The show goes on as new city performance venue gets green light
BUT SOME CIVIC LEADERS CRITICISE DESIGN OF THE BUILDING
DERBY is to have a new performance centre after city planning councillors gave the £45 million project the go-ahead despite some of them criticising the “dull” exterior of the building.
The venue, which is to be managed by world renowned operator ASM Global and owned by the city council, will be a key part of the £200 million regeneration of the Becketwell area.
It will have an audience capacity of 3,500 and it is projected that the venue would host more than 200 cultural and commercial events each year and attract an additional 250,000 visitors to Derby.
Planning control committee councillors were asked to approve the demolition of properties in Becket Street, erection of the venue and approve arrangements for vehicle and pedestrian access, highway infrastructure amendments, landscaping and associated works.
An 80-page report was presented to the committee members and council officer Paul Clarke explained that there were no highways objections to the plan and that the project was “extremely important for the growth of the city”.
David Ling, of Derby Civic Society, addressed councillors and said the society was supportive of the need for a performance venue but felt the planned site in Colyear Street was not right. He said: “It seemed obvious to us that the obvious site for the venue was where Duckworth Square is now, and not facing Colyear Street – a narrow dingy side street. Derby deserves a bold structure not a bland lacklustre building tucked away down a side street.”
Some members of the committee were equally critical about the building’s design, especially the rear elevation facing Becket Street.
The committee chairman, Councillor Shiraz Khan, said: “We need the building looking good. It could be made to look better. Frankly, it looks like the back end of an office building or a warehouse. The front is nice and it looks like two different buildings.”
Councillor Lucy Care suggested some public art could be put on the back of the building to improve it.
Councillor Joanna West said it was not a “great design” and was quite “dull”. She added: “I had hoped for better. I would like to see something better presented to this committee.”
She suggested deferring a decision to allow the developers St James Securities to be consulted further on the design. But a vote was against that happening.
Councillor Steve Hassall suggested the committee should “grasp the nettle” and be proud “we are doing something with this area once and for all”.
He said: “This will bring investment to this area and is the start of something far bigger. The rear elevation could be sorted by using it as a huge projection space that could be changed daily, or even hourly.”
Councillor Ged Potter said he was impressed by the interior, having seen a presentation previously.
Mr Clarke said conditions imposed on the phase two application could include public art, wayfaring and projection.
He said: “Taking into account what members have said about public art and projection and concerns about the rea elevation, we can talk further about including this in the conditions and then get the developer to work up a visual to show how it would work and be brought back to chair and vice-chair.”
Mrs Care said she thought the building’s viability would be improved if it could be seen and found.
A vote supported the application with 10 councillors voting in favour and one abstention.