DOCSLIB.ORG

BS-Kew-Gardens-CLOSING-FINAL-1

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
BS-Kew-Gardens-CLOSING-FINAL-1 APP/F5540/W/17/3180962 & APP/F5540/Z/17/3173208 TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990 APPEAL BY STARBONES LTD LAND AT CHISWICK ROUNDABOUT, GREAT WEST ROAD, CHISWICK, LONDON CLOSING SPEECH ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF ROYAL BOTANIC GARDENS KEW Introduction 1. The Royal Botanic Gardens (“Kew Gardens”) is a world renowned botanical garden established in 17591 that has developed through centuries of scientific and cultural evolution and is now also a global scientific institute. It is also the site of a designed landscape of international significance with contributions by most of the major landscape designers of the eighteenth century including Charles Bridgeman, William Kent and Lancelot “Capability” Brown. This landscape was later redesigned in the nineteenth century by William Hooker, William A Nesfield and Decimus Burton to create the most famous example of a Victorian botanic garden. 2. Kew Gardens is also the site of a very important collection of buildings, including a large number of listed buildings, six of them Grade I listed, of all periods of English architecture from the sixteenth century onwards, including: Kew Palace; a number of important surviving garden buildings from the eighteenth century and the most significant collection of glasshouses worldwide including the Orangery, the Palm House and the very recently restored and re-opened Temperate House2. 3. It was Kew Gardens’ unique combination of: 1) its scientific, and in particular botanical and ecological, importance; 2) its highly influential landscape design; and 1 It houses a historically and scientifically significant collection of living and preserved plants and fungi. Kew Gardens contains the most diverse collection of plant species of any botanic garden in the world. As Mr Ground said in opening it “has had a greater impact on the world than any other botanic garden”. 2 This has recently undergone a £42million restoration and was re-opened by Sir David Attenborough in May 2018. 1 WORK\31744720\v.1 17316.240 Classification: Confidential 3) its outstanding collection of historic buildings and other architectural features that led to its inscription as a World Heritage Site in 20033. 4. As explained in opening4, and as discussed in Mr Williams’ evidence, the Board of Trustees of the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew (“RBG Kew”5) is a non-departmental public body sponsored by DEFRA. It is a charity6. Its Trustees are appointed by the Government. Being a charity, the decision to seek rule 6 status and to oppose the appeal proposal at this inquiry was not one that was lightly taken given the considerable costs and resources involved. 5. The fact is that the RBG Kew, while monitoring all planning applications in six wards in the LB of Hounslow and two in the LB of Richmond7, only objects to a very small number of applications. It objects only when its interests are adversely affected, as is the case here. It really is a wholly exceptional course for RBG Kew to have sought rule 6 status and to be appearing at a planning appeal as it is doing here8. It has done so only because of genuine concern as to the harm that will result to the World Heritage Site if this appeal is allowed. RBG Kew’ case is that the appeal proposal is “a tipping–point beyond which further development would result in substantial harm to the OUV, authenticity and integrity of the World Heritage Site”9. For the Appellant in opening10 to seek to dismiss out-of-hand these concerns as “overblown, inappropriate and irresponsible” is risible and betrays a fundamental lack of appreciation of the Outstanding Universal Value or “OUV” of Kew Gardens as a World Heritage Site. 3 See further below. 4 INQ4. 5 In this closing “Kew Gardens” is used to describe the physical site of the gardens - “The Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew” - which has the World Heritage Site designation. In contrast “RBG Kew” is used to identify the legal entity that now occupies and manages the site: “The Board of Trustees of the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew.” 6 In opening it was said that RBG Kew was a “registered charity” (INQ4, emphasis added). This is an error, for which apologies. The correct position is that it is an exempt charity (i.e. under the Charities Act it is exempt from the requirement to register with the Charity Commission (hence it does not have a charity registration number)) but it is a charity regulated by, and subject to, charity law. 7 This is several dozen applications a week. It has done this monitoring for many years. 8 See Mr Williams EinC, confirming the accuracy of the content of para. 9 of RBG Kew’s opening (INQ4) to be correct. 9 See para. 5.31 of the Mayor’s London’s World Heritage Sites – Guidance on Settings SPG, 2012, CDC.11. 10 See para. 91. 