Deceiving the Eye

As part of the planning application for the Memorial Stadium redevelopment, there were a series of computer generated images that were created of the new stadium structure and these were merged with actual photographs of the surrounding area to give people an idea of what the stadium would look like. These images were originally shown in DESIGN & ACCESS STATEMENT CHAPTER 9 which was posted on the council web site on 3 Oct 2006.

These drawings were updated to reflect changes to the planning application made at the end of November 2006 and the document DESIGN AND ACCESS STATEMENT ADDENDUM: VISUAL IMPACT was posted on the council web site on 21 December 2006. These changes involved moving the top two rows of student flats on the south side of the building to other places and adding two storeys to the hotel tower on the north side of the stadium. The rectangular roof trusses were changed to arched trusses to make the building look more like a stadium and two towers were added to the north side “to
increase the presence of the building on Filton Avenue”.

A few days before the planning officers report was due to be published there was a further change to the stadium design. Again updated images were presented on the web site on 15 Jan 2007 under the title DESIGN AND ACCESS STATEMENT - ADDENDUM REV A. These changes involved further reductions to the height of the south side of the building. Although these changes did not change the overall height of the building they did move the higher parts away from the southern edge which overlooks the houses to the south.

These modifications to the building were critical to the planning officer’s recommending the approval of the plans. As late as 8 Jan 2007, the planning officer stated in correspondence that the plans would be recommended for refusal. The final modifications were submitted to the planning department on 9 Jan 2007 and the report published by the planning officer on 10 Jan 2007 recommended the plans for approval. This clearly shows that the modifications on the 9th of January 2007 made the difference to the planning officer’s report.

If one compares the simulated images provided with the original application and the ones presented on the 9th of January there is something quite startling: even parts of the stadium that were not altered by the change in plans have been drawn smaller in the later images which makes the whole stadium appear smaller and less overbearing.

If one measures parts of the building that are unchanged in an original image and the corresponding one from the last submission the whole stadium is drawn or rendered 25% smaller.

In the images below the height of the south side of the stadium was reduced but according to the plans the width remains exactly the same. When you look at the original image on the top, eight of the vertical white lines reaching the top edge appear within the image. However the lower image submitted on the 9th of January shows ten of these lines and part of the student accommodation on the south east corner of the building. The impression in the first image is of a wall bearing down over the street in the foreground. The later image gives the impression of a building that is further away even though the position of the stadium according to the actual plans remained unchanged.



In the second image, the stadium can be seen from the listed gates on Filton Avenue. Note the size of the pop-out windows. In the original image on the top they are march larger than the same sized windows in the lower image submitted on the 9th of January. Again, the overall impression of the stadium is that it is further away from the surrounding buildings.



The third image the stadium in the lower image appears to be further away than the stadium as shown in the original upper image. The building is shrunk so much that the north side of the building has come into view and was completely hidden behind the house on the right in the top image. Comparing other elements of the stadium in the two images shows that again the stadium in the lower image is roughly 25% smaller than the one on the top.



This raises the significant question of whether the planning officer would have made the recommendation to approve if these images had been drawn consistently between the first and last submissions in the application. The members of the Development Control Committee too would have been influenced by these images when making their decision and images such as these would have carried far more weight than the actual plans which are difficult to interpret.

We generated out own model of the stadium so that we could produce similar images to those in the planning application but from other vantage points. One key vantage point was from the back gardens of the houses on Downend Road. Although the images in the application include an image from Downend Road they are from out in the street where the actual effect of the overlooking cannot be seen accurately.

The image below shows the January 9th modifications on the bottom and the previous design on the top. The changes are barely even noticeable on first glance and hardly constitute a make or break change to the proposals. It is also worth noting that the number of student rooms and hotel rooms remained constant despite the changes. The changes therefore represent no sacrifice for the stadium in terms of seating capacity, or revenue from the enabling development (ie the student flats and hotel).




There were other misleading aspects of the images produced in the application. When overshadowing by the stadium became an issue that could not be ignored, the illustration of the whole stadium by a computer model including the surrounding streets was produced. This image shows shadows but curiously the position of the sun is in the north east as the shadows fall to the south west. This never happens in the northern hemisphere but it does have the effect of making the dark and gloomy north and east sides of the stadium look brighter and open. It is also amusing that the property in Trubshaw gardens closest to the stadium entrance is completely surrounded by trees despite the reality of the land in front being completely paved and there being no space to plant trees between it and the stadium. And it is unlikely that trees taller than three storey terraces will be planted between Trubshaw Gardens and the stadium.



Click on any of these images to see them in full size.