Integrated Healthcare,

Research & Education Campus

London Bridge
Masterplan Report

30 September 2016
London Bridge Campus, masterplan vision
Executive Summary
The London Bridge Campus masterplan supports the
Development Partners aim to create an integrated
healthcare, research and education campus. The
Development Partners, Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS
Foundation Trust (the Trust or GSTT), King’s College
London (KCL) and Guy’s and St Thomas’ Charity (the
Charity), are working together to create a practical
property strategy to support the vision of King’s Health
Partners (KHP) with a ambition to become one of the
top ten academic healthcare organisations in the world.
Currently KHP delivers excellence in education
providing a unique breadth of education and training
to 9,500 students and is recognised nationally and
globally for delivering excellence in research. KCL,
ranked 5th in the UK QS World University Rankings
2014 and the Trust one of the UK’s busiest and most
successful NHS Foundation Trusts are both members
of KHP. Together the King’s Health Partnership has a
combined staff of 31,000 and a turnover in excess of
£3bn per annum. Approximately 5,000 hospital staff
and 500 University staff work on the London Bridge
Campus, 3,000 students are based on the Campus and
half a million patient visits are made each year.
In a competitive global economy universities and
research centres are recognising that they must change
and adapt to sustain and grow and that the physical
environment plays a critical role to their future success.
In London there is significant demand for healthcare
based research and development space on sites which
combine healthcare and research on a single site such as
the London Bridge Campus (MedCity Report, Planning
for Growth – Demand for Healthcare R&D Space in
London, March 2016). Southwark Council have a strong
vision for the area as ‘a globally significant, historic and
vibrant place of modern commerce, enterprise and
creativity’.
The masterplan sets out the potential for re-development
and enhancement of the London Bridge Campus.
Taking into account possible future space needs of
the Partners the masterplan also identifies further
opportunities for maximising commercial development
space within the site and meeting the objectives of LB
Southwark.
The Partners brief identifies the following masterplanning
opportunities:
• Value of Guy’s properties and prospect to build
tall
• Contribute to regeneration of London Bridge
Quarter
• Proximity to a major London transport hub
• Create a Bio-medical Research Hub for commercial
and academic income
• Maximising floor area with flexible built
infrastructure
• Create a combined vision to add value to “GSTFT,
Guy’s, Charity, St Thomas’ and KCL” brand.
Specific opportunities identified within the masterplan
include:
• Create clear connections north-south across
the site, improving permeability and connecting
the site with the station and the residential
neighbourhood to the south
• New entrances to the site from St Thomas Street
and London Bridge Station
• Opening up the ground floor of the Southwark
and Bermondsey Wing on St Thomas Street with
potential retail activity to contribute to the vision
for a pedestrian priority boulevard
• Strengthen the connection with Borough High
Street, creating coherent routes through the
Backlands and routes east-west across the site
• Regenerate the Yards and Lanes within the
Borough High Street Backlands to create a new
vibrant place with retail and other commercial and
education activities
• Preserve the historic buildings and spaces and
enhance their setting
• Create new, legible high quality public realm and
open space across the campus
• Develop flexible sustainable infrastructure
and buildings to reduce running costs and
environmental impacts.
The total size of the London Bridge estate is currently
283,326m2 (GIA) of which 252,376m2 is occupied by
the Partners. Taking into account future trends and
space needs both the Trust and KCL have identified
their space requirements to accommodate growth.
For the Trust an uplift from 139,635m2 to 190,478m2 is
assumed and for KCL a modest uplift from 112,311m2
to 120,650m2. The Charity’s requirement is to maintain
a similar amount of floor space to that which it currently
occupies, approximately 430m2. Overall the combined
anticipated future space requirement of the Partners is
311,558m2 an increase of 23% from existing.
Strategically the Campus is exceptionally well located
adjacent to a major London transport hub. In recent
years London Bridge has seen major transformation,
completed projects include the Shard and the highly
successful revitalised Borough Market. Further
significant developments are taking place including
the re-development of London Bridge Station which is
due for completion in 2018 following which passenger
numbers are predicated to increase from 55 to 90
million per annum.
The site falls within the London Bridge, Borough and
Bankside Opportunity Area (Annex 1 of the London
Plan March 2016) and is recognised for its potential for
intensification, particularly surrounding London Bridge
Station. London Borough of Southwark (LBS) have
already consulted on the preferred draft policy for the
New Southwark Plan. Later this year LBS will consult
on area specific visions and policies including London
Bridge and this will be an opportunity to influence
policy and to reflect and safeguard aspirations for the
development of the London Bridge Campus.
The site comprises two identifiable campus areas; to
the west the King’s College London University buildings
centred around Memorial Park and also occupying the
‘Backlands’ area behind Borough High Street, and
the Guy’s Hospital Campus encompassing much of
the site to the east of Great Maze Pond Road. For the
masterplan study the buildings within the site boundary
are owned by either the Partners with the exception of
Ronald McDonald House and the Munro Clinic which
are owned by third parties. A collective masterplanning
approach has been taken which maximises the benefit
of development across the entire site and therefore the
ownership of individual buildings has been put aside.
During the masterplan study several development
scenarios were tested and from these options the
following development principles were established:
• The lecture theatre must be re-provided before
demolition of the existing theatre commences
• The student accommodation in Wolfson House
must be re-provided on campus before demolition
of the existing building
• There is no immediate requirement to re-build the
swimming pool
• The activities in the Borough Wing must be
re-provided before it can be demolished this
includes; operating theatres, wards, treatment
rooms, research space and offices
• The activities in Nuffield House must be re-
provided before it can be demolished this includes;
2 day case operating theatres and the sleep clinic
• The Mortuary must be re-provided before it can be
demolished
• The Central Stores and other hospital activities
located adjacent to the Mortuary can be relatively
easily relocated.
The masterplanning vision is for the Campus to
become an integrated and connected piece of the city.
A coherent hierarchy of routes and spaces across the
campus will create a new sense of place linking the site
with the surrounding context. A vibrant mix of activities
intermingled across the site; healthcare, research,
education, student residential, retail and commercial,
will enliven the whole area. New buildings are sited to
maximise potential for development whist responding
to the scale of surrounding streets and spaces.
Strong pedestrian routes north-south provide clear
connections from the site to London Bridge Station
and the residential area to the south responding to the
anticipated changes that are taking place around the
station. On the western side, from Borough High Street,
the routes into the campus through the Backlands are
informal and build upon the character of the existing
Yards and Lanes. The east-west route is continued
through Memorial Park connecting through to Weston
Street.
The proposed buildings in the Backlands will have a mix
of uses including the Student Village with residential
accommodation for 500 students, a new lecture theatre
and seminar spaces. To the south a new bio-sciences
building will face onto Newcomen Street and to the
north a new commercial development adjoins New
City Court which is also planned for redevelopment
by Great Portland Estates. In this area the Yards and
Lanes will be re-invigorated with active ground floor
uses including community education spaces, retail and
cafes and restaurants.
St Thomas Street, Station and Campus Gateway
The historic core of Old Guy’s House and the University
buildings facing onto Memorial Park are retained and
enhanced with a new feature building, the Bio-Science
Hub connected to the retained New Hunts House. To
the east of Great Maze Pond Road the existing Guy’s
hospital site is transformed with the replacement of the
Borough Wing and the opening up of the Southwark
and Bermondsey Wing with shop fronts facing onto St
Thomas Street, a new pedestrian entrance and street
orientated north-south linking from the new station
concourse through to Snowsfields. Two large scale
developments sit either side of this route rising up in
scale towards the Guy’s Tower. A new centralised Out-
Patients Department and other hospital activities are
located opposite, on the south side of Snowsfields.
Other developments on Snowsfields include new
offices for the Charity and the potential re-development
of Elizabeth Newcomen House for residential use.
Great Maze Pond Road, Campus Heart
The opportunity for maximising commercial/ third party
space on the campus is significant. Early discussions
have taken place with LBS who are supportive of
development on the campus and feedback from these
meetings has been used to develop the public realm and
tall buildings strategies. The area to the east of Great
Maze Pond Road is considered by LBS as suitable for
a tall buildings cluster, the tallest of which should be no
taller than the existing Guy’s Tower (149m) and stepping
down in height to the south and east in response to the
context. The masterplan proposals take into account
the impact of the development on the London View
Management Framework and local townscape views
which will need to be discussed in detail with LBS and
the GLA as development plans are progressed.
Overall the masterplan proposals represent a
potential total gross internal area of 543,478m2. This
accommodates the Partners combined future space
requirements of 311,558m2 plus a further 231,920m2
of additional related space for third party/ commercial
uses, representing a combined increase in space of
92%.
The masterplan sets out an access and movement
strategy for the site. Priority is given to pedestrians with
clear gateways into the campus and a legible hierarchy
of routes and spaces connecting all parts of the site
through to the surrounding neighbourhoods. Vehicle
access within the campus will be predominately for
servicing, patient transport and drop-off.
A sustainable future for the campus is a key objective
and the masterplan outlines a sustainability and
infrastructure strategy to create a healthy campus with
the aim to deliver cost savings alongside environmental
and social benefits.
Careful consideration has been given to potential
phasing options for the masterplan. The main driver is
to safely maintain ongoing operations whist maximising
opportunities for development across the campus. The
study has identified some key enabling projects that will
be required.
These include:
• Relocation of the Mortuary to the basement of the
main hospital
• Relocation of the Central Stores to the basement
of the main hospital
• Relocation of the Wards from the eastern part of
the Borough Wing to the vacant ex-SLAM Wards
in the Bermondsey Wing
• Expansion of Theatres capacity in the atrium of
the Southwark & Bermondsey Wing.
Newcomen Street, Memorial Park Gateway
An outline programme and capital cost estimate have
been prepared by Essentia based on the masterplan
proposals and phasing strategy. Deloitte Real Estate
have provided advice in relation to potential value
and implementation of the masterplan. The next
masterplanning steps should seek greater clarity on the
Partners space requirements, develop outline proposals
for the identified enabling and first stage projects to test
programme and cost assumptions, establish planning
certainty with LBS through further consultation
and input into the Local Plan and undertake wider
consultation to garner support for the redevelopment
plans with stakkeholders including the GLA as part of
the engagement process.
Snowsfields, ODP and Campus Gateway
6 London Bridge Campus Masterplan

Contents
C
1. Introduction and Masterplan Objectives 6. Townscape and Visual Analysis
1.1 Purpose of the Masterplan Report 6.1 LVMF – Protected Views and Vistas
1.2 Masterplan Team 6.2 Local Views
1.3 Masterplan Study Area 6.3 Streetscape
1.4 Masterplan Objectives
7. Phasing
2. Future Space Needs 7.1 Options
2.1 Context and Briefing Process 7.2 Preferred Phasing
2.2 Space Analysis 7.3 Theatres Strategy
2.3 Future Trends and 10 Year Plan for Growth
2.4 Space Requirements 8. Appendix
A. Masterplan Drawings
3. Site Context and Estate Analysis B. Space Analysis and Area Schedules
3.1 London Context and Campus Location C. Alternative Massing Studies
3.2 Site Location D. Access and Movement Review – Report by Urban Flow
3.3 Town Planning Context E. Notes from Briefing Meetings
3.4 Site Context and Character F. Client Briefing Documents
3.5 Routes and Linkages
3.6 Open Space and Public Realm
3.7 Historic Analysis, Conservation Areas and Heritage Assets
3.8 Buildings Strategy
3.9 Site Constraints
3.10 Masterplanning Opportunities

4. Development Scenarios and Principles

5. Masterplanning Strategy
5.1 The Masterplan
5.2 Public Realm and Landscape
5.3 Landscape Masterplan
5.4 Approach to Height and Massing
5.5 Flexible Buildings
5.6 Access and Movement
5.7 Sustainability and Infrastructure
 Introduction and
Masterplan Objectives 1
8 London Bridge Campus Masterplan

1.1 Purpose of the Masterplan 1.2 The Masterplan Team 1.3 Masterplan Study Area

1 Report

The Masterplan Report sets out an estates framework
and vision to support the development of the campus
at London Bridge. This brings together the combined
interests of the three main landowners (the Development
Partners); Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust
(the Trust or GSTT), King’s College London (KCL) and
the Guy’s and St Thomas’ Charity (the Charity) with the
aim to create a joint vision for property development
known as the Integrated Healthcare, Research &
Education Investment Strategy.
The masterplan supports the Development Partners
vision to create an integrated healthcare, research and
education campus which maximises opportunities for
development to accommodate the KCL and Trust plans
for growth and create further flexible accommodation
for additional growth and commercial activities
centred around the Life Sciences. The report identifies
the potential space need and additional capacity of
the site. The report summarises the key findings of
a detailed analysis of the existing estate at London
Bridge, the planning context and future changes within
the London Bridge area, the potential for maximising
development opportunities on the site and an appraisal
of the impacts on the townscape and London Plan
strategic views.
BDP were appointed by the Development Partners The study area for the masterplan is the London Bridge
in May 2016 to prepare an integrated masterplan for Campus and considers the local and wider London
Healthcare, Research & Education at London Bridge. context. The study area includes the ownership
The masterplan has been led by BDP Architects with boundaries of the Trust, KCL and the Charity. Further
support from the following: additional development plots owned by third parties
have also been identified during the briefing process
and have been considered in the study.
BDP Landscape – Landscape and Public Realm
Strategy
BDP Engineering – Sustainability and Infrastructure
Strategy
BDP Planning – Town Planning consultation and
review of proposals
Urban Flow – Transport and movement advice
The BDP team have also worked closely with Deloitte,
Real Estate the jointly appointed Development Advisor
and Essentia who have provided Project Management
and Cost Management advice.

The masterplan strategy considers buildings,

landscape and public realm, access and movement,
sustainability and infrastructure, phasing and decant.

The report is divided into the following sections:

1. Introduction and Masterplan Objectives

2. Future Space Needs
3. Site Context and Estate Analysis
4. Development Scenarios
5. Masterplanning Strategy
6. Town Planning and Visual Analysis
7. Phasing
London Bridge Campus Location

1.4 Masterplan Objectives
The Development Partners are working together to
create a practical property strategy to support the
vision of King’s Health Partners (KHP) and its member
organisations to deliver their respective ambitions.
KHP include; King’s College London, Guy’s and St
Thomas NHS Trust, King’s College Hospital NHS
Trust and the South London and Maudsley NHS Trust.
The masterplan supports the Development Plan with
funding options for the London Bridge Campus. It
illustrates the property development opportunities on
the joint land holdings in order to assist in the creation
of a long-term property development strategy that is
capable of implementation. A significant part of the
masterplan is to identify the commercial opportunities
for the site which will feed into the Development Plan.
The Vision and ambition of KHP is:
• To be a world leading clinical and academic
partnership
• To form a number of globally competitive clinical
academic Institutes
• To become one of the top 10 academic healthcare
organisations in the world
• To maintain a thriving clinical academic programme
of activity, attracting the best staff and students
to work in excellent facilities that deliver tangible
improvements in patient care.
The Trust and KCL have operational space and property
requirements that need to be accommodated in the
masterplan. The masterplan also makes provision for
new and expanded services that both the Trust and
KCL are planning on the campus.
The London Bridge Campus has developed in many
phases over time by the various landowners based on
the demands of the time. As a result the Estate is varied
in terms of the quality of buildings and public realm.
In many instances the current building stock requires
significant investment to address maintenance issues
and improve the quality of the internal environment
for the building users. Externally the public realm
and wayfinding across the campus is poor with weak
connections between parts of the campus and the
surrounding area. The joint masterplan approach
provides a significant opportunity to enhance the
experience of the campus for staff, students and
visitors. It also will ensure that the future needs of
the Development Partners are brought together in
a coherent plan to meet the increasing demands for
healthcare, research and education.
London Bridge Campus Planning Principles
The following principles specific to the London Bridge
Campus masterplan have been identified as part of the
briefing process:
• Maintain a world class academic and clinical
environment with a core mission to benefit the
population of SE London/ England
• Financially viable and space-efficient
• Match the best of the competition
• Able to respond to changes in external environment
• High quality, dynamic, flexible facilities, designed
generically wherever possible
• Student, research and clinically-focussed
• Ability for third party/academic and commercial
partners to be co-located
• Joint use of facilities where possible (e.g. teaching,
meeting spaces, clinical skills and social).
There is a strong need for commercial space related
to Life Sciences and Bio-medical Research at London
Bridge. The masterplan must be flexible to allow the
partners to capitalise on this demand by creating
flexible buildings that are suitable for a range of uses
including healthcare, research, teaching and learning
and offices.
As part of the Masterplanning study two meetings
have been held with Southwark Council to discuss
the emerging proposals and understand the Council’s
vision for London Bridge as ‘a globally significant,
historic and vibrant place of modern commerce,
enterprise and creativity’.
The key objectives that are identified are to:
• Cater for the increased capacity of London Bridge
Station from 55m to 90m passenger arrivals per
year
• Create better permeability through the area
• Provide more green spaces
• Re-invigorate retail activity in the area
• Promote new large scale developments to create
growth of residential and mixed used schemes.
Master Plan - September 2016 9
1.5 The Requirements of the
Development Partners
1
The brief identifies the following requirements from
each of the Partners:
The Charity
• Deliver clinical and/or commercial value
commensurate with prominence to enhance the
Charity portfolio
• As part of the overall strategy, the Charity will seek
to reduce its exposure to property having assisted
in the delivery of the overall strategy.
King’s College London
• Education Hub, Imaging and Biomedical
Engineering Research
• Research growth, innovative education facilities
through KITS investment proposals
• Modernising Infrastructure and buildings to
facilitate commercial partnerships including
relocation of Greenwood Theatre
• Enhancement of cultural facilities.
The Trust
• Replace and enlarge aged infrastructure including
Surgical and Inpatients.
• Capacity, create flexibility with longevity through
diversifying revenue streams in a constrained
financial environment.
• Infrastructure stabilisation and renewal. Re-
provision and modernisation of space for
administrative functions.
Future Space Needs 2
12 London Bridge Campus Masterplan
2.1 Context and Briefing Process
2
In the coming years, the Higher Education and
Research market will continue to become increasingly
competitive. An increase in the number of providers in
the UK and greater international competition means
students are becoming more business and consumer
aware, expecting more for their investment in learning,
and demanding buildings and facilities that are of
high quality and fit for purpose. Social interaction
and collaborative learning have become important
features of the student experience and the London
Bridge Campus must provide spaces to facilitate
these activities. This coupled with the planned growth
of the campus present significant challenges for the
estate in terms of enhancement of existing buildings
and facilities and expansion of the estate if it is to
continue to attract the best staff and students and also
commercial partners.
Context – King’s Heath Partnership
King’s Health Partners (KHP) vision is to form a number
of globally competitive clinical academic institutes –
to be a world leading academic partnership - with
an ambition to become one of the top 10 academic
healthcare organisations in the world. Currently
KHP deliver excellence in clinical service within a
comprehensive portfolio of excellent quality innovative
services. KHP is recognised internationally in renal and
liver disease, dermatology, haematology, children’s,
neurosciences, fetal medicine and mental health.
KHP delivers excellence in education providing a
unique breadth of education and training to 9,500
students. KHP is at the forefront of innovation, exploiting
new technology and currently building capacity for
translational research. KHP is recognised nationally
and globally for delivering excellence in research.
KCL was ranked 5th in UK in QS World University
Rankings 2014; 8th in the world for Clinical, Pre-clinical
and Health (Times Higher, 2015). In recent rankings
the national assessment of research excellence (REF
2014) ranked KCL 2nd for Bio-medical research. KHP
is one of six UK Academic Health Science Centres.
KHP includes; five Medical Research Centres, three
National Institute for Health Research Centres and a
British Heart Foundation Centre of Excellence. The
Institute of Psychiatry and SLaM are recognised as a
leading mental health research centre in Europe.
Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust is among
the UK’s busiest, most successful NHS foundation
trusts and member within KHP. The Trust provides
a full range of hospital and community services for
people in Southwark, Lambeth and Lewisham, as well
as specialist services for patients from further afield
including cancer and cardiovascular. The Trusts Care
Quality Commission inspection in 2015/16 achieved a
‘good’ overall rating. Recent building and infrastructure
projects include the Guy’s Tower refurbished delivering
£111k annual savings, carbon reduced by 8,000 tonnes
over the lifetime of the refurbishment and the new
Cancer Centre which opens in October 2016.
Together the King’s Health Partnership has a combined
staff of 31,000 and a turnover in excess of £3bn per
annum.
London Bridge Campus Staff, Student and Visitor
Numbers
Breakdown of staff, students and visitors to the London
Bridge Campus:
• 5,000 hospital staff
• 500 university staff
• 3,000 students on campus
• 500,000 patient visits per year
London Bridge Campus Masterplan Aims
For the London Bridge Campus the following aims
have been identified:
• KHP Institute Model – to create/ build on existing
centres of excellence for Cancer, Transplantation,
Research and Specialist Research Services
including gene and cell therapy
• Trust – Replace and enlarge aged infrastructure
including Surgical and Inpatients capacity. Create
flexibility with longevity through diversifying
revenue streams in a constrained financial
environment
• University – Research growth, innovative education
facilities. Modernising Infrastructure and buildings
to facilitate commercial partnerships
• Charity – To enable the delivery of a vibrant clinical,
research and education hub with commercial
partners and innovation space to enhance the
Endowment Portfolio.
The Masterplan Brief and Site Strategies
The Development Partners brief as set out in the
Masterplan Proposal, 17 May 2016, sets out the
masterplan brief and vision for the London Bridge
Campus. The masterplan is required to support
the joint vision for property development known as
the Integrated Healthcare, Research & Education
Investment Strategy. This emerging strategy supports
the King’s Health Partners (KHP) Institute Model to
create excellent education and teaching facilities at the
London Bridge Campus.
The brief sets out the following key site strategies:
• To maximise flexible property proposals that are
capable of being used in the long term for hospital,
research, commercial and residential uses whilst
maximising site development and floor areas
• The Masterplan output is to be utilised to establish
land valuations and development cost estimates
that will enable funding opportunities to be fully
explored
• To support and enable KHP Institute Model as set
out and enhance the Charity’s Portfolio
• The Partners’ intention to deliver the scheme
through innovative models and not solely through
traditional methods. The outputs of the study
are to be used in market testing to understand
the funding, revenue and delivery implications
of this ambitious programme. It is important for
the Partners to have this guiding principle at the
forefront of the masterplanning proposals
• Unlocking the site’s potential income streams
through identification and articulation of Enabling
and Early Development proposals
• The plots and the total development is to attract
and accommodate sufficiently diverse and
appropriate levels of revenue or investment from
suitable primary and secondary partners
• Proposals must allow the site to run effectively
during development phases with no reduction in
operational parameters
• Identification of long-term key expansion sites
inside and beyond the Partners’ current land
ownership. This will include the additional need
for KCL Lab space in addition to the Innovation
and Translation Centre
• Consolidate Viapath spaces across both
campuses and articulate consolidation option
proposals
• Generically the overall campus proposals are to
enhance the Partners’ standing in the community
and with key stakeholders, helping it meet
its corporate and social responsibilities and
sustainability aspirations.
 Master Plan - September 2016 13

