DOCSLIB.ORG

Committee: Date: Planning and Transportation 2 April 2019 Subject

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Committee: Date: Planning and Transportation 2 April 2019 Subject Committee: Date: Planning and Transportation 2 April 2019 Subject: Public Land Adjacent To 20 Bury Street London EC3A 5AX Demolition of existing building and structures and construction of a building to a height of 305.3m AOD for a mixed-use visitor attraction, including viewing areas [2,597sq.m GEA], an education/community facility [567sq.m GEA] (Sui Generis) and restaurant/bar use (Class A3/A4) [1,535sq.m GEA]; together with a retail unit at ground floor (Class A1); a new two-storey pavilion building [1,093sq.m GEA] (Sui Generis) comprising the principal visitor attraction entrance with retail at ground floor level (Class A1/A3) [11sq.m GEA] and a public roof garden; provision of ancillary cycle parking, servicing and plant and alterations to the public realm. [Total Scheme Area: 17,441sq.m GEA]. Ward: Aldgate For Decision Registered No: 18/01213/FULEIA Registered on: 19 November 2018 Conservation Area: Listed Building: No Summary The proposed development includes the demolition of the existing building at 20 Bury Street and the construction of a building 305.3m high (AoD) (with an area of 470 sqm) comprising a mixed use visitor attraction including viewing areas at levels 4-7 (2,597 sqm GEA) and an education/community facility at level 3 (567 sqm GEA) (Sui Generis), restaurant/bar at levels 8-12 (Class A3/A4) together with a retail unit at ground and basement level (Class A1). The stem of the structure would house lifts and stairs to access the upper floors. A new two storey pavilion building would be erected at the north west corner of St Mary Axe Plaza and would comprise the principal entrance to the visitor attraction (1,093 sqm GEA) (Sui Generis) where visitors' tickets would be checked with a retail unit 11sqm (GEA) (Class A1) at ground floor level and a publicly accessible roof garden on the roof of the Pavilion building. The Pavilion building would also house some of the cycle parking spaces (long stay and short stay) for the Gherkin and the Tulip at level 1. The existing servicing ramp leading to the basement of the Gherkin would be removed and would be replaced by two lorry lifts. The two x 2m high walls on either side of the existing vehicle ramp would be removed. The resulting space would be occupied by the new Pavilion building and Plaza and a new pocket park (137sqm). The basement of the Gherkin would be re-arranged and would provide 4 new loading bays, waste compactor and waste storage facilities, cycle parking and lockers and shower facilities in association with the cycle parking for the Gherkin and the Tulip. A new basement mezzanine floor would provide the area for airport style security checking for visitors to the viewing gallery and access to the lifts which would take visitors to the upper floors. The development requires an EIA assessment. The application has attracted a number of objections including from Historic Royal Palaces (HRP) and Historic England (HE) and advice from Greater London Authority (GLA) and a number of representations in support of the scheme. These are set out in the report and are attached in a separate bundle of papers. The characteristics of the proposal and those visiting it and the impact on the servicing arrangements for the Gherkin would mean that it would have some impact on local vehicular and pedestrian movement in the most densely developed part of the City as set out in the report. However, it would not be at a level where it would prejudice the operation of the business City or would limit the development of the City cluster. Impacts would require to be managed by conditions and S106 obligations as set out in the report in order to ensure that the Tulip is operated such that unacceptable impacts would not arise. It is a shared view with HE, HRP and the Mayor of London along with other objectors that the proposal results in harm to the setting (and to the significance) of the World Heritage Site of the Tower of London. The world heritage site status and the Grade I listing places the Tower of London at the very highest heritage level and as a result greater weight should be given to the asset's conservation. The assessment of the degree of that harm is what is at variance. It is considered that the Tulip due to its height and form results in less than substantial harm to the significance of the Tower of London World Heritage Site and would be contrary to Local Plan Policy CS12 and London Plan Policies 7.7, 7.8, 7.10, 7.11 The proposal is contrary to Local Plan Policy CS13 and London Plan Policy 7.12 due to non-compliance with the LVMF visual management guidance for view 10A1 from the north bastion of Tower Bridge. In relation to other designated and non-designated heritage assets, it is considered that the proposed development would not harm their significance or setting. In considering the proposal, considerable importance and weight must be given to preserving the settings of listed buildings. As set out in paragraph 193 of the NPPF, great weight should be given to the designated heritage asset's conservation, and at paragraph 194, any