Stratford didn't need the Games
Article | Legacy | Regeneration | Thames Gateway
I came across this comment about the impact of the Olympics on the regeneration of the east end of London in a recent interview with Peter Hall. He is Professor of Planning and Regeneration at the Bartlett School of Architecture and Planning, University College London. From 1991 to 1994 he was Special Adviser on Strategic Planning to the Secretary of State for the Environment, with special reference to London and South-East regional planning, including Thames Gateway and the Channel Tunnel Rail Link. In 1998-9 he was a member of the Deputy Prime Minister's Urban Task Force.
The interview is published in 'Regenerating London', Governance, sustainability and community in a global city, Editors, Rob Imrie, Loretta Lees & Mike Raco, Routledge, 2009
Editors: Could you say one or two things about the Olympic Games and the impact and effects that it may have on the regeneration of that part of London?
Peter Hall: I think in retrospect there's a serious doubt about whether we ever should have campaigned for the Games, and of course one version is that the government never ever thought for one minute they were going to get it, that Paris was going to win, but they had to show enthusiasm, and they were absolutely blown apart when they got it. And its been more or less a disaster ever since.
The physical regeneration of Stratford was going to happen anyway. It didn't need the Games. It will clean up a vast mess of the Lower Lea Valley, between Stratford and Canning Town, which is a good thing and generations in the future will say that's great – as long as they don't mess it up afterwards, but there's now a rumour that they're going to try develop half of it afterwards and not leave it as a park, which you can now well see the Treasury trying to do.
But it has had terrible distorting effects, apart from the cost of it all, direct and indirect. It has skewed all the regeneration of Thames Gateway on to the Lea Valley and to some degree the Royals [Docks] and away from Barking and other areas, which I think is a negative. And if we wanted to clean up the Lower Lea Valley and get Barking done, we could have got the whole job done much cheaper, than what we'll pay for the Games and the Lea Valley.
Submitted by Martin Slavin on Mon, 15/06/2009 - 19:08.
"Lea River Park"
Submitted by Steve Dowding on Fri, 19/06/2009 - 13:07.
Julian, There are indeed proposals for parkland south of Stratford High St. Clearly within the category of would-have-happened-anyway (eventually) it's not part of the Olympic Park, but falls or fails under the aegis of Thames Gateway and Lower Lea Valley Framework. Phase 1, ludicrously named "The Fatwalk" - erm, because in places it's wider than your average linear park - is subject of a series of consultations at present, one of which was listed here http://www.gamesmonitor.org.uk/node/824.
"...initial ideas for the ambitious new Lea River Park, phase 1 of which is programmed to be complete in 2011. This phase includes Three Mills Green, East India Dock Basin and the first phase of the Fatwalk, the linear parkland that will link these two parks and adjacent areas."
Other consultation events are upcoming locally.
In a later phase, after the gasometers south of Three Mills and Bow Creek are decommissioned post-2015 it is proposed to create a park on that site.
Meanwhile, the island towards the top of Bow Creek, close to the point where raw sewage is discharged from the Northern Outfall Sewer, aka 'The Greenway', by Thames Water, and in front of Channelsea House and the 'Super-Mosque' site, is allegedly - as a one-time sulphur works - the most contaminated land in London!
» reply
by
Mess between 'Stratford and Canning Town'?
Much though I agree with Peter Hall's assertions about Stratford not needing the Olympics he is incorrect when he says 'It will clean up a vast mess of the Lea Valley, between Stratford and Canning Town.....'. The Olympic Park does not extend south of Stratford High Street to Canning Town.
The original plan put forward by Arup did extend further south and might be said to have reached Canning Town and the plans put forward in 2003 did include a few small areas south of the High Street, but at no time have the present plans, dating back to 2006, included those areas.
I don't know what he is referring to when he says 'there's now a rumour they're going to try to develop half of it afterwards and not leave it as a park.' The area to be turned into parkland does not extend south of the High Street. There is a contested proposal to build a super mosque near West Ham station and the area south of Three Mills is already heavily industrialised so there would be little room for a park in that section. The remaining piece of land is at Mill Meads which could indeed be converted into parkland as at present it is unoccupied unused green space. If this what he is referring to then that would indeed be a loss of potential parkland.