26 September 2008
LAND SECURITIES SUBMITS PLANNING APPLICATION FOR ARUNDEL GREAT COURT WC2

Land Securities today announces that it has submitted a planning application for Arundel Great Court, its 3.3 acre island site bounded by Strand, Arundel Street, Surrey Street and Temple Place, adjacent to Temple Underground station.

The detailed plans, submitted to Westminster City Council, seek permission for a mixed use development which will transform this historically and strategically important area that links the West End and the City of London with spectacular views on the curve of the River Thames.

Master planned by award winning architects Wilkinson Eyre and Horden Cherry Lee, the proposed development will reinstate the historic street pattern and create two new buildings, an office building located at the north of the site, on Strand, and a residential and hotel building to the South which will exploit the wonderful views along the River Thames. The 1.04m sq ft (96,450 sq m) proposed development will deliver private housing, a new 5-star hotel, premium office space and high quality retail and restaurants. The affordable housing element will be provided elsewhere in the City of Westminster.

The proposed gross floor areas are as follows:
• Office - 623,359 sq ft (57,933 sq m).
• Residential 151 units (278,737sq ft, 25,905 sq m).
• Hotel - 98 rooms plus 18 serviced suites (162,174 sq ft, 15,072 sq m).
• Retail - 31,139 sq ft (2,894 sq m).

The proposals will enhance dramatically the environment for those living, working and visiting the area, with much improved pedestrian permeability through the site. A public open space incorporating a children’s play area will create a new place to pause and relax along with exemplary landscaping and architectural treatment of shared spaces.

Using pioneering techniques, the scheme will create the opportunity to share infrastructure with neighbouring developments and trial environmentally innovative concepts such as fuel cell technology and a heat rejecting green wall. As ever, this Land Securities initiative will be at the forefront of the push for more sustainable construction.

The proposals reflect extensive consultation in Westminster with local and statutory stakeholders and will continue with a public exhibition due to be held next month.

Colette O’Shea, Head of Development for Land Securities' London Portfolio, said: "Arundel Great Court is a mixed use scheme of exceptional design which respects the historical importance of the site and its surrounding context whilst, at the same time, delivering the space that modern occupiers demand. Our proposals will transform the existing site from an uninspiring monolithic office block to a thriving new commercial and residential hub, which will deliver long term benefits to the area by providing investment, the highest quality space and a welcoming environment for residents, workers, shoppers and visitors.”

Subject to planning consent, work on the scheme could start as early as Autumn 2009.

http://i202.photobucket.com/albums/aa278/fit3xl/LandSec20Temple2_tcm23-1875008.jpg

http://i202.photobucket.com/albums/aa278/fit3xl/LandSec20Temple_tcm23-1875002.jpg

Demolition has begun, hail Keltbray!

http://i527.photobucket.com/albums/cc360/londonfire/Picture122_105.jpg

http://i527.photobucket.com/albums/cc360/londonfire/Picture122_106.jpg

I don't mind the strand elevation, but what happened to the riverside? Looks very 6o's and makes the Brutalist building next to it look quiet good which is not exactly a good thing. I wish architects would understand the importance of a site and not just design mundane buildings along the river.

I agree the river frontage is very boring.

This is a large site and while the elevations (river-side in particular) aren't great, has anyone seen a plan showing the internal space. Any courtyards, public routes etc?

Well I hope they tell them to go back to the drawing board on the river frontage. The public Realm may be good but this should not be the deciding point on this building.

Utterly bland and offensive for the quality of buildings on the embankment especially further west.
Wilkinson Eyre designing this is unbelievable to me. Milton should like and approve of it.

it is all because of Westminster! The banal use of stone cladding is pure Westminster. They have the collective imagination of a tea pot.

doesn't look a whole lot better than what its replacing. Surely the nasty concrete culprit next door is more deserving of the Keltbray treatment?

