now - Wandsworth Council

Report
Bilfinger GVA
65 Gresham Street
London
EC2V 7NQ
Draft Lombard Road/York Road
Riverside Focal Point SPD
Representation on behalf of Safestore Ltd and Fraser & Ellis Ltd
August 2015
gva.co.uk
Safestore Ltd and Fraser & Ellis Ltd
SPD Representations
Contents
1.
Introduction .......................................................................................................................3
2.
SPD Representation…..……………………………………………………………………….6
3.
Townscape Analysis…………………………………………………………………………..10
5.
Conclusion………………………………………………………………………………………12
Appendices
Appendix I
Collado Collins Architectural Analysis
Appendix II
Ben van Bruggen Townscape Analysis
August 2015
2
Safestore Ltd and Fraser & Ellis Ltd
1.
1.1
SPD Representations
Introduction
These representations are submitted on behalf of ‘Safestore Ltd’ and ‘Fraser & Ellis
Ltd’. The diagram below indicates the parcel of land (outlined in red) which both
businesses currently own. The site is identified as ‘19 Lombard Road, 80 Gwynne Road
SW11’ within the draft Lombard Road/York Road Riverside Focal Point Supplementary
Planning Document (SPD).
1.2
Safestore is a nationwide self-storage business that owns and occupies part of the site
known as ‘19 Lombard Road’. Fraser & Ellis are independent plumber merchants who
currently own and operate from the other part of the site known as ‘80-100 Gwynne
Road’.
1.3
The
draft
SPD
describes
the
site
as
containing
‘two
storey
industrial/warehouse/storage buildings; adjoining similar buildings and uses, with 9
storey residential flats known as Oyster Wharf on the Thames riverside to the West’. In
addition to this, the Overground railway line runs parallel to the northern boundary.
1.4
The site owners support the principle of producing an SPD to provide additional
guidance that supports the existing and proposed policies within the Local Plan,
helping applicants make successful applications and aid infrastructure delivery for the
next 5-10 years.
August 2015
3
Safestore Ltd and Fraser & Ellis Ltd
1.5
SPD Representations
This consultation response has benefited from the technical input from two specialist
consultants:
1.6
x
Collado Collins Architects (architect); and
x
Ben Van Bruggen (townscape advisor)
These two consultants have provided their specialist advice on the potential of the
site following a review of the locality including what type of development (size, scale
and massing) could be delivered. Fully optimising the site in accordance with
national, regional and local planning policy would ensure development could be
delivered and subsequent contributions made to improve the public realm and
infrastructure improvements to come forward, the redevelopment of this site should
be fully optimised in accordance with national, regional and local planning policy.
These inputs are attached to this report in appendices I & II.
Site Allocation Summary
1.7
The site is allocated for mixed use development which is required to provide
replacement employment floorspace and new residential development. The site is
identified as a proposed ‘Focal Point of Activity’.
1.8
The Design Principles section of the site allocation states that the development of this
site provides an opportunity to substantially improve the character and appearance
of Lombard Road and Gwynne Road. Other design principles for the site include;
x
Coordination with the improvements of the public realm adjacent to the potential
footbridge across the Thames and access to it;
x
Potential for a new public realm on the Lombard Road frontage;
x
Potential to improve pedestrian and cyclist crossing facilities;
x
Define street frontages with active uses at ground floor level on Lombard Road and
Gwynne Road;
x
Enhance the appearance of the railway bridge/viaduct;
x
Retain the mature trees on the south facing embankment;
x
To deliver required public realm and infrastructure improvements tall building
elements may be appropriate;
August 2015
4
Safestore Ltd and Fraser & Ellis Ltd
x
SPD Representations
Building heights on both Lombard Road and Gwynne Road frontages should
generally reflect the height of new buildings on the north side of Gwynne Road (Nos.
6 – 28)
1.9
The Tall Building section also states that the site is located in an area where tall
buildings may be appropriate and that any new building at or above 5 storeys must
satisfy the criteria in DMPD Policy DMS4, which is supported.
Neighbouring Development
1.10
In Jun 2015 planning permission was granted for the erection of a 28 storey residential
tower (2014/6909) to the west of the site at 12-14 Lombard Road. The scheme
delivered archway improvement to works to Cremorne Bridge to the value of
£600,000, Lombard Road/Gwynne Road Junction improvements and resurfacing
works contribution to the sum of £273,646 and constructing the foundations to deliver
the landing site for Proposed Diamond Jubilee Bridge on its site to the value of
£300,000.
1.11
In addition to this a 14 storey building at 56-66 Gwynne Road (2014/5357) located to
the east of the site has recently been approved at the 18th February planning
committee; however negotiations on the S106 agreement are still ongoing. The
Planning Committee report outlines that the scheme proposed to deliver a financial
contribution of £290,125 to improve the Harroway Gardens to the south of the site,
together with providing 33% of all units as intermediate forms of housing.
1.12
Both of these two two schemes are located next to the ‘Safestore’ and ‘Fraser & Ellis’
site and clearly demonstrate that at this proposed focal point location, tall buildings
could be acceptable.
August 2015
5
Safestore Ltd and Fraser & Ellis Ltd
SPD Representations
2.
SPD Representations
2.1
Whilst the principle for redeveloping this particular site for a mix of residential and
employment uses with active ground floor frontages is fully supported, there is a
concern that the some aspects of the Site Allocation as currently worded could be
interpreted in a manner that would not be fully in accordance with the aspirations
and objectives of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), the National
Planning Policy Guidance (NPPG), the London Plan and Wandsworth Local Plan to
proactively drive and support sustainable economic development to deliver new
homes and jobs.
2.2
There is currently a clear growth agenda at a national and regional level seeking to
optimise housing and economic development. The NPPF sets an overarching
emphasis on encouraging new development, ensuring it’s not overburdened by the
planning process, with a presumption in favour of sustainable development at its
heart. Planning should operate to encourage and not act as an impediment to
sustainable growth (Para 19). The Further Alterations to the London Plan (FALP)
adopted on 10th March 2015, states that over the next 10 years the Wandsworth
Borough Council (WBC) should provide a minimum of 18,123 residential units (1,812
units annually).
2.3
In addition to this in February 2015 the Greater London Authority (GLA) announced
London’s first nine housing zones which will bring enormous regeneration and
transform key areas of the capital, with £260m of new investment to deliver 28,000
much need new homes. The 19 Lombard Road & 80 Gwynne Road site is located
within the Clapham Junction to Battersea Riverside Housing Zone, which seeks to
deliver 5,000 new homes and 1,300 new jobs by 2025. These nine housing zone
designations intend to trigger regeneration and turbo boost the transformation of the
capital’s brownfield sites.
Design Policies
2.4
The FALP states that architecture can contribute to the creation of a cohesive built
environment that enhances the experience of living, working or visiting the city (Policy
7.6). This can be achieved by ensuring new buildings reference, but not necessarily
replicate, the scale, mass and detail of the predominant built form surrounding them,
August 2015
6
Safestore Ltd and Fraser & Ellis Ltd
SPD Representations
and by using the highest quality materials. All buildings should help create streets and
places that are human in scale so that their proportion and composition enhances,
activates and appropriately encloses the public realm, as well as allowing them to be
easily understood, enjoyed and kept secured. The building form and layout should
have regard to the density and character of the surrounding development and
should not prejudice the development opportunities of surrounding sites. This policy
demonstrates that a well-designed tall buildings, manufactured from high quality
materials, which are predominately taller than the surrounding buildings can be
considered acceptable.
2.5
The London Plan sets a density matrix based on the character of the area and public
transport accessibility of a site, and encourages more intense development to locate
in town centres and other areas well served by public transport. While the
characterisation of areas in the matrix is relatively coarse grained, it nonetheless sets
out an approach to ensure that development proposals achieve the highest possible
intensity of use compatible with local context.
2.6
Similarly, Para. 4.134 of WBC Core Strategy (CS) states that the scale and density of
development must be sustainable, to ensure the most effective use is made of land
and buildings. Policy IS3 of the WBC CS states that designs and layouts which make
efficient and effective use of land, including innovative approaches that help deliver
high quality outcomes will be promoted. Throughout the borough the scale and
density of development should make the most effective use of land and buildings,
paying regard to the site's accessibility and existing and proposed infrastructure and
the London Plan density matrix, without harming the character of the surrounding
area.
