… AND AN APPEAL TO THE HIGH AND MIGHTY
Some 23 objections to Royal London’s revised proposals for 57 Henderson Row (26/01640/FUL) have been submitted. On the other hand, 14 notes of support were sent in to the Council by the deadline of 22 May.
As first reported in Issue 362, the developer proposes converting former offices to create 63 build-to-rent apartments, including blind-tenure affordable housing.
Changes to the original scheme (which was refused consent in December 2025) include two fewer flats, larger 1-bedroom flats, more dual-aspect flats and a greater proportion of 3-bedroom flats.
Royal London has dropped plans to create a top-heavy double mansard.
[No. 57: first proposal.]
Instead, it now proposes adding an extra storey to the building. It is this upward expansion which continues to draw criticism.
[No. 57: the latest proposal.]
In a draft response posted here, the Cockburn Association welcomes a ‘simplification’ of the earlier ‘cluttered’ roofscape design. However, it says the extra floor ‘remains insufficiently justified in relation to the established scale, roofscape character and cumulative townscape qualities of Henderson Row and the wider conservation area’.
In layperson’s terms, it’s still Frankenstein’s Monster, just with a different haircut.
‘While the revised design is more restrained’, continues the Cockburn, ‘the proposal would still contribute to the gradual erosion of the consistent parapet line and roofscape hierarchy that form an important part of the area’s character.’
So, whilst it objects to the latest proposal, the Cockburn says it detects progress and looks forward to further refinement.
[No. 57: the current reality.]
Local concerns
Local residents in two nearby tenements have contacted the Spurtle with their concerns. They say the six families living here feel they’re being ‘steamrollered’ by a financial giant which has ignored the reasons for its first application being refused planning consent (Issue 358).
They suspect the additional storey is motivated solely by profit, would reduce sunlight for their properties, ‘completely dominate the street ‘and reduce the ‘nice vibe’ they enjoy at present.
They also allege contravention of various planning regulations and material loss of amenity including historic railings and the protected view to St Stephen’s Church.
One householder has even sent a personal email to Royal London’s CEO Barry O’Dwyer, appealing to the great panjandrum’s sense of empathy.
Are actuarial City nabobs bothered about far-away locals’ access to sunlight? We shall see.
