119 farringdon road responses to gla stage 1 report

December 2015

Viridis Properties 5 Ltd

119 Farringdon RoadResponses to GLA Stage 1 Report

Contact detailsMarc [email protected]

Morelands5-23 Old StreetLondonEC1V 9HL

T: 020 7251 5261F: 020 7251 5123www.ahmm.co.uk

Document Control

Job Title: 119 Farringdon Road

Job number: 12164

Report title: Responses to GLA Stage 1 Report

Report number: -

Revision: -

Date of issue: December 2015

Purpose of issue: Responses to GLA Stage 1 Report

Compiled by: Philip Richards – AHMM Architects

Reviewed by: Marc Williams – AHMM Architects

Date reviewed: December 2015

File name/location I:\AHMM Images 2012\12164 119 Farringdon Road\5.0 Reports\151207_GLA_Responses\12164_119_FR_GLA_Responses

12164_119_FR_GLA_Responses 1

This report collates the Design Team responses to the GLA Stage 1 Report.

Supplementary material clarifying the responses has been provided within the enclosed appendices.

1.0 Introduction


Paragraph Reference GLA Comment Team Response

5 Site Description The application site is currently occupied by a 7 storey office building. Constructed in the mid-1970s and containing 10,596 sq.m. of gross internal floorspace, this building was the Guardian newspapers headquarters until 2008, and was subsequently let to multiple office tenants between 2008 and 2014. From 2014 until now, the building has been used for a temporary pop up theatre. Along the Farringdon Road frontage the building is set back from the edge of the pavement by approximately 5 metres, and has a large open yard to the rear. The existing building features a fairly inactive frontage to both Farringdon Road and Ray Street.

The gross internal floorspace of the existing building is 9,258 sq.m.

7 Site Description Whilst the existing building is not listed, there are a number of listed buildings and structures nearby. These include the Grade II listed 113-1167 Farringdon Road (including 1-7 Ray Street) and also Grade II listed 11 Ray Street, to the south of the site. The site is located within the strategic viewing corridor of St Paul’s Cathedral from Parliament Hill and Kenwood House. The site is also located within Islington Local Views LV1 with views to St Paul’s Cathedral.

There is a typographic error – the address of the adjacent listed building is 113-117 Farringdon Road.

12 Details of the Proposals

The proposal involves:• Demolition of the existing office (Class B1) building;• Redevelopment to provide office (Class B1) floorspace at part lower ground, part ground and 7 upper

storeys;• Provision of SME space at ground floor level;• Provision of flexible A1/A3/D1 uses at part lower ground and part ground floor creating actives frontages to

the building;• Removal of 7 London plane trees along Farringdon Road and 4 trees on Crawford passage;• Provision of 8 new companion trees along Farringdon Road, 6 trees to the rear on Crawford Passage and

11 trees in off-site locations; and• Provision of improved public realm on Farringdon Road and new public realm to the rear of the building on

Crawford Passage.

The report notes that 8 new companion trees are proposed along Farringdon Road, however we believe this is incorrect, as the proposed trees are not all to be seen as companion trees to the existing.

Of the 8 no. new trees, 5 no. will be super instant and when planted will be around 10 metres tall. It is expected that these will grow to reach similar heights as the existing. The other 3 no. proposed trees are semi-mature companion trees and will be planted at 6-7 metre heights.

Apart from practical considerations for the site, these trees, with their variety of sizes and colours, contribute to the composition of the group as a whole.

24 Principle of Development

The current building on the site contains approximately 9,934 sq.m. GEA of employment related (B1 class) uses. The proposed scheme includes a total of 12,285 sq.m. of flexible B1 uses, and 1,1413 sq.m. of flexible A1, A3 and D1 uses, equating to a total of 13,698 sq.m. This results in a net increase of 3,764 sq.m. GEA in office floorspace. The demolition and redevelopment of the site is considered essential to providing new office space in the CAZ, a (General) Employment Priority Area and Farringdon/Smithfield Intensification Area.

Please note that there is a typographic error in noting the areas of flexible A1, A3 and D1 uses. This should read as 1,413 sq.m GEA.

The report states that the net increase in office floorspace is 3,764 sq.m GEA. This is in fact the total uplift in GEA sq.m. The net office increase is 2,351 sqm GEA.

2.0 Responses


2.0 Responses


28 Urban design and historic developmentStrategic Views

The site is also within two designated viewing corridors as set out in the Mayor’s London View Management Framework, which protects London Panorama views of Central London and St Paul’s Cathedral from Parliament Hill (2A.1) and Kenwood House (3A.1). Whilst a TVIA has been submitted, it does not provide an assessment of the impact of the scheme upon this strategic view. The applicant should confirm the height of the proposed building and whether it falls below the threshold plane as set out in the LVMF SPG, and if it does exceed the threshold plane, should produce a visual impact assessment, including a verified view of the proposal from this position. This should be provided before the application is referred back to the Mayor at Stage II.

The proposed development falls below the datum identified in the London View Management Framework as noted in the Design and Access Statement section 3.2 London View Management Framework:• The site is within the foreground viewing corridors of St Paul’s Cathedral from Kenwood House and

Parliament Hill. • The existing building height (the existing Guardian building roof is +41.68m AOD) is lower than the

heights of the protected vistas. When considered solely in relation to the protected vistas, a significant amount of vertical development is possible before impinging on the views to St Paul’s Cathedral.

