Developers get strict instructions on Imax site height (From Bournemouth Echo)
When news happens text pix and video to 80360. Start your message with BE then leave a space.
Don't miss our new Youth Sport supplement every Thursday inside your Echo 
Daily Echo on FacebookAll of today's content from across the site, all in one place at bournemouthecho.co.uk/today
Developers get strict instructions on Imax site height
8:45am Thursday 2nd September 2010 in
NOW you see it – soon you won’t? As the bid to rid Bournemouth of its hated IMAX building continues, potential developers are being issued with a strict set of instructions for the site.
And these include a condition that the building – either the current one or a replacement – must be reduced in height to restore some sea views.
The planning brief for the key seafront site, which will go before cabinet on Wednesday, specifies that the maximum height for the main part of the building must not exceed 18 metres above sea level.
This means that aspects of the building will need to be reduced by between 6.4m and 8.5m.
Developers are being advised they can create additional height at the front of the building but are warned they will need to “fully justify” this requirement. They are also being urged to make best use of the roof space and use landscaping to “soften” the general appearance of the building.
Bournemouth council is leaving it to bidders to decide whether they would prefer to demolish the controversial Waterfront building completely, or improve what’s there.
But it is insistent that the remodelled or replacement building must be something “the town can be proud of”.
Following a public consultation exercise in March, Bournemouth council claimed that a mix of various different uses – including a water park, tropical gardens, interactive arts, museum and entertainment and a performing arts space – would prove most popular.
The publication of the draft planning brief sparked a total of 118 responses, with many people calling for a total re-build rather than alterations.
One comment said: “The brief seems to allow for adaptation of the existing building – a massive adaptation would be required to disguise this much hated eyesore.” And another said that complete demolition was necessary because reducing the height would still leave an “ugly, low quality building”.
Comments(38)
Linpoole
says...
9:43am Thu 2 Sep 10
Knock it down, cut your losses and landscape the site. That will help to attract people to Bournemouth. Knocking the top 20ft off isn't going to change anything!
MJD
says...
10:31am Thu 2 Sep 10
jobsworthwatch
says...
10:41am Thu 2 Sep 10
boracay
says...
11:06am Thu 2 Sep 10
Square Old Codger
says...
11:20am Thu 2 Sep 10
jobsworthwatch
says...
11:20am Thu 2 Sep 10
Bob49
says...
11:23am Thu 2 Sep 10
.
However ......
.
" Developers are being advised they can create additional height at the front of the building "
.
Ian Rathbone
says...
11:39am Thu 2 Sep 10
Palm
Ian Rathbone
says...
11:41am Thu 2 Sep 10
Everyone form an orderly queue in front of the IMAX and you can all take turns banging your head against it's wall.
£1 Adults
50p Children
75p Old People (please ensure that you're not too old as we're not insured)
£2 Family Ticket (2 adults and 2 kids, synchronised head banging)
Gordon Cann
says...
11:43am Thu 2 Sep 10
1.Bournemouth Symphony Orchestra now based in Poole, with Winter Gardens turned into carpark
2, Imax Cinema once sanctioned by a previous Bournemouth Council -
did all members who approved this appreciate how tall it would be?
3,Surf reef getting four out of ten for performance following survey by Plymouth University
4. Planned casino , not supported by residents in a survey conducted in 2006.
5 Over £200,000 paid to an employment agency to recruit a manager on a salary of £250,000
How did it all go so badly wrong?
TinyLegacy
says...
11:43am Thu 2 Sep 10
Bad Rabbit
says...
11:46am Thu 2 Sep 10
You said:
"The 'Mock up/down picture still looks like it is off an industrial estate!" of course it's plain, our councillors like things in plain covers...
...adult reading matter, treasury beer tokens etc.
Strict guidelines to reduce the height of the buildings except of cours if you want to increase the height at the front. What are the justifications?
More beer tokens in plain covers???
Gordon Cann
says...
11:49am Thu 2 Sep 10
Ian Rathbone
says...
