Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London NW8 6PX Heritage Statement

Heritage Significance, Impact Assessment & Justification Statement

Dorian A. T. A. Crone BA BArch DipTP RIBA MRTPI IHBC Daniel Cummins MA (Oxon) MSc PhD Melisa Thomas BA PgDip LPC of Heritage Information Ltd

January 2021

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021)

14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement

Issued January 2021

While Copyright in this document report as a whole is vested in Dorian Crone, Daniel Cummins and Melisa Thomas of Heritage Information Ltd, copyright to individual contributions regarding sections of referenced works belongs to their respective authors, and no part may be reproduced, transmitted stored in a retrieval system in any form or by any mean whether electronic, mechanical, via photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the previous consent from Dorian Crone, Daniel Cummins and Melisa Thomas.

Contact details: Dorian Crone, [email protected]

Page | 1

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021)

Contents

1.0. Introduction ...... 3 2.0. Location and Heritage Context ...... 5 3.0. History and Development of the Subject Site ...... 14 4.0. Description of the Subject Site As Existing ...... 26 5.0. The Significance of the Subject Site ...... 30 5.4. Archaeological Interest ...... 31 5.5. Architectural and Artistic Interest ...... 31 5.6. Historic Interest ...... 32 5.7. Setting ...... 32 5.8. Contribution to the St John’s Wood Conservation Area ...... 32 5.9. Summary of Significance ...... 33 6.0. Impact Assessment ...... 34 7.0. Policy Compliance and Justification Statement ...... 39 7.1. Westminster City Plan (2016) and Westminster’s Unitary Development Plan (“UDP”) (2007) ...... 39 7.2. London Plan (2016) ...... 41 7.3. The National Planning Policy Framework (Feb 2019) ...... 43 7.4. National Planning Guidance (PPG) ...... 45 8.0. Conclusion ...... 46 Appendix 1: List Descriptions ...... 47 Appendix 2: Elevations of Proposed Development ...... 50 Appendix 3: Historic England’s Planning Note 3: “The Setting of Heritage Assets”, Dec 2017 ...... 52 Appendix 4: The Building in Context Toolkit ...... 56

Page | 2

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021)

1.0. INTRODUCTION

1.1. Kilgarron House, no. 14 Ordnance Hill, London NW8 6PX is a building within the St John’s Wood Conservation Area in the City of Westminster, and recognised by the local planning authority as a Building of Townscape Merit. The subject site comprises a secluded plot containing a 1950s two-storey house (subsequently substantially altered), with a garden and swimming pool.

1.2. This Heritage Statement has been produced to inform the proposals, and to accompany an application for planning permission. The proposals involve demolition of the existing building, and the development of four semi-detached houses, with their front elevations addressing Ordnance Hill.

1.3. This Heritage Statement complies with the requirements of the National Planning Policy Framework, February 2019 (NPPF) and the online Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) in respect of heritage issues. No archaeological assessment has been undertaken as part of this report.

1.4. At pre-application stage, the local planning authority provided some written advice (dated 12th January 2021), and the current proposed scheme has been designed in response to this advice.

1.5. This Heritage Statement sets out:

• An historical background of the building, the site and the surrounding area. • An analysis of the context of the site and the contribution it makes to the setting of the Conservation Area and any statutorily and locally listed buildings within close vicinity of the site. • An appraisal of the historical significance of the building and its setting. • An assessment of the potential or actual impact of the proposed works upon the significance of the subject site. • How the proposed works comply with relevant national, regional and local planning policies.

1.6. Summary

• The subject site at no. 14 Ordnance Hill comprises a building recognised as a Building of Townscape Merit within the St John’s Wood Conservation Area. • An assessment of the significance of no. 14 Ordnance Hill concludes that it possesses low archaeological interest, low architectural and artistic interest, and low historic interest. The setting of no. 14 Ordnance Hill is considered to be of medium significance. • The proposals involve the demolition of the existing building, and the re-development of the subject site to create a terrace of four houses. • An assessment of the impact of the proposals concludes there would be a moderate and neutral to positive impact on the character and appearance of the St John’s Wood Conservation Area, and a minimal and neutral to positive impact on the settings of other nearby heritage assets.

Page | 3

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021)

1.7. Authorship

• Dorian A T A Crone BA BArch DipTP RIBA MRTPI IHBC - Heritage and Design Consultant. Dorian has been a Chartered Architect and Chartered Town Planner for over 30 years. He has also been a member of the Institute of Historic Building Conservation for 25 years. Dorian is a committee member of The Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings (“SPAB”), the International Committee on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS), ICOMOS UK and Institute of Historic Building Conservation. He has been a court member with the Worshipful Company of Chartered Architects and a trustee of the Hampstead Garden Suburb Trust. He is currently a trustee of both the Dance and Drake Trusts and a scholar of SPAB. He is the Chairman of the City Heritage Society, and a panel member of the City Conservation Area Advisory Committee.

Dorian has worked for over 30 years as Historic Buildings and Areas Inspector with English Heritage, responsible for providing advice to all the London Boroughs and both the City Councils. Dorian has also worked as a consultant and expert witness for over 20 years advising a wide variety of clients on heritage and design matters involving development work, alterations, extensions and new build projects associated with listed buildings and conservation areas in design and heritage sensitive locations. He is a panel member of the John Betjeman Design Award and the City of London Heritage Award. He is also a Design Review Panel member of the South-West Region; as well as the London Boroughs of Islington, Lewisham, Wandsworth and Richmond-upon-Thames and of the Design Council. In addition, Dorian has also been involved with the Royal Academy Summer Exhibition Architectural Awards and the Philip Webb Award along with a number of other public sector and commercial design awards.

• Dr Daniel Cummins MA (Oxon) MSc PhD IHBC – Historic Environment Consultant. Daniel is an historian with a BA and Master’s in History from Oxford University and a doctorate from the University of Reading, where he specialised in ecclesiastical buildings and estates and had his work published in leading academic history journals.

Daniel has a Master's in the Conservation of the Historic Environment and provides independent professional heritage advice and guidance to leading architectural practices and planning consultancies, as well as for private clients. He undertakes detailed historical research, significance statements, character appraisals, impact assessments and expert witness statements for new development projects, as well as for alterations and extensions which affect the fabric and settings of Listed Buildings and Locally Listed Buildings, the character and appearance of Conservation Areas, the outstanding universal value of World Heritage Sites, and all other types of heritage assets.

• Melisa Thomas BA PGDipLaw LPC – Heritage Consultant. Melisa studied English and History at university. She then pursued a career in the law for some years, while also working as a specialist guide, researcher and lecturer at Strawberry Hill House, Richmond-upon-Thames. She is shortly to complete a Master’s degree in the Conservation of the Historic Environment. Melisa has focused on the historic environment for a number of years on various heritage-sensitive and complex cases. Her specialist subjects are country houses, buildings from the Georgian period, vernacular architecture and urban townscapes. Due to her background in the law, she keenly follows developments in the regulation of the historic environment through legislation, policies and case law.

Page | 4

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021)

1.8. Methodology

This assessment has been carried out gathering desk-based and fieldwork data. Research sources included the City of Westminster Archives Centre, Historic England Archives, Old Maps Online and the London Metropolitan Archives. A site visit was carried out on 8th October 2020 when a review of the subject site was conducted by visual inspection. The subject site was analysed, as were the elements which contribute to its heritage significance. Consideration was then given to how the proposals might affect that significance, and if and how there would be an impact on the character and appearance of the St John’s Wood Conservation Area and other nearby heritage assets.

2.0. LOCATION AND HERITAGE CONTEXT

2.1. The subject site at no. 14 Ordnance Hill is located just within the boundary of the St John’s Wood Conservation Area, within the City of Westminster. The surrounding area is residential in character. Most of its houses were built in the 19th century, and its streets are relatively spacious and verdant.

Figure 1: The location of the subject site (outlined in red). Statutorily listed buildings are indicated by small blue triangles.

Page | 5

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021)

Figure 2: St John’s Wood Conservation Area. Subject site location indicated by red dot. 2.2. Historic England’s Good Practice Advice in Planning Note 3 (December 2017) provides guidance on managing change within the settings of heritage assets. The setting of a heritage asset is the surroundings in which a heritage asset is experienced. Elements of a setting may make a positive, neutral or negative contribution to the significance of an asset, may affect the ability to appreciate that significance or may be neutral (NPPF glossary). The guidance provides detailed advice on assessing the implications of development proposals and recommends a broad approach to assessment, as set out in Appendix 3.

2.3. The subject site is within the St John’s Wood Conservation Area (in the City of Westminster), along with a number of other statutorily and locally listed buildings whose settings may be affected by the proposed development of the subject site. The following appraisal identifies the key elements of significance of those heritage assets and their settings, and assesses the contribution the subject site as existing makes to those settings.

2.4. St John’s Wood Conservation Area: The subject site is just inside the St John’s Wood Conservation Area (“CA”) which was first designated in 1967, its boundaries altered in 1979 and 2007. The Conservation Area Audit (2008) (“CAA”) emphasises the overall character of the CA as being residential, spacious and leafy, with a low density of development. Its residential dwellings comprise large detached and semi- detached villas “in diverse architectural styles” which “combine to create an informal and picturesque townscape”, and “pockets of terraced housing and mansion blocks”. The CA is largely defined by its 19th century Georgian houses [Figure 9, Figure 10, Figure 13 & Figure 14], but there are also some neo-Georgian red-bricked houses built in the early 20th century, which contribute to the CA’s character and appearance

Page | 6

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021)

[Figure 15 & Figure 16]. Ordnance Hill is mentioned in the CAA as being the location of some of these 19th century terraced houses [Figure 3]. The local planning authority recognises Ordnance Hill as a secondary route, and it also recognises a “short view” from Ordnance Hill [Figure 6], looking southward towards the statutorily listed (Grade II) no.s 24-37 St John’s Wood Terrace and no.s 9-23 St John’s Wood Terrace. The subject site is considered to have a minimal impact on this short view.

Figure 3: Extract from the CAA’s diagram showing Approximate Building Ages. Key: Blue = 1820-1849; Green = 1850-1879; Orange = 1880-1914; Red = 1915-1945; Yellow = 1946-present day. Conservation Area boundary indicated by red line, and location of the subject site indicated by red arrow. (Note the houses at no.s 14, 15, 17 & 19 Acacia Road were likely built in the 1930s, as indicated by ordnance survey maps – and not 1820-1849, as suggested in this diagram.)