In relation to the Protected Vista from Assessment Point 2A.1 Parliament Hill • The site is located on the eastern edge of the Wider Setting Consultation Area 1.• The protected vista datum is defined as +52.1m AOD at St Paul’s Cathedral. • The protected vista datum at 119 Farringdon Road is approximately +61.0m AOD.

In relation to Protected Vista from Assessment Point 3A.1 Kenwood• The site is located partially beneath the Viewing Corridor and partially beneath the Wider Setting

Consultation Area 1. • The protected vista datum is defined as +52.1m AOD at St Paul’s Cathedral. • The protected vista datum at 119 Farringdon Road is approximately +62.0m AOD.

The Proposed Development is +46.67m AOD at its highest point i.e. below the protected vista datum of both London View Management Framework views.

32 Urban design and historic developmentUrban Design

Whilst the overall design approach of the scheme is generally supported, some urban design issues are to be addressed. Currently there is no access provided along the Ray Street frontage, aside from at the corners of the building. This should be amended, and additional entrances should be added to the retail/cafe space along Ray Street to further activate this frontage.

The retail/café (A1/A3/D1) space at the south of the site towards Ray Street is located over multiple levels: lower ground floor level (+11.07m AOD) addressing Crawford Passage, chamfer entrance level (+13.095m AOD) addressing the corner of Ray Street and Farringdon Road, and ground floor level (+14.72m AOD) addressing Farringdon Road.

Along Ray Street the levels of the footway adjacent the facade range from +11.52m AOD at the west to +12.74m AOD to the east and represent a change in level of 1.22m. Entrances along the Ray Street frontage were considered but the existing site levels, and the significant change in level to the above noted floor levels, have precluded these.

In addition, the narrow footway, busier roadway (including future cycle superhighway route), plus limited potential for planting, and overshadowing from buildings to the south have meant that entrances to Ray Street are not considered practical or appropriate. However, the frontage will be seen as ‘active’ due to the glazed facade and uses within.

The potential for enhanced visual and spatial interest along the Ray Street façade has been allowed through the provision of soft spots in the ground floor level slab. Depending on the final tenant(s) to the space(s) these will allow for double-height volumes to the lower ground floor and views in from the footway and out from the space.



32 cont. Urban design and historic developmentUrban Design

Further information should also be submitted to the GLA clarifying the length and details of the facade of the building at the location of the plant facilities and how this is being addressed in terms of active frontages at street level. This information should be provided before the application is referred back to the Mayor at Stage II.

The site has a change in level (with a relatively consistent gradient) of approximately 4.77 metres from its low point at the south (+10.94m AOD), to its high point at the north (+15.71m AOD). The sections with the steepest gradients are along the boundary to Ray Street (as noted previously), to the northern extent of Crawford Passage (a change in level of approximately 2.81 metres) and along its northern boundary to Dabb’s Lane (a change in level of 1.36 metres).

In order to maximise the active frontages to Farringdon Road and to the new public space to Crawford Passage, and given the inability to provide access from the steeper parts of site, the key servicing and plant areas of the proposal are generally located towards the northern extent of the Crawford Passage elevation.

To note, a number of alternative servicing strategies and plant layouts to the above had been reviewed during the schematic design period. Included as part of these was a study for servicing via Ray Street, allowing more of the Crawford Passage facade to be activated and dual aspect provided to a greater extent of the SME / Retail Space. However, due to the previously mentioned levels to Ray Street service access was not practical, and the relationship to the adjacent listed buildings considered problematic.

The proposed Crawford Passage elevation measures 41,990mm between Dabb’s Lane to the north and entrance fronting the public space to the south. The northernmost 13,750mm of the elevation relates to the SME space at ground (Farringdon Road) level and provides 3 no. large windows consistent with other ground level glazing. The key servicing and plant areas interface with the remainder of the Crawford Passage elevation and have been detailed as follows:

• The off-street (internal) loading bay (as required by LBI policy) is accessed by a 5,650mm wide by 4,300mm high architectural metalwork door.

• The refuse and recycling storage area is located to the north of the loading bay with precast concrete louvres for natural ventilation.

• The relocated UKPN substation (currently located on the corner of Ray Street and Crawford Passage) with precast concrete louvres to the facade for natural ventilation.

• The main, lower ground plant area (largely located towards the east of the plan) with supply and extract air via discreet metal louvres.

• The ground level plant and substation areas (above the loading bay) with hit and miss louvres for required ventilation free area.

Refer to drawings in Appendix A – planning drawings and detail studies of concrete louvres and hit and miss brickwork to Crawford Passage elevation.

2.0 Responses


2.0 Responses


36 Urban design and historic developmentTrees and Woodland

Three of the existing London plane trees will be retained along Farringdon Road with new companion planting. Some of the trees to be retained will be the most likely to survive the adjacent building work and are some of the furthest from the proposed building line, which is being brought forward from the existing building line given the constraints of the site. The companion planting will provide seasonal fruit and more interest (flower, fruit and foliage) at the pedestrian scale, and will also let more natural light into the building whilst providing shelter at ground level.

As noted in the response to paragraph 12, of the 8 no. new trees to Farringdon Road 5 no. are the larger super-instant trees and 3 no. are companion trees.

