Home
News
Planning and Licensing
Join us

Latest news, planning issues & archive

-- ALL -- News Planning Archive
Back
Object today to Massive Redevelopment around South Kensington Station!
Archive  |  Sat - August 15, 2020 14:08
Lost Horizon: What the Bullnose would look like from the south
Lost Horizon: What the Bullnose would look like from the south
Have your say and file an Objection by 4 September!
 
We and other local residents’ associations have closely examined the re-development proposals by TfL and their partner, Native Land.  Our joint conclusion is that this is GROSS OVER-DEVELOPMENT which will destroy the character and attraction of South Kensington.  MOREOVER, TFL HAVE ANNOUNCED A DEFERMENT OF THE STATION UPGRADE SO WE GET NO STEP-FREE ACCESS but do get a MASSIVE re-development of the surrounding area, totally out of scale with the current buildings.
The much loved BULLNOSE will be DESTROYED to make way for a 5-storey new build which will rob us of many of our cherished views of our world-famous museums.
The houses and shops on Thurloe Street will reduced to a MERE PASTICHE of what is there now.
Pelham Street will become a CANYON of high-rise blocks of office/shops.
We exceeded our goal of 1,000 objections by September 4--there were 1,401.  We should keep filing objections right up until the planning committee meeting, which has not yet been set.
Please have EVERY MEMBER OF YOUR HOUSEHOLD express and file their own objection!
We provide a guide that is quite detailed for those who want to know more but, if you do not have the time, please put in a 3-4 liner as the number of objections is as important as the content! 
The Proposed Development
For an overview of the development click on https://www.saveoursouthkensington.com/
For a visual assessment post development pre- and post- development click on the link to see the photomontages that we commissioned together with Thurloe Owners and Leaseholders Association and Pelham Association. You have to slide the white bar to see the post development "future" https://www.saveoursouthkensington.com/proposals.

How to Object – It is easy
You can file an objection by either: How to file an objection
  • On RBKC website’s make sure you change to “Reason for commenting: Objection” scroll down bar by highlighting “Objection”.
  • Formulate in Comments Your Objection in your own words choosing your own priorities of the areas that you do object to
  • Make Your Objection valuable by making comments to specific aspects and relate them to the specific contravention of RBKC planning policies. We provide you with examples with a full list of the planning policies that are contravened in an Annex at the end.
  • Make sure that you also question the balance of the development’s public benefit against the impairment of designated heritage assets, the neighbourhood’s character and deferment of the station upgrade. This is important as National Planning Policy Framework (para. 195) stipulates that significant harm to listed heritage assets needs to be out weight by the benefits.
  • Provide your name, address and email specifically if you are a local resident (RBKC’s website will only show your address but not your name)
  • You can upload and attach any attachment at the end, such as a picture or other relevant documents.
 
Ideas for the arguments you could consider for your objection
Each aspect should ideally contravene at one planning policy (to be quoted in brackets, e.g. CL3a)
  1. Massing and height of the development seriously harms the character and appearance of the neighbourhood, specifically the conservation area and its adjacent Grade II listed buildings
  2. Demolition of the existing 1 storey curtilage listed Bullnose and replacement by a new 4 storey (3 floors plus mezzanine) colosseum like office building which is disproportionate and dwarfs the Grade II  listed 1 storey South Kensington Station entrances next to it.
  3. Development of a new residential and office 4 storey blocks along Pelham Street increasing to 5 storey at the Station end compared to mostly 3 storey residential cottages along Pelham Street and Grade II * listed terrace houses on Pelham Place. The result for Pelham Street is the creation of a “Canyon effect” and a material loss of light to existing residents. The developer is currently trying to buy off this impact by offering compensation.
  4. Development of a new 5 storey residential development on Thurloe Bridge seriously harming the setting of the Grade II* listed terrace houses on Pelham Place as well as Grade II listed Thurloe Square houses.
  5. Loss of the unique sense of space and openness of the public realm north and the south of the South Kensington Station due to the construction of a Colosseum like Bullnose office block with its oppressive, inadequate proportions in height and massing.
Contravention of RBKC Policy “CL1 Context and Character”
The Council will require all development to respect the existing context, character and appearance, taking opportunities available to improve the quality and character of buildings and the area and the way it functions, including being inclusive for all.
Contravention of RBKC Policy “CL12 Building Heights”
The Council will require new buildings to respect the setting of the Borough’s valued townscape and landscapes, though appropriate building heights. (..)
To deliver this the Council will:
a. require proposals to strengthen our traditional townscape in terms of building heights and roofscape by requiring developments to:
 i. reflect the prevailing building heights within the context;
 ii. provide, for larger developments, a roofscape that reflects that of the context of the site;
 (..)
b. resist buildings significantly taller than the surrounding townscape other than in exceptionally rare circumstances, where the development has a wholly positive impact on the character and quality of the townscape. (..)”
Contravention of RBKC Policy “CR5 Parks, Open Spaces and Waterways”
To deliver this the Council will in relation to: Parks, Gardens and Open Spaces (..)
b. resist development that has an adverse effect upon the environmental and open character, appearance and function of Conservation Areas (..) or their setting.
 