harm should require clear and convincing justification. Paragraph 196 of the NPPF sets out that where development proposals will lead to less than substantial harm to the significance of a heritage asset, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal. Virtually no major development proposal is in complete compliance with all policies and in arriving at a decision it is necessary to assess all the policies and proposals in the plan and to come to a view as to whether in the light of the whole plan the proposal does or does not accord with it. In this case, while the proposals are in compliance with a number of policies, they are not considered to be in compliance with the development plan as a whole due to non-compliance with heritage policies identified above. The Local Planning Authority must determine the application in accordance with the development plan unless other material considerations indicate otherwise. Additional material considerations are as follows: - The proposed development provides the City and London with a new iconic building. - It provides a new and significant visitor attraction in London, and would help to boost London's tourist offer and economy and would draw people into the City who would not otherwise be drawn to it and thereby benefits the wider UK economy. - It adds to and diversifies the City's visitor offer and both directly and indirectly supports the City's aspirations to be a 24/7 City. It is anticipated that it would be particularly busy at weekends which is of particular benefit in this regard. It provides a restaurant and bar and facilities that may support local businesses enabling longer opening hours such as in Leadenhall Market. The new facilities it provides may be attractive to local workers and residents. - The provision of an educational facility for 40,000 of London's state school children free of charge each year is a significant benefit of the proposal enabling each London school child to visit once in their school life time. It is welcomed as a significant resource for key subjects in the school curriculum and has the potential to introduce the City to many children who may not otherwise visit the City or consider it as a place that they may one day wish to work. These benefits would be secured by S106 agreement. - The educational space would also be available for community and educational use between 1500-1900 hours, the arrangements and details of this benefit would be secured by S106 obligation. - Consolidated delivery arrangements would be secured for the Gherkin as well as the Tulip, including the prohibition of peak time servicing. The scheme would provide benefits through CIL for improvements to the public realm, housing and other local facilities and measures. That payment of CIL is a local finance consideration which weighs in favour of the scheme. In addition to the general there would be site specific measures sought in the S106 Agreement. Together these would go some way to mitigate the impact of the proposal. This case is very finely balanced. The development is significant in terms of its local and wider impacts and in particular its less than substantial harm to the World Heritage Site. Taking all material matters into consideration, I am of the view that, giving very considerable importance and weight to the desirability of preserving the setting of the Tower of London as a heritage asset of the highest significance, the public benefits of the proposal nevertheless outweigh the priority given to the development plan and other material considerations against the proposals. As such that the application should be recommended to you subject to all the relevant conditions being applied and section 106 obligations being entered into in order to secure the public benefits and minimise the impact of the proposal. Recommendation (1) That planning permission be granted for the above proposal in accordance with the details set out in the attached schedule subject to: (a) the Mayor of London being given 14 days to decide whether to allow the Corporation to grant planning permission as recommended, or to direct refusal, or to determine the application himself (Article 5(1)(a) of the Town & Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2008); (b) planning obligations and other agreements being entered into under Section 106 of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990 and Section 278 of the Highway Act 1980 in respect of those matters set out in the report, the decision notice not to be issued until the Section 106 obligations have been executed; (c) That your Officers be instructed to negotiate and execute obligations in respect of those matters set out in "Planning Obligations" under Section 106 and any necessary agreements under Section 278 of the Highway Act 1980.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • THE INTEGRATION of TALL BUILDINGS in URBAN ENVIRONMENT: CONSIDERING the KEY SUSTAINABILITY CONCEPTS (1) Tulû TOHUMCU*, A
