The City of London Corporation has been accused of pushing through its controversial London Wall West scheme without enough scrutiny.
Documents seen by the Local Democracy Reporting Service (LDRS) detail how the Corporation is recommended to enter into a multi-million-pound agreement with the Worshipful Company of Ironmongers, one of the city’s livery companies, which among other items includes the purchase of Ferroners’ House for £4million.
Ferroners’ House is a 1970s addition to the Grade-II listed Ironmongers’ Hall, situated by the Barbican Estate, and is owned by the Company.
As part of the London Wall West scheme, which was granted approval by the City’s Planning and Transportation Committee in April, Ferroners’ House is to be demolished to enable the construction of a new building, making its purchase essential for the redevelopment.
The LDRS understands the proposed deal has already gone before the City’s Investment, Finance and Policy and Resources committees in private sessions, and was due to go to the Court of Common Council later on Thursday for final approval.
However, this has since been withdrawn, with no firm date as to when it will next go before members.
Under the London Wall West scheme, the former Museum of London and Bastion House, a prominent brutalist structure, are to be demolished and replaced by three new office blocks.
In January, the Ironmongers’ Company submitted a letter strongly objecting to the proposal.
While writing that it supports the redevelopment of the application site, the Company raised concerns including the scheme’s impact on Ironmongers’ Hall, the viability of the proposal, in particular its scale, the likely ‘harm to heritage assets’, and how much consideration was given to ‘less harmful alternatives’.
The objection, which ran to several pages, also questioned the case for demolishing rather than retaining Bastion House and whether as the City’s assessment concluded there would be ‘no significant wind microclimate effects’ as a result of the redevelopment.
Days before the committee meeting in April, the Company however withdrew its objection.
In a fresh representation, it wrote that after some seven years of discussions, “a common interest has emerged in part due to the long term interests of both organizations [sic] to foster a continually improving environment in the City that all those in the area can benefit from, whether residents or workers.”
The submission continued to detail how the Company’s previous concerns had been ‘alleviated’, and that it considered the scheme to be “a welcome addition to this part of the Square Mile.”
The LDRS has asked the Company what had caused it to change its mind on the scheme, though received no response.
What is in the deal?
As well as the £4million to be paid to the Ironmongers’ Company for Ferroners’ House, the proposed deal also includes:
- £350,000 to reimburse the Ironmongers’ fees
- Transfer of the freehold of the scheme’s ‘North Commercial Block’ to the Ironmongers
- Cmpensation for potential loss of revenue at Ironmongers’ Hall, which generates income from rents and events such as weddings, capped at £250,000 per year during the development period
In the documents outlining the proposal, the City Surveyor’s Department wrote: “Agreeing these terms is critical to enabling the development at LWW (London Wall West) site as designed. The transaction and cost is designed to enhance the liquidity and realisable value of the LWW site.”
It added all costs are expected to be recovered from the sale of the London Wall West site.
Averil Baldwin, co-chair of the Barbican Quarter Action campaign group, which has consistently opposed the redevelopment, said: “We are disappointed that this deal has been done without proper elected member scrutiny.
“The de facto leader of our council, Christopher Hayward, has repeatedly said that all options for the site remain on the table but this deal shows once again that they are not.
“We believe that the option to retrofit the site should be preferred as it is the cleanest, fastest and least risky route to redevelopment. If approved by the council this deal will likely raise the cost for any re-use developer.
“It is yet another example of the City making short-term decisions with little regard for long-term consequences. We expect better from our elected representatives.”
The City of London was also approached, but did not wish to comment.