2.2 Space Analysis

Development of the Masterplan Proposals
The masterplan has been developed in close
collaboration with the Development Partners through
a series of fortnightly workshop meetings. Members of
the Core Working Group are:
2
Total Size of the London Bridge Estate
The total size of the London Bridge Campus is
approximately 283,000m2 (GIA). This includes 20,000m2
of residential accommodation bringing the total size of
the non-residential estate to 263,000m2.

Alastair Gourlay (the Trust) The split by occupancy is:

Ralph Luck (KCL) Today GIA (m2)
Professor Simon Howell (KCL) Trust 139,635
David Renton (the Charity) KCL 96,224

Gail Macdonald (the Charity) Charity 430

Other 26,850
Alex Newman- Burke (Essentia)
Total 263,139
BDP
Existing Non - Residential Estate
The following additional briefing meetings have also
Today GIA (m2)
been held:
KCL 16,087
Other 4,100
23.06.16 - KCL Space Needs Briefing and Review of
Total 20,187
Existing KCL Buildings at Guy’s
23.06.16 - Review of Existing Guy’s Space and Buildings Existing Residential Estate
29.06.16 - Briefing with GSTT Charity
14.07.16 - Review of Clinical Requirements and Cost
with the Trust/ Essentia
04.08.16 – Sustainability and Infrastructure Briefing
18.08.16 - Review of Clinical Requirements and Cost
with the Trust/ Essentia

The draft Masterplanning proposals were presented at The London Bridge Campus
a Masterplan Briefing to the Senior Stakeholders on 10
August 2016.
14 London Bridge Campus Masterplan

2
London Bridge Estate Today

Schedule of Existing Accommodation

Building Building Name GIA m2
Number
GH02 Cunliffe Laboratories 1415
GH03 Tower Wing 57139
GH04 Borough Wing & Tabard Annexe 27359
GH06 Southwark and Bermondsey Wing 53739
GH07 Tower Link 3854
St
Th GH08 Boiler House 2961
om GH09 New Salmons Centre 254
as
S tr GH10 Old Guy’s House 14712
ee
t

t GH11 Central Stores 1905

re e

GH12 Mortuary 438

St

GH13 Tabard House 150

igh

GH14 Nuffield House 3320

hH

GH16 OC 80
ug

GH17 Addison House 2946

ro

GH18 Works Department 1154

Bo

GH19 Henriette Raphael 5802

GH20 Hodgkin Building 16838
GH21 Shepherds House 4994
oad

GH25 New Hunt’s House 18884

GH28 Doyle’s House 714
nd R

GH41 Greenwood Theatre 1500

o

GH45 20 Newcomen Street 227

ze P

GH46 Cancer Treatment Centre 20000

GH47 Swimming Pool 630
t Ma

GH48 Multi Storey Car Park 10900

treet
GH50 Wolfson Centre 3532
G re a

GH51 Francis House 1282

S
Ne GH54 Three Tuns House 422
wc

Weston
o me
nS Total Non-residential Estate 257,148
tr e
et fields
Snows Building Building Name GIA m2
Number
GH22 Wolfson House 8126
GH26 Iris Brook House 1714
GH27 Orchard Lisle House 6247
GH30 Sarah Swift House 936
GH32 Elizabeth Newcomen House 3200
GH49 Hotel 5526
GH52 Snowsfields Flats 430

Total Residential Estate 26,179

Estate Total 283,326


2.3 Future Trends
In a competitive global economy, universities and
research centres are recognising that they must change
and adapt to sustain and grow and that the physical
environment plays a critical role to their future success.
Collaboration – Future environments will dissolve
traditional boundaries and support collaborative
working between learners, academics and clinicians
from different disciplines. High quality collaborative
space will increase as a percentage of the overall estate.
Academic workspaces will increasingly adopt flexible
open plan concepts and support mobile working
practises adopted in the ‘real world’. This will break
down the barriers between disciplines and between
students and academics. Standard ‘formal’ didactic
‘teaching’ spaces will be replaced with a mix of spaces
designed to accommodate interactive project based
learning and research.
Change – Future environments will be flexible, allowing
users to configure different settings for learning and
research. Adaptable spaces will offer engagement
opportunities with a wide range of partners. Mobile
furniture and walls which can be easily re-configured
will become an essential part of the learning and
research environment.
Multi Use and Sharing – Future environments
will support the trend towards student centred,
collaborative and flexible spaces with multi-functional
and shared environments. Spaces will be designed to
maximise utilisation so that they can be used creatively
throughout the day for different activities and by
different users. This will result in multi-functional
spaces with high utilisation and in a reduction of poorly
utilised dedicated specialist space. Future estates will
‘do more with less’.
Student Centred – Estates will support new ways of
delivering learning to the learner. Future environments
must be student centric, not institution centric. They
will provide a variety and choice of settings; offering
more spaces and choice ranging from open to
enclosed and quiet to collaborative. This will empower
the user to choose the best environment to meet their
needs. Digital infrastructure will be in place to support
anytime anywhere working and a high quality teaching
and learning environment will be complemented by
high quality social, catering, leisure, sport and living
accommodation. Evidence shows that many students
reject or select institutions based on the physical
environment.
Outreach – Future environments will feel open and
welcoming and encourage accessibility. They will
physically connect with their communities, be human
scale and be shaped around the user experience.
Routes, spaces and buildings will form a coherent
whole experience and showcase the activities of the
institution; raising awareness and promoting outreach
to learners, researchers and partners. New types of
space will encourage wider participation and wider
audiences taking part in seminars, workshops, lectures
and events. Blended learning will drive the need for high
quality Media Labs where talks, events and lectures
can be captured for e-learning.
Sustainability & Wellbeing – A strong sense of place
towards the creation of a place people want to be. In a
carbon conscious world, universities must be overt in
their attitude to sustainability. Future environments will
adopt low carbon technologies and foster low carbon
behaviours. Future environments will reflect meaningful
engagement and feedback from the people who will
use and operate them. Good day lighting, air quality,
views and the effective use of outdoors will contribute
to a sense of wellbeing.
Identity – University/ Healthcare estates are the
physical expression of the vision and values of the
institution. Future environments will have a distinct
identity for each location while ensuring a consistent
Master Plan - September 2016 15
2
quality of experience and service. Students come
with high expectations (and with high fees) and will
be attracted by institutions with a distinctive and
welcoming identity.
MedCity
The recent MedCity report ‘Planning for Growth-
Demand for Healthcare R&D Space in London’, March
2016 confirms that there is demand in London for
healthcare based research and development space
related to Life Sciences activities. The report identifies
the significant demand for space that is close to
both an academic base and hospital site, excellent
transport links such as those at London Bridge are Project Office
also highly desirable in selecting a location. The core
facilities that are required are for spin outs – close to
their originating faculty, grow on space, innovation
centre space – for small and larger companies, lounge/
community meeting spaces and spaces within or very
close to hospitals. The masterplan development brief
is to maximise the opportunities for creating such
space on the London Bridge Campus in addition to
accommodating the space needs of the Partners as
set out in Section 1.
Quiet Staff Space
Multi Use Space Breakout Space
 16 London Bridge Campus Masterplan

2
Precedents and Scale Comparisons
Royal Sussex County Hospital, Brighton Ann & Robert H. Lurie Children’s Hospital of Chicago, USA
3Ts Proposal
11 Storeys + 2 Basement Levels 22 Storeys + 1 Basement Level
Stage 1 62,000m2 116,000m2

Floor 20 - Typical Acute Care Unit

Figure 5.1 - Aerial view, Stages 1 and 2

Brighton 3Ts: Design & Access Statement

98

Building Footprint Overlaid on Site Plan Building Footprint Overlaid on Site Plan Floor 11 - Public Spaces
 Master Plan - September 2016 17

2
Chemical Engineering Building, University of Cambridge Covent Garden Area, Central London

4 Storeys
10,000m2

Building Footprint Overlaid on Site Plan Footprint of Covent Garden Overlaid on the Site
18 London Bridge Campus Masterplan

2.4 Space Requirements

2
Both the Trust and KCL have plans for future growth at Step 3 from the Borough Wing, an expanded BSU, additional Summary of Combined Space Requirements
the London Bridge Campus which the masterplan needs Service capacity increased for growth (10 Years), research capacity and incubator space and space
to accommodate. The Charity’s space requirements identifies projected functional content to meet current to accommodate the re-location of Chemistry to the Today GIA (m2) Future GIA (m2) % increase
for their offices are modest. In addition to these HBN or best practice standards. London Bridge Campus. The total space requirement Trust 139,635 190,478 36
needs the masterplan seeks to maximise the potential for new and replacement facilities is 29,400m2 of which KCL 96,224 107,650 12
development opportunities on the site for commercial The conclusion of the study identifies an increase in 17,980m2 replaces existing facilities. This results in a Charity 430 430 0
space for third parties to be co-located on the site. space required from 28,093m2 today to 49,529m2 net increase of 11,420m2 bringing the total size of the Other 26,850 219,971 764
This will also include the potential for ground floor following the steps referred to above. An additional non-residential KCL estate from 96,224m2 today to Total 263,139 531,479 107
retail space relating to the public realm improvements allowance of 40,841m2 has been made to allow for, as 107,650m2 . Non - Residential Estate
and the development of the new concourse at London yet undefined, future growth of other areas of the Trust
Bridge Station adjacent to St Thomas Street and estate. For the space calculation this is based upon an The Charity Space Requirements
also the reinvigoration of the Yards and Lanes in the assumption of a 76% increase in the space currently The Charity require 280m2 (3,000sqft) of office
Today GIA (m2) Future GIA (m2) % increase
Backlands area of Borough High Street as identified by accommodated within the Southwark and Bermondsey accommodation and a further 93m2 (1,000sqft) of
Southwark Council and the vision developed by Team Wing (this excludes any allowance for expansion of the storage space. This would approximately replicate/ KCL 16,087 13,000 -19
London Bridge. Tower Wing accommodation/ activities). replace the existing offices located in Francis House. Other 4,100 12,000 193
Total 20,187 25,000 24

The Trust Space Requirements
For the Trust the known future space requirements
are summarised in the Essentia Space Assessment
report dated April 2015. The report identifies the
existing and future space needs for the replacement
of the Borough Wing, Cunliffe Laboratories, Nuffield
House and Mortuary. Each of these buildings is no
longer fit for purpose and the study provides a high
level assessment of the clinical and research services
carried out in these buildings to determine what space
needs to be re-provided elsewhere to clear the sites for
redevelopment.
The study follows a three step approach to assess the
future space requirements:
Step 1
Assessment of current provision of services, identifies
current functional content and current space
Step 2
Assessment of current provision of services, identifies
current functional content uplifted to meet current HBN
or best practice standards
Combining the current size of the Trust estate with The Residential Estate Residential Estate
the projections for growth over the next ten years KCL currently occupy 559 study bedroom places on
this increases the size of the estate from 139,635m2 the campus in Orchard Lisle, Iris Brook and Wolfson
Today GIA (m2) Future GIA (m2) % increase
today to 190,478m2 . An efficiency has been identified House. The brief replaces this accommodation with 500
in rationalising and co-locating the out-patients new study bedroom places within the masterplan. The Trust 139,635 190,478* 36
departments onto a single site this reduction has been proposed area of this development is approximately KCL 112,311 120,650 7
included in the 190,478 of 4,000m2 when compared 13,000m2. Charity 430 430 0
with the areas noted above. Other 30,950 231,971 650
The Trust occupy one residential building on the Total 283,326 543,479 92
KCL Space Requirements campus; Elizabeth Newcomen House and let out one Combined Estate
For KCL the future space requirements relate to their residential property directly on Assured Shorthold * Includes 4,000m2 redcution in OPD space
vision for an expanded Bio-sciences Hub on the Tenanicies; Sarah Swift House. Redevelopment of anticipated due to co-location of services.
London Bridge Campus. KCL also require 500 study these sites is optional as their development is not
bedroom places in residential accommodation to considered necessary to the success of the overall
replace the current on-site provision in Wolfson House Development Plan.
and Orchard Lisle House.
KCL’s space requirements have been reviewed and are
confirmed in their briefing document. The brief identifies
a range of activities which require new or expanded
space on the campus including enhanced student
facilities, re-provision of the Guy’s Day Nursery, re-
provision of the Greenwood Theatre with new lecture
theatre and seminar space, relocation of Guy’s DIID
 Master Plan - September 2016 19

2
Combined Space Requirements
Existing Guys Estate Existing KCL Estate
Total Existing Estate Occupied by Guys 139,635 Total Existing Non-Residential Estate Occupied by KCL 96,224 Notes
Total Existing Residential Estate Occupied by KCL 16,087 559 bedspaces
Total Size of KCL Estate 112,311
Demolition
Existing Areas to be Demolished Total Area (GIA) m2 Notes
Cunliffe Laboratories (Imaging) 1,600 Included in Essentia brief KCL Future Space Requirements (non-residential)
Borough Wing & Tabard Annexe 22,615 Included in Essentia brief
Existing Space to be reprovided (GIA) m2 Total Space Requirement (GIA) m2
Tower Link 3,154 Other space to be reprovided
Boiler House 2,961 Other space to be reprovided Student Facilities 2,000 2,500
New Salmons Centre 254 Other space to be reprovided Guy's Day Nursery (Trust operation) 350 500
1,905 Relocate offsite Leacture Theatre & Seminar Spaces 1,500 3,000
Central Stores
Sports Facilities 630 600
Mortuary 438 Included in Essentia brief
Guy's DIID (Infectious diseases from Borough Wing) 4,000 4,000
Tabard House 150 Other space to be reprovided
Guy's - Infrastructure- BSU 700 2,000
Nuffield House 3,320 Included in Essentia brief
Additional Research Capacity 6,000
OC 80 Other space to be reprovided
335 Relocate offsite Additional Incubator Space 2,000
Addison House
Chemistry relocation 8,800 8,800
Works Department 1,154 Other space to be reprovided
422 Other space to be reprovided 17,980 29,400
Three Tuns House
Total Guys Space to be Demolished 38,386
Net Increase in KCL Space Required (non-residential) 11,420

Future Space Requirements Total Future Size of KCL Estate (non-residential) 107,644
Total Guys Space to be Retained 101,069 Existing buildings retained
Notes:
Total Guys Space included in Essentia Brief 49,529 As Essentia Document *
Gene Therapy Partnership and Dental School relocation of offices from Denmark Hill to be accommodated in Tower Wing -
Total Other Guys Space to be Reprovided 8,174 Not inc in Essentia Brief
not included here
Consolidation of OPD Space from 12,000m2 to 8,000m2 -4,000 Consolidation of Space
Re-use of vacant space and consolidation within Main Hospital -5,135 Vacant & Consolidation of Space
Total Guys Fututure Space Requirement 149,637
KCL Future Space Requirements (residential)
Future Space Requirements allowing for Additional Growth Number of bedspaces Total Space Requirement (GIA) m2
Student residential accommodation 500 13000
Expansion of Southwark and Bermondsey Wing accommodation 40,841 Additional Space for growth
Total Guys Future Space Requirement with Additional Growth 190,478
Future Size of KCL Estate
Total Future Non-Residential Estate Occupied by KCL 107,644 Notes
Assumptions/ Notes:
Total Residential Estate Occupied by KCL 13,000 500 bedspaces
* Future Space Requirements for Replacement of Borough Wing, Cunliffe Labs, Nuffiled House and Mortuary as per Essentia Space
Total Size of KCL Estate 120,644
Assessment Report - April 2015
** Future Space Requirements allowing for additional growth based on a 76% GIA space increase in the size of the Southwark and
Bermondsey Wing - currently 53,739m2 (excludes expansion of the Tower Wing accommodation/ activities)

The Trust Space Requirement Summary Table KCL Space Requirements Summary Table
20 London Bridge Campus Masterplan

Diagram to illustrate the increase in area for activities in Borough Wing, Cunliffe Laboratories, Nuffield House and Mortuary, as set out in Essentia Space Assessment Report, April 2015.
Site Context and
Estate Analysis 3
22 London Bridge Campus Masterplan

3.1 London Context and Campus

3 Location

London Context
The Higher Education sector in London is a global
success story with approximately 370,000 students in
London; an increase of 60% since 1995/96. The growth
in international students enrolling at London universities
has been significant and recent studies show that this
trend is set to continue (London Calling: International
Student’s contribution to Britain’s economic growth,
London First/PwC, May 2015) placing a demand on the
need for academic and living space.

