Consultation On Hotel Planning Application *NEW*

Many people will have received a letter from Roy Thompson at RBK concerning the revised planning application made by NHP for the erection of:

(a) A part 7 / part 7 / part 8 storey building on the east side of site around the EDF substation (on Skerne Road) for a 180 bedroom hotel (with conference, banqueting & meeting facilities) and 121 flats; and (b) 2 blocks (part 6 / part 8 and and part 9 / part 11 storey) providing 235 flats on the west part of the site (the Riverside); together with parking and amenity space on the site of the old Kingston Power Station, Skerne Road, Kingston-upon-Thames.

These latest proposals are different from those previously refused permission in October 2007 (06/12424/FUL) in the following respects:

The Riverside proposals:

• have been entirely redesigned
• there would be two blocks arranged around a central courtyard
• the overall height of the proposals has been drastically reduced
• there would be 13 more flats in this part of the site
• vehicular access to the site remains off Henry MacCauley Avenue but the entrance to the underground parking has been relocated further south within the site.

The Skerne Road proposals:

• there are detailed changes to the external appearance and its scale and mass
• the proposed hotel has been increased from 150 to 180 bedrooms
• the proposed flats have been redesigned internally, some are enlarged and thus there would be 27 fewer flats in this block.

You can see a copy of the application at:

1. The Environmental Services Help Desk, 2nd Floor, Guildhall 2 between 8.45am and 5pm Monday to Thursday and 8.45am to 4.45pm on Fridays.
   
2. Kingston Library during normal opening hours.

You can also view applications on the Council's website at www.kingston.gov.uk

After a huge amount of debate the CARA Committee is broadly supportive of these new proposals as we wish to see improvements to this long neglected but strategically important site for the town centre, creating a solution of which everyone can be proud of.

We would also encourage all interested parties to comment on this application (both those who are 'for' and those 'against'). In fact the Council welcomes relevant comment as part of the consideration of the application. Please write, e-mail (including your name and address) to dc@rbk.kingston.gov.uk, or comment directly at www.kingston.gov.uk by 21st April 2008, quoting the reference number 08/12146.

Presumably this will be reviewed at the Development Control Committee scheduled for Thursday 5th June 2008 at 7.30pm at the Guildhall.

(Click on the image for a larger view of the plan)

Power Station Proposals Exhibition

Further to the other recent posts, we have been informed that the developers and their architects will be holding an Exhibition of their revised proposals at the Adult Learning Centre (North Kingston Centre on Richmond Road) on Friday 15th February (4pm - 8pm) and Saturday 16th February (10am - 4pm).

Only in draft phase at the moment but we have been supplied these images by way of example. This is a view from Canbury Gardens:


This is an impression of what the "courtyard" might look like:


This view, highlights any impact on the aspect from Kingston Bridge.

Notes from Power Station / Hotel Development Workshop 16th Jan 2008

Venue:
Richard Mayo Centre, Kingston


Present: Michael Squire (MS) Squire and Partners
Paul Harrison Squire and Partners
Nerea Mendicute Squire and Partners
Matt Holloway Squire and Partners (Project Manager)
Mike Spenser-Norris (MSN) NHP
Philip Trim NHP

Kevin Howlett PPS

Hugh Scantlebury (HMS) CARA
Trevor Willis CARA
Richard Mobbs CARA

Glenda Leveson CARA Member
Tim Kimber CARA Member (and liasing with Tony Leitch who was not present)
Clive Howard Royal Quarter Residents Association
Graham McNally Kingston Town Centre Management
Anne Brown Hampton Wick resident

+ 10 or so other interested parties

Kevin Howlett introduced meeting.

Michael Squire introduced Squire & Partners and provided background to company (offices in Kings X and examples of work including Reiss headquarters in London). Looking to come up with alternative form of design for riverside development. Not concerned with elements of affordable housing and size of units. These are details being addressed by the developer.
Rather more, they are concerned with addressing the issues of scale and mass which previously proved unpopular.

Went through options considered and shown previously highlighting desire to keep height away from the river side.

Been developing their original option 6 which is essentially comprised of two blocks - a riverside block (G+4 storeys) plus another G+7 storey unit abutting EDF substation / hotel unit which is planned to have a vertical garden fascia (i.e. green).

A "very" rough schematic of the proposed layout is attached above (we're waiting on some proper graphics from the developer).

Design features a central courtyard with road access from Sury Basin / May Bate Avenue. Road also leads to ramp to underground car park featuring 200 spaces. The "Turn" section of front building has a lower roof line so as not to block too much light from Canbury Place.

Both buildings feature large, glass entrance halls so as to facilitate views from courtyard through to river and vice versa. Front building also features two "very generous" glass access halls, again to open up vista.

Rear building "may" feature bridges (think wharf style developments) to roof garden on EDF substation / hotel development.

Preferred elevation for apartments has been taken into consideration in that larger windows of living rooms face river in front building and courtyard in year. Larger glazing faces predominantly WNW. Correspondingly smaller bedroom windows face rear.

