Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance by muf architecture/art

Whitechapel

Public Realm & Open Space Guidance (WPROSG) September 2016

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Fenna Wagenaar / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

About this Study

Whitechapel Comprehensive Public Realm Plan

About the Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance (WPROSG)

muf architecture /art were commissioned as lead consultant working with J+L Gibbons (landscape designers), Civic Engineers (structural, civil and transport engineering), Robert Bevan (heritage consultant), Daisy Froud (engagement consultant) and Artelia (cost consultants) in November 2015 by the London Borough of Tower Hamlets (Whitechapel Vision Team), to undertake the work related to the creation of a new guidance for the Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space (WPROSG). This guidance was intended as the ‘next layer’ of design guidance to the Whitechapel Vision Masterplan Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) adopted in 2013, which identified the need for high quality, well functioning public realm and open spaces in the area. Given the scale and scope of significant change forecast for Whitechapel, and its already large (residential, academic and 2

working) population, it was important to commission a detailed and updated strategy for the public realm for Whitechapel to guide this change. The consideration of the public realm ‘beyond the plan’, is essential in this study so that the multiple influences shaping the area (whether Crossrail, QMUL, Civic Hub, residential developers) do so in a coherent way. Therefore, open spaces and public realm are not seen as a collection of isolated ground floor spaces, but as a bigger interconnected network, very closely related to its use and to what surrounds it. Put together by a multi-disciplinary team, this guidance looks at the many layers that affect the public realm in order to contribute to the flourishing of Whitechapel. These layers include: existing guidances, existing uses and communities, site history, historic assets, green infrastructure, biodiversity, micro-climate, movement, development to come, ownership, adjacencies, and the

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

complex negotiations that enable these to work together. The bespoke recommendations for the design of all public realm in Whitechapel set out in this guidance are intended as a strategic tool to help steer the Borough’s objectives through a state of great change. In turn, to support detailed urban design studies as the strategic and detailed proposals from developers and land owners come forward, we hope the WPROSG will provide useful and holistic guidance in the context of the existing masterplan, SPDs and the wider ‘placeshaping’ agenda in Whitechapel.

in key areas in Whitechapel – in terms of stakeholder engagement – this guidance is intended to begin a collaborative conversation about the future of Whitechapel’s public realm. It is only the opening of this new chapter in Whitechapel’s story. If you would like to be part of this conversation, please feel free to contact the team responsible for the creation of this guidance: the Tower Hamlets Whitechapel Vision Delivery Team (WVDT). They can be reached directly by phone on: 020 7364 3308 or by email at: whitechapel.vision@towerhamlets.gov.uk

Process, mapping and dialogue. As a starting point, key stakeholders were engaged through conversations for the research stage of this guidance. Key stakeholders and the general public will continue to be engaged via further conversations. In order to ensure a joinedup approach for the design of public realm

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

How to use this book Page 9: Baseline Study

Page 331: Key Projects

The Baseline Study brings together the initial study results for the development of the Comprehensive Public Realm Plan (CPRP) and can be read as the collated evidence for the further development of this guidance. Other documents might refer to the evidence in this book. The Baseline Study was first published in March 2016 and updated in September 2016 following the completion of the whole study.

This section contains the projects thought to be most critical to the immediate relief of pressure on the network of Whitechapel’s open spaces. They are all touching areas of imminent change and are seen as necessary to unlock key strategic spaces to make Whitechapel’s public realm more accesible, legible, appropriate and beautiful. They represent the necessary quick wins and an opportunity to demonstrate best practice and so have been set out in greater detail to ensure their respective successes.

Page 225: Principles The Comprehensive Public Realm Plan (CPRP) principles booklet sets out the strategic reasoning for the development of Whitechapel’s public realm. It describes the potential and need for public realm and how these could be developed and delivered. These principles form the basis for the projects listed in the Rolling List and mapped in the Project Matrix foldout and describe how and why these should be taken forward.

Page 295: Rolling List The Rolling List and Project Matrix foldout are part of the Comprehensive Public Realm Plan (CPRP) and together list and map the series of projects that are proposed to be taken forward. They categorise the projects by theme and by area, and list the rationale, description, estimated costs, owners, wider stakeholders and possible funding streams of each.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Foldout: Project Matrix

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

Glossary of key terms CPRP The part of the WPROSG that proposes a more detailed strategy to follow. KPT The Key Place Transformations (KPT’s) are six specific locations identified in the Masterplan. These are crucial to unlock the potential of the whole area as a ‘world class destination’, through a number of ‘transformational’ interventions specified in the Whitechapel Vision. The 6 KPT’s are: KPT1 Revitalising Whitechapel Road Supporting the town centre by making Whitechapel Road easier for pedestrian movement as part of a major public realm improvement scheme, including enhancement of the market. KPT2 New Civic Hub Bringing back the former Royal London Hospital building into civic use to improve the range of public services provided in the town centre, as well as opportunities to co-locate new employment, retail, office, cultural and community facilities. KPT3 Durward Street Gardens A new high quality urban quarter to enliven the area to the north of the new Crossrail station. It will provide new homes, retail, offices and public spaces, including modernising and redeveloping the leisure centre and building over the station and rail track. KPT4 Med City Campus Supporting the expansion of the health, bio-tech and life sciences research activities supported by new opportunities for higher density residential and mix of uses based around a new ‘Green Spine’. KPT5 Raven Row A new neighbourhood within Whitechapel centred on residential-led development

with improved links to the town centre and hospital, with supporting commercial uses. KPT6 Cambridge Heath Gateway Redevelopment of the Sainsbury’s site with a new larger store, residential and community facilities, including the potential relocation of the leisure centre. It is centred around a future secondary Crossrail entrance. LBTH The London Borough of Tower Hamlets (LBTH) has been the client for this piece of work and its predecessor the Whitechapel Vision Masterplan. LCWF Local Community Ward Forums (LCWF’s) are forums led by a key point of contact within LBTH, open to the public and meant to allow people to raise and discuss local services priorities and promote wider resident action. LDF The Local Development Framework (LDF) is the council’s planning guidance consisting of a series of documents that provide a positive approach to managing development by helping to assess planning applications and create a more vibrant, sustainable community and to improve quality of life for all. The Development Plan for Tower Hamlets is comprised of the London Plan (produced by the Mayor of London), Local Plan and Neighbourhood Plans (should any be adopted). OAPF Opportunity Areas are, by definition, places where change and growth can happen. The Opportunity Area Planning Framework allows for this growth to be planned for within a design framework to ensure certain parameters are followed and aspirations delivered.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

PTAL A TfL measure which rates locations by distance from frequent public transport services. RLH Royal London Hospital SED A measurement of Special Engineering Difficulty as set out by TfL. SPD A Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) is a document that supports, clarifies and/or illustrates by example planning policy statements and plans. SPD’s provide further detail to the policies in the London Plan, Local Plan and Neighbourhood Plans. SuDS Sustainable drainage systems (SuDS) are drainage solutions that provide an alternative to the direct channelling of surface water through networks of pipes and sewers to nearby watercourses. TfL Transport for London (TfL), agency responsible for keeping London roads moving, is a major landowner in the Whitechapel area with the A11 at the centre of the Whitechapel Vision Masterplan. TLRN TLRN (Transport for London Road Network) is the network of roads across London with strategic function that are managed and maintained by TfL. TPO A Tree Preservation Order (TPO) is an order made by a local planning authority to protect specific trees, groups of trees or woodlands in the interests of amenity. These prohibit the cutting down, topping, lopping, uprooting, wilful damage or

destruction of trees without the local planning authority’s written consent. TRA A Tenant and Resident Association (TRA) is a group of people in the same area who get together to look after their interests. WPROSG / Guidance The Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance (WPROSG) is the study commissioned at the end of 2015 by Tower Hamlets as the ‘next layer’ to the Whitechapel Vision Masterplan (WV) adopted in 2013. The study was written in the following 3 parts (printed as one book): 1 Baseline Study Report; 2 Comprehensive Public Realm Plan (CPRP): Principles, Rolling List and Foldout Map; 3 Comprehensive Public Realm Plan (CPRP): Key Projects. WV The Whitechapel Vision (WV) Masterplan is a Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) adopted by Tower Hamlets in 2013 to guide new development within the Whitechapel area up to 2028. The WV is a material consideration in the determination of planning applications, providing greater certainty for developers, registered providers, the local community and other key stakeholders. For more information, refer to the Whitechapel Regeneration Prospectus and the Whitechapel Masterplan, which can be found in the Tower Hamlets web page. www.towerhamlets.gov.uk/lgnl/ environment_and_planning/planning/ planning_guidance/consultation_and_ engagement/whitechapel_vision_spd.aspx WVDT Whitechapel Vision Delivery Team.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

Whitechapel Public Realm & Open Space Baseline Study Report March 2016

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Introduction to the Baseline Study

muf architecture/art J&L Gibbons Civic Robert Bevan Daisy Froud objectif Artelia

1.1 1.2

Public Realm – What is there? Public Realm – Opportunities and Emerging Themes

by muf architecture/art

2.1 2.2

Green Infrastructure – What is there? Green Infrastructure – Opportunities and Emerging Themes

for London Borough of Tower Hamlets

by J&L Gibbons

3.1 3.2

Movement – What is there? Movement – Opportunities and Emerging Themes

by Civic Engineers

4.1 4.2

Heritage – What is there? Heritage – Opportunities and Emerging Themes

by Robert Bevan

5.1 5.2

Community – What is there? Community – Opportunities and Emerging Themes

by Daisy Froud

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

83 93 113 119 145 167 183 189 207

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

Introduction

What is the Baseline Report? The Baseline Report pulls together the team’s first comprehensive (but not exhaustive) findings from a series of specific perspectives. It forms the evidence base for the Comprehensive Public Realm Plan (CPRP) that defines in principle and detail the Borough of Tower Hamlets’ strategic blueprint for Whitechapel’s open spaces. These documents are suggested to become a tool for planners, managers and case officers in steering the Borough’s clear objectives through a single conversation with developers, residents, local businesses and other stakeholders. This report offers a critical review and update of the parameters set out in the 2013 Whitechapel Vision by BDP, which set out a spatial ambition for the improvement of the existing urban environment in the context of imminent change. The CPRP aims to further develop its objectives and strategies for a more legible, easy to navigate and generous open space for all. 12

The Baseline Report also aims to highlight the opportunities and challenges of the wider area and ensure that change is made with a long-term view, addressing deficiencies and disjointedness with a comprehensive and coherent plan.

The Baseline Report, first drafted in March 2016 and revisited in September 2016, makes a revision of the current scenario within the Whitechapel Masterplan area looking not only at the policy and guidance available for any new development proposals but also at the opportunities and challenges related to the existing provision (or lack) of public realm.

Why is this important? Recent development and re-development proposals have demonstrated that the areas in which existing documents – such as the London Plan, City Fringe Opportunity Area Planning Framework (OAPF) adopted December 2015 and LBTH Conservation Area guidances’ – have fallen short in providing the guidance needed for the provision of new open spaces and the protection and improvement of the existing public realm. Due to this, the area has seen a number of large scale development proposals not taking sufficient notice of their neighbours and failing to imagine purposeful open spaces for the wider community. Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Public realm is as much figure as ground

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

a more holistic approach to health in which well-being is intimately linked to its immediate environment. Unfortunately the new building (by HOK, 2011) appears to have been designed from the inside-out and the spaces around it are disjointed and blighted by the effects of the hospital buildings themselves.

The London Hospital was built in 1752, triggering further building in the area with the development of its estate funding its work. Overlaying Perspectives The Historic Hamlets and Like a doctor examines his patient, establishing background, constitution, diet and personal history before deciding on treatment, this health report is laying Whitechapel on the table to evaluate how multiple objectives can achieve well designed and managed public spaces. Its aim is to support an urban renaissance, respond to and build upon existing initiatives and – where viable – guide them in promoting social inclusion and community cohesion to improve peoples’ health and wellbeing, while promoting a more sustainable development. For this, the Baseline Report starts by overlaying an analysis of existing (and planned) open spaces, green infrastructure, road engineering, history, community and existing guidances as a means to map the opportunities, constraints, ambitions and desires from a wide range of perspectives. 14

The overriding theme which comes out of this baseline review is that due to the complexity of existing and future density, the great potential of the confluence of civic amenity – whether town hall, market, hospital, university, schools, communal spaces within housing estates, parks or gardens – must be envisioned to be realised. This requires that every new development considers what it brings to the neighbourhood, beyond a schedule of accommodation, following a careful appraisal of the value of what already exists and of how the development can offer to support a strong foundation for wellbeing in the future.

The Royal London Hospital as key frontage to Whitechapel Road

Garden at The Royal London Hospital

The Royal London Hospital

The road which stretches from Essex into the City of London was once dotted with hamlets (shown in pale blue in the illustration in pages 12-13). Whitechapel was such a hamlet, which atypically developed not from a church or coaching inn, but around a large district hospital. Since its construction, the hospital has shaped the city and its economy around it. Initially, in the 1790s and 1820s, the area east and west of the road and south of the hospital was laid out as a grid of streets that grew as the hospital expanded with new wings, buildings and nurses’ homes built around ornamental gardens. When viewed as an arial photograph the sheer bulk of the hospital building looks like a city within a city. The clear boundary around the hospital, that shielded the institution from the city and everyday life, is today replaced by

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

The Royal London Hospital

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

1.1

Public Realm — What is there?

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

Existing Open Spaces Survey We have taken a wide definition for this overview of open spaces within the study area. These include open spaces and small parks managed by Tower Hamlets, streets, public realm and green spaces within estates and institutions such as schools, the hospital and university buildings. The list is not exhaustive – the networks of streets themselves are understood as spaces in themselves, intimately linked to the buildings, uses and spaces both along them and between them. Consideration of the over-use of existing spaces and the development to come, means that the recommendations to follow this baseline will include the streets as candidates to become sites of amenity provision. Some of the spaces are historic and their presence is evidence of how the area was originally laid out on a grid of streets and squares. Some are green spaces that emerged from a need,the result of active residential involvement, such as Spitalfields city farm which emerged as a community-led project in response to a loss of allotments to development. Other spaces were introduced as a result of the 1943 Abercrombie Plan for London to rectify the over-crowding and lack of local open space for the surrounding population. They include both parks and spaces within estates. These spaces today share a number of problems such as incomplete land acquisition, anomalous boundaries, poor natural surveillance, with houses backing onto parks, thin top soils, services such as sewers remaining under sites and no tree planting or ground modeling. Many of these spaces do not offer ‘value for space’ as they are bitty and not part of public routes or spaces. Today there is still much overcrowding and the existing open spaces are showing signs of stress. Although there is currently no planned loss of green space due to development, the scale of development 18

has its cumulative impact – shadows and an increase in population. This survey starts putting many of these spaces on the map so that we can start to identify: need and offer, space and lack of space, and opportunity and loss. It allows us to map where we think open spaces would be most beneficial to bring about a well-used, active and successful public realm that connects uses and enhances accessibility and legibility by making sense of what is there or almost already there. An increase in population and the role of schools Included in this record are the schools with their boundaries, playgrounds and routes to / from them. These places reflect the public realm of the under 16’s, a large percentage of the Whitechapel population. The school grounds and their fringes and surroundings are where parents and children meet and this therefore plays an important role in the community with a distinct timetable of regular use. In the study area we find many adjacencies where schools and parks sit alongside each other. It is here we find opportunities to create spatial overlaps between formal and informal learning. Where the school playground is the only open space, we suggest the streets could, where space permits, serve this extended role. This piece of work starts to map the existing amenities, opportunities and needs and begins to join the dots. It is a close grain exercise which will identify a street, its character(s) and its role to align an aggregate of small fragments of spaces. These bits can all play their part in accommodating the very real needs of the existing and wider area today, let alone the estimated doubling of population, in the future.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Intensification and the role of public realm and open spaces The GLA document Accommodating Growth in Town Centres 2014 gives little attention to the repercussions to and needs of open spaces and public realm. Given that this part of Tower Hamlets is currently over-stretched and will be more so with coming development and Crossrail, the pressure on open spaces will be intense. Within the study area there are examples where the combined provision of open space is greater than just the sum of its parts, such as the linked amenity of Allen Gardens, the Allen Gardens Playgroup, Spitalfields City Farm and Thomas Buxton School. In looking at new provision, beneficial adjacencies and overlaps should be considered to maximise ‘value for space’. Whitechapel is famous for its history, market and its diversity and culture. This is what makes it world class. The Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space guidance will pull these aspects to the surface even more to boost community cohesion and ensure that all areas and people can benefit from future investments or improvements.

Consultation Event On the 5th December 2015, the consultant team joined the client at an event held to support local businesses on Whitechapel Road. The team was able to speak to a wide variety of residents and market stallholders and have included their knowledge in the descriptions which follow. In short, it was made clear how important in particular the market is for residents and visitors, beyond its role in Whitechapel’s diverse retail offer. There were interesting conversations around what it would mean to include storage within the market stall positions themselves. The strain of living and working in a building site was described as draining the area’s energy. Disappointments were expressed about the quality of the spaces around the new hospital. People expressed the wish to be able to be more physically active. A general desire to get involved and to be engaged has been recorded. The consultation team found much interest in green spaces, trees, support for provision for children and generally a commitment to a shared public realm. These thoughts and other observations were considered for the mapping exercise in the next stages. The community and local stakeholders should hereby be strategically embedded to ensure that the opportunities that Crossrail and the redevelopment of Whitechapel Road bring, benefit visitors, patients, carers, the local community and businesses equally.

Consultation and consultation cards, 5th December 2015, Whitechapel Market

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

Existing Open Spaces Survey Open spaces within estates 100 Collingwood

Estate Estate 102 Sidney Street Estate 103 Chicksand Estate 110 Christchurch Estate 101 Cleveland

Historic open spaces Jewish Cemetery St Bartholomews Gardens 9 Trinity Green and Mile End Waste 12 Ford Square 13 Sidney Square 16 Jubilee Gardens 42 Vallance Gardens 46 Allen Gardens 2 5

Fringe open spaces and other gardens Globe Town Square of the Cell 56 Cavell Street Gardens 6

55 Centre

Boundaries to new civic buildings and housing development Philpot Street sidings Wallace Road 49 Tent Street Open Space 57 Durward Street 58 Future Hospital Square 58 Hospital Northern Facade 58 Mount Terrace Car Park 58 Microclimate around the Royal London Hospital 18

48 Railway

Formal parks 1 3

Weaver Fields Bethnal Green Gardens

City farms / productive landscapes 45 Spitalfields

City Farm 47 Nomadic Community Gardens Schools thresholds 36 Madani

Girls School Nazrul Primary 43 Osmani Primary School 44 Thomas Buxton Primary 51 Swanlea School Grounds 52 St Anne’s Catholic Primary School 59 John Smith Children’s Centre 37 Kobi

High Street 8

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Whitechapel Road

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

Existing Open Spaces Survey

Your thoughts on... Future hospital square 58

? Introduction

Currently, the use of parks and open spaces is intense and the overcrowding which exists in the area is evidenced by the worn out grass, clutter and litter. Whitechapel desperately needs spaces of respite and activity for the many workers, students, shoppers, commuters, families and young children that have to negotiate the use of the limited available space on a daily basis. With many new developments planned (3500 new homes to be built by 2025), efforts should be made to provide public spaces for the existing and future populations. In Whitechapel, the lack of funding for the maintenance of parks and open spaces is visible, and as development increases, so will the number of people without a garden. Yet, there does exist under-utilised public realm that could be consolidated as part of the investment coming to the area, while new opportunities to promote a culture of generous boundaries and shared spaces could be tested during this stage of change.

Whitechapel‘s open spaces are not easily characterised. They include historic garden squares, small parks, grassy expanses within modernist housing estates, inaccessible spaces inhabited only by birds and insects, public spaces with charitable governance, school playgrounds and two large parks created at the end of the Second World War as part of Abercrombie’s London Plan. The changing landscape of Whitechapel brings with it some potential new public landscapes, notably the linear green spaces of Philpot Street (Green Spine) and the spaces which are included in the Sainsbury’s development (Whitechapel Square). In addition to this, there are interesting conversations around open spaces associated with the Civic Hub given the history of the original London Hospital and it’s gardens and about the role of public realm as a site for learning.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

This could be demonstrated at the very heart of the area with the potential to have generous footways along both north and south sides of the Whitechapel Road, to hold the dual identity of market by day and a night economy after dark; the environs of the London Hospital and the Civic Hub; the requirements for the movement of traffic, bicycles and people. In the following pages we describe some of the existing parks and open spaces, which can be found in Whitechapel (within the masterplan area plus the only major parks in the vicinity that are located just outside it), showcasing their diversity. By consciously including the streets and building fringes in this survey we expect that both the current challenges and opportunities for the area’s public realm and open spaces are exposed so these can be further explored.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

Under-utilised spaces

Open spaces within estates

100 Collingwood Estate

View of the Chicksand Estate

This category includes the large areas of green spaces, sports pitches, playgrounds and paved paths within the large housing estate blocks in the area. These overlooked spaces hold the potential to become more active by being upgraded and by encouraging appropiation by use. Local residents and visitors alike would benefit from the increased sense of safety that could derive from occupation.

‘There is a big grassed area in front of Orion house that could become something more special as it’s directly in front of the community room. It seems a shame that is not used more.’ – Collingwood Estate resident.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

101 Cleveland Estate

This housing estate extends from Cambridge Heath Road to Brady Street, making it the biggest within the Whitechapel Masterplan area. Laid out as a typical Abercrombie estate with separated areas of public green space, its spacious ground floor is currently dominated by traffic and refuse and feels unwelcoming and neglected. The triangular hard landscaped area to its east provides some planters and bollards as the only places to sit. The inner blocks show their access galleries covered with washing, revealing the density and need for air and light. In between the blocks, there are two tarmac football pitches, a small play area for the under 4’s and many grassed areas with mature trees. As many of the routes / streets within the estate are dead-ends, they are not very well used by the wider public in the Whitechapel area.

The estate south-east of Cambridge Heath Road has many four storey blocks facing east / west in a spacious but disjointed landscape. The rigour of the orientation creates many triangular open spaces adjacent to the road, reflecting the layout and open space of the Collingwood Estate across it. The eleven-storey block to the north of the estate is raised from the ground, leaving a large, hard landscaped area as its access point. Within the estate, roads, parking spaces, pedestrian passages and chunks of communal but mainly inactive bits of grass, surround the blocks. A number of barriers, gates, bollards and planters have been placed to screen off vehicles from the pavements, resulting in a very disjointed and confusing landscape. According to the TH Homes officers, this is the estate that is most in need of improvements.

Key observations – Large areas used as car parking. – Lack of suitable street furniture. – Potential to be linked to St Bartholomew’s Gardens. – Disjointed landscape.

Key observations – Abundance of unused green and paved spaces. – Labyrinth-like arrangement of blocks with many barriers, gates and fencing along the pedestrian routes make moving around the estate difficult. – It has a well used multi-sports pitch and a small playground.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

102 Sidney Street

103 Chicksand Estate

110 Chirstchurch Estate

The Chicksand Estate is formed by a group of distinct blocks built at different times, from the 1970s to the 1990s. It’s positioned north of Whitechapel Road and west of Vallance Park. It offers the typical semipublic bits of open spaces that are hard to manage as they do not foster a sense of ownership. A large amount of fencing within and around the estate creates a sense of inaccessibility. Many of its large open spaces are currently underused. A recent report produced by ‘We Made That’, drafted a strategy to improve the open spaces of this estate with a series of sensitive interventions that included the introduction of rain gardens, the reduction of hard surfacing, an upgrade in lighting and material quality, and ‘welcome points’ to improve footfall through the estate and discourage antisocial behaviour.

The space around this group of housing blocks offers an open aspect opposite the entrance of Osmani Primary School. The green, tree-lined open space facing the road is fenced off as part of the estate’s collective space. The pavement and its railings on both sides of Vallance Road are evidence of the scarce space available to people moving to and from the school and the speed of the traffic. The triangular space in front of Lister House could offer some elbow room but at the moment remains fenced off. The space between the housing blocks holds parking spaces, a small playing area for under-4s and some areas of grass. The layout represents the disengaged grouping of open spaces unrelated to the wider public realm. The gated football pitch on Selby Street represents an opportunity to join up with other public spaces as it faces the street.

Estate

Ansell house, the block directly fronting onto Mile End Road, offers a green open strip to the road that directly faces one on the other side of the road. This establishes a valuable breathing moment amongst the density of the Whitechapel Road and its frontages. The estate continues behind Ansell House south of Lindsey Street, offering more of this inaccessible, fenced areas of collective grass. These do not relate to the public realm or to pedestrian routes, but do offer valuable space for trees and elbow room for the blocks. The former Sidney Street Library within this estate was identified as one of LBTH’s open spaces. Stepney Way on the other hand, is identified in the Tower Hamlets Green Grid 2010 strategy, as a green route towards Stepney Green Park. The fenced off area around the Old Artichoke Pub offers good opportunity to further establish this green route. The space between Colverton House and Wexford House holds a small playing area for under 4’s, more inaccessible grass and parking spaces. Lindsey Street has a row of spacious front gardens that are mostly looked after. This street, with parking to one side only, would be greatly affected by the Raven Row development. The estate around the Jubilee Gardens,

is a spaciously laid out group of 5 storey blocks. Within them are large open green spaces and little fenced off patches of green, with occasional flower beds. These green areas are well-kept, but are not intended for play. The two storey terraced housing to the north of Jubille Gardens have well-kept front gardens and the houses to the east, have private gardens. These seem well loved. The green zone to the south of Kerry House facing Sidney Street has beautiful mature trees but this is fenced off from the street. The houses have no private space on the ground floor but do have balconies above. Of the larger five storey blocks, the apartments have private parking spaces and again, the patches of green left over are well kept, but inactive. Key observations – Abundance of unused green and paved spaces. – Introverted and fragmented inaccessible areas.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Key observations – Adjacent to the Brady Arts & Community Centre. – Abundance of unused green and paved spaces. – Very well used as a thoroughfare for pedestrians and cyclists.

Key observations – MUGA at north entry to estate. – Big areas remain inaccessible with the pavements removed or broken. – Abundance of unused green and paved spaces.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

Spaces in need of celebration and care

Historic open spaces

2 Jewish Cemetery

View of Ford Square’s playground

This category includes some of the former burial grounds repurposed as parks, a few historic formal gardens and squares, a number green of spaces laid out after the war as part of the large-scale building of housing estates and two local productive landscapes. Some of these spaces are always busy and tensions between the multiple users have been arising due to the lack of alternative amenity space nearby. Others are very unique in their history or local amenity offer but are at risk of disappearing due to development or lack of proper maintenance.

is expanding and there is no playground for them now so I imagine this situation will just get worse.’ – Woman with young children speaking about using Ford Square.

‘The area is rich in history yet one can’t see it. These squares should be restored rather than used to play soccer on them.’ – Local resident on Ford and Sidney Square.

‘I love the gardens. There are two paths one can follow: one fast and one slow. After two whole circuits the baby is asleep. As I walk, I get to see all the different trees; it’s perfect.’ – Local resident who walks in Bethnal Green G.

‘You can’t use Ford Square during the day because of the schools. The teachers are there with their whistles and the kids are playing sports full-on. The school

‘This area now looks amazing, it used to be just a dump. I hope they are here to stay.’ – Local Resident talking about the Nomadic Community Gardens.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

This is a large open space which presents a brick wall and large tree canopies to Brady Street. A one off burial in 1990 ensured that this Jewish Cemetery cannot be developed until at least 2090. The cemetery dates back to just after the opening of the The Royal London Hospital. Access is by appointment only, which has helped to preserve the cemetery and this record of Jewish life in the East End. At the same time, as a large open plot it creates a breathing space rich in biodiversity and provides outlook to neighbouring buildings. Key observations – Inaccessible and thus preserved. – Rich in history and biodiversity. – Provides outlook and breathing space.

9 Trinity Green

and Mile End Waste

The Trinity Almshouses, designed by Sir William Ogbourne and completed in 1695, were intended for ‘28 decayed masters and commanders of ships or the widows of such.’ The development incorporated a chapel building around which the Almshouses grouped. These group of buildings, the first of its kind in the East End to be preserved, exist today as an early example of the benign provision of social dwellings common in the area. The high architectural quality and detail of the buildings add to the character of the street. Its small garden with facing rows of brick cottages and small chapel building at the end can be seen from the street. To Mile End Road, the facade of the almshouses is composed of two stone-dressed gable ends decorated with 2 miniature fiberglass ship models, copies of the original stone are kept in the Museum of London. Key observations – Historic green with several mature trees. – Shops and cafes face the green. – People walking over desire lines have damaged the grassed area. – It’s very quiet in comparison to the Whitechapel Market section of the A11. – Trinity Green is not accesible to the public.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

12 Ford Square

Ford Square lies at the eastern edge of the Ford Square Conservation Area. It is framed on 3 sides by early 19th century 3-storey terraced housing, amongst some Grade II listed. The design of the square once reflected the residential and formal character of the space. Currently, the square is subject to intensive use, and there is a lack of space provisions, which has compromised its heritage features. The edge of the square is lined with London planes. The square has a much used gravel play pitch and a seperate play area with a climbing frame, swings and spring rockers. Recently erected Bamboo fences protect the linear treepitch around the perimeter. The street furniture, including benches, bollards and fences are suggestive of the heritage standard of the conservation area. Key observations – Historic neighbourhood green. – Insufficient provision of street furniture. – Grass has been eroded by heavy use (used as a football pitch by nearby school students).

13 Sidney Square

46 Allen Gardens

Sidney Square lies on the eastern edge the Ford Square Conservation Area. Sidney Square divides the Sidney Street Estate into two parts: north and south. The quality of the streetscape, the surface materials, the street furniture and other features are all integral parts of the character of the Conservation Area. The open grassed area has no play equipment and is quieter than the nearby Ford Square, hence becoming highly frequented by homeless people and adults. The formal open space is surrounded by a linear planted shrub bed and mature trees. Integrated benches are aligned with the path around the rectangular formal grassed area in the middle. The hospital towers above the 19th century 3-storey terraces and the proposed Raven Row development would be visible from this square.

Allen Gardens is one of the green spaces laid out after the war as part of the largescale building of social housing in the area. It has open lawns and mature trees mainly limited to the perimeter. It has a leisure provision for a range of ages. Its playground has recently been re-equipped making it suitable for older children and active play. There is a TfL cycle dock to its south. Adjacent to it is the Spitalfields City Farm and Thomas Buxton School. This suite of spaces could be considered as a template for new developments, providing adjacencies between formal and informal learning. In the summer barbeques are popular. More recently Allen Gardens has become an extension of the night-time economy of Brick Lane. There have been concerns about late night crowds leaving behind the canisters of ‘legal highs’.

Key observations – Historic neighbourhood green. – Garden remains free of sports/play equipment. – Surrounded by a fence with tall hedging. – Neighbours have voiced concerns about anti-social behaviour.

Key observations – Heavily used as it remains one of the few green open spaces in a very densely populated area. – In close proximity to Brick Lane Market for which it gets used as picnick grounds. – Neighbours have voiced concerns about anti-social behaviour.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

Formal parks

1 Weaver Fields

City farms / productive landscapes

3 Bethnal Green

45 Spitalfields City Farm

Gardens

Your thoughts on...

47 Nomadic Community

nomadic community garden

Gardens

Key observations – It is the largest park in Bethnal Green measuring 15.6 acres. – It caters for many ages with its 3 full size football pitches with changing facilities, toddler play area, fitness trail, woodland walk, seats and bins. – Lighting and CCTV coverage. – Adjacent to Oxford House cultural centre.

These gardens give its name to the Bethnal Green Gardens Conservation Area, which gives the setting for listed buildings such as the old Town Hall, the V&A Museum of Childhood, St John’s Church and the Bethnal Green Library. The park provides relief from the busy Cambridge Heath and Bethnal Green Roads. The southern part contains 3 tennis courts and a large play area. There are further sports pitches in the middle for basketball, football, netball. There are public toilets. The northern part is occupied by a lawn with rose gardens, a quieter and more formal area with seating and a war memorial known as the Stairway To Heaven. Key observations – In between two busy roads. – Closes at dusk. – Good sports provision (booking for pitches in high demand).

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

This city farm is an example of an important local resource which is also perceived as a visitor attraction – commanding 4 stars on Tripadvisor. Situated on a former railway goods depot, the farm was started in 1978 in response to local people’s wishes to convert wasteland into allotments, having lost theirs to developers. Chickens, rabbits and geese populated the allotments. It has had charitable status since 1980. It includes gardens for wild flower and vegetable growing (the vegetables are sold) and farm animals. It has an important role for many of the local schools, having been designed as an outdoor classroom that children of all ages visit as part of their school day. Key observations – Important recreational and educative role in the area. – Adjacent to two schools and Allen Gardens.

This publicly accesible garden is run by a young organisation as a meanwhile use. They describe themselves as guardians of a privately owned space making it public while it is inert. It is located on Fleet Street Hill on the edge of our study area. The developers ‘London and Newcastle’ own the site and have planned a mixed-use scheme. The project could have a life beyond its limited time frame on a specific site, by being supported to move to different locations. It could be promoted as a template for other spaces awaiting development in the area. We recommend that the Active Spaces Framework or other LBTH initiatives are linked to this space.

Weavers Fields is bordered by Vallance Road to the west, Derbyshire Street to the north and Dunbridge Street to the south. It was first proposed as an 18 acre park necessitating extensive clearance in the Abercrombie Plan due to high levels of deprivation and density. In 1963 the first 5 acres were laid out which was slightly extended in 1965. It is simply laid out as grass with no ground modeling and trees generally linked to the perimeter. There is a day nursery within the park, an adventure playground that offers creative activities and active play, and a youth club.

Key observations – Meanwhile project. – Educative and cultural reach.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

Spaces with the potential to host multiple uses

Historic open spaces

16 Jubilee Gardens

View of the entry to the Osmani Primary School

This category includes some historic gardens, the high street, the routes to the local schools, and some of the fringe open spaces around existing housing estates and university buildings. These have been highlighted by users as in need of improvement, to mitigate the competition for space in between cars and pedestrians, the existing problems with accessibility and a poor sense of safety. With small scale interventions and a relatively modest investment, these could be improved to become safer and more accessible and would therefore be used more and perceived differently. The rich but hidden history of some of these spaces could be uncovered with design interventions, to enable a change of culture in terms of how they are currently used.

‘I usually use this park as it’s conveniently close. Sometimes it feels dangerous as you can see people doing or selling drugs. This problem has come to the point that the council has closed it a few times.’ – Local resident living by Jubilee Gardens.

‘Schools are starting to incorporate outdoor gardens and public space as most children in the borough don’t have access to a garden or a square. They seem ahead of the curve in recognising this.’ – Local resident.

‘There are no traces of its history left. There used to be a monument but when they did some works they didn’t replace it.’ – Local resident on Vallance Gardens.

This is a small formally laid out park, located between Jubilee Street and Sidney Street. Car parking dissociates this small park from Jubilee Street. The open space has areas of lawn and flower beds, a fenced hard children’s play area with swings and climbing frames, suitable for under 7’s. Jubilee Street Gardens is surrounded by 5-storey blocks and 2-storey terraced houses. Ball games and bicycles are prohibited. It is not locked at night. Key observations – It is open at night. – Provides play space for under 7’s. – Formal area with flower beds.

42 Vallance Gardens

The site was formerly a Quaker Burial Ground established in 1687, the last burial taking place in 1857. Laid-out as a public garden and re-opened in 1880, it was later named Vallance Road Recreation Ground. It appears in the LBTH’s Parks and Open Spaces list. It features an historic granite drinking fountain, grass, serpentine paths, mature plane trees, some rose beds and a children’s playground. In 2002, a new set of 2-storey housing blocks was built along three of its sides. A closed hedge obscures the view into the park from the southern Wodeham Street end. To the east side, the park is protected from the noise and business of Vallance Road by a low railing. Key observations – In close proximity to the Whitechapel station, the sports centre and to several schools. – History of site remains hidden except for historic water fountain, which remains on site. – Segregated playground lies within. – Neighbours have voiced concerns about anti-social behaviour.

‘The market used to sell fruits, vegetables and a lot of flowers. Nowadays, there are only cheap clothes and fruit bowls.’ – Resident living in the area for 40+ years.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

Schools’ thresholds

5 St Bartholomews

Gardens

Defined by LBTH as one of their publicly accessible parks and open spaces, this green space lies on the former burial grounds of St. Bartholomew’s Church. It opened to the public in 1885 and apart from one memorial there is no evidence of its former use. It has a single accessible slide on a gentle hillock. The Collingwood Children’s Centre is located within it, providing both informal surveillance and services to young children and their parents. The Centre has a rich program of activities that could perhaps, with support, be expanded into the garden.

36 Madani Girls School

37 Kopi Nazrul Primary

This is an independent girls’ school with 300 pupils between 11 and 18. It is housed in a C19th grade II listed school building. Its entrance is on a narrow footway and its playground is concealed behind a tall brick wall. The street outside contains a number of large and valuable Maidenhair trees.

This school is on Settle Street, which runs south from Fieldgate Street. The boundary of the footway is narrow and planted with beautiful mature Maidenhair trees. The school boundary is a brick wall with fenced opening, which reveals a garden behind.

Key observations – High walls plus a secondary line of fencing separate the school from the street. – Very narrow footpath directly in front of school’s gate.

Key observations – Internal spaces closed to the public. – No interaction with the street. – Good provision of open spaces and play facilities within the school.

Key observations – It is locked at night. – Rich history remains invisible. – Provides space and activity to young families.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

43 Osmani Primary School

44 Thomas Buxton Primary

Osmani Primary School is a larger than average-sized primary school located on Vallance Road, an important northsouth route. Its entrance sits adjacent the Osmani Centre, a community space with activities for young people and facilities for hire. As the footway widens and narrows alongside the boundary line of these two institutions there is an opportunity to improve the quality of the public realm for the benefit of both. There are familiar anxieties about making spaces where young people feel comfortable, but design can address this and accomodate for the daily routine of drop-off and collection; the age range of the children and young people using the centre; and the ambition on part of the school to engage parents better.

The school makes a green edge to Buxton Street with a planted fence which creates a green boundary. This peters out as it turns the corner north where the footway widens at the entrance to the school. Thomas Buxton has 460 children enrolled and an above average percentage of children on free school means. It has a variety of playground spaces with both hard and soft landscapes. The school regularly uses both Allen Gardens and the Spitalfields Farm as a resource; its curriculum emphasises healthy living, activities and food.

Key observations – The narrow footpath at the access point is entrapped between railings. – The green in front of the school is inaccessible. – Front the very busy Vallance Road.

Key observations – Close to Spitalfields City Farm an Allen Park. – Railings on both sides of the street, narrow footpaths. – Planted fencing as edge to street.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

51 Swanlea School

52 St Anne’s Catholic

Grounds

Primary School

Directly abutting the Jewish Cemetery are the school grounds of Swanlea School. These grounds are visible only through the metal gates covered with unpleasant anti-climb-guard. The open space around the school is further south off Brady Street where the swooping steel white portico leans over the small tarmac open space in front of the entrance. Some small planters hug the fence with small shrubs.

Directly south from Allen Gardens just across Buxton Street we find St. Anne’s Catholic Primary School. The pavements surrounding it are narrow. During the busy drop-off and pick-up times the road remains partially closed with bollards at the corner to Deal Street. The boundary treatment to the school is visually semipermeable with planted climbers along some edges and a clear line of sight at the entrance and around the main playground.

Key observations – Little external public space. – Many students use the street to walk after school, as the pavements are too narrow.

Key observations – Close to Spitalfields City Farm an Allen Park. – Railings on both sides of the street, narrow footpaths. – Planted fencing as edge to street.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

High street

8 Whitechapel Road

59 John Smith

Children’s Centre

This site holds the single-storey building housing a Sure-Start centre that caters for young families. The centre’s character is introverted, not giving much to the public realm. The entire perimeter of this block has fencing around it, seemingly to protect it from traffic and unwanted visitors. Directly south of the newly proposed Raven Row development, it will not suffer the impact of overshadowing, but its frontage and access area could offer immediate relief from the effects of such development. The centre presents itself with a perimeter of green fencing and its grounds are only accessible through the centre, weekdays between 9:00 and 17:00. On either side of the centre are small housing blocks with large parking areas. As the corner of Sidney Street and Stepney Way is fenced off, pedestrians find themselves fenced in on two sides. Traffic safety measures are indicative of the dominance of the car over the pedestrian.

Whitechapel Road has great significance in the development of East London, having been a major thoroughfare since the 12th century, forming a coach link to Europe via Harwich and built up as part of the suburban expansion of London from as early as the 16th century. It continues life today as a major movement route. An old Roman road and formerly the road from Essex into London, Whitechapel Road was to become more densely populated after the construction of the hospital. The market itself has been running continuously here for over 200 years. Today, the station, the extended hospital, local economy, the IDEA store and the market make this road a vibrant town centre. It is a place of huge significance for the local and wider community and with an international reputation. Women in particular use the market as a place to meet each other. However the speed and volume of traffic have worsened the divide between north and south. With the relocation of the hospital entrance, the south side of the road has lost much of its active frontage. Some investment has come to the market recently as part of the High Street

Key observations – Services families in the neighbourhood. – Shielded and safe playground for kids. – Discreet access point.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

2012 scheme which created spaces for sitting along its length, added new planting, introduced lighting columns and repaved the area. Problems due to the lack of storage, parking, insufficient bin provision and lack of public toilets remain to be resolved. Communication between stall holders and the local authority has not always been seen as productive and there are concerns that there is a lack of support for the market. The market will be affected by the changes associated with Crossrail and great care is required to protect it and enable it to flourish. Only in the evenings, when the market stalls are packed away, is the true scale of the street revealed. This suggests that, if it were better resourced, the high street could have a double life, making the area active also after dark. Key observations – High traffic (vehicular, cycles, pedestrian). – Few formal crossings make people cross at risk all along the road. – The market gives it back to the road making it look dirty and messy. – The market is a local asset.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

Fringe open spaces and other gardens

6 Globe Town Square

This open, hard-landscaped space is located at the fringe of two estates: the Collingwood and Cleveland estates. It features a few mature trees, greenery inside brick planters and an arrangement of east and south facing benches. The square receives direct sunlight most of the day but is in close proximity to two busy roads which makes it noisy and polluted. Key observations – Directly in front of a busy road. – Always open. – The layout of benches and planters doesn’t lend itself to social interaction.

55 Centre of the Cell

56 Cavell Street Gardens

Since Centre of the Cell opened in 2009, around 60,000 visitors have taken part in ground-breaking educational programmes. Designed as a children’s science education centre within a working research laboratory in London, it is set up to allow the public and visiting schools to participate in activities to encounter science. However, compared to its bubbly interior, the open space in between the buildings remains unappealing. There is an opportunity to create a learn and play space that attracts and inspires visiting and local children and passers-by alike.

Included in LBTH’s parks and open space list, this linear green space runs along Cavell Street facing south and is separated by a single block from Ford Square. It has mature trees, hard landscaping and a small lawn with railings and shrubs along the street. The gardens are overlooked by residential buildings on one side and commercial units on the Cavell Street side.

Key observations -L arge hard surfaced area remains unused. - Basement below. -O pportunity to activate with a storable (overnight) science play kit, seating or planting. - The neighbours have expressed interest in contributing to the maintenance of trees on pots to enliven the square.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Key observations – It is locked at night. – Not very well used except for homeless people that store their bags on it during the day. – Could be better used by the neighbouring Islamic school that runs on weekday late afternoons and weekends.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

Open spaces to come

Boundaries to new civic buildings and housing development 18 Philpot Street

View of the waiting rooms to the back of the Royal London Hospital

This category refers to the open spaces related to planned development. As the Whitechapel Vision Masterplan gives way to the creation of 3,500 more housing units, the improvements related to the relocation of the Town Hall, the expansion of the medical campus and the arrival of Crossrail to the area, it is important to keep an eye on the proposed designs for the public realm and buildings that surround it to make sure the area as a whole benefits from the change to come.

‘These arches hold all garages now, but, you know, as the rent is going to increase they will become all wine bars.’ – Local resident showing us around the Railway Sidings on Wallace Road.

‘It’s not amazing but you have all you need to do some sports. I come to meets friends and stay fit. Outdoor spaces to do sports in the area would be great.’ – Local resident on the Whitechapel Sports Centre.

‘It’s glossy and new and kind of pretty, but what really matters are the services it offers. The spaces around it seem neglected, though, you would not expect this of an institution that is all about getting better.’

This sequence of open spaces forms part of the Whitechapel Vision as a ‘Green Spine’ that connects different parts of the neighbourhood. Its northern section is part of the London Hospital Conservation Area. The large green space is flanked by the brick nurses’ house with a small arcade. The area between Ashfield and Varden street is pedestrianised and contains an important piece of green relief space for people working in the hospital. On its west side are early 19th century Georgian terraces with small front gardens. With the addition of bricked planters, grassed tree pits, concrete pebbledash planters, bollards and a wide selection of cycle parking along this frontage, the landscape has become more arbitrary. Shrubs and grass, hedges and a mismatch of street clutter, including many purple refuse containers, detract from the character of this potentially great space fronted by buildings with real quality. The historical and present day

association with the hospital facilities surrounding this space make it all the more important. The London Hospital site has been the scene of continuous change in response to evolving healthcare needs and provision of services including the most recent redevelopment of the Hospital. To its south side, bordered by a brick wall, the open space changes into the tree lined Philpot Street with its social housing and perpendicular parking on both sides. The southern end of the street has a TfL cycle dock. Key observations – Pedestrian only green area leading to the hospital. – Seems fragmented in terms of design. – As it lies hidden behind walls or buildings people use it to dispose of litter.

