignored. The main negative qualities associated with the site are associated with poor links and movement, while architectural style captured most of the commentary. We asked 270 people what their impressions of the Shell Centre are today and 157 responded. Comments made were categorised, and split according to positive, negative or neutral responses. Of the 157 comments made, 36% were positive about the Shell Centre believing that the current arrangement works well, 38% negative thinking that the building was too austere and uninviting. 17% were neutral towards it and were happy for any eventuality. Some recalled life in the South Bank before it was so-called, and consisted of warehouses, wharves & shot towers. Others mentioned the construction of County Hall and how it, or the subsequent 1951 Festival of Britain, changed perceptions and fortunes of the area. Over half of the comments (59%) were about the Shell Centre’s architectural style with a full array of opinions and preferences expressed, while a few mentioned links and movement (9%). Other comments (32%) spanned suggestions, many acknowledging that the building is rather old, and may well have gone past its ‘sell by’ date in terms of contemporary office needs.
“I like the idea of restaurants etc being there. Would be good to smarten up the area”
“We live opposite it in County Hall - we don’t want a thousand people coming on to our small road”
“A huge building - too plain. If it was a car, it would be a Volvo. Just yuck! Like Lego”
“I like the tower - not the other buildings”
“The Festival of Britain. I have good memories walking through the highlevel walkway. I took a photo of the fountain and the sculpture in 1968ish” “I went there with my mum - she was a cleaner. There were long corridors”
“Iconic. Art Deco-like but not quite” “Horrible”
“It’s still there. Quite iconic. Jubilee Gardens is a ‘waste of space’ - not the best use. The car park is used as a builder’s yard”
“I quite like it. It’s a monolith - a massive structure, dependable”
“All good - unique part of London would be a shame to make it look like everywhere else”
“Navigation is hard - public areas is an issue. It is a barrier - I naturally go the other way. It is a problem at ground level. I only come here if there is an event at Jubilee Gardens”
“Concrete monstrosity and inaccessible. I’ve never been in the building - it’s a closed space”
“It’s a waste - half of it is closed down. It’s a big tall building that spoils the landscape slightly”
“It has changed so much better”
“Landmark. First thing you see out of the station. I like the building, it’s an ugly old trout too. It has meaning though”
“An eyesore glad to see it go”
“It was nice not to have to cross the roads. It’s never been the same since they stopped the ability to walk through - loss of access to walkway level is a real shame”
“We are a married couple who moved to the South Bank after our children left home to be near the centre of town, and have not been disappointed. We live in County Hall. We love the lively welcome of the area” “I used to work at County Hall and I remember it being built. There used to be old derelict warehouses on the South Bank. The 1951 exhibition was brilliant - the area changed to a tourist’s area. All cultural things were built after that” “I was friends with an architect of the Royal Festival Hall so love the area”
Shell Centre Dialogue
Needs and aspirations We asked you some questions
Message to the developers
What would you like to change about Shell Centre and the surrounding area? What would you like to see? Anything missing?
Change community facilities, green & public space and the surrounding area
Restaurants, cafe society and the need for decent pubs
We asked 270 people what they would change about the Shell Centre and surrounding area, including what they would like to see. We also asked what is missing in the area. 221 people responded to the first question, and 205 to the second. We took both data sets and analysed a total of 504 individual comments, which were then themed according to elements of the masterplan.
The top issue raised when asked “what would you like to see change” was ‘community and other facilities’. A need for a local supermarket was mentioned by many - somewhere to go for your everyday shopping, rather than having to go all the way to ‘Covent Garden’ or the ‘Old Kent Road’ for a ‘big shop’ or ‘clothes’ shopping.
Others called for restaurants, cafes and decent pubs to be brought to the area. Here are some examples:
A few headlines from our findings follow below: • The area as a whole needs to be a lot easier to get around. • Shops selling clothes and a supermarket needed • At night time, there are still dark areas that feel unsafe. • Traffic and parking is an issue • Affordability - both of housing, and of facilities and restaurants is important • The South Bank is difficult to get around in a wheelchair or pushing a buggy. • Antisocial behaviour - there are some issues with street drinkers in the area • Cycling is not easy • Green & public space is important to people • Remember the surrounding area - link up with other developments to understand what is happening.
Some are keen that the unique identity of Lower Marsh is not threatened by any retail that would be introduced into the Shell Centre redevelopment, and it is clear that a clever strategy will have to be devised to underpin decisions on local retail. Many believe that chain shopping and the location of multiples elsewhere, could complement and boost trade in the Lower Marsh area.
