st thomas st.master plan.d1 _edit

7/31/2019 St Thomas St.master Plan.D1 _edit

1/7

BVAGSt Thomas St Plan (STP) (1st Draft)

THEIRS OURS

The images above are two alternative planning options for St Thomas Street.

On the left is Southwark Councils high-rise proposal. It brings a wall of height-risedevelopment along the south side of the Street, creating a wind tunnel in permanent

shadow. It makes the railway arches unwelcoming, undermining their potential for

restoration and commercial regeneration. This option has the attraction to Southwark

Council of enabling them to sell planning permission to developers who can make moreprofit if they are allowed to build higher.

On the right is the alternative proposed by BVAG. This recognizes the responsibility of the

Local Authority to safeguard the railway arches for their historic and aesthetic importance

to the local area. It proposes a common sense route to their restoration and re-use as

prime restaurant/ retail/ entertainment premises. The completion of the Shard and the

expansion and improvement works to London Bridge Station will create an acute need for

such facilities. This option is unviable in the dark wind tunnel proposed by SouthwarkCouncil.


2/7

St Thomas St Plan (STP) Area Map:

St Thomas St (and its eastern extension, Crucifix Lane) consists, on the North side, of

essentially one continuous grade 2 listed heritage asset: The London Bridge train shed and

contiguous viaduct arches, designed for the London, Brighton and South Coast Railway in

1868 by Charles Henry Driver. This continuous facade marked the limit of the south

extensions to the London & Greenwich railway viaduct of 1836. The London & Greenwich is

often cited as the worlds first commuter railway.

For all its historic significance, St Thomas St now features The Shard, dividing the Driver-designed Victorian Railway architecture from the Georgian Mary Sheridan Houses at the

western end of the street. This juxtaposition makes St Thomas St an extreme example of

the old co-existing with the new. A further significant feature of the street is the proposed

new entrance to London Bridge Station. The design treatment of this entrance has not been

finalised at present but the new entrance will obviously become the point of ingress and

egress for a certain amount of London Bridge Stations passengers who presently enter and

exit through the entrance in Railway Approach.

St Thomas St, together with the natural boundary formed by the railway lines, marks a

natural division between the corporate, commercial north side of the railway lines and the

eclectic, artisanal, independent and residential south side. There is an ideological division

between those who want to maintain the railway tracks as a dividing line between areas of

different character to protect erosion of the distinctive character of the south (Bermondsey

Village) and those who want to bring the high-rise character from north of the street to thesouth. Local residents are overwhelmingly opposed to the character shift that would be

heralded by the latter approach. The Council, on the other hand, sees financial opportunity

in encouraging such development as it enables them to extract substantial planning gain

from developers keen to capitalise on what has become established as an expensive and

desirable residential area in the last decade.


3/7

The planning treatment of St Thomas St is thus a stark example of local opinion conflicting

with the perceived financial opportunities for the local authority. BVAG has since its

inception maintained that there is a compelling logic to the treatment it proposes for the

street. As long ago as 2003, when the Shard was still embroiled in planning controversy,

CABE noted in one of their reports on the proposal that the quality of the built

environment was as much determined by the treatment of adjacent and associated public

spaces as by the buildings that punctuate them. The scale and population of the Shardmeans that there will be an inevitable leap in demand in the immediate vicinity of the building

for retail and restaurant facilities.

The need for such retail/restaurant space, together with the planned new entrance to the

station concourse and the need for suitably pedestrian-orientated access to the main

entrance to Guys hospital argues forcefully for a traffic free (or traffic-limited) environment

in St Thomas St. A pedestrian friendly treatment of the street is inconsistent with the idea

of high-rise buildings on the south side. The effect of such buildings would be to exacerbate

the wind-tunnel effect already apparent from the Shard and to overshadow the listed viaduct

arches. The scope for a high quality public space would therefore be seriously

compromised.

Our plan envisages a restoration of the neglected viaduct arches that enables them to

provide attractive restaurant/retail spaces. By reducing or eliminating traffic in the street itwill be possible to provide outdoor space associated with the arch premises as well as to

create a comfortable environment for users of the station entrance and Guys hospital.

The realisation of these objectives will require the treatment of a few key sites to be

consistent with them. It will mean the Council abandoning its ambitions to extract money

or benefits in kind from a location from with such extraction can only be achieved with

serious detrimental effect on the local environment.

Two examples of local buildings of unacceptable quality:

Snowsfields Weston Street


4/7

Site briefs (To be expanded and formalised)

Capital House

Recent permission for the construction of a high-rise student hostel on this site is widely

recognized as being about establishing a height precedent to increase the land value. (This isthe stated business of the applicant.) The building was stated to be for Kings College

students. However, few people, including Kings College property department staff, believe

the building will ever be built.

The existing 1960s podium building of 10 floors is not without architectural interest as to

its form and 60s architectural ethos. A more environmentally sensitive treatment would beto follow the increasingly favoured approach of saving the concrete frame and re-working

the cosmetic treatment of the exterior.

The building was originally given permission for abnormal height for the area on the basis

that what was lost in local amenity by increased height was compensated by increased public

space at street level. This principle should not be abandoned merely because of the passage

of time.


5/7

Becket House

This is a distinctive pre-fabricated concrete building, again strongly evocative of its time.

There is no justification for increased height on the site and hence working with the existing

building to realise any update or refurbishment is more appropriate, environmentally sound

and economically feasible than demolition. There is also the issue of treatment of the

associated public space to the south side of the building.

Car Park site

This site has been vacant since bomb damage in the Second World War forced clearance. It

is an eyesore and needs to be developed. It is an obvious site for a building of some

community value. Educational or cultural uses should be encouraged.


6/7

Vinegar Yard/Snowsfields/Vinegar Warehouse

The 19c. warehouse in Vinegar Yard is a good example of the Victorian warehouses thatwere once widespread in the area. It is universally acknowledged as making an important

contribution to the area. It is also eminently suitable for restoration to provide the kind of

studio space much sought after by the creative-industry occupiers attracted to the area.

The adjacent former car park to the warehouse is vacant and currently being used as an

unauthorised waste transfer station.

BVAG has recently submitted a planning application for the vacant site which is intended to

complement the old warehouse. The approach is to facilitate a high-quality restoration of

the old warehouse by providing an adjoining building that could readily be connected to the

original part and carry all services and ancillary facilities. This allows a sensitive treatment of

the original building which can be restored and reused with negligible structural intervention.

The current application explores two slightly different treatments of the site, both on the

same principles. This treatment is the obvious route to saving and realising the potential of


7/7

the warehouse. The application establishes the principles that should form the site brief by

example. It should appear on the Southwark website shortly.

Proposed Conservation Area boundaries:

Red: Existing Green: Proposed

st thomas st.master plan.d1 _edit

Documents