  1. Loss of unique long views, two even listed in the THURLOE ESTATE AND SMITH’S CHARITY CONSERVATION AREA APPRAISAL, that define the character of our area.
  2. Loss of the listed conservation view as the sight of both towers of Grade I listed Natural History Museums is entirely blocked off by the new Bullnose looking a) from Onslow Square up to South Kensington Station as well as b) from Carluccio, Melton Court up to Cromwell Place.
  3. Loss of the listed conservation view of one of the Grade I listed Natural History Museum towers from Pelham Place towards Thurloe Bridge/Pelham Street as the new residential building along Pelham Street blocks the sight entirely off.  
  4. Loss of the characteristic view of the V&A cupola above the station when viewed from Old Brompton Road as the new Bullnose blocks the view.
  5. Loss of the characteristic view of the V&A cupola between 2-12 Pelham Street as the new office building along Pelham Street blocks the view.
  6. Impairment of the listed conservation view from Exhibition Road towards 20-43 Thurloe Street due to a new mansard, which is not sufficiently recessed and does not fit architecturally, with further harm coming from the visible addition of servicing equipment top of the mansard.  
Contravention of RBKC Policy “CL11 Views”
The Council will require all development to protect and enhance views, vistas gaps and the skyline that contribute to the character and quality of the area.
Contravention of RBKC Policy “CL8 Existing Buildings–Roof Alterations/Additional Storeys”
The Council will require roof alterations and additional storeys to be architecturally sympathetic to the age and the character of the building or the group of buildings.
To deliver this the Council will: (..)
b. resist additional storeys and roof alterations on: (..) v. buildings or terraces where the roof line or party wally are exposed to long views from public spaces, and there they would have an intrusive impact on the view or would impede the view of an important building or open space beyond.  

 
  1. Demolition and impairment of a large number of prominent listed and heritage buildings that define the beautiful character of our neighbourhood and the conservation area.
  2. Demolition of the existing 1 storey curtilage listed Bullnose including some original shop fronts and other unique historic features currently hidden behind cardboard walls.
  3. Demolition of part of the Grade II listed Edwardian George Sherrin Arcade to accommodate the new 4 storey Bullnose (3 floors plus mezzanine).
  4. Demolition of the entire shop front of 20-34 Thurloe Street to accommodate new building layout with larger shop fronts and increased shop floors and a central residential entrance.
  5. Demolition of 20-34 Thurloe Street building, except for the façade from the 2nd storey upwards.
  6. Addition of a mansard storey and building equipment on top of existing 20-34 Thurloe Street, in an architectural design that does not match the mansards of the adjacent conservation buildings and with the building’s equipment clearly visible on top of the mansard.
  7. The proposed ASD development as a whole is an impairment to South Kensington’s designated “residential neighbourhood of distinction” which attracts visitors as well as residents.   
Contravention of RBKC Policy “CL3 Heritage Assets”
The Council will require all developments to preserve and to take opportunities to enhance the cherished and familiar local scene.
To deliver this the Council will:
a. require developments to preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the conservation area and protect the special architectural or historic interest of the area and its setting;
(..)
c. resist substantial demolition in conservation areas unless it can be demonstrated that
   i. the building or part of the building or structure makes no positive contribution to the character
     or appearance of the area.

 
  1. The design of the new buildings lacks context and proportion to the surrounding heritage assets
  2. The proposed contemporary design conflicts with the historic design of the existing buildings that create the village character and feel of our neighbourhood.
  3. The attempt to achieve a conservation-led design by only replicating the colour of adjacent heritage assets while using modern material like glass and steel, when the area’s main materials are stucco, brick, stone and metal railings, does not work and destroys the integrity and character of the area.  
  4. The new Colosseum-like Bullnose lacks any context to the adjacent heritage facades of the Thurloe and Smith’s Charity Conservation Area. The design is too generic and so does not correspond well to the context of the adjacent heritage assets with their village character.  
  5. The contemporary design of the proposed 4 – 5 storey office and residential buildings along Pelham Street do not correspond and lacks context to the facades of the 3-4 story heritage cottage buildings on the opposite side of Pelham street.
     
