Save Dorset Street

[adrian]

With time rapidly running out I have below an official objection put together by the Spitalfield Community Group in relation to the proposed development. This may help when lodging your objections.

F.A.O. Shay Bugler,
LBTH Planning.

REDEVELOPMENT OF LONDON FRUIT AND WOOL EXCHANGE, REMOVAL OF DORSET STREET, REDEVELOPMENT OF WHITE’S ROW CAR PARK

PA/11/02221 PA/11/02220

I write on behalf of the Spitalfields Community Group - a local residents’ association with more than eighty members - in opposition to the plans submitted by Exemplar Properties for the redevelopment of the London Fruit and Wool Exchange and the removal of Dorset Street.
Other members of the Group will write with specific objections and proposals, but I want to provide an overview on behalf of the Group outlining our reasons for opposing this lazily designed and inappropriate development.

WHAT'S WRONG WITH THE DEVELOPMENT ?
- It's appalling architecture. Poorly designed and half heartedly supported by the developers' lead architect (who himself calls it 'blocky') it's wholly inappropriate for this important site opposite the area's crown, the Grade 1 listed Christ Church.
- Amongst Spitalfields' many strengths is its historic street pattern with wynds, alleys, and ancient streets. This proposal seeks to wipe historic Dorset Street from the map and to build over it with an anonymous block . Once dubbed 'The most dangerous street in London', Dorset Street was home to Huguenot silk weavers, Wedgewood's first London shop, and one of Jack the Ripper's victims. There is no recent precedent for losing an historic thoroughfare from the Spitalfields map.
- There's no residential mix in this development. Areas are soulless if they're
overwhelmed by office development. They die at night. For most of Spitalfields' history this site has been residential. The Council has gone to great lengths to get residents back to other parts of Spitalfields in recent years; a successful project which has rejuvenated the area. This development is a throwback, and is dated in its conception. It should have a residential component.
- There aren't enough retail spaces in this development. Historically, Brushfield Street, Dorset Street, Commercial Street, and White's Row would all have had shops at ground floor level. The developers plan only 20% retail space at ground floor level. It’s guaranteed to make the area look dead.
- It misses an important opportunity to extend customer flow into the under developed and often squalid streets round Petticoat Lane and the southern end of Commercial Street. The ground floor level of the Commercial Street part of this development should draw people down from the Market and be visually stimulating.
- Through routes in the development are eccentric, user unfriendly, and subject to capricious closure by the site owner.

WHAT THE RESIDENTS WANT;
The developers need to go back to the drawing board and come up with a plan that respects this important site. The proposals, in cheap brick, and of mediocre design quality just won't do. The architect himself, apparently embarrassed by his proposals defends himself by saying he’s only working to a brief. Not good enough.
And while the developers will tell you that they’ve had umpteen meetings and say that they've taken on board our criticisms in reality they’ve had a single agenda from the outset and have listened to no one. They want mass office space and a cut price build. We don’t.

Key to this development however should be the following principles;
1) respect for the existing street pattern and the retention of historic Dorset Street at its heart.
2) open and unimpeded access through the site
3) the dominance of small retail and non chain restaurant space at ground floor level
4) the reintroduction of an element of domestic space to bring life back to this large area of Spitalfields
5) humanity of scale
6) a determination to provide inspirational 21st century architecture facing Christ Church.

17th October 2011

[ChrisGeorge]

I'm torn on this one. The line of Dorset Street still exists, sort of, but it's been shifted to the north and, the last I heard, access to the current service road is often barred by a locked gate. In any event, I've always found this to be the most disappointing of the C5 sites: I never got much of a sense of place, or time, by looking at that chipped curb stone. And, whatever building they're planning, it would have to be really ugly to be uglier than the car park.

I've signed petitions about, or objections to, the destruction of other East End sites, but this one was ruined so long ago that I'm not sure it's worth the effort to save what little is left.

Thanks, Maurice. I would agree that there is nothing to see of the original Dorset Street, let alone Miller's Court. The demolition of the White's Row Parking Garage is nothing to mourn -- though I did park there when I attended the 2009 convention. The addition of a nice quality building to the neighborhood instead of the parking garage should be welcomed.

