1 Silk Street – consultation now underway; 2 public exhibitions pending

The first stage of consultation regarding the future of the site at 1 Silk Street has now gone lives, with a dedicated website available to view and two public exhibitions announced.

The website states “Lipton Rogers Development are bringing forward emerging proposals for the future of 1 Silk Street, a commercial building in the City of London, EC2. Our vision is to create a best-in-class office building that is sustainable, an excellent place to work, with new public amenities and spaces for everyone to enjoy.

As part of our early consultation programme, we will be holding two public exhibitions on:

  • Tuesday 23rd July at the Roman Catholic Parish of Bunhill Row, 15 Lamb’s Passage, EC1Y 8LE from 4:00 pm – 7:00pm
  • Thursday 25th July at the St Giles Cripplegate Church, Fore St, EC2Y 8DA from 4:00 pm – 7:00 pm

The website can be accessed here

If you have any questions, or would like to get in touch with the team, please use the contact details below:

ASB Reporter – June Summary 2024

There were 42 reported asb incidents during June which is 61.5% more than the number reported for the same period last year.

Totals by house and their percentage of the total were as follows

HouseIncidents
FROBISHER CRESCENT15 (35.7%)
SHAKESPEARE TOWER 5 (11.9%)
SPEED 5 (11.9%)
BEN JONSON 4 (9.5%)
BUNYAN COURT 4 (.5%9)
ANDREWES 2 (4.8%)
GILBERT 2 ( 4.8%)
WILLOUGHBY 2 (4.8%)
MOUNTJOY 1 (2.4%)
CROMWELL TOWER 1 (2.4%)
BRYER COURT 1 (2.4%)

In terms of the type of asb, some respondents reported on more than one activity as follows:

LIME e-bikes abandoned7 (16.7%)
Rowdy behaviour6 (14.3%)
Skateboarding3 (7.1%)
Cycling3 (7.1%)
Delivery cyclist3 (7.1%)
FOREST e-bikes abandoned2 (4.8%))
Noisy behaviour2 (4.8%)
Vehicle nuisance/noise2 (4.8%)
Parkour2 (4.8%)
Rap music recording & loud shouting2 (4.8%)
Graffiti1 (2.4%)
Noisy group smoking1 (2.4%)
Noisy group smoking weed (?)1 (2.4%)
Noisy vehicles racing1 (2.4%)
Linklater’s generator noisy + polluting1 (2.4%)
Roller skating1 (2.4%)
Loud motorbike on Silk Street1 (2.4%)
Loud music & filming1 (2.4%)
3 boys on bikes throwing eggs1 (2.4%)
Children climbing on the fountain & running in flower beds1 (2.4%)

A report based on 12 months data June 2021 to June 2022 together with findings & recommendations of the Barbican Estate Security Committee has been provided to appropriate Corporation Members & Officers and discussions are ongoing – as an initial outcome a Task/Finish Joint Action Group was formed and met, just once, in December 2022.

This group has since been replaced with a new “ASB Strategic Meeting”. Unlike the previous group, however, this is not an open meeting – Decision taken for BEO’s Residents Service Team to produce an information leaflet for residents, revisiting and advising them of who to contact, for which type of anti-social behaviour and a brief explanation of what they should expect from making such contact.  

Following an encouraging meeting held with the new Assistant Director of Barbican Estate, Dan Sanders, on 30th April ’24 I am pleased to report that work is now actively in hand to produce the required leaflet.

An outline draft has been produced. Further work is required and when completed, this draft will be issued to the Barbican Estate Security Committee to consider and comment on prior to release.

Meantime, please continue to report any anti-social behaviour you may witness occurring across the estate. Any crime, such as phone, bag or laptop snatching should be reported directly to the City of London Police and not included here.

Please remember that the intention of the ASB Reporter is purely to gather evidence of anti-social behaviour. Therefore, if you witness an asb incident please use the website to record the event but if immediate action is also required then you should follow normal procedure such as calling the Police on 101 (or 999 but only if URGENT); Barbican Estate Office; City Noise Team etc…

If it is the City of London Police that you call, it is essential that you are provided with a reference/case number – please include this case number in the “action taken” section of the ASB Reporter. IF YOU DO NOT, this incident will not be “officially” counted and the police will assume that no additional measures or activity is required.