Contravention of RBKC Policy “CL2 Design Quality”
The Council will require all developments to be of the highest architectural and urban design quality taking opportunities to improve the quality and character of the buildings and the area and the way it functions.
To deliver this the Council will:
a. require development to be:
   
     iii. Attractive - pleasing in its composition, materials and craftsmanship;
     iv. Locally distinctive - responding well to its context. (..)
 
  1. Material Loss of natural day light caused to some existing residential and protected conservation assets.
  2. Material loss of light for existing residents along Pelham Street, including several Grade II* listed buildings on Pelham Place, due to the height of a new 4 storey office block along Pelham Street increasing to 5 storey at the Station end.
  3. Material loss of light into the Grade II listed Edwardian George Sherrin Station Arcade, with its recently restored clear glazed roof, as it will lie in the shadow of the 4 storey Bullnose.   
Contravention of RBKC Policy “CL5 Living Conditions”
The Council will require all developments to ensure good living conditions for occupants of new, existing and neighbouring buildings.
To deliver the Council will: (..)
b. ensure good standards of daylight and sunlight are achieved in new developments and in existing properties affected by new development.
 
  1. Inadequate infrastructure measures to support such development.
  2. Omission to assess the adequacy and sufficiency of the development’s Foul Water and Surface Water infrastructure by the developer.
    The developer failed to liaise in time and to assess with Thames Water the adequacy of the development’s Foul Water and Surface Water infrastructure. If the application would be approved, it would be without knowing if the water infrastructure is adequate or which further works would be needed (See RBKC Application Document 31.07.2020 - Thames Water email). 
  3. New loading bay south of the station is inadequate to support the needed 25+ Deliveries per day for the Bullnose and Pelham Street’s flexile A Class “retail” and it obstructs pedestrian passage. (See drawing RBKC Application Document 18.06.2020 - Transport Assessment, p.57 - Part 2, Appendix D)
    The loading bay, cut off the public plaza south of the station, will need to accommodate 25+ Deliveries per day for flexible! Class A units, meaning more restaurants/coffee shops in Bullnose and Pelham Street. Due to the amount of deliveries trucks are likely to permanently obstruct passage for pedestrians from the station to the crossing to Malvern Court and disturb the traffic at this neuralgic junction of Pelham Street and Onslow Square/Old Brompton Road.
    It is expected that trucks will enter the bay from Old Brompton Road and exit into Pelham Street but no measure is planned to obstruct the mayhem of a reverse truck entry from Pelham Street.   
  4. Material increase of “Sacks on Street” specifically from the Bullnose and 20-34 Thurloe Street
    The developer seeks a flexible A Class classification for the Bullnose retail units. This is likely to mean more restaurants/coffee shops and so more waste. Thurloe Street’s retail waste will also increase materially on the back of the new large commercially used basement.
    In addition, as no collection room is planned on site in the Bullnose for its offices all its office waste will need to transported to a collection room in the middle of Pelham Street. Due to the distance it is very likely that the waste will end up in sacks on the street instead.
  5. South Kensington Station’s Capacity is already stretched and cannot absorb further passenger flows from such a massive development for an indefinite period.
    Following the decision of TfL to “pause” the much-needed Station Capacity Upgrade would acerbate the existing overcrowding of the station during peak times as well as school holidays.
     
