Memorandum submitted by the Regional Urban
Designer, English Heritage
English Heritage (EH) is an active member of
the World Squares for All Steering Group and with others has helped
to guide the Parliament Square Feasibility Study. This is a wide
ranging study a key aspect of which has been to consider the visitor
experience and interpretation of this internationally important
historic place. We are also responsible for the operation and
maintenance of the Jewel Tower, a key visitor attraction within
the World Heritage Site.
The following comments are provided with the
Parliament Square Study in mind and in recognition that the area
is of outstanding national and international importance. It is
a World Heritage Site and, contains a large number of highly graded
Listed Buildings of national importance including Westminster
Abbey, the Palace of Westminster, Jewel Tower, Church of St Margaret's,
Abbey Precinct Wall and Victoria Tower Lodge (all grade 1). It
also embraces two Registered Historic Parks and Gardens (Parliament
Square & Victoria Tower Gardens), lies within the Westminster
Abbey and Parliament Square Conservation Area and forms part of
an Area of Special Archaeological Priority (Lundenwic & Thorney
Island).
Does EH have a view on the suitability of either
Abingdon Green or Victoria Tower Gardens as potential sites for
a Parliamentary Visitor Centre?
Victoria Tower Gardens is a grade II Registered
Historic Park and Garden. It is a vitally important riverside
green space, with a tranquil character unimpaired by any large
obtrusive structures. The Gardens were formed from the embankment
of the river and provide an important visual and historic relationship
with Black Rod's side of the House of Lords. There is significant
archaeological evidence within this stretch of the embankment
which will require careful analysis and consideration.
In contrast Abingdon Green has existed as an
open space only since the 1950's when the remaining buildings
were removed, following bomb damage in the Second World War. This
left exposed the southern flank of the Jewel Tower (grade I) and
the precinct wall of Westminster Abbey. The insertion of an underground
car park in the 1960's disturbed much of the archaeology, but
some is thought to be preserved in situ.
Victoria Tower Gardens is located at the southern
point of the World Heritage Site, whilst Abingdon Green is sited
at its heart, between the Houses of Parliament and Westminster
Abbey. Introducing a visitor centre on Abingdon Green, and the
anticipated pedestrian movement it would generate would provide
an opportunity to introduce an improved pedestrian environment
throughout St Margaret's Street/Old Palace Yard/Abingdon Street
and confer significant wider benefits.
We would have major concerns about any proposals
to build on or under Victoria Tower Gardens as this is a major
historic riverside space of immense townscape significance which
warrants careful conservation and enhancement. Abingdon Green
is the most appropriate of the two locations being considered.
We would strongly recommend that a conservation plan is undertaken
as the basis on which to consider sightline/setting/context issues
in relation to the surrounding listed buildings including the
Jewel Tower. An architect well-versed in providing new buildings
in a historic context, who would engage in a creative, iterative
dialogue with English Heritage, Westminster and other interested
stakeholders is essential. It is vital that any new building is
of the highest quality, and that it enhances the character of
this internationally important complex of buildings and spaces.
Does EH have a view on whether there is a need
for a Visitor Centre dedicated to Parliament alone whose function
alone would be to provide information for visitors to explain
how Parliament works and its purpose?
The World Heritage Site was partly designated
because of its complex social, political and environmental history
and the manifestation of this legacy in the architectural quality
of its buildings and spaces. Whilst there is a clear need for
a high quality facility to explain how Parliament works and its
functions and purpose, any new facility should be expanded to
tell the whole story of how the Palace relates to the Abbey and
its development and also to the wider World Heritage Site. There
is a great opportunity here to take a strategic approach to help
visitors understand the entire context. There is the potential
to link the requirements of Parliament, Westminster Abbey, English
Heritage (via the Jewel Tower) and ICOMOS (via the World Heritage
Site) into one visitor centre.
Does EH consider that the scope of the project
proposed by previous Committees is appropriate to either site:
ie an exhibition space explaining the work and role of Parliament;
accommodation for school parties and their reception; a bookshop
or retail facility; a ticket office for tours of Parliament and
a display area for pictures and artefacts from Parliament's collection?
The principle of a new off-site Visitor Centre
should help reduce the need for further disruption to the physical
fabric of Palace of Westminster. However the constraints of the
site should be carefully considered and, as discussed, above,
we believe Abingdon Green provides the most appropriate location.
Within the Palace of Westminster (close to,
but not actually in, Westminster Hall) we believe that it is essential
that there should be an opportunity to provide exhibition space,
relating directly to the buildings history. This could include
pictures and artefacts as well as information on recent archaeological
work undertaken on the site. This would help visitors understand
the fundamental role the WHS had in forming England's history.
This is also a key objective of the draft WHS Management Plan.
Are there any other facilities that the Visitor
Centre should contain?
As part of the World Heritage Site, we strongly
suggest that the Visitor Centre should explore the development
of the area from prehistory and also Parliament's role in helping
to define its current character and appearance. This might include
an introduction to the significance of key buildings such as the
Palace of Westminster, Westminster Abbey, the Jewel Tower, and
the range of statues and monuments found within the area. Any
visitor centre should take account of the site management plan,
as submitted in the World Heritage Site nomination process, and
the interpretation/visitor management proposed.
Should it also contain information or facilities
which are heritage based but non-Parliamentary?
The Visitor Centre provides an ideal opportunity
to provide information on the archaeological and built heritage
of Parliament on the Palace site and other key institutions/buildings
in the area such as Westminster Abbey. It also provides an opportunity
to describe the social history of Parliament and its relation
both to the Church and the Monarchy.
Does EH think that the Parliamentary Visitor Centre
could attract 1.3 million visitors a year (from 650,000 current
visitors)?
It is difficult to comment on the estimated
increase in visitors to 1.3 million without seeing the details
which generated this figure. In comparison, our Kenwood Estate
receives 1.2 million visitors a year, whilst Kenwood House (which
is free) receives 120,000 per year. However Kenwood is very different
from the Palace of Westminster in terms of its location, scale
and form of attraction.
From an operational perspective we always consider
the needs of the visitor and why they seek to visit an attraction.
With this in mind, we would envisage that visitors to the Palace
of Westminster would also wish to experience and understand the
whole of the World Heritage Site and its component parts including
the Abbey and the Jewel Tower, and not just Parliament. This should
be explored by market research which examines on motivations for
a visit awareness, origin, language needs etc. The decline in
domestic tourism suggests the need to achieve broad appeal for
overseas visitors.
If so, what would be the impact of the doubling
of the numbers of visitors on this part of Westminster on existing
facilities in the area such as the Jewel Tower; and the transport
infrastructure around the Palace of Westminster?
Unless carefully anticipated and planned, the
doubling of numbers of visitors to this part of Westminster could
have a significant adverse impact upon the character of the area.
Pedestrian movements and their relationship with traffic movement
through the area needs to be carefully considered and managed.
In addition the majority of visitors currently access the area
via Westminster underground station, by public bus or coach. Managing
movement from the underground, bus stops, and coach drop-offs
would also need to be fully assessed and considered as part of
the overall scheme.
Given the sensitivity of the site and the wider
area, would you please ensure that English Heritage is involved
at every stage as the project progresses.
27 June 2006
| 
