planning report D&P/3101b/01 19 March 2014 301 Central Markets (Smithfield General Market), Farringdon in the City of London planning application no.13/01151/FULL

Strategic planning application stage 1 referral Town & Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended); Greater London Authority Acts 1999 and 2007; Town & Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2008

The proposal Change of use of the ground floor of the General Market Building, Annex and former Iron Mountain loading bay to a flexible allocation of uses to include classes A1, A3, A4 and A5, (retail use), D1 and D2 (assembly leisure, market, theatrical performance and live music performance) and B8 (storage), plus the provision of cycle parking facilities, pedestrian access and associated works.

The applicant The applicants are SAVE Britain’s Heritage and The Victorian Society.

Strategic issues The principle of reinvigorating the use of these historic, but long-disused market buildings and the introduction of a mix of retail, commercial and leisure uses in the Farringdon/Smithfield Area of Intensification, with its emerging public transport improvements is strongly supported in strategic planning terms.

Recommendation That the City of London Corporation be advised that whilst the changes of use proposed are acceptable in principle, the application does not fully comply with the London Plan, for the reasons set out in paragraph 73 of this report. The application does not need to be referred back to the Mayor if the Corporation resolves to refuse planning permission, but it must be referred back if the Corporation resolves to grant permission.

Context

1 On 3 January 2014, the Mayor of London received documents from the City of London Corporation notifying him of a planning application of potential strategic importance to develop the above site for the above uses. Under the provisions of The Town & Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2008 the Mayor had until 13 February 2014 to provide the Corporation with a statement setting out whether he considers that the application complies with the London Plan, and his reasons for taking that view. The Mayor may also provide other comments. This report sets out information for the Mayor’s use in deciding what decision to make.

2 The application is referable under Category 3E of the Schedule to the Order 2008:” Development- (a) which does not accord with one or more provisions of the development plan in force in the area in which the application site is situated; and (b) comprises or includes the provision of more than 2,500 sq metres of

page 1 floorspace for a use falling within the following classes in the Use Classes Order-(i) class A1 (retail); (ii) class A2 (financial and professional); (iii) class A3 (food and drink); and (vi) class B1 (business).”

3 Once the City of London Corporation has resolved to determine the application, it is required to refer it back to the Mayor for his decision, as to whether to direct refusal or allow the Council to determine it itself, unless otherwise advised. In this instance if the Council resolves to refuse permission it need not refer the application back to the Mayor.

4 The environmental information for the purposes of the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2011 has been taken into account in the consideration of this case.

5 The Mayor of London’s statement on this case will be made available on the GLA website www.london.gov.uk.

Site description

6 Smithfield is the oldest and largest wholesale meat market in Europe and the last of the great medieval markets to remain on its original site. Many of the most attractive buildings in its immediate locality are related in architectural character and historic purpose to the market complex. This application relates to the former General Market and Annex Buildings within the Smithfield complex of market halls.

7 The application site comprises some 1.03-hectare of land on both the north and south sides of West Smithfield. The portion to the north is occupied by 43 Farringdon Street, the General Market Buildings bounded by Farringdon Street on the west, Charterhouse Street on the north, West Poultry Avenue on the east and West Smithfield on the south. The portion to the south comprises most of the area bounded by West Smithfield on the north, Snow Hill on the west and Smithfield Street on the east. A short distance to the south is the Grade II listed Holborn Viaduct of 1869. The General Markets stand immediately to the west of the Grade II listed Poultry Market of 1963, linked by a 1960s canopy.

8 There are three other buildings that adjoin the site, none of which have any heritage significance. These are the nondescript ten storey Atlantic House office building of the c1980s and the 1990s 6/7 storey office block - 19 Charterhouse Street (both to the west of the application site on the western side of Farringdon Street). To the south of the triangular site of annex buildings is the construction site of the new 10 storey office development - 60 Holborn Viaduct (replacing the 1967 Bath House office block and including the welcome reinstatement of the missing fourth corner block fronting Holborn Viaduct). Below the site are the Thameslink railway tunnels; the running tracks and sidings of which are situated at basement level through part of the site, beneath the General Market and Annex buildings in particular.

