Design Statement Supplementary

1A Market Hill

Dalrymple Associates Ltd

RAMSEY

24.06.04

Request for review. Supplementary information - Design statement

The design seeks to produce a complimentary and contemporary response to the issues raised by the location of the site within the Conservation Area while avoiding the option of resorting to pastiche and inappropriate stylistic decoration.

The form, massing, materials and proportion of the proposal pay respect to the predominantly 'Victorian' architecture of the area.

Form and massing - the proposal respects the existing 2-storey nature of the general area, which together with the incorporation of a pitched roof behind a parapet provides continuity with the adjacent Victorian architecture.

Care has been taken in the alignment of window and cornice lines within the constraints of internal headroom and layout requirements.

The proposed window reveal depth of 100mm reflects the general character of the traditional buildings in the area.

The corner is turned by the traditional expedient of the inclusion of a corner entrance at ground level. In recognition of the corner position on the square, the difficult geometry of the site boundary is resolved by the continuation of the entrance 'slot' through the upper storeys to roof level. It is not considered that a more demonstrative celebration of the 'corner' is appropriate in this instance.

Materials - the predominant walling material in the area is rendered or painted masonry which present a series of flat planes to the street frontage. Roofs are predominantly of pitched form and slated. The proposal continues this theme with flat painted elevational planes beneath a slated, pitched roof behind a low parapet.

In recognition of the site's location on the corner of the square, the proposal introduces reconstituted masonry for the walling elements framing the ground floor windows.

Proportion - the overall elevational proportion, including the proportion of the principal window openings pays reference to the adjacent Victorian buildings rather than the 20th C development immediately to the south east of the proposal site.

An examination of buildings in the area shows that there is little consistency in the detailed proportion of windows, the main theme being that associated with the historical limitations on lintel span and the needs of sliding sash casements. The windows therefore exhibit a general proportion recognised as being 'Victorian' or 'Georgian'.

Similarly there is little consistency in the break-up of window casements into individual glazed panes. Indeed the variety to be found is a contributing factor in the character of the area. Current requirements for thermal insulation of windows preclude the break-up of casements into individual panes of glass separated by slim astrigals; the cover required to disguise double glazing edges results in heavy and unattractive proportions.

The application of false astrigals to the face of glazing is inappropriate, and as such the windows have been expressed as simple punched openings having a vertical emphasis as is to be found in the adjacent 19th century buildings.

Conclusion - the proposal respects and strengthens the fundamental character of the Conservation Area while being contemporary. The character of the area is not demeaned, and the development chronology of the area is not confused, by the incorporation of elements of Victorian pastiche.