11:54am Thu 2 Sep 10
Maybe a prize winner can actually knock a councillor through the wall?
collarge
says...
12:02pm Thu 2 Sep 10
Then stop getting your pants in a twist about this plot and think about the top car park on the other side of the road, and build your family entertainment thing there. the little walk will do you good after your happy meal.
Job done lets go have an ice cream and enjoy the view.
But lets do it quickly before the council decide to relocate the building in front of Durdle Door.
Gordon Cann
says...
12:07pm Thu 2 Sep 10
on a salary of £50,000 , not £250,000
marjorie01
says...
1:05pm Thu 2 Sep 10
Just an idea - sell off the bricks etc as a momento of one of the worse buildings ever - im sure some people would buy them - or recycle them in the surf reef.
BmthNewshound
says...
1:28pm Thu 2 Sep 10
Gordon Cann wrote:How did it go so badly wrong ?...... We, the voters of Bournemouth, got it badly wrong by voting in Councillors who are more interested in putting their own personal interests before the best interests of the town.
Put on one side many . but not all of the comments directed at Bournemouth Council, by bloggers on this site members and concentrate on what has happened to the town 1.Bournemouth Symphony Orchestra now based in Poole, with Winter Gardens turned into carpark 2, Imax Cinema once sanctioned by a previous Bournemouth Council - did all members who approved this appreciate how tall it would be? 3,Surf reef getting four out of ten for performance following survey by Plymouth University 4. Planned casino , not supported by residents in a survey conducted in 2006. 5 Over £200,000 paid to an employment agency to recruit a manager on a salary of £250,000 How did it all go so badly wrong?
.
Perhaps we'll learn from our mistakes and take more care before casting our votes next year.
Jean-Pierre Blaireau
says...
1:46pm Thu 2 Sep 10
BTW Can respondents kindly check their spelling, grammar and use of homonyms? I notice far too many errors. You do not do your arguments any good by coming across as ill-educated or, worse, lazy...
Jean-Pierre Blaireau
says...
1:51pm Thu 2 Sep 10
From your article: "As the bid to rid Bournemouth of its hated IMAX building continues..."
Don't let editorialising or (your) opinion creep into a news story; it's poor journalism.
Bob49
says...
2:47pm Thu 2 Sep 10
.
You are kidding. The council is to build on a huge chuck of Kings Park, open grass parkland, without a murmur od protest.
.
Part of the concreting over will include - an INDOOR SURF FACILITY !
.
If that is not taking the p after all the failures at Boscombe seafront I don't know what is.
.
But as a councillor said a few weeks back " don't expect Bournemouth to do anything till afterwards"
jinglebell
says...
3:34pm Thu 2 Sep 10
I really think Bournemouth Council should leave it as it is in this economic climate. As Adrian Fudge has said, it has already cost £5.5 million and there are still more costs to come.
This means currently, it has cost each resident £32 each when there are so many other aspects of the town, which need addressing and could produce a better return.
Perhaps the architectural and art students at Bournemouth's Art University or Bournemouth and Poole College could come up with innovative ideas for decorating/designing the exterior of the building.
The interior could be segmented with removable partitions making space for artists selling unique clothes and goods.
B'mth Council could make the rental space affordable but still make an income and an interesting inside space for tourists and residents.
But what am I talking about? The Councillors will do whatever the Council officers tell them to do.
Wolfstan
says...
4:43pm Thu 2 Sep 10
Option 2: Remove it and the flyover. Replace with large open plaza. Add sculptures, seat and plants. Leave enough space that can be used for "themed" events/stalls, such as the Air Show or the Christmas Market. Would also allow for other ideas to be tried out.
The main thing is smooth it all out, the flyover really restricts it.
Xchurch-man
says...
4:52pm Thu 2 Sep 10
Bournemouth knocks down Imax cinema and returns to the stone age of Tourist Entertainment!!
A competent council would have re-possessed the Sheridan lease years ago and re-sold it to a reputable Cinema company to operate, who by now, would have made millions out of the place and provided a facility for tourists and locals alike.
