No.1 Poultry, City of London Case Number

Historic England Advice Report 14 October 2015 Case Name: No.1 Poultry, City of London

Case Number: 1428179

Background We have been asked to assess No.1 Poultry, City of London, for listing.

Asset(s) under Assessment Facts about the asset(s) can be found in the Annex(es) to this report.

Annex List Entry Number Name Heritage Category HE Recommendation 1 1428881 No.1 Poultry Listing Add to List

Visits Date Visit Type 09 July 2015 Full inspection

Context THE APPLICATION Historic England has been asked to assess No.1 Poultry for listing on the grounds that a planning application to make alterations to the building constitutes a threat to the building and that it has the very high level of interest to merit listing at a high grade.

Designed by James Stirling, Michael Wilford and Associates, No.1 Poultry was built by the practice after Stirling’s premature death in 1992. Constructed in 1994 to 1998, we are only able to recommend the building if it is under threat. To be listed at this relatively young age, a building would normally need to meet the criteria denoting a higher level of interest (Grade II* or I), although we could alternatively come to the view that the building will, in 2024, merit listing at Grade II.

REPRESENTATIONS At the outset, Dp9, representing the owner and occupiers, noted (7 July 2015) that the proposed alterations to No. 1 Poultry are sympathetic and seek to ensure its long term viability and important contribution to the wider commercial success of the local Bank area. They noted that occupants have expressed concern at the limitations of the building such that renewal of long term leases of the office floors by Aviva and Regus (due in Sept and Oct 2015) and leases on some retail units are dependent on the successful outcome of the planning application.

The supporting Heritage Assessment, prepared by the architectural historian and critic Ken Powell, concluded that since proposed changes are minor and do not constitute a fundamental threat, and the building is not manifestly of ‘more than special interest’, the application should be rejected.

Herbert Smith Freehills LLP, acting for the owners PW Real Estate, regrets (10 Aug 2015) that we have taken the decision to proceed with the listing assessment since the considerations should, more appropriately, be managed through the planning process, and believes that No.1 Poultry should be assessed for listing in a timely manner when thirty years old.

HE RESPONSE We accept that opinions differ as to whether the changes constitute a threat. We do consider, however, that the proposed changes, if effected, would alter the character and structure of the original building. Most importantly, since the question has been posed, assessment of the building will provide clarity for future management. The value of this approach has been clearly demonstrated in our recent project on post-war

Page 1 of 16 Historic England Advice Report 14 October 2015 commercial offices 1964-1994; No.1 Poultry was identified but was not taken forward because of its age and as there was, at that time, no potential threat to it.

We agree that it is beyond our remit to comment on the planning application and we do not propose to do so in the assessment of special interest. For information, however, it is useful to summarise here the proposals set out in the Design and Access Statement, by Buckley Gray Yeoman, 17 June 2015. They address, first, the ground floor retail units and first and second floor offices, which are considered to be dark, under-utilised and unprofitable, and second, access to the upper floors and restaurant, to resolve a pinch point at the main street level entrance within the atrium.

The proposals are as follows:

* Remove the bowed shop front and structural first floor wall behind the eastern colonnaded bay of the Queen Victoria Street elevation, where first floor windows are offset behind the columns. Extend the floor and bring forward the façade, creating a recessed, outer glazed wall rising through two storeys on the line of the colonnade, thereby enclosing the colonnade and bringing the external space into the building;

* Create a new entrance in the western colonnaded bay of the Queen Victoria Street elevation, similarly enclosing the colonnade with recessed, full-height glazed sliding doors and office floor windows above;

* Enlarge windows in the Queen Victoria Street elevation of the retail unit occupied by the Green Man public house;

* Drop cills and enlarge ground floor window openings within the central space. Insert first floor windows and doors in the currently blank atrium wall; drop cills to enlarge 2nd floor windows;

* Re-position the escape doors on Queen Victoria Street on the outer facade, to provide direct access to the street;

LETTERS OF SUPPORT We have received a substantial number of letters from architectural and cultural alumni and professionals, some of whom were involved in the building project, objecting to the proposed changes to a building that they consider to be of the highest merit, by an architect of international standing and stating their support for the Twentieth Century Society’s application for listing.

Respondents include Lord Palumbo who commissioned No 1 Poultry; Lord Foster, Dame Zaha Hadid, Lord Rogers, Charles Jencks, Prof Charlie Hussey, Prof Mark Swenarton, Stephen Bayley, Ted Cullinan, Paul Koralek, Piers Gough, Sir Nicholas Serota, Sir Michael Snyder; Siggi Wernik, Chris Dyson, Andrew Pryke - former colleagues and associates; Mary Stirling - Stirling's widow; Stirling's partners Michael Wilford and Laurence Bain, and Arabella Lennox-Boyd, author of the roof garden.

Commendations recognise No.1 Poultry 'as the work of a commission by one of the great patrons of modern architecture and one of the most outstanding and influential architects of his generation on the world stage'. (Lord Foster) The architect Ted Cullinan captures their sentiments in his summary of 'this unique, skilfully composed, brilliantly urbane, joyful, one off building'.

Charles Jencks considers that the building and the debate surrounding it illustrate some core values of post-modern urbanism, contending that No.1 Poultry is a masterpiece, one of the British urban landmarks of its time. Along with the extension to the National Gallery and 30 St Mary Axe, it epitomises the iconic and communicational motives of the period...... and is easily among the best architecture of its type in the City.

ADDITIONAL CONSULTATION As part of our assessment, Historic England has discussed the evolution of the design with the original project architect to establish how the scheme responded to the brief, to clarify the level of detail determined before Stirling's death and the extent of later amendments to his design.

Assessment CONSULTATION

Page 2 of 16 Historic England Advice Report 14 October 2015

We consulted the Twentieth Century Society as applicant; the owners, lessees and tenants through their consultant Dp9; the City of London as planning authority and the Greater London Historic Environment Record (GLHER).

APPLICANT The C20 Society’s detailed application set out a case for listing at Grade II*; the factual content had informed our Consultation Report. In response to consultation, the C20 Society firmly reiterated its view that the building should be designated at Grade II*.

