Bishopsgate Goodsyard: Hackney and Tower Hamlets mayors in joint bid to halt scheme
Final proposals: following consultation and amendments, the latest designs for the Bishopsgate Goodsyard development. Photograph: Hammerson PLC
Two East London mayors will speak out against the contentious Bishopsgate Goodsyard development next Monday in a joint bid to prevent Boris Johnson from approving the plans.
The Mayor of Hackney, Jules Pipe, and the Mayor of Tower Hamlets, John Biggs, have already slammed the proposals for the site, which straddles the two boroughs.
Now the two council chiefs will publicly make their case against the planned tower blocks — one of which will tower 48 storeys high — at a debate at St Leonard’s Church in Shoreditch.
Campaigners fear the vast development will overshadow the surrounding area and have accused developers of disregarding housing policy.
“This development cynically ignores housing policy and fails to provide homes that Londoners can afford,” said David Donoghue, a spokesperson for the More Light, More Power campaign group.
“Massive tower blocks will deprive local people of light and warmth every day of the year.”
Until September the two councils were considering the scheme proposed by Hammerson and Ballymore to redevelop the site around Shoreditch High Street.
But after lengthy revisions and negotiations, the Greater London Assembly ‘called-in’ the scheme, bypassing the local authorities and taking the decision into the Mayor of London’s hands.
The organisers of the debate, The Hackney Society and More Light More Power, claim they have invited the developers and Greater London Authority to share the platform and defend the scheme, but no one has yet been nominated.
The organisers are holding a rally at the earmarked site on Sunday 15 November, and are running a free exhibition, Bad Goods Yard, from 12-2pm daily from 12–30 November at St Leonard’s, Shoreditch.
Click here to register for the debate, taking place Monday 16 November at Shoreditch St Leonard’s Church, 7pm
Why does the journalist keep referring to this as a “debate” when it is organised by those who oppose it and there’s no-one from the pro side to counter. This is a rally not a debate.
as the developers have been invited and not bothered to respond it is hardly the “rally” organisers fault if no one turns up to put the other side
Sheer monstrosities by and for the mafia. London has become a money laundering machine for the mega rich of this world – stolen from its people and torn apart as a socio-cultural fabric. Londoners do not need these monstrous towers. They need decent and affordable housing, schools, and cultural centres – all on a socially fair and ecologically sound basis.
Simon – “fault” doesn’t come into it. It simply isn’t a “debate”.
What all this demonstrates is the need for a mayor of London who is sympathetic to the needs of ordinary Londoners for housibg they can afford. Not affordable housing – something else entirely.
“We need more homes!”
*Proposal to build 48-story residential tower*
“Not those homes!”
Ben – Nor is it a “rally” (a snide little word) since we seem to be picking up on nuances in language.It is interesting that the organisers have struggled to find anyone – apparently not even some of the architects associated with the scheme – will speak in favour.
Ryan – the scheme has been criticised as at present affordable (a misused term in itself) amounts to 0% and 10% (in boroughs that require more affordable homes). Given policy is in Tower Hamlets to try and achieve close to 50% affordable it clearly doesn’t meet policy goals. So, yes in one respect you are absolutely right, we don’t need more of “those homes” which are well catered for in every single new development across London.
Just stupid NIBYism. Then no home will be built! Shame on those selfish protesters!
The problem is that the flats being built are not going to provide homes for the people that need them, and despite this will make life worse for hundreds of people who have to live in their shadow. Its nothing to do with NIMBYism.
Both “mayors” are over-hyped. The first problem is the absence of any democratic audit of the two councils mentioned. The City of London Corporation is in less accountable. As for BoJo, he doesn’t care about democratic at all, as the Big Biz Media owners have been plying him with both cash and toxic oxygen of
lethal publicity. The London Assembly has not held Boris to any account at all. The same Assembly failed to call Ken Livingstone’s own bluff. So, the two “mayors” do not deserve the hype they have been given.
The threat that Big Biz Agenda extension via the Goodsyard represent as been being implemented right around that site and well into both Tower Hamlets and Hackney.
Neither Hackney councillors nor Tower Hamlets Councillors care.
Neither Council has even registered the assault taking place on both boroughs as any real debate in the Council.
Neither has Hackney nor Tower Hamlets got any sign of Economic Review of the area in place.
The inevitable way has been created for multi-faced cleansing of what used to be the East End of London.
In Newham, the “mayor” there has behaved just as had been predicted.
The answer therefore to the threat and the takeover is not to carry placards and promote slogans that do not bite: the only way the destruction of London can be halted is by taking strategic political ac ton that really threatens careers,. Say John Biggs. What will galvanise his attention to really use all the energy that he has saved in the past 15 years and apply it to stopping the Big Biz takeover?
