BUNHILL and CLERKENWELL Area Action Plan Consultation

Planning for the future of

BUNHILL AND CLERKENWELL Area Action Plan consultation

Issues and Options Paper

DRAFT for the Executive, April 2009 FOREWORD

Islington Council, in partnership with EC1 New Deal for Communities, is producing an “Area Action Plan” for Bunhill and Clerkenwell. This consultation document sets out the challenges that the area will face over the coming years, and provides some suggestions and ideas about how these could be addressed. We want to hear what you think about these.

The south of Islington is a unique part of London. Between 1900 and 1965 the area fell within the Metropolitan Borough of Finsbury: a name that prevails in the local government-led projects of that era, such as the health and leisure centres.

Prior to the creation of Finsbury Borough, the area was two separate parishes: St. Luke’s and Clerkenwell. The distinct identities of these areas remain to this day; however, both areas are recognisably part of central London.

Over the last 15 years, parts of the area have been an urban success story. Clerkenwell, in particular, has retained its historic character whilst accommodating more residents and providing jobs in creative industries. EC1 New Deal for Communities, which has operated in the area since 2001, has had a positive impact on the lives of many residents and businesses. However, despite lying less than a mile from London’s financial heart, parts of the area remain among London’s most deprived.

Despite the recent economic downturn, the Bunhill and Clerkenwell area is about to enter a period of major change. By 2017, Farringdon station will be the only place within London served by both the Crossrail and Thameslink networks, bringing the area within reach of thousands of commuters. This will drive substantial local residential and employment growth, with an estimated 3,400 new homes and 18,000 jobs needed by 2025.

All of this change raises questions about how the area should develop:

• Where and how should new residents and jobs be accommodated? • How can inward investment benefit all of the area’s residents, reduce deprivation and improve quality of life? • What improvements might be needed to support the additional people? • How can development reinforce, rather than erode, the area’s character?

This document identifies issues and opportunities facing the area, and sets out various options for addressing them. Your feedback will help us to produce an “Area Action Plan” for Bunhill and Clerkenwell, which will encourage the right sort of development in the right places, and will identify what the council will do to improve local facilities. The Area Action Plan will complement existing neighbourhood plans, and enable them to be achieved.

The Area Action Plan has the potential to create a great future for Bunhill and Clerkenwell, cementing their roles as vibrant parts of central London, while retaining their unique character and sense of community. We need your help to make sure that we get it right.

1

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. The Bunhill and Clerkenwell area has changed significantly over the last few years, particularly in terms of housing development. Despite the current recession, development pressures are likely to continue into the future. It is the council’s role to manage this change so that people and businesses in the area benefit from future investment.

1.2. While there are choices to make in how change is managed, they have to be made within the existing national, regional and local policy context. This is outlined below.

• The government produces “planning policy statements” for the whole of England. The government favours new development in urban locations, on previously developed land, and in areas accessible by public transport. Bunhill and Clerkenwell meet all of these government requirements.

• The Mayor of London’s “London Plan” has a significant influence on the capital’s future development. The London Plan argues for stimulating developing within London’s “Central Activities Zone”, which covers all of the area covered by this Area Action Plan, plus some neighbouring areas. The London Plan specifically identifies the Farringdon and “City Fringe” areas as their priority locations for population and jobs expansion within the Central Activities Zone (see map below).

Figure 1: Islington’s part of London’s “Central Activities Zone”

2

• The council’s emerging “Core Strategy” will identify where new development and infrastructure will be accommodated in Islington over the next 15 years. To achieve this it will include a range of policies, which will have a major impact on Bunhill and Clerkenwell as well as other locations within the borough.

• EC1 New Deal for Communities, which has operated in the area since 2001, continues to undertake a number of projects and programmes within Bunhill and Clerkenwell. These include providing new community and leisure facilities, and regenerating streets and parks.

• The council’s Unitary Development Plan (2002) is currently used to make planning decisions in the area. The Unitary Development Plan will eventually be replaced by the Core Strategy and other new planning policy documents.

• Design for London, Transport for London, Crossrail, the Greater London Authority, the London Borough of Camden, and the City of London are collaborating with the London Borough of Islington on a masterplan for the area around Farringdon station, which will inform the Area Action Plan.

Planning for residential and employment growth

1.3. The population of Bunhill and Clerkenwell is likely to increase substantially over the next few years. In addition to residents, the area will need to accommodate a considerable number of new jobs and services. Although the current downturn may result in less development in the short term, economic growth is likely to return during the latter half of the plan period, along with associated pressures for development.

1.4. Since 2001, the number of residents within the area has grown by well over 25%, to around 23,000 people. The Greater London Authority estimates that this growth will continue, with the population of Bunhill ward increasing by 4,375 residents, and Clerkenwell ward by 2,415 residents, between 2008 and 2020. This growth stems both from natural increases in the local population as well as new residents moving into the area.

1.5. Currently, the Area Action Plan area accounts for 80% of the total population of Bunhill and Clerkenwell wards. If population growth is sustained as forecast, this means that the area will need to

3 accommodate at least 6,800 additional residents by 2026 – equivalent to around 3,400 new homes 1.

1.6. Islington’s part of the Central Activities Zone contains well over half of the borough’s jobs. A recent study commissioned by the council estimates that by 2026 there will be an additional 22,500 employees within Islington’s part of the Central Activities Zone, representing around 75% of the borough’s total employment growth.

1.7. Currently, the Area Action Plan area accounts for around 80% of employment floorspace within Islington’s part of the Central Activities Zone , and has an estimated 85,000 employees. The majority of these jobs are occupied by people who live outside the area. To retain its share of employment the area may need to accommodate an additional 18,000 2 employees by 2026.

1.8. These figures assume that 60% of new jobs will be office-based, with the rest provided in other service industries (e.g. hospitality and catering). Given the changing economic climate, and in particular the uncertainty about the commercial office sector, these figures may need to be substantially revised.

1.9. To support the additional residents and employees, there will also need to be a corresponding expansion in floorspace for shops, leisure, community facilities and parks.

Figure 2: City Road Basin is a major new development for the area

An “Area Action Plan” for Bunhill and Clerkenwell

1.10. Because of the scale of change likely to occur in the area, Islington Council is preparing an Area Action Plan (AAP) to guide its future

1These housing figures are based on GLA population growth forecasts. However, a Housing Capacity Study currently being completed will identify potential housing sites. This will produce more robust estimates for future housing growth in the area. 2 Based on 2008 GLA employment projections.

4 development. AAPs focus on the implementation of policy in a specific area. They are an important way of ensuring development of an appropriate scale, mix and quality for areas of change or opportunity.

1.11. Once adopted, the Area Action Plan will help us to manage change in the area by:

• set out the council’s vision for how the area should develop • influence and guide land uses and building design in the area • identify site-specific and area-based proposals to stimulate regeneration in areas where it is most needed • set out the public sector’s spending priorities in the area

1.12. It is expected that fundamental economic and environmental improvements will result from commercial-led development along the southern and northern boundaries of the area (i.e. around Farringdon station and along the City Road axis). A key principle of the Area Action Plan will be to see these improvements extended to the rest of the area and all of its residents.

The “Issues and Options Paper”

1.13. An issues and options paper is the first step along the way towards adopting an Area Action Plan. It is a document that is used to generate and gather views for what should be in the AAP.

1.14. The council has undertaken some background work 3 and has started collaborating with key delivery partners on options for the development of the area. This background work has informed this issues and options paper.

1.15. Options identified thus far have been included in this document, and have been assessed in a Sustainability Appraisal Report, which accompanies this issues and options paper.

1.16. Consultation on this issues and options paper, alongside additional technical and financial studies (including sustainability appraisal), will help the council to identify “preferred” options to include in the AAP.

Stages of preparation of the Area Action Plan

1.17. The preparation of the AAP will follow a set process, as outlined below.

Consultation on Refining options Consultation on draft Examination Adoption issues & options Up to August Area Action Plan in Public December June/July 2009 2010 September 2010 May 2011 2011

3 A series of “topic papers” have been compiled to explain how issues and options were identified. A bibliography is appended to this paper.

5

Getting involved

1.18. This paper gives you a first chance to say how Bunhill and Clerkenwell should develop. We hope that residents, local organisations, workers, business people and everyone else interested in the future of this important area will tell us what they think about these options. Comments should be given to us by 13 July 2009.

1.19. You can comment via:

• our website: www.islington.gov.uk/planningpolicyconsultations • emailing us at [email protected] • filling in a questionnaire (available from council offices, libraries and other local venues) • attending one of the public workshops or exhibitions being held between 1 June and 13 July (full details on our website, or on posters displayed locally) • writing to us at Bunhill and Clerkenwell AAP, Planning Policy, Islington Council, 222 Upper Street, N1 1XR.

What happens next?