The Society had sought clarification on the Consultation Report from Laurence Bain, the project architect and, after Stirling’s death in 1992, the partner responsible for the project, and attached his comments.

HE RESPONSE: we note the architect's comments, with whom we have also spoken, and where appropriate have amended the draft List entry to correct any errors and to provide clarification.

OWNERS and TENANTS Dp9 confirmed the view expressed in the Heritage Assessment, submitted in early July, that the building was not of ‘more than special interest’; attached the Design and Access Statement (Buckley Gray Yeoman, 17 June 2015); attached the letter from Herbert Smith Freehills to PW Real Assets (10 Aug 2015) and their own letter of 7 July 2105 to Historic England, which sets out the practical failings of the building, the merits of the proposed alterations and their view that the building does not justify listing at a high grade. Dp9 strongly urge against listing at this stage.

1 The Heritage Assessment (Ken Powell, 2015) sets out a thorough summary and critique of the architect Sir James Stirling, of No.1 Poultry and its authorship and the wider context of the building. It acknowledges the very high regard in which Stirling is held, but concludes that No.1 Poultry is not of more than special interest and does not warrant listing at Grade II*, concluding:

* It is not under threat; * The final design is not of Stirling’s hand, but is the simulacrum of a Stirling building, being completed some years after his death; * The design was frozen in time and lacks the development of ideas that Stirling would plausibly have brought to the building; * Compared with Stirling’s major works it is ‘second tier’ and received mixed reviews.

2 With regard to special interest, Herbert Smith Freehills considered:

* The Consultation Report lacked rigorous objectivity, citing only positive quotations and awards, and referred to the Heritage Assessment for a more balanced view; * No. 1 Poultry is not of the outstanding quality or under a threat that merits listing at Grade II*; * Given its location within the Bank Conservation Area, and the acknowledged importance of the surrounding, highly graded heritage assets, it is already subject to close oversight and planning control; * Its functionality and adaptability, citing the High Court‘s decision on Pimlico School as comparison, noting that if 1 Poultry performed satisfactorily in today’s market, the planning application would not have been necessary; * Whilst generally considered to be undeniably interesting in its use of materials, it lacks technical innovation; * Unlike Stirling’s earlier works, it has never merited a high award, echoing the extent of divided opinion as to its success; * The difficult precedent created by listing a building of this date, where opinion is divided.

HE RESPONSE: it is usual practice in a Consultation Report to cite plaudits and awards that contribute to understanding the genesis of a design and the standing of a building. Reference to the public inquiry and High Court Appeal indicates the controversy the project generated. We have however expanded the draft List entry to provide greater clarity. The Consultation Report does not contain opinion or assessment as a matter of policy, but these are included in the following Discussion that sets out our advice.

We do not underestimate its controversial planning history, but we are tasked with assessing it objectively, against the criteria for listing, which for a building of this recent date are exacting. Those pertaining to architectural and historic interest, including innovation, fitness for purpose and its context, are addressed in the Discussion that follows.

Page 3 of 16 Historic England Advice Report 14 October 2015

AVIVA, one of the first occupiers of the building and longstanding tenant, expressed deep concern that the building might become listed. Whilst the majority of the floor space continues to suit their occupational needs, the existing office entrance has always been defective, since it is inadequate and undersized for a building of this size and profile, and is compromised by the lifts to the rooftop restaurant.

KM HERITAGE, on behalf of AVIVA, noted that their submission should be read in conjunction with the Heritage Assessment, which, they consider, provides thorough and cogent background information.

KM Heritage, summarising their own view:

* Acknowledged the significance of Stirling and his practice within post-war architecture where he in particular was a major figure and author of a number seminal buildings, but considered that Stirling’s style was evolving at the time of his death, that No.1 Poultry is a hybrid building, does not compare with his earlier work and received mixed critical reaction; * That the proposed changes are consistent with the building and do not constitute a threat.

Regarding the criteria for listing, KM Heritage concluded:

* Selectivity: it does not distinguish itself from other Post-modern buildings or projects by Stirling to create a significant degree of exceptionality or special interest; * Group value: it does not form a group with any other building or occupy a unique corner position; * Date: late iteration of Post-modernism * Rarity: one of a large number of buildings in the Post-modern style, and represents an approach explored elsewhere by Stirling; * Authenticity: the key issue, that there is strong evidence to suggest that the implemented building is not as Stirling might have intended;

It does not therefore have the outstanding quality required to list a building less than 30 years old.

The CITY OF LONDON, here cited in full, noted:

* The building and site has a complex, controversial and unusual planning history. The design, planning permission and construction of the building were subject to scrutiny at a public inquiry and High Court appeal. The design of the building and the principle of redevelopment of the listed buildings and buildings in the Bank Conservation Area previously on the site was influenced by the Secretary of State’s decision to refuse planning permission and listed building consent for an earlier scheme on a larger site, known as Mansion House Square. * Following the grant of planning permission and listed building consent, minor detailed changes to the design were approved in 1995 and 1996. These were designed to meet current standards and market conditions at that time and care was taken to avoid diluting or substantially altering the scheme approved by the Secretary of State in 1989. The changes included increasing the floor area of the retail space and reducing the number of units, changes to access between the street, the public throughway (Bucklersbury Passage), details of materials and the public roof garden. * The building contains office and retail space, including covered shopping and a significant degree of publicly accessible space at ground and basement level including access to Bank Station, the ground floor colonnades, the internal atrium which is open to the sky, the roof garden and the replacement by Bucklersbury Passage of the historic route of Bucklersbury between Poultry and Queen Victoria Street. This was described by the Inspector as ‘some compensation for the regrettable loss of Bucklersbury as well as the provision of covered shopping routes as potential enhancements of the area.’ The site forms part of the principal shopping centre of Cheapside. * The building is in a very prominent location and has a distinctive appearance, made of high quality materials and finishes.

DISCUSSION

No.1 Poultry was designed in 1985-88 and built in 1994-98 by James Stirling, Michael Wilford and Associates (JSMWAL) which, after Stirling’s death in 1992 was renamed Michael Wilford and Partners (MWAL).