  6. Questionable public benefits for this independent 100% commercial development claimed to offset the harm to the heritage assets.
  7. There is a real risk that the ASD could be completed without the Station Upgrade being undertaken! This is because these are two separate developments (Application Documents – Planning Statement – 3.3., p.19). On 27 July 2020, we learned that the Station Upgrade has been officially put on hold until further notice. https://www.mylondon.news/news/west-london-news/south-kensington-london-underground-station-18667951. TfL has been contacted but could not provide any guidance if and when the Station Upgrade would start. The Station capacity is already now beyond its limit and cannot not cope with the additional traffic that would come with the ASD development (during and after construction).
  8. Step free access to the District and Circle line platforms depends entirely on Station Upgrade, while this development is only a complement.
  9. All monetary benefits estimated are grossly overly optimistic as consistently stated on a gross income and not on a net additional income basis. None of the figures provided in the Socio-Economic Benefits Statement take the existing income generation into account or assumes a detrimental impact on neighbouring businesses. Interesting is specifically the aspect of an additional £0.90mn in gross business rates revenue when retail floor space is effectively reduced from an existing GIA of 2.502 m2 to a proposed 2.282m2.
  10. Creation of only additional 25 residential units rather than the stated 50 units, of which only 17 are affordable residential units, none are social housing. The developer talks about 50 new units, but omits to deduct the 25 existing units in 20-34 Thurloe Street. Of the 17 affordable units the majority or 11 units are 1- or 2-Beds, whereas only 6 are much needed 3- or 4-Beds.  
  11. The affordable housing element will only approximately meet the minimum requirement of 35% of habitable room set by RBKC, if at all, this despite the large scale of this development. Due to the lack of information provided there is actually a question whether the development even meets this requirement as it is based on a minimum of 35% of all residential floor space.
  12. New retail shop layouts will allow easy amalgamation of shops into larger retail units, thus threatening existing independent small retail businesses as well as the small village character of our area. We are not only concerned about the new basement in 20-34 Thurloe Street.
  13. The Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) of £2.92mn to RBKC is kept to a minimum for this development which includes the material “brown-site” along Pelham Street. The CIL is only payable for residential floorspace, while there is no levy payable to RBKC for the equally significant commercial floorspace (retail and office) of the development.
  14. The proposed development will destroy and not “contribute towards the Council’s ambition for an engaging public realm that provides a range of opportunities for external living”. The development destroys conservation views and the open space feeling around the station, specifically the public realm south of the station’s entrance due to the new oversized
Colosseum-like Bullnose as well as the installation of a loading bay and the additional 27 new cycling racks in this area.  

 
ANNEX
 
List of the Planning Policies contravened by Planning Application PP/20/03216 and Listed Building Application LB/20/03217:
 
National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF):
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/810507/NPPF_Feb_2019_print_revised.pdf
 
NPPF – 193. When considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be given to the asset’s conservation (and the more important the asset, the greater the weight should be). This is irrespective of whether any potential harm amounts to substantial harm, total loss or less than substantial harm to its significance.
 
NPPF - 194. Any harm to, or loss of, the significance of a designated heritage asset (from its alteration or destruction, or from development within its setting), should require clear and convincing justification. Substantial harm to or loss of:
a)grade II listed buildings, or grade II registered parks or gardens, should be exceptional;
b)assets of the highest significance, notably scheduled monuments, protected wreck sites, registered battlefields, grade I and II* listed buildings, grade I and II* registered parks and gardens, and World Heritage Sites, should be wholly exceptional.
 
NPPF - 195. Where a proposed development will lead to substantial harm to (or total loss of significance of) a designated heritage asset, local planning authorities should refuse consent, unless it can be demonstrated that the substantial harm or total loss is necessary to achieve substantial public benefits that outweigh that harm or loss, or all of the following apply:
a)the nature of the heritage asset prevents all reasonable uses of the site; and
b)no viable use of the heritage asset itself can be found in the medium term through appropriate marketing that will enable its conservation; and
c)conservation by grant-funding or some form of not for profit, charitable or public ownership is demonstrably not possible; and d) the harm or loss is outweighed by the benefit of bringing the site back into use.
 
NPPF - 196. Where a development proposal will lead to less than substantial harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal including, where appropriate, securing its optimum viable use. xxx

RBKC’s Local Plan (Sept 2019)
https://www.rbkc.gov.uk/sites/default/files/atoms/files/Local%20plan%202019%20%28full%20document%29.pdf
 
RBKC Planning Policy - CO4 Strategic objective for An Engaging Public Realm
Our strategic objective for an engaging public realm is to endow a strong local sense of place by
maintaining and extending our excellent public realm to all parts of the borough.

RBKC Planning Policy CF2 Retail Development within Town Centres
The Council will promote vital and viable town centres and ensure that the character and diversity of
the borough’s town centres is maintained.
To deliver this the Council will:
a…..; and
b. require a range of shop unit sizes in new major retail development, and resist the amalgamation
of shop units, where the retention of the existing units contributes to achieving the vision for the
centre.