Given planned "mansion house" style design apartments will have long adjoining walls which will be more energy efficient. Materials will feature elements of river - highly finished timber and ripple effect facade as opposed to being bland and flat. To maintain exterior design aspects, interior wooden shutters will be used (as opposed to people using 300 different types of net curtain).

Architects feel the design is not constrained by other buildings in the area and so can be of highly contemporary design and one which people will be proud of.

In addition Michael Squire would still like to consider a tall, slim tower or "camponile" which would be a beautiful and architecturally interesting feature.

Confessed to the fact that the canopy of an adjacent tree would have to be pruned if it went ahead. This would be a landmark construction of some 1500 sq foot per story and rise perhaps to some 15-18 storeys.

Trevor commented that he had preferred the previous proposals but that a camponile might compensate for relative 'blandness' of revised proposals.

Interested to know if there is interest / support for such an edifice.
Generally this appeared to be the case (of those who voted I counted 8 for, 1 against).

Graham McNally commented that he liked different heights of development, quoting good examples from the South Bank.

Michael Squire commented on the roof jewellery which would feature a range of full height and half height spaces on the riverside building. Such jewellery would be somewhat simpler on the rear construction but still present.

Trevor commented on need to review balance of access versus security / crime prevention and encouraged architects to have meaningful dialogue with local police given location.

Trees in Canbury Development would hide most aspects of development form Hampton Wick side but one attendee still said that although no trees would be affected (4m away), she would still object to the proposed height.

Various people complimented the team on the design especially in relation to reduced impact on surrounding areas including Canbury Place, Royal Quarter etc.

Kevin Howlett proceeded to wrap up the meeting, thanking everyone for coming along around 8.45pm.

Power Station / Hotel Site Development Follow Up

Following the rejection of NHP's proposals by the RBK Planning Control Committee last year, there have been a few developments.

After holding follow up meetings with the GLA and the RBK planning officers, two things started happening in parallel. The first is that NHP are going to appeal against the decision. This will, if it goes ahead, result in a public enquiry which they believe will probably be heard by a senior QC sometime during the Spring (residents may have received some correspondence in relation to this).

The second is we believe somewhat more constructive. Given most parties were in favour of a dual use of hotel / residential development but objecting in the main to the design and most significantly the height of the proposals, NHP have decided to bite the bullet and design an alternative scheme.

This will entail most likely leaving the design for the bit covering the substation (which everyone appreciates is a significant technical challenge) intact and reworking the remainder (ie. the bit that most people objected to).

NHP have commissioned a brand new architect - Michael Squire (www.squireandpartners.com), to come up with a revised proposal to run in parallel to the existing one. This is a well regarded UK firm with a number of high profile projects under it's belt. See the web site for details.

In order to not have a repeat of the previous situation, all parties involved have attempted to engage with local community representatives, officers and planning committee members throughout the early stages of the design process. Given our representation and proximity, it is felt that CARA is a key party in such matters. In a similar way, they are keen to engage with the residents group based in the Royal Quarter development.

To this end we arranged a meeting in November 2007 for our Committee to meet with personnel from Squire & Partners, representatives from the developers - NHP, people from the Royal Quarter residents association and any local councillors who had an interest in the project.

Given some initial reticence on behalf of some elected members to attend, we pointed out that given this is an attempt at working towards a consensus approach by all parties concerned, we as an association believe it would have no material impact on any due process in place once (if) any application is / was finally registered and we would of course reserve all rights to participate fully in any subsequent consultation and decision making exercise.

Furthermore, we also held that we did not believe that there was any risk of anyone pre-judging anything given this exchange taking place at a pre-application stage. Once an application is registered, it would be a different matter and the normal controls will come into effect.

On behalf of CARA residents, we asked all parties to be sensible and pragmatic in helping to improve this long forgotten but strategically important site for the town centre and where possible work together for towards a solution of which everyone can be proud of.

It turned out to be a very useful session.

The follow notes are those of that initial meeting and the subsequent workshop held in the Richard Mayo Centre in Kingston last month.

Obviously the notes whilst thorough are not verbatim and we apologise for any errors or omissions.

Notes Of Hotel / Power Station Site review 27th November 2007

Venue:
Canbury Pavilion

Present:
Michael Squire (MS) Squire and Partners
Paul Harrison Squire and Partners
Nerea Mendicute Squire and Partners

Mike Spenser-Norris (MSN) NHP
Philip Trim NHP
Philip Villars Indigo Planning
Kevin Howlett PPS
Charles Chamberlain Merlion Capital

Hugh Scantlebury (HMS) CARA
Trevor Willis CARA
Bazil Arden CARA
Clare Francis CARA
Richard Mobbs CARA
Marilyn Mason CARA

Clive Howard Royal Quarter Residents Association

Cllr Dennis Doe RBK - Tudor Ward
Cllr Frank Thompson RBK - Tudor Ward
Cllr David Glasspool RBK - Canbury Ward
Cllr David Ryder-Mills RBK - Canbury Ward

Apologies: Cllr David Cunningham, Cllr Geoff Austin, Amanda Stephenson (Royal Qaurter), Penny D'Souza (CARA), Helen Moss (CARA)

HMS welcomed everyone to the meeting, set the scene and encouraged everyone to make the meeting a constructive and positive event to exchange views, ideas and opinions.

