Representation to Lancaster City Council Planning Committee by
Lancaster Civic Society
Application No. 10/00317/FUL
STUDENT ACCOMMODATION
VICTORIA COURT, PENNY STREET, LANCASTER
Victoria Court is a mid-terraced three storey property with a pitched slate roof and a stone, Arts and Crafts style, symmetrical frontage onto Penny Street where this street has a junction with King Street, the main road into Lancaster city centre from the south. To the north of Victoria Court is a five storey block of student accommodation, City Block, and to the south are traditional two and three storey stone buildings with many architectural features. Though City Block is slightly higher than Victoria Court there is a continuity of scale along the terraced frontage. There is a variety of contrasting building styles in the frontage and Victoria Court, as it is, makes a positive contribution to the street scene on this important road in the city centre.
Representatives of the Civic Society were invited to pre-application discussions with the Architects of the proposed scheme and were shown initial drawings of the proposed Penny Street frontage of the scheme. The Society’s comments to the Architects following that meeting were as follows:-
1. The principle of retaining the façade of the existing building is acceptable. The façade, however, should be preserved at ground floor level as well as above.
2. Infilling existing openings is acceptable but should be in a contrasting material. Otherwise the form of the openings would be lost once the façade is punctured by new window openings. The regular pattern of new window openings on the frontage should be symmetrical with the existing facade.
3. Whilst we have some reservations about the height of the proposed frontage it is the design of the elevation above the existing façade that is the most important consideration. Careful consideration must be given to how the ‘parapet’ of the frontage is treated and how the overall frontage responds to the context of the surrounding area.
The stone frontage of the existing building would be largely retained and the existing openings infilled with stonework rather than with a contrasting material. More importantly, the ground floor of the existing façade would be completely removed and there would be a wide glazed shopfront to one side. The symmetry of the façade would be lost and there would be no visual support to the retained façade above. The new window openings in the student accommodation above the ground floor retail space would not be symmetrical with the existing façade resulting in a further loss of symmetry. The introduction of a wide shop front at ground floor level and the loss of symmetry seriously undermine the principle of retaining the façade of the existing building.
There would be four floors of student accommodation above ground floor level and the proposed development would be at least one storey higher than City Block and nearly two storeys higher than the two storey building to the south. The proposed development would have a significantly greater scale than the adjoining buildings and for this reason alone the building would be prominent and intrusive in the street scene.
A member of the Civic Society offered further written comment to the Architects of the scheme as follows:
As you know there is a common thread running through Georgian, Victorian and Edwardian architecture regarding hierarchy on frontage elevations that was a response to lower floor to ceiling heights in upper stories. This hierarchy is present on many traditional buildings in Lancaster. I wonder if a similar hierarchy could not be employed in the design of a remodelled frontage for Victoria Court. I know that you would be employing regular storey heights but reducing the height of the top storey windows and introducing a ‘pediment’ feature over them at parapet level might be a way of a. reducing the regularity of window proportions, b. reflecting the context of the area, and c. addressing the building to sky relationship that is so important.
The proposed Penny Street frontage of the building would have regular window openings at all floor levels above ground floor level and the frontage would have a minimal parapet capping. The drawings of the building, in fact, indicate that there would be no capping. Simply stopping the frontage at parapet level is not an appropriate design response. Not only is the building to sky relationship not addressed but the building would, given also the regularity of window openings, have a dull and bland appearance. The proposed scheme does not display an appreciation of its context or any skilful architectural design. The proposed building, on its Penny Street frontage, would be a large unattractive decorated box.
The five storey box would extend, albeit in a narrower form, to the rear of Penny Street and would have a frontage onto Thurnham Street, another main road in the city centre. The view north from South Road in front of the Royal Infirmary is important and in this view there would be a five storey wall of development to the rear of, and dominating, a two-storey mews development on Thurnham Street. The contrast in scale would be incongruous. Furthermore, the extensive unbroken wall of development, without any eaves or parapet features, would be visually intrusive in an area where there is a wide variety of building heights, styles and roof forms.
The proposed redevelopment scheme at Victoria Court is unacceptable for a variety of reasons. It would be, in simple terms, one storey too high and, consequently, its scale would be thoroughly out of keeping with adjoining development. The scheme, given its dull design, would be unattractive and would have a significant adverse effect on the character and appearance of the Conservation Area within which it would be located. The Civic Society recommends that planning permission be refused for what would be a visually intrusive development on a prominent site on an important road in Lancaster city centre.
