Sustainable living for the JHERA community report

Jesus Hospital Estate Residents’ AssociationSustainable living for the JHERA community

February 2007

Jesus Hospital Estate Residents’ AssociationSustainable living for JHERA community

01 February 2007

Contents

02 Section One: Introduction03 JHERA04 History05 Consultation

06 Section Two: The Brief

09 Section Three: Design Proposals10 Design statement11 Location12 Drawings19 Artist’s impressions

20 Section Four: Cost and Structure21 Quantity surveyor’s report22 Budget breakdown23 Structural considerations

24 Section Five: Environment and Community25 Promoting green roofs, roof terraces and roof gardens 26 Mayoral support for environmental and community improvements27 Renewable energy generation and energy efficiency29 Community projects

Concept and designTheis + Khan Architects22a Bateman’s Row, London EC2A 3HH

BudgetSteven Cuddy1 Cobham Court, Chester Close, London SW1X 7BE

Structural and surveyor’s reportF J Samuely and PartnersCeltic House, 33 St. John’s Mews, London WC1

Environmental strategyXC021-5 Offord Street, London N1 1DH

Proposal designRob Richewww.robertriche.co.uk

Project committee Wanda Briggs, Carol Budd (Chair of JHERA), Sarah KafalaEmail: [email protected] Web: www.jhera.com

Credits


02 February 2007

Section One: Introduction


03 February 2007

JHERA

The Jesus Hospital Estate in Bethnal Green encompasses 321 houses within theborders of Wellington Row, Durant Street, Columbia Road and RavenscroftStreet. The Jesus Hospital Estate Residents’ Association (JHERA) was formed in1979 with the objectives:

a. To promote the exercise of the tenants’ rights and improve housing conditions and the environment of the Estate

b. To encourage community spirit and organise social activitiesc. To represent the interests of residents in consultation with other bodies.

JHERA has now been a working Residents’ Association for nearly thirty yearsand has held this same constitution ever since its inception.

Over the years, various improvements have been made to the properties on anad-hoc basis; the most important of these was the internal bathroom. This,however, reduced most of the houses from a three bedroom dwelling into a twobedroom one. The turnover of families moving out due to lack of room wasbeginning to erode the community. In May 2003 an idea originated by localarchitects Patrick Theis and Soraya Khan was moved forward – to create asympathetic roof level extension that would enhance the neighbourhood andincrease housing density. They volunteered, in discussion with a committee ofresidents, to draw up a scheme.


Above: Quilter Street in 1900s.Left: Linda Wilkinson’s book on the history of the area.

04 February 2007

Brief history of the area

The Jesus Hospital Estate was established as a charity by James Ravenscroft in1679, the original land being farmland. The first houses were built in 1822when it was “the desire of the Charity to erect buildings in keeping with a morecivilized lifestyle”.

These houses were, however, of such poor quality that they had to be torndown and rebuilt in 1862. During the Second World War, many of the houses onthe estate were bombed and destroyed. Many were rebuilt but some were simplycleared to make way for open spaces like Ion Square.

In the 1960s the area was considered by London Borough of Tower Hamletsfor clearance and demolition but a spirited defence from the Charity and localresidents prevented this from happening.

Again, in 1971, an application was made by the GLC for a CompulsoryPurchase Order which would designate five areas of the Estate as clearance areasresulting in the demolition of 190 houses. After a lengthy public enquiry held atBethnal Green Town Hall in October 1972, the only area finally designated forclearance was the area now know as Jesus Green.

After nearly 300 years, the Charity offered the freehold of each property tothose existing tenants who could afford it or to some other landlord.

The protection of the neighbourhood (as observed in historical references)remains to this day with local residents strongly supporting the residents’association, JHERA, and actively participating in local issues and events.


05 February 2007

Consultation

In September 2003 a questionnaire, designed simply to assess whether theresidents were in favour of pursuing the idea of a roof level extension, wasdistributed to all 321 houses on the Estate. The results were analysed at the Max Lock Centre, which specializes in community led projects, at WestminsterUniversity. The analysis showed that the majority of resident respondents are in support of the roof level extension. The elected committee of JHERA draftedin a sub-committee and this group collated all the information.

After a period of reflection and research and bearing in mind the original brief,an environmentally friendly design was then developed.

With overwhelming support for the idea, it is the intention to seek the London Borough of Tower Hamlets’ approval for a combined residentsplanning application.

Note: The Max Lock report is available on request from the Chair of JHERA.


