The Story So Far

Since the launch of our campaign against the applications at 33 Creechurch Lane and 31 Bury Street, the threat to Bevis Marks has become a national issue, with many prominent architectural campaigners, historians and political figures joining our campaign to Save Bevis Marks. A full list of our most prominent supporters is available here, and a selection of coverage in the Jewish, architectural, and national and local press is below:

·         “Bevis Marks: UK’s oldest synagogue faces closure threat over towers plan” (BBC News) ·         “Historic London Synagogue Fights to Stay Out of the Shadows” (New York Times)
·         “London skyscraper plans threaten UK’s oldest synagogue” (The Guardian) ·         “Rabbi urges planners to keep UK’s oldest synagogue out of the shadows” (The Telegraph)
·         “Rage against the dying of the light: High rise developments threaten Britain’s oldest synagogue” (Sky News) ·         “London skyscraper plans threaten UK’s oldest synagogue Bevis Marks” (ITV News)
·         “UK’s oldest synagogue ‘under-threat’ from London office development” (Evening Standard) ·         “Save Bevis Marks: Skyscraper plans are a menace to the City’s heritage” (City AM)
·         “Simon Schama joins battle to ‘save’ UK’s oldest synagogue from nearby tower” (Jewish News) ·         “Bevis Marks could ‘ultimately close’ if tower block plans are approved” (The Jewish Chronicle)
·         “Britain’s oldest synagogue under threat of closure from developers” (The Jewish Weekly) ·         “Developers Threaten Future of UK’s Oldest Continually Used Synagogue”  (Jewish Press)
·         “The oldest synagogue in the UK is under threat” (Time Out) ·         “London skyscraper plans threaten UK’s oldest synagogue” (News Cabal)
·         “Britain’s oldest synagogue under threat from skyscraper plans” (My London) ·         “Fight to save Bevis Marks synagogue from skyscrapers’ shadow” (Hendon & Finchley Times)
·         “Bevis Marks synagogue under threat of closure” (Church Times) ·         “Worshippers fear new high-rise towers could shroud Britain’s oldest synagogue in darkness” (New Statesman)
·         “Bevis Marks synagogue ‘under threat’ from skyscraper plans” (City Matters) ·         “Battle to save historic synagogue from shadow of skyscrapers” (The Tottenham Independent)


City of London councillors refused the 31 Bury Street application on 5 October 2021. The even greater threat posed by 33 Creechurch Lane remains, however, so our campaign continues. Press coverage of this victory in the first stage of our campaign is below:


·         “Bevis Marks: Tower block plans near UK’s oldest synagogue rejected” (BBC News) ·         “City of London Rejects New Skyscraper After Synagogue Uproar” (Bloomberg)
·         “Historic synagogue wins first round of City planning battle” (The Guardian) ·         “Office block plan that posed ‘existential threat’ to UK’s oldest synagogue turned down” (The Telegraph)
·         “UK’s oldest synagogue ‘saved for now’ as City of London Corporation rejects tower application” (City AM) ·         “Editorial: The City’s values endure in its buildings – old and new” (City AM editorial)
·         “City of London rejects tower which ‘threatened future’ of UK’s oldest synagogue” Jewish News ·         “Saving Bevis Marks shows what we can achieve when we come together as one” (Times of Israel)
·         “London councillors reject plan for high-rise building next to historic synagogue” (Times of Israel) ·         “Voice of the Jewish News: VBM Day (…victory for Bevis Marks Day)” (Jewish News / Times of Israel)
·         “City of London Rejects Skyscraper That Threatened U.K.’s Oldest Shul” ( ·         “Relief for Bevis Marks as City of London rejects plans for nearby tower block” (The Jewish Chronicle)
·         “UK’s oldest synagogue saved for now after City of London rejects tower block plan”  (Planning Resource) ·         “London’s oldest synagogue could be saved as skyscraper plan blocked” (My London)

This wonderful Synagogue, which has endured throughout the centuries must not now be put at risk by the decisions of the City of London planning department.