A new 21-storey office block near Moorgate station has been green-lit despite drawing more than 100 objections. The building will replace the 11-storey Tenter House, the demolition of which had already been approved via a previous application.
A retail unit, community space and works to City Point Plaza are also included in the plans. The site, which is between the station and the Barbican estate, has been the subject of multiple proposals over the last 17 years.
The most recent plans, submitted on behalf of Metropolitan Properties (City) Limited, intend to construct a new part-14 and part-21 storey structure following the demolition of Tenter House.
Critics claim the redevelopment would result in a building which is too big for the area, with consultees including Historic England stating it would impact certain views of St Paul’s Cathedral.
A spokesperson for the Barbican and Golden Lane Neighbourhood Forum previously told the Local Democracy Reporting Service (LDRS): “As well as open terraces right next to our bedrooms, this new tower will bring dozens of vans a day down a quiet cycling street, with some reversing out because the developers have provided no space for them to turn around. This is all contrary to the City Plan, but the planning committee is only proposing to spend 10 minutes on it; no wonder over 100 objections have been received.”
NOW READ: Historic building potentially to become hotel
At a City of London Corporation Planning Applications Sub-Committee meeting yesterday (October 29), Helen Kay, objecting to the scheme, said there was a sense of ‘frustration and upset’ among residents as a result of the submission.
She ran through a series of requests she argued would resolve some of the concerns raised, including making the servicing yard big enough to allow larger lorries to turn around rather than have to reverse in.
Bleeping vehicles, she added, would significantly impact residents, and that a design change enabling them to turn around could avoid ‘20 years of disturbance’.
The potential issue of the noise from reversing vehicles and their access via Moor Lane, which runs parallel to Willoughby House in the Barbican, was returned to frequently during the meeting.
Alder Liz King was among those to ask the applicant why neither of these points had been resolved in the designs. She was told most vehicles will be able to turn in the servicing yard, though that amendments to the consented scheme, such as removing a basement level, have meant there is reduced space to deliver the likes of cycle parking. As a result, they have had to accommodate more in a smaller area without affecting servicing levels.
Deputy Edward Lord asked whether there was any technical planning reason why a condition could not be added stipulating deliveries arrive by Moorfields rather than Moor Lane.
Gwyn Richards, Planning and Development Director at the City, said such a change could not be done by condition as it would require amendments to the entire layout. He added concerns about deliveries could be mitigated by conditions around timings.
Deputy Marianne Fredericks raised doubts about how enforceable limits on the number of daily deliveries would be, and asked why City officers did not push for more servicing space.
“Should we be future-proofing the servicing requirements of that development? By doing that, we need to actually enlarge the servicing area. There’s only one way to ensure that there’s not an impact on the surrounding streets and on the residents, and I’m not sure why officers haven’t pushed more to ensure that we have that.”
Deputy Fredericks was told that widening New Union Street, from which vehicles will access a loading bay for servicing, is not ‘feasible’, in-part due to it being a private road and there not being the space to do so.
The application did receive praise for features such as its inclusion of community space. Deputy Alastair Moss told the committee the applicant had made a ‘great deal of concessions’ with the scheme, and that a redesign of the building to accommodate changes to servicing would not be ‘appropriate or proportionate’.
Deputy Lord proposed a motion suggesting that while the committee is supportive in principle of the application, a decision be deferred until concerns around the servicing and deliveries had been resolved. This was however not carried when put to a vote, and the scheme was subsequently approved.
For the latest headlines from the City of London and beyond, follow City Matters on Twitter, Instagram and LinkedIn.