Figure 4: Extract from the CAA’s diagram showing Unlisted Buildings of Merit, Neutral and Negative Buildings. Key: Yellow = Unlisted Buildings of Merit; Pale blue = Grade II Listed; Orange = Neutral; Red = Negative. Conservation Area boundary indicated by red line, and location of the subject site indicated by red arrow.

2.5. The subject site at no. 14 Ordnance Hill is mostly hidden from the public realm, due to the existence of tall boundary walls, trees and overgrown planting [Figure 5 & Figure 7].

Page | 7

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021)

Figure 5: View looking southward towards subject site from the street by no. 29 Ordnance Hill. Location of subject site indicated by red arrow. No.s 11 and 10 Acacia Road (Unlisted Buildings of Townscape Merit) can be seen on the left and right.

Figure 6: Approximate view recognised as a “short view” on page 46 of the St John’s Wood Conservation Area Audit (2008). Location of subject site indicated by red arrow.

Page | 8

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021)

Figure 7: Subject site, viewed from other side (west) of the road (Ordnance Hill).

Figure 8: View looking northward towards subject site. Location of subject site indicated by red arrow. No.s 1-27 (odd) and 2- 8 (even) Ordnance Hill (Unlisted Buildings of Townscape Merit) can be seen on the left and right. 2.6. Statutorily Listed Buildings: Within the St John’s Wood Conservation Area are a number of statutorily listed buildings. The ones closest to the subject site are Grade II listed, and all date to the early to mid- 19th century, as follows: no. 8 Acacia Road [Figure 9], no.s 48 and 49 Acacia Road [Figure 10], and no.s 9- 23, 24-37 and 88-94 (consec.) St John’s Wood Terrace [Figure 12 & Figure 11]. As stated in their listing descriptions [Appendix 1], no. 8 Acacia Road is a mid-19th century detached house, no.s 48 and 49 Acacia

Page | 9

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021)

Road are semi-detached villas dating to c. 1830-40, and built as part of the same Eyre Estate development (not Portland Estate, as suggested in the listing entries)1. The aforementioned terraced houses along St John’s Wood Terrace Road similarly date to c. 1830-40, and they were built as part of the Portland Estate development. Despite the fact all of these listed buildings are within close proximity of the subject site, they are not visible from no. 14 Ordnance Hill, and vice versa. It is considered that the subject site has a minimal and neutral impact on the settings of no.s 8, 48 and 49 Acacia Road, and due to the fact St John’s Wood Terrace is located further away and around the corner, the subject site has a negligible and neutral impact on their settings.

Figure 9: No. 8 Acacia Road (Grade II listed).

1 Historic England’s listing entries for no.s 8 and 48-49 Acacia Road state that these buildings were built as a part of the Portland Estate development. However, as set out in para 3.8 and Figure 2 of the St John’s Wood Conservation Area Audit (2008), the Portland Estate included St John’s Wood Terrace, but Ordnance Hill and Acacia Road were within the Eyre Estate. Page | 10

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021)

Figure 10: No.s 48-49 and 46-47 Acacia Road (Grade II listed).

Figure 11 (left): No.s 28-23 (consec.) St John’s Wood Terrace (Grade II listed). Figure 12 (right): No.s 9-23 (consec.) St John’s Wood Terrace (Grade II listed). 2.7. Unlisted Buildings of Townscape Merit: The subject site is recognised by the City of Westminster as an Unlisted Building of Townscape Merit, along with the adjacent no. 11 Acacia Road [Figure 15], the building to the rear at no. 14 Acacia Road [Figure 16], the terraced buildings opposite at no.s 21-27 (odd) Ordnance Hill [Figure 13], the terraced buildings at no.s 2-8 (even) Ordnance Hill [Figure 14] and no.s 9 and 10 Acacia Road [Figure 5]. Likely built in the 1920s-30s, no. 11 Acacia Road is a good example of an ornate, neo- Georgian red-bricked house with interesting architectural features including quoins, sash windows with aprons at first floor level and brick arches with keystones at ground floor level. The early to mid-20th century neo-Georgian house at no. 14 Acacia Road has a somewhat suburban character, but it is not without architectural interest. It is in red brickwork, with a deep pitched clay roof, and a front door with a pediment over its porch. Whereas the aforementioned houses on Acacia Road are rightly credited as being Unlisted Buildings of Townscape Merit, the subject site is a poor example of a neo-Georgian house,

Page | 11

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021) with low architectural interest. The terraces along Ordnance Hill date to the 19th century, and are Georgian in character and appearance. It is considered that the subject site has a neutral impact on the settings of the other Unlisted Buildings of Townscape Merit in the local area. Unlisted Buildings of Townscape Merit are credited as making a positive contribution to the character and appearance of the Conservation Area, but they are not considered non-designated heritage assets (i.e. locally listed buildings). The National Planning Guidance asserts that non-designated heritage assets need to be “clearly identified as such”, preferably in a publicised list (040 Reference ID: 18a-040-20190723).

Figure 13: No.s 1-27 (odd) Ordnance Hill (Unlisted Buildings of Townscape Merit).

Figure 14: No.s 2-8 (even) Ordnance Hill (Unlisted Buildings of Townscape Merit).

Page | 12

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021)

Figure 15: No. 11 Acacia Road (Unlisted Building of Townscape Merit).

Figure 16: No.s 14 & 15 Acacia Road (Unlisted Buildings of Townscape Merit).

Page | 13

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021)

3.0. HISTORY AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE SUBJECT SITE

3.1. The subject site is likely to have remained undeveloped until the 1840s-50s [Figure 17 & Figure 18]. St John’s Wood is so-named as it was originally forested; and it was formerly owned by the Knights of the Order of St John of Jerusalem, before passing to the Crown in 1539 upon the dissolution of the monasteries. The area ceased to be a “wood” when Henry VIII felled a number of its trees (to provide timber for building ships and royal palaces). The Crown started to sell parts of St John’s Wood from the early 18th century, and in 1732 a 500-acre plot was purchased by Henry Samuel Eyre (known as the “St John’s Wood Estate”). This plot consisted of some of the land on which the St John’s Wood Conservation Area is now located, including the area occupied by the subject site. Further south of the subject site (i.e. where St John’s Wood Terrace is located) was an estate owned by the Duke of Portland, the Portland Estate.

3.2. A brigade of the Royal Artillery moved to Ordnance Hill in 1810 (north-west of the subject site), and this site continued to acquire buildings in the 1820s, 1920s and 1972. The construction of Regent’s Canal in 1812 encouraged urban expansion into the area, although the continuing existence of undeveloped parkland (i.e. Primrose Hill and Regent’s Park) may be credited as setting the precedent for the spacious, leafy character of the housing which was designed for the surrounding areas during the years that followed.

3.3. The 1830 map [Figure 17] indicates that the subject site was still undeveloped, but considerable development had taken place to the south of the site, with new roads, and what appear to be terraced housing. By the 1840s [Figure 18], Ordnance Road and Henstridge Road had both been laid.

Figure 17: 1830 Map. Approximate location of subject site indicated by a red dot.

Page | 14

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021)

Figure 18: 1840s plan of the Eyre Estate. Location of subject site indicated by a red dot. 3.4. In 1842, Walpole Eyre let the plots to the north and south of Henstridge Place to James Berry, for its development [Figure 19]. Berry built terraced houses on the south side of the street [Figure 20 & Figure 21] and semi-detached villas on the north side [Figure 22 & Figure 23]. There are subtle differences between the architectural features and detailing to the various buildings constructed in the Eyre Estate during this time, but their general style and appearance are now recognised as being typical of the area – very much defining the local character of St John’s Wood.

Figure 19: Extract from Articles of Agreement between Mr Walpole Eyre and Mr James Berry for land on the south east and north west side of Henstridge Place, St John’s Wood, 1842

Page | 15

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021)

Figure 20 (left & centre): Proposed plan forms of houses within terrace on the south side of Henstridge Place, 1844. Figure 21 (right): Proposed front elevations of two houses within terrace on the south side of Henstridge Place, 1844.

Figure 22: Proposed plan forms of semi-detached houses on the north side of Henstridge Place, 1845.

Figure 23: Proposed front elevations of semi-detached houses on the north side of Henstridge Place, 1845.

3.5. The 1853 map [Figure 24] shows the subject site as comprising a pair of semi-detached villas facing Henstridge Road. They appear to have been identical in footprint to the other semi-detached villas along

Page | 16

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021)

that road, and similar to the ones built along Acacia Road, indicating that they were all a part of the same development. Some of these semi-detached villas still exist today, such as the Grade II listed buildings at no.s 48 and 49 Acacia Road. The terrace south of the subject site on the east side of the road then comprised eight houses, and some of these can be seen in the 1853 map; and similarly the semi-detached villas at no.s 25 and 27, and the terrace on the west side of the road appear to have been built by then. This map also shows that Henstridge Road appears to have been renamed “Henstridge Place”.

Figure 24: 1853 map. Subject site outlined in red. 3.4. The former Henstridge Place appears to have been without a name in the mid-1860s before being renamed “Henstridge Villas” (by 1893) [Figure 26]. Ordnance survey maps in 1865-66 [Figure 25] and 1893 [Figure 26] show how the semi-detached houses along that road were individually altered over time. The surrounding neighbourhood comprises rows of small terraced houses, and larger semi-detached houses with front and rear gardens.

Page | 17

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021)

Figure 25: 1865-66 map. Subject site outlined in red.

Figure 26: 1893 map. Subject site outlined in red.

3.5. The 1913 map [Figure 27] shows an additional development to the rear of one of the semi-detached villas on the subject site. This may be two conjoined out-buildings attached to two out-buildings to the rear of the semi-detached villa on the corner of Ordnance Road and Acacia Road. Ordnance Road had been renamed “Ordnance Hill” by 1936, and Henstridge Villas reallocated its former name of “Henstridge Place” [Figure 28]. The 1936-37 map also shows the subject site as having been completely cleared, and the semi-detached villas to the rear on Acacia Road as demolished and rebuilt as a single house.

Page | 18

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021)

Figure 27: 1913 map. Subject site outlined in red.

Figure 28: 1936-37 map. Subject site outlined in red.