On Saturday 22 June 2013, I filmed Biggs on the Big Biz takeover of the East End. He promised to reply to the Question if I wrote to him.
I did write to him.
Three weeks later I organised a “Future of the Community in the East End”organised Seminar in Commercial Street area. Biggs sent a token message but did not turn up. Luther Rahman, who was in situ, neither came nor sent a note.
A COMPREHENSIVE six point programme to protect the East End was sent to
Lutfur Rahman. No reply came forth. Nor has Biggs replied to the many Questions I put to him.
It is not Biggs who will defend the Community. It is those who can put his career at risk who will.
Same applies to individual MPs.
How many of the “supporters” of the Goodsyard are prepared to join the campaign to sink the careers of these careerists?
Both “mayors” are over-hyped. The first problem is the absence of any democratic audit of the two councils mentioned. The City of London Corporation is EVEN less accountable. As for BoJo, he doesn’t care about democratic audit at all, as the Big Biz Media owners have been plying him with both cash and toxic oxygen of lethal publicity.
The London Assembly has not held Boris to any account at all.
The same Assembly failed to call Ken Livingstone’s own bluff.
So, the two “mayors” (Tower Hamlets and Hackney) do not deserve the hype they have been given.
The threat that Big Biz Agenda extension via the Goodsyard represents has been being implemented right around that site and well into both Tower Hamlets and Hackney.
Neither Hackney councillors nor Tower Hamlets Councillors care.
Neither Council has even registered the assault taking place on both boroughs as any can be measured by any real debate in the Council.
Neither has Hackney nor Tower Hamlets got any sign of active and Socially necessary Economic Review of the area in place.
The inevitable way has been created for multi-faceted cleansing of what used to be the East End of London.
In Newham, the “mayor” there has behaved just as had been predicted.
The answer therefore to the threat and the takeover is not to carry placards and promote slogans that do not bite: the only way the destruction of London can be halted is by taking strategic political ac ton that really threatens careers,. Say John Biggs. What will galvanise his attention to really use all the energy that he has saved in the past 15 years and apply it to stopping the Big Biz takeover?
On Saturday 22 June 2013, I filmed Biggs on the Big Biz takeover of the East End. He promised to reply to the Questions if I wrote to him.
I did write to him.
Three weeks later I organised a “Future of the Community in the East End”organised Seminar in Commercial Street area.
Biggs sent a token message but did not turn up.
Luther Rahman, who was in situ, neither came nor sent a note.
A COMPREHENSIVE six point programme to protect the East End from Big Biz take-over was sent to Lutfur Rahman at the start of July 2013.
No reply came forth.
Nor has Biggs replied to the many Questions I put to him.
It is not Biggs who will defend the Community.
It is those who can put his career at risk who will.
The same applies to individual MPs.
And to whoever is seeking to get into Biggs’ spot at the London Assembly. Unmesh Desai’s “election” should be made conditional on his actual opposition to assaults like the Goodsyard one.
How many of current “supporters” of the Bishopsgate Goodsyard are prepared to join the campaign to sink the careers of these careerists?
0144 Hrs Tower Hamlets Saturday 15 November 2015
THIS IS MORE OF ASN UPDATER Comment since my last posting on your site in November 2015:
What is the “development” on the issue now at 2152 GMT Sunday 28 February 2016?
I only ask because Tower Hamlets Council has granted another planning permission for a sky scraper 67 storeys high in the Canary Wharf.
And as far as is publicly accessible, there is not a single word on any of that by ‘new mayor’ John Biggs.
Nor was there anything from the man at Shadwell last night (1700 Hrs GMT Saturday 27 February 2016) where Biggs appeared as “the mayor” and failed to address the issues concerning the Council’s role in letting the Big Biz Agenda get bolder and bolder by the day at the expense of the local Community.
The meeting was held under the cover of local concerns focussed on cycling route/s in Cable Street but ended up as being a platform that Biggs was allowed to use as a propaganda for him.
This was later confirmed by his being shown on SKY Channel 814 which did not refer to local concerns nor about the hazards of the Boris-route/s but gave a100% plug for Biggs and his “statutory” “deputy mayor” Sirajul Islam.
For context and evidence it is important to point out that in more than a decade at the GLA in the name of THREE Boroughs (or equivalents-, e.g. “City of London”) including Tower Hamlets, Biggs has NOT made a single London-wide impact statement about anything.
How awful is that!
How equally awful is that a statement about the “activists” who have regularly made appearances on “issues” and then have faded out of reference!
I am very concerned that Biggs is fronting the implementation by and via Tower Hamlets Council of the Big Biz Agenda for taking over the borough of Tower Hamlets.