06 20th December 2006

Section Two: The Brief


07 February 2007

The Brief

The primary aim of creating a roof level extension is to optimise the existing buildings with a uniform, modern, environmentally friendly additionmaintaining the uniqueness of the neighbourhood. At the same time this will increase the density of the dwellings to meet with the increased need forhousing capacity in the borough, in line with Mayor Ken Livingstone’s statement:

“Well designed higher density housing is crucial to my vision for London… both well designed contemporary housing and the Victorian terraces of a typical London street can deliver just as high a density as many tower blocks.

These are the places where a mixture of uses - living, working and relaxing -generate character and vitality.”


08 February 2007

The aims of creating a roof level extension are to:

• maximise available space to accommodate growing families or to providethe possibility of home working.

• increase the stability of the community, which might have a knock-on effect in raising the level of local services eg schools, GP services, etc.

• increase housing density• enhance local biodiversity and water conservation• replace original third bedroom lost to indoor bathroom• maintain a family-oriented area by creating family-sized housing and

allow for diversity in central London location [non-white households tend to be larger than white households]

• maintain a ‘unique’ sense of community spirit and enhance the local ‘rich mix’

• show that change can be good and modern ideas can be applied to historical situations and buildings

After careful consideration as to the character of the buildings and after aconsultation period, a design was proposed that would enhance the existingbuildings as well as offer an opportunity to implement environmental options,often only associated with new builds. It was also felt that since the greatestnumber of respondents to the questionnaire indicated that it was the sense ofneighbourhood that they valued the most, if an element of this could beincluded, so much the better.

Jesus Hospital Estate Residents’ Association3rd Floor extension Proposal document


Section Three: Design Proposals


10 February 2007

Design statement

The proposal is for a lightweight extension at roof level to provide additionalaccommodation for the existing two storey houses. The extension createsapproximately 23m2 or 246ft2 extra floor space.

The design and construction of the extension is to follow sustainable principlesto create a building with low energy needs and small carbon footprint.

The intention is that the external design for the extension is standardised undera design licence to ensure overall uniformity of appearance and the highestquality construction. It is proposed that the shell of the extension is made off siteby a specialist company. The walls and roof would be laminated timber panelsusing renewable resources which are then clad externally with insulation andweather proof coverings. A planted roof is proposed to slow water run off andenhance the biodiversity. Roof mounted solar and photovoltaic panels areincorporated to supplement water heating and electricity. A combination ofzinc cladding and double glazed windows is proposed for the walls. Thisprefabricated unit can then be installed with the minimum of disruption.

The extension is set back from the front wall to minimise its visual impact. This creates a new roof terrace behind the existing front parapet wall accessedvia double glazed doors. The proposed flat roof keeps the height of theextension as low as possible. The extension is set away from the chimney stacksto avoid the need to alter their height. Taller chimney pots would be fitted to live flues as necessary. Storage would be created below the new gutter againstand between the chimney stacks. This storage could accommodate waterrecycling equipment.

Internally there are various alternative arrangements ranging from one singleroom to a main front room with smaller back room.


11 February 2007

Location within London

Site plan

Hackney Road Columbia Road

Proposed allotments andCommunity Recycling in Ion Square gardens

Proposed energy efficient, roof-level extensionto all houses incorporating a terrace, green roof,and renewable energy generation


12 February 2007

Ground floor planExisting


13 February 2007

First floor planExisting

First floor planProposed

New stair over existingto new roof level


14 February 2007

Roof planExisting

Second floor planProposed option A: Single space with front roof terrace.

New stair over existingto new roof level


15 February 2007

Second floor planProposed option B: Double bedroom with roof terrace at front.Bathroom and services storage at rear.


16 February 2007

SectionExisting

SectionProposed

Highly insulated greenroof with solar andphotovoltaic panels

New stair overexisting to rooflevel

Glazed doors toterrace at front


17 February 2007

Front elevationExisting

Front elevationProposed

Extension set awayfrom existingchimney stacks

Green roof with solarand voltaic panels

Glazed doors toterrace set backbehind existingparapet wall


18 February 2007

Rear elevationExisting

Rear elevationProposed


19 February 2007

Artist’s impressionsSection across typical street

Aerial view

Roof extensions set back fromfront wall to minimize impact onstreet and create terrace space

Prefabricated unit ensures highquality construction andminimizes site disruption

Highly insulated greenroof with solar andphotovoltaic panels

Glazed doors tofront terrace space



Section Four: Cost and Structure


21 February 2007

Quantity surveyor’s report

The total budget estimate for all works associated with the extension for eachhouse is approximately £65,000.