    INTEGRATIONMETU JFA 2017/1 OF TALL BUILDINGS IN URBAN ENVIRONMENT DOI:METU 10.4305/METU.JFA.2017.1.4 JFA 2017/1 163 (34:1) 163-186 THE INTEGRATION OF TALL BUILDINGS IN URBAN ENVIRONMENT: CONSIDERING THE KEY SUSTAINABILITY CONCEPTS (1) Tulû TOHUMCU*, A. Berrin ÇAKMAKLI** Received: 30.12.2014; Final Text: 17.07.2016 INTRODUCTION Keywords: Sustainable tall buildings; environmental harmony; sustainability Tall buildings can create negative or positive impacts on urban concepts; architectural scale; urban scale. environment both physically and socially. They should be designed with a 1. This paper is an updated overview consideration on basic parameters that satisfy both structural requirements of author’s M.Sc. thesis entitled “The and requirements of an ideal sustainable built environment. The harmony Integration of Tall Buildings with The Urban Environment: Considering The Key between a tall building and its environment is an important point that Sustainability Concepts” (Tohumcu, 2014) should be discussed together. Research in the field of tall buildings and supervised by A. Berrin Çakmaklı at METU. their sustainable capabilities determine important design issues in different The theoritical part of this paper was scales from urban scale to architectural scale. Location, site organization, presented at “II. International Sustainable Buildings Symposium” held on May 28-30th. transportation, urban skyline, material selection and façade design, 2015. entrance floor design, vertical design and the urban microclimate may be listed as fundamental concepts that should be taken into consideration in order to define the boundaries and intersection points of a tall building with the city. These key concepts should be used in examining the negative and positive impacts of a tall building on its environment.
    [Show full text]
  • 22 Bishopsgate London EC2N 4BQ Construction of A
    Committee: Date: Planning and Transportation 28 February 2017 Subject: Public 22 Bishopsgate London EC2N 4BQ Construction of a building arranged on three basement floors, ground and 58 upper floors plus mezzanines and plant comprising floorspace for use within Classes A and B1 of the Use Classes Order and a publicly accessible viewing gallery and facilities (sui generis); hard and soft landscaping works; the provision of ancillary servicing and other works incidental to the development. (201,449sq.m. GEA) Ward: Lime Street For Decision Registered No: 16/01150/FULEIA Registered on: 24 November 2016 Conservation Area: St Helen's Place Listed Building: No Summary The planning application relates to the site of the 62 storey tower (294.94m AOD) granted planning permission in June 2016 and which is presently being constructed. The current scheme is for a tower comprising 59 storeys at ground and above (272.32m AOD) with an amended design to the top. The tapering of the upper storeys previously approved has been omitted and replaced by a flat topped lower tower. In other respects the design of the elevations remains as before. The applicants advise that the lowering of the tower in the new proposal is in response to construction management constraints in relation to aviation safeguarding issues. The planning application also incorporates amendments to the base of the building, the public realm and to cycle space provision which were proposed in a S73 amendment application and which your Committee resolved to grant on 28 November 2016, subject to a legal agreement but not yet issued. The building would provide offices, retail at ground level, a viewing gallery with free public access at levels 55 and 56 and a public restaurant and bar at levels 57 and 58.
    [Show full text]
  • Swiss Re Sponsors Tate Modern's First Major Architecture Exhibition
    News release ab Swiss Re sponsors TATE’s first major architecture exhibition. Contact: London, 31 May 2005: Swiss Re is sponsoring the TATE Herzog & de Meuron exhibition demonstrating its commitment to great Group Media Relations, Zurich Telephone +41 43 285 7171 design, art and architecture. Corporate Communications, London Telephone +44 (0)20 7933 3448 With TATE Modern, Swiss architects Herzog & de Meuron created both an iconic building and one of the most visited museums in the world. When Swiss Re commissioned Lord Foster to design their London headquarters at 30 St Mary Axe, affectionately known as ‘The Swiss Reinsurance Company Mythenquai 50/60 Gherkin’, they created another architectural landmark for London P.O. Box which won the prestigious 2004 Stirling Prize. CH-8022 Zurich Telephone +41 43 285 2121 Anne Keller, Head of Brand Communications for Swiss Re and in Fax +41 43 285 2999 www.swissre.com charge for the company’s art activities says: ‘The TATE exhibition proves that Herzog & de Meuron are leading architects of our time, creating buildings that inspire and uplift. We are delighted to be lead sponsors of Herzog & de Meuron: an exhibition, reinforcing our involvement with and support for contemporary architecture.’ As a supporter of social, humanitarian, educational, scientific and cultural projects around the world, Swiss Re has been funding high profile art exhibitions in its native Switzerland for many years, bringing key shows such as Sigmar Polke and Richard Prince to the Kunsthaus in Zurich. The commitment to cutting-edge architecture can be seen in Swiss Re buildings worldwide: in Europe and the USA they have worked with leading architects such as Bothe, Richter, Teherani, Thilla Theus und Partner and Marcel Meili and Markus Peter.