43 Urban design and historic developmentTrees and Woodland

While GLA officers concur with the Council’s assessment, the applicant should clearly set out the development constraints to justify the removal of the 7 London plane trees. A detailed assessment of whether T2 can be retained instead of T3, as recommended by the Council, should also be provided before the application is referred back to the Mayor at Stage II.

Please refer to Appendix B for a separate tree note regarding the constraints and benefits to justify the removal of the 7 no. London plane trees.

For the retained trees T3 has been selected for retention for two primary reasons: T3 is positioned farther from the building line than T2 and no roots were exposed during the initial trial root investigations associated with T3 but there were several associated with T2.

Consequently, T3 was selected to be retained for both practical and technical arboricultural reasons (i.e. no significant root loss likely for T3, whilst some root loss with T2 which is potentially harmful or destabalising in this case (if it were to be retained)).

45 Transport for London’s commentsRoad network

All servicing will be on site with access via Crawford Passage which is acceptable to TfL, subject to Camden Council’s consideration as highway authority. TfL would expect a Delivery and Service Plan (DSP) and a Construction Logistics Plan (CLP) to be secured by condition to appropriately manage any potential adverse effects on the local road network and the TLRN, which should include cyclists’ safety. Construction access is proposed to the site from Farringdon Road, which is acceptable subject to the developer entering into a s278 agreement with TfL for the construction of a vehicle access on the TLRN.

The reference to Camden Council is understood to be an error and should refer to the London Borough of Islington.

47 Transport for London’s commentsRoad network

As highlighted above 7 London plane trees along the TLRN frontage to the site are proposed for removal. Whilst this vegetation is to outside TfL’s highway boundary, TfL would not support its removal on the basis of their significant contribution to the streetscape and environment and that the design of the development should be capable of being revised to accommodate retention. However in the event that it is agreed that any of the trees can be removed then TfL would encourage the loss to be mitigated in the form of new tree planting. If any of the proposed replanting is within TfL’s highway boundary then the details should be agreed with TfL via the s278 agreement.

Please refer to response to paragraph 43.



48 Transport for London’s commentsWalking and cycling

Given the likely demand from this development especially in the context of existing pressure, TfL considers that a site specific s106 contribution of £100,000 to double the capacity of the existing docking station opposite the site to 32 points is justified.

Measures to address the potential scheme impacts, such as the contribution to support expansion of the existing cycle hire station opposite the site, should be considered solely against the additional tripmaking activity as a result of the development scheme and not the scheme in full, thus only the impacts relating to additional office floorspace and the wholly-new non-office floorspace.

Additionally, as explained in the Transport Assessment, with regard to the non-office floorspace only if this were occupied by a D1 operation would the corresponding trips during the daytime period in particular be wholly new, with trips associated with either A1 or A3 operations typically being either pass-by or linked trips and thus similarly not new to the local travel networks.

The trips assessment put forward within the Transport Assessment suggested an initial demand of the proposed cycle parking of around fifty spaces (the number of trips divided by two to reflect a cyclist both arriving and departing), which would sit significantly below the number of on-site cycle parking spaces to be provided – a total of 145 spaces and thus as a robust assessment the scope to accommodate 290 cycle movements based on one arrival and one departure each day per space.

As such, it is demonstrated that by virtue of this provision, there would be the scope to facilitate a progressive shift from the other non-car modes, in particular walking, equivalent to 194 two-way person trips; this would equate to around half of the additional walking trips. This suggests that the access strategy put forward for the site would accommodate both the projected trip demands by mode and the scope for a shift to cycling without the requirement for additional cycle hire stands.

Records collected during the time of the original cycle parking beat survey, undertaken during April 2015, also had observations of the typical utilisation of the existing cycle hire station opposite, which suggest that for significant periods of the day there were at least half of the current provision available and thus not suggesting significant existing pressure.

For further objective comment to be given with regard to the request to contribute towards an expansion of the existing cycle hire docking station opposite the site, the applicant team would request sight of the TfL utilisation data for a typical period (be it week-long or month-long) to ascertain whether such a request over and above the standard CIL payments can be justified.

48 cont. Transport for London’s commentsWalking and cycling

Overall 168 long and short stay cycle spaces are proposed which falls below London Plan (2015) minimum requirements. At least five more spaces should be provided.

The current proposals comprise 12,285 sq.m GEA of office (B1) floorspace and 1,413 sq.m GEA of non-office (A1/A3/D1) floorspace. The current version of the London Plan, at Table 6.3 therein, presents minimum cycle parking standards by land-use for both long-stay and short-stay provision.

As explained within the Transport Assessment, it should be acknowledged when considering this response that whilst the non-office floorspace could take as part or in whole a D1 operation, the corresponding cycle parking figure for such a use is based on staffing levels and cannot be fixed at this stage, but that it is anticipated that provision of cycle parking as an A1 or A3 use would address this.

2.0 Responses


2.0 Responses


48 cont. Transport for London’s commentsWalking and cycling

With regard to the long-stay provision, the guiding standard for B1 office is a minimum provision of 1 space for every 90 sq.m GEA for inner London sites, which would equate to a provision of 136-137 spaces (the exact figure would be 136.5). The guiding standard for either A1 food retail or A3 (as part of the A2-A5 standard), which would represent the worst-case, is a minimum provision of 1 space for every 175 sq.m GEA, which would equate to a provision of 8 spaces.