London has a world renowned reputation in Higher

Education institutes and both international and local
students want to be able to attend a prestigious
university situated in central London. Students have
access to an unparalleled array of academic resources
including a wealth of world renowned libraries,
museums and research institutes on their doorstep. It
is in this competitive Higher Education market that KHP
must compete to attract the best staff and students.

The London knowledge economy is very strong with

the capital accounting for 23% of the UK’s economic
output in 2014 (London and the Knowledge Economy,
GVA Research, Spring 2015). Life Sciences activities are
identified as a strong contributor with a considerable
need for medical and science sectors to be close to
hospitals, particularly teaching ones. The new Catapult
Centre for cell therapy at Guy’s and the private medical
centre based in the Shard are examples that are
supporting the emerging medical sector at London
Bridge.

The London Bridge Campus within the London Regional Context

 Master Plan - September 2016 23

3.2 Site Location

3
The masterplan site is located adjacent to London
Bridge mainline station in the London Borough of
Southwark. The site is close to the south bank of the
River Thames and immediately south of the station.
To the west lies Borough High Street/ Borough Market
and to the east Bermondsey Street and Tower Bridge.

Local landmarks include the Guy’s Tower within the

site, an icon of the London skyline, and The Shard
located immediately to the north of the site, the tallest
building in London. Southwark Cathedral is also close
by to the north-west adjacent to Borough Market. A
Shakespeare’s
range of cultural activities in the area are within walking TATE
Globe HMS
Modern Southwark
distance of the site. Cathedral Belfast
Hay’s
Galleria
Campus Connections
The location directly adjacent to London Bridge, a City
major transport hub, makes the campus one of the best Tube & Hall
connected places in the capital. London Bridge station Station
is served by London Underground (Northern and Borough The
Tube
Jubilee Lines) and mainline passenger services. There Market Shard To
ole
yS
are Thameslink trains running between Bedford and tre Potters
et
Brighton as well as Southeastern services from Cannon Fields
Street to destinations in southeast London, Kent London Park
King’s
and East Sussex. It is also the terminus for Southern Bridge Station
College
commuter and regional services to south London and London Guy’s
numerous destinations in South East England. Hospital Station

London Bridge station is currently undergoing a major

re-development with passenger journeys forecast to
increase from 55million to 90million per year in the St.John’s
next few years. The new concourse, which will open

Berm
Courtyard
in 2018, will unify the station for the first time providing

onds
access to all platforms. There will also be more Tube
et
trains to more destinations including a connection to tre

ey St
S
Crossrail services at Farringdon, providing links across h Residential Area
ig
H Leathermarket

reet
and beyond London in all directions. Entrances on gh
Garden
r ou
Tooley Street and St Thomas Street will connect the Bo
surrounding areas including the masterplan site which
lies directly to the south of the new entrance on St
Thomas Street. Wider Area Context Map
24 London Bridge Campus Masterplan

3.3 Town Planning Context

3
Introduction
This section of the report provides an overview of the Vinopolis
London
HMS
Bridge
planning context related to the future development of City Pier Belfast

the London Bridge Campus. In particular, it identifies

the planning considerations and benefits of adopting
Southwark
a masterplan process, outlines the status of planning Cathedral
policy and identifies the London Bridge development Hay’s
Galleria
context in order to provide a discussion of the key Tooley S
treet
planning themes of relevance to the preparation of the
masterplan and the delivery of development.
London Bridge is experiencing rapid growth,
City
galvanised by the area’s outstanding strategic location Borough
The Old
Hall
Operating Museum
and major developments in the area including the Market

redevelopment of London Bridge Station, which will

see a 60% increase in Thameslink rail capacity (London London
Bridge Plan), and an emerging cluster of tall buildings, To Bridge
ole City Potters
yS
delivering a substantial increase in commercial and The tre Fields
et
residential floorspace. This dynamic and fast moving Shard
London
Park

King’s Bridge
context is managed by a comprehensive planning Science
Station
College Gallery
policy framework, including regional and local plans, London
and masterplan studies, as identified below.
In order to be cognisant of the planning context Guy’s
Hospital
and identify both the potential for and nature of Gordon
Museum
redevelopment of the London Bridge Campus a
High
et

masterplan approach is now being adopted. The

Stre

Greenwood Density
Theatre Area
London Bridge Campus Masterplan enables significant St.John’s
igh

Courtyard
hH

benefits in planning terms, allowing future development

oug

to:
Bor

Residential Area

Berm
• Build on and supplement adopted and emerging

onds
planning policies and plans for the campus and

ey St
London Bridge area, and where appropriate
Leathermarket
provide an evidence base to challenge policies;

reet
Garden

• Integrate with and complement surrounding Fashion &

Textile Museum
developments, schemes and initiatives; and
Commercial/ Mixed Uses Areas Borough Market GreenAreas
Areas Tube Station Entrance
• Take a holistic view of campus development, London Bridge Station Residential Area
Green
Railway Station Entrance
allowing opportunities and constraints to be
Existing Uses Surrounding the Site
addressed across the campus as a whole, and
identify the appropriate capacity and form of
development.

Planning Policy Framework
This section of the report sets out the planning policy
framework of relevance to the London Bridge Campus
Masterplan. There are a number of adopted planning
policy documents that comprise the London Borough
of Southwark’s (LBS) Development Plan and are used
to set out the strategy for development and determine
planning applications across the borough. In addition
to the Development Plan, regard has to be given to
national, regional and local planning policy including
Supplementary Planning Documents (SPDs), and also
emerging planning policy.
The planning policy framework consists of the following
documents:
National
• National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)
(March, 2012)
• National Planning Policy Guidance (NPPG)
(March, 2014) (as amended)
Regional
• London Plan (March, 2016)
Local
• LBS Core Strategy (April, 2011)
• LBS Southwark Plan (2007) (Saved Policies)
Supplementary Planning Guidance / Documents
• LBS Section 106 Planning Obligations / CIL (April,
2015)
• LBS Sustainable Transport SPD (March, 2010)
• LBS Sustainable Design and Construction SPD
(February, 2009)
• GLA Central Activities Zone (March, 2016)
• Social Infrastructure (May, 2015)
• Accessible London: Achieving an Inclusive
Environment (October, 2014)
• Town Centres (July, 2014)
• Character and Context (June, 2014)
• Sustainable Design and Construction (April, 2014)
• London View Management Framework (March,
2012)
Emerging Policy and Evidence Studies
• LBS New Southwark Plan Preferred Option Draft
(October, 2015)
• London Bridge Plan – A Collective Vision and
Strategy
LBS consulted on the New Southwark Plan Preferred
Option Draft, which sets out overarching strategic
policies and development management policies from
October 2015 to February 2016. LBS is also preparing
to consult on area specific visions and policies,
including the London Bridge, later this year, where
there will be an opportunity to influence policy to reflect
and safeguard aspirations for the development of the
London Bridge Campus. Once consultations have
been concluded LBS will review the draft policies in
relation to responses ahead of anticipated adoption in
2017.
Key Planning Themes
A review of the adopted and draft planning policy
framework, and recent planning applications of
relevance to the London Bridge Campus Masterplan
has identified the following key planning themes.
London Bridge as a Centre of Major Development
The importance of the redevelopment of London
Bridge is recognised within regional and local policy.
Annex 1 of the London Plan (March, 2016) designates
London Bridge within the London Bridge, Borough and
Bankside Opportunity Area, including an indicative
employment capacity of 25,000 and 1,900 minimum
new homes. The Opportunity Area is recognised for
its potential for intensification, particularly surrounding
London Bridge station, complemented by transport
infrastructure improvements and the area’s ability
to deliver a mix of land uses including an enhanced
leisure and cultural offer and the creation of synergies
with the existing centre of medical excellence.
Furthermore, development within the opportunity
area is also encouraged to support the regeneration
of wider surrounding areas, such as Snowsfields and
Tabard Gardens.
At the local level the LBS Core Strategy sets an
overarching vision for the area and identifies
development that will continue the transformation
of London Bridge into a thriving centre of activity,
where major landowners including TfL, the Primary
Care Trust and King’s College will help to deliver large
scale change. This change is driven by and centred
on improvements to London Bridge station, which
provides a highly sustainable location for intensification,
significantly increases transport capacity, and
provides an upgraded public realm which enhances
interchange and improves connectivity. Planning
policy also recognises the importance of key cultural
centres in the area, including Borough Market and
Bermondsey Street, and encourages development,
which complements the offer and helps to better reveal
and connect these areas.
In 2015 Team London Bridge Business Improvement
District (BID) in partnership with LBS prepared the
London Bridge Plan a Collective Vision and Strategy
to identify the principles and projects for development,
and help guide the emerging New Southwark Plan and
investment decisions in the area. The plan sets out
principles to help create identity, support the economy,
and identify key projects to contribute towards
placeshaping. The plan also identifies the importance of
partnerships in the delivery of a collaborative approach
and outcome focused projects, recognising the role of
the area’s Science, Education and Medical Hub.
Master Plan - September 2016 25
3
Science, Education and Medical Hub
Planning policy across all levels seeks to promote the
distinctive and crucial contribution made by specialist
clusters of activity to London. In particular planning
policy recognises the importance of London’s medical,
health, academic and research clusters, such as
MedCity, and provides strong support for their growth
to provide continued world leading excellence.
The London Bridge Plan identifies the London Bridge
Science, Education and Medical Hub as one of the four
key character areas, and states:
“The reorientation of Guy’s and King’s campuses will
embrace St. Thomas Street, utilising architecture and
placemaking to transform the area and connect to a
reimagined Borough High Street. London Bridge’s
quality of life will be directly improved by integrating
and better connecting the educational and medical
campuses in the district, establishing stronger
partnerships, and creating a more navigable and
porous environment. This will provide opportunities
for interesting shared spaces, and a new market for
retail uses to serve an increasing professional and
educational clientele.” (page 6)
The planning policy context provides strong policy
support in relation to the principle of developing of the
campus. Notwithstanding this, there are a number of
other planning issues that will need to be addressed as
summarised below.
In addition, hospital developments can be complex due
to clinical planning considerations, which can affect the
scale and massing of buildings. It will be important to
explain any such constraints and specific operational
requirements to LBS and other key stakeholders. In
particular, how these affect the design of any proposed
buildings.
26 London Bridge Campus Masterplan
3
Heritage
The London Bridge Campus benefits from a wide
variety of heritage assets within its immediate area
and setting, which provide a visually rich environment
and contribute to the sense of place. Planning policy
across all levels seeks to conserve and enhance the
significance of heritage assets and their settings.
Conservation Areas
The campus is partially situated within the Borough
High Street Conservation Area to the west and adjacent
to the Bermondsey Street Conservation Area to the
east. Within and in close proximity to these areas it will
be important development preserves or enhances the
setting of the Conservation Areas, particularly in views
from the Conservation Areas towards the campus.
In this regard, scale and massing will be key design
issues to be addressed to ensure an appropriate design
response is provided in relation to the surrounding
context.
Listed Buildings
There are a number of listed buildings in the surrounding
area, including:
• The George Inn – Grade I
• Guy’s Hospital Main Building including wings and
chapel – Grade II*
• Newcomen Street terraces – Grade II
• Borough High Street properties – Grade II
• St. Thomas Street properties – Grade II
The presence of a number of listed buildings in the
surrounds means that any new development will
need to respect the setting of these heritage assets.
In addition, if the proposals directly affect any listed
buildings on the site (e.g. through demolition) then
listed building consent will be required along with a
robust justification and mitigation strategy.
Archaeology
The campus is located within an Archaeology Priority
Zone as identified within the LBS Local Plan. As such,
planning applications must be accompanied by an
archaeological assessment and evaluation, including
the impact of the proposed development.
London Bridge’s Cluster of Tall Buildings
Recent years have seen the emergence of a cluster
of tall buildings at London Bridge, with the opening
of the Shard (310 metres). in addition, the approval of
the Quill (110 metres), Fielden House (95 metres) and
the proposed redevelopment of New City Court (108
metres), as well as to the existing Guy’s Tower (149m),
are redefining the London skyline. Whilst tall buildings
and high density development make optimal use of
sites with high levels of public transport accessibility;
careful design is required to ensure they also contribute
their immediate setting by ensuring a human scale is
felt at street level and that the public realm is designed
proportionate to the scale of buildings thereby helping
to make a significant contribution to the environmental
enhancements of the wider area.
The Shard sets a precedent in terms of height that
future buildings can respond to, there is an agreed
general principle that that future tall buildings must
step down from The Shard. The masterplan provides
an opportunity to holistically consider the future
development of a tall buildings cluster, ensuring location
and scale respond to the surrounding heritage assets,
key local and strategic views and the established scale
of neighbouring areas.
Views
The London View Management Framework (LVMF)
(March, 2012) designates protected views across
London, which are considered to make a significant
contribution to the image and character of London. The
site falls within the background consultation areas of
2A.1 Parliament Hill and 3A.1 Kenwood. The campus
is also visible in two river prospects 12B Southwark
Bridge and 10A Tower Bridge. The designation of these
views seek to ensure proposed development does
not harm the overall composition of views towards
St. Paul’s Cathedral or the juxtaposition between key
elements including river frontages and key landmarks.
There are also a number of local views relevant to the
development of the campus, which need to be identified
in coordination with the LBS conservation officer.
Any new development will have to respect the setting
of the designated views, particularly in relation in
relation to scale and massing. Depending on the height
of any buildings proposed, a townscape and visual
assessment is likely to be required to support new
development.
Recent planning applications in the neighbouring
area, including Fielden House have not regarded the
background of LVMF viewing corridors, placing greater
precedence on the local views, the need to be visually
subservient to the Shard, and not altering the viewers
ability to appreciate landmarks or harm the setting of
heritage assets.
Materials
Appropriate materials will also be required to ensure
that any proposal responds to the surrounding heritage
context.
Transport
The campus is situated in a highly accessible location
by public transport, buses, underground and rail
services within close proximity, and as such sits
within PTAL rating level 6b. Planning policy seeks to
ensure there are no adverse impacts on transport
networks and adequate provision has been made
for servicing, circulation, parking and access. Given
current arrangements across the campus, there is a
clear opportunity to rationalise access and servicing
and significantly enhance the public realm and quality
of pedestrian environment.
LBS encourages sustainable travel and seeks to
minimise levels of car parking within the Central
Activities Zone. However, in the case of hospitals
essential car parking would be allowed where it can
be justified through a Transport Assessment. In terms
of cycle parking the policy seeks to ensure a minimum
of 1 space per 250sqm for retail and employment uses,
with the provision of other land uses determined on an
individual basis as applications come forward.
Culture and Leisure
The London Bridge Campus is situated within the
London Bridge Strategic Cultural Area, as identified in
the London Plan, which seeks to protect and enhance
the provision of arts, culture and tourism. At the local
level the LBS Core Strategy states:
“There will be a mix of uses that blend well with and
help improve the surrounding neighbourhood areas
and historic places and create a lively and friendly
place throughout the day and week.”
The London Bridge Campus is adjacent to a number of
significant cultural and leisure destinations, including
Borough Market and Bermondsey Street, in addition to
the Southbank and riverfront. Planning policy supports
development, which enhances the area’s distinct offer
and supports London Bridge as a cultural destination
for visitors.
The London Bridge Plan recognises the importance of
cultural and leisure uses in the area, and specifically
seeks to:
• “Highlight heritage principles.
• Encourage economic opportunities to strengthen
the cultural offer and diversify the mix.
• Create linkages between existing cultural assets
through partnerships, programming and public
realm, in a way that is digital, physical and sensory.