9 The site itself comprises a complex of five buildings, all non-designated heritage assets that make a positive contribution to the character and appearance of the Smithfield Conservation Area. They also contribute to the settings of the Hatton Garden and Charterhouse Square conservation areas in the neighbouring London boroughs of Camden and Islington respectively. They form the westernmost part of the extensive Smithfield Markets complex whose original buildings occupy the eastern half of the site, opened in 1867 which are listed Grade II*. Both the Grade II* market halls and the General Market buildings were designed by the Corporation of London’s city architect Sir Horace Jones, who also designed the iconic Tower Bridge and Leadenhall Market. The General Market Building (GMB) has frontages on Farringdon Road, Charterhouse Street and West Smithfield, with a much altered rear elevation on West Poultry Avenue linked by a rather unsightly high level corrugated plastic sheet canopy (also of the 1960s) to the copper roofed canopy of the Poultry Market. The GMB was built between 1879 and 1883 when it opened as a fish market, converted to a meat market in 1889 and later became a general market. It comprises perimeter buildings with elevations of red Fareham brick and Portland stone in the French manner, enclosing a large market hall of arched wood trusses on lattice girders supported on substantial iron columns. The markets are largely three stories in height (including a mansard roof storey).

page 2 10 The north-western corner (known as Hart’s Corner) was damaged in WWII and rebuilt in Portland stone. Part of the market hall was also damaged by enemy action and made good by the addition of an elegant concrete dome in c1950. A characterful traditional timber awning spans West Smithfield linking the general markets building to a wedge-shaped smaller market building (known as the Annex, formerly a fish market) built in 1886 with a long frontage on Snow Hill. This is joined to the Red House (once a cold store - photo top row below - right) built in 1899 which has an imposing east facing façade, and the adjacent former Engine House of 1884. The lavatory block is partially visible in the right-hand foreground in the photo below right.

11 The Red House, General Market Building and the Annex closed in stages between the 1970s and the 1990s and the whole complex has been disused for many years with the exception of a barbers shop on Charterhouse Street and a café on Farringdon Street, both on short term leases.

12 The surrounding area is typified by a mix of land uses. Areas to the north, west and south consist predominantly of offices, with some retail at ground floor level. To the east is the active Smithfield Market comprising the poultry market and old meat markets; with offices, retail and residential uses beyond that. Indeed the character of Smithfield is largely shaped by its unique mix of uses.

13 The nearest section of the Transport for London Road Network (TLRN) is Farringdon Street itself and Holborn Viaduct (100m to the south) forms part of the Strategic Road Network (SRN). Farringdon Station is 200m north of the site and is served by the Circle, Metropolitan and Hammersmith & City lines, as well as Thameslink rail services. Crossrail will service the development by 2019, when the on-going Thameslink upgrade is also likely to be completed. 19 bus routes run within 450m of the site. Given its central location and proximity to public transport, the site has an estimated public transport accessibility level (PTAL) of 6b, on a scale of 1a to 6b, where 6b is the most accessible. Details of the proposal

14 The proposal is for a mixed-use development in the General Market building, the Annex and the former Iron Mountain building, comprising retail/restaurant/ licensed and hot food premises (classes A1/A3/A4 and A5); assembly and leisure (D2), together with sui generis uses including markets, theatrical and live music performances; storage, and cycle parking. The new uses amount to 6,774 square meters. The applicant has stipulated in the Design and Access Statement that A4 uses (bars) will not exceed 20% of the net internal area. The Red House would be repaired and mothballed for a future active use. The Iron Mountain building (ground floor only) would be used for storage uses or temporary ‘pop-up’ promotion events, eateries, arts or exhibition space, and theatrical or music performance. The site would operate on all days of the week between the hours of 8am and 11pm.

15 This application has been submitted by two national heritage amenity societies - The Victorian Society (a charity responsible for the study and protection of Victorian and Edwardian architecture and other arts in Britain covering the period 1837-1914) and SAVE Britain’s Heritage (a charity dedicated to the conservation of historic buildings of all periods). They have jointly produced this scheme working with Urban Space Management, an urban regeneration consultancy that was previously involved in the rejuvenation of Camden Lock Market in the 1970s and Spitalfields Market in the 1990s.

16 The proposed new uses are confinedto the ground floor of the complex. Future phases are envisaged for the basement and upper floors, which for the time being, would be closed off or used for storage/ancillary office purposes. The key objectives are outlined in the DAS and include the retention and repair of the two historic buildings (including their elevations, roofs, entrances and canopies); bringing the perimeter retail units back into use; introducing a ‘cultural market’ within the market halls of both the General Market and the former Fish Market/Annexe; enabling permeability through the site for the first time in over 30 years; and ‘identifying possibilities for a new public realm’, with the goal of regenerating this long disused complex. A new entrance at the north-west corner is ‘to be explored’.

