Farringdon St & Smithfield developments

[potto]

whether or not the new building would actually ruin the prospects of the area to continue as it is or become a more popular leisure destination is questionable (thinking along the lines of Foster @ Spitafields). It is more along the lines of throw in a catalyst and see what happens approach.

I just wish the City would put out some intelligent urban design for once for its many different areas. The Farrell Smithfields docuement shows intelligence and understanding of an area!

London has benefited from the no-rules competition provided by Canary Wharf and the mono-culture of the City - now here comes the rather bitter aftertaste.

[DarJoLe]

Smithfield Market buildings are saved as Hazel Blears blocks KPF scheme
Published: 07 August 2008
AJPlus.co.uk

Communities Secretary Hazel Blears has blocked KPF's controversial proposals to demolish Smithfield General Market in central London and replace it with a £200 million office building.

The practice, backed by Thornfield Properties, had hoped to demolish the 19th-century market buildings in the City of London, but Blears turned down the proposals following a public inquiry held last year.

In the inspector's decision letter, Blears claims that the market buildings add to the character of the surrounding area, as well as providing necessary context for nearby listed buildings.

The letter stated: '[The secretary of state] considers that the existing buildings on the site make a significant contribution, not only to the character and appearance of the Smithfield Conservation Area, but also to the settings of adjoining Conservation Areas and nearby listed buildings.

'The Secretary of State concludes that the [KPF] proposals would cause harm to the character and appearance of the conservation area and the setting of listed buildings. She considers that the proposals would conflict with PPG15 [which deals with the protection of the historic environment] and development plan policies which aim to preserve or enhance the character and appearance of conservation areas and preserve listed buildings.

'She therefore concludes that there is a presumption in favour of retaining the buildings.'

A Thornfield spokesman said: 'We clearly are disappointed by today's decision by the Secretary of State.

'Thornfield will now give careful consideration to the government decision and comments contained in the inspector's report. We will then bring forward, within a short period, revised proposals that take account of the Secretary of State's comments.

'We have been working on this project for more than five years and are committed to carrying it through to planning permission and full development of the site.'

[fitz44]

Well the right decision IMO, now lets see what happens. Thornfield's move next.

[El_Greco]

Good news.
Now lets hope Smithfield wont be left to rot and they will come up with something nice really really nice.

[.Adam]

A restoration and extension programme could do this site wonders, glad it didnt get the go ahead.

[pencialcase]

[henry]

Good decision. Now I would like to see the City actively promote (possibly with a masterplan) the West Smithfield/Farringdon area as a creative and residential district akin to Spitalfields. There are already some flats and a number of architects based in the area, and its proximity to Clerkenwall adds to its potential. I think the square mile would benefit from a greater mix of uses.

[Zenith]

Great decision.

[london lad]

Originally Posted by fitz44

Well the right decision IMO, now lets see what happens. Thornfield's move next.

Apparently they have already got revised plans to submit soon. Will have to see what they come up with but I wouldn't hold your breath.

-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Thornfield to revise its Smithfields plans following rejection

11:10 | 07.08.08

By Laura Chesters

Thornfield is to re-submit revised proposals for its redevelopment of Smithfield’s market in London following the decision this morning by the secretary of state to reject its scheme.

A statement from Thornfield said: ‘We clearly are disappointed by the secretary of state’s decision. We will now give careful consideration to the government decision and comments contained in the inspector’s report. We will then bring forward, within a short period, revised proposals that take account of the Secretary of State’s comments.’

Thornfield had entered into a development agreement with the City of London, the freehold owner of the land, to redevelop the neglected buildings on the disused west side of Smithfield market in 2002.

The 480,000 sq ft design combines an open market area including around 100,000 sq ft of retail and 380,000 sq ft of offices and is designed by architects Kohn Pedersen Fox.

Thornfield said it had been: ‘working on the project for more than five years and we are committed to carrying it through to planning permission and full development of the site.

‘We will consult widely on our new proposals with a range of stakeholders including the City of London and English Heritage together with the Smithfield market traders.'

English Heritage disliked Thornfield’s original plans and said they would damage the ‘special character’ of the area and the market which has been at the site for 800 years.

The City of London also expressed disappointment over the decision. ' We will have to study the full report before we know all the implications and can determine what will be the best steps to take for the future of the site and the Thameslink tunnel lids that lie under it,' it said.

Roger Mascall, planning partner at DPP, which advised English Heritage, said: ‘We are pleased, we put forward what we felt was a strong case in planning and heritage terms and the inspector and secretary of state has agreed wholeheartedly with that.’

[El_Greco]

Lets hope its not pastiche but something amazingly cool!

[ledge88]

Have just read the good news.

[delores]

This is great news, I love this area of London, as it seems to be the only part that has not been taken over by commercial development.I really find the City's attitude to the rather sad for not seeing its full potential, this is a ' Covent Garden' for the city and would do wonders for the surrounding area if developed properly.

[mediadave]

Great news. A chance - if only a chance - to do something good with this land.

[nukey]

THANK GOD!

[mediadave]

I had started to think I had misjudged the corporation with the promising cheapeside developments, but rereading this and the whole JP Morgan situation I'm back to thinking - nah, the corporation should not be entrusted with the City of London. Give it a pile of derelict land in east London and let it go crazy.

[ought]

Yes, thank god for this.

Now why don't English Heritage just get them all listed. I really don't understand their thinking. These buildings must be kept and we will fight for them, but we have not used our powers to list them.

What?

These buildings could be used so amazingly... and the City of London disgust me sometimes. They do good such as rightly spending millions on keeping the Monument standing and salvaging Temple Bar but then they will gleefully demolish the cities soul elsewhere.

Fingers crossed for a sensible solution.

[NothingBetterToDo]

Good decision, i just hope they see sense and do something interesting with the site.

The City really needs to start enhancing what it's got, rather than trying to compete with Canary Wharf by creating massive floor plates that destroy the soul and character of the place.

As others have said, this would be an amazing spot for a Covent Garden style area of shops, cafes and stalls. By keeping the office workers happy with nice street environments the business will be even more inclined to stay - as it is, Canary Wharf is competing on both floorspace and a nice working environment.

There have been some steps in the right direction, but with a few more well thought out schemes to bring out the historic attractions (together with the new architectural gems), it could even bring in more tourism making the place more lively at the weekend.

[delores]

I think the market idea would work not only for the city workers but tourists too. This part of London is a bit dark and sinister but in some ways isn't this what olde London was like? Making it more attractive would do wonders for the area.

[Monters]

These are generally welcome, save for the demolition of the old market building. Not an architecturally meritorious part of London. HOWEVER be it said, loud and true, the new Bath House mings almost as hard as the old one.

[jayo]

I don't understand EH.They waste their time blocking magnificent gleaming skyscraper proposals and can't seem to list a relatively small building.