黑洞社区

The project lead for Foster & Partners鈥� rejected Tulip tower has admitted the scheme would be 鈥渋nconsistent鈥� with the City of London鈥檚 vision for the so-called 鈥楨astern Cluster鈥� of skyscrapers 鈥� one of the reasons why mayor Sadiq Khan turned it down for planning.

Fosters partner Robert Harrison made the admission on the fourth day of an inquiry into the tower, which is being held as part of an appeal launched by developer Bury Street Properties following London mayor Sadiq Khan鈥檚 refusal of the proposals in summer last year.

Historic England has also objected to the scheme, which had previously been approved by the City of London Corporation in April of that year.

Despite the City鈥檚 approval, the mayor had objected because the height of the tower violated the City鈥檚 own planning policy for the cluster, the group of skyscrapers in the City鈥檚 north east in which the Tulip would be located.

The strategy for the cluster, which includes the Cheesegrater, the Gherkin and 22 Bishopsgate, envisages a group of towers 鈥済radually stepping downwards鈥� from a central peak at Eric Parry Architects鈥� 304m tall office scheme 1 Undershaft.

In making his decision last year, Khan agreed with the findings of the London Review Panel which said: 鈥淭he location and height [of the Tulip] do not accord with planning policies on the Eastern Cluster of tall buildings, which envisages the height of buildings descending from a peak at the centre of the cluster in deference to the Tower of London.鈥�

At 305m, the Tulip would be slightly taller than 1 Undershaft, which is envisaged to be the tallest tower in the City.

Scott Lyness QC, representing Historic England, suggested that Fosters had ignored the City鈥檚 vision for the cluster because of its goal to build the tower as high as possible.

Lyness asked Harrison: 鈥淏ecause [the Tulip] has been primarily driven by your desire to be as high as possible for your viewer experience, you鈥檇 accept that what is said there is right, that it would be inconsistent with the curated approach of the City, wouldn鈥檛 it?鈥� Harrison replied: 鈥淚 agree.鈥�

Lyness then asked if Fosters鈥� approach to the scheme鈥檚 massing had been focused on making sure that it complimented the adjacent Gherkin, which is also owned by Bury Street Properties, and not the wider context of the cluster and the protected views of the Tower of London.

Lyness said: 鈥淚t鈥檚 quite clear, isn鈥檛 it, that your focus on massing was on the Gherkin and not on the wider context including the setting of [the Tower of London].鈥�

Harrison admitted: 鈥淭he focus was on the Gherkin.鈥�

But Harrison hit back at Lyness鈥� suggestion that the 鈥渨hole purpose鈥� of the Tulip was to make it distinct from the glazed office buildings which surround it. The architect said: 鈥淭he whole purpose of the building is to provide the best possible experience for visitors that would go to it.鈥�

The visitor attraction, which consists of a 12-storey viewing 鈥榩od鈥� at the top of a thin concrete shaft or 鈥榮tem鈥�, would be built on the plaza which surrounds Fosters鈥� Stirling Prize-winning Gherkin just 5m away from the base of the existing tower.

Earlier in the hearing, Harrison admitted to City Hall鈥檚 QC Hereward Phillpott that the gap between the two buildings would be just 4.3m at its narrowest point where the bulbous shape of the Gherkin curves towards the Tulip鈥檚 stem.

Phillpott had said that he was 鈥渉appy鈥� to leave the planning inspectorate to form a judgement on 鈥渢he success or otherwise鈥� of the distance between the two buildings.

The appeal into the mayor鈥檚 decision was formally launched by billionaire financier and owner of Bury Street Properties Jacob J Safra.

The project team for the scheme includes construction consultant Skanska, QS Alinea, planning consultant DP9 and townscape consultant Cityscape Digital.

Closing submissions will be heard on 11 December with the final decision set to be made by secretary of state Robert Jenrick 鈥� although no timeframe has been given for when this will be announced.