KINGSTON AND NORTH KINGSTON NEIGHBOURHOOD

Conservation Areas Advisory Committee

PLANNING APPLICATION COMMENT FORM DATE: 8 February 2023

CA6

RBK ref: 23/00023/FUL

Address: Former Builders Yard Off Littlefield Close Land Rear Of 6 To 9A Fairfield West Littlefield Close Kingston Upon Thames KT1 2UG Planning Officer: Helen Harris

Description of proposed works: Erection of 2 storey residential building with 3nos dwellings with associated bins, cycle provision and amended drop kerb.

APPRAISAL

By full committee on …… 8 February 2023 …… with …… 8 …… members present

Issued on 8 Feb 2023

1. Positive support		2. No objection
3. Objection	X	4. Objection unless revised as below
5. No comment/neutral		6. Lack of detail
7. Decision already issued

Reason for objection:

Objection.

The roof of the proposed building should not be flat. The PA says it would match properties nearby, which is entirely wrong. All surrounding properties have pitched roofs. The applicant should install a slate pitched roof to match the typology of the area.

The proposed glazing bars are of mock Georgian design but the prevailing style of the area is Victorian &, therefore, the applicant should match this by installing equivalent fenestration.

The proposed east elevation, facing the rear of properties on Fairfield West, is a large unbroken mass of brickwork and should be ‘broken up’ by use of faux window reveals. Greater detailing of this elevation is important given it would be the most visible aspect of the building when viewed from Fairfield Green.

For all of the above reasons this application would cause substantial harm to the character and appearance of the CA and must be refused.
The proposed building is positioned too close to the boundary with the back gardens of the properties on Fairfield West & is akin to cramping. More space & natural light should be provided.

The plans would create a very boxy/ bulky building of incongruous design which would detract from the character & appearance of the CA.

The overall height of the proposed dwellings is not marked on the drawings. The line drawing of the side view with #6 Fairfield West is wrong and misleading: it shows the proposed building being of a similar height to that property which would not be the case.

The brickwork specification is not given, with a reference only to London Stocks. Exact details of the proposed materials are necessary in a CA.

The proposed drop curb would detract from the street scape & should be replaced by a Residents’ Parking Bay in front of the property on Littlefield Close.

The PA contains an amount of incorrect information eg:
- ‘Protected or Priority Species’ should be ‘YES’ as the building would be immediately adjacent to the protected trees on Wheatfield Way;
- ‘Existing Parking Spaces’ should be ‘MULTIPLE’ as this area was previously a car park;
- ‘Open Space’ should be ‘YES’.

The DAS contains some inaccuracies which shows a lack of care by the applicant. For example, it does not make clear this is a residential area. In addition, it refers to ‘the extension of’ #6 Fairfield when the main bulk of #6 is part of the 1883 building not an extension. It also states there are ‘limited rear windows to houses on Fairfield West’ when all of these properties have ample windows in common with the Victorian typology of the area.