    [Show full text]
  • Newsletter 10-2005 4 Pgs.Indd
    AIA London/UK• news The First International Chapter of The American Institute of Architects Number 46 • October 2005 A Summer of Events Past On High - Smart Buildings - Clean Air - On Tour upcoming 30 St. Mary Axe (the Gherkin) is best know for its striking impact on the London skyline, however this summer guests and events members of the AIA and Herman Miller enjoyed spectacular views over London from inside the 40th fl oor of the Gherkin F at this year’s AIA London Summer Event. Sarah ox of AIA London / UK SwissRe gave an insightful and entertaining speech on the design development of the tower, its path through the planning Student - Professional system and its construction from the client’s perspective. Design Charrette J In uly the AIA visited the “Knightsbridge” the soon to be If you are an Architecture Student or completed luxury apartment building in the centre of London. Professional you are invited to participate The tour focused on the design, specifi cation and use of smart in this year’s AIA London / UK design building control systems with presentations from Lutron, Icon charrette. Connects and Squire and Partners. Saturday 22nd October In September Mary Bowman of Gustafson Porter presented London City Hall a profi le of the fi rm’s work to the AIA at the Building Centre’s Time, 9 AM to 6 PM exhibit “Civilized Spaces”. Mary gave an overview Fee £10 of the fi rms work focussing on the process from concept RSVP at [email protected] design through to construction and the technologies they are developing and utilizing to create their visions.
    [Show full text]
  • Minutes Template
    PROJECTS SUB (POLICY AND RESOURCES) COMMITTEE Tuesday, 12 February 2013 Minutes of the meeting of the Projects Sub (Policy and Resources) Committee held at Guildhall on Tuesday, 12 February 2013 at 3.00 pm Present Members: Deputy Sir Michael Snyder (Chairman) Mark Boleat (Deputy Chairman) Alderman Sir Michael Bear Deputy Ken Ayers (Chief Commoner) Anthony Llewelyn-Davies John Tomlinson Officers: Peter Lisley - Assistant Town Clerk Julie Mayer - Town Clerk’s Rebecca Kearney - Town Clerk’s Caroline Al-Beyerty - Financial Services Director Philip Everett - Director of the Built Environment Peter Bennett - City Surveyor Victor Callister - Department of the Built Environment Iain Simmons - Department of the Built Environment Malcolm MacLeod - Department of Markets and Consumer Protection Peter Snowdon - City Surveyor’s Department Eddie Stevens - Community and Children’s Services Karen Tarbox - Community and Children’s Services Hannah Bibbins - Guildhall School of Music and Drama 1. APOLOGIES Apologies were received from Stuart Fraser, Jeremy Mayhew and Hugh Morris. 2. MEMBER DECLARATIONS UNDER THE CODE OF CONDUCT IN RESPECT OF ITEMS ON THIS AGENDA None. 3. MINUTES The public minutes and summary of the Projects Sub Committee of 10th January 2013 were approved. 4. AVONDALE SQUARE AND YORK WAY - CAVITY WALL INSULATION - PROJECT PROPOSAL (GATEWAY 2) Members received a report of the Acting Director of Community and Children’s Services and noted that British Gas had contacted the Department to offer free insulation works, fully funded from the Energy Company Obligation. RESOLVED, that: The project progress to Gateway 5, as per the Project Procedure, with authority delegated to the Director of Community and Children’s Services.