RBKC Policy CR2 Three-dimensional Street Form
The Council will require that where new streets are proposed, or where development would make
significant change to the form of existing streets, the resultant street form and character must draw
from the traditional qualities and form of the existing high quality streets.
To deliver this the Council will:
a……;
b. require the ratio of building height to street width to give a coherent and comfortable scale to the
street;
c. require building lines and building scales to be consistent and related to context;
d.….
 
RBKC Planning CL1 Context and Character
The Council will require all development to respect the existing context, character and appearance,
taking opportunities available to improve the quality and character of buildings and the area and the
way it functions, including being inclusive for all.
To deliver this the Council will:
a. require development to contribute positively to the townscape through the architecture and urban form, addressing matters such as scale, height, bulk, mass, proportion, plot width, building lines, street form, rhythm, roofscape, materials and historic fabric as well as vistas, views, gaps, and
open space;
b. require development to respond to the local context;
c….
 
RBKC Planning Policy CL2 Design Quality
The Council will require all development to be of the highest architectural and urban design quality,
taking opportunities to improve the quality and character of buildings and the area and the way it
functions.
To deliver this the Council will:
a. require development to be:
 i….;
 ii….;
 iii. Attractive - pleasing in its composition, materials and craftsmanship;
 iv. Locally distinctive - responding well to its context…..
 
b. require an appropriate architectural style on a site by-site basis, in response to:
 i. the context of the site;
 ii. the building’s proposed design, form and use;
 iii. whether the townscape is of uniform or varied character.
 
RBKC Planning Policy CL3 Heritage Assets - Conservation Areas and Historic Spaces
The Council will require development to preserve and to take opportunities to enhance the
cherished and familiar local scene.
To deliver this the Council will:
a. require development to preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the conservation
area and protect the special architectural or historic interest of the area and its setting;
b….;
c. resist substantial demolition in conservation areas unless it can be demonstrated that:
 i. in the case of substantial harm or loss to the significance of a heritage asset it is necessary to
achieve substantial public benefits that outweigh that harm or loss;
 ii. in the case of less than substantial harm to the significance of a heritage asset, that the public
benefits, including securing the optimum viable use, outweigh that harm;
 iii….;
 
RBKC Planning Policy CL4 Heritage Assets - Listed Buildings, Scheduled Ancient Monuments and
Archaeology
The Council will require development to protect the heritage significance of listed buildings,
scheduled ancient monuments and Archaeological Priority Areas.
To deliver this the Council will:
a. require all development and any works for alterations or extensions related to listed buildings,
scheduled ancient monuments and Archaeological Priority Areas, to preserve the heritage
significance of the building, monument or site or their setting or any features of special
architectural or historic interest;
b. resist the demolition of listed buildings in whole or in part, or the removal or modification of
features of architectural importance, both internal and external;
c. require the preservation of original architectural features, and later features of interest, both
internal and external;

RBKC Planning Policy CL8 Existing Buildings – Roof Alterations/ Additional Storeys
The Council will require roof alterations and additional storeys to be architecturally sympathetic to
the age and character of the building and group of buildings.
To deliver this the Council will:
a…;
b. resist additional storeys, and roof level alterations on:
 i. complete terraces or groups of buildings where the existing roof line is unimpaired by
extensions, even when a proposal involves adding to the whole terrace or group as a coordinated design;
 ii….

RBKC Planning Policy CL10 Shopfronts
The Council will require shopfronts to relate well to the buildings above and to either side to provide
an attractive setting for the display of goods and to drive up the quality of the area.
To deliver this the Council will:
a. require alterations to existing shopfronts to preserve those elements that contribute to their
traditional character, such as corbels, part-glazed doors, fascia, glazing bars, pilasters, and
stallrisers, awnings and blinds;
b. require new, and alterations to existing, shopfronts to:
 i. respect the building’s original framework;
 ii. have a positive visual impact on the appearance of the building or streetscene;
 iii…;
 iv…;
 v. maintain existing independent access to upper floor accommodation;
c…;
d. resist new shopfronts that would involve the removal of existing separate access to residential
accommodation;

RBKC Planning Policy CL11 Views
The Council will require all development to protect and enhance views, vistas, gaps and the skyline
that contribute to the character and quality of the area.
To deliver this the Council will:
a. resist development which interrupts, disrupts or detracts from strategic and local vistas, views,
and gaps and the skyline;
b. require developments whose visual impacts extend beyond that of the immediate street,
to demonstrate how views are protected or enhanced;
c. require, within conservation areas, development to preserve or enhance views:
 i. identified in conservation area appraisals;
 ii. generally within, into, and out of conservation areas, including the rear of properties;
 iii. that affect the setting of and from development on sites adjacent to conservation areas and
listed buildings;
d. require development to respect the setting of a landmark, taking care not to create intrusive
elements in its foreground, middle ground or background.
 
