微密圈

Historic England has said Network Rail鈥檚 revised plans for the controversial redevelopment of Liverpool Street station are a 鈥渟ignificant improvement鈥� over the transport operator鈥檚 previous designs for the scheme.

The government鈥檚 heritage advisor has published its assessment of new proposals for the grade II-listed station designed by Acme which replace an earlier scheme designed by Herzog & de Meuron which Network Rail scrapped last year.

While it said Acme鈥檚 拢1bn plans would still cause a 鈥済reat deal of harm鈥� to the building鈥檚 historic significance, it said parts of the scheme would enable some aspects of the station to be better appreciated.

However, Historic England鈥檚 warmer response to the scheme compared to its appraisal of Herzog & de Meuron鈥檚 proposals is not reflected in the wider reaction to the application, which has already amassed nearly 2,000 objections from members of the public. 

Influential campaign group Save Britain鈥檚 Heritage has also objected to Acme鈥檚 plans in the 鈥渟trongest terms鈥�, warning the redevelopment would cause 鈥渟ubstantial harm鈥� to the station and the setting of multiple nearby heritage assets.

Acme is proposing the construction of an 11-storey office block above the station鈥檚 trainshed as an alternative to Herzog & de Meuron鈥檚 larger 拢1.5bn proposal for a controversial 17-storey block which would have been cantilevered over the trainshed and the adjacent grade II*-listed Andaz hotel.

Network Rail鈥檚 rethink of the scheme comes after a significant backlash against its initial proposals, led by now-dropped development partner Sellar, which racked up a total of 2,273 objections from members of the public against just 29 letters of support.

>> See also: Sellar revising its original plans to redevelop Liverpool Street station

But that number is only slightly higher than the 1,928 objections to Acme鈥檚 proposals which have accumulated since the newer application was submitted in April. But Acme鈥檚 plans have received significantly more backing from the public, with 991 comments in favour.

Historic England said Acme鈥檚 scheme would 鈥渇undamentally alter the relationship between the station and its surrounding context鈥�, while proposed gothic-inspired new entrances on Liverpool Street and Bishopsgate would 鈥減resent an entirely new scale and aesthetic that would contrast with and dominate the surrounding street scenes鈥�.

However, the body praised Acme鈥檚 鈥渁ppropriately lofty鈥� plans for the interior of the station, which would include a series of Victorian-style supporting structures for the over-station development.

It added the proposals 鈥渕ay appear more comfortably鈥� alongside the retained historic fabric of the station鈥檚 concourse compared to Herzog & de Meuron鈥檚 proposals for a series of contemporary white-coloured arches.

And the assessment described Acme鈥檚 plans to open up interior views of the trainshed as 鈥渓argely positive鈥�, allowing visitors to 鈥渁ppreciate some aspects of the station鈥檚 significance more clearly鈥�, while it said war memorials on the site would be 鈥渕ore sensitively presented鈥�.

Significantly, Historic England fell short of issuing an official objection, advising the City of London鈥檚 planning committee to 鈥渙nly grant planning permission if persuaded that the harm has been minimised and would be outweighed by public benefits鈥�.

But it said it believes the harm which the scheme would cause to the station can be 鈥渞educed further鈥� and called for the City to seek amendments to the scheme.

The comments contrast sharply with Historic England鈥檚 report on Herzog & de Meuron鈥檚 proposals, which called for the application to be withdrawn, refused or 鈥渇undamentally revised鈥�.

The City expects to make a decision on Acme鈥檚 application towards the end of this year or early in the new year.

The project team includes Aecom on engineering and transport, Certo as project manager, Newmark, previously known as Gerald Eve, on planning, Gleeds as cost manager, Donald Insall Associates on heritage and townscape, GIA on daylight and sunlight and SLA as landscape architect.