In accordance with the Principles of Selection for Listing Buildings (March 2010) particularly careful selection is required for buildings dating after 1945 and for those less than 30 years old exceptional scrutiny is applied. The broad architectural and historic context in which the late C20 commercial office can be understood is set out in our Introduction to Heritage Assets 'The Late-20th Century Commercial Office' (September 2013). Our Listing Selection Guide: Commerce and Exchange Buildings (April 2011) identifies considerations for listing.

Page 4 of 16 Historic England Advice Report 14 October 2015

Pertinent to this building are the quality of the design, the use of materials and detailing, technological, planning and architectural innovation, and its fitness for purpose. In this case the issue of authorship is also a key question.

PLANNING CONTEXT No.1 Poultry is one of the key developments of the post-war era, built on a strategic City site of primary significance by the developer, Peter, later Lord Palumbo, who was determined to create a building of enduring quality. Intensely scrutinised, proposals for the site were subject of public inquiries in 1984 (Mies van der Rohe scheme) and 1988 (Stirling), taken to Appeal at the High Court in 1990, while Stirling's scheme was subject of a further public inquiry concerning rights of way in 1993 before consent was given. The development was catalyst for an important ideological debate which the critic and architectural historian Charles Jencks has likened in historic significance to the C14 debate between architects on Milan Cathedral. In his view No.1 Poultry ranks as one of the major British urban landmarks of the later C20, the building, and debate, illustrating core values of post-modern urbanism, notably that of contextualism, in acknowledging the adjacent buildings in scale and material, and in showing that contrast is essential for meaning to be communicated.(Jencks, letter of support, 26 June 2015).

ARCHITECTURAL INTEREST No.1 Poultry embodies Stirling’s exploration of space and movement through interlocking geometrical forms, and in terms of motifs and materials and colour, as first realised at the Staatsgalerie, Stuttgart (1979-84). Whereas the gallery extension included a central courtyard that also serves as the heart of a public way, at Poultry, the drum-shaped void becomes the focal point of the building, both in plan and in section, instead of a concealed space. This striking spatial inter-relationship cleverly addresses the mixed-use requirements of the building, providing commercial and retail space, while also accommodating a public right of way, a roof garden and restaurant. The generosity of the public realm is exceptional for a speculative scheme and the interlocking geometry has a powerful intensity that derives from the tight constraints of the site. Its stature among comparable post-modernist commercial buildings is considered below, but it is rare among commercial buildings to sustain an interest through to an interior space, here achieved in a dramatic, classically informed way. The approach from the apex into the central drum creates a fluid, contextual relationship of internal and external spaces that conjures up the multi-facetted historic fabric of the City, representing a recurring theme of cities within cities in Stirling’s later work.

The building is rigorously symmetrical about its central axis and in elevation, responding in scale and rhythm to the principally classical language of buildings in close proximity, many listed at high grades, which Stirling admired greatly, regarding the site as being very special 'at this spider's web intersection surrounded by all those heroes like Lutyens and Hawksmoor and Dance' (Sunday Times, April 1991). Despite its size, the building’s bulk is broken down into contrasting volumes and materials that can be taken in from a single viewpoint and in progression round or through the building. Intellectually powerful, the building is scholarly in its references, particularly to classical precedent, and the inclusion of the friezes by Joseph Kremer from Chancellor’s demolished but widely admired 12-13 Poultry of 1875, is evidence of the building's engagement with and reference to its predecessors. Far from being derivative, Stirling also deliberately and wittily referenced his own work, for example in the use of bright colour, and the mushroom column, here in the Green Man pub.

The underlying ground conditions and disturbed nature of the site and its archaeology dictated a conventional form of construction. Materials, most obviously the banded sandstone cladding, and execution are of impeccable quality, a reflection of commitment to the highest architectural standards and extent to which the scheme was scrutinised at all stages. The sandstone -- Australian Helidon and English Wilderness Red, from the Forest of Dean -- and Rosa Gallura granite detail reflect an interest in the traditional materials of construction, appropriate to the site, and in contrast to the modernity of the High Tech movement. The design is carried through to the smallest details, giving the impression of consistency and rigour, and this dialogue between finely executed vertical and horizontal surfaces, glass and masonry is vital to the building's success.

Virtually unaltered, the complexity and significance of Stirling’s interwoven plan and contextual referencing remain clearly legible.

Architecturally this is an outstanding commercial building, among the best architecture of its type in the City, which if permitted to remain in its original guise will take its place among key buildings of the later C20.

AUTHORSHIP The building is assessed on its own architectural merits, but Stirling’s hand is paramount, and it is significant that according to Girouard (1998), on the recommendation of John Summerson and Colin St John Wilson,

Page 5 of 16 Historic England Advice Report 14 October 2015

Palumbo turned to Stirling. However, Michael Wilford’s contribution to the partnership should not be overlooked, for his skill in taking the project to completion. In line with standard practice, construction was managed by the project architect within the firm and detailed specification was finalised by the long-standing project engineers, Ove Arup and Partners.

Whilst the building was constructed by the same practice, it would be naive to assume that the building would have been completed as built had Stirling lived, but the hallmark of the building is decidedly Stirling’s, and comparison with Wilford’s later Lowry Centre in Salford shows how Stirling had a unique intensity and individuality of vision.

Despite Stirling's untimely death, since it was a requirement of the judicial and planning process No.1 Poultry was in principle executed to Stirling's design, as meticulous Public Inquiry records and the practice archive demonstrate, and his virtuosity is clearly legible in the geometry, plan and elevational articulation and bold use of colour.

Since the question has been asked, there is a distinction between Stirling’s overarching design, prepared to a level of technical detail for the public inquiry, and subsequent and generally subordinate issues finalised after his death, to meet, for example, revisions to the brief regarding the public right of way and safety. Details finalised after Stirling's death include the main office entrance sequence and lifts in the central court, the internal portal at the base of the ceremonial stair, finished in white-painted stucco, and the set-back doorways (but not the curved frontages) to the shops. Some amendments, for example to meet increased safety regulations following the Public Inquiry into the Kings Cross fire of 1987, were introduced as the building was under construction and we have made it clear in the draft List entry where later interventions were made.