David Bradshaw – Chair, Barbican Estate Security Committee

1st July 2024

ASB Reporter – May Summary 2024

There were 49 reported asb incidents during May which is 63% more than the number reported for the same period last year.

Totals by house and their percentage of the total were as follows

HouseIncidents
SPEED14 (28.6%)
FROBISHER CRESCENT12 (24.5%)
SHAKESPEARE TOWER 7 (14.3%)
WILLOUGHBY 5 (10.2%)
BEN JONSON 4 (8.2%)
BUNYAN COURT 3 (6.1%)
CROMWELL TOWER 2 (4.1%)
ANDREWES 1 (2.0%)
MOUNTJOY 1 (2.0%)

In terms of the type of asb, some respondents reported on more than one activity as follows:

Loud Motorcycle8 (16.3%)
RIVER, FOREST & LIME e-bikes abandoned8 (16.3%)
Illegal drug use5 (10.2%)
Loud car(s) revving & racing5 (10.2%)
E-bikes being used on Podium4 (8.2%)
Cycling3 (6.1%)
Skateboarding3 (6.1%)
Noisy behaviour3 (6.1%)
Vandalism/graffiti2 (4.1%)
Loud music2 (4.1%)
Loud music & noisy party2 (4.1%)
Parkour1 (2.0%)
Rowdy behaviour1 (2.0%)
Problem area n.w. Ben Jonson1 (2.0%)
E-scooter being used on Podium1 (2.0%)

A report based on 12 months data June 2021 to June 2022 together with findings & recommendations of the Barbican Estate Security Committee has been provided to appropriate Corporation Members & Officers and discussions are ongoing – as an initial outcome a Task/Finish Joint Action Group was formed and met, just once, in December 2022.

This group has since been replaced with a new “ASB Strategic Meeting”. Unlike the previous group, however, this is not an open meeting – Decision taken for BEO’s Residents Service Team to produce an information leaflet for residents, revisiting and advising them of who to contact, for which type of anti-social behaviour and a brief explanation of what they should expect from making such contact.  

Following an encouraging meeting held with the new Assistant Director of Barbican Estate, Dan Sanders, on 30th April ’24 I am pleased to report that work is now actively in hand to produce the required leaflet.

Meantime, please continue to report any anti-social behaviour you may witness occurring across the estate. Any crime, such as phone, bag or laptop snatching should be reported directly to the City of London Police and not included here.

Please remember that the intention of the ASB Reporter is purely to gather evidence of anti-social behaviour. Therefore, if you witness an asb incident please use the website to record the event but if immediate action is also required then you should follow normal procedure such as calling the Police on 101 (or 999 but only if URGENT); Barbican Estate Office; City Noise Team etc…

If it is the City of London Police that you call, it is essential that you are provided with a reference/case number – please include this case number in the “action taken” section of the ASB Reporter. IF YOU DO NOT, this incident will not be “officially” counted and the police will assume that no additional measures or activity is required.

David Bradshaw – Chair, Barbican Estate Security Committee

2nd June 2024

Public Consultations re proposals for The Montcalm Hotel and Milton Gate  

Consultation on proposals for a new Milton Gate, 60 Chiswell Street

Brookfield Properties has announced that it has launched its second-round consultation on the proposals for a new Milton Gate. This follows the first public consultation carried out in May 2023 along with engagement with local stakeholders and the City of London corporation.

In early June, there will be two public exhibitions where the local community can view the proposals, talk to members of the project team and tell them their thoughts.

The details of these public consultations are as follows:

  • Monday 3rd June, 11am-2pm, Former Wagamama, Unit 1A Citypoint, One Ropemaker Street, EC2 0HR
  • Tuesday 4th June, 3pm-7pm, Former Wagamama, Unit 1A Citypoint, One Ropemaker Street, EC2 0HR

Information about the proposals and how neighbours can get involved can be accessed anytime on the consultation website

If you have any questions and would like to get in touch please email drowson@conciliocomms.com or call 0800 193 0884.

Proposed renewed investment in The Montcalm at the Brewery

The Montcalm Group has announced its proposals for renewed investment in The Montcalm at the Brewery, 52 Chiswell Street.

Following several meetings with key stakeholders over the previous months, the public consultation has now been launched and a drop-in public exhibition to share the plans is to be held.

