5 Strand

Consultation report

May 2023

Consultation to date

The second public consultation was launched on the 2nd May. This page details key figures relating to that consultation along with the survey responses received from 2nd May to 15th May.

Consultation overview

116 unique visitors to the website during this consultation phase

4 meetings with Craven Street residents

2,038 flyers sent to local residents

167 letters sent to neighbours on Craven Street

1 online meeting

12 people registered for the meeting

14 responses to the survey

12 subscribers to weekly updates


Q1. Which of the following best describes your relationship to the local area?

Local Resident
Community Representative
Local Businessperson/Employee
Local Councillor

Q2. Did you participate in the first stage of consultation, and if so, how?

Q3. Earlier in the year, we asked for your thoughts on what the scheme could offer and updated our proposal accordingly. Which of the following are important to you?

Other comments:
- A quality looking building that suits such a prominent location
- Adding a high quality, viable building that enhances the area

Q4. The community told us you wanted to see public realm improvements. What would you like us to do with the Public realm on Craven Street and Strand?

Tree Planting
Create a feeling of safety
Public Art
Public seating
Open spaces


Q2. Did you participate in the first stage of consultation, and if so, how?

Overall, what do you think about the design being proposed?

  • I attended your Zoom call, and am happy with plans in general.
  • It’s ok, but a Victorian Design would be more fitting for the area. Londoners are sick of modernist architecture.
  • we don’t need more hotels – we need infrastructure to help the residents and those who work in the area – we’re swamped by the tourists and horrible cheap touristy shops and American candy stores – we need gps libraries dentists decent family shops and cafes and restaurants – enough with vertical drinking establishments who don’t even pay taxes never clean streets and make our lives even more difficult with drug users alcoholics on the pavements so we can’t even walk without fear of intimidation or worse
  • looks cheap and tacky
  • Very poor and cheap looking, unforgiving for such a prominent location
  • Awful. The first proposal was good and I liked the 2nd a lot too. This is awful.
  • Very ugly and cheap looking. This being a Premier Inn means the final building will be value engineered and cheapened further to become an absolute eyesore. I prey this doesn’t get built.
  • Terrible. Down market and cheap. Awful architecture after the previous proposals
  • Poor/cheap design with no-name architect inappropriate for prestigious site
  • Horrendous. The previous design of 3 do far proposed (so the 2nd design) was far superior and fit the area well.
  • The proposed design has many good qualities. I was a huge fan of the now defunct proposal, but I feel that with a few modifications this design could be equally as good. I would like to see more pronounced/detailed cornices above the fourth and ninth floors. Additionally, I feel that the vertical columns between the third and ninth floors should be more articulated through fluted pilasters (see, Clarges building in Mayfair for a good example of this or Chelsea Barracks Phase 1) . These would help integrate the building more into the surrounding context.
  • Overall, the proposed design has many good qualities. I like the arch effect, stone work and bronze detailing. I do, however, feel that the cornices (both at the top of the building and further down) could be made more prominent/detailed (as they were in the previous proposal for the site) in order to tie in with the surrounding buildings and break the monotony of the facade. I would also like to see the stonework of the groubd floor to be rusticated (or a modern interpretation) , again to the with the site context and help to structure the facade
  • Don’t think it should be a hotel. We need more affordable housing

Are there any other measures you would like to see included in our proposals?

  • My main concerns are 1. That bottlenecks for both pedestrians and traffic aren’t created. 2. The side streets by the old Boots have become rather iffy since the store closed, and it’s vital that they become safe and clean again.
  • A classic design of Victorian architecture
  • better designed building like the previous design not this cheap tacky building which will downgrade Trafalgar square. Stop being so cheap and design a quality building for the area.
  • A redesign on the façade, something closer to the initial designs
  • Complete redesign from a good architectural practice.
  • Quality architecture and public realm
  • Affordable housing

Do you have any other questions or comments that might help us shape our plans?

  • Some amenities for the residents to have priority – this development needs to help get homeless off the streets – no more hotels !!!!
  • Hire better architects, stop being cheap and nasty.
  • Ditch this awful design.
  • Change architects
  • Refer to the previous designs by Squire+Partners/David Adjaye
  • Go back to previous design.
  • No – only that I do hope that you take my comments on board, and that I wish you the all the best as you take this project forward.
  • None – ib ckosing though I will say that, with a few tweaks, this is a good proposal.

Further Engagement

Following the second consultation, we will continue to engage with Neighbours and key stakeholders throughout the process.