PRESS RELEASES

Development threatens Historic St James’s

The historic core area of London, home to a Royal Palace, former town mansions, gentlemen’s clubs and ancient shops, is at risk of being blighted by insensitive development, according to a recently published study commissioned by The St. James’s Conservation Trust.
St. James has been the preserve of historical and architectural gems for more than 300 years, but current trends threaten to destroy it with inferior structures and an excess of restaurants and bars.

“Major new developments are proposed within the core area of
St. James’s and their design tends to be monolithic and lacking in architectural distinction” said Mr. John Beveridge QC, the chairman of the St James’s Conservation Trust.

The Trust has commissioned a revolutionary proposal that new architecture in this unique area should be of a quality and character that is fitting not just to it but also the City of Westminster, at large. If successful, it could become the template for other areas of architectural distinction, in which new buildings should be of a specific standard, to contribute to their environment positively and not destructively.


Notes to Editors:

1. For further information please contact Brian Woodham:
tel. 01483 239 875 or mob. 07821 377299
email: bw565@btinternet.com

2. It is evident from the large number of Listed Buildings within the core area of St James's that every century from the 17th century has produced buildings of high architectural merit within this relatively small area, and the Trust is concerned to ensure that this tradition is continued in the 21st century, because it wishes its to promote high standards of planning in or affecting the historic area of St James's.

3. The late 20th century, and early 21st century, unfortunately, witnessed the erection of a number of inappropriate buildings, some of which are now, for various reasons, Listed Buildings as of architectural or historic interest (such as the Economist Building). Some were hastily built soon after WWII to replace bombed damaged buildings and others appear to have been built with inadequate thought to the sensitivity of this unique area.

4. The study, by Peter Heath RIBA MRTPI, a respected architect and town planner, makes the following points and it seeks to provide guidance to planning authorities and developers for new buildings in sensitive and important heritage areas such as historic St James:

1. New development and modernity is welcomed in historic
   St. James’s but it must be considered a privilege, to be undertaken responsibly and will be assessed on its quality and suitability. Replicating older buildings stylistically is not the only approach that can demonstrate the highest design quality.
   
   
2. Development for historic St. James’s should aim for excellence and beauty, matching exemplars from the past, rather than merely improving on sites where past mistakes have been built.
   
   
3. Development applications must demonstrate an understanding of the definitions applied to St. James’s:
   
   “The spirit of St. James’s has grown from over three centuries of cultivated living and working in the shadow of the Court and the Palace of St. James’s. The shops, clubs and architecture of St James’s embody this special history, developed down
   the times”
   
   
4. Designs must demonstrate in applications, the aspects of architectural form, scale, detail, integrated artistry and craftsmanship, particularly at ground level which harmonise with the physical context and spirit of St James’s.
   
   
5. Development must not be monolithic or bulky and should respect the grain of historic St. James’s in terms of former, generally small plot sizes of narrow widths. Amalgamating individual facades to create an image of monumental HQ building is to be resisted.
   
   
6. Building heights should be no higher than the existing relatively low, neighbouring buildings and ideally, should follow the height of preceding buildings, when lower, unless there are exceptional circumstances.
   
   
7. Retention or adaptation of existing building facades will generally be welcomed, even for unlisted buildings of agreed quality, generally dating up to the 1940s.
   
   
8. Replica, authentic facades of important lost or disfigured historic buildings of agreed quality, will also be welcomed as will designs employing traditional, classically inspired detailing in appropriate locations.
   
   
9. Over-large development which includes a mix of uses likely to increase local footfall and the risks of nuisance from intensification, will be discouraged.
   
   
10. Priority for the need to increase the residential community and its supporting mix of uses should continue to have preference over increased commercial or entertainment developments.