Boris Johnson as Mayor - what are the implications for London's development?

[JGG]

A pro-Boris and pro-Milton statement here is probably going to get me slaughtered, but anyway.

1. The statements about skyscrapers are populist and that is how politicians work. However, even Simon Milton is not radically opposed to skyscrapers, because he knows it is the only way to create the required accomodation for people and offices in a city like London. The people around him in planning like most of the tower projects we like; however they do not want a skyscraper backdrop for Buckingham Palace or Westminster Palace and they want well defined clusters. On the lack of defined clusters even Rogers has been criticizing Livingstone.

2. Boris is not fundamentally opposed to skyscrapers. As Steve Norris writes, he likes the Shard, which is not in the City or CW.

3. They will listen more closely to EH but not exclusively. Was it not under Simon Milton that the EH headquarters were allowed to be demolished? They will pick their fights with the developers: they fought the Crown Estate on the planned demolition of the Metropole but then allowed them to go ahred with the Regent street scheme.

4. The creation of a clear framework of clusters will actually make it easier for new towers to get approved. Expect more consensus and less conflict.

In any case, for the next four years, the driving factor in whether skyscrapers get developed will not be planning, it will be the economy.

[JGG]

Originally Posted by DarJoLe

The Mayor's policy review also comes as it emerged that plans are afoot to demolish and redevelop the London Fruit & Wool Exchange opposite Spitalfields Old Market in Brushfield-street.

British Land, the developers behind the colossal Broadgate Tower that now dominates the Spitalfields skyline, are leading the running to build a new office block on the Exchange site.

The famous Gun pub in Brushfield-street would be bulldozed if they're successful, as well a multi-storey car park on Whites-row and Barclay's bank in Commercial-street.

The land is owned by the City of London Corporation, but is within Tower Hamlets.

I hope Boris shows the change in policy by stopping this development. Spitafields market and the area around have already been stripped of too much of their charcter for the impressive and sympatheric Fruit and Wool exchange to be demolished and replaced by another identikit office block.

[Rational Plan]

Originally Posted by Zenith

Jesus you keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel better. He likes the Shard and yet he considers tall buildings outside of the Canary Wharf and city clusters to be wrong? What a bloody hypocrite. So why the hell is the Shard exempt and yet close by 'Beetham' etc are wholly wrong. Absolute idiocy.

Yes I agree with shoreditch etc being protected.

The Beetham Site is over 1km to the West of the Shard. They do not form a cluster. The Beetham and paticularly the Doon Street tower impinge on the Setting of the Palace of Westminster and Whitehall in general. Now it is a matter of taste whether you feel these views are worth preserving or not, but many people do!

[delores]

But there are towers where the beetham tower is to be built? That horrible seifert brown and gold lump needs something far more attractive next to it and there is another tower already being built down the road. I have to agree though Clusters in London will look so much better than having a tower dropped in random manner across the capital. Just look at the horizon of London and you see those horrible refridgerator council flats popping up everywhere. I can totally understand peoples frustration and fear of that happening again.

[london lad]

[QUOTE=JGG;20794648]A pro-Boris and pro-Milton statement here is probably going to get me slaughtered, but anyway.

1. The statements about skyscrapers are populist and that is how politicians work. However, even Simon Milton is not radically opposed to skyscrapers, because he knows it is the only way to create the required accomodation for people and offices in a city like London. The people around him in planning like most of the tower projects we like; however they do not want a skyscraper backdrop for Buckingham Palace or Westminster Palace and they want well defined clusters. On the lack of defined clusters even Rogers has been criticizing Livingstone.

Sorry JGG- Mr Milton has been against every skyscraper proposed for central London, Westminster has tried to stop all the towers in the city including the pinnacle because they slightly stick out in certain views (when not obscured by trees that is). It says a lot when all that the new planning big wigs under Boris have sprouted out how they are going to get rid of towers with nothing about the other more pressing major planning issues effecting London

Boris is not fundamentally opposed to skyscrapers. As Steve Norris writes, he likes the Shard, which is not in the City or CW.

No. Then why did he make it such an issue in the election. Typical Boris sprouts out what he really thinks before someone has a quiet word in his ear that the city is actually quite important to London & thats where a lot of big business lives so probably not wise to piss them off to much.

They will listen more closely to EH but not exclusively. Was it not under Simon Milton that the EH headquarters were allowed to be demolished? They will pick their fights with the developers: they fought the Crown Estate on the planned demolition of the Metropole but then allowed them to go ahred with the Regent street scheme.