RBKC Planning Policy CL12 Building Heights
The Council will require new buildings to respect the setting of the borough’s valued townscapes
and landscapes, through appropriate building heights.
To deliver this the Council will:
a. require proposals to strengthen our traditional townscape in terms of building heights and
roofscape by requiring developments to:
 i. reflect the prevailing building heights within the context;
 ii. provide, for larger developments, a roofscape that reflects that of the context of the site;
 iii….;
b. resist buildings significantly taller than the surrounding townscape other than in exceptionally
rare circumstances, where the development has a wholly positive impact on the character and
quality of the townscape…
 
RBKC Planning Policy CE6 Noise and Vibration
The Council will carefully control the impact of noise and vibration generating sources which affect
amenity both during the construction and operational phases of development. The Council will
require new noise and vibration sensitive developments to mitigate and protect occupiers against
existing sources of noise and vibration.
To deliver this the Council will:
a. require that noise and vibration sensitive development is located in the most appropriate location
and, wherever located, is protected against existing sources of noise and vibration, through
careful design, layout and use of materials to ensure adequate insulation from sound and
vibration;
b. resist developments which fail to meet adopted local noise and vibration standards;
c. resist all applications for noise and vibration generating development and plant that would have an unacceptable noise and vibration impact on surrounding amenity;
 
 
The London Plan (March 2016) - https://www.london.gov.uk/sites/default/files/the_london_plan_2016_jan_2017_fix.pdf
 
London Plan - POLICY 7.1 LIFETIME NEIGHBOURHOODS
Strategic
A ….
Planning decisions
B …
C …
D The design of new buildings and the spaces they create should help reinforce or enhance the character, legibility, permeability, and accessibility of the neighbourhood.
 
London Plan - POLICY 7.4 LOCAL CHARACTER
Strategic
A Development should have regard to the form, function, and structure of an area, place or street and the scale, mass and orientation of surrounding buildings. It should improve an area’s visual or physical connection with natural features. In areas of poor or ill-defined character, development should build on the positive elements that can contribute to establishing an enhanced character for the future function of the area.
Planning decisions
B Buildings, streets and open spaces should provide a high quality design response that:
a ….
b …
c ….
d allows existing buildings and structures that make a positive contribution to the character of a place to influence the future character of the area
e is informed by the surrounding historic environment.
 
London Plan - POLICY 7.5 PUBLIC REALM
Strategic
A London’s public spaces should …. relate to local context, and incorporate the highest quality design, …..
 
London Plan - POLICY 7.6 ARCHITECTURE
Strategic
A Architecture should make a positive contribution to a coherent public realm, streetscape and wider cityscape. It should incorporate the highest quality materials and design appropriate to its context.
Planning decisions
B Buildings and structures should:
a be of the highest architectural quality
b be of a proportion, composition, scale and orientation that enhances, activates and appropriately defines the public realm
c comprise details and materials that complement, not necessarily replicate, the local architectural character
d …
 
London Plan - POLICY 7.7 LOCATION AND DESIGN OF TALL AND LARGE BUILDINGS
Strategic
A Tall and large buildings should be part of a plan-led approach to changing or developing an area by the identification of appropriate, sensitive and inappropriate locations. Tall and large buildings should not have an unacceptably harmful impact on their surroundings.
Planning decisions
B …
C Tall and large buildings should:
a …
b only be considered in areas whose character would not be affected adversely by the scale, mass or bulk of a tall or large building
c relate well to the form, proportion, composition, scale and character of surrounding buildings, urban grain and public realm (including landscape features), particularly at street level;
d ….
D Tall buildings:
a …
b should not impact on local or strategic views adversely
E The impact of tall buildings proposed in sensitive locations should be given particular consideration. Such areas might include conservation areas, listed buildings and their settings, …...
 
London Plan - POLICY 7.8 HERITAGE ASSETS AND ARCHAEOLOGY
Strategic
A London’s heritage assets and historic environment, including listed buildings, …, conservation areas, … should be identified, so that the desirability of sustaining and enhancing their significance and of utilising their positive role in place shaping can be taken into account.
B ….
Planning decisions
C ….
D Development affecting heritage assets and their settings should conserve their significance, by being sympathetic to their form, scale, materials and architectural detail.
 
 
Top