1.20. The next stage is to consider responses received from this consultation, and to work with all interested parties to develop the options into policies and actions. A draft version of the Area Action Plan will then be the subject of further consultation from around September 2010.

6

2. THE AREA

2.1. The Bunhill and Clerkenwell area occupies a key location between King’s Cross, Angel town centre, Shoreditch, the Barbican and Holborn (see Figure 4). The area lies in the very northeast part of London’s Central Activities Zone, between the commercial centre of the City of London and the dense residential areas of Islington and Hackney to the north. It is a mixed residential and commercial area that has a strong sense of identity and community.

2.2. The area borders the City of London and the London Boroughs of Hackney and Camden. Borough boundaries are often unnoticeable; however, where these are defined by main roads (e.g. Farringdon and City Roads), there is a stronger sense of separation between neighbouring locations.

Figure 3: The Smithfield-Farringdon area straddles the City of London and the boroughs of Islington and Camden

7 2.3. A boundary has been proposed for the Area Action Plan that includes most of Islington’s part of central London, including St. Luke’s, Bunhill Fields, Whitecross Street, King Square, Northampton Square, City University, Charterhouse Square, Farringdon, Clerkenwell Green and the Mount Pleasant sorting office. These areas are likely to experience most change, or pressure for change, in the future.

2.4. The proposed boundary excludes Angel town centre, Pentonville and the Amwell Street area. These areas have been excluded for the following reasons.

• Angel Town Centre is covered by separate planning guidance.4 • The New River / Amwell Street area contains a significant number of listed buildings and falls within a Conservation Area. The nature of housing in this area provides very little opportunity for redevelopment, and as such it is expected to experience little pressure for change over the coming years. • Pentonville and King’s Cross are separated from the Area Action Plan area by the New River Conservation Area and Angel Town Centre. This area is likely to be subject to area-specific planning policy in Islington’s Core Strategy.

Question 1. Figure 4 shows the proposed boundary for the Area Action Plan. Do you agree with this proposed boundary?

4 The Angel Town Centre Strategy (Supplementary Planning Guidance) was adopted in March 2004 and will be updated and replaced in 2011.

8

9 The area in 2025

2.5. Below is a description of what Bunhill and Clerkenwell could be like in 2025, at the end of the period of operation of the Area Action Plan. We have included various ideas in this proposed “vision” for the area to get people thinking about how Bunhill and Clerkenwell might change in the future.

1. The area’s diversity of businesses and industries will have been consolidated to create a local economy that supports and complements the central London economy (specifically that of the City of London).

The creative industries and charities will have been nurtured. New corporate office development (driven by the increase in the area’s regional rail accessibility and focussed on areas such as City Road, Goswell Road and Old Street) will be complemented by a range of smaller, more affordable workspaces to support small and medium enterprises. Opportunities will be taken to secure job opportunities for local residents within new employment development.

2. The area will be an exemplar for sustainability within central London.

New buildings will minimise their environmental impact; walking and cycling will be promoted over road-based transport; dependence on cars will be reduced; the biodiversity of streets and spaces will be improved and impermeable areas reduced; and decentralised energy networks will be established or expanded.

3. The area will have more mixed communities, through diversifying and improving the quality and design of homes.

Throughout the area there will be a greater choice of housing, suitable for people with different incomes and needs, including families, older people, disabled people, young professionals and students. A greater range of housing choices will be available to local residents who wish to move within the area. Intelligent design responses tailored to the dense urban context will result in a greater variety and quality of housing. Larger residential developments will successfully accommodate different sections of the community.

4. The area will have facilities that nurture active community life and ensure that all people have access to great public services.

The area’s sense of community will be retained and developed. Schools, adult education, leisure and health facilities will provide excellent services and be valued community assets. Each facility will provide a range of leisure, recreation and development opportunities to local residents, employees and visitors. The quality of public open space will be enhanced and its use for the whole community improved.

10

5. The area will comprise distinctive neighbourhoods, all of a high quality.

The area will be an attractive place to live and work. Areas of historic character will be managed in a way that ensures their enjoyment by future generations. Buildings and spaces will have been designed to increase opportunities for informal meeting, remove barriers and reduce fear of crime, and mixes of uses and activities will reinforce local distinctiveness. Newer buildings will have reinforced local identity and enhanced views of townscape and landscape value.

6. The area will be a centre of excellence for leisure, culture and the arts that is accessible to everyone in the community.

The role of the area in central London’s tourist industry will be enhanced. Its history and identity will be promoted, and linkages enhanced to promote exploration by foot and bike (including the “green chain”). Existing visitor attractions will be complemented by smaller leisure attractions, events and festivals. The retail roles of Old Street and Farringdon will be enhanced, and these and other local centres will contain a diversity of shops, market stalls, restaurants and cafes. The City of London’s business tourism industry will be supported through an increase in hotel bedspaces.

Figure 5: The new open space at Agdon Street

Question 2. What do you think of this description of the area in 2025? Which parts do you like, and which are you not so keen on?

11 The area now

2.6. Chapters 3 to 7 summarise the main issues and opportunities that the Bunhill and Clerkenwell area is likely to face over the next 15 years. These are grouped into five “themes”:

• People and housing • The local economy • Community life and public space • The environment and transport • Character and history

POLICY These boxes (shaded green) suggest a policy position that the council could take on certain matters, particularly future proposals for new buildings and land uses.

ACTION These boxes (shaded orange) suggest actions that the council and other partners (particularly in the public sector) could take to address identified challenges.

2.7. A number of the issues and opportunities that this area faces will be addressed by the Core Strategy and other Local Development Framework documents (e.g. housing tenure). In this paper, some of the key issues are repeated for the sake of completeness. In some cases the Core Strategy will be able to address these issues sufficiently; however, on some occasions there may be a need to adopt a more local approach. This will be resolved as we take both the Core Strategy and the Area Action Plan forward.

2.8. The final version of the Area Action Plan will be focused on delivery, and will have a very local "neighbourhood" focus. This is explored in Chapter 4. The final Area Action Plan will not repeat policies contained within other Local Development Framework documents.

2.9. Not all of the ideas for actions or policies will make it into the final version of the Area Action Plan. Feedback received on this issues and options paper will help us to identify what the priorities for the area should be. We also want to hear your suggestions for other policies or actions.

12

3. PEOPLE AND HOUSING

3.1. The area is currently home to around 23,000 residents. The number of people who live in the area has grown substantially in recent years, and is likely to continue to grow in the future. Some of this growth will stem from natural increases in the local population, in addition to new residents moving into the area.

3.2. Currently, a large number of households in the area experience considerable poverty. This particularly affects children and older people, who are more likely to live in social housing. The area’s high land values increase the cost of living and place some services and resources out of the reach of many residents and their families, which has an impact on the quality of life of many.

3.3. Many parts of the area have a high concentration of social housing (see Figure 6). Households within these areas have extremely low savings rates and lower than average incomes, making it extremely hard for those residents who wish to move into home ownership to do so (including shared ownership). High concentrations of social housing in some areas conflicts with the government’s objective of creating sustainable, mixed communities 5.

Figure 6: Proportion social rented housing (by Lower Super Output Area, 2001 Census)

3.4. Much of the area’s social housing is contained on council-owned housing estates. A large number of homes on these estates have

5 The Core Strategy is likely to contain detailed policies on housing tenure.

13 been refurbished under the government’s “Decent Homes” scheme, but this programme is due to end in 2011. As larger estates come to the end of their natural life, there may be an opportunity for the council to redevelop them for local residents with improved design that would make them less cut off from the streets around them. Opportunities may also exist to create a more varied pattern of types and tenures, thereby helping to reduce social barriers.

Figure 7: Spa Green Estate has benefitted from the “decent homes” programme

3.5. Added to this, there is a backlog of households in need of social housing. Within the EC1 New Deal for Communities area alone, the backlog is for an additional 200 homes every year. With ongoing population growth these challenges will become even more acute, particularly in terms of providing new homes in an already dense built environment.

3.6. The existing housing stock is mainly comprised of smaller flats that may not be suitable for expanding families. Given the area’s central location, there is limited potential to provide “traditional” family houses, but potentially a greater number of larger homes could be accommodated.

3.7. Much of the area’s private housing is situated within areas of a very mixed character. Buildings that combine homes with other uses need to be carefully designed to reduce conflicts (e.g. noise pollution) 6.

3.8. In addition to new homes, there has been significant recent expansion in student accommodation. Much of this is let out on a short-term basis, and so increases the incidence of transience in the local population 7.

6 The forthcoming Development Management document will contain policies on mixed use development. 7 Islington’s Core Strategy, which is currently being developed, will include policies that aim to ensure a better balance between homes and student accommodation.

14

To respond to these issues and opportunities, the following policies and actions are suggested.