    [Show full text]
  • 25 Townscape View: the Queen's Walk to Tower of London
    25 Townscape View: The Queen’s Walk 211 to Tower of London 407 The view from The Queen’s Walk to the Tower of London World Heritage Site is from a stretch of the south bank of the Thames close to the two public open spaces either side of City Hall; to the east a green space known as Potter’s Fields Park; and to the west a hard landscaped space including the Scoop, sculptures and water features. 408 There is one Viewing Location at the Queen’s Walk: 25A. It is located close to the river’s edge. 212 London View Management Framework Viewing Location 25A The Queen’s Walk at City Hall N.B for key to symbols refer to image 1 Panorama from Assessment Point 25A.1 The Queen’s Walk at City Hall – foot of pathway from Potter’s Fields Panorama from Assessment Point 25A.2 The Queen’s Walk at City Hall – in front of the public terraces 25 Townscape View: The Queen’s Walk to Tower of London 213 Panorama from Assessment Point 25A.3 The Queen’s Walk at City Hall – close to Tower Bridge Description of the View Landmarks include: 409 Three Assessment Points (25A.1, 25A.2 and 25A.3) are Tower of London (I, II*, II) † located in this location. They provide good views of the The Monument (I) Tower of London, and the relatively clear background Tower Bridge (I) setting of the White Tower, in particular. A Protected Vista is included from Assessment Point 25A.1 and a Also in the views: Protected Silhouette is applied to the White Tower between Custom House (I) Assessment Points 25A.2 and 25A.3.
    [Show full text]
  • Considering the Key Sustainability Concepts
    ANKARA - TURKIYE ThE INTEGRATION OF TALL BUILDINGS WITh ThE URBAN ENVIRONMENT: CONSIDERING THE KEY SUSTAINABILITY CONCEPTS Tulû Tohumcu and Dr. Ayşem Berrin Zeytun Çakmaklı ODTÜ, Mimarlık Fakültesi, Yapı Bilimleri, Ankara, Türkiye, [email protected] ODTÜ, Mimarlık Fakültesi, Yapı Bilimleri, Ankara, Türkiye, [email protected] Abstract 1. INTRODUCTION As a result of physical, social and economic needs, demand for Tall buildings can have both negative and positive impacts tall buildings is increasing worldwide. Due to their great size on the urban environment both physically and socially; they and large impacts on the urban environment, tall buildings, should be designed with consideration of basic parameters 193 through careful design and urban integration, have the that satisfy both their structural requirements and ideally the potential to improve the quality around them. Also, depending requirements of the sustainable built environment. The harmony on their large area of influence, design considerations regarding between a tall building and its environment is an important sustainability and environmental integration of tall buildings concern that should be handled together. Researches in the need to be handled with more care than with other conventional field of tall buildings and their sustainable capabilities identify buildings to provide the most positive impact. important design issues in different scales from urban scale to This study focuses on the physical and social environmental architectural scale. Location, site organization, transportation, impacts of tall buildings where these impacts are examined urban skyline, material selection and façade design, entrance through determined ‘key sustainability concepts’. The identified floor design, vertical design and the urban microclimate are relevant ‘key sustainability concepts’ reveal the positive or some of the fundamental concepts that should be considered negative, physical and social environmental impacts of tall in order to define the boundaries and intersection points of a buildings.
    [Show full text]
  • 33 St Mary Axe London Ec3
    EXCHEQUER COURT 33 ST MARY AXE LONDON EC3 UP TO 40,526 SQ FT PROMINENT CITY SPACE ACROSS PART 1ST, 4TH & 5TH FLOORS 21,886 SQ FT OF PLUG & PLAY SPACE / 18,640 SQ FT OF CAT A SPACE THE BUILDING AMONGST THE LANDMARKS OF LONDON'S BUSINESS DISTRICT Amongst Impressive new iconic City double-height landmarks reception hall Flexible Plug & Contemporary Play options Category A options 2 THE SPACE Ground Floor reception CGI AN IMPRESSIVE IMPRESSIVE AN RECEPTION NEW 3 THE SPACE 1 HIGH SPEC PLUG & & PLUG HIGH SPEC FINISHES PLAY 2 4 1 5th floor meeting rooms 2 1st floor reception 3 5th floor breakout 3 4 5th floor kitchen 4 THE SPECIFICATION CAREFULLY CONSIDERED AND WELL DESIGNED FEATURES High quality plug & play Newly refurbished LED lighting part first and 5th floors CAT A 4th floor Newly refurbished Dual entrance off the New VAV ground floor reception historic private and gated air conditioning St Helens Place and St Mary Axe Shower facilities Cycle storage Locker room and Fully fitted floors ready for access changing area occupation and suitable for a range of potential occupiers 5 THE SPACE 1st Floor Breakout / Co-working SPACE FOR COLLABORATION 6 LAYOUT PLANS & ACCOMMODATION Sq M Sq Ft Occupied Condition Floor 1,650 17,756 6th 1,732 EXCHEQUER COURT Plug & Play 18,640 5th St Helen's Place Occupied Cat A 4th Occupied 3rd 384 4,130 2nd 100 St Helen’ Occupied Bishopsgate Plug & Play s Plac Part 1st 3,766 e 40,526 7 s St Helen’ Church Ground St Helen's Place Entrance Total e c a l P rks rks Undershaft e l EXCHEQUER COURT C St Mary Axe St Mary Axe Entrance St Mary Axe Bury Cour t 30 St Mary Axe Plan not to scale.