Proposed Revisions
2.7
One of the Design Principles states that:
2.8
‘… a tall building may be appropriate on this site, however, building heights on both
on both Lombard Road and Gwynne Road frontages should generally reflect the
height of new buildings on the north side of Gwynne Road (Nos. 6 – 28). The recent
planning permission for a 14 storey building at 56-66 Gwynne Road must be
considered an exception , where the height of the building approved was in
August 2015
7
Safestore Ltd and Fraser & Ellis Ltd
SPD Representations
recognition of its strategic location opposite the open space and the benefits that it
would bring to the skyline and townscape’.
2.9
The height of new buildings on the north side of Gwynne Road (Nos. 6 – 28) are
predominately 6 storeys which means that the draft wording within the SPD is strongly
implying that any new buildings should generally be no higher than 6 storeys. As a
result, it is considered that this design principle is placing a significant design constraint
on the development site in the absence of any informed townscape rationale,
analysis or commentary.
2.10
There is no reason why the development on the adjacent site should be viewed as
‘an exception’ or why it is a ‘strategic location’. The site at Lombard Road and
Gwynne Road is similarly positioned opposite the open space and occupies a
prominent corner position where the two roads meet. There is also every opportunity
that a new development on this site could bring similar benefits to the skyline and
townscape.
2.11
Any proposed building on this site greater than 5 storeys in height would be required
to provide a tall building analysis and townscape assessment to support the
application in any event. It’s considered that as the character of the proposed focal
point area is likely to substantially change in future years resulting in a transformed
townscape, therefore restricting the height of any development on the site before it
has been appropriately tested is not conducive to optimising its development
potential.
2.12
It should be noted that a building at predominately 6 storeys in height will not
deliverable as it would severely disrupt and displace two successful businesses to
provide a small number of residential units. This would conflict with another of the
design principles objective to fund the improvement of the public realm and local
infrastructure projects. Due to the emerging character of the immediate and
surrounding area, the site's public transport accessibility and capacity, and existing
and proposed infrastructure, restricting the height to predominately 6 storeys is
considered inappropriate and would not be in the interests of optimising
development on sustainable sites in central urban areas.
2.13
In summary we suggest that to ensure the site is optimised in accordance with
national, regional and local plan policies, the proposed SPD should not restrict the
August 2015
8
Safestore Ltd and Fraser & Ellis Ltd
SPD Representations
height of the development which could be brought forward on the site. We conclude
and recommend is that the final two sentences of the Design Principle Section
‘Lombard Road, 80 Gwynne Road’ should be deleted.
August 2015
9
Safestore Ltd and Fraser & Ellis Ltd
SPD Representations
3.
Townscape Analysis
3.1
To support our representations an initial townscape assessment has been undertaken
by Ben Van Bruggen to assess the site to evaluate whether tall buildings could be
appropriate (Appendix II). This assessment is supported by the Architectural Analysis
proposed by Collado Collins Architects (Appendix I).
3.2
The site lies adjacent to the Grade II* Listed Cremorne Railway Bridge. This is a
significant structure running through the area. To the south of the Bridge and the
viaduct new development has occurred and more is planned or consented. The
Battersea Square Conservation Area is to the north, beyond the Bridge and the Fred
Wells Garden open space. To the north east is another conservation area, the Three
Sisters. While these are considerations for the design of the scheme neither would be
significantly harmed by redevelopment of this site. In recognising that further detailed
assessment in line with Policy DMS4b, it is clear that tall buildings could be
accommodated on this site without causing significant harm to any designated
heritage assets.
3.3
The site occupies a key position in the proposed Focal Area. 19 Lombard Road is at
the junction of two significant routes, Lombard Road and Gwynne Road that has
become more important as the railway was developed, as the site also sits at one of
the few crossing points under the railway viaduct.
3.4
In our view there is nothing about the character of this area or its surroundings that
would preclude the redevelopment of the site for a building that significantly
exceeded 5 storeys. Indeed there is a case that the area is already characterised by
tall and large scale buildings, is distinctive from the surrounding character areas but is
not dissimilar to that across the river. A site that sits at a key point in the townscape
should have no objection to a new building of high quality that raises the general
quality of the area, whether this is through a tall building or not.
3.5
The site is an important junction where there is a particular change in character from
north to south of the railway line. This sense of arrival or transition from one area to
another is likely to be enhanced by the completion of the 28 storey 12-14 Lombard
Road. This would be reinforced by a tall element opposite, on this site. It could
August 2015
10
Safestore Ltd and Fraser & Ellis Ltd
SPD Representations
enhance the townscape by marking a major point of entry, a threshold, and one of
only two in this area from the north to the south.
3.6
Much of the justification for 55-56 Gwynne Road is that there are several tall buildings
existing and that the building is on axis with the open space of Harroway Gardens.
Whilst this may be accurate for Harroway Gardens, the south of the Gardens is
loomed over by Caius House, a seven storey block with a blank and inactive ground
floor facing the gardens. In terms of wayfinding and legibility the wider townscape
neither of these schemes adds much. Indeed the existing 28 storey Totteridge House is
much more likely to provide the marker and dominate skyline in this area rather than
56-66 Gwynne Road. Therefore, it is the contention that in terms of townscape and
skyline a tall building(s) on 19 Lombard Road and 80 Gwynne Road could be justified
and therefore reference to 56-66 Gwynne Road being ‘the exception’ should be
deleted from the SPD draft. We note that no such qualification is applied to 37
Lombard Road for example, despite being a very similar site sharing it’s frontage with
both Lombard Road and Gwynne Road.
3.7
In an area such as this there can be no objection to promoting tall buildings of high
architecture quality and in our view 19 Lombard Road & 80 Gwynne Road should be
considered more suitable for a building of greater height than currently suggested in
the SPD. Policy IS3 and DMS4 set out strict requirement for demonstrating the visual
and townscape impacts of any tall building and we believe that this is a better test
than restricting the height through the SPD.
3.8
The analysis presented here suggests that a development significantly higher than five
storeys could be appropriate and could bring significant townscape benefits, subject
to a high quality design and meeting the relevant tests in Policy DMS4b and IS3.
3.9
It is our assessment that the character of the riverside area does not terminate at
Lombard Road as suggested by the Thames Policy Area but that the character of the
northern end of Lombard Road is defined by the River, the railway bridge and
embankment and the open spaces rather than Lombard Road as suggested in the
draft SPD.
August 2015
11
Safestore Ltd and Fraser & Ellis Ltd
SPD Representations
4.
Conclusion
4.1
It’s considered that the design principles outlined in the draft SPD are too restrictive
limiting the height of any new buildings to generally reflect the height of buildings to
the north side of Gwynne Road (6 storeys). This is not considered to be in accordance
with the NPPF and FALP, which has a clear growth agenda at a national and regional
level seeking to optimise housing and economic development. Any reference to
building heights should be removed from the ’19 Lombard Road, 80 Gwynne Road’
site allocation to ensure when the site is brought forward for redevelopment to
optimises the site potential.
4.2
Any proposed building on this site greater than 5 storeys in height would need to
provide a tall building analysis to support the application; which would incorporate a
townscape assessment. As the proposed focal point area is at a junction of change
the surrounding context of the site could change considerably where a building
predominately 6 storeys in height would appear inappropriate in scale.
4.3
The townscape analysis undertaken demonstrates that in townscape terms the site
could provide tall buildings on the site, as the site is located an important junction
where there is a particular change in character from north to south of the railway line.
This sense of arrival or transition from one area to another is likely to be enhanced by
the completion of the 28 storey 12-14 Lombard Road. This would be reinforced by a
tall element opposite, on this site. It could enhance the townscape by marking a
major point of entry, a threshold, and one of only two in this area from the north to the
south.
4.4
In an area such as this there can be no objection to promoting tall buildings of high
architecture quality and in our view 19 Lombard Road & 80 Gwynne Road should be
considered as suitable for a building of greater height as currently suggested in the
SPD. Policy IS3 and DMS4 set out strict requirement for demonstrating the visual and
townscape impacts of any tall building and we believe that this is a better test than
restricting the height through the SPD.