POLICY People and housing 1: achieving a greater range of housing types

We could aim to diversify the range of housing within the area, by identifying existing imbalances in the size and type of dwellings, and their suitability for various sections of the community, to ensure a better choice of housing for existing and new residents.

We could also identify areas within which student accommodation and live/work units would be encouraged or discouraged.

ACTION People and housing 2: neighbourhood management

We could encourage partnership working between local agencies and the community to join up services at a neighbourhood level. This could include better management of housing estates, improving community safety, wellbeing, healthcare and education and encouraging economic growth in the local area.

ACTION People and housing 3: housing renewal and provision of community facilities on estates

The council could replace deteriorating residential buildings and/or build new housing, by formulating individual plans for housing estates in partnership with estate management bodies. Renewal could take the form of infill housing on smaller sites, or it could extend to more ambitious phased renewal of housing estates. New housing could be of more than one type of tenure: e.g. some social rented, some intermediate housing and some units for sale to widen opportunities to local residents. Opportunities could also be taken to develop buildings for community use (e.g. GP surgeries, nurseries, shops etc) on estate land, where there was a demand for such facilities.

Question 3. Have all the main issues and opportunities relating to people and housing been identified? Do you agree with the proposed policies and actions set out above?

15 4. THE LOCAL ECONOMY

4.1. The area is a significant employment location, with an estimated 85,000 employees. Commercial offices are mainly concentrated south of Old Street (see Figure 8). The number of people who work in the area has grown over the last ten years, but has slowed more recently, and may start to decline if the economy goes further into recession.

Figure 8: Pattern of land uses across the area

4.2. Among the area’s population, there is high dependence on benefits, and a high incidence of worklessness, particularly on larger estates. Despite attempts to tackle disadvantage, there has been little change in employment rates.

4.3. More positively, very few of the area’s 16 year olds are not in education, employment or training, and there are a greater-than- average number of people of working age. The potential therefore exists to create an extremely vibrant and creative local economy with opportunities for more local residents to enter work.

4.4. The area has notable clusters of specialist industries, many of which are growing strongly and have a reputation for innovation. Creative industries (e.g. architecture, jewellery, publishing and visual arts) are particularly well represented, but an ICT cluster is emerging near the Old Street roundabout. Specialist and smaller businesses are the cornerstone to building successful economies, however, many may also be threatened by the economic downturn.

16 4.5. There is also a significant voluntary and community sector within the area. Like smaller and specialist industries, this sector requires a ready supply of suitable premises, but rising land values make it increasingly difficult for many to remain in the area. There may be some opportunity to use planning obligations to create floorspace suitable for these sectors within new development. 8

4.6. Given that the City of London lies adjacent to the area, there is also potential for expanding commercial office floorspace. The growth of this sector is uncertain given the recent economic downturn; however, the proximity of the City also makes the area an ideal location for visitor accommodation and conference facilities.

4.7. The closest major shopping areas are at Angel and Moorgate. However, there is potential for Old Street and Farringdon to develop as local shopping destinations. There will also be some expansion in retail at City Road Basin (and potentially at City Forum). This may have implications for the vitality and viability of local shopping centres such as King Square, which fulfil a valuable community role.

4.8. The area has many successful local shopping areas and markets, such as those at Exmouth Market and Whitecross Street (which has improved significantly following recent investment from the public sector). Potential exists for these markets to grow.

4.9. Some parts of the area have a concentration of bars and cafes (see Figure 10), which creates vibrancy during the evenings but sometimes conflicts with the local residential population. Future conflicts between housing and licensed premises need to be avoided wherever possible.

4.10. The area is home to City University, and a number of its students. The university is proposing to redevelop part of its Northampton Square campus, which has potential to deliver benefits to the community and the local economy.

4.11. The area has a number of unique attractions and events, particularly in terms of the performing arts (e.g. St. Luke’s London Symphony Orchestra, Sadler’s Wells) and historic buildings and monuments (e.g. St. John’s Gate, Wesley’s Chapel) (see Figures 9 and 10). Despite its significant potential for tourism, visitor spend in the area is lower than in other parts of central London. However, the development of Crossrail may make the area more accessible to visitors.

8 Islington’s Core Strategy, which is currently being developed, is likely to include a policy on providing affordable workspace. This policy will apply in Bunhill and Clerkenwell.

17

Figure 9: St John's Gate, built in 1504, survives in the rebuilt form of the Priory Gate

Figure 10: Cultural and leisure draws

To respond to these issues and opportunities, the following policies and actions are suggested.

18 POLICY The local economy 1: offices, business tourism and economic diversity

We could strengthen the commercial role of certain locations by identifying places that might benefit from more intensive employment uses (e.g. in the vicinity of tube stations, and along the Goswell, Farringdon and City Road axes).

We could identify preferred locations for developments that support business tourism, including hotels and conference facilities, so long as these do not result in an overall decrease in commercial floorspace.

We could aim to protect premises in certain locations that specifically serve a key sector industry, for example, workshops and studios for light industry and the performing arts.

POLICY The local economy 2: local centres and licensed trade

The area west of the Old Street roundabout, and the Cowcross Street / Farringdon Road area, could be identified as local centres to reinforce their retail role and create a greater and more successful mix of uses. There may also be potential to extend the existing King Square local centre to Central Street, and to identify new centres on City Road opposite the canal basin and at Clerkenwell Green.

We could identify maximum unit sizes, in order to encourage shops that serve the local market.9

We could include a policy to control clustering of licensed activities (including café-bars, pubs and nightclubs) in areas where night-time activities are likely to impact on residents, such as Farringdon and City Road/Old Street. We could also identify areas where night-time uses would be appropriate.

ACTION The local economy 3: promoting and supporting local employment

The council and Housing Associations could develop affordable workspace on estates, for example in redundant garage space, as well as other vacant land or buildings, to support and encourage entrepreneurship. Development of this type of workspace would require market testing to ensure its viability.

9 The approach taken by the Area Action Plan would have to be consistent with Islington’s Core Strategy, which is currently being developed and will identify local centres.

19 We could develop a business support/incubator programme for the creative industries, the voluntary sector and SMEs in the area. For certain industries, there may be potential to run forums and programmes in partnership with major employers and educational establishments, such as City University.

We could develop a programme to provide routes into employment for local residents. Ideally this would be supported by, or be in partnership with, major employers in the area.

We could work with local traders in existing shopping centres, such as King Square, Whitecross Street and Exmouth Market, to support, develop and promote local businesses.

ACTION The local economy 4: promoting tourism

We could develop a strategy that aims to increase tourism in Bunhill and Clerkenwell through marketing and supporting local events.

Question 4. Have all the main issues and opportunities relating to the local economy been identified? Do you agree with the proposed policies and actions set out above?

20 5. COMMUNITY LIFE AND PUBLIC SPACE

5.1. The area has a range of community facilities, although not all of them are well used. Many are isolated from neighbourhood centres, which may be a factor in poor levels of usage, particularly for community (tenant) halls and youth clubs. Understandably, lack of usage can pose a threat to the viability of community facilities. However, there is significant potential for achieving better coordination between community services to increase usage, including by extending the role of local schools, as is already happening at Central Foundation School and Golden Lane Campus.

5.2. A number of changes are planned for local sports, health and education facilities (e.g. Ironmonger Row Baths, Moreland School and local GP services) to address existing imbalances or improve services. These improvements could address some deficiencies that currently exist, but it will be important for public sector partners to work together to ensure that the right facilities are provided in the right places.

5.3. Planned improvements will also need to ensure that other facilities remain in viable use. For example, the area currently has some good outdoor sports facilities, and many play facilities for children and young people, but their use may decline following improved or expanded provision elsewhere.

5.4. Residents in the area currently lack access to large areas of open space. It is not possible to create a large green space in the area, but there may be opportunities to improve existing or create new smaller spaces, and to improve links to neighbouring open spaces such as Shoreditch Park. As the population of the area increases, the amount of open space per head will decrease. Improving the quality of existing open space is therefore important, as is providing outdoor space within new housing development (particularly those with a high residential density).10

Figure 11: the regenerated Spa Fields

10 The Core Strategy and Development Management documents will address the need for new development to provide public, semi-private and private open spaces through comprehensive policies.

21

5.5. A particular feature of the area is the large amount of “amenity space” provided on housing estates. These are often unusable and of poor quality; however, there may be possibilities for some of these areas to be improved and brought into use as either semi-private or public space (as has been achieved in many areas by EC1 New Deal for Communities and Islington Council working in partnership). It may also be possible to convert some of these areas into natural areas or allotments, both of which the area lacks.