ARCHITECT James Stirling has claim to be among the first modern British architects to achieve widespread international standing. He was one of the first post-war British architects to work abroad, when in 1974 he was invited to design a museum in Düsseldorf that led directly to that at Stuttgart. He was given the Aalto Award in 1977, the RIBA Gold Medal in 1980, and in 1981 was the first British recipient of the Pritzker Prize, considered the world’s leading award to an architect. He was awarded the Japanese culture prize ‘Praemium Imperiale’ in 1990, and his knighthood was announced in 1992, shortly before his death. The Stirling Prize, the UK’s most prestigious architecture prize, is named after him. There is no question of the very high regard in which James Stirling was held during his lifetime and continues to be held. His legacy in Britain is recognised by listed buildings, in some cases listed at high grades, from across his career, and in the number of recent publications examining his work. These sources, combined with Stirling’s extensive archive, allow close analysis of the project as it unfolded, and place No.1 Poultry in context.

His early work, in partnership with James Gowan, is epitomised by Langham House Close, Ham, London Borough of Richmond upon Thames (1957-8, listed Grade II*) which explores the honest use of form and materials, an interest that was to dominate his work. Then follows the Leicester University Engineering building (1961-3, Grade II*), Andrew Melville Hall, University of St Andrews (completed 1964, listed Grade A), the History Faculty Library, Cambridge (1964-8), and the Florey Building for Queen’s College, Oxford (1968-7) each listed at Grade II. An extension to Branksome Conference Centre, Haslemere, Surrey for Olivetti (1971-2, listed Grade II*) is an indication of a turning point in his work from the New Brutalist ethos he had espoused early in his career, towards (although he strongly disliked labels) a post-modernist re-interpretation of the past, fully realised in Britain in No.1 Poultry. Of all James Stirling's major buildings in England, No.1 Poultry is the only one not yet recognised through listing.

CRITICAL RESPONSE No.1 Poultry was finished in 1998 when post-modernism was unfashionable. The reputation of the building has suffered from a fast-changing critical discourse, some claiming that as a result of its protracted design and construction period, contemporary trends and concerns had moved on by the time it was finished.

It is important to consider the building in terms of its original conception and achievement, and place within Stirling’s work, and it is in this light that it is assessed for listing. Inevitably for a high profile development in a highly sensitive location, at the centre of a conservation battle, and the subject of two controversial public inquiries before its construction, No.1 Poultry received mixed acclaim. Conservationists at the time - SAVE mounting the official opposition to the scheme, taking it to Appeal at the High Court - considered it a poor replacement for the destroyed listed buildings, some critics regretting the change in direction Stirling's work was taking, while others have speculated how the building would have appeared had he lived. We have set out the context in which 1 Poultry was built and recognise the significance of the debate it stimulated, and although this context does not per se constitute a reason for listing, it had a bearing on the design and execution.

Page 6 of 16 Historic England Advice Report 14 October 2015

Leading critics, architects and architectural historians, including Stirling's biographers, contemporary critiques (for example Architects' Journal, Nov 5 1998; Architecture Today,1998) and letters of support for this case, have recognised the contribution Stirling made in No.1 Poultry to British architecture: turning away from the modernist functionalist ethos that had previously dominated commercial office design; the building’s architectural quality and its stature as the high point of post-modernist commercial architecture in England, and its rarity as exemplar of this short-lived movement.

The building was shortlisted for the Royal Fine Art Commission Trust Building of the Year Award 1999 and gained a Civic Trust Award in 2000, while the post-modernist garden, designed by Arabella Lennox-Boyd, won the Soft Landscape Award 1998. Regarding further recognition, we are advised by the project architect that at the client's request, the building was not put forward for other awards.

Stirling's biographer, writing in 1998, noted, ‘However much one may regret the destruction of the listed buildings, there was probably no other contemporary firm which could have fitted a building onto this difficult site with such a combination of skill, consideration for neighbours, and panache’ (Girouard, 1998, p 241).

FITNESS FOR PURPOSE Whilst the building's fitness for purpose has been questioned, lack of alteration suggests that it has until recently met this test. To reiterate, it is a mixed-use building where office space is proportionally a small percentage of its volume by City standards. It exceptionally accommodates a generous public right of way, roof garden and restaurant, the plan established by the historic footprint of the site. For operational reasons, there are elements of the building, principally the intended main entrance at the apex and monumental staircase, which have not been used as planned, thereby increasing the likelihood of pressure on the entrance within the central court, the main cause of concern to users of the office floors. Yet the underutilised approach from the apex into the central drum and onward into the building is key to the dramatic relationship of internal and external spaces that epitomises Stirling's work. The offset placing of first floor office windows and lack of natural light in office floors has also raised concern, yet these outward facing windows are implicit in the mannerist articulation and the structure of the colonnaded bays, and their role within the currently unaltered external form.

CONTEXT No.1 Poultry draws on many aspects of what is generally regarded as Stirling's masterpiece, the Neue Staatsgalerie, Stuttgart (1979-84), but with an increased intensity, transported to the highly sensitive location at the heart of the City of London. In a national context, alongside the smaller Clore Gallery for the Tate Gallery (1978-86), No.1 Poultry is Stirling’s most significant late work in Britain. Both the Clore Gallery and No.1 Poultry challenged the user by departing from convention, but the larger Poultry site enabled Stirling to apply greater inventiveness within the spatial dimensions of the site.

No.1 Poultry excels, as Charles Jencks has expressed, as an essay in post-modern urbanism. Through its engagement with the urban context and allusion to an eclectic range of sources, the building sheds light on the balance between continuity and innovation in Stirling’s later career. It is the ludic quality of No.1 Poultry, the play of motifs and the clever and witty references to Stirling’s own work and those of his heroes - Lutyens, Soane and above all Hawksmoor - that makes it an inventive and civic presence at this most architecturally important City space. In his recent monograph on Stirling, Geoffrey Baker writes that ‘No 1 Poultry has a flamboyant energy, theatricality, boldness and brazen confidence that is specifically Stirling (Baker, 2011, p. 230-1).