4.5
A scheme that is predominately 6 storeys in height is viewed by our clients as an
unviable proposition, in addition to the disruption to their businesses and the value
any redevelopment is likely to generate. Should the SPD be overly restrictive, there is a
August 2015
12
Safestore Ltd and Fraser & Ellis Ltd
SPD Representations
high risk that the owners will not bring this site forward for redevelopment.
Consequently WBC’s objectives to improve the public realm and assist in the funding
of infrastructure would not be provided, nor would enhancements to the existing
townscape be delivered. In addition to this the much needed residential
accommodation outlined in both the FALP and Housing Zone designation would also
not be delivered.
4.6
We recommend that the final two sentence are removed from the Design Principles
section of the ’19 Lombard Road, 80 Gwynne Road’ allocation within the draft SPD, to
ensure the height of any proposed development which could come forward on this
site is not restricted by the proposed SPD. We propose that the Design Principles
Section is amended to;
Design principles: Development of this site provides an opportunity to substantially improve
the character and the appearance of this part of Lombard Road and Gwynne Road.
Development of the adjoining site at 12-15 Lombard Road should enhance access to the
riverside and provide new public realm at the point where the new footbridge will cross the
Thames and this site should be developed to coordinate with and extend the improvements.
There is potential for new public realm on the Lombard Road frontage, especially at the
junction with Gwynne Road and potential to improve pedestrian and cyclist crossing facilities
in this location. Buildings fronting Lombard Road and Gwynne Road should define the street
frontages with active uses at ground floor level. Enhancement of the appearance of the
brick railway bridge / viaduct will be sought and mature trees on the south facing railway
embankment adjoining the site should be retained. In order to deliver the public realm and
infrastructure improvements taller buildings may be appropriate on this site.
August 2015
13
Report
$SSHQGLFHV
Report
$SSHQGL[,
Collado
Collins
Architectural Analysis
Lombard Road
19 Lombard Road and 80 Gwynne Road
Architectural Analysis
ColladoCollinsArchitects
07 08 2015
Lombard Road
1
2
Lombard Road
Contents
1.0
Assessment
1.1
1.1.1
1.1.2
1.1.3
ϭ͘ϭ͘ϰ
1.1.5
1.1.6
ϭ͘ϭ͘ϳ
ϭ͘ϭ͘ϴ
Physical Context
Site Analysis
Aerial Views
Historical Context
džŝƐƟŶŐ^ŝƚĞƵŝůĚŝŶŐƐ
Local Context
Local Context (Views)
dŽƉŽŐƌĂƉŚLJ
hƌďĂŶŐƌĂŝŶ
17-19 Foley Street
London W1W 6DW
t:
e:
w:
020 7580 3490
[email protected]
www.colladocollins.com
ColladoCollinsArchitects
Lombard Road
3
1.
Assessment
1.1
Physical Context
1.1.1 Site Analysis
dŚĞƐŝƚĞŝƐůŽĐĂƚĞĚŝŶĂƩĞƌƐĞĂ͕ǁŝƚŚŝŶƚŚĞ
>ŽŶĚŽŶŽƌŽƵŐŚŽĨtĂŶĚƐǁŽƌƚŚ͘/ƚƐŝƚƐ
ƐŽƵƚŚŽĨƚŚĞdŚĂŵĞƐĂĐƌŽƐƐĨƌŽŵ/ŵƉĞƌŝĂů
tŚĂƌĨĂŶĚŚĞůƐĞĂ,ĂƌďŽƵƌ͘dŚĞĂƌĞĂ
ŝƐĐŚĂƌĂĐƚĞƌŝƐĞĚďLJĂŵŝdžŽĨůĂƌŐĞƐĐĂůĞ
ŝŶĚƵƐƚƌŝĂů;ƐŚĞĚƚLJƉĞͿďƵŝůĚŝŶŐƐĂŶĚĂǁŝĚĞ
ǀĂƌŝĞƚLJŽĨƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƟĂůďƵŝůĚŝŶŐƐƚŚĂƚƌĞĂĐŚƵƉ
to 24 storeys.
dŚĞĐƵƌƌĞŶƚƐŝƚĞĐŽŵƉƌŝƐĞƐĂ^ĂĨĞƐƚŽƌĞ
ĨĂĐŝůŝƚLJĂŶĚ&ƌĂƐĞƌΘůůŝƐ;ƉůƵŵďĞƌ͛Ɛ
ŵĞƌĐŚĂŶƚͿĂůŽŶŐǁŝƚŚƉĂƌŬŝŶŐĨĂĐŝůŝƟĞƐ
ĂůŽŶŐ>ŽŵďĂƌĚZŽĂĚ͘dŽƚŚĞŶŽƌƚŚƚŚĞ
ƐŝƚĞďŽƌĚĞƌƐŽŶƚŽƚŚĞƚƌĂŝŶůŝŶĞůĞĂĚŝŶŐƚŽ
ůĂƉŚĂŵ:ƵŶĐƟŽŶ͘
>Žŵď
dŚĞƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐĂƌĞĂƐŽĨ'ǁLJŶŶĞZŽĂĚ
ƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĨŽƌŽŶƐƚƌĞĞƚƉĂƌŬŝŶŐ͘
4
Lombard Road
1.
Assessment
&ƌĞĚtĞůůƐ'ĂƌĚĞŶƐ
,ŽůŵĂŶZŽĂĚ
'ĞŽƌŐĞWŽ
ƩĞƌtĂLJ
,ĂƌƌŽǁĂLJLJ
'ĂƌĚĞŶƐ
>Žŵď
ĂƌĚZ
ŽĂĚ
'ǁLJŶŶ
ĞZŽĂĚ
Lombard Road
5
1.
Assessment
1.1
Physical Context
1.1.2 Aerial Views
dŚŝƐĂĞƌŝĂůǀŝĞǁƐŚŽǁƐƚŚĞƐŝƚĞ;ŽƵƚůŝŶĞĚŝŶ
ƌĞĚͿĨƌŽŵƚŚĞǁĞƐƚ͘
Site
ŝƌĚ͛ƐĞLJĞǀŝĞǁůŽŽŬŝŶŐĞĂƐƚ
6
Lombard Road
1.
Assessment
1.1
Physical Context
1.1.3 Historical Context
dŚĞƐŝƚĞǁĂƐĚĞǀĞůŽƉĞĚŝŶƚŚĞůĂƚĞ
ŶŝŶĞƚĞĞŶƚŚĐĞŶƚƵƌLJ͘&ƌŽŵϭϴϵϱƵŶƟůƚŚĞ
ϭϵϱϬ͛Ɛ͕ƚŚĞƐŝƚĞǁĂƐŽĐĐƵƉŝĞĚďLJĂůŝŶĞŽĨ
ƚĞƌƌĂĐĞĚŚŽƵƐĞƐ͘
dŚĞĐƵƌƌĞŶƚ'ǁLJŶŶĞZŽĂĚĚŝĚŶŽƚĞdžŝƐƚ
ƉƌŝŽƌƚŽϭϴϵϱ͘hƉƚŽƚŚĂƚƉŽŝŶƚƚŚĞƐŝƚĞ
ǁĂƐƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚĞĚďLJĂŶŽƉĞŶŐƌĞĞŶƐƉĂĐĞ
ƚŽǁĂƌĚƐƚŚĞƐŽƵƚŚĂŶĚĞĂƐƚ͘
/ƚŝƐĐůĞĂƌĨƌŽŵƚŚĞϭϴϵϯŵĂƉƚŚĂƚŽŶĐĞƚŚĞ
ƌĂŝůǁĂLJǁĂƐŝŶƚƌŽĚƵĐĞĚ͕ƚŚŝƐĚĞĮŶĞĚƚŚĞ
ŶŽƌƚŚĞƌŶďŽƵŶĚĂƌLJŽĨƚŚĞƐŝƚĞ͘
^ĞǀĞƌĂůƐŵĂůůĞƌůĂŶĞƐƐƵĐŚĂƐ'ǁLJŶŶĞ
ZŽĂĚĂŶĚ,ĂƌƌŽǁĂLJZŽĂĚǁĞƌĞďƵŝůƚŝŶ
ĐŽŶŶĞĐƟŽŶǁŝƚŚƚŚĞŝŶƚƌŽĚƵĐƟŽŶŽĨƚŚĞ
railway.
