29 and 20 storey tower blocks proposed for Hardess Street /Wellfit St, Loughborough Junction.
- Thread starter teuchter
- Start date
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
Yes. Bit surprised at this. There argument is that high tower means more public space at ground level. Instead of building lower heights and using up any free space at ground level.
I can see the rationale. They are talking to NR about opening up space by the arches. (Whirled cinema, the boxing arch etc).
So they are taking on board ideas to make this part public space and more permeable.
Told them the high tower will be an issue.
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
At base of each tower will be two levels of workshop space. On top of workshops is level of amenity space for residents. Including play space for children up to ten.
The flats will have 35% affordable. They said they wont use a vialibity assessment later on.
When I was there people were raising issues of pressure on transport and services.
They said they have talked to GLA member (Florence?) who lives nearby. She is lobbying for better trains.
The flats will have 35% affordable. They said they wont use a vialibity assessment later on.
When I was there people were raising issues of pressure on transport and services.
They said they have talked to GLA member (Florence?) who lives nearby. She is lobbying for better trains.
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
The workshop space drawings. These dont show the flats above. They are designing a makers space/ light industrial. The main space is big with high ceiling. At mezzanine level will be smaller work units.
The exterior walls will be transparent so people walking by can see in.
They are goung to design the whole insides. Including buying and installing equipment. People will hire use of equipment and workbenches.
There will be public café and they want for example local young people to have placements there.
Its a radical concept. I liked it.
They said they might manage workspace themselves or seek a management company.
The want to make it affordable.
The exterior walls will be transparent so people walking by can see in.
They are goung to design the whole insides. Including buying and installing equipment. People will hire use of equipment and workbenches.
There will be public café and they want for example local young people to have placements there.
Its a radical concept. I liked it.
They said they might manage workspace themselves or seek a management company.
The want to make it affordable.
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
From what I can see from drawings and chatting to the architects what they are doing is balancing dramatic change in the street Scape (tower) with dramatic intervention at ground level.
Making ground level space open up to public. The existing architecture of the arches with more public space and thoroughfares. Space that was essentially closed off to public. So at this street level its an enhancement of the public realm. Above the newly acquired public space will be the towers.
I can see the sense of the proposal. The new towers will at ground level incorporate themselves into the fabric of LJ as a light industry area.
The flats above will float above this workspace. So at ground level will not appear to dominate the space.
Its at a distance that problems occur. The sheer height , along with Peabody site, will alter the area for good.
Making ground level space open up to public. The existing architecture of the arches with more public space and thoroughfares. Space that was essentially closed off to public. So at this street level its an enhancement of the public realm. Above the newly acquired public space will be the towers.
I can see the sense of the proposal. The new towers will at ground level incorporate themselves into the fabric of LJ as a light industry area.
The flats above will float above this workspace. So at ground level will not appear to dominate the space.
Its at a distance that problems occur. The sheer height , along with Peabody site, will alter the area for good.
cuppa tee
Well-Known Member
did the 12 storey Hero of Switzerland tower get the go ahead ?
Last edited:
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
It hasn't got to the planning application stage yet.
Though apparently the developers claim that pre application talks with planning officers show the Lambeth planners sympathetic to the height and design.
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
Tried to put the architects views and drawings here.
They are making a lot of promises. Affordable workspace, community engagement, 35% affordable housing guaranteed.
I'm wondering how it will end up. If it will get watered down as it progresses.
Or what happens if this architects firm get planning permission and then realise they can't do this project and sell the site on with planning permission for a high tower.
They are making a lot of promises. Affordable workspace, community engagement, 35% affordable housing guaranteed.
I'm wondering how it will end up. If it will get watered down as it progresses.
Or what happens if this architects firm get planning permission and then realise they can't do this project and sell the site on with planning permission for a high tower.
CH1
"Red Guard"(NLYL)
Thank you for all the photos & summaries. Useful record ready for when it comes back to planning later on.
Florence will have to lobby hard for better trains. Chris Grayling comes into the category of "The President's Brain is Missing" as far as I'm concerned.
To be fair I doubt there is anything they can do to improve the crrent train service, which is back up to every 15 minutes plus one or two extra services.
The new 700 series trains (with ironing board seats) have greatly enhanced standing room -so I imagine they accommodate all that can be sqeezed in during the rush hour - the only possible extra would be going to 10 or 12 carriage trains.
