DESIGN AND ACCESS STATEMENT PLANNING APPLICATION. 25 Gilston Road, SW10 9SJ June 2015

Transcription

1 DESIGN AND ACCESS STATEMENT PLANNING APPLICATION 25 Gilston Road, SW10 9SJ June 2015

2 CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION 2.0 SITE & CONTEXT 2.1 SITE CONTEXT 2.2 CONSERVATION AREA 3.0 BACKGROUND 3.1 RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY 3.2 DESIGN PRINCIPALS 3.3 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT BRIEF SUMMERY GILSTON ROAD 4.0 DESIGN STATEMENT 4.1 USE 4.2 AMOUNT 4.3 LAYOUT 4.4 ACCESS 4.5 SCALE 4.6 APPEARANCE 4.7 LANDSCAPE 4.8 CONCLUSION REDCLIFFE ROAD 5.0 APPENDIX 5.1 PRE PLANNING ADVICE DECEMBER 2014 (PRE/PP/14/01285/LEV 3) PLAN 1. LOCATION PLAN

3 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.0 INTRODUCTION This Design & Access Statement has been prepared by Studio Indigo Ltd in support of an application for planning permission at 27 Gilston Road. This application has been submitted following Pre Application Advice with ref: PRE/PP/14/01285/LEV SITE & CONTEXT Gilston Road was built in the mid 1900 century. The property is located within The Boltons Conservation Area. The property is a four story high, semi-detached property built with a rendered exterior to the front and exposed brick sq. m. 2.2 THE CONSERVATION AREA As extracted from the Kensington Conservation Area Proposals Statement document: It has been shown in the history section that most of the buildings in the area are not great works of art. They were, rather, houses erected by speculative builders at particular point in history to meet what were then the needs of the market...many of them have, surprisingly, retained their original function that of single family houses - more than have buildings of similar size almost anywhere in London, Site Location - Google Maps [Fig 1.1] The Borough of Kensington & Chelsea Kensington Conservation Area Map [Fig 1.2]

4 2.0 SITE & CONTEXT View of 25 & 27 Gilston Road [Fig 2.3] View of 23 and 25 Gilston Road [Fig 2.4] Partial view of front garden and Gilston Road [Fig 2.5] View of garage door and ramp [Fig 2.6] View of lightwell in front garden [Fig 2.7] View from Gilston Road towards the Boltons [Fig 2.8] View from Gilston Road towards Fulham Road [Fig 2.9]

5 2.0 SITE & CONTEXT [Fig 2.11] View of Rear Garden [Fig 2.12] Rear elevation [Fig 2.10] Close up of rear elevation at garden level {Fig 2.13] [Fig 2.14]

6 3.0 BACKGROUND 3.0 BACKGROUND 3.1 RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY 3.2 PROPOSAL SUMMARY Studio Indigo recently submitted a planning application for the property which was The proposal seeks to refurbish all of the existing elements and to restore many of the lost original refused (08/06/2015), reasons for refusal have been noted and adressed in the new aspects of the property, which has deteriorated in recent years. The proposal seeks to maintain application (see Appendix 5.1). We have also undertaken a review of the online planning history of No. 25 and an application was approved in 2006 for the erection of a rea exten- The dominant four storey rear wing extension will be replaced with a subservient three storey rear Application reference: PP/06/00660 bay wing, which intends to mirror the bay which currently exists at No. 27. This change reintro- Application Granted: 02/05/2006 duces the roof line, which is currently lost behind the rear wing, and recreates a symmetrical pair with No. 27. Surrounding area - - We consider the following applications to be relevant: chitectural features. A single-storey basement is proposed under both houses, largely contained under the houses and partly under the front and rear gardens - in compliance with the latest RBKC 29 Gilston Road policy documentation, which we fully support. Application Received: 11/09/ PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OUTLINE Refurbishment of existing townhouse including underpinning and partial excavation of rear garden; form new basement slab and swimming pool under main house; alterations to rear and side elevations and alteration to front entrance gate. - Application Reference: PP/06/2250 Conditional Permission 22/11/2006 gardens (under 50 % of the free area) 23 Gilston Road ing side extension. Application received: 08/01/1987 Conditional permission: 21/05/1987 basement level, in front of the existing side extension. Application Received: 14/01/1985 Conditional permission: 29/05/1985

7 3.0 BACKGROUND 3.0 BACKGROUND Cont d 3.4 BUILDING & AREA HISTORY 3.5 HISTORIC PHOTOGRAPHS Gilston Road was built in the mid-ninteenth centruy, with numbers 25 to 41 being build approximately 1852, but W.Harding, builder. The wider area area, just off the Fulham Road, became known as Little Chelsea and was largely developed by the Gunter Family around the same time. GIlston Road is part of the Boltons Conservation Area, with The Boltons to the most architecturally rich, detached houses. Gilston Road is home to mainly semi-detached houses, which are similar to those in the Boltons, although subservient in size and detail. The west side of Gilston Road retains the stucco fronted villa style, with the east side comprised of a variety of styles and a number of the properties containing towers, which can also be found on the corners of Tregunter Road and Hollywood Road. The houses on the west side, from No. 7 onwards, are stucco fronted villas, with set back side wing extensions - many formed of London Stock Brick. They are set back from the street, behind a stucco fronted wall with bottle balusters and prominent gate piers, with seperate access for the driveway and walkway. Boltons Studios, which were created as artists studios in the late 19th Century. These are currently undergoing renovation work to create a series of small studio residences. Gilston Road, Looking North, Gilston Road, Looking South-West, 1970