UPDATED MAP TO BE PROVIDED

Figure 12: existing open spaces and leisure facilities in the area

5.6. Potential also exists to create a “green chain”: a network of pedestrian- priority streets and pathways which links areas of open space, as identified in the EC1 Public Space Strategy. This would improve access to the area’s existing parks, help to improve the amenity of the area and encourage active recreation. Recent examples of “greening the grey” can be seen at St. John Street and Malta Street, where space given over to vehicles has been reclaimed for public use.

To respond to these issues and opportunities, the following policies and actions are suggested.

POLICY Community life and public space 1: new community facilities

22 Given local opportunities to achieve greater coordination, we could require proposals for any new type of community or leisure facility (including schools) to serve a cross section of the community for a variety of purposes.

We could identify sites within which we would require community facilities (e.g. GP surgeries) within future redevelopment proposals. This could include sites currently used to provide community services but which may become redundant during the life of the Area Action Plan.

POLICY Community life and public space 2: new public space and a green chain

We could identify potential locations for creating small areas of new public open space, including above the rail line north of Farringdon station and at Old Street roundabout. To deliver this, the council would have to commit significant resources, as well as seek financial contributions from new development.

We could identify streets and pathways which make up the “green chain”. Along this, new development would be required to reduce vehicle road space and car parking, and create an excellent quality pedestrian environment and contribute to public realm improvement, potentially including historic interpretive artwork.

ACTION Community life and public space 3: coordinating service delivery

The council could redevelop its assets in the area to create an improved range of facilities for the community (e.g. Ironmonger Row Baths, Moreland School), and coordinate this with the plans of other service providers (e.g. St Luke’s Trust, Islington Primary Care Trust).

ACTION Community life and public space 4: creating, reconfiguring and improving access to open space

Some green spaces on estates could be improved to increase their use and functionality for residents, and opened up for public use at certain times of the day.

We could undertake improvements to the public realm aimed at transferring road space and areas of car parking into public or semi-public open spaces, as has already happened at Agdon Street and Malta Street.

23 Where public realm works are undertaken, we could incorporate space for nature. This could be achieved through quite small interventions, or more ambitious means, such as creating rainwater ponds within amenity spaces.

We could identify open spaces owned by the council that might be suitable for use as community allotments.

There may be opportunities to open up existing private green spaces in the area (e.g. Charterhouse Square) to the public during certain hours of the day or on special occasions.

Question 5. Have all the main issues and opportunities relating to community life and public space been identified? Do you agree with the proposed policies and actions set out above?

24 6. THE ENVIRONMENT AND TRANSPORT

6.1. Future economic and housing growth may have significant environmental impacts on the area, including increased greenhouse gas emissions, increased resource and energy use (including reliance on fossil fuels), increased risks of overflowing sewers following significant rainfall events, and increased noise and air pollution. Increased building densities may also contribute to overheating in the summer months: an issue that particularly affects Bunhill and Clerkenwell, given their already high buildings density and the number of tall residential buildings in the area (which are particularly badly affected during heatwaves) 11 . These impacts will need to be mitigated.

6.2. There is significant potential to develop decentralised and renewable energy capacity in the area, and to ensure that new buildings reduce their energy consumption 12 . Decentralised energy networks supply an efficient source of energy to buildings connected to the network, often through the use of Combined Heat and Power (CHP). Citigen, based on Charterhouse Street, is an existing CHP facility within the area that supplies a number of local buildings with heat and cooling.

Figure 13: Citigen power station on Charterhouse Street

6.3. The south of the borough sits on a confined chalk aquifer, which provides a potential source of groundwater. This water has been used in the past in water intensive industries such as breweries and manufacturing plants. It may be possible to increase abstraction of groundwater for use in the area, for example for non-potable uses (such as flushing toilets) or providing cooling. However, abstraction is closely controlled by the Environment Agency and licenses are granted on a case by case basis.

11 Islington’s Core Strategy (currently being developed) and the forthcoming Development Management document are likely to include policies on minimising the environmental impact of new development, including reducing carbon emissions, rainwater run-off and pollution. This policy will apply in Bunhill and Clerkenwell.

12 Detailed policies on Combined Heat and Power are likely to be included in the Core Strategy.

25 6.4. The area currently has very little biodiversity, and residents have poor access to nature. This makes it particularly important to ensure that existing areas of natural value are retained (e.g. Bunhill Fields cemetery, King Square, St. Luke’s Gardens, Spa Green and Benjamin Street Gardens). Some recent developments have employed “living roofs”, which can also improve local nature habitats (e.g. Ropemaker Place) 13 . Mature trees also promote biodiversity, as well as moderating local summer temperatures. However, many parts of the area have an absence of street trees.

6.5. The area lies within the Central London Congestion Charge Zone, which has moderated traffic flows on local roads (although major roads such as City Road continue to carry a high volume of through-traffic and suffer from congestion at peak times). The congestion charge, coupled with the fact that the area has one of the lowest car ownership rates in the country, has created significant opportunities for transferring road space and car parking for use by pedestrians. There are also opportunities to improve the cycle network in a manner that reduces conflicts and improves the safety of all users. Plans being developed by the Mayor of London to introduce an easy-access cycle hire scheme across Zone 1 in 2010 may lead to an increase in the number of cyclists.

6.6. Despite the relative “walkability” of the area, pedestrian connections in some locations are poor. This is particularly the case around the Angel and Old Street station, as these areas are dominated by busy roads. Some areas are particularly inaccessible to people with mobility issues or other disabilities 14 .

Figure 14: Old Street roundabout provides a confusing environment for pedestrians

13 Islington’s Core Strategy (currently being developed) and the forthcoming Development Management document will include standards to encourage biodiversity within new buildings (e.g. green roofs). 14 The Core Strategy and other borough-wide development plans will contain detailed policies on creating accessible environments.

26 6.7. The area has an extensive public transport network, comprising mainline train and London Underground services from Old Street and Farringdon, as well as an extensive bus network. Completion of the Thameslink and Crossrail schemes will make the Farringdon area one of the most accessible locations in London and the south east, although platform extensions at Farringdon station has resulted in the closure of the Thameslink branch to Moorgate station 15 . Despite the significant investment programmed for the rail network, many stations (e.g. Old Street) may continue to suffer from congestion during peak hours. This is likely to be exacerbated by localised employment and residential growth.

6.8. The local Underground stations lie at the area’s periphery, and as such buses play a particularly important local transport role. Some parts of the area are very well served by the bus network (e.g. Old Street and Angel tube stations); however, other locations have deficiency in provision (see Figure 15). Bus connections to western parts of Islington are notably poor, and journey times are slow when roads are congested (stationary buses may also lead to localised air pollution, particularly around the Old Street roundabout).

6.9. Farringdon station will become an increasingly important transport hub within the area , but at present it has extremely poor bus provision.

Figure 15: local bus network and frequency (March 2009)

15 The forthcoming Development Management document is likely to include policies on safeguarding future or existing railway infrastructure.

27

To respond to these issues and opportunities, the following policies and actions are suggested.

POLICY The environment and transport 1: groundwater

We could encourage new development to use groundwater as a water supply or cooling buildings through preserving and using existing boreholes, or sinking new wells.

POLICY The environment and transport 2: decentralised energy networks

We could identify areas or sites within which new buildings should be connected to an existing decentralised energy network, or if the network is not in place, be future-proofed to enable its future connection. These areas would focus on locations identified as having high heat loads (e.g. at Finsbury Leisure Centre and Old Street).

We could also protect existing and proposed generating “hubs” (for example Citigen at Charterhouse Street) 16 .

POLICY The environment and transport 3: natural areas and trees

We could identify sites of local nature value and afford them protection from new development.

We could identify priority areas and streets for increasing tree cover.

We could also require adequate replacement provision where development proposals involve the removal of trees.

POLICY The environment and transport 4: car-free development

We could require all new development in Bunhill and Clerkenwell to be car- free, with parking only provided for disabled people.

16 The approach taken by the Area Action Plan would have to be consistent with Islington’s Core Strategy, which is currently being developed, and which is likely to contain detailed policies on decentralised energy and CHP.

28

ACTION The environment and transport 5: climate change adaptation

We could implement measures to reduce overheating and surface water flood risk, for example by planting trees and developing local Sustainable Drainage Systems (SUDS), and reducing the amount of impermeable surfacing materials (e.g. tarmac).

ACTION The environment and transport 6: the bus network and gyratories

With Transport for London, we could identify improvements to the bus route network, aimed at improving local provision and reducing journey times. This could include installing bus priority measures in certain locations (e.g. extended bus lanes on City Road).

We could work with Transport for London and the London Borough of Hackney to reduce the impact of traffic around the Old Street and Angel gyratory systems on the local environment, including reconfiguring the road space and improving connections for pedestrians.

ACTION The environment and transport 7: cycle routes and cycle parking

We could install new cycle lanes on certain streets in the area, or undertake other measures to encourage cycling and improve road safety.

We could also increase the amount of secure cycle parking available to residents, particularly on housing estates.