&ƌŽŵƚŚĞĞĂƌůLJϭϳƚŚĐĞŶƚƵƌLJƚŽƚŚĞĞĂƌůLJ
ϭϵƚŚĂƩĞƌƐĞĂǁĂƐďĞƐƚŬŶŽǁŶĨŽƌŵĂƌŬĞƚ
ŐĂƌĚĞŶŝŶŐƐƵƉƉůLJŝŶŐǀĞŐĞƚĂďůĞƐ͕ĨƌƵŝƚĂŶĚ
ŇŽǁĞƌƐƚŽƚŚĞ>ŽŶĚŽŶŵĂƌŬĞƚƐ͘dŚĞǀŝůůĂŐĞ
ŶƵĐůĞƵƐŝƚƐĞůĨǁĂƐďLJƚŚĞƌŝǀĞƌ͕ĐůŽƐĞƚŽƚŚĞ
ƉĂƌŝƐŚĐŚƵƌĐŚ͕ĂŶĚƚŚĞƌĞǁĂƐĂƐĐĂƩĞƌŝŶŐŽĨ
ŝŶĚƵƐƚƌLJĂůŽŶŐƚŚĞƌŝǀĞƌƐŝĚĞ͘
dŚĞĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƟŽŶŽĨƌĂŝůǁĂLJƐŝŶƚŚĞsŝĐƚŽƌŝĂŶ
ƉĞƌŝŽĚŚĂƐƚĞŶĞĚƚŚĞƐƵďͲƵƌďĂŶŝƐĂƟŽŶŽĨ
>ŽŶĚŽŶĂŶĚƚŚĞƉŽƉƵůĂƟŽŶŽĨĂƩĞƌƐĞĂ
ŝŶĐƌĞĂƐĞĚĨƌŽŵϲ͕ϲϭϳŝŶϭϴϰϭƚŽϭϲϴ͕ϵϬϳŝŶ
ϭϵϬϭ͕ďLJǁŚŝĐŚƟŵĞŝƚǁĂƐĂDĞƚƌŽƉŽůŝƚĂŶ
ŽƌŽƵŐŚ͘
DƵĐŚŽƉĞŶůĂŶĚǁĂƐƚĂŬĞŶƵƉďLJĨŽƵƌ
ƌĂŝůǁĂLJĐŽŵƉĂŶŝĞƐĂŶĚƚŚĞƌŝǀĞƌƐŝĚĞ
ǁŝŶĚŵŝůůƐĂŶĚǁŚĂƌǀĞƐǁĞƌĞƌĞƉůĂĐĞĚďLJ
ŶĞǁŝŶĚƵƐƚƌŝĞƐ͕ƐƵĐŚĂƐWƌŝĐĞƐĂŶĚůĞƐ͕
DŽƌŐĂŶ͛ƐƌƵĐŝďůĞǁŽƌŬƐ͕'ĂƌƚŽŶ͛Ɛ'ůƵĐŽƐĞ
ĨĂĐƚŽƌLJ͕ŇŽƵƌŵŝůůƐ͕ďƌĞǁĞƌŝĞƐĂŶĚƚŚĞEŝŶĞ
ůŵƐ'ĂƐtŽƌŬƐ͘dŚĞĚĞĐŝƐŝŽŶƚŽĐƌĞĂƚĞ
ĂƩĞƌƐĞĂWĂƌŬŚĂƉƉĞŶĞĚũƵƐƚŝŶƟŵĞƚŽ
ƐĂǀĞƚŚĞǁŚŽůĞŽĨdŚĂŵĞƐͲƐŝĚĞĂƩĞƌƐĞĂ
ĨƌŽŵďĞŝŶŐĞŶŐƵůĨĞĚďLJŝŶĚƵƐƚƌŝĂůďƵŝůĚŝŶŐ͘
ŌĞƌϭϴϳϬƐƚƌĞĞƚƐŽĨďĞƩĞƌƋƵĂůŝƚLJ
ƐƵďƵƌďĂŶŚŽƵƐĞƐǁĞƌĞďƵŝůƚĂůŽŶŐ
ĂƩĞƌƐĞĂZŝƐĞ͕ĂŶĚďĞLJŽŶĚ͕ǁŝƚŚŝŶ
ƌĞĂĐŚŽĨƚŚĞĐŽŵŵŽŶƐ͘,ŽǁĞǀĞƌ͕ƐŽĐŝĂů
ĐŽŶĚŝƟŽŶƐŝŶƚŚĞŶŽƌƚŚŽĨƚŚĞƉĂƌŝƐŚǁĞƌĞ
ƐĞǀĞƌĞůLJŝŵƉŽǀĞƌŝƐŚĞĚ͘&ŽƌĮŌLJLJĞĂƌƐ
ĂƩĞƌƐĞĂƐƚĂLJĞĚƌĞůĂƟǀĞůLJƵŶĐŚĂŶŐĞĚ͕
ƵŶƟůƚŚĞďŽŵďŝŶŐŽĨƚŚĞ^ĞĐŽŶĚtŽƌůĚ
tĂƌĚĞƐƚƌŽLJĞĚŽƌĚĂŵĂŐĞĚŵƵĐŚŽĨƚŚĞ
ƉƌŽƉĞƌƚLJŶĞĂƌƚŚĞƌŝǀĞƌ͘ŌĞƌƚŚĞtĂƌĂ
ůĂƌŐĞƉĂƌƚŽĨƚŚŝƐĂƌĞĂǁĂƐƐǁĞƉƚĂǁĂLJŝŶĂ
ǀĂƐƚŵƵŶŝĐŝƉĂůƌĞͲďƵŝůĚŝŶŐƉůĂŶ͘ƚƚŚĞƐĂŵĞ
ƟŵĞƚŚĞƌŝǀĞƌƐŝĚĞŝŶĚƵƐƚƌŝĞƐǁĞƐƚŽĨůďĞƌƚ
ƌŝĚŐĞďĞŐĂŶƚŽĐůŽƐĞĚŽǁŶŽƌƌĞůŽĐĂƚĞ͕
ǁŝƚŚŚŽƵƐŝŶŐĮůůŝŶŐƚŚĞǀĂĐƵƵŵͲŵĂŝŶůLJ
ŚŝŐŚƌŝƐĞĂƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚƐƐƵĐŚ
ĂƐƚŚĞdƌĂĚĞdŽǁĞƌŽŶWůĂŶƚĂƟŽŶǁŚĂƌĨ
;ƉŝĐƚƵƌĞĚͿĚĞƐŝŐŶĞĚƚŽĂƉƉĞĂůƚŽLJŽƵŶŐ
ƉƌŽĨĞƐƐŝŽŶĂůƐ͘
1746
ϭϴϵϯ
ϭϴϵϱ
ϭϵϭϱ
ϭϵϰϵ
Lombard Road
7
1.