They have no need to listen exclusively to EH as Mr Milton has views even more extreme as EH. I would bet that the champers has been flowing at EH ever since the election.

The creation of a clear framework of clusters will actually make it easier for new towers to get approved. Expect more consensus and less conflict.

Kens London plan was helping to define where skyscrapers were desirable & perfectly reasonable for a city of nearly 1000 square miles. Boris et al would begrudgingly except half a square mile in the city & CW but even then if a proposed tower in the city is impinging on any sightlines they will vigorously enforce it. They cant refuse towers at CW & the city anyway as they are already in a predefined cluster & through the planning system. Had the Boris & Simon been elected 8 years ago the pinnacle,heron etc would not have been approved.

In any case, for the next four years, the driving factor in whether skyscrapers get developed will not be planning, it will be the economy.

Thats try. Boris & Simon might scupper lots of new towers at the emybrolic stage some of which we will now never hear about but the ones that have worked there way through the system the last 8 years such as the pinnacle & LBT are almost certain to rise & the one consolidation we have is every day the new mayoral administration comes to work they will have to watch them rise from the windows of there offices whilst sitting at their desks.

[london lad]

Originally Posted by Rational Plan

The Beetham Site is over 1km to the West of the Shard. They do not form a cluster. The Beetham and paticularly the Doon Street tower impinge on the Setting of the Palace of Westminster and Whitehall in general. Now it is a matter of taste whether you feel these views are worth preserving or not, but many people do!

They will slightly come into view when viewed from certain parts of St James Park- but then again so will LBT & so does the London Eye.

Beetham, the two towers at 20 Blackfriars & Kings reach are within 100m of each other so form quite a tight cluster.

The question is can Westminster bully other less deprived boroughs on the South bank of the Thames by riding rough shed over what can & cant be built. Its interesting to see they are all up in arms about these towers but dont suggest anything else that should go in there place. They would quite happily see non-descript low rise office blocks & see Blackfriars remain a backwater provincial office park in central London.

Beethams viewing platform would have opened up a whole new perspective of viewing central London & Doon St would have facilitated a new new dance school & swimming pool for the local area. Who will provide these instead when both Lambeth & Southwark say they cant afford to?

[london lad]

Originally Posted by DarJoLe

His deputy mayor Richard Barnes told the East London Advertiser he was keen to protect districts like Bethnal Green and Shoreditch on the 'City Fringe.'

"It's important we protect the heritage of the area," he said.

"I'm not at all keen on having our skyline ruined by all these huge tower blocks.

"We've got far too many of them and they seemed to be a favourite of the last administration."

Again the use of loaded phrases such as "tower blocks" bringing up images of dire post war tower blocks.

Tall buildings are just another type of building & shown successfully around the world of solving problems of space & density. These are people who have the task of running one of the worlds major cities not a twee little village. One of the reasons they don't want any skyscrapers here is because,like 201 Broadgate it will be seen from Waterloo Bridge. I doubt any of them have spend anytime around this neck of the woods , other than polling time.

[chest]

did Simon Milton approve the 150m tower at Paddington or was that a different department at Westminster?

[gothicform]

he didnt approve it. councillors did. you may want to look at who voted for/against it at the planning meeting.

[Zenith]

Originally Posted by Rational Plan

The Beetham Site is over 1km to the West of the Shard. They do not form a cluster. The Beetham and paticularly the Doon Street tower impinge on the Setting of the Palace of Westminster and Whitehall in general. Now it is a matter of taste whether you feel these views are worth preserving or not, but many people do!

When did I say they formed a cluster. Weird. Go and live in a village then.

[Erebus555]

I think this is great:

St Paul's gets a face-lift to appease London's new Mayor

Recently the UK's resident 'clown' politician Boris Johnson was appointed as Mayor of London. His manifesto stated that he would protect historical views and in particular, "Reinstate planning rules that protect the views of St Paul’s Cathedral and the Palace of Westminster and reinforce protection around new viewing corridors". In other words he would prevent any tall building in the centre of London.

In the spirit of protecting views of St Paul's, architects Feix&Merlin have come up with a novel idea of how to ensure the historic building can be seen from afar. The company have revealed renders of a 50-storey tower to raise the roof of St Paul's cathedral, so that its trademark dome could be seen above any other tall building.