    [Show full text]
  • The Art of Living FACTSHEET OVERVIEW DEVELOPER
    The Art of Living FACTSHEET OVERVIEW DEVELOPER .....................................................................................................................................ST GEORGE PLC One Location DEVELOPMENT ......................................................................................................................... ONE BLACKFRIARS ESTIMATED COMPLETION ...................................................................................................QUARTER 3 & 4, 2018 LOCAL AUTHORITY .............................................................................. LONDON BOROUGH OF SOUTHWARK (LBS) One Blackfriars is a modern and impressive sculptural addition to the skyline of London. TENURE ..........................................................................................................................................999-YEAR LEASE The building will offer buyers a truly luxurious lifestyle with spacious interiors and BUILDING WARRANTY ....................................................................................10-YEAR NHBC BUILD WARRANTY the very best views across the River Thames including the Houses of Parliament, SERVICE CHARGES ......................................... EST. £6.54 PER SQ.FT. PLUS CAR PARKING AT £1,009 PER ANNUM St Paul’s Cathedral, the City and beyond. CAR PARKING..........................CAR PARKING AT £100,000 FOR TWO AND THREE BEDROOM APARTMENTS ONLY LOCATION ........................................................... ONE BLACKFRIARS, 1-16 BLACKFRIARS ROAD, LONDON SE1 9PB SITE
    [Show full text]
  • Supertall Elevator Maintenance 2. Journal Paper Ctbuh.Org/Papers
    ctbuh.org/papers Title: Supertall Elevator Maintenance Author: Rony Eappen, Vertical Transportation Engineer, D2E Subject: MEP Keywords: Building Management Vertical Transportation Virtual Reality Publication Date: 2017 Original Publication: CTBUH Journal 2017 Issue II Paper Type: 1. Book chapter/Part chapter 2. Journal paper 3. Conference proceeding 4. Unpublished conference paper 5. Magazine article 6. Unpublished © Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat / Rony Eappen Vertical Transportation Elevator Maintenance Considerations For Supertall Buildings Abstract The type and quality of elevator maintenance should be considered at the design stage to ensure the longevity and reliability of the elevators proposed. The implications of getting this wrong will have a disproportionately adverse effect on the functioning of supertall buildings (compared to those of a lesser height). This paper addresses how that risk can be minimized. The long-term reliability of Rony Eappen vertical transportation has an impact on design and building users, and early awareness of this in the design process can greatly assist the operation of a tall Author building throughout its lifecycle. Rony Eappen, Vertical Transportation Engineer D2E International VT Consultants Ltd. 7 Denbigh Mews Keywords: Vertical Transportation, Building Management, Virtual Reality London SW1V 2HQ United Kingdom t: +44 207 233 9355 Introduction Traditionally, the travel range of elevators, e: [email protected] and the necessity to include several shafts to www.d2e.com At present, there are 1,184 buildings over 200 house elevators serving several functions Rony Eappen meters tall around the world. Of these, 114 (local, express, hotel, residence, office, etc.), Rony joined D2E in 2010. For the first five years at are 300 meters or higher, classified as have been among the primary limiters of D2E, Rony was involved in account management for several prestigious tall buildings in London, “supertalls.” Additionally, there are 327 height.