• Identify architectural gems to be preserved and
highlighted.
• Implement public art opportunities to reinforce
coherence and a sense of place.”
The London Bridge Plan identifies a number of projects,
to ensure the delivery of a world class environment,
enhance leisure facilities and better connect existing
centres of activity. Within the masterplan area, the plan
proposes the creation of the Thomas Street Boulevard,
which reimagines the street as pedestrian focused link,
with a vibrant cultural and evening economy, between
Bermondsey and Borough Market, as well as improving
the setting of the London Bridge Campus and links to
London Bridge Station.
Sustainability
The London Plan seeks to ensure development
minimises carbon dioxide emissions and maximises
opportunities for sustainability in accordance with the
energy hierarchy:
• Be lean: use less energy
• Be clean: supply energy efficiently
• Be green: use renewable energy
Core Strategy Policy 13 - High Environmental Standards
- reinforces the London Plan, requiring:
“...development to meet the highest possible
environmental standards, including targets based on
the Code for Sustainable Homes and BREEAM, and
…development to be designed and built to minimise
greenhouse gas emissions across its lifetime. This will
be achieved by applying the energy hierarchy.”
Future development will need to explore opportunities
for renewable energy technologies, including
connection to the Guy’s Hospital CHP district heating
network, and take account of the specific requirements
of hospital development and the constraints imposed
by the historic significance of the area.
Student Housing
The LBS Core Strategy identifies a housing target of
1,900 net new homes from 2011 to 2021. Planning
policy seeks to ensure this includes the provision of
student homes to meet the needs of universities and
colleges.
CIL
Future development of the campus will be required to
pay the mayoral and LBS Community Infrastructure
Levy (CIL), which seeks to raise funds for physical
infrastructure projects, including transport, schools,
health and sports facilities.
Education and health development are exempt from
mayoral CIL, with all other types of development
required to pay £35 per sqm. Education and health
development is also exempt from LBS CIL with £100
per sqm for student housing and £125 per sqm for
retail.
Next Steps
In order to successfully take the redevelopment plans
through the planning process, engagement and
consultation with LBS and the GLA will be key. LBS
is currently reviewing its Local Plan, which provides
the opportunity to influence planning policy before it is
adopted. Once policy is adopted it will be used in the
determination of planning applications.
It is noted that LBS is consulting on a number of draft
area visions and schedule of draft proposals sites later
this year, including London Bridge. There may be an
opportunity to agree with LBS that the masterplan can
set the vision for the London Bridge Campus, and be
incorporated into planning policy through the emerging
Master Plan - September 2016 27
3
Local Plan. This would enshrine the masterplan in It would be prudent to engage with surrounding
planning policy and help to smooth the planning landowners, residents and businesses at the
application process for individual developments. appropriate time. This will give LBS the comfort that the
plans have buy-in, and thehave already been through
Engagement public scrutinym. In the case of hospitals and education
As part of the engagement process, it will be important public engagement is usually very positive and
to undertake wider consultation in order to garner provides an opportunity for stakeholders and residents
support for any redevelopment plans. We have to get behind the principle of the redevelopment.
highlighted some of the key stakeholders below: Notwithstanding this tthere are always objectors but
these can be minimised through a carefully managed
and timed engagement process.
• LBS – a number of strategic-level meetings should
be held with key officers from LBS to ensure that
high-level support exists. Engagement with LBS
will be key to determining how the campus vision
can align with emerging planning policy and the
best approach for delivering development.
• GLA – Engagement with the GLA will be key as
the area is identified as an Opportunity Area
within The London plan. Its redevelopment also
forms a key part of the jigsaw in the wider London
Bridge area.
• Political support - it would be advisable to begin
early consultation with senior members to achieve
political buy-in for the plans at a strategic level.
• London Bridge Team – it will be important to
engage with the London Bridge Team, to ensure the
masterplan proposals align with other emerging
schemes in the area, and the masterplan’s
aspirations are included in the emerging vision for
the area.
• Historic England - Due to the large number of
surrounding heritage assets and location in a
protected viewing corridor, early consultation with
Historic England would be advantageous to agree
principles and gain buy-in to the proposals.
28 London Bridge Campus Masterplan
3.4 Site Context and Character
3
The Site
The site comprises two identifiable campus areas; to
the west the King’s College London University buildings
centred around Memorial Park and also occupying the
Backlands area behind Borough High Street, and to
the east the Guy’s Hospital campus encompassing
much of the site to the east of Great Maze Pond Road.
Both the University and Guy’s Hospital occupy various
buildings across the site within the two halves of the
campus for example KCL occupies buildings on Weston
Street to the east and Guy’s occupy buildings including
the Mortuary in the Backlands area. The building uses
Owned by KCL
Owned by GSTFT
Owned by Guy’s & St. Thomas’
Charity
Site Boundary
Building Ownership Across the Site
are predominately heathcare, research, teaching and
related residential accommodation.
The buildings included within the site boundary are all
owned by either the Charity, NHS Trust or KCL. The
ownership and building occupier drawings included
here show how interlinked the relationships are between
the three building owners. A collective masterplanning
approach has been taken that maximises the benefit of
development across the entire site and therefore for the
masterplan study the ownership of individual buildings
has been put aside.
Owned by KCL
Owned by GSTFT
Owned by Guy’s & St. Thomas’
Charity
Site Boundary
There is an opportunity to develop existing housing
sites owned by the Charity; Sarah Swift House and
Elizabeth Newcomen House. However, following review
it is considered that these sites are not fundamental to
the masterplan and future development of the site.
A number of further sites owned by third parties are also
considered as part of the masterplan these include:
Ronald McDonald House
Munro Clinic
Further development opportunities have also been
identified including:
Occupied by KCL
Occupied by GSTFT with KCL
emedded space
Occupied by Guy’s & St. Thomas’
Charity / Charity third party tenants
Site Boundary
Building Occupiers Across the Site
Properties on Borough High Street
Corner of Borough High Street and Newcomen Street
Land to the east of the site on St Thomas Street
Public House on Snowsfields
Great Portland Estates are proposing redevelopment of
New City Court adjacent to Francis House. Preliminary
discussions have taken place with the developers to
better understand their intentions for the site. Both
parties (developer and the Partners) would benefit
from a collective masterplanning strategy for this part
of the site, something which Southwark Council have
encouraged.
Occupied by KCL
Occupied by GSTFT with KCL
emedded space
Occupied by Guy’s & St. Thomas’
Charity / Charity third party tenants
Site Boundary
 Master Plan - September 2016 29

3
Character Areas
Borough Market Hay’s Galleria City Hall_More London

Tooley Street Tower Bridge

London Bridge Station Bermondsey Street Residential Area Leathermarket Gardens

30 London Bridge Campus Masterplan

3
Microclimate
The north-south orientation of the site maximises the
opportunities for daylight and solar access into the
campus. This is already established with the orientation
of Memorial Park and Great Maze Pond Road creating
solar corridors. A wind tunnel effect is experienced
along Great Maze Pond Road created as a result of the
tall buildings and orientation of the street.

Key Views from the Site

Given the proximity of the site to the River Thames
and the City there is great opportunity to capitalise
on outstanding views across London form the higher
levels of the buildings.

Microclimate Key Views from the Site

 Master Plan - September 2016 31

3
> 70m
40-70m
30-40m
20-30m
15-20m
Building Heights 10-15m
< 10m
The existing buildings on the site vary greatly in scale
A
and height. This existing context is import to inform the
scale and massing of future buildings including taller
buildings across the site. Several precedents for taller
buildings have already been established notably the
Guy’s Tower (149m) and the Cancer Centre (60m). The
Shard to the north of the site is 310m high and further
future developments with planning consent include
Fielden House (95m) on St Thomas Street and the Quill B
(110m) on Weston Street., A and B respectively on the
diagram opposite.

Building Age
> 70m
Beginning with the construction of Old Guy’s House in 40-70m
1774 the buildings within the site have been developed 30-40m
20-30m
in many stages over time. The main University buildings 15-20m
10-15m
to the west of Memorial Park were developed in the < 10m

late 19th/ early 20th Century. On the hospital site the

Building Heights Building Age
Borough Wing was constructed in 1961, followed by
Guy’s Tower Wing in 1974 and the Southwark and
Bermondsey Wing in 1997. The developments on
Weston Street are from 1975 and the Charity office
(Francis House) and Orchard Lisle residences were
constructed in the 1980’s.
32 London Bridge Campus Masterplan

3.5 Routes and Linkages

3
Overview
The London Bridge Campus is bound by Borough
High Street to the north-west, St Thomas Street to the
north-east, Weston Street to the east and Newcomen
Street/ Snowsfields to the south. Connections across
the campus are very poor with Great Maze Pond Road
providing the only direct route through the campus
north-south connecting St Thomas Street/ London
Bridge Station to the predominately residential area
to the south of the campus. Generally there is very
little permeability for pedestrians to move through the
campus and this is particularly so to the east of Great
Maze Pond Road where the footprint of the hospital
buildings severely restricts access in all directions.

To the west of Great Maze Pond, Memorial Park and

Old Guy’s House provide a less formal link north-south.
However the east- west routes through the Backlands
area linking to Borough High Street are poor. The routes
through the existing Yards and Lanes are difficult to
navigate, they are congested with servicing, buildings
obstruct lines of sight and often turn their backs to the
routes resulting in a very poor pedestrian experience
overall.
 Master Plan - September 2016 33

3
Surrounding Streets

Borough High Street Weston Street

Newcomen Street/ Snowsfields St. Thomas Street

34 London Bridge Campus Masterplan

3
Existing Access and Movement Issues
The masterplan study area is characterised by narrow
streets, generally residential in nature, with constrained
footway widths and low – modest vehicle flows. The
notable exception to this is Borough High Street, an
important and very busy traffic north-south corridor,
though also carrying substantial pedestrian flows.
Borough High Street’s footways are though generally
narrow and insufficient for present pedestrian volumes,
offering a poor level of service.

St Thomas Street offers greater width but is currently

closed to through traffic east of Great Maze Pond Road
related to the ongoing London Bridge Station works. It’s
value to the local road network is limited beyond those
works too, offering access only to Great Maze Pond
Road for vehicular traffic. Related to this restricted use,
pedestrians are seen to benefit by sharing the road
space encouraged by the limited vehicle flows.

The general narrowness of local streets has led to one-

way traffic operation on streets including Newcomen
Street and Snowsfields and other adjoining streets
to the south. This limits vehicular movement access
possibilities, particularly for larger delivery vehicles.
Servicing opportunities are also limited from Borough
High Street, owing to the restricted width openings
available to delivery vehicles. Once within the site,
vehicle turning is severely constrained and loading
facilities limited.

Access and Movement Issues

 Master Plan - September 2016 35

3
The masterplan site presents considerable difficulty in
terms of permeability for pedestrians and cyclists with
the large and disparate blocks obstructing clear and
legible paths through the area disrupting movement
along desire lines for substantial distances. This
is compounded by pockets of ad-hoc parking and
loading activity across the site, most notably found in
the area west of Great Maze Pond Road.

Whilst the southernmost Great Maze Pond Road

access is of modern design and geometry it does
not provide a full-length north-south vehicular link to
St Thomas Street with only Borough High Street and
Weston Street (some 200m distant) providing that
connection.

The main hospital entrance area accommodates

activity related to ambulance movements, patients’
transport vehicles and visitors – leading to congestion
and an intense, unwelcoming and somewhat chaotic
experience for all users. This requires the presence
of staff to manage movement activity utilising traffic
cones along with other ad-hoc means to enforce
access restrictions.

Existing Traffic Management

36 London Bridge Campus Masterplan

3
Summary
Pedestrian Flows
• Significant number of pedestrians walking in the
area – expected to increase very substantially
with the expansion of London Bridge station
• Narrow footway and high vehicular traffic flow,
especially on Borough High Street
• Poor wayfinding / lack of signage
• Lack of permeability throughout the campus
(east-west and north-south links)
• Lack of green / open spaces to enhance and
facilitate pedestrian journeys.

Cycling Routes and Facilities

• Poor wayfinding and lack of signage
• Limited width streets with one-way operation
require contraflow movement by cyclists – e.g.
eastward on Newcomen Street
• Lack of cycle parking facilities.

Guy’s Hospital Entrance

• Unwelcoming environment
• Poor arrangement and layout for all users
• Conflicting and confusing environment
• Ambulance, patients’ transport vehicles and
visitors all directed to the same entrance
• Staffed parking management needed to address
parking demands and conflicts.
 Master Plan - September 2016 37

3
Parking
• Collingwood Street and Talbot Yard are dominated
by vehicles parked on-street
• Numerous vehicles, especially motorcycles park
on the footway
• One multi-storey car park is available in the area
but wayfinding and access to it is poor, notably
because its only entrance is located on King
Street, which is a one-way road.

Deliveries and Servicing

• On-street parking complicates delivery and
servicing on the campus
• Newcomen Street’s constrained width presents
considerable difficulty for large vehicles, forcing
deliverers to either trolley their deliveries or drive
on the footway
• Few entry/exiting points for delivery at the moment

Conclusion
Overall, the area presently has a number of significant
physical constraints to efficient operation and the
addition of London Bridge Station related movement
will serve to further emphasise those shortcomings.

Additional masterplan-related development will

require a very substantial improvement in movement
conditions, particularly for pedestrians to provide
for thus far supressed desire line movement and the
needed capacity to cater for numbers more related to
crowd than group pedestrian movement.
38 London Bridge Campus Masterplan

3.6 Open Space and Public Realm

3
The existing provision of open space and public
realm across the campus is very limited. Memorial
Park provides a welcome retreat from the dense
and chaotic arrangement of adjacent spaces on the
campus both to the east, Great Maze Pond Road and
to the west, the Yards and Lanes of the Backlands area
leading to Borough High Street. Memorial Park is the
main space for outdoor activities on the campus and
features attractive mature trees and lawn areas. There
are smaller more private garden spaces at Old Guy’s
House and Orchard Lisle student residences. The
majority of the remaining outdoor spaces are used for
car parking and servicing and have little landscape or
placemaking quality.
 Master Plan - September 2016 39

3
Campus Character Areas
Old Guy’s House Borough Wing/ Tower Wing/ Southwark & Bermondsey Wing

Cancer Centre/ Great Maze Pond Road Memorial Gardens

Tablot Yard “The George” Yard The King’s Head Yard/ White Hart Yard Wolfson House Yard Orchard Lisle House
40 London Bridge Campus Masterplan
3.7 Historic Analysis, Conservation Areas and Heritage Assets
3
The site is subject to a number of heritage and planning
context considerations, including:
• The entire site falls within an Archaeological
Priority Area
• The western part of the site lies within the Borough
High Street Conservation Area
• The eastern edge to Weston Street is adjacent to
the Bermondsey Conservation Area
• Old Guy’s House within the site is Grade 2 listed
• The site is adjacent to the Grade I Listed George
Inn Public House and other Grade 2 listed
buildings
• The site falls within the Kenwood House and
Parliament Hill LVMF protected Vista corridors and
the river prospect views from Southwark Bridge –
downstream and Tower Bridge – up stream
• Other buildings within the site that are not listed
but considered to make a positive contribution to
the Conservation Area.
It will be important going forward to develop a detailed
understanding of the heritage assets to identify the
significance of individual buildings and their potential
for development. Any perceived harm to a heritage
asset will need to be out-weighed by a Public Benefit
case. An overview of the history of the local area
including the site is given below.
Roman Origins
The development of the area commenced with the
construction of a permanent bridge across the Thames
built by the Romans shortly after the invasion of Britain
in 43A.D. A Roman road, the forerunner of Borough
High Street, lay just to the east of its present position
and crossed the bridge into the provincial capital of
Londinium established on the north bank of the river.
A large suburb was soon established on the southern
bridgehead. The community that developed from this
time set the overall pattern of Borough as it still exists
today.
Southwark was listed as a ‘burgh’ in 910 in the Anglo
Saxon “Burghal Hideage”, a list of burghs measured
by area. The Middle Ages saw the foundation of the
Market. It originates from a market that was held on
Old London Bridge, and then in Borough High Street
from as early as 1276.
Post 16th century
With the only bridge link over the river, Southwark was
able to develop not only as a service centre for the
City, but also as an alternative location for businesses
that were not welcome in the City for whatever reason.
Borough became noted for its skilled craftsmen, of
whom many were religious refugees and had to live
outside the City to avoid restrictions that would have
been placed on them there. Other industries developed
such as butchery and brewing, which spawned
associated trades in commodities such as leather
and hops; and it became particularly infamous for its
entertainments.
Engraving of Old Guy’s House,
Established 1721
18th century – Guy’s Hospital is established
It was not until 1750 that other bridges were built over
the river in addition to London Bridge. Transport by
coach had become a major feature of 18th century
commercial life, and many of the coaches travelling
south from London set off from Borough. Inns had
been established along the High Street since the
Middle Ages to service travellers, including the famous
Tabard and The George. Such was the congestion
in Borough High Street by 1756 that the market was
moved off the street to its present day site. Great Dover
Street was constructed in 1814 to relieve the traffic
on old Kent Street. Overcrowding had its obvious
human consequences, too, and the 18th century saw
the establishment of many humanitarian institutions
– schools, and notably Guy’s Hospital. The hospital
was founded in 1721 by Thomas Guy, established
as a hospital to treat ‘incurables’ discharged from St
Thomas’ Hospital. The original buildings, known today
as Old Guy’s House, formed a courtyard facing St
Thomas Street and include the Chapel on the east side.
Victorian Development
The railway arrived in Southwark in 1836 resulting in the
loss of the inns as a physical and economic resource,
and the major impact of the viaducts on the townscape.
Even so, the enormous variety of commercial activity in
Borough continued, often occupying premises and sites
that had been established for centuries on long narrow-
fronted sites. There were many different businesses on
Borough High Street, including clothes and furniture
shops, ironmongers, and estate agents. Certain historic
trades developed prominence, such as the hop trade,
and there were many hop merchants’ warehouses in
the area. The foundation of the Metropolitan Board of
Works opened up in 1855 to address London’s social
and sanitation problems. Philanthropic trusts like
the Peabody and the Improved Industrial Dwellings
Company also began to erect tenement blocks to
replace the slums. The process continued into the 20th
century, establishing the character of the surrounding
residential areas in medium rise apartment blocks.
During this time Guy’s Hospital also began to expand
with a bequest by William Hunt in 1829 allowing a
further hundred beds to be accommodated in Hunts
House, the site of the present day New Hunts House
which replaced the earlier building in 1999.
20th Century to Present
Borough’s lively mix of commercial activities continued
to provide the essence of its character through the
20th century. Second World War bombing affected
Guy’s Hospital and residential areas to the south. The
east wing of Guy’s was rebuilt more or less exactly, but
modern redevelopment characterises the south end of
Borough High Street.
Borough’s proximity to the City of London and good
underground links continued to attract office business.
The Market itself has remained and the Guy’s Hospital
site has continued to develop over the 20th century
with new hospital and university buildings creating a
significant medical, research and teaching campus to
the south of St Thomas Street and east of Borough
High Street around Old Guy’s House.
In 1974 the Guy’s Tower was completed, the tallest
hospital in the world, and for a time the tallest building
in London standing currently at 149m. The most recent
developments on the site are the Wolfson Centre for
Age Related Diseases, 2004 and the new Cancer Centre
opening in 2016. Surrounding the site London Bridge
and Borough continue to evolve, most recognisably the
construction of the Shard, currently the tallest tower in
London at 310m, and the ongoing re-development of
London Bridge Station immediately to the north of the
site planned to open in 2018.
 Master Plan - September 2016 41

workforce. And the Market itself has remained, still the most distinctive
element of a distinctive Conservation Area. Moreover, with the opening
in 1999 of the specialist foods retail market on Fridays and Saturdays, it
has become a vibrant and successful public attraction.

3
Key to Historic Maps
1. 1658
2. 1794
3. 1830
4. 1896
5. 1936

1 2 3

4 5

map of 1658, showing

key street patterns, but
pment along much of
High Street
42 London Bridge Campus Masterplan

3.8 Building Strategy

3
The diagram opposite illustrates a high level analysis of Buildings to be re

the existing buildings, their current use and fitness for

Development site
purpose, the building condition and potential heritage
value. This study established the key buildings to Potential opportu
be retained within the masterplan (shown in BLUE)
Potential develop
and the main buildings identified for re-development (not owned by Pa

(shown in RED). Additionally opportunities for further Site Boundary

re-development were identified which could potentially
contribute to the overall success of the masterplan
(shown in ORANGE). Further sites, not owned by the
ST
partners, indicated on the plan (hatched) have also been TH
OM
AS
identified which may also contribute to the masterplan ST
RE
ET
vision and longer term growth of the campus.