Question 6. Have all the main issues and opportunities relating to the environment and transport been identified? Do you agree with the proposed policies and actions set out above?

29 7. CHARACTER AND HISTORY

7.1. Many parts of the area are rich in heritage values (including buildings, spaces, views and other townscape elements, archaeological remains, land uses and communities). Around 50% of the area falls within a Conservation Area designation. Protecting heritage values now will ensure that the area’s sense of history and community can be enjoyed by future generations.

7.2. Throughout the area, there are views of locally important buildings (e.g. St. Luke’s Church, St. James’s Church, Lowndes House, Triton Court) that add to the character of the area. There are also some significant street-level views of St. Paul’s Cathedral from Clerkenwell that are afforded protection by both Islington Council and the City of London.

Figure 16: Views of St. Paul’s Cathedral have had some form of protection since the 1930s

7.3. The majority of the area is characterised by buildings of less than 12 storeys in height (see Figure 17). The character of many parts of the area is derived in large part by the predominating building height. Some taller buildings exist, though there are few over 18 storeys. Much of the character of Clerkenwell is derived from buildings with irregular, small footprints and narrow plot widths, based on medieval street patterns. The scale of new development is therefore an important part of retaining character values.

30

Figure 17: prevailing height of existing buildings in the area

7.4. Some areas of post-war redevelopment suffer from a poor delineation between private, semi-private and public space, and from poor legibility, caused by an erosion of historic or traditional street patterns. This can lead to poorly maintained areas, detracting from local environmental quality, and can make navigation difficult. It may also exacerbate fear of crime and can lead to areas being perceived as threatening.

7.5. While Conservation Areas (see Figure 18) place constraints on new development, other parts of the area present significant redevelopment opportunities (e.g. Mount Pleasant Sorting Office, City Forum, Old Street, and the Farringdon station area). It is particularly important for large developments to enhance the identity and quality of local areas, for example by creating quality public open space, improving local pedestrian routes and minimising adverse impacts to neighbouring buildings.

7.6. The government defines a “tall building” as being a building that is significantly higher than its immediate context. Some parts of the area have been identified by the London Plan as holding potential for tall buildings (e.g. Old Street roundabout and the City Road Basin area). Tall buildings can provide efficient use of land but are recognised as having social and environmental impacts (generally, the taller the building, the larger the impact). The council’s role is to manage the development of tall buildings in a manner that reduces any adverse impacts.

31

Figure 18: existing and proposed tall buildings, and main policy constraints to developing new tall buildings

7.7. Along borough boundaries, better local connections could be made with neighbouring areas by working in partnership with the City of London, and the London Boroughs of Camden and Hackney, particularly where there are barriers to movement (e.g. between Barbican and Whitecross Street).

To respond to these issues and opportunities, the following policies and actions are suggested.

POLICY Character and history 1: protecting heritage values

We could take a stricter approach to development, changes of use, advertising and public realm improvements in the Clerkenwell/Smithfield area, in order to preserve and enhance its special character. We could also specifically encourage a conservation-led approach to regeneration in the area, beginning by identifying buildings that detract from its special character.

We could continue to identify local views of St. Paul’s Cathedral, within which corridors new buildings would be subject to maximum height restrictions, as well as maintaining a list of landmarks of local significance. Views and aspects of landmarks would have to be retained and respected by new

32 development.

We could also identify new local views to certain landmarks, such as St. Luke’s Church and St. James’s Church.

We could also identify historic monuments or features that require restoration or improvement. This could be funded in part through contributions from new development.

POLICY Character and history 2: design frameworks and masterplans

We could develop local “design frameworks”, particularly for areas suffering from fragmentation, or for major development sites. These frameworks could build on strategies already in place to identify overall massing and building heights, mix of uses, improved or newly created pedestrian routes, and potential new urban block structures.

POLICY Character and history 3: tall buildings

In line with the London Plan, we could identify locations that might be acceptable for buildings over 12 storeys in height, ensuring that such buildings minimise their environmental and social impact on local matters such as public space and transport capacity.

ACTION Character and history 4: improving linkages with neighbouring areas

We could undertake joint work with neighbouring boroughs and the City of London to improve connections across boundaries, for example by adopting a shared approach to way-finding and public realm improvements in certain areas (e.g. Farringdon, Barbican/Whitecross Street, Old Street roundabout).

Question 7. Have all the main issues and opportunities relating to character and history been identified? Do you agree with the proposed policies and actions set out above?

33

8. NEIGHBOURHOOD PRIORITIES

8.1. The south of Islington is very diverse. Commercial areas exist alongside residential areas. Some areas are defined by taller buildings and wide streets, while other parts have a medieval street pattern.

8.2. In Chapter 2 we set out a proposed vision for the area, which aimed to protect and promote local character rather than force a generic identity upon the area. To do this, the Area Action Plan will need to explain what is good about each part of the area, and what might need to be changed. It will also need to identify the amount of new development that can be accommodated in certain places.

8.3. We have loosely identified eleven “neighbourhoods” within the area based on their existing qualities and their potential for change (see map below). This section sets out how the policies and actions listed in Chapters 3 to 7 could apply to each neighbourhood.

Figure 19: “neighbourhoods” within the area

Bunhill Fields and Finsbury Square is a mainly (but not entirely) commercial area with significant ties to the City of London and some notable “city scale” buildings.

34 Old Street is a transportation hub, providing shopping and leisure facilities, transport interchange and housing. The environment is significantly traffic-dominated. The area has a large night-time economy.

St. Luke’s is a predominantly residential area, with a large number of estates, community facilities at its heart and some commercial uses around its fringes. There is potential for extensive redevelopment along parts of City Road, including the “City Forum” business park, opposite the canal basin.

City Road Basin is previously industrial canalside area, undergoing extensive redevelopment to become a residential neighbourhood. The basin is likely to become a major public focus that will stimulate regeneration in the wider area.

Whitecross Street is a mainly residential area, with local trading on Whitecross Street, and containing some ex-industrial buildings converted into other uses.

Goswell Road South is an old industrial neighbourhood characterised by east-west laneways and a strong mix of small businesses and housing. It has significant heritage value, particularly around the junction of Goswell Road and Old Street, and at Great Sutton Street.

Goswell Road Central is an area comprising large land parcels of 1960s and 1970s redevelopment, dominated by estates but also accommodating City University and with some Georgian elements remaining around Northampton Square.

Goswell Road North is a transitional area between central London proper and Angel town centre, with a traffic-dominated environment that creates legibility problems, a notable student presence around City and Islington College and some quiet backstreets containing Georgian townhouses.

Rosebery Avenue and Mount Pleasant is an area of very mixed character, including a typical “central London” confluence of streets at Rosebery Avenue and Farringdon Road, a shopping/restaurant area at Exmouth Market, and a large area of post-war residential development at Spa Fields and Finsbury Estate. The Royal Mail sorting office has a significant influence on the character of the area.

Clerkenwell is an area of significant historic value surrounding Clerkenwell Green, with a surviving medieval street pattern, a number of pedestrian alleys and a homogenous built form.

Farringdon and Charterhouse is an area similar in character and heritage value to Clerkenwell, but with a greater mix of uses, a stronger

35 people presence around Farringdon station, and a currently little-trafficked area around the Charterhouse. The area has a significant night-time economy.

Question 8. Thinking about one or more of these neighbourhoods, please tell us…

• what you like (i.e. what should be protected)

• what don’t you like (i.e. what should be changed)

• what you think could be improved

Please also tell us if you think the neighbourhood boundaries could be improved.

36 Bunhill Fields & Finsbury Square

8.4. Listed below are some suggested priorities for the Bunhill Fields and Finsbury Square neighbourhood up to 2025:

a) Encourage new commercial development (e.g. offices, hotels) throughout the area

b) Encourage underused land and buildings to be redeveloped for housing, alongside community facilities

c) Support new well-designed tall buildings on appropriate sites around Chiswell Street

d) Encourage new development around Finsbury Square to create a more lively street environment by including small-scale shops, cafes or bars at ground level

e) Improve walking routes to Bunhill Fields Cemetery and Finsbury Square by making backstreets “pedestrian priority” along signed walking routes

f) Promote nature conservation in Bunhill Fields Cemetery

g) Protect views to two local landmarks: Lowndes House and Triton Court

h) Strictly control the licensed trade (e.g. pubs, nightclubs) in residential areas around City Road

Question 9: Bunhill Fields & Finsbury Square

These priorities are suggestions for discussion. If you disagree with any of the priorities listed above, or if you like to suggest others, please tell us.

