3 Alternatives and Design Evolution: Planning Application 1 - RBKC Design Freeze Draft One (January 2011) Figure 3-19 3.82 The design freeze draft one was a point in time in the evolution of the Masterplan which aimed to settle the fundamental components across the scheme for all of the project disciplines, and hence determine the Earls Court Development Proposals that are being sought approval for. 3.83 This stage of design allowed the development of smaller components to continue and be tweaked, whilst having the majority of the scheme settled. This settling of the overall masterplan also enabled the illustrative and executive architects to take on various areas of the scheme and test and develop these in more detail (refer to Figures 3-19 and 3-20 overleaf). 3.84 Changes that were made from the previous stage included adjusting some of the smaller routes through the Site which in turn adjusted the size and arrangement of some of the building plots, squares and gardens. Also green connections from the public squares in the residential quarters to the Broadway were introduced and significant green spaces were positioned adjacent to the Lost River Park. 3.85 During the Concept Masterplan stage, there were two options running for the buildings that are to be located where the current Earls Court Exhibition Buildings are: one which allowed buildings to be positioned over the rail lines and one which avoided building over them. The two options were tested in terms of their technical and financial implications and a detailed study of the structural constraints was undertaken to assess the impact of the design. This assessment resulted in the option of not building over the rail lines to be taken forward and included in the design freeze draft one, meaning that the layout of the streets and building blocks responded to the rail infrastructure underneath the Site. 3.86 Townhouses were added to the Masterplan along Warwick Crescent and Empress Crescent in response to massing studies. 3.87 After the Concept Masterplan stage, Seagrave Road, a proposed development to the South of the main Earls Court Site, became a real project and gave the Earls Court project more viability and deliverability. During the design development a process of questioning and challenging the strategy of how height was dealt with and distributed on the Earls Court Site was taken. Different urban solutions for dealing with height on the Site were considered and assessed in terms of townscape and daylight/sunlight, and discussions were held with the LBHF and the RBKC. These included height in the form of towers and also in a series of smaller tall elements. 3.88 The compositional solution that was chosen and was included in the design freeze stage one, which is in alignment with the EKWKOA Draft SPD, was a cluster of towers which a form a dance with the Empress State building. In the lead up to the design freeze, the density and quantum of development was interrogated and tested in terms of the resultant townscape, daylight and sunlight analysis, and also in consultation with the consultation with the LBHF and the RBKC. The density and quantum included in the design freeze was a result of this process. 3.89 At the Concept Masterplan stage, the access proposals included a central signalised road junction coming off Lillie Road, which connected traffic coming from the south of the Earls Court Site to the new proposed Broadway. This was a very large junction with high capacity. 3.90 Throughout consultation with the LBHF, the RBKC, and TfL, concern was expressed at relying on this one road junction for the traffic flows approaching the Earls Court Site from the south. Therefore WSP looked into the possibility of introducing more junctions at Lillie Road / Old Brompton Road. Consequently, the access proposals were amended to reflect three junctions coming off Lillie Road / Old Brompton Road. The three junctions create a more permeable access to the Broadway, each have smaller capacity, and there are no traffic lights / signalling, which is in line with the consultation feedback received. The change to the access to the southern boundary of the Earls Court Site has the benefit of helping access the different phases of the Earls Court Development Proposal, as they progress. It stops the reliance on one major access point for demolition and construction vehicles. There is also the added benefit that the additional junction providing access to the RBKC element of the Earls Court Site helps to ease traffic flow pressures along Warwick Road. (Illustrative) Design Freeze Masterplan 3-11 Properties Earls Court Project Application 1 Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea Environmental Statement Volume I June 2011 41
Figure 3-20 Design Freeze Masterplan Illustrative Testing and Post-Exhibition 3.91 After the design freeze draft one, a number of illustrative and executive architects were appointed to look in detail at individual character areas and building plots to test the illustrative Masterplan and develop the scheme further. The technical team continued to analyse both the illustrative Masterplan and the Earls Court Development Proposals to be submitted for planning approval. 3.92 As this process was taking place, the fourth public consultation stage was also in progress. An exhibition at Earls Court invited members of the public to view the design freeze draft one Illustrative Masterplan and provide comments and suggestions as to how the scheme should develop further. 