Merlin explained to WAN why they decided to do the redesign: "It's a response to St Paul's cathedral having a strangle-hold on the London skyline...It's a tongue-in-cheek response to Boris' plans and to say we shouldn't be restricting the upward ascent of London...We want people to think about what they want from London. Do they want a historic relic or do you want it to move forward?"

Although it was designed as a statement, Merlin added that he would be happy to assist anyone who wished to take the plans forward. I wonder if Boris would consider it?..

Niki May Young
News Editor

http://www.worldarchitecturenews.com...upload_id=2303

[mulattokid]

@ rational plan

I dont think they are in danger at all...Even if you can just see them, the weather is rarely clear enough to see that far. I dont want London to necessarily follow the rest of the worlds 'cluster' idea. Its not our tradition. We were pioneers with the GPO, Euston and Centre point towers. London is a patchwork of building periods cheek by jow with each other. If you look at it that way then your attitude is anti traditional and at odds with Londons history.

[DarJoLe]

London is big and varied enough to have a collection of tight village clusters, as well as a selection of lone iconic soaring towers across its vast landscape.

[potto]

yes I agree, Im going to use visuals to try and hammer this stupid cluster debate once and for all!

[potto]

Originally Posted by JGG

4. The creation of a clear framework of clusters will actually make it easier for new towers to get approved. Expect more consensus and less conflict.

you what? Strange logic there. The only conflict and confusion with a helpful splattering of delay, dirty under-hand tricks, lies and last minute interventions have been caused by EH and their cronies! Without them interfering outside of their remit even local planning besieged by nimbys has far more clarity. Instead of putting the lunatic in charge of the machine you should instead lock him out.

Progressive = Positive = Clarity.

[potto]

Originally Posted by Rational Plan

The Beetham Site is over 1km to the West of the Shard. They do not form a cluster. The Beetham and paticularly the Doon Street tower impinge on the Setting of the Palace of Westminster and Whitehall in general. Now it is a matter of taste whether you feel these views are worth preserving or not, but many people do!

needing to preserve a view implies that what you are adding is in some way negative. I have yet to hear anyone, EH, in the papers or on this board, give a good logical account of why slender silohettes of the top portion of distant buildings will damage a view, particularly a view that is heavily defined by a messy montage of rooftops of different architectural styles with a lot of green foilage framing a very sharp and explicit foreground building. Doon Street and Beeham do not hinder the view they just add to the existing backdrop montage.

Now I understand that sticking a building infront of something can actually spoil a view, or even how sticking a large horizontal slab behind something can interfere with an existing 'skyline' but with these buildings it has descended into a witch hunt. Perversely their inteventions in the quest for beauty has rendered the buildings, other views and the sacred view far less attractive with far less elegance and compromised detailing. Let alone the more developer led advantages of buidling space and funding for amenities.

[pricemazda]

Don't worry JGG will be proved wrong and most of us can recognise that on skyscrapers a Boris regime won't approve any.

But one positive thing is Boris promised to change the London Plan to reflect this, well the London Plan is a legal document and any changes need to be put out to extensive consultation and is a legal process and takes years to finalise.

[wjfox]

BORISLOLZ!!!



http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standa...ilt/article.do


The towers that Boris could stop being built

Mira Bar-Hillel and Ellen Widdup

19.05.08

Fourteen skyscrapers planned for London may never be built as the 'Boris Johnson effect' ripples across the capital.

An Evening Standard investigation reveals that 11 out of 21 proposed towers are at risk of being vetoed by the new Mayor.

Three supported by local councils could be kicked out after public inquiries amid growing concern that tall buildings are blighting the London skyline.

A further seven, including the 'Walkie-Talkie' at Fenchurch Street, were given planning permission before Mr Johnson was elected and he can't overturn this.

However, sources today warned that even these projects are at risk from the economic downturn as firms lay off staff and cut office space.

Piers Gough of architects CZWG said: "The mood is very grim because there is just no money to build anything really ambitious. Now we have also got a mayor who is known to be unsympathetic. It is very worrying."

Mr Johnson has warned he will not approve skyscrapers if residents are opposed to them and today confirmed he will redraw the planned skyline as a matter of priority.

Developers and architects are also concerned at the influence of Sir Simon Milton as his new planning adviser.

The former head of Westminster council fought off a succession of skyscrapers in central London, including Victoria station, and is seen by some as a 'fogey' when it comes to tall buildings.

Peter Bill, editor of the influential Estate Gazette, said: "The climate in City Hall will change from eager acceptance of any commercial redevelopment to a more sceptical analysis of why it is needed."