37

38 Old Street

8.5. Listed below are some suggested priorities for the Old Street neighbourhood up to 2025:

a) Encourage underused land and buildings to be redeveloped for housing, as well as community facilities, including sites owned by the council

b) Focus new commercial development (e.g. offices, hotels) along the Old Street and City Road corridors

c) Encourage shops, bars, cafes and community facilities to locate on Old Street, west of the roundabout

d) Support new well-designed tall buildings on appropriate sites around Old Street roundabout

e) Reconfigure the roundabout to provide public open space, reduce the impact of traffic and improve the pedestrian environment

f) Develop a decentralised energy hub/network on St. Luke's (high rise) Estate

g) Improve pedestrian and cycle connections across City Road to Shoreditch Park and other parts of Hackney

h) Strictly control the licensed trade (e.g. pubs, nightclubs) in residential areas around the Old Street roundabout

i) Give greater priority to buses at the Old Street roundabout and on City Road, and undertake improvements to Old Street station

Question 10: Old Street

These priorities are suggestions for discussion. If you disagree with any of the priorities listed above, or if you like to suggest others, please tell us.

39 40 St. Luke’s

8.6. Listed below are some suggested priorities for the St. Luke’s neighbourhood up to 2025:

a) Encourage underused land and buildings to be redeveloped for housing, as well as for community facilities, including sites owned by the council

b) Focus new commercial development (e.g. offices, hotels) along the Old Street and City Road corridors

c) Develop workshops and affordable offices on estates where there are opportunities to do so

d) Encourage small-scale shops and cafes around the redeveloped Finsbury Leisure Centre, on Central Street and opposite the canal basin on City Road

e) Support new well-designed tall buildings on appropriate sites along the City Road corridor

f) Improve walking routes to St. Luke’s Gardens and Radnor Street Gardens by making backstreets “pedestrian priority” along signed walking routes

g) Provide new and improved pedestrian routes through City Forum and Finsbury Leisure Centre as part of future redevelopment

h) Improve pedestrian and cycle connections across City Road into Hackney

i) Develop a decentralised energy network / hub at Finsbury Leisure Centre and Wenlake and Redbrick Estates

j) Promote nature conservation in St. Luke’s Gardens

k) Protect views to St. Luke's Church

Question 11: St. Luke’s

These priorities are suggestions for discussion. If you disagree with any of the priorities listed above, or if you like to suggest others, please tell us.

41

42 City Road Basin

8.7. Listed below are some suggested priorities for the City Road Basin neighbourhood up to 2025:

a) Encourage underused land and buildings to be redeveloped for housing, as well as for community facilities

b) Focus new commercial development (e.g. offices) along City Road and residential / leisure development around the basin

c) Improve walking routes to City Road Basin by making backstreets “pedestrian priority” along signed walking routes

d) Support new well-designed tall buildings on appropriate sites on City Road

e) Encourage any new development around public spaces such as the canal basin to create a more lively street environment by including small-scale shops, cafes or bars

f) Improve pedestrian and cycle links across City Road and into Hackney

g) Give greater priority to buses on City Road

Question 12. City Road Basin

These priorities are suggestions for discussion. If you disagree with any of the priorities listed above, or if you like to suggest others, please tell us.

43

44 Whitecross Street

8.8. Listed below are some suggested priorities for the Whitecross Street neighbourhood up to 2025:

a) Encourage underused land and buildings to be redeveloped for housing, including sites owned by the council

b) Focus new commercial development (e.g. offices, hotels) along Old Street and around Chiswell Street

c) Encourage shops, leisure facilities (e.g. bars and cafes) and community facilities to locate on and around Whitecross Street

d) Encourage development of a similar height and scale to existing buildings

e) Improve walking routes to Fortune Street Park and neighbouring parks by making backstreets “pedestrian priority” along signed walking routes

f) Extend the Citigen CHP network (which powers the Peabody Estate) to other parts of the neighbourhood

g) Improve pedestrian connections to the Barbican (particularly the Arts Centre) through public realm improvements and better lighting / signage

Question 13: Whitecross Street

These priorities are suggestions for discussion. If you disagree with any of the priorities listed above, or if you like to suggest others, please tell us.

45

46 Goswell Road South

8.9. Listed below are some suggested priorities for the Goswell Road South neighbourhood up to 2025:

a) Focus predominantly commercial development along Goswell Road, Old Street, Clerkenwell Road, St. John Street and Great Sutton Street

b) Encourage underused land and buildings to be redeveloped for a genuine mix of uses including housing, including on sites owned by the council

c) Improve walking routes to neighbouring parks by making backstreets such as Seward Street and Bastwick Street “pedestrian priority” along signed walking routes

d) Encourage development of a similar height and scale to existing buildings

e) There is potential to provide public open space at Seward Street, at the end of the current lease period

f) Give greater priority to buses and increase their frequency on Goswell Road

Question 14: Goswell Road South

These priorities are suggestions for discussion. If you disagree with any of the priorities listed above, or if you like to suggest others, please tell us.

47

48 Goswell Road Central

8.10. Listed below are some suggested priorities for the Goswell Road Central neighbourhood up to 2025:

a) Encourage underused land and buildings to be redeveloped for housing, as well as for community facilities, including sites owned by the council

b) Focus new commercial development (e.g. offices, hotels) along Goswell Road

c) Encourage shops, cafes and community facilities to locate in King Square

d) Improve walking routes to Northampton Square and King Square by making improvements to pedestrian routes

e) Encourage any new development around St. John Street / Agdon Street to create a more lively street environment by including small- scale shops and cafes

f) Provide new and improved pedestrian routes through City University as part of future redevelopment proposals

g) Promote nature conservation in King Square Gardens and at Moreland School

h) Develop workshops and affordable offices on housing estates where there are opportunities to do so

i) Give greater priority to buses and increase their frequency on Goswell Road

Question 15: Goswell Road Central

These priorities are suggestions for discussion. If you disagree with any of the priorities listed above, or if you like to suggest others, please tell us.

49

50 Goswell Road North

8.11. Listed below are some suggested priorities for the Goswell Road North neighbourhood up to 2025:

a) Encourage underused land and buildings to be redeveloped for housing, as well as for community facilities, including sites owned by the council

b) Focus new commercial development (e.g. offices, hotels) along Goswell Road and City Road

c) Develop workshops and affordable offices on housing estates where there are opportunities to do so

d) Improve pedestrian and cyclist connections to the Angel, including by reducing traffic impact by reconfiguring the gyratory system

e) Improve connections to the New River walk by making Lloyd’s Row pedestrian priority

f) Promote nature conservation in Spa Green Gardens

g) Encourage development of a similar height and scale to existing buildings

h) Give greater priority to buses on City Road and increase their frequency on Goswell Road

Question 16: Goswell Road North

These priorities are suggestions for discussion. If you disagree with any of the priorities listed above, or if you like to suggest others, please tell us.

51 52 Rosebery Avenue & Mount Pleasant

8.12. Listed below are some suggested priorities for the Rosebery Avenue and Mount Pleasant neighbourhood up to 2025:

a) Encourage underused land and buildings to be redeveloped for housing, as well as for community facilities, including sites owned by the council

b) Focus new commercial development (e.g. offices, hotels) along Farringdon Road and Rosebery Avenue

c) Develop workshops and affordable offices on housing estates where there are opportunities to do so

d) Encourage shops, bars, cafes and community facilities to locate on and around Exmouth Market

e) Encourage development of a similar height and scale to existing buildings

f) Improve walking routes to Spa Fields by making backstreets “pedestrian priority” along signed walking routes, including potential pedestrian improvements at the Exmouth Market/Skinner Street junction

g) Provide new and improved pedestrian routes through the Mount Pleasant Sorting Office site and a new area of public open space as part of future redevelopment proposals where the use of the site is intensified

h) Improve pedestrian and cyclist connections to Hatton Garden

Question 17: Rosebery Avenue & Mount Pleasant

These priorities are suggestions for discussion. If you disagree with any of the priorities listed above, or if you like to suggest others, please tell us.

53

54 Clerkenwell

8.13. Listed below are some suggested priorities for the Clerkenwell neighbourhood up to 2025:

a) Focus new commercial development along Farringdon Road, Clerkenwell Road, Farringdon Lane and St. John Street

b) Encourage a genuine mix of uses throughout the area, including light industry and residential uses

c) Encourage development of a similar height and scale to existing buildings

d) Protect local views to St. James’ Church, and to St. Paul’s cathedral from Ray Street bridge and St. John Street

e) Encourage shops, cafes and community facilities to locate on and around Clerkenwell Green

f) Improve walking routes to Clerkenwell Green by making backstreets “pedestrian priority” along signed walking routes

g) Reconfigure bridge environment over the railway cutting north of Farringdon to provide improved public open space, linked to improvements to pedestrian priority routes

Question 18: Clerkenwell

These priorities are suggestions for discussion. If you disagree with any of the priorities listed above, or if you like to suggest others, please tell us.

