POINTS YOU MAY WISH TO MAKE

It is important you use your own words, but you might like to comment on these matters:

• A 45 storey tower would completely overwhelm the synagogue, which is a Grade 1 Listed building of enormous historic and cultural significance.
• It is inconceivable that such a building would be allowed next to St Paul’s cathedral, so why is the synagogue not afforded the same protection?
• It would destroy the southern sky view, which is an essential part of the setting of the synagogue, and important for the intangible qualities it contributes to religious ritual. The view of the moon’s passage across the sky, and many of the celestial bodies, would be blocked.
• The proposed building may be well designed and an exemplar of sustainability, but it is simply in the wrong place.
• It would overshadow the synagogue and its courtyard for much of the day, reducing the useability of the courtyard for rituals and celebrations.
• It would also further reduce the already minimal daylight that penetrates into the synagogue, making it even more difficult to conduct worship. Because of the historic nature of the synagogue, installing additional electric lighting is not feasible.
• The development site is within the Creechurch Conservation Area. Current planning policy is not to allow tall buildings in Conservation Areas, so there is a direct conflict with the statutory development plan.
• The City Corporation is required to identify locations suitable for tall buildings. It has done some work on this, but there is much more work to be done, and their work eventually has to be assessed by an independent inspector. This process is unlikely to be complete before late 2025.
• The developers are arguing that they are providing lots of planning benefits that outweigh the harm to the synagogue. These benefits do not stand up to scrutiny. Many – for example, being car free, demonstrating holistic environmental design, having consolidated deliveries – are simply features that would be expected in any modern commercial building, and they do not represent a gain to the community.
• They propose to restore the Listed Holland House[1] and turn it over to various uses which are claimed to be of community benefit. Whilst the restoration of this building is to be welcomed, the claims about the community value of the uses must be viewed with great scepticism.
• The existing building at 31 Bury Street is only 40 years old and is capable of being refurbished and providing good service for many more years. Unnecessary demolition simply squanders the energy embodied in the building.
• The proposed building would also damage the setting of other heritage assets in the local area, and would compromise the qualities of the Conservation Area as a whole.
• The City Corporation is being disingenuous: claiming to recognise the importance of the synagogue, yet simultaneously facilitating this monstrous development. We are entitled to expect much higher standards from Britain’s most prestigious local authority.

[1] There is a separate Listed Building consent application for Holland House: 24/00011/LBC