No.1 Poultry is a complex and erudite building and does not reveal its hand easily in the way we have become accustomed to viewing principally Miesian, curtain walled commercial offices, notably through our recent assessment of post-war commercial offices from 1964-94. Since most of Stirling’s later work is outside Britain, we may less readily understand its context or feel comfortable with it, but rather than a maverick British building that parodies the historic tradition, it demonstrates the architect’s deep understanding and respect for architectural innovators who had previously challenged the status quo, and whose buildings provided the setting for No.1 Poultry that he so admired. Acknowledging this and comparing No.1 Poultry with its close neighbour, Lutyens’ Midland Bank, Colin St John Wilson observed that ‘common to both buildings are an element of wit, of knowingness, of “the high game”; a tradition passed with gathering momentum from generation to generation through Wren, Dance and Soane.’ (Architecture Today, 1998, 60-63).

APPRAISAL We can now approach post-modernism with a sense of balance and critical perspective, as demonstrated by the 2011-12 major exhibition at the V&A - 'Postmodernism: Style and Subversion 1970-1990' - and No.1 Poultry has a strong claim to be the definitive post-modern commercial building in Britain, standing head and

Page 7 of 16 Historic England Advice Report 14 October 2015 shoulders above its comparators. Whilst some schemes, such as Terry Farrell's 1 Embankment Place, Charing Cross (City of Westminster) command a distinctive urban presence, No.1 Poultry possesses a rare articulation of function, spatial interest and quality of architectural design and finishes.

As a result of the recent project on post-war commercial offices, we now have a good understanding of post-war commercial offices. There is a paucity of comparable commercial buildings in Britain from the 1980s and 1990s, and since the other notable London development from this period, Broadgate, has undergone fundamental change, the significance of No 1 Poultry is heightened.

Unlike a number of the recently assessed offices, No.1 Poultry is very little altered, a key criteria in meriting listing at high grade, and despite acknowledged modifications during construction, Stirling's hand is clearly legible in this virtuoso building.

We have made it clear in the proposed List entry where the emphasis on architectural and historic interest lies, in the form and external or public faces of the building, by excluding the internal office and retail spaces from listing, as is now customary given the recent provisions of exclusion under s.1 (5A) of the 1990 Act.

SUMMARY We are aware of the high significance this case carries and have given very careful thought to our recommendation. No.1 Poultry, like other Stirling buildings, is exacting and challenging, but it is rigorously thought through and inventive in its exploration of space and movement.

To reiterate, architecturally this is an outstanding commercial building, among the best architecture of its type in the City, which if permitted to remain in its original guise will take its place among key buildings of the later C20.

For its combined architectural authority, provenance and civic presence, as an unsurpassed example of commercial post-modernism, by an architect of international acclaim, No.1 Poultry has the undoubted high level of special architectural and historic interest to merit listing at Grade II*.

In recommending the extent of designation, we have considered whether powers of exclusion under s.1 (5A) of the 1990 Act are appropriate, and consider that they are, which is clear in the proposed List entry.

CONCLUSION

Having considered all the available evidence the criteria determining more than special interest are met and No.1 Poultry should be listed at Grade II*.

REASONS FOR DESIGNATION DECISION

No.1 Poultry, designed in 1985-88 by James Stirling, Michael Wilford and Associates, and built in 1994-98 by the practice, renamed Michael Wilford and Partners after Stirling’s death in 1992, is recommended for listing at Grade II* for the following principal reasons: * Architect: a highly significant late work by one of Britain's foremost post-war architects, which expresses Stirling's singular approach to design; * Architectural and design interest: an unsurpassed example of commercial post-modernism, on a monumental scale, intricate in its planning and rigorously scrutinised and executed; * Commercial development: one of the key developments of the post-war era, built by a prominent developer, determined to create a building of enduring quality; * Spatial interest and form: a striking symmetrical composition on a tightly constrained site, exemplifying Stirling’s work in its exploration of space and movement though interlocking geometrical volumes and in its use of materials, colour and motifs, and exceptionally carrying this through to a dynamic interior space; * Planning: exemplary urban contextualism in a complex spatial inter-relationship of mixed-use office and retail accommodation, a public right of way, roof garden and restaurant, entrance to the underground station and public house, where the generosity of the public realm is exceptional for a speculative scheme; * Civic presence and group value: occupies a very prominent site in the heart of the City of London, in close proximity to highly prestigious civic and commercial buildings, which are referenced in the design.

Countersigning comments:

Page 8 of 16 Historic England Advice Report 14 October 2015

Agreed. We have very carefully considered the qualities and claims of No. 1 Poultry. This is a highly significant and accomplished building by an architect of international repute, arguably the quintessential post-modern commercial building and public space. As such we are recommending that this building is of more than special interest and should be listed at Grade II*. V. Fiorato, 7th October 2015

Further Comments: This assessment has had considerable thought and close involvement from the Listing Director. It is a complex case but the building is, without question, a major and important work of post-modern commercial architecture, rich in architectural quality and interest, and designed by one of the country's most significant post-war architects. We acknowledge the commercial sensitivities and have proposed a rigourously clear List entry to focus attention on the special parts of the building. No.1 Poultry merits listing at Grade II*. Emily Gee 14 October 2015

Page 9 of 16 Historic England Advice Report 14 October 2015

Annex 1

List Entry

List Entry Summary This building is listed under the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 as amended for its special architectural or historic interest.

Name: No.1 Poultry

List Entry Number: 1428881

Location 1 Poultry, London, EC2R 8EJ

The building may lie within the boundary of more than one authority.

County District District Type Parish Greater London Authority City and County of the London Borough Non Civil Parish City of London

National Park: Not applicable to this List entry.

Grade: II*

Date first listed: Date of most recent amendment:

Legacy System Information The contents of this record have been generated from a legacy data system.

Legacy System: Not applicable to this List entry. Legacy Number: Not applicable to this List entry.

Asset Groupings This List entry does not comprise part of an Asset Grouping. Asset Groupings are not part of the official record but are added later for information.