Mike Spenser-Norris of NHP:
Welcomed everyone to speak. Provided background on owning land since 1999; 27 months working with planning officers and committees. refusal, appeal process etc.
Given this has already been a very expensive exercise and a whole lot of work, decision made to amalgamate proposals that were welcomed e.g. the EDF substation contruction along Skerne Road. Michael Squire has been asked to come up with an alternative form of design for riverside development.

Michael Squire of Squire & Partners:
Been on job for two weeks. Tonight want to outline results of initial thoughts on what can be done to overcome objections. Most related to height and density. Affordable Housing is not an issue - merely a interior and financial technicality.
Squire & Partners are based in Kings Cross. Partner here tonight, Paul Harrison lives in Burton Road, Kingston-upon-Thames. Provided some example of work and an overview of site.
Commented on trees which are mature and which shield any view when in leaf.
Discussed walk through access to riverside.

Existing proposal is for a twin tower 15 + 12 storey construction linked to a 6 storey block on Skerne Road.
Aiming for 7/8 storeys (similar to Edwardian and Victorian mansion blocks found in much of London).

Examples given include:

• Simple Block Frontage
• Three Buildings + Slim Tall Tower
• Multiple Low Rise Small Riverfront Dwellings

Looking to design a simple building with rooftop 'jewellery'. Happy to sacrifice external space for external "vistas".

Iconic can mean a lot of things. Patterns of similar design, light, colour, all sorts. Believes this project would benefit from something interesting above the parapet line. Where height is applicable, looking for a slender design, not a land grab.

Bazil Ardren
Commented that he in fact liked the wooden ribs and timber of the recent design.

Cllr Denis Doe commented:
John Lewis is OK for something that signifies something as people enter Kingston over the bridge.
Believes narrower, taller buildings can be beautiful e.g. the Skylon at the Festival of Britain in 1951.
Recalled the facts around the 'poplars' issue whereby building activity disrupted the roots and damaged trees along with residents views being diffierent from those set out by the developer in the brochure material. Denis believes people would be irrationally unhappy if trees were affected.

Marilyn Mason:
Entering Kingston should reflect the 21st century
The chimneys on the old power station were iconic and beautiful.
Agrees that slender helps taller building appear beautiful.
No one objects to height of St Pauls
Green issues are a concern as are public access, sensitive lighting and sustainability.

Clive Howard (Royal Quarter)
Not affected by this section of the development too much (unlike the Skerne Road / EDF proposal). Felt the towers were thin. A small block allows views from back of site. Larger building would obstruct views.

Cllr Frank Thompson (RBK)
Likes
Glad to see back of poplars
Likes example number 5 so long as there is quality brickwork.

Richard Mobbs
View on entry to Kingston is key.
Towers / Blocks of flats are not the impression we want
If something is going to stick up, should be attractive e.g. Skylon, church spire etc..
Michael Squire commented that what he had in mind was a beautiful slender design and provided some examples.

Cllr David Glasspool (RBK)
Objected on grounds of height
Believes it is at this point that the river changes it's character from town centre to less formal landscape until Teddington Lock.
Liked the previous design, just believed it should be located elsewhere. Likes some of the ideas proposed and discussed tonight. Flats are a bad use = selfish. Need family housing. Contemporary design is ok. Would prefer density to be lower but understands nothing much can be done in this regards.

Trevor Willis
Feels state of town is very poor (e.g. Slug & Lettuce, new student accommodation block, time that power station site has lain dormant) and that along with others from Kingston Town Centre Management Committee, feels that Kingston might lose it's competitive advantage if things don't change soon. Requests that whatever happens, developers just get on with it!
Overall a request for high quality construction standards.

Claire Francis
Likes lower proposed schemes
Liked chimneys too but understands needs for new housing.

Cllr David Ryder-Mills (RBK)
Has considered his position on Development Committee but his comments have been made easier but has been said earlier. Believes beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Liked the towers but beyond the height, the whole bulk of the development was unacceptable. Does not want to see a whole lot of flats. Would like to turn around the development to have the tower on the riverside, believing the public aspects should face the river. Is reserving judgement re the the hotel.

MSN commented that with no access, no passing trade the 1998 plans for a hotel near the river resulted in no hotel chain taking an interest.

Dennis Doe commented that he had been very keen on the proposals that had been turned down and that a delay had been affecting the community and had previously voted in favour of the development.

David Ryder-Mills requested that the developers look hard at the 50% affordable housing target and that size of the units was addressed.

Philip Trim commented tht the GLA were happy with 23% and that the mix of dwellings would be addressed.

Other comments were raised with reference to the continuing existence of the barge dock proposals for a restaurant development and the potential negativity this would engender. It was strongly suggested that the developers communicated openly as regards the whole development, not sections of it.

Furthermore HMS ran through comments of absent Committee members and recalled previous comments made by residents at the expo held at the Pavilion previously.

HMS thanked everyone for their input and the meeting was closed.