3.93 A number of amendments to the design were made following public feedback, comments by various bodies, technical analysis, and the illustrative architects detailed testing. The following points detail the main changes to the massing of the development plots sought for approval following further technical work in relation to townscape, daylight / sunlight, and landscaping / public realm, and taking into consideration feedback and comments received. These changes are also reflected in the illustrative Earls Court Masterplan: Plots WK03, WK04, BW01 and WV01 amended to consider townscape views of the Church on Philbeach Gardens; Plots BW01 and BW03 amended to relate to the massing and scale of adjacent plots and the existing residential buildings on Philbeach Gardens; Location of tall buildings to respond to key townscape views resulting in the massing housed within plots BW04 and NE06 (numerous moves: original position 2010, changed in February and also April/May 2011); Plots WV04 and WV06 extended at High Street to allow potential for enhanced public realm; WV06 maximum parameter reduced to the south to relate scale and massing to adjacent plots and existing buildings of Eardley Crescent; BW01 maximum parameter to the north-west corner extended to account for Energy Centre flues. Location adjusted to consider townscape views; WV04 maximum parameter extended to account for Energy Centre flues; WK03 plan extent of maximum parameter adjusted to align with existing infrastructure constraints; NE01 maximum parameter extended south on residential square as part of design development; Reduction in the massing of WV02 and WV05 to match illustrative scheme to take into consideration the daylight sunlight impacts to Eardley Crescent and Philbeach Gardens; and Plots BW05 and BW07 amended to provide additional, annexed space to the Lost River Park (this is in the illustrative model only and does not change the maximum parameter) (April 2011). 3.94 Figure 3-21, overleaf, presents the main massing changes, as discussed in the above bullet points. 3-12 42 Earls Court Project Application 1 Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea Environmental Statement Volume I June 2011 Properties
Figure 3-21 Changes made (to the Illustrative Masterplan) post-public exhibition in February 2011 3-13 Properties Earls Court Project Application 1 Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea Environmental Statement Volume I June 2011 43
Summary of Key (Illustrative) Masterplan Design Changes 3.95 Throughout this Chapter, design amendments and the development of the design is described through the various stages of Masterplan evolution. These changes are summarised within Figure 3-22, overleaf. Whilst Figure 3-22 presents the Illustrative Masterplan, as discussed previously, the Masterplan is the basis of the resultant scheme which is being submitted for outline planning approval. Subsequently, all design changes were fed through to the scheme which is being sought for approval - the Earls Court Development Proposals. 3-14 44 Earls Court Project Application 1 Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea Environmental Statement Volume I June 2011 Properties
Figure 3-22 Summary of Key Masterplan Design Changes 3-15 Properties Earls Court Project Application 1 Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea Environmental Statement Volume I June 2011 45
3 Alternatives and Design Evolution: Planning Application 1 - RBKC the direction of the Empress State Building pre-empting the shift in scale between Earls Court Village and the existing structure. As the design team learnt more about the Empress State Building, and its importance to the identity of the local area, this informed the massing study on the Development Option (RBKC) Site and resulted in the lifting of the massing towards the Empress State Building. The Development Option (RBKC) Proposals 3.96 Whilst the above sections discussing the evolution of the Earls Court Site-Wide Masterplan and Earls Court Development Proposals are useful to aid understanding of the evolution of the Development Option (RBKC) Proposals, this section of the Chapter discusses the design alterations and evolution of the Development Option (RBKC) Proposals as a stand alone scheme. 3.97 The Earls Court Proposals have been used as the vehicle to explain the aspirations, principles and content of the Earls Court Masterplan. The aspirations and principles are inherent within the Development Option (RBKC) Masterplan however, there are a number of specific factors to this Development Option that would benefit from further explanation to gain a comprehensive understanding of the evolution of the Development Option (RBKC) Proposals. 3.98 In the Development Option (RBKC) Masterplan (Figure 3-23), the following components of the overall Earls Court Masterplan are included: 3.99 Earls Court Village; The eastern end of West Brompton Village (Counters Place); The southern half of the Lost River Park; The eastern end of the High Street; and The eastern end of West Kensington Village. Figure 3-23 The Development Option (RBKC) Masterplan In addition to these elements which are present in both Development Options, there is the proposed temporary large green open space that will be created on the deck of the existing EC2 exhibition hall, adjacent to the Lost River Park (not accessible by the general public). Although only part of the existing Earls Court Exhibition Centre falls within the red line boundary of this planning application (Application 1), the implementation of the Development Option (RBKC) Proposals assumes the demolition of the Exhibition Centre in its entirety (including EC1 and EC2). This means that the EC2 would be a cleared site which would be the subject of further discussion with the planning authorities. In these Development Option (RBKC) Proposals, it is envisaged that a temporary landscape treatment and boundary condition would come forward. Location of Plots 3.100 During the concept Masterplan stage of the Development Option (RBKC) Proposals, there were two options running for the location of the buildings that would replace the current EC1 and EC2 exhibition halls: one which allowed buildings to be positioned over the rail lines and one which avoided building over them. 3.101 The two options were tested in terms of their technical and financial implications and a detailed study of the structural constraints was undertaken to assess the impact of the design. This assessment resulted in the option of not building over the rail lines to be taken forward. This was included within the initial design freeze, and the design of the layout of the streets and building blocks consequently responded to the rail infrastructure underneath the site. Below ground studies that were undertaken also informed the massing potential with consideration to existing infrastructure and structural constraints. 