Chris

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
I dislike change, however Whitechapel 2011 has no authenticity to that of 1888, [at least very little] it is left to ones imagination to create a picture in ones own mind, when visiting the area , either solo, or on a guided tour.
The tour guides do a fair enough job, considering what they have got to work with, but it is to be honest, just a money making scheme, that is relying on the Ripper media to fathom custom.
From a personal view , I am lucky enough to have frequented Whitechapel when ones imagination, was enhanced by more historic sites intact, which I shall cherish.
Back to Dorset street, most of us will always know its location, despite any weird and wonderful structures that emerge.
Regards Richard.

[adrian]

Phil,

Thanks for the post.

The gist of the original thread has little to do with the Ripper which is of no real concern to residents, but to the wider concerns of the those residents and the desire to have something more diverse on the site.

The original post also embraced the need to change which was slightly missed here. It was also more about the standard of replacement.

I will be meeting with the local resident group soon over this proposal and I would be amazed if the Ripper gets mentioned once!

ADRIAN.

[Fiona]

Hi all

Just to clarify, this isn't a campaign to save Dorset Street - I agree there is virtually nothing to save!

The Spitalfields Community Association is fighting the planning application on the grounds that the building the developers want to put on the site is ugly, lazily designed and not in keeping with the character of the area.

In addition to this, it has very little retail space or housing - both of which would be of great benefit to the area.

The Association have suggested that the development would be far better (aesthetically and in terms of usefulness) if it were split into two sections, thus creating more space for potential shop fronts. A by-product of this is that the old Dorset/Duval Street would be reopened as a pedestrian through-route from the market complex to Commercial Street.

While I certainly wouldn't mourn the loss of the gorgeous Whites Row car park, I agree with the Association that it would be a shame to waste this great opportunity to try and develop the site into something exciting, interesting and beneficial to the local people. At the moment, the developers are proposing an ugly office block that will be a dead zone at night - not really in keeping with an area that is one of the most vibrant districts of London after dark.

The opportunity is there to do something really good with the site but at the moment, the plans fall very short of achieving that.

Kind regards
Fiona Rule

[Phil H]

Ripper tours and Ripper-related tourism must bring ££££s into the local economy - pubs and meals etc, as well as boosting the world-wide knowledge of and interest in the area.

There may be a prejudice against memorialising horror, but there is an alternative view that needs to be advanced. The plaques could also be seen as about the VICTIMS and woman, which might attract support from feminist groups.

Phil

[John Bennett]

Two views of the planned development, from Crispin and Commercial Streets.

Cities have to change. There is nothing left of Mary Kelly's Dorset St, and I cannot get sentimental over what is on the site now. Let it be replaced by something useful, more attractive and practical.

Trying to preserve junk which has absolutely no historical relevance simply undermines the position when there is a REAL prurpose and need to object.

I agree. I also don't think that being a Ripper murder site is a particularly good reason to preserve what is in effect a drab bit of urban space. That said, getting rid of the carpark and replacing it with something better looking is wholly desirable. It would be a pity to get rid of the Wool Exchange building as it's quite handsome, although the proposals do keep the whole facade on Brushfield Street.

On the other hand, maybe we could lobby - even raise funds to pay for - for a plaque to go on the wall of whatever replaces the current structures, as close as possible to Mary's room.

Again, marking a Ripper murder site would probably cut no ice with the powers that be.

JB

[Phil H]

Cities have to change. There is nothing left of Mary Kelly's Dorset St, and I cannot get sentimental over what is on the site now. Let it be replaced by something useful, more attractive and practical.

Trying to preserve junk which has absolutely no historical relevance simply undermines the position when there is a REAL prurpose and need to object.

On the other hand, maybe we could lobby - even raise funds to pay for - for a plaque to go on the wall of whatever replaces the current structures, as close as possible to Mary's room.

Phil

[The Grave Maurice]

I'm torn on this one. The line of Dorset Street still exists, sort of, but it's been shifted to the north and, the last I heard, access to the current service road is often barred by a locked gate. In any event, I've always found this to be the most disappointing of the C5 sites: I never got much of a sense of place, or time, by looking at that chipped curb stone. And, whatever building they're planning, it would have to be really ugly to be uglier than the car park.