2 WORK\31744720\v.1 17316.240 Classification: Confidential 6. From the outset RBG Kew’s objection to the appeal proposal has been based on harm to the OUV of the World Heritage Site, in particular: (i) Kew Garden’s rich and diverse historic cultural landscape, and (ii) Kew Garden’s iconic architectural legacy, in particular the Orangery11. The LB of Hounslow refused the scheme citing the impact on the setting and OUV of the Kew World Heritage Site in its reasons for refusal. Moreover, Historic England (“HE”) in its consultation response12 indicated that it “considered that there would be appreciable adverse harm to the OUV of the World Heritage Site (and the significance of the Grade I listed buildings …) …”13 (emphasis added). The issues upon which RBG Kew makes submissions 7. RBG Kew’s objection is to Appeal A (APP/F5540/W/17/318962). RBG Kew makes no case on the linked Appeal B (APP/F5540/Z/3173208). This is because these advertisements would not be visible from Kew Gardens. But of course, if Appeal A is refused, as RBG Kew says it should be, then Appeal B must also inevitably be refused. 8. RBG Kew’s case on this appeal is very largely confined to Main Issue 2 – the effect on the setting and significance of heritage assets. However, in so far as it overlaps with Main Issue 1 – the design issue - some submissions must be made on this also. Preliminary matters 9. Before considering in detail the heritage impacts there are a number of preliminary matters to be dealt with. (i) The support for RBG Kew’s objections by others and the weight to be given to these views 11 See CDE.07. 12 CDE.05 13 The consultation response states “[t]he outstanding universal values of the World Heritage Site specifically refer to the landscape design and the iconic architectural legacy of the Royal Botanic Gardens. A particularly important aspect of the many highly graded listed assets within the WHS is their designed landscape setting. Similarly, much of the significance of the grade I registered park & garden comes from the landscape design with its primary and secondary views, with formal and informal elements overlapping. Whilst certain viewpoints may be of particular value within the WHS, the experience of this unique asset is a kinetic one which clearly cannot be distilled to singular viewpoints”. And it is also said “[t]he development will appear as an arbitrary new element on the skyline from within the World Heritage Site from a number of viewpoints. An important kinetic view affected would be of the Grade I listed Orangery as one approaches from the south west …” 3 WORK\31744720\v.1 17316.240 Classification: Confidential a. The World Heritage Site Steering Group 10. The decision to actively participate and to oppose the appeal at inquiry has been endorsed by the World Heritage Site Steering Group14 (“the Steering Group”). This brings together various bodies to ensure that the Kew World Heritage Site is considered as part of wider decision-making. In addition to the Director and departmental heads, the Steering Group includes representatives of: the LB of Richmond; the LB of Hounslow; the GLA15; HE; the UK national committee of International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS-UK)16; Thames Landscape Strategy17, and also external consultants18. The Steering Group also oversees the implementation of the World Heritage Management Plan for Kew Gardens (2014) (“the Management Plan”)19. b. The World Heritage Centre 11. The refusal of planning permission has also been very recently supported by the UNESCO World Heritage Centre in Paris. The Centre supports the World Heritage Committee20. 12. Thus, in a letter to the Department for Culture, Media and Support (“DCMS”) dated 28 May 2018, the Director of the World Heritage Centre, confirmed their support for the 14 See section 7 of Mr Williams’ proof, his App. 4 and his answers in EinC. 15 Given the Appellant’s suggestion of support from the Mayor (see below) it is notable that support for RBG Kew’s objection to the appeal proposal was endorsed by the Steering Group which includes a GLA representative. 16 See Mr Croft’s proof at para. 3.3.5 for the role of ICOMOS; it acts as adviser to the World Heritage Committee and World Heritage Centre – as to which see below. ICOMOS-UK is the UK national committee of ICOMOS. They are an independent charity with a UK-wide and international mission to promote and support best practice in the conservation, care and understanding of the historic environment. ICOMOS-UK also has a role in advising on aspects of World Heritage and sites for nomination across the UK 17 The Thames Landscape Strategy is a not-for-profit partnership that champions the river corridor between Weybridge, Hampton and Kew that for centuries has been known as the Arcadian Thames: see CDF.11.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Trade Marks Manual