17 The mix of uses will include ‘food, leisure and creative offer exhibitions, gallery and performance space’ – comparisons with Greenwich, Borough and Spitalfields market halls have been made. Prospective

page 3 tenants would include independent food, design, art, fashion and other creative retailers; cafes, tapas bars or similar licensed bars. Natural ventilation of the complex would be maximised with extract ducting touted through existing chimney flues. Lavatory facilities would be provided for staff, tenants and visitors, with drainage utilising the existing drainage system. Existing access ways for vehicles and pedestrians would be used, with no new means of access required. The future use of perimeter footways for outside cafe seating areas is also mooted, subject to discussions with the City of London.

18 The site has the highest possible public transport accessibility level (PTAL) and the applicants anticipate that the majority of visitors would arrive by rail (comprising theThameslink service, the three Underground lines serving Farringdon; and from 2018, a Crossrail service) and the frequent bus services along Farringdon Road. Another popular mode of transport for visitors to the markets would be cycling. Visitor numbers are expected to be highest over the weekend, with weekday visitors comprising mostly office workers in the City and nearby parts of Camden and Islington. The scheme would require new pedestrian crossings on the surrounding streets.

19 The Design and Access Statement outlines servicing, retail storage, refuse and recycling storage and collections and cleaning arrangements. It also confirms that a waste management policy would be submitted as a “reserved matter” as part of planning permission. No noise-sensitive properties have been identified in the vicinity of the markets complex and the entertainment uses would be subject to a separate licensing application

20 The scheme would provide a total gross internal floor space of 6,774 (5170 in the General Market Building and 1,604 in the Annexe); comprising retail/food and drink (A1, A3, A4 and A5) and sui generis uses (including music and live performance space). The following table summarises the proposed change of use, retained uses, and proposed dual/flexible uses:

Case history

21 The site has a complex planning history that has culminated in a call-in by the Secretary of State of previous applications for development on the site.

22 The General Market Building and the Red House were both considered by English Heritage for listing in 2005. The market building was rejected by the English Heritage Designation department on the grounds that it lacked sufficient individual special interest to merit listing, partly due to its partial destruction during the Blitz of World War II and subsequent partial rebuilding. The Red House was listed by English Heritage in 2005, but then delisted on the grounds that the listing was based on erroneous reasons. A Certificate of Immunity from listing for this building was issued in December 2009 (to expire in December 2014). Nonetheless EH did make it clear that all of these market buildings possessed strong local historic and architectural interest and made a positive contribution to the character, appearance and history of the conservation area. Another listing application was made in February which was also rejected. 23 In February 2007, the Corporation of the City of London referred an application by Thornfield Properties (London) Ltd to the former Mayor, proposing the demolition of the existing building and other structures at 43 Farringdon Street and part redevelopment and part refurbishment of the existing buildings and other structures at 25 Snow Hill and 29 Smithfield Street to provide an overall total of 44,896 sq.m. of office (B1), retail/market (A1, A2, A3, A4 and A5) space; with associated railway engineering works, car parking, servicing, pedestrian and vehicular routes.

24 The application represented a departure from the development plan for the City of London and was subsequently called in for determination by the Secretary of State before the former Mayor could issue his response. In his May 2007 response, the Mayor indicated that, on balance, he would have supported the proposed development and allowed the Corporation of London to determine the application if the Secretary of State had not intervened.

page 4 25 In an August 2008 decision, following a Public Inquiry, the Secretary of State agreed with her Inspector’s observation that: “the existing buildings on the site make a significant contribution, not only to the character and appearance of the Smithfield Conservation Areas, but also the settings of adjoining Conservation Areas, notably the Charterhouse Square Conservation Area, and nearby listed buildings, including the Grade II* Meat Market and Grade II Poultry Market. There is, therefore, a presumption in favour of retaining the buildings”. He acknowledged that the buildings and tunnel lids were in poor condition, but that this was due at least in part to neglect and engineers agree that the buildings could be repaired.

26 This observation appeared to set the benchmark against which the proposal was assessed. In particular, the Inspector determined that the proposal took its cue “from the large commercial buildings adjoining the Conservation Area, rather than the scale and character of the buildings within the Conservation Area” and concluded that the proposed building would detract from the character and appearance of the Smithfield Conservation Area. This was the principal reason for his recommendation and subsequent decision of the Secretary of State to refuse permission for the development.