3.6. The Bomb Damage Map [Figure 30] suggests that between 1937 and the outbreak of the Second World War a large house was built on the subject site, but this was damaged beyond repair by bombing. Six of the other houses (i.e. semi-detached villas) along Henstridge Place were either destroyed or damaged beyond repair, as were the terraced houses opposite the subject site along Henstridge Place [Figure 29]. In addition, four of the eight houses within the terrace on the east side of the Ordnance Hill were damaged beyond repair or seriously damaged. The existing no.s 2-8 (even) Ordnance Hill are the four houses within this terrace which survived [Figure 14]. The 1954-55 map [Figure 32] shows all these damaged houses as having been cleared.

Page | 19

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021)

Figure 29: 1943 photograph showing bomb damage of Henstridge Place.

Figure 30: Bomb Damage Map (1939-45). (Key: Black = total destruction; Purple = damaged beyond repair; Red & pink = seriously damaged; Orange = general blast damage (non-structural); Yellow = minor blast damage.) Subject site outlined in red.

Page | 20

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021)

Figure 31: Extract from Metropolitan Borough of Marylebone Proposed Layout of factory made houses along Henstridge Place, 1946.

Figure 32: 1954-55 map. Subject site outlined in red.

3.7. In 1946, new factory-made houses were proposed for Henstridge Place [Figure 31], but these works never went ahead. The 1960-62 [Figure 36] map shows how the western part of Henstridge Place had by then ceased to be a public highway, and it had been reallocated together with the land on which the bomb- damaged terrace had existed, as the site for a new primary school. The school’s name, “Robinsfield”, likely harks back to the 1840s when there was a Great Robins Field and a Little Robins Field in that general area [Figure 18]. By this time a large house had been built on the subject site, its front elevation facing the former Henstridge Place, and this is the house which exists today [Figure 33, Figure 34 & Figure 35]. Its architectural style of this house reflects that of nearby early 20th century houses along Acacia Road, although it is much plainer in appearance.

Page | 21

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021)

Figure 33: Front (south-east) elevation of no. 14 Ordnance Hill, 1957.

Figure 34: Street (south-west) elevation of no. 14 Ordnance Hill, 1957.

Figure 35: North east elevation of no. 14 Ordnance Hill, 1957.

Page | 22

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021)

Figure 36: 1960-62 map. Subject site outlined in red. 3.8. The 1968 drainage plan for the new swimming pool shows how the house had been extended to the north by then [Figure 37]. This northern extension can also be seen in the 1972 map [Figure 38] and the 1973 drainage plans [Figure 40]. The glazed single-storey extension to the south-west and the room to the north- east had been built by 1968 [Figure 37] – the former referenced in the 1968 drainage plan as a “summer house” and the latter as a “cacti house”. The “cacti house” was later extended and referred to as a “conservatory” in the 1973 drainage plan [Figure 40]. The 1973 plan also shows the south-east extension comprising the garage and utility room. Since then there has been a further extension to the north-west (i.e. a new conservatory, bedroom and bathroom [Figure 41]). Not all of these alterations are apparent in the 1992 map [Figure 39]. However, ordnance survey maps today show the full footprint of the house [Figure 1].

Page | 23

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021)

Figure 37: Plan of no. 14 Ordnance Hill, 1968 (i.e. proposed drainage for new pool).

Figure 38 (left): 1972 map. Subject site outlined in red. Figure 39 (right): 1992 map. Subject site outlined in red. 3.9. The novelist, journalist and political commentator Frederick Forsyth (b. 1938) is known to have lived at no. 14 Ordnance Hill in the 1970s. He had formerly worked in the Royal Air Force before joining Reuters in 1961 and the BBC in 1965. In 1969 he became a freelance reporter and a spy for MI6. He started to write novels in the 1970s (including The Day of the Jackal and The Odessa File), and he has been publishing novels ever since.

Page | 24

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021)

Figure 40: Ground floor plan, 1973. (The side elevation facing Ordnance Hill is on the right-hand side.)

Figure 41: Extract from 2020 estate agent sales brochure – basement plan (left) and ground floor plan (right).

Page | 25

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021)

Figure 42: Extract from 2020 estate agent sales brochure – first floor plan (left) and loft plan (right).

4.0. DESCRIPTION OF THE SUBJECT SITE AS EXISTING

4.1. The front elevation of the two-storey 1950s house at no. 14 Ordnance Road faces southward [Figure 44], its side (west) elevation facing Ordnance Hill [Figure 43 & Figure 47]. Apart from part of the side (west) elevation, the house is barely visible from the public realm – due to the existence of tall boundary walls, trees and planting [Figure 5, & Figure 7].

4.2. The house was advertised as being “neo-Georgian” in the estate agent sales brochure – a description which is not wholly incorrect, but the building’s style is principally Post-War in style, reminiscent of the more utilitarian “telephone architecture” of the time. Its architectural interest is considerably lower than that of the well-designed neo-Georgian villas along Acacia Road (at no.s 11, 14, 15, etc.). The elevational treatment of the house is simple, with minimal architectural detailing. It has red brickwork in English bond, modern sash windows (with flat brick arches), a metal-balustraded balcony at first floor level over the front door [Figure 44], French windows to the south-west elevation at ground floor level, and a glazed south extension [Figure 47]. There is a single storey north-east extension, and a single-storey north-west extension visible from the public realm comprising a garage and utility room. The pitched roof is not visible from the street or the garden. There is a small garden to the south of the house [Figure 45], including a swimming pool [Figure 46].

Page | 26

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021)

Figure 43: Street (west) elevation viewed from Ordnance Hill (i.e. public realm).

Figure 44: Front (south) elevation viewed from the garden (i.e. private realm).

Page | 27

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021)

Figure 45 (left): Garden within the subject site. Figure 46 (right): Swimming pool within on the subject site.

Figure 47: Side (west) elevation facing Ordnance Hill, viewed from within the private realm.

4.3. The interior of the house has an “international” character, with its wide, rounded archways [Figure 48 & Figure 49], its curved staircase with solid balustrade [Figure 50], and its internationally-inspired fireplace in one of the front rooms [Figure 48]. It has the character and appearance of a film set. The rooms on the first floor are high-ceilinged, reaching up into the roof-space in order to display the timbers, as mock Tudor design features [Figure 51].

Page | 28

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021)

Figure 48 (left): Living room south of entrance hall (i.e. the “bedroom/family room” in Figure 41). Figure 49 (right): Reception room north of entrance hall.

Figure 50: Entrance hall and staircase.

Page | 29

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021)

Figure 51: Master bedroom on first floor. (Photograph copied from estate agent brochure, 2020.)

5.0. THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE SUBJECT SITE

5.1. The aim of a Significance Assessment is, in the terms required by Paragraphs 189-190 of the NPPF, “to describe the significance of any heritage assets affected, including any contribution made by their setting”. In the context of a historic building which has been the subject of a series of alterations throughout its lifetime, it is also a useful tool for determining which of its constituent parts holds a particular value and to what extent. Good Practice Advice in Planning Note 2 (March 2015) states that understanding the nature of significance is important for understanding the need for and best means of conservation. Understanding the extent of that significance leads to a better understanding of how adaptable a heritage asset may be. Understanding the level of significance provides the essential guide as to how policies should be applied.

5.2. The descriptive appraisal will evaluate the building against listed selection criteria of ‘Principles of Selection for Listing Buildings’, DCMS, 2018. Historic England’s criteria outlined in ‘Statements of Heritage Significance: Analysing Significance in Heritage Assets,’ which partially overlap with the Statutory Criteria, have also been considered and encompass the following values:

• Archaeological Interest – relating to evidence of past human activity worth of expert investigation; • Architectural and Artistic Interest – relating to the design and general aesthetics of a place. They can arise from conscious design or fortuitously from the way the heritage asset has evolved. More specifically, architectural interest is an interest in the art or science of the design, construction, craftsmanship and decoration of buildings and structures of all types. Artistic interest is an interest in other human creative skills, like sculpture;

Page | 30

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021)

• Historic Interest – relating to past lives and events which are illustrated or associated with the heritage asset in question. Heritage assets with historic interest not only provide a material record of our nation’s history, but can also provide meaning for communities derived from their collective experience of a place and can symbolise wider values such as faith and cultural identity.

5.3. Although not officially considered to be one of the four principal values, setting is increasingly viewed as an important value that makes an important contribution to the significance of a heritage asset. This assessment of the contribution to significance made by setting should provide the baseline along with the established values used for assessing the effects of any proposed works on significance.

The level of significance for each value and the setting will be assessed using the following grading:

• High – values of exceptional or considerable interest; • Medium – values of some interest; • Low – values of limited interest.

5.4. Archaeological Interest

The closest Archaeological Priority Areas (“APA”s) to the subject site are the St John’s Wood Chapel Grounds APA (Tier 2) comprising a burial ground with Post-Medieval origins (approx. 420 metres south of the subject site), and the Regent’s Park APA (Tier 3) which has always been open ground, formerly used for farmland and/or hunting (approx. 485 metres east of the subject site). The City of Westminster Archaeological Priority Areas Appraisal (2017) makes no mention of any Prehistoric, Roman, Anglo Saxon or Medieval archaeology in the St John’s Wood. The subject site itself remained as undeveloped agricultural land until the mid-19th century. There may have in the past been some potential for Post- Medieval agricultural soil and/or spot-finds beneath the subject site, but this potential will have been compromised by the development which took place in the 19th and 20th centuries. There may now be some remains of the 19th century semi-detached villas and the 1930s house, but the potential for this will have been reduced by the construction of the existing house in the 1950s.

The Archaeological Interest is low.

5.5. Architectural and Artistic Interest

The house at no. 14 Ordnance Road was built in the 1950s, with subsequent alterations. Its plain, rather utilitarian elevational treatment (symptomatic of the “telephone exchange” type architecture of some 1950s buildings), fails to match the architectural interest of the early to mid-19th century neo-Georgian houses along Acacia Road (such as no.s 11, 14 and 15 Acacia Road). Its 1970s interior derives some architectural interest by virtue of its distinctive round arches on the ground floor and its curved staircase with solid balustrading. Such “Hollywood Californian” features are very much of their time, likely formerly representing an aspirational film set, but now with a very much dated appearance. The interior as a whole is fragmented in character, with a lack of cohesion.

The Architectural and Artistic Interest is low.

Page | 31

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021)

5.6. Historic Interest

The subject site formerly comprised a pair of semi-detached villas in the 19th century, built as part of a large development – many buildings of which still survive today, and help to define the character and appearance of the local area. However, the building on the subject site itself was built in the 1950s, and the only visual link it has with other nearby 20th century buildings is its use of red brickwork. Some historic interest is derived from the fact the house was formerly owned by Frederick Forsyth (in the 1970s), the novelist, journalist and political commentator Frederick Forsyth (b. 1938).