No doubt Crispy or teuchter would have something to say about that - such as 90% of the platforms on the Sutton loop are too short (I'm guessing here, but generally with our local railways insurmountable reasons dictate that changes cannot occur).
In my opinion the one major improvement we could demand is proper access to the station, which is currently dangerous and discriminates against disabled people and travellers with heavy suitcases going to Gatwick and Luton.
Proper access to LJ station ought to be on the list for "Regeneration" to activate - and is of course even more relevant to the Peabody/Higgs proposals.
ChrisSouth
Well-Known Member
teuchter
je suis teuchter
I think that's right.
I think that their proposals for the ground floor design/use essentially have to be ignored when assessing this proposal. Once planning permission is obtained then there's not really anything to stop that space becoming something very different - either when they realise that what they are imagining doesn't stack up financially, or the site gets sold on to another developer. It just has to remain in the broad usage category.
Providing generous-ish public space at ground level is welcome in principle but they are setting up a false dichotomy in saying that you have to choose between low-rise and decent public space/street level realm. If they are saying that the only way they can provide a decent environment at street level is by building a very tall development, then this means that whatever they paid for the site was based on an assumption that they would be able to go for a certain density of development.
In the first consultation they provided three 'options', one of which was for tall towers (although they did not state the height). It was obvious to me that it was their intention that this would be the one they wanted people to choose, because they listed it with lots of pros and few cons, in contrast to the other two options which were shown with lots of cons and few pros. Surprisingly enough, the tall towers is now the people's 'preferred approach'!
I think it's important to be clear that, a bit like the Higgs scheme, what they are proposing to replace the existing light industrial units is *not* equivalent space - they are not proposing something that car mechanics or steel fabricators can move back into; it's another trendy makerspace/co-working type thing. I've come to hate the term "creative light industrial". Like the Higgs, I expect most of such space would end up essentially as office space.
Anyway, it's basically in the hands of Lambeth planners: if they have decided that high density, high rise developments are now fine in locations such as this (and it seems that they have), that is what we will get, in which case the best that can be done is to try and make sure the space at ground level is as good as it can be.
teuchter
je suis teuchter
As I understand it, there may be some scope to intersperse the existing service with some additional services that would terminate at Blackfriars, although I'm not 100% clear on that.
teuchter
je suis teuchter
A new overground station in LJ is simply not going to happen. On the other hand, re-opening Brixton East is something that could happen given sufficient will.
ChrisSouth
Well-Known Member
I could live with that.
Planning application for a 29 storey building at Hardess Street
editor
hiraethified
Fucking hell. Look at the size of THIS!Planning application for a 29 storey building at Hardess Street
Does anyone fancy writing about this for Buzz? I'm guessing an awful lot of people aren't going to be aware of this monstrosity landing on their doorstep.
hungry_squirrel
Well-Known Member
Good Lord, those towers are massive...
editor
hiraethified
Buzzed:
www.brixtonbuzz.com
Proposed view showing the 29 story building and its 20 storey companion completely dominating the landscape.
“The architectural quality and visual richness adds well to a dreary view,” insist the developers.
Huge 29 and 20 storey tower blocks proposed for Loughborough Junction – register your opinion now
The public only have until the 25th February 2020 to express their opinion on the proposed two gigantic tower blocks rising to 29 and 20 storeys high at Hardess Street in Loughborough Junction, nex…
www.brixtonbuzz.com
Proposed view showing the 29 story building and its 20 storey companion completely dominating the landscape.
“The architectural quality and visual richness adds well to a dreary view,” insist the developers.
editor
hiraethified
Good to see that a lot more people are getting involved with the planning page now. There was just four comments when I wrote the article on Buzz and now it's up to 22 (21 objections and 1 supporting)....
It seems ridiculous to add to the already overburdened railway station with a residential scheme this massive.
It seems ridiculous to add to the already overburdened railway station with a residential scheme this massive.
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
Good to see that a lot more people are getting involved with the planning page now. There was just four comments when I wrote the article on Buzz and now it's up to 22 (21 objections and 1 supporting)....
It seems ridiculous to add to the already overburdened railway station with a residential scheme this massive.
Thats good.
I was at meeting in LJ tonight and some people turned up to ask about the application. Its useful to have this article to show people.
There is a super organised contingent of NIMBYs in Herne hill.
Similar threads