The Mayor has the power to veto any project before it has been given planning permission. But under new powers granted only weeks before Ken Livingstone was ousted, the Mayor can also overrule local councils that have refused developments the go-ahead.

Mr Livingstone, a strong advocate of tall buildings, was set to ignore residents' wishes by approving planned developments such as the 'Penny Whistle' in Ealing.

A spokesman for Mr Johnson said today he would work with boroughs.

He continued: "The Mayor is concerned the London Plan actively promotes tall buildings. He has nothing against tall buildings but thinks they should be placed where appropriate.

"Furthermore, he is concerned that tall buildings in London do not block historic views. The London Plan will be amended to introduce balance on the placing of tall buildings in London."






1. Ealing Broadway Leaf Development (Penny Whistle)

Developer Glenkerrin UK's proposals have been sent back to the drawing board after being rejected by planners thought to be influenced by Boris Johnson's election.

Height: 143 metres (470 feet) and 40 storeys under original plans.

Location: Ealing Broadway.

Status: On hold while developer draws up a new scheme. Planning application for new designs
expected by end of year.

Boris effect: Already a victory for the new mayor as he was known to oppose this suburban tower. Developer now promises tower 'will not be a skyscraper' but Mr Johnson could still object.




2. 100 West Cromwell Road (Tesco Tower)

Nicknamed the Tesco Tower because the land is owned by the supermarket giant, the revised plans offer 367 apartments, a gym, swimming pool, creche and 610 parking spaces.

Height: 82m (270ft) and 24 storeys.

Location: West Cromwell Road W14.

Status: The application was submitted in March after developer Multiplex Living changed the design to try to satisfy Kensington and Chelsea council.

Boris effect: The Mayor's presence in City Hall will encourage the Conservative-run council to reject an unacceptable scheme.




3. Victoria Transport Interchange

Developer Land Securities was forced to change plans from two 128m towers and a third building of 90m after the council said it would ruin the view from Buckingham Palace. Now just one tower will house flats, offices and shops.

Height: 80m (262ft) and 20 storeys.

Status: Planning application due to be submitted in the summer.

Boris effect: A victory for the Mayor as plans have been scaled down massively, but he will be watching the details very closely.




4. The Ram Brewery (Wandsworth Towers)

Two residential skyscrapers supposed to create a 'new urban quarter' and comprising 1,000 apartments as well as 200,000 sq ft of shops, restaurants and offices.

Height: Up to 145m (475ft) with 39 storeys and 29 storeys.

Location: 16.5-acre site of the Young's Ram Brewery, Ram Street, SW18.

Status: Planning application submitted in February and approval for the scheme to be sought before the summer.

Boris effect: If residents around this development express outrage, the Mayor will have to intervene to keep his campaign pledge.




5. Heart of Battersea Towers (Clapham Junction skyscrapers)

Two towers with 500 homes to dwarf buildings for miles around Clapham Junction station. Platforms will also be revamped by Delancey and Land Securities with nine new lifts and the shopping centre will be developed.

Height: 170m (557ft) and 40 storeys.

Location: Clapham Junction.

Status: Plans to be submitted within next month.
Boris effect: The Mayor is likely to bow to local opinion and, if there are objections, intervene.




6. Vauxhall Cross Island Towers

Twin-tower scheme with a mixture of one-, two- and three-bedroom apartments as well as offices and a 220-bed business hotel. Ken Livingstone was instrumental in the Greater London Authority's London Plan which designated Vauxhall an opportunity area — a place 'with potential for significant increase in density'.

Height: one tower of 100m (328ft) and the other 170m (557ft).

Location: Vauxhall Cross SE1.

Status: Planning application still to be
submitted after developer was sent away amid complaints about a lack of affordable housing.

Boris effect: He will examine this one very closely in case the towers affect important views — a key pledge for the new Mayor.




7. Doon Street Tower

Supposed to provide 329 apartments on South Bank as well as a shopping centre, swimming pool, leisure centre and large landscaped gardens.

Height: 144m (427ft) and 43 storeys under the
original plans.

Location: Doon Street, next to Waterloo Bridge, SE1

Status: After massive opposition from English Heritage, the scheme by Coin Street Community Builders went to public inquiry and the result is due from Communities Secretary Hazel Blears in July.

Boris effect: The Mayor could try to kill off this project by making an immediate submission to Ms Blears.




8. Beetham Tower (the Boomerang)

Also known as the Jumeirah Tower, it boasts that each of its 96 flats and 261 hotel rooms would have a conservatory.