List Entry Description

Summary of Building Speculative commercial building incorporating offices and retail units, the Green Man public house, a public right of way in Bucklersbury Passage and rooftop restaurant and garden. Designed in 1985-88 by James Stirling, Michael Wilford and Associates for Peter Palumbo’s City Acre Property Investment Trust Ltd, and built in 1994-8 by the practice, renamed Michael Wilford and Partners Ltd after Stirling's death in 1992.

Page 10 of 16 Historic England Advice Report 14 October 2015

Reasons for Designation No.1 Poultry, designed in 1985-88 by James Stirling, Michael Wilford and Associates, and built in 1994-98 by the practice, renamed Michael Wilford and Partners after Stirling’s death in 1992, is listed at Grade II* for the following principal reasons:

* Architect: a highly significant late work by one of Britain's foremost post-war architects, which expresses Stirling's singular approach to design; * Architectural and design interest: an unsurpassed example of commercial post-modernism, on a monumental scale, intricate in its planning and rigorously scrutinised and executed; * Commercial development: one of the key developments of the post-war era, built by a prominent developer, determined to create a building of enduring quality; * Spatial interest and form: a striking symmetrical composition on a tightly constrained site, exemplifying Stirling’s work in its exploration of space and movement though interlocking geometrical volumes and in its use of materials, colour and motifs, and exceptionally carrying this through to a dynamic interior space; * Planning: exemplary urban contextualism in a complex spatial inter-relationship of mixed-use office and retail accommodation, a public right of way, roof garden and restaurant, entrance to the underground station and public house, where the generosity of the public realm is exceptional for a speculative scheme; * Civic presence and group value: occupies a very prominent site in the heart of the City of London, in close proximity to highly prestigious civic and commercial buildings, which are referenced in the design.

History Speculative commercial building incorporating offices and retail units, the Green Man pub and a rooftop restaurant and garden. Designed in 1985-88 by James Stirling, Michael Wilford and Associates for Peter Palumbo’s City Acre Property Investment Trust Ltd, and built in 1994-98 by the practice, renamed Michael Wilford and Partners Ltd, after Stirling's death in 1992. In order to secure the project Palumbo entered into a joint venture with German financier Dieter Bock’s company Advanta, and the project was managed by its subsidiary, Altstadtbau.

PLANNING HISTORY The commission came from Lord Palumbo in July 1985 after an earlier scheme, designed by Mies van der Rohe in 1962-68, was rejected by the Secretary of State following public inquiry in 1984. The development was controversial from the outset given the prominence of the site within Bank Conservation Area, its proximity to highly graded listed buildings and in the demolition of Grade II listed buildings, notably Belcher’s Mappin and Webb building, to secure the site.

During 1986 two options were prepared, the first retaining the Mappin and Webb building, the second opting for total redevelopment. Following a second public inquiry in 1988, it was for the latter, Scheme B (Revised) that the Secretary for State, Nicholas Ridley, gave permission, seeing it as a potential masterpiece which was more important to the nation than the retention of the listed buildings. At the time a highly controversial development at the centre of a conservation battle, providing the catalyst for an important ideological debate, opponents of the scheme sought a judicial review which was overruled by the High Court, but it was not until 1991 that the House of Lords finally gave consent for the redevelopment to proceed. Once objections concerning the public right of way across the site were resolved, work finally began on site in 1994, concluding four years later.

DESIGN Stirling’s design was developed in 1985-88, and in principle changed little thereafter. After Stirling’s early death in 1992 the production of working drawings continued to be supervised by the practice (then Michael Wilford and Partners Ltd), with Laurence Bain as long-standing partner-in-charge of the project, and with Ove Arup and Partners continuing as engineers. The detailed design for No.1 Poultry was subject to particular scrutiny at public inquiry, by the High Court, the City planning authority and by English Heritage, and it was stipulated that it was to be built in accordance with the Secretary of State's decision.

Intellectually powerful, the building is scholarly in its references, particularly to classical precedent. It occupies the wedge of land at the intersection of Queen Victoria Street and Poultry, a critical City site imbued with the

Page 11 of 16 Historic England Advice Report 14 October 2015 presence of John Soane’s Bank of England (1788-1808, listed Grade I), the Mansion House of 1739-53 by George Dance the Elder (listed Grade I), Sir Edwin Lutyens’ Midland Bank Head Office (1924-39, listed Grade I), and Sir Edwin Cooper’s National Westminster Bank (1930-32, listed Grade II), and close to Hawksmoor’s St Mary Woolnoth (1716-27, listed Grade I), the latter a particular favourite of Stirling. Stirling regarded the site as being very special 'at this spider's web intersection surrounded by all those heroes like Lutyens and Hawksmoor and Dance. It's the quintessence of London' (Sunday Times, 24 April 1991). Comparing No.1 Poultry with Lutyens’ Midland Bank, Colin St John Wilson observed that ‘common to both buildings are an element of wit, of knowingness, of “the high game”; a tradition passed with gathering momentum from generation to generation'. (Architecture Today, 1998, 60-63).

It is planned with geometric precision, a 'play of forms that was inventive with a refreshing wit' (Architecture Today, 59). Like much of Stirling’s late work, such as the Neue Staatsgalerie in Stuttgart, Germany (1979-84) and the Braun headquarters at Melsungen, Germany (1986-92), it is a large building whose bulk is broken down into contrasting volumes and materials that can be readily taken in from a single viewpoint and in progression through the building.

Inevitably for a high profile building in a highly sensitive location, No.1 Poultry received mixed acclaim, conservationists considering it a poor replacement for the destroyed listed buildings, some critics regretting the change in direction Stirling's work was taking, while others have speculated how the building would have appeared had he lived.

Following the grant of planning permission and listed building consent, minor revisions to the design were approved in 1995 and 1996. These were designed to meet current safety standards and market conditions at that time, and care was taken to avoid diluting or substantially altering the scheme approved by the Secretary of State in 1989. Revisions included increasing the floor area of the retail space and reducing the number of units; changes to the position of shop entrances and to the public throughway (Bucklersbury Passage); the public roof garden was also designed at that time.

