I’ve been itching to do a video on Borough Triangle for years, so here it is. It’s one of my favourite proposed development schemes for London, taking a prominent site between Elephant & Castle and London Bridge/Borough and developing it with a stunning set of buildings and two skyscrapers which pull heavily from the Art Deco style.
The towers, around 40 storeys each, have set backs and vertical articulation with beautifully-defined crowns in a brilliant nod to Art Deco. While at ground floor, a number of heritage buildings will be retained which already embeds the development and gives it a human scale. But there’ll also be a load of active frontage and a stunning new public square with a ‘woodland’ area (a load of trees, vegetation, and a fountain!)
Mercato’s will also find a new home in the new development. In this video we’ll also explore some of the more controversial elements of the scheme – including its affordable housng provision, which has been in the press a lot recently.
I can’t wait to read your thoughts in the comments.
If you’d like to watch the extended interviews, I’ve uploaded them to my Patreon (link below).
https://www.patreon.com/CityEd
I’m also on Buy Me a Coffee if you’d like to support me there!
https://buymeacoffee.com/cityed
#cities #architecture #uk #london #southlondon #elephantandcastle #boroughmarket #development #planning #urbanism #urbanplanning #cityplanning #gentrification #realestate #property #propertyinvestment
20 Comments
🌞🌴🌞🌴 It would be helpful to see the breakdown of the office and retail rent projections along WITH the housing forecast. (Can a small family business afford the retail space or only an M&S or Tesco? That greatly affects the success of a 3rd place)
How much office occupancy % is nearby makes it easier to defend more affordable housing units in a sizeable proposal like this one.
In other words, stop looking at housing as distinct from the total project profitability for the private developer…
Another great video!
Could you please do videos of Project Flourish, Ladbroke Grove and White City Living?
Check out Deptford bridge development. Nothing crazy but will make the area nicer
You are nuanced, knowledgable, self-reflective, erudite and professional! Truly enjoying your videos! Keep 'm coming!
I just want to say I love your videos and enjoy hearing your views on complex urbanism issues. I’m love sustainable urbanism and hearing about new developments 🙂 keep up the great work!
Another nail in the coffin that is london developments.
Too Tall
Too dark
Fake "third space" central square (horrid)
Kitsch & bland generic details.
Another shitty developer cramming as much as they can on a site with so much potential without thinking about the quiet consequences on people's lives long term.
To me this development isn't terrible, but I am far less positive than you. I like that they've included the best of the old buildings, and the amount of greenery and the "art deco" detailing, but I have many issues with it. First and foremost, I am not generally a fan of building lots of really tall towers. I know that we need to increase density, but tall towers are not the most environmentally friendly way to do it, and they don't even result in the highest density areas always. The highest density part of London is Maida Hill (next to Maida Vale). Most of the buildings there are under 10 stories. Tall towers create issues with shadows, wind tunnel effects, fire safety, balconies that you can't use because it's too windy and other issues. I would much rather see more mid-rise developments in London. I also don't think the towers look that fantastic from a distance. They lack ornamentation and feel quite chunky and "monolithic". There isn't a lot to break up the slab sidedness of them. The space in the centre looks nice in the render, but I guarantee it'll be in shade most of the time, and not as nice as that. Also, will the centre space be owned by the developer and patrolled by private security guards, or will it be truly public space? I suspect the former.
Honestly, I can't remember where I read this before. Basically: your fancy homes of today are your mediocre homes of tomorrow. We need to build more today to reduce costs tomorrow.
I Agree with the need for more green space and green views from homes, my conclusion from that quote in the book however is simply that wealthy areas have less crime than impoverished areas. Generally speaking a wealthy neighbourhood will have lots of greenery and views while poorer neighbourhoods are more likely to be in a more urban concreted area and the wealthy neighbourhood will have less crime than the poorer neighbourhood due to factors not related to greenery. Think back-to-back workers terraces in somewhere like Salford vs Lush gardens and trees in Altrincham
These places are never affordable. They call them affordable because we have a bs definition that 80% market rate is affordable, which means absolutely nothing in real terms. Not only that, but because these are flats in England, they will be sold under leasehold, putting "owners" on the hook for uncapped service charges. Most of these also end up getting sold under the awful share to buy scheme which traps you with a useless mouse's share of the lease while leaving you with all the responsibility.
Its so great to see things like working with the trees that are already there when developing an area
Battery means physical contact. Assault can mean verbal attacks and intimidation.
My issues with conquest tower is its public realm is really poor the water feature wall on thr podium building doesn’t work and the planting is really poor… so I’m really hesitant to believe that they’ll put as much effort into place making as they’re making out (literally live on borough road so have skin in this game)
Disagree strongly that you should have centrally located and or nicely located homes for people who do not work for a living and receive benefits. This completely desensitizes contributing to society like as hard working people do and those of us who just can't afford to live in areas like that. Point me to the literature that argues otherwise in which case there's a disincentive to do well and to contribute to the economy and therefore get somewhere nice to live
Greenery is so important, it makes a place look grounded. Keep up the greenery talk.
I would rather be surrounded by greenery than buildings.
The fact they are keeping the heritage buildings is great and I wouldn't expect anything else.
Imagine if they took down the heritage buildings and put in taller buildings the site would be much darker. I accepted that I couldn't afford property so just moved easy
I really like the development but that 10% is very egregious.
Assault is a confrontation that causes psychological threat. Battery is actually striking someone.
Once again, another outstanding vid. I always learn so much from you, and you certainly have piqued my interest in urban planning, and your enthusiasm is contagious.
Great video!
I agree with the people who oppose it base on the reduction of social/ affordable housing.. I understand some social/affordable housing is better than none but I believe these councils need stop letting these developers stop taking the piss.. going from 17% to 10% is a piss take… council should say either its 20% or it's not approved… cus if they keep given in future developments will only have 5 % social/ affordable housing