    Trade Marks Manual Intellectual Property Office is an operating name of the Patent Office Contents New applications .........................................................................................................3 The classification guide ..............................................................................................9 The classification addendum ..............................................................................31 Classification desk instructions ........................................................................... 55 The examination guide ...............................................................................................84 Addendum ........................................................................................................257 Certification and collective marks ........................................................................... 299 International examination guide .............................................................................. 317 Register maintenance .............................................................................................. 359 Tribunal section ....................................................................................................... 372 Trade Marks Manual 1 1. Preliminary check of the application form We check every application to make sure that it meets the requirements for filing stated in the Act and Rules. Some requirements are essential in order to obtain a filing date. Others are not essential for filing date
    [Show full text]
  • For Immediate Release 11 November 2005
    For Immediate Release 11 November 2005 Contact: Catherine Manson 44.207.389.2664 [email protected] Christina Freyberg 44.207.389.2117 [email protected] PROPERTY FROM THE ESTATE OF HIS ROYAL HIGHNESS, PRINCE HENRY, DUKE OF GLOUCESTER, KG, KT, KP, TO BE OFFERED AT CHRISTIE’S IN JANUARY 2006 London - Christie’s announces that a selection of works of art and books from the Estate of His Royal Highness, Prince Henry, Duke of Gloucester, KG, KT, KP and other family items will be offered for sale on 26 and 27 January 2006. The auction will comprise a broad range of works of art including furniture, silver, porcelain, Asian art and pictures as well as a superb sporting library. The selection to be offered at auction reflects the life, travel and interests of HRH the late Prince Henry, Duke of Gloucester from the sporting areas of the collection to the objects and works of art that formed part of the interiors of his Royal residence. Universally well regarded and known as a dedicated and diligent individual, His Royal Highness the Prince Henry, Duke of Gloucester, KG, KT, KP (31 March 1900 -10 June 1974) was the third son of King George V and Queen Mary. Prince Henry was the last Prince to be photographed as a baby sitting on Queen Victoria’s lap and the first Royal Prince to go to school, rather than being educated at home. He entered Sandhurst towards the end of the First World War and embarked upon the career of a regimental cavalry officer. In 1928, his father, by now King, created him Duke of Gloucester, Earl of Ulster and Baron Culloden.
    [Show full text]
  • WH2-3 Appendices Poe Chris Miele, Heritage Townscape
    FOR THE APPLICANT: WESTON HOMES EXPERT EVIDENCE TO THE PUBLIC INQUIRY UNDER SECTION 77 OF THE TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990 ANGLIA SQUARE, NORWICH APPENDICES: HERITAGE, TOWNSCAPE AND VISUAL IMPACT WH 2/3 LPA REF. 18/00330/F PINS REF. APP/G2625/V/19/3225505 Dr Chris Miele MRTPI IHBC Senior Partner Montagu Evans LLP December 2019 2 Appendix 1.0 3 DR CHRIS MIELE PARTNER, PLANNING Experienced in advising on development affecting major heritage ■ Market Towers, Nine Elms – Wandsworth – Planning and development advisor to CIT/Green assets, including several World Properties on the redevelopment of a complex Heritage Sites across the UK. strategic site at the gateway to the Wandsworth section of the Vauxhall Nine Elms Battersea Opportunity Area. ■ Elizabeth House, London – Townscape and Key Skills heritage advice with regard to the redevelopment All aspects of planning, urban design and the historic of this sensitive site located with the Waterloo environment with particular expertise in: Opportunity Area and featured within strategic views identified within the London View ■ Listed building consents, including for major Management Framework, including from the alterations and extensions Palace of Westminster WHS. The work culminated ■ New development in conservation areas in a Townscape, Visual and Built Heritage ■ Charitable and public projects, with an emphasis Assessment Chapter for an Environmental on museums, galleries and educational projects Statement. ■ Masterplanning in the historic environment ■ St Michael’s Square, West Croydon – Re- ■ Mixed use central London development at St Michael’s Square, West Croydon comprising the construction of two tall ■ Tall buildings buildings and façade retention of 6-12 Station ■ Historic landscape characterization Road.