It is not the cinema or the building which are to blame for this fiasco.
It is the inept and incompetent local councillors who allowed the situation to persist for so long.
jinglebell
says...
5:06pm Thu 2 Sep 10
Afraid not, its quite clear from the "Porngate" fiasco where the power lies - in the hands of Council officers.
What they say goes - so it matters not which political party is in power or how hard various Councillors try, on our behalf, to do what they can - they are mere pawns in a game.
Council officers can't be voted out and are far too shrewd to be sacked.
Whatever the officers say, will be what happens.
All, so called, public consultations, elections or any other kind of pretence at gathering the public's views are merely tick box excercises - there really is no point whatsoever in making comments here either (other than to fill in a bit of idle time)!
Its still a lovely day - forget about the IMAX or Councillors and just enjoy being alive.
Bormuf Boy
says...
6:04pm Thu 2 Sep 10
Failing that, if it had to be the current Imax site you could have a single storey building that went further back and used some of the area currently occupied by the Bath Rd south car park.
As part of this plan Bournemouth really needs to get a park and ride scheme up and running asap.
psal
says...
6:29pm Thu 2 Sep 10
11:06am Thu 2 Sep 10
Having look over the site my self and have run my own Construction Company for the last 10 years in my opinion without thingking on a Commercial aspect - is they should clear the whole area and just simply open it up and the views would be a spetical comming from top of bath hill downwards. Do more for tourisum than another building and cost effective.
Couldn't have put it better myself boracay
KLH
says...
6:55pm Thu 2 Sep 10
What would be on the top then?
KLH
says...
7:01pm Thu 2 Sep 10
Jean-Pierre Blaireau wrote:No auto correction on here mate!!
Keep the IMAX and make it work. It can be done... BTW Can respondents kindly check their spelling, grammar and use of homonyms? I notice far too many errors. You do not do your arguments any good by coming across as ill-educated or, worse, lazy...
Typo errors - that all you are worried about... my goodness!!
Markmag
says...
7:30pm Thu 2 Sep 10
AbuThanett
says...
9:10pm Thu 2 Sep 10
lippy250980
says...
9:29pm Thu 2 Sep 10
lovetheuk
says...
12:24am Fri 3 Sep 10
Mediclogan5
says...
6:35am Fri 3 Sep 10
marcuscarcuss
says...
11:03am Fri 3 Sep 10
Chris12
says...
9:13pm Fri 3 Sep 10
Bournefre
says...
5:44pm Tue 7 Sep 10
Well that's the first step towards getting another Imax or surf reef; same as insisting "we need wet weather activities on the beach".
People don't go to the beach when the weather is bad, and when it's good they don't want wet weather activities on it.
-
The building should be razed and a (largely outdoor) beach cafe-bar set into the cliff with a roof terrace overlooking an enlarged overstrand area.
More News stories
- UPDATED: Crash sparks A338 road closure
- Women beaten up by stranger during a night out in Bournemouth
- Snow warning issued for the South West
- Bag a visit to Buckingham Palace at Waggy Tails charity auction
- New Forest man in Everest base camp trek
- Dorset Police Authority adopt government council tax protection grant
- Artist Stuart Semple returns to Bournemouth and Poole college to open new £1m centre
- Wool's Monkey World needs help keeping animals warm
- Police warning over credit card scam
- Front desk at Ringwood police station to close
SCALE PLAN: A mock-up (or down) of what the Waterfront building could be reduced to
Most popular
Local Information
Enter your postcode, town or place name
Adrian Fudge says...
9:10am Thu 2 Sep 10
What does anyone think a developer is going to offer to alter/demolish the building when for years , in a better economic climate, nobody could come forward with a commercially viable suggestion especially when they now have to include an Arts element which is unlikely to be profitable
Having spent all this Capital and lost the investment income and the Ground Rent income this has got to be the most stupid waste of money just to try and replace part of a view that never existed until the Baths were demolished