James Stirling and Michael Wilford & Partners’ No 1 Poultry has been listed at Grade II*, just a year after a previous bid was rejected
The Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) today reversed its decision of December 2015 (see AJ 04.12.15) not to give the Postmodern landmark statutory heritage, ignoring Historic England’s advice and an application for listing from the Twentieth Century Society (C20).
Following a challenge by the conservation group, the department has now given protected status to the City of London block – making it the most modern listed building in the UK.
Roger Bowdler, director of listing at Historic England, said: ‘We are delighted that No 1 Poultry has now been listed. It is one of London’s best-known modern buildings, a key work of late 20th-century architecture, by one of England’s leading post-war architects, James Stirling.
‘No 1 Poultry is a highly significant and striking building and ranks as one of the major British urban landmarks of the later 20th century.’
After last year’s decision not to determine the application, C20 gained a legal opinion that argued the department was bound to make a decision.
Catherine Croft, director at C20, told the AJ: ‘We argued that they had done the work, so the minister was bound to have an opinion.
‘We wrote to them saying it was unacceptable not to make a decision on listing.’
The office block, which also houses a pub and a rooftop restaurant, was built in 1994 by Peter Palumbo’s City Acre Property Investment Trust.
Historic England was asked to assess No 1 Poultry for listing on the grounds that plans by Buckley Gray Yeoman to make alterations constituted a threat to the building.
Culture secretary Karen Bradley has now agreed that the block has special architectural or historic interest.
A report by Historic England assessed No 1 Poultry as a ‘highly significant late work by one of Britain’s foremost post-war architects, which expresses Stirling’s singular approach to design’.
It added: ‘Intellectually powerful, the building is scholarly in its references, particularly to classical precedent.’