The Historic Interest is low.

5.7. Setting

The subject site is in the leafy and residential St John’s Wood Conservation Area, within the settings of some statutorily listed buildings. Although the area was bombed during the Second World War, many original 19th century houses built as part of the Eyre Estate survive – and these to a large extent define the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. In addition, there are some 20th century houses in red brickwork which are recognised as contributing positively to the Conservation Area (i.e. as Unlisted Buildings of Townscape Merit).

The Setting value is medium.

5.8. Contribution to the St John’s Wood Conservation Area

5.8.1. The following questions contained in the document Conservation Area Designation, Appraisal and Management (Historic England Advice Note 1, February 2016) might be asked when considering the contribution made by unlisted buildings to the special architectural or historic interest of a Conservation Area. A positive response to one or more of the following may indicate that the site makes a positive contribution provided that its historic form and values have not been eroded.

Is the building the work of a particular architect of regional or local note? No.

Does it have landmark quality? No. Not only does the building lack the architectural/artistic and historic interest needed for it to be a landmark building, its impact on the surrounding area is minimal due to its lack of visibility.

Does it reflect a substantial number of other elements in the conservation area in age, style, materials, form or other characteristics? No.

Does it relate to adjacent designated heritage assets in age, materials or in any other historically significant way? No. The statutorily listed buildings at no.s 8, 46-47 and 48-49 Acacia Road were built in the 19th century, and are Georgian in style, with a rendered finish.

Page | 32

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021)

Does it contribute positively to the setting of adjacent designated heritage assets? No. It is considered to make a moderate and neutral contribution to the statutorily listed buildings at no.s 8, 46-47 and 48-49 Acacia Road.

Is it associated with a designed landscape eg. a significant wall, terracing or a garden building? No.

Does it individually, or as part of a group, illustrate the development of the settlement in which it stands? The layout and architecture of the local area is defined by its 19th century past when it was developed by the Eyre family. No. 14 Ordnance Hill is an individual infill development dating to the 1950s on a former bomb site, and it is not considered to have any group value with the other buildings built during that Post- War era.

Does it have significant historic association with features such as the historic road layout, burgage plots, a town park or a landscape feature? No.

Does it have historic associations with local people or past events? The novelist, journalist and political commentator Frederick Forsyth (b. 1938) is known to have lived at the subject site in the 1970s.

Does it reflect the traditional functional character or former uses in the area? It is a residential building, like most in the Conservation Area.

5.8.2. In summary, it is considered that the subject site makes a neutral contribution to the character and appearance of the St John’s Wood Conservation Area, in contrast to the other early to mid-20th century neo-Georgian style buildings along Acacia Road which make a positive contribution.

5.9. Summary of Significance

The subject site has low archaeological, architectural/artistic and historic interest. Its only heritage significance is derived from its 19th century residential setting, to which it contributes to a negligible to minimal and neutral degree.

Page | 33

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021)

6.0. IMPACT ASSESSMENT

6.1. The description of the proposal is accompanied by a series of drawings, as proposed, prepared by KSR Architects in October 2020 which can be found within the application bundle. The proposals involve the demolition of the existing building, and the development of four terraced houses, with their front elevations addressing Ordnance Hill.

6.2. The proposals may have an impact on:

• The character and appearance of the St John’s Wood Conservation Area; • The settings of nearby Grade II statutorily buildings, and Unlisted Buildings of Townscape Merit.

6.3. This Heritage Statement has also evaluated the proposals according to the eight principles of the Building in Context Toolkit (2001) which was formulated by English Heritage and CABE (now the Design Council) to stimulate a high standard of design for development taking place in historically sensitive contexts. The founding and enduring principle is that all successful design solutions depend on allowing time for a thorough site analysis and character appraisal to fully understand context; the principles are listed in Appendix 4. The application of the principles of good design is considered to reduce or remove potential harm and provide enhancement. The evaluation (at para 6.13 of this report) and the Building in Context Toolkit itself have both informed the design of the proposals by KSR Architects.

6.4. This impact assessment has also evaluated the proposals according to the ten characteristics of the Government’s National Design Guide (October 2019) – in particular Characteristic 1: understanding the history of the area, the settings of heritage assets and the context of the site (appropriate form, appearance, scale, details and materials) in order that the proposal relates well to its surroundings; and Characteristic 2: reinforcing a coherent and distinctive identity (appropriate scale, height, materials, street frontage, façade design and consideration of views) that relates well to the history and context of the site. The proposed development by KSR Architects has been informed by the National Design Guide.

6.5. The impact of the proposals on the setting of nearby heritage assets has been assessed in accordance with Historic England’s Good Practice Advice in Planning Note 3 (December 2017) [Appendix 3].

6.6. For the purposes of assessing the likely impact to result from the proposals and the subsequent impact on heritage assets, established criteria have been employed. If the proposed scheme will enhance heritage values or the ability to appreciate them, then the impact on heritage significance within the view will be deemed positive; however, if it fails to sustain heritage values or impair their appreciation then the impact will be deemed negative. If the proposals preserve the heritage values then the impact will be deemed neutral.

6.7. Within the three categories there are four different levels that can be given to identify the intensity of impact: • "negligible" – impacts considered to cause no material change. • "minimal" - impacts considered to make a small difference to one’s ability to understand and appreciate the heritage value of an asset. A minor impact may also be defined as involving receptors of low sensitivity exposed to intrusion, obstruction or change of low to medium magnitudes for short periods of time.

Page | 34

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021)

• “moderate" - impacts considered to make an appreciable difference to the ability to understand or appreciate the heritage value of an asset. • “substantial” - impacts considered to cause a fundamental change in the appreciation of the resource.

6.8. Demolition of existing building and boundary wall fronting Ordnance Hill: Although the local planning authority recognises the existing house as being an Unlisted Building of Townscape Merit, the subject site’s only positive contribution to the character and appearance of the Conservation Area (“CA”) and the settings of other nearby heritage assets may be by virtue of the overgrown vegetation on its boundary walls. The building itself has low architectural/artistic interest and historic interest, and its contribution is considered at best to be neutral (whereas the early to mid-20th century Unlisted Buildings of Townscape Merit along Acacia Road make a positive contribution). It is considered that the proposed loss of the boundary wall (and associated vegetation) would be mitigated by the architectural interest of the proposed development’s front elevation and landscaping. It is considered that the demolition of the existing building and boundary wall fronting Ordnance Hill will have a minimal, neutral impact on the character and appearance of the Conservation Area and the settings of nearby heritage assets.

6.9. Height, bulk, scale and massing: Although the height, bulk, scale and massing of the proposed terrace is greater than that of the existing house, the proposed development is considered to sit comfortably within the streetscape. The terrace at no.s 2-8 (even) Ordnance Hill (south of the subject site) originally comprised eight houses, but four were severely damaged by bombing during the Second World War, and since their demolition there has been an undesigned empty space in the streetscape. The reason for the open space is that it provides for a primary school playground, but it is nevertheless incongruous in appearance, and out of character with the rest of the street. The proposed building helps mitigate the impact of this uncomfortable gap, partly due to the fact its height, bulk, scale and massing is comparable to that of no.s 2-8 (even) Ordnance Hill. The proposed building would help balance the appearance of the streetscape, by framing the open space, together with no.s 2-8 (even) south of the subject site. This aspect of the proposal is considered to have a moderate, neutral to positive impact on the character and appearance of the Conservation Area and a minimal and neutral to positive impact on the settings of nearby heritage assets.

6.10. Front Elevation – Architectural idiom, style, detailing, proportions and use of materials [Figure 52]: The architectural idiom of the proposed front elevation is similar to that of 19th century terraces built as part of the Eyre Estate in its idiom, style, detailing and proportions. It has not been designed as a replica of an Eyre Estate terrace, but as a building which complements and reflects the character and appearance of the surrounding townscape (i.e. the terraces south of and opposite to the subject site). The inclusion of a plaque featuring the year of completion will help ensure the building remains legible from the “original” terraces in the CA. It is considered that this choice of idiom is appropriate, given the fact the overriding character and appearance of the St John’s Wood CA derives from the area’s 19th century architecture. Archived sketches made during the development of the area in the 1840s suggest that the original terrace along the south side of the former Henstridge Place was comparable in design to those which survive along Ordnance Hill today – being classically inspired, and with consistent architectural features such as the rendered bracketed surrounds and “overmantels” to the windows at first floor level. The design of the proposed terrace is principally inspired by that of no.s 2-8 (even) Ordnance Hill, including its rustication at ground floor level, rendered upper floors, rounded windows at ground floor level and windows with

Page | 35

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021)

rendered bracketed surrounds and “overmantels” at first floor level. It is considered appropriate that the mansard roofs of no.s 2 and 8 Ordnance Hill are reflected in the proposed scheme (albeit with pared down dormer windows to the front elevation). These mansard roofs were likely later additions (and therefore not a part of the original design of the terrace) – but, as already emphasised, the proposed building is not intended to imitate original Eyre Estate building designs, but to sit comfortably within the existing townscape, reflecting and enhancing the character and appearance of the Conservation Area and settings of nearby heritage assets. No.s 2 and 3-11 (odd) Ordnance Hill have balconettes at first floor level, and this feature has inspired the proposed balconettes to the windows at first floor level of the proposed terrace. The designs of the proposed balconettes are deliberately comparatively simple in order for the overall appearance of the proposed terrace to remain subservient to the historic terraces in the street. One notable difference between the proposed terrace and nearby historic terraces is that the proposed houses are three bays wide as opposed to two, and the proposed terrace has front porches. The proposed materials are traditional and of high quality, reflecting those of the existing terraces along Ordnance Hill. This aspect of the proposal is considered to have a moderate, positive impact on the character and appearance of the Conservation Area and a minimal, positive impact on the settings of nearby heritage assets.