    [Show full text]
  • 52-54 Lime Street & 21-26 Leadenhall, 27 & 27A
    planning report PDU/3015/02 30 January 2013 52-54 Lime Street & 21-26 Leadenhall, 27 & 27A Leadenhall Street and 34-35 Leadenhall Street and 4-5 Billiter Street in the City of London planning application no. 12/00870/FULEIA Strategic planning application stage II referral (new powers) Town & Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended); Greater London Authority Acts 1999 and 2007; Town & Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2008 The proposal Demolition of existing buildings and redevelopment with a 39-storey (190 metre) office-led mixed use development The applicant The applicant is W.R. Berkley Corporation and the architect is Kohn Pedersen Fox Strategic issues The provision of new high quality office floorspace in the heart of the City of London is strongly supported. Strategic issues relating to tall buildings, views and World Heritage Sites, urban and inclusive design, climate change and transport have been satisfactorily resolved. The Corporation’s decision In this instance the Corporation of London has resolved to grant permission. Recommendation That the Corporation of London be advised that the Mayor is content for it to determine the case itself, subject to any action that the Secretary of State may take, and does not therefore wish to direct refusal or direct that he is to be the local planning authority. Context 1 On 1 October 2012 the Mayor of London received documents from the Corporation of London notifying him of a planning application of potential strategic importance to develop the above site for the above uses. This was referred to the Mayor under Category 1C of the Schedule to the Order 2008: 1C: Development which comprises or includes the erection of a building of one or more of the page 1 following descriptions— (b) the building is more than 150 metres high and is in the City of London 2 On 7 November 2012 the Mayor considered planning report PDU/3015/01, and subsequently advised the Corporation of London that.
    [Show full text]
  • 87443A97-00Ae-46B5-B643-56B6cf5751c7-27.Pdf
    OUR STORY STARTS HERE 4 — 11 LOCATION 12 — 25 ARCHITECTURE 26 — 35 AMENITIES 36 — 49 INTERIORS 50 — 67 MATERIALS & SPECIFICATION 68 — 75 SITE OVERVIEW 76 — 77 BARRATT LONDON 78 — 79 OUR STORY STARTS HERE 5 | 6 OUR STORY STARTS HERE. IN AROUND AD 43, ON THE RIVERSIDE BETWEEN BLACKFRIARS AND TOWER HILL, THE ROMANS ESTABLISHED LONDINIUM. TWO THOUSAND YEARS LATER, LONDON’S ROMAN ORIGINS LIE DEEP BENEATH ITS STREETS, BUT WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THAT FIRST SETTLEMENT, ON THE BANKS OF THE THAMES, LIES LANDMARK PLACE, LONDON’S ORIGINAL ADDRESS. COMPUTER GENERATED IMAGE FOR INDICATIVE PURPOSES ONLY LANDMARK PLACE IS A BUILDING OF SUBSTANCE: ELEGANT, REFINED, AND ENTIRELY SUITED TO ITS ICONIC POSITION. A LANDMARK IN DESIGN, IN LOCATION, AND IN LONDON’S CONTINUING STORY. COMPUTER GENERATED IMAGE FOR INDICATIVE PURPOSES ONLY OUR STORY STARTS HERE THE CITY’S RIVERSIDE For millennia, ships have sailed for London’s north shore, bringing goods from the furthest corners of the known world. Around this quay, the modern City has grown and flourished, a global capital, its landmarks clustered about its ancient core. 11 | 12 COMPUTER GENERATED IMAGE FOR INDICATIVE PURPOSES ONLY LOCATION FIRST LIGHT. THE DAY BEFORE YOU, HISTORY JUST BENEATH YOUR FEET. 15 | 16 THE FIRST CITY OF LONDON Two thousand years ago, at a strategic Thames crossing, Britannia’s most important city was founded. Within seven years of the Roman invasion of AD 43, Londinium was established around a strategic crossing point with deep water access to the Thames’ north bank, now the heart of the modern City. The new settlement swiftly became a major trading post, the centre of the road network of the new Roman province of Britannia.
    [Show full text]