High Court allows challenge to Make’s contentious South Bank tower
  • You are here: News

High Court allows challenge to Make’s contentious South Bank tower

Michael Gove’s approval of Make’s redevelopment proposals for the former ITV Studios on London’s South Bank is set to be challenged in the High Court

The Save Our South Bank Action Group (SOS), a coalition of local opponents of the 72 Upper Ground project for Mitsubishi Estate, applied for a judicial review of the community secretary’s approval of the 25-storey development shortly after his announcement in February.

Last week (7 May), in a letter to campaigners, High Court justice Beverly Lang said SOS had ‘raised arguable grounds’ regarding Gove’s much-delayed decision to approve the Thameside development ‘which merit consideration at a full hearing’.

Campaigners claim that Gove’s approval, which followed a public inquiry last year, was ‘legally flawed and contradicted his recent announcements regarding housing priorities and reducing carbon’.

Advertisement

They argue that the local plan allocates the site for a mixed-used development comprising homes, whereas Make’s scheme is office-led.  They are also challenging the impact of the part 14-and-25-storey block on protected views of St Paul’s Cathedral and other heritage buildings including Somerset House.

Michael Ball, a campaigner who spoke at the inquiry, said he hoped the High Court would stop ‘an extraordinary act of self-harm’ and the estimated emission of over 100,000 tonnes of CO2 associated with the development.

He added: ‘Millions of people enjoy walking the South Bank for the delightful views afforded by the river [and] these views – of some of the nation’s crown jewels – would be wrecked and the South Bank cast into gloom by an ugly jumble of tall buildings.’

SOS said Gove’s failure to rule on the impact on St Paul’s was the ‘the first ground of our legal challenge' against the planning application for the scheme, which opponents have dubbed ‘the Slab’.

When Gove approved the scheme, he said that though he had reservations about the scale and massing of the north building, he agreed with the planning inspector’s conclusion that it was ‘an appropriate response to the site’.

Advertisement

He also acknowledged concerns about the development’s impact on ‘designated heritage assets’, including Denys Lasdun’s Grade II*-listed National Theatre and Grade II-listed IBM Building, and questioned whether the Make scheme would ‘provide a positive contribution to the townscape of the South Bank’.

But he concluded that the public benefits, such as employment opportunities, improved public realm and the creation of affordable creative workspace, outweighed the harm to the surroundings.

Gove set up the possible call-in in April 2022, during his first stint as head of the Department for Levelling Up, Housing & Communities. Greg Clark, who served in the post between July and September 2022, officially called in the scheme over heritage concerns before Gove’s return to the department.

Lambeth Council approved the scheme in March 2022, despite receiving more than 260 objections and opposition from figures including Kate Hoey, the former MP for Vauxhall, and the area’s current MP, Florence Eshalomi.

Source:Cityscape Digital

View along Queen's Walk at National Theatre

Groups such as the Twentieth Century Society and statutory consultee Historic England had concluded that the project would harm nearby listed buildings while dominating the riverfront.

London mayor Sadiq Khan declined to intervene in the project, delegating the planning decision to deputy mayor Jules Pipe. Greater London Authority officers had praised the design quality of the Make scheme and said it had been ‘designed to be sympathetic to its historic neighbours’.

The inquiry was held between 6 December 2022 and 25 January 2023, with Gove’s decision originally due in August 2023 but repeatedly delayed, eventually until February this year.

Make previously told the AJ that its ‘transformational plans’ for 72 Upper Ground would be ‘a fantastic addition to the character of the South Bank' which was ‘sensitive’ to the surrounding Modernist architecture.

In response to the latest legal steps, Make and Mitsubishi Estate referred the AJ to a previous statement which said: ‘72 Upper Ground represents a £700 million investment in the UK, creating over 4,000 new jobs, and vital new workspace that prioritises sustainability and wellbeing.

'Crucially, it will benefit the local community through the London Studios, which will provide 3,700m² net of affordable workspace that is tailored to the needs of Lambeth’s emerging creative industries. This includes new cultural venues that have rehearsal space, gallery and presentation spaces and studios, alongside new public spaces with river facing cafes and restaurants.'

‘We understand and respect the responsibilities that come with building a major new development on this prominent part of central London. We are looking forward to working with our cultural neighbours and the wider community to deliver an outstanding building that makes a significant positive contribution to its place.'

The Department for Levelling Up, Housing & Communities declined to comment.

Comment: the Twentieth Century Society

Why? This monstrous, mediocre development simply does not belong on one of the most prominent and significant sites in London. It endangers the unique setting, post-war heritage, and dynamism of London's South Bank while failing to deliver any new housing – yet nearly 1 million square feet of mostly speculative office development.

The Twentieth Century Society welcomes the High Court’s granting of a judicial review, and the chance to force a much-needed rethink from the developers. Nearly a decade on, the world has changed and this scheme looks out of place, and out of time.

You might also be interested in…

Leave a comment

or a new account to join the discussion.

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions. Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.