– Local resident talking about the Royal London Hospital.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

48 Railway sidings

Wallace Road

Your thoughts on...

57 Durward Street

49 Tent Street Open Scott street open space

Space

This space, situated just behind a small playground part of Northesk House, holds at the moment a vehicle recovery business and secure store for cars.

This TfL owned green strip of land facing the rail corridor remains inaccessible to the public showing some overgrown self-seeded vegetation, which can be see through the palisade fencing that encloses it. Together they might contain the opportunity to create the east-west green link which is so badly missing in the area north of Whitechapel Road.

Key observations – Innaccesible to general public. – Constant entry and exit of heavy vehicles. – Vegetation-rich.

Key observations – Inaccessible plot of land. – Strategic position for the regeneration of the area as a west-east link could be created.

Durward Street houses the northern exit to Whitechapel Station and will be upgraded with the arrival of Crossrail. As per the Whitechapel Vision, it is envisaged that this area will become more pedestrian friendly. Whitechapel Sports Centre faces the exit and touches the rear gardens of Castlemain, the dead end of Trayhorn Close and the rail corridor. The centre does not reveal its sporty programme to the street and is by nature and position inward facing. Key observations – At the moment space is fenced off during construction. – Plans have been prepared by Crossrail for a new public square. – Opportunity to make sports centre more visible.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

Your thoughts on...

58 Future Hospital

58 Hospital Northern

Future hospital square

58 Mount Terrace

58 Microclimate around

Facade

Car Park

the Royal London Hospital

The future hospital square has been planned as the public space accompanying the relocation of the town hall ‘Civic Hub’ to the old hospital, with the potential to be one of the most significant civic spaces for London in the next decade. It sits between the future town hall and hospital and has the potential to host activities related to both. It is an opportunity to make an exemplary space that demonstrates how a playable landscape, spaces of wellbeing, sustainable urban drainage, biodiversity and multi-use host spaces for diverse activities can be realised. As it can be seen in the heritage section of this report, there is the potential to consider the role that other elements of the hospital site could contribute to the shared amenities of the area. One example of this is the former outpatients building. The size of a traditional covered market, it could become an extraordinary venue to almost double the provision of civic space in the area. The future hospital square has the potential to be well connected and to contribute to the LBTH Green Grid network.

This façade is Grade II listed and is an imposing feature along the Whitechapel Road, representing a good example of Georgian and Victorian classical architecture. Its gilded sign is iconic and an important element for wayfinding, given the new hospital building entrance is hidden. Although the London Hospital Conservation Area is defined by a hard building edge and does not currently contain any significant open space, the perimeter condition is important. The railings that run continuously along its length (interrupted by the entrance portico), and the strip of land behind the railings and the hard landscaped area (used as parking) to the west corner of the hospital, are all important in defining the pedestrian experience of this urban environment. Historically, the site did have important open spaces within it, and the restitution of any green space would reinforce the area’s character as one historically used for recovery and the promotion of well-being.

Today a car park – in the time of the construction of the London Hospital a significant mount with trees – this corner of Whitechapel road offers the last bit of sunny open space and a potential relieve from the busy road. In 1790 it was agreed that the City would, at its own expense, take down the Mount and cart it away. Once the Whitechapel Mount was gone, its location was marked by the streets which were built upon the site, Mount Place, Mount Terrace and Mount Street. The houses in one of these rows still stand, showing the City Arms on their south walls. The Old Mount, once such a familiar feature of the East London scene, can still be traced in the slightly rising ground east of the north end of New Road and in Mount Terrace. Today the place could mark the entrance to the Queen Mary University Campus or be restituted as a green space.

With the completion of the new buildings of the Royal London Hospital in 2011, the climate and atmosphere of its fringes have been severely impacted. Cavell Street is overshadowed and feels much cooler now that the new Hospital’s tall slabs overshadow the surface. The towers have also created a wind-tunnel that sucks and blows debris from Whitechapel Market, disposing it in the lewths of the street, as can be seen in the Mission’s fenced off loading dock and surrounding parking areas.

Key observations – Unfinished look due to hoardings. – Ambulances / drop-off vehicles crossings. – Visitors like to sit on the few sunny spots by the hoarding.

Key observations – Grade II Listed. – Edge of a conservation area. – Railing and parking are opportunities for introducing greening.

Square

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Key observations – Shaded and cool. – Wind tunnel fills are with litter. – Most of the fringe areas around the hospital are hard-surfaced.

Key observations – Elevated from street level. – Currenlty used as parking. – Surrounded by a railing and the back of a row of historic terraced houses.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

Change to come and cumulative impact In addition to the consideration given to the extent and qualities of the existing public realm and open space around Whitechapel, it is important to note the extent of change expected to come to the area and its cumulative impact on the surrounding environments. The following pages show a 3D study that shows the existing conditions and the future landscape if the major proposed developments were built out as described in their planning applications (as per September 2016). This study is valuable in drawing conclusions as to where we should plan for spaces to sit, relax, plant trees and lay turf. The north side of Whitechapel Road has good aspect. The areas to the north and east of the hospital less so. These will be cooler and less likely candidates for successful and valuable open space. Many spaces already suffer from wind turbulence and with additional high-rise development this will become a greater issue unless microclimate is properly addressed at street level.

Whitechapel Masterplan area shadow study (showing cumulative impact of existing conditions)

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

South of the Whitechapel Road

North of the Whitechapel Road

Modelling the cumulative effect of only two of the major proposed developments south of the Whitechapel Road (Cavell Street and L&Q developments) already gives us an impression of the impact that tall buildings will have on the surrounding environment.

Shadows are significantly larger in the winter time, when it is cold. Modelling the volume of the buildings proposed north from the Whitechapel Road, questions emerge as to whether trees proposed in the Sainsbury’s development proposal will get enough sun and how the communal spaces of the Collingwood Estate will fare under the proposed overshadowing. Could these effects be mitigated?

Our study shows that if / when these two developments are built, Cavell Street will remain dark most of the day, bringing into sharp relief the questions around the credibility of a quality open space replacing the Mission Site as shown in the Masterplan.

We recommend similar studies are used as more development proposals come forward to ascertain their impact on the surrounding Whitechapel environment.

Open space provision could be improved instead by finding a space for the desired public square south of these developments, where it would remain bathed by natural light. A public space in this location would improve at the same time the currently tight access to John Smith Children’s Centre.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

Image from the 3D model showing the existing hospital (in pale blue), the L&Q and Cavell Street proposed developments (in dark blue) adjacent to it and the Sainsbury’s proposed development to the North of the High Street (shown in purple).

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

Whitechapel is going up – current development proposals 18 13 17 16

15 9 8

9 19 6

3 2 1

01 Pedley Street and Repton Street PA/12/02228 – approved

07 Whitechapel Crossrail Station PA/16/00338 – in planning

13 Cavell Street PA/16/00784/A1 – in planning

18 Jubilee Estate PA/16/02296 – in planning

02 Fakruddin Street PA/16/01012 – in planning

08 Sainsbury Foodstore PA/15/00837/A1 – in planning

14 L&Q Safestore a. PA/16/00670 (demolition) – in planning

19 Tyler-Parkes PA/16/00929 – in planning

03 Vallance Road and Hemming Street PA/15/01231 – in planning

09 Barts and The London PA/15/02774 – in planning

b. PA/15/01789/B1 (redevelopment) – in planning

20 105-107 Fieldgate Street PA/16/01945/A1 – in planning

04 59A-63 Cudworth Street PA/16/02251 – in planning

10 The Good Samaritan PA/16/00988 – in planning

15 London Newcastle PA/15/02959 – in planning

21 Empire House – New Road PA/14/00754 – approved

05 35-39 Buckhurst Street PA/16/00356 – in planning

11 Temporary Staff car parking PA/15/02987 – in planning

16 London Islamic School and Mosque PA/16/02142 – in planning

06 Whitechapel Crossrail PA/16/00692 – in planning

12 Post Office PA/16/02287 – in planning

17 22 Cavell Street PA/16/01682 – in planning

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Note: Information updated as per September 2016.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

1 2

6 7 12

14 9 13 11

01 Repton and Pedley

02 Fakruddin Street Carpark Development

PA/12/02228 – approved

PA/16/01012 – in planning

Car free development (2 to 7 storeys) of 63 units providing: – 100% affordable housing (72% social rent, 28% Shared Ownership); – Shared amenity space of 105 sqm; – Private amenity space of 363+61 sqm for a total of 1336 sqm inc. balconies; – 6 no. disabled parking spaces; – 93no. cycle parking; – Children play area of 537 sqm; – Community centre of 349 sqm.

Development over existing car park and unused linear strip of land providing: – Gardeners’ club facilities of 40 sqm; – 11no. cycle parking spaces; – 1 x 4 bed house; – 3 x 3 bed houses; – 1 x wheelchair accessible maisonette; – 1 x commercial unit of 52 sqm; – A new crossing on Vallance Road; – A garden extension for the neighbouring properties at 1-5 Fakruddin St. (from 237 to 315 sqm).

15 16 18

20 17

All images in this section by the different design teams involved. Sourced from the planning portal development.towerhamlets.gov.uk/online-applications

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

03 120 Vallance Road & 2-4 Hemming Street

04 59 Cudworth Street

05 35-39 Buckhurst Street

PA/15/01231 – in planning

PA/16/02251 – in planning

PA/16/00356 – in planning

Demolition of existing warehouses and erection of two buildings providing: – 1,311 sqm of commercial space; – 144 residential units (65% market value, 35% affordable rent) of which: – 107 are private (12 wheelchair) – 37 are affordable (5 wheelchair) – 2no. disabled car parking spaces; – 224no. cycle parking spaces; – Communal amenity areas for a total of 517 sqm; – Private amenity areas for a total of 411 sqm (excluding balconies/terraces); – Brown roof of 750 sqm (with photo voltaic panels); – New public realm of 1310 sqm (including road surfaces).

Provision of 4 new flats on top of existing development providing: – 2 x 1 bed and 2 x 3 bed new built flats; – 23 sqm of private amenity spaces;

Provision of 3 additional flats over two additional stories over existing building providing: – 1 x 1 bed, 1 x 2 bed, 1 x studio; – 15 sqm of additional private amenity. (no proposed shared amenity space).

06 Whitechapel Crossrail station (public realm) PA/16/00692 – in planning

* This site was included in a previous PA: PA/07/03276: erection of a five storey building to provide 10 residential flats (5 x one-bedroom, 3 x two-bedroom and 2 x three-bedroom) with communal roof garden, refuse and cycle storage.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Redevelopment around new Crossrail station providing: – New public realm around new station’s entry with grassed areas with semimature trees, benches, improved lighting and york stone pavements; – 80no. cycle parking spaces; – Dedicated residential (5no.), disabled (2no.) and service parking (1no.) bays.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

07 Whitechapel Crossrail Station

08 Sainsbury’s

09 Royal London Hospital

10 87 Turner Street

PA/16/00338 – in planning

PA/15/00837/A1 – in planning

PA/15/02774 – in planning

PA/16/00988 – in planning

Detailed proposal for the finishes to Crossrail’s new station buildings.

Demolition of the existing store and decked car park to allow for a replacement Sainsbury’s store and new housing development on top providing: – 5,766 sqm of commercial space for the renewed shop; – 559 new residential units arranged in 8 blocks and including a 28 storeys tower; – energy centre and plant of 2,509 sqm GIA – 240 ‘retail’ car parking spaces; – 40 disabled car parking spaces for use by the proposed residential units.

Retention of temporary car park. Extension of permit for a further 2 years period.

Refurbishment of existing public house to allow the use of the upper stories as four residential units.

The graphic pattern detail discharges a condition of the previously approved planning application no. PA/11/01215 for the erection of a new station on Durward Street and parts of the parking place of the Whitechapel Sports Centre. A separate planning application PA/11/01216 allowed for the demolition and excavation necessary to enable the rest of the works as well as for the erection of a temporary ticket hall.

Original aplication PA/09/02608 included a temporary restaurant.

2 additional disabled units are proposed at ground floor level at Merceron Street. The creation of an east-west public realm route from Cambridge Heath Road to Brady Street, including further public realm provision and associated highway works to Brady Street, Merceron Street, Darling Row, Collingwood Street and Cambridge Heath Road.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

11 Royal London Hospital Temporary car park PA/15/02987 – in planning Application to use 2no. empty plots of land as temporary car parking up to the end of 2017 providing:

12 Whitechapel Post Office

13 100-136 Cavell Street

14 L&Q Safestore

PA/16/02287 – in planning

PA/16/00784/A1 – in planning

Change of use of ground floor space from a sui-generis class use to B1 (office space).

Demolition of existing building and erection of two buildings of 8 and 24 stories respectively providing: – 4,893 sqm of non-residential floor space (flexible commercial / retail / community use) at ground floor level and office space above ground floor level; -113 residential units; – Landscaped public space of 558 sqm; – Private amenity space of 959 sqm; – Communal amenity space of 315 sqm; – Children play area of 168 sqm; – Cycle parking.

a. PA/16/00670 – in planning with Committee approval 24 August

– 114 staff car parking spaces.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Demolition of existing buildings holding: – 150 car parking spaces; – 19,180 sqm of storage space; – 4,700 sqm of assembly and leisure space. b. PA/15/01789/B1 – in planning with Committee approval 24 August Erection of 3 housing blocks of 4 to 25 stories providing: – 564 residential units; – Commercial floor space; – 70 off-street car parking spaces; – Communal courtyards; – New landscaped areas; – Children play area of 1740 sqm; – Communal amenity space of 815 sqm.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

15 London Newcastle

16 London Islamic School and Mosque

17 22 Cavell Street

18 Jubilee Street

PA/15/02959 – in planning

PA/16/02142 – in planning

PA/16/01682 – in planning

PA/16/02296 – in planning

Demolition of all existing buildings and erection of 12 new buildings ranging from 2 to 23 stories providing: – 343 residential dwellings of which 26,6% are to be affordable; – 168 specialist accommodation; – Office and non-residential floorspace; – Car parking; – Cycle parking; – New public open space with hard and soft landscaping of 2802 sqm (including 510 sqm of communal amenity space and 645 sqm as play space).

Submission of details persuent to condition number 26 (lighting) of previous planning application.

Application for variation of condition to amalgamate two business units to create one measuring 142 sqm in relation to the approved planning application number PA/07/1794.

Removal of existing car park (26 parking spaces) and erection of new 5, 6 and 7 storey building providing: – A car free development of 24 dwellings of 100% affordable rent; – 2 disabled car parking spaces; – 44 cycle parking spaces; – New vehicular access from Jubilee Street and conversion of Jubilee Gardens into a one way road, relocation of the existing bus stop and the removal of parking spaces on Jubilee Street.

PA/12/00133 – approved. Erection of an additional storey to the existing building and associated works to provide new classrooms (for up to 900 people), additional male prayer area and new ladies prayer hall including ablutions facilities.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

PA/07/1794 – approved Erection of six storey building, plus plant room, to provide two business units to the ground floor and nine flats.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

19 100 Whitechapel Road

20 105-107 Fieldgate Street

21 Empire House – New Road

PA/16/00929 – in planning

PA/16/01945/A1 – in planning

PA/14/00754 – approved

Submission of details pursuant to condition no. 12 (contaminated land) related to the planning application number PA/13/01168.

Change of use from Job Centre Plus (A2) to Office (B1a), along with the erection of a 4 storey rear extension of 455 sqm.

Extension at roof level for additional office space of 155sqm, a roof terrace and plant room of 26sqm to the rear of the existing building. Application includes the restoration of existing building’s facade.

It includes the provision of 4 car parking spaces (1 for disabled users). PA/13/01168 – approved Extension and alterations to existing hotel to provide 119 additional bedrooms, together with extension and change of use of part of existing ground floor car showroom to flexible retail and/or commercial uses.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

The Mission Site – a Key Space in the Whitechapel Vision

Mission site – plan as existing

Background As part of this baseline study, the team looked closely at one of the Masterplan’s proposed Key Place Transformations (KPT’s), or ‘key’ locations holding the potential to unlock the desired transformation of the area. The Mission Site sits within the KPT5 ‘Raven Row’, envisaged as a new neighbourhood to be created by the addition of extensive residential developments and improved links to the town centre and hospital. The site under consideration was put forward in the Vision as a new public space, made possible by the complete or partial demolition of The Whitechapel Mission. The Whitechapel Mission is a charity that provides support for homeless people

and those who are socially isolated, continuing a 150-year long history of people being helped on this site. For them, the Mission is a place to eat, get warm, have a shower and socialise, but also to be supported to find permanent accommodation. In 2015, the Whitechapel Mission helped over 5000 people.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Mission site – from Whitechapel Road

Mission site – looking south from Maples Place

Mission site – from Raven Row

Mission site – looking south from Cavell Street

An assessment of the feasibility for the relocation of this institution to give way to the envisaged public square on its site, has led us to consider a number of alternative options to more efficiently provide for the desired open space. These, together with their rationales and implications, are described in the following pages. This exercise has brought attention to the need to refine the Masterplan’s proposals as the broad strokes of the Vision are developed into detailed designs.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

The Mission Site as counterpoint to new developments

Mission site – wind tunnel effect: The wind hitting a flat-fronted skyscraper is directed down the building creating a windier and colder microclimate in the surrounding area. Mission site – location

The scale of the proposed developments is brought into sharp relief when seen in tandem with the Mission building (shown in yellow). The great scale contrast between the proposed developments and the Mission is striking. The Whitechapel Vision proposed one scenario of demolishing the Mission building to create a public space adjacent to the Whitechapel Road and redistributing its accommodation. Further analysis of the qualities of the proposed public space showed that the location would not have been favourable due to the shadowing and wind currents resulting from the proposed developments to the south. Adding to that, given the importance of the services the Mission provides for the community, it was noted 72

that it would not only be difficult but undesirable to relocate its uses. In Whitechapel, civic functions have their presence on the High Street itself and so the Mission takes its place alongside the post office, the underground station, the Idea Store, the GP clinic, the hospital and soon the Town Hall and its offices. In the longer term, there might be an interest in the redistribution of the uses at the southernmost section of the site, but it is worth noting that it would be for a negligible gain. Instead, we propose that the quick win of enhancing its perimeter, coupled with a redistribution of the pavement along Cavell Street is explored.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Site characteristics The site is approximately 0.14 ha. It is bound by Whitechapel Road to the north, Maples Place to the east, Raven Row to the south and Cavell Street to the west. The various uses on the site include:

– 3 x ground floor retail units (fronting Whitechapel Road) – approximately 178 sqm with a secure lease until 2024 (according to property title); – 1 x Mission site ‘soup kitchen’ split over two levels and consisting of a dining room, male and female toilets, conference room and some office space (approximately 662 sqm); – Approximately 290 sqm of accommodation comprising 13 nurses homes rented at social rent levels which are located at the rear of the site on Raven Row, over 3 levels; – 8 car parking spaces and 5 bicycle spaces at the rear of the site (ground floor).

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

The Mission Site – OptionMasterplan one: Complete relocation of Mission Illustrative Interventions for Raven Row D ROA L E AP

H ITEC

EN RAV

W RO

18b

Royal 19a Mail site

ET Mission site – plan with existing buildings and shadows

REET

Option 1 Whitechapel Vision, Open Space

L&Q site 18c

Y STRE

Mission site – plan as shown on Whitechapel Vision

CAVELL ST

19b

NEW ROYAL LONDON HOSPITAL

SIDNE

18a Cavell St. site

Mission site – plan with proposed buildings and shadows

Analysis

Description: Objectives / justification: Mission building demolished. Relocation – To provide ‘breathing space’ for new and WAY STEPNEY of all of its functions to an alternative existing developments in the area. location (to be found). Rebuilding of the – To mitigate the overuse of Ford Square nurses flats in an adjacent development. and Cavell Street open spaces. Creation of a well designed activeLondon open Borough Figure 28 ©high Crown copyright and database rights 2013 Ordnance Survey, – To ensure quality public realm for space to improve the area’s permeability, the town centre and draw people into of Tower Hamlets 100019288 resulting in ease of pedestrian movement the area. and better access to local amenity via the – To provide better permeability between creation of new north-south links through key sites/precincts and Whitechapel to Whitechapel Road. Road. – To provide a potential location for the expansion of the market with a weekly Consideration to be given to its design, specialty market. materials, street furniture, trees and – To improve some of the perceived recreational use, anticipating both negative aspects of the current building the future look, feel and usability of such as the blank walls and back Whitechapel Road as a new place and the undercroft (to Raven Row). emerging proposals for the surrounding – To address the stigma sometimes developments (L&Q on Raven Row, Flick associated with serving the homeless site on Cavell Street and Royal Mail depot population at this location. building at the corner of both streets).

Reservations: – The volumetric studies show that most of the area of any new square would be in shadow even at the height of summer. This would make the space cooler and less pleasant than, for instance, Whitechapel Road or many of the existing nearby open spaces. – The area is currently windy due to the effect of the hospital development. Further developments planned on the Royal Mail Site and to the south will only exacerbate this effect. The effects of both wind and shadow will make this a challenging space for any planting to flourish. – The air quality is poor. At circa 30 times the recommended levels of pollutants, it is not suitable for play or sports. – It seems hard to argue that a CPO of the Whitechapel Mission would be for public betterment.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

– Given the services the mission offers and the history of doing so in this location, there is a likelihood that the homeless will continue to gather here as their habits of use have become embedded in the space. – The high costs involved with this option do not represent value for money compared to alternative options. – The difficulties around relocating the Mission to another nearby location. – The replacement of the nurses homes, with secured tenancies and large in size, would need to be secured alongside the percentage of affordable homes. – The loss of an historic philantropic asset with a 150 year history.

The Mission Site – OptionMasterplan two: Partial relocation of Mission Illustrative Interventions for Raven Row EL HAP

ITEC

D ROA

EN RAV

W RO

18b

Royal 19a Mail site

ET Mission site – plan with existing buildings and shadows

REET

Option 2 Relocating most of the existing uses

L&Q site 18c

Y STRE

Mission Site – plan describing option 2 NEW ROYAL

CAVELL ST

19b

LONDON HOSPITAL

SIDNE

18a Cavell St. site

Analysis

Objectives / justification: Description: – A high quality public realm behind the Retention of high street frontage including STEPNEY WAY retail units with active frontages that ground floor retail premises with offices respond effectively to functions within and accommodation above plus the creation the public realm and ensure enhanced of a new public open / civic space to the Figure 28 © Crown copyright and databaserear. rights 2013 Ordnance Survey, London Borough permeability through to Whitechapel The new open space to be provided ofRoad. Tower Hamlets 100019288 at the rear of the site and north of Raven – To refurbish the two retail facilities Row should be of reasonable scale. (approximately 178 sqm of existing Consideration of all potential servicing ground floor space) and reposition requirements should be included in them on the high street with potential this option. development above. – To relocate the remaining functions This option should take into consideration of the Mission site comprising the finding complimentary open space in the community service facility ‘soup kitchen’, developments to the south and east of the including the workshop space on the Mission Site, and avoiding the creation first floor (approximately 662 sqm over of a tight clustering of tall buildings around 2 levels), the existing accommodation this newly found public realm. (approximately 3,144 sqm over 3 levels) and the car parking.

Mission site – plan with proposed buildings / shadows and possible locations of surrounding developments’ open spaces

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

– A smaller open space being created, this is a better-protected piece of public realm but with low amenity value due to size and overshadowing. – Most of the activities of the Mission would be curtailed, as there is little appetite by local developers to service the homeless. – Given the current climate, it is unlikely that there will be any reduction in this vulnerable sector. – It is hard to imagine that the low amenity of the spaces offered would justify the loss of the Mission site.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

The Mission Site – OptionMasterplan three: Interventions Partial relocation Illustrative for Raven Rowof Mission EL HAP

ITEC

D ROA

EN RAV

16 Royal Mail 19a site

SIDNE ET

Y STRE

L&Q 18csite

Mission site – plan with existing buildings and shadows

REET

Option 3 Optimising existing uses

CAVELL ST

19b

LONDON HOSPITAL

18b

Cavell18a St. site

Mission Site – plan describing option 3 NEW ROYAL

W RO

Analysis

Description: Objectives / justification: Retention and redevelopment of existing – To provide the ‘win win’ scenario of WAY STEPNEY building and new open space at the accommodating all the existing uses rear. This option is for the retention within a more efficient footprint, of all existing facilities of the Mission preferably upfront to the north of Figure 28 © Crown copyright and databasesite rights 2013 Ordnance comprising two retailSurvey, units, London Borough the site. accommodation, ground floor community – deliver a high quality open space ofTo Tower Hamlets 100019288 service area, worship space at the first behind the ‘front heavy’ building, unless floor and car parking. The uses will be there is an innovative way the building reconfigured on the high street frontage could be delivered i.e. split retail to provide a more efficient footprint. This elements. option would require a rationalisation of the existing uses and reassessment of their space requirements in order to ensure some public space could be enabled on the existing site. This option would not look to incorporate the proposals for the Royal Mail site or Cavell Street. It would need to consider all the potential servicing requirements for the site.

Mission site – plan with proposed buildings / shadows

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

– T his option creates a space of low amenity value given the scale of proposed development to the South. – This option might have a long-term interest for the mission but again, given the amenity value of the space created, it might be worth looking elsewhere. – The costs related to this option will undoubtedly be very high and will include the temporary relocation of all uses in an alternative location while works take place.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

The Mission Site – Other possibilities

Mission site – plan with existing buildings / shadows

Mission site – plan with proposed buildings / shadows

Option 4 All share Rework the nearby development proposals to allow for a substantial open space to the south of the site (sunny end), as the public realm as actually proposed is tight, has low amenity value and its width does not prevent overlooking in between building blocks. This, alongside investment elsewhere south of Whitechapel Road, could create far more useful and higher quality spaces.

Mission site – plan with proposed buildings / shadows

Cavell Street – as existing (top) and as proposed (bottom).

Option 5* Quick Win – Keep in the character of the area and provide a more substantial square to allow for a wider range of activities. – Higher quality space with daylight and relationship to the adjacent children’s centre. – Give spaces between buildings for light and privacy.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Make the top section of Cavell Street (from Raven Row to Whitechapel Road) a one way street, removing on street parking and extending the pavements both sides along this stretch. Enrich the entire boundary condition of the Mission through linear planting of green walls and lighting. Create a maintenance plan in conjunction with local farms and the Mission to possibly upskill their service users. Create a public face for the Mission by converting the undercroft to the south of the site into a cafe run by the Mission and those they serve.

* This option has been chosen as the preferred one and a schematic design for it has been put forward as a priority scheme in the ‘Key Projects’ section of this book.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

1.2

Public Realm — Opportunities and Emerging Themes

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

Public realm as more than its metreage

Cultural hubs

Major development sites

Green open spaces

Key arteries

Open spaces and public realm cannot be understood just in plan. Rather they are as much defined by their boundaries as what they contain, by what overlooks them or the activities which spill out into them. Some of these factors are hard to measure except by observation. Others can be calibrated more easily, for example the microclimate of daylight and cast shadows. The following pages show some of the layers that we have considered as affecting the conditions of the public realm and open spaces in Whitechapel. These layers include: cultural hubs, major development sites, green open spaces, key arteries, heritage assets, social housing and daylight. Historically an area where the large scale of developments (the Old Hospital) successfully co-existed with the small (the buildings around it), in this next stage of change it is vitally important that the wider repercussions of any development are thought through with a long-sighted view and with a generous attitude.

Heritage assets

Social housing

Daylight

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Cultural and social hubs

25 23 24

21 22 19

3 26

8 9

15 16

This list is not comprehensive. The sheer number of schools, hospital, religious and chariable buildings is hard to quantify.

1. Royal London Hospital & Museum 2. The East London Mosque 3. Kobi Nazrul Primary School 4. The Good Samaritan Pub 5. East London Central Synagougue 6. Mulbery School for gilrs 7. Bishop Challoner Catholic School 8. Padel Club London 9. John Smith Children’s Center 10. Former Sidney Street Library 11. Whitechapel Mission 12. Idea Store Whitechapel 13. The Blind Beggar Pub 14. The White Hart Brew Pub 15. Tower Hamlets Mission 16. Genesis Cinema 17. John Scurr Primary School 18. Collingwood Children’s Centre 19. Swanlea School 20. Whitechapel Sports Centre 21. Osmani Primary School 22. Osmani Trust 23. Thomas Buxton Primary School 24. Brady Arts and Community Centre 25. St Anne’s Catholic Primary School 26. Centre of the Cell

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

Major development sites

Green open spaces

6 3

26 4 1

4 5

11 22

8 21

20 19

9 12

17 18

16 15

The hoarding length projected for the area has the potential to dominate the pedestrian experience as it extends along the routes to the hospital and to schools.

1. Ex-Pavillion Theatre grounds 2. Whitechapel station Crossrail improvements 3. Sainsbury’s Foodstore 4. Royal Mail 5. L&Q 6. Cavell Street 7. The Royal London Hospital 8. The Green Spine 9. London Newcastle

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

This map shows how green and open spaces are clustered to the nortwest and east of the Whitechapel Road and are far more scattered to the south.

1. Allen Gardens 2. Weavers Fields 3. Bethnal Green Gardens 4. Jewish Cemetery 5. Collingwood Estate 6. Tent Street Open Space 7. St. Bartholomew Gardens 8. Cleveland Estate 9. Trinity Green 10. Mile End Waste 11. Ansell House 12. O’Leary Square 13. Wexford House Green 14. Sidney Street Library Green 15. Stepney Green 16. Clark St. Green 17. Sidney Square 18. Jubilee Gardens 19. Cavell St. Gardens 20. Ford Square 21. Future Civic Hub Square 22. Philpot St. 23. Mount Terrace Open Space 24. Centre of the Cell Open Space 25. Vallance Gardens 26. Chicksand Estate

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

Key Arteries

Heritage Assets

A 8 6

12 26

10 5

F 32

The key arteries within or crossing the Masterplan area are shown here in gray.

1. Fieldgate St. 2. Stepney Way 3. Philpot St. 4. Commercial Rd. 5. Turner St. 6. Fulbourne St. 7. Vallance Rd. 8. Brady St. 9. Cavell St. 10. Raven Row 11. E Mount St. 12. Durward St.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

29 d 31 22

30 4

5 24 B

21 20

23 E

14 h

17 D

Whitechapel is rich in heritage assets: Listed Buildings 1. 12-22 Deal St 2. 7-20 Victoria Cottages 3. Davenant Foundation School 4. Royal Oak Pub 5. 261-263/265-267 Whitechapel Rd 6. King Edward VII Jewish Memorial Drinking Fountain 7. Albion Brewery 8. 27a Mile End Rd 9. Mile End Rd 10. Statue of William Booth 11. Commemorative Plaque on Stone Plinth 12. Bust of Edward VII 13. Drinking Fountain 14. 175/177-191/193 Jubilee St 15. 18-25 Sidney Square 16. 1-9 Sidney Square 17. 84-98 Ashfield St 18. St Augustine w/ St Philip’s Church 19. 28-42 Newark St. 20. 43-69 Philpot St. 21. 46-48 Ashfield St.

12 C

22. 39-49 Walden St. 23. The London Hospital 24. 22-34 Mount Terrace 25. 138-142 Whitechapel Rd 26. 15-21/22-26/34-60/37-53 Parfett St. 27. 8-28 Myrdle St. 28. 40-42 Myrdle St. 29. 15-21/25-47/63-65/77-79 New Rd. 30. 24-32 New Rd. and attached railings 31. 2-16 Walden St. 32. Grenfell School Conservation Areas A. Fournier St. B. Whitechapel Market C. Stepney Green D. Ford Square E. London Hospital F. Myrdle St. Locally Listed Buildings a. LST42 b. LST54 c. LST55 d. LST60 e. LST56 f. LST58 g. LST62 h. LST59 Listed telephone kiosks

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

Daylight

Social Housing

5 4

The social housing of Whitechapel was built in three tranches. It is mainly managed by Tower Hamlets Homes. Currently, there are plans for small infill developments following on from – for example – the Peabody Trust’s prize winning Darbishire Place scheme. Generally, open spaces within estates are subject to minimal maintenance regimes.

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Collingwood Estate Cleveland Estate Sidney Street Estate Chicksand East Estate Christchurch Estate

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

This mapping of the areas with greatest daylight was made by creating a 3D digital model. Sunlight is increasingly under threat due to the scale of developments and existing density. Therefore, those areas that are sunlit should be safeguarded.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

Public Realm: Challenges and Opportunities

2.1

– Lack of quality public realm and poor distribution of open spaces – Connect and improve green spaces within housing estates – Protect and enhance existing assets – capitalise on existing open space opportunities with high amenity – Provide ‘breathing space’ between emerging development proposals – Public realm and open space is as much defined by their boundaries as what they contain, what overlooks them and the activities which spill out into them

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Green Infrastructure — What is there?

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

Existing guidance Green infrastructure refers to the network of green city spaces between and attached to buildings including parks, open space, heritage landscapes, growing spaces, street trees and the urban forest, rivers, canals and wetlands, nature reserves and wild spaces, front and back gardens, paths, wastes and commons, incidental self seeded green infrastructure, green roofs and walls, that are planned, designed and managed for multiple benefits. It works across many agendas including health and well being, biodiversity, local economy, heritage and climate change. The Tower Hamlets green infrastructure strategy is captured in the Green Grid supplementary planning guidance as: ‘A network of interlinked and multifunctional open spaces, including rivers and other corridors linked in between, that maximises opportunities for improving the quality of life’. In addition to the Green Grid this work is informed by Tower Hamlets’ Open Spaces, SuDS Guidance and Biodiversity strategies, and through conversation, baseline site analysis and collaborative team-work. Of significance is the Council’s ratification of the decision to transform the old hospital into the new town hall and Civic Hub, and this just opposite the enhanced station with Crossrail interchange. This offers significant potential in terms of green infrastructure enhancement at the civic heart of the borough.

As the borough intensifies, communities shift and evolve. The liveability agenda and the critical role of the public realm and its green infrastructure is becoming ever more vital. Those who live and work in the area already realise the magnitude of change that is happening, captured in comments at our consultation event on 5th December. At the same time the footways are saturated with below ground services, leaving no room within the existing Whitechapel Road to even accommodate replacement of the 23no. trees lost as a result of recent works. Currently green infrastructure that can provide for the diverse community of the vulnerable visiting the mission or the hospital is limited; the high proportion of young who need safe places to socialise and connect to nature; the elderly and skilled who seek places to garden and connect to nature; the visitor or trader who enjoys the buzz and rich cultural experience of the street market environment despite the fact that even basic facilities are missing. There is the opportunity to redefine the ‘growth agenda’ more broadly, where green initiatives are valued in equal measure to the built development proposals, despite their relative modest scale, and where the incidental is nurtured as a fundamental part of neighbourhood identity.

Below are some of the vision and guidance documents that were considered as part of the baseline study. These documents have provided a solid basis of knowledge around different aspects in the borough in relation to green infrastructure.

The Whitechapel Vision document prepared by BDP on behalf of LBTH. Masterplan vision for the Whitechapel area. The vision sets out 6 Key Place Transformations.

Tower Hamlets Green Grid Strategy

An Open Space Strategy for the London Borough of Tower Hamlets 2006–2016

Play Matters in Tower Hamlets A strategic approach to play in Tower Hamlets

Tower Hamlets Local Biodiversity Action Plan 2014–2019

London Borough of Tower Hamlets – SuDS Guidance

Trees in Hard Landscapes A Guide for Delivery

Trees in Hard Landscapes – A Guide for Delivery 2014

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Natural Capital – Investing in Green Infrastructure for a Future London 2015

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

Baseline swatch analysis Incidental green infrastructure

Potential for strategic green infrastructure

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

Open space provision analysis The LBTH Biodiversity Action Plan states that within Tower Hamlets 40% of open space is found in housing estates, schools and businesses. Many of these spaces demonstrate poor biodiversity and lack areas for planting, wildflower growth, for resident involvement and meaningful play. A further 13% of Tower Hamlets open space is formed of parks and other public open spaces. These spaces offer further scope for enhancement and habitat creation. Two of the key open spaces in the Whitechapel area, which perhaps typify some of the issues around open space, are Ford Square and Sidney Square. These

two historic squares provide an essential open space for the local community and have potential for enhancement. However, through consultation with local residents and LBTH representatives, it became clear that the current allocation of public open space in this area does not adequately provide for the diverse range of uses required of it, and that existing open space is suffering from the intensity of use. There are clear tensions present between residents of the square and users from the wider neighbourhood.

Sidney Square

Weavers Fields is a high performing open space.

Ford Square

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

na l

Glo

Gr ee

Ga rd e

To wn

olm art h 5. S tB

4. C

3. St

orfie ld

ew sG

ard en

Stre et P ark

Mathe ws C hu

rchyar d

Horwood & Waterlow Estate 2. Brady Street Cemetery

et h 7. B

DS re Street Su 54. Derbyshi

1. Weavers Fields

ol o Sch

l Schoo y Primar Davis illiam 53. W

Bancroft Estate

Longnor Estate

Collingwood Estate

Christchurch Estate

e Gard are Squ

u Bea

11.

Road

ord S 12. F

Sidney Street Estate

Beveridge Mews

Heath ridge Camb

Clichy Estate

16. Jubil ee

Stepney Green Estate

Sidney Street Estate

Dickson House

15. Cavell Street Garde

17. A

42. Vallance Gardens 41. Chicksand Street

40. Atlee 39. P

38. 31 Martineeau Estate

te p

tM .S 22

Ash

rbou rS

field

re en

Garden s

quare

Stre

et p u

ital su rro u

Ch a

llo n

an d

le ab

nd ya

Pa rk

Gard ens

blic re

alm

Ho sp

.B ish op

.C 23 ree St

er C

St ep n

nd s

ath oli c

Co lle gia

te S

Cit

oo l

yS o ch ol

ity

r Sc

s Jn

un mm

Field

n rde Ga

l hoo

For Girls

s arden rges G

t s/

ar rim lP

tm llo tA

n rde Ga

ate

t Geo

G Blue 25.

26. S

ad .M 36

i an

ing

well and Wapp

rry School 27. Mulbe

28. Mulberry Sports & Leisure Centre

towards Shad

ae ich .M

Solander Gardens

ert Alb 24.

Crowder Street

Shadwell Gardens Estate

20 Taraling Estate

. 37

Berner Estate

Cannon Street

19 .

re ey Squa

quare

13. Sidn

Solander Gardens

Ga rd e

Gr ee

ary Prim

ts Scho

rivate

Alta

open

ry ar

ls gir

zru

o ho

li os

ntre

e spac

ary rim lP

ol ho

en s

arm

sC ity F

45. Spit alfie ld

42. Vallance Gardens 41. Chicksand Street

o ho

llen G

6. A

ark li P

ard

open space and MUGA

unity Ce Comm

be To wn

lic atho es C Ann St. 52. Hereford Estate

Chicksand East Estate

Studen

na l

ol cho aS anle Sw 51 .

e hit .W 50 Chicksand West Estate

Glo

tre

Gr ee n

Scho

na l

riv .P 49

43. Keen

n Pri mary

Buxto

en 44. T hom as

et h

pita lfield

et h

sC ort

Ga rd en s

arm

ity F

45. S

7. B

Sp el ap ch

e ac sp en e at

rde ns be To wn

llen

Glo

7. B

Co mm

No ma d

2. Brady Str eet Cemetery

1. Weavers Fields

nt mo

18.

g Gardens

l Cit y

.S 10

s en

29. Goslin

12 14

d Pla y Are a

St ep n

ourt an

an d

40. Atlee

38. llo tA

study area boundary

ts en

Proposed Green Grid

un mm

Railway

ity Ga

district park

n rde

s arden rges G

Tower Hamlets Green Grid

o /C

t Geo

open space and MUGA

unity Ce Comm

Alta

ark li P

ntre

g Gardens

29. Goslin

26. S

ree St

rd en s

le ab

.C 23

alk

Pa rk

Ball C

re en

30. B igland

.R op ew

* Rating criteria based on LBTH study found in ‘An Open Spaces Strategy for the London Borough of Tower Hamlets 2006-2016’ document

n rde

cho ol

te p

ary S

Below standard with a higher priority weighting for future investment*

100

Prim

ity 26

. Big land Gre en

n mu om

s pa ce

/C 34

3 2. Priv ate op en

Ga rde

ts en

Above average and performing well

33 .S w org

ed e

ard

14.London Islamic Schoo

Way

llo tA

Gard ens

rd en s

quare

ree St

St ep n

rbou rS

ee Gr ey pn

Road

Jubilee Street

17. A

End

Sidney Street

as W

alk

le ab

an d

Garden s

pe w

.C 23

Pa rk

16. Jubil ee

re en

Commericial Road

15. Cavell Street Garde

Mile

13. Si

39 38

Cavell Stree

Stepney

uare dney Sq

Rave

whitechapel Turner Stree

n Ro

el Ro

chap

Gard ens

8 9

White

Settle Street

re Squa

te p

Road

il e .M

a re

reet

ord 12. F

quare

as W

d En

c bli pu

y St

ree yG ne

Parfett Street

rbou rS

tep

.S 10

s en ard

Buxton Street

Myrdle Stree

17. A

e Garde

45 44

New

16. Jubi le

as W

ile

Brad

ens

15. Cavell Street Gard

il e .M

e Roa

7 1

Vallanc

ard en

ity G

mu n

re ey Squa

Brick Lane

13. Sidn

Pr iv

quare

ord S 12. F

y ne

tep

.S 10

op e

Square, Cavell Street Gardens, Jubilee Gardens, Brady Street Cemetery, Vallance Gardens and Mile End Waste. As shown in the diagram there is a lack of ‘well performing’ public space within the study area. Furthermore, the diagram opposite reinforces this lack of useful open space provision, demonstrating the lack of facilities provided in these spaces.

at e

Within the study area, shown with a red boundary, open space is largely made up of estates and schools. No district parks sit within the study area, with Weavers Fields, Bethnal Green Gardens, Allen Gardens and Stepney Green Park all outside the study area. te as W Public within the study nd open space s eE en il M ard nG area9.is made ee up of Ford Square, Sidney r G

Existing open space performance rating

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

‘Tower Hamlets in Bloom’ winner

Existing open space provision and facilities

music

garden

kick about

playground

paddling pool

cycle path

city farm

pond

running hockey

childcare facility

parkland

youth/children’s centre

school/community/leisure

swimming

tennis

estate outdoor space

basketball

markets

library

pub/restaurant

Large sp. parkland trees

london overground

civic space urban agriculture

lawn bowls

bench/seating

nature reserve

netball

outdoor gym

cafe

football

public convenience

private open space

cricket

leisure facility

events

bmx park

meanwhile use

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

101

Ga rd en s

Sidney Street Estate

Stre

et p u

er C

St ep n

ge H e a th brid

Cam

Clichy Estate

Stepney Green Estate

arde ns

blic re

alm

nd s

ath oli c

Co lle gia

te S

rim lP

oo l

ar yS o ch ol

ity

Solander Gardens

Parkland

parkland

tennis

estate outdoor space

en ard rt G

Private open space

private open space

103

S Jnr

ard

ping

.N om a

dic

Co mm m

All en

ity

hool

ard en

. Tho m a s Buxt o

rde ns

43.

arm

ity F

. Sp italfi eld

n Pri mary

44. T h 43

Scho

. Keen Stude

40. Atle

e Com

39. P 38.

Alta

. 37

ad .M 36

i an

ry ar

rivate

ls gir

zru

o ho

42. Vallance Garden

nts Sch oo

open

open space and MU

e spac

e 40. Atle

39. P Sc

en space and MUGA

Centre munity

ark li P

ary rim lP

op 41. Chicksand Street

ol ho

38.

Alta

o ho

School

entre unity C Comm

rivat

e op

li os

Keen S tudents

rima ry Sc

oma s Bu xto

42. Vallance Garden s

Cour

. 37

ad .M 36

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

rima r

elds e Fi

Green Grid enhancement zone

Gat

Meanwhile use

meanwhile use

rges G

rry Scho 27. Mulbe

well and Wap

g Garden

igland Ball

public convenience

Urban agriculture

urban agriculture

Blue

football

25.

cafe

netball

civic space Civic space

t Geo

nature reserve

towards Shad

bench/seating

28. Mulberry Spor

london overground

29. Goslin

Large sp. parkland trees

30. B

pub/restaurant

26. S

3 1 . Bigl and G reen P

hockey

Estate outdoor space

e Alb 24.

Crowder Street

District park

district park

School / community / leisure school/community/leisure

bmx park

Martineeau Estate

n rde

Shadwell Gardens Estate

Ga study area boundary Study area boundary Tower Hamlets Green Grid Green Grid Tower Hamlets Proposed Green Grid Proposed Green Grid Railway Railway 25

youth/children’s centre

library

events

an d

ae ich .M un mm

i an

pe n s pac e

ry ar

g G ard e

2. P r i vat eo

33 .S w e de nb

markets

leisure facility

Pa rk

llo n

childcare facility

basketball

cricket

field

re G

rdens

Green grid proposal

running

outdoor gym

Ch a

St Co

34 .