    [Show full text]
  • Historic England London Plan Review No.2 Report
    Historic England London Plan Review No.2 Report Final | September 2016 This report takes into account the particular instructions and requirements of our client. It is not intended for and should not be relied upon by any third party and no responsibility is undertaken to any third party. Job number 247256 13 Fitzroy Street London W1T 4BQ United Kingdom Historic England London Plan Review No.2 Report Contents Page Executive Summary i 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Purpose of the Study 1 1.2 Background 1 1.3 Aims and Objectives 2 1.4 Structure of this Report 3 2 Methodology 4 2.1 Overview of Stages of Work 4 2.2 Compliance Framework 4 2.3 Conservation Officers Survey 5 2.4 Case Studies 6 3 Compliance Framework 8 3.1 Policy 2.10 Central Activities Zone – strategic priorities 8 3.2 Policy 7.4 Local Character 9 3.3 Policy 7.7 Location and design of tall and large buildings 10 3.4 Policy 7.8 Heritage assets and archaeology 12 3.5 Policy 7.9 Heritage led regeneration 15 3.6 Policy 7.10 World Heritage Sites 16 3.7 Policy 7.11 LVMF 16 3.8 Policy 7.12 Implementing the LVMF 17 4 Conservation Officers Survey 19 4.1 Who responded 19 4.2 Relationship with Local Plans 19 4.3 Use of London Plan 19 4.4 Which London Plan policies are used 20 4.5 Weight given to London Plan policies 20 4.6 Benefit of London Plan policies 20 4.7 Suggested improvements 21 5 Case Studies 22 5.1 The Case Studies 22 5.2 Differences between decision makers 29 5.3 Analysis of policies 32 5.4 Weight given to London Plan heritage policies compared to other policies in the Plan 41 | Final | September 2016 Historic England London Plan Review No.2 Report 6 Findings and Recommendations 46 6.1 Overall Findings 46 Appendices Appendix A London Plan Policies Appendix B Conservation Officers Questionnaire Appendix C Compliance Framework Appendix D Case Study Proformas Appendix E Use of London Plan Heritage Policies by LPAs | Final | September 2016 Historic England London Plan Review No.2 Report Executive Summary Background London is a complex world city with a rich and diverse heritage.
    [Show full text]
  • Royal Household Mail Postal Markings and Cachets from 1990 to Q1 2012 an Update to the Royal Household Mail Handbook, 1992
    Royal Household Mail Postal Markings and Cachets from 1990 to Q1 2012 An update to the Royal Household Mail handbook, 1992 Glenn H Morgan Note: There are a number of postal markings that were introduced years or even many decades before the Vidler and post-Vidler years which are included here, but separately from recent markings. They were gradually phased out from 1990 onwards and none probably still exist in use, especially when counter services were withdrawn from Balmoral, Holyrood and Sandringham. This compilation excludes any markings known not to have been used from 1990 onwards. (See the 1992 Royal Household Mail handbook by Glenn H Morgan for those.) Royal Household Mail ~ Glenn H Morgan ~ Version 2.0 ~ 13 March2012 ~ Page 1 Balmoral Castle Balmoral Castle on the Balmoral Estate in Aberdeenshire, Scotland is the private residence of The Queen. Mail from this castle is collected and handled by Royal Mail Aberdeen. Post Office counter services were permanently withdrawn on 9 October 2000. No longer in Use Introduced pre-Vidler era, but still used subsequently Rectangular Postage Paid Cancellations Date introduced Never introduced. Only proof pulls should exist Intended Usage First class mail destined for inland addresses Date introduced Never introduced. Only proof pulls should exist Intended Usage Mail destined for overseas addresses, hence inclusion of Great Britain Royal Household Mail ~ Glenn H Morgan ~ Version 2.0 ~ 13 March2012 ~ Page 2 Still in Use in Q1 2012 Circular Court Post Office Date Stamps Date introduced By 1998 Date range seen 1998 to 2012 Usage First Day Covers. Rectangular Postage Paid Cancellations Date introduced 1998 Date range seen 1998 to 2012 Usage First class mail destined for inland addresses Notes Incorporation of Aberdeenshire and postcode, plus ‘A/C’.