The current scheme proposals provide 136 cycle parking spaces for the office floorspace and 9 cycle parking spaces for the non-office floorspace, thus confirming that the long-stay cycle parking provision would be in accordance with the requirements of the London Plan.

With regard to the short-stay provision, the guiding standard for B1 office is a minimum provision of 1 space for every 500 sq.m GEA for the first 5,000 sq.m GEA and then 1 space for every 5,000 sq.m GEA thereafter, which would equate to a provision of 11-12 spaces (the exact figure being 11.45). The guiding standards for A1 non-food retail and A3 (again as part of the A2-A5 standard) would represent the range for non-office floorspace, with the former having a minimum provision of 1 space for every 125 sq.m GEA for the first 1,000 sq.m GEA and then 1 space for every 1,000 sq.m GEA thereafter and the latter having a minimum provision of 1 space for every 40 sq.m GEA, which would equate to a range between 8-9 spaces (the exact figure being 8.41) and 35 spaces.

The current scheme proposals provide as additional physical infrastructure within the public realm 24 cycle parking spaces by means of 12 stands, which would be greater than the number required for the minimum provision of 21 spaces (based on 12 for the office floorspace and 9 for the non-office floorspace). It is acknowledged that the additional stands as referenced would not, however, fully accommodate the number required if based on an overall provision of 47 spaces (based on 12 for the office floorspace and 35 spaces for the non-office floorspace) – a shortfall of 23 spaces.

As explained within the Transport Assessment, it should be acknowledged when considering this response that it has been agreed with LB Islington during the pre-application scoping that the short-stay cycle parking requirements could be offset against the spare capacity amongst the existing public cycle parking within the vicinity of the site.

The assessment within that report identified that within 200 metres of the site, having allowed additionally for the transferral of current informal cycle parking local area and a reserve capacity of at least 10%, there would be typically 25 spare spaces.

Thus, it is confirmed firstly that the additional cycle stands would be in accordance with the requirements of the London Plan when based on the combination of office and non-office floorspace (with the latter as A1 non-food retail) and that with the inclusion additionally of the spare capacity within the local area the level of provision would be accordance with the requirements of the London Plan when based on the combination of office and non-office floorspace (with the latter as A3).



49 Transport for London’s commentsWalking and cycling

Furthermore additional cycle parking may be required for the proposed D1 use when the nature of the activity is determined. It is noted that cyclist facilities are proposed and these and the cycle parking itself should be secured by condition.

Please refer to response to paragraph 48

51 Transport for London’s commentsCar parking

The proposed development is car free with the exception of two blue badge parks proposed on Ray Street. This parking may impact upon the safety and operation of the potential extension of the NSCS which should be considered by Islington and Camden Councils.

It is acknowledged that there are proposals to extent the North-South Cycle Superhighway (NSCS) from Farringdon through to King’s Cross and that currently the proposals are to have this extension run along Ray Street and Warner Street. However, it is understood that to date there has been no consultation on this extension and that currently this is scheduled to be undertaken in early 2016.

The proposed on-street parking for use by blue badge holders along Ray Street, as referenced, would be no different in terms of width on-street than the current on-street parking spaces, but it is not clear from the comment made whether the potential impact on safety and operation of the NSCS is reflective of the spaces being specifically for use by those with mobility difficulties or of the presence of on-street parking along this stretch in general.

Should it be the former, as part of a separate note prepared by TPHS and submitted to LB Islington in relation to further developing the accessible parking strategy post-submission a parking beat survey was undertaken of the existing on-street parking spaces within the vicinity of the site (typically no more than 200 metres of the site) and under the management of LB Islington to confirm the scope to deliver up to six accessible parking spaces without materially impacting upon general use.

This exercise confirmed the scope to bring forward the six accessible parking spaces than identified potential locations for these six spaces – the two as originally proposed on Ray Street and then a further two each on Warner Street (those closest to Ray Street) and Farringdon Lane (at the northern end). The delivery of these six spaces would be by means of converting existing on-street spaces.

There would continue to be the scope to provide the six accessible parking spaces within the site but not along either Ray Street or Warner Street, thus removing the potential impact on the safety and operation of the NSCS should this have been as a result of the spaces being for use by blue badge holders and not as a result of the on-street parking in general. The alternative strategy would be to locate three spaces each on Bakers Row (southern end) and Farringdon Lane (northern end), both of which would continue to be within around 100 metres of the accesses into the proposed site building.

Should it be the latter, and as a result of the proposals put forward TfL be seeking to have the existing on-street parking removed at least along the southern side, this would suggest the loss of nineteen on-street parking spaces. It is anticipated that as part of the consultation LB Islington would either raise concerns with regard to this loss of on-street parking and/or develop an alternative strategy for on-street parking within the local area to offset this potential reduction and thus maintain capacity.

2.0 Responses


2.0 Responses


51 cont. Transport for London’s commentsCar parking

Against the above background, there would continue to be no preclusion to the provision of three accessible parking spaces within the existing parking bank along Bakers Row and the provision of three accessible parking spaces within the existing parking bank along Farringdon Lane, with changes undertaken elsewhere as part of any wider alternative parking strategy addressing potential removal of on-street parking along Ray Street and Warner Street should this be progressed with the NSCS.