6.11. Rear and Side Elevations – Architectural idiom, style, detailing, proportions and use of materials [Figure 53, Figure 54 & Figure 55]: Rear elevations of buildings are traditionally less architecturally detailed and “polite” than the front elevations, as they tend to be less visible from the public realm. The upper floors of the rear elevation of the proposed terrace have a broadly 1840s St John’s Wood idiom (in common with the front elevation). Given the discreet nature of the rear elevation at ground floor level, its elevational treatment has been designed to appeal to 21st century occupants, with large glazed doors (subdivided into smaller panes, to reflect the appearance of the sash windows of the upper floors) framed in metal. The architectural idiom, style, detailing, proportions and use of materials of the side elevation reflects that of the front elevation – i.e. using “polite” architecture in a balanced and poised manner. The roof terrace has been judiciously concealed by a sloping tiled wall, to resemble the appearance of a roof [Figure 53 & Figure 56]. The rear and side elevations are rendered and rusticated. This aspect of the proposal is considered to have a minimal, neutral to positive impact on the character and appearance of the Conservation Area and the settings of nearby heritage assets.

6.12. Orientation: The subject site used to be located on Henstridge Place before the local area was severely bombed during the Second World War. The front elevation of the existing house therefore faces south- east, instead of facing south-west together with no.s 2-8 (even) Ordnance Hill. Given that the west end of Henstridge Place no longer exists and has been superseded by Robinsfield primary school, it is appropriate for the front elevation of any building on the subject site to face south-west, addressing Ordnance Hill. The front elevation of the proposed development therefore faces Ordnance Hill. It is considered that this new orientation will have a minimal, positive impact on the character and appearance of the Conservation Area and the settings of nearby heritage assets.

6.13. Response to local planning authority’s pre-application advice (12th January 2021)

6.13.1. The advice states that “the footprint of the building does dominate the plot and whilst it is accepted that terraces will span the full width of a site, there appears to be limited separation between the new terrace and the neighbouring sites, including no11 Acacia Road. As such the footprint of the building compromises the characteristic arrangement of appreciable gaps between the built form, which is particularly relevant where the built form changes

Page | 36

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021)

architecturally.” It also states, “…whilst the height of the buildings generally is reflective of the neighbouring terraces, the building appears overly deep and as such the plot contains more building than amenity space, which could be argued to be atypical for the area. It is noted the neighbouring terraces have closet wings which provide greater depth, however how the buildings relate to the plot needs to be fully considered in order to respect the relationship between buildings and their plots, which is a positive characteristic of the conservation area.” In accordance with this advice, the area of each house has been reduced to 248m², as the building has been reduced (at its west and east sides) by 350mm. The footprint of the terrace is 12 metres in depth, which is in-keeping with the other terraces in the local area (and the overall plot depth is 23.5 metres). In addition, the height of the mansard roof has been reduced at the rear.

6.13.2. In response to the advice that “the terraces along Ordnance Hill are less formal in terms of architectural detailing than the terrace proposed”, the design of the building has been altered so that’s front elevation no longer resembles a mansion, but a comparatively pared down terrace. Some of the detailing has been altered so that it is less ornate, such as the rustication of the front elevation at ground floor level, and some of the metal railings.

6.13.3. The advice suggested, “The amount of fenestration and its proportions is visually prominent on the elevation as opposed to there being a comfortable balance between the solid to void”. Therefore, the single dormer windows to the front elevation have been reduced in width by 150mm, and the windows to the first and second floors have been reduced by 50mm (so that they are 950mm wide as opposed to 1,000mm).

6.13.4. It is also stated that “the use of render to all elevations reinforces the grandeur of the design and it is questioned if this is appropriate for a terrace. Alongside the design development it is questioned if the detailing can be rationalised.” In response to this advice, London stock brickwork has been introduced to the side and rear elevations of the building.

6.13.5. The advice asserts that the lightwells in the previous proposed scheme created “an atypical arrangement”, and it suggested that the lightwells be “located centrally on the front elevation” instead. The current proposed scheme has addressed this issue by omitting the basement altogether, and therefore the lightwells.

6.13.6. The current proposal includes a rendered boundary wall, in response to the advice which suggested that the “front boundary should be rendered to match the terraces as this would relate the new terrace to its immediate setting and create a visual distinction with the detached buildings on Acacia Road.”

6.14. This Heritage Statement has also evaluated the proposals according to the eight principles of the Building in Context Toolkit (2001) which was formulated by English Heritage and CABE (now the Design Council) to stimulate a high standard of design for development taking place in historically sensitive contexts [Appendix 4]. It is considered that the proposals have taken full account of the eight principles, as follows: • Principle 1: A successful project will start with an assessment of the value of retaining what is there. The existing subject site merely makes a neutral contribution to the character and appearance of the Conservation Area, its greatest contribution being its planting (as opposed to the architecture of the building, which has low architectural/artistic interest). • Principle 2: A successful project will relate to the geography and history of the place and lie of the land. The history of the local area and of the subject site itself has been assessed by Chapter 3 of this report. The proposals have thus been informed by an understanding of the history, character and identity of the subject site, the streetscape, and the surrounding area. The design

Page | 37

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021)

of the proposed terrace reflects the architecture of nearby terraces which were built as a part of the original Eyre Estate in the 19th century. • Principle 3: A successful project will be informed by its own significance so that its character and identity will be appropriate to its use and context. The heritage significance of the subject site has been assessed by Chapter 5 of this report, and its heritage context by Chapter 2. The proposals have thus been informed by an understanding of the heritage significance of the subject site; the character and appearance of the Conservation Area and the contribution which the subject site makes to it; and the contribution which the subject site makes to the settings of any other nearby heritage assets. • Principles 4 & 6: A successful project will sit happily in the pattern of existing development and the routes through and around it. A successful project will respect the scale of neighbouring buildings. Henstridge Place formerly ran between Ordnance Hill and Woronzow Road, but following the destruction caused by bombing during the Second World War, the south-west end of Henstridge Place was demolished, thereby making way for a new site for a primary school. The 19th century semi-detached villas originally on the subject site would have been facing Henstridge Place. The front elevation of the existing 1950s house faces the former Henstridge Place which was demolished between 1955 and 1960. This orientation therefore appears somewhat arbitrary, and at odds with the mostly street-facing character of the buildings and terraces in the CA. The proposed terrace represents some change in orientation, given that its front elevation addresses Ordnance Hill, but this is appropriate – especially given the fact there is now a primary school south-east of the subject site. The proposed development is considered to sit happily in the pattern of existing development, having taken its architectural cue from surrounding buildings. In addition, it addressing the street in accordance with the other terraces along Ordnance Hill. The height of the proposed terrace reflects that of the terrace at no.s 2-8 (even) Ordnance Hill, south of the subject site. The proposed terrace and no.s 2-8 (even) would thus frame the open space occupied by the Robinsfield School. • Principles 5 & 8: A successful project will respect important views. A successful project will create new views and juxtapositions which add to the variety and texture of the setting. The subject site has a minimal impact on one of the views which are recognised by the local planning authority as being important [Figure 6]. It is considered that the proposals will have a minimal and neutral to positive impact on this view. In addition, general views have been taken into consideration – such as the south-east facing one from the junction between Acacia Road and Ordnance Hill, and views looking northward from Ordnance Hill and St John’s Wood Terrace. The proposal adds architectural interest to what is currently a somewhat bland gap site. It is considered that the proposed development makes a neutral to positive contribution to these views, as well as to the character and appearance of the CA and the settings of other nearby heritage assets. • Principle 7: A successful project will use materials and building methods which are as high quality as those used in existing buildings. The proposals have been informed by a good understanding of the heritage of the local area, and the appointed architects are committed to maintaining the same high quality of the materials and workmanship of nearby historic buildings within the St John’s Wood CA.

Page | 38

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021)

6.15. Overall, the proposed scheme is considered to have a moderate and neutral to positive impact on the character and appearance of the St John’s Wood Conservation Area and a minimal and neutral to positive impact on the settings of other nearby heritage assets.

7.0. POLICY COMPLIANCE AND JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT

7.1. Westminster City Plan (2016) and Westminster’s Unitary Development Plan (“UDP”) (2007)

7.1.1. Policy S25 of the City Plan deals with Heritage in broad terms:

Recognising Westminster’s wider historic environment, its extensive heritage assets will be conserved, including its listed buildings [and its] conservation areas... Detailed policies for each type of heritage asset will be set out in City Management policy.

The existing building has low architectural/artistic and historic interests, and the only positive contribution which the subject site makes to the character and appearance of the St John’s Wood Conservation Area (“CA”) and the settings of nearby statutorily listed buildings is by virtue of the overgrown planting around its boundary walls. It is considered that demolition of the existing building will make a neutral impact, and the proposed loss of the boundary wall (and associated planting) would be mitigated by the architectural interest of the proposed development’s front elevation. The design of the proposed terrace has been informed by a clear understanding of the heritage context of the local area, the character and appearance of the CA, and the settings of nearby listed buildings.

7.1.2. Policy S28 of the City Plan deals with Design:

Development must incorporate exemplary standards of sustainable and inclusive urban design and architecture. In the correct context, imaginative modern architecture is encouraged provided that it respects Westminster’s heritage and local distinctiveness and enriches its world-class city environment.

The appointed architects, KSR Architects, are committed to maintaining high standards of sustainable and inclusive urban design and architecture. The design of the proposed development has been informed by a clear understanding of the heritage context and urban design of the local area, and by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government’s National Design Guide (2019). The materials used in the proposed building are traditional (save for the Crittal-style metal framed windows to the rear elevation at ground floor level), and the parts which are visible from the public realm are in a mid-19th century idiom. The proposed terrace will thus reflect and complement the local area, but it is intended to remain subservient to the historic environment.

7.1.3. Policy DES1 of the UDP deals with urban design and conservation:

(A) Architectural quality, local distinctiveness and sustainability:

Development should: 1) be of the highest standards of sustainable and inclusive urban design and architectural quality; 2) improve the quality of adjacent spaces around or between buildings, showing careful attention to definition, scale, use and surface treatment; 3) use high quality, durable and, where possible, indigenous and recycled materials appropriate to the building and its setting;

Page | 39

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021)

4) respect and, where necessary, maintain: • the character, urban grain, scale and hierarchy of existing buildings; • the spaces between existing buildings; and • the character, scale and pattern of historic squares, streets, lanes, mews and passageways.

The appointed architects, KSR Architects, are committed to maintaining high standards of sustainable and inclusive urban design and architectural quality. The design of the proposed development has been informed by a clear understanding of the heritage context of the local area, and by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government’s National Design Guide (2019). The proposed terrace has been designed to sit comfortably within the streetscape, complementing and reflecting the character and appearance of the surrounding townscape, rather than replicating the design of a typical Eyre Estate terrace. However, its idiom is mid-19th century, and its architectural detailing and proportions reflect those of the terraces along Ordnance Hill. The proposed materials are traditional (save for the Crittal-style metal framed windows to the rear elevation at ground floor level) and of high quality, reflecting those of the existing terraces along Ordnance Hill.