    [Show full text]
  • Historic Buildings and Conservation Areas Assessment
    Newcombe House & Kensington Church Street Revised Application: Historic Buildings and Conservation Areas Assessment September 2017 Newcombe House and Kensington Church Street 43/45 Notting Hill Gate, 39/41 Notting Hill Gate and 161-237 Kensington Church Street (odd), London Revised Application: Historic Buildings and Conservation Areas Assessment for Notting Hill Gate KCS Limited September 2017 ii Donald Insall Associates | Newcombe House and Kensington Church Street Contents Circumstances of the Revised Application 1 1.0 Introduction and Background 2 2.0 Historical Background 6 3.0 Description of the Site and Buildings 26 Appendix I - Sources of Information 33 Appendix II - The Urban Street Past and Present - a supplementary report by Donald Insall Associates 34 Appendix III - Listed Landmark Buildings and Tall Landmark Buildings - Two maps produced by Donald Insall Associates 45 Appendix IV - Listed buildings in the vicinity - A schedule of list descriptions and photographs 48 Appendix - The Conservation Areas with maps and short descriptions of their character 88 Contact information Helen Ensor IHBC (Associate Director) [email protected] Tel: 020 7245 9888 London Office 12 Devonshire Street London, W1G 7AB www.insall-architects.co.uk This report and all intellectual property rights in it and arising from it are the property of or are under licence to Donald Insall Associates or the client. Neither the whole nor any part of this report, nor any drawing, plan, other document or any information contained within it may be reproduced in any form without the prior written consent of Donald Insall Associates or the client as appropriate. All material in which the intellectual property rights have been licensed to DIA or the client and such rights belong to third parties may not be published or reproduced at all in any form, and any request for consent to the use of such material for publication or reproduction should be made directly to the owner of the intellectual property rights therein.
    [Show full text]
  • Town and Country Planning Act 1990 Appeal By
    TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990 APPEAL BY STARBONES LTD LAND AT CHISWICK ROUNDABOUT, GREAT WEST ROAD, CHISWICK, LONDON W4 APP/F5540/W/17/3180962 & APP/F5540/Z/17/3173208 PROOF OF EVIDENCE: ROYAL BOTANIC GARDENS, KEW WORLD HERITAGE SITE Andrew Croft BA MA On behalf of Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew May 2018 CONTENTS 1.0 QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE ............................................................ 3 2.0 DEVELOPMENT AND SCOPE OF EVIDENCE .................................................. 5 3.0 LEGISLATIVE AND PLANNING POLICY CONTEXT ........................................ 9 4.0 SETTING AND THE ASSESSMENT OF IMPACT ............................................. 45 5.0 ROYAL BOTANIC GARDENS, KEW WORLD HERITAGE SITE ...................... 53 6.0 OTHER AFFECTED ASSETS WITHIN THE WHS ............................................. 84 7.0 REVIEW OF THVIA AND THVIA ADDENDUM........................................... 107 8.0 CONCLUSIONS .......................................................................................... 113 Appendices A EXTRACTS FROM 2014 WHS MANAGEMENT PLAN B EXTRACTS FROM 2002 WHS CONSERVATION PLAN C SUPPORTING MATERIAL D ILLUSTRATIVE PHOTOGRAPHS E HISTORIC ILLUSTRATIONS, MAPS AND PLANS F 2014 PERIODIC REPORT G EXTRACTS FROM 2014 WHS MANAGEMENT PLAN RELATING TO SETTING H EXTRACTS FROM LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND LOCAL PLANS I LAND BETWEEN CITY FARM AND COTSWOLD VIEW, BATH: APPEAL DECISION J LAND SOUTH OF ST GEORGE’S ROAD, HAYLE: APPEAL DECISION K ELIZABETH HOUSE, 39 YORK ROAD, LONDON: APPEAL DECISION L LAND OFF NORTH AVENUE, DARLEY ABBEY: APPEAL DECISION 1.0 QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE 1.1.1 My name is Andrew Croft. I am a Director at Chris Blandford Associates, an independent environmental, heritage and landscape consultancy. I was formerly a Technical Director at Atkins Ltd, a firm of multi- disciplinary engineering and environmental consultants. 1.1.2 I am a professional heritage consultant with a BA in Archaeology and Prehistory and a MA in Landscape Archaeology, both from the University of Sheffield.
