Often when large or controversial planning applications are submitted to councils to be considered for planning consent, the applicant supplies one or more ‘Artist’s Impressions’.
These don’t have the same restraints on them that the plans also submitted do.
Plans have a duty to be accurate – to reflect what the property developer is intending to build – so those in the planning department and the elected councillors on the Planning Committee can make their decisions to allow or reject them on the basis of fact.
Artist’s Impressions can mislead
Artist’s Impressions do not have to adhere to what will actually be built.
As an extreme example – an Artist’s Impression could be a drawing of a space rocket and still comply with the planning rules.
They have, in the past, been shown to be very misleading for those relying upon them to give a feeling of how a new building might affect the area.
The Artist’s Impressions used for the Cheetah Marine building on the Eastern Esplanade is an example. Many people who initially approved of the building, based on the Artist’s Impression, told us how shocked they were once it was built and its true size realised.
Mill Bay
The latest Artist’s Impression to grab attention is that of the proposed Mill Bay development on the Ventnor seafront, that includes a five-story tower on the its western end.
No matter if you agree with the development – you have to question the Artist’s Impression.
Discrepancy between draughted plans and Artist’s Impression
The Artist’s Impression for the Mill Bay development is a classic example.
Apart from the fact that it is marked online by IWC as ‘Plans’ rather than Artist’s Impression, there is a serious discrepancy in what is being shown in the draughted plans and the representation given by the artist’s impression.
The plans show the roof line of the five storey block level with the bottom of the window of the top floor of the Metropole. The Artist’s Impression shows it well below that level, giving the impression that the building will be much lower than is clear in the plans.
We’ve concentrated on the five story building on the left/west of the site – other areas might also be misleading, we don’t know.
Looking at the drawings
The two lines on this front-elevation of the provided plans are used on the Artist’s Impressions below. The red line show that the top of the proposed block (coloured brown) is in a line with the floor level of the single, top Metropole flat.
The pink line is an approximation of where the roof line would be if the Artist’s Impression were to be accurate.
Artist’s Impression
Looking at the Artist’s Impression, we see the top of the roof of the proposed building is in line with the lower section of the second-from-top floor of the Metropole. We’ve marked it in pink.
Guestimate of actual roof height
We’ve altered the Artist’s Impression below as a guess of how the height of the roof-line of the proposed block might actually look.
The red line on the drawing is the same red line that you see on the front-elevation on the plans.
English Heritage no fan of Artist’s Impressions
We’re not the only ones not in favour of Artist’s Impressions. English Heritage were far from keen on the Artist’s Impression for the previous application at the Mill Bay.
A dig through the archives finds them saying “Unfortunately the information appears conjecture and Artistic Impressions rather than accurate visual representation from points accessible by the public.”
Independent verification
We’ve done research on this and found out from people involved in planning in other parts of the UK that councils have, in the last 10 years or so, been asking applicants of large or contentious applications to produce ‘independently verified images.’
The realistic images are produced by a third-party imaging studio, at cost to the applicant.
While this isn’t law, it’s viewed by the councils as Best Practice.
They want to avoid residents being misled with drawings done by a mate of the architect / developer, who makes it look less over-bearing / lower / prettier.
Seems reasonable wouldn’t you say?
Over the Island
This Artist’s Impressions problem isn’t just restricted to the Ventnor.
We’ve had contact from people all over the Isle of Wight with similar concerns.
The future
Isn’t it about time that the Isle of Wight council catchup with its many mainland councils and insist that developers of large or controversial planning applications have ‘independently verified images’ produced and submitted with planning applications.
After all, who would be losing out if they did?
Image: © L Hewitt