As identified in the LBTH Green 32 Grid Strategy this area has been identified as a Neighbourhood Centre, District Centre and is also identified Development Site ‘Tower Hamlets in as Bloom’a winner 26 and ‘GreenmusicSpine’ in the Local Development garden kick about Millenium Quarter playground paddling to pool extension Framework. This cycle path 33 lends itself city farm Green Gridpond the existing network. swimming andofCrossharbour lawn bowls

re en

ts/

l hoo

Cannon Street

r Sc

s Jn

rdens

Berner Estate

Field

a rges G

nd ya

Gate

t Geo

n rde Ga

llo tA

Blue

26. S

r Girls

School Fo

ping dwell and Wap

rry 27. Mulbe

28. Mulberry Sports & Leisure Centre

towards Sha

29. Go

an d P lay Are a

Sch ool

sling Garde ns

ary

Court

Prim

d Ball

Gre en

30. B iglan

ree St

25.

31. Bigla nd

s pa ce

te p

Solander Gardens

le ab

Crowder Street

13qua

rbou rS

ital su rro u

ho p

Ash

e Garde

Ho sp

1520. Bis

ert Alb 24.

2 . P riva te o pen

gG ard e

.C 23

alk

33 .S we

ew rd en s

Sidney Street Estate

op e

17. A

19 .

14.London Islamic Scho

18.

tM .S 22

34 .R

Solander Gardens

Commericial Road

are ney Squ

15. Cavell Street Ga

quare

13. Sid

ens ard eG uar

u Bea

Taraling Estate

Sq ont

16. Jubi le

Martineeau Estate

Taraling Estate

Cannon Street

ord S 12. F

Shadwell Gardens Estate

Pr iva

41. Chicksand Street t

Dickson House

reet

ree yG ne

s en ard

Jubilee Street

Turner St

Way

p Ste

Mile

Sidney Street Estate

et h 7. B

Cam

Sidney Street Estate

Stepney

Jubilee Street

Dickson House

Sidney Street Estate

Sidney Street

et Turner Stre

re Myrdle St

Parfett Stree

Berner Estate

Road

Beveridge Mews

th Ro ad

Hea

brid ge

Way

Roa d

na l

Glo

Gr ee n

5. S tB Bancroft Estate

Longnor Estate

Christchurch Estate

To wn

art h

4. C orfie l

3. St

Horwood & Waterlow Estate 2.

Collingwood Estate

Hereford Estate

Chicksand East Estate

d ile En

Sidney Street

Stepney

Commericial Road

en R

Rav

reet

Chicksand East Estate

Rave

et Cavell Stre

Road

d Roa New

New

t Parfett Stree

Myrdle Stre

Settle Street

Lower37 Lea Valley regeneration and growth area

Wood Wharf

ls gir

zru

li os

en s

pace

ark li P

ary ri m lP

ol ho

o ho

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

n Ro

Road

as W

d En

11.

whitechapel apel

a re

Roa

tech

ic bl pu

. 10

Cavell St

Chicksand West Estate

pel

cha

e Whit

whitechapel

wa lk

Potential Green Grid enhancement zone

Whi

il e .M

ile

et tre

ce Ro

Ro p

LDF LDFDevelopment DevelopmentSites Sites Permitted PermittedDevelopment DevelopmentSites Sites Neighbourhood NeighbourhoodCentre Centre District DistrictCentre Centre Major MajorCentre Centre Green Development GreenGrid Grid- – DevelopmentPotential Potential Green GreenGrid GridNetwork Network

54. Christchurch Estat

53.

A St. 52.

a anle Sw

ri v .P 49

S dy Bra

Chicksand West Estate

51 .

e at

en op e

as W

d En

Buxton Street

50 42

45 44

e Str dy Bra

Settle Street

39Y Estate Ocean regeneration

LBTH Green Grid Strategy

102

a r de ns

Just as this plan highlights Bishopsgate Goodsyard as a potential area of regeneration within the Green Grid, the addition of a similar focus Fish canIsland be put on regneration the proposed Civic Hub area around the hospital and proposed Town Hall. This will define a key area of transformation within Whitechapel.

Whitechapel

ND AREAS OF CHANGE

Extract from LBTH Green Grid Strategy 2010

Wapping regeneration

Vallan

Brick Lane

r po lS pe ha c e hit .W 50

e ac sp

45. S Brick Lane

Bishopsgate Goodsyard regeneration

Buxton Street

ad ce Ro Vallan

Bethnal Green North Opportunity Green Grid Extension regeneration

Green Infrastructure – The Urban Forest Analysis of the data acquired from EzyTree allows for the plotting of street and park trees across the study areas. This highlights in more detail the areas of Whitechapel that have a deficiency of tree planting. The mix of species also highlights the biodiversity value to allow the selection of suitable species for future proposals.

The tree species information shows there are 1123 total trees in the wider study area. There are a total of 69 species represented in the area, this diversity of species is likely to ensure that the urban canopy is more resilient. There is a relatively even specie diversity with the largest groups being made up of plane, lime, cherry, pear, maple

and ash. Many of these species represent ‘large specie’ tree types which are beneficial to the long term urban canopy. Generally there is a relatively good mix of mature and young trees, from the mature plane trees along Whitechapel Road to younger, more recently planted birch street trees.

Chart Title

ridge Camb

reet

Road

y St

Heath

Brad

Vallance

Road

Series1

White

Rav

el Ro

chap

tree

tagu

Old

en Row

Mon

Jubilee

Street

Milward

Cavell Street

whitechapel New

Road

Feildgate

Stepney

Way

Newark

Street

Sorbus 'Joseph Rock' (Sorbus)

Sambucus nigra (Elder)

Salix species (Willow)

Rhus typhrina (Sumach)

Quercus ilex (Oak)

Pyrus communis (Pear)

Prunus padus (Cherry)

Prunus cerasifera 'Pissardii' (Cherry)

Prunus avium 'Plena' (Cherry)

Prunus 'Botan Zakura' (Cherry)

Prunus 'Amanogawa' (Cherry)

Picea abies (Spruce)

Liriodendron tulipifera (Tulip Tree)

Ficus carica (Fig)

Fagus sylvaCca (Beech)

Cornus mas (Dogwood)

Betula pendula 'Dalecarlica' (Birch)

Betula papyrifera (Birch)

Morus alba (Mulberry)

Magnolia species (Magnolia)

Ligustrum lucidum (Privet)

Betula pubescens (Birch)

Aesculus hippocastanum (Chestnut)

Acer ginnala (Maple)

Pinus sylvestris (Pine)

Larix decidua (Larch)

Juglans nigra (Walnut)

Cotoneaster x wateri (Cotoneaster)

Betula jacquemonCi (Birch)

Robinia pseudoacacia 'Inermis' (False Arcacia)

Corylus maxima 'Purpurea' (Hazel)

Alnus gluCnosa (Alder)

Street

Parfett Street

Settles Street

Myrtle

Ilex aquifolium (Holly)

Varden Street Philpot

ers Ro

Plumb

Greenfield Road

Ashfield

Street

Taxus baccata 'FasCgiata' (Yew)

Street

Street Nelson

Commericial Road

Alnus cordata (Alder)

Acer psuedoplatanus 'Atropurpureum' (Maple)

Prunus x 'SchmiZi' (Cherry)

Prunus spinosa (Cherry)

Populus tremula (Poplar)

Corylus colurna (Hazel)

Ailanthus alCssima (Tree of Heaven)

Ginkgo biloba (Maidenhair Tree)

Malus tschonoskii (Apple)

Liquidambar styraciﬂua (Sweet Gum)

Acer platanoides (Maple) Fraxinus ornus (Ash)

12 14 17

Acer pseudoplatanus (Maple)

Populus nigra 'Italica' (Poplar) Sorbus aucuparia (Sorbus)

19 20 21

Robinia pseudoacacia (False Arcacia)

Crataegus monogyna (Thorn)

Malus species (Apple)

Carpinus betulus (Hornbeam)

Betula species (Birch) Carpinus betulus 'FasCgiata' (Hornbeam) Acer campestre (Maple) Fraxinus excelsior (Ash) Acer saccharinum (Maple) Acer platanoides Purple Variety (Maple)

104

Fraxinus oxycarpa (Ash) Sorbus x thuringiaca (Sorbus)

Study areaarea boundary Study boundary

Sorbus intermedia (Sorbus)

Ulmus species (Elm)

Pyrus calleryana 'ChanCcleer' (Pear)

Tree – extracted from Tree - extracted from EzyTree dateEzyTree provided by LBTH data provided by LBTH

Betula uClis (Birch)

24 27 35 45 48 51 57

Prunus species (Cherry)

Tilia x europaea (Lime) Tree - extracted from EzyTree date provided by LBTH Study area boundary

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Platanus x hispanica (Plane)

155

Tree species information extracted from EzyTree

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

105

Tree Preservation Orders

The mapping highlights the lack of trees around the central hub and the important contribution trees on estates and private land make to the urban tree canopy.

Within the study area there are a total of 73 Tree Preservation Orders (TPOs) placed on trees. This shows that there may be many important trees at risk from development. Trees in a conservation area are protected by the provisions in section 211 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. This requires notification of any intended work to trees six weeks in advance of the works being carried out, to give the local authority an opportunity to consider whether to make a TPO on the tree. t

Old

e tre

apel

tech

nta

Whi

eath R

ge H

Cam brid

e Road

eet Str dy Bra

Vallanc

oad

Urban Tree Canopy

Rave

rchyar d

Ga rd en s

na l

Glo

Gr ee n

be To wn

4. C

art h

olm

orfie ld

ew sG

ard en

Stre et P ark

Mathe ws C hu 3. St

et h

ard en

nit yG

.N o

ma d

Heath

te p

Road Heath

mm u

llen

rde ns

45. Spit

arm

ity F

alfie ld

44. T hom as

n Pri mary

Scho

Buxto

hool

43. Os mani Pr imary Sc 42. Vallance Gardens 41. Chicksand Street

40. Atlee 39. P

. 37 ad .M 36

i an

tM .S 22

ry ar

Alta

rivate

ls gir

zru

o ho

li os

re en

nd ya

Ch a

Pa rk

Street

Commericial Road

blic re

alm

ital su rro u

llo n

an d

le ab

er C

St ep n

nd s

ath oli c

Co lle gia

te S

Cit

oo l

/C n mu ity n rde

l hoo

r Sc

s Jn

Field

For Girls

s arden rges G

o ch

ts en

rim lP

llo tA

Gate

t Geo

n rde Ga

Blue

ae ich .M

ree St

ert Alb 24.

25.

26. S

rry School 27. Mulbe

g Gardens

d Pla y Are a

open space and MUGA

unity Ce Comm

open

e spac

ark li P

ary rim lP

ntre

ol ho

o ho

cho ol

28. Mulberry Sports & Leisure Centre

29. Goslin

ary S

ourt an

Prim

Ball C

s pa ce

igland

30. B

pen

31. Bigla nd G reen

3 2. Priv ate o

Ga rde ns

n rde

nb org

rd en s

.C 23

alk

ity

33 .S we

pe w

un mm

o ch

t s/

34 .R

et p u

Study area boundary Railway

study area boundary Study area boundary

Conservation area extents

tree on private land Tree on private land

Tree in estate tree in estate

ridge Camb

Co m

38. 21

Street

.B ish op

Varden Street

Street

Stre

Street

Philpot

Jubilee

Street

Gard ens

Nelson

Ho sp

29 30

Cavell Street

Milward

19 .

park tree or tree street tree or street tree Park

reet

quare

Street

Ashfield

Street

field

Parfett Street

Ash

Way

Newark

Street

Settles Street

18.

rbou rS

y St

Feildgate

Myrtle

Street

17. A

Stepney

Garden s

ers Row

Roa

16. Jubil ee

Varden Street

Nelson

Brad

New

12 14

37 36

ar rim lP

Road

Street

Plumb

oo l

Vallance

Ashfield

Row

Mon

Greenfield Road

ae ich

19 Street

Newark

Street

Old

el Ro

hap

Whitec

tagu

15. Cavell Street Garde

Way

Raven

reet

e St

Street

Cit

Jubilee

te S

re ey Squa

14.London Islamic Schoo

Commericial Road

Stepney

Street

Co lle gia

Row

Philpot

St ep n

ath oli c

Cavell Street

Street

nd ya

an d

Milward

Pa rk

er C

Camb

reet

re en

alm

nd s

13. Sidn

Mon

quare

Raven

el Ro

hap

Whitec

e St

tagu

Old

Street

llo n

ord S 12. F

reet

Parfett Street

Ch a

e Gard are Squ

Gard ens

blic re

s en

u Bea

ridge

y St

50 42

Settles Street

te p

.B ish op

et p u

ard

nt mo

Road

Greenfield Road

ital su rro u

2. Brady Str eet Cemetery

7. B

47 43

ers Row

Ho sp

1. Weavers Fields

Primar Davis illiam

.S 49

Pr iv

op e

Plumb

19 .

Stre

ee Gr ey pn

11.

Feildgate

field

Street

Commericial Road

Myrtle

Ash

5. S tB

ec hit .W 50

53. W

cho aS anle Sw 51 .

po m dla ea tH ar ew

45 44

Roa

18.

DS re Street Su 54. Derbyshi

ool y Sch

ol o Sch ary Prim

e ntr Ce rts

ol ho Sc y ar im Pr

lS pe ha

Gr ee n

na l

lic atho es C Ann St. 52.

Ga rd e

at e

Garden s

quare

New

rbou rS

.S 10

Brad

17. A

le Mi

as W

Road

16. Jubil ee

Varden Stre

Nelson

Vallance

15. Cavell Street Garde

as W

d En

l 14.London Islamic Schoo

ile

a re

49 47

reet

re ey Squa

lee St

13. Sidn

Street

re Squa

ord 12. F

c bli pu

reet

aum

Be 11.

ot St

e Gard are Squ ont

Jubi

Milward

et Cavell Stre

s en

Philp

ard

d Roa

tep

.S 10

ree yG ne

Street

t Parfett Stree

as W

Street

Ashfield

Myrtle

Way

Newark

w rs Ro

il e .M

Stepney

Street

t Settles Stree

Feildgate

Greenfield Road

d En

a re

be Plum

ile

c bli pu

New

t as W

n Ro

Roa

Whitechapel Urban tree study area boundary canopy mapping

Whitechapel Tree protection mapping

Tree Preservation Orders

tree on private land

park tree or street tree

106

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance tree in estate

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

107

Whitechapel Road – Tree Planting

Meeting outcomes (early 2016)

Existing road arrangement

LBTH Landscape Architect

Arboricultural & Landscape Manager TfL

Main points from discussion – TH pressed the point that the project must address the provision of facilities/ spaces for young people in the borough, there is a significant lack of spaces for young people ages 8–20. – TH noted concern over intensity of use of specific open space – e.g. Ford Square that is used by a number of local independent schools as a recreational ground – mainly for playing football. TH explained there is no compulsory requirement to have outdoor space. This explains the poor condition of the park and more importantly demonstrates a lack of spaces for this type of use. – TH voiced concerns over lack of public realm and projected increase in local population of the area due to the developments proposed. – TH noted the lack of mapping, monitoring and protection of trees in the borough, and that TPOs had not been updated for years. – TH asked that trees be large specie trees, we had a discussion generally around development compromising the health and sustainability of existing trees and the importance of development setbacks to allow tree retension.

Main points from discussion – 23 trees were recently lost along the route of CS2. – Along Whitechapel Road 40/50 trial pits were dug to assess suitability for additional tree planting but only 4 no. locations were suitable due to below ground services. – TfL are always seeking to add trees where possible. – TfL are committed to their ‘soft estate’.

Little potential for additional tree planting*

ING ammatic cross section

EMAIN

CASTL E STR

North side

South side

EET

Whitechapel Road

REE

P ST

WIN

T EE

AR RW

Potential found ground with opportunity for tree planting*

Potential found ground with opportunity for tree trench*

Potential found ground with opportunity for tree planting*

LES

MAP PLAC

APE

ITE

RE T ST

UN ET

TRE

TS UR

FULB

EAST

O LR

OSED ammatic cross section

RD MILWA

North side

STREET

Whitechapel Road section and plan showing the train tunnels underneath

South side

Whitechapel Road

Key plan

C RA

T TE

This section and plan indicatively show the constraints for additional tree planting along the high street. The footway currently provides limited opportunities due to extensive services below ground. The road itself is deemed by TfL as a Street of Engineering Difficulty due to the rail tunnels running underneath. The 2no. young trees that were recently planted along the Whitechapel Road are not doing as well as intended.

108

Opportunities to plant any new trees should be carefully looked at and the feasibility study should include trial pits. Consideration should be given to changing the newly planted trees to semimature and to a more robust specie as well as to improving the existing pits along the high street. Y NEY WA

STEP

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

TfL – Interest Group Whitechapel Road section study Scale 1:200 @ A3 03/12/2015

Focus of the discussion was predominately based around Whitechapel Road. – Generally supportive of the ideas presented slowing traffic flow and tree planting. – TfL asked that they are involved in decisions and proposals early on so as to provide constructive critique and allow the design team to produce a scheme that TfL can accept as the project develops.

Friends of Sidney Square – As a result of the proposal for Ford Square, an enormous amount of information about Ford Square and Sidney Square has been discovered, not least the fact that they appear to date back to 1820 and are heavily protected under the London Squares legislation being one of the original 19 squares so protected. – There is other legislation protecting them and in recent reports the Council has marked the two squares out as being areas of important open space. – The squares were neglected and are in urgent need of tender loving care. – There had been a recent attempt to convert Ford Square to a childrens’ playground. – A large number of signatures in opposition has been gathered and an alternative solution to the Madrassa’s wish to provide outside space for its pupils has been put forward. – Local residents have been instrumental in organising a group who had given time in planting Sidney Square and providing some much needed care to that Square. – The local residents have embryonic thoughts in seeking substantial improvements to the two Squares and

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

109

their surrounding area by 2020. – The significance of that date, we believe, is that it is the 200th anniversary of the creation of the Squares. – It will be valuable to arrange a meeting to discuss matters further. – Appreciation of the use of setts in slowing the speeding vehicles that bedevil some of the local streets, including Ashfield Street. LBTH Biodiversity Officer – ‘Open mosaic’ habitat is most valuable for biodiversity – there are no examples of this habitat type within our study area – however it can be imitated on roofs. – It is important to provide big tree species in the landscape. – There are “no areas of natural conservation” within the study area. – The estates have a lot of potential for biodiversity, got to be able to do more than provide ‘green deserts with lollipops’.

areas as rain gardens, swales etc. and for potential SuDS to be introduced at boundaries of roads/paths. Green Finger Network / TH in Bloom – Teach gardening workshops at the Women’s Environmental Network in Bethnal Green. They also teach at St Hilda’s Community Centre which has a community garden attached to it. This is also where they promote their garden at Winterton House. – The main problem that their gardeners encounter is lack of education regarding vermin i.e dog fouling, rats, pigeons and the rubbish people throw in green areas. – Both use the hospital regularly either for themselves or their family and they find the care offered very good, the area around the hospital they find to be oppressive, dark, bleak and unwelcoming. Friends of Sidney Square Gardening Group

LBTH Drainage Officers – Primarily discussed the use of SuDS in LBTH of which Derbyshire Street is the scheme they are proudest of and used as an example for use of SuDS and the development of pocket parks. – LBTH work towards a minimum 50% reduction in runoff as set out in the London plan. Enthusiastic about introduction of SuDS schemes throughout the Borough. – Funding for SuDS projects comes from the flooding grant or from gullies maintenance fund. These are not sustainable sources of funding, S106 money could be a potential source of funding. – Agree on potential for SuDS to be retrofitted onto estates, using the green 110

– Friends of Sidney Square local gardening group set up 5 years ago. – Inspired by the gardening style of the Bethnal Green Garden. – The square has been entered in the TH in Bloom competition. – Felt the squares were very ‘unloved’ and not well taken care of despite the fact they are so beautiful in the summer. – Sidney Square is the meeting place for local homeless people and Eastern European labourers who come there to drink – this leads to public urination and aggressive behaviour and creates tension.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Spitafields City Farm, The Coriander Club

Stepney City Farm

– The Coriander Club has been running for the last 16 years and it consists of Bengali women who like to garden. They use the produce that they grow to prepare a healthy meal at the Brady Centre each Monday morning. – Some of the women in the Coriander Club now have growing beds in the Nomadic Community Garden. – Has connections with the Women’s Environmental Network and Capital Growth and St Hilda’s Community Centre.

– The farm has a number of volunteer programmes which are very popular with the people in the community. One of these programmes is called Furry Tails whereby a group of young volunteers take small animals such as rabbits or guinea pigs to day centres catering for older residents. They also have connections with the Hospital which sometimes refers people for occupational therapy. – The farm rents out for free community allotments to Oceans Women’s Association, Hestia, Muslim Women’s Collective, Bangladeshi Youth Movement, APASENTH, City Gateway. – Also a number of schools use the farm regularly. These are Cayley School, Ben Johnson primary, Stepney Green secondary, Alice Model nursery, Old Church nursery, Bonner School, Harry Roberts School etc.

East London Mosque – Daily 4-5000 people, Friday (Special Prayer) :9000 people. During Ramadan this number doubles. The Mosque serves the biggest Muslim community in the UK. On Christmas Day even though there was no transport around 5000 people came to pray. – The Mosque actively encourages (through sermons and leaflets) people to walk or use public transport to get to prayers. – There is not outside space where people can talk to one another after they finish their religious duties because of the pressure on space. Spitalfields City Farm – The farm has always been a community farm and therefore very accessible for the local population. The farm grows a lot of bengali vegetables and this attracts the local Bangladeshi Community. – In recent years due to development of the area in terms of buildings the farm has become even more important as green spaces disappear. – The farm carries out outreach work with local schools, local minority community groups and has volunteer programmes.

Friends of Arnold Circus – Friends of Arnold Circus set up in 2010 and since then the place has been transformed completely. – One of their first initiatives was to create The Pumpkin Club which helpped Bengali women plant in the circus prior to the regeneration. Also with the help of the council they paid for a part-time gardener. Furthermore, they had a contract for a few years with the Spitafields City Farm who sent a gardener to teach residents about plants. – Negative spaces within Whitechapel: Vallance Gardens – never seems to be used by anyone, Hanbury Street-bleak, dreadful. A lot of potential for more green spaces on the Chicksand Estate.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

111

2.2 Cable Street Community Garden

Stepney City Farm

– Cable Street Community Garden has won the Wildlife award in the Tower Hamlets in Bloom competition. There are currently about 100-150 regular volunteers in the garden and they have people from all over the world using it. – They provide gardening skills to schools in the area and generally members of the public who come to ask. – They are in close contact with the other city farms in the area such as Stepney, Spitafield and Mudchute Farm and also the other winners of the TH in Bloom competition.

– The team met again with Stepney City Farm in early July 2016 to discuss their possible involvement in the delivery of two of the ‘Key Projects’ proposed as first outcome of the WPROSG. – We discussed the delivery of workshops to up-skill the Mission users to maintain the proposed pockets of green in the hoardings around the future hospital square and the proposed green edge to the Mission building. – We also discussed the farm’s involvement in the detailed design process of these green pockets by helping with the specification of medicinal plants and their supply. – The farm saw these proposals favourably and expressed interest in making them happen with LBTH’s Vision Team and the relevant land owners / developers. – The collaborative delivery of these two ‘Key Projects’ could set a template and be a test bed for future projects to bring together different constituencies in Whitechapel.

Women’s Environmental Network – WEN works with the main housing associations (Tower Hamlets Community Housing, Poplar Harca) in the area to bring gardening skills and green infrastructure to people in the community. They do this as organically as possible by engaging the community through flyers but also have strong connections with all the womens’ and community organisations in and around the estates where they work. – By working closely with the housing associations in the area it allows more people to become involved with their local food growing group, especially women who may not attend community groups or libraries and women who don’t speak English. – Wen is currently setting up another project with the 3 farms in TH (Spitafields, Stepney, Mudchute) to provide ecotherapy for people with mental health problems in the borough- this is done through Mile End Hospital.

112

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Green Infrastructure — Opportunities and Emerging Themes

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

113

Important opportunities from baseline work include:

Key green infrastructure themes emerging are:

– Redefine ‘growth’ to incorporate quality as well as the quantity of development and management of change, the expansion of connectivity of green infrastructure. Not compromising to development but realising the potential to enable the well-being of existing and new communities. – Set the standard of green infrastructure provision ahead of development with a holistic approach rather than promoting a site by site approach. Take into account urban design related considerations that go beyond immediate ownership of a site. – Quantify the cumulative effect of development on heritage, community assets and amenity including trees, quality of public space, how comfortable it is to be in it, space in terms of microclimate, and consequently whether it raises the spirits of its users, especially to those who are vulnerable. – Ensure existing provision and town squares are not put under a level of intensity of use that their inherent qualities are compromised, their ability to perform as a multifunctional space is curtailed, or their heritage features are put under threat. – Seek to maximise the potential of existing under utilised assets, particularly land held within estates, which is being intensively managed with little value to the health and well-being agenda of the community.

1. Civic wellbeing: Focusing on the civic epicentre of Civic Hub and hospital to reimagine and value the complex as natural capital: a series of ‘high performing’ multifunctional public gardens and green routes that extend the network and improve the quality of the local environment for physical and mental well-being of the young, working, residential and visiting populations, as well as for habitat connectivity.

– Explore the wider recognition and mobilisation of the green skills held within the community in concert with the borough’s own Green Team and officer expertise in biodiversity and drainage to enable creative partnerships to ensure green infrastructure sustainability. – Investigate the potential for an ‘avenue planting programme’, as a highways investment, through progressive transformation of Whitechapel Road and Stepney Way, and reinforcement of the north-south Tower Hamlets Green Grid, together with the general quality of the walking environment in terms of ‘linear forests’. – Value and review protection of existing urban trees with new TPOs that inform development briefs. – Reveal the heritage of the hospital site in terms of a network of courts and gardens that integrates with the Green Grid within a new Civic Hub, promoting natural assets to beautify and enhance biodiversity as an inherent part of the civic and hospital experience.

2. Microclimate: Mitigating wind turbulence generated around the hospital development, and demanding the considerate design of future development for comfortable street environments that are the conduit of everyday life. 3. Linear Forests and heritage highways: Valuing, protecting (through TPOs) and making space for urban trees as part of the highway, as heritage assets and to benefit biodiversity, air quality, carbon sequestration, storm water interception and traffic calming. 4. Green fingers: Connecting local communities through encouraging skills exchange through gardening activity. The pool of talent was evidenced at Tower Hamlets in Bloom celebration in December 2015. 5. Flow: Pedestrian flow and water conveyance where there is pressure on the capacity of the footway and road space and where the porosity of pavement construction and slowing the flow through green roofs and SuDS features can enable attenuation and multiple benefit that is ecologically sound.

114

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

6. Diversity: Specie diversity for biodiversity and biosecurity in the light of climate change and the effect of heat island in the city, and to enhance priority habitats and species. These themes reference: – Natural Capital: Investing in a Green Infrastructure for a Future London, GLA’s Green Infrastructure Task Force Report, December 2015. – Valuing London’s Urban Forest: Results of London i-Tree Eco Project, Treeconomics, November 2015 supported by the Mayor of London, Forestry Commission, Forest Research, Trees for Cities, amongst others. – LBTH Policy DM11 Living buildings & biodiversity where major development is required to submit an Ecological Assessment demonstrating enhancement in accordance with the Council’s Local Biodiversity Action Plan. – The Flood and Water Management Act was introduced in 2010 which defines the role of lead local flood authority for an area and the requirement to develop, maintain, apply and monitor a strategy for local flood risk management in its area, called ‘local flood risk management strategy’. – London Plan Policy 5.11A: Green roofs and development site environs: Major development proposals should be designed to include roof, wall and site planting, especially green roofs and walls where feasible, to deliver the following objectives: a. adaptation to climate change b. sustainable urban drainage

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

115

Green Infrastructure: Challenges and Opportunities – London Plan Policy 5.13A: Sustainable Drainage: Development should utilise sustainable urban drainage systems (SuDS) unless there are practical reasons for not doing so, and should aim to achieve Greenfield runoff rates and ensure that surface water run-off is managed as close to its source as possible. – LBTH Core Strategy: Policy SPO4.5: Reduce the risk and impact of flooding. – LBTH Development Management DPD 2012: Policy DM 13 Sustainable Drainage: Development will be required to show how it reduces the amount of water usage, runoff and discharge from the site, through the use of appropriate water reuse and Sustainable Urban Drainage (SuDS) techniques. – LBTH An Open Spaces Strategy for the London Borough of Tower Hamlets 2006–2016 December 2011. – Spatial themes of the LBTH Core Strategy a. Strengthening neighbourhood well being b. Enabling prosperous communities c. Designing a high quality city d. Tackling climate change

116

In summary A review of existing guidance and conditions on the ground through the baseline study have highlighted a need for high performing green infrastructure for enhanced health and wellbeing. This is supported by various conversations that voice a concern for: – Protection of existing trees and heritage assets; – Lack of provision for young people; – Opportunity for enhanced amenity and biodiversity through development set backs and retrofitted sustainable urban drainage; – Potential for greater collaboration between hospital, community and city farm activities; – Potential to create an open mosaic of habitats, growing opportunities and large specie tree planting in place of green deserts and monocultures. Therefore the emerging green infrastructure themes include civic wellbeing, linear urban forests, the green skills network, surface water management, walking and city rambling, microclimate and biodiversity.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

– Protection of existing trees and heritage assets – Lack of provision for young people – Enhance amenity and biodiversity through development setbacks and retrofitted sustainable urban drainage – Grow semi mature and more robust specie trees – The proposed Life Sciences campus lends itself to an area of potential regeneration within the Green Grid – Provide green routes that extend the network and improve the quality of the local environment for physical and mental well-being

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

117

3.1

Movement — What is there?

118

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

119

RLE

G RA NA RY

RO AD

GR EA TO RE X

TA P P

Whitechapel Road at the centre of the Whitechapel Vision

S TR E E T

ST RE ET

T R

A H

O R

RFO

BRA D

C LO S E

STR

YS TRE ET

rin

gW alk

SS TR

TRAHORN CLOS

R A N S Y S R T

VA L

E E

ER O

AD C

CA ST L

MOSS CLOSE

O LL IN

ST R

ST RE ET

O O D

G W

EM AIN

DAVENA NT STR EET

EE T

REGA L CLO SE

DEHA

M GA RD

ENS

WHITE

CHAP

EL RO AD

MER

CER

REE

DURWARD STREET

H M ST

STRE

T EE

THR

WIN

ST R

DURW ARD

E R T

COU

LB OU R

E T A G LD

IE F VINE

STR

EET

EE T

CO UR TS DA

RLIN

G RO

YS TR

T TE RR

EET

ACE

PA RF E

TT ST RE E

WHI

NE W RO AD

APEL

ATH

RID

TECH

E AS T MO

NT S

TR EE

H AT

RO RD

E IDG

EE T

MA ES

PA R

PL AC

STE

WAY

RAVE N

ROW

REET

EY ST

KS T

WA R

SIDN

ILW AR

WA LD

MIL

EE N

DR O

CA VE LL ST

N ER

HFI

RE E

TU R

STR

ELD

STR

ELI

YW AY

DLE

SID

A W R R E T

REE

A S T E R E

L IA

The Whitechapel Road Outcome Plan

R E

Q U

ILP

E S

ID S

R A

H S

T E

R LA

E E

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

S T

EA EH OM T BR REE ST

SID

IL E

T EE

SID

N SO

Y E

The TfL Surface Transport Plan provides an overview of the desired characteristics of any London road and the parameters that any study into improving them must pursue. Our study therefore appraises the existing street environment along this stretch of the Whitechapel Road under a series of established TfL key indicators, evaluating its performance against each to identify shortcomings and related opportu nities. This analysis, ‘The Whitechapel Road Outcome Plan’, is then used to inform three proposed options for change, further development and testing.

The Whitechapel Vision Masterplan Supplementary Planning Document 2013 identifies Whitechapel Road as a Key Place Transformation (KPT) space and sets out its revitalisation by supporting the town centre and prioritising pedestrian movement as part of a major public realm improvement scheme including enhancement of the market. The Whitechapel Vision document explains: ‘The revitalisation of Whitechapel Road is a key regeneration component of the Vision and includes an ambitious transformation of the road and the public realm to promote Whitechapel town centre as a shopping, cultural and leisure destination and boost local jobs and businesses.’ LIN

EE T

STR

120

Whitechapel Vision

The key suggestions from the TfL Surface Transport Plan adapted for Whitechapel Road are: – Adopt City Hub priorities; – Limit congestion and maintain journey times; – Make Whitechapel Road a safer environment for vulnerable road users and reduce collision risk; – Improve location, visibility and waiting environment of bus stops; – Improve ability for crossing Whitechapel Road; – Improve urban realm and create a sense of arrival into City Hub; – Take into account CS2 upgrade and Crossrail. ST

Whitechapel Road is at the heart of a complex district centre, experiencing significant change and forecast to grow and expand strongly over the next fifteen years and beyond. The existing street and surrounding spaces are not offering the best environment for the existing functions or planned changes to root and help form a coherent neighbourhood. Although the Street Types for London, in close consultation with the Borough of Tower Hamlets, classified the A11 as a Core Road with a high movement function, the stretch that sits between Cambridge Heath and Vallance Road junctions was classified as a City Hub. This means that this stretch of Whitechapel Road needs to serve a series of multilayered movement needs, from local access and stay qualities suited to the market, hospital, retail, offices and other local place requirements through to the strategic movement needs of the A11, NE

cycle super highway, bus routing and rail interchange. This stretch is regarded as a strategically significant location for movement needing to accommodate high flows of all modes in a high quality, safe and coherent environment.

RE E

Introduction

BIL

For both TfL and LBTH, the Whitechapel Road is a priority area for improvements within a challenging context.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

121

Street Types

Whitechapel Vision… LBTH Whitechapel Vision Core Road

City Street

Connector

P2 eg

City Hub

KTP1 Whitechapel Road

M3/P1 M3/P2

KTP2 Durward Gardens

M3/P3 P3

City Street

High Street

Town Square

KTP3 New Civic Hub

M2/P2 M2/P3

M1 P2

M2/P1

Connector

Local Street

Street types matrix Source: TfL

Town Square

Street Type P3

High Road

Core Road

Local Street

6 KPTs (Vision’s areas of focus)

Legend M3 Movement

City Hub

Movement

TfL Street Types

KTP4 Med City Campus inc. ‘Green Spine’

M1/P1 City Place

Place

M1/P2

KTP5&6 Major development areas

M1/P3

LBPlace Bromley - No agreed classifications LB Bromley - Applied Ergonomics: “Putting mind Whitechapel routes and connections map. Source: Whitechapel Vision and body back together “– W.S. Marras & P.A. Hancock 2013 No agreed Illustration: Brain, created by Blake Ferguson, Noun Project. classifications

The Whitechapel Vision Masterplan Supplementary Planning Document identifies 6 Key Place Transformation (KPTs) spaces as areas of focus within its study boundary.

and public spaces, including modernising and redeveloping the leisure centre and building over the station and rail track.

PRINTED BY:

Surface Playbook Admin

KPT4 – Med City Campus DATE: Supporting the expansion of the health, KPT1 – Revitalising Whitechapel Road bio-tech and life sciences research 15/11/2016 © Crown copyright and database rights 2016 Ordnance Survey 100035971 Supporting the town centre by making activities by the introduction of new Whitechapel Road easier for pedestrian opportunities for higher density residential movement, as part of a major public and mixed-use units based around a new realm improvement scheme including ‘Green Spine’. the enhancement of the market. KPT5 – Raven Row KPT2 – New Civic Hub A new neighbourhood within Whitechapel Bringing back the former Royal London comprising residential-led development Hospital building into civic use to improve with supporting commercial uses and the range of public services provided in the improved links to the town centre and town centre by collocating new retail, hospital. business, cultural and community facilities. KPT6 – Cambridge Heath Gateway KPT3 – Durward Street Gardens Redevelopment of the Sainsbury’s site A new high quality urban quarter to enliven with a new larger store, residential and the area to the north of the new Crossrail community facilities, including the creation station to provide new homes, retail, offices of a new square as west-east link.

122

0.15

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

0.3 km

Pedestrian-priority secondary ‘loop’

The Whitechapel Vision aims to introduce a series of new public squares and open spaces as well as a series of new streets and public pedestrian routes to better connect and improve the whole area. While this study focuses on analysing and providing design guidance for a wider number of key areas, from a transport perspective Whitechapel Road (KPT1) is the ordering force for the whole plan with the changes that occur on it cascading through the rest of the neighbourhood, setting the landscape metrics and allocation of space within the ground plane and fundamentally affecting how people will move through streets and spaces. It is for this reason that this section of the study will look with more detail into the Whitechapel Road as the heart of the area.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

123

KPT1 – Revitalising Whitechapel Road Transformation requirements Connections – To create an ambitious and transformational vision for users of the town centre prioritising the pedestrian. – To create gateways into Whitechapel. – To develop design and technical interventions that respond to the possible expansion of the market to a side street or south of the High Street and the opportunity to provide a fullysegregated Cycle Superhighway in this area. – To develop design and technical interventions that respond proactively to Whitechapel Station entrances and arrival experiences. – To deliver early baseline analysis that records footfall data / space syntax and mapping of footfall. – To consider cycle hire dock relocations. 124

– To consider the re-introduction of a central reservation for multiple uses. – To develop design and technical interventions that respond proactively to the Vallance Road and New Road intersection highway improvements, such as cycle safety and pedestrian crossing layout, as well as interventions for the Sidney Street and Cambridge Heath Road intersection. – To develop design and technical interventions that respond to the impacts of the temporary station entrance on Durward Street and the re-alignment of the temporary crossing. Safety – To develop design and technical interventions that respond proactively to Whitechapel Road collision analysis statistics (Whitechapel Road Outcome Plan including assessing current permitted turning movements on/off Whitechapel Road).

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

– To develop design and technical interventions that will minimise accidents on the road in order to inform TfL project delivery. – To develop design and technical interventions that address pedestrian desire to cross Whitechapel Road in multiple locations. – To develop design and technical interventions that respond proactively to the bus stop waiting facilities and location of bus stops currently obscured by the market, as well as the integration of the eastbound bus lane with the Cycle Superhighway lane. – To develop design and technical interventions that respond proactively to the increase in cycle journeys and bus flow along Whitechapel Road between 2009-2013, 77% and 10% respectively. – Enhancement of the cycling environment and Cycling Level of Service as a component of upgrades to the public realm.

Heritage & Sense of Place – To identify key sight lines. – To enhance Whitechapel market. Amenity – To declutter Whitechapel Road and enhance the public realm. – To consider interventions of redevelopments on the public realm – Barts NHS, Old Royal London Hospital and Royal Mail site. – To consider linking the transformations related to these bigger projects with the ones resulting from smaller, quickwin improvements both along the Whitechapel Road and on the side roads leading to it. – To develop design and technical interventions that respond proactively to the poor air and noise quality along Whitechapel Road.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

125

Whitechapel High Street, Facts and Figures

Public Transport Accessibility Levels

– Population

Public Transport Accessibility Level map. Source: TfL

Map key – PTAL

0 (worst) 1b 3 5 6b (best)

Population Key Figures London Borough of Tower Hamlets is one of the fastest growing boroughs in London. The population in 2016 is estimated to be 296,000. In the next ten years the population is predicted to grow by 26% from 296,000 to 374,000 and the reach forecasts the population to reach 390,000 by 2036. In terms of density, Tower Hamlets is the 2nd most populated borough in London with an average of 12,900 people per km2. Whitechapel Ward has an even higher density of 14,800 people per km2. The population in Whitechapel Ward, which covers part of the study area, is forecast to increase by 25% in the next ten years from 16,800 to 20,900. Whitechapel’s regeneration will deliver over 3,500 homes by 2025, which will increase both population and density in the study area.

126

The work day population of the Borough increases by 62.7% with the City Fringe, Whitechapel and Canary Wharf being the main centres of employment. In 2012, Whitechapel Ward recorded 22,600 jobs which represents 9.4% of the total employment in Tower Hamlets. Sources: ONS, GLA, Tower Hamlets population Projections 2016. LBTH, Local Employment by Industries, February 2014.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

1a 2 4 6a

PTAL Facts

Crossrail

The Public Transport Accessibility Level index adopted by Transport for London, reflects walking times to public transport facilities as well as the service range and reliability of services. PTAL scores for Whitechapel have been assessed using the TfL web-based Connectivity Assessment Toolkit (WebCAT). The study area predominantly demonstrates an excellent PTAL index score of between 6a and 6b in the areas immediately adjacent to Whitechapel Station and bus stops. Whitechapel boasts excellent bus, underground and overground connections with the District and Hammersmith & City lines running east-west, the East London line running north-south. Crossrail, scheduled to open in December 2018, will increase the area’s connectivity with more frequent services and connections.

Crossrail, when operational, will link Whitechapel to Heathrow Airport in 38 minutes, Bond Street in 10 minutes and to Canary Wharf in 3 minutes. Forty-eight services per hour will run bidirectionally through Whitechapel station at peak hours. Whitechapel is the most easterly station on the central section of the line and is likely to attract passengers from East London. Crossrail along with Underground and Overground lines will be accessed through the refurbished train station entrance on Whitechapel Road. Future population forecasts, employment growth, modal shift and station usage along with a cost benefits analysis may trigger the need for opening a second entrance in the future.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

Roads and Traffic

Buses from Whitechapel and The Royal London Hospital Manor House

PADDINGTON

Blackstock Road

Holloway

Stamford Hill Clapton

Clapton

Little Ilford Lane

Manor Park

+$&.1(<

Camden Town

%(7+1$/ *5((1

Peel Grove

Mornington Crescent

T STRE ET

RO A

BUCK HURS

GE HE ATH

BR ID

CA M

D ROA l RY O’LEA RE SQUA

LD STR

LINDL EY

0LOH (QG

Access Roads

Stepney Queen Mary & Westfield Green College

S T R EET

ST EP

NE Y

Borough Boundary

WAY

EET

High Street

Manchester Road

The Highway

Free Trade Wharf

Island Gardens

Commercial Road

:(67 (1'

Buses Whitechapel Road is a key east/west bus corridor catering for some of the busiest routes in London. Approximately 51 buses per hour travel through Whitechapel. The bus 25, 205, N205 and N253 travel east/ west through Whitechapel and the 106, 254 and D3 travel north/south. Bus 25 travels from Oxford Circus to Ilford and according to TfL bus passenger usage data, in 2015 it was the busiest route in London with 19.4 million passengers. Route 254 is ranked the 20th most used route with 9.7 million passengers in 2015. The 205 had 7.6 million passengers while the 106 had 5.7 million and the D3 had 2.1 million passengers. On the south side, travelling east to west, the bus lane is operational Monday to Saturday from 7-10am and 4-7pm. When not in operation, parking is permitted on sections of the bus corridor effectively reducing the carriageway to one lane. On the north side, the bus lane shares space with CS2 Cycle Superhighway which is currently not segregated. The bus lanes are operational from Monday to Saturday from 7-10am and from 4-7pm. The bus lane between Vallance Road junction and Cambridge Heath junction occupies

,6/( 2) DOGS

Limehouse Burdett Road

Westferry

Canary Wharf

Mudchute Westferry Road Heron Quays

Limehouse

es m ha

Oxford Circus

Crossharbour

Wapping Wall

T er Riv

Tottenham Court Road

ASDA

WAPPING

Wapping

Chancery Lane Holborn

Source: LBTH Street Design Guide

D3 Isle of Dogs

Wapping Lane Tobacco Dock

Holborn Circus

128

D E EN

RE ET

Y W AY

K STRE ET

ASHFIE

for City Thameslink

N253

NE WAR

STREE T

Holborn Viaduct

24 hour service

S TEP NE

CAV ELL

Royal London Hospital

EY ST SIDN

EET

AD L RO Z

Local Distributor Roads

Bow Road

CLARK STREET

St Paul ’s

TE STR FIEL DGA

APE

T MOUN E AC TE RR

Bank

254 N253

` M IL

W RO

Coborn Road

_ \

205 Bow Church

0,/( (1'

Bow Road

Leadenhall Street

ITE

RO AD

Bus stops B, G , J A , C , F, K , S B, G , J A , C , F, K , S

Whitechapel

VINE T UR CO

CEPH AS

STRE ET

KEY CLOSE

[

STREE TURNER

Towards Leyton Paddington Aldgate Tottenham Court Road

RE ET D ST AR RE ET RW P ST DU THRO W IN

NT EAST MOU STRE ET

Aldgate (DVW

Y ST

Aldgate

Liverpool Street

A R L I NG ROW

E GU TA T ON EE M STR

NE W

N205

N253

Shoreditch High Street

Gower Street

Whitechapel Sports Centre

Shoreditch Curtain Road

STREE T

Sainsbury ’s

Swanlea School

LOM AS STR EET

R OA

Old Street

Night buses Bus route

0RRUÀHOGV (\H +RVSLWDO

Bus stops B, G , J A , C , F, K , S M, N, W B, G , J A , C , F, K , S A , C , K , P, R B, E , J, M , N B, E , L , M , N A , C , H, P, R

HEADLAM

Burial Ground

AN CE

254

Towards Ilford Oxford Circus Finsbury Park Bow Paddington Aldgate Holloway Bethnal Green Crossharbour

ISLINGTON

Angel

VA L L

24 hour service

SELBY STREET

Principal Borough Roads

Stratford International g

Islington

Day buses including 24-hour services

SCOTT STREET

Y ROA

Caledonian Road

GRA NAR

King ’s Cross

Stratford Stratford High Street

(DVW 9LOODJH

HEMMING STRE

King ’s Cross

Route finder 25

Broadway

BARNSLEY STREET

TENT STREET

St Pancras International

Stratford Stratford

Bethnal Green

Three Colts Lane

(XVWRQ

TRLN Roads

8QLYHUVLW\ RI (DVW /RQGRQ

Downsell Road

Cambridge Heath Road (XVWRQ Square

Romford Road

N205 Leyton

Old Ford Road

Mare Street Well Street

Camden Road

Warren Street

106 205

Forest Gate Princess Alice

Cambridge Heath

Bus route

Woodgrange Park

London Chest Hospital

Hackney Central

Great Portland Street

(86721

Library

D3 Bethnal Green

Hackney Downs

254

Regent ’s Park

Ilford Romford Road

Clapton Pond

Library

106

Nag ’s Head

for Madame Tussaud ’s

Hainault Street

ILFORD

Broadway

Stoke Newington

Riv er

Marylebone Baker Street

24 hour service

Stoke Newington Common

Green Lanes

Finsbury Park

(GJZDUH 5RDG

Stamford Hill

Lordship Park

205 N205 Paddington

25 Ilford

approximately 50% of the length of the carriageway on the south and 60% on the north side and carries high volumes of passengers to, from and via Whitechapel. Bus stop B on the north side on the left of the station when exiting serves bus routes 25, 205 N205 and N253. Due to Crossrail works, bus 254 is temporarily not stopping at this bus stop and has been rerouted to bus stop W on Cavell Street. Bus stop E located in front of the Ideas Store is still signed as serving the 254 and the N253. Only one bus stop serves east / west travel on the south side at Bus Stop A in front of the old Royal Hospital building. To accommodate the CS2 which runs behind the bus stop, a ‘floating’ bus stop has been installed where passengers cross the cycle lane with caution to reach the bus shelter. The bus stop waiting environment at stops B and E is often obscured and encroached upon by market infrastructure such as stalls, waste bins, carts and cages. The bus stops can be difficult to sight from the Station entrance, especially when the market is operational, and poor lighting can add to the sense of insecurity during the hours of darkness. Buses operating through Whitechapel have predominantly diesel engines which contributes to poor air quality in the area.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Road Network Whitechapel Road (the A11) is part of the Transport for London Road Network (TLRN) which travels towards East Cross in the east and the City In the West and is part of the strategic road network. The A11 is located between other strategic TRLN routes, the A13 to the south the A12 to the east and the A1202 to the west. There are approximately 25,000 daily bi-directional vehicle movements through Whitechapel Road. In the study area the A11 is formed of 4 lanes, 2 lanes in each direction, as it travels through Whitechapel, causing severance to the commercial and civic core of the study area. There are three approach lanes at the Vallance Road and Cambridge Heath junctions. In addition there are dedicated left turns for cyclists at these junctions. There are three crossing points: one at Cambridge Heath junction, one at Court Street which serves the temporary Station entrance on Durward Street and one at Vallance Road junction. Whitechapel Road is an important bus corridor serving some of London’s most used bus routes. Bus lanes operate in sections on the north and south of Whitechapel Road.