27 In 2013 an application was submitted by Henderson Global Investors Ltd. for the retention and restoration of the perimeter buildings fronting Farringdon Street, Charterhouse Street and West Smithfield (i.e. the frontages facing south, west and north), removing the eastern perimeter block and the post-war Hart’s Corner block. A new office building with Corten-steel elevations was proposed to be inserted within the restored Victorian perimeter ranges, stepping up from a height of 3 storeys behind the Farringdon Street range to four storeys in the centre portion and five storeys at the eastern end. This application also proposed the restoration of the facades of the former Red House cold store, behind which would rise a new seven storey office. The scheme included the restoration of the former fish market and engine room for shops and café uses. Also to be retained was the Edwardian timber canopy bridging West Smithfield between the annex and General Market buildings, and the triangular market porters’ lavatory block which would accommodate a small retail unit. This application followed extensive negotiation between the architects (John McAslan), English Heritage and officers from the City of London.

28 The GLA issued its decision on 2 May 2013 advising the City of London Corporation that whilst the application was broadly acceptable in strategic planning terms, on balance, it does not fully comply with the London Plan. The City was advised that if these deficiencies could be addressed the application could possibly become compliant with the London Plan. These issues included further justification for the loss of the market hall and the stone-fronted Hart’s Corner block; issues of accessibility and transport, energy (site- cooling), air quality and surface water drainage. The application was approved by the City of London in July 2013. However six weeks later the Secretary of State called in the application and a public inquiry was held in February 2014. A decision is expected later this year. Strategic planning issues and relevant policies and guidance

29 The relevant issues and corresponding policies are as follows:

 Economic development London Plan; the Mayor’s Economic Development Strategy; Employment Action Plan  Regeneration London Plan; the Mayor’s Economic Development Strategy  Retail/town centre uses London Plan; the Draft SPG on Town Centres  Tourism/leisure London Plan; Good Practice Guide on Planning for Tourism (DCLG)  Mix of uses London Plan  Urban design London Plan;  Historic environment London Plan; World Heritage Sites SPG; Circular 07/09  Access London Plan; Accessible London: achieving an inclusive environment SPG; Planning and Access for Disabled People: a good practice guide (ODPM)  Transport/parking London Plan; the Mayor’s Transport Strategy;

page 5  Crossrail London Plan; Mayoral Community Infrastructure Levy; Crossrail SPG  Sustainable development London Plan; Sustainable Design and Construction SPG; Mayor’s Climate Change Adaptation Strategy; Mayor’s Climate Change Mitigation and Energy Strategy; Mayor’s Water Strategy  Air quality London Plan; draft Revised Early Minor Alteration to the London Plan; the Mayor’s Air Quality Strategy;

30 For the purposes of Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, the development plan in force for the area is the September 2011 City of London Core Strategy DPD, (Delivering a World Class City) and the July 2011 London Plan.

31 The following are material planning considerations:

 The National Planning Policy Framework and Technical Guide to the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).

 The draft Further Alterations to the London Plan (January 2014)

Regeneration, employment and economic development

32 Despite their historic and architectural value as heritage assets, the buildings subject of this application are in various stages of deterioration, largely vacant and have been grossly underused for several years. In particular, they are no longer suitable for the wider wholesale market use for which they were originally built and as such, they require an innovative new approach and a significant amount of investment to secure a viable restoration and optimum use of their strategically located premises.

33 In principle, therefore, the proposal to change the use of the application premises from what was a predominantly wholesale market with ancillary office space (largely disused for some 30 years), to a retail market with restaurants and other eateries, bars, music, performance events, and other leisure uses, accords with the London Plan policies on London’s economy ( particularly policies 4.1, 4.6, 4.7, and 4.8).

34 The refurbishment of significant parts of the historic Victorian market buildings would respect and preserve their architectural integrity, historic character and general appearance; and thereby accord with the aims of the London Plan policies on‘Living Places and Spaces’ (especially policies 7.4, 7.5, 7.6, 7.8 - 7.9).

35 Thus, for the built environment, the development has the potential to secure much of the historic complex and in so doing enhance this relatively overlooked part of the conservation area. It would also enhance pedestrian permeability by creating new/reinstated routes through the complex, which have the potential to improve the perception of safety and enhance the vitality of the area.

36 In landuse terms , however, the Farringdon/Smithfield area is identified on Map 2.4 and supporting policy 2.13 of the London Plan as an Area for Intensification, given the potential improvements that the forthcoming Farringdon Crossrail facility would add to its existing excellent public transport accessibility. The area also falls within London’s Central Activities Zone (CAZ) as identified in the London Plan; and wherein policies 2.10 and 2.11 seek to enhance and promote Central London a strategically important, globally-oriented financial and business centre, based on a rich mix of local as well as strategic uses and by sustaining and enhancing its distinctive

page 6 environment and heritage. These policies also encourage the support, enhancement and improvement of the retail offer in the City, for residents, workers and visitors.