Assessment
1.1.4 Existing Site Buildings
dŚĞĞdžŝƐƟŶŐ^ĂĨĞƐƚŽƌĞďƵŝůĚŝŶŐǁĂƐ
ĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞĚŝŶϮϬϬϮĂŶĚŝƐŚŝŐŚůLJǀŝƐŝďůĞ
ĂůŽŶŐ>ŽŵďĂƌĚZŽĂĚ;>ŽŶĚŽŶŽƌŽƵŐŚ
ŽĨtĂŶĚƐǁŽƌƚŚͿǁŝƚŚĨƵƌƚŚĞƌĨƌŽŶƚĂŐĞƐ
ĨĂĐŝŶŐ'ǁLJŶŶĞZŽĂĚ͘dŚĞŵĂŝŶĞŶƚƌĂŶĐĞ
ƚŽ^ĂĨĞƐƚŽƌĞŝƐƐůŝŐŚƚůLJƉƵůůĞĚďĂĐŬĨƌŽŵ
>ŽŵďĂƌĚZŽĂĚĂůůŽǁŝŶŐĨŽƌĂŶƵŵďĞƌŽĨ
ĐĂƌƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƐƉĂĐĞƐ͘dŚĞ^ĂĨĞƐƚŽƌĞďƵŝůĚŝŶŐ
ĂůŽŶŐ>ŽŵďĂƌĚZŽĂĚŝƐƚǁŽƐƚŽƌĞLJƐŚŝŐŚ
ǁŚŝůƐƚŝƚŝŶĐƌĞĂƐĞƐŝŶŚĞŝŐŚƚĂůŽŶŐ'ǁLJŶŶĞ
ZŽĂĚ;ĞƋƵŝǀĂůĞŶƚŽĨϰƐƚŽƌĞLJƐͿ͘dŚĞƐĞĐŽŶĚ
ŽĐĐƵƉŝĞƌŽĨƚŚĞƐŝƚĞŝƐ&ƌĂƐĞƌΘůůŝƐ
;ƉůƵŵďĞƌ͛ƐŵĞƌĐŚĂŶƚͿ͘dŚĞŝƌďƵŝůĚŝŶŐŝƐ
ƚǁŽƐƚŽƌĞLJƐŚŝŐŚǁŝƚŚƚŚĞŝƌŵĂŝŶĂĐĐĞƐƐŽī
'ǁLJŶŶĞZŽĂĚ͘
dŽƚŚĞƌĞĂƌŽĨƚŚĞƐŝƚĞĂĚũĂĐĞŶƚƚŽƚŚĞ
,ĂƌƌŽǁĂLJ'ĂƌĚĞŶƐƚŚĞƌĞŝƐĂůĂƌŐĞŽƉĞŶ
ƐĞƌǀŝĐĞLJĂƌĚ͕ǁŚŝĐŚƚŽŐĞƚŚĞƌǁŝƚŚƚŚĞ
ďƵŝůĚŝŶŐƉƌĞƐĞŶƚƐĂůĂƌŐĞůLJďůĂŶŬĨƌŽŶƚĂŐĞƚŽ
'ǁLJŶŶĞZŽĂĚ͘^ŝŵŝůĂƌůLJ͕ƚŚĞ>ŽŵďĂƌĚZŽĂĚ
ĨƌŽŶƚĂŐĞƉƌĞƐĞŶƚƐůŝƩůĞĂĐƟǀŝƚLJƚŽƚŚĞƐƚƌĞĞƚ͘
dŚĞĐŽŶƚĞdžƚĂůŽŶŐƚŚĞŵĂŝŶƌŽĂĚŝƐŵĂŝŶůLJ
ƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƟĂůĞŶƚƌĂŶĐĞƐŽƌŝŶĚƵƐƚƌŝĂůƐŚĞĚͬ
ƐĞƌǀŝĐĞLJĂƌĚƐ͘
>ĂŶĚƵƐĞƐŝŶƚŚĞŝŵŵĞĚŝĂƚĞǀŝĐŝŶŝƚLJ
ĐŽŵƉƌŝƐĞĂŵŝdžŽĨŝŶĚƵƐƚƌŝĂůĂŶĚƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƟĂů͘
8
Lombard Road
1.
Assessment
1.1.5 Local Context
ĂƩĞƌƐĞĂŝƐĂůĂƌŐĞůLJƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƟĂůŝŶŶĞƌͲĐŝƚLJ
ĚŝƐƚƌŝĐƚŽĨƐŽƵƚŚ>ŽŶĚŽŶŝŶƚŚĞ>ŽŶĚŽŶ
ŽƌŽƵŐŚŽĨtĂŶĚƐǁŽƌƚŚ͘/ƚŝƐŽŶƚŚĞƐŽƵƚŚ
ƐŝĚĞŽĨƚŚĞZŝǀĞƌdŚĂŵĞƐ͕Ϯ͘ϵŵŝůĞƐ;ϰ͘ϴŬŵͿ
ƐŽƵƚŚͲǁĞƐƚŽĨŚĂƌŝŶŐƌŽƐƐ͘
Fred Wells Gardens
&ƌĞĚtĞůůƐ'ĂƌĚĞŶƐŝƐĂŵĞĚŝƵŵͲƐŝnjĞĚ
ƉƵďůŝĐƉĂƌŬĐůŽƐĞƚŽƚŚĞZŝǀĞƌdŚĂŵĞƐ͘dŚĞ
ƉĂƌŬŚĂƐĂŐŽŽĚƐĞůĞĐƟŽŶŽĨĨĂĐŝůŝƟĞƐƚŚĂƚ
ŝŶĐůƵĚĞĂŶŽƉĞŶĂĐĐĞƐƐƚĞŶŶŝƐĐŽƵƌƚƚŚĂƚ
ŝƐĨƌĞĞƚŽƚŚĞƉƵďůŝĐĂŶĚĂůĂƌŐĞĐŚŝůĚƌĞŶ͛Ɛ
ƉůĂLJŐƌŽƵŶĚ͘
ďĞƩĞƌĚĂŶĐĞƐƚƵĚŝŽƐĂŶĚƉĞƌĨŽƌŵĂŶĐĞ
ƐƉĂĐĞ͕ǁŝƚŚŵŽĚĞƌŶŝƐĞĚĐŚĂŶŐŝŶŐƌŽŽŵƐ
ĂŶĚŽĸĐĞƐƉĂĐĞ͕ĂůŝďƌĂƌLJĨŽƌZ͛ƐĂƌĐŚŝǀĞƐ
ĂŶĚƚǁŽĐĂĨĠƐ͘
St Mary’s Church
dŚĞƌĞŚĂƐďĞĞŶĂĐĞŶƚƌĞŽĨŚƌŝƐƟĂŶ
ǁŽƌƐŚŝƉŽŶƚŚŝƐƐŝƚĞĨƌŽŵĂƚůĞĂƐƚƚŚĞϭϯƚŚ
ĐĞŶƚƵƌLJ͘dŚĞƉĂƌƚƐŽĨƚŚĞŵĞĚŝĞǀĂůĐŚƵƌĐŚ
ǁŚŝĐŚƐƵƌǀŝǀĞƚŽĚĂLJĂƌĞƚŚĞƚŽǁĞƌ͕ƐŽŵĞŽĨ
ƚŚĞŶĂǀĞĂƌĐĂĚŝŶŐ;ŵŝĚͲϭϱƚŚĐĞŶƚƵƌLJͿĂŶĚ
ƚŚĞŝƐŚŽƉtĞƐƚŚĂƉĞů͕ďƵŝůƚŝŶƚŚĞĞĂƌůLJ
ϭϲƚŚĐĞŶƚƵƌLJ͘dŚĞĐŚƵƌĐŚŝƐ'ƌĂĚĞ//ΎůŝƐƚĞĚ͘
Harroway Gardens
^ŝƚƵĂƚĞĚŝŶĂĐŽƌŶĞƌŽĨĂƩĞƌƐĞĂ
ĨĂƐƚĐŚĂŶŐŝŶŐǁŝƚŚŶĞǁƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƟĂů
ĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚƐ͕ƚŚŝƐƌĞůĂƟǀĞůLJƐŵĂůůƉĂƌŬŝƐ
ĂŶŝŵƉŽƌƚĂŶƚĨŽĐĂůƉŽŝŶƚŽĨŐƌĞĞŶĞƌLJĨŽƌĂ
ŐƌŽǁŝŶŐƉŽƉƵůĂƟŽŶ͘dŚĞ'ĂƌĚĞŶƐĂƌĞŝŶĂ
ŐƌĞĞŶǁĞůůƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚĞĚďLJŵĞĚŝƵŵĂŶĚŚŝŐŚ
ƌŝƐĞďůŽĐŬƐŽǀĞƌůŽŽŬŝŶŐƚŚĞŵĂƚƵƌĞƚƌĞĞ
ĐŽǀĞƌ͘ƐŚŽƌƚĚŝƐƚĂŶĐĞĨƌŽŵƚŚĞŚĞůŝƉŽƌƚ
ĂŶĚƚŚĞƌŝǀĞƌƐŝĚĞǁĂůŬ͘
London Heliport
ĂƩĞƌƐĞĂ,ĞůŝƉŽƌƚŽƌŝŐŝŶĂůůLJƐƚĂƌƚĞĚůŝĨĞ
ďĂĐŬŝŶϭϵϱϵ͘&ŽůůŽǁŝŶŐĐůŽƐƵƌĞŽĨƚŚĞŝƚLJ
ŽĨ>ŽŶĚŽŶŇŽĂƟŶŐŚĞůŝƉĂĚĂƚdƌŝŐŐ>ĂŶĞ