55

56 Farringdon & Charterhouse

8.14. Listed below are some suggested priorities for the Farringdon and Charterhouse neighbourhood up to 2025:

a) Focus new commercial development along Farringdon Road, Clerkenwell Road, Turnmill Street, Cowcross Street, St. John Street, Charterhouse Street and Aldersgate Street

b) Encourage a genuine mix of uses throughout the area, including light industry and residential uses

c) Encourage shops, bars, cafes and community facilities to locate on and around Cowcross Street, St. John Street, Turnmill Street and Farringdon Road

d) Encourage development of a similar height and scale to existing buildings

e) Provide new and improved pedestrian routes through the Farringdon station area as part of future redevelopment proposals, and improve connections to Hatton Garden and Smithfield

f) Protect the operation of Citigen’s decentralised energy hub and identify locations for extending the network

g) Investigate if public access could be gained to Charterhouse Square during certain hours

h) Protect local views to St. Paul’s cathedral

i) Promote nature conservation in Benjamin Street Gardens

j) Strictly control the licensed trade (e.g. pubs, nightclubs) in residential areas around Charterhouse, Turnmill and Cowcross Streets

k) Give greater priority to buses and increase their frequency on Farringdon Road

Question 19: Farringdon & Charterhouse

These priorities are suggestions for discussion. If you disagree with any of the priorities listed above, or if you like to suggest others, please tell us.

57

58

9. IMPLEMENTING THE PLAN

9.1. This section adds further detail to the potential “actions” identified in Chapters 3 to 7, including the plans and programmes that are in place or will be required to deliver proposed changes. Where possible actual costs for works have been included to give a broad indication of the scale of funding, but both the plans and the funding estimates will be refined prior to finalising the Area Action Plan.

Establishing future infrastructure needs

9.2. Islington’s primary planning document, the Core Strategy, is currently under development. When complete, it will include a delivery plan providing details of costs, timescales and key partners for infrastructure projects. Research currently being carried out by the Central London Forward grouping of boroughs (which includes Islington) will be particularly important in establishing capacity requirements for large-scale infrastructure, such as transport and utilities.

9.3. The council currently negotiates with developers to recover costs associated with new development (called planning obligations). A (draft) Supplementary Planning Document sets out what obligations are typically sought and how they will be applied as part of the planning process. In addition, the government is proposing to introduce a Community Infrastructure Levy, which would replace aspects of the current system. This levy would fund infrastructure to support the development of an area. To apply the levy, the council must set out anticipated infrastructure needs and their likely cost.

9.4. The Core Strategy will identify these needs in more detail, but the following requirements relate specifically to the south of Islington.

Strategic infrastructure

• The Thameslink rail project, which will increase the capacity of the route by 90% with expected completion by 2015 • Crossrail 1, a heavy rail line running east/west across central London connecting Heathrow with Canary Wharf via Farringdon, scheduled to be operational by 2017 • Signalling improvements on the Northern London Underground Line in 2012, as part of the Public Private Partnership improvement scheme for the network. • Various transport projects under the council’s Sustainable Transport Strategy totalling £206 million. These include improvements to rail and Underground stations, bus interchange upgrades, improvements to road crossings and junctions, cycle network

59 development, environmental improvements in regeneration areas, bus priority measures and promotion of walking and cycling. • Transco’s £15 billion programme to replace ‘at risk’ gas pipelines over the next 25 to 35 years. • National Grid’s plans to improve the transmission network by constructing a new deep tunnel between St John’s Wood substation and City Road substation. • Thames Water’s 20-year mains replacement programme, which seeks to reduce leakage and improve capacity. Thames Water also plans to open a desalination plant in Beckton and construct a new reservoir in Oxfordshire to improve supply. • Thames Water is also proposing to extend the London Ring Main (a major water supply constructed in the 1980s and 90s). The extension will enable water to be transferred between major water treatment works, and will involve a new tunnel being created between Stoke Newington and New River Head in Islington. • The ‘Thames Tideway’ is a proposed long term solution for London’s sewage network. This is a 32km long storage-and-transfer tunnel, providing approximately 1.5 million cubic metres of storage capacity 80 metres below the Thames, between Hammersmith and Beckton.

Social Infrastructure

• The council is planning to refurbish the Ironmonger Row Baths and rebuild the Finsbury Leisure Centre. Together with other leisure centre improvements, the estimated cost of this is £72 million. • Islington Primary Care Trust is planning to restructure GP, dentistry, podiatry and other health services in the area, which may involve the closure of the Finsbury Health Centre. • The council has acquired over £100 million from the government’s Building Schools for the Future fund to refurbish and rebuild secondary schools. Construction on the Central Foundation Boys School has recently commenced. • The council has successfully bid for funds from the government’s 14-year Primary Capital Programme. Moreland School is a priority project for redevelopment as part of this programme.

Other projects and programmes

9.5. As suggested in Chapters 3 to 7, the council could take action to address some of the challenges facing the area. These are summarised below.

• Working with neighbouring boroughs and the City of London to improve pedestrian connections and legibility across boundaries • Public (and semi-public) space strategy: aimed at creating space for nature, creating usable public space, reducing vehicle dominance, creating pedestrian routes, and reducing impermeable surfaces

60 • Council asset redevelopment coordinated with the plans of other service providers (e.g. St Luke’s Trust, Islington Primary Care Trust) • CHP network development / expansion of Citigen network • Develop affordable workspace on estates • Tourism strategy • Biodiversity enhancement strategy (existing sites for nature conservation and other locations) • Development of community allotments • Business support/incubator programmes and forums; routes into employment programme; local trading support/strategies • Housing renewal, management strategies and redevelopment of selected housing estates • Improve public access to existing private and semi-private green space • Improve safe cycle routes and access to secure cycle parking for residents • Bus network improvements; remodelling of Old Street and Angel gyratories

Phasing

9.6. The table overleaf sets out how these projects could be phased during the plan period, which runs to 2025.

Question 20: Implementation

Do you agree with the proposed list of projects and phasing? Do you have any other comments on the how Area Action Plan should be implemented?

61 Project or action Lead Start Complete AAP PHASE I AAP PHASE II 2025- Strategic infrastructure Northern Line signalling improvements LUL 2012 2012 Thameslink rail project Network Rail 2012 2015 Islington Sustainable Transport Strategy (various Islington Council 2012 2016 projects) Crossrail 1 Crossrail 2012 2017 Mains water replacement programme; supply Thames Water 2012 2028 improvements ‘At risk’ gas pipeline replacement Transco 2012 2040 ‘Thames Tideway’ storage-and-transfer sewer Thames Water Unknown Unknown Construction of underground transmission line National Grid Unknown Unknown between St John’s Wood and City Road substations. Social infrastructure Central Foundation Boys School redevelopment Islington Council 2012 2012 Rebuild/refurbishment of Ironmonger Row Baths and Islington Council 2012 2014 Finsbury Leisure Centre Moreland Primary School redevelopment Islington Council Unknown Unknown Healthcare service relocation/restructuring Islington Primary Unknown Unknown Care Trust Potential local initiatives Working with neighbouring boroughs and the City of Islington Council 2012 2017 London to improve pedestrian connections and legibility across boundaries Public (and semi-public) space strategy: aimed at Islington Council 2012 2017 creating space for nature, creating usable public space, reducing vehicle dominance, creating pedestrian routes, and reducing impermeable surfaces Council asset redevelopment coordinated with the Islington Council 2012 2017 plans of other service providers (e.g. St Luke’s Trust, Islington Primary Care Trust) CHP network development / expansion of Citigen Islington Council 2012 2025 network / Citigen Ltd Develop affordable workspace on estates Islington Council 2012 2025 Tourism strategy Islington Council 2014 2018 Biodiversity enhancement strategy (existing sites for Islington Council 2014 2021 nature conservation and other locations) Development of community allotments Islington Council 2014 2025 Business support/incubator programmes and Islington Council 2014 2025 forums; routes into employment programme; local trading support/strategies Housing renewal, management strategies and Islington Council 2014 2025 redevelopment of selected housing estates Improve public access to existing private and semi- Islington Council 2014 2025 private green space Improve safe cycle routes and access to secure Islington Council 2014 2025 cycle parking for residents Bus network improvements; remodelling of Old Islington Council 2014 2025 Street and Angel gyratories / Transport for London

62 10. NEXT STEPS

10.1. We may not end up with a document that you agree with in every detail. But we will do our best to take your views on board, and set out in an open way how and why decisions were taken. As we develop the Area Action Plan (AAP) we will continue to seek your views through consultation (see table below). More detail about how we intend to consult is set out in our Statement of Community Involvement.

10.2. The AAP will also set out how the final policies and actions will be delivered. It will do this by being clear about who will deliver policies or actions.