8 4.0 DESIGN STATEMENT 4.0 DESIGN STATEMENT 4.1 USE 4.3 LAYOUT 25 Gilston Road is an unlisted semi-detached 19th Century Victorian property. The property is an The proposed development relates only to 25 Gilston Road, whilst symmetrical references are made existing single family dwelling and the proposal seeks to maintain this use. to No. 27. The proposal has no negative impact on the immediate neighbour at No. 27, with whom the design for this property has been developed. 4.2 AMOUNT - It is proposed that the front façade to the main house is to be retained and restored, apart from the ment level intended to improve the amenity and enhance the existing space available. The occu- - pancy levels will remain unchanged and the house will remain as a single family home. trance steps are proposed to match in size and style the existing. The alteration to the front façade seeks to restore and improve the existing facade, whilst reintroducing the symmetry 27 Gilston road. 4.4 ACCESS Access to the site will remain unchanged, directly off the street to the front garden retaining the and four storey rear wing are to be replaced by a subservient, three storey, bay window to match existing main entrance. currently masks the original roof form, and creates a symmetrical pair with No. 27. At Lower Ground Access for pedestrians will be maintained via the existing front garden, steps and Upper Ground Floor level, new timber glazed french doors are proposed for access to the garden. A new basement level is to be constructed below the footprint of the existing property, as well as existing garage door will be replaced with a new painted timber door, to match the existing. partially under the front and rear garden, to accommodate new facilities for the family home. 4.5 SCALE The existing stuccoed window surrounds are to be restored, with the surrounds to the side extension The proposed basement is of will be built to a depth of approximately 3.2 metres below Lower - The sympathetic and sensitive works proposed respect the building and its history. The proposed posed to remodel the rear elevation, as noted in point 4.2. external alterations are small and do not impact upon the surrounding buildings. It is concluded that this proposal respects the character and appearance of the house and of its area. house and redress the balance between the main house and rear wing.

9 4.0 DESIGN STATEMENT 4.6 APPEARANCE Roof The proposed development will not alter the existing pitched roof. The existing roof will be refurbished and new slate tiles. Walls The front façade of the property will remain stucco The rear will once again consist of exposed London Brick. Doors The front door will be replaced to match the existing. The garage door will be replaced façade are to be painted timber, glazed french doors. Windows All windows are proposed to be replaced with new painted timber double glazed units. The style and details of mouldings proposed are to match the existing and be timber framed, sash windows, painted white. Rainwater Goods - Such as down pipes, gutters and rain hoppers will be made of cast iron and painted black, consistent with the main building. Exposed external drains will be removed and concealed within the structure where possible. i. The proposed subterranean extension in principle is acceptable subject to compliance with the adopted policy CL7. ii. The proposed guest accommodation in the middle of the proposed basement level appears to be of poor quality in terms of natural light and ventilation levels and is not acceptable in its current form. Response: Guest Accommodation moved to upper levels of the garage door with a single door is unacceptable. Response: Garage door style and details retained sion at no.27 is acceptable. The proposed new front entrance stairs to match the existing is accept- along the boundary with the adjoining property no.27, and the formation of a bay window, and the insertion of three new sets of French doors in the rear elevation to match the existing arrangements at no.27 is acceptable LANDSCAPE The front and rear garden areas are proposed to be re-landscaped, with the exact planting scheme to the rear garden to be agreed. The front boundary wall and gate posts are to be rebuilt, with the style and details to match the existing and painted metal vehicle and walkway gates will be remade. CONCLUSION & PRE-PLANNING RESPONSE The proposals described in this design statement and on the drawings have been carefully considered to ensure they are respectfully integrated with the existing building fabric, scale and character of the surrounding area. The proposal has been developed following Level 3 Pre-Planning Advice, and all of the points raised in the advice have been addressed. The advice is contained within Appendix A and the key points are (with responses as required in bold): proposed new staircase in place of the existing are acceptable. mass of rear extensions to the property. It would also have an unacceptable impact on neighbouring occupiers in terms of daylight and sense of enclosure. Response: Extension omitted and existing terrace retained viii. The proposed front new acoustic double glazing windows in place of the existing front bay 1.2 For these reasons I,would support the proposal, if an application were made subject to changes. Whilst the advice is given in good faith, it is based on the information provided and does not bind the Council to a particular decision.

10 5.0 PLANNING RESPONSE 5.0 Responses to Planning Refusal 5.1 RE: PLANNING - REFUSED PLANNING APPLICATION JUNE Studio Indigo submitted a planning application for 25 Gilston Rd (APP NO. PP/5/02238) on 13/04/2015. The aplication was refused on 08/06/2015 for the reasons stated below; 1. The proposed basement by reason of the lack of 1m of soil above the basement would fail to provide adequate opportunities for drainage and planting and would fail to preserve the character and appearance of the conservation area. The proposal would be contrary to the Council s policies in particular Core Strategy policies CL3, CL7 and CL The application fails to demonstrate that the construction impacts, including noise, vibration and dust would be kept to acceptable levels for the duration of the works. The development would consequently result in harm to the living conditions of neighbouring occupiers. The proposal would be contrary to the Council s policies in particular Core Strategy policies CL5, CE6 and CL7. 3. The application fails to demonstrate that the basement would be adequately particular Core Strategy policy CL7. Studio Indigo have addressed the reasons for refusal (see above) in this planning application by means as stated below 1. A minimum depth of 1m of soil between the top of the basement structure and the landscape level above has been implemented in the design. (refer to drawing 2680_A4-210_Proposed Section A-A_RevP3). 2. A revised methodology statement has been issued. 3. A revised basement drawing showing the proposed drainage strategy and structural design report has beeen included.

11 6.0 APPENDIX A PRE PLANNING ADVICE DECEMBER 2013 (PRE/PP/13/01265/LEV 3)