ŝŶϭϵϴϱ͕ĂƩĞƌƐĞĂ,ĞůŝƉŽƌƚ͕ůŽĐĂƚĞĚŝŶ
>ŽŵďĂƌĚZŽĂĚŽŶƚŚĞĂƩĞƌƐĞĂƌŝǀĞƌƐŝĚĞ͕
ďĞĐĂŵĞƚŚĞŽŶůLJůŝĐĞŶƐĞĚŚĞůŝƉŽƌƚ
ƐĞƌǀŝŶŐƚŚĞĐŝƚLJŽĨ>ŽŶĚŽŶ͘/ƚƉƌŽǀŝĚĞƐĂŶ
ĞƐƐĞŶƟĂůƐĞƌǀŝĐĞƚŽƚŚĞďƵƐŝŶĞƐƐĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚLJ
ĂŶĚůŽĐĂůĞŵĞƌŐĞŶĐLJƐĞƌǀŝĐĞƐ͕ƐƵĐŚĂƐƚŚĞ
>ŽŶĚŽŶŝƌŵďƵůĂŶĐĞ;,D^Ϳ͘
>ŽŶĚŽŶ,ĞůŝƉŽƌƚ
&ƌĞĚtĞůůƐ'ĂƌĚĞŶƐ
ZŽLJĂůĐĂĚĞŵLJŽĨĂŶĐĞ
,ĂƌƌŽǁĂLJ'ĂƌĚĞŶƐ
^ƚ͘DĂƌLJ͛ƐŚƵƌĐŚ
Royal Academy of Dance
dŚĞƉƌĞƐƟŐŝŽƵƐĂŶĚŚŝƐƚŽƌŝĐZŽLJĂůĐĂĚĞŵLJ
ŽĨĂŶĐĞǁŝůůďĞŵŽǀŝŶŐƚŽĂŶĞǁƉƵƌƉŽƐĞ
ďƵŝůƚŚĞĂĚƋƵĂƌƚĞƌƐŝŶĂƩĞƌƐĞĂĂŌĞƌ
ĐŽƵŶĐŝůƉůĂŶŶĞƌƐĂƉƉƌŽǀĞĚƉůĂŶƐĨŽƌ
ƚŚĞƌĞĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚŽĨƚŚĞ,ŽŵĞďĂƐĞ
ǁĂƌĞŚŽƵƐĞƐƚŽƌĞŝŶzŽƌŬZŽĂĚ͘dŚĞŶĞǁ
ĂĐĂĚĞŵLJǁŝůůŽīĞƌďŝŐŐĞƌ͕ďƌŝŐŚƚĞƌĂŶĚ
Lombard Road
9
1.
Assessment
1.1.6 Local Context (Views)
dŚĞƐŝƚĞƐŝƚƐǁŝƚŚŝŶĂŵĂŝŶůLJŝŶĚƵƐƚƌŝĂůĂŶĚ
ƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƟĂůĞŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚǁŝƚŚĂŵŝdžƚƵƌĞ
ŽĨůŽǁĞƌƐŚĞĚůŝŬĞƐƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞƐĂŶĚŚŝŐŚƌŝƐĞ
ƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƟĂůďƵŝůĚŝŶŐƐ͘
4
5
1
2
3
7
6
ϬϭͲdžŝƐƟŶŐďƵŝůĚŝŶŐĨƌŽŶƚĂŐĞ
10
Lombard Road
ϬϮͲĂƐƚǀŝĞǁĂůŽŶŐ'ǁLJŶŶĞZŽĂĚ
8
ϬϯͲ,ĂƌƌŽǁĂLJ'ĂƌĚĞŶƐĂůŽŶŐ'ǁLJŶŶĞZŽĂĚ
1.
Assessment
ϬϰͲdžŝƐƟŶŐďƵŝůĚŝŶŐĞŶƚƌĂŶĐĞ
ϬϱͲ^ŽƵƚŚǀŝĞǁĂůŽŶŐ>ŽŵďĂƌĚZŽĂĚ
ϬϲͲĂŝƵƐ,ŽƵƐĞĂůŽŶŐ,ŽůŵĂŶZĚ
ϬϳͲsŝĞǁƐĂůŽŶŐzĞůǀĞƌƚŽŶZŽĂĚ
ϬϴͲϭϱzĞůǀĞƌƚŽŶZŽĂĚ
ŚĞůƐĞĂ,ĂƌďŽƵƌ
KLJƐƚĞƌtŚĂƌĨ^ƵŝƚĞƐǁŝƚŚdŽƩĞƌŝĚŐĞ,ŽƵƐĞŝŶƚŚĞďĂĐŬŐƌŽƵŶĚ
sŝĞǁĨƌŽŵŚĞůƐĞĂ,ĂƌďŽƵƌ
Lombard Road
11
1.
Assessment
1.1.7 Topography
The siteůŝĞƐďĞƚǁĞĞŶƚǁŽĐŚĂƌĂĐƚĞƌnjŽŶĞƐ
ĚĞĮŶĞĚďLJƚŚĞĨŽůůŽǁŝŶŐ͗
‡ dŚĞŝŵŵĞĚŝĂƚĞĐŽŶƚĞdžƚƚŽƚŚĞǁĞƐƚĂŶĚ
ƐŽƵƚŚŽĨƚŚĞƐŝƚĞŝƐĚĞĮŶĞĚďLJŚŝŐŚĞƌ
ůĞǀĞůďƵŝůĚŝŶŐƐͲďĞƚǁĞĞŶϴĂŶĚϮϰ
storeys.
‡ dŚĞĞdžĐĞƉƟŽŶƚŽƚŚŝƐĂƌĞƚŚĞŶĞǁ
ƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƟĂůďƵŝůĚŝŶŐĨĂĐŝŶŐĞĂƐƚ;ϲ
ŇŽŽƌƐͿĂŶĚƚŚĞdƌĂǀŝƐWĞƌŬŝŶƐƐŝƚĞ
ǁŚŝĐŚĐŽŶƚĂŝŶƐƚǁŽƐŝŶŐůĞƐƚŽƌĞLJƐŚĞĚ
ƐƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞƐ;ĞƋƵŝǀĂůĞŶƚŽĨƚǁŽƚŽƚŚƌĞĞ
storeys)
‡ dŽƚŚĞǁĞƐƚĂŶĚĞĂƐƚƚŚĞƐŝƚĞǁŝůůďĞ
ďŽƵŶĚďLJƌĞůĂƟǀĞůLJƌĞĐĞŶƚƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƟĂů
ůĞĚĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚŽĨĂůĂƌŐĞƌͬŚŝŐŚĞƌ
scale.
tĂƚĞƌƐŝĚĞdŽǁĞƌ
24 storeys
/ŵƉĞƌŝĂůtŚĂƌĨ
15 storeys
KLJƐƚĞƌtŚĂƌĨ
ϵƐƚŽƌĞLJƐ
EĞǁƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚƐ
24 storeys
&ĂůĐŽŶtŚĂƌĨ
ϭϵƐƚŽƌĞLJƐ
ϭϵƐƚŽƌĞLJƐ
13 storeys
8 storeys
6 storeys
ϯƐƚŽƌĞLJƐŽƌĞƋƵŝǀĂůĞŶƚƚŽ
12
Lombard Road
KƌďŝƐtŚĂƌĨ
16 storeys
1.
Assessment
ϭϮͲϭϰ>ŽŵďĂƌĚZŽĂĚ
ϭϰ>ŽŵďĂƌĚZŽĂ
reys
28 storeys
'ĂŝƚƐŬĞůůŽƵƌƚ
ĞůůŽƵƌƚ
oreys
15 storeys
tĂŶĚƐǁŽƌƚŚdŽǁĞƌ
ǁŽƌƚŚ d
14 storeys
dŽƩĞƌŝĚŐĞ,ŽƵƐĞ
24 storeys
ĂŝƵƐ,ŽƵƐĞ
8 storeys
WĞŶŐĞ,ŽƵƐĞ
15 storeys
Lombard Road
13
1.