58 Energy and climate change and sustainabilityEnergy strategy

The applicant is proposing to install a communal heat network. However, the applicant should confirm that all building uses will be connected to the site heat network.

The micro-CHP is the lead heating system for the central heat network which will supply heat to tenanted spaces of the building, which in turn will be billed to the tenants via heat meters. Please refer to Energy Strategy Appendix E for further details of proposed connection of CHP system serving the entire heat demand i.e. heating and domestic hot water.


The applicant should provide information on the management arrangements proposed for the system, including anticipated costs and electricity sale arrangement, given that the management and operation of small CHP systems can significantly impact their long term financial viability.

The mirco-CHP’s 19kW(e) output will supplement the landlord’s shared communal areas and common central plant which includes the following:

Communal Areas / Plant:• Central AHU Units for fresh air• Lobby areas lighting • Waste storage area lighting• Mains water booster pump• Heating and domestic hot water circulator pumps• Lifts• Security System (CCTV & Controls) It is estimated that the CHP will generate 98,477 kWh per annum and this will be subtracted from the total electrical energy consumption of the common areas benefiting the total landlord bill at a subsidised rate proportional to the heat supplied. With the diverse common plant electrical demand there will not be any requirement to supply energy directly to the end user either to serve their ‘fix building service’ or ‘unregulated’ demand, as it is unlikely the CHP will have any spare capacity. Therefore in summary ‘CHP generated electricity will be measured and distributed to the tenant indirectly via the common plant and it is anticipated the costs will be recovered via a monthly maintenance charge which includes for common area energy consumption’.

The CHP will be optimised to run during peak hours by topping up heat used and generating electricity meeting the demand. The CHP is sized to avoid any export external to the site in order to have a payback encouraging constant usage and replacement by the tenants / landlord of CHP at end of its life.



The applicant has investigated the feasibility of a range of renewable energy technologies and is proposing to install Photovoltaic (PV) panels on the roof of the development. The applicant should confirm the size of the PV array in kWp and sq.m. A roof layout drawing detailing the location of the PV array should be provided to demonstrate that there is sufficient space to accommodate the proposed system free from significant shading.

The PV array calculation is based upon 19 to 20% efficiency panels with a electrical output range of 8,000 to 15,000 kWh. The final output will be established during the detailed design to ensure ‘Lean’ measures take a priority over offsetting energy usage via zero carbon technology. Although the ‘Green’ commitment will be maintained on any top up carbon reduction achieved beyond the ‘Lean’ measures adopted to a level of at least 1 to 2% of the overall carbon emissions from the building.

Refer to Energy Strategy Report – Appendix H for Photovoltaic Panels Notional Layout, outlining various potential areas for the PV Panels.

The final area (and kilowatt-peak kWp) of the PV array is to be confirmed and influenced by the extents of brown and green roofs, planter and terrace detailing, plant layouts and roof buildups.

65 Energy and climate change and sustainabilityFlood risk

The site is within Flood Zone 1, however the EA mapping indicates a significant surface water flood risk for the site and its immediate surroundings. Given that the proposed development includes a lower ground floor area such a risk should be taken into account in the siting and design of the proposals.

Thames Water have confirmed they have no historical evidence that the site has flooded. However, the lower ground floor has considered the surrounding ground levels in order to design out any potential flood risk. The existing lower ground floor level is at +10.62m AOD and below the level of the junction of Crawford Passage and Ray Street. The proposed lower ground floor level is at +11.07m AOD and above this junction, and with levels falling away from the building facade.

In addition, the surface water drainage strategy proposes a 50% reduction over the existing building. Appropriate attenuation tanks are being provided. Refer to the Design and Access Statement section 7.7 Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems and Appendix E Underground Drainage for further information.

66 Energy and climate change and sustainabilityFlood Risk

The applicant should consider this and supply information on the nature of the risk and to what extent it requires mitigation measures.

As per response to paragraph 65.

67 Energy and climate change and sustainability Drainage

There are surface water flooding risks affecting the site and its immediate surroundings, therefore the application of London Plan Policy 5.13 will be important at this site. However, there do not appear to be any details submitted at this stage.

As noted in the response to paragraph 65, attenuation tanks are proposed to limit the flow rate off the site in-line with the local authority requirements, this provides 50% attenuation over the existing site.

2.0 Responses

2.0 Responses



Given the nature of the site and the proposals, there may be limited opportunities but following techniques are considered likely to prove viable:• Green roofs;• Landscaping designed to maximise rainwater storage/absorption;• Permeable pavements;• Design for exceedance (i.e. low impact areas of public realm that could be flooded during low return period

storms – say 1 in 10 years or less often).

In addition to the attenuation strategy noted above, the scheme employs a number of other methods which will also have inherent levels of attenuation.

The biodiverse brown roof to the uppermost roof level serves as a natural attenuation system including soil pockets and localised ponding areas, storing water similarly to a natural ecosystem. Additional water retention will be provided by the base aggregate/drainage layer. The brown roof covers a total area of 183 sq.m.

One of the defining features of the building is the planting to the external terraces. The planters cover a total area of 267 sq.m and provide visual and spatial amenity for the building’s occupants and neighbours. The irrigation system for the planters has been carefully selected to efficiently optimise the water consumption, storage and drainage. A combination of a moisture sensor kit and an irrigation timer along with irrigation tubing allows for efficient watering without water evaporation.