South Bank - busy and in need of areas for local residents to gather
Some see the South Bank as a victim of its own success - whilst it is wonderful to draw such crowds on a daily basis, the local residents would also like a few islands of calm, where they can enjoy their neighbourhood without the constant threat of crowds. For this reason there are many who would like to see the Hungerford car park changed into a green open space yet there is also recognition that there could be room, in addition, for a world class cultural building and perhaps a place where young people from the area and further afield can get exposed to and become more familiar with the cultural activities and promise of the South Bank.
Things you like / dislike
Those living in the buildings nearby are concerned about the height of the redevelopment, and rights to light, views and their property values.
“A good Indian restaurant!” “At peak times, somewhere to eat preconcert - a quick meal (e.g. pizza etc).” “Coffee Shop on the riverside instead of at the station.”
A favourite thing about the area was the Book Fair outside the BFI
“Decent pubs” “English restaurants with traditional English food.” “Have higher quality spaces for the arts and restaurants. Make it a more attractive destination for riverside entertainment.” “Have more restaurants geared to locals and local workers.” “Increase the amount of outside space for cafes/bars to encourage more of a cafe culture.”
Other favourites were Greensmiths grocers on Lower Marsh
“More modern bistros, wine bars, activity on Thames.” “More cafes.” “More restaurants.” “More small restaurants (not chains).” “Nice restaurants (no fast food outlets).”
The main message to the developers is ‘don’t mess it up’ - people want the area to be a success, and feel that the community have a large part to play in this.
Elizabeth House is seen as an eyesore, and people are glad it is getting redeveloped
“Places to meet, chat, eat.” “Pret a manger.” “Put a restaurant on top of the tower.” “Variety of shops and bars.”
The alleyways underneath the IMAX are little favoured
There is a call for this redevelopment to be unique, yet in-keeping with the South Bank. People feel that the true community of the area should be involved at all times, in helping to generate the new masterplan. There is, on the part of many stakeholder groups, an understanding that there will be dense and tall development proposals for the site - but this will only be supported if there are sufficient, honest and robust community benefits identified in the scheme. In the main these take the form of green and open space, shops/bars and restaurants, and improved local services. Access to ‘real jobs’ has also been mentioned.
Shell Centre Dialogue
Route Mapping Findings
Blackfriars bridge
We asked people to draw their routine journeys around the area on a large map and to describe the reasons for their journey. They were also invited to indicate any positive or negative aspects which determined their chosen route, as well as hot-spots (i.e. no-go areas) and places of personal significance.
loo ter Wa
Commuter Routes
e idg Br
W
H
ng
erf
ord
Bri
dg
e
Rive rside Wall
Victori a Emba nkmen t
Hu
Lower Marsh and The Cut were identified as a special shopping area, loved for its local flavour. Many were concerned with the lack of convenience shopping in the area, using Waterloo Station and the small Sainsbury’s on Waterloo Road. Participants enjoy the open space and social offer along the South Bank, especially indicating Jubilee Gardens and the Southbank Centre as their favourite places to play and spend time.
W
W
H
W
W
W
W
H
Southwark Station
W
W
W
W
Yor kR oad
H
W W W
W
W W
d oa oR rlo ate W
London Marriott County Hall
Waterloo Station
H H
ut C e Th
W
H
t eS ak Le
Belve dere Road
W
W
W
Westminster Bridge
Ideal Commuting Shopping/convenience Leisure/social/entertainment H
Home
W
Work Places where you shop
St.Thomas’ Hospital
Lambeth Pa lace Road
Routes
W
W
sh r a M r e w o L W es tm ins ter
H H
Mor ley Stre et
Ideal routes and ‘hot spots’ Routes from Waterloo Station to the river are difficult. A large number of participants would like to cut through York Road and the Shell Centre to access the river and Hungerford Bridge. People would like better access between Lower Marsh and Waterloo Station. The Leake Street tunnel that currently connects the areas had mixed reviews, with some participants fearful of its current state and others enjoying the graffiti within the tunnel. Other no-go areas are the Westminster Bridge Road tunnel, behind Elizabeth House, the Hungerford carpark, and the subway passage under the IMAX.
W
Royal National Theatre nd u ro G er p Up t d e a e tr Royal S Ro n e o t r o e Festival Hall e e D d tr e S d lv r e o f B m a Co St nce rt H all Ap pro ach
Embankment
Shopping & Leisure
W
et tre in S Co
Commuter journeys follow the bus routes on Waterloo Road and York Road towards Westminster and Waterloo Bridge. There is significant traffic towards the two underground stations in the area: Waterloo Station and Southwark Station. The Riverside Walk, Hungerford Bridge and smaller streets to the South and East of Waterloo Station are also popular.
