Leisure Centre, Gunnersbury Park
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Leisure Centre, Gunnersbury Park HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT October 2015 KATHARINE BARBER AND HELEN WARREN 15 Bermondsey Square, Tower Bridge Road, London SE1 3UN [email protected] www.purcelluk.com All rights in this work are reserved. No part of this work may be reproduced, stored or transmitted in any form or by any means (including DOCUMENT ISSUE without limitation by photocopying or placing on a website) without the prior permission in writing of Purcell except in accordance with ISSUE 1 (OCTOBER 2015) - EALING COUNCIL the provisions of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. Applications for permission to reproduce any part of this work should be addressed to Purcell at [email protected]. Undertaking any unauthorised act in relation to this work may result in a civil claim for damages and/or criminal prosecution. Any materials used in this work which are subject to third party copyright have been reproduced under licence from the copyright owner except in the case of works of unknown authorship as defined by the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. Any person wishing to assert rights in relation to works which have been reproduced as works of unknown authorship should contact Purcell at [email protected]. Purcell asserts its moral rights to be identified as the author of this work under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. Purcell® is the trading name of Purcell Miller Tritton LLP. © Purcell 2015 KB/lkc/01.236743 CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION 5 4 IMPACT ASSESSMENT 38 1.1 Purpose of the Report 5 4.1 Summary of Proposals 38 1.2 Scope of the Study 5 4.2 Assessment Criteria 44 1.3 Existing Information 5 4.3 Impact Assessment 45 4.4 Discussion 47 2 UNDERSTANDING 6 2.1 Planning Context and Legislative Framework 6 2.2 Site Location and Setting 12 APPENDICES 2.3 Heritage Context 16 2.4 Historic Development 20 APPENDIX A: BIBLIOGRAPHY 49 2.5 Development Phases 24 APPENDIX B: VIEWS IMPACT ASSESSMENT 66 2.6 The Evolution of the Site by Development Phases 26 2.7 Views 32 3 SIGNIFICANCE 34 3.1 Assessing Significance 34 3.2 Statutory and Local Designations 35 3.3 Evidential Value 35 3.4 Historic Value 36 3.5 Aesthetic Value 36 3.6 Communal Value 37 3 [THIS PAGE HAS BEEN LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK] 4 Leisure Centre, Gunnersbury Park, Heritage Impact Assessment, October 2015 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 PURPOSE OF THE REPORT 1.2 SCOPE OF THE STUDY 1.3 EXISTING INFORMATION This Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) The HIA covers the following areas in order The report references a suite of heritage has been commissioned by Ealing Borough to provide a baseline assessment of the documents prepared in support of Heritage Council. It has been prepared to assess proposals: Lottery Fund applications for the Park the impact of a proposed sports pavilion, • Understanding: to establish what heritage as a whole (Parks for People) and the sports pitches and associated car parking assets are within the setting of the Gunnersbury Museum on the Large Mansion on the heritage value of Gunnersbury Park. proposal site and the legislation that (Heritage Grant) and associated Listed The sports pavilion will consist of changing protects them Building consents. These documents include rooms, sports hall, studios, equipment storage, a park wide Conservation Management Plan • Site Assessment: to give a description of café/bar and a limited amount of ancillary which along with supplementary research and the site and any adjacent heritage assets. office space for NGO sporting bodies. It is analysis has informed the preparation of this proposed to situate the pavilion in the area • Historic Development: to establish report. west of the café, pond and walled gardens, the key dates in the development of currently occupied by two disused bowling Gunnersbury Park and specifically the greens and an associated clubhouse. The impacted area. report also assesses the impact of a series of • Significance: to assess the heritage value sports pitches including a Muga to the north- of impacted heritage assets and how they west, west and south west of the Pavilion. are important within their setting. Parking is proposed within the walled area to the east of the Pavilion. • Impact Assessment: to analyse the effects the proposals will have on the The park itself is designated as a significance of the heritage assets within Conservation Area and a Registered Park the visual envelope of the site. and Garden. In addition to this, a number of structures within the park and in the vicinity of the proposed sports pavilion location are afforded Listed Building status. 