The front elevation of the proposed development addresses Ordnance Hill, along with the neighbouring terrace at no.s 2-8 (even) Ordnance Hill. Although the height, bulk, scale and massing of the proposed terrace is greater than that of the existing house, the proposed development is considered to sit comfortably within the streetscape – not least because its height, bulk, scale and massing is comparable to that of no.s 2-8 (even). By reflecting the architectural idiom, style, detailing, proportions and materials of the historic terraces along Ordnance Hill, the proposed development helps mitigate the negative impact made by the uncomfortable gap between no.s 2-8 (even) and the subject site.

7.1.4. Policy DES9 of the UDP deals with Conservation Areas:

(B) Planning applications involving demolition in conservation areas:

1) Buildings identified as of local architectural, historical or topographical interest in adopted conservation area audits will enjoy a general presumption against demolition

2) Development proposals within conservation areas, involving the demolition of unlisted buildings, may be permitted

a) If the building makes either a negative or insignificant contribution to the character or appearance of the area, and/or b) If the design quality of the proposed development is considered to result in an enhancement of the conservation area’s overall character or appearance, having regard to issues of retaining and repairing the existing building

3) In any such case, there should also be firm and appropriately detailed proposals for the future viable redevelopment of the application site that have been approved and their implementation assured by planning condition or agreement.

Unlisted Buildings of Townscape Merit are credited as making a positive contribution to the character and appearance of the Conservation Area, but they are not considered non-designated heritage assets (i.e. locally listed buildings). The National Planning Guidance asserts that non-designated heritage assets need to be “clearly identified as such”, preferably in a publicised list (040 Reference ID: 18a-040- 20190723). There are some early 20th century neo-Georgian houses on Acacia Road, which are rightly credited as being Unlisted Buildings of Townscape Merit. The subject site, however, is a poor example of a neo-Georgian house, with low architectural and historic interests. Furthermore, its orientation (facing the former Henstridge Place which was demolished between 1955 and 1960, instead of addressing Ordnance Hill) appears somewhat arbitrary, and at odds with the mostly street-facing

Page | 40

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021)

character of the buildings and terraces in the CA. The terraces along Ordnance Hill date to the 19th century, and are Georgian in character and appearance. It is considered that the subject site has a neutral impact on the settings of the other Unlisted Buildings of Townscape Merit in the local area – and as such, its demolition is justified.

(F) Setting of conservation areas:

Development will not be permitted which, although not wholly or partly located within a designated conservation area, might nevertheless have a visibly adverse effect upon the area’s recognised special character or appearance, including intrusiveness with respect to any recognised and recorded familiar local views into, out of, within or across the area.

St John’s Wood CA is largely defined by its streets and houses built in the 19th century as part of the Eyre Estate. Its character and appearance is also defined by some of its 20th century neo-Georgian buildings, such as the Unlisted Buildings of Townscape Merit along Acacia Road. The existing subject site merely makes a neutral contribution to the character and appearance of the Conservation Area, its greatest contribution being its planting (as opposed to the architecture of the building, which has low architectural/artistic interest). The proposals have been informed by an in-depth understanding of the history, heritage context and character and appearance of the Conservation Area – the design of the proposed terrace reflecting (but not imitating) the designs of the other terraced houses along Ordnance Hill. In addition, general views have been taken into consideration – such as the south-east facing one from the junction between Acacia Road and Ordnance Hill, and views looking northward from Ordnance Hill and St John’s Wood Terrace. It is considered that the proposed development makes a neutral to positive contribution to these views, as well as to the character and appearance of the CA and the settings of other nearby heritage assets.

7.2. London Plan (2016)

7.2.1. The London Plan is the overall strategic plan for London, and it sets out a fully integrated economic, environmental, transport and social framework for the development of the capital to 2036. Chapter 7 sets out policies on a range of issues about the places and spaces in which Londoners live, work and visit. The policies are designed to create a city of diverse, strong, secure and accessible neighbourhoods, and a city that delights the senses which has the best of modern architecture while also making the most of London’s built heritage (London Plan, para. 7.1).

7.2.2. Policy 7.4 deals with local character:

B Buildings, streets and open spaces should provide a high quality design response that: • d allows existing buildings and structures that make a positive contribution to the character of a place to influence the future character of the area • e is informed by the surrounding historic environment.

Page | 41

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021)

history, heritage context and character and appearance of the Conservation Area – the design of the proposed terrace reflecting (but not replicating) the designs of the other terraced houses along Ordnance Hill. The front elevation of the proposed development addresses Ordnance Hill, along with the neighbouring terrace at no.s 2-8 (even) Ordnance Hill. By reflecting the height, bulk, scale, massing, architectural idiom, style, detailing, proportions and materials of the historic terraces along Ordnance Hill, the proposed development helps mitigate the negative impact made by the existing uncomfortable gap between no.s 2-8 (even) Ordnance Hill and the subject site. The inclusion of a plaque featuring the year of completion will help ensure the building remains legible from the “original” terraces in the CA.

7.2.3. Policy 7.6 deals with architecture:

A Architecture should make a positive contribution to a coherent public realm, streetscape and wider cityscape. It should incorporate the highest quality materials and design appropriate to its context. B Buildings and structures should: a. be of the highest architectural quality b. be of a proportion, composition, scale and orientation that enhances, activates and appropriately defines the public realm c. comprise details and materials that complement, not necessarily replicate, the local architectural character d. not cause unacceptable harm to the amenity of surrounding land and buildings, particularly residential buildings, in relation to privacy, overshadowing, wind and microclimate. This is particularly important for tall buildings e. incorporate best practice in resource management and climate change mitigation and adaptation f. provide high quality indoor and outdoor spaces and integrate well with the surrounding streets and open spaces g. be adaptable to different activities and land uses, particularly at ground level h. meet the principles of inclusive design i. optimise the potential of sites

The appointed architects, KSR Architects, are committed to maintaining high standards of sustainable and inclusive urban design and architectural quality, using materials which are traditional and of high quality, reflecting those of existing buildings within the historic environment. (The metal-framed windows to the rear elevation at ground floor level will not be visible from the public realm.) The design of the proposed development has been informed by a clear understanding of the heritage context of the local area, and by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government’s National Design Guide (2019). The architectural idiom of the proposed terrace is mid-19th century, and its height, bulk, scale, massing, architectural idiom, style, detailing and proportions have been inspired by those of the terraces along Ordnance Hill. The proposed development has been designed to complement and reflect the character and appearance of the surrounding townscape, without actually replicating the design of a typical Eyre Estate terrace. It has been designed as a subservient addition to the streetscape (for example with less decorative balconettes at first floor level than those at no.s 2 and 3-11 (odd) Ordnance Hill). The inclusion of a plaque featuring the year of completion will help ensure the building remains legible from the “original” terraces in the CA. The front elevation of the existing house on the subject site addresses south-east, whereas that of the proposed development more appropriately addresses Ordnance Hill, along with the neighbouring historic terrace at no.s 2-8 (even).

7.2.4. Policy 7.8 deals with heritage assets and archaeology:

• A London’s heritage assets and historic environment, including listed buildings, registered historic parks and gardens and other natural and historic landscapes, conservation areas, World Heritage Sites, registered battlefields, scheduled monuments, archaeological remains and memorials should be identified, so that the desirability of sustaining and enhancing their significance and of utilising their positive role in place shaping can be taken into account.

Page | 42

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021)

• C Development should identify, value, conserve, restore, re-use and incorporate heritage assets, where appropriate. • D Development affecting heritage assets and their settings should conserve their significance, by being sympathetic to their form, scale, materials and architectural detail. Nearby statutorily listed buildings include those at no. 8 and no.s 48 and 49 Acacia Road, and no.s 9-23, 24-37 and 88-94 (consec.) St John’s Wood Terrace. All these Grade II listed houses date to c.1830s-40s, those along Acacia Road being a part of the former Eyre Estate and those along St John’s Wood Terrace being a part of the former Portland Estate. It is considered that the subject site as existing has a minimal and neutral impact on the settings of the listed buildings on Acacia Road, and a negligible and neutral impact on the settings of those on St John’s Wood Terrace. Its impact on the character and appearance of the Conservation Area is similarly neutral. Overall, the proposals are considered to make a neutral to positive impact on the settings of the aforementioned listed buildings and on the character and appearance of the CA.

7.3. The National Planning Policy Framework (Feb 2019)

7.3.1. The revised National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) was published in February 2019 and provides a full statement of the Government’s planning policies.

7.3.2. The NPPF contains a presumption in favour of sustainable development sympathetic to the conservation of designated heritage. The government’s definition of sustainable development is one that incorporates all the relevant policies of the Framework, including the protection and enhancement of the historic environment.

7.3.3. Relevant NPPF Policies are found in Section 12 “Achieving Well-Designed Places” and Section 16 “Conserving and Enhancing the Historic Environment”.

7.3.4. Paragraph 124 states that “Good design is a key aspect of sustainable development, creates better places in which to live and work and helps make development acceptable to communities”. Section 12 goes on to outline the core expectations for good design and the importance of engagement between stakeholders relating to design:

Paragraph 127. Planning policies and decisions should ensure that developments:

• a) will function well and add to the overall quality of the area, not just for the short term but over the lifetime of the development; • b) are visually attractive as a result of good architecture, layout and appropriate and effective landscaping; • c) are sympathetic to local character and history, including the surrounding built environment and landscape setting, while not preventing or discouraging appropriate innovation or change (such as increased densities); • d) establish or maintain a strong sense of place, using the arrangement of streets, spaces, building types and materials to create attractive, welcoming and distinctive places to live, work and visit;

Paragraph 131. In determining applications, great weight should be given to outstanding or innovative designs which promote high levels of sustainability, or help raise the standard of design more generally in an area, so long as they fit in with the overall form and layout of their surroundings.

The tenets of these paragraphs support the importance of good design in relation to conserving and enhancing the historic environment in Section 16:

Page | 43

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021)

Paragraph 192. In determining applications, local planning authorities should take account of:

• c) the desirability of new development making a positive contribution to local character and distinctiveness.