I've signed petitions about, or objections to, the destruction of other East End sites, but this one was ruined so long ago that I'm not sure it's worth the effort to save what little is left.

[adrian]

SAVE DORSET STREET

Dear all,
Recently we (Whitechapel Society) informed you that the playground at the top of one of the only remaining landmarks from that famous Autumn/Fall of Terror in 1888, The Old Board School, (Trinity Hall) was under threat from the prospect of development. We encouraged you all to submit objections. You did, it might still work. Thank you all very much.
Unfortunately, another set of proposals affecting the historical balance of the East End have been submitted that will have an impact on the area off Commercial Street that was once Dorset Street where Mary Kelly was murdered in 1888.
We now ask you again to submit an objection. Submitting an objection (not a petition) is quick and easy, we will show you how below.
(We are grateful to the writer FIONA RULE for bring this campaign to our attention).

WHAT'S HAPPENING TO DORSET STREET?

In September this year a proposal was put forward to demolish the White's Row car park area and part of the Fruit & Wool exchange building off Commercial Street. Then the proposed building to replace it - plans have been submitted by EXEMPLAR PROPERTIES - would cover up the whole area - including what we know as Dorset Street (Although this is not officially a street, the line of it still survives). You would have no access to any such site in the future.
A local residents group, SPITALFIELDS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION (SCA), although agreeing with the demolition of the much hated White's Row car park, opposes the greater detail in the plans, especially the cheap building option that has been proposed in its place. A proposal that the lead architect of the development has called 'blocky'.
Not only will this mean the loss of an historic thoroughfare, but also does not allow for residential concerns and needs, retail spaces and tourist interest (this area is directly opposite the famous Christchurch church. Basically, the SCA and the Whitechapel Society would ask for more involved community consultation and the preservation and development of the historic Dorset Street thoroughfare.
We will be asking you to lodge - if possible - objections via the Tower Hamlets website. This is not a petition, but an objection. Try not to mention the Jack the Ripper connection but detail those issues outlined above; [COLOR="Blue"]1,weakness of proposed development, 2,residents' concerns, 3,tourist interest, 4,community cohesion, 5,retailing opportunities, 6, Improvements are welcome but must be acceptable.[/COLOR]

PLANNING APPLICATION: PA/11/02220 & PA/11/02221

PA/11/02220 This is the DEMOLITION of the White's Row multi-storey car park, 99-101 Commercial Street (the Bank), 54 Brushfield Street (The Gun public house), and partial demolition of the London Fruit & Wool Exchange behind the retained Brushfield Street facade.
PA/11/02221 This is the CONSERVATION AREA CONSENT for the demolition of White's Row multi-storey car park, 99-101 Commercial Street (the Bank), 54 Brushfield Street (The Gun public house) and partial demolition of the London Fruit & Wool Exchange behind the retained Brushfield Street facade.
N.B. These are both related planning applications so therefore must be both objected to, so please object to both separately

SUBMITTING AN OBJECTION

This can only be done by residents of the U.K.
(Non U.K. residents can submit an objection by letter or e-mail as outlined below)

*THIS MUST BE DONE BY TUESDAY 1st NOVEMBER 2011*

- Visit the Tower Hamlets website at: www.towerhamlets.gov.uk
- In the search bar at the top right-hand of the home page put in the application number: PA/11/02220
- Then press 'enter'
- This will now give you three options. Pick the SECOND option: "Comment on Application - online planning register"
- Then fill in the form completing all the fields asked for and click on submit button.
- Now repeat the process for the application PA/11/02221
- You have gone some way to save a piece of history for future generations! Well done.

Alternatively, you can email SHAY BUGLER at Tower Hamlets Planning department with your concerns, remembering to include the application numbers; PA/11/02220 and PA/11/02221
Or e-mail SHAY BUGLER. His e-mail address is: planningandbuilding@towerhamlets.gov.uk
Or, you can write to them (be very quick!!!) at: SHAY BUGLER, Tower Hamlets Planning & Building Dept. Planning Office, Mulberry Place (AH), P.O. Box 55739, 5 Clove Crescent, London, E14 2BE

WE CAN INFLUENCE THIS ONE AS WE HAVE BEFORE!

ADRIAN.
(Editor: Whitechapel Society Journal)