This will take place at:

Date: Thursday 6th June

Time: 3pm- 7pm

Location: Samuel Room, Montcalm at the Brewery, 52 Chiswell Street, EC1Y 4SA

For further information, please visit the consultation website

City Plan 2040

What is the City Plan 2040?

The City Plan 2040 is a plan for the development of the Square Mile, setting the City Corporation’s priorities for development up to 2040, together with policies that will guide future decisions on planning applications. The plan provides a framework for future development in the Square Mile, outlining priorities for its communities, businesses and places until 2040 and beyond.

Once adopted, the new Plan will replace the current Local Plan 2015

Development of the City Plan 2040

The City of London Local Plan was adopted in January 2015 and plans for development requirements up to 2026. It is important that the City’s planning framework remains responsive and flexible to address changing circumstances, whilst providing a clear vision for how a future City should develop.

The first stage of preparing the new City Plan 2040 was the Issues and Options stage in 2016, during which consultation took place on the key planning issues facing the City and on the potential options that should be considered in a new local plan to address them.

The second stage, the draft City Plan 2036, was a consultation on a full draft local plan during later 2018 and early 2019.

Responses from these two consultations, along with evidence, informed a proposed submission version of the City Plan 2036, which was consulted on between March and May 2021. As a result of comments made during this consultation, the City Corporation decided to undertake further technical work and evidence to address consultation responses and changing economic, social and environmental trends.

Informal public engagement on key issues and the Key Areas of Change was undertaken during the summer of 2023.

The City Corporation has used this technical work, public engagement and updated evidence to prepare the City Plan 2040, which is a revised submission version. The timeframe for the new City Plan has been amended to ensure a 15 year timeframe for the plan.

What is in the City Plan 2040?

The City Plan 2040 is a large document, which provides a framework for future development in the Square Mile, outlining priorities for its communities, businesses and places until 2040 and beyond. It comprises 15 separate chapters and representations can be made on the Plan as a whole or by individual chapter.

These are:

Chapter 1 – Strategic Priorities

The City Plan 2040 covers a wide range of issues, and it is important that the Plan has clear priorities for its delivery. Identifying ‘strategic priorities’ is also a requirement of legislation. Chapter 1 of the Plan sets these priorities out, and these underpin the strategic policies that form the backbone of the Plan. These priorities build on earlier versions of the City Plan, and have been informed by engagement work, evidence and relevant strategies.

Chapter 2 – Spatial Strategy

The spatial strategy for the Plan sets out a broad framework for understanding how policies with a spatial element will affect different parts of the Square Mile. It outlines the overall spatial vision for the growth of the Square Mile and identifies the Key Areas of Change, where transformational growth is envisaged over the Plan period. 

Chapter 3 – Health, Inclusion and Safety

This chapter helps to realise a range of strategic priorities, particularly creating a more inclusive, healthier and safer City for everyone. 

Chapter 4 – Housing

This chapter sets out how the City Plan will meet the requirements of the London Plan and national policy in delivering housing in the City. It identifies the housing requirements for the City Plan, which have been informed by the City Corporation’s Strategic Housing Market Assessment. 

Chapter 5 – Offices

This chapter continues the City Corporation’s long-standing approach of supporting economic and employment growth in the City through the delivery of additional office floorspace; resisting the loss of existing offices in many instances; and seeking to encourage investment in existing office stock. This approach also reflects the requirements of the London Plan, which promotes employment growth in the City in particular. 

This chapter has been informed by a report by Arup/Knight Frank for the City Corporation, which identified strong positive demand for office floorspace over the lifetime of the City Plan.

Chapter 6 – Retail

This chapter has been informed by recently completed retail evidence, which shows that over the long term there remains strong demand for retail uses in the Square Mile, supported by a growing workforce and increased visitor footfall. 

The policies in this chapter take a more flexible approach to retail and related uses, seeking to promote more diversity of active frontages across the City and in the Principal Shopping Centres. 

Chapter 7 – Culture and Visitors

The City Corporation’s Destination City vision has had a significant impact on this chapter, which recognises the crucial role that culture and visitors will have to play in creating a more vibrant Square Mile that is a welcoming destination for everyone. The policies in this chapter seek the development of a wide range of cultural, leisure and recreational facilities across the City. These policies have been informed by the Culture Planning Framework, which is currently under development, and which will set out a framework for how new development can support the cultural life of different parts of the Square Mile.

The policy on hotels sets out a positive approach to the provision of visitor accommodation, reflecting recent evidence from Avison Young for the City Corporation. 