St John’s Wood CA is largely defined by its streets and houses built in the 19th century as part of the Eyre Estate. The character and appearance of the CA is also defined by some of its 20th century neo-Georgian buildings, such as the Unlisted Buildings of Townscape Merit along Acacia Road. In contrast with those buildings along Acacia Road, the existing subject site merely makes a neutral contribution to the character and appearance of the Conservation Area, its greatest contribution being its planting (as opposed to the architecture of the building, which has low architectural/artistic interest). The proposals have been informed by an in-depth understanding of the history, heritage context and character and appearance of the Conservation Area – the design of the proposed terrace reflecting (but not replicating) the designs of the other terraced houses along Ordnance Hill. The front elevation of the proposed development appropriately addresses Ordnance Hill, along with the neighbouring terrace at no.s 2-8 (even) Ordnance Hill. By reflecting the height, bulk, scale, massing, architectural idiom, style, detailing, proportions and materials of the historic terraces along Ordnance Hill, the proposed development helps mitigate the negative impact made by the existing uncomfortable gap between no.s 2-8 (even) Ordnance Hill and the subject site. The inclusion of a plaque featuring the year of completion will help ensure the building remains legible from the “original” terraces in the CA.

7.3.5. Section 16 deals with Conserving and Enhancing the Historic Environment. Paragraph 184 states that heritage assets “an irreplaceable resource, and should be conserved in a manner appropriate to their significance, so that they can be enjoyed for their contribution to the quality of life of existing and future generations”.

Paragraph 194. Any harm to, or loss of, the significance of a designated heritage asset (from its alteration or destruction, or from development within its setting), should require clear and convincing justification. Substantial harm to or loss of:

• a) grade II listed buildings, or grade II registered parks or gardens, should be exceptional; • b) assets of the highest significance, notably scheduled monuments, protected wreck sites, registered battlefields, grade I and II* listed buildings, grade I and II* registered parks and gardens, and World Heritage Sites, should be wholly exceptional. Nearby statutorily listed buildings include those at no. 8 and no.s 48 and 49 Acacia Road, and no.s 9-23, 24-37 and 88-94 (consec.) St John’s Wood Terrace. All these Grade II listed houses date to c.1830s-40s, those on Acacia Road being a part of the former Eyre Estate and those on St John’s Wood Terrace being a part of the former Portland Estate. It is considered that the subject site as existing has a minimal and neutral impact on the settings of the listed buildings on Acacia Road, and a negligible and neutral impact on the settings of those on St John’s Wood Terrace. The proposed scheme will not cause any harm or loss to the settings of these statutorily buildings, and overall it will make a neutral to positive contribution.

Paragraph 200. Local planning authorities should look for opportunities for new development within Conservation Areas and World Heritage Sites, and within the setting of heritage assets, to enhance or better reveal their significance. Proposals that preserve those elements of the setting that make a positive contribution to the asset (or which better reveal its significance) should be treated favourably. It is considered that the subject site as existing makes a neutral contribution to the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. The proposals have been informed by an in-depth understanding of the history, heritage context and character and appearance of the Conservation Area – the design of the proposed terrace reflecting (but not replicating) the designs of the other terraced houses along

Page | 44

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021)

Ordnance Hill in terms of height, bulk, scale, massing, architectural idiom, style, detailing, proportions and materials. The proposals also involve a change in orientation, whereby the front elevation of the subject site no longer faces Robinsfield Primary School. Instead it more appropriately addresses Ordnance Hill, along with the neighbouring historic terrace at no.s 2-8 (even). The proposals therefore will not involve any harm or loss to the character and appearance of the CA, and the contribution will be neutral to positive.

7.4. National Planning Guidance (PPG)

7.4.1. Available from March 2014, the PPG is an online guidance resource which is updated continuously. 7.4.2. Paragraph: 002 Reference ID: 18a-002-20190723 – What is meant by the conservation and enhancement of the historic environment?

• Conservation is an active process of maintenance and managing change. It requires a flexible and thoughtful approach to get the best out of assets as diverse as listed buildings in every day use and as yet discovered, undesignated buried remains of archaeological interest. In the case of buildings, generally the risks of neglect and decay of heritage assets are best addressed through ensuring that they remain in active use that is consistent with their conservation. Ensuring such heritage assets remain used and valued is likely to require sympathetic changes to be made from time to time. …

The proposals involve a change in orientation, whereby the front elevation of the subject site no longer faces Robinsfield Primary School. Instead it more appropriately addresses Ordnance Hill, along with the neighbouring historic terrace at no.s 2-8 (even). The existing subject site merely makes a neutral contribution to the character and appearance of the Conservation Area, its greatest contribution being its planting (as opposed to the architecture of the building, which has low architectural/artistic interest), and its demolition is therefore considered to be neutral in impact. The proposals have been informed by an in- depth understanding of the history, heritage context and character and appearance of the Conservation Area – the design of the proposed terrace reflecting (but not replicating) the designs of the other terraced houses along Ordnance Hill in terms of height, bulk, scale, massing, architectural idiom, style, detailing, proportions and materials. The inclusion of a plaque featuring the year of completion will help ensure the building remains legible from the “original” terraces in the CA.

7.4.3. Paragraph: 007 - Reference ID: 18a-007-20190723 – Why is ‘significance’ important in decision- making?

• Heritage assets may be affected by direct physical change or by change in their setting. Being able to properly assess the nature, extent and importance of the significance of a heritage asset, and the contribution of its setting, is very important to understanding the potential impact and acceptability of development proposals.

Chapter 5 of this report assesses the heritage significance of the subject site and its existing contribution to the character and appearance of the CA. It concludes that existing subject site has low archaeological, architectural/artistic and historic interests and a setting of medium heritage value, and it merely makes a neutral contribution to the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. Chapter 6 then considers the likely impact which the proposals will have on the character and appearance of the Conservation Area, and the settings of any other nearby heritage assets. It is concluded that the proposals will make a moderate and neutral to positive impact on the character and appearance of the St John’s Wood

Page | 45

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021)

Conservation Area and a minimal and neutral to positive impact on the settings of other nearby heritage assets.

7.4.4. Paragraph: 008 Reference ID: 18a-008-20190723 – How can proposals avoid or minimise harm to the significance of a heritage asset?

• Understanding the significance of a heritage asset and its setting from an early stage in the design process can help to inform the development of proposals which avoid or minimise harm. Analysis of relevant information can generate a clear understanding of the affected asset, the heritage interests represented in it, and their relative importance. Chapter 6 of this report considers the likely impact which the proposals will have on the character and appearance of the Conservation Area, and the settings of any other nearby heritage assets. It is concluded that the proposals will not involve any harm or loss to the character and appearance of the St John’s Wood CA, the contribution being moderate and neutral to positive. Similarly, they will not involve any harm or loss to the settings of other nearby heritage assets, the contribution being minimal and neutral.

8.0. CONCLUSION

8.1. The existing subject site comprises a building of low architectural/artistic and historic interest, adjacent to an uncomfortable gap in the townscape (created by bombing during the Second World War). The subject site has low archaeological interest, and a setting of medium interest. Overall, its existing contribution to the character and appearance of the Conservation Area and the settings of other nearby heritage assets is neutral.

8.2. The proposals involve the construction of a high quality terrace which has been inspired by the surrounding 19th century architecture of Ordnance Hill, and this design is considered to help mitigate the negative impact of the undesigned gap between the subject site and no.s 2-8 (even). This open space would be appropriately framed by the proposed terrace and no.s 2-8 (even). The proposals have been designed so as to cause no harm to the character and appearance of the St John’s Wood CA, nor to the settings of other nearby heritage assets. Overall, the proposals are considered to make a moderate and neutral to positive impact on the former and a minimal and neutral to positive impact on the latter.

8.3. The applicant has recognised the importance of performing investigations and analysis necessary for the assessment of the effects of the proposed works on the special interest of the surrounding heritage assets. This approach has been beneficial with regard to the process of acknowledging the best practice guidance as outlined in the NPPF and in local policies. It is considered that the information provided in this Heritage Statement is proportionate to the significance of the subject site. It sets out an appropriate level of detail sufficient to understand the potential heritage implications of the proposals in accordance with the proportionate approach advocated by Paragraph 189 of the NPPF. It is therefore concluded that the proposed works satisfy the relevant clauses of the NPPF. These are consistent with the spirit of local, regional and national planning policies and conservation principles.

Page | 46

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021)

APPENDIX 1: LIST DESCRIPTIONS

Name: 8, ACACIA ROAD NW8 Overview Heritage Category: Listed Building Grade: II List Entry Number: 1357151 Date first listed: 14-Sep-1970 Location Statutory Address: 8, Acacia Road NW8 County: Greater London Authority District: City of Westminster (London Borough) National Grid Reference: TQ 26916 83413 Details TQ 2683 SE CITY OF WESTMINSTER ACACIA ROAD, NW8 12/3 (south side) 14-9-1970 No 8 GV II Detached house. Mid C19. Stucco front. Slate hipped roof to eaves. 2 storeys and basement. 3 windows wide. Central projecting Doric porch; solid sided with arched side lights. Arched entrance with decorative plaque to tympanum. Panelled door. Square-headed windows; architraved. Sashes, glazing bars. Ground floor windows corniced, with cast iron window guards. Balustraded steps to entrance.

Name: 48 AND 49, ACACIA ROAD NW8 Overview Heritage Category: Listed Building Grade: II List Entry Number: 1292502 Date first listed: 01-Dec-1987 Location Statutory Address: 48 and 49, Acacia Road NW8 County: Greater London Authority District: City of Westminster (London Borough) National Grid Reference: TQ 26942 83498 Details TQ 2683 NW CITY OF WESTMINSTER ACACIA ROAD, NW8 12/2 Nos 48 and 49

Page | 47

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021)

II G.V. Semi-detached villas. c1830-40 Portland Estate St John's Wood villa development. Stucco; slate roof. Italianate- Grecian. 3 storeys and semi-basement. Each 2 windows wide with flanking 1-bay entrance wing. Entrance to No 48 altered. No 49 has pilastered porch to Ordnance Hill return. Recessed sashes in architrave surrounds with cornices and consoles to ground floor. Doric pilaster order rises from plat band over semi-basment to entablature over 1st floor of main block; panelled pilaster attic storey and bracketed flat eaves to hipped roof. Central corniced chimney stack. Similar villa type to the adjoining Eyre Estate.