H
H H H
Br idg Lambeth North e R Station oa d H
W
W
H W
H
“Hot spots” - places you avoid/feel unsafe Places where you play “Comfort spots” - places where you like to go
Route map and ‘hot spots’
Images above: route mapping at various locations
Shell Centre Dialogue
Canvass Card Priorities Findings
Your top priorities by selected locations
Your top 3 priorities - cumulative
Canvass cards were distributed during popup events and also to targeted stakeholders in the Wateroo area. A list of fifteen priorities were given as options on the canvass cards, and participants were asked to rank their top three choices in order of importance. In total, 270 canvass cards were collected.
Co
m
ity
Li
nk
Heritage & History
s
He
&
rit
01
Culture & Events
G
re
02
Green & Public Space
B
re
Priorities
Priorities by location
en
&
lit
Pu
ffi ce rta
si
gn
s t
y
ht
Sp
ac
e
us
in
g
Sp
ac
e
m
au
en
ra
Q
ua
1st Priority
s
3rd Priority
lit
y
Ar
t
th
Cumulative Priorities
t
nt
O
er
2nd Priority General * Priorities catagorised as “other”
frequently cited affordable housing and sports & leisure facilities. Cumulative results based on a total of 9 consultation events.
*
C
Links & Movement 01 D
Jobs Jobs
02 01
Green & Public Space
Green & Public Space
03 02
Heritage & History 03
Jobs 01
Community Facilities Pop-up Locations A
Lower Marsh
B
South Bank
C
Waterloo Station
D
Shell Podium
* There were a total of 9 consultation events.
Pop-up events and people’s top priorities
02 A
Green & Public Space 03
120
ig
st
De
100
or
He
in
Re
80
en
Ho
O
60
op
st
ic
40
ts
Hi
bl
20
s
en
em
&
00
ie
Ev
ov
e
bs
Sh
te
While participants from the South Bank indicated Heritage & History, Culture & Events and Green & Public Space as their key priorities, Lower Marsh participants valued Jobs, Community Facilities and Green & Public Space.
ci
M
ag
En
Different areas and users around the Shell site have very different needs and concerns. The map shows four selected pop-up locations and their top three priorities.
&
Number of respondents
Jo
Fa
ltu
03
Heritage & History, mentioned often during both South Bank and Shell Podium popup’s, possibly have different ideals, if a shared category of concern, with the former identifying the Modernist and Brutalist architectures of the cultural quarter while the latter favour a more traditional palette. Where South Bank pop-up’s identify Culture & Events as a priority, Lower Marsh seeks Community Facilities, reflecting distinctive aspirations.
un
Cu
The map to the right shows that the most cited first priorities are location specific. The graph to the right complies the top three priorities collected and shows cumulative results.
Links & Movement was the most popular priority among Waterloo Station participants. Although results are location-specific it is interesting to note that Green & Public Space and Jobs were consistently ranked very highly across most locations.
m
Cumulative priorities We compiled all of the priorities from the different pop-up locations and found that ‘Green & Public Space’ ranks as the highest priority among participants. This is followed by ‘Jobs’ and ‘Culture & Events’. ‘Community Facilities’ and ‘Heritage & History’ are also highly valued. ‘Height’ and ‘Office Space’ were the lowest ranking priorities although qualitative data gathered from the canvass cards indicates that height is an issue, especially for neighbouring residents. It is interesting to note that ‘affordable housing’ and ‘sports and leisure’ facilities were frequently mentioned when participants chose their priority as “Other.”
Shell Centre Dialogue
Walk & Talk Results Qualitative Information
Comments by location - close to the site
‘Walk and Talks’ help us to understand issues about the area surrounding the site from a local person’s point of view. We meet and discuss our route, then walk for around 90 minutes or so. The walks were themed by target group including residents, businesses, tourist operators and cultural organisations to identify distinctive issues for each stakeholder.
We have summarised the general feeling towards different locations in the list below.
The routes Each route was designed with a specific target group in mind so that relevant locations were covered along the walk. The ‘tourist operator’ route passed by the Park Plaza Hotel, Marriott County Hall, London Eye and tourist attractions along the South Bank. The ‘cultural organisation’ route included the National Theatre, Southbank Centre, ITV and also smaller scale cultural landmarks such as The Old Vic, Futures Theatre Company and Warehouse performance space.
“Should be a real foca point for public realm, could retail from Shell spill over here?”