ET
RE
ST
IGH
HH
UG
RO
BO

ET
N ST R E
NE
WC
OM

W E S TO
EN
ST
RE
ET
S
IELD
WS F
SNO

Buildings to be retained

Development site

Potential opportunity

Potential development opportunity

(not owned by Partners)

Site Boundary
 Master Plan - September 2016 43

3.9 Site Constraints

3
There are significant constraints which must be taken Listed buildings
into consideration as the masterplan develops and
Buildings to be reta
individual building projects come forward:
• Listed buildings adjacent to the site including the Other campus build
Grade 1 Listed George Public House located off
2.
Borough High Street in the Backlands area. Within LVMF Protected Vi
London Bridge
the site the only listed building is Old Guy’s House Station Conservation area
(Grade 2) which sits at the historic core of the site St
Th 1. Borough High S
om
• Part of the western side of the campus lies within as
Str 2. Tooley Street

et
ee
the Borough High Street Conservation Area. Also t

re
The Shard

St
3. Bermondsey Str
the western side of the campus is adjacent to the

gh
Hi
Bermondsey Street Conservation Area Site boundary

h
ug
ro
• London View Management Framework constraints

Bo
on height and massing of development
• Buildings and spaces to be retained including key
assets such as the Gordon Museum located in the
Hodgkin building
• Scale of the existing surrounding residential areas
and Borough High Street may restrict in places
the height and scale of proposed buildings
• Rights of Light and Sunlight & Daylight impacts Memorial
of new developments on buildings within the site park
and neighbouring buildings and spaces

treet
• Ownership of buildings particularly those owned/

Weston S
occupied by third parties will need to be taken 3.

into account
Ne
wc
• Maintaining ongoing operations for the Hospital om
en
Str L o w s c a le
and the University during construction including eet r e s i de ntia l
safe access to buildings field
1. Snows
• Phasing of works and decanting Listed buildings

• Potential impacts of other planned developments Buildings to be retained

around the site such as the Quill, Fielden House

Other campus buildings L o w s c a le
and New City Court r e s i d e ntia l
2.
LVMF Protected Views
• Re-developmentLondon
of London
Bridge Bridge station and
Station Conservation area boundary
St
Th
the new concourse 1. Borough High Street
om
• as SRestricted
tre pavement widths and access issues 2. Tooley Street
et
The Shard
on surrounding streets may impose limitations on 3. Bermondsey Street

access to the site both in construction and day to Site boundary

day in use.
44 London Bridge Campus Masterplan

3.10 Masterplanning Opportunities

3
Ideagram
The Partners Masterplanning brief identifies the following Buildings to be

opportunities:
Development s

• Value of Guy’s properties and prospect to build tall Green Spaces

• Contribute to regeneration of London Bridge Quarter St
• Proximity to a major London transport hub Th Development s
om owned by othe

• Create a Bio-medical research Hub for commercial and as

Str

et
academic income ee

re
t

St
• Maximising floor area with flexible built infrastructure

gh
Hi
• Create a combined vision to add value to “GSTFT, Guy’s,

h
Charity, St Thomas’ and KCL” brands.

ug
ro
Bo
Through the masterplan study these opportunities have been
developed. The masterplan draws on Southwark Council’s vision
for the London Bridge Quarter and this site in particular which
offers great potential in unlocking this part of London Bridge to
create a new permeable piece of the city. a
c
t
i v
Specific opportunities identified within the masterplan include:
i t
y
• Create clear connections north-south across the site,
improving permeability and connecting the site with the
station and the residential neighbourhood to the south

treet
• New entrances to the site from St Thomas Street and London
Bridge Station Ne
wc
om

Weston S
• Opening up the ground floor of the Southwark and Bermondsey en
Wing on St Thomas Street with potential retail activity to Str
eet
contribute to the vision for a pedestrian priority boulevard
• Strengthen the connection with Borough High Street, creating
coherent routes through the Backlands and routes east-west
across the site
• Regenerate the Yards and Lanes within the Borough High Snow
sfield
Street Backlands to create a new vibrant place with retail and
other commercial and education activities
• Preserve the historic buildings and spaces and enhance their
Buildings to be retained
setting
• Create new, legible high quality public realm and open space Development site

across the campus Green Spaces

St • Develop flexible sustainable infrastructure and buildings to

Th Development site -
omreduce running costs and environmental impacts. owned by others
as
Str
ee
t
Options Development
Scenarios 4
46 London Bridge Campus Masterplan

4 Development Scenarios and Principles

4
Overview Scenario 1
Early in the masterplanning study a series of Court by Great Portland Estates was also identified.
development scenarios were tested with the Partners
to identify a preferred strategy for development of the Five development scenarios were reviewed by the
campus and in particular the key first moves that are Partners as illustrated opposite. Each test an alternative
necessary to enable the future development of the scenario for development
masterplan.
Scenarios 1, 2 and 5 were identified as preferred as they
From this the following principles were established: all consolidate hospital activities to the east of Great
• The lecture theatre must be re-provided before Maze Pond Road and locate the student residential
demolition of the existing theatre commences village in the Backlands area. Following further review
Scenario 1 emerged as the preferred development
• The student accommodation in Wolfson House
scenario as it best met the Partners objectives and
and Orchard Lisle House must be re-provided on
requirements as set out in the principles listed above.
campus before demolition of the existing building
• There is no immediate requirement to re-build the
swimming pool
• The activities in the Borough Wing must be
re-provided before it can be demolished this
includes; operating theatres, wards, treatment
rooms, research space and offices
• The activities in Nuffield House must be re-
provided before it can be demolished this
includes; 2 day case operating theatres and the
sleep clinic
• The Mortuary must be re-provided before it can
be demolished
• The Central Stores and other hospital activities
located adjacent to the Mortuary can be relatively
easily relocated to the basement of the Southwark
and Bermondsey Wing as part of an enabling
stage.

An opportunity for development of Francis House and

the residential grouping to the south (Orchard Lisle and
Iris Brook) to be developed as a single development
potentially related to the development of New City
 Master Plan - September 2016 47

4
Scenario 2 Scenario 3
48 London Bridge Campus Masterplan

4
Scenario 4 Scenario 5
The Masterplanning
Strategy 5
50 London Bridge Campus Masterplan

5.1 The Masterplan

5
Masterplan
The masterplan vision is for the campus to become
an integrated and connected piece of the city. A
coherent hierarchy of routes and spaces across the
site will create a new sense of place linking the site
with the surrounding context. A vibrant mix of activities
intermingled across the site; healthcare, research,
education, student residential, retail and commercial,
will enliven the whole area. New buildings are sited to
maximise potential for development whist responding St
Th
om
to the scale of surrounding streets and spaces. as
Str
ee
t
The proposed buildings in the Backlands area off
Borough High Street will have a mix of uses including
the Student Village with residential accommodation for
500 students and a new lecture theatre and seminar

et
tre
spaces. To the south a new bio-sciences building will

hS
Hig
face onto Newcomen Street and to the north a new gh
commercial development connects into the proposed
rou

re-development of New City Court adjacent to the site.

Bo

In this area the Yards and Lanes will be invigorated with

new uses and active ground floor frontages including
community education spaces, retail and cafes and
restaurants.

The historic core of buildings; Old Guy’s House,

Road
Shepherds House, Henriette Raphael and the Hodgkin

ond
building are mostly retained with the rear extensions

ze P
removed and a new fit-for-purpose academic building

treet
t Ma
added to the rear of the Hodgkin building. These historic

S
G re a
buildings contribute to the setting of Memorial Park, Ne

Weston
wc
o me
an important space and feature within the campus, nS
tre
which is retained and enhanced with the demolition et
of the weak Nuffield House building to the south. This
sfie lds
is replaced by a new feature building, the Bio-Science Snow
Hub, connected to the retained New Hunts House bio-
medical building.

To the east of Great Maze Pond Road the existing Guy’s

hospital site is transformed with the replacement of the
Borough Wing and the opening up of the Southwark
 Master Plan - September 2016 51

5
Pedestrian Movement and Key Spaces
and Bermondsey Wing to create an active frontage
to St Thomas Street and a new pedestrian entrance
and street orientated north-south to align with the
new London Bridge Station concourse entrance. Two
large scale developments sit either side of this route
which opens up to the south onto Snowsfields. The tall
building elements rise up in scale towards the Guy’s
Tower.

A new centralised out-patients department and other

hospital activities are located opposite, on the south
side of Snowsfields. Other developments along the
south side of Snowsfields include new offices for the
Charity and the potential re-development of Elizabeth
Newcomen House for residential use.

Key Routes and Spaces

The diagram opposite illustrates the hierarchy of
proposed routes and spaces across the campus and
the strong connections created with the surrounding
area.

On the western side, from Borough High Street, the

routes into the campus are informal and build upon the
character of the existing Yards and Lanes. Wayfinding
is improved with clear lines of sight from one space to
the next making the area easier to navigate. The route
east-west extends through Memorial Park and the new
development on the eastern side of the campus linking
with Weston Street.

Strong pedestrian links north-south provide clear

connections from the site to London Bridge Station
and the residential area to the south. Great Maze
Pond Road is retained and new links are created off St
Thomas Street to the west of Old Guy’s House and to
the east of the Tower Wing aligning with the new station
concourse entrance to the north and the proposed
development on the south side of Snowsfields. Here a
new public space is proposed for arrivals and drop-off.
52 London Bridge Campus Masterplan

5.2 Public Realm and Landscape

5
Public Realm
Public Realm
Creating a new public realm across the site is central
to the masterplan vision of opening up the campus to
become a connected piece of the city. The increase in
activity across the site and the increase in passenger
numbers arriving at London Bridge station following
its re-development will both have a significant impact
on the area. The public realm strategy reflects this by
creating a series of new, connected spaces within the
campus.
 Master Plan - September 2016 53

5
Character Areas
Character Areas
The masterplan identifies three distinct character areas
across the site:

• Borough High Street Yards

• Memorial Park
• The Eastern Quarter

The images on the following pages reflect the varying

nature of each of these areas and the types of activities
that may take place within the public realm.
54 London Bridge Campus Masterplan

5 Character Areas -
Borough High Street Yards and Lanes

Key to Images
1, 7 Retail and Restaurant/Cafes
St. Christopher’s Place, West End, London
2, 5, 6 Outdoor eating/food and beverage trends
3, 4 Retail and Restaurants/Cafes
Slingsby Place, Covent Garden, London

1 2 3
6
7
5 4
 Master Plan - September 2016 55

5
Character Areas - Memorial Park

Key to Images
1, 3 Memorial Park Central Space
looking North towards Old Guy’s House
2 Looking South towards Nuffield House and
the War Memorial
4 The Hodgkin Building West elevation

1 2

4 3
56 London Bridge Campus Masterplan

5 Character Areas -
Eastern Quarter

Key to Images
1, 7 City of London, Bennetts Associates
2 New Development, Toronto
3, 4 Cardinal Place, London
5 Thomas Moore Place, London
6 More London, London

1 3
2
4
7 6 5
 Master Plan - September 2016 57

St Thomas Street, Station and Campus Gateway Newcomen Street, Memorial Park Gateway

Great Maze Pond Road, Campus Heart Snowsfields, ODP and Campus Gateway
 Master Plan - September 2016 59

5.3 Landscape Masterplan

5
The drawing opposite illustrates the potential to create
a pedestrian focused external environment with
attractive areas of green and soft landscape through
out the campus.
9

10
11

7 8

2
13

6 3

12 4
1 Memorial Park
2 St Thomas Street Entrance
3 Great Maze Pond Road Entrance
4 Hospital Arrival and Drop-Off
5 Out-Patients Entrance Snowsfields
5
6 Southern Yards
7 Talbort Yard
8 New Square
9 New City Court Yard
10 Old Guy’s House Quad
11 Great Maze Pond Gateway
12 New Gateway Newcomen Street
13 Student Village

Roof Level - Landscape Plan

60 London Bridge Campus Masterplan

5
Key Landscape Views within the Campus

View from Memorial Park towards the new Bio-Science Hub

Ground Level - Landscape Plan View from Backlands towards Old Guy’s House
 Master Plan - September 2016 61

5
Masterplan Diagrams
BUILDING DESIGN PARTNERSHIP SHALL H
MADE OF THIS DOCUMENT OTHER THAN F
ISSUED.

ALL DIMENSIONS SHOULD BE CHECKED O

DO NOT SCALE FROM THIS DRAWING
ANY DRAWING ERRORS OR DIVERGENCIE
OF BUILDING DESIGN PARTNERSHIP AT T

NOTES

REVISION / DESCRIPTION

KEYPLAN

CLIENT

Public Areas

Proposed Buildings

Exicting Buildings
16 Brewhouse Yard

Proposed Retail
Clarkenwell
London EC1V 4LJ
United Kingdom
T +44 (0)20 7812 8000
F +44 (0)20 7812 8399
www.bdp.com

Key Routes and Spaces Microclimate and Environment Entrances / Ground Floor Uses / Active Frontages
PROJECT TITLE

Project Name

P2007447
ap00200 DRAWING TITLE

1 1 : 1000
Masterplan - Ground F

DRAWING No.

(SK)AP3
62 London Bridge Campus Masterplan

5.4 Approach to Height and Massing

5
The heights strategy has been informed by assessment
of the existing context, historic analysis, character
assessments, and review of recently approved
planning applications, local and London wide planning
strategies.

The key considerations that have influenced the

strategy are: Redevelopment of
• Relationship to the Shard and the Guy’s Tower New City Court
Fielden House
• Relationship to Borough High Street Conservation
Area and Bermondsey Street Conservation
• Local Views which contribute to orientation and
experience.
• London Plan Strategic Views and Panoramas
• Retention and enhancement of existing streetscape
character
This has led to defining the following design principles: Guy’s Tower
1. The central part of the site, including the listed Guy’s
Hospital and Memorial Garden to be enhanced
as the historic core of the area and be low rise in
character. The Quill
2. Buildings immediately to the east and west of
the historic core should frame it and enhance its
Cancer Centre
character. The same applies to buildings adjacent
to the listed George Inn, located to the west of the
site boundary
site boundary.
3. New buildings between the buildings framing the listed buildings

western side of Memorial Gardens and Borough historic core

High Street could be taller than the existing but
lower to higher rise building
step down from east to west towards Borough High
Street. relate to adjacent buildings
4. The area to the east of Great Maze Pond Road is proposed tall building
suitable for creating a cluster of taller buildings,
which can be of similar height to the Guy’s Tower. approved tall building
However they should step down in height to south NTS existing tall building
and east in response to the existing context. N
 Master Plan - September 2016 63

5
5. New building frontages along Newcomen Street
should respond to the existing buildings on
the southern side of the road and enhance the
streetscape character. Continuous building line
will be preferable and where taller elements are
proposed these could be set back from the building
line.
6. The redevelopment presents an opportunity for
reinstating and improving the streetscape quality
of the western part of Snowsfields. Building height
should be considered in relation to the width of the
street. Where much taller buildings are proposed
these should be set back from the building line, A) Provide active frontages at ground B) Articulate street frontages to provide setbacks C) Respect scale and proportion of the streets by stepping tall
so that their visual impact is minimised and where level with generous floor heights in order at strategic points and create facade rhythm. buildings back to reduce their visual impact.
possible the historic urban character of the area to give prominence to street level.
enhanced.
7. New buildings along Weston Street should sensitively
respond to the character and height of buildings
within the Bermondsey Street Conservation Area.
Building along the street frontage should respect
the existing streetscape qualities and where taller
elements are proposed they should be set back so
that their immediate visual impact is minimised.
8. The north-eastern part of the site will potentially
accommodate taller buildings. These need to be
designed to respond to London Bridge Station
frontage and enhance the character of St Thomas
Street with appropriate scale of development at
street level.
9. New taller blocks parallel to Great Maze Pond and
Borough High Street, should not be longer than
existing Guy’s Tower Façade and if it is should be
D) Buildings location and design to frame and address E) Buildings location and design to minimise overshadowing of open spaces.
subject to façade treatment that has vertical rather
open spaces.
than horizontal emphasis.
10. Some more generic best practice design principles
are also illustrated to the right.
64 London Bridge Campus Masterplan

Existing Massing Proposed Massing

 Master Plan - September 2016 65

Summary of Proposed Estate Schedule of Proposed Accommodation

Building Code Building Name Building Area

GIA (m2) 5
Retained Buildings
GH03 Tower Wing 57139
GH06 Southwark and Bermondsey Wing (partial) 47839
GH10 Old Guy’s House 14712
GH19 Henriette Raphael (partial) 3730
GH20 Hodgkin Building (partial) 5074
GH21 Shepherds House 4994
GH25 New Hunt’s House 18884
GH46 Cancer Treatment Centre 20000
GH49 Hotel 5526

Retained Building Total 183,129

Proposed Building
A Plot A 25400
B Plot B 83000
C Plot C 34000
D Plot D 120000
E Plot E 18000
Fa Plot Fa 24600
Fb Plot Fb 24450
Fc Plot Fc 15400
G Plot G 1700
H Plot H 9000
I Plot I 3000
J Plot J 1800

Proposed Building Total 360,350

Estate Total 543,479

66 London Bridge Campus Masterplan

5
Site Section

The Shard

CHAPEL

BD

BD
BD

BD
310m

S002
G12B
SH
G12C
SH
LAJ1
S004

G02
G.20BN

A6GF0180

G11
G.20CN
R002

R001

R006
Key Plan

+150

+130
The Quill
Potential (Proposed)
Fielden house +110 110m
New city court
Redevelopment (Proposed)
100m
+90

+40
+40 +40

+25 +23 +25

+17 +17

Proposed Henriette New Hunt’s

Proposed Mixed use Development
Student Village Raphael House
House

Borough Memorial Great Maze New arrival Weston

High Street Park Pond Road Piazza Street
 Master Plan - September 2016 67

5
Proposed Building Heights
The diagram opposite shows the proposed building
heights illustrated in the massing and townscape
studies.

The building height strategy is set out earlier in this

section.

100m
108m

57m 310m

38m
17m
19m
30m

20m 10m 45m

150m
35m 35m

18m 22m
25m
130m
25m 110m
30m 25m 40m
30m
150m
25m
25m 110m 110m
40m 90m
25m 40m
50m
130m
25m
90m 40m
70m
60m
35m 24m 15m
25m
20m
23m 55m
15m

24m

15m

Proposed Building Heights

 68 London Bridge Campus Masterplan

5.5 Flexible Buildings

5 commercial

Core and Grid Arrangement

The Partners brief calls for flexible buildings that will hospital clinical/ hospital clinical/
FM/ fire FM/ fire lab/off
be suitable for a range of uses; hospital, research commercial evacuation lifts evacuation lifts
commercial commercial lift/sta
laboratory and commercial uses. The following study
demonstrates how the core arrangement for vertical
circulation within the towers (Plits B and D) could
work to allow for access for the different users whilst
providing safe emergency egress for patients. lab/office lab/office office
commercial commercial evacu
lift/stair core lift/stair core lab/office stair/ lab/office stair/
lift core lift core
A 8.1m grid is illustrated in the diagrams as the optimum
arrangement for a range of clinical activities. This is also
tested for laboratory and office uses in the diagrams.
A floor to floor height of 4.5m offers optimum flexibility
office fire office fire
for the range of uses required. This could be reduced evacuation stair evacuation stair office fire
office fire
where the use is soley for office based activity.
BUILDING DESIGN PARTNERSHIP SHALL HAVE NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY USE MADE
OF THIS DOCUMENT OTHER THAN FOR THAT WHICH IT WAS PREPARED AND ISSUED.
evacuation stair evacuation stair
ALL DIMENSIONS SHOULD BE CHECKED ON SITE.
hospital
DO NOT SCALE FROM THIS DRAWING
ANY DRAWING ERRORS OR DIVERGENCIES SHOULD BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION
OF BUILDING DESIGN PARTNERSHIP AT THE ADDRESS SHOWN BELOW.