No.1 Poultry ranks as one of the major British urban landmarks of the later C20, the building, and debate, illustrating core values of post-modern urbanism, notably that of contextualism, in acknowledging the adjacent buildings in scale and material, and in showing that contrast is essential for meaning to be communicated.

The building was shortlisted for the Royal Fine Art Commission Trust Building of the Year Award 1999 and gained a Civic Trust Award in 2000, while the garden, designed by Arabella Lennox-Boyd, won the Soft Landscape Award 1998. The building was not entered for other awards at the client's request.

ARCHITECT Sir James Stirling (1926-92) was born in Glasgow and studied at Liverpool University before setting up in partnership first with James Gowan (1956-63), and then in 1971 with Michael Wilford. Notable works in Britain include: Langham House Close (1957-8), the Leicester University Engineering building (1961-3), each listed at Grade II*; Andrew Melville Hall, University of St Andrews (completed 1964, listed Grade A); the History Faculty Library, Cambridge (1964-8), and the Florey Building for Queen’s College, Oxford (1968-7) each listed at Grade II. An extension to Branksome Conference Centre, Haslemere, Surrey for Olivetti (1971-2, listed Grade II*) represents a turning point in his work in the 1970s from the New Brutalist ethos he had espoused early in his career, towards (although he strongly disliked labels) a post-modernist interpretation of the past, fully realised in Britain in No.1 Poultry.

James Stirling has claim to be among the first modern British architects to achieve widespread international standing. He was one of the first post-war British architects to work abroad, when in 1974 he was invited to design a museum in Düsseldorf that led directly to that at Stuttgart. Notable in Europe are: the award winning extension to the Neue Staatsgalerie, Stuttgart (1979-84), generally regarded as his masterpiece, Stuttgart Music School and Theatre Academy (1987), Braun Headquarters at Melsungen, all in Germany; the Electra bookshop for the Venice Biennale, Italy (1989), and in North America, the Fogg Museum extension at Harvard University.

He was given the Aalto Award in 1977, the RIBA Gold Medal in 1980, and in 1981 was the first British recipient of the Pritzker Prize, considered the world’s leading award to an architect. He was awarded the Japanese culture prize ‘Praemium Imperiale’ in 1990, and his knighthood was announced in 1992, shortly before his death. The Stirling Prize, the UK’s most prestigious architecture prize, is named after him. Subject of a biography by Mark Girouard in 1998, the last few years have seen a revival of interest in the architect’s work, marked by the publication of a number of studies by authors including Geoffrey H Baker, Mark Crinson, Amanda Reeser Lawrence and Anthony Vidler.

Page 12 of 16 Historic England Advice Report 14 October 2015

Details Speculative offices incorporating retail units, the Green Man public house, a public right of way in Bucklersbury Passage and rooftop restaurant and garden. Designed in 1985-88 by James Stirling, Michael Wilford and Associates for Peter Palumbo’s City Acre Property Investment Trust Ltd, and built in 1994-98 by the practice, renamed Michael Wilford and Partners after Stirling's premature death in 1992.

Architect-in-charge Laurence Bain. Structural and mechanical engineers - Ove Arup and Partners; Main contractor - John Laing Construction; rooftop landscape - Arabella Lennox-Boyd, restaurant - Conran Design Partnership.

STRUCTURE AND MATERIALS: the structure was determined by the underlying geology and archaeology. The building has a reinforced concrete frame on granite foundations and is clad with alternating bands of rusticated buff and red sandstone (Australian Helidon and Wilderness Red from the Forest of Dean, Glocs.); Rosa Gallura granite detail, cladding and paving, and glazed blue tiles lining the atrium; in the principal public areas fixtures and fittings, including windows, are in bronze; elsewhere window frames are predominantly powder coated aluminium, in places brightly coloured. The ground floor level of the atrium or courtyard is paved in York stone, defining the public realm.

PLAN: No.1 Poultry occupies the wedge of land at the intersection of Queen Victoria Street and Poultry. Symmetrical in plan and section, laid out about a central longitudinal axis, it is set out on a 1.5m grid which informs the rhythm and bay divisions of the external and inward facing facades and internal plan. In plan it resembles a wedge pierced with an open cylindrical volume into which is inserted a triangular form. The building is of six storeys plus two basement floors; the ground floor and lower ground floor concourse levels incorporate retail units, including covered shopping, an entrance to Bank underground station and public right of way, namely Bucklerbsury Passage. Floors 1-5 are occupied by offices, with a publicly accessible rooftop restaurant and garden above. On the SW corner is a pub opening from the street and concourse. Cutting through the building, Bucklersbury Passage, expressed as a courtyard with an open rotunda above and below, replaces the historic route of Bucklersbury.

The design is characteristic of Stirling’s work in its exploration of space and movement through interlocking geometrical forms, and in terms of motifs and materials, as first realised at the Staatsgalerie, Stuttgart. The generosity of the public realm is wholly exceptional for a speculative scheme and the interlocking geometry and use of colour have a powerful intensity that derive from the tight constraints of the site.

The project was conceived, revised and executed by the same practice, and in principle executed as stipulated, to Stirling's agreed design, as set out in his Proof of Evidence to the Inquiry. Materials were sourced and technical detail finalised after his death, incorporating later revisions and amendments imposed as the building was under construction, for example to allow emergency access.

EXTERIOR: the long elevations are symmetrical in three main bays with atypical bays at the western end. Each elevation has a colonnaded base, rising through two storeys, either side of a projecting monumental opening with sloping sides. Above, the middle and top sections are trade motifs, organised in a pattern of alternating segmental stone bays into which are set two tiers of windows, and V-shaped glass bays, the bay rhythm and parapet height acknowledging the surrounding buildings. The colonnades are separated from the upper floors by a giant bull-nosed stringcourse of grey granite. Behind the colonnades are bronze, segmental glazed shop fronts and at first floor level, windows which are offset from the colonnade. The Poultry elevation incorporates a terracotta frieze of royal progresses by Joseph Kremer, incorporated from the demolished 12-13 Poultry, by Frederick Chancellor. Flanking the Poultry entrance, the address - 1 Poultry - is set into the stone in bronze lettering.