“Great example of converting a nasty grey area into something nice with minimal effort.”
“Shame you have to go underground.”
“Keep parking underground, don’t block route to the station.”
09 10
11
08
“Is disliked and there is not access through it to the river.”
“Needs to be iconic.” 07
“Waterloo Station itself is really the ‘elephant in the room’.”
“Green space should be here rather than a building.” 06
02
“[Roupell Street has] view of Eye and Shell and other end is view of Shard.”
“Local culture and dining.” 03
“Boring, no light, dull, not one piece of greenery in sight.”
“It forms a barrier between the river and the South Bank to pedestrian exploration.”
Shell Centre Podium: ‘bleak, but has potential’ Participants felt that the podium in its current state looks very bleak. However many commented that it had potential as a plaza with cafes or green space. Most participants said that it is vital to keep this as an open space with access to the river and views of the London Eye. Very few understood that the area already had planning permission for office development and retail.
“Lower Marsh is fantastic as it is full of quirky independent shops.”
York Road & Elizabeth House: ‘a barrier’
Walk & Talk Mapping The map to the right shows the locations along the routes that were most spoken about and the comments that were most frequently made about these locations.
Many participants commented that the new development should be bold and iconic – to generate buzz in the same way as The Shard at London Bridge. Some were concerned about height, blocking sunlight or views and creating wind. There were mixed views about the type of retail that should exist on the site ranging from large chain stores like John Lewis and Sainsbury’s to small independents. There were frequent comments regarding competition to Lower Marsh’s retail offer.
“There needs to be more places like the garden.”
Participants were encouraged to take us off route to show us any hidden treasures in the area or places of interest. All Walk & Talks had a central meeting point at the Shell Centre along York Road encouraging site-specific comments about the new development.
“The sun dries the brick along these homes, if towers obstruct the sunlight there will be opposition.”
“Subway better than before - try to link with station and tube.” “Desire line to cut through at this point - currently blocked by car entrance to Shell.”
Shell Centre redevelopment: ‘bold and iconic’
“Definitely needs more light & cheer in the tunnel.”
Walk & Talk Routes Residents Walk & Talk 1 Tourist Operator Walk & Talk Businesses Walk & Talk Cultural Organisations Walk & Talk Residents Walk & Talk 2 Most frequenly cited locations
Walk & Talk mapping sharing locations, comments and routes.
05 04
“Major challenge is how in planning terms we offer protection to independent retail.” “You should improve permeability down to Lower Marsh.”
Many participants disliked York road for its traffic, lack of pedestrian crossings and pavement clutter. Some even commented that it felt dark and dangerous. Elizabeth House was also disliked for its dull and dark appearance and perceived as a barrier. Waterloo Station: ‘good, bad and ugly’ People told us that the station severs the northern and southern parts of Waterloo. All agree that connectivity should increase through the station to surrounding areas and public realm improvements should be made to currently existing links and areas around the station’s perimeter.
Shell Centre Dialogue
Walk & Talk Results A: Cumulative Walk & Talk Comments
50 40
07
Residents 1 08
Businesses
08
Cultural Organisations
10
Cumulative Results * Sufficient data was not gathered
O
th
er
ts
lo
pm
m e
Ne
w
de
ve
us
nd
La
en
es ix
nt ra
au
st Re
Ac ul Ve h
ic
s
il ta
M
Re
lF ca
Sp n
as & ces si cy s ng , cl p e ed m e ov st em ria en n Fa t ci lit ie s Cu ltu De re si gn Q ua lit Pu y bl ic Re al m
it
Themes
ar
Af
Pu
bl
ic
O
pe
Lo
in us
Ho le
ab rd
fo
ac
g
y lit bi ea rm Pe
e
00
Talk and is not shown.
B: Walk & Talk Comments by target group “The huge weight of accumulated buildings must be alleviated with light, space and green.” 20
“Don’t compete in Shell site with Lower Marsh.”
“I hope there’s no chains in the new development.”
“The new scheme needs to improve connectivity.” 15
“We want good retail here (e.g John Lewis or House of Fraser.”
10
Walk & Talk Comments Residents 1 Businesses Cultural Organisations
05
Residents 2 * Sufficient data was not gathered
from the Tourist Operator Walk &
Themes
Ne
w
er th O
ts
0 0
de ve lo pm
m ix us e d
La n
en
0 0
es
nt ra
il ta Re
au Re st
ic
Re
al m
0
0
Q gn si
De
Pu bl
re
ua lit y
0 0
Cu ltu
s ci lit ie
Fa
si Ac ng & ces cy s cl , p e ed m e ov st em ria en n t
ar
M
as
it al F
Ve hi cu l
O ic bl Pu
Lo c
ac Sp pe
n
Ho le rd ab
fo Af
e
g
0 0
us
in
ili ty ea b rm
0 0 0
Talk and is not shown.
