Hi, I posted above asking why the objections as London simply needs many more homes to meet demand. I looked at the plans , read the supporting documents and today had a look at the site.I agree that the architects have been somewhat inventive in parts of their design statement, also that the building has some interesting history and that past usage as a motor repair garage of part of the site might have been a useful amenity for some local residents (although all too often residents complain about nuisance from such places!)Long standing use of the main building as offices does not seem to be an issue, whether there is any demand for continuing use is doubtful.Residential use for the whole site seems a sensible solution so it is up to the owner/developer to choose whether to convert or demolish and rebuild.The building is not Listed, Locally Listed or in a Conservation Area.Newbuild will increase the number of habitable rooms on the site, improve significantly the energy efficiency/carbon footprint of the homes, and provide modern attractive? design. It will also maximise the value of the site for the landowner/developer.Conversion of the main house is no doubt feasible and might produce attractive homes though the expense of internal restructuring and retrofitting to meet current standards on energy efficiency and other building control matters might make costs unacceptable. If the main building is retained how will the rest of the site be used to maximise habitable rooms, meet design standards, planning and value to the owners?Yes it is sad to see an old building go, I have a keen interest in Local History and architecture and wish to see what we have which is viable preservered but from the landowner/developers perspective, it is a ‘no brainer’As for the design? The 4 houses will be in a similar style to some other houses in the road but to modern standards including energy production and efficiency. (Shakespeare has the typical mix of different styles as different builders produced small numbers on small plots, before going bust!) They will add to this mix. I do not have strong views as to their design. Some would say better to use a striking modern design rather than a pastiche....The treatment of the ‘separate house’ three flats matches the houses and I think OK. Excavation of the basement to a lower level to facilitate the car stacker will be a concern to the immediate neighbour but is not a planning matter if it is clearly differentiated from basement development to extend non basement terraced/semi’s in the area.I would however advise prospective purchasers to allow for large service charges, as stackers always break down and cost a fortune to fix!To summarise, Shakespeare Rd will lose an empty Victorian Villa, last used as offices, with an interesting history and an empty garage workshop. Or gain 4 good sized 4 bed houses, three flats, all with gardens/garden access and a concealed car stacker for 3 cars .London needs more homes, where will your children be able to live?. Ok these will not be affordable to most but seem a good addition to the mix.Over to the planners, who I suspect will recommend for approval...IainPS I have no connection with the land owners/developers or especially the Conservative Party (doubt they have any interest either!)
Iain Muir ● 5729d