City of London delays decision on new tallest building

The City of London has delayed a decision on the Square Mile’s new tallest building after a last-minute objection from the chair of insurance market Lloyd’s of London.  

City of London Corporation officials had recommended the approval of the 73-storey skyscraper, called 1 Undershaft. But on Tuesday they faced a grilling from members of the body’s planning committee over the encroachment on St Helen’s Square, at the base of the tower.

Shravan Joshi, planning chair at the City of London corporation, said delaying the decision would allow time “to go back and negotiate with the applicant” about the fate of the public square.

“This is not a message to industry that we are against development,” he added.

The unexpected delay followed a letter from Bruce Carnegie-Brown, Lloyd’s chair, objecting to the project because it “would rob the City of a really important convening space”. 

The City of London corporation had been expected to vote through the landmark project, almost 10 years after it was first proposed. At about the same height as the Shard, it would be one of the tallest buildings in Europe.

Lloyd’s recently agreed a lease extension at its Richard Rogers-designed headquarters across the road, the heart of the City’s specialist insurance market where brokers and underwriters still meet face-to-face to hammer out policies.

1 Undershaft would be 50 storeys taller than the existing 23-floor 1960s tower on the site, formerly home to Aviva, whose design was influenced by modernist architect Mies van der Rohe. The Twentieth Century Society, which campaigns to preserve modern architecture, argued it should not be knocked down.

The location sits between four well-known buildings: 22 Bishopsgate, now the City’s tallest building; 122 Leadenhall Street, known as “The Cheesegrater”; the Gherkin; and Lloyd's of London, which is Grade I-listed and dubbed the “inside-out” building because its services, such as lifts and pipes, run down the exterior. 

The project was first approved by the City in 2016 as a straightforward tower design by architect Eric Parry. It is being pushed by Aroland Holdings, working with developer Stanhope. Aroland is backed by Singaporean tycoon Kuok Khoon Hong, chair and chief executive of food processing giant Wilmar International Limited, one of the world’s largest oil palm plantation owners.

Last year, Aroland applied for permission to significantly expand the tower, adding one storey to the height, as well as a stepped design that would allow for several terraces and would add to the building’s floor space. The new design, also by Parry, includes an 11th-floor garden and top-level viewing gallery that would be open to the public.

The architects said the new design would “crown” the City’s cluster of skyscrapers and align with its plans to make the London business centre a more attractive place for workers and visitors, with “high-quality external spaces, public open spaces, improved sustainability and a cultural and creative offer”.

Responding to Tuesday’s decision, a spokesperson for the project said it “had listened carefully to the comments made regarding the public space”.

“We will be working closely with the City of London Corporation and our neighbours in the insurance industry to consider these through minor revisions to the scheme,” they added.

However, the new proposal also takes a large chunk out of St Helen’s Square. Committee members said Carnegie-Brown’s intervention highlighted opposition to the project in the insurance industry.

Carnegie-Brown said the 11th-floor garden would be “significantly less attractive than the space it would replace” because of security requirements. Similar roof gardens elsewhere in the City require visitors to clear airport-style security, sometimes causing queues.  

Historic England objected to the development along with the owners of neighbouring buildings, including Cheesegrater investor CC Land and the Universities Superannuation Scheme pension fund, which oppose the bulk of the new design and the loss of public space.