00
B
“Lower Marsh has great character and mix of cafes and restaurants.”
“Any decent society is judged by its arts and culture.” “[York Rd] is very intrusive - needs space for runners.”
Pe
‘Retail and Restaurants’ was a very important issue for the business Walk & Talk however the type of retail differed greatly among groups and individual preferences. Some preferred small independent shops like those on Lower Marsh while others wanted a higher end retail offer with chain stores like House of Fraser and Waitrose. Surprisingly, Affordable Housing was one of the least commented issues during the Walk & Talks across all groups.
Walk & Talk Comments
from the Tourist Operator Walk &
Graph B - Results by Target Group
For example the two residents’ Walk & Talks had distinct results although they are within the same target group. The first residents group who took a route north of Waterloo Station commented mostly on ‘Vehicular Access, pedestrian & Cycle movement’ and ‘Public Open Space’. The second residents group was taken on a more southern route, identifying ‘Public Open Space’ as their main concern followed by ‘Retail’.
06
Residents 2
The cumulative findings show that ‘Retail’ was the topic most spoken about during the Walk & Talks. This is followed by ‘Restaurants’ and ‘Public Open Space’. ‘Links and Movement’, ‘Massing’ and ‘Vehicular Access, pedestrian & cycle movement’ were also frequently commented on.
Although the cumulative comments give an overall picture of important issues in the area, Graph B reveals priorities among different stakeholders.
04
20
Interestingly, comments made on the Walk & Talks differ from those collected through the canvass cards since the walkabouts are focused on specific locations around the area and there is a greater concentration of local people.
03
05
30
A
02
Number of comments
Graph A - Cumulative Results
01
Number of comments
All Walk & Talk participant comments were data based and divided into the most common, recurring themes. Graph A shows the cumulative results gathered from all Walk & Talks while Graph B separates comments by target group revealing a more detailed layer of information.
60
Quantitative Information
Shell Centre Dialogue
Historical Context Europes first major office block
The Festival of Britain
Designed by Sir Howard Robertson and opened in 1963 by the Queen, the Shell Centre is located within land originally used for the Festival of Britain in 1951. It was an important development set out in the subsequent 1953 masterplan to regenerate the South Bank.
In 1951, the South Bank hosted the Festival of Britain, a celebration of reconstruction and national identity after the struggle and deprivation of the war and its aftermath. The Festival also marked the centenary of the Great Exhibition in the Crystal Palace at Hyde Park.
The area over time Due to the area’s extensive marshes the Romans avoided this stretch of the Thames, which was then very much wider. This pattern remained for hundreds of years however in the 17th Century Industrial development finally began along the South Bank. Timber wharves and yards sprung up and the area grew as a prosperous commercial area, benefitting from being outside of the control of the Corporation of London and its various guilds.
It was a revelation for a nation just coming to terms with early consumer society and notions of ‘life style’ and personal freedom. The futurist forms of the ‘Dome of Discovery’ and the spike of the ‘skylon’ laid out a national aspiration for renewal, and a new language of urban form. The whole swathe of the riverbank between Waterloo Bridge and the County Hall was cleared for the Festival. An embankment and river walk were created along with Festival Pier (which still survives). The area was transformed with a variety of structures and entertainments by the leading British architects and designers of the day. The centrepiece of the Festival, and its only permanent building, was the Royal Festival Hall (RFH) erected 1949-51. More evidence of the areas transformation into a thriving cultural and business destination is demonstrated by more recent additions such as the London Eye and the Jubilee Gardens, due to re-open later this year.
Indeed, it hardly needs the occasional incursions of the river to remind the water-side inhabitants that this now dense and widelyspreading region was once a marsh, and even a flat swampy level, scarcely raised above the surface of the Thames” Edward Walford, Old and New London: Volume 6, 1876 View of the South Bank today One of the series of views along north side of Vine Street at junction with Manners Street. Vine Street originally ran from the site of Waterloo Station, across York Road and Belvedere Road. Most of this area was redeveloped after World War II. Source: www.lambeth.gov.uk
The building was the first major air-conditioned office block to be constructed in Europe. It was also one of the first projects to use natural resources to help reduce energy demands. For instance, it used water from the Thames to cool the building, limiting the use of the air conditioning system it showcased. The 27-storey tower is clad in Portland stone and has become an important feature on the South Bank.