Height: 170m (557ft) and 49 storeys.

Location: Junction of Blackfriars Road and Stamford Street, South Bank, SE1.

Status: The design was scaled down from 219 metres and developer the Beetham Organisation eventually won round English Heritage. But it was 'called in' by Hazel Blears for a public inquiry to ask if it will really improve the area.

Boris effect: Another opportunity for the Mayor to lobby the public inquiry into a tower that many say is too close to surrounding tall projects.




9. 20 Blackfriars Road

Tower with 243 apartments, offices and some shops with parking for 82 cars on the ground floor by developer Circleplane.

Height: 148m (485ft) and 43 storeys.

Location: 20 Blackfriars Road SE1.

Status: Approved by Southwark council in January but was called in by Hazel Blears just days after
Mr Johnson won the mayoral election. The prime reason for her move is to examine the appropriateness of a very tall building in this location. There are rumours it has more to do with the forces at work in the Mayor's camp.

Boris effect: Mr Johnson may well try to influence the inquiry into this disputed South Bank scheme.




10. Eileen House

Tower expected to contain 340 flats and offices. Developer Oakmayne says penthouses will be available in the peaked tip of the building and will be higher than the Barbican towers.

Height: 143m (470ft) and 47 storeys.

Location: Newington Causeway, Elephant and Castle, SE1.

Status: Council is in early talks with developers.

Boris effect: The Mayor can get involved at an early stage to prevent 'inappropriate' designs.




11. Cherry Orchard Road

Four skyscrapers will tower over East Croydon station, with three containing 1,300 homes and one reserved for offices. Shops and cafés are also earmarked for the six-acre site. Developer Menta says one of the towers will be the tallest residential building in the capital.

Height: 160m (525ft) and 52 storeys.

Location: Cherry Orchard Road CR0

Status: Planning application due to be submitted in the autumn.

Boris effect: If the council is in favour the location next to a major railway station may convince Mr Johnson not to oppose.




12. 151 City Road

The tower close to Old Street roundabout will include an apartment hotel, shops, bars and a fitness centre. Self-storage spaces would also be stacked vertically instead of horizontally for the first time in London.

Height: 140m (460ft) and 43 storeys.

Location: City Road EC1.

Status: No planning application submitted yet.
Boris effect: The developer may yet lower the height of the tower to avoid a confrontation.




13. Sugar House Tower

The wedge-shaped tower is designed at an angle of 73.6 degrees and is supposed to include 410 flats and 830 square metres of shops.

Height: 158m (518ft) and 44 storeys.

Location: Off Stratford High Street, next to River Lea, E15.

Status: No planning application submitted yet.

Boris effect: A key decision for the Mayor as this is clearly a suburban location and the tower is extremely prominent. However, if there is no local opposition, he is likely to let it happen.




14. Bishops Place

Three towers designed to hold at least 310 flats and an 80-bed hotel. Developer Hammerson is planning other towers nearby but it is bitterly opposed by the Save Shoreditch campaign group.

Height: 160m (524ft) and 50 storeys.

Location: Norton Folgate/Shoreditch High Street EC2

Status: Planning application has been submitted and is due before the planning sub-committee within months.

Boris effect: Given the strength of local opposition, Mr Johnson is likely to act quickly and use his veto.

[london lad]

Boris effect: Another opportunity for the Mayor to lobby the public inquiry into a tower that many say is too close to surrounding tall projects.

I thought the whole point of calling in 1 & 20 Blackfriars was because they were not an appropriate location for a tall building & for not stand alone towers .Now they are saying they are to close together!!

Sounds like Boris has given the a NIMBY's charter- You complain long enough & hard enough you & Boris has the excuse to stop development. Fantastic progressive planning policies from Boris again.

[wjfox]

5. Heart of Battersea Towers (Clapham Junction skyscrapers)

Two towers with 500 homes to dwarf buildings for miles around Clapham Junction station. Platforms will also be revamped by Delancey and Land Securities with nine new lifts and the shopping centre will be developed.

Height: 170m (557ft) and 40 storeys.

Location: Clapham Junction.

Status: Plans to be submitted within next month.

Boris effect: The Mayor is likely to bow to local opinion and, if there are objections, intervene.

This is an outright lie. Where on earth did they get this figure from? The towers are 127m. They are hardly going to "dwarf everything for miles around". If this was a 400m building they were talking about, I might understand the language being used, but 127m is hardly massive.