Chapter 8 – Infrastructure

The policies in this chapter seek to deliver infrastructure and utilities provision for the City and seek to deliver a net zero and climate resilient Square Mile. The approach in the chapter has been informed by the City Corporation’s Utilities Infrastructure Strategy and the Local Area Energy Plan.

Chapter 9 – Design

The design of buildings and spaces plays a vital role in ensuring development is sustainable, makes a positive contribution to the City’s aesthetic qualities, and meets the requirements of all users. The Design chapter sets out a range of requirements covering issues ranging from sustainable design, form and layout, experience of spaces, and the quality and character of buildings. 

Chapter 10 – Transport

This chapter has been informed by the City Corporation’s Transport Strategy. It sets out how development should seek to enable the vision of the Transport Strategy, prioritising people walking and wheeling while facilitating the servicing of the Square Mile in sustainable ways, for example through consolidation. Policies seek to ensure development reinforces the Healthy Streets Approach, address freight and servicing and vehicle parking; promote the use of the river Thames for transport; enhance permeability and wayfinding; and facilitate pedestrian movement, active travel and cycling.

Chapter 11 – Heritage and Tall buildings

The policies in this chapter seek to ensure the City’s historic environment will be protected, celebrated and positively managed. Tall Buildings policy sets out a comprehensive approach to managing tall building proposals in the Square Mile. This approach has been informed by extensive evidence including characterisation work, exploring the suitability of areas for tall buildings; three-dimensional computer modelling of potential tall building heights; and assessments of views and the impact on key heritage assets. 

Chapter 12 – Open Spaces and Green Infrastructure

The policies in this chapter seek to protect existing open and green spaces and provide new ones through development and other measures. 

The chapter also seeks to enhance the City’s biodiversity through new development, instigating a new approach to biodiversity that builds on the recently introduced national approach while tailoring it to the City’s circumstances. It also supports urban greening and the provision of trees.

Chapter 13 – Climate Resilience

This chapter seeks a range of measures to help make the City more resilient as development comes forward, helping to minimise the urban heat island effect and the risk of flooding, implement sustainable drainage systems, reduce and manage the City’s waste in sustainable ways.

Chapter 14 – The Temples, The Thames Policy Area and The Key Areas of Change

This chapter includes a revised policy on the Temples, setting out that the Plan will support its broad range of education, training and other facilities as well as the balance between professional and residential accommodation. The Thames Policy Area sets out how the City will seek to enhance this important part of the City, the enjoyment of the Thames and its use for transport including waste and freight.

The chapter also sets out a broad framework for the Key Areas of change, that are likely to experience significant transformation during the plan period. It includes a range of measures and spatial requirements, to guide future development in these areas.

Chapter 15 – Implementation

This chapter sets out the types of contributions that will be expected to be provided by relevant development, including through Section 106 and the Community Infrastructure Levy (Policy S27: Planning Contributions). It also sets out how the City Corporation will expect developers to approach viability, and sets out how the City Plan will be monitored.

Appendices

The appendix to the City Plan provides information into why the City Corporation is preparing a new Local Plan and what are the different stages of preparing a Local Plan. 

City Plan 2040 – Glossary

The glossary in the City Plan provides a list of definitions or explanations related to specific topic areas. It acts as a reference guide to help readers understand unfamiliar or technical terminology, within the context of the plan.

Policy Maps

This document outlines the changes made to the existing Policy Maps A and B and introduces two new Policy Maps, C and D.

Policies Map A – Tall Buildings, Views and Heritage 

Policies Map B – Key City Places 

Policies Map C – City Cluster Tall Building Area 

Policies Map D – Fleet Valley Tall Buildings Area 

Make representation

The City of London Corporation is conducting a Regulation 19 consultation for the ‘City Plan 2040’.

This consultation will focus on assessing whether the plan is sound, legally compliant and prepared in accordance with the duty to co-operate. It has been running since April 18 and will close at 11pm on June 17 

All representations must set out whether it is considered that the City Plan 2040 is sound, legally complaint and complies with the ‘Duty to Cooperate’. The tests of soundness are set out in the National Planning Policy Framework (paragraph 35). Any response should consider the following questions:

  • Is City Plan 2040 legally compliant and sound?
  • Are any modifications necessary to make City Plan 2040 legally compliant and sound? It will be helpful if you are able to put forward your suggested revised wording of any policy and text.
  • If your representation is seeking a modification to the plan, do you consider it necessary to participate in examination hearing session(s)? 