The Silva cell system being used as a tree pit system for proposed new trees to Farringdon Road can be used for additional water storage within the geotextile that surrounds it. (A silva cell can withhold up to 40% of its volume in water.) The water will then be directed to the proposed attenuation tank on Crawford Passage.

Refer to the Design and Access Statement section 6.7 Terrace and Roof Planting and Appendix D Trees and Planting for further information.


The applicant should supply information about the proposed approach to sustainable drainage for this development.

Please refer to the Design and Access Statement section 7.7 Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems and Appendix E Underground Drainage for further information.

Crawford Passage Elevation Details

To be read in conjunction with the team response to GLA comment paragraph 32

Appendix A

Hit and miss brick and precast louvres to Crawford Passage elevation

LEVE

L 01

FFL

+19.

420

LEVE

L 00

GF

FFL

+14.

720

LEVE

L -0

1 LG

FFL

+11.

070

3(2

1)_6

006

3(2

1)_6

006

EWS-

02PR

ECAS

T C

LAD

DIN

G W

ITH

BRIC

KWO

RK

FAC

ING

EWS-

04H

IT A

ND

MIS

S BR

ICKW

OR

KC

LAD

DIN

G

EWS-

01PR

ECAS

T C

ON

CR

ETE

CLA

DD

ING

(SPA

ND

REL

)

EWS-

06AL

UM

INIU

M F

RAM

ED C

UR

TAIN

WAL

LIN

G

EWS-

01PR

ECAS

T C

ON

CR

ETE

CLA

DD

ING

(LO

UVR

ES)

A

6

13

4(2

1)_6

111

3(2

1)_6

111

890

2175

2175

100

100

100

100

MBL

-101

BLO

CKW

OR

K

EWS-

01PR

ECAS

T C

ON

CR

ETE

CLA

DD

ING

(LO

UVR

ES)

EWS-

09 L

OU

VRE

PAN

EL T

YPE

TWO

13

1(2

1)_6

2072

(21)

_620

7

3(2

1)_6

207

EWS-

01PR

ECAS

T C

ON

CR

ETE

CLA

DD

ING

(SPA

ND

REL

)C

ON

CR

ETE

SLAB

REF

ER T

O S

TRU

CTU

RAL

ENG

INEE

R'S

DR

AWIN

GS

150 350 29504275275

EWS-

09LO

UVR

E SC

REE

N S

YSTE

M T

O P

LAN

TAR

EAS

EWS-

09LO

UVR

E SC

REE

N S

YSTE

M T

O P

LAN

TAR

EAS

EWS-

04 H

IT A

ND

MIS

SBR

ICKW

OR

K C

LAD

DIN

G

EWS-

01PR

ECAS

T C

ON

CR

ETE

CLA

DD

ING

(LO

UVR

ES)

LOC

ATIO

N

Craw

ford

Pass

age

RayStreet

Farri

n gd o

nR

oad

N

NO

TE

job

title

draw

ing

title

/ lo

catio

n

ARC

HIT

ECTS

Ltd

MO

REL

AND

S, 5

-23

OLD

STR

EET

LON

DO

N E

C1V

9H

LTE

L 02

0 72

51 5

261

FAX

020

725

1 51

23 W

EB W

WW

.AH

MM

.CO

.UK

Do

not s

cale

from

this

dra

win

g.Al

l dim

ensi

ons

to b

e ch

ecke

d on

site

by

the

cont

ract

or a

nd s

uch

dim

ensi

ons

to b

e hi

s re

spon

sibi

lity.

Rep

ort a

ll dr

awin

g er

rors

, om

issi

ons

and

dis

crep

anci

es t

o th

e a

rchi

tect

.Th

is d

ocum

ent m

ay b

e is

sued

in a

nun

cont

rolle

d C

AD fo

rmat

to e

nabl

eot

hers

to u

se it

as

back

grou

ndin

form

atio

n to

mak

e al

tera

tions

and/

or a

dditi

ons.

In th

at in

stan

ceth

e fil

e w

ill be

acc

ompa

nied

by

aPD

F ve

rsio

n. It

is fo

r tho

se m

akin

gsu

ch a

ltera

tions

and

add

ition

s to

ensu

re th

at th

ey m

ake

use

of c

urre

ntba

ckgr

ound

info

rmat

ion.

AHM

M L

td a

ccep

ts n

o lia

bilit

y fo

ran

y su

ch a

ltera

tions

or a

dditi

ons

toth

e ba

ckgr

ound

info

rmat

ion

or a

risin

gou

t of c

hang

es to

bac

kgro

und

info

rmat

ion

whi

ch o

ccur

prio

r to

alte

ratio

ns o

f add

ition

s be

ing

mad

e.

1. 2. 3. 4.

CO

NSU

LTAN

TS

CLI

ENT:

CO

NTR

ACTO

R:

STR

UC

TUR

AL E

NG

INEE

R:

MEC

HAN

ICAL

EN

GIN

EER

:

CO

ST C

ON

SULT

ANT:

PRO

JEC

T M

ANAG

ER:

ACO

UST

IC C

ON

SULT

ANT:

CLA

DD

ING

CO

NSU

LTAN

T:

SPEC

IFIC

ATIO

NS

CO

NSU

LTAN

T:

REV

DAT

ED

ESC

RIP

TIO

NAL

LFOR

D HA

LL M

ONAG

HAN

MOR

RIS

KEY

stat

usdr

awn

bych

ecke

dsc

ale

proj

ect

revi

sion

zone

sour

cecl

assi

ficat

ion

Adr

awin

g no

.