The next page sets out some key principles for flexible NOTES
floor plates, which would be developed and tested at Entrances - Ground Floor
the next stages of the project. hospital public lifts/
hospital public lifts/
bed evacuation lift
bed evacuation lift
hospital hospital + matress + matress
evacuation stair evacuation stair
Entrances - Ground Floor Core Arrangement - Lower Levels
hospital clinical/ Entrances - Entrances - Ground Floor
Ground Floor Core arrangement
Core arrangement - lower levels
- lower levels
FM/ fire 24300 16200 24300
evacuation lifts
8100

8100
24300 24300
16200 16200
24300 24300 24300 24300
lab/office stair/
lift core 8100 8100 8100 8100 8100
5700 8100 5700 8100 8100 8100 2

48600

48600
8100

8100
8100

8100

8100
office fire
evacuation stair
48600

48600

48600
48600

48600

48600

48600
or or
hospital public lifts/
bed evacuation lift
Core Arrangement - Upper Levels 8.1m Grid Overlaid

2400
+ matress

2400
evacuation stair
8.1m grid overlaid
2400 2400
Core arrangement - lower levels Core arrangement - upper levels
 Master Plan - September 2016 69
office fire
evacuation stair office fire
BUILDING DESIGN PARTNERSHIP SHALL HAVE NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY USE MADE
OF THIS DOCUMENT OTHER THAN FOR THAT WHICH IT WAS PREPARED AND ISSUED.

evacuation stair
ALL DIMENSIONS SHOULD BE CHECKED ON SITE.

DO NOT SCALE FROM THIS DRAWING

ANY DRAWING ERRORS OR DIVERGENCIES SHOULD BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION
OF BUILDING DESIGN PARTNERSHIP AT THE ADDRESS SHOWN BELOW.

NOTES

hospital public lifts/

bed evacuation lift
hospital + matress
evacuation stair

commercial
Entrances - Ground Floor FM/ fire
hospital clinical/

evacuation lifts
Core arrangement - lower levels
5 Core

Flexible Floor Plates

The following Design Principles for Flexible Floorplates 8. A minimum template free of any communications
for Hospital/ Research Laboratory/ Commercial Uses
lab/office would be sized
24300 16200
to accept a24300 standard 24 bed ward. 24300 24300
lift/stair core lab/office stair/
are set out below. These are intended as a guide at lift core
8100 9. Assume ‘fire streets’ are not used as a basic 8100 8100 5700 8100 8100 2400 1500 6600
this stage to inform the development of the masterplan.
fire provision but may be used on the podium
floors in combination with providing essential
8100

8100

8100
Design Principles for Flexible Floorplates
interdepartmental circulation.
1. Public lifts may or may not be shared foroffice fire
hospital,
evacuation stair 10. In a fire engineering solution assume there will office fire
office and laboratory users. evacuation stair
need to be four fire compartments per floor, all
2. Vertical circulation will extend into the lowest level four of which will need to interconnect for the
48600

48600

48600

48600
of clinical accommodation i.e. 2 basement levels. purposes of horizontal fire evacuation and refuge or
independently of serving any lobby serving a fire
3. Stairs serving hospital floors would need to be
and mattress evacuation stair or lift/ firefighting
hospital public lifts/
mattress evacuation size but a view could be
lift. bed evacuation lift
taken that above a certain level they could be + matress

2400
hospital
reduced to laboratory/ office size. 11. Assume that inevacuation
additionstair
to a low level plant room
and a roof level plant room, an interstitial plant
4. Bed lift and bed fire evacuation lifts will be required 2400
und Floor room
Core at every sixth
arrangement floor levels
- lower or alternatively a vertical Core arrangement - upper levels
as high as there is clinical accommodation.
stack of plant rooms serving each floor will be
5. Accepting any hospital above ground level is required.
required to be a fire engineered solution, current Upper Level Wards
accepted practice is that the fire engineered 8.1m grid overlaid
12. Assume that 4% of the floor area would be lost Upper levels wards Upper levels laboratorie
for ducts.
solution follows as closely as possible to published
16200 24300
guidance as is practicable (HTM 05-02). 13. From 24300
our brief/ area analysis we anticipate that 24300 24300
the clinical accommodation may not need to go
6. Any floor that is flexible for hospital/ laboratory/ 8100 8100 5700 8100 8100 2400 1500 6600 8100
above six storeys on plots B and D.
office is 4.5m floor to floor. If such a floor is to be
used for offices there would be an over provision
8100

8100

8100
support space
of ceiling height.
CLIENT

7. Given the different clinical uses possible and the write-up space

pressure on perimeter window area the structural

grid used for any floor for clinical accommodation
48600

48600

48600

48600
should be able to accommodate an HTM single or
REVISION / DESCRIPTION DRAWN CHECKED DATE REVISION / DESCRIPTION DRAWN CHECKED DATE REVISION / DESCRIPTION DRAWN CHECKED DATE REVISION / DESCRIPTION DRAWN CHECKED DATE REVISION / DESCRIPTION DRAWN CHECKED DATE REVISION / DESCRIPTION DRAWN CHECKED DATE REVISION / DESCRIPTION DRAWN CHECKED DATE REVISION / DESCRIPTION DRAWN CHECKED DATE

bedroom pattern employing any one of the laboratories

three normal hospital patterns (bathroom on
corridor wall, bathroom on window wall or nested
2400

bathrooms).

2400

Upper Level Laboratories Upper Level Offices

d Upper levels wards Upper levels laboratories Upper levels offices
70 London Bridge Campus Masterplan
5.6 Access and Movement
5
Accommodating the very substantial movement
increases related to London Bridge Station and the
masterplan requires a fundamental re-planning of the
movement environment – an opportunity presented
through the re-provision/ removal/ replacement of
several of the buildings in the masterplan area.
The following are high level movement principles
intended to help steer onward masterplan development
with that movement growth in mind. Along with these
principles, we include some example early stage
actions that may be considered at a later time to
assist in putting these principles in action. Clearly,
considerable downstream design would be required to
assess the merits of associated actions and these are
offered as indications of principles in action rather than
necessarily proven as fully appropriate or feasible.
Physical Site Design
Pedestrian & Cyclist Movement – Desire Lines
• Accommodate identified pedestrian and cyclist
movement desire lines to / through the site
• Provide ample and high quality cycle-related
facilities e.g. cycle parking
• Example Action: Cycle Hub provision – high
capacity parking provided at a central and
accessible location with associated user facilities
Pedestrian Movement Capacity & Flexibility
• Provide for high capacity pedestrian movement
links
• Encouraging the shared use of connections within
the site by all users, i.e. vehicles, pedestrians,
cyclists, where safe and practicable
• Where possible, make Shared Use of external
streets too (‘Shared Space):
* To maximise route flexibility for all site users
and visitors
* To maximise street carrying capacity for all
site users and visitors
• Example Action: shared use of St Thomas Street
through shared surface.
Wayfinding
• Arrange site to provide for optimum legibility –
‘self-describing streets’
• Action e.g. provide clear vistas through site with
visual cues to destination
• Provide high quality supporting and informative
direction signing to, and within, the site to key and
intermediate destinations
• Example Action: extension of ‘Legible London’
(i.e. TfL supported) signing within site along with
key hospital-related visitor information
Traffic Management
• Seek opportunities to provide limited carriageway
widening as part of development block frontage(s)
to enable better 2-way movement
• Minimise / prohibit two-way movement on limited
width roads to avoid congestion and impact on
residents
• Where possible provide access ‘loops’ to / within
site to minimise vehicle search activity, on-site
movement and impact on external road network
• Consider limited access (and possible closure) for
external roads
• n.b. maintaining access for local residential area
will be a key consideration
• Example Actions: Closure of Newcomen Street as requiring site access
a through route with use of alternative route(s) e.g.
• Providing a central goods delivery point
Long Lane
• Southwark Council have proposals to alter • Providing for the on-site forwarding of goods
traffic management which better reflect wider within the site by hand / trolley / buggy etc
placemaking and connectivity aims – see plan • Minimise site service access points for large
and extract deliveries and restrict access to roads:
• With appropriate width to accommodate
Parking associated turning movements
• Co-ordinate on-site provision with (external) on- • Where associated access routes minimise impact
street parking supply and control to minimise on-
on the residential area
site supply and limit on-street overspill parking
• Actively manage parking within the site, with Example Actions
provision limited to valid / essential use only
• Use of Great Maze Pond Road junction with
• Example Action: Barrier controlled parking supply Snowsfields – offering appropriate geometry for
with tariffs targeted to minimise stay durations to turning movements
minimum levels
• Servicing for King’s College buildings via one way
system within the campus accessed from GMPR
Hospital Access
& Newcomen Street
• Rationalise access points for various user groups
to minimise activity and conflicts at single points:
• Separate visitor arrival points whether on foot or
by vehicle parking area
• Example Actions:
• Shared parking areas but separate parking access
points
• Drop-off and visitor parking in front of the new
OPT building through carriageway set-back/bay
Servicing
• Incorporate Consolidated Delivery regime:
• Minimising the numbers of delivery vehicles
Southwark Council Proposed Traffic Plan for Vehicles
 Master Plan - September 2016 71

5
Development Planning
Beyond the specific ‘physical’ site planning principles,
there are development planning means by which the
generated movement demand may be managed to
minimise impact and therefore the need for remedial
measures.

Travel Demand Management – Travel Planning

• Ensure masterplan development related vehicular
movement (and parking demand / provision) is
managed to minimum levels through:
• Parking provision management
• Active promotion of sustainable travel mode use

Land Use Mix / Planning

In preparing land use mix proposals, consideration
should be given to minimising the coincidence of similar
development types with similar travel characteristics
e.g. high movement generating uses, peak user arrival/
departure times etc.
72 London Bridge Campus Masterplan
5.7 Sustainability and Infrastructure
5
In accordance with local planning requirements
and the Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation
Trust sustainability targets, any new development
will be assessed under the BREEAM environmental
assessment methodology for achieving a minimum
rating of BREEAM ‘Excellent’.
Current Performance
The Trust have set an ambitious programme to deliver
cost savings while delivering environmental and social
benefits. The Trust’s sustainability strategy (2016-2020)
identifies sustainability as a driver for innovative service
provision. To date, the Trusts sustainability programme
has saved the Trust over £3m each year in energy water
and waste costs and has reduced carbon emissions by
over 15% since 2007, exceeding their carbon reduction
target of 10% by 2015.
Future targets include a commitment to invest in energy
efficiency to reach or exceed 34% reduction in carbon
emissions by 2020 (against a 2007/08 baseline) and by
80% by 2050. Meeting and exceeding these and future
targets will require the master plan to be driven by low
carbon design.
KCL has committed to a target of a 43% reduction in
Scope 1 and 2 carbon emissions by 2019/20 against a
2005/06 baseline. The implementation of their carbon
management plan has led to annual savings and during
2014/15 KCL had achieved a reduction of 8% against
the baseline.
Energy Strategy
In line with local planning requirements for the London
Borough of Southwark, the development will follow the
energy hierarchy – Lean, Clean, Green, to achieve a
minimum 25% improvement over Building Regulations
energy efficiency standards, and a reduction in carbon
emissions of 20% from onsite renewable energy
generation.
Sustainable energy systems of the future will rely on
two major principles – efficient end-use and efficient
use of renewables.
Be Lean
The highest possible standards of thermal insulation
and air tightness and energy efficient lighting should be
specified for all new developments, in accordance with
Part L 2013 minimum standards.
The opportunities to integrate passive measures initially
come from layout and massing. Developing massing
to minimise east/west glazing, to harness solar gains,
and to consider floor plate depth for natural ventilation
potential have all been considered. This includes the
addition of atria to maximise daylight penetration and
opportunity for drawing in fresh air.
We seek to use air movement to passively cool
and ventilate, reducing the need for mechanical air
conditioning systems. This needs to be balanced
with internal acoustic or functional requirements and
local air quality standards, particularly in clinical and
scientific research spaces.
Be Clean
Once energy demand has been reduced as far
as possible, priority should be to use local (or
decentralised) energy sources, this will mean exploring
the potential for future connection to the South East
London Combined Heat and Power (SELCHP) network. Guy’s and St Thomas’ Heat Map
Where connection to a wider energy network is not
possible, onsite heating systems should be designed
to minimise CO2 emissions. These should incorporate
district network heating systems. Network systems
maximise energy efficiency through load balancing
and efficiencies in run-time/outputs.
Be Green
An initial review highlights technologies likely to be
suitable for the site to be a combination of PV, an
extended case of CHP and CCHP, and Ground Source
Heat Pumps – adaptable for multiple applications
relating to both efficient end-use and renewable supply.
Rooftop Solar Panels

Future Opportunities for renewables
As the grid is de-carbonised, the ability for gas-fired
CHP engines to deliver net reductions in carbon
emissions will be compromised. Solar thermal, waste
and biogas-fired CHP engines, or CHP engines fired
by a de-carbonised grid will continue to yield a net
reduction in carbon emissions. Fuel cells also provide
onsite power and often by-product heat, which can be
fed into campuses network. While fuel cells are still
more expensive than competing technologies, this gap
is rapidly narrowing with technical advances.
Water Demand
The Trust has a target to reduce water consumption
by 20% by 2020 and 30% by 2050. Ambitious water
recycling targets have also been set, with a target
recycling rate of 75% by 2020/21 and 100% by 2050/51.
In 2015/16, the Trust had reduced water consumption
by 12%, with a 58% water recycling rate. Currently, the
Trust has not set targets for water consumption per m2
but aims to set these for the master plan.
To meet these targets, development will be required to
minimise water use as far as possible by incorporating
appropriate water efficiency and water recycling
measures in line with the water hierarchy. This puts
the focus on improving system efficiency and reducing
consumption at the point of use.
Following opportunities to reduce water demand, water
recycling systems can then be used to collect rainwater
or greywater for the supply of non-potable uses such
as WC flushing or commercial washing. These not only
reduce mains water consumption, but also reduce the
amount of rainfall discharged to drains and sewers.
Consideration will need to be given to the available
roof collection area and the construction and location
of storage tanks. Where space is constrained, modular
storage tanks can be interconnected to maximise
storage volume.
Flood Risk
The site lies in flood zone 3 due to its proximity to the
River Thames. Although protected by the Thames
barrier, an assessment and management strategy for
surface water will need to be developed to reduce any
risk of localised flooding.
Opportunities to incorporate Sustainable Urban
Drainage Systems (SuDS) will be identified, taking into
consideration the constrained site. Incorporating SuDS
into early design considerations will help to identify
systems that manage runoff close to its source to avoid
the need for large storage areas. Space efficient SuDS
include green roofs, bioretention gardens, permeable
paving, rainwater harvesting and tree pits.
Master Plan - September 2016 73
5
Waste
The Trust has identified waste as a key area of strategic
focus within their sustainability strategy and has set
targets for overall waste to be recycled. A good waste
management strategy is already in place, with 100%
of domestic waste processed via waste to energy and
transportation of waste by barge, cutting 3000 lorry
trips annually.
In accordance with the waste hierarchy, the first step
for any waste management strategy will be to minimise
waste generated before seeking routes for disposal.
Storage considerations will need to be planned into any
new developments. The use of bailers and compactors
onsite should be considered, reducing space needed
for site management as well as reducing the number of
collections by waste management contractors.
74 London Bridge Campus Masterplan

5
Ecology
The development will ensure that disruption to
existing ecology is minimised throughout design and
construction. Habitats will be enhanced where possible
with additional areas for foraging and nesting created.
Key to the development will be the provision of areas
that improve the quality of biodiversity on the site,
with species chosen to enhance ecological diversity.
Opportunities for the inclusion of green and brown roofs
will provide ecological value and offer wider benefits
including attenuating rainwater, reducing the urban
heat island effect, improving thermal performance, air
quality, and reducing energy costs.
Thermal Energy Systems
Existing Thermal System
The existing thermal energy infrastructure is based
around a centrally located boiler house at the base of
the Tower Block which generates hot water for heating.
Whilst this is currently produced as High Temperature
Hot Water at around 160oC there is currently work
underway to reduce the operating temperature to less
than 95oC (Low Temperature Hot Water – LTHW) thus
reducing transmission energy losses. The hot water
is distributed to local secondary heating plant in each
building or group of buildings by a district heating
pipework network.

The district heating network serves both the Guy’s and

KCL sites as shown in the diagram on the right.

The energy centre includes a 3MW combined heat

Bio - Diverse Roof
Energy Infrastructure Strategy
The development of the site energy strategy will
address the Carbon Reduction Targets for the campus
and look at how the phased construction programme
will impact on delivery of infrastructure services to the
new and retained estate.
and power (CHP) unit that generates electrical power
for use on site with the waste heat being injected into
the site heating system. The CHP is a relatively recent
addition to the site and is understood to provide
a significant proportion of the Hospital’s electrical
demand and heat demand, although it is understood
that when the new Cancer Centre comes on-line this
capacity will be largely used by the development. The
CHP is believed to have a further useful remaining
life of 8-10 years, although when the boiler house is
finally decommissioned there is likely to be very little
economic life remaining for the CHP unit.
Whilst the CHP plant is relatively new, the existing
boiler plant is over 30 years old and is expected to
reach the end of its useful life during implementation
of the masterplan.
There is currently an Energy Performance Contract
(EPC) being carried out by a third party of which the
heating temperature reduction forms part. Coupled
with this are proposals to disconnect much of the
Backlands area, e.g. Mortuary from the district network
Existing campus heat network
and provide decentralised standalone boilers. It should
be noted that the Backlands area of the campus is
planned to be the first area to be cleared and this may
impact on the investment strategy for this part of the
site.
Analysis of Predicted Thermal Load Growth
An analysis of the campus thermal loads has been
undertaken based on building area as given in the
Massing Breakdown and is shown in Table 1 overleaf.
The analysis indicates that the peak demand for
heating will increase to around 50MW by completion
of the masterplan, which represents an increase of
around 60-70% on the existing plant and infrastructure
capacity.
Implementation of the masterplan creates the
opportunity to renew the primary thermal energy
infrastructure with a view to:
• Meeting the increased load, taking account of the
load growth at each phase of the masterplan.
• Provide new energy efficient plant and systems
incorporating the most appropriate renewable
and low carbon technologies
• Improve reliability and resilience
• Provide a flexible and adaptable thermal energy
system
 Master Plan - September 2016 75

5
Review of Meeting the Thermal Loads • Ground Source Heat Pumps (GSHP) – Local GUYS INFRA-STRUCTURE THERMAL ENERGY PROPOSALS Date - Aug 16
The campus will be a large site and thus benefit in ground source heating, with the option for cooling On Existing Standby
PLOT BUILDING APPROXIMATE APPR0X BUILDING Indicative Loads at Each
reducing Carbon emissions and energy demand from as well, would be particularly suitable for the REFERENCE REFERENCE AREA - M2 NOTES LOAD - W/M
2
LOAD - KW
Heat
network
Fuel
Required
COMMENTS
Existing Step 2 Ste

an integrated energy approach. residential and commercial elements of the site BUILDINGS TO BE RETAINED

and should be considered for each of the local GH03 Tower Wing 57139 110 6285 Yes Yes 6.3 6.3 6.
GH06 Southwark and Bermondsey Wing 47839 (partially retained) 110 5262 Yes Yes 5.3 5.3 5.
In addition to providing the thermal site load there is also thermal energy plants GH10 Old Guy’s House 14712 110 1618 Yes Yes 1.6 1.6 1.
GH19 Henriette Raphael 3730 (partially retained) 110 410 Yes Yes 0.4 0.4 0.
the benefits associated with low carbon technologies, • Bore Hole Cooling - Local ground source cooling GH20 Hodgkin Building 5074 (partially retained) 110 558 Yes Yes 0.6 0.6 0.
GH21 Shepherds House 4994 110 549 Yes Yes 0.5 0.5 0.
for example: would be particularly suitable for the commercial GH25 New Hunt’s House 18884 110 2077 Yes Yes 2.1 2.1 2.
GH46 Cancer Treatment Centre 20000 95 1900 ? Yes 1.9 1.9 1.
elements of the site and should be considered for GH49 Hotel 5526 60 332 ? No 0.3 0.3 0.

