黑洞社区

The Victorian Society has become the latest heritage group to lay into Woods Bagot鈥檚 plans to build a 32-storey office above Leadenhall Market.

The campaign group said the designs for developer Hertshten Group to partially demolish a 1930s building at 85 Gracechurch Street and replace it with a 35,000 sq m tower would contradict the City鈥檚 newly adopted planning guidance on building reuse.

The City Corporation is set to make a decision this morning on the scheme, which has been recommended for approval by the council鈥檚 planning officers despite objections from Historic England on heritage grounds.

The Victorian Society鈥檚 intervention comes a week after the City voted to introduce guidance requiring developers and their design teams to consider refurbishing existing buildings rather than demolishing and replacing them.

Under the rules, developers will be expected to carry out a detailed review of the carbon impact of development options before submitting an application.

The Victorian Society said: 鈥淭he City of London Corporation claims to be the first planning authority in the country to expect a detailed review of new development鈥檚 carbon impact.

鈥淐urrently the existing handsome 1930s building would be demolished apart from its fa莽ade. Refurbishing it would be much less carbon intensive.鈥�

The group added that the scheme鈥檚 public benefits, including a new route into Leadenhall Market, could be provided without demolition or harming the market and the local conservation area.

The Victorian Society also objected to the plans on heritage grounds, saying the tower would 鈥渃omically dominate鈥� the listed market, which was built in 1880.

鈥淐ombined with towers outside the conservation area it would plunge the light filled market space into shadow,鈥� the group鈥檚 conservation adviser Guy Newton said.

鈥淲hat is the purpose of the City鈥檚 conservation areas if what is special and important about them is not actively protected?  

鈥淎llowing such towers in conservation areas, will, over time, irreversibly harm the City鈥檚 historic character that still makes it stand out from its financial rivals worldwide. 

鈥淭here is a danger the City will become a monoculture of glass towers, its conservation areas and heritage assets diminished and disrespected.鈥�

Historic England said the proposals would result in 鈥減ronounced harm鈥� to the historic environment. It categorised the harm as in the 鈥渓ow to moderate range鈥� of 鈥渓ess than substantial鈥�, in the language of the National Planning Policy Framework.

The heritage advisor also flagged that although 85 Gracechurch Street is within the City of London鈥檚 Eastern Tall 黑洞社区s Cluster 鈥� which contains RSHP鈥檚 122 Leadenhall Street and PLP鈥檚 22 Bishopsgate, its location within a conservation area should trump that status under local planning policy.

In their report to members of the City of London鈥檚 Planning Applications Sub-Committee, City planning officers acknowledged 鈥渁 tension鈥� between the wording of different planning policies. 

They said the site鈥檚 location within the tall-buildings cluster suggested 鈥渋n principle support鈥� while Local Plan Policy CS14 identified the site as 鈥渋nappropriate鈥� for a tall building because of its conservation-area status.

However, recommending the scheme for approval officers said Woods Bagot鈥檚 proposals were 鈥渁 high-quality design鈥� and included 鈥渁 number of attractive features鈥�, such as greening and vehicle lifts that integrate into the landscaping.