37 Whilst the current proposals have the potential to restore these heritage assets to economically beneficial use, in line with the aspirations of strategic and local planning policy; it only aims to secure a relatively modest quantum (6,774 sq.m, net) of flexible new uses confined to the ground floor of the General Market and Annex buildings. It is envisaged that future phases of the development would include further proposals for the use of the existing basement and upper floors but no specific details of these are provided or form part of the current application. In that context, it is considered that the limited scale of development and the lack of office content with the potential for high-density employment, falls significantly short of the London Plan aspirations for the Farringdon/Smithfield Area of Intensification, which include high-density development and a broader objective to make the most efficient use of scarce development land in a central London location with a high existing and future public transport accessibility level.

38 In particular, it would fail to optimise the use of the existing grossly under-utilsed buildings, its floorspace potential and the site as a whole. It is, therefore, an inherently “sub-optimal” proposal that is unlikely to achieve the essential aims of the Area of Intensification and other core strategic objectives of the London Plan. If approved in its existing form, it would represent a “missed opportunity” to achieve the optimum strategic benefits that the London Plan strongly advocates.

39 In terms of economic and regeneration benefits, the planning application form indicates a potential employment of 500 new jobs would be created (450 full-time and 50 part-time). No additional details have been provided on the likely breakdown of that figure according to use or floorspace , but the rejuvenation of the market halls and the creation of new retail, food and drink and entertainment uses is likely to generate a modest level of employment that would benefit the Farringdon, Smithfield and adjoining areas of the City of London, Islington and Camden.

40 To summarise, this proposal is supported in principle by the relevant policies of the London Plan, but in view of its strategic location in London’s Central Activities Zone (CAZ), it has much greater potential to make a positive contribution to the regeneration of the Smithfield/Farringdon area of the City, Islington and Camden; if the quantum of usable floorspace and development were significantly intensified. . Retail issues

41 The subject application is referable to the Mayor primarily on grounds that the replacement of wholesale market uses with 6,774 sq.m of retail, restaurant and performance uses, is a departure from the City’s Core Strategy policy CS20 (Retailing); which in line with paragraph 24 of the NPPF and policy 4.7 of the London Plan, adopts a sequential approach in directing new retail developments, firstly to locations within the five Principal Shopping Centres (PSCs); secondly to sites immediately adjoining the PSCs and links between those centres; and thirdly, to other areas within the City. The PSCs are Cheapside, Fleet Street, Liverpool Street/Bishopsgate, Moorgate and Leadenhall Market.

42 The application site falls into the lowest category of the above hierarchy so the retail element of this scheme stands to be assessed against the availability of sequentially preferable sites within the PSCs and the impact that it would have on those existing centres.

Impact assessment

43 Paragraph 26 of the NPPF provides that the assessment of planning applications for retail, leisure and office development outside town centres, which are not in accordance with an

page 7 up-to-date Local Plan, should include an impact assessment if the development is over 2,500 sq.m, unless the relevant planning authority has adopted a different space threshold.

44 The assessment of impact should include: (a) the impact of the proposal on existing, committed and planned public and private investment in a centre or centres in the catchment area of the proposal; and (b) the impact of the proposal on town centre vitality and viability, including local consumer choice and trade in the town centre.

45 London Plan policy 4.7 is consistent with these objectives of the national planning policy framework.

46 The applicant has not submitted a retail impact assessment report and the City of London has advised the applicant that they require details of the sequential test undertaken to inform the retail conclusions drawn in paragraph 5 of the Planning Statement.

Urban design and heritage issues

47 The London Plan sets out the Mayor’s commitment to protect and enhance London’s historic built environment, to promote conservation-led regeneration, and the re-use of redundant or under-used buildings. It also includes policies to support culture and tourism and economic and social regeneration.

48 The City of London’s ‘Character Summary and Management Strategy SPD’ for the Smithfield Conservation Area sets out the history, development and character of the area; and describes how the Smithfield Western Market Buildings contribute to the architectural unity of all of the market buildings. The Core Strategy promotes ‘high quality architecture and street scene appropriate to the City’s position at the historic core of London, complementing and integrating the City’s heritage assets and supporting the continued development of the City as a cultural destination for its own communities and visitors’. Policy CS12 advises of the duty to conserve or enhance the significance of the heritage assets and their settings, by ‘preserving and enhancing the distinctive character and appearance of the City’s conservation areas, while allowing sympathetic development within them’.