The apex of the building is distinguished by a prominent tower. This rises from the blind flanking walls which are carried forward at ground floor level to form a large, round-headed entrance with a revolving door. Above this is an acutely angled V-shaped window - echoing those on the side elevations - and the cylindrical tower itself which incorporates a window in the form of a clock and higher up the cantilevered platforms of the viewing turret. Behind, the flanking walling terminates in a bold prow-like cornice. The tower has been compared with that of the Mappin and Webb building (J and J Belcher, 1870-71) which it replaced but may also allude to Roman rostral columns and a 1974 scheme for a Tuscan tower house by Stirling’s former assistant, Léon Krier. The clock window, the design completed after Stirling's death, is said to be based on Stirling's own watch.

Page 13 of 16 Historic England Advice Report 14 October 2015

INTERNAL SPACES: the public thoroughfare through the side entrances, the ancient right of way of Bucklersbury Passage, is threaded through a centrally placed open court, articulated on the street elevation by the curved form of the drum at the top. Into this volume is inserted a triangle of offices, the switch indicated by the diagrid ceiling of the covered way, the superimposition of geometries, a favourite Stirling device, and wall treatment, echoing the alternating bays of the exterior. At street level a central triangular gallery within the compass of the structural piers overlooks the lower level concourse and, as on the upper floors, has a bronze handrail. In each quadrant of the ground floor atrium are shop windows of different heights, the main entrance to the office floors to the west (finalised after Stirling's death), and access to the lower concourse to the east. The clock from the Mappin and Webb building is mounted above the entrance. The lower concourse, also circular on plan was designed to accommodate retail outlets, with a restaurant added after completion. At first floor office level the stone-clad wall of the atrium is blind while the second floor has deepset small square lights, as if echoing a classically informed basement storey; the triangular inserts of the projecting upper office floors are clad in blue glazed tiles into which deepset windows with pink, yellow and blue reveals are set, the whole resembling an intimate domestic street or court, as if the tight City street plan is represented in ascending layers. Paving as elsewhere is of granite slabs.

The approach from the apex into the central drum creates a dramatic and fluid relationship of internal and external spaces, exceptional in a post-modernist commercial building, that conjures up the multi-facetted historic fabric of the City, a recurring theme, of cities within cities, in Stirling’s later work. Rising from the principal entrance at the apex of the building to the first floor is a dramatic, monumental stair of inclined granite steps, lined within banded masonry walls and beneath a vaulted roof. At upper levels panels appear to pivot, to accommodate small windows which let in light and provide glimpses from the office floor.

From the main entrance within the central court, glass-sided lifts rise to roof level where they emerge beneath a steel canopy (the entrance sequence and lifts all detailed after Stirling's death), which oversails the atrium, which can be viewed from the terrace. The rooftop restaurant, named by Terence Conran the Coq d’Argent (Silver Cockerel), punning on the name of the building and its architect, has bronze doors, fixtures and fittings. The interior, designed by C D Architects (Conran Design) in 1997, appears to have been partly refitted but is essentially as built. The garden, designed by Arabella Lennox-Boyd, reflects the geometrical form of the building. An open loggia within the banded sandstone lined drum is formed of a sturdy oak pergola on granite plinths, with diagonally set paving that echoes the diagrid, and is backed by luxuriant informal planting. A simple opening in the drum wall opens onto a lawn above the prow of the building (astro-turfed in 2015) flanked by formal rows of box hedging and spherical forms and leads to an enclosed circular platform and viewing turret at the apex, a rare instance of a post-modern garden associated with its parent building.

The asymmetrical south-western bay on Queen Victoria Street containing the Green Man pub is treated in the manner of the main elevations and turns abruptly to the largely unseen Sise Lane elevation which is in a simpler palette of materials, of stucco walls and geometrical forms. The west-facing pub window is supported on a striking yellow conical shaft, the latter a reference to Stirling's earlier work. Above, deepset windows picked out in yellow in pronounced rectangular masonry architraves, contrast with the adjacent section where bands of strip glazing, in an almost moderne spirit, are picked out in blue, with yellow portholes above.

INTERIOR: granite-lined lift lobbies with sloping sides and deep-set lift openings with bright coloured reveals echo the external openings in their form and use of colour. Ceilings which echo the diagrid are apparent in the office floors; the offices and retail units were intended to be flexibly fitted out and have been refitted*. On the first floor are squinch-like internal openings of the windows lighting the monumental stair. On the second office floor the rear openings of the atrium windows are deeper than on the external face. Aside from a perimeter counter below and adjacent to the window, the Green Man pub has also been refitted. Office partitions, fixtures and fittings*, retail unit and concourse restaurant interiors, fixtures and fittings*, the bar and counter* in the Green Man pub, plant and services* and basement storage* and parking facilities* are not of special interest.

* Pursuant to s.1 (5A) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (‘the Act’) it is declared that these aforementioned features are not of special architectural or historic interest.

Selected Sources

Page 14 of 16 Historic England Advice Report 14 October 2015

Books and journals

Architects' Journal, vol.208, no.17, 1998 Nov 5, p.33-43

Arup Journal, vol.34 no.2, 1999, p 308

Architecture Today, no.91, 1998 Sept, p.52-73

Building, vol. 262, no. 7978 (7), 1997 Feb. 21, p.9

RIBA Journal, vol. 104, no. 10, 1997 Oct, p 30-31

Building, vol. 262, no. 8010 (40), 1997 Oct 10, p.40-41

Architectural monographs no.32,1993, p.38-45

Baker , Geoffrey H , The architecture of James Stirling and his partners James Gowan and Michael Wilford , (2011)

Berman, ed, Alan, Stirling + Wilford American Buildings, (2014)

Girouard, M, Big Jim: The Life and Work of James Stirling, (1998)

Reeser Lawrence, Amanda, James Stirling: revisionary modernist , (2012)

Vidler, Anthony, James Frazer Stirling: notes from the archive, (2010)

Page 15 of 16 Historic England Advice Report 14 October 2015

Map

National Grid Reference: TQ3256981105

The above map is for quick reference purposes only and may not be to scale. For a copy of the full scale map, please see the attached PDF - 1428881_1.pdf

Page 16 of 16