SkyscraperCity banner

1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
Moderator
Joined
·
37,804 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
60 Sloane Avenue
Chelsea
SW3


Planning application: Kensington & Chelsea PP/16/03878


Development Facts

Address: 60 Sloane Avenue, London SW3

Architect: David Chipperfield

Developer: 60 SA Limited

Residential units: 49

Height: 30m

Floors: 7


Floorspace

Retail (A1): 2,646m²

Leisure (D2): 1,932m²

Residential (C3): 14,155m²


Existing




Proposed











-
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,167 Posts
How interesting, if they can do it justice and the materials spot on then it would be great to see this complete - the current glass sections are provincial at best.

Shame the obviously modern section of the new build on the roof couldn't be more contemporary, it seems a wasted opportunity after the rebuild.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,098 Posts
am i understanding this correctly - an old building was at some previous point altered (by blitz or bad architects?) to end up a partially-historic, partially-contemporary frankenstein, and the new proposal is to recreate the entire facade so that it matches the historic sections? that should please those on the global forum who claim london never does this! :lol:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,114 Posts
Here is a link to the design background and proposal to clarify the building history: https://www.rbkc.gov.uk/idoxWAM/doc/Other-1704604.pdf?extension=.pdf&id=1704604&location=volume2&contentType=application/pdf&pageCount=1

I like the proposal, though would prefer that the new terracotta facades were not a simplified version of the original design (which permits distinguishability between original facades and new facades) but rather were an exact match to enable the original design intent to be achieved, and often buildings were constructed in phases while maintaining the façade design. This said, I am open minded about the roof top in terms of being a simplified harmonious addition in terracotta or in glass and metal. So long as the new façade is stepped back from the parapet and is discreet, which it is, either option works.

Interestingly, the 1994 Stanton and Williams/YRM redevelopment mixing old with new in a harmonious manner won many civic and architectural awards.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,691 Posts
Looks great, even though the existing structure is not bad by any means. it will be interesting to know what's happening inside.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
136 Posts
I like the proposal, though would prefer that the new terracotta facades were not a simplified version of the original design (which permits distinguishability between original facades and new facades) but rather were an exact match to enable the original design intent to be achieved, and often buildings were constructed in phases while maintaining the façade design.
This is exactly right and well put.

Also, the blank columns on the 5th floor loggia look a bit crude and clunky.

Sometimes there is a case for simply recreating a past style rather than making a contrast between past and present, and this building is probably such a situation. Therefore, they just need to go the final mile, or there is a danger of looking like a cut-price version of the past rather than a celebration of it. Which would be bit of a waste of all this positive effort.

Currently this proposal deserves four out of five stars; it would be nice to be able to give it five.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
37,804 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
Planning Application
2019

Planning application: Kensington & Chelsea PP/19/06879


Development Facts

Address: 60 Sloane Avenue, London SW3

Architect: Squire & Partners

Developer: 60 SA Limited

Height: 35m

Floors: 7


Floorspace (GIA)

Retail (A3): 2,690m²

Office (B1): 16,339m²

Leisure (D2): 1,653m²

Plant/back of house/parking: 3,524m²




 

·
create streets
Joined
·
1,113 Posts
Awesome! Are we finally starting to see a rejection of grotesque modernist aberrations? I will keep my fingers crossed.

Although saying that I realise such a density (and value) increase in a location like this will obviously justify the additional cost of the materials and design, and RBKC will have had more leverage over design with it being in a conservation area and... not sure if it's owned by Cadogan? Possibly not.

Anyway would be good to see more of this.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,114 Posts
cool! they're going for the full historical replication then and not the pared back earlier version? good! v rare to see this happen in the UK
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Top