• Combined Heat and Power (CHP) to generate on- each of the commercial buildings Existing Area 177898
Total of
Retained 19 MW
site electricity and use the waste heat produced to • Fuel Cells - Option worth exploring as part of
Loads

heat the buildings, as already being utilised on the final design solution. Whilst this is an emerging NEW BUILDINGS

Trust’s site. The electricity output is dependent technology its use in the future should be allowed Plot A Outpatients Department 24500 85 2083 Yes 2.1 2.
Plot B Clinical and commercial 83000 95 7885 No 7.
on heat demand which in summer, when lower, with flexible ‘new technology’ space allowed in Plot C Commercial 34000 70 2380 No 2.
Plot D Clinical and commercial 120000 95 11400 Yes
can limit the size of the CHP. This technology the energy centres Plot E Bio-Sciences Hub 18000 100 1800 Optional 1.
Plot Fa Bio-sciences and commercial hub 40000 85 3400 Optional
currently offers the best potential for substantial Plot Fb Teaching and Student residential 24450 60 1467 No Partial Backup may be requested 1.5 1.
Plot G Clinincal 0 Area TBC 95 0 Yes
energy and CO2 emissions savings for the health There are many ways to meet the thermal demand Plot H Residential 9000 60 540 No
Plot I Residential 3000 60 180 No Mains Power Supply could be derived from Plot H Transformer
care elements of the site; however, CHP cannot for the campus and below are outline thoughts on a Plot J Commercial 5600 70 392 No 0.4 0.

be considered as a renewable source as it still strategy that suits the phasing of the development, suits Total of New
New Area 361550 32 MW
uses Carbon fuel, albeit in a more efficient way. the profiles of loads anticipated and gives manageably Loads

Increased capacity Co-generation should be sized systems for maintenance and resilience.
considered for the new energy centres Total Site Area 539448
Total Site
51 MW
Options Load

• Combined Cooling, Heating and Power (CCHP)

The principal alternatives appear to as follows:
often described as ‘Tri-generation’ uses the same Table 1 Analysis of Site Thermal Loads
Notes :
2
1
principles as CHP but uses the spare heat in 1. Provide a new single thermal energy centre at an 2
Additional Building area to be Circa 260,000M
Phasing of the buildings will dictate the buld up of load on the local network infrastructure.
3 Consideration to electrical billing to be given to establish whether the building supplies are on a private Client or UKPN HV feed.
summer to produce cooling. This would involve early stage in programme. This would replace the 4 The Option of for CHP will be dictated by the chosen energy centre options the space for which will be dictated by the development program.
• Works will be ongoing in the energy centre for Disadvantages
the addition of absorption type chillers to convert existing energy centre and would have capacity for APPR0X BUILDING
the duration
am in presentaion of 24)the masterplan- representing
for plot labeling (slide a
LOAD - W/M 2
• Potential for increased efficiencies through load
LOAD - KW
the CHP waste heat into chilled water for cooling. expansion the serve the new buildings. Existing Building Area in Plot to be New plot massing
significant riskGIAto(m2)ongoing(GIA)
demolished operations.
m2 sharing not realised.
A district cooling network would distribute
BUILDINGS TO BE DEMOLISHED
the cooling water to the various buildings. Advantages • Less/no opportunity to incorporate CHP and Tri-
2. PlotInclude
A smaller
11860 local thermal
25400energy plant in each
0 0 Car Park- assumed unheated 0.0
The effectiveness of this depends on the balance • Optimum solution for overall efficiency and plant Plot B
new 26150
development and 83000
progressively decommission125 3269generation 3.3 3.3
Plot C 9650 34000 125 1206 1.2 1.2
of heating and cooling loads for each building. capacity Plot D
the
Plot E
26100
existing plant
4030
120000
18000
125
125 • Increase plant area required overall
3263
504
3.3
0.5
3.3
0.5
3.

It can be particularly effective in healthcare and • Potential to be the least expensive solution overall
Plot Fa 13200 40000 125 1650 1.7 1.7 1.
Plot Fb 1535 24450 125 • Likely to be more expensive overall.
192 0.2
research buildings with higher cooling demands Advantages
Plot G
Plot H
5900
3200
0
9000
125
125
738
400
0.7
0.4
0.7
0.4
0.
0.
• Expensive primary fuel network required (gas &
• Solar thermal heating – the uses the sun to heat Disadvantages Plot I 936
• No large single site required.
Plot J 430
3000
5600
125 117
0 Assumed on independent plant
0.1
0.0
0.1 0.

back-up oil) 0.0 0.0 0.

water which can then be used to heat domestic • Requires a large area on the Guy’s site at an early • Flexible- no dependency on subsequent phases. 0.0 0.0 0.
• Increased operational/maintenance costs of
hot water. Whilst this is often used in domestic stage in the programme. Totals 30 34 41
• Resilient- plant failure will only affect a single multiple plant.
housing the application to large scale sites is • Will be significantly under-utilised in early stages building Loads on Existing Energy Centre Start Step 2 Ste
less practical, especially when other low carbon of the redevelopment with consequent losses in Existing Retained
Existing to be demolished
19
11
19
11
19
6
technologies, such as CHP are employed efficiency.
Moved to new plant
Total 30 30 25
Reduction 1% 17

Loads on New Energy Centres

Outpatients Plant 2.5 2.
Residential Plant 1.5 1.
West EC 11
East EC 25
76 London Bridge Campus Masterplan

5
3. Provide a number of larger thermal energy centres This strategy will involve: Thermal Load (MW)
serving groups of buildings. Step Area Existing Total Indicative Solution
New
• The provision of local thermal energy plant in the Boilerhouse Campus
Advantages early phases (Outpatients and Residential) which Modify existing heat distribution
1 Clear part of Backlands site N/A 30 30
• Good potential for increased efficiencies through could be connected to the wider site distribution network to suit
load sharing. at some point in the future Local Energy Centres using GSHP
Construction of Student Village 1.5 as primary heating (and cooling
• Reduces potential for under-utilisation of plant in • Establishing separate larger energy centres
source for offices and Outpatients)
early phases incorporating CCHP with heating and cooling 2 30 34
• Flexible, less dependency on other/subsequent distribution networks on the East and West sides
Construction of OPD and offices
of the campus serving the subsequent phases. 2.5
phases. (Snowfields)
• More resilient than a single energy centre (Option • Progressive transfer of retained buildings onto the PV on roofs and facade
1) new networks and subsequent decommissioning
Demolish part Borough Wing,
of the existing boiler house. Provide temporary plant for
3 Residences and Lecture Theatres 4 25 29
remaining Borough Wing hub
Disadvantages • Extension of the new infrastructure to serve the and remainder of Backlands site
• Plant may still be slightly under-utilised initially but final developments in the masterplan.
Establish new 25MW Energy Centre
for less time Construction of Block B 8 19 in Block B incorporating CCHP ready
• Requires more space overall for transfer of Retained Estate
• Works will be ongoing in the energy centre for
the duration of the masterplan- representing a 4 36 Establish new 11MW Energy Centre
significant risk to ongoing operations Construction of Block C in Block C incorporating CCHP ready
for transfer of Retained Estate

Indicative Masterplan Solution 5

Construction of Block C PV as appropriate on buildings
The final solution will need a more detailed analysis
Transfer Retained Estate to new Complete connection to new heating
at the time when the outcome of the Masterplan is
Energy Centres and cooling networks
implemented and further information on the types of
developments are fully defined; however, at this time
5 21 0 36 Block B 25MW Energy Centre
in terms of meeting the phased load growth, optimum
carbon reduction potential for the site and future Decommission existing boiler house
proofing, a combination of options 2&3 is proposed as 11 Block B 11MW Energy Centre
offering the best compromise. Increase capacity of Block B Energy
Construction of Block D 32.5
Centre to 33MW
6
Increase capacity of Block B Energy
Construction of Block F 13 0 50
Centre to 13MW

Notes
CCHP – Combined Cooling Heating Power
GSHP – Ground Source Heat Pump
PV – Photo-voltaic

Enabling works will be essential to the infrastructure
services throughout the redevelopment. This will
involve the disconnection, isolation and diversion of
services and some temporary plant hubs to facilitate
safe demolition and construction whilst maintaining
the operation of the buildings during the development
phases.
New gas supplies for each of the energy centres. Whilst
there is an extensive gas distribution network on and
surrounding the site, the requirements will need to be
discussed with the statutory supplier at an early stage.
The diagrams that follow indicate how the new energy
centres could be established and is summarised in the
following table.
Master Plan - September 2016 77
5
Mechanical Engineering Phasing Diagrams
Metering Strategy
The campus will accommodate the three client bodies
in various buildings and with the commercial space
provide house many tenants. Whilst full consideration
to the agreement of energy charging will need to be
developed, it is recommended that comprehensive
metering is provided throughout the buildings so that
Cost Centres can be established and heating and
cooling consumption metered accurately.
This will generate a significant quantity of data and will
need to be analysed through interfacing software by
the Energy Management team.
Phase 1
Phase 2
78 London Bridge Campus Masterplan

Phase 3 Phase 4

Phase 5 Phase 6
 Master Plan - September 2016 79

5
Electrical Energy Systems PLOT BUILDING APPROXIMATE APPR0X BUILDING SUPPLIED SUPPLIED GENERATOR
Existing Electrical System REFERENCE REFERENCE AREA - M2 NOTES LOAD - W/M2 LOAD - kW AT HV AT LV BACKUP COMMENTS

The Guy’s Hospital site is served by a number of BUILDINGS TO BE RETAINED

11kV incoming supplies from St. Thomas Street
feeding main 11KV switchpanels located in the main GH03 Tower Wing 57139 80 4571  
GH06 Southwark and Bermondsey Wing 47839 (partially retained) 80 3827  
boiler house building GH08 and within the Southwark GH10 Old Guy’s House 14712 80 1177  
& Bermondsey wing GH06. From these locations GH19 Henriette Raphael 3730 (partially retained) 80 298 Optional  
there are 11kV supplies to local transformers as well GH20 Hodgkin Building 5074 (partially retained) 80 406  
as transformers in the Borough Wing GH04. These GH21 Shepherds House 4994 80 400  
GH25 New Hunt’s House 18884 80 1511  
transformers provide Low Voltage (LV) 400V supplies GH46 Cancer Treatment Centre 20000 80 1600  
to the smaller surrounding hospital buildings. GH49 Hotel 5526 60 332  Optional

Total of
The Guy’s stand-by generators consist of both To maintain this retained load will require modification to the
Existing Area 177898 Existing 14 MW
HV & LV distribution network as the buildings are modified.
11kV generators located within the Southwark & Loads
Bermondsey Wing GH06 and Low Voltage (LV) 400V
generators located adjacent the main boiler house NEW BUILDINGS
GH08. Additionally a gas turbine 3MW Combined Heat
Plot A Outpatients Department 25400 65 1651  
and Power (CHP) system is located in the GH08 and is
Plot B Clinical and commercial 83000 70 5810  
connected into the 11kV private distribution network at Plot C Commercial 34000 80 2720  
the main 11kV switchboard in the boiler house. Plot D Clinical and commercial 120000 70 8400  
Plot E Bio-Sciences Hub 18000 80 1440  
Plot Fa Bio-sciences and commercial hub 40000 80 3200  
From the Main 11KV panels HV cables run within the
Plot Fb Teaching and Student residential 24450 60 1467  Optional Partial Backup may be requested
basement and ducts around the site. Plot G Clinincal 0 Area TBC 70 0 ? ? 
Plot H Residential 9000 50 450  NO
Buildings on the Backlands and Western side of the Plot I Residential 3000 50 150 Optional  NO Mains Power Supply could be derived from Plot H Transformer
Plot J Commercial 5600 80 448  
campus are predominantly serving at LV from the local
UKPN network. Total of New This load will require the installation of new HV supplies and
New Area 362450 26 MW
Loads transformer for each building as it is developed.

Analysis of Predicted Electrical Load Growth

Given this total load which is an increase of circa 20MW,
An analysis of the campus electrical loads has been Total Site
Total Site Area 540348 40 MW consideration to the siting of a Primary substation may need
undertaken based on building area as given in the Load
to be agreed with UKPN, if power not available locally.
Massing Breakdown and is shown in Table 2 opposite.
Table 2 Analysis of Site Electrical Loads
The analysis indicates that the peak demand for heating
will increase to around 40MW by completion of the
masterplan, which represents an increase of around
100% of the existing infrastructure capacity.
80 London Bridge Campus Masterplan
5
Review of Meeting the Electrical Loads
New 33kV / 11KV networks to the campus development
As a general rule, 11KV network supplies are capable
of a supply rating of circa 8MW and with initial estimate
for the total development in the order of 40MW. The
estimated capacity for the existing development is
20MW therefore a further 20MW is to be agreed in
stages for the new development.
This size of supply can be either supplied via several
11,000 volt HV supplies or at a higher voltage (33kV)
from a primary HV sub-station.
A review of the local primary substation will be required
by UKPN due to the increased load and this may require
a significant cost to be funded by the development.
This network will require agreement with UKPN who
will be providing the revised incoming electrical infra-
structure required to support the new increased
development size.
The Client will need to agree which of the new buildings
will need to be on the private development supply
(i.e. the Hospital HV network) which will require sub
metering and billing of the individual tenants / buildings
and buildings that will be supplied directly by UKPN
and metered/billed directly by their own electricity
suppliers.
It is likely that some temporary supply arrangements
will need to be put in place that will change as the
development phases progress.
Due to the size of the development most of the new
buildings will be supplied at 11kV and have separate
11kV switchgear, transformers and LV distribution
systems.
Indicative Masterplan Solution
The final solution will need a more detailed analysis
at the time when the outcome of the Masterplan is
implemented and further information on the types of
developments are fully defined.
At the point in the development when the main boiler
house is demolished, which houses a main 11kV
switchpanel, gas turbine CHP unit and LV generator
plant, a new central 11kV switch room will need to be
established as an enabling package to replace the
11kV and LV electrical switchrooms.
Where supplies route to or through buildings to be
demolished these will need to be removed and diverted
to ensure continuity of supply to other buildings, i.e. the
current Borough Wing transformer supply will need to
be removed when the building is partially demolished
and this transformer supports the Cunliffe Laboratory
and other surrounding buildings that are planned to be
demolished at a later date. This will therefore require
temporary supplies to be installed to maintain operation
Distribution within the new development
During the re-development consideration particularly
needs to be given to the Hospital’s power supply
network as these elements have to comply with the
Health Technical Memorandums (HTM) in terms of
down time and speed of re-instatement of supply after
a mains power failure. This will affect the generator
back-up arrangements which can be centralised and
distributed at HV to all buildings on the Hospital network
or local on a building by building basis, supplied at LV.
As with the back-up generators the CHP generation
can be located centrally and feed at HV or locally at
LV but will this will require more space overall if not
centrally located.
The Hospital distribution network will be designed
where required to provide “A” & ”B” supplies from
separate switchboards to each area served and this
would ideally come from alternate HV sources.
The hospital 11kV network will serve 11kV/400V sub-
stations within the agreed buildings, each configured
in a ring or as an N+1 arrangement to facilitate
maintenance with minimum downtime. The sub-
stations will be supplied on this dual feeder basis with
HV cables run on diverse routes to provide network
resilience and provide supply security.
Where the supply is not derived from the Hospital HV
network the supply from UKPN may have to be re-
instated by them after the fault is identified, which can
delay restoration of power.
The HV network serving each stage of the development
should have sufficient spare capacity / spare ways at
the main 11kV switch panels for future development.
Designated cable routes will need to be defined early
to allow cable ducts for future changes to HV/ LV power
(& Data) as the development grows to reduce the need
for adding ducts within finished areas where changes
to the HV supply network are required and new sub
supplies between smaller buildings are to be installed.
11kV/400V sub-stations
Sub-stations will be located within each individual
building & comprising 11kV intake, transformers and
main LV switchboard.
Where required generators / CHP will be interconnected
to these substations either at 11kV or LV to suit the final
system design.
 Master Plan - September 2016 81

5
Electrical Engineering Phasing Diagrams

Combined Heat and Power Systems Metering Strategy

Options for the CHP design are as follows:
• Install smaller local units within each development
to meet the BREEAM needs.
 These would
probably be LV units and feed into the LV supply
system serving the individual building only.
• Install larger units centrally within major energy
centres within the development. The location of
these energy centres will need to be agreed and
adopted as part of the staged development.
These
units would probably be HV units and feed into
the HV supply system serving the site.
The campus will accommodate the three client bodies
in various buildings and with the commercial space
provide house many tenants. Whilst full consideration
to the agreement of energy charging will need to be
developed, it is recommended that comprehensive
metering is provided throughout the buildings so
that Cost Centres can be established and electrical
consumption metered accurately.
This will generate a significant quantity of data and will
need to be analysed through interfacing software by
the Energy Management team.

Peak Lopping
In order to limit Maximum Demand on the incoming
supplies to the campus there is the option to use the
standby generators to run at peak site loading thus
generating electricity on site, in addition to the CHP, to
reduce the incoming capacity. This is known as ‘Peak Phase 1
Lopping’. This can offer significant financial savings.
However, as with the CHP the generated power has
to run in parallel with the UKPN network and thus their
agreement is needed and certain protection measures
put in place. Furthermore, the generators use fuel oil
which has a high Carbon content and thus will increase
emissions. Therefore, the decision to employ Peak
Lopping needs to be carefully considered as part of
the overall site strategy.