49 The DAS and the proposed plans submitted with this application indicate that physical works to the buildings are confined to the restoration of shop units and market hall, entrances to the market hall, canopies, roofs and lighting. A new entrance at the North West corner is ‘to be explored’. The upper floors and the basement will be either closed off or used for storage/ancillary office use. The mix of uses will include ‘food, leisure and creative offers ...exhibition, gallery and performance space’ – the comparators of Greenwich, Borough and Spitalfields market halls are cited. Future use of perimeter footways for outside café seating areas is also mooted, subject to discussions with the City of London.

Inclusive design and access

50 The applicant has confirmed that the General Market Hall, Annexe and former Iron Mountain building all currently possess step-free access. The entrance to the General Market Hall at its north west and south west corners comprise solely of stairs and it proposed to install a chair lift serving both these entrances. There are modest level changes within the General Market Hall but these will be removed or mitigated with new ramps. The street-facing retail units comprise a mix of step free and single step access - the applicants have confirmed they will work with the City of London to address any obstacles to mobility. They will also liaise with the City to agree provision of parking bays for disabled visitors/staff.

page 8

Transport for London’s comments

51 The site is bounded by Charterhouse Street to the north, West Poultry Avenue to the west, West Smithfield to the south and Farringdon Street to the east, which forms part of the Transport for London Road Network (TLRN). Farringdon Station, which is served by the Metropolitan, Circle and Hammersmith & City Lines on the London Underground, National Rail services, and further by Crossrail from 2018 which is located less than 250 meters north of the site. There are also 8 bus routes located within an acceptable walking distance, with the nearest bus stops located directly outside of the site on Farringdon Street. Additionally Cycle Hire facilities are located in close proximity to the site; with the nearest docking station approximately 100 metres away on Snow Hill. As such, it has been demonstrated that the site records an excellent Public Transport Accessibility Level (PTAL) of 6, on a scale of 1-6 where 6 is the highest.

Pedestrian improvements

52 TfL notes the applicants’ desire to improve pedestrian facilities in the area, namely through the provision of new pedestrian crossings on the surrounding roads. This is strongly supported by TfL as currently developing a scheme to improve pedestrian and cycle connectivity in the area along Farringdon Street. As such it is recommended that a contribution of £100,000 be secured towards the installation and maintenance of a new pedestrian crossing facility at the junction of Farringdon Street with Charterhouse Street and Farringdon Road. TfL would welcome further discussions on this point in advance of the application being determined in order to ensure a suitably worded obligation is contained within the s106 agreement. In addition, TfL requests that the applicant submits some further information on anticipated pedestrian flows to the site, and where they expect people to be travelling to/from as this may influence the final design of the crossing. Further to this, the submission of a pedestrian audit is also recommended to identify any other areas in need of improvement.

Crossrail

53 The site is located within the area where s106 contributions for Crossrail should be sought in accordance with London Plan policy 6.5 and the associated Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) ‘Use of planning obligations in the funding of Crossrail’ (April 2013 ). It is understood that the existing building has been largely unused for a number of years, and that the current proposals are for a change of use of the ground floor to provide a mixed use development.

54 Assuming a maximum retail floorspace of 7,345 sqm, TfL would expect a total Crossrail contribution of £661,050 to be secured through the section 106 agreement. It is however noted that not all of this floorspace is intended to be used for a Crossrail chargeable use, and as such the actual contribution required is likely to be much lower. Given that the precise mix of uses is unknown at the current time however, TfL would recommend that the wording in the s106 agreement is suitably flexible to ensure the total amount payable can be determined by the total scale of development at the reserved matters stage.

55 In addition the Mayor has also introduced a London-wide Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) to help implement the London Plan, particularly policies 6.5 and 8.3 toward the funding of Crossrail. The rate for the City is £50/ sq meter. The required CIL should be confirmed by the applicant and council once the components of the development or phase have been finalised. In these situations, the Mayoral CIL will be treated as a credit towards the s.106 Crossrail liability.

Parking and access

page 9 56 The development is proposed to be car free except for the provision of a small number of blue badge spaces, which is supported. It is noted that the basement is to retain its existing use, including access for Crossrail construction operations. Whilst this is noted, TfL would recommend consulting with Crossrail Ltd separately to ensure they do not have any specific concerns about the potential impact on their operations which would need to be taken into consideration.