Representations can be submitted on all or any chapter of the City Plan 2040 and Policy Maps here.

What happens then?

Following consultation on the City Plan 2040, it will be submitted to the Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities. The Secretary of State will then appoint an independent Planning Inspector to examine the submitted Plan, which is expected to be adopted in 2025.

ASB Reporter – April Summary 2024

There were 35 reported asb incidents during April which is 59% more than the number reported for the same period last year.

Totals by house and their percentage of the total were as follows

HouseIncidents
FROBISHER CRESCENT11 (31.4%)
SPEED 7 (20.0%)
BEN JONSON 6 (17.1%)
BUNYAN COURT 3 (8.6%)
SHAKESPEARE TOWER  2 (5.7%)
GILBERT 2 (5.7%)
WILLOUGHBY 1 (2.9%)
BRYER COURT 1 (2.9%)
WALLSIDE 1 (2.9%)
LAMBERT JONES MEWS 1 (2.9%)

In terms of the type of asb, some respondents reported on more than one activity as follows:

Parkour5 (14.3%)
Skateboarding5 (14.3%)
Cycling5 (14.3%)
Loud Motorbike5 (14.3%)
Rowdy behaviour4 (11.4%)
LIME ebike abandoned3 (8.6%)
Delivery cyclist2 (5.7%)
Noisy behaviour2 (5.7%)
Vehicle nuisance/noise1 (2.9%)
Intimidating behaviour1 (2.9%)
Loud music1 (2.9%)
Roller skating1 (2.9%)

A report based on 12 months data June 2021 to June 2022 together with findings & recommendations of the Barbican Estate Security Committee has been provided to appropriate Corporation Members & Officers and discussions are ongoing – as an initial outcome a Task/Finish Joint Action Group was formed and met, just once, in December 2022.

This group has since been replaced with a new “ASB Strategic Meeting”. Unlike the previous group, however, this is not an open meeting – Decision taken for BEO’s Residents Service Team to produce an information leaflet for residents, revisiting and advising them of who to contact, for which type of anti-social behaviour and a brief explanation of what they should expect from making such contact.  STILL AWAITED ! from more than 1 year ago. There has been no response from Barbican Estate Management. However, an encouraging meeting was held yesterday with the new Assistant Director of Barbican Estate, Dan Sanders – so watch this space.

Meantime, please continue to report any anti-social behaviour you may witness occurring across the estate. Any crime, such as phone, bag or laptop snatching should be reported directly to the City of London Police and not included here.

Please remember that the intention of the ASB Reporter is purely to gather evidence of anti-social behaviour. Therefore, if you witness an asb incident please use the website to record the event but if immediate action is also required then you should follow normal procedure such as calling the Police on 101 (or 999 but only if URGENT); Barbican Estate Office; City Noise Team etc…

If it is the City of London Police that you call, it is essential that you are provided with a reference/case number – please include this case number in the “action taken” section of the ASB Reporter. IF YOU DO NOT, this incident will not be “officially” counted and the police will assume that no additional measures or activity is required.

David Bradshaw – Chair, Barbican Estate Security Committee

1st May 2024

Cromwell Tower – proposal to install 92 antennae on rooftop

An application was submitted in the middle of March from “global connectivity specialists” Luminet Solutions Ltd for “The installation of 92 no. small antennas attached to new supporting steelwork, together with associated shrouding and ancillary works, on the rooftop of the building”. For the avoidance of doubt, the building in question is Cromwell Tower. The relevant application numbers are 23/01387/LBC and 23/01386/FULL. Access to the relevant planning portal to view all of the accompanying documentation can be gained here. The more technical description of the proposals can be viewed here.

History – first application in 2009 withdrawn, second application approved

Some may recall that a similar application was made back in 2009 (the LBC application reference is 09/00204/LBC; the FULL application reference is 09/00203/FULL). However, this application was subsequently withdrawn on 29th July 2009. A second application then followed later in 2009 – on 2nd October 2009 to be precise. The LBC application reference is 09/00681/LBC. This was for the “Installation of six antennae and two 0.3m dishes on the roof of Cromwell Tower, including the installation of two wall mounted equipment cabinets plus ancillary development thereto”. This application was approved and is referenced in Luminet’s proposal as a “reason for approval” (for this current application) with the applicant stating that “The proposed installation would be barely visible and would have a minimal impact upon the appearance of the special architectural and historic character interest of the listed building”.