10.3. The AAP will:

• clearly identify other partners and their strategies • where possible, indicate where budgets are, or are likely to be, available • indicate arrangements for ongoing partnership working

10.4. The AAP will set out clear targets against each policy that will allow the council to judge how it successfully it is operating. This data will be collected each financial year and published in Islington’s Annual Monitoring Report.

10.5. Finally, the AAP will include a spatial vision for Bunhill and Clerkenwell, including a description of how each of its neighbourhoods will change until 2025. As far as possible, the aim is for this to represent a shared view.

Consultation on Refining options Consultation on draft Examination Adoption issues & options Up to August Area Action Plan in Public December June/July 2009 2010 September 2010 May 2011 2011

10.6. The aim will be to resolve or minimise all disagreement before Examination in Public. At that stage the planning inspector will be concerned with the soundness of the plan – that the plan has been prepared correctly. This is not a good time to challenge the policies for the first time. In general, the inspector will expect that challenges to policies will have been made earlier in the process.

10.7. These dates and stages could change with circumstances, for example if there are changes to planning legislation or policies. The council produces a Local Development Scheme that sets out the timetable for producing the AAP along with all of the other documents that together make up the Local Development Framework. Our website is the best source of up-to-date information (http://www.islington.gov.uk/Environment/Planning).

63 APPENDIX: BIBLIOGRAPHY

Listed below are some of the documents and references that have been used to put together this issues and options paper. These have been used as part of the evidence base but have not been endorsed by the council.

Document Author Date 2001 Census data UK Statistics Authority 2001 A1 Borough London Borough of Islington 2006 By Design: Urban Design in the Planning Department for Communities System: Towards Better Practice and Local Government 05/2000 Car parking – operational statistics LB Islington 08/2008 Car parking information Homes for Islington 10/2008 Central London Partnership website Central London Partnership 10/2008 Central London Tourism Development Framework 2006-09 London Development Agency 2006 City Fringe Development Framework (draft) Greater London Authority 02/2008 City Growth Strategy: London City Fringe – Main Strategy City Fringe Partnership 10/2004 City of London website City of London 10/2008 City University website and prospectus City University 10/2008 Atkins FOR London Borough Clerkenwell Village Renaissance of Islington 2007 Crossrail website Cross London Rail Links Ltd 10/2008 DEFRA Local government performance Department for the framework NI 186 Environment & Rural Affairs 2006 E.ON UK website E.ON UK 10/2008 EC1 Capital Programme 2008/9 (Annex B) EC1 NDC 2008 EC1 Committee Reports EC1 NDC 09/2007 EC1 Estates, Schools, Play Areas and Open Spaces Physical Audit Groundwork / EC1 NDC 04/2003 EC1 New Deal for Communities: Local Fordham Research FOR EC1 Housing Needs Assessment, Final Report New Deal for Communities 05/2008 EC1 New Deal for Communities / Islington EC1 Public Space Strategy Council 07/2004 Emporis.com website Emporis 10/2008 Estate Security Building Solutions for Islington 2003 Farringdon Urban Design Study (baseline East FOR Design for London report, draft) (and partners) 03/2009 General data from CEA@Islington CEA@Islington 2007 May Department of Work and 2006; General data sets; National Evaluation Data Pensions 2005 Good Practice Guide on Planning for Department of Communities Tourism and Local Government 05/2006 Greater London Authority website Greater London Authority 10/2008 Housing benefit claimants at working age by residence Homes for Islington 08/2007 Department for Communities Index of Multiple Deprivation and Local Government 03/2008 Infrastructure Development Strategy Islington Voluntary Action 2008

64 Council Islington Boat Club website islingtonboatclub.org.uk 10/2008 Islington Council (various data and information) London Borough of Islington 03/2009 Islington Employment Study update Atkins FOR Islington Council 06/2008 Islington Greenspace Strategy London Borough of Islington 2006 Land Use Consultants / PMP Islington Open Space, Sport and FOR London Borough of Recreation Study Islington 09/2008 Islington Police statistics Metropolitan Police 2008 Islington Sustainability Action Plan (2006- 2010) London Borough of Islington 2006 Islington Sustainable Transport Strategy London Borough of Islington 12/2006 Islington Unitary Development Plan 2002 London Borough of Islington 06/2002 Islington’s Conservation Area Design Guidelines London Borough of Islington 11/1996 Fluid FOR EC1 NDC and LB King Square Framework and Action Plan Islington 05/2008 Local Area Tourism Impact Model London Development Agency 2006 London Air Quality Network website King’s College London 10/2008 London Borough of Islington: Local Housing Fordham Research FOR LB Needs Assessment, Final Report Islington 05/2008 London Catchment Abstraction Management Strategy Environment Agency 04/2006 London Housing Capacity Study Greater London Authority 07/2005 London Safety Plan 2008-2011 London Fire Brigade 2008 London’s Central Business District – its global importance GLA Economics 01/2008 LSO St Luke’s website London Symphony Orchestra 10/2008 Metropolitan Police and City of London met.police.uk; Police websites cityoflondon.police.uk 10/2008 Mid year population estimates UK Statistics Authority 2005 MORI Quality of Life survey MORI FOR EC1 NDC 2006 Mount Pleasant Development Framework John McAslan and Partners (draft) FOR Royal Mail 05/2006 NCP website National Car Parks Ltd 10/2008 Network Rail website Network Rail 10/2008 NHS Healthcare for London Plan Sir Ara Darzi FOR the NHS 07/2007 Alan Baxter and Associates / Northampton Square and Brunswick Estate East FOR EC1 NDC and LB Environmental Improvement Framework Islington 2008 Old Street Roundabout - Public Relam JMP/Tonkin Liu et al FOR TfL Improvements - Stage C Report and partners 11/2008 East FOR EC1 NDC and LB Percival-Triangle Area Framework Islington 05/2008 Planning Policy Guidance Note 13: Department of Communities Transport and Local Government 04/2001 Planning Policy Guidance Note 15: Department for Communities Planning and the Historic Environment and Local Government 09/1994 Planning Policy Guidance Note 16: Department for Communities Archaeology and Planning and Local Government 11/1990 Planning Policy Guidance Note 17: Department of Communities Planning for Open Space, Sport and and Local Government 07/2002

65 Recreation Planning Policy Guidance Note 19: Outdoor Department for Communities Advertisement Control and Local Government 03/1992 Planning Policy Statement 1: Delivering Department of Communities Sustainable Development and Local Government 01/2005 Planning Policy Statement 10: Planning for Department of Communities Sustainable Waste Management and Local Government 07/2005 Planning Policy Statement 22: Renewable Department of Communities energy and Local Government 08/2004 Planning Policy Statement 23: Planning and Department of Communities Pollution Control and Local Government 11/2004 Planning Policy Statement 25: Department of Communities Development and Flood Risk and Local Government 12/2006 Department for Communities Planning Policy Statement 3: Housing and Local Government 11/2006 Planning Policy Statement 4 (consultation Department of Communities draft) and Local Government 2008 Planning Policy Statement 6: Planning for Department of Communities Town Centres and Local Government 03/2005 Planning Policy Statement 9: Biodiversity Department of Communities and Geological Conservation and Local Government 08/2005 Planning Policy Statement: Planning and Climate Change (Supplement to Planning Department of Communities Policy Statement 1) and Local Government 12/2007 Ropemaker brochure British Land 2007 Transport for London and Route 38 website partners 10/2008 Rowers Against Thames Rowers Against Thames Sewage Sewage 10/2008 Sadler’s Wells website Sadler’s Wells Theatre 10/2008 School Organisation Plan 2003 CEA @ Islington 12/2003 Department for Children, Schools Achieving Success White Paper Schools and Families 2001 Smithfield Farringdon: Reinforcing Urban Identity and Character Farrells FOR English Heritage 09/2006 Parklife FOR EC1 NDC and Spa Fields Framework Plan LB Islington 2005 Atkins FOR EC1 NDC and LB St Lukes Area Improvement (streets) Islington 04/2007 EC1 New Deal for Survey of EC1 Community Facilities Communities 2008 Survey of London Volumes 46 and 47 English Heritage 2008 Sustainability Appraisal London Borough of Islington 09/2008 Teachernet Schools Places Planning Information teachernet.gov.uk 2007 Thames Water website Thames Water 10/2008 The London Biodiversity Action Plan Greater London Authority 2002 The London Plan Greater London Authority 02/2008 The Mayor’s Biodiversity Strategy Greater London Authority 07/2002 July 2008; May Transforming the Tube; Transport 2025 Transport for London 2006

66 Transport for London website Transport for London 10/2008 London Metropolitan 2005- VivaCity project University and others 2006 Wild Islington: Islington’s Biodiversity Action Plan London Borough of Islington 2005 Yell.com and Post Office website yell.com; postoffice.co.uk 10/2008 Your Neighbourhood, Your Islington London Borough of Islington 09/2008

67