Cycling

57 The level of cycle parking provision proposed should be clarified as the application form states there will be 200 spaces, whilst the Design and Access statement indicates there will be 160. Both figures are however considered to be London Plan compliant, although TfL would recommend that some of these spaces are allocated for the specific use of staff members, with the others being located on-street for the use of visitors to the market and the surrounding area. It is also noted that the applicant proposes to identify suitable locations for the visitor parking in consultation with the City. Whilst this is supported in principle, it should be noted that the location and delivery mechanism for any cycle parking proposed on the TLRN would need to be agreed in consultation with TfL, and is likely to require the applicant to enter into a s278 agreement for its delivery. It is therefore recommended that this requirement be secured through a suitably worded planning obligation. TfL welcomes further discussion on this matter.

Highway works

58 TfL would also request that a planning obligation be imposed requiring the applicant to enter into a section 278 Agreement with TfL for any highway works required on the TLRN as a result of the re-development of the site, including, but not limited to, potential footway renewal on Farringdon Street. The detailed scope of the works will be determined post application as appropriate. TfL would welcome further discussions on this in advance of the application being determined.

Travel Plan and plans for construction logistics and delivery and servicing

59 The applicants have advised that they will prepare and implement a travel plan, although no additional details have been submitted to date. TfL would therefore request that the requirement to submit a workplace travel plan for approval by the City in consultation with TfL prior to first occupation on site is secured by condition. Given the sites location near to the TLRN, TfL would recommend that a draft is submitted at the applicant’s earliest convenience. Furthermore, the travel plan and all agreed measures therein should be secured, reviewed, monitored and enforced as part of the section 106 agreement.

60 TfL requests that both a Construction Logistics Plan (CLP) and a Delivery and Servicing Plan be secured for the site by condition, to be approved by the City in consultation with TfL prior to commencement/ first occupation on site.

TfL Summary

61 Subject to the above items being satisfactorily addressed, and suitably worded conditions and planning obligations being agreed, TfL is satisfied that the proposed development could be considered to be general compliance with the transport policies of the London Plan.

62 In summary, TfL requires to be satisfied on the following matters before the application can be considered to be compliant with the transport policies of the London Plan.

page 10

Other transport issues

63 The City of London have informed us that they have requested the following information from the applicants: Further details on the proposed servicing arrangements, segregation between vehicles and pedestrians (especially given the servicing hours for the market would be 9-11am when the market would be open); the number of expected deliveries per day; how the maximum 50 vehicles (confirmed in the submitted documents, which would result in 25 vehicles per hour accessing the site) would be accommodated; what the on-site storage for market traders would comprise and where would it be located; how much storage space would there be per trader and how would it be allocated; and what the proposed servicing vehicle sizes would be. Information has also been requested pertaining to the tracking details for the largest servicing vehicles in respect of the servicing for the event and exhibition access (stemming from a concern that a 10.00–17.00 hours delivery time would clash with pedestrians using the proposed market); the location of serving arrangements for these larger vehicles to enable an assessment of their impact; and how the five deliveries per week figure has been decided upon for the event and exhibition use. Clarification has also been sought as to the types of event that would be held and the sources of the delivery trip generation figures, further details on the refuse storage arrangements, the amount of cycle parking, details of anticipated pedestrian flows to the site and where it is expected people would be travelling to/from, and finally clarification as to whether any discussions with Crossrail have been held concerning on the proposal.

Energy, flood risk and air quality 64 No new development is proposed - this scheme is for the restoration of an existing historic building, reinstating its original market use (albeit a speciality market with retail outlets serving the general public rather than its previous general wholesale market function) together with new food, drink and entertainment uses within the existing building. No statements or reports on the energy, air quality or flood-risk aspects of the development have been submitted by the applicant.

65 The applicant should submit an energy assessment to respond to London Plan energy policy. The report should be compiled in line with the GLA Guidance on the preparation of energy assessments (September 2013) available on the GLA Planning website. As the project consists of the refurbishment of an existing building, the carbon reduction target set in policy 5.2 does not apply, however the applicant should still demonstrate that the refurbishment has been designed following the energy hierarchy, implementing energy efficiency measures and considering (and implementing where possible) opportunities for connection to district heating and the use of low or zero carbon technologies.