“The Belvidere Road, or Narrow Wall, is an ancient way, as it is depicted in views of London dated 1588; as are Vine Street and the Cornwall Road; but no houses seem to have been in either of them, with the exception of a few in and about Vine Street. From the Belvidere Road, in the present day, an excellent opportunity is afforded of noticing the extent of the artificial elevation given to the road when the approaches to Waterloo Bridge were made.
Festival of Britain aerial view circa 1951
Illustrated London News, May 12 1951
Waterloo station was built in 1848 by London and South Western Railway (LSWR), which encouraged further industrial development. In 1872 there were builders’ yards, timber yards, mills, a brewery, printers, an iron foundry and a lead works. County Hall was the first public building on the South Bank, built to house the London County Council (LCC), completed in 1933. County Hall changed the course of the whole area’s development and led to proposals in the late 1930s to extend its riverside walk as far as Waterloo Bridge; however the outbreak of war prevented progress on this matter. Waterloo area historic map 1870s * Indicative Shell Centre site boundary shown in red
Waterloo area historic map 1890s
Waterloo area historic map 1910s
Waterloo area historic map 1950s
Shell Centre Dialogue
Context and Constraints Site context and planning issues
Two pedestrian routes are suggested through the Shell Centre site, one primary and the other secondary, though these reflect the condition of the existing Shell Centre plus the re-developed ‘podium site’ for which planning permission exists (immediately south of the Shell Centre buildings) – see ‘Surrounding scheme – 1’. As much more comprehensive re-development is now proposed, there is a chance to rethink this. The Shell Centre site is identified as a ‘Major Development Opportunity’ (MDO 93). It is also in the vicinity of a nodal area around the station which the WASPD suggests is appropriate for ‘high density development’. The WASPD defines Lower Marsh, the Cut and a segment of Waterloo Road as a District Centre with a retail focus on ‘local needs’ and specialist and independent retailing. Retail developed in other areas, potentially in the former international platform space at Waterloo Station as currently being considered by British Rail Board (Residuary) – otherwise known as the Secretary of State for Transport – will need to ensure it is not of a ‘scale or type’ to adversely affect the District Centre.
Shell Centre Podium Office development & retail use 9 storeys Consented
7
2
It is expected that a new planning application will shortly be made for the redevelopment of the Elizabeth House site to the east of the Shell Centre.
5
6
ge
8
2
Note: There are four views from Westminster that have been identified in the London Mayor’s ‘View Management Framework’. These will have an impact on the location of tall buildings and will be addressed in detail at future workshops.
Roa d
Doon Street Mixed use base with swimming pool & 43 story tower Consented
Yo rk
Ro ad
Belv ede re
The site is adjacent to Jubilee Gardens (due to re-open in the summer) and Hungerford car park. These are designated as Metropolitan Open Land, restricting the ability to build there. Of the Hungerford car park, the WASPD (2009 draft) suggests that the site could be suitable for a cultural facility of national importance that allowed for an extension of Jubilee Gardens.
rid oB
The designations of most immediate relevance to the site referred to in the WASPD are shown on the board and are summarised below.
lo ter Wa
This board looks at the wider area and describes some of the planning issues in terms of both emerging planning policy and planning applications. The policy referred to is the Draft ‘Waterloo Area Supplementary Planning Document’ (WASPD) 2011.
There has been substantial hotel development given Mayoral priorities for the Central Activities Zone. The number of hotel rooms within the SPD area (and immediately adjacent) totals in excess of 2,750 rooms.
1
Chic he
3
ley Stre et
1
Waterloo Station
4
Constraints key
Westminster Bridge
York House Office development & retail 16 storeys Renewal of planning consent sought
Shell Centre site Existing Shell Tower
3
Grade II Listed Fountain Existing high level bridge
4
Listed buildings Nearby development sites Pedestrian routes identified in the WASPD South Bank Conservation Area boundary
N
WASPD Boundary Major Development opportunity Areas
Former Lying In Hospital 234 Room Hotel development 15 storeys On site
5 Betham Tower (1 Blackfrairs) Office development. 51 storeys. Consented
Metropolitan Open Land Nodal area around station where high density development would be appropriate Elizabeth House development site
6 Kings ReachTower Office development 173 apartments & retail Consented
7 20 Blackfriars 23 storeys office & retail 43 storey residential towers Consented
8 240 Blackfriars Road Office development & limited retail 20 storeys Consented
Shell Centre Dialogue
Masterplanning Approaches 1
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 initiatives outlined above.
oa d
re R
re R
Yor k
Yor k
Ro
Ro
ad
ad
B elv e de
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.
