Another regeneration project has been submitted for planning in recent weeks. The developer has paid for the Gold package with its architects as we get a vast array of CGIs from every conceivable angle. This must be Reading’s most photographed building despite not yet being built. You can almost hear the disquiet from neighbouring buildings: “Who’s this Johnny-come-lately with sixteen selfies?”
Clearwater Court pipes up, “I’ve got two cylindrical fire escapes yet you don’t see me carrying on like that”.
In amongst the abundance of imagery, I’ve pulled out a few details for you…

The site is the former offices of insurer Covea, who adopted a fully remote working model after the pandemic leaving their premises surplus to requirements. Covea was the final brand name of a lineage that can be traced back to Norman Insurance who, as the original occupants, appear to have managed to get the short access road, Norman Place, named after them. In the comments please for any other Reading streets named after businesses!

Reading’s dominance in the insurance industry has slowly faded in favour of technology, broader financial services and pharmaceuticals. Searching online, I can’t even find a locally curated list of the all the insurers based in town at its peak.

Recognition of former industries could be done a lot better, and the public art funding linked to new developments could be one route to do that. Below we have a generic swirly thing proposed, but that could change once the core scheme is approved. Quite what could work I’m not sure – a statue of a “man from the Pru” might need some interpretation.

I tried asking an AI image generator to create a microchip-themed public art to celebrate Reading’s early role in the computing industry, and actually I don’t mind the result! This is the level of subtlety I think I’m going to need to appreciate one of these pieces.

The proposed Waterfront Square isn’t quite on that scale. But it offers promise, with a raised area hosting a few trees and seating for the proposed commercial unit fronting the river. The 3000 sq ft cafe/restaurant is the critical element to enliven this space, adjoining entrances to the tenant-only amenity areas such as co-working. The developer, Packaged Living, mentions the possibility of offering the unit at a subsidised rate to secure a local tenant.

Given the criticality of letting the space – and keeping it occupied – to the overall success of the location, I wonder why Packaged Living don’t consider operating it themselves? They must have similar predicaments within their other schemes, and given they already employ staff to operate their sites from security, concierge, to social events organisers, it wouldn’t be that much of a stretch to operate a cafe. They could give discounts to tenants, and it would help blur the lines between their resident population and the wider community in a world where high-amenity BTR schemes could risk becoming isolated social enclaves.

I covered the public consultation for this scheme back in January. It remains largely as it was presented then. The pitched roofs have gone, as I’d predicted, to accommodate solar panels. With varied rooflines now removed from the architect’s limited scope for expression, you can sense them enacting their revenge through the introduction of a curved glass riverside frontage under a new colonnade section either side of the proposed Waterfront Square. The builders won’t thank them, but it could add some interest, and shelter from the elements.

Given the limited supporting facilities on Christchurch Meadows for leisure users – the tennis courts, playground and paddling pool, you would think there would be a market for some kind of riverside food and drink offer… and toilets if nothing else. It’s not clear what will emerge at the proposed cafe unit at Berkeley’s SSE development just getting underway. It’s very small and a local expert hinted to me it might be more of a peak time-only ambush coffee stand to snare the morning and evening commuters winding their way between Caversham and Reading Station. That might leave room for Waterfront Square to succeed, but its challenge will be lack of visibility from the road and a risk of being hidden away… plus winter.

The developer is confident on the role that the Waterfront Square can play, describing it as the “best bit of quality public realm on the Reading side of the Thames”, and a great place to “sit, relax, meet, with a good food and beverage offer”. I really hope that vision can be achieved and it can be a great asset not just for the growing Thames-side population but for the town as a whole.

The Vastern Road frontage has had its colour-scheme jazzed up a bit, with greens and browns to break up the greyscale. The heights remain in the play-it-safe territory below the council’s tall building threshold, and the limited parking combined with generous cycle storage should comply with the transport requirements. The loss of the existing building is only to be welcomed – it typified Reading’s unfathomable approach of turning its back on the Thames, a wrong worth righting in my book.

Moving onto the numbers, the scheme proposes 254 build-to-rent apartments set within 22,000 sq ft of landscaping including 61 new trees. Only around 5% of the homes will be 3-bedroom units, contrary to the council’s latest proposed policy change to demand 15% in the town centre. And the affordable housing offer, also at around 5% is justified based on the site’s economic viability. For a project that’s broadly very welcome on all other dimensions, it’s those affordable homes that are most likely to irk the planning committee and risk a refusal. We’ll have to see whether the developer has an insurance policy.

What do you think of the plans? Comments below can be left without registration, and the planning application is open for comments on the council portal.

Follow @readingonthames