    [Show full text]
  • Barnwell Castle - Part 2
    Barnwell Castle - Part 2 Fig. 1. Aerial photograph from the east taken in 2019 showing the road and brook to the left, the Manor House bottom left and the courtyard with the stable block and medieval barn to the bottom right. The well is situated between the stable block and medieval barn on the far side of the single storey later stable block. The approach to the castle gatehouse is on a similar alignment to that shown on the 1718 estate map. © T Howard. Barnwell Castle - Part 2 abbot. When the Abbot renewed the Barn- Brian Giggins well Market Charter in 1278, he lost the right to hold one of the two weekly markets but The first part of this article in volume 32 of retained the right to hold a six-day fair.² In the Castle Studies Group Journal, mainly the following year, the Abbot of Peterbor- covered the first decade of the castle’s ough disputed the right to hold the market history when it was owned by Berenger le which resulted in it being discontinued and a Moyne. This article looks at the castle’s loss of revenue to Ramsey Abbey.³ later history and its relationship to the four ¹⁰ J Harvey, Henry Yevele. The Life of an structures that make up the present mano- Ramsey Abbey appears to have let part of rial complex: The Manor or Lordship Berenger’s Barnwell holdings to William Le House, the stables, barn and well (fig. 1). Moyne, as he acted as a guarantor in a 1287 court case.⁴ In 1294, William, along with History from 1276 Thomas Warwick, undertook the Abbey’s The sale of Berenger’s estates to Ramsey required service in the King’s Gascony cam- Abbey (Benedictine) in 1276¹ saw the role of paign in respect of the lands formerly held this small castle change to monastic owner- by Berenger.
    [Show full text]
  • 20101009102De.Pdf
    jggvr^; isri I |PJ| |PJ| se i ii ii s» s» IlIP 1* 1* BH&BSMHHHBB9HH^BBB9Hn9H^Bii9i IIs HHtS i ii*£^ t^i^?' Rlillj f !5; i;. '¦; 9. ¦ ¦ 11•• t* ¦ ¦ fix (31 II ,i Pi? I iiiI I I 1Sf? I*- t« KVp&V' tj E^ >' E« j! = — — M E 1 =c ~mm mZ > H r ~* I = (fl 0 o> 1 0 O > =00 -< M M o P 0 ¦n = o 2 O t* ¦ to 0 ro JJ z o <a o 2 X 0 o m E* pi u> (/> =IA E^1 = W Icn-i = M ~ w — i -\ THE DESCENT OF THE FAMILY OF D EACO N OF ELSTOWE AND LONDON, WITH SOME GENEALOGICAL, BIOGRAPHICAL AND TOPOGRAPHICAL NOTES, AND SKETCHES OF ALLIED FAMILIES INCLUDING REYNES } ( MERES AND OF > J OF CLIFTON, ) v KIRTON. BY i EDWARD DEACON, Hon. Treas. Fairfield Co. Historical Society, Conn. Bridgeport, Conn. 1898. 2075 i Grove Cottage, Residence ofEdward Deacon, Bridgeport, Conn, TO -THE MEMORY OF MY FATHER AND MOTHER. " /// this world, Who can do a tiling, willnot ; And who would do it, cannot, Iperceive : " Yet the will's somewhat Browning. PREFACE. This work being intended for private distribution only, to members of the family, and possibly to a few societies inter­ ested in genealogy, no apology is needed for the personal character of some of its contents. Ithas been a labor of love during: the past eighteen years to gather the facts herein presented, and the writer has the satisfaction of knowing that he has succeeded in bringing to light from the musty documents of distant centuries, some interesting material which has never before seen print.