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.
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).
OPTION B
OPTION C
OPTION D
Via
ct
oa d
re R C hi c e et
hele
ct
ad
ad Ro
Yor k
y Str
du
ct
B elv e de
re R
B elv e de
ad Ro
Yor k
hele
Via
du
du
Ro
Via
C hi c
re e t
eet
Connecting to the Eye
oa d
oa d re R
y St
y Str
Central route either to the north or south of the tower
ct
B elv e de
hele
hele
Diagonally through the site
du
C hic
ee t
Yor k
Via
C hi c
y Str
oa d
OPTION A
re e t
hele
re R
PUBLIC OPEN SPACE
y St
C hi c
ct
B elv e de
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.
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
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.
ad
hele
Connecting Waterloo Station and the South Bank along the viaduct
b
Yor k
C h ic re e t
du
ct
ad
y St
Via
a
Ro
ad
Ro
Yor k hele
du
ct
re R
re R C h ic
Via
du
oa d
oa d
Vi a
oa d
ct
OPTION D
B elv e de
du
B elv e de
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.
Via
OPTION C
Ro
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.
OPTION B
Yor k
OPTION A
B elv e de
LINKS & MOVEMENT
y Str
C hi c
e et
hele
y Str
eet
Along the viaduct
Central space
Facing Jubilee Gardens
Along Chicheley Street
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.
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.
The third option suggests that the public space is arranged to face the Jubilee Gardens. This would offer the potential of maximizing the impact of the open space in the area. However, it would preclude the delivery of any other type of public space.
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.
Shell Centre Dialogue
Masterplanning Approaches 2
We have shown six highly diagrammatic options for the arrangement of the taller buildings. A conceptual grid is shown within which the letter donates 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).
Via
tree
ct
re R
re R ey S
du
oa d
oa d
ct
C hic
hel
t
Yor k
Yor k
Ro
Ro
ad
ad
B elv e de
B elv e de
ad Ro
Yor k
hel
Vi a
du
ct
oa d C hic
C hic
ey S
tree
hel
t
ey S
tree
t
Perimeter blocks
Slab blocks
Mixed 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.
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.
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.
OPTION A
OPTION B
OPTION C
Via
L L L C hic h
M
H
M
M
H
L
M
M
ad
M
M el ey
H
L
ct
Ro
M
du
Yor k
H oa d
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.
OPTION C
du
re R
HEIGHT
Via
B elv e de
There are three very broad options for the scheme, and these are illustrated by the diagrams shown opposite.
OPTION B
re R
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.
OPTION A
B elv e de
URBAN LAYOUT
OPTION D
L L
M
M
H H
Stre
L
M
M
M L M H H
OPTION E
H
H
H
H
M
M
M L H M L
OPTION F
M L
L
M
M
H
M
L L L
L M
H
H
M
H
M
H H
L
L
M
M
M
et
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 midday 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.
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.
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 northeast corner of the site to Chicheley Street. This would soften the arrangement to York Road, but would cast pronounced shadows over Jubliee Gardens until midday and may interrupt views of the Tower from strategic vantage points.
Shell Centre Dialogue
Masterplanning Approaches 3 OPTION B
du
re R
re R
ad Ro
ad
Yor k
Ro
Ro
ad
ad Ro Yor k
eet
ct
oa d
oa d
ct
B elv e de
B elv e de
re R
re R
oa d
oa d
ct
y Str
hele
C hi c
y Str
e et
hele
y Str
eet
Along the viaduct
Along York Road
Along Chicheley Street
Mall style through the site
Land use
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.
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.
Chicheley Street is proposed as the third option. This responds to and mirrors 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.
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.
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. We would like you to consider which of these uses you would prefer to see provided.
OPTION A
OPTION B
OPTION C
OPTION D
C hi c
hele
eet
hele
ct
C hi c
y Str
eet
Ro
ad
re R
B elv e de ad
All
Ro
C hi c
y Str
du
oa d
oa d B elv e de
ad
Ro Yor k
hele
Via
ct
re R
oa d
re R eet
du
ct
B elv e de C hi c
y Str
Via
du
ct
Yor k
Via
du
Yor k
Via
ad
The following four options define suggested locations for affordable housing and consider how they could be implemented.
eet
Via
du
C hi c
Ro
Though there are no concrete plans as regards the residential offer, if it is brought forward, ‘affordable housing’ will have to be considered.
y Str
hele
Yor k
AFFORDABLE HOUSING / LOCATION & PROVISION
C hi c
oa d
Retail Bars, restaurants, cafés Cultural use Leisure Sport Health facility
hele
re R
• • • • • •
C hi c
Via
du
ct
B elv e de
In addition to the location, we would also like to consider what these facilities might be and choose the most suitable priorities for the chosen area from the list below:
Via
du
B elv e de
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 shown here.