Name: 9-23, ST JOHN'S WOOD TERRACE NW8

Overview

Heritage Category: Listed Building Grade: II List Entry Number: 1236016 Date first listed: 06-Apr-1982

Location

Statutory Address: 9-23, St John’s Wood Terrace NW8 County: Greater London Authority District: City of Westminster (London Borough) National Grid Reference: TQ 27010 83295

Details

TQ 2683 SE and 2783 SW. CITY OF WESTMINSTER ST JOHN'S WOOD TERRACE NW8 12/37 ;13/3. 6.4.82 Nos 9 to 23(consec) G.V. II Long terrace of houses. c 1830, Portland Estate development. Stock brick with stuccoed ground floors to Nos 14, 15, 19 and 21 to 23, Nos 19 to 23 channelled. Slate roofs. 3 storeys, 2- window wide fronts. Semi-circular arched doorways to left; panelled doors with decorated knocker roundels and fanlights, No 21 with pilaster jambs carrying entablature doorhead, and Nos 9 to 20 with fluted jambs. Recessed glazing bar sashes, under flat gauged arches. Plat band over ground floor and crowning stucco cornice and blocking course. Except for Nos 21 and 22, the 1st floor windows have "Chinese" pattern cast iron balconettes. Nos 3 to 6 q.v. are part'of the same terrace.

Name: 24-37, ST JOHN'S WOOD TERRACE NW8

Overview

Heritage Category: Listed Building Grade: II List Entry Number: 1236017

Page | 48

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021)

Date first listed: 06-Apr-1982

Location

Statutory Address: 24-37, St John’s Avenue Terrace NW8 County: Greater London Authority District: City of Westminster (London Borough) National Grid Reference: TQ 27080 83350

Details

TQ 2783 SW CITY OF WESTMINSTER ST JOHN'S WOOD TERRACE NW8 13/4 6.4.82 Nos 24 to 37 (consec) G.V. II Terrace of houses, No. 37 with corner shop. c 1830, Portland Estate development, continuing long terrace range of Nos 3 to 6 and 9 to 23 consec q.v. Stucco; slate roof. 3 storeys. 2- window wide fronts. Semi-circular arched doorways to left; panelled doors with decorated knocker roundels and fluted jambs and moulded doorheads under fanlights. No. 37 has altered corner shop with splayed entrance. Recessed glazing bar sashes, in architraves on first floor; ist floor sill band. Crowning cornice and blocking course. 1st floor windows have cast iron "Chinese" pattern balconettes. 2nd floor windows have apparently original louvred shutters.

Name: 88-94, ST JOHN'S WOOD TERRACE NW8

Overview Heritage Category: Listed Building Grade: II List Entry Number: 1236018 Date first listed: 01-Dec-1987 Location Statutory Address: 88-94, St John’s Wood Terrace NW8 County: Greater London Authority District: City of Westminster (London Borough) National Grid Reference: TQ 27045 83380 Details TQ 2783 SW CITY OF WESTMINSTER ST JOHN'S WOOD TERRACE NW8 13/2 Nos 88 to 94(consec) G.V. II Terraced houses. c1830 -40. Portland Estate development. Stock brick with channelled stucco ground floors. 3 storeys, 2- window wide fronts. Square headed doorway to left, with fanlight. Recessed glazing bar sashes, under flat gauged arches to upper floors, those on 1st floor with consoled cornices. Plat band over ground floor. Moulded stucco crowning cornice and parapets to Nos. 93 and 94, stucco coped parapets to Nos 88 to 92. Cast iron balconettes to 1st floor except for No. 94. Included for group value only.

Page | 49

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021)

APPENDIX 2: ELEVATIONS OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

Figure 52: Proposed front elevation (addressing Ordnance Hill).

Figure 53: Proposed rear elevation.

Page | 50

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021)

Figure 54: Proposed side (east) elevation (facing no.s 2-8 (even) Ordnance Hill).

Figure 55: Proposed side (west) elevation (facing no. 11 Acacia Road).

Figure 56: Section, showing the roof (viewed from the west side).

Page | 51

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021)

APPENDIX 3: HISTORIC ENGLAND’S PLANNING NOTE 3: “THE SETTING OF HERITAGE ASSETS”, DEC 2017

This note gives assistance concerning the assessment of the setting of heritage assets. Historic England recommends the following broad approach to assessment, undertaken as a series of steps that apply proportionately to the complexity of the case, from straightforward to complex:

Step 1: Identify which heritage assets and their settings are affected.

The setting of a heritage asset is ‘the surroundings in which a heritage asset is experienced’. Where that experience is capable of being affected by a proposed development (in any way) then the proposed development can be said to affect the setting of that asset. The starting point of the analysis is to identify those heritage assets likely to be affected by the development proposal.

Step 2: Assess the degree to which these settings make a contribution to the significance of the heritage asset(s) or allow significance to be appreciated.

This assessment of the contribution to significance made by setting will provide the baseline for establishing the effects of a proposed development on significance. We recommend that this assessment should first address the key attributes of the heritage asset itself and then consider:

• the physical surroundings of the asset, including its relationship with other heritage assets

• the asset’s intangible associations with its surroundings, and patterns of use

• the contribution made by noises, smells, etc to significance, and

• the way views allow the significance of the asset to be appreciated

Step 3: Assess the effects of the proposed development, whether beneficial or harmful, on that significance or on the ability to appreciate it.

The wide range of circumstances in which setting may be affected and the range of heritage assets that may be involved precludes a single approach for assessing effects. Different approaches will be required for different circumstances. In general, however, the assessment should address the attributes of the proposed development in terms of its:

• location and siting • form and appearance • wider effects • permanence

Page | 52

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021)

Step 4: Explore ways to maximise enhancement and avoid or minimise harm. Enhancement may be achieved by actions including:

• removing or re-modelling an intrusive building or feature • replacement of a detrimental feature by a new and more harmonious one • restoring or revealing a lost historic feature or view • introducing a wholly new feature that adds to the public appreciation of the asset • introducing new views (including glimpses or better framed views) that add to the public experience of the asset, or • improving public access to, or interpretation of, the asset including its setting

Options for reducing the harm arising from development may include the repositioning of a development or its elements, changes to its design, the creation of effective long-term visual or acoustic screening, or management measures secured by planning conditions or legal agreements. For some developments affecting setting, the design of a development may not be capable of sufficient adjustment to avoid or significantly reduce the harm, for example where impacts are caused by fundamental issues such as the proximity, location, scale, prominence or noisiness of a development. In other cases, good design may reduce or remove the harm, or provide enhancement. Here the design quality may be an important consideration in determining the balance of harm and benefit.

Step 5: Make and document the decision and monitor outcomes. It is good practice to document each stage of the decision-making process in a non-technical and proportionate way, accessible to non-specialists. This should set out clearly how the setting of each heritage asset affected contributes to its significance or to the appreciation of its significance, as well as what the anticipated effect of the development will be, including of any mitigation proposals.

Page | 53

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021)

Assessment Step 2 Checklist

The starting point for this stage of the assessment is to consider the significance of the heritage asset itself and then establish the contribution made by its setting. The following is a (non-exhaustive) check-list of potential attributes of a setting that may help to elucidate its contribution to significance. It may be the case that only a limited selection of the attributes listed is likely to be particularly important in terms of any single asset.

The asset’s physical surroundings Experience of the asset • Topography • Surrounding landscape or townscape • Aspect character • Other heritage assets (including buildings, • Views from, towards, through, across and structures, landscapes, areas or including the asset archaeological remains) • Intentional intervisibility with other historic and • Definition, scale and “grain” of surrounding natural features streetscape, landscape and spaces • Visual dominance, prominence or role as • Formal design (eg. hierarchy, layout) focal point • Orientation and aspect • Noise, vibration and other nuisances • Historic materials and surfaces • Tranquillity, remoteness, “wildness” • Green space, trees and vegetation • Busyness, bustle, movement and activity • Openness, enclosure and boundaries • Scents and smells • Functional relationships and communications • Diurnal changes • History and degree of change over time • Sense of enclosure, seclusion, intimacy or privacy

• Land use • Accessibility, permeability and patterns of movement • Degree of interpretation or promotion to the public • Rarity of comparable survivals of setting • Cultural associations • Celebrated artistic representations • Traditions

Page | 54

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021)

Assessment Step 3 Checklist

The following is a (non-exhaustive) check-list of the potential attributes of a development affecting setting that may help to elucidate its implications for the significance of the heritage asset. It may be that only a limited selection of these is likely to be particularly importance in terms of any particular development.

Location and siting of development Wider effects of the development • Proximity to asset • Change to built surroundings and spaces • Position in relation to relative topography and • Change to skyline, silhouette watercourses • Noise, odour, vibration, dust, etc. • Position in relation to key views to, from and • Lighting effects and “light spill” across • Change to general character (eg. urbanising • Orientation or industrialising) • Degree to which location will physically or • Changes to public access use or amenity visually isolate asset • Changes to land use, land cover, tree cover • Changes to communications/ accessibility/ Form and appearance of development permeability, including traffic, road junctions • Prominence, dominance, or conspicuousness and car-parking, etc • Competition with or distraction from the asset • Changes to ownership arrangements • Dimensions, scale and massing (fragmentation/ permitted development/ etc) • Proportions • Economic viability • Visual permeability (i.e. extent to which it can be seen through), reflectivity Permanence of the development • Materials (texture, colour, reflectiveness, etc) • Anticipated lifetime/ temporariness • Architectural and landscape style and/or • Recurrence design • Reversibility • Introduction of movement or activity • Diurnal or seasonal change

Page | 55

Kilgarron House, 14 Ordnance Hill, London – Heritage Statement (January 2021)

APPENDIX 4: THE BUILDING IN CONTEXT TOOLKIT

The Building in Context Toolkit grew out of the publication Building in Context published by English Heritage and CABE (now the Design Council) in 2001. The purpose of that publication was to stimulate a high standard of design for development taking place in historically sensitive contexts. The founding and enduring principle is that all successful design solutions depend on allowing time for a thorough site analysis and character appraisal to fully understand context.

The eight Building in Context principles are:

Principle 1

A successful project will start with an assessment of the value of retaining what is there.

Principle 2

A successful project will relate to the geography and history of the place and lie of the land.

Principle 3

A successful project will be informed by its own significance so that its character and identity will be appropriate to its use and context.

Principle 4

A successful project will sit happily in the pattern of existing development and the routes through and around it.

Principle 5

A successful project will respect important views.

Principle 6

A successful project will respect the scale of neighbouring buildings.

Principle 7

A successful project will use materials and building methods which are as high quality as those used in existing buildings.

Principle 8

A successful project will create new views and juxtapositions which add to the variety and texture of the setting.

Page | 56