    [Show full text]
  • Rosalind Ramirez Collection
    GB165-0408 ROSALIND RAMIREZ Reference code: GB165-0408 Title: Rosalind Ramirez Collection Name of creator: Ramirez, Rosalind Cecilia (1912-1999) Teacher and Governess Dates of creation of material: 1929-1964, 1999 Level of description: Fonds Extent: 3 boxes Biographical history: Ramirez, Rosalind Cecilia (1912-1999) Teacher and Governess Born 12 January 1912. Educated Ramsgate, then Cheltenham Ladies’ College. Froebal teacher training course 1932-1935, taught at Repton Junior School 1940-1942. Governess to King Faisal II of Iraq 1943-1946, Governess to the sons of the Duke of Gloucester 1946- 1950. School’s inspector in the Midlands 1950-1974. Died 28 September 1999. Scope and content: Papers relating to Rosalind Ramirez’s life and work as governess to King Faisal II of Iraq and her subsequent life, including letters from King Faisal II, letters of condolence received upon his death, and the research for and publication of a number of essays on the subject of Iraq and King Faisal II. System of arrangement: 1. Correspondence between Rosalind and friends and family 2. Newspaper clippings related to King Faisal II and Iraq 3. Photographs 4. Research and essays on Faisal II and Iraq by Rosalind Ramirez 5. Coronation and funeral of King Faisal II and the death of Rosalind Ramirez Access conditions: Open Language of material: English, with some Arabic words and names Conditions governing reproduction: No restrictions on copying or quotation other than statutory regulations and preservation concerns Custodial history: In possession of Rosalind Ramirez and her family Immediate source of acquisition: Received as a gift from Alison Warner, August 2007 and May 2010 1 ©Middle East Centre, St Antony’s College, Oxford.
    [Show full text]
  • Historic England Response on Watermans Site Proposals
    LONDON OFFICE Mr Stephen Hissett Direct Dial: 020 7973 3785 London Borough of Hounslow Development Control Our ref: P00639153 The Civic Centre Lampton Road TW3 4DN 14 September 2017 Dear Mr Hissett Arrangements for Handling Heritage Applications Direction 2015 & T&CP (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015 40 AND 40A HIGH STREET (ALBANY RIVERSIDE) BRENTFORD TW8 0DS Application No 00607/T/P1 Thank you for your letter of 10 August 2017 notifying Historic England of the above application. Historic England first commented on pre-application proposals at the Waterman’s Site in August 2016. The proposals were presented internally to our regional casework review panel, and the applicants also presented to our most senior casework committee on site at Kew Gardens in September 2016. Following that meeting further advice was issued on 7 October 2016. Having been consulted on subsequent amendments to the scheme Historic England provided a third letter of advice on 4 August this year. Summary Throughout the course of our pre-application consultation we set out our serious concerns over the impact of the proposals on the setting of the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, World Heritage Site, and in particular the Grade I listed Scheduled Monument of Kew Palace. The setting of the Palace and World Heritage Site is of the highest quality and is an essential part of the experience and enjoyment of this world famous site. It also plays a major part in understanding how Kew and the ‘Arcadian Thames’ played such an important role in drawing the royal court and centuries of royal, scientific, and artistic patronage to this area of London.
    [Show full text]
  • APP/G6100/V/19/3226914 Your Ref: GLA/4279 & 01508/A/P6 10
    Our ref: APP/G6100/V/19/3226914 Mr Mark Connell Your ref: GLA/4279 & 01508/A/P6 JLL 30 Warwick Street London W1B 5NH 10 September 2020 Dear Sir TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990 – SECTION 77 APPLICATION MADE BY L&Q LAND AT CITROEN SITE, CAPITAL INTERCHANGE WAY, BRENTFORD TW8 0EX APPLICATION REF: GLA/4279 & 01508/A/P6 1. I am directed by the Secretary of State to say that consideration has been given to the report of David Nicholson RIBA IHBC, who held a public local inquiry on 14-24 January and 4-6 February 2020 into your client’s application for planning permission for redevelopment of the site to provide a mixed use scheme of 441 residential units (Class C3) including 50% affordable housing with ancillary facilities, flexible uses (within Classes A1, A2, A3 and B1) and a nursery (Class D1). Comprising buildings of 12, 13, 16, 17 and 18 storeys in height with associated cycle parking, car parking, play space, landscaping and public realm improvements, ref. GLA/4279 & 01508/A/P6, dated 3 November 2017. 2. On 15 April 2019, the Secretary of State directed, in pursuance of Section 77 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, that your client’s application be referred to him instead of being dealt with by the local planning authority. Inspector’s recommendation and summary of the decision 3. The Inspector recommended that the application be approved. 4. For the reasons given below, the Secretary of State agrees with the Inspector’s conclusions, except where noted, and agrees with his recommendation.
    [Show full text]