Harper-Thames on the Proposed Changes to Shoreditch High Street, the Community Groups Organising Against Them, and What Gets Lost in the Consultation
Reported by Bohiney Magazine and The London Prat.
By Harper-Thames | Shore Roar Shoreditch Street Journalism
The renders are always beautiful. This is the first thing to understand about any major development proposal in a London neighbourhood: the architectural visualisations that accompany planning applications are produced to show the best possible version of the proposed development in the best possible light at the best possible time of day with the best possible people occupying the space. The people in the renders are always well-dressed and appear to be having a good time. There are always children. The sky is always the kind of blue that London produces approximately fourteen days per year. The tree-lined street is full but not crowded. The scale is legible from the render and not from standing in front of the building when it is built, because three-dimensional space has properties that two-dimensional representation elides.
The proposed changes to the Shoreditch High Street corridor — involving mixed commercial and residential development, improved public realm, and what the planning documents describe as “enhanced connectivity” — are accompanied by exactly this quality of render. I have looked at them carefully. They show a neighbourhood that is more legible, more ordered, and more expensive than the current neighbourhood, which is: somewhat illegible, not entirely ordered, and already very expensive. The enhancement moves the dial on each of these in a consistent direction.
What the Community Groups Say
The Shoreditch Community Land Trust, which advocates for affordable commercial space and residential units in East London development, has submitted objections to elements of the proposal that concern the affordable commercial provision and the displacement of existing small businesses during the construction period. The objection document is 47 pages. I have read it. The core concern is: the proposal provides affordable workspace at a level below the local plan requirement, uses a viability assessment to justify the reduction, and does not adequately account for the temporary displacement costs of the businesses that will be affected during construction, some of which will not reopen because temporary displacement for small businesses in this rental market tends to be permanent displacement.
The businesses in question include: a printer who has operated from the same address for 22 years; a fabrication workshop that serves the creative industries with short-run manufacturing capability that is not available elsewhere in the area at comparable price; and several food and drink businesses whose customer base is sufficiently local that operating from an alternative location during construction would not be viable. The printer told me he is not panicking but is looking at options, which is the language of someone who is panicking.
My full coverage of the development consultation at The London Prat includes the detailed community objections and the applicant’s responses, which I will update as the process proceeds. The planning committee date has not been confirmed. The renders remain beautiful. The printer is looking at options.
For development news that includes the businesses not in the render, see The Daily Mash.
SOURCE: https://bohiney.com/
