Appeal by Redtree Ventures Ltd 104 TOLLINGTON
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Town & Country Planning Act 1990 Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 Appeal by Redtree Ventures Ltd 104 TOLLINGTON PARK, LONDON, N4 3RB REFERENCES: Council Reference: P2018/1225/FUL PINS Reference: APP/V5570/W/18/3204636 SUMMARY TO PROOF OF EVIDENCE (HERITAGE MATTERS) by STEPHEN LEVRANT September 2018 Stephen Levrant: Heritage Architecture Ltd 62 British Grove London W4 2NL T 020 8748 550 E [email protected] Land to the Rear of 104 Tollington Park, N4 3RB. Summary to Proof of Evidence by STEPHEN LEVRANT September 2018 A. SUMMARY TO STATEMENT RELATING TO HERITAGE MATTERS 1. My name is Stephen Levrant and I am a chartered architect and principal of Heritage Architecture Ltd, a practice specialising in matters concerned with the historical cultural environment. I am a member of both the Royal Institute of British Architects ant the Institute of Historic Building Conservation. I have also been elected a Fellow of the Royal Society of Arts, and of the Association for Studies in the Conservation of Historic Buildings, and served on the latter committee for many years. 2. I have spent my professional career working with historic buildings, in both the public and private sectors of the profession with more than 30 years of experience in this specialist area and hold memberships of numerous conservation societies. I am also a committee member of the Wallpaper History Society and served on two London Conservation Area advisory committees, one of which I helped establish and am currently professional advisor to another. I have also been called upon to provide specialist professional conservation opinion and evidence at many appeals, appeal hearings and public inquiries. A fuller account of my career is included in Appendix 1 of the Proof of Evidence. 3. My Proof of Evidence deals with heritage issues arising in the appeal of the client against the London Borough of Islington ("LBI”) for refusal of Planning Permission in respect of the proposed residential development at Number 104 Tollington Park and is limited to heritage significance, townscape assessment of the area and impact issues to demonstrate how the proposed development will secure the preservation and enhancement of the historic environment. 4. The subject site is Number 104 Tollington Park (exclusive of the main house). The rear part of the subject site comprises three blocks of single-storey garages around three sides of the former garden space with a central concrete yard area; these garages date from the early 20th century and are visually poor with no architectural or aesthetic merit. The subject site also includes the former front garden/forecourt space of Number 104. The house itself does not form part of the subject site referred to throughout the proof of evidence. The site falls within the Tollington Park Conservation Area. There are no designated heritage assets within the site, although the main house at ©Stephen Levrant: Heritage Architecture Ltd p2 of 6 Land to the Rear of 104 Tollington Park, N4 3RB. Summary to Proof of Evidence by STEPHEN LEVRANT September 2018 Number 104 is considered to be a non-designated heritage asset owing to its local listing by LBI. 5. The proposal comprises the demolition of the existing three blocks of garages and the construction of nine two-storey “mews” houses to the east and west boundaries of the rear part of the subject site, together with the reinstatement of appropriate landscaping to the former front garden area and adjacent to the rear elevation of the house. If approved, the appeal scheme would also enable the repair and restoration of the front and rear elevations of the house at Number 104 Tollington Park pursuant to a separate permission (P2018/1351/FUL) and linked to this appeal by a S.106 agreement. 6. The current application was refused by LBI in June 2018. There were four reasons for refusal, the first of which relates to heritage matters to which this proof of evidence will respond: The proposed development by reason of its excessive and inappropriate design, scale, massing, bulk and footprint is considered to form a dominant and discordant form of development in this backland site location. The proposal would have a clear detrimental impact on the surrounding private realm and would fail to preserve or enhance the character and appearance of the Tollington Park Conservation Area and the existing locally listed terrace. 7. The LPA have agreed that the principle of the replacement of the existing garages is acceptable and that the use of brick, Juliet balconies and flat green roofs may be considered acceptable on any replacement buildings (ref Officer’s Report paragraphs 30 and 37). 8. It is also common ground that there is no impact on the setting of any statutorily listed buildings. 