Assessment
1.1.8 Urban grain
dŚĞƵƌďĂŶŐƌĂŝŶŝŶƚŚĞŝŵŵĞĚŝĂƚĞǀŝĐŝŶŝƚLJ
ŝƐŵĂŝŶůLJůĂƌŐĞŐƌĂŝŶͬůĂƌŐĞƐĐĂůĞďƵŝůĚŝŶŐƐ͕
ƉĂƌƟĐƵůĂƌůLJƚŽƚŚĞƐŽƵƚŚŽĨƚŚĞƐŝƚĞĂŶĚ
across the river.
dŚŝƐĐŚĂƌĂĐƚĞƌŝƐǀĞƌLJĚŝīĞƌĞŶƚƚŽƚŚĂƚƐŽƵƚŚ
ŽĨzŽƌŬtĂLJĂŶĚŶŽƌƚŚŽĨƌĞŵŽƌŶĞƌŝĚŐĞ
ǀŝĂĚƵĐƚ
8
5
7
1
4
2
3
14
Lombard Road
6
1.
Assessment
ϬϭͲtĂŶĚƐǁŽƌƚŚdŽǁĞƌ
ϬϮͲdŽƩĞƌŝĚŐĞ,ŽƵƐĞ
ϬϯͲ&ĂůĐŽŶtŚĂƌĨ
ϬϰͲKLJƐƚĞƌtŚĂƌĨ
ϬϱͲϭϮͲϭϰ>ŽŵďĂƌĚZŽĂĚ
ϬϲͲĂŝƵƐ,ŽƵƐĞ
ϬϳͲ/ŵƉĞƌŝĂůtŚĂƌĨ
ϬϴͲdŚĞĞůǀĞĚĞƌĞ
Lombard Road
15
ColladoCollinsArchitects
Report
$SSHQGL[
Ben van Bruggen
Townscape Analysis
19 LOMBARD ROAD & 80 GWYNNE ROAD
A RESPONSE TO THE TOWNSCAPE ISSUES
RAISED BY THE DRAFT LOMBARD ROAD/YORK
ROAD RIVERSIDE FOCAL POINT
SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENT
(SPD).
7TH AUGUST 2015
This document was prepared for
‘SafeStore’ and ‘Fraser & Ellis’
regarding their site at 19 Lombard
Road & 80 Gwynne Road. It
accompanies documents prepared
by Collado Collins and GVA.
WRITTEN BY
B van Bruggen
CHECKED
BvB
Introduction
Collado Collins and van Bruggen Urbanism have been requested to review
the townscape issues on the Safestore and Fraser & Ellis site as identified as
‘19 Lombard Road, 80 Gwynne Road’ within the Draft Lombard Road/York
Road Riverside Focal Point Supplementary Planning Document (SPD). The
intention of this work is help inform the Council’s SPD regarding this particular
site, its constraints and opportunities. There is much to welcome in the SPD to
guide development in the area, recognising the benefits of higher density
development and creating a coherent set of planning propositions. However,
there is insufficient townscape and urban design evidence in the
documentation to seek to restrict the height on this site to be below that of the
neighbouring sites. The reference to restricting height (to that of the north side
of Gwynne Road) is not justified by the urban design analysis of the site or
area and this should be removed.
The SPD’s approach to seeking to redefine this area and to recognise that the
changes that have occurred in the last decade have transformed the
character of the area is welcomed.
The Safestore & Fraser & Ellis sites (19 Lombard Road & 80 Gwynne Road)
could, if redeveloped, contribute to realising the benefits of higher density,
contribute to the delivery of the new Thames foot/cycle bridge and
connections to it, improve the public realm creating a distinctive place with
strong linkages to the surrounding area. The site’s location at the northern
entry to the area, at one of the few connections under the railway, is pivotal. It
is a threshold. The site also has the role of improving the connections from
Battersea High Street and the hinterland to the Riverside and to the proposed
foot/cycle bridge via the 12-14 Lombard Road redevelopment. Contributing to
the foot/cycle bridge alongside Cremorne Railway Bridge not only through
direct financial assistance brought about from high density development but
also through facilitating linkages to it are clear public benefits.
Analysing the Character of the area
1. The Thames Policy Area covers the area from the River to Lombard
Road. While this has some common characteristics it is an area set to
reflect the policy focussed on the Thames and not related to the
character of this area.
2. The site of 19 Lombard Road & 80 Gwynne Road sits at the northern
part of an area characterised by a mix of uses and building types.
Much of it is poor quality design. It is a course urban grain of generally
large scale buildings, contained or defined by poor quality public realm,
much traffic movement and areas of surface car parking. There are few
small scale uses and fine grain that make for active street edges. (1.1.4
and 1.1.5 of the supporting document)
3. The area of the riverside and Lombard Road have been redeveloped
several times with more to come. This area is characterised by the
medium and large scale developments adjacent to the river built in
recent years, such as the nine storey Oyster Wharf, 19 storey Falcon
Wharf, the 16 storey Crowne Plaza hotel and the equally large Altura
Tower scheme, and the low scale sheds of the retail uses adjacent to
Lombard Road.
4. Lombard Road is further characterised by commercial retail sheds of
low architectural quality, such as Halfords, Pets at Home and Jewsons
at the south to Travis Perkins and the Safestore / Fraser and Ellis of 19
Lombard Road & 80 Gwynne Road. Away from the riverside walk the
public realm is equally poor and dominated by vehicle movement. It
has hard to cross Lombard Road as a pedestrian.
5. Further to the east the large scale and urban grain continues
culminating on the 24 storeys Totteridge House and the seven storeys
linear blocks of maisonettes, developed as local authority housing.
6. The area north of the Listed Cremorne Bridge is of a quite different
character. It is smaller and finer grain with many historic buildings set
around Battersea Square (See 1.1.8 in Collado Collins supporting
document). Adjacent to the Bridge is the Fred Wells Garden, a large
piece of open space with mature trees a line of which form a screen to
the railway embankment along the southern edge of the Garden. There
is a strong sense of enclosure from within this space. Beyond the
Gardens is the large redbrick apartment buildings built in the 1930’s
with a central courtyard area facing south. Similar large apartment
blocks are located north of the Bridge adjacent to the river.
7. On the opposite side of the River Thames to the south of the Bridge the
character continues with the substantial and tall Imperial Wharf scheme
2
at up to 15 storey and the site known as Fulham Wharf which will be
similar in height.
8. To the north of the Cremorne Bridge is Chelsea Harbour area
dominated by the large scale residential buildings that form this
enclave. The 24 storey Belvedere Tower dominates this area but it will
be joined by the 25 and 37 storey towers of Lots Road.
9. This is not intended to be a full appraisal of the character of the site but
it seeks to provide a broader picture of the character of the area than is
evident from reading the Focal Point draft SPD. It is appropriate to
consider the context wider than the areas identified in order to
understand the townscape issues and opportunities for the site.
10. There is nothing about the character of this area or its surroundings
that would preclude the redevelopment of the site for a building that
significantly exceeded five storeys. Indeed there is a case that the area
is already characterised by tall and large scale buildings, is distinctive
from the surrounding character areas but is not dissimilar to that across
the river. A site that sits at a key point in the townscape should promote
a new building of high quality that raises the general quality of the area,
whether this is through a tall building or not.
Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas.
11. The site lies adjacent to the Grade II* Listed Cremorne Railway Bridge.
This is a significant structure running through the area. To the south of
the Bridge and the viaduct new development has occurred and more is
planned or consented. The Battersea Square Conservation Area is to
the north, beyond the Bridge and the Fred Wells Garden open space.
To the north east is another conservation area, the Three Sisters.
While these are considerations for the design of the scheme neither
would be significantly harmed by redevelopment of this site. In
recognising that further detailed assessment in line with Policy DMS4b
it is clear that a tall building could be accommodated on this site
without causing significant harm to any designated heritage assets.
Section 1.1.3 of the Collado Collins supporting document illustrates the
history of the area.
3
Views
12. In terms of visual impact tall buildings have a wider impact than other
buildings. Key views from important locations of significant buildings
are seen as needing special treatment in planning terms. In 2012 the
Mayor of London published the London Views Management
Framework SPG (LVMF). It sets out key views and guidance of how
the London Plan policies are to be implemented. This site and Focal
Area would not impact on these strategic views.