5 2.1 PLANNING CONTEXT AND The policies within the document emphasise POLICY 7.8 HERITAGE ASSETS AND LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK the need for assessing the significance of ARCHAEOLOGY heritage assets and their setting in order to Strategic 2 2.1.1 NATIONAL POLICY fully understand the historic environment A. London’s heritage assets and historic UNDERSTANDING National planning policy framework and inform suitable design proposals for environment, including listed buildings, The National Planning Policy Framework change to, or within, the locality of significant registered historic parks and gardens and (NPPF; March 2012) is the overarching buildings. The document also requires an other natural and historic landscapes, planning policy document for England. Within assessment of the impact of development conservation areas, World Heritage Sites, Section 12 – conserving and enhancing the proposals affecting heritage assets. registered battlefields, scheduled monuments, historic environment – are the government’s archaeological remains and memorials should policies for the protection of heritage 2.1.2 REGIONAL PLANNING POLICY be identified, so that the desirability of assets. Paragraph 128 states: “In determining The London Plan March 2015 sustaining and enhancing their significance and applications, local planning authorities should The London Plan is the overall strategic plan of utilising their positive role in place shaping require an applicant to describe the significance for London, and it sets out a fully integrated can be taken into account. of any heritage assets affected, including any economic, environmental, transport and social contribution made to their setting. The level of framework for the development of the capital B. Development should incorporate detail should be proportionate to the assets’ to 2036. It forms part of the development measures that identify, record, interpret, importance” it also states that the assessment plan for Greater London. London boroughs’ protect and, where appropriate, present the should be “no more than is sufficient to local plans need to be in general conformity site’s archaeology. understand the potential impact of the proposal with the London Plan, and its policies guide Planning decisions on their significance” decisions on planning applications by councils C. Development should identify, value, and the Mayor. conserve, restore, re-use and incorporate The policies advise a holistic approach heritage assets, where appropriate. to planning and development, where all Key Policies to be considered in the context significant elements that make up the historic of the site include: D. Development affecting heritage assets environment are termed ‘heritage assets’. and their settings should conserve their These consist of designated assets (such as significance, by being sympathetic to their listed buildings or conservation areas) and form, scale, materials and architectural detail. non-designated assets (such as locally listed buildings or those features which are of heritage value). 6 E. New development should make provision details and form. Development that affects London’s heritage should be exploited. In LDF Preparation for the protection of archaeological resources, the setting of heritage assets should be of particular, where new development uncovers C. Boroughs should support the principles of landscapes and significant memorials. The the highest quality of architecture and design, an archaeological site or memorial, these heritage-led regeneration in LDF policies physical assets should, where possible, be and respond positively to local context and should be preserved and managed on-site. made available to the public on-site. Where character outlined in the policies above. Where this is not possible provision should 7.33 Based on an understanding of the the archaeological asset or memorial be made for the investigation, understanding, value and significance of heritage assets, cannot be preserved or managed on-site, 7.31A Substantial harm to or loss of dissemination and archiving of that asset. the sensitive and innovative use of historic provision must be made for the investigation, a designated heritage asset should be assets within local regeneration should understanding, recording, dissemination and exceptional, with substantial harm to or loss POLICY 7.9 HERITAGE-LED be encouraged. Schemes like Townscape archiving of that asset. of those assets designated of the highest REGENERATION Heritage Initiatives, Heritage Lottery Fund, significance being wholly exceptional. Where Strategic Heritage Economic Regeneration Schemes or LDF preparation a development proposal will lead to less A. Regeneration schemes should identify and Buildings at Risk Grants can play an important F. Boroughs should, in LDF policies, seek than substantial harm to the significance make use of heritage assets and reinforce the role in fostering regeneration of historic to maintain and enhance