1 :

25@

A1ST

AGE

EJR

JD;1

:50@

A3

(21)

_600

61

1216

4

119

FAR

RIN

GD

ON

RO

AD

FAC

ADE

ASSE

MBL

Y BA

Y - C

RAW

FOR

DPA

SSAG

E PE

RFO

RAT

ED B

RIC

KWO

RK

PAN

EL

PER

FOR

ATED

BR

ICKW

OR

K PA

NEL

S EL

EVAT

ION

1

PER

FOAR

ATED

BR

ICKW

OR

K PA

NEL

S PL

AN2

PER

FOR

ATED

BR

ICKW

OR

K PA

NEL

S SE

CTI

ON

3

118

.12.

15IS

SUED

FO

R S

TAG

E E

119 Farringdon Road Trees

To be read in conjunction with the team response to GLA comment paragraph 43

Appendix B

119 Farringdon Road

LJW/NGR/HBR/J10106A 10/12/2015

1

Trees

Executive Summary

- The removal of seven of the existing London Plane trees will allow the most efficient use of land along with substantial public benefits. It is considered by the team to be the right approach.

- The existing building is considered to have a negative impact on the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. The building was never constructed as an office building and is not fit for purpose.

- Redevelopment of the existing building would not be feasible without the removal of seven of the existing trees due to other site constraints including daylight and sunlight and townscape.

- The existing London Plane trees cause significant problems in the area. Namely; cracking of the pavement/planters creating an uneven surface, lack of light to the existing building requiring greater energy consumption, dark and gloomy environment to walk beneath and regular pollarding and maintenance.

- The redevelopment of the site, and the removal of seven of the existing London Plane trees, will result in the following significant benefits:

Strengthening of the building line;

Active frontages to all elevations;

Retention of three existing London Plane trees and replacement with eight mature/semi-mature trees of between 6-10m on planting;

Increased arboricultural and biodiversity benefits;

A new area of high quality public realm; Provision of 11 trees in three off-site locations; and

A high quality, well designed, sustainable office building including SME and affordable workspace within the CAZ, intensification area and employment priority area.

119 Farringdon Road

LJW/NGR/HBR/J10106A 10/12/2015

2

119 Farringdon Road – Trees This note summarises the key constraints of the existing 10 London Plane trees along the Farringdon Road elevation of 119 Farringdon Road. The note also seeks to summarise the significant benefits that result from the removal of seven of the trees and redevelopment of the existing building. The existing building at 119 Farringdon Road was constructed between 1973 and 1975 as a warehouse. The building was then modified to become the editorial offices for The Guardian newspaper. As such the now office accommodation was never purpose built and the existing building therefore provides inefficient floor plates, core configuration and irregular space planning modules for modern tenancies and occupation. Likewise, floor to floor heights are restrictive, building services outdated and energy consumption is high. The design team considered the retention and refurbishment of the existing building, but it is considered that in order to upgrade the floorspace significantly to current occupier requirements would require considerable alteration and deconstruction, so much so that it would not be worth retaining the existing building. The existing building is also considered to be unattractive and of poor quality design, which detracts from the character, appearance and significance of the Clerkenwell Green Conservation Area. The site presents the opportunity for a new building of a high quality that will add to the rich variety of brick commercial buildings along Farringdon Road, and reinstate a more appropriate building line on all three frontages. It is therefore considered that demolition and redevelopment is necessary. In considering the redevelopment of the site, it became apparent that the site is considerably physically constrained. There is very little opportunity to extend the footprint of the existing building due to daylight and sunlight issues and also for townscape reasons. Directly behind the site are several residential properties on Crawford Passage which would be significantly affected in terms of daylight and sunlight if the rear of the building was extended outwards to a greater extent than is proposed as part of the current application. Furthermore the site falls just below the strategic viewing corridor of the LVMF view of St Paul’s Cathedral from Parliament Hill and there are additional local townscape issues with increasing the height further than proposed. The options for an additional storey were explored with Islington officers but considered unacceptable in townscape terms. For this reason, the only way in which to increase the floorspace of the building is to extend the building line forwards on Farringdon Road, resulting in the removal of seven of the London Plane trees. This extension of the building footprint on the front façade provides for 829sqm of the total uplift in office floorspace (2,351sqm) proposed. It is apparent from this that it would not be feasible to demolish the existing building and rebuild, to provide only an additional 1,500sqm of office accommodation. Notwithstanding the above, the design team consider that the scheme proposed is the right approach, in architectural and townscape terms. The following benefits confirm this. The existing building is of no architectural merit, is tired, outdated and unfit for purpose as an office building. The 10 London Plane trees were planted after the existing building was constructed; no doubt to hide the poor quality architecture that currently exists. The building provides no active frontage. Whilst these trees are of some amenity value due to their contribution to the street scene, they cause several problems which are as follows:

119 Farringdon Road

LJW/NGR/HBR/J10106A 10/12/2015

3

- The trees are planted irregularly and do not relate to the existing building façade. The

majority of trees are planted too close to the building façade and to each other. The trees have been planted in a row parallel with the building but the trees are not entirely in line with one another. The planting gives the impression of being somewhat scattered as a result.

