Loampit Vale (2)

Lewisham

Eight buildings from five to 22 storeys in Lewisham, including 819 apartments, a leisure centre, offices and replacement facilities for the London City Mission. Designed by Assael Architecture.

We also reviewed this scheme on 13 November 2008.

Loampit Vale plays a vital role in the redevelopment of this part of Lewisham and we welcome the efforts that went into the design of this scheme. The quantum of the proposed development appears large, but that could be acceptable on this site. We welcome the changes to the scheme since we last reviewed it but we think that our concerns about the typological strategies and the relationships between the different building blocks are not fully resolved.

Massing

We continue to believe that the mix of use and the overall size of the development are sound and we think that the simplification of the massing and form of the blocks is beneficial. We acknowledge the work that has been done to improve the microclimate around the building, particularly the wind conditions at the foot of the tower. Bearing in mind the building heights around the eastern courtyard, we urge the local authority to assure themselves that that the necessary standards in terms of daylight and overshadowing are met.

Typology

Overall, we do not think that the typological strategies of the scheme are fully convincing. The configuration of the proposal, incorporating large podiums, towers, slab blocks and terraced houses above and against the podium appears over-complicated and we feel that particular care is needed to ensure that all residents and visitors can easily find the way to their flats.

Leisure centre

While we support the idea of a leisure centre in this location, we continue to think that it is challenging to integrate this function into a residential scheme. The characteristics of a leisure centre, for example the large volume of the pool, limit the design of the residential accommodation adjacent to it. Furthermore, the two functions have different life expectancies and the programme for a swimming pool, in terms of use and maintenance, is likely to change in the future. Fundamental alterations to the leisure centre could be difficult to carry out with the fixes of the residential above.

Conclusion

To conclude, while we see the potential to create a vibrant public destination and a pleasant place to live, we do not think that the composition of the different typological elements and the quality of the courtyards in terms of sunlight are fully convincing.