Haha indeed, that's the Kings College London Students' Union, an old haunt of mine. It's truely horrid I agree, however the club on the top two floors probably has the best view of any club in London.

it is all because of Westminster! The banal use of stone cladding is pure Westminster. They have the collective imagination of a tea pot.

Have to agree but some of the blame surely lies with the architects not stone.

how else will stone be used on an office? They aint going to start carving cherubs on it.

Haha indeed, that's the Kings College London Students' Union, an old haunt of mine. It's truely horrid I agree, however the club on the top two floors probably has the best view of any club in London.

and probably the most slippery and dangerous dance floor

Wilkinson Eyre are doing the office with Horden Cherry Lee the hotel & resi.

http://i38.tinypic.com/1610qxt.jpg
http://i37.tinypic.com/4qs7xd.jpg
http://i35.tinypic.com/2njhfmw.jpg
http://i37.tinypic.com/2poyvz9.jpg
http://i36.tinypic.com/2q0n5lt.jpg

http://www.capitalcommitment.co.uk/pdf/AGC%20BOARDS%20FINAL.pdf

Wilkinson Eyre are doing the office with Horden Cherry Lee the hotel & resi.

http://i38.tinypic.com/1610qxt.jpg
http://i37.tinypic.com/4qs7xd.jpg
http://i35.tinypic.com/2njhfmw.jpg
http://i37.tinypic.com/2poyvz9.jpg
http://i36.tinypic.com/2q0n5lt.jpg

http://www.capitalcommitment.co.uk/pdf/AGC%20BOARDS%20FINAL.pdf

The office part of the development actually looks very good.

I see makes more sense now.

how else will stone be used on an office? They aint going to start carving cherubs on it.

If you were to carve some of the clients as the faces of the cherubs you might be able to sell it as an idea. Not sure it would survive 'Value Engineering' though. :)

http://www.propertyweek.com/story.asp?sectioncode=297&storycode=3134462&c=1

LandSecs refused planning consent for 1m sq ft Arundel Great Court scheme
11:42 | 20.02.09
By David Doyle

Westminster Council last night refused to give planning consent to Land Securities plans for a 1m sq ft redevelopment of one of its largest London assets last night.

At a meeting of Westminster’s planning and development committee last night, councillors voted not to give consent to the plans for Arundel Great Court on The Strand.

Land Securities was proposing 151 apartments, a 116-bedroom hotel and 584,000 sq ft of offices to be developed at the block.

In a 51-page report Westminster planning officers advised the council to not give consent to the plans because of the impact the development would have on historic views in the area, particularly from the bridges over the River Thames and the 18th century Somerset House.

The report said: ‘The demolition of the existing buildings is only considered acceptable as part of a redevelopment scheme that demonstrably enhances the heritage assets of the area.

‘The buildings adversely affect the settings of the listed buildings and the character and appearance of the Strand Conservation Area.’

A statement from Land Securities said: ‘The Temple area is currently encumbered by outdated building stock and now needs to be invigorated so that it keeps pace with what businesses, residents and visitors want from London today.

‘We believe that our plans for Arundel Great Court would have delivered that change, both by creating an attractive, high-quality mixed-use scheme and by acting as a catalyst for further investment in the area.

‘We will now be considering our options for Arundel Great Court in the light of the planning committee's decision.’

Land Securities bought the block, which is bordered by The Strand, Temple Pace, Arundel Street and Surrey Street, from the Hong Kong based Ho family in July 2006 for £306m.

Westminster said the buildings were ‘unacceptable due to their height, massing and design, which would have an adverse impact on a significant number of local views and Somerset House river terrace’.

English Heritage also objected.

It said the scheme, which increases the size of the property on the 3 acre site by 300,000 sq ft, will do ‘harm to the historic environment’.