The Cycle Superhighway, CS2, travels through the study area and is segregated to the south and it shares space with the bus lane to the north. As part of the study’s traffic modelling study, peak traffic times were observed for Vallance Road junction at 08:15 -9:15 (am peak) and between 17:45-18:45 (pm peak). Cambridge Heath junction peak times have been recorded at 8:30-9:30am and 16:3017:30.pm

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

129

Growth in use of Public Transport, walking and cycling DfT bi-directional average annual daily flow Whitechapel Rd. 2015 – Total vehicles 22,849

Census 2001 -2011, Travel to Work Methods LBTH (in percent)

2015

Other On foot

4% 4%

12%

Bicycle Pedal Cycles Pedal Cycles

Motorcycles Motorcycles Cars/Taxis Cars/Taxis Buses/Coaches Buses/Coaches Light Goods VehiclesVehicles Light Goods All HGVs All HGVs

66%

Source: DfT Traffic Counts

Traffic Flow Analysis The Department for Transport count point located just east of Cambridge Heath junction recorded 22,849 vehicles per day in 2015. The majority of vehicles are classified as cars / taxis and represent 72% of all motor traffic or 66% of all traffic including pedal cycles. LGVs and HGVs make up 12.7% and 4.7% of total traffic. In 2010 the overall traffic count registered 27,655 vehicles per day. Comparing the 2010 figures to 2015, cars have decreased by 12% and LGVs and HGVs by approximately one third.

Bidirectional flow (all motored vehicles) 2013 Increase / decrease % since 2009 Motor vehicles

24,506 - 6%

Cyclists

5,383

+ 77%

Buses

1,762

+ 10%

Passenger in a car or van Driving a car or van Motorcycle/ Scooter/ moped Taxi Bus/minibus / coach Train Underground/ metro/light rail/tram Work mainly from home 0

10% 20% 30% 40%

2011 2001

Travel to work methods

Source:TfL Surface Transport Outcome Plan 2015

Car ownership and travel to work methods were analysed for trends in movement within the area. The Office for National Statistics (ONS) figures show that Tower Hamlets has one of the lowest car ownership rates of any London borough. According to the ONS, 63% (63,797) households in Tower Hamlets do not own a car or van. This graph shows a decrease in car ownership (19,215 households) from the 2001 Census figures.

According to TfL data the bi-directional daily flow of vehicles was 24,506 (vehicles per day) in 2013. Between 2009 and 2013 motor vehicle traffic flow has fluctuated between 26,000 and 23,000 vehicles per day.

130

Vehicle Occupancy

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Lower car ownership has coincided with the rise in the use of bus , walking and cycling as modes of transport. The travel to work methods analysis show an increase in cycling, walking, bus and Underground use and a decrease in car usage.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

131

Cycling Infrastructure

Cycle Superhighway Upgraded on-road cycle network Canal and riverside path Park and green spaces route Quietway Phase 1 Quietway Phase 2 Potential additional routes Planned routes by neighbouring boroughs Parallel canal route Quietway Green spaces and parks

New Traffic lights at Vallance Road/ New Road Junction heading west

LBTH Cycling Strategy 2016 – Existing – proposed Quietways and new routes. Source: LBTH, A Cycling Borough 2016

Cycling rates in LBTH are increasing. The rate of commuters travelling to work by cycle went from 3% of travel to work in 2001, to 6.4% in 2011.

inconsistently marked, with poor surface treatment and requires a systematic upgrade to take account of the latest London Cycle Design Standards.

Whitechapel Ward has shown also an increase in rates from 2.7% in 2001 to 7.1% in 2011. The neighbouring borough of Hackney has the highest percentage of cyclists travelling to work out of all London boroughs with 13.8%.

Currently there are no Quietways in the study area. These are key to encourage people who prefer to cycle at a more gentle, safe pace. A Quietway is planned from Hackney Wick to Liverpool Street and it will run parallel to the CS2 and is scheduled to commence once Crossrail has been completed.

S2 Cycle Superhighway runs through C the study area and it was completed in February 2016. Currently CS2 is segregated only on the south side of the High Street and shares space with the bus lane on the north.

To accommodate the growth in cyclists and cycle journeys, safe cycle parking provision will need to increase to cater for the increased flows to the area that will be generated by Crossrail, and the forecast increase in employment, educational and retail opportunities.

The key to encourage more cyclists is to improve the safety. From 2 012 to 2014, 29 collisions involving cyclists were registered on Whitechapel Road. A cyclist was killed at the junction with Cavell Street and Commercial Road in 2014. The non-segregated section of the CS2 on the north side can be intimidating for cyclists where they have to share the road with buses, and where market waste and bins encroach onto the carriageway. The proposed network of Quietways and new routes along with the borough-wide speed limit of 20mph should help encourage more cyclists.

Percentage of workers in LBTH who commute by bicycle London

England and Wales except London Tower Hamlets

allance Road is a part of the London V Cycle Network which is a signed route from Hackney Road to Cable Street which satisfies a north / south desire line and links CS2 and CS3. Currently this route is

132

BTH Cycling strategy has identified L further potential cycling routes in the study area along Cambridge Heath Road through to Jubilee Street to connect to CS3 and is part of the Borough’s aim to double the cycling to work rates to at least 15% by 2025.

Hackney

2011 2001 Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

0 1% 2% 3% 4% 5% 6% 7% 8% 9% 10% 11% 12% 13%

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

133

Pedestrian Infrastructure and Movement

The width of the footpath on the north side is generous ranging from approximately 16 metres at its widest (corner with Brady St.) and 10 metres at its narrowest (between Vallance Road and Fulbourne St). However, the effective width of the footpath is compromised by the infrastructure of the market, with its stalls, carts, stock and waste adding to the sense of clutter.

Formal Crossing The footfall survey conducted from 7am to 7pm on Thursday 21st April 2016 captured formal crossings at Vallance Road Junction, at the temporary crossing at Court Street and at the crossings at Cambridge Heath junction. The survey showed that the temporary crossing at Court Street to access the temporary station entrance on Durward Street is the busiest north / south crossing

The catenary lighting columns are located along the length of the street and are positioned approximately 4 metres from the building line. During trading hours the area from the lighting column to the drainage channel close to the stall boundaries can be obstructed by items such as stock, packaging and waste. Where customers congregate in front of stalls, further pinch points are created affecting pedestrian comfort levels. Along with street furniture, stock from stores, advertising boards and the large volume of people passing can give the footway a sense of crowding.

Formal crossing diagrams: The arrows indicate the direction of pedestrian movement and the size of the arrow is indicative of the volume of people crossing. FORMAL CROSSINGS

ge H brid Cam Maples Pl

Cavell St

Fulbourne Rd Turner St

East Mount St

Source: illustration by objectif after data provided by Civic

FORMAL CROSSINGS SATURDAY 23/04/2016

ge H brid Cam Maples Pl

Cavell St

East Mount St

Fulbourne Rd Turner St

New Rd

ey St

Sidn

Formal Crossings, Saturday 23/04/2016

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Brady St

Court St

Vallance Rd

eath

Traffic Survey Partners were commissioned to capture footfall movements along Whitechapel Road and the footfall survey took place on Thursday 21st of April 2016 and on Saturday 23rd of April 2016. The survey recorded pedestrian movements along an approximately 500 metre section of Whitechapel Road from the Cambridge Heath Road to the Vallance Road junction. In terms of overall levels of activity, the north side of Whitechapel Road registered higher movements of pedestrians, with the temporary Whitechapel Station Entrance on Durward Street being the main focus of movement. The survey registered higher levels of movements during the week.

ey St

Formal Crossings, Thursday 21/04/2016

Sidn

New Rd

Brady St

Court St

Vallance Rd

eath

THURSDAY 21/04/2016

The widths on the south side of Whitechapel Road fluctuate between 11 metres at the widest point towards Sidney Street junction to 5.5 metres at its narrowest near the junction with New Rd.

134

and is a key crossing point with 18,772 north / south movements. The nearest formal crossings are located approximately 100 metres to the west and 360 metres to the east. The busiest formal east / west crossing is located at the pelican crossing to the north at Vallance Road, with a total of 12,089 pedestrian movements.

Source: illustration by objectif after data provided by Civic

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

135

Informal Crossing Informal crossings were recorded along seven screen lines, which are represented A to G in the formal crossing diagram. The main locations for informal crossing on Whitechapel Road are from Cavell Street to and from Brady Street and the Idea Store (section F in the informal crossing plan) with 4,394 people crossing north / south on the week day (2126 heading north and 2268 heading south).

Another key location for informal crossing is adjacent to Zone F from the Post Office to East Mount Street (Zone E) crossing from the hospital to the north side with 1,392 movements. On Thursday 21st April 14% of overall pedestrian movements in the study area registered as informal crossings. When looking at north / south formal crossings only, this percentage rises to 25.5%. On Saturday 23rd, 15.3% of pedestrian movements registered as informal crossings. When looking at north / south crossings only, this percentage rises to 31.4%.

Formal crossing diagrams: The arrows indicate the direction of pedestrian movement and the size of the arrow is indicative of the volume of people crossing. CROSSINGS INFORMAL

ge H brid Cam Maples Pl

East Mount St

Cavell St

Fulbourne Rd Turner St

ey St

Informal crossings, Thursday 21/04/2016 INFORMAL CROSSINGS

Sidn

New Rd

Brady St

Court St

Vallance Rd

eath

THURSDAY 21/04/2016

Source: illustration by objectif after data provided by Civic

136

brid ge H Cam Maples Pl

1903 Cavell St

East Mount St

Turner St

ey St

Informal crossings, Saturday 23/04/2016

Sidn

New Rd

1927

Fulbourne Rd

Brady St

Court St

Vallance Rd

eath

SATURDAY 23/04/2016

Source: illustration by objectif after data provided by Civic

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Evidence of informal crossing along the Whitechapel Road and of conditions while crossing on desire lines.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

137

Key Movement Routes The weekday recorded 19.6% higher flows along Whitechapel Road, with 232,362 movements compared to the weekend figure of 194,235. The north of Whitechapel Road shows the highest levels of movements with 104% more pedestrian traffic compared to the south, with the Station being the main generator of pedestrian flow in the area.

The busiest movements on the weekday are on/off Court Street, registering a total of 13,662 north movements and 8,025 south movements heading east and 4,302 movements heading west from Court Street on to Whitechapel Road. The busiest times are at the AM peak and in the evenings from 4pm to 7pm. Brady Street is second busiest route on the north side of Whitechapel Road with a total of 4,548 south movements heading west and 2,126 south movements off Brady Street heading east. The total north movements are 5,583.

On the south of Whitechapel Road, East Mount Street, the route to the Royal Hospital, registered the highest flows with 5,888 movements heading south in the AM. Turner Street was the second busiest area with 4,136 pedestrians heading north east with the crossing to Court Street being the main generator of trips.

DIRECTIONAL FLOW THURSDAY 21/04/2016 eath ge H brid

Fulbourne Rd

Cam Maples Pl

Cavell St

East Mount St

New Rd

Turner St

Vallance Rd

ge H brid Cam Maples Pl

East Mount St

Cavell St

Fulbourne Rd Turner St

New Rd

ey St

Directional flow, Thursday 21/04/2016

Sidn

Source: illustration by objectif after data provided by Civic

DIRECTIONAL FLOW SATURDAY 23/04/2016

eath ge H brid

Fulbourne Rd

Cam Maples Pl

Cavell St

East Mount St

New Rd

Turner St

Vallance Rd

ge H brid Cam Maples Pl

Cavell St

East Mount St

Fulbourne Rd Turner St

New Rd

ey St

Directional flow, Saturday 23/04/2016

Sidn

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Brady St

Source: illustration by objectif after data provided by Civic

Court St

ey St Sidn

138

Brady St

Footway flow, Saturday 23/04/2016

Court St

Vallance Rd

eath

SATURDAY 23/04/2016

Brady St

ey St

Sidn

Footway flow, Thursday 21/04/2016 FOOTWAY FLOW

Court St

Brady St

Court St

Vallance Rd

eath

FOOTWAY FLOW THURSDAY 21/04/2016

Source: illustration by objectif after data provided by Civic

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

139

Collision Analysis

Towards a low emission Area

Collisions 2012-2014 Cambridge Heath Rd – Cleveland Way Brady St – Cambridge Heath Rd Vallance Rd – Brady St Greatorex St – Vine Ct Cleveland Way Jct

Cambridge Heath Rd Jct

Brady St Jct

Vallance Rd Jct No. Collisions of which serious of which cyclists involved Pedestrian informal crossing

Fieldgate St Jct

0 10 20 30 40 50

Locations of Collisions

Personal injury collisions were recorded for a 36 month period to 31 December 2014. 192 collisions occurred on the section of Whitechapel Road from Plumbers Row to Cleveland Way of which 25 of were classed as serious. Over 20 pedestrians were injured while informally crossing Whitechapel Road. 29 cyclists were involved in collisions. This was prior to the opening of the segregated cycle lane on most of Whitechapel Road and the introduction of dedicated left turn for cyclists travelling west through Vallance Road / New Road junction and at Cambridge Heath junction for cyclists travelling east. Cambridge Heath Road junction registered 46 collisions while 27 collisions were registered on Vallance Road junction.

<16

37 40 Passes annual mean objective

>97

Fails annual mean objective

Pollution Whitechapel Road is located in a GLA Air Quality Focus Area which not only exceeds the annual EU limit for N02 but also has high human exposure. Pollution causes 9,500 premature deaths per year in London. N02 levels are nearly double the EU permitted level and have serious health implications for, residents, school children, patients, workers and commuters. For both PM10 and PM2.5 particulate pollution Whitechapel Road along with most of central London is at EU Limit Values. However these pollutants are damaging to health at any level and in particular at long term exposure. Traffic emissions, particularly diesel engines, along with brake and tyre wear are the main sources of pollutants. Approximately 29,000 pupils in Tower Hamlets are exposed to illegal levels of NO2.

Whitechapel Masterplan Area PM 10 Pollution Map Source: TfL

DEFRA reports that London will exceed EU limits till at least 2030. In close proximity to the Royal London Hospital this level of pollution does not aid the recovery and well-being of patients. Exceeding limits – Nitrogen dioxide NO2 above EU limit primarily due to traffic congestion; – EU limit: 40 ug/m3. Whitechapel Road: 76 ug/m3; – PM10 (Particulate Matter up to 10 micrometers in size) is at or above EU limits of 40 ug/m3; – GLA Air Quality Focus Area- exceeds EU limit for NO2 and has high human exposure; – 38% of Nitrogen Oxides NOx comes from buses and 29% from HGVs.

Source: King’s College/Policy Exchange Up in the Air study.

140

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

141

NO2 (µg/m3) < 16 16 - 19

The Market

19 - 22 22 - 25 25 - 28 28 - 31 31 - 34

Designing for the local economy

34 - 37

37 - 40 40 - 43

Limit

43 - 55 55 - 58 58 - 73 73 - 76 76 - 97 > 97 0

0.15

0.3

0.6 Km

TRANSPORT FOR LONDON PLANNING © Crown copyright and database rights 2015 Ordnance Survey 100035971; Digital Map Data © Collins Bartholomew Ltd (2015)

Document Path: \\Onelondon.tfl.local\Shared\5026d\Air Quality Strategy\LAEI\LAEI 2013\Data Request Log\20161118_MartinGilmour_WhitechapelRoadNO2\Workspaces\20161118_WhitechapelRoadNO2.mxd 18/11/2016

Whitechapel Masterplan Area

Annual mean NO2 air pollution for 2010, in microgrammes per metre cubed (µg/m3). Source: www.cleanerairforlondon.org.uk (site now closed)

<16 16 19 22 25 28 31 34 37 40 43 46 49 52 55 58 61 64 67 70 73 76 79 82 85 88 91 94 >97 EU Limit

Whitechapel

Low Emission Area From September 2020, all motor vehicles including, private cars and buses will need to meet new exhaust emission standards, or pay a daily charge when travelling in central London. This will be in addition to the congestion charge. Vehicles passing through Whitechapel en route to the City will need to become cleaner in order to avoid the new charge. To have a positive impact on the study area an extension of the Ultra Low Emissions Zone (ULEZ) would be required. Congestion Zone and Ultra Low Emissions Zone boundaries.

142

Windsor House, 42-50 Victoria Street London SW1H 0TL

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

The Market is comprised of approximately 116 stalls arranged linearly along the Whitechapel Road from Vallance Road to Cambridge Heath Road. Whitechapel station is located centrally and is the focal point for pedestrian movement drawing pedestrians east /west and north/south. The market operates Monday to Saturday attracting many visitors to the area and is an important meeting and focal point for the local community. The Market is serviced by loading bays along Whitechapel Road with 20 minute loading times. However, from observation approximately 11 vans are parked in the morning in the loading bays and remain parked for much of the day. Market traders assemble / disassemble stalls every morning and evening. Stalls are stored in various lock ups which vary in distance from the market and have to be carted along narrow footways such as on Vallance Road. Some stalls structures are not stored overnight, and are left chained to street furniture on Whitechapel Road causing

obstruction and clutter even on Sundays when the market is not operational. This detracts from the public realm and the historic fabric of the area. The market’s operational stock is stored in vans which are parked for numerous hours throughout the day on Whitechapel Road and adjoining side streets, creating a visual and physical barrier along the north side. The market can in these ways interfere with pedestrian flow, especially at points where shops also have stock displayed outside and where stalls have encroached on the pavement. The stalls located closest to the station entrance cause pinch points and affect pedestrian comfort levels. Refuse encroaches on the footway and occasionally on to the portion of the road which is designated as the Cycle Superhighway. Bus stops B and E are difficult to see from the station and their proximity to refuse bins and market clutter creates a poor waiting environment.

Views of the Whitechapel Market.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

143

3.2

Movement — Opportunities and Emerging Themes

144

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

145

Approach There is a finite amount of space available in Whitechapel Road and its environs, understood as the available ground plane from building line to building line, to meet the current and forecasted needs of the people of Tower Hamlets and the wider community of Whitechapel. Every square metre of space needs to be carefully allocated to ensure that it is offering the optimum advantage to the function and environmental quality needed to serve the diverse needs of a London Borough District Centre.

The cycle superhighway is a significant and strategic link offering attractive active travel as part of a coordinated city-wide network that passes through the centre of Whitechapel. We support this approach entirely and propose to make distinct and intuitive provision for cycle routes through the space, however we believe the behaviour of cyclists using the resulting cycle infrastructure should be based on a design speed of 13mph or 20kmph. Cycling at these speeds is more appropriate to a district centre environment where pedestrians and social life have priority. (https://ec.europa.eu/environment/ecoap/ news/green-waves-cyclists-danish-cities_en)

Bus waiting environment

For the purposes of developing our design, we started by removing all of the existing roadway features within the immediate footprint of Whitechapel Road. Furthermore, the free and safe movement of people around the street with easy comfortable access to the buildings, market stalls and public transport station, is prioritised, all of which meets the principles set out in the various prevailing studies and the objectives of the project brief.

Place / Movement

146

CS2 Upgrade

Bus Operations The siting, access and bus waiting environment is key to making bus travel a more attractive experience. However, the pedestrian crossing demand means dedicating single purpose bus lanes within the street needs to be evaluated against the impact on north-south connectivity. The supplementary pedestrian survey records the high demand to cross Whitechapel Road, with the Station, market, Ideas Store and schools to the north and the Hospital, QMUL, Barts and Innovation Centre to the south generating footfall. There is currently only one crossing between the Vallance Road junction and Cambridge Heath junction which is at Court Street.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

The Court Street crossing is situated approximately 300m from Cambridge Heath. This encourages a high percentage of informal crossings especially in the area in the vicinity of Brady Street/ Ideas Store and Cavell Street/Maples Place and the Post Office on the south side. The lack of crossings along the whole 500m stretch of road from Vallance Road to Cambridge Heath further encourages informal crossing, with 14% of overall pedestrian movements in the study area registering as informal crossings. When looking at north / south crossings only, this percentage rises to 25.5%. This high percentage of informal crossings where pedestrians have to negotiate four lanes of traffic travelling at speed (30mph speed limit still in effect at time of survey), is a danger to vulnerable pedestrians. The advent of Crossrail opening in 2018, added to further residential, educational, business and retail offerings will only lead to more demand and pressure on pedestrian comfort levels in the near future. The available data set out in the brief and baseline, corroborated by supplementary footfall surveys undertaken in April 2016, supports the view that footfall and pedestrian activity should be the most dominant user of the space and therefore pedestrians needs should be allocated more space within the ground plane. Three options have been prepared with varying degrees of space within the ground plane allocated to different combinations of users. The results of this modelling will need open debate to judge what allocation offers the best balance of outcomes across the board.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

147

Crossing Whitechapel Road Most people in Whitechapel need to cross Whitechapel Road and do so in a wide variety of locations along the street with a corresponding variety of risk within the current system. The type of facilities required depend on many, often interlinked factors. The complex combination of these factors affect the choice of provision. The proposals have had to balance these competing issues, which have emerged as the most important considerations through the baseline analysis and guided by the objectives of the brief. The principles affecting this selection process include: – Numbers of people wishing to cross at any one time; – Speed and volume of traffic; – Crossing distance; – Confidence of person crossing; – Age of person crossing; – Physical or visual conditions of the person crossing; – Perception of danger; – Time of the day. Examples of linked issues are as follows: – High volumes of traffic at peak times when children are crossing the road to a primary school. This will include people with pushchairs who are not able to move or react as quickly as they would on their own. There is often a perception of danger amongst parents and children will not have the same awareness as adults. Subjective safety might be the main issue for users in this situation and dealing with the following concerns may be the prime consideration: – High volumes of people crossing Whitechapel Road where through traffic is permitted, with parking and loading taking place; 148

– People wishing to cross Whitechapel Road from residential area in the north to access the hospital. The volume and speed of the traffic at certain times of the day may not be high and gaps will therefore be easier to find, but the physical and visual conditions of users and their different ages might lead to different needs from crossing facilities. The principal design consideration is to accommodate crossings where people want to go (desire lines). If pedestrian crossings require large diversions from desire lines or impose substantial waiting times, they may not be used (diminishing the value of provision), or people will stick to their desire line, which may perpetuate or create a safety problem. There is a need to ensure that the width of a crossing is appropriate for the numbers of people expected to use it. A wider crossing will accommodate more people crossing at the same time. Designs have been developed based on a 20mph design speed. A design speed has been used to inform the layout and order of the landscape as a self-enforcing environment rather than a speed limit communicated by lining and signing, which is open to a greater degree of discretion by drivers. Whitechapel Road is wide and the use of pedestrian refuges or a meridian strip offers pedestrians the opportunity to negotiate bike or vehicular traffic one lane at a time, approaching from one direction only in a staged crossing on each of the options. The crossings have been shown in a different colours to the carriageway and the bike lanes to indicate a contrast in materials, texture and order. The general arrangement of the pavements has been informed by the four guiding principles of inclusive design requirements:

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

– Early and meaningful engagement with local representatives from this group; – Even, wide and firm pavements under foot. Back of pavement definition with shop fronts clear of ‘A’ boards or other temporary or fixed obstructions; – A distinct shore line on the outer edge of the pavement that will vary in width, occupied for large parts of the day and week by market stalls on the north side, but extending out to the cycle lane and traffic lanes, with clearly marked links to the pedestrian crossings along the street; – Clear, comfortable and reliable pedestrian crossings at regular intervals along desire lines. The crossings in all options have been designed at the same grade as the adjacent footway, reinforcing the comfort and priority afforded to pedestrians over vehicles in these locations. The junctions at Cambridge Heath and Vallance Road are currently controlled by traffic lights. Systematic management of traffic can lead to waiting time inefficiencies, for the simple reason that pre-progrmamed red phasing on lights means that at certain times it is inevitable that arms of a junction may be signalled green while there is no traffic availing of the green phase. Furthermore containing and marshalling vehicles into groups and releasing them in a staged and mechanical manner is not necessarily sophisticated enough to deal with the huge number of variables that the junctions are confronted with at different parts of any given hour, on any given day, or any given month or season. The scale of the junction spaces needed to facilitate the operation of a traffic light system, with cycling infrastructure layered on top, is a function of queuing and storage for waiting and manoeuvring

vehicles. This results in the junction geometry needing to be large enough to accommodate these vehicles under these conditions and junctions need to occupy a large footprint of ground plane within the limited availability of the street, which also increases the distances that cyclists and pedestrians need to travel to cross the junctions. These crossings are convoluted and counter-intuitive making them less attractive to use, especially for vulnerable people, observations reinforced in the findings of the traffic modelling report. Changing the perception and experience of Whitechapel Road safety and user appeal is critical to encouraging these people to walk and cycle the typically short distances that they currently prefer to drive. The current, hard engineered quality of Whitechapel Road can be softened to make connections to wider network of new and historic green spaces threaded along a reimagined network of routes, especially north / south. These routes can be shaped and ordered with the use of green infrastructure in the form of trees, rain gardens or other surface water components to create a coherent, legible neighbourhood-wide series of multipurpose green spaces. The opportunity to deliver these features is limited by the extensive network of below ground utilities and the protection of London Underground infrastructure, however reallocation of ground plane space might offer up new potential to incorporate green infrastructure into the street.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

149

A re

ima

The market The market is a key component in the vibrancy and energy of Whitechapel. However, the current layout and servicing arrangement has an adverse impact on the permeability and aesthetic of the High Street. The constant band of stalls further reinforced by an almost constant band of service vehicles closes off the north side of the street. In many respects this is a function of the current, heavy, east / west bias of the high street and actually provides some protection to those shopping and working in the market from the hostile experience of the carriageway.

gine

hite

A reimagined landscape that reduces the negative impact of traffic by reducing the amount of space it occupies, will allow the market layout to respond to a new pattern of movement that is far less linear east/west, but that carves out regular and attractive north/south routes, creating a loose grid of movement throughout the street.

cha

pel

Roa

Whitechapel Market with its current linear layout. OS – Baseline map

150

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

151

Whitechapel Road – Discussion We have carefully considered all of the available project information, supplementary surveys, traffic modelling, feedback from stakeholder consultations and our expertise to prepare three concept proposals for a reimagined Whitechapel Road to meet what we understand as the objectives of the brief. Create Hamlet gateways by changing the appearance and order of the junctions at Vallance Road and Cambridge Heath to set distinct thresholds, making it clear to any traveller that they are crossing from one environment to another. Allow the architecture and buildings to occupy the streetscape, extend the activity of buildings along the route to encourage greater interactivity between street and ground floor uses. This offers a much more attractive and welcoming experience, creating more social spaces and a stimulating cognitive environment. Create a coherent landscape connecting north with south seamlessly, rather than along the current, dominant east/west movement axis. Forge regular actual and virtual connections north/south by introducing many and varied crossings, with extended connections into the wider movement network into the surrounding streets such as Durward Place and Stepney Way. This grid of connections can be formed in the landscape with materials, lighting and market stalls, green infrastructure and other static elements such as picnic or seating areas, each carefully positioned to provide protection, shelter and ultimately ease of use along desire lines. There may be a combination or cluster of trees, stalls and benches in a composition or module that can be replicated and given the impression of scattered across the surface.

152

Behavioural impacts This is a landscape for town centre activities, social, commerce and cultural. Cyclists are welcomed into the street and regarded as a regular and natural experience. People don’t feel threatened or awkward by mixing with cyclists because the cyclists are less aggressive and behave in a way that recognises they are in a town centre. Vehicles are accommodated, however their occupation of the space is subordinate and considered, surrendering to town centre activity and qualities. Buses are a common and desirable feature in the street scene, passengers are comfortable waiting for buses and it is easy for them to understand where and when they can expect and access a bus. Reallocating the space away from the highway provides breathing space for the market, allowing them to break out of the longitudinal defensive line, freeing up adjacent pavement space for a greater number of pedestrians. The clustering and order of the market stalls also means that they relate to each other as a sequence rather than a solid block, providing opportunity for shoppers to pause between stalls and occupy pockets of social space sheltered by trees and benefiting from access to swathes of green rain gardens. The Hospital and new Civic Hub offer a forecourt to their patients and citizens that positively contributes to their sense of arrival or departure. Rather than a security line at the building threshold, the public buildings engage with people in the street and draw them into the interior seamlessly.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

To stress test the three options, led initially by traffic modelling, and to develop a more refined and robust scheme, the following questions related to the major proposed moves need to be addressed in the next stage of the process: 1. Reduce number of lanes and reduce road width to enable public realm gain and better integration of the cycle highway into the public realm. – Bus lane impacts: How are buses accommodated if the bus lanes are removed? How would impacts on buses be mitigated, especially at turning points? – Speed Impacts: If traffic speeds are normally reduced when road width is reduced, is this evidenced by credible research, has it been bench marked? Does it have any knock-on impacts in terms of traffic saturation, particularly on traffic moving into central London? – Safety Impacts: How will this intervention reduce pedestrian accidents and what exemplars can be provided to show this impact? – Public Realm Impacts: How would additional public realm enable better security, pedestrian comfort and enable other modes of transport? How would this be measured and where are the current pinch points that could benefit? 2. Will removal of some or all of the traffic lights to enable phased approach to traffic entering the town centre which is guided incrementally by intuitive road design to manage speeds and maintain pedestrian safety?

– Safety Impacts: Do case studies demonstrate that reduced speed and tighter carriageway geometry will enable greater safety and comfort for pedestrians, cyclists and motorists. – Speed Impacts: How does this approach enable management of speed and driver response? – Traffic Flow Impacts: Is there evidence to show this approach aids traffic flow and how is this informed by past examples? 3. Reinstallation of the central reservation in key locations. – Pedestrian Impacts: Where would the central reservation be reinstated to ensure maximum safety for pedestrians? What are the impacts currently of having it removed? – Crossing Removal Impacts: How will pedestrian safety and movement (general pedestrian comfort) be impacted by the removal of the crossing outside the station in terms of pedestrian movement? 4. Ensure planting complements road design to enable boulevard-type design. – Location impacts: What is the evidenced approach for the planting of trees in relation to highway design? Best case studies, etc.? Are there other local authorities considering planting on central reservations and to what height? Is the location suitable also with the tunnels running underneath?

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

153

A Core Road and a City Hub

Design Principles

Reimagining Whitechapel Road

Whitechapel Road today

General

Whitechapel, as a district centre within Tower Hamlets, is a dynamic and vibrant neighbourhood that has already experienced a great deal of recent, positive change and which will see more improvements coming soon. It could be fairly described as the London Borough that is forecast to experience the greatest degree of change in terms of population growth and demographic shift. Analysis of the assembled baseline evidences Whitechapel Road as the centre of gravity for this change, occupying the convergence of commercial, cultural, social, political, transport and medical activity within the district. It makes clear that the demand for space within and around the High Street is very competitive and every square metre of the High Street needs to be carefully allocated and designed to best serve the greatest number of interests over the longest periods, which calls for a definition of space that is versatile and flexible. Defining space within the High Street in this way is an assessment of the balance between place and movement, linked directly to its TLRN status as a Core Road on the approaches to Whitechapel Road and City Hub for its length between and including Vallance Road junction to the west and Cambridge Heath junction to the east. It is this City Hub section of the A11 that forms the centre piece of our opinion.

It is clear from the detailed analysis of its existing performance that the A11 does not perform as a City Hub. Its current arrangement of four traffic lanes, two east bound and two west bound with a shared bus and cycle lane east bound and a segregated cycle lane west bound without a median strip and just a single formal crossing causes a high degree of severance north / south further exacerbated by the layout of the market stalls and the positioning of stall holder vehicles that shields the stalls from highway traffic and simultaneously further limits pedestrian movement north / south. The single formal, traffic light controlled crossing has been temporarily positioned at Court Street to serve the interim rail station access now located on Durward Place. The carefully recorded existing key performance indicators of Whitechapel Road as a City Hub show that it does not meet the required standards in terms of urban realm quality, traffic level of service, safety, convenience, cycle connectivity, street market functionality amongst others. Doing nothing would mean that Whitechapel Road remains under performing within the current demands that are placed upon it and offers no resilience to deal with the significant change that is already in train, which will compound its dysfunctional nature and its poor district centre qualities.

The footprint of Whitechapel Road under consideration needs to contrast with the character and qualities of the rest of the A11, reinstating the physical experience of entering a Hamlet along this strategic route, referencing back to the way the settlement was first established and functioned. The scheme will have a distinct threshold, clearly signalled through the change in physical environment, that makes the balance of users different to the core road approaches from the east and west in particular.

TfL Street Types Core Road City Hub City Street Connector Local Street Town Square

154

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Highways – Speed In all cases the dominance of vehicles will be addressed through a series of measures that reduces carriageway space, tightening up of highway geometry, raising of levels and use of materials amongst other features. Manual for Streets provides useful guidance on the relationship between lane width, forward visibility and traffic speeds, highlighting that narrowing lanes, limiting forward visibility reduces traffic speeds. Employing this approach in the complex streetscape of Whitechapel presents the opportunity to create a self-enforcing 20mph environment. The options consider a range of scenarios with a different number of vehicle lanes, the relative merits and risks associated with each are explored in the comparison table, however the basic premise of more lanes means greater crossing hazard and likelihood of higher vehicle speeds stands. Kerb radii have been tightened so that the crossing distances are minimised, the waiting area enlarged, and the speed at which traffic can turn is reduced. This also has the advantage of pedestrians not needing to

look over their shoulder to see what traffic is approaching. Away from crossings there is a distinct 40mm upstand between carriageway and cycle ways and pavements, this edge is emphasized with a kerb of contrasting colour and texture to surrounding surfaces. Gradients across the surface are no greater than 1:20. Highways – Pedestrian Crossings & Junctions Refuges and median strips allow people to cross the High Street in stages and can be used when gaps in traffic flow can be found, but the gaps in opposing traffic flows do not occur at the same time. They also allow people intimidated by a wide (but not necessarily busy) carriageway to cross in two halves, bearing in mind that Whitechapel is home to the Royal London Hospital, which brings with it a disproportionate number of pedestrians with medical issues and associated higher vulnerability when negotiating busy road crossings. Refuges can be used within the side road entry of a wide junction and allows people to concentrate on fewer traffic movements at a time. They are particularly helpful for younger and older people and people with learning difficulties, who can find it difficult to judge gaps in the second stream of traffic. Blended or continuous footway junctions are increasingly common around London. This type of treatment continues the footway across a side road at the general footway levels and materials, strengthened for traffic use. Drivers are expected to give way to pedestrians and negotiate the crossing of the footway as they would if using an access to a private site. This approach can be used with cycle tracks in parallel with the footway. As most users will not be familiar with the layout, some

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

155

pedestrians may feel intimidated continuing along a footway, which goes over a side road and engagement with access groups is recommended. Selection of materials can also send messages to users. If the entry treatment is surfaced in materials similar to the surrounding carriageway, then pedestrians are more likely to assume traffic priority. Tactile paving should be provided where the footway is left flush with the carriageway; otherwise, visually impaired people may not be aware they are walking into the carriageway. There will be a trade-off between the junction radius and providing the crossing point on the desire line and the need to cut tactile paving when meeting a radius kerb.

seen, and drivers must be able to register the presence of a crossing in time to slow down and stop. An 85th percentile speed of 30mph would normally require a minimum forward visibility of 50m (DfT1995a).

Options 1 and 2 retain controlled crossings at the junctions of Cambridge Heath and Vallance Road. For all 3 options there is also the addition of four new at grade pedestrian crossings strategically located along the street. Zebra crossings are one way of designing and regulating these crossings. Zebra crossings are a type of controlled crossing and provide priority for pedestrians over traffic, but they are not appropriate in all circumstances. Where traffic speeds are higher than about 30mph, pedestrians will find it difficult to use the crossing, and in these circumstances, another crossing type should be considered or vehicle speeds reduced. Zebra crossings are more flexible in terms of positioning and accommodating desire lines than signalcontrolled crossings that need to be set back from junctions as drivers may mistake them as controlling the whole junction. In general, zebra crossings should not be positioned within 5m of a junction approaching a side road. Visibility is important at any crossing. Drivers and pedestrians must be able to see and be 156

Lane widths. Source: Manual for Streets

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Buses – Stopping / Alighting / Embarking

Rail – Station Forecourt / Entrance Access

Whitechapel Road is a strategic corridor for bus routes that also serve the local centre. Bus stop design and location is recognised as a key element in the drive to improve the quality of bus services. From an operational perspective, a well designed bus stop can provide significant benefits. The economic benefits will vary on a case by case basis, and normally be influenced by the volume of bus passengers. Route specific passenger journey data is available to inform designers in the form of boarding and alighting data, and this has been used rather than generic pan-London bus occupancy numbers. For a bus stop to be fully compliant as an accessible bus stop the following criteria need to be met: – Kerb > 100mm – In order for a bus to deploy its ramp safely the ideal range in terms of kerb height is 125–140 mm, with 100mm as the minimum to be compliant. – Clearway in place – On borough roads a clearway is denoted by a thick solid yellow line (TSRGD 1025.1). Each bus stop should have one of these along the length of the bus stop cage. This, in conjunction with the timeplate (TSRGD 924), allows for the enforcement of the no stopping restrictions. The requirement for timeplates has now been removed for roads on the TLRN because the double red line at bus stop denotes no stopping. – Access free of impediments – This is a visual check of the area around the bus stop, including the surrounding pavement, to ensure that the bus will be able to deploy its ramp so that wheelchair users and people with prams can access it.

The arrival of Crossrail brings with it many opportunities for Whitechapel, however it also creates additional competition for space within an already crowded street scene. The expected footfall data has been provided through the following studies: – Crossrail Passenger Demand Forecasting Workshop 2: Latest Entry & Exit Forecasts dated 1st July 2015 – Crossrail Passenger Demand Addendum 1 dated July 2015 – Crossrail Demand Forecasting Workshop April 2015 – BDP Urban Integration Study – Court Street Study 2012 The available information summarises the estimated impact of updated TfL passenger demand forecasts on Crossrail station entry/exits, noting that Crossrail stations have been designed to meet “Sponsor Requirements” which include the best available forecast in 2010. The updated 2015 figures provide a basis for consideration of the wider borough interfaces around the stations, including bus planning and urban realm ‘sizing’. Crossrail delivery partners will continue to work together to further evaluate these changes and take action where necessary. The 2010 forecast (2026) had shown Whitechapel ticket hall total of 12,150 of which 4,150 were related to Crossrail. The 2015 forecast (2026) shows Whitechapel ticket hall total of 15,700 of which 5,950 were related to Crossrail. The TfL workshop and research paper conclusions make reference to additional modelling of stations and their designs being undertaken where increases between 2010 & 2015 data exceeded 1,000 trips and unless otherwise noted additional forecasted trips could be accommodated within current station

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

157

designs. Whitechapel station is not noted, therefore it is assumed that its designed capacity can accommodate the increased quantum of traffic. It is also worth noting that TfL’s reference material includes GLA population forecast data that shows Tower Hamlets as one of the only two boroughs across the city with 50% or more forecast increase in population by 2031. It is understood that passive future proofing for station access and movement capacity along with associated physical space has been set aside at Whitechapel with a potential additional entrance at the Cambridge Heath end of the station. On inspection there appears to be a risk associated with calculating and designing future station demand based on a forecast horizon of 2026. In the period between the two assessments of 2010 and 2015 the figure as a whole has increased by almost 30% in 5 years (43% related to Crossrail demand). This exponential degree of growth is further underlined by the accepted likelihood that the population of Tower Hamlets is set to increase by a further circa 50% by 2031. Passively protecting physical space around a future Crossrail entrance at the Cambridge Heath end of the station limits the ability to develop structures and accommodation in a highly desirable and logically located part of the district plan. Based on the available information it seems that station trip demand may have been underestimated, which affects a number of design parameters within the station, its accesses and the surrounding environment. Whatever the outcome of a revisited trip demand exercise, it appears that passively protecting the potential additional entrance space at Cambridge Heath hampers the Boroughs ability to properly plan and coordinate new development in critical areas of the district centre. What is the trigger point in realised or reliably forecasted trip numbers to 158

commit to this additional entrance? Or perhaps there is an opportunity to fix and construct a conservatively sized Cambridge Heath entrance envelope to allow surrounding development to be undertaken without compromising the future entrance being fitted out in due course. Cycling The role of cycling as a means of transport across London is well documented and a detailed assessment of how it fits within the existing and variant proposals in Whitechapel Road is catalogued in the CLOS assessment appended to this report. However the competition for space within the landscape on Whitechapel Road means that reallocation is necessary to provide the high quality and safe cycling infrastructure London aspires to within this City Hub. Market – Servicing and Operational Needs The Market is at the heart of Whitechapel life. The configuration of the existing market in terms of the layout of stalls and how they are serviced is a defensive response to the hostile highway environment in which it is set. Stalls are huddled onto pavements with storage of goods and associated service vehicles forming a barrier between the stalls and the carriageway behind. This combines to create a cluttered landscape, obstructing physical and visual connections onto and across the highway, that brings with it heightened complications for pedestrians, cyclists and traders wishing to cross the space. There is a need to rationalize the servicing and consider reordering how service vehicles access the bays provided to support the traders. Reallocation of

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

space and better management are needed to improve this arrangement and the safety of the market environment. Emergency Services – Emergency Access The Royal London Hospital is a major medical facility located in the heart of Whitechapel. This includes an accident and emergency unit, so ambulance traffic is frequent. The access needs for this service have been discussed with the London Ambulance Service and their requirements for safe access are reflected in the variant options provided and appraised. This same rationale applies to other emergency services such as the police and fire brigade. Public Realm – Leisure / Recreation / Open Spaces Offering a coherent series of social spaces that vary in scale and character spread around the street is a core objective of the brief. The connectivity, environmental quality (in terms of noise and air quality) as well as physical shelter from vehicles are key factors in determining the success and attractiveness of these spaces and the fundamental balance of the street as a whole. Reallocation of space is needed to provide meaningful opportunity for these spaces to root and function. The assessment of risk across each variant option offers a gauge on these benefits.

3 Opportunities Understanding and agreeing the current and future patterns of behaviour and role of Whitechapel Road as part of a district wide and highway network wide assessment in close consultation with LBTH and TfL officers amongst other stakeholders, has led to the generation of three options for the redesign and landscape change to this City Hub. There remains further analysis and consultation to develop and refine these options to identify the optimum solution that best serves the conflicting, competing and challenging needs for this complex piece of cityscape. Whitechapel Road as the heart of public life, must actively enable access by all in society, and it must also support efficient access by delivery, service and emergency vehicles. At the same time it should be an attractive place to shop, eat, drink, work, play, do business, meet, study, hang around and look at. There is no such thing as the perfect street and the final solution will be a delicate negotiation of fine judgements based on reliable data that will ultimately come down to a political decision on what compromises are acceptable in which areas. With this in mind the 3 Options have been developed to provide a sufficiently broad range and allow stakeholders to appraise the relative merits of each. This approach also has the added benefit of pursuing the option with the highest degree of change in incremental stages, Option 2 building on Option 1 and Option 3 building on Option 2. The 3 options are briefly described next in terms of movement analysis and intent. For more design information please refer to the section ‘Key Projects’ of this book.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

159

Option 1 This requires the least amount of change, although it does offer significant opportunity for public realm improvements and street de-cluttering generally. The street geometry generally remains as existing with four lanes of traffic and the junctions at Vallance Road and Cambridge Heath stay traffic light controlled. There is no additional space provided for the market on the northern pavement. However, there is a new east bound segregated cycle lane, while not impinging on existing available space for the street market or its servicing. It also provides four new at grade pedestrian crossings sited along key north / south axes along the length of the street and a reinstatement of a 1.5m wide central median strip, where this space results from trimmed lane widths. The space has been arranged to work with the southern kerb as existing that has been recently installed as part of the CS2 Works.

staged crossing fashion. More confident pedestrians can cross wherever they wish and have the intermediate protection of a traffic free 1.5m wide strip running along the length of the street. There may be short sections of this median space that become shallow rain gardens that drain highway surface water and connect back to the trunk system. It is acknowledged that Whitechapel Road is designated as a TfL Special Engineering Difficulty space due to the fact that TfL / London Underground assets are located at shallow depth below the existing prevailing cover levels. The rain gardens can be designed to be shallow to respond to this constraint along with careful specification of pit details, root barriers, dimensions and growing media. Option 2

The crossings are located on Brady Street / Cavell Street; one linking the Whitechapel Road station in the north to the entrance to the main hospital along East Mount Street in the south; one located in front of the old hospital building entrance that will become the new council offices; and one linking Turner Street in the south to Fulborne Street in the north. The crossings are 12m wide and meet with the raised crossing design guidance from TfL buses with 1:26 ramps to transition from general carriageway up and down 40mm to the raised central section of the platform. These crossings are intended for vulnerable pedestrians to use, offering wide, at grade and protected routes.

This option reduces the number of traffic lanes down to one in each direction and the traffic lights at Vallance Road and Cambridge Heath are altered to allow straight across crossings only, eliminating left and right filter lanes. This option also includes the new east bound segregated cycle lane, four at grade crossings and central median strip described in Option 1. The cycle lanes are shown segregated from carriageway vehicles by 1m wide strip. This strip may simply be a heavily textured rumble strip, which will allow market service vehicles to carefully negotiate across the cycle lane to their designated service areas on the market side of the cycle lane. Or they may be planted with shallow rain gardens subject to detailed checks on below ground constraints and TfL London Underground asset positions.

The reinstated central median strip provides a simple refuge for pedestrians to negotiate traffic approaching from a single direction at any one time in a self

Reducing the number of lanes begins to meaningfully reallocate carriageway space away from vehicles to become public realm. The simplification of the

160

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

traffic light controlled junctions to straight ahead only allows for the tightening up of junction geometry, the surrendered space can similarly be reallocated to public realm, although some form of maintaining bus turning movement would need to be incorporated and this is reflected in the traffic modelling work. Public realm in this instance can mean space available for use as additional street market, servicing, green infrastructure, pedestrian pavement, social spaces, tree planting or other things. It begins the transition of carriageway allocation that exclusively serves the longitudinal vehicle (typically commuter) movement patterns and reapportions that same space as a versatile and flexible ground plane that can be used for a much greater variety of activities at different times of the day, week or year, responding to the needs of the local community and the increasing footfall that will be created as a result of the current, imminent and future local changes and developments. The reallocation of carriageway space will reduce the room for vehicles, requiring buses to share the single lane in each direction with all other vehicular traffic, although bus passing has been incorporated into the proposals in the vicinity of bus stops to minimise traffic queuing when collecting and dropping off passengers. This may be a case of designing the central median strip to be over run or similar. Clearly this needs very careful consideration as the intention is to protect the appeal and reliability of bus journey times such that current private vehicle occupants positively change and choose active travel or public transport. A traffic modelling assessment of this change has been commissioned and designs will be appraised in light of the findings from this study.

Option 3 This option removes the traffic lights at the junctions of Vallance Road and Cambridge Heath, with the expressed intention of smoothing out traffic flow, which should reduce the pressure on waiting traffic when buses collect and drop off passengers and remove the need to provide bus passing spaces in the vicinity of bus stops. When the junction is controlled by traffic lights queues of vehicles wait for lights to turn green and when buses are at the front of these queues the traffic behind is trapped again when the bus stops for passengers. Allowing vehicles to negotiate junctions without lights eliminates any down time and makes for very efficient passage through the intersections. This reduces the quantum of vehicles and the waiting time of vehicles, which reduces the impact of buses on holding up traffic when they stop for passengers. The scope of the commissioned traffic modelling does not include MicroSimulation, which is the most appropriate software to consider the prevailing factors in a non-traffic light controlled junction. This work will need to be undertaken at the next stage of the design development and appraisal. There are London and UK precedents for junctions successfully dealing with this quantity to revert to a non signalised arrangement and the Street Types for London report makes reference to comparable best practice examples such as Poynton in Cheshire.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

161

Traffic Modelling The proposed scheme under consideration is to redevelop Whitechapel Road to provide a more pleasant environment for pedestrians and to improve the quality of the overall urban realm and streetscape. The Options under consideration to deliver these objectives include variations such as widening the pavements to increase circulation space, making improvements for the market traders and also introducing informal crossing points to reduce walking distances for pedestrians. Three options have been developed with the intention of providing these improvements. Of these, Options 2 and 3 also include the removal of traffic signal control from the junctions of Whitechapel Road with Cambridge Heath Road and Vallance Road. Following discussions with TfL it has now been established that the designs should be further tested to determine the wider impact, capacity constraints and displacements. Modelling Approach In order to provide a holistic and comprehensive assessment of the proposed options, a tiered modelling approach has been adopted. This consists of strategic modelling using TfL’s ONE model to determine strategic impacts including traffic displacement effects; and Junction modelling using LinSig of the Whitechapel Road/ Cambridge Heath Road and Whitechapel Road/Vallance Road to facilitate detailed analysis of the operation of these junctions in Option 1 where they remain under signalised control. The modelling strategy has been developed in close consultation with TfL. This has also included verification and agreement of the approach with TfL prior to commencing the modelling and regular 162

liaison with TfL throughout the course of the modelling work. Utilising the ONE model has involved undertaking a significant portion of the modelling work within TfL’s offices. This provided the opportunity to work alongside TfL’s in-house modelling staff to benefit from their expertise and provide TfL with confidence on the work our team has been undertaking. Strategic Modelling Strategic modelling has been used to determine the general impacts of the proposed schemes. This determined the extent of any rerouting of traffic and also assessed the impact on journey times, identifying any particular areas where significant delays are caused by the scheme. It was agreed with TfL that the strategic modelling be undertaken using the ONE model. TfL have provided assurance that the ONE model is sufficiently validated within the study area and its vicinity. The forecast year model has been updated to reflect the designs in terms of amendments to the highway and junctions. This included changing the junction layout in Option 2 and 3, changing from signalised to uncontrolled junctions and adjusting the number of lanes, speeds and capacities on the links as required. This provided a strategic overview of the impacts of the proposed schemes, including traffic displacement effects and changes in journey time along the corridor, which helps inform the feasibility of the options.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Junction Modelling

Intermediate Traffic Modelling Findings

LinSig models were prepared of the Whitechapel Road/Cambridge Heath Road and Whitechapel Road/Vallance Road junctions to facilitate detailed analysis of the operation of these junctions in Option 1 where they remain under signalised control. This also provided optimal signal timings, which were fed back to the VISUM model in order to optimise traffic movements at the two junctions. Based on this, the LinSig models were developed and calibrated/validated for the AM and PM peaks in accordance with TfL’s Modelling Guidelines. Whilst it is understood that the models are not required to undergo a MAP audit at this stage, the models were developed in accordance with LMAP 6 procedures to facilitate auditing in the future. Our team worked closely with TfL in order to ensure that all modelling work was delivered to their standards. The intention is to utilise these models to provide an assessment of the operation of the junctions for Option 1 where the signalisation is retained. A ‘Do Minimum’ model will be developed by taking the difference between the forecast and base ONE model flows at these junctions and applying them to the flows in the validated LinSig models. The Option 1 demand has been calculated through similar means, with the LinSig model networks updated to reflect the proposed junction design. Comparison of the Option model in terms of DoS and queue lengths provides an understanding of the feasibility of the option.

The Systra report provides a traffic assessment of two junctions along Whitechapel Road in relation to the predefined design options to improve the public realm in the vicinity of Whitechapel station and Whitechapel Road generally between Cambridge Heath and Vallance Road Junctions. Since Option 3 consists of unsignalised junctions, detailed traffic impacts using LinSig could only be assessed for Options 1 and 2. For all the options it should be noted that at this stage, the modelling is indicative, requiring further design inputs. LinSig base models for both junctions were calibrated and validated against observed DoS measurements. Observed and modelled results are generally in good agreement, making the model fit for purpose. Traffic flows for option tests were based on outputs from VISUM, which was used to predict the changes in flows and network-wide rerouting caused by the proposed redesign of junctions. LinSig modelling results for Options 1 and 2 suggest that both options would perform acceptably from a traffic perspective as a result of lower overall junction flows; in fact, the overall performance of the junction is predicted to improve for both options compared to the existing situation. Modelling results shed little light as to whether Option 1 or 2 is preferable from a traffic perspective – each option has both advantages and disadvantages. In the case of Option 1, overall junction capacity is larger than in Option 2 and all turning movements are allowed, but cycle times are higher; in addition, the junction layout is complex and the safety of cyclists from left turning vehicles is not guaranteed. Option 2 would allow shorter cycle times (and therefore shorter queues and delays), more pedestrian space and provide a clearer junction layout, but banning all

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

163

turns could have negative traffic impacts in the surrounding area and increase traffic on alternative routes. Tests in VISUM shows that Option 1 has the least negative impact on the network regarding traffic displacement and journey times. As Option 2 does not allow turns at the junctions traffic displaces into the area. A negative journey time effect can only be seen in the AM on the Sidney Street and Cambridge Heath Road. This could be caused by slightly unbalanced signal timings. Option 3 shows the biggest traffic displacement impact. Especially in the PM traffic uses other routes and delays are seen to rise on these routes. The changes to traffic flow direction on Raven Row and Brady Street could not be applied in VISUM as these links are not in the ONE model. Also VISUM is not made to code pedestrians crossing or shared-space environments.

In summary

Vallance Road Junction

Cambridge Heath Road Junction

Next Steps These options and the techniques and research that underpins them are regarded as Pathway 1, Outcome Definition stage on the TfL Pathway Project Lifecycle process. Whitechapel Road as KPT 1 remains a high priority for both TfL and LBTH. This study forms the basis for both organisations to draw the project into the business case and funding stream processes and develop the proposals through to the delivery cycle. This requires the proposal and its three variants to be appraised in business case terms of safety, economic vitality, congestion and health to determine its priority within the different potential available funding streams and delivery programmes. LBTH will work with TfL to develop a Strategic Outline Business Case, and it take through Gate 1 into Feasibility Design, prior to a full business case and a single preferred option. 164

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Civic engineers were commissioned to undertake a study into Whitechapel Road as part of the Comprehensive Public Realm Plan. A detailed review of the Whitechapel Vision Masterplan and Supplementary Planning Document and the TfL Surface Transport Outcome Plan was undertaken with supplementary baseline analysis relating to population growth forecasts, public transport and road networks, cycling and pedestrian infrastructure, collision data, pollution and market function and needs were all considered. The baseline report was further corroborated by a pedestrian footfall survey which was commissioned as part of the brief. The assembled data illustrates that the London Borough of Tower Hamlets and the Whitechapel study area are forecast to experience a significant degree of change in terms of population growth and job creation with the construction of a slew of new buildings and facilities to accommodate this demand. Whitechapel Road’s importance as part of the Transport for London Road Network and the area’s development into a major transport hub with the arrival of Crossrail in late 2018 along with the aspiration to transform Whitechapel into a town centre prioritising the pedestrian have been carefully assessed to balance its character in terms of place and movement. The Street Types for London categorises Whitechapel Road as a City Hub for its length between and including Vallance Road junction to the west and Cambridge Heath junction to the east, where it is categorised as a Core Road east and west of the settlement. It is the City Hub section of the A11 that forms the centre piece of the movement study for the emerging movement proposals for the Whitechapel neighbourhood, its cultural, transport and commercial centre of gravity.

To understand, negotiate and seek consensus for this complicated piece of city involved detailed mapping of the current and future patterns of behaviour and role of Whitechapel Road as part of a district wide and highway network wide assessment in close consultation with LBTH and TfL officers amongst other stakeholders. This has led to the generation of three options for the redesign and landscape change to this City Hub. The proposals aim to reallocate space away from vehicle dominated streets to create social spaces and to increase pedestrian safety and public realm improvements. Traffic modelling was commissioned to analyse the potential effects of the three proposals on the local and greater network. There remains further analysis and consultation to develop and refine these options to identify the optimum solution that best serves the conflicting, competing and challenging needs for this complex piece of cityscape.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

165

Movement: Challenges and Opportunities

4.1

– Reallocate space back to the pedestrians and cyclists – Increase safety along Whitechapel Road, while maintaining access for buses and operational, service and emergency vehicles – Support Whitechapel Road and the surrounding street network loop as the heart of public life – Reinstate the physical experience of entering a ‘Hamlet’ along the Town Centre segment of Whitechapel Road – Create a coherent landscape connecting north with south seamlessly, rather than the current, dominant east / west movement axis

Heritage — What is there?

– Soften the distinctly urban quality of Whitechapel Road; encourage greater interaction between ground floor uses and the High street

166

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

167

Outline of Heritage Considerations This outline has been written by regeneration consultant Robert Bevan to feed into the early stages of the Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance prepared in early 2016 by lead consultant muf architecture/ art and its sub-consultants for its client, the London Borough of Tower Hamlets. The Guidance supports the Whitechapel Vision Masterplan that has been adopted by the local planning authority as a Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) and which will provide a framework for development within the Whitechapel area up to 2028. (Note: Number references (1), (2) … included in this outline relate to map on page 175.) The outline starts with a premise that the presence of heritage assets can enhance proposals to improve an area, elaborating on its existing qualities and supporting placemaking by reinforcing a local sense of place. Rather than seeking to block development within an area, creative regeneration can encourage high quality new buildings and the maintenance and repair of historic structures. New development that acknowledges the area’s character and typologies and the setting of heritage assets is to be positively welcomed for its ability to reduce the fragmentary and degraded character of Whitechapel, to change negative perceptions, to encourage investment in the local economy and to promote social cohesion. Tower Hamlets has the potential to make much more of its heritage than it does. A recent set of indicators around heritage and identity developed by the Royal Society of Arts together with the Heritage Lottery Fund found that despite the borough having the 14th highest number of built heritage assets of any council area in England, the gap between that figure and the level of activities (such as tourism and museum visits) around its heritage sector – i.e. its heritage potential – was the sixth 168

largest recorded. Tower Hamlets’ cultural and built assets could, therefore, work much harder and engage many people and communities. Incorporating heritage considerations into the Guidance is an important means by which proposals that are uniquely Whitechapel are formulated and which eschew over-scaled or generic solutions of the kind that threaten to overwhelm nearby locations such as the Bishopsgate Goodsyard. At the same time, a climate of certainty can be created for developers encouraging long-term thinking in investment decisions, creating a virtuous circle whereby design quality is driven up rather than downwards to the benefit of all. This is particularly important in an area such as Whitechapel where, in the past, disagreement over the future of sites such as the Pavilion Theatre (1) on Vallance Road has created uncertainty and delays. Such episodes are unfortunate in that they can create perceptions that heritage is an inhibitor to growth rather than an opportunity for improvement. It is noted that the Survey of London – formerly an arm of English Heritage and now based at the Bartlett School of Architecture, University College London – is presently researching Whitechapel in-depth. This may lead to new evidence supporting calls for the designation of additional heritage assets in the Whitechapel area that are currently unidentified. If incorporated early on, this improved understanding of the area’s assets can assist in driving growth. Industry surveys have repeatedly demonstrated the attractiveness of heritage to investment: Commercial investments in listed buildings, for instance, yield a higher return than unlisted property over three, five, ten and 30 year periods (Encouraging Investment in Heritage at Risk: the investment performance, Colliers 2011).

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

One in four businesses in this survey agreed that the historic environment was an important factor in deciding where to locate. An essential part of ensuring the growth of Whitechapel as a town centre for Tower Hamlets with a thriving economy, decent housing and an attractive retail environment is to encourage growth on either side of Whitechapel Road and to use open spaces and the public realm (built features as well as landscaping) to create linkages to other growth points nearby in order to create a critical mass of sustainable activity. This will support the wider regeneration of Tower Hamlets. This can be done east-west from Aldgate to Stepney and north-south from Bethnal Green Road/Bethnal Green down to Commercial Road and The Highway. This involves generating an enthusiasm for contemporary new design alongside a respect for extant heritage rather than accepting a binary opposition between the two. A layered approach combining intelligent modern architecture and urban design with a sensitivity to history and the setting of heritage assets will help ensure that Whitechapel becomes an attractive, dynamic place without losing its essential qualities and its potential for a high quality public realm.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

169

A Brief History of the Area Whitechapel grew as an extramural extension to the city of London beyond Aldgate. By the early 14th century, when the Church of St Mary Matfelon (2) replaced the original ‘white chapel’ (on the site of today’s Altab Ali Park) a parish of over 200 acres had developed. Ribbon development spread along busy Whitechapel Road (originally a Roman road) to the edge of London where the London Hospital (3) was built in 1752, triggering further building in the area with the development of its estate funding its work. The New Road was cut through the estate c.1772 to create a direct route between Whitechapel and Wapping. Between the 1790s and 1820s the area east and west of the road and south of the hospital was laid out as a grid of streets. The hospital continued to be the focus for the area and expanded in the subsequent centuries with new wings, ancillary buildings and nurses’ homes. Development spread along Commercial Road from c.1810 onwards.

The area extending towards Bethnal Green Road north of Whitechapel Market was built up in quite a different manner to the streets on the hospital estate. Instead of a grid, a much more organic pattern of streets emerged. In the early 19th century, as shown on Cruchley’s New Plan of London to 1839 these were punctuated by the bulk of a distillery and the Spitalfields Parish Workhouse, the Brady Street (now North Street) Jewish burial ground (4). The burial ground is still in situ but, almost a century later, the OS map of 1914 depicts a quite different character with the enlarged distillery and Albion brewery (5) taking much land along with the substantial sidings of the Spitalfields Coal Depot that branched south from the Great Eastern Railway. Whitechapel Underground Station (6) and its attendant cutting opened in 1876. The old Baker’s Row became Vallance Road, was extended north to Bethnal Green Road and its notable bend at the southern end later straightened out.

2.0

Understanding Whitechapel

2.I

A Brief History Of The Area Whitechapel grew as an extramural extension to the city of London beyond Aldgate. By the early 14th century, when the Church of St Mary Matfelon replaced the original ‘white chapel’ (on the site of today’s Altab Ali Park) a parish of over 200 acres had developed. Ribbon development spread along busy Whitechapel Road (originally a Roman road) to the edge of London where the London Hospital was built in 1752, triggering further building in the area with the development of its estate funding its work. The New Road was cut through the estate c.1772 to create a direct route between Whitechapel and Wapping and between the 1790s and 1820s the area east and west of the road and south of the hospital was laid out as a grid of streets. The hospital continued to be the focus for the area and expanded in the subsequent centuries with new wings, ancillary buildings and nurses’ homes. Development spread along Commercial Road Whitechapel in 1839. The area was still at the edge of the builtfrom up city.c1810 onwards.

The Hospital in 1753.in The hill on the away,now TheLondon London Hospital 1753. Theright, hillnow on cleared the right, marked the edge of the city’s defences during the English Civil War.

cleared away, marked the edge of the city’s defences during the English Civil War.

170

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

171

for the relief of the poor and to cultural provision such as the Whit Art Gallery to the west of the masterplan area. Although the main frontages were relatively prosperous – as indicated Booth’s pover – some back streets and courts became notorious for their slum l conditions and attendant dangers. The streets south of the hospit Commercial Road, remained in good order at the time of the surv

Boot show main and sout hosp be re afflue muc pove

The terrace associated with the Pavilion Theatre (1) development (the latter had its entrance on the Whitechapel Road before it burned down) survives on the east side. The area within the masterplan north of Whitechapel Road was the parish of Mile End New Town until its abolition in 1921.

The heart of the masterplan area in 1914 showing the grid of streets laid out to the south of the hospital on its estate and the axis of Philpot St.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance The terrace associated with the Pavilion Theatre development (the latter

172

The Pavilion Theatre was, before it burned down for the Booth showed the main streets and the grid south of the hospital to be relatively amid bombing much poverty Though much ravagedaffluent by wartime and by post-war rebu last time, that sometimes paid little heed to the established street pattern, t famous for with substantial elements of historic its Yiddish fabric; both institutions such as the programme. London Hospital buildings and terraces or fragments of terraces. The decline of the docks and related activities in the postwar period exacerbated the inequalities The Pavilion Theatre was, before it burnt down for the last in the area, depressing economic activity time, famous for its Yiddish programme. Successive waves of immigration characterised the and area leading leaving atolegacy dereliction and a further of buildings including the Great Synagogue on Fieldgate Street built after degrading of the built environment while the arrival of Jewish from eastern Europe. Poverty was acute by Successive wavesrefugees of immigration the subsidised, development corporationcharacterised the area leaving legacy of regeneration leading to theaestablishment ofled various institutionsof the Isle of Dogs meant the mid 19th century, buildings the Great Synagogue that industries and housing for the reliefincluding of the poor and to cultural provision such as financial the Whitechapel on Fieldgate Street (7) built after the arrival investment following the financial Big Art Gallery to the west of the masterplan area. Although the main street of Jewish refugees from Eastern Europe. Bang leapfrogged Whitechapel in favour of frontages were relatively prosperous – as indicated Booth’s poverty maps Poverty was acute by the mid 19th century, Canary Wharf and its environs. – some back streets and courts became notorious for their slum living leading to the establishment of various More recent waves of redevelopment conditions and attendant dangers. The streets south of the hospital to institutions for the relief of the poor and has seen the expansion of the Royal Commercial Road, remained in good order at the time of the survey. cultural provision such as the Whitechapel London and the building of new schools, Art Gallery to the west of the masterplan the Ideas Store and other local facilities. Booth area. Although the main street frontages While welcome, not all these new showed the were relatively prosperous – as indicated developments relate well to the street main streets in Booth’s poverty maps – some back pattern or adjacent buildings. The arrival andbrings the gridwith it another slew streets and courts became notorious for of Crossrail south of the their slum living conditions and attendant of proposals that have the ability to help hospital to However, the large dangers. The streets south of the hospital regenerate the area. bebulk relatively to Commercial Road, remained in good scale and of many of these proposals affluent order at the time of the survey. Though means that theyamid carry the threat of much ravaged by wartime bombing and overwhelming much the public realm as well by post-war rebuilding that sometimes as the potential poverty to provide regenerative paid little heed to the established street opportunities. At the same time initiatives pattern, the essential historic street such as the façade improvements pattern of Whitechapel survives along programme under the High Street 2012

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

Though much ravaged by wartime bombing and by post-war rebuilding

173

STREET

HIRE

DERBYS

VOSS

WILMOT STREET

N ROAD

NAL GREE

BETH

TR AIN

STREET

ST EX

SS WE LD STREET CORFIE

HIRE

STREET

DERBYS

K STREET BIRKBEC

BUCKFA

CE ROAD VALLAN ST

REET

RIDGE CAMB

D HERAL T STREE

EE STR IGH

HEAT

ST ST

DLE

H ROAD

DING

BUIL

IAM'S

ROA

WILL

TUS

MAN

Y STREET

PLAC

MALC

TS LAN EE COL

THR KELSEY

CE ROAD VALLAN

RAMSE

OLM

STREET

MAPE

STREET

VIOLET

STREE

RD STREET HEREFO

STREET

'S ROW

RAMSE

Y STREE

WOOD

TS COL EE THR E LAN

FINNIS

WILMOT STREET

Y STREE

N CLOSE

ER STREET

CHEST

THREE COLTS LANE G LAN EE STR T

WOOD MENOT

STREET

BACON

COVENTRY ROAD

TI STREET

STREET

DUNBRIDGE

DUNBR

IDGE

STREE

STREET

CUDWORTH

STREET UE

RTH

STREE

STREET

ROAD D AR TH STO

CAMBRIDGE HEATH ROAD

TAPP STREET

HARE MARSH

EE STR

BUCKHURST

LE CO

MALCOLM

CUDWO

STREE

WICKFORD STREET

DGE

DUNBRI

IRE CHESH

BARNSLEY STREET

DOVETON STREET

TENT STREET

G STREET

SOMERFORD

STREET

HEMMIN

SCOTT STREET

D STREET COLLINGWOO

STREET

DY EET STR

VALLANCE

CLOSE LAMPLIGHTER

BRA

SURMA CLOSE

WEAVER STREET

BRATLEY ST

FAKRUDDIN

ROAD

PEDLEY

WYLLEN CLOSE

CO S ER

Y ROAD GRANAR

SURMA CLOSE

WEAVER STREET

D WA Y

HEADLAM

STREET

SELBY STREET SELBY STREET

STREE

ERON

MERC

HEA TH ROA

CL Y RE WD VA

CAM

BRI DGE

BUXTON STREET

ND GROVE

DEAL STREET

CLEVELA

ING

UNDERWOOD

ROW

DARL

ROAD

TRAHORN CLOSE

KEY CLOSE

BARDSEY PLACE

SEY

BARD PL

HUNTON STREET

CAMBRIDGE

DEAL

HEATH ROAD

STREET

E OS

LOMAS

STREE

CASTLEM

STREET

EET

STR

EET

STREET

DAPLYN STREET

ROA

AINE

WA DUR

VALL

DEAL STREET

COVERLEY

E END

MIL

BRA

WOODSEER

EET

P STR HRO

ANC

DEN

WINT

GAR

ROA

DEH

AR RW

ADELINA

NEY

SID

EET

STR

MAPL

PLAC E

L RO

APE

Spring Walk

ITE

STR

T STRE

MOUN

RNE

CLO

BOU

COU

FUL

REG

EAST

EET

ROW

RAV

LINDLEY

TORE GREA

CLO

STR

X STRE

ST ET TER

STREET

MOU

EET STR

UE TAG MON OLD

JUBILEE STREET

CAVELL

RAC

EY STRE

STRE

STREET

ET THOP

MON

SIDN

MILWARD

VE DA

CASS

STRE ROAD

STREET

EET

KSA

CHIC

GROVE

Y STREET HANBUR

WOLSEY

STREET

STEPNEY WAY

RT COU VINE

Y WAY

STEPNE

NEWARK STREET

MIRANDA CLOSE

STEPNEY

STREET

FIELDGATE STREET

WAY

STREET

NEWARK

HALCROW

FORD SQUARE

SIDNEY SQUARE

ASHFIELD STREET

D STREET

ASHFIEL

ROMFORD

STREET

FORD SQUARE

PARFETT

ASHFIELD STREET

SIDNEY SQUARE

ROAD

STREET

NEW

TURNER

ITE

STREET

FORD SQUARE

CLARK STREET

SIDNEY SQUARE

CLARK STREET

FORD SQUARE

AD EL

RO ROMFORD

STREET

EET

WALDEN

STR BER

STREET

MUL

FORDHAM STREET

ROW

STREET

MUSBURY STREET

CAVELL STREET

TURNER STREET

POT

PHIL

STREET

EET

STREET

STR

NELSON

JUBILEE STREET

NEW ROAD

LAN

PARFETT

HUR

TEC

STREET

SETTLES

EET

LD ROAD

STR

MYRDLE

GREENFIE

ADL

WHI

DAMIEN STREET

BERS VARDEN

COKE STREET

STREET

SIDNEY STREET

PLUM

FORDHAM

STREET

EET

STR AM

ASS

WEYHI

ROAD

CORNWOOD DRIVE

COMMERCI

AL ROAD

COMMERCIAL ROAD

ILE

ST N'S

BUROSS

STREET

FENTON STREET

UMBERSTON

BROMEHEAD STREET

STREE

STREET

COMME

STREET

HAINTON CLOSE

HENRIQUES

DEANCROSS STREET

FLINTLOCK

RCIAL ROAD

HESSEL STREET

RAMPART STREET

BATTY STREET

AMAZON STREET

SLY STREET

MORTON CLOSE

KINDER STREET

STREET

STREET ROAD

BURSLEM STREET

TIMBERLAND ROAD

PACE PLACE

BURWELL CLOSE

TARLING STREET TARLING STREET

SUTTON STREET

CHU K BAC

CANNON

WALK

RCH

LAN

FAIRCLOUGH

CHRISTIAN STREET

GOWER'S

MIT ALI

PAS

SAG

T RD AYLWA

HUNGERFORD

ANTHONY STREET

RICHARD

STREET

JANE

ROPEWALK GARDENS

BARNETT

STREET

BOYD STREET

WATNEY

MORRIS

MONTPELIER PLACE

STREET

PLACE

FORBES

PHILCHURCH

STUTFIELD

YARD

STREET

PERS

HOO

STREET

PONLER STREET

OYSTER ROW

STREET

JAMES VOLLER WAY

DUNCH

TILLMAN STREET

GOLDING STREET

ELLEN STREET

WALBURGH STREET

BIGLAND STREET

Heritage assets under threat or not yet listed

MARTHA STREET

Conservation Areas

Grade 2* Listed Grade 2 Listed Locally Listed Building

174

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

ST AS

Unidentified Heritage Assets The potential exists for what are termed ‘unidentified assets’ in the National Planning Policy Framework to be identified. These not only include archaeological finds unearthed during watching briefs or rescue works but also buildings whose heritage significance is revealed after further research. The in-depth study by the Survey of London could throw up new candidates for statutory or local listing during the life of the masterplan. Other buildings that have not been previously recommended for listing could have that position reviewed – perhaps including the now restored houses on Varden Street (8). This could have an impact on both developers and the local planning authority because of its duty to seek to preserve and enhance the character and appearance of conservation areas and the significance of heritage assets and their setting.

BRAINT

LD STRE

REE

HERA

STREET

KELSE

GOLDMA

SPELM

Identified Heritage Assets Within the masterplan area are numerous heritage assets – these include statutory listed buildings, locally listed buildings and conservation areas. Among the principle assets are the original building of the London Hospital, the Grade I listed Trinity Green almshouses, the Grade II listed main building of the Albion Brewery and the grade II* listed church of St Augustine with St Philip Church that also houses the hospital’s museum. There are also pockets of listed terraced houses – most notably along New Road and along the streets to its west as well as Mount Terrace (10), on Whitechapel Market itself, and a group fronting Newark Street and Turner Street. In addition, there is a small number of locally listed buildings dotted through the masterplan area. A substantial proportion of the study area south of Whitechapel Road is also covered by conservation area designations. These include the London Hospital Conservation Area, the Myrdle Street Conservation Area (covering land either side of New Road) and Ford Square Conservation Area. North of Whitechapel Road are the linear Whitechapel Market Conservation Area and, to its east, Stepney Green Conservation Area and to its northwest, the edge of the Fournier Street Conservation Area.

Y STREE

KELSE

STREET

GLASS

ST MATTHEW

Whitechapel’s Heritage Assets and Significance

The incremental nature of these designations has the advantage that conservation area boundaries can be drawn tightly but their discontinuity has the disadvantage that the importance and coherence of these historic areas collectively is less appreciated. An Area of Archaeological Importance runs diagonally through the masterplan area taking in places such as the former Outpatients building of the Royal London through Whitechapel Market and the Sainsbury’s site and on to Cambridge Heath Road and beyond.

EIG

STREE

BUCKFA

SALE

programme and the Spitalfields Trust’s sensitive renovation of terraced housing on Varden and Turner Streets (8) has helped restore the lost qualities of existing buildings, helping reveal more of the rich hidden heritage of Whitechapel.

WITAN STREET

WITAN

STREET

ST STREET

'S ROW ST MATTHEW

FINNIS

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

175

The Sainsbury’s Site

Restored, butasasyet yet unlisted, terraces Restored, but unlisted, terraces at the corner of Varden Street at the corner of Varden Street 3.0

Threats and Opportunities from Major Developments

Threats and Opportunities from Major The regenerative impact of the Masterplan has the potential to bring an up-lift to their entire Whitechapel area and beyond. In particular, the Developments

provision of new housing and retail opportunities and the expansion of the hospital campus could fill in gaps in the urban fabric, replace The regenerative impact of theandMasterplan buildings that detract from the area’s character encouraging the economic of existing to buildings thatan make a positiveto contribution has there-use potential bring up-lift the to the character and appearance of the conservation areas.

entire Whitechapel area and beyond. In However, some ofthe the major proposalsof nownew coming forward exhibit particular, provision housing, damaging drawbacks that, together, would frustrate the creation of a retail opportunities and the expansion of high quality public realm and, could, therefore, discourage high quality the hospital campus could gaps developments and new businesses locatingfill herein in the future.in the urban fabric, replace buildings that Tower Hamlets more widely would benefit if linkages to adjacent areas detract from the area’s character and are reinforced and heritage assets beyond the masterplan area used as encourage economic ofroutes existing attractors to drawthe people along activatedre-use high-quality between areas. An example would be down Road and Cannon Street Road buildings that make a New positive contribution to Hawksmoor’s Grade I listed St George-in-the-East and Tobacco to the character and appearance of the Dock. This potentiality is discussed more below. conservation areas. However, some of the major proposals now coming forward exhibit damaging 12 drawbacks that, together, would frustrate the creation of a high quality public realm and could, therefore, discourage high quality developments and new businesses locating here in the future. Tower Hamlets would benefit more widely if linkages to adjacent areas are reinforced and heritage assets beyond the masterplan area used as attractors to draw people along activated high-quality routes between areas. An example would be down New Road and Cannon Street Road to Hawksmoor’s Grade I listed St George-in-the-East and Tobacco Dock. This potentiality is discussed more below. 176

Keeping general urban design concerns regarding overshadowing etc aside, the Sainsbury’s site proposal raises specific issues with regard to the setting of heritage assets including the Trinity Green Almshouses (9) and the former brewery. Historic England’s London Advisory Committee has taken the position that it would oppose a tower that appeared above the ridgeline of the almshouses (or perhaps the intervening tree line). Moving the bulk of the development forward could ameliorate its affect on their setting – and provide a better eastwest route to Cambridge Heath Road, but that would increase a tall tower’s detrimental relationship to the brewery and the setting of the Whitechapel Market Conservation Area. Tower Hamlets officers are also concerned about the affect of the proposals on these heritage assets. The proposals also fail to take the opportunity to form the north side of a perimeter block that would include the brewery and the Blind Beggar pub (12) (a surprising omission from the local list). Raven Row Interventions There are numerous urban design issues that the consultant team will address in connection with the bulk and disposition of the blocks. In heritage terms, the redevelopment of empty sites, the Royal Mail site (13) and the Barclay’s Bank (14) at the corner of Sydney Street are to be welcomed. The formation of perimeter blocks and the reinforcement of the Sydney Street corner also have the potential to reinforce the morphology of the grid of streets although the relationship in scale between the new build and the retained buildings need to be considered.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

The proposal to redevelop the two storey former workshop building on the east side of Cavell Street (15) needs care. It is one of the few historic buildings of quality in this sub-section of the masterplan area away from the frontage streets. Its replacement with a taller building is understandable given the desire to create a high-density centre either side of Whitechapel Road. One potential way forward would be to retain and extend the building upwards. It is also noted, however, that the building is active with a number of SME enterprises that no doubt contribute to the indigenous economy of Whitechapel. Such space cannot be readily replicated in new builds because of the rents needed to recoup construction costs. The removal of this building would also tip the balance of the street environment from a lively mix of the historic and contemporary to a totally new build environment. This might be an acceptable strategy with the introduction of high quality new buildings but it reduces the potential for continuity – a sense of a mix of infill and new midrise development that could happily extend south beyond Ford Square (16) towards Commercial Road, so reinforcing another north-south route, encouraging investment southwards and contributing to the repair of the degraded grid. Med City buildings: Varden, Philpot and Ashfield Streets substantial new development towards the southern end of the hospital campus has the potential to activate nearby Commercial Road and its environs, promoting growth more widely and is to be welcomed. The replacement of the Y-shaped modernist tower, John Harrison House (17), has the potential to introduce a new building that more successfully addresses the street frontages and is of a more appropriate scale as does the redevelopment of the sites to the west side of Turner Street. However, the proposed replacement buildings by, respectively PLP

Architecture and AJ Associates fail to take full advantage of the potential offered. They do not reinforce the scale and building line of Philpot Street sufficiently and should have more regard to the parapet line of the listed terrace to the north and the listed and unlisted (but listable) houses on Varden Street (8) in determining the position of podiums, set-backs etc. They should also frame rather than unduly overshadow the green north-south spine. The arcade of the 1950s nurses home at Philpot Street (18)could be usefully continued (in a more contemporary idiom) northwards and southwards and become a vocabulary that unites additions to the campus. This is discussed in more detail below.

Student hospital on Philpot Street in 1949

The houses on Varden that have been exceptionally well-restored The houses onStreet Varden Street that have by the Spitalfields Trust are likely to be statutorily listed in the near future been exceptionally well-restored by the and negotiations with the developers and architects of the above Spitalfields likely to regard be statutorily buildings should takeTrust this intoare account and have had to their setting. not need to frustrate development listedTheinabove thedoes near future andsuccessful negotiations but it could entail further negotiations regarding the form and the rewith the developers and distribution of their bulkier elements – thisarchitects is particular true of of the PLP Architecture proposals. the above buildings should take this into

account and have regard to their setting. The above does not need to frustrate The proposal to usedevelopment the now empty wingsbut (partially grade II) ofentail the Royal successful it could London as a new Civic Centre for the borough is an important furthertonegotiations the use form opportunity bring back a buildingregarding at risk into beneficial and to active Road and to create quality open space on its andWhitechapel the redistribution ofa high their bulkier ‘garden side’. Its new use would be transformative for the area. Mayor elements – this is particularily true of the Biggs has described the site as being “an icon at the heart of the East PLP Architecture proposals. End since the 1700s”. Civic Centre at the Old Royal London

It is essential, however, that an objective significance assessment of the historic fabric is undertaken at the earliest opportunity to establish which parts of the complex are capable of radical transformation and which elements need to be conserved more tightly (for example entrance halls

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

177

The nurses’ garden above with a fountain and bridge over an ornamental pond. The map below shows ornamental gardens east of the church.

Civic Centre at the Old Royal London The proposal to use the now empty wings (partially grade II) of the Royal London (3) as a new Civic Centre for the borough is an important opportunity to bring back a building at risk into beneficial use and to activate Whitechapel Road to create a high quality open space on its ‘garden side’. Its new use would be transformative for the area. Mayor Biggs has described the site as being “an icon at the heart of the East End since the 1700s”. It is essential, however, that an objective significance assessment of the historic fabric is undertaken at the earliest opportunity to establish which parts of the complex are capable of radical transformation and which elements need to be conserved more tightly (for example entrance halls and main staircases are usually much more sensitive to change). Setting these parameters early can reduce themain potential conflict widen theSetting and staircases arefor usually much moreand sensitive to change). these parameters early can reduce the potential for conflict and widen chance for creative interventions. the chance for creative interventions.

Above, the entrance London Hospital at is full extent before the demolition of its The main in 1956. west wing. Below, the main entrance in 1956.

A particular public realm issue that such an assessment would inform is how best to16 create connections between Whitechapel Road and the area immediately to the south of the historic wings and the new open space planned there. For instance, can a public route be created north-south through the original main entrance or would this conflict with a civic centre’s need for security barriers? Can such a route be made accessible to people with disabilities? Alternatively, is there the potential to create a contemporary undercroft/covered market on the lowest floor that will connect activity north of Whitechapel Road with areas to the south? Options should include looking at the replacement or remodelling of the insensitive late 70s west wing (19).

The much altered south façade facing the new public space has the potential to become the ‘garden front’ akin to that of a large mansion in contrast to the more urban street frontage to Whitechapel Road. The loggia/arcade vocabulary could be extended from here and continue down Philpot Street, perhaps framing the apse of the grade II* church of St Philip with St Augustine (11). Historic maps show that this was once the location of a garden with a picturesque layout including ponds that fronted a now vanished almshouse. The main wing, together with the church Early images within the Whitechapel document of this site are Ornamental gardens east of Vision the church. and the retained Medical College (20) unfortunate in that they suggest a rear façade to the old hospital of by architect Rowland Plumbe(1886–7) with its ground floor loggia, provide an Early images within the Whitechapel Vision 18 unrivalled opportunity to enclose the new document of this site are unfortunate public spaces with a mixture of heritage in that they suggest a rear façade to the assets and high quality contemporary old hospital of closely spaced verticals interventions that respond to the that would entirely conceal the hospital’s spaces with a mixture of heritage assets and high quality contemporary historic fabric. historic character, obliterating the sense interventions that respond to the historic fabric. of continuity and area specific identity that would otherwise be major gains from the Civic Hub. It is recognised that these are tentative, propositional images but images of more robust and intelligent solutions that creatively balance the historic and the modern should be prepared in order to provide better guidance to designers and to more readily achieve buy-in from the community and stakeholders.

The nurses’ garden above with a fountain and bridge over an ornamental

The nurses’ garden above with a fountain and bridge over an pond. The map below shows ornamental gardens east of the church. ornamental pond. The map below shows ornamental gardens east of the church. The London Hospital at is full extent before the demolition of its west wing.

178 Above, the London Hospital at is full extent before the demolition of its

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Former Outpatients Wing and Mount Terrace The proposals for the area bounded by Whitechapel Road, New Road and Stepney Way need careful consideration in order to use both heritage assets and new development to activate this zone. This could be an important balance to the Sainsbury’s proposal, adding to the ‘depth’ to the Whitechapel Road retail offer and stimulating investment to the south and west of the Masterplan area and beyond.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

Early images within the Whitechapel Vision document of this site are unfortunate in that they suggest a rear façade to the old hospital of

179

The Outpatients Department at its opening in 1903. The central, austere brick waiting room could hold 1000 people.

In particular, consideration should be given to the retention (at least in part) and re-use of the unlisted (but within the conservation area) Outpatients Department (21) main building (1903 and also by Plumbe). Its corner towers and pyramidal roofs help reinforce local identity and are an important contributor to the emergence of a high quality public realm. The later wing across the yard to the north could be remodelled or replaced with a building that together with the redevelopment of the hospital chimney building forms a frontage to the listed The central, austere brick waiting room could hold of a perimeter block on the north side of Mount Terrace Mount Terrace(10) instead of the indicativeThe formation 1000 people. block shown in the Vision document that incorporating the terrace itself is also to be welcomed. For some reason, however, the indicative block placement shown in the Whitechapel suggests a development that presents its Masterplan’s The formation of a perimeter block on the Key Place Transformations diagram (fig 13) does not rear to the terrace. An amalgam of new includenorth side of Mount Terrace incorporating a frontage building flanking the west end of the terrace and and historic buildings around a yard could addressing the New terrace to be welcomed. Road.itself There isis thealso potential for additional development provide an enclave of retail units, market For some reason, however, the indicative space and offices for SMEs. The 1936 wing block placement shown in the Whitechapel 20 (22), formerly the Dept. of Massage and Masterplan’s Key Place Transformations Medical Electricity, facing New Road, is diagram (fig 13) does not include a frontage of less interest than the main Outpatients building flanking the west end of the building (21) but should be considered terrace and addressing New Road. There together with other buildings in the block is the potential for additional development when considering the overall balance on this infill site that would help mend the between new build and retention in the street layout of the area and form a strong on this infill site that would help mend the street layout of the area and angle between New Road and corner to New Road/Whitechapel Road. form a strong corner to New Road/Whitechapel Road. Whitechapel Road. Regency houses at Mount Terrace and New Road – now a car park

The Department at its opening in 1903.in The central, TheOutpatients Outpatients Department (21)at its opening 1903. austere brick waiting room could hold 1000 people.

180

The redevelopment of the former Dental Institute (23) on the south side of Stepney Way is also indicated in the Masterplan. Any new development should have regard to the Georgian formality of New Road and take the opportunity to enhance this important route south to Commercial Road and beyond to George-in-the-East and Tobacco Dock. This redevelopment also provides the opportunity to improve the relationship between the site and St Augustine with St Philip (11). A development brief for the site should encourage a high quality contemporary development that in form and materiality is sympathetic to these adjacent heritage assets. Solid to void should be carefully considered: A sheer glass development similar to the 2003-4 AMEC/ Alsop Architects School of Medicine and Dentistry would not be appropriate in this location. The outline block plan also suggests a pocket park on the site spanning from Stepney Way to Newark Street between the new build element and block to its east (24). An extra void in the building line at this point would be detrimental to the sense of enclosure in this location and the site could be more usefully used for additional development that has regard to the setting of nearby heritage assets such as the church and the historic Medical College building (20).

Regency houses at Mount Terrace(10) and New Road – now a car park.

The redevelopment of the former Dental Institute on the south side of Stepney Way is also indicated in the Masterplan. Any new development should have regard to the Georgian formality of New Road and take the opportunity to enhance this important route south to Commercial Road and beyond to St George-In-the-East andSpace Tobacco Dock. This Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Guidance redevelopment also provides the opportunity to improve the relationship

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

181

4.2

Heritage — Opportunities and Emerging Themes

182

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

183

Initial Recommendations From the above analysis, the following heritage-related recommendations are made, principles for the public realm set out and priorities then suggested. These are intended to achieve high standards in fulfilling the vision of the masterplan, reinforcing the sense of Whitechapel as a place with a unique identity and to underpin continued business and cultural investment in a way that transforms experience of the area from a linear frontage to a centre with depth and connectivity to other regenerating neighbourhoods nearby. – A heritage audit identifying all existing and potential assets should be carried out. This will help set out opportunities and priorities for investment and enhancement and assist in reducing unexpected delays in the successful implementation of the masterplan due to any assets being designated at short notice in the future as perhaps, listed or locally listed buildings. As part of this, discussions should be had with MOLA/Historic England about any archaeological deposits that are likely to impinge on development sites and with the Survey of London about its ongoing study of Whitechapel. – If not already in existence, a preparatory heritage statement with a significance assessment (ahead of any final proposals) should be prepared for the old Royal London buildings. This would identify opportunities for intervention and specific areas of greater significance and sensitivity on the hospital estate. This should assist in the preparation of public realm proposals for the areas immediately adjacent including the new square south of the civic centre. Ideally, the hospital should also be preparing an up-to-date Conservation Management Plan for its historic estate. 184

The remodeling of the old main wing into the civic centre should ensure that an extensions to the south side do not fully block views of the fabric of the historic building. New extensions can serve to improve this face of the building but should be subordinate in form and scale and also avoid overshadowing the public realm. – Consideration should be given to combining some of the adjacent conservation areas in one larger conservation area. This would allow an holistic approach to be taken to development and reinforce the notion of this being Tower Hamlets’ main town and civic centre. Enhancing the current Conservation Area Appraisal documentation with design principles would create more certainty for development and produce better quality outcomes and integrate the CAA documentation more closely with the public realm strategy and the masterplan. – There is the potential for the growth envisioned in the masterplan to bring benefits well beyond its boundary.To achieve this, linkages with adjacent areas exhibiting growth or the potential for growth should be reinforced. These routes should targeted for sensitive infill development and the renovation of existing buildings that make a positive contribution to the area. Examples of these routes include: New Road south to Tobacco Dock and the regeneration south of The Highway; Cambridge Heath Road north towards Bethnal Green tube station and its environs; east towards Stepney and west towards Aldgate. Cultural assets such as St George’s in the East, the Whitechapel Art Gallery and the V&A Museum of Childhood need to be brought into this connecting web.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

– Commercial Road has the potential to be a second focus of economic activity flowing from the growth of Whitechapel. By regenerating the frontage on both sides of Commercial Road (the south side is just outside the masterplan area), the centre of Whitechapel will gain a depth of activity, reducing the linearity of Whitechapel Road itself. – This will assist in the entire area becoming a destination rather than a linear place that is passed through – a true town centre with substantial retail, cultural and service uses. To help achieve this, the boundaries of the conservation areas around Commercial Road should be reviewed. The boundaries could usefully be adjusted somewhat to incorporate additional frontages. Such a move would enable the council to demand higher quality developments than those that have recently been built along the street within the vicinity – there are some especially poorly designed recent residential buildings. This greater council control would flow from the need for development to preserve or enhance conservation areas and their setting. There are some key buildings facing redevelopment that should be retained in and around Commercial Road. – Overall, the Whitechapel area is witnessing development proposals of a massive scale. This is welcome in principle but the height of some of these developments threatens to overwhelm Whitechapel’s existing character and public realm and detract from the setting of some key heritage assets such as the Grade I Trinity Green Almshouses. It is a similar threat to that facing the Bishopsgate Goodsyard environs. At the same time, there are numerous gaps in the townscape which new development would be very beneficial. Developments

that help close these gaps rather than over-expand vertically should be encouraged. – Consideration should be given to the further development of a list of key views to be protected and proposals tested against them. – Additionally, the development of smaller windfall sites should be promoted as part of a strategy to obtain a similar quantum of development without extratall towers overwhelming the public realm. There are opportunities along New Road, Vallance Road, Cavell Street and elsewhere including underused parts of public housing estates. The area between Whitechapel Road and Bethnal Green Road should be much more intensively urban than it is at present and growth here would reconnect areas now separated by low-rise buildings and lowgrade open spaces. New development along the perimeter of upgraded open spaces would frame them to the advantage of both. – There are a number of weak corner sites where new development can enhance legibility – although it should be recognised that landmarks are as much about form as about height. The corner of Cambridge Heath Road and Whitechapel is one example of a weak corner. Outdoor seating could be reprovided front and rear allowing the development of a corner building at this point – perhaps as an extension to the Blind Beggar pub. Likewise, the junction of Mount Terrace and New Road and the corner of Vallance Road and Whitechapel Road: At the latter, proposals are coming forward that, like so many others in the area, appear to involve awkward relationships to new higher elements set behind lower frontages. This does not

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

185

Vision Priorities make for good landmarks and legibility as the taller elements do not truly mark routes – for instance at a junction – and can misdirect, confusing rather than improving legibility. Alternative massing and modelling should be explored that would provide a more satisfactory solution. – A language of arcades and loggias within the medical campus has the potential to respond to existing examples in a contemporary way and can be used to create a specific identity for the campus as well as activate frontages and mediate between old and new development or screen detracting features. At the same time, the positioning of surface car parks in what are otherwise key locations for enhancing the setting of heritage assets should be resisted. Creating car parking in the vicinity of the church apse is entirely inappropriate and will harm its setting. – Opportunities to extend the successful High Street 2012 façade programme should be taken. New Road and Commercial Road between New Road and Sydney Street should be a priority. – Developments either side of Philpot Street/the Green Spine should frame the street and the new green space. Attention should be given to ground level activities and commonality in language as well as the need to reinforce the building line and create a strong line at a height that creates continuity with nearby heritage assets and that is respected by development set backs.

economic role for SMEs and retail as well as residential. The building itself, its out buildings and the yard between them could be an extension of the market south of the street and/or speciality retail that forms an activity anchor to balance that of Sainsbury’s at the other end of this section of Whitechapel. – Indeed, a comprehensive strategy for the development of the area bounded by Stepney Way, New Road, Whitechapel Road and the old Royal London wings should be developed that promotes and exciting mix of new and historic architecture. – A development brief for the above should be prepared that reintegrates Mount Terrace into a perimeter block with active frontages along Stepney Way, New Road and Whitechapel Road and fronts a link back to Whitechapel Road at the same time as creating a strong (although not tall) corner presence at New Road/ Whitechapel Road. – This would support a ripple of investment further south and east that would encourage investment in the rehabilitation of historic properties down New Road and west along Whitechapel Road beyond its junction with Vallance Road. A ‘2012’-style frontage improvement programme to properties on New Road would see the appearance of the historic street greatly enhanced, integrating it with central Whitechapel and providing a high-quality link to Commercial Street to kick-start regeneration further south.

– The future of the Outpatients Department main building should be reviewed and serious consideration given to its retention and remodelling because of its inherent qualities and its potential 186

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

In summary, key considerations regarding heritage as it relates to growth and the public realm in and around the masterplan area are: – To properly understand the historic hospital properties and how they can be used to frame public open space and relate to movement and changing Whitechapel from a linear place to a destination with depth either side of the main road and with active connections to it. – A significance assessment should be undertaken of the main hospital, the medical college, the church and the outpatients complex to identify those areas of the estate most sensitive to change and the opportunities to relate heritage to open spaces and enhance movement patterns. – It might be possible to create linkages between Whitechapel Road and its market and the areas south of the old main hospital wing either directly through its historic main entrance, or if that raises security or other concerns because of its intended civic centre use, through its lowest level, creating an undercroft route that typologically could relate to existing arcades/loggias and to contemporary versions of these forms.

– Tower Hamlets is encouraged to look again at the boundary of the conservation areas around Commercial Road to ensure that successful linkages can be built between the Masterplan area and adjacent areas. It should explore the opportunity for 2012-style frontage improvements to historic streets including New Road and parts of Commercial Road. This also has its importance for wayfinding, for heritage trails and so that the Green Spine has a proper terminus. i.e. to ensure quality in depth. – Identify corner and gap sites for renewal and for protection and enhancement. This includes around the surviving London squares south of the hospital and the Jewish burial ground north of the station. – Using the public realm strategy for the Green Spine to ensure that new developments have regard to heritage assets and create a unifying identity for the medical campus. – Determining matters such as the setting of the Trinity almshouses’ setting needs to be done within the context of key views analysis. Tower Hamlets’ past work on views and tall buildings should be revived and reviewed

– This is also an opportunity for Tower Hamlets to be proactive in the area between Whitechapel Road, New Road and Stepney Way/ Mount Terrace rather than just respond to incoming developer proposals. An outline urban design/ development brief for this area should be prepared (if that is not yet underway) that retains its heritage assets (both designated and non-designated) and adds to them with high quality contemporary designs that work in dialogue with the retained historic fabric.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

187

Heritage: Challenges and Opportunities

5.1

– Heritage sensitive area – Ensure heritage properties relate to open spaces and enhance movement patterns, in particular around the Green Spine – Reinstate the existing grid street pattern; identify corner and gap sites for renewal and for enhancement – Change Whitechapel from a linear place of transition to a destination – Ensure that new developments have regard to heritage assets and create a unifying identity for the medical campus – Revive and review Tower Hamlets’ past work on sight lines and tall buildings to determine emerging matters relating to key sight lines analysis

188

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Community — What is there?

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

189

Whitechapel Community Research Baseline

Introduction

“Tower Hamlets has long been subject to external regeneration organisations whose strategic intentions didn’t always align with what local people wanted. We were very aware that Crossrail would be a catalyst. As a council, we felt that it was important to have a framework for capturing the value of new investment for local people.”

As the Whitechapel Vision Masterplan SPD sets out in its introduction, ‘Whitechapel has historically been the heart of the local community – a key hamlet of the East End which has catered for the changing migrant population for generations’. It has also been ‘a historic centre of philanthropic and community organisations’. The introduction goes on to discuss the rate and scale of change that has happened and is happening in the area, and stresses both the potential to ‘benefit from increased investment and development’ and the need for ‘the Council to take the lead in making sure that the place moves forward for the benefit of existing stakeholders, preserving what is good while using this opportunity to make the most of the future.’ It is adamant that the improvements must be for all and celebrate and enhance the diverse community that live and work in the area.”

Former Cabinet Member for Housing and Regeneration (April 2015).

“So much development in the borough over the past 25 years has been led by market forces, and you can see the rather unmanaged effects in the built environment. We saw an opportunity to take a lead on place-shaping for the investment that is coming.” Former Strategic Project Manager, Whitechapel Vision Delivery Team. Both quoted in: www.planningresource.co.uk/article/1334600/it-masterplanning-catch-growth-benefits

190

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

However, given patterns of growth and development in London in 2016, and the wider regional and national policy context within which Whitechapel’s regeneration is taking place, we need to be aware of the challenges inherent in working in ‘a key destination within London’. How does the Council ensure that those who already live and work there are not displaced and are truly able to enjoy the benefits that the area’s increased popularity and affluence may bring? As the consultants for the 2013 Whitechapel Vision set out on p67 of their baseline report, ‘property market prospects for Whitechapel are very good’, with property demand and values rising, and developer interest expected to increase. This is likely to manifest itself through pressure for higher density development. Higher property values usually also mean higher house prices and rents. The population is also forecast to continue to grow, and so it is clear that

there will be a need to balance demand for different types of houses and for more open spaces. Public realm has a key role to play in this: a. As the place where all members of a community are able to see each other, to visibly take part in activity alongside each other and – ideally – to come together and understand themselves as a community; b. As potential benefit of – and at times compensation for – major new development in the area, often secured through the planning system’s gains and levies. When the place that you know is rapidly changing, the public realm can be one aspect of daily life that remains reassuring, in which you can continue to recognise yourself and your community, and that – in the form of open spaces, parks, gardens or even streets – offers pleasant space away from home and work to be and breathe. By preparing a public realm guidance with design strategies for key sites, we can help secure some of the benefits for the existing community that the Vision desires to achieve, as well as find opportunities to ‘celebrate and enhance’ that community. In order to do that well, we need to: – Understand who that community is now, and what their specific needs and desires might be. – Understand how that community feel about change in the area and forthcoming development – What do they hope for? What do they fear? How can public and open space best serve them, in all their diversity? Some of that work can be done through reading and researching existing or past activity. Some needs to be achieved through structuring conversations and activity – community engagement – as part of our process.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

191

Who / What is the community in Whitechapel? Interesting facts about the community who live and work within the Study Area (From the BDP Baseline Report 2013)

BDP’s 2013 Baseline Report for the Whitechapel Vision provides a thorough socio-economic analysis of the Masterplan area, both the Core Area, immediately around the Key Place Transformation areas (KPTs) and the Wider Area, the predominantly residential area around the KPTs. This covers sections of five of LBTH’s 20 political wards (Whitechapel, Stepney Green, Bethnal Green, St Peters’ and Spitalfields & Banglatown). BDP’s data is sourced from the 2011 Census. It’s not clear how they prepared it but the assumption was made that they aggregated neighbourhood data for those of the wards that lie within the study area, which is mapped below. It’s worth noting though that Whitechapel’s ‘community’, in terms of those that use the district centre for shopping and services, extends well beyond that blue line and deeper into those respective wards.

– Extremes of wealth: Whitechapel is home to some of the most deprived communities in the UK. However, it is also on the edge of the City, Tech City and Canary Wharf, and people are increasingly choosing to locate in Whitechapel to serve these markets. – A rapidly growing community: Population in the Wider Area only grew by 4% in the decade from 2001 to 2011, but it grew by 33% in the Core Area. Even in 2001 the population density was already high, so this is really very striking. With further development in the Core Area, the population is likely to continue to rise and densify. – Changing ethnicity: Around half of the population of both the Core and Wider Areas is of Asian descent. However, the ratio of this ethnic group to others has dropped between 2001 and 2011, from 54% to 45% in the Core Area, and from 52% to 48% in the Wider Area. The White British population has been increasing. Approximately 1 in 4 households has no-one who speaks English as their main language. 20% of the population within the Core Area, and 23% within the Wider Area speaks Bengali, compared to 1% of London’s population. – A young community: There is a very young population in the area as a whole, with almost 60% of people in the Core Area aged under 30. – More working people: Between 2001 and 2011 the population of working age increased by 72%. This is well above the rate of increase in LBTH as a whole, but below the London average.

Image 1: map of areas from Whitechapel Masterplan: Baseline Report, BDP (2013)

192

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

The proportion of those people in employment has increased over the decade, getting closer to levels for the borough and for London. Still, levels of unemployment have remained high and changed little over that time. – Less traditional ‘working-class’ employment: The occupational profile of people in the area is similar to that of the borough as a whole and to that of London. However, there has been a relatively significant decline in the proportion of people who work in operative (plant and machine operators, assemblers and drivers) or elementary (e.g. cleaners, labourers, street vendors, refuse workers) positions. Students living in the area have risen to about 15% of the population, and a greater proportion of people work in professional and managerial jobs, with ‘financial services’ now the top employment for residents. This suggests an increase in the number of people who live locally and who work in the City or Canary Wharf. – A more skilled population: The population has become more skilled over the decade, with higher levels of NVQs being attained, and the proportion of people with no qualifications dropping significantly. A relatively high proportion of residents have degree level qualifications. – Less social housing, more private renting: Housing tenure has seen significant changes since 2001. Private renting has overtaken social renting as the dominant tenure type. In the Wider Area I in 3 properties is privately rented. The proportion of people who own their own property has dropped from 27% to 23%, a slightly higher drop in ownership than for London as a whole. Levels of social renting have dropped from 44% in the

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

193

Whitechapel Vision: How has the local community been engaged with so far? Core Area and 54% in the Wider Area to 28% and 39% respectively. However, these patterns reflect those across London and Tower Hamlets. –T hat wealth divide in more detail: Areas of severe deprivation exist alongside areas of relative wealth. In 2004 all of the Wider Area was within the 20% of London’s most deprived locations, with some of the estates to the north of Whitechapel Road in the top 5%. Over the past decade deprivation has decreased in the area, especially around the High Street, to the south of the hospital and in stubborn pockets, such as around Old Montague Street.

Interesting questions provoked by this study are:

Masterplan Vision and related projects - Consultation by LBTH

a. How much of the change in the composition of the population is due to new members augmenting the existing population i.e. relatively little reluctant displacement – as opposed to people moving on by choice – for economic reasons?

ebruary to August 2013: F Preliminary Vision Consultation through meetings and workshops – Stakeholder ‘surgery’ for key stakeholders including local residents’ groups at the Idea Store. – Community group meetings for local business associations, media and cultural groups at the Town Hall. – A drop-in session for market traders at the Town Hall.

b. And how much of the change in the composition of the population has been due to reluctant displacement of the existing population to more affordable areas? (With changes to housing policy and benefits this kind of shift may increase.) Even if the case tends more towards (a), the question remains as to how much of the older/established population is able, and will be able to take advantage of the changes to the nature of the area. Will they be able to afford to use local shops and services? Will they be able to source better-paid employment or run more affluent businesses? And specifically, how will they be made feel welcome in, and have their needs met by, existing and new public and open spaces, alongside newer and more affluent residents.

A report of findings from this is available in the BDP Baseline Report (Section 8). September to November 2013: Statutory Community Consultation through meetings and workshops. http://www.bdp.com/en/latest/news/2013/ setting-out-the-vision-for-whitechapelpublic-consultation-launch/ – Public drop-in sessions at the Idea Store. – A bespoke drop-in Residents sessions at the Idea Store. – A presentation and Q&A of the draft masterplan to key stakeholders including community organisations at the Idea Store. – A drop-in session for market traders at the Idea Store. A full report is available online of this Statutory Consultation stage: http://www.towerhamlets.gov.uk/ lgsl/451-500/494_th_planning_guidance/ consultation_and_engagement/draft_ whitechapel_vision_spd.aspx

194

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Regeneration team consultation on improvements to Whitechapel Market, October 2015 – The Whitechapel Vision Delivery team and Markets team jointly held with TfL and Crossrail an open drop in consultation session for shop traders and market stall holders at the Whitechapel IDEA store on Monday 26th October between 10am-4pm to explain the regeneration of the area and engage local businesses and market traders on how they would like to see improvements. Open Spaces consultation on improvements to Ford Square and Cavell St Gardens, October 2015 – Ford Square is within the Ford Square Sidney Square Conservation Area and Cavell Street Gardens sits just outside it to the south. They are both to the south of a Key Place Transformational area according to the masterplan. – No report yet available – info is not in the public realm and anecdotally it sounded as though the consultation was rather contentious. Community ward forums – Local Community Ward Forums (LCWFs) are a key component to the Tower Hamlets Partnership. They are meant to ‘allow people to raise, discuss and address local service priorities by codesigning solutions with providers and promoting wider resident action’. – Consultation is assumed to happen in an ongoing way through these structures so we recommend that the teams responsible for of any proposed changes or development use them as a resource. – http://www.towerhamlets.gov.uk/lgnl/ community_and_living/community_plan/ local_community_forums.aspx

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

195

Masterplan Vision and related projects – Consultation by others

KPT1: Whitechapel Road Upgrading the Cycle Superhighway – TfL consulted on this from September to November 2014 using a variety of methods, including public drop-ins and online consultation. – A support rate of 95% was reported for the new cycle lane alongside the market plus other changes including alterations to loading bays, reduction to pavement width and removal of some trees. – Work took place in 2015, continuing into 2016. High Street 2012 – Whitechapel Market – To help Whitechapel adapt to the increased numbers of people moving through the area, the High Street 2012 initiative aimed to make improvements to the market so that the limited space for both pedestrians and market traders would be managed more effectively. – The market proposals were developed by Fluid, Alan Baxter and East in 2009/10 in consultation with local traders and the local community. – One of the aims of the scheme was that when the market was not in use, the area would be experienced as a more generous public space for all to enjoy.

More than five years after the completion of these two schemes, renewed conversations about the market and the quality of its spaces have been re ignited by the LBTH officers and all the interested parties. Time has shown that the market is still under-performing and that there continues to exists a fierce competition for space, not only in between traders and pedestrians but also for servicing and storage. This is what determined that the planned cycle lane to the north side of the Whitechapel Road was dropped from the TfL scheme, following pressures from the local market traders to have a better access to their vans. In the present, lack of storage has become one of the most pressing issues to be resolved. The lack of facilities for this purpose leaves the street cluttered and dirty at night, with stalls left on the pavement and vans parked illegally along the loading bays overnight. Negotiations between LBTH and adjacent landowners – who could have potentially offered a permanent solution to these issues by the allocation of spaces for storage and parking within their new developments – have so far not been fruitful. In the interim, and as a proposal deriving from this baseline study, the Vision Team has commissioned a feasibility study to offer the traders a permanent structure for their market stalls. The public realm strategy should acknowledge these proposed changes and also look for opportunities to replace any lost green infrastructure along the market stretch.

196

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

KPT2: New Civic Hub – LBTH’s proposal to refurbish the grade II listed 18th century old Royal London Hospital building to convert it to a new Civic Hub (town hall) went out to tender in early 2016. In April 2016, it was announced that a team lead by the architecture firm Allford Hall Monaghan Morris (AHMM) would lead the design for the £77 million scheme. – No public information was available on this scheme at the time of this report. KPT3: Durward Street Gardens – Crossrail’s proposal for the works to the new station (on the way and due to finish in 2018), with its entry and associated buildings and public realm, has been consulted on with the wider public in different instances from November 2014. – The questions used for the public consultations have related more to strategic moves than to detailed designs. Crossrail has nevertheless, made available their proposed designs for the public realm on their website. This information can be found here: http://www.crossrail.co.uk/ route/property-developments-and-urbanrealm/urban-realm-proposals/londonborough-of-tower-hamlets#Whitechapel KPT4: Med City Campus – BARTS Health NHS Trust launched a competition to recruit a team to develop a masterplan for the land behind and around the new Royal London Hospital buildings in January 2016. – No public information was available on this scheme at the time of this report. – Queen Mary University has been working on a similar vision for the buildings they occupy around the same area with their consultants BDP from 2014. – No public information was available on this scheme at the time of this report.

KPT5: Raven Row – The various landowners and developers engaged in regeneration projects around this area (L&Q, Cavell & Royal Mail sites) have held various consultations with the local community, some as early as March 2014. – For more information on these schemes please refer to section 1.1 of this report. KPT6: Cambridge Heath Gateway – Sainsbury’s announced their plans to develop housing over their mega store in March 2014 and have been in informal and formal talks with the general public and the LBTH planning team since then. – Their design statement postulated the redevelopment would focus on delivering around 600 new homes, new jobs and a new open public space. It stated that the design for the new buildings and square would be inspired by the local architecture as well as by Whitechapel’s rich culture and history. – The pre-application consultation supporting Whitechapel Square apparently reached over 2100 people, showing ‘an encouraging level of support for the proposal’, with 94% of those who completed feedback forms being in favour or favouring some elements of the scheme. – Although the pre-consultation for this scheme started as early as 2014 and Sainsbury’s has declared that public consultation ‘has been instrumental in shaping the submission’, at present the scheme has not yet been approved as the developers respond to some non-favourable feedback from English Heritage, the local planning authority and a few groups within the local community. – For more information on this scheme please refer to section 1.1 of this report.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

197

Key issues or questions that have arisen from that process that are useful to consider, or will need to be addressed, when drawing up public realm guidance and proposals. External reaction to the Whitechapel Vision Masterplan – The Whitechapel Vision was ‘highly commended’ for the Award for Strategic Planning at the 2014 Planning Awards. “The Whitechapel Vision plans, which were launched in March 2014, have generated a huge amount of support and excitement from residents and businesses, along with strategic partners involved in the delivery of this project” said a press release on the QMUL website. (http://www.qmul.ac.uk/media/ news/items/143198.html) · A Local Cllr, cabinet member for housing and development, added: “It’s fantastic to hear that our vision for Whitechapel is being recognised as one of the leading regeneration projects in the country. What is so brilliant about Whitechapel Vision is that residents are so on board with this project. We want to capture their enthusiasm for these plans and ensure that, by 2025, Whitechapel is even more of a thriving, cohesive and vibrant community.” http://www.labmonline.co.uk/news/ industry/silverliningforwhitechapel#. Vm5frun5_-U – The Vision has been praised by Planning Magazine as a masterplan that catches the benefits of growth for local people, and that is tailoring its plan to community aspirations http://www.planningresource.co.uk/ article/1334600/it-masterplanningcatch-growth-benefits: · “ The first six months of work involved intensive talks with more than 100 stakeholder groups, ranging from major landowners, developers, 198

statutory bodies, QMUL and the NHS to community groups, residents’ associations and market traders.’ [The planning director from BDP] said local groups were very influential in shaping ideas for open space, improving Whitechapel Road and making its street market work better. ‘We invited people to come to us and influence our ideas, says Brown [Whitechapel Vision Delivery Team Member]. ‘The local authority played a facilitating role. The early rounds of consultation opened people’s eyes to the opportunity. The vision was not fixed from the start – it emerged during consultation.’” · “[The cabinet member for housing and development] is confident that Whitechapel Vision will provide a support mechanism for the business community and allow residents to ensure that development goes the way they want. ‘The fundamental objective is to promote sustainable development, with an improved educational offer and better cultural, leisure and community infrastructure,’ she says. ‘The level of development expected in the area is huge and we have to make sure that we protect our investment and our land resources,’ she concludes. – In 2013, the FT mentions the Vision in a discussion about changing Whitechapel. UK property: swanky London heads east to Whitechapel: “Currently Whitechapel is very much location over lifestyle, but we expect that to change very rapidly,” says [...], Docklands development manager at Savills. “The proposed new mix of residential, retail and ‘public realm’ space will really bring the location to life.” http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/fef52b1c5d9a-11e3-95bd-00144feabdc0.html Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Reaction within the local community to the Masterplan overall

There is definitely concern, as reported in local media, regarding how much existing local people – particularly the market traders – will benefit from the proposed changes. This is inevitable, given the rate of change and displacement of existing communities that people witness happening across London at the moment. People will believe this until they see it not happening, whatever the intentions or stated commitments are. But there actually seems to be relatively little criticism online compared to what one might see for a major London regeneration project. – The recently formed East London Preservation Society has expressed concern about the project. – The East London born artist who was involved for a decade with the campaign to save Queen’s Market in Newham, expressed concern on digital news service East London Lines, that local businesses, and particularly market traders, had not been considered enough by, or involved enough in, the process: · “ When I spoke to the traders they said they were barely consulted – they are for improvement but it seems a bit unfair – if anything the market has been the drawing factor to that area for a long time. With the changes the rents are going to go up so when I spoke to the traders that was one of their big concerns. They certainly aren’t in favour of the local people – they are looking to bring new people, the plans need to provide for all sorts of people, not just new ones.” http://www.eastlondonlines. co.uk/2013/12/local-campaignerscriticise-whitechapel-masterplan/

· He continued: “Markets are the last social spaces in the capital and resist the generic pattern of centralised shopping areas. I’m always questioning the neoliberalisation of public space and I see the immense scale of change in East London, meaning fewer places for people to freely congregate in. Immigrant communities bring with them complex shopping patterns from bazaars, riverboat markets, night markets, shopping centres and shopping halls. Within all markets, lives are anchored together like ‘human coral’.” http://www.richmix.org.uk/whats-on/ event/saif-osmani-human-coral · He spoke at the launch of the East End Preservation Society in December 2013 on “the monster scheme for Whitechapel” and “revealed that the future development plan for Whitechapel, of over one hundred pages, does not include a single mention of the Bangladeshi people”. He also said, “It’s not architecture that engages, nor does it connect with the local inhabitants.” http://spitalfieldslife.com/ 2013/12/01/the-east-endpreservation-society-launch/

– The Director of the Whitechapel Gallery: · “There is in Whitechapel and around Brick Lane an incredibly fragile ecosystem of small business owners, artists and creatives,” she says. “So long as the developments do not price these people out, then I think it will be beneficial to the area … but if we drive them out, London as a city will be much the poorer for it.” http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/ fef52b1c-5d9a-11e3-95bd00144feabdc0.html

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

199

– The then Mayor, stressed in an interview with The Guardian in May 2014: · “Obviously we have Canary Wharf to learn from. Although I’m a firm supporter of that financial district I believe it could have been delivered in a way that worked in partnership with the indigenous community there, the white working class community, and not forced them out – a way where they could co-exist. There’s a lesson from that that we’re taking forward.” · “It’s about working with the existing shop owners and stallholders of the market in Whitechapel as part of what we do, then working with the big landowners: Transport for London has land behind the Crossrail station, we have some land and there are other stakeholders such as the Royal Mail site, the London Hospital site, and a site has already been bought by London and Quadrant Housing Association. So I’m very mindful of the existing community, very mindful of those who live and trade and have offices there. But with that in mind, life needs to go on.” · “When we did the masterplan I said all along that the existing communities must be protected, must be looked after and supported. We had a rigorous, three-month consultation process led by officers, and the cabinet member for regeneration [...] was part and parcel of that, and we met the stakeholders and people were quite excited, but of course there was some anxiety and opposition but we made sure we heeded those apprehensions and accommodated them.” · “I believe the change will be a positive change. Of course, we want gentrification, but gentrification that supports and assists the existing 200

local community. We want to bring in jobs, housing, office space and shopping, but local shops, not big chains. We’re not here to compete with Westfield [in Stratford]. We’re here to complement Westfield, and the shopping centre in Canary Wharf. We’re five minutes away from the City. We’re in the middle of the A11 corridor. We want to complement and add to what already exists.” · “And can I also say this? We are in the process of relocating the Town Hall to the middle of Whitechapel, the old Royal London Hospital site, as part of a new Civic Hub. That’s for two reasons: one, to keep that building in public ownership, so it doesn’t become a five-star hotel, and make our Town Hall more accessible; two, we want to save the £40m a year we spend on rent on this place [the current Town Hall] and take the workforce into the heart of Whitechapel so that their buying power is used for local products. We will be the catalyst. I support inward investment, I support mobility and capitalism. But it must be managed capitalism, a managed market economy that benefits the local people.”

Non place-specific issues / general areas of concern relevant to our enquiry 1. Does the Vision adequately benefit less affluent existing residents? The following concerns were expressed during the Vision consultation process in December 2013. – That more deprived housing estates are not included in the Masterplan boundary. – That more social or truly affordable housing is not being provided. (As opposed to ‘affordable’, the term used in response to this concern by the Council.) – Quite a few people want to see housing, but are concerned as to whether the appropriate mix of housing is being delivered. – That the needs of Bangladeshi, Somali and other ‘hard-to-reach’ groups had not been taken sufficiently into account. – Whitechapel is becoming too expensive to live for local residents. A number of residents expressed concerns that they had not been adequately consulted, and one resident expressed concern that market traders had not been adequately consulted. This was particularly vocal from residents of Durward Street. There were also concerns from residents about the amount of development that has gone on in the past decade or so, and that continues to go on, and that makes life quite difficult for residents. Consultation for the BDP Baseline document showed that the dividing line is not neat between ‘existing’ , ‘incoming’, and even within existing resident groups. It identifies tensions between longer term residents (older population) and newer residents (e.g. students and immigrants).

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

2. How will the existing character of Whitechapel be preserved? The following concerns were expressed during the Vision consultation process in December 2013. – Encroachment of the City on Whitechapel. – Loss of Whitechapel’s diversity. – Loss of Whitechapel’s unique character. – Loss of history. – Potential extension of City Fringe area with subsequent impact upon acceptable heights. – Tall buildings and chain stores changing the character of the area. – However another resident supported the Vision’s retention of the area’s unique heritage and character. – Another requested new buildings that are of modern high-quality design and that compliment the area’s existing historic architecture. – One Kempton Court resident suggested a tourist trail of Art Deco buildings in area to attract tourists and revenue. 3. What will the impact of tall buildings be? The following concerns were expressed during the Vision consultation process in December 2013. – Concerns about tall buildings affecting skyline and historical character of Whitechapel. – Concerns about tall buildings and their impacts in general. – Concerns about non-human scale – Concern regarding the creation of desolate spaces – Concerns regarding effects in terms of micro-climate and wind tunnel effects. – Concerns that the shadows of tall buildings are not shown on the graphics of the documentation. – Concerns over nature of ‘iconic’ tall residential buildings/ their design quality.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

201

– Concern that tall buildings will affect the character of the area. – Suggestion that building heights should step down as they approach living zones. – However, one resident expressed support for new taller buildings on Whitechapel Rd. 4. How will this impact upon existing local businesses and economic activity? The following concerns were expressed during the Vision consultation process in December 2013. – Concern regarding loss of local independent shops and belief that the area would benefit from greater diversity of businesses, and not chains. – Desire for new jobs to be created that benefit local people. – Will small businesses be able to get leases? – Concern regarding rent rises for small local businesses with all the new development. 5. How will this impact upon existing social infrastructure? The following concerns were expressed during the Vision consultation process in December 2013. – Concern regarding population increase and impact upon schools and surgeries. – Desire for more detail regarding additional social infrastructure. 6. How will traffic and movement be managed? The following concerns were expressed during the Vision consultation process in December 2013. – Desire for traffic to be better controlled in the area and movement of traffic to be carefully resolved in future proposals. – Desire for traffic on side roads to be reduced. 202

– Desire for parking to better managed and reduced on side roads. Parking comes across as an issue for people locally. 7. Is enough open space being provided? The following concerns were expressed during the Vision consultation process in December 2013. – More than one resident felt that more was needed than is currently proposed in the 2013 Masterplan. – Others express support for the Masterplan’s provisions of public open space, seating, more green space, trees and plants. The BDP Baseline consultation also identified feelings that there is a lack of open space in the area. 8. How might crime, fear of crime and antisocial behaviour be tackled? This came across as a big issue in the Baseline consultation run by BDP for the Vision. – Concern regarding prostitution and drug dealing, street drinking, anti-social behaviour on surrounding housing estates – Interest in better lighting and in Secure By Design principles 9. Desire for community, cultural and leisure facilities This came across as a big issue in the consultation run by BDP for the Vision and was also a comment made by a resident in the Statutory consultation for the Vision. – The relevant section of the Baseline Report concludes: “There is a range of community spaces within the area, which are well used but by a limited range of groups / sections of the community.” – There is a perceived lack of facilities

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

such as youth centres for young people although the Whitechapel Sports Centre is seen as making a positive contribution to the local area. – A number of people mentioned the lack of leisure and entertainment facilities in the area and that after dark there is little to do. 9. Other points made – Improving accessibility is a good thing, especially for disabled people. – Priority should be given to the needs of old people when preparing plans for the local area.

Reactions to specific Key Place Transformation (KPTs) KPT1 Whitechapel Road The following points were made during the Vision consultation process in December 2013. – Views appear quite mixed regarding the future of the market. Most residents who contributed to the Vision consultation would like to see it relocated or rebuilt or even ‘removed’ in order to address issues with storage, servicing, waste management, flooding, security, parking, congestion, noise and accessibility. – There are various suggestions for a new structure: one suggests that Borough Market is taken as a precedent; another suggests a self-contained market with a “grid-like pattern and supporting infrastructure,”; another suggests it is reduced in size. – The quality of the produce is also mentioned, or the lack of diversity of ‘offer’; it is hard not to get the impression that for some residents the market is an inconvenience and an eyesore, and certainly that at present it does not serve them. One resident says that the stalls give a bad impression of Whitechapel, and asks for standards to be enforced regarding appearance of stalls and waste disposal – Someone suggests that a ‘themed food market’ would be good. This impression is reinforced by the BDP Baseline Study, which states that “the market is seen by some as unclean and odorous.” – However, others stress the Market as a crucial part of the area’s history and local economy. This definitely comes across in other discussions outside this consultation – there is general concern across East London about markets being lost or ‘gentrified’.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

203

– Many concerns regarding the quality of shops and businesses along Whitechapel Road in general. Desire for cafes and restaurants with a more diverse food offer. – Desire stressed repeatedly that the street does not become a bland High Street full of chain stores. Specific request for no fast food chains. – Requests that pedestrian areas are widened. – Suggestions that there should be easyto-clean new paving and trees to create a ‘boulevard’ feel. – Request for public toilets. – Request for improved street lighting. The BDP Baseline study consultation found that local people see the HS2012 public realm improvements along Whitechapel Road as a positive addition to the area. KPT2 New Civic Hub The following points were made during the Vision consultation process in December 2013. – Desire for the Royal London Hospital to be sensitively restored. Concern as to whether this will happen. – Desire that more is preserved than simply the frontage. Concerns about preservation of old entrance. – “New civic square is an appealing concept but needs to fit with local character including the old hospital.” – Some support for it becoming a civic centre, given location and ease of access for residents, but others would like to see it become housing, commercial space or even an art gallery. KPT3 Durward Street Gardens The following points were made during the Vision consultation process in December 2013. In general there were a lot of concerns from local residents. 204

– Concern regarding increased traffic and noise on Durward Street, and impact on safety of students. – Concerns that new development is being prioritised at the expense of focus on improving existing social housing. LBTH responded that a capacity and improvement study for some of the local estates had been commissioned. – Concerns regarding condition of Vallance Gardens since the construction of Crossrail in Spring 2013. – Objections to creation of public space on Durward Street. – Objections to scale of tall buildings being built over station and consequent impact on light/ overshadowing. – Concern regarding plan for new station entrance on eastern end of Durward Street and its impact upon Kempton Court. – Concern that Durward St. is being misrepresented as a rundown place. – Belief that the name ‘Durward Street Gardens’ is misleading as it does not provide a ‘garden’. – Support for improved walkway through to Hanbury Street and walkway garden from Brady Street to Cambridge Heath Rd. – One resident of Durward Street had suggestions about how the street and links could be developed. – In summary, at the consultation stage there was clearly a lot of upset about the KPT3 proposals. As one resident said, “Durward Street and its residents have suffered too much development over last 20 years – need to enhance this street by restoring public realm.” Residents of north Durward Street expressed particular concern regarding the potential demolition of their properties. – Concerns from some residents of Kempton Court regarding the “environmental and amenity impacts” of the proposed redevelopment on their properties.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

– Concern from a Kempton Court resident regarding the new “commercial loop” through Durward Street. The East End Preservation Society (with the Victorian Society) campaigned against the demolition of a terrace at 3-11 Vallance Road by LBTH which they saw as being allowed to go ahead in order to aid Vision Development in the area, although there was no explicitly stated link by LBTH. The Council withdrew its plans to demolish the structure and instead has stabilized the building. http://www.bdonline.co.uk/council-haltsbdp-plan-to-demolish-victorianterrace/5068014.article – However, questions are now being asked about why so much money is being spent to keep the buildings stabilised: http://www.wharf.co.uk/news/ local-news/tower-hamlets-councilspends-123000-10246401 Issues that came across or points that were made in the Baseline consultation run by BDP for the Vision. – Prostitution and drug dealing on Vallance Road – That the Whitechapel Sports Centre is a good thing. KPT4 Med-City Campus Only one resident made comments about this as part of the 2013 Vision consultation. – Concern regarding proposals/uses for land around Mount Terrace and effect on amenity, and note that initial BARTS plan showed the land in front of Mount Terrace as meadowland. The Council disagreed with this criticism. They said that the indicative development proposals included appropriate scale and land use for the District Town Centre

and that the site provides an opportunity to strengthen the District Centre as a key ‘gateway’ site on the south side with active frontage onto Whitechapel Rd and associated complementary town centre uses. KPT5 Raven Row The following points were made during the Vision consultation process in December 2013. Only 2 local residents commented on this scheme. – Concern about tall building and its impact upon amenity. As well as upon the air ambulance. – Concern about demolition of historic property on Raven Row. – Concern that the kind of housing being provided is not really affordable. – Keen to see the site used for an arts/ theatre/music venue or sports centre/ swimming pool. The Council responded that their will be leisure and community uses provided on this site. Issues that came across in the Baseline consultation run by BDP for the Vision. – Concerns about street drinking and about a property being used as a squat by drug dealers on Cavell Road. No report is available from the L&Q consultation. KPT6 Cambridge Heath Gateway The following points were made during the Vision consultation process in December 2013. – Concern about impact of larger Sainsburys on small local shops. – A number of residents of Albion Yard objected to proposals for a new open space at the rear of their properties with regard to impacts on their amenity, security and privacy. The Council

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

205

5.2 therefore amended the proposals to exclude Albion Yard parking/refuse land, and to provide screening along the boundary. – Noted that if 2nd Crossrail entrance doesn’t open new green space could become deserted at night, issues with crime etc. The Council disagreed, as safe design will be required. – One resident supported the plan to redevelop the store but suggested that focus should be placed on redeveloping some of the social housing estates to the north of the station.

worried about new residents putting pressure on existing park spaces. – Albion Yard residents were concerned about the impact on privacy and the public realm of the new residential buildings, as per the 2013 Vision consultation. The Sainsburys Team redesigned the public realm to offer a landscaped area just for these residents and re-designed windows on the new residential scheme.

During the 2014/15 consultation on this scheme the following points were raised:

Community — Opportunities and Emerging Themes

– Concern regarding anti-social behavior in public areas. In response to this the Sainsbury’s Team amended the design of the car park areas of the scheme, include fob access only for residents of the new housing. – Pupils, parents and teachers of Swanlea School wanted to see more greenery, fountains and good lighting (for security reasons) in new public spaces. The Sainsbury’s Team added seating areas, landscaped areas and fountains in response, and will implement a site-wide lighting strategy. – The Swanlea School community wanted indoor public space as well as outside space. In response the Sainsbury’s Team redesigned one of the residential entrance lobbies to be a flexible community space opposite the school. – Local residents wanted the design of the building to be better aligned with local characteristics. In response the Sainsburys team added railings to building that are similar to those of the Whitechapel Bell Foundry and proposed cladding the “statement building” in terracotta like the Whitechapel Gallery. – Collingwood Estate residents were 206

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

207

Groups and networks identified We have assembled a preliminary list of groups that we suggest could be consulted during further development work related to the WPROSG. This list is not comprehensive and should therefore be cross-checked against the Council’s community database to make sure all relevant parties are consulted.

Residents Groups Group Durward Street North Residents Association

Official/Statutory* Group

Contact

Particular interests

Local Community Ward Forums for each ward

LBTH Localisation Service

General local interest – a good way to access concerned local residents.

Safer Neighbourhood Teams for each ward

Via the Met website

Kempton Court Residents’ Committee/ Association, Durward St

Particular interests Impact upon their homes of new buildings and public spaces (KPT3 in particular but also KPT6) Lack of focus on existing residents. Vallance Gardens.

Secretary

Concerns around environmental and amenity impacts of KPT3. KPT6 also relevant. Prior history of concern re impact of Crossrail – appeared in front of Select Committee. Vallance Gardens.

Albion Yard residents Secretary

Had some concerns re impact of KPT 6 in response to which Council made minor amendments. Quite a lot of them have concerns about the state and offer of the current market. Mile End Waste.

Sydney Street Tower Hamlets Tenants and Homes Resident Association Neighbourhood Engagement Officers

KPT5 Sidney Square, Ford Square, Cavell Street Gardens. Green space on their estate.

Community safety/ anti-social behavior – something that we know is also of concern to many local residents.

* It is not the proposed task of community engagement resource for this project to engage with council departments or statutory teams. However, both of the below are ways of accessingon-theground knowledge and experience about public realm in the area. NB. KPT1 is really of direct interest to everybody.

208

Contact

2 Jarman House Jubilee Street, E1 3BL admin@sidneytra.plus.com

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

209

Collingwood Estate TRA

Secretary/ Treasurer Collingwood Community Hall Collingwood Street E1

Chair

www.collingwoodtra.org.uk/ @CollingwoodTRA info@collingwoodtra.org.uk

Cleveland Estate/ Bancroft TMC

Cambridge Heath Rd

Chicksand Estate TRA

Chicksand East TRA

http://bancrofttmc.org.uk/ projects/bancroft-clevelandelderly-lunch-club/

Ground Floor, Pauline House, Old Montague Street, E1 5NX

KPT6 See their recent discussion of the Masterplan here: http://www.collingwoodtra.org.uk/ meeting-minutes-20th-july-2015/ “Concerns were expressed that the compensation needed might not be used quick enough to respond to the level of change. The TRA spoke in particular about the need for further parking, schools, GP’s (Albion only has funding secured for next 2-3years), larger rubbish chutes, better recycling facilities and more frequent waste management collections.” Greenspace on their estate. KPT6 Greenspace on their estate.

Group

Contact

Whitechapel Business and Traders Association UK

Particular interests Needs of the market and local businesses. KPT1

Whitechapel Market Traders

Javed Iqbal – Traders Rep

KPT1

East End Trades Guild

Chair

“The EETG is a co-operative of proprietor owned and run businesses working together in the interests of all the small independent traders of the East End. As well as offering goods and services our members provide social spaces, sustaining relationships between neighbours and making our streets safer and better places to be.”

eastendtradesguild.org.uk

KPT3 See Chicksand East Estate Landscape Design Brief (draft). Vallance Gardens

Christchurch Estate

KPT3 Green space on their estate.

Tower Hamlets Community Housing Association

Housing less affluent people locally. Increased property value in the area has become a real issue for them, as there is overcrowding and demand for large family homes, but families can’t afford the larger properties.

The Tower Hamlets Federation of TRAS

Interests of residents on all housing estates. Housing estate open space.

210

Business Groups

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

211

Educational Establishments Group

Contact

Swanlea School

Cultural or Community Institutions & Services Particular interests

Group

Contact

Particular interests

Nb. Students passing through streets and spaces to access school and potentially chilling in them after school. KPT 6 and also KPT3. St Bartholomew’s Gardens.

Whitechapel Gallery

Director

Maintaining fragile local cultural ecosystem KPT1

Community Representatives

Ayasofia Primary School

Cavell Street

Close to KPT5

Idea Store

Judith St John

General useful facility on KPT1 and opposite KPT2

John Smith Children’s Centre

Stepney Way

Close to KPT5

Brady Arts Centre

Hanbury Street

Youth Vallance Gardens

Collingwood Children’s Centre

Jerry Deeks, Manager

KPT6

Youth Arts Manager

Osmani Primary School

Vallance Road

Vallance Gardens

Thomas Buxton Primary School

Vallance Road

Vallance Gardens

Kobi Nazrul Primary School

Greenfield Rd

KPT2 & 4

Madani Girls School

Myrdle Street

Barts Health Trust/ Barts Charity Also PALS (Patient Advice and Liaison Service) for the Royal London

Drop-in centres within the hospital

Hospital user experience. KPT 1 & 2

Whitechapel Sports Centre

KPT3 Vallance Gardens

Albion Health Centre

KPT6

KPT2 & 4

Leisure and Amenity Groups Group

Contact

Particular interests

Tower Hamlets Wheelers

www.towerhamlets wheelers.org.uk

Impacts on and opportunities for cycling.

212

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

213

Community / Citizen Groups

Groups representing specific cultures or religions

Group

Contact

Particular interests

Group

Contact

Particular interests

TELCO (The East London Community Oganisation) – a branch – and the founding chapter of – Citizens UK.

Has/had its HQ in Whitechapel? Used to be based on Cavell Street by KPT5. But now its website simply re-directs to the main citizens uk one? @telcocitizens

A voice made up of 38 local community groups. People power. Previously campaigned to clean up Whitechapel and make it safer. They have young community leaders too.

The East London Mosque Trust Ltd

Salman Farsi

Wants to see as much affordable housing as possible, plus improvements to existing social housing and plans for improvements of streets and areas where people already live. Desires provisions of a neighbourhood connection route between Fieldgate Street and Whitechapel Rd, designed to be safe to use by night as well as day. Wants better wayfinding in key places outside of central Whitechapel including signposting to ELM. KPT1

Salvation Army

Booth House, 153-177 Whitechapel Rd

KPT1, KPT3

Community organizer Osmani Trust/ Centre – a youth and community centre which helps people, particularly those living in disadvantaged urban communities to re-engage with mainstream society and improve their quality of life. Used by between 800 and 1000 people each week.

Located close to KPT3. Ran a gang mediation programme at one point. Long term resident of area = 20 years.

Civic Amenity and Architectural Groups Group East End Preservation Society

Jagonari Women’s Educational Resource Centre

183-5 Whitechapel Rd

Whitechapel Mission homeless shelter staff and users

212 Whitechapel Rd

214

Interests of women and children. Founded by Bangladeshi women.

Contact

Particular interests “And, once we in the audience learned of the breakdown in the democratic process that will permit large-scale, destructive plans to be imposed upon the East End if we do nothing, there was an accumulating sense of horror as the list of imminent developments became apparent.” Spitalfields Life Blog

KPT5 Interests of its users.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

“This is not just a debate about what kind of places we want our cities to be, but about who controls the process of change. Is it you – that is local people and communities – or is the developers, with their short-term interests, aided by highly-paid planning consultants and supported by the Mayor? The East End Preservation Society is about wresting back control and the fight-back starts tonight.” East End Preservation Society

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

215

Key themes for engagement 1. ‘Viability’ Striking within the consultation report from the Whitechapel Masterplan SPD are the requests from developers and landowners for their viability statements to have more weight in the process, opening up possibilities of increased height and density, or reduced affordable housing commitments. But what if we looked at this the other way round? Given the Vision’s focus on existing communities, what does it take for a community to be able to be – to remain – confidently viable in a changing place? This project offers the opportunity to ask: how much development, and what kind of development, is viable for local people? And to explore the role of public realm and open space in helping existing communities feel that this continue to be an area that meets their needs, and is not just generically ‘liveable’ , but somewhere where they and their families can not only survive, but ‘thrive’, as the saying goes.

2. Trade a) The Vision expresses a strong commitment for the market to remain at the heart of Whitechapel. But community feedback around this is complex. Some residents feel that the market is messy, low quality and disruptive and would like to see it moved, or at least see its offer refocused and its structures smartened up (Borough Market is referenced). Others see it as integral to what Whitechapel to the identity and economy of Whitechapel. This project needs to unpack thinking about the role and function of the market as a community asset, and about the way in which it both is public realm, and affects the nature of the experience of wider public realm. This will require some negotiation – trade offs even – between different interests and ideas of value and quality. 216

4. ‘World-class’ b) At the bigger scale, statutory ‘trading’ is also important when it comes to major new development – those who are delivering and generating profit from it, and those who are living around it. The planning system and its gains facilitate this to some degree. But this project offers the opportunity to get the best possible outcomes within that trading process – to be an act of trading in itself – when it comes to public spaces, how they feel and what they contain. All parties need to feel that they have got something valuable as a result of investing in the process and in their area. 3. Roots Consultation so far is full of concerns for how the character and history of Whitechapel – its ‘roots’ – particularly as expressed through its buildings and spaces, but also through its people, will be preserved in the face of extensive development. This includes recent history: Whitechapel is the area where the London Bengali community has put down its roots. Indeed, traditionally this has been an area where successive generations of new incomers have been able to put down roots, moving on at their own pace as circumstances change. The question for this project is: What would a community ‘root protection zone’ look like? How can a focus on the public realm – what it is, how it used, and who it is useful and accessible to – help ensure that no-one is forcibly uprooted and that roots are respected, but that there is still space for new cultures and other things to move in, to take root and grow?

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

‘World-class’ development is clearly underway in Whitechapel, as the Vision Suplementary Planning Document states with regard to KPT4. But the rest of Whitechapel is also world-class, in its diversity and uniqueness, and in the skills, knowledges and experiences from all over the world that it contains. This project should seek to reveal and celebrate that status. A recent national newspaper article about the Italian Bengali community, for example, gives insight into one aspect of this, including the case of a migrant man who is fluent in 4 or 5 languages. (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/ home-news/italian-bengalis-meet-londonsnewest-ethnic-minority-a6753821.html) Design and cultural critic Fatema Ahmed exclaimed on Twitter, “ Tower Hamlets should be paying them to live there”. And you can see what she meansone can’t invent or create to order the culture that has emerged, and continues to emerge over time in Whitechapel. Culture and heritage exist above all in people – buildings and spaces are simply frameworks and symbols to support and accommodate them – they would have no meaning without people. How can public realm help foreground and celebrate the wold-class PEOPLE of Whitechapel, and the amazing brilliant surprising things that they do, know and carry with them?

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

217

Involving local groups in the project Methods proposed 1. Awareness-raising Complete and refine database in Section E. Contact all groups making them aware of the project and opportunities to participate. Determine which groups we want to invite to general events, and which we want to do targeted work with. 2. Talking to people about spaces in spaces Continuing the work that was started for the drop in market stall event on 5 December 2015 by talking to users in Whitechapel’s open and public spaces, asking the same questions and collecting anecdotal knowledge. 3. Phone and email mini-interviews about the spaces with all interested community stakeholders Following Point 1 above, circulate the public space cards to all identified groups, using them as a basis for conversations about what spaces they use and how they perceive public and open space in Whitechapel.

218

4. Targeted face-to-face interviews/ conversations with identified groups Identify groups from the stakeholder list to talk to in more detail, in order to particularly understand their specific perspective. – These might be ‘hard-to-reach’ groups with specific experiences who would not be reached through traditional consultation e.g. youth, elderly, Bengali women, homeless shelter users or support staff. – They might be groups who live in particularly close proximity to, or have a particular interest in one of the KPT sites. · KPT1: Market traders, community organisations and institutions based on or close to the road, all groups (as their High Street). · KPT2: Hospital users, local residents who cut through the hospital grounds. · KPT3: Residents of adjoining estates (Durward Street, Chicksand, Christchurch in particular), nearby schools, sports centre users, Osmani Centre. · KPT4: Nearby schools. · KPT5: Sidney Street Estate residents, The Mission users and staff, nearby schools. · KPT6: Nearby estates, particularly Collingwood and Cleveland, Albion Yard, Swanlea School. – Or they might be groups who have skills that can be shared to detail or deliver any parts of the projects in a collaborative way. · Spitafields and Stepney City farms, local gardening groups, local sports clubs, etc.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

5. Public value ‘walking workshops’. During design development stage, a series of investigative walks with local groups around key public spaces, collectively evaluating the public realm: What is Whitechapel? Who is the Whitechapel’s public? How is it visible and active in public and open space? What do we value? What is missing and might be introduced? What is nascent and might be nurtured? What is fading and needs strengthening? What are our priorities for the public realm? 6. Traditional consultation drop-in events to engage with the broader audience The traditional stall/gazebo consultation on 5 December 2015 was the first of these. 7. Invite collaboration to deliver the vision Deliver projects in conjunction with local groups who have the skills to help design, deliver, maintain or activate any of the long term or interim public realm proposals. They might be groups that by doing so, can display the richness and diversity that exist in the area.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

219

Widening the debate in a creative way There are many ways of engaging people in conversation about what the area could be or how the changes could be implemented.

Whitechapel as town centre for learning by Carmel Keren (Royal College of Art student), 2016.

In line with the history of creativity in the area, below we present a student project that offers an approach to deliver initiatives in Whitechapel. The approach acts as a means to open up the conversation and bring attention to the masterplan vision for the area.

The proposed approach presents Whitechapel as a town centre for learning, by making links between all associations, groups and places of knowledge.

Whitechapel Whitechapel

bancroft estate

2 collingwoood collingwoood estate estate

1 St Anne’s Primary

St Anne’s Primary

Thomas Buxton Thomas Buxton Primary Primary

Osamani Primary

Nomadic Community Community 1 Nomadic Garden Garden

cleveland cleveland estate estate

christchurch Osamani Primary estate

christchurch estate

12 8

8 10

7 6 5 4 2

220

Spitalfields 2 Spitalfields City Farm City Farm

Jagonari Women’s Women’s 4 Jagonari 3 Centre Centre

Kobi Nazrul Primary

Stepney Green Stepney Green estate estate

East LondonEast London Mosque Mosque

Sidney Street Sidney Street estate estate

Clichy estate

John Smith John Smith Children’s Children’s Centre Centre

Kobi Nazrul Primary

The Centre the of the 5 Centre 4 The of Cell Cell

12Arbour Arbour Youth Centre Youth Centre

10 9

chicksand chicksand estate estate

Swanlea School Swanlea School

St 5Augustine’s 7 Royal 7London 8 Whitechapel Sports Sports St Augustine’s6 Royal 6London Royal Hospital London Hospital Royal Hospital London Hospital 8 Whitechapel 9 Community Garden Garden LearningLearning Wing Volunteers Centre Centre Community Wing Volunteers

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Stepney Stepney 11 City Farm City Farm

The 9Whitechapel The Whitechapel 10 Mission Mission

The Ideas The Ideas 10 Store Store

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

221

Community: Challenges and Opportunities – Ensure existing communities remain confidently viable in a changing place – Consider the Whitechapel Road market both as a community asset and a public realm asset – Respect the roots of Whitechapel – the history and culture – while providing space for new cultures and ‘World Class’ development to grow – Ensure buildings and spaces celebrate the World-Class people and communities of Whitechapel

222

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

223

Credits

muf architecture/art J&L Gibbons Civic Engineers Robert Bevan Daisy Froud objectif Artelia

Comprehensive Public Realm Plan for Whitechapel (CPRP)

for the London Borough of Tower Hamlets

Principles March 2016

224

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

225

10 Principles

226

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

227

Introduction

Why this is important

CPRP Development

The Comprehensive Public Realm Plan (CPRP), aims to define the Borough of Tower Hamlets’ strategic blueprint for Whitechapel’s open space.

Recent developments and development proposals have highlighted those areas in which existing documents such as the London Plan, the City Fringe OAPF, the LBTH Local Plan and Conservation Areas have fallen short in the determination and guidance of emerging open space provision, and the protection and strategic improvement of the existing public realm. We see large-scale development proposals still not taking sufficient notice of their neighbours, with a failure to imagine purposeful open space for the wider community.

In the course of the design work for three key public realm and open space enhancements (commissioned by LBTH at the end of 2015), which form part of the wider delivery of the Whitechapel Vision, the team has developed a number of principles.

This document aspires to become a strategic planning tool for planners, managers, and case officers in conversation with developers, residents, architects, local businesses and other stakeholders as they steer Whitechapel’s changes in the direction of LBTH’s strategic objectives. The Whitechapel Vision by BDP for LBTH sets out a spatial ambition for the improvement of the existing public realm, in the context of imminent change. The CPRP develops a set of principles to help ensure the delivery of a more legible, easy to navigate and generous open space for all. The spatial ambition communicated by these principles will be realised by capturing the opportunities and challenges of the wider area; ensuring that change is made with a long term view; addressing deficiencies or disjointedness with a comprehensive approach; and providing a coherent plan for the long term future.

All too often, open space comes as a percentual addendum to a development, instead of as the delivery of an area wide offer. The CPRP attempts to set out the guidance for (piecemeal) delivery of an integrated and strategic public realm for the wider area. Developments should take forward these public realm objectives as much as possible and where there is open space already, new buildings should be designed so that this open space is not overshadowed, windy or disappears. The WPROSG team recommends that the CPRP and its principles are adopted and promoted by LBTH in the course of their efforts to support Whitechapel. It should offer effective and helpful guidance in terms of guiding principles for future developments. The team believes that LBTH can take a more pro-active role in shaping the future of Whitechapel. As a highly dense area, deficient in accessible open space and destined to welcome a large amount of new inhabitants and visitors, Whitechapel cannot afford to not look ahead. It risks, like a badly planned party, to run out of drinks before the guests have even arrived.

228

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

These principles, set out hereafter, have been developed through engagement with the area of Whitechapel and following LBTH’s aspirations. They reflect and respond to the specific challenges and opportunities that on-going growth and development in Whitechapel present. In addition, the principles form a comprehensive response to LBTH Local Plan, which sets out the framework for the delivery of, “successful place-making in Tower Hamlets to create locally distinctive, well designed, healthy and great places which interconnect with, respond and integrate into the wider London area.” The principles here described endeavor to make the offer of open spaces work better for Whitechapel, so that more people will use them, they feel safer, they are more beautiful, more legible and better connected. With the existing open space provision already deficient and under pressure from imminent growth, this document sets out how we can we make best use of what is there, release some of what is underused, and reconnect existing uses and spaces so that we reveal the best of this wonderful part of the city. The emerging principles and principle projects following this chapter elaborate on how this might be achieved in the context of Whitechapel.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

229

Principles Contents 1. 2. 3.

4. 5. 6. 7.

9. 10.

230

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Synergise ground level uses Support wellbeing through open spaces Preserve assets through positive interventions and temporary uses

233 239 245

Design the public realm to enhance amenity 251 Design public realm for its specific use 257 Recognise and celebrate heritage 263 Target public realm investment 269 to maximise added value Connect people in Whitechapel with and through nature Enhance Whitechapel for all Support active spaces

275 287 291

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

231

Synergise ground level uses Rich ground plane – outside and inside

232

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

233

Rich ground plane – outside and inside

Str eet

Tu r

Wa ld

tre et

This principle captures the opportunity to extend the influence of land use beyond its threshold, so that the public realm enhances adjacent ground floor uses and vice-versa. DM23 (1b), Local Development Framework, states that: “Development should be well-connected with the surrounding area and should be easily accessible for all people by ensuring design of the public realm is integral to development proposals and takes into consideration the design of the surrounding public realm.” The principle ‘Synergise Ground Level Uses’ would broaden this requirement to include the surrounding uses in the design of public realm adjacent to developments.

234

The rich ground plane principle recognises that it is vital to the success of a place that adjacent ground floor uses relate to and activate each other in order to animate and embrace the public realm. This association of open space with local services inherently brings with it the opportunity to enhance a sense of ownership and captures the opportunity for different uses, including schools, hospitals, local businesses to the open spaces around them.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

1 Possible project: Centre of the Cell What if the bio-med campus extended as learning / play space for local schools and children, within an open air science garden? It could be animated and activated by adopting a ‘Centre of the Cell’ programme. Seating, potted trees and commissioned play equipment drawing on cellular structures could create a shared space where wind is mitigated, informal play is encouraged, and a meeting place for visitors, students and staff is created.

2 Precedent: Gillett Square At Gillett Square in Dalston, the public realm is regularly activated by children’s play equipment. Build-your-own play equipment is brought out from a decorated container that is managed by the local cafe by muf architecture/art, 2012.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

235

3 Possible project: Idea Store Alleyway The identification of zones of investment in new social spaces along Whitechapel’s crowded streets and walkways, for example a courtyard extension as IDEA’s exterior reading room in the disused Sainsbury’s access alley off the High Street. In this temporarily blocked alley, seating and planting would transform the space into a reading room that could connect to the interior as well as to the future public realm of the supermarket.

236

Precedent: outdoor reading room The New York Library’s outdoor reading room, adjacent to the library on fifth Avenue and 42nd street, consists of two long tables with lamps under a canopy of mature trees. There is also a cart with staff-picked books for all ages. The library’s campaign is called the “Library Inside Out: Read Everywhere.” The space aims to encourage reading and studying in a more public environment.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Possible project: Vallance Garden Loop This principle is vital to the emerging programme of improvements along Vallance and New Roads and includes the spilling out of sports use from the Whitehapel Sports Centre onto Vallance Gardens.

6 Precedent: Payer’s Park, Folkestone Informal play equipment along the boundary path of the park is used for exercise and play at Payers Park, Folkestone by muf architecture/art, 2014.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

237

Support wellbeing through open spaces Hospitable corridors and spaces

238

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

239

Hospitable corridors and spaces

This principle recognises the relationship between well-being, health and the regenerative potential of the public realm. It builds on SO10 of the Local Plan, which seeks to deliver healthy and liveable neighbourhoods. The benefits to all the people who enjoy open spaces can be measured through the construction of a quality-adjusted life years (QALY) model. One QALY is equivalent to one year lived at optimal (physical and mental) health, which the National Institute of Clinical Excellence values at between £20,000 and £30,000 (per QALY).

240

The restorative and healing properties that well designed open spaces can produce have been long acknowledged and evidenced. The Old London Hospital had such internal gardens, where patients could enjoy respite from treatment and the city, patients and staff alike would sit and read, enjoying the sun, or go for a restorative walk. The doorstep environment of the hospital today does little to nurture such experience. Well-designed and cared for open spaces would benefit health workers, visitors (at often anxious times), patients and local residents alike.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

1 Possible Project: Outpatients Doorstep The hoardings surrounding the nearby development sites get thickened as a ‘generous boundary’ that includes planting, seating and lighting. In this way, the hoardings not only mitigate the effects of construction but provide an extension of the public realm while the area is in a state of change.

2 Possible project: St Augustine’s green This proposal envisions St Augustine’s community garden to spill out beyond the street wall, with planting in front of the building’s newly revealed back. The garden could face a new open space skirting around the entire perimeter of the building, becoming the backdrop to a restorative walk and a caring and cared for environment.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

241

APE

E HIT

TM EAS

EET STR

AY NEY W

STEP

TURNER STREET ET

K STRE

NEWAR

REET

LD ST

ASHFIE

3 Possible project: Temporary Green Spine setting the scene for the permanent one The proposal seeks to provide spaces for well-being around the hospital during a stage of continuing construction. Unused space, left over from demolition, could become available for start-up businesses and studios, an ornamental tree garden, 242

4 tennis courts, a welcoming drop-off area, spaces for seating and parking, or any combination of these. The temporary Green Spine could grow from the community roots already established by the city farms close to the hospital, offering opportunities for food growing, therapeutic horticulture and skills sharing.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Visual of a before/after state A series of connected green spaces would offer not just respite from the busy environment of the high street, but glimpses of green life from the hospital corridor to the outside.

5 Precedent: Tennis courts Tennis courts at Roosevelt hospital in New York. Tennis courts as a possible intermediate use of land awaiting development around the Royal London Hospital.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

243

Preserve assets through positive intervention and temporary uses Safeguard your assets

244

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

245

Safeguard your assets (during a time of change) 1

On-going change and development in Whitechapel present both opportunities and risks. One such risk is the disruption caused to the daily lives of local residents and visitors. Young children living in the area will experience this upheaval throughout their formative years. Thankfully, this disruption can be mitigated in-part by designing temporary interventions that enliven and activate the pubic realm and open spaces. Approximately 7,000 metres of hoarding will go up in Whitechapel as a consequence of on-going development work. DM23 (4b) seeks to mitigate the negative visual impacts of development, advertising and hoardings. Hoardings can also be seen as an opportunity for temporary interventions that mitigate the negative impacts of development. It is important to remember that it is the quality, as much as the quantity of public realm provision, which will help to mitigate any negative impacts of the development coming to Whitechapel. 246

Fragile uses, such as the market, are at risk of losing the vital space needed to thrive. This principle describes the obligation to preserve and look after existing assets by designing the temporary measures necessary to mitigate the negative temporary effects of change. Whitechapel market is world-famous and offers, like Brick Lane or China Town, a real taste of a different world within the city. These assets, like Whitechapel’s historic assets, need to be considered with care and given space to flourish, especially in times of change. In turn, they will get the chance to positively enhance Whitechapel.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

1 7km of Hoarding With over 7km of hoarding to shield the new development sites, hoarding in Whitechapel should be more than site security. As an opportunity to animate, hoarding could set the scene for future, more permanent interventions becoming an asset, adding lighting, seating, windows to development, and greening otherwise long sections of blank walls.

2 Precendent: Ruskin Square Hoardings Mitigating disruption with lovely boundaries for years of construction, not blank wall hoardings: Ruskin Square, Croydon by muf architecture/art & J+L Gibbons, 2013.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

247

3 Possible project: Safeguarding the Market Widening the northern pavement of Whitechapel Road to give elbow room to the market. This would help consolidate the market’s spill-out while creating a more generous space for shopping, commuting, visiting or walking. Seating in sunny spots could generate spaces for locals and visitors to meet and socialise.

248

Crossrail works disrupting the market During construction, any relocation of market pitches should aim to retain the market as a whole piece, avoiding fragmentation.

Possible project: Consider the child Young children in Whitechapel will be teenagers once developments being proposed now have neared completion. Play is both learning and work for children, who are the future of Whitechapel. The current local provision is low in both quantity and quality of play space. (Image: schoolchildren crossing Philpot St.)

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

6 Precedent: Play within social housing Play space within the Whittington Estate, Camden by muf architecture/art, 2013.

7 Precedent: Playful boundary Playful boundary at Wick Green play space, Hackney by muf architecture/art, 2011.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

249

Design the public realm to enhance amenity Multiply its uses

250

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

251

Multiply its uses

With pressure on land so high in Whitechapel, LBTH needs to take the opportunity to increase the amenity value of land by designing multiple uses into a single space in order to meet multiple needs. Roof gardens, games areas, cafes with planting and active play, can all be designed into or onto the boundaries of other spaces, such as car parks, markets, school grounds and roof space, so that the benefits that can be delivered from a limited supply of open space can be maximised. The intensification of public realm amenity can produce spaces within which complementary uses create positive interaction, natural surveillance, and new local economies, all whilst providing for the various needs of local residents, workers and visitors. 252

Programming spaces for multiple uses often happens organically where libraries, churches or schools let out part of their premises during or after opening hours. Developers and planners often do not take opportunities for the intensification of uses. Mixed-use developments do not normally programme their spaces for multiple uses – such as a crèche in the day and exercise space in the evening, etc. This principle would therefore require mixed-multiple-use developments to come forward in Whitechapel, in which the amenity areas are always accessible to the general public. (Image: Southbank Terrace)

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

1 Possible project: Parking+sports+square There is a desire for more car parking on areas which have been earmarked as open space. At the same time, there is also a wish for more sporty/social spaces especially as some are being displaced by development. Perhaps Whitechapel can have both.

2 Precedent: Basket Bar NL Architects’ project for Utrecht University, ‘Basketbar’, had a Basketball court added on top of the campus canteen. The red skate court functions as external seating during term time. Basket Bar, Netherlands by NL Architects.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

253

R E B UI L T

WHITECHAPEL ROAD

noodle

CHINESE

plus

241

L A

C H

H A

0207 747 7712 HALAL

Traditional Fish Bar

Diana's

OPTOMETRIST

L.A. SACKWILD

L S E

C H

Percy Ingle EAST LONDON'S TRADITIONAL FAMILY BAKER - EST 1954

fresly baked by family bakers

Mishti

P R E M I E R S WE E T C O NF E C T IO N E R S

feast

Apsara Herbal

WOOD'S BUILDINGS

Hair & Beauty Salon

B O M BAY

P LA ZA

Bombay Jewlers

FOR MEN & WOMEN

noodle plus

3 Possible project: School’s MUGA rooftop Existing schools lack space for playtime and students have to exercise elsewhere. The effect is evident in the worn out state of Ford Square. We recommend that future schools and extensions use their roofspace for open play space. Image: Rooftop conversion at Hanover Primary School, Islington.

254

Precedent: Ganjui Nursery’s play roof Ganjiu Nursery, Maryang, South Korea by JY Architects.

5 Precedent: Rooftop Crèche Unite d’habitation, Marseille by Le Corbusier, 1952.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Possible project: Market Structure A permanent skeletal structure for the market, which enabled the space to double-up as event space or food court at night. This would create a day-tonight environment on the north side of Whitechapel Road, with the market frame structure holding produce by day and social activity by night.

7 Precedent: Street market, France A continuous structure that runs the full length of the street is dressed in textiles during market trading hours and left as an empty, simple canopy when the market is not there.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

255

T HE G R A VE

M A UR I C E

Design public realm for its specific use The public realm is where you walk

256

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

257

The public realm is where you walk

This principle is based on the understanding that good public spaces are spaces that people use. Good public spaces exist for people to walk, wait for their children and enjoy the sun. This principle reinforces this knowledge by proposing the enhancement of open spaces that people already use, rather than where we might imagine them when looking at a plan. This principle goes against the idea of considering open space as a quantum of new open space required from developments. Existing public space should be enhanced as a network of quality open spaces that define where development can go, instead of the other way around.

258

Furthermore, this principle aims to enhance the footfall and natural surveyance of existing precious open space, some of which is currently not well looked after. We propose that the routes people take to move between estates, parks, schools, shops and public transport are enhanced to aid their intuitive use by improving visual connections, activating frontages, and improving lighting. The Core Strategy of the Local Plan makes clear LBTH’s aspiration to deliver, “a safe, attractive, accessible and well designed network of streets and spaces,” (SO20) to “promote social interaction and inclusion, and where people value, enjoy and feel safe and comfortable,” (SO21).

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

1 Possible project: Collingwood Estate The Estates harbour some of the greenest spaces in the Whitechapel Masterplan area, with mature trees and sunlight. These spaces, which are the backdrop of the homes of the local community, should be better looked after. By opening up and enhancing the routes through the estates with signage, lighting and incidental play, natural surveillance would be increased. With a carefully planned intensification

of use, these spaces could in turn help challenge the perception that the estates north and south of Whitechapel Road, are unpleasant fortresses, fostering crime and a sense of unwelcomeness.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

259

2 Precedent: Rhodes Estate as public route Simple moves, like the removal of railings and additional planting, were used to make a route through the estate feel welcoming. The Rhodes Estate as a shared route, Dalston by muf architecture/art, 2009.

260

Rhodes Estate before Fencing and barriers hinder pedestrian movement and make people feel unwelcome.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Precedent: Kings Crescent Estate’s Pocket Park A fruit orchard and wildlife garden was planted with residents on a patch of amenity grassland, turning the back of the estate into a frontage. King’s C. Estate, Hackney by muf architecture/art, 2014.

5 Kings Crescent Estate before Fencing and barriers hinder pedestrian movement and make people feel unwelcome.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

261

Recognise and celebrate heritage Look back to look forward

262

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

263

Look back to look forward

O HR

S PLE MA PLA

PEL

A CH

ITE

TM EAS

heated food display

chilled food display

STR EET

VE RA

Single

lan s ce Am ckbuBu De

Heritage adds cultural value and desirability to an area; people value things the older they are. Unfortunately, most things do not get the chance to grow old. Whitechapel’s history is as rich as it is varied, but there are many aspects of this history that are currently hidden and are thus undervalued as assets. If properly cared for, these assets would link the area’s history to the identity of Whitechapel today, enriching the local environment.

264

SO22 of the Local Plan Core Strategy describes the need to “Protect, celebrate and improve access to our historical and heritage assets by placing these at the heart of reinventing the hamlets to enhance local distinctiveness, character and townscape views.” In order for Whitechapel’s heritage assets to effectively express and celebrate the area’s unique identity, it is crucial that they are presented within a sensitive, well-designed and uncluttered setting.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

1 Possible project: Mission Green Skirt To make Cavell St. one-way, to extend the pavement around the Mission building and plant its edges to create a positive public frontage to the west and south. Training to maintain the green edge as a skill upgrade with a possible therapeutic benefit. This project recognises the heritage of philanthropy that is unique to Whitechapel.

2 Possible project: Mission Cafe To use the undercroft of the Mission to host a cafe / greenhouse space, creating an active frontage to Raven’s Row.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

265

4 6

3 Possible project: Temporary Green Spine A new landscape for the Green Spine, temporary or permanent, could incorporate many of the features of the ornamental gardens of the Old Hospital, which provided patients and hospital workers with a space to enjoy and relax, rather than just pass through.

266

Precedent: Historic Nurse’s Gardens The nurses’ garden had a fountain and a bridge over an ornamental pond. The historic map shows the location of ornamental gardens east of the Royal London Hospital Museum, former St. Augustine’s Church.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Possible project: Mount Terrace A new landscape for Mount Terrace. The open corner of the hospital site, by the QMUL campus, was once a hilltop fortification dating back to the Civil War. The only trace left of this is the name of the street: ‘Mount Terrace’. An open space here could be designed as the front door to the QMUL campus providing local amenity whilst drawing attention to the rich history of the area.

6 Children playing in front of the Royal London Hospital in 1890.

7 Precedent: Cartier Open Space An open space with pronounced facade. Cartier Foundation building, Paris by Architect Jean Nouvel.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

267

Target public realm investment to maximise added value There is value in uneven investment

268

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

269

There is value in uneven investments

Not every open space is going to be successful. An open space that is windy, overshadowed or next to a bus terminal, is never going to be successful however well-designed it is. Investment in public realm and open space enhancement must be strategically directed into those spaces and routes which present the best opportunities to maximise public amenity, social value and well-being. In the same vein, small funds that strategically target identified deficiencies or unexploited assets, could make a world of difference to an area’s appearance and feel.

270

Whitechapel, for instance, is seeing the speedy loss of open spaces that receive sunlight as developments come forward. Preserving those open spaces that still enjoy a great deal of sunlight, will maximise the value of these open spaces for local workers, residents and visitors. Money should be spent where it has the greatest effect: where there are overlaps for use and positive qualities of space relating to these uses. Imagine, for example, a lunch-break spot near the market, in the sun, with trees and seating. Image: People choose to sit in the sun regardless of the cars outside RLH.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

1 Possible project: Mount Terrace An amenity space in the open northwestern corner of the hospital site (currently used for car parking) would benefit from secured sunlight due to the adjacent low height, listed terraces.

2 Listed terraces reduce over-shadowing what could be valuable open space.

3 Precedent: Altab Ali, Aldgate Sunlight is allowed through by medium density developments facing the park. Altab Ali Park, Aldgate by muf & J+L Gibbons, 2012.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

271

22m

4 Possible project: North Pavement of Whitechapel Road Investing in the extension of the north pavement of the High Street to give space for the market to continue to thrive. A pavement that thickens to become a linear public square when the market is not active.

272

5 Precedent: Southbank Riverside The Southbank owes much of its success to the generosity of its doorstep space.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Possible project: Brady Lunch market The proposal to introduce a mid-day Saturday food market at the southern end of Brady Street. This area is sunny and the activity could compliment the existing offer from the IDEA Store, the market and the route to/from the existing supermarket, sports centre and housing.

7 Precedent: Whitecross Street Market By introducing a licensed pavement strip, Whitecross Street Market was supported to trade in a regulated, tidier way. Whitecross Street Market, Islington by muf architecture/art.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

273

Connect people in Whitechapel with and through nature Greenfingers

274

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

275

Greenfingers Slow the flow – Managing rainwater runoff Implementation of Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) and permeable paving will help mitigate the negative impacts of heavy rains and extreme weather events. Rainwater management systems can be integrated into parks and street ways – producing a healthy and happy public realm. Big up the canopy cover – Protecting and developing Whitechapel’s trees The development of an effective arboriculture strategy will help provide continuity across the hamlet as development progresses. Planting fewer, large species trees will provide effective canopy cover without cluttering the public realm. Greenfingers for therapeutic gardening – Activating the volunteer economy Making use of the existing network of skills and enthusiasm in community horticulture and local urban agriculture in Whitechapel will enable the effective and positive maintenance of open spaces in Whitechapel, whilst promoting positive community relations and well-being. Re-balance the street: make real room – Activating street spaces to enliven place-making Urban forestry and increased street activity will help to calm traffic and ensure that pedestrians are prioritised, greener streetscapes will weave neighbourhoods together connecting them with and beyond the green grid.

In an area such a Whitechapel where there is a shortage of green spaces, it is important that the provision of green links, urban ecology, and urban forestry be woven into the entire public realm. Rather than providing a public square and routes paved entirely with granite and slate etc. – urban greening must be emphasised as a means to break up monotonous and alienating spaces and provide the city and its citizens space to breath.

276

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

277

Slow the flow — managing rainwater runoff 2

3 1

1 Slow the flow Make porosity and permeability part of every move, express the quietways and spotlight rainwater (that makes ours a green and pleasant land after all) to encourage urban rambling and cycling for fitness and enjoyment.

278

For example – Introduction of SuDS through sunken rain gardens along the Green Spine to Philpott Street to create a high performing amenity space – De-pave where possible and relay permeable paving to alleviate run off – Extend linear landscape to Commercial Road – Introduce tree trench planting

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

2 Iris pseudacorus – marginal planting in wet soils

3 Copenhagen – Tivoli Hotel roof garden

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

279

Greenfingers for therapeutic gardening — activating the volunteer economy 2

1 Green fingers for therapeutic gardening To propagate and nurture city soils through realising the network of skills and enthusiasm in community horticulture, botany, plant exchange and local urban agriculture, promoting healthy soil and healthy community.

280

For example – Reinstate Ford Square understory planting and pathways – Focus planting palette on sensory and medicinal planting – Link maintenance and care for the planting with Mission service users – Reinstate a tranquil space by reintroducing principles of historic design, this space can then be used by local residents hospital visitors and patients – Introduce natural play along pathway

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

2 Seed trays – Community planting Summerford Grove Estate, J & L Gibbons / muf

3 Dalston Eastern Curve Garden J & L Gibbons / muf

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

281

Big up the canopy cover – protecting and developing Whitechapel’s trees 2

3 1

1 Big up the canopy cover: Diversity and large specie trees, living heritage, articulating the city landscape as development comes and goes, resilient and heroic, protected within an arboricultural strategy for the neighbourhood that finds space for new planting.

282

For example – Protect existing trees of merit through Tree Protection Orders to cover street trees and park trees that are vulnerable to development pressures – Linking the existing urban canopy together with additional tree planting – Plant diverse selection of large specie trees for long term climate change adaptation impact – Integrate with SuDS, traffic calming and cycleways

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

2 St. Pancras Churchyard – Urban Forest

3 Angel Building J & L Gibbons

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

283

Re-balance the street: make real room

3 1 Connect with nature, connect with life Biodiversity meets sustainable urbanism in incidental wild pockets of biodiversity, planted as if by Nature herself, urban ecology to feed the soul and make room for resilient habitats

284

Looking up – Sun shines through hazelnut tree canopy

2 For example – Create a wildlife garden for natural play and biodiversity, a wild place and escape in the city with composting and outdoor classroom.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

3 Barbican – Fann Street wildlife garden in amongst tower blocks, managed by local garden groups with City of London Barbican Management Guidelines: J & L Gibbons / Avanti

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

285

Enhance Whitechapel for All Ensure the benefits of growth are distributed equitably

286

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

287

Ensure the benefits of growth are distributed equitably 1

1 Given the projected growth in Whitechapel’s population, as well as the large number of young people living in the area, it is clear that Whitechapel will need to provide more space for leisure activities in the near future. This need is particularly pressing since, as described in the Baseline study, the provision of spaces for leisure and play is already inadequate. As the Whitechapel Vision Masterplan Cabinet Report makes clear, the regeneration of Whitechapel “should maximise the benefits of growth for the community by providing… public realm enhancements, and community infrastructure through various mechanisms, including Section 106 and Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) funding arising from new developments.” The vision for Whitechapel’s future presented in developer’s drawings and plans must be realised for all of the neighbourhood’s residents, workers and visitors. 288

Investment in public realm in Whitechapel must be strategically planned and sequential in order to fully deliver the benefits of growth to the whole of Whitechapel. In this regard the phasing of projects is key and should be determined according to: (a) the opportunities presented by new development proposals and connected S106 negotiations; (b) a cost-benefit analysis based on the cost of each project relative to the projected improvement in quality of life (QALY analysis); (c) LBTH’s strategic objectives and outcomes. In order for the benefits of growth to be enjoyed by the the wider community of Whitechapel and Tower Hamlets, provision must be made for the on-going maintenance of any public realm enhancements that are delivered as part of the regeneration of Whitechapel.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

This requires that LBTH ensures stakeholder participation from developers, public agencies like TfL and Crossrail, and business improvement boards. Local community groups should also be engaged in these discussions to make the most of local networks and the volunteer economy already at work in the provision of green and growth spaces within Whitechapel. The WPROSG team therefore recommends, that LBTH set-up a Whitechapel Public Realm Steering Group made up of councillors, key stakeholders and local community organisations in order to manage the delivery and maintenance of Whitechapel’s public realm improvement programme.

1 Architect’s illustration of Sainsbury’s development with recycling bin added.

2 Precedent: Phillpott Street, E1. Poorly resolved refuse managements hinders the sense of wellbeing and health.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

289

10.

Support active spaces Transitional interventions

290

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

291

ENTERPRISE

Insight:

04/30 Transitional interventions 4. FENCE OFF!

PUBLIC REALM + MOVEMENT

05/30

TRANSPARENCY N/A Revenue cost:WAYFINDING

Insight: Development time:

SITE TYPE

DESCRIPTION:

PROPOSED SITES Collingwood Estate Sidney Estate

OUTLINE FIGURES:

time:

Activities:

£3-10K/space Ofﬁcer time

SITE TYPE

Site-speciﬁc

3-6 months

TESTS LONG-TERM PROPOSALS

Capital cost:

£50-75K

POTENTIAL WIDER PARTNERS

COUNCIL ROLE

A central ‘mother’ nursur trees and plants that eve Mediator - hosting the forum to develop and nurture this idea (increasing) ‘green ﬁngers and develop partnerships around its delivery and activation, potentially taking on the role of a co-investor with ed the major identiﬁ in the Whitecha local stakeholders above. Spaces Strategy and seed ASSOCIATED RISKS commission initially, with Confused ownership - lack of adquate ‘guardianship’ areas and networks in the LINKS TO ADDITIONAL ACTIVATIONwith PROJECTS the potential to activ • Pop-up Parliament (host) point for training, transpl • Whitechapel nursery (potential co-location)

OUTLINE FIGURES:

LINKS TO Gardening ADDITIONAL ACTIVATION PROJECTS Activities:

Enabler, Broadcaster - Applying internal resources to oversee the identiﬁcation of sites, and aligning appropriate call-out mechanism and supporting initial partner groups, potentially with seed funding covering garden sheds and tools, for the ﬁrst round of projects per estate.

Development time:

ASSOCIATED RISKS

COUNCIL ROLE

SITE TYPE

Weak uptake if call-out mechanism is not linked with existing Function speciﬁ c: in multiple formats and languages communication strands

OPEN TO EXPLORATION

Capital cost:

SELF-SUSTAINING

Active period: 2 years

5-6 months

Enterprise Support Networking Workshops

STIMULATES NEW RELATIONSHIPS INVITES PEOPLE TO PARTICIPATE BROADENS PERSPECTIVES BROADCASTS THE FUTURE VISION

BROADENS PERSPECTIVES

292

BROADCASTS THE FUTURE VISION

POTENTIAL WIDER PARTNERS

Hult Business School (programmatic partners) TESTS LONG-TERM PROPOSALS

Incredible Edible Todmorden Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

BASED ON REAL OPPORTUNITY SUPPORTS LOCAL SUCCESSES

muf

£50-60K

Revenue cost: £3-5K (d £1-2K /m Development 4-7 mon time:

BUILDS CAPACITIES

EG Urban Physics Garden, Wayward Plants

Mediator - identifying available spaces, operators and pro-SITE TYPE Tower Hamlets Homes (project initiators) ON REAL OPPORTUNITY The Principles for BASED the Public Realm and 1 3 potentially Site-specific 5 TRAs (potential growing partners) Shop unit grammatic partners to bring this idea forward, Local schools (potential growing partners) Open Space Guidance are strengthened LINKS TO ADDITIONAL ACTIVATION PROJECTS SUPPORTS LOCAL SUCCESSES High footfall leveraging its own presence or real estate (eg the potential Tower Hamlets Leisure and Culture • Fence off! (precursor) re-location of the Whitechapel Delivery Team as ground floor and complimented by the themes set out Fence Off:forRemoving fences Whitechapel Incubate: Urban Apothecary: a medicinal • Whitechapel Nursery (resource growers) activation). EXPLORATION PROPOSED SITES • Host it here! (comparable project for programming POTENTIALOPEN WIDERTO PARTNERS PROPOSED SITE by Architecture 00(training, in the Active Space to open up space. provision of start-up retail garden next to the Hospital. and events) Groundwork workshop providers) St Barts NHS Outpatient building Mount Terrace parking lot, St Barts NHS (training, workshop providers) SELF-SUSTAINING Project. ForSustrans example, the ‘Fence Off’ theme Royal Mail building ground floor space. ASSOCIATED RISKS City Farms Inadequate uptake of shared retail spaces and financial vulidentified by 00TESTS relates to the ‘Public Realm 2PARTNERS LONG-TERM PROPOSALS BUILDS CAPACITIES nerability, without market testing and meet-ups POTENTIAL LOCAL is Where You Walk’ principle. Similarly, Potentially low numbers of ‘buyers’ if not strategically located Creative Works London (Queen Mary University) (advisors) BASED ON REAL OPPORTUNITY STIMULATES NEW RELATIONSHIPSNESTA (advisors) Whitechapel Nursery: POTENTIAL LOCAL PARTNERS Architecture 00’s ‘Nursery’ and ‘Grow it 4 SUPPORTS LOCAL SUCCESSES Cook’s Yard operators (potential space operators) City Farms (partners) LINKS TO ADDITIONAL ACTIVATION PROJECTS a central growing nursery to Here’ projects support our ‘Greenfingers’ OPEN TO EXPLORATION INVITES PEOPLE TO PARTICIPATE • ‘Made in Whitechapel’ Whitechapel Grow it Here: Developing in Bloom (local suppliers) produce all of Whitechapel’s SELF-SUSTAINING principles. POTENTIAL WIDER PARTNERS • Community Lab BROADENS PERSPECTIVES Tower Hamlets Homes (consumers) growing spaces across Living Under One Sun allotments, Tottenham Hale BUILDS CAPACITIES London College of trees Fashionand (potential occupants) plants locally. Greater London Authority (funders) Whitechapel’s estates. STIMULATES NEW RELATIONSHIPS BROADCASTS THE FUTURE VISION INVITES PEOPLE TO PARTICIPATE

DESCRIPTION:

POTENTIAL LOCAL PARTNERS

future complementary market, perhaps attracting students from nearby UAL’s Mare Street campus, or Middlesex University art and design degree shows, to host their work (currently Consultation fatigue, if identiﬁcation not action hosted at converted Brick Lane).to The space could also seek support from TESTS LONG-TERM PROPOSALS within short turn-around period CreativeWorks at Queen Mary, a consortium of universities, BASED ON REAL OPPORTUNITY colleges, and museums and libraries archive interested in Active period: Permanent exploring support for creative entrepreneurship. SUPPORTS LOCAL SUCCESSES

Revenue cost: £6-8K / month Activities:

Gardening Talks, workshops Health outreach

Mount Terrace parking lot (LBTH site)

City Farms (operators, programming) St Bart’s NHS Trust (physical hosts, co-investors)

£50-£100K

Active period: Mar-Oct

Revenue cost: £3-5K (dev) Activities: £5-7K (active) Development 4-7 months time:

Wellcome Trust public engagement grants, encouraging the public to explore bio-medical science CORE Landscapes (operators of Canning Town medicinal garden looking for new home)

PROPOSED SITE

Foraging •Grow it here! (call-out campaign inviting others) OUTLINE FIGURES: Apprenticeships • Whitechapel nursery (potential resource) Recreation

SK LEA

WAYFINDING

COUNCIL ROLE

Network of sites required

POTENTIAL LOCAL PARTNERS

TRANSPARENCY

Local procurement

2-3 months

Capital cost:

SITE TYPE

WAYFINDING

OUTLINE FIGURES:

3. WHITECHAPEL NURSERY SKILLS + N/A LEARNING

ASSOCIATED RISKS

Tower Hamlets Homes (initiator, manager) Capital cost: Tower Hamlets Leisure and Culture (funding) Revenue cost: THH residents (project participants) Development

Collingwood Estate Sidney Estate Chicksand Estate

Insight:

on residents and THH desire to support gardening along with the ‘green ﬁngers’ within the Public Realm and Open Spaces Strategy.

POTENTIAL LOCAL PARTNERS

TRANSPARENCY

A public medicinal garden where edible and medicinal plants WHITECHAPEL ACTIVATING SPACES FRAMEWORK can be grown, so that we have more spaces for quality green ‘pauses’ in this busy part of the city, and opportunities to learn about herbal medicine and natural healing, building on the extensive growing networks of the area, including Spitalﬁelds City Farm, who desire a more prominent public ‘outpost’ and leverage corporate PUBLIC volunteer REALM networks. Potential for ‘drawing HEALTH out’ institutional knowledge of Queen Mary andRECREATION St Bart’s + WELLBEING + MOVEMENT participation, and providing a neutral and inclusive space which can be used by a variety of demographics.

DESCRIPTION: Vital Arts, St Bart’s Charity (potential sponsorship) Investor, Broadcaster A project identifying, demarcating and broadcasting a series of - Council (THH) can identify a series Queen Mary ofﬁce of Public Engagement (clinical trials, dedicated growing spaces across estates, from together with ofWhitechapel’s appropriate sites residents and TRA’s to onsupport a ‘box-shop’ or sharedpatient Potential for the Council retailoutreach) larger open spaces to smaller sites for ﬂowers. Seeded with an Local growing networks, including Womens Environment spaceas where new designers or students can test their products, adelivered seriesvia ofangroup walkabouts, as well re-routing existing initial ‘demonstrator’ project and active callNetwork (WEN) (outreach) providingto interim of what could inform Whitechapel’s out mechanism inviting groups maintenance and individuals to lead. orBuilding estate renewal budgets coverversion the costs.

Network of sites required

PROPOSED SITES

GREEN + GROWING

03/30

7. whITECHAPEL INCUBATE

5. GROW IT HERE

SKILLS + LEARNING

RECREATION

07/30

Insight:

ENTERPRISE

OUTLINE FIGURES: GREEN HEALTH PUBLIC REALM RECREATION Capital +cost: Varies Active period: + GROWING WELLBEING + MOVEMENT

ENTERPRISE HEALTH + WELLBEING

WHITECHAPEL ACTIVATING SPACES FRAMEWORK

GREEN + GROWING

SKILLS + LEARNING

RECREATION

DESCRIPTION:

A project focused on removal of overzealous fencing across Whitechapel’s estates. A ‘ﬁrst step’ project enabling a wider range of uses on Tower Hamlets open land, and building off resident feedback and building excitement. The project would see ‘walk and talks’ with residents identifying key fencing areas for removal and for residents to gather and discuss future activation, such as growing projects that these more open spaces could enable. Potentially funded via existing internal maintenance and renewal budgets.

ENTERPRISE

PUBLIC REALM + MOVEMENT

1. URBAN apothecary DESCRIPTION:

WHITECHAPEL ACTIVATING SPACES FRAMEWORK

HEALTH + WELLBEING

Insight:

01/30

GREEN + GROWING

Capel Manor College (training) Greenwich Horticultural Skills / Centre (training) architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers Robert Bevan / Daisy

COUNCIL ROLE

Commissioner, Investor- c to design a nursery and d including associated train partnerships around its d taking on the role of inves assisting the developmen the project as potential s

ASSOCIATED RISKS

Choice of partner potenti

LINKS TO ADDITIONAL

Froud / objectif / Artelia

• Urban Apothec • Grow293 it here (su

Credits

muf architecture/art J&L Gibbons Civic Engineers Robert Bevan Daisy Froud objectif Artelia

Comprehensive Public Realm Plan for Whitechapel (CPRP)

for the London Borough of Tower Hamlets

Project Matrix & Rolling List March 2016

294

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

295

Projects Matrix Overview

A visual guide to how the projects described in the Projects Matrix relate to each other

Fieldgate Street – Stepney Way A series of connected projects aligned to create a green route to Stepney Green and improve the areas around the Hospital’s ground floor and outpatients entrance. The projects all aim to counteract the hostile effects of wind and shade and create a new “hospitable corridor” for the hospital.

New Road & Vallance Road A series of projects on and linked to New Road (south) and Vallance Road (north) to establish a pedestrian-friendly link across Whitechapel Road, touching different schools and educational institutions, and enhancing their immediate doorstep spaces. These projects aim to allow room for playing and journeys to and from school for the children and their carers. These linked projects will better integrate communities by threading uses with open spaces and enhancing the visibility and accessibility of local assets.

Key Pedestrian Routes Group of projects to improve the open spaces surrounding the north housing estates, increasing footfall and thus safety. By enhancing public accessibility and play offer, these projects aim to create a public route between Cambridge Heath Road and Allen Gardens through the estates.

Soft Projects A group of programmatic, non-physical projects that aim to support the existing and future Whitechapel in a sustainable way.

296

Whitechapel High Street Group of projects that enhance Whitechapel High street as a pedestrian priority town centre and support the cultural heritage of the market.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Pedestrian Priority Loop A series of connected projects to prioritise the pedestrian within the public realm around the High Street, the Civic Hub, the Hospital and the Whitechapel Station.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

297

1.0 Whitechapel High Street and Pedestrian Priority Ring

PP AS SaA

Pocket Park Active Space Street as amentity

Group of projects that support and enhance Whitechapel High street as a town centre. To be read in conjunction with the attached A2 fold-out map.

Notes: No / Location / Project Name

Project Owner / Partners

Project Description / Project Rationale

1.1 All along the High St. from Vallance Rd. to Cambridge Heath Rd. Making Space for the Market Option 1

LBTH TfL

Rearrangement of the High Street to accommodate for an extended North pavement, 4 uncontrolled crossings on raised tables, a drivable meridian, segregated cycle lanes and 2 car lanes per road side.

19200sqm

£ 3,400,000.00

1.2 All along the High St. from Vallance Rd. to Cambridge Heath Rd. Making Space for the Market Option 2

LBTH TfL

Rearrangement of the High Street to accommodate for an extended North pavement, 4 uncontrolled crossings on raised tables, a drivable meridian, segregated cycle lanes, road reduction to 1 car lane per side and reconfiguration of junctions at Vallance Rd. and Cambridge Heath Rd.

19200sqm

£ 5,000,000.00

1.3 All along the High St. from Vallance Rd. to Cambridge Heath Rd. Making Space for the Market Option 3

LBTH TfL

Rearrangement of High Street to accommodate for an extended North pavement, 4 uncontrolled crossings on raised tables, a drivable meridian, segregated cycle lanes, road reduction to 1 car lane per side and reconfiguration of junctions at Vallance Rd. and Cambridge Heath Rd. including the removal of traffic lights.

19200sqm

£ 4,600,000.00

298

Associated programmes / overlaps

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Project Size

Kit of parts

Budget Cost LBTH Themes (Inc. Fees PP AS SaA @ 25% & Contingency @ 15%)

Making it happen Who Who could could deliver? keep?

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

What funding sources?

299

Budget Cost (Inc. Fees @ 25% & Contingency @ 15%)

LBTH Themes PP AS SaA

No30 market storage lockers, internal spaces 20-30sqm each, with secure door and lighting.

£625,000.00

No / Location / Project Name

Project Owner / Partners

Project Description / Project Rationale

Associated programmes / overlaps

Project Size

Kit of parts

1.4 Various locations on North side of Whitechapel Road Market Storage

TfL Crossrail s106

Provision of internal market store rooms. Temporary provision during redevelopment and permanently within new developments on the North side of Whitechapel Rd. Provision of market storage within the public realm on the North side pavement for the existing 120 market stalls and anticipated expansion.

Whitechapel Vision

200sqm internal storage

1.5 LBTH North side of High TfL St. Market’s Permanent Skeleton

Installation of a permanent lightweight but sturdy skeletal structure for the market so that no storage is needed for mobile structures anymore.

450m

Feasibility has been commissioned. Detailed design, testing, engineering fabrication.

£863,000.00

1.6 Fulbourne Street Fulbourne Street Pedestrian Priority

LBTH Crossrail TfL

Raised table throughout. Shared Surface with loading vehicles.

740sqm

Pedestrian priority surface, drop bollards, signage, tying into Durward gardens and existing.

£198,000.00

1.7 Junction of Castlemain St. and Durward St. Station to Vallance Gardens Link

Private Ownership

Greening of defensible spaces to create a visual link from Whitechapel station to Vallance Gardens.

Legible London, Business as Usual

75sqm planted area

Potted planting climbers, No2 dwarf trees.

£11,000.00

1.8 Durward Street station back entrance Durward Gardens

Crossrail Better Gym Group

Improvements by Crossrail for new station's temporary back access. Could become benchmark pilot project for a pedestrian priority area. Opportunity to keep the temporary entrance as permanent. Greening of the Sport Centre’s facade. Further opportunities found in the addition of a rooftop sports use.

Whitechapel Vision, Streets for People, All London Green Grid

230sqm

No7 Semi-mature Trees, climbers to Sport Centre’s facade, lighting.

£125,000.00

300

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Making it happen Who Who could could deliver? keep?

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

What funding sources?

301

No / Location / Project Name

Project Owner / Partners

Project Description / Project Rationale

Associated programmes / overlaps

Project Size

Kit of parts

1.9 Durward Street and Brady Street Brady Street (link to Cavell Street and the Mission)

Sainsbury's s106, LBTH TfL

Pedestrian priority ensured for the Southern section of Brady Street. Possible rationalisation of existing streetscape elements to create a more generous streetscape for all giving special consideration to market storage and public seating. Enhance the existing tree pits. Provide 'quiet way' cycle infrastructure and surface treatments to create ease of cycle and pedestrian travel into Durward Gardens and across the A11 towards Cavell Street and the Mission.

Sainsbury's public realm, Crossrail public realm

4700sqm shared surface

1.10 Brady Street Swanlea School

LBTH Swanlea School, s1.06 contributions

Enhance square and open space along Brady street to include more greening and incidental play elements as transition from primary to secondary school. Street to include additional trees and hedges. Introduce permeable paving. Depave existing trees.

Sainsbury's public realm, Crossrail public realm

1.11 Darling Row & Merceron St. Sainsbury’s Edge Improvements

LBTH, 1.06 contributions

Enhancements alongside Sainsbury's development. Pavement upgrade, tree planting, seating, SUDS drainage.

1.12 Idea Store Whitechapel High Street Idea Store Skirt

Idea store, LBTH, 1.06 contributions

The Ideas Store is an incredibly important local resource. Investment in its surrounding public space would be valuable, specially the enhancement of the side alley to the East as: Opt 1:Market storage. Opt 2:Outdoor reading room, Opt 3: Small (crafts) stalls for startups.

302

Budget Cost (Inc. Fees @ 25% & Contingency @ 15%)

LBTH Themes PP AS SaA

Pedestrian priority surface, tree planting No15 semi mature trees, public seating, bins. De-clutter bollards, remove railings.

£1,736,000.00

200m perimeter 675sqm

Planted boundary with incidental play, improvement of existing tree pits.

£135,000.00

Sainsbury's development

645m perimeter 4000sqm

Extending pavement over 2no.corners/car spaces for mature trees and seating/ planters. Planting of edge lawns of the Collingwood Estate.

£150,000.00

Sainsbury's public realm, High Street, Diversification of Market support. Links top Active Spaces Brief

740sqm

Allowance for the £120,000.00 realisation of either of the options for the side alley.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Making it happen Who Who could could deliver? keep?

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

What funding sources?

303

No / Location / Project Name

Project Owner / Partners

Project Description / Project Rationale

Associated programmes / overlaps

Project Size

Kit of parts

1.13 Cavell Street Mission Site

Mission/ LBTH

Cavell Street as amenity open space between Raven Row and Whitechapel Road. Pedestrianisation with raised table, bollards and green perimeter to Mission Building. Trees to mitigate wind. Addition of a conservatory as an extension of the ground floor for a South facing cafe within the existing undercroft parking. Possible maintenance of green edge by the Mission users.

Mission upskill programme

Raised table 2,200m2 café 250m2

Raised table with £1,099,000.00 collapsible bollards, semi-mature tree planting and benches. Conservatory to rear undercroft. Provision for perimeter planting.

1.14 Cavell Street Green Edge

Royal Mail

Opportunity to create a wider walking route at the West pavement of Cavell Street by the moving back of the boundary fencing (to the temporary parking) and the creation of a green edge with seating at the bus stop area and sunny corner to South end. Opportunity to implement SUDS.

All London Green Grid

Perimeter 65m Area 250sqm

Moving back of fence, greening (trench and planting), seating at sunny corner and bus stand areas.

£56,000.00

1.15 Stepney Way/ Cavell Street Green Wall

Barts/ LBTH

The Terracotta perimeter wall of the All London Green Hospital South of Stepney Way holds Grid the opportunity for the inclusion of a green wall system using rainwater collection.

60sqm

Climber planting. Maintenance allowance during plants establishment period..

£15,000.00

Enhancement of the back entranceway to the hospital – area commonly used for waiting and outdoor breaks by patients and staff. Opportunity to link this area to the other projects related to the use of the hospital boundaries as resources for the improvement of health.

2600sqm Bespoke public

£223,000.00

1.16 Barts/ LBTH Hospital entrance on Stepney Way Outdoor Waiting Room

304

All London Green Grid

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Budget Cost LBTH Themes (Inc. Fees PP AS SaA @ 25% & Contingency @ 15%)

Making it happen Who Who could could deliver? keep?

What funding sources?

seating, large glazed cabinet within lobby area facing street for curated displays, lighting, planting.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

305

No / Location / Project Name

Project Owner / Partners

Project Description / Project Rationale

Associated programmes / overlaps

Project Size

Kit of parts

1.17 Stepney Way Royal Hospital Museum

Barts / QMUL

Medicinal garden around edges of ex-church and adjacent hoardings, to highligh this heritage asset and the social capital of area (the existing small garden within the perimeter of the building is maintained by neighbours).

All London Green Grid

600sqm

Removal of hard £190,000.00 surfacing and planting of decorative gardens. Removal of bollards to provide cycle storage on pavement. Improvement of South entrance with greening and rationalisation of cycle storage.

1.18 Turner Street Turner Street South

Barts / QMUL

New QMUL pedestrian link to Whitechapel High Street at the South side of Stepney Way. With tree planting, SUDS, street furniture provision and raised tables at the junctions with Stepney Way and Newark Street.

All London Green Grid

2000sqm

Street to be tested as pedestrian/cycle only. Supply urban provision: benches, planting, incidental play.

£748,000.00

1.19 Turner Street Turner Street North

Barts / QMUL

Improvements to existing QMUL pedestrian link to Whitechapel at the North side of Stepney Way. With tree planting, SUDS, street furniture provision.

All London Green Grid

2000sqm

Street already £748,000.00 pedestrianised. Supply urban provision: benches, mature tree with planting, incidental play.

306

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Budget Cost (Inc. Fees @ 25% & Contingency @ 15%)

LBTH Themes PP AS SaA

Making it happen Who Who could could deliver? keep?

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

What funding sources?

307

2.0 Vallance Road – New Road

PP AS SaA

Pocket Park Active Space Street as amenity

A series of projects on and linked to New Road (South) and Vallance Road (North) to establish a pedestrian friendly link across Whitechapel Road, touching different schools and educational institutions and enhancing their immediate doorstep spaces. The improvements should provide elbow room for playing and moving safely to and from the schools, for both the children and their carers. These linked projects could better integrate communities with the local schools, businesses and open spaces, by enhancing their visibility and improving the accessibility to local assets.

Notes: No / Location / Project Name

Project Owner / Partners

Project Description / Project Rationale

2.1 Vallance Road Weaver Field’s Entrance

LBTH, Network Rail

2.2 Selby Street Selby Street Link

Project Size

Kit of parts

Improvements to the pedestrian routes through the tunnels. Lighting. Wider pavements by replacing parking for a more cycle and pedestrian friendly environment. Improved raised table at entrance to Weavers field on Brady street.

Undercroft 2250sqm Pavement 450sqm Raised Table 450sqm

LBTH

Improved link from/to Selby Street with lighting and greening of the pedestrian route. Consolidating green fragments along the estate's North edge including the existing sports pitch fencing.

2.3 Christchurch Estate Through the Estate Green Route

LBTH Homes

2.4 Vallance Road Lister House Community Garden

LBTH Homes

308

Associated programmes / overlaps

Budget Cost (Inc. Fees @ 25% & Contingency @ 15%)

LBTH Themes PP AS SaA

Tunnel uplighting and widening / improvement of pavements and raised table.

£812,000.00

Pitch 470sqm, vertical planting 170sqm,

Lighting to route and games area, climbers to existing fencing, removal of bollards / barriers.

£82,000.00

Used by many as N-S route to avoid the busy Vallance Road, there is the opportunity to – by consolidating the insulated and underused green bits – improve the whole route through the estate as a safer school run.

Amenity grassland 540sqm

Lighting to route, climbers to blank walls, incidental play elements.

£180,000.00

Opportunity to improve and open to the public this inaccessible, forgotten public square. Possibility to work with local farms to create a community maintained garden.

1186sqm

Planters, plants, gardening tools, water tap. Training and support by local farm.

£331,000.00

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Making it happen Who Who could could deliver? keep?

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

What funding sources?

309

No / Location / Project Name

Project Owner / Partners

Project Description / Project Rationale

Associated programmes / overlaps

Project Size

Kit of parts

Budget Cost (Inc. Fees @ 25% & Contingency @ 15%)

LBTH Themes PP AS SaA

2.5 LBTH Christchurch Estate Highways, Osmani Primary Local schools and Keen School Improvements

Removal of street clutter and railings. Creation of meeting space for children and parents. Engaging the space in front of the housing block by removing fence and adding play so that this under used green becomes a shared asset

Amenity grassland 780sqm

Removal of railings, play equipment, lighting. De-clutter, rationalisation of barriers and/ or greening. Social furniture.

£252,000.00

2.6 Vallance Gardens Vallance gardens Play/Stage/Gym

LBTH Parks

Improvement of play/social offer in Vallance Park and enhancement of its southern edge and impaired relationships with street. Removal of barriers and enhancement of play/social provision including new stage and sports equipment for outside extension to Sports Centre (within a garden setting). Introduce biodiversity and access to nature, utilise as an educational resource.

Park 6000sqm

Public exercise equipment, play equipment, barrier removal, outdoor stage, biodiverse planting.

£556,000.00

2.7 Vallance Rd. and Old Montague St. Chicksand Estate Entrance

LBTH Highways, LBTH Homes

Consolidates 3 green fragments: Vallance Park, Cherry Walk and the clumps of trees to the North of Old Montague Street. Continuation of playable route to link schools. Rationalise cycling and integrate with street tree planting and SuDS.

Raised table 670sqm, grassland 2000sqm

Raised table, removal of railings, public seating, incidental play, bins.

£345,000.00

2.8 Chicksand Estate Chicksand Estate

LBTH Homes, WeMadeThat

Bring forward phase one of the 'WeMadeThat' project to improve the open spaces throughout estate while promoting community ownership.

5000sqm

Upgrade lighting to LED, growing workshops and planting, play equipment, furniture, storage, SUDS and repaving of East entry.

£500,000.00

2.9 Old Montague St. Old Montague St.

LBTH Highways

Improvement the route to the clump of community services buildings at the corner of Greatorex St. by continuing the line of street trees from Vallance Gardens. Prioritising the pedestrian with widened pavement to include crossings and seating opportunities.

5 x 25sqm bumps

Widened pavement, No12 trees, SUDS surfacing.

£282,000.00

310

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Making it happen Who Who could could deliver? keep?

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

What funding sources?

311

No / Location / Project Name

Project Owner / Partners

Project Description / Project Rationale

2.10 Old Montague St. Institute of Psychotrauma & Family Support Unit Shared Green

LBTH Highways LBTH Homes

2.11 Mount Terrace and Whitechapel Rd. Mount Terrace Open Space

LBTH QMUL BARTS

2.12 New Road Ex-dental Institute Parking-Sports Centre

2.13 Walden Street Centre of the Cell Open Space

312

Associated programmes / overlaps

Project Size

Kit of parts

Budget Cost (Inc. Fees @ 25% & Contingency @ 15%)

LBTH Themes PP AS SaA

Remove railings, provide planted seating edge instead. Support LBTH Homes with maintenance endowment. Add semi-mature specimen tree.

900sqm garden

Railing removal 45m, 325sqm of generous boundary with planters and seating, 1no. semimature specimen tree, maintenance endowment for LBTH.

£41,000.00

Opportunity to create open space to relieve the busyness, density and traffic of Whitechapel Rd. This space receives good day light exposure and is surrounded by heritage buildings with no future threat of overshadowing. Could hold market overspill or seats for breaks / meetings. An urban forest could be created by connecting the canopies of gardens and streets. Design to be planned in conjunction with Secure by Design. Further dialogue with landowners on mitigating impact of wider development proposals needed.

2700sqm

Granite blocks and steps for seating, pavilion structure for food or crafts, seating and tables, lighting, surface treatment, bins.

£466,000.00

BARTS, sports Opportunity to set a precedent where clubs (like the displaced uses by development Padel Club) get incorporated in new built or meanwhile schemes. Opportunity to test having multiple uses on same location, in this case: parking and sports.

1300smq

Equipping the roof with fenced courts for padel playing (or alternative sport) and lighting. Create secure access to roof.

£400,000.00

QMUL

1500sqm

Bespoke play equipment and storage, bespoke seating, 10no. olive trees on pots.

£158,000.00

Opportunity to extend the educational program of the centre to surrounding area. Inviting potential future biomedical scientists (children) to activate existing empty space with interactive play equipment that encourages invention and learning through play. Design of elements by interaction with the existing users and neighbours. Could become a model for informal learning spaces beyond the lecture theatre.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Making it happen Who Who could could deliver? keep?

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

What funding sources?

313

3.0 Fieldgate Street – Stepney Way

PP AS SaA

Pocket Park Active Space Street as amenity

A series of connected projects aligned on the green link to Stepney Green that are the vestibule to the Hospital’s ground floor and outpatients entrance. The projects aim to counteract the hostile effects of wind, shade and neglect to create a new “hospitable corridor” associated with the hospital.

Notes: No / Location / Project Name

Project Owner / Partners

Project Description / Project Rationale

Associated programmes / overlaps

Project Size

Kit of parts

3.1 Fieldgate Street Bell Foundry Public Realm

LBTH, Bell Foundry, Gateway housing.

Removal of unnecessary street clutter. Potential for social space or green corner with SUDS around the existing mature trees with new seating and historic map on blank walls.

All London Green Grid

720sqm

Mural for Bell Foundry, de-clutter, new bespoke benches, SUDS, resurfacing.

3.2 Fieldgate Street Mosque Doorstep

LBTH, East London Mosque

Decluttering of pavement, replacement of failed tree, planters around trees and sitting areas around them to make a space for gathering. Removal (consideration) of the railed front areas for refuse) and replacement with alternative solution.

250sqm

3.3 Greenfield Road Greenfield Road Green Route

LBTH Highways

Removing clutter, planting trees, SUDS.

Heritage and green fabric improvements. TPO of existing trees, improvement of existing pits, de-clutter.

3.4 Settles, Parfett, Myrdle & Romford streets Fordham to Fieldgate

314

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Budget Cost (Inc. Fees @ 25% & Contingency @ 15%)

LBTH Themes PP AS SaA

£257,000.00

De-clutter, re-planting, £83,000.00 new planting beds around trees, new bespoke benches around trees.

3200smq

De-clutter, new planting, SUDS.

£282,000.00

4 streets

Protecting and improving tree surroundings for 16no. mature trees. TPO work. De-clutter.

£17,000.00

Making it happen Who Who could could deliver? keep?

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

What funding sources?

315

No / Location / Project Name

Project Owner / Partners

Project Description / Project Rationale

Associated programmes / overlaps

Project Size

Kit of parts

Budget Cost (Inc. Fees @ 25% & Contingency @ 15%)

LBTH Themes PP AS SaA

3.5 Fieldgate Street Fieldgate Street Refuse Collection Pilot Scheme

This project is a first in decluttering of Stepney Way. With many enterprises and institutions being serviced here, the amount of refuse containers dominates the pedestrian experience of this street. This project seeks to find a strategic and logistically sound solution for this issue.

120 meters

Pilot in collection or underground storage for refuse.

Tower Hamlets to provide indicative costs

3.6 Fieldgate Street Fieldgate Street Business Support

Opportunity to consolidate the doorstep of this cluster of restaurants by increasing footpath and providing space for outdoor tables, subject to licensing and other permissions.

100sqm

Extension of pavement, 6 months license as trail.

£50,000.00

3.7 Stepney Way Stepney Way Improvements

Removal of bollards and railings and inclusion of more raised tables at pedestrian priority routes. Lighting of empty buildings for a safer night environment.

80 m

General de-clutter of route to hospital. Lighting of empty buildings.

£14,000.00

3.8 Stepney Way Stepney Way Business Support

Opportunity to support night activity at the corner of the Good Samaritan pub and the Student Union. Re-surfacing directly in front of these locations and licensing for outdoor tables. Opportunity to test a shared toilet scheme pilot. Lit signage.

60sqm

Repaving of 60sqm. Yearly license for outdoor furniture. Lit signage.

£29,000.00

3.9 Stepney Way and Philpott Street Temporary use of empty plot

Explore alternatives to parking 00 Active Spaces by degrees from 10 to 100% of a boundary treatment of medicinal garden or tree nursery.

1800sqm

Removal of hoarding, gravel, up to 240 trees on rings, seating, signage.

00 to costs

3.10 Philpot Street (Hospital to Varden St.) Green Spine

The Green Spine / Philpot Street line will be explored through an interim project to have planted hoardings as amenity edge between the new development and the existing public route.

3500sqm

Planted hoarding edge. Fixed terracotta pots, landscaping with seating. Maintenance endowment for local farms.

tbc

316

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Making it happen Who Who could could deliver? keep?

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

What funding sources?

317

No / Location / Project Name

Project Owner / Partners

Project Description / Project Rationale

Associated programmes / overlaps

Project Size

Kit of parts

Budget Cost LBTH Themes (Inc. Fees PP AS SaA @ 25% & Contingency @ 15%)

3.11 Philpot Street (Varden St. to Commercial Rd.) Green Spine Extension

Extension of Green Spine to Commercial Rd. by changing some car spaces for green corners and social spaces.

3000sqm

Planting mature trees at 4no.corners and adding seating. Change of 4no. car spaces for planting.

£324,000.00

3.12 Future Civic Hub hoarding Medicinal Hoarding Temporary Garden

Skirting of hospital and edge to Civic Hub development to be enriched with play and opportunities for involvement in gardening. Social area in sunny spot of Hospital Forecourt

hoarding 90m area planting 180sqm area farming 120sqm

Creating a 3 meter thick medicinal garden against the existing hoardings. Add graphics with names and uses of the plants. Mini pop-up farm/ social space created at sunny corner.

£64,000.00

3.13 Stepney Way L&Q Shared Edge

Extra meter of pavement proposed by developers offers an opportunity to add an amenity strip with seating, planting and SUDS on the sunny side for residents and passersby alike. Opportunity to exchange some parking places for trees and social corners.

100sqm

Creating amenity strip at extended pavement with seating, planting, SUDS.

£160,000.00

3.14 Stepney Way Nice Edge to John Smith Centre, Mini Forest

The mini forest enriches the play offer for local children attending the centre.

120sqm

Boundary £42,000.00 improvements and mini forest at entry and sides of yard of nursery.

Support for the planned upgrades by LBTH Parks and Open Spaces team to these four very well used public park areas.

4500sqm

Maintenance endowment for park improvements.

3.15 Ford and Sidney squares, Cavell Gardens, Tynley House LBTH Park Upgrades

318

LBTH parks

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

£20,000.00

Making it happen Who Who could could deliver? keep?

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

What funding sources?

319

No / Location / Project Name

Project Owner / Partners

Project Description / Project Rationale

Associated programmes / overlaps

Project Size

Kit of parts

Budget Cost (Inc. Fees @ 25% & Contingency @ 15%)

LBTH Themes PP AS SaA

3.16 Stepney Way & Sidney Street Junction

Removal of railings and implementation of straightforward crossings on raised tables. Improvement of existing tree pit with additional planting and seating around. Intuitive wayfinding to farm and hospital.

1200sqm

Raised table, decluttering of railings, improvement of tree pit with new planting and seating.

£345,000.00

3.17 Stepney Way The Old Artichoke Temporary Public Realm

Opportunity for the negotiation and creation of a temporary social space at a key crossing and route. Supporting the protection of the existing historic pub building.

200sqm

Removal of low hoarding and creation of temporary social space around pub premises with trees on pots, seating and lighting.

£25,000.00

3.18 Lindley St. Lyndley Street Sunfower Garden

Supporting LBTH with the proposal to convert an unused corner and sunny plot to a sunflower garden.

150sqm

Lifting of selected paving slabs, introduction of trap door planter, seeding and maintenance endowment. Long seating and lighting.

£40,000.00

3.19 Stepney Way Sidney Street Estate Improvements

Green areas could be improved and, together with the empty ex-library premises and surrounding hard surfaces, could house some of the sports activities losing their spaces due to L&Q development.

600sqm

Allowance for greening £647,000.00 improvements and sports surfacing and equipment.

3.20 Stepney Way Green Route to Stepney Farm

Improvement of route to farm by continuing the line of street trees and prioritising the pedestrians with widened pavements to include crossings and seating opportunities.

1km

Widened pavement, 12no trees, SUDS, repair surfacing as needed.

320

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

£500,000.00

Making it happen Who Who could could deliver? keep?

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

What funding sources?

321

4.0 Key Pedestrian Routes

PP AS SaA

Pocket Park Active Space Street as amenity

St. Bartholomew Gardens to Weavers Fields / Allen Gardens through the Collingwood Estate – Group of projects to improve the connectivity of the spaces within the estate and beyond and promote a sense of safety with an increased footfall.

Notes: No / Location / Project Name

Project Owner / Partners

Project Description / Project Rationale Associated programmes / overlaps

4.1 Cambridge Heath Road Sainsbury’s Streetscape Improvements

Sainsbury's LBTH Highways

A widened pavement to encourage walking and social encounters. Large specie tree planting integrated with bioretention SUDS.

106's CIL

4.2 Cambridge Heath Road Celveland Estate

Tower Hamlets Homes Collingwood TRA

Various opportunities to enhance public routes through the estate and improve a sense of safety by the inclusion of better lighting, play, biodiversity, SUDs, tree planting.

Secure by Design

4.3 Cambridge Heath Road Globe Town Square

LBTH

A legible wayfinding strategy through estates starts here. Open spaces to have less clutter and include more seating, opportunities for play, SUDS, enhanced biodiversity and more clumped trees.

322

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Project Size

Kit of parts

Budget Cost (Inc. Fees @ 25% & Contingency @ 15%)

LBTH Themes PP AS SaA

£25,000.00

25000sqm Commission study together with capital pot to kick start improvements to estate that is most in need according to TH Homes officers.

£125,000.00

825sqm

£154,000.00

Landscape design advice to scheme that developers have proposed.

De-cluttering, demolition of dwarf walls, new clumped trees, lighting, introduction of incidental play features.

Making it happen Who Who could could deliver? keep?

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

What funding sources?

323

No / Location / Project Name

Project Owner / Partners

Project Description / Project Rationale Associated programmes / overlaps

Project Size

Kit of parts

4.4 Cambridge Heath Road Collingwood Square

TH Homes

Continuation of a legible wayfinding route through the estates. Opportunity to create a wellcoming public square on an underused sunny area..

1100sqm

4.5 LBTH Parks St. Bartholomew Gardens St. Bartholomew’s Play Route

Upgrade of existing garden. Enhance play and seating offer. Remove palisade fencing around parking lot.

4.6 Collingwood Estate Collingwood Hall

TH Homes TRA

4.7 Collingwood Estate Headlam Primary Legible Route

TH Homes TRA

4.8 Scott Street Scott Street Green Link

324

Budget Cost (Inc. Fees @ 25% & Contingency @ 15%)

LBTH Themes PP AS SaA

Re-surfacing, new trees, planted landscape as intuitive signage to Bartholomew's Gardens. Removal of undercroft railings, lighting.

£589,000.00

fence 75m garden 2500sqm

Removal of fencing, enhancing of play and seating.

£223,000.00

Opportunity to enhance and activate the estate’s open spaces. Removing fencing around hall front and increasing the size of the hall to create an active frontage to both the grassed areas and on Collingwood Street.

1000sqm 3000sqm

1,000m2 hard landscape upgrades. 3,000m2 soft landscape upgrades. De-cluttering of West access area.

£906,000.00

Upgrade planting, lighting and add incidental play as intuitive wayfinding play route for children.

1350sqm

Upgrade planting, lighting, remove fencing, add 2 moments of incidental play.

£50,000.00

Removal or railing to allow a access to grassland behind housing. Equip fringe area as generous boundary to street with seating, planting and incidental play.

95m 500sqm

Removal or 100m of railing. Equip fringe area as generous boundary to street with seating, planting and incidental play.

£187,000.00

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Making it happen Who Who could could deliver? keep?

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

What funding sources?

325

No / Location / Project Name

Project Owner / Partners

Project Description / Project Rationale

4.9 Surma Street Surma Close as link to Vallance Rd.

LBTH

4.10 Selected locations around the Collingwood Estate Collingwood Estate Hidden Rubbish Collection

Project Size

Kit of parts

Enhancing route with trees and planting for a green link Vallance Rd. Opportunity to negotiate a link back to Scott Street to complete an E-W route through the area.

200m

Removal of 4no. £144,000.00 parking spaces for social corners and planting as wayfinding. Removal of fencing around green areas and use seating as boundary protection instead.

TH Homes TRA Veolia

Bulk rubbish collection system with hidden central collection point or collection per areas. Opportunity to use LBTH’s ‘waste and street cleaning’ funding.

67000sqm Underground bin storage.

4.11 Along all W-E route through the Collingwood Estate Lit wayfinding for secure route

TH Homes

Lit intuitive wayfinding throughout route to facilitate day/night use.

350m

4.12 Pedley Street Pedley Street cycle link

LBTH

Lighting to new or improved cycle path and pedestrian sidewalk on Pedley Street to meet existing cycle lane along the Nomadic Community Garden.

300m

326

Associated programmes / overlaps

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Budget Cost (Inc. Fees @ 25% & Contingency @ 15%)

LBTH Themes PP AS SaA

Tower Hamlets to provide indicative costs

Lighting all through the route.

£126,000.00

Extending pavement to accommodate for pedestrians and bikes. Greening blank walls along route.

£323,000.00

Making it happen Who Who could could deliver? keep?

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

What funding sources?

327

5.0 Area Wide Projects A group of programmatic, non-physical projects that aim to support the existing and future Whitechapel in a sustainable way.

Notes: No / Location / Project Name

Project Owner / Partners

Project Description / Project Rationale

Associated programmes / overlaps

Project Size

Kit of parts

Budget Cost LBTH Themes (Inc. Fees @ 25% & Contingency @ 15%)

5.1 Toilet Scheme – pilot

Testing of a scheme in which local businesses would receive support (financial or as a street use licence) in exchange for them opening up their toilets to the public.

£100,000.00

5.2 Wayfinding and Planting on Hoardings

Wayfinding strategy to create intuitive links between key public spaces, to help the public navigate the area during construction and highlight local assets.

£10,000

328

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Making it happen Who Who could could deliver? keep?

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

What funding sources?

329

Credits

Comprehensive Public Realm Plan for Whitechapel (CPRP)

muf architecture/art with Fenna Wagenaar J&L Gibbons Civic Engineers Robert Bevan Daisy Froud objectif Artelia

Key Projects

for the London Borough of Tower Hamlets

330

May 2016

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

331

1. 2. 3.

The High Street Brady Street & Cavell Street – the Mission Site The Green Spine Restorative Spaces

337 347 357

Material Palette

367

for London Borough of Tower Hamlets

332

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

333

SHIRE

STREE

DERBY

VOSS

WILMOT STREET

N ROAD

NAL GREE

BETH

TR AIN

STREET

ST EX

SS WE

STREE

CORFIE

SHIRE

CK STREET

BIRKBE

VALLAN CE ROAD

FINNIS

REET

CAMB

D HERAL T STREE

RIDG

WILMOT STREET

STREET

BRAINT REE

VIOLET

OLM

STREET

T STREE

MAPE

H EIG

DING

S BUIL

WILL

IAM'

ROA TUS

MAN

FINNIS

HEREF

E PLAC

MALC

E TS LAN EE COL

THR

STREET

KELSEY

CE ROAD VALLAN

ORD

'S ROW ST MATTHEW

T Y STREE RAMSE

LTS CO EE THR E LAN

T Y STREE

RAMSE

ET LD STRE HERA

T Y STREE KELSE

N CLOSE

GOLDMA

STREE

H ROAD

E HEAT

ST ST

Y STREE

KELSE

STREET

GLASS

WOOD

EIG

STREE

BUCKFA

SALE

WITAN STREET

WITAN

STREE T

'S ROW ST MATTHEW

ST STREET BUCKFA

T LD STREE

DERBY

T ER STREE

CHEST

THREE COLTS LANE LAN G ET RE ST

WOOD

STREET

DUNBRIDGE

COVENTRY ROAD

T TI STREE MENOT

STREET

BACON

DUNBR

IDGE

STREE T

STREET

CUDWORTH

STREET UE EN AV

T STREE

CUDW

HA OT ST RD

STREET

TAPP STREET

HARE MARSH

ET RE ST

BUCKHURST

LE CO

ROAD

CAMBRIDGE HEATH ROAD

T STREE

MALCOLM

ORTH

WICKFORD STREET

DGE

DUNBRI

IRE CHESH

BARNSLEY STREET

DOVETON STREET

TENT STREET

ET RE ST AS

G STREET

SOMERFORD

STREET

HEMMIN

SCOTT STREET

COLLINGWO

STREET

DY EET STR

VALLANCE

R LAMPLIGHTE

BRA

SURMA CLOSE

ROAD

STREET

WEAVER STREET

BRATLEY ST

FAKRUDDIN

OD STREET

PEDLEY

WYLLEN CLOSE OP CO ER

Y ROAD GRANAR

E OS CL

SURMA CLOSE

WEAVER STREET

AN D WA Y

HEADLAM

STREET

SELBY STREET SELBY STREET

ET STRE ERON

E OS CL

HEA TH ROA D

MERC

Y RE WD VA

CAM

BRI

DGE

BUXTON STREET

AND

GROVE

DEAL STREET

CLEVEL

ING

UNDERWOOD

ROW

DARL

ROAD

TRAHORN CLOSE

KEY CLOSE

BARDSEY PLACE

SEY

BARD PL

N OR AH TR

HUNTON STREET

E END

D ROA

MIL

CAMBRIDGE

DEAL

HEATH ROAD

STREET

E OS CL

LOMAS

T STREE

R STREET

EET STR RD

STREET

EET STR

WA DUR

MAINE

DAPLYN STREET

BRA

CASTLE

WOODSEE

DEAL STREET

Y CLOSE

LAN

VAL

COVERLE

S DEN GAR

EET STR

THR

WIN

D ROA

DEH

ET RE ST

AR RW

ADELINA

GROVE

Y STREET HANBUR

SID EET STR

MAPL E PLAC

AD L RO

APE

Spring Walk

ITE

EAST NT MOU

EET STR

ET STRE

RNE

SE CLO

BOU

COU

FUL

REG

RAV

W RO

LINDLEY

STREET

MO SE CLO

EET

STR

TORE GREA

KSA

CHIC

ET X STRE ET RE ST

MILWARD

VE DA

E RAC TER

STREET

MOU

EET

WOLSEY

JUBILEE STREET

CAVELL

EET EY STR

ET STRE

STRE

SIDN

STREET

MAN

CASS

SPEL D ROA

E THOP

MON

STREET

STR GUE NTA MO OLD

STEPNEY WAY RT COU E

VIN

Y WAY

STEPNE

AD RO TURNER

ITE

ROAD

STREET

NEW

NEWARK STREET MIRANDA CLOSE

STEPNEY

WAY

HALCROW

NEWARK

STREET

FORD SQUARE

ASHFIELD STREET

SIDNEY SQUARE

ASHFIELD STREET

FIELDGATE STREET

D STREET

ROMFORD

STREET

FORD SQUARE

PARFETT

SIDNEY SQUARE

ASHFIEL

3 STREET

FORD SQUARE

CLARK STREET

SIDNEY SQUARE

CLARK STREET

FORD SQUARE

AD EL

RO ROMFORD

STREET

RRY

LBE

FORDHAM STREET PLUM

FORDHAM

STREET

DAMIEN STREET

S ROW

BER

VARDEN

STREET

GREENFIE

CAVELL STREET

TURNER STREET

STREET

EET STR

NELSON

POT

PHIL

SIDNEY STREET

STREET

LAN

PARFETT

COKE STREET

NELSON

JUBILEE STREET

NEW ROAD

STREET

SETTLES

LD ROAD

EET STR

MYRDLE

ADL

MUSBURY STREET

HUR

STREET

EET STR AM

ASS

LL WEYHI

ROAD

CORNWOOD DRIVE

COMMERC

IAL ROAD

ILE ST

COMMERCIAL ROAD

N'S

ERCIAL

HAINTON CLOSE

MORTON CLOSE

SAG E

STREET STREET ROAD

BURSLEM STREET

TIMBERLAND ROAD

MORRIS

STREET

PACE PLACE

PONLER STREET

MONTPELIER PLACE

STREET

STUTFIELD STREET

PHILCHURCH

PLACE

STREET

The Green Spine Restorative Spaces

MARTHA STREET

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

335

OYSTER ROW

STREET

JAMES VOLLER WAY

DUNCH

WATNEY

WALBURGH STREET

BIGLAND STREET

TILLMAN STREET

ELLEN STREET

FORBES

GOLDING STREET

2 YARD

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

TARLING STREET

BOYD STREET

PERS

1. Whitechapel High Street 2. Brady Street & Cavell Street – the Mission Site 3. The Green Spine Restorative Spaces

Brady Street & Cavell Street – the Mission Site

BURWELL CLOSE

TARLING STREET

The key projects are:

SUTTON STREET

CANNON

CHRISTIAN STREET

WALK

CHU RCH

LAN

STREET

BAC

PAS

DEANCROSS STREET

FLINTLOCK

HESSEL STREET

RAMPART STREET

HENRIQUES

GOWER'S

MIT ALI

BROMEHEAD STREET

STREET

BUROSS

COMM

KINDER STREET

Whitechapel High Street FAIRCLOUGH

T STREE

STREET

BATTY STREET

AMAZON STREET

SLY STREET

RD AYLWA

HUNGERFORD

STREET

ANTHONY STREET

FENTON STREET

UMBERSTON

BARNETT

JANE

ROPEWALK GARDENS

RICHARD STREET

HOO

334

WALDEN

ITEC

All three have been chosen as key projects because they fulfill the immediate need for public realm intervention in areas of imminent change. These projects are key to realising LBTH’s objective of providing a new network of publicly accessible spaces that enhances intuitive way-finding and helps deliver a better connected and more joyful public realm for all users: residents, visitors, workers and local businesses.

Public realm thinking has to happen as part of a strategic collaboration between different parties, so challenges and opportunities are tackled