3.102 A key consideration for the design evolution of the western portion of the Development Option (RBKC) Site was the relationship with the National Rail and LUL infrastructure on this boundary. These considerations are discussed in more detail within Chapter 5: Deconstruction / Demolition and Construction of this ES. Massing Considerations 3.103 In the lead up to the design freeze the density and quantum of the development was interrogated and tested in terms of the resultant townscape and also in consultation with the planners. 3.104 There is a degree of flexibility of the building blocks which are defined by the parameter plans. The massing principles made particular reference to the reduction of building height to the Philbeach Gardens and Eardley Crescent street buildings. The massing of the buildings along the eastern boundaries of the Site responds to their context in the same way as they do in the Earls Court Masterplan. 3.105 The buildings along the western edge of the Development Option (RBKC) Site have a slightly different relationship to their surroundings when comparing against the Earls Court Masterplan. The height of these buildings build towards 3-16 46 Earls Court Project Application 1 Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea Environmental Statement Volume I June 2011 Properties
3.106 After the design freeze draft one, a number of executive architects were appointed to look in detail at individual building plots on EC1 to test the masterplan and develop the scheme further. Their design studies tested and informed the Design Guidelines and Parameter Plans. 3.107 The detailed design studies informed the development blocks which are adjacent to the Lost River Park. These development plots form a gentle crescent responding to the curve of the Lost River Park. 3.108 The position of the Lost Rover Park acts as a buffer space dealing with the shift in massing between the proposed buildings within Earls Court Village (refer to Chapter 4: The Development Option (RBKC) Proposals of this ES) and the existing buildings of the West Kensington Housing Estate. Views and Vistas 3.109 The evolving view from Earls Court underground station into Exhibition Square and along the High Street is organised so that the existing local icon, the Empress State Building, remains its focus. The southern gateway into the Development Option (RBKC) Proposals offers views along the residential crescent and along the Lost River Park with the existing Ashfield House terminating this view. Access References Ref. 3-1 DETR, 1999; Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)) (England and Wales) Regulations, (as amended 2007). Ref. 3-2 Greater London Authority, October 2009; The Draft Replacement London Plan. Ref. 3-3 GLA, London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham and Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea, 2011; Draft Earls Court West Kensington Opportunity Area: Supplementary Planning Document. First Draft For Public Consultation. Ref. 3-4 GLA, 2010; London View Management Framework SPG. Ref. 3-5 London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham, 2003; London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham Unitary Development Plan as amended by the Secretary of State September 2007. Ref. 3-6 Terry Farrell and Partners on behalf of Earls Court Properties Ltd, 2010; Shaping West London 3.110 Changes were made to the existing road junction on Warwick Road from a fork with central road junction to the two one-way crescents linking the areas beyond the first development plots. This developed through understanding the constraints of the ground level changes and obstacles presented by the existing infrastructure (portals, train tunnels etc). 3.111 The new crescents within the Development Option (RBKC) Site were designed whilst reflecting the many traditional Crescents in West London. Hence, these crescents are not a major primary vehicular connection into the development area. Uses 3.112 The same uses are proposed as those within the Earls Court Site-Wide Masterplan. A detailed study has been carried out to ensure that the uses provided the required proportions for a scheme located within the RBKC only. Although the uses are the same, the locations have been moved to take into account the requirements of the Development Option (RBKC) Proposals. This included the movement of the hotel use and uses of residential, A1-A5, Hotel, serviced apartments, community and cultural at gateway entrances onto the Development Option (RBKC) Site. Landscape Strategy 3.113 The public realm and landscape strategy for has been developed as an integral part of the RBKC Masterplan and adheres to the principles established within the Earls Court Masterplan strategy. 3.114 Landscaping has evolved to absorb any wind implications from the west across the EC2 deck towards the building plots and High Street / Warwick Walk. 3.115 To recap, the underling principles for the public realm and landscape on the Development Option (RBKC) only Site is to: Create a framework of open space that provides support to the built proposals; Establishes connections and permeability; Positively reinforces its existing context; Provide a series of open spaces that supports proposed land use, creating a usable and sustainable green landscape; Promote environments that responds to existing and changing climate conditions; and Promote biodiversity and create habitats that are rich, diverse, enjoyable and usable. 3-17 Properties Earls Court Project Application 1 Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea Environmental Statement Volume I June 2011 47