13. In February 2014, Wandsworth Borough Council adopted the Local
Views SPD. It is unlikely that a tall building on the site of 19 Lombard
Road & 80 Gwynne Road would impact on these views either. There
are unlikely to be impacts on any key views that would suggest that the
height of a building on this site should be restricted. The important local
views are illustrated in 1.1.6 of the Collado Collins supporting
document
Existing Policy on tall buildings
14. Wandsworth Borough Council has set out a plan approach to the
location of tall buildings. This is welcome and is consistent with advice
from CABE / EH in their Guidance on Tall Buildings 2007 and the
London Plan 2014. This approach is being adopted in the proposed
Lombard Road/York Road Riverside Focal Point SPD draft June 2015.
15. Further to this Wandsworth Borough Council also sets out a detailed
test for tall buildings on a site by site basis in Policy DMS4 of the
DMPD, which requires at iv) detailed visual analysis to ensure that the
proposal will have an ‘acceptable visual impact’ and at vii) that any
scheme is well integrated in massing and scale with the surrounding
development, which includes new development as well as the historic
environment. It also describes at viii) that any development proposals
will need to ‘demonstrate how the proposal sits within the existing
townscape and landform.’
16. The analysis presented here (other tall buildings illustrated in 1.1.7 of
the Collado Collins supporting document) suggests that a development
significantly higher than five storeys could be appropriate and could
bring significant townscape benefits, subject to a high quality design
and meeting the relevant tests in Policy DMS4b and IS3.
17. This assessment indicates that the character of the riverside area does
not terminate at Lombard Road as suggested by the Thames Policy
Area but that the northern end of Lombard Road is defined by the River,
4
the railway bridge and embankment and the open spaces, which gives
it its character.
18. It is encouraging that the SPD states, in accordance with Policy DMS4
the site forms part of an area where tall buildings may be appropriate
and that any building ‘at or above 5 storeys must satisfy the criteria in
DMPD Policy DMS4’. It should be recognised that the criteria in
DMS4b require the townscape and visual impact to be described and in
some instances to demonstrate what this impact will be. This implies
that tall buildings will be assessed on a case by case basis and that
while some impacts associated with tall buildings may be adverse, they
will be assessed in the round for their contribution overall. Improving an
unattractive and poorly utilised site for a new higher density and
attractive development will be a consideration regardless of height.
19. This initial study of the character of the area does not suggest that the
height of the site ought to be restricted. SPD does not need to set out a
height-limiting element for this site. Indeed, this may be inconsistent
with Policy DMS4. The SPD suggests that the tallest element will be
56-66 Gwynne Road; ‘where the height approved was in recognition of
its strategic location opposite the open space and the benefits that
would bring to the skyline and townscape.’
20. The existing Policies are sufficient to determine whether a tall building
is appropriate or not.
Is This Site Appropriate for a Tall Building?
21. As the analysis demonstrates the site of 19 Lombard Road & 80
Gwynne Road is a key location. It connects one of the few points to
cross under the railway; the busy route of Lombard Road, the riverside
walk to the wider hinterland and will be an important connecting site
when the Thames footbridge is completed.
22. Redeveloping the site with a taller building could improve the public
realm in quantity and quality allowing the footway to be widened and
improving the pedestrian environment.
23. A tall building on this site would also be a positive feature in the
townscape, reflecting and complementing the tall buildings at the river
edge to the west and the proposed 12-14 Lombard Road very tall
building, as well as the tall buildings existing to the east. Tall buildings
would also mediate the scale from the riverside to the proposed
building (14 storey) on Gwynne Road and to any future development of
the Travis Perkins site 37 Lombard Road.
5
24. Furthermore, views of the River and over Fred Wells Gardens to the
north could greatly benefit the occupants of any new tall building
allowing residential accommodation to be lifted above the height of the
railway embankment.
25. In terms of microclimate this site could also be a suitable location for a
tall building. The site is south of an area of open space, Fred Wells
Gardens. There would very limited overshadowing of existing
properties (if any) and any overshadowing of the Gardens is likely to be
limited. The Gardens are to the north of the site but are approximately
25 metres from the site and set behind the railway viaduct and two
bands of large mature trees. Visually it could be seen as being
separate from the Gardens. It is also noted that there are many
buildings visible to the south from the Gardens already, including no.628 Gwynne Road and the 28 storey Totteridge House, which
dominates. This will be added to by the completion of both 56-66
Gwynne Road and 12-14 Lombard Road. In this context it is only 12-14
Lombard Road that marks an important point in the townscape when
approaching from the north. A taller element at 19 Lombard Road could
act to reinforce this marker and threshold, creating a clear sense of
entry under the railway viaduct.
26. The urban design, townscape and visual impact analysis do not
suggest that there is sufficient justification for stating that ‘building
heights on both Lombard Road and Gwynne Road frontages should
generally reflect the height of new buildings on the north side of
Gwynne Road’, or that; ‘The recent planning permission for a 14 storey
building at 56-66 Gwynne Road must be regarded as an exception’.
27. Much of the justification for the 56-66 Gwynne Road is that there are
several tall buildings existing and that the building is on axis with the
open space of Harroway Gardens. While this may be accurate for
Harroway Gardens, the south of the Gardens is loomed over by Caius
House, a seven storey block with a blank and inactive ground floor
facing the Gardens. In terms of wayfinding or legibility in the wider
townscape neither of these schemes adds much. Indeed the existing of
the 28 storey Totteridge House is much more likely to provide the
marker and dominate skyline in this area rather than 56-66 Gwynne
Road.
28. Therefore, it is the contention that in terms of a townscape and skyline
a tall building on 19 Lombard Road & 80 Gwynne Road could be
justified and therefore reference to 56-66 Gwynne Road being ‘the
exception’ should be deleted from the SPD draft. We note that no such
qualification is applied to 37 Lombard Road for example, despite being
a very similar site sharing its frontage with both Gwynne Road and
Lombard Road. While acknowledging that this site backs onto
6
Harroway Gardens, the presence of open space adjacent should not
be the only criteria for justifying a tall building. The justification has
been about the contribution made to the public realm of Harroway
Gardens, however public realm improvements to the junction of
Lombard Road and Gwynne Road could be a direct benefit of allowing
a taller building on the site, freeing up the ground floor. A financial
contribution to the pedestrian bridge or other public realm could also be
secured and a high density, tall building could contribute to these aims
also.
29. It is recognized that due to their height, tall buildings can have a
greater visual impact on the skyline than lower buildings when seen
from medium and long distances. The visual impact of a tall building
can be positive and beneficial, or negative and damaging but can also
be nondescript and not overly intrusive. Clusters of tall buildings can
form particularly interesting skylines marking areas of regeneration or
change such as the focal point of Lombard Road / York Road area.
The SPD could recognize that clusters of tall buildings or a clustered
skyline could provide more interest than single towers that pick out
particular locations. It should also recognize that new tall buildings
clustered could enhance the existing character and appearance of the
area. In the fullness of time this approach could encourage some of the
poor existing tall buildings to be replaced with higher quality
architecture.
7
Summary of townscape and visual impact
30. While welcoming the broad approach of the SPD to the Focal Area
development and to 19 Lombard Road & 80 Gwynne Road, the SPD
could go further. Clearly, a redevelopment of this site for a high quality
scheme would represent a significant improvement compared to the
current situation.
31. It should also be recognised that the site occupies a key position in the
proposed Focal Area. 19 Lombard Road is at the junction of two
significant routes, Lombard Road and Gwynne Road that have become
more important as the railway was developed, as the site also sits at
one of the few crossing points under the railway viaduct.
32. The site is an important junction where there is a particular change in
character north and south of the railway line. This sense of arrival or
transition from one area to another is likely to be enhanced by the
completion of the 28 storey 12-14 Lombard Road. This could be
reinforced by taller elements opposite, on this site. It could enhance the
townscape by marking a major point of entry, a threshold, and one of
only two in this area from the north to the south.
33. In an area such as this there can be no objection to promoting tall
buildings of high architecture quality and 19 Lombard Road & 80
Gwynne Road should be considered as suitable for a building of
greater height than currently suggested in the SPD. Policy IS3 and
DMS4 set out strict requirements for demonstrating the visual and
townscape impacts of any tall building and that this is a sufficient test
rather than restricting the height through the SPD.
8