Whilst there is indeed already some telecoms equipment installed on Cromwell Tower (but without residents’ prior knowledge or consent), that does not mean that even more needs to be installed. It is also my understanding that another application to install telecoms equipment on the Cromwell Tower roof was made in 2014 but was quickly withdrawn.  

Current application

The cover letter of the proposed works states that the application is for “The installation of 92 no. small antennas attached to new supporting steelwork, plus development ancillary thereto, all contained within new GRP-shrouding, upon the rooftop of the building”.

It goes on: “The proposed apparatus will enable line-of-sight wireless internet connection between local buildings within the area. This is considered preferable to the digging and laying of new fibre cables in the ground. The proposal allows for the wireless connection of fibre-quality internet between short-range buildings. The rooftop at Cromwell Tower measures 123m in height. The proposed development has been designed to sit within GRP-shrouding to ensure that any visual impact of the scheme is reduced the maximum effect. It is not anticipated that the proposed shrouding will be visible from ground-level, as it is purposely designed to be set-back from the roof-edge……. Whilst the shrouding may be visible from neighbouring towers within the immediate vicinity, the shrouding is likely to be viewed as part of the building  rather than an identifiable telecommunications installation”.

And continues: “Given the Listed status of Cromwell Tower, every step has been taken to reduce the visual impact of the proposed apparatus on the rooftop, as far as practicable, with the proposed deployment of GRP shrouding. All associated telecommunications apparatus has been designed to sit within this GRP shrouding. As such, the visual impact on the rooftop, and the building itself, is considered negligible as the GRP-shrouding will allow the telecommunications to be effectively deployed on the building rooftop whilst creating the appearance of a small building extension on the 123m-high tower. This type of extension on a residential tower within London is not unusual”

So how high is this proposed “small building extension” going to be?

The increase in height is 3.2m (10.5 feet in old money), and will be located in a “small area” in the centre of the upper roof Level of the building.

The applicant then asks itself the question:” The question that must therefore be posed; is what level of impact would a relatively small area of GRP shrouding on the Upper Roof Level of a 123m-high building cause to a) Cromwell Tower itself; b) the heritage asset that is The Barbican; and c) to the wider London skyline. The Applicants would argue that the impacts on all three are negligible, and highly unlikely to be even identified from ground-level, within The Barbican, or from other neighbouring tower blocks across the skyline. Given the height increase measures 3.2m, and is restricted to only a small area in the centre of the Upper Roof Level of the building, it is considered that the proposed development offers a viable, realistic and wholly appropriate town planning and environmental solution for Cromwell Tower….”

Potential objections to this application

The 2009 application was approved before the Barbican and Golden Lane Conservation Area was designated in 2018. This current application also does not meet the Barbican Listed Building Management Guidelines (LBMG).  For example, in Volume II it states that “The architectural form and character of the residential buildings isconsistent and distinctive. No alteration should be made that would affect the silhouette, massing, volume, modelling, material character, surface, colour (except as provided for by the approved Palette of Colours) or regularity of any of the buildings”.

It is clear that this proposal, if accepted, would change the roofline of the Tower and interrupt the skyline view of the three towers – in contradiction of the LBMG. In addition, if the application were to be approved, this could set an unwelcome precedent as it could be argued that similar structures could be placed on other Barbican Towers or buildings. 

In addition to the negative impact it would cause to the appearance of the building, the associated heritage harm and the non-compliance with Listed Building and Conservation Area guidelines, other issues that may be raised by residents include:

  • Health concerns arising from the electromagnetic radiation
  • Damage to the structure of the building given the extra height and weight
  • Possibility of falling debris in strong winds
  • No financial benefit to residents from the revenues but residents have to bear the costs of wear and tear on use of lifts and carpets

Just to point out that there are many (many!) tall buildings in the City. This type of equipment should be installed on a commercial building where there are not only no residents but the roof space is likely to be bigger and access to the lifts and stairs better, thereby allowing contractors to work when the building is either empty or less busy.  A Grade 2 listed residential building in a Conservation Area is surely not the place for this type of equipment.

