Assael Architecture gets OK for £100 million London square
Assael's scheme for Farm Lane, Fulham
Architect’s design inspired by Chelsea’s Wellington Square
Assael Architecture has won planning for a £100 million residential scheme in west London.
The project will see a former light-industrial trading estate in Fulham, that was once used as stables for the horses that pulled London’s buses, transformed into a traditional square.
The 0.8ha site on Farm Lane will be filled with 40 townhouses on three sides around communal gardens. A locally listed Edwardian arched entrance and railings will be restored and retained on the fourth side.
Developer London Square described the design of the townhouses as a “contemporary interpretation of Georgian proportions” using stone and brick.
Adam Lawrence, chief executive of London Square, said: “Our inspiration came from Wellington Square, just off the King’s Road in Chelsea. Assael’s design reflects the proportions of Wellington Square, with its four-storey terraced houses.”
Work will start on site in late summer 2012, with completion due in 2015.
The back-street site is next to London’s only Michelin-starred pub, the Harwood Arms, and is yards from a bingo hall currently being converted into flats by CZWG.
Related Articles
- Margate ruling ends Assael's homes plan
21 August 2012
- Assael Architecture wins planning for 14 homes and a GP surgery
7 June 2012
- Assael promotes Badman to director
1 June 2012
- Vote for Assael for Arb’s board
17 February 2012
- Assael begins renovation to create hotel in Greenwich
7 February 2012
Have your say
Sign in to make a comment on this story.
Sign InDesktop Site | Mobile Site
Readers' comments (15)
Oh right- another Quality Street gated development for rich people with no taste.
That is one of the most souless landscapes i've seen. A blandscape.
I'm baffled by the objections to this. Would you call the terraces of, say, Pimlico "souless"?
I remember trying to design an acceptable scheme for this site 20 years ago; it was very tricky for housing as Hammersmith then regarded it as a "windfall" site which should therefore have 100% social housing. I wished we could retain more of the fantastic existing budings; 2 story brick stables (with horse ramps) around 2 courts covered with steel truss roofs.
Sceptical -- what bothers you about this? Is it the communal green space? The generous windows? The fact that the (mandated) retained arch has been retained in use rather than as a museum piece? The use of brick, blending with neighbouring buildings?
Why must everything be reduced to a funky shape in glass and kalzip?
Graham, the first two complainants have both proven themselves to be experts on everything that is negative in new design in London. It would, of course, be facinating to discover what they consider to be commendible in new London architecture.
Perhaps they could be persuaded to commit themselves to a cribsheet of good design in the Capital..?
check out those stingy floor to floors!
I'm talking about the landscape. It's dull, sterile and totally unimaginative.
The pedestrianised mini-square surrouned by town houses is arguably a new typology (which is perhaps partly why it seems odd). But where does the Ocado van unload? A site plan would have been nice.
Mike - that's a different issue and one that BD ought to address. Assuming that the readership is an informed (and cynical) one, some basic documentation (such, indeed, as a site plan and maybe a section or two) would make it easier to form a more reasoned opinion of schemes.
Perhaps, BD, this could be requested of firms who submit their press releases with no more than publicity-standard eye candy?