- The dense foliage of the trees obscure the building façade, restricting daylight levels, up to second floor level, to the internal floorspace and therefore increasing the buildings energy consumption.

- The trees create a dark and gloomy environment under which to walk. The planting pits from which the trees grow, are insufficient in size and design to prevent damage occurring. The trees’ roots have distorted the paving stones aligned to contain the trees’ bases and the surrounding brick work of the larger raised planting pits. They pose potential risks for pedestrians, particularly those in wheelchairs and those with pushchairs.

- They require regular pollarding and constant maintenance throughout the year.

- Whilst the trees are protected by a TPO the trees themselves are not a native species and have limited ecological value compared to other species.

- At 30-40 years old and not yet fully mature, the trees are therefore middle-aged, with the capacity to increase in height and spread meaning the current issues presented by the trees will only be exacerbated in the future.

The removal of the trees allows the building line to be brought forward. Whilst the project team considered bringing the proposed building line forward to match the historic building line, it was felt more appropriate to set it back a bit to allow views of the adjacent listed building up and down Farringdon Road. The retention of three of the London Plane trees plus the existing tree on the opposite side of the street, maintains the local townscape views up and down Farringdon Road. Alongside the three retained trees, the proposals provide an additional five Sweet Gum and three semi-mature Rowan trees. The new proposed trees are not all to be seen as companion trees to the existing. Of the eight new trees, five will be super instant and when planted will be around 10m tall. It is expected that these will grow to reach similar heights as the existing. The other three proposed trees are semi-mature companion trees and will be planted at 6-7m heights. Apart from practical considerations for the site, these trees contribute to the composition to the line of trees with their size and colour. The proposed replacement trees will be more suitable species that would relate better to the streetscape and the proposed replacement building and, along with the tree on the opposite side of the street, will help to create a ‘Clerkenwell cluster’ of trees that is characteristic of the area. The replacement trees will also provide seasonal interest, flower, foliage and fruit, and a pedestrian scale. The lighter foliage allows more natural light into the building whilst providing shelter at ground level. The replacement of the existing trees with these more suitable species will reduce the energy

119 Farringdon Road

LJW/NGR/HBR/J10106A 10/12/2015

4

consumption of the proposed building, by allowing further daylight and sunlight into the building, and will not require as much maintenance as the existing London Plane trees. There are a number of arboricultural benefits of retaining three mature London Planes and introducing new, vigorous trees together companion trees. The mixture of species will introduce biodiversity and a contrast of colour and texture from a visual perspective. The lower storey companion trees will diversify and enhance the treescape structure, over the rather monocultural planting that currently exists. In addition, the retention of the three London Plane trees will maintain a sense of maturity with the development. The new tree planting will help to support a continuum of tree cover in this area as the younger specimens will take the position of the older trees in the future. It is proposed to remove the four trees to the rear of the building and replace them with six new trees (five Alder and one Downy Birch). Furthermore, we are seeking to provide a further 11 large trees (three London Plane, six Sweet Gum and two Rowan) in off-site locations to create three further ‘clusters’ of trees within the London Borough of Islington. The provision of planting and growing space for the new trees will be secured for the future and provides an opportunity for trees to be planted in locations which would otherwise not be possible. The development scheme results in a total of 28 trees, three of which are the London Plane trees on Farringdon Road. The proposed trees, onsite and offsite, will more than replace the existing canopy cover. The proposals will provide for diversity in species, offering significant biological enhancements and resulting in sustainable and successional planting. Whilst the proposed scheme does result in the removal of seven existing London Plane trees, the scheme as a whole offers significant benefits that must form part of any consideration, namely:

- Redevelopment of an allocated site within the Central Activities Zone, Farringdon-Smithfield Intensification Area and Islington’s employment (office) priority area, for an office led scheme providing SME and affordable workspace;

- Provision of a significant number of new jobs, contributing towards the Boroughs target, which will benefit from the new Crossrail station at Farringdon Station, once complete;

- Provision of a new area of attractive, high quality public realm to be enjoyed by tenants and residents alike;

- Flexible commercial uses at ground floor, to include retail (Class A1), restaurant (Class A3) and gallery use (Class D1) designed to activate the frontage of the proposed building, providing visual interest for pedestrians, which currently doesn’t exist;

- Replacement of the existing unattractive building with a building of a much higher quality, enhancing the site’s setting within the Clerkenwell Green CA and providing wider benefits through the high quality design and enhanced public realm;

119 Farringdon Road

LJW/NGR/HBR/J10106A 10/12/2015

5

- Development of a building that has been informed by extensive studies of the local area; context and prevailing character and representing a scheme of the highest quality in terms of architecture and urban design;

- The proposals will deliver a highly sustainable development which is secured through commitments to reach a BREEAM rating of “Excellent” and substantial savings in carbon emissions.

It is clear from this summary note, that the proposed development scheme, offering significant benefits to the London Borough of Islington and London as a whole, would not possible without the removal of seven London Plane trees.

119 farringdon road responses to gla stage 1 report

Documents