How the hell do they adversely impact on the Somerset House river terrace compared the Student Uni building next door & the current building on site?!?!:nuts:

Westminster said the buildings were ‘unacceptable due to their height, massing and design, which would have an adverse impact on a significant number of local views and Somerset House river terrace’.

English Heritage also objected.

It said the scheme, which increases the size of the property on the 3 acre site by 300,000 sq ft, will do ‘harm to the historic environment’.

How the hell do they adversely impact on the Somerset House river terrace compared the Student Uni building next door & the current building on site?!?!:nuts:

Because you can, um, see it.

I wonder if EH has checked if it's visible from Somerset House courtyard? ;)

I think this is the right decision but for the wrong reasons. The Horden Cherry Lee hotel and residential building facing the river is unremarkable at best. I would have liked to hear Westminster argue that given the extraordinary prominence of sites along the river bank only architecture of the highest standard should be allowed there. I would like see them, in conjunction with the City and the Mayor, suggesting that all riverside sites are subject to design competitions, so that in time as sites are redeveloped we might have a river bank of gems rather than turds.
What's likely to happen here is that a few floors are lopped off and the density either reduced or shifted to the northern end of the site. The already bland appearance might blanded down a bit more.
I have no problem with Westminster setting height limits along the river, I wish the city would lower theirs, but they should intervene in ways that encourage quality rather than mediocrity.
The Wilkinson Eyre building isn't up to much either.

I think this is the right decision but for the wrong reasons. The Horden Cherry Lee hotel and residential building facing the river is unremarkable at best. I would have like to hear Westminster argue that given the extraordinary prominence of sites along the river bank only architecture of the highest standard should be allowed there. I would like see them, in conjunction with the City and the Mayor, suggesting that all riverside sites are subject to design competitions, so that in time as sites are redeveloped we might have a river bank a gems rather than turds.
What's likely to happen here is that a few floors are lopped off and the density either reduced or shifted to the northern end of the site. The already bland appearance might blanded down a bit more.
I have no problem with Westminster setting height limits along the river, I wish the city would lower theirs, but they should intervene in ways that encourage quality rather than mediocrity.
The Wilkinson Eyre building isn't up to much either.


It would be refreshing that a plan as you say for any new sites on the riverfront to go through a rigourous design process and competition to get the best result would do wonder's for London's architecture. You only have to look at the St Georges development in Vauxhall to see where we went terribly wrong . Horden Cherry Lee's attempt is quiet frankly an updated 60's 70's esq building with nicer materials. I don't think it's really addressing the site's incredible setting but I do fear that it will only be amended as apposed to redesigned as you say.

The planning report is here:

http://www3.westminster.gov.uk/csu/Planning%20Applications%20Committees/2008%20onwards%20-%20containing%20Planning%20and%20City%20Development%20Committee%20and%20Planning%20Applications%20Sub-Committee/2009/8%20-%2019%20February/ITEM%2002%20-%20Arundel%20Great%20Ct,%20Surrey%20St,%20WC2.pdf

The reasons for refusal are the "bulk, height and design" of the south site by Horden Cherry Lee and the form of the roof on the north site by Wilkinson Eyre.

http://i37.tinypic.com/4qs7xd.jpg

haha classic Westminster fuck up. The taller middle element was the designs saving grace from the river view.

haha classic Westminster fuck up. The taller middle element was the designs saving grace from the river view.

Completely agree. Although I think it could be made somewhat more graceful

I think this is the right decision but for the wrong reasons. The Horden Cherry Lee hotel and residential building facing the river is unremarkable at best. I would have liked to hear Westminster argue that given the extraordinary prominence of sites along the river bank only architecture of the highest standard should be allowed there. I would like see them, in conjunction with the City and the Mayor, suggesting that all riverside sites are subject to design competitions, so that in time as sites are redeveloped we might have a river bank of gems rather than turds.
What's likely to happen here is that a few floors are lopped off and the density either reduced or shifted to the northern end of the site. The already bland appearance might blanded down a bit more.
I have no problem with Westminster setting height limits along the river, I wish the city would lower theirs, but they should intervene in ways that encourage quality rather than mediocrity.
The Wilkinson Eyre building isn't up to much either.