No consultation with residents prior to the application being submitted

The documents supporting the application state that local stakeholders were consulted on 18th March. This did not happen and is against the City’s own policies. When made aware of this, the City finally sent out consultation letters to residents on 11th April, albeit that they were only received around the 18th.

The City has accepted that there were delays to letters arriving by post and that they will still consider any representations received until 21 days after the 18th April ie. 9th May.

Any representations can be made here

Underfloor Heating Daily Time Overview

Underfloor Heating Daily Time Overview

Profile A Unbiased – 13:00 to 16:00 – Total Time = 0.00 minutes Profile A Unbiased – 20:30 to 01:30 – Total Time = 11.00 minutes Profile A Unbiased – 02:30 to 07:30 – Total Time = 144.00 minutes Profile A Unbiased – Total Time = 155.00 minutes

Profile A Adjusted – 13:00 to 16:00 – Total Time = 0.00 minutes Profile A Adjusted – 20:30 to 01:30 – Total Time = 32.00 minutes Profile A Adjusted – 02:30 to 07:30 – Total Time = 170.00 minutes Profile A Adjusted – Total Time = 202.00 minutes

Underfloor Heating Daily Time Overview

Underfloor Heating Daily Time Overview

Profile A Unbiased – 13:00 to 16:00 – Total Time = 10.00 minutes Profile A Unbiased – 20:30 to 01:30 – Total Time = 113.00 minutes Profile A Unbiased – 02:30 to 07:30 – Total Time = 243.00 minutes Profile A Unbiased – Total Time = 366.00 minutes

Profile A Adjusted – 13:00 to 16:00 – Total Time = 27.00 minutes Profile A Adjusted – 20:30 to 01:30 – Total Time = 135.00 minutes Profile A Adjusted – 02:30 to 07:30 – Total Time = 257.00 minutes Profile A Adjusted – Total Time = 419.00 minutes

Tenter House – application for revised development proposal

The application for the revised Tenter House development for the “Demolition of the Class E unit (and related structures), ground and basement floor slab, car park and access ramp of Tenter House together with the demolition of part of the City Point Plaza floor slab and New Union Street, to provide a new part 14-storey and part 22-storey [+99.9m AOD] office building [34,880sq.m GIA], with two ground floor retail units, community floorspace at first floor level, new level plaza (open space), and a reconstructed New Union Street, together with cycle parking, waste storage, servicing, landscaping, plant, and other associated works [Total 39,490 sq.m GEA]”  has now been submitted.

 However please note that: “Demolition of the existing 11 storey building (except for the Class E Unit and its related structures) will take place pursuant to planning permission reference 17/01050/FULMAJ (the Proposed Development)”.

The planning reference number is: 24/00209/FULMAJ and the accompanying documents can be viewed here

Overview of proposals

The Planning Statement provides a detailed overview of the proposals.

Volume 1 and Volume 2 of the Design & Access Statements also provide good pictorial depictions of the development.  

The building will comprise lower ground, ground, and 20 further levels of office accommodation, albeit that the height will be staggered along its length between 22 and 14 floors. The building will be accessed via City Point Plaza, and the loading bay will be located along New Union Street. A deli/ cafe is provided at ground level with access from City Point Plaza, and a restaurant is provided at the corner of Moorfields and New Union Street. The existing car park ramp to the north of the site will be removed along with the raised ground level to provide an enhanced pedestrian route across City Point Plaza, to the north of the Site.

In terms of height, the current Tenter House is 11-storeys high – the proposed development will be part-14, part-22 storeys, totalling a maximum height of 85.8m (99.9m AOD). This means that it will be considered and assessed as a tall building in accordance with the City of London’s definition. The previously consented scheme in 2020 was for an 18-storey building on the site giving a height of 87.9m AOD – hence this new application is 12m taller at its highest point.  However, as already described, this application includes a greater variation in volume, height and massing across the building. In terms of floorspace, the development will provide 34,880sqm of office floorspace – some 8,477sqm more than the previously consented scheme of 26,403sqm

Demolition of the site already approved

As already commented, it should be noted that the site benefits from an extant planning permission dated 29 September 2020 (planning reference 17/0150/FULMAJ). The 2020 permission granted consent for the ‘Demolition of existing building and structures to existing basement slab level and construction of an 18-storey office building …… with associated servicing, waste storage, plant facilities and cycle parking and public realm improvements to New Union Street’

Demolition of the existing building in accordance with this existing permission has already commenced and is anticipated to take c6 months to complete. As such, by the time this new planning application is to be determined the building is likely to have been substantially demolished.