Local planning authority’s position

66 At the time of writing, officers of the City of London Corporation were still in the process of assessing the application and could not be certain at this stage when it would be reported to the City’s planning committee or what their recommendation was likely to be. Legal considerations

67 Under the arrangements set out in Article 4 of the Town and Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2008 the Mayor is required to provide the local planning authority with a statement setting out whether he considers that the application complies with the London Plan, and his reasons for taking that view. Unless notified otherwise by the Mayor, the Council must consult the Mayor again under Article 5 of the Order if it subsequently resolves to make a draft decision on the

page 11 application, in order that the Mayor may decide whether to allow the draft decision to proceed unchanged or direct the Council under Article 6 of the Order to refuse the application. There is no obligation at this present stage for the Mayor to indicate his intentions regarding a possible direction, and no such decision should be inferred from the Mayor’s statement and comments. Financial considerations

68 There are no financial considerations at this stage. Conclusion

69 There is without doubt a pressing need to bring the Victorian market buildings back into a vibrant and viable use and arrest the advancing decay of the last two decades. This dereliction has exerted a deadening impact upon this part of the conservation area for too long. The proposed uses and works to the historic buildings accord in principle with the London Plan policies on place- shaping, local character, heritage assets and heritage-led regeneration in Chapter 7. It is considered that the proposed development has the potential to bring back into use substantial parts of these market buildings which, if successful, would represent an important step towards; preserving and enhancing this part of the Smithfield Conservation Area, the settings of the listed market buildings to the east and other listed/historic buildings in the vicinity; thus securing the long term future of these heritage assets. If this scheme proves to be viable, fundable and deliverable, the reintroduction of active uses on this site would also achieve significant public benefits of enhancing the life and vitality of the area, creating new employment opportunities and improving the permeability of this part of the market by providing new public routes through this complex.

70 Despite this, it is considered that the scale of development and lack of office content with a potential for high-density employment, falls short of the London Plan aspirations for the Farringdon/Smithfield Area of Intensification, which include high-density development and an objective to make the most efficient use of scarce development land in a central London location, with a high existing and future public transport accessibility level. In particular, it fails to optimise the use of the site, its floorspace potential and the existing, grossly under-utilsed buildings. If approved in its existing form, it would represent a “missed opportunity” to achieve the optimum strategic benefits which the London Plan strongly advocates.

71 London Plan policies on the Central Activities Zone, regeneration, retail and office development; heritage and urban design; inclusive access, transport/parking, energy, flood risk and air quality are relevant to this application. Whilst the application is broadly acceptable in strategic planning terms, on balance, it does not fully comply with the London Plan. The following changes might, however, remedy the above-mentioned deficiencies, and could possibly lead to the application becoming compliant with the London Plan:

 Compliance with the London Plan aspirations for the Farringdon/Smithfield Area of Intensification: The application excludes any specific proposals for use of the basement and upper floors of the General Market Building or proposals for additional new space, and in so doing fails to optimise the potential of a site in an Area of Intensification within the CAZ and with excellent existing and emerging public transport accessibility. A further intensification of the use of the site is, therefore, more likely to comply with the policy objectives of the London Plan.

 Inclusive access: The applicant is requested to ensure full wheelchair access into and within the markets complex, provide fully accessible public toilets; and submit further information as to how the level change within the retail units would be overcome.

page 12  Transport: The applicant should liaise with Transport for London with a view to resolving the following issues required to ensure full compliance with the transport policies of the London Plan: confirmation of the level, allocation and delivery mechanism of cycle parking provision (which may require a s278 agreement for its delivery), the safety of the proposed access arrangements; financial contributions towards Crossrail (secured through a s106 agreement) and a new pedestrian crossing at the junction of Farringdon Street/Charterhouse Street/Farringdon Road; highway works (requiring a s278 agreement) including, but not limited to potential footway renewal on Farringdon Street; the protection of rail infrastructure; and for the submission of a travel plan, delivery and servicing plan, and a construction logistics plan to be secured by appropriate planning conditions. The applicant should also liaise with Crossrail Ltd with regard to any potential impact upon their operations.

 Energy: The applicant should submit an energy assessment to respond to London Plan energy policy. The report should be compiled in line with the GLA Guidance on the preparation of energy assessments (September 2013) available on the GLA Planning website.

 Surface water drainage: If the City of London Corporation is minded to grant permission for this development, it is requested that an appropriate planning condition be imposed to secure the implementation of measures proposed in the flood risk assessment to manage surface water drainage from the site.

 Air quality: The applicant should submit an air quality assessment of the proposal for approval by the City Corporation in conjunction with the GLA, prior to any subsequent referral of this application back to the Mayor and this must include modelled evidence to demonstrate that the emission limits can be met and neutral air quality achieved, in line with the requirements of London Plan policy 5.2.

for further information, contact GLA Planning Unit – Development & Projects Team Colin Wilson, Senior Manager – Planning Decisions 020 7983 4783 email [email protected] Justin Carr, Strategic Planning Manager (Development Decisions) 020 7983 4895 email [email protected] Edmund Bird, Senior Heritage Advisor (Case officer) 020 7983 5812 email [email protected]

page 13