:applause: Great post... I hope some planners read your contribution.

I think it's moving again....

Land Securities’ Arundel Great Court scheme gets green light

14:25 | 13.11.09

By Deirdre Hipwell

Land Securities has been granted full planning consent for its 1m sq ft mixed use development of Arundel Great Court at appeal.

Read more: http://www.propertyweek.com/story.asp?sectioncode=297&storycode=3153281&c=1#ixzz0X49d0TGy

I wonder if EH has checked if it's visible from Somerset House courtyard? ;)

"Westminster planning officers advised the council to not give consent to the plans because of the impact the development would have on historic views in the area, particularly from the bridges over the River Thames and the 18th century Somerset House."

Read more: http://www.propertyweek.com/story.asp?sectioncode=297&storycode=3153281&c=1#ixzz0XywDwXW7

It's got to the pint now that you can actually imagine the design of new Embankment buildings before you actually see the plans. They are so predictably bland. Very dispiriting. So much architectural education, so much whizzy CAD, and yet, perhaps not surprisingly, the amount of design talent remains the same. :ohno::bash:

I actually like the riverside facade. It's the side facing Fleet Street that bothers me more.

It's got to the pint now that you can actually imagine the design of new Embankment buildings before you actually see the plans. They are so predictably bland. Very dispiriting. So much architectural education, so much whizzy CAD, and yet, perhaps not surprisingly, the amount of design talent remains the same. :ohno::bash:


I would say the blandness is more to do with Westminister & EH meddling than anything else.

I actually like the riverside facade. It's the side facing Fleet Street that bothers me more.

May I ask why?

Bumping this thread to announce that Swissotel's the Howard hotel is closing at the end of September 2011 because of the Arundel Great Court development.

Shortly after closing, should the Swissotel the Howard Hotel be dismantled and replaced with an empty lot before the Olympics or will they wait until after the Olympics?

May I ask why?Incoherent and bland. By contrast the river-facing facade is quite imposing.

great riverside improvement... I only wish efforts like this could be replicated at the city and southwark's riversides - which are horrible!!!

The river frontage does not look too bad, could have been a bit more interesting but at least it's not one of those freaks you see going up in other cities which are going to be hideously dated very quickly just like the junk from the 70's. The Howard was a good hotel in an uninspiring building.

What they should propose instead is not a better designed building or a park but a lawn, one well manicured lawn Bowling green style. There should be no shrubs, trees or park benches only a perfectly even lawn that follows the terrain down to the river.

The trees on the embankment in front of the site should be lopped and the section of the Temple Street Station building that faces this site demolished. Street furniture should be removed too as should a section of the Embankment wall of the same width of the site and neighbouring roads. If possible the road and pavement should be at the same level on the Embankment.

Remove the embankment wall containing the district & circle line tunnels, the main north outfall sewer, a BT IPCore fibre optic trunk and the statutorily Grade I listed Temple Underground station...

What have you been smoking?

Remove the embankment wall containing the district & circle line tunnels, the main north outfall sewer, a BT IPCore fibre optic trunk and the statutorily Grade I listed Temple Underground station...

What have you been smoking?

No no no, not the entire embankment just the wall at ground level. You could have a lowered platform (so hidden) with a railing over hanging the river as a safety precaution.

This must be right opposite The Royal Courts of Justice plus a few churches and the Australian High Commission, this reminds me of the big scheme on Regent Street.

It's kind of crappy.

This one is back on hold. Demolition was suspended and continues to be lain derelict inside (the front section at least).

Land Securities sold the project onto Waterway PCP Properties Ltd early last year, who aren't in a particular hurry to carry on.

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8386/8572863486_6cc66c8efa_b.jpg