We would just point out that new planning applications are encouraged to consider the carbon implications of their proposals to make sure the most climate-friendly option is built. As the existing Tenter House building is being demolished under an old planning consent, however, the current applicants can claim that there is very little embedded carbon to consider in this new scheme, thereby somewhat disingenuously side-stepping the City’s “retrofit first” policy.

Impact of massing

The documents claim that ‘Like the Permitted 2020 Scheme, the western end of the Proposed Development steps down in relation to the adjacent mass of the new building at 21 Moorfields on Moor Lane. The overall height and scale of the Proposed Development is consequently broadly the same as the Permitted 2020 Scheme. The massing of the Proposed Development differs from the Permitted 2020 Scheme in its composition, which has been simplified from a series of five, all-glass volumes to three main volumes: one central volume, clearly addressing City Point Plaza to the north and smaller, lower volumes set either side that relate to the frontages of the adjacent streetscapes on Moorfields and Moor Lane’.

It goes on ‘The building which forms part of the Proposed Development is articulated as four volumes that step down to the east and west, reducing the impact of the massing along Moorfields and in relation to the Barbican, and relating to the new development at 21 Moorfields to the south of the Site. The central element is taller, retaining the vertical emphasis of the Permitted 2020 Scheme and providing a clear address at Citypoint Plaza. ….. The existing route of New Union Street to the south, which presently is primarily used for servicing, will be pedestrianised….. At the upper levels, the proposed terrace and balconies will add greenery and interest to local views…’

Roof terrace and balconies

The plans show that there are over 2000sq m of balconies and terraces on the proposed building – 60sq m on levels 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 and 69sq m on level 12. The ‘design concept’ of the large roof terrace on level 14 ‘visualises a woodland in the sky’.  It appears that the smaller section of the 14th floor terrace that faces west leads off from the proposed café. The other terraces seem to be at the corners of the building. As has been the case in all of the previous development applications submitted in the vicinity in the area, it seems reasonable to request the setting of conditions as to the use and timing of terraces in order to preserve the amenity of the many neighbouring residential properties.

Daylight and Sunlight analysis

Volume 1 of the Daylight and Sunlight Analysis seems to be the most helpful of the 4 volumes submitted on the subject although those in the residential blocks closest to the site may also want to look through the individual window analyses in the other volumes to see what, if any, impact the proposed building will have.

The documents make reference to the proximity of Willoughby House to the site – but claim to have “satisfactorily addressed” any negative impact of the proposed development. They claim that ‘Whilst the Proposed Development will give rise to some minor reduction in daylight and sunlight to Willoughby House these reductions are considered to be so minor as to be unnoticeable particularly as the reductions identified are principally the result the presence of very deep overhanging projections above the windows in Willougby House itself’.

We have heard this explanation before Ie “it’s the balconies what done it” as the documents go on: ‘It is therefore clear that it is the architectural features of Willoughby House itself that are the principal factor in the relative loss of light as opposed to there being any overdevelopment……..The windows would experience no more than a 13% reduction which clearly illustrates that it is the presence of the balcony, rather than the bulk and mass of the proposed scheme, that is the principal factor for the relative loss of light. Subsequently, the VSC transgressions are solely a consequence of the overhanging projections.

Residents may well have a different view however as “No more than a 13% reduction” still sounds quite a significant loss.

Access, entry and servicing routes

The Delivery and Service Plan shows all vehicles from any direction accessing New Union Street from Moor Lane and leaving the site onto Moorfields. Those from the south come in from Fore Street, those from the east along Silk Street and those from the west along Ropemaker.  

Given that some 88 deliveries are expected to the site – added to the 100+ deliveries to City Point – and it is clear that Moor Lane is unlikely to be the quiet, greened street that has long been promised. Perhaps it would be better for the access route to the service yard to be from Moorfields rather than Moor Lane given the proximity of the proposed service routes to many residential premises.   

It also appears that the servicing yard will be too small for lorries to turn round in which means that they will either have to reverse out onto New Union Street or reverse into the yard. A suggestion may be therefore to enlarge the service yard to prevent this.

Standard Consultation Expiry date

The Standard Consultation Expiry date to make representations is 7th May 2024. These can be made here.