Phase 2
82 London Bridge Campus Masterplan

Phase 3 Phase 4

Phase 5 Phase 6
 Master Plan - September 2016 83

Data Systems
As part of the re-development the existing data
distribution will need to be modified at each phase of
the work.
It is recommended that an IT Specialist is appointed at
an appropriate time to advise on:
5
BMS / Security / LV Signal Cables
• Similar to the ICT above, there will be a need to
be routes to interconnect the buildings for other
shared LV systems, information exchange. It
would therefore be prudent to install additional
ducts, probably on the same route as the ICT
systems.

• Enabling works to disconnect existing supplies Manholes / Cable Access Chamber

ready for demolition, divert / provide temporary
• Manholes will be required for the above systems
supplies to surrounding buildings affected by
and future ducted systems provided for the
the work and possibly establish new temporary
interconnection of power cables.
connections.
• It may be a consideration to have locked manholes
• Design of the new infra-structure with future
on the ICT duct system to restrict access into
equipment room locations and incoming /
these ducts to authorised personnel only, with
outgoing data connections established for each
keys for these manholes held by key staff only.
building.
• Building entry point strategy to facilitate diverse
routing of data cabling.
• Establishing any new local / central data centre
facilities within buildings and across the site.

Other system design considerations are as follows:

ICT / Data / Telephony

• Each building within the development will require
ducts for the connection of incoming / outgoing
data system cabling which could consist of both
copper and fibre optic cabling.
• Consideration to the interlinking ducts around the
development should be a major consideration
and designed with alternate routes between the
buildings of any interconnected buildings.
• These ducts would need to be installed as part of
the individual development and therefore routes
should be flexible to suit future changes to the
data network.
84 London Bridge Campus Masterplan
Townscape and Visual
Analysis 6
86 London Bridge Campus Masterplan

6.1 LVMF - Protected Views and Vistas

6
The site falls within the background view of the protected

3A
viewing corridors to St Paul’s Cathedral from Kenwood

.1
2A
(view 3A.1) and Parliament Hill (view 2A.1) as identified

K
.1

en
in the London Plan, London View Management Plan. 4A

1A.1
Pa

wo
.1
Pr

r
im

od
lia
Further views from Alexandra Palace, Primrose Hill and
ro

Alexa
Blackheath are also identified. In these views the site se

en
Hil
is visible in the panorama but outside of the protected l

tH

ndra
ill
viewing corridor.

There are two river prospect views which will also need

Pala
to be taken into consideration; from Southwark Bridge

ce
(view 12B) and Tower Bridge (view 10A). The key views
are illustrated on the following pages.

12B Southwark
Bridge 10A Tower
Bridge

6A
.1
Bl
ac
kh
ea
th

NTS
N

Protected View
 Master Plan - September 2016 87

6
Protected Views
View 3A.1
The view south from Kenwood House shows the
proposed taller masterplan developments are visible
to the right of the Shard and St Paul’s Cathedral.
The proposed Fielden House sits in the background
between the Shard and the Cathedral. The outline of
the potential New City Court Development is shown
dotted in front of the proposed towers.

3A.1 Kenwood

View 2A.1
The view south from Parliament Hill shows the
proposed masterplan developments are all to the right
of St Paul’s Cathedral and the Shard clustered around
the Guy’s Tower.

2A.1 Parliament Hill

88 London Bridge Campus Masterplan

6
Protected Vistas
View 12B
In the view from Southwark Bridge the proposed
buildings sit to the right of Guy’s Tower. The proposed
Fielden House sits to the left in the background of
Southwark Cathedral.

Viewing Location 12B - Southwark Bridge View - down stream

View 10A
In the view from Tower Bridge the tallest proposed
building is just visible behind Guy’s Tower. The planning
consented Quill tower sits to the left.

Viewing Location 10A - Tower Bridge North Bastion - up stream

 Master Plan - September 2016 89

6.2 Local Views

6
The following local views have been established
and tested to determine the potential impact of
the proposed masterplan developments within the
townscape setting.

Six local views have been identified and tested:

1. From Tooley Street / More London Place
2. From Bermondsey Street / St Thomas Street
St
3. From Snowsfields / Kirby Grove Th
om
as
4. From St George’s Churchyard Gardens Southwark Street St
ree
t
5. From Southwark Street / Railway bridge
6. From The George Inn Yard

d
tree

Pon
hS

aze
Hig

at M
gh

Gre
rou
Bo

Ne
wc
om
en
Str
eet

treet
Weston S
s
sfield
Snow

NTS
N
Local Views
90 London Bridge Campus Masterplan

6
Local View 1 - From Tooley Street / More London Place

Existing Proposed

This is a view southwards from the northern side of Tooley Street where it opens up in front of the Hilton Hotel The proposed development is likely to fill in the open views across the viaduct and as such should not dominate
at More London Place. The view is framed by the Shard to the right hand side and a four storey building at the the historic structures in the foreground. The massing and height has been sensitively managed to enhance the
corner with Bermondsey Street to the left. Most of the Guy’s Tower is visible across the railway viaduct of London perspective and impression of the new buildings blending with the sky in the background.
Bridge Station but partially concealed behind the Shipwright Arms building.
 Master Plan - September 2016 91

6
Local View 2 - From Bermondsey Street

Existing Proposed

This view is taken at the eastern end of St Thomas Street, at the junction with Bermondsey Street, south of It will be important to consider how the proposed taller element located to the south of the Guy’s tower will relate
the tunnel. The view westwards along St Thomas Street is framed by the railway viaduct and the Shard in the to the scale of the existing buildings within the Bermondsey Street Conservation Area. It will be preferable that
distance to the right hand side with the Bermondsey Street corner building and trees in front of it visible to the they step down to the south and do not significantly exceed the height of the new Cancer Centre which is just
left. The Guy’s tower is in the middle of the view in the background. The new Cancer Centre building is also visible in this view.
visible behind the houses along Snowsfields. The recently approved Quill development will obstruct the view
to the Guy’s tower. In a similar manner other redevelopment planned alongside St Thomas Street will affect the
foreground of this view in the longer term.
92 London Bridge Campus Masterplan

6
Local View 3 - From Snowsfields / Kirby Grove

Existing Proposed

This is a view westwards along Snowsfields from the crossing with Kirby Grove. Although new development has
been just completed in the block on the northern side of Snowsfields within the Bermondsey Street Conservation
Area the Guy’s tower and the Shard are still visible on the right. The new Cancer Centre terminates Snowsfields
in the distance, with the Guinness Trust buildings dating from 1897 visible in the foreground on the left hand side.
A similar view would be experienced from the grounds of Snowsfields primary School as well.
Some parts of the proposed new development located between the new Cancer Centre and the Guys’ tower are
likely to be visible in the background. It would be recommended that the proposed buildings slope down from
north to south and do not exceed the height of the Guy’s tower and the Cancer Centre respectively.
 Master Plan - September 2016 93

6
Local View 4 - From St George’s Churchyard Gardens

Existing Proposed

This view is taken from St George’s Churchyard Garden. The garden, once the churchyard around St George the It is recommended that new development retains this relationship. If taller elements are proposed they could be
Martyr Church, is now cut off from the church. The northern boundary of the gardens, visible in the view to the clustered around the higher block of the Guy’s tower with buildings to the right of it should sloping down to relate
development site is the wall of the old Marshalsea Prison. The view is framed by the Southwark Local History to the height of the Courts building.
Library & Archive building on the left and the lane trees within the garden to the right. The back façade of the
Southwark Coroner’s Court is visible to right under the trees. The new Cancer Centre, Guy’s tower and the Shard
form a group of buildings, sloping down from north to south that are visible behind the old prison.
94 London Bridge Campus Masterplan

6
Local View 5 - From Southwark Street

Existing Proposed

This view is taken from the southern side Southwark Street on the eastern side of the Railway Bridge. The site
in foreground is not built up and the view would change if it was, a similar view is also experienced from trains
running on the bridge above into Cannon Street Station and London Bridge Station. Some of the platforms at
Blackfriars Station and Cannon Street Station also offer similar views to the masterplan area, with Southwark
Cathedral also visible in the foreground.
The dominant element in the view is the Shard with Guy’s tower secondary in height to the south. Proposed taller
buildings in the masterplan area should step down to south and have vertical emphasis to help break up the
massing. The townscape will benefit from breathing space between taller elements which would be secondary
to the Shard and The Guy’s tower.
 Master Plan - September 2016 95

6
Local View 6 - From the George Inn Yard

Existing Proposed

This view provides the background setting of the Grade I listed George Inn. Visitors are invited to go through The redevelopment immediately to the east of the George should respect the scale and character of the existing
the gates of the Inn on Borough High Street and as they have just made a couple of steps the view opens up. historic context. The scale of the potential new development to the right of Guy’s tower should be designed to not
The three storey inn is on the right, with the view terminated by a 4 storey building and the Guy’s tower in the dominate the skyline but blend with it, be secondary to the Guy’s tower and, slope down to the south with vertical
background. emphasis in the treatment of the façade.
96 London Bridge Campus Masterplan

6.3 Streetscape

The following pages analyse the impact of the

development on the surrounding streetscape. The
studies on the following pages relate to Newcomen
Street, Snowsfields, Weston Street and Borough High Southwark Street
Street

d
Pon
Section D

aze
eet

at M
Str

Gre
igh
hH

Ne
wc
g

om
rou

en
Str
Bo

eet

Section A1 Section C2

et
Section A2

tre
s
sfield

Weston S
Sn o w

Key to Sections Section B3

Section A1-A3 Newcomen Street NTS Section A3 Section B2

Section B1-B3 Snowsfields N Section B1 Section C1
Section C1-C2 Weston Street
Section D Borough High Street

Borough High Street Newcomen Street Snowsfields Weston Street

 Master Plan - September 2016 97

6
Street Image 1 - Weston Street
Weston Street runs north to south linking St Thomas
Street to Long Lane. The predominant width of the
street is 12m but it goes down to 9m just to the south
of the junction with Snowsfields. A tight urban grain

treet
existed in this area before but it has been lost through
the various 20th century interventions.
Section
C2

Weston S
The existing campus buildings fronting the western
side of Weston Street vary in height from 2 -the
fi elds
Snows
Greenwood Theatre to 18 - the Wolfson House, and
in facade length - from 44 to 15m. The ground floor
frontages are predominantly blank and uninviting.

The existing buildings on the eastern side of Weston View to North

Street which are within the Bermondsey Street Section
Conservation Area are of much finer grain. C1

The redevelopment represents an opportunity to

improve the frontages along Weston Street, establish
an attractive pedestrian environment and enhance the
settings of historic buildings. Where taller buildings are
proposed they should be set back from the building
line.

Existing Building Section

Proposed Building Section

Proposed Building at back

Section C1 Section C2 View to South

98 London Bridge Campus Masterplan

6
Streetscape - Snowsfields
The character of Snowsfields west of Weston Street is
very different to the tight urban grain of 19th Century
terraces. Frontages are poorly defined and often blank.
The recently completed Cancer Centre is built tight
against the building line and its presence is somewhat
s
overbearing against the two storey buildings on the sfield
south side of the street. Snow
Section
The new development provides an opportunity to B2
Section
consider street proportions and frontages on both B3
ion B1
sides of the street. At the moment the width varies from
Sect
11m at the Weston Street, to 17m at the multistorey car
park to 13 at Great Maze Pond Road. A consistent
width and height could be introduced along the street East of Great Maze Pond, the new cancer centre
with taller buildings set back from the building line to
create a street of human scale and proportions, which
opens up at main entrances and street junctions.

Existing Building Section

Proposed Building Section

Proposed Building at back

Section B1 Section B2 Section B3 West of Weston Street

 Master Plan - September 2016 99

6
Street Image 3 - Newcomen Street
The western end of Newcomen Street has retained

t
tree
its historic character with widths ranging from 6 to 8

hS
metres and buildings of 3 - 4 storeys. The majority of
the street has been significantly changed by post war

Hig
development and the feeling of enclosure and scale

gh
has been lost.

rou
Sec
tion Ne
Bo
The redevelopment could provide better containment A1 wc
om
to the public realm located on the southern side of the Se en
cti Str
street and maintain a strong street frontage. The new on eet
development will need to be of appropriate scale and A2
proportions to maintain a consistent building line and
have regard to the quality of the adjacent Conservation
Area and listed buildings. Sec View to East
tion
A3

Existing Building Section

Proposed Building Section

Proposed Building at back

Section A1 Section A2 Section A3 View from Borough High Street

100 London Bridge Campus Masterplan

6
Street Image 4 - Borough High Street
Borough High Street is a Conservation Area and
includes a number of listed buildings. It is characterised
by continuous frontages only interrupted by narrow
lanes. The building height is predominantly 4 storeys
which creates comfortable street enclosure against
the width of the street.

The masterplan area is immediately to the east of

Borough High Street but only Guy’s tower is visible

t
tree
from the western pavement to the south of Union
Street where one of the buildings on the eastern side

hS
drops down to 2 floors.

Hig
Building heights within the masterplan area respect View to South

gh
the character and proportions of Borough High Street
with buildings immediately to the east being sensitively
Section D
rou
integrated within the existing urban grain.
Bo

Existing Building Section

Proposed Building Section

Proposed Building at back

Section D View from west side, south of Union Street

Phasing

7
102 London Bridge Campus Masterplan

7.1 Options

7
Two phasing options have been tested with the
Masterplanning team:

Option A - Phased demolition of Borough Wing

Option B - Single phase demolition of Borough Wing

Option A was selected to be tested further as this

option is less disruptive to ongoing operations on
the campus and also requires less decant within the
retained Hospital Estate.

F (b)

G
F (a)
F (c) D
E
B

H J A

Plot Diagram Showing Area for Partial Demolition of the Eastern End of the Borough Wing
 Master Plan - September 2016 103

7.2 Preferred Phasing

7
Enabling Step
Enable

Area Total Demolition

Plot Action (m2)

Decant
G Construction 1700
G Refurbishment 2400 Construction

Refirbishment
Summary of Enabling Actions
Built
The following enabling works to the main hospital have been
identified which will be required before the following steps
can progress:

• Mortuary moves to basement - Plot G

GH06
• Central Stores (engineering) moves to basement - Plot G GH10

• Wards from eastern part of Borough Wing (3no.) move to

vacant SLAM wards (4no.) in Bermondsey Wing - Plot G Plot Fb GH21
• Expansion of theatres in atrium of Tower Wing - Plot G GH03
GH19

GH49 GH20 Plot G

GH25

Plot B

GH46

Plot A
Plot J
104 London Bridge Campus Masterplan

7
Step 1
Step 1

Area Total Demolition

Plot Action (m2)

Decant
A Demolition 12200
Construction
Fb Demolition 10815
Refirbishment
Summary of Step 1 Actions
Built

• Demolition of KCL Backlands around Talbot Yard -Plot Fb

• Demolition of Multi storey car park
• Demolition of Ronald McDonald House

GH06
GH10

Plot Fb GH21
GH03
GH19

GH49 GH20 Plot G

GH25

Plot B

GH46

Plot J
 Master Plan - September 2016 105

7
Step 2
Step 2

Area Total Demolition

Plot Action (m2)

Decant
J Demolition 480
Construction
A Construction 25400
Fb Construction 22600 Refirbishment

Summary of Step 2 Actions Built

• Construction of 500 seat lecture theatre and seminar

spaces - Plot Fb
• Construction of 500 residential bedspaces - Plot Fb
• Construction of new consolidated Outpatients GH06
Department - Plot A GH10

• Demolition of Snowsfields flats - Plot J

Plot Fb GH21
GH03
GH19

GH49 GH20 Plot G

GH25

Plot B

GH46

Plot A
Plot J
106 London Bridge Campus Masterplan

7
Step 3
Step 3

Area Total Demolition

Plot Action (m2) Decant

B Demolition 26150
Construction
C Demolition 9650
E Demolition 4030 Refirbishment

J Construction 1800 Built

Summary of Step 3 Actions

• Demolition of Iris Brook House, Orchad Lisle House and

Plot C
Francis House - Plot C
• Demolition of Nuffield and Doyles House - Plot E GH06
GH10
• Demolition of east section of Borough Wing and south
link of Southwark and Bermondsey - Plot B
Plot Fb GH21
GH03
GH19

GH49 GH20 Plot G

GH25

Plot E Plot B

GH46

Plot A
Plot J
 Master Plan - September 2016 107

7
Step 4
Step 4

Area Total Demolition

Plot Action (m2)

Decant
B Construction 83000
Construction
C Construction 34300
E Construction 18000 Refirbishment

G Construction 800 Built

C Refurbishment 6900
G Refurbishment 10000
Summary of Step 4 Actions
Plot C

• Construction of potential joint commercial development GH06

with New City Court - Plot C GH10

• Construction of Bio-sciences Hub - Plot E

• Construction of mixed-use clinical and commercial Plot Fb GH21
GH03
building - Plot B
GH19

GH49 GH20 Plot G

GH25

Plot E Plot B

GH46

Plot A
Plot J
108 London Bridge Campus Masterplan

7
Step 5
Step 5

Area Total Demolition

Plot Action (m2) Decant

D Demolition 26955
Construction
Fa Demolition 16300
H Demolition 3200 Refirbishment

I Demolition 900 Built

Summary of Step 5 Actions

• Demolition of KCL Backlands - Plot Fa

Plot C
• Demolition of remaining Borough Wing, Cunlifffe
Laboratories, Tower Link, Boiler House and New Salmon GH06
GH10
Centre - Plot D
• Demolition of Sarah Swift House and Elizabeth
Newcomen House - Plots H and I Plot Fb GH21
GH03
GH19

GH49 GH20 Plot G

Plot Fa

Plot Fc GH25 Plot D

Plot E Plot B

GH46

Plot H Plot A
Plot J

Plot I
 Master Plan - September 2016 109

7
Step 6
Step 6

Area Total Demolition

Plot Action (m2)

Decant
D Construction 120000
Construction
Fa Construction 24600
Fc Construction 15400 Refirbishment

H Construction 9000
Built
I Construction 3000
Fa Refurbishment 2100
Summary of Step 6 Actions
Plot C
• Construction of new KCL academic facilities - Plot Fc
GH06
• Construction of commercial bio-sceinces centre - Plot Fa GH10

• New residential buildings Plots H and I

• Expansion of hospital and additional commercial activity Plot Fb GH21
GH03
- Plot D
GH19

GH49 GH20 Plot G

Plot Fa

Plot Fc GH25 Plot D

Plot E Plot B

GH46

Plot H Plot A
Plot J

Plot I
110 London Bridge Campus Masterplan

7
Completed Development
 Master Plan - September 2016 111

7.3 Theatres Strategy

7
Masterplan to accommodate 22 theatres in total, distributed
as follows:

• Tower/ Southwark Wing first floor 11no

• OPD building on Snowsfields (plot A) 4no
• New development (plot B) 7no

The diagram opposite illustrates how the first floor of the

Southwark and Tower Wings could be reconfigured to
accommodate 11 theatres including the 4 existing theatres.

x 4

x 2 x 9

Existing Theatres Location

x 11

x 7

x 4

Proposed Theatres Location Theatres Study