9. The subject site is considered to possess little if any heritage significance in itself beyond illustrating the changing socio-economic fortunes of the Tollington Park area and the Duerdin Villas in particular. All values have been heavily compromised by the business and commercial uses of the site throughout the 20th century (see Chapter F: Significance Appraisal of the Proof of Evidence). ©Stephen Levrant: Heritage Architecture Ltd p3 of 6 Land to the Rear of 104 Tollington Park, N4 3RB. Summary to Proof of Evidence by STEPHEN LEVRANT September 2018 10. In accordance with the 2016 Historic England guidance on the assessment of unlisted buildings in a conservation area, it is considered that the rear part of the subject site makes a neutral to negative contribution to the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. The poor-quality landscaping and lack of planting within the front part of the site is considered to make a negative contribution to the character and appearance of the Conservation Area (see Chapters E and F: Characterisation Appraisal and Significance Appraisal of the Proof of Evidence). 11. The principal sources of heritage significance for Number 104 are derived from its historical and aesthetic values which are recognized in its local listing. The rear part of the subject site is considered to be a neutral to negative contributor to the setting and significance of the locally listed Number 104, whilst the front part of the subject site is also considered to be a neutral to negative contributor to the setting and significance of the locally listed Number 104 (see Chapter H: Significance and Impact Assessments, Main House of the Proof of Evidence). 12. The existing character and appearance of the Conservation Area has been shaped by its changing fortunes in terms of the socio-economic history of the area and the uses of the buildings. Whilst the built form is generally uniform and of high architectural quality in terms of 19th century classical villas and terraces, the uses of the buildings for businesses and commercial enterprises throughout the 20 h century has led to an erosion in original detailing and uses of front and rear garden spaces, many of which have been eroded or replaced by hard landscaping and workshops, particularly those at the former Duerdin Villas. Only more recently, with the decline in commercial uses, has a more predominant residential character re-emerged within the area. 13. The prevailing age, style and materials within the Conservation Area are all drawn from the 19th century villas and terraces, bookended by the “landmark” statutorily listed churches. The rear part of the subject site is largely enclosed by neighbouring extensions and boundary walls and can at best be glimpsed from the public realm on Tollington Park via the “carriageway”. The garage blocks date from the early 20 h century and have a form and use of materials which is alien to most of the high-quality architecture in the area. The site was originally the rear garden of Number 104 – all traces of landscaping have ©Stephen Levrant: Heritage Architecture Ltd p4 of 6 Land to the Rear of 104 Tollington Park, N4 3RB. Summary to Proof of Evidence by STEPHEN LEVRANT September 2018 been obliterated and there is no longer a perceivable garden character. The site no longer possesses an undeveloped open garden character unlike many other rear spaces within the Conservation Area. However, the presence of garaging does illustrate the development of the area in the early 20th century as residential uses gave way to business and commercial uses which saw the construction of many new additions within former gardens, hence the neutral to negative contribution to the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. 14. The proposed modern design using a mews typology and use of traditional and modern materials are considered appropriate to the context of the subject site given its historical development, the surrounding built context and the historical character and uses of the Conservation Area as a whole. The replacement of the existing garage blocks and front forecourt with formal soft landscaping and new mews buildings of an appropriate and high-quality design and sympathetic to the local context will enhance the contribution the subject site makes to the character and appearance of the Conservation Area as a whole. 15. The proposed height, bulk and mass of the mews houses have been key considerations to keep the new buildings subservient within the enclosed site without further limiting the sense of openness within the setting of the locally listed building to the rear. The openness of the former garden site has long been compromised by the existing garages and neighbouring extensions. The proposed landscaping will help to sustain and enhance the sense of openness to the setting of the rear elevation of the locally listed building and will ensure that the rear part of the subject site will form a more attractive and positive contributor to the rear setting and significance of the locally listed building, whilst sustaining an appreciation of the historical development and uses of the site.