Via
OPTION D
B elv e de
The ‘feeling’ of the scheme will depend to some extent on what uses are accommodated on the site – particularly at ground floor level.
OPTION C
Yor k
OPTION A
Yor k
COMMUNITY & OTHER FACILITIES
Some hele
y Str
eet
All in one cluster
Along viaduct and phased
Scattered and phased
Some or all off site
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.
The 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.
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.
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.
Shell Centre Dialogue
Next Steps Next Steps for the Shell Centre site
Contact us
After the workshops and drop-in exhibitions are brought to a close, we will collate all the feedback and issue a report on the website. This will provide commentary on responses to our initial findings, a summary of general discussions at the workshops and information on expressed preferences for the six thematic areas of the masterplan including measures of the level of support.
If you feel that you could play an effective role on the Community Liaison Group, or would like to get involved in the process in any other way, we would be very happy to hear from you.
Outreach & establishing aspirations
By freephone: 0800 285 1580
2013
By email: team@shellcentredialogue.com Initial outreach
L
L
L
L
Ex
Ex
Ex
W
W
W
L
L
Fb
L
The next stage will be about generating a masterplan that has the widest possible support, while recognising that it will never be possible to please everybody. We have started from first principles in order to have the best chance of making the most effective opening design moves and of embedding key thoughts and desires. The masterplanning stage will run through to the summer and be the subject of two further workshop clusters, by which point we hope to have an agreed plan in place.
*Feedback sessions are arranged where considerable consultation has already taken place, and where the options to revise designs being consulted on are beginning to be reduced. They act as a means of capturing ‘final considerations’.
Statutory Consultation & post application outreach
Final Masterplan & Detail design development
2012
2011
We will continue to hold regular meetings with our Community Liaison Group, who will act as a sounding board for the emerging masterplan and a means of relaying the issues and thoughts of the groups they represent to the masterplanning team and developers.
As well as workshops, exhibitions,feedback sessions* and Community Liaison Group meetings we will be sending out newsletters to the South Bank Forum area of over 7,500 individual addresses to keep people informed. We will also update the website (www.shellcentredialogue.com) and keep an eye on any feedback we receive through it. We will continue to stage outreach projects both individually and through partnering arrangements to ensure we meet and understand the needs of hard to reach groups, local youth, the elderly of the area and those who have mobility issues.
Draft Masterplan development
Community Liaison Group meeting
*
L
Fb
Fb
Feedback Session
By post: Ex
Ex
Exhibition
W
Workshop
*
Stage 1 • ‘Launch’ exhibition continued at the ‘Consultation Base’ for two weeks • Workshop report on website (February 2012) • Newsletter updating on consultation and workshop findings (February 2012) • Ongoing Community Liaison Group meetings (6-8 weekly) • Masterplan workshops (March and April/May 2012) • Newsletter updating on masterplan workshops (April/May 2012) • Ongoing and targeted oureach
Shell Centre Dialogue Shell Centre
Website Coming Soon
Join in the conversation Local residents, businesses and visitors are invited to help establish the approach for the masterplan of the Shell Centre site.
01.Feb.12
02.Feb.12
Shell Centre Dialogue website launching soon at
Drop-in www.shellcentredialogue.com Exhibition 3.00-6.00 pm Workshop (RSVP) 6.30-9.00 pm
Shell Centre Dialogue Consultation Base now open at
Drop-in Exhibition 11.00 am2.00 pm 6.00-8.30 pm
Workshop (RSVP) 3.00-5.30 pm
Shell Centre (former reception) 2 York Road, SE1 7NA
Join us and tell
Planning Application submitted
Shell Centre team Soundings 148 Curtain Road London EC2A 3AT
www.shellcentredialogue.com Our website is now live, so please do check it regularly. Shortly after the launch exhibition and workshops we will be uploading content from this exhibition for those who missed it. The website will track the process as we move forward, and act as an archive of the project. Consultation Base The consultation base is our ‘chat room’, where different groups will meet to discuss the project. It is a home for the consultation process where you can join in exhibitions and events. Opening times will be posted on our website and on the windows. We look forward to seeing you here again.