KINGSTON AND NORTH KINGSTON NEIGHBOURHOOD
Conservation Areas Advisory Committee

PLANNING APPLICATION COMMENT FORM
DATE: 9 February 2022

N/A
 RBK ref:

21/04022/FUL 		Address: Surrey House, 34 Eden Street NCP Car Park, St James Road Former Hippodrome, Eden Street And Bo Concept, The Roundhouse 20 Eden Street Kingston Upon Thames KT1 1ER

Planning Officer: Toby Feltham

Description of proposed works:

Application under Section 73 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to carry out development without compliance with Condition 1 (Approved Plans) of Planning Permission ref: 20/02495/FUL (Full Planning application for the demolition of Surrey House, Multi Storey Car Park, Hippodrome and Bo Concept and the erection of 2 (two) Office buildings [Use Class - E(g)(i)] Building A and Building B: Building A 9 storeys (22,144 (GEA) sqms) Building B 11 storeys (11,587 (GEA) sqms). The erection of a replacement multi storey car park of 354 spaces plus cycle parking (for use as a public car park at weekends) landscaping, public realm upgrades, servicing, pedestrian and vehicular access) dated 02/12/2021. Variations to include alterations to bridge link, elevations, floorplates, ground floor level access, rooftop plant and screen, service yard, reduction to height of Buildings A and B, alterations to landscaping/public realm, removal of basements and stairs on sides of Building A.This application is accompanied by an Environmental Statement.

APPRAISAL

By full committee on …… 9 February 2022 …… with …… 8 …… members present

Issued on 10 Feb 2022


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.

We reiterate our strong objection to this scheme of 3 non-compliant tall buildings & the unacceptable harm they will cause to adjacent heritage assets & their settings. The harm stems from an over-developed site of excessive scale, height, form & mass, the result of cramming a non-compliant 8 storey car park into the scheme when there should be none. We expect any variations to the consented scheme to reduce this level of harm, however the current amendments make matters worse because:

i) the applicant now seeks to fell the 2 established/ healthy London plane trees on Brook Street. These were to be retained as a condition of approval of 20/02495/FUL.

ii) the applicant now proposes to increase the footprint of building B (the ‘Honey’ building), squeezing the entry to the ‘woodland walk’ by pushing out the south west corner. This would dissuade public entry to this space, reinforcing a suspicion that it was never intended to be public realm at all.

iii) the applicant now proposes to reclaim part of the ground floor of building A (the ‘Hive’ building) set back on Eden Street - the consented scheme has space for 6 trees here, now reduced to 4. In addition intrusive planters are to be placed at the end of the ramps, it seems, to dissuade public entry & undermine any retail purpose. Furthermore, the consented proposal for 3D pale green bricks to the facade is replaced by bright green flat glazed brickwork - garish, cheap looking & incongruous by comparison. The harm done to the setting of the grade 2 listed Old Post Office & United Reformed Church would increase & the Eden Square public space would be further compromised by halving the size of this building’s inset entrance, pushing its upper floors further out over Eden Street, deploying inferior finishes & additional planters.

iv) the reduction in height of buildings A & B is so marginal that it fails to ameliorate the harm to the setting of the numerous surrounding heritage assets, including the highly important views to/ from the Town’s Ancient Market Place & premier CA of Kingston Old Town.

v) the applicant continues to portray the development as environmentally sensitive even when the existing & still useful car park structure is to be demolished & rebuilt in the same place - a London Plan T6 zone. No amount of ‘green washing’ can offset the CO2 emissions from making new concrete for a structure of this scale.

In conclusion, CAAC maintains its strong objection to what we regard as a highly damaging development that will cause extensive & unnecessary harm to the Town’s rich heritage.

Request to Call-in:

Although not in a CA, due to this development’s close proximity to designated assets we consider it appropriate to request a call-in of these amendments so that they are determined by elected members & not appointed officers.

Thank you.