Covent Garden
Sir: Minette Marrin's article on Covent Garden (Spectator September 16) is such a tissue of illinformed peculation that I hardly know where to begin a reply, but a reply is essential.
Let me begin with a categorical denial that 'plans are being implemented' or that the .GLC is granting permission for ' major redevelopment and is doing so in collusion with developers. The fact is that the GLC has not given any permission at all for imporant redevelopment in the area and indeed has no applications under consideration. The Haslemere development mentioned in the article received planning permission from the Camden Borough Council, the local planning authority for that part of the area, because it was in accordance with the Initial Development Plan. The GLC did, however, secure some modification to it to make sure that it would not prejudice the CDA proposals if they are approved.
It is also nonsense to say that the GLC is failing to restrain private developers in the area. We have done so and are continuing to do so by persuasion when informally consulted about embryo schemes and when that fails we propose vigorously to fight any appeal which may be lodged against our refusal to grant consent. Two such appeals will be the subject of public inquiries shortly.
The article is full of serious errors of perversion of facts. I cannot deal with all of them but would like to correct the more serious ones:—
(a) 'open space reduced from four acres to two and a half acres' — The total amount of open space is still to be about four acres but there has been some redistribution since the original draft plan.
(b) 'The Adelphi is . . . to be pulled down' — The CDA proposals do not require the demolition of the theatre. The road referred to was never planned to go through the theatre.
(c) 'Sandringham Flats . . are part of a block owned mainly by the Westminster City Council and the GLC 'and the whole thing is to be redeveloped' — The western block of Sandringham Flats is 'owned by the Westminster City Council and is not in the Covent Garden area. The eastern block, owned by the GLC, is expected to have a life of about 10 years under the CDA proposals and is being' improved. Tenants are being moved only where necessary to permit .improvement works.
In regard to the proposed amount of office space, this is not an increase over that which exists in the area as of right.
Robert Mitchell Chairman, Covent Garden Joint Development Committee The County Hall, London SE! 7PB Miss Marrin replies: Haslemere Development The ultimate control over the proposed CDA area rests in the hands of the GLC. To claim that the local authorities, Camden and Westminster, have final control, would be to deny the point of the GLC having taken over the local authority consortium in 1970. When Haslemere Estates first applied for planning permission for a scheme with a sizeable amount of rehabilitation, the planning team refused to give it, on the grounds that redevelopment should fit in with the proposed plan, including a sunken road and pedestrian deck. Haslemere Estates then submitted a new plan to Camden, who referred it to the GLC planning team for their opinion. "The GLC made no direction to the borough of Camden" (report from the GLC to the Member for the City of Westminster June 1972). So Camden gave permission, and the GLC had brought no pressure against this permission, even though it was in their power to do so. Mr Mitchell has not contradicted the rest of what I said about this development. Open Space in Covent Garden A comparison between the two official GLC publications, Covent Garden is moving, and the recent The Next Step definitely suggests that open space will be reduced substantially unless pedestrian deck space, and closed-off road space can be interpreted as open space. This is a matter of interpretation.
The Adelphi Theatre The Next Step shows that the site on which the Adelphi stands is scheduled for redevelopment, "timing not critical " (Fig. 4). Figures 2 and 3 show that the theatre area is marked for a pedestrian deck network, and a new service area in a development plot. It is true that the road I referred to was scheduled to go through Bedford Street, and not the Adelphi. But The Next Step clearly suggests that the Adelphi should come down.
Sandringham Flats Sandringham West is, as Mr Mitchell and I agree, outside the Covent Garden Area. But in town planning, the future of one area can rarely be independent of the future of the area next to it. In this case, where the areas are only separated by the Charing Cross Road, and The Next Step has marked h possible pedestrian bridge across the road, the Covent Garden Joint Development Committee must certainly be concerned about the future of Sandringham West. Further, the GLC sold Sandringham West to Westminster with the provision that Westminster would sell back enough land to widen the Charing Cross Road to six lanes.
Office Space
The GLC's Explanatory Statement shows that under the proposed plan there will be a 4.2 per cent increase of office space in the Comprehensive Development Area. Just over two million square feet of office space will be new; about 55 per cent of existing office space will be demolished and replaced. I do not understand Mr Mitchell:s phrase ' as of right.'
Previous page