Construction would be in three stages:

Stage 1 Replacement of existing roof with new floor and adaptation of existing brick outer walls and chimney stacks.

Stage 2 Installation of timber wall and roof panels and double glazed windows and doors followed by roof covering and external wall cladding including insulation.

Stage 3 Internal fit out and finishes including new stair connection with the existing first floor.


22 February 2007

Budget breakdown per house

Preparatory worksScaffolding and protection 4,000 Remove existing butterfly roof retaining ceilings below 1,200 Raise party walls (1Nr. Per property) 2,500 Raise rear parapet wall 1,000 Repoint and repair internal faces of all retained brickwork 1,300 New structural deck to take prefabricated addition 4,000 New waterproofing to structural deck and connection to existing hoppers 6,000 Preliminaries 2,500

Total 22,500

Prefabricated unitSolid timber building to form single storey addition 15,000 External walls finished and watertight 1,500 Glazed sliding screen to front elevation 4,000 Roof finished with sedum on single ply membrane 4,000 Craneage and installation 3,000

Total 27,500

Integration works (minimum requirement)Trim ceiling joists and install new staircase 4,000 Provide new electrical installation 4,000 Wall and ceiling finishes 3,000 Upgrade all internal doors to fire doors 2,500 Skirtings trims and architraves 500 Decorations 1,000

Total 15,000

BasisThe above estimate is based on current tender prices.

ExclusionsNo allowance has been made in the costs for VAT or Professional, Legal and Planning fees.


23 February 2007

Structural Considerations

Single storey rooftop extensions are common throughout the London area. Anessential component of the financial viability of such proposals is that theexisting structure should be capable of accommodating the new loading regimewithout the need for strengthening of the loadbearing walls or underpinning ofthe foundations.

The major part of the extra loading that is generated by the proposals comesfrom a combination of a) the prefabricated roof structure itself and b) theadditional dead and imposed loading generated by the conversion of theexisting ceiling level construction to a useable floor plus the additional imposedloading that this attracts. The remainder of the new loading comes from theextra triangle of brickwork incorporated onto the rear elevation to level this out.

Loads from the extra brickwork to the rear can reasonably be ignored, instructural terms, as the maximum load on the rear foundations will be onlyslightly i.e. less than 10% greater than currently exists.

A preliminary assessment of the new loading regime on the party walls indicatesthat the loading on these walls could increase by up to 35%. However if weassume that a) the walls are of traditional 229 mm (9”) thick solid brickconstruction with stepped brick footings to give a footing width in the region of450 mm and b) that the foundations bear on London Clay the resulting bearingstress on the clay is comfortably within its capacity. Exploratory trial pits shouldbe dug in due course at a few locations to confirm, or otherwise, the validity ofthese assumptions.

The capacity of the party walls themselves to carry the new loading is not, subjectto checks on their actual thickness and construction, anticipated to be aproblem structurally.

With a combination of careful attention to the form and weight of the newconstruction, and sound existing construction, the proposals should be entirelyviable in structural terms without the need for remedial strengthening.



Section Five: Environment and Community


25 February 2007

Living Roofs: promoting green roofs, roof terraces & roof gardens across London

The Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, and his Chief Advisor on Architectureand Urbanism, Richard Rogers, are promoting access to roof space as part ofLondon’s urban renaissance. The GLA Environment Team has been promotinggreen roofs to enhance London’s biodiversity and improve buildingperformance. Policies within the London Plan also promote Living Roofs.

“Well cared for, attractive and lively external ‘private’ spaces add to the beauty of the street and the sense of community and local civic pride in an area,promoting social cohesion through visual contact and communication. Many ofLondon’s typical urban neighbourhoods – including Georgian and Victorianterraced housing – have the potential for roof gardens and terraces that wouldmake them more attractive to a wider range of potential residents.”

“Living Roofs – green roofs, roof terraces and roof gardens – can deliver benefits throughout the city for individuals and for society as a whole,enhancing biodiversity, reducing flood risk (by absorbing heavy rainfall),providing insulation and improving the appearance of our cityscape.”

“Cities are places of change; we cannot and should not arbitrarily freeze theurban form and layout of the existing city, letting it develop in a piecemeal anddysfunctional manner. Instead, the emphasis should be on planning the city sothat it can adapt to provide liveable communities for all its citizens, while placingan appropriate value on preserving local character and heritage in all its forms.”

From 'Green light to clean power' the Mayor of London's Energy Strategy‘proposal 15’: “The Mayor requires planning applications referable to him toincorporate passive solar design, natural ventilation, borehole cooling andvegetation on buildings where feasible. Boroughs should expect the same.”


26 February 2007

Mayoral support for environmental & community improvements

The following text is an extract from the recently published Sustainable Design and Construction: The London Plan Supplementary Planning Guidance in May 2006:

“...2.1.3 BuildingsEssential StandardExisting building reused where practicable, where the density ofdevelopment and residential amenity are optimised and where the buildingconforms to or has the potential to meet the standards for energy, materials,biodiversity and water conservation set out in this SPG...”

“...2.3.2 Mayor’s Preferred Standard Existing roof space reused where practicable to create new outdoor spacesand enhance biodiversity alongside the integration of renewable energy...”

“...These standards are based on the principle of:Maximising the re-use of existing buildings...”

“...Guidance on how this principle can be addressedMaximising the re-use of existing buildings - existing buildings can berefurbished or extended without the need for substantial use of new materialsfrom primary resources. This can provide viable futures for listed buildingsyet meet new needs…”

“...The re-use of existing buildings should, where other policies permit:l Maximise the re-use of the buildings including the basements

and roof spaces...l Where other policies allow, consider increasing the floorspace of the

existing building through additional floors and/or extensions...”


27 February 2007

Renewable energy generation and energy efficiency

The addition of a roof level extension for each dwelling provides scope for theintroduction of standalone renewable energy generation and increased energyefficiency. Building integrated photovoltaic panels, solar thermal panels, windturbines or grass roofs could be offered to the individual household as a series ofoptions depending on the roof location and orientation. Each of these optionsare suitable for integration into a dwellings existing heating or electricaldistribution via new hot water cylinders or electrical relays.

High levels of insulation should be added to the new roof and walls. As themajority of the dwellings are terrace, the improved roof insulation should gosome way to reducing the overall dwelling heat loss. Sustainable sources ofinsulation could be considered such as recycled newspaper or sheep’s wool.

The use of a green roof could improve the level of insulation further, provide retention of rainfall during storms and add some greenery to a dense urban area.

Solar thermal panelsSolar thermal panels capture solar radiation andtransfer the heat to water, which is then used forspace heating or, more commonly, domestic hotwater heating. Water is passed through thepanels before flowing to a heat exchanger in thehot water cylinder. The cylinder is usually of thetwin coil type so that top up heat can be suppliedfrom the existing gas boiler. Around 2m2 of solarcollector connected to a twin coil DHW cylindershould provide around 50% of a typical dwellinghot water demand.


28 February 2007

Photovoltaic panelsPhotovoltaics convert daylight into direct currentelectricity. In principle they are the ideal source of renewable energy as they harness the mostabundant source of energy on the Earth, the sun.

PVs are silent in operation, have no movingparts, and have a long life with zero maintenancelevels. PV systems can either be connected to thegrid or used as stand alone systems, which aremore suited to remote locations. Grid connectedsystems consist of PV arrays connected to the gridthrough a charge controller and an inverter which converts the direct current into the moreuseable alternating current.

Building Integrated WindBuilding integrated wind turbines could be considered and would provide a strong visual eco statement for the project. These are suitable for mounting on the roof or chimneystack of the building.

www.windside.com/products.html


29 February 2007

Community Projects

JHERA residents also wanted to engage with the rest of the local community(largely Bangladeshi) and it was felt that allotments would make the idealmeeting place. There is an already separated piece of land on Ion Square whichcould easily accommodate 30 - 40 allotments. This piece of land is, at present,totally under-utilised being used mainly by dog owners for toileting their pets. Ifthe land was turned over to vegetable growing, there would be a need fornatural compost which could be generated from local kitchen waste throughworm and normal composting methods thus further reducing rubbish destinedfor landfill.* The added bonus is the opportunity for sales of locally producedorganic food with no transport costs.

We have also been looking at the viability of a wood chip power plant. We would take our lead from the BedZED (Beddington Zero [fossil] EnergyDevelopment) ecovillage in Croydon. The wood chips are generated by localgovernment tree pruning and parks waste. Once again, we would be looking atsiting this plant in Ion Square.

* Similar to scheme in Hackney by East London Community RecyclingPartnership

Date post:	10-Nov-2014
Category:	Technology
Upload:	ian-jindal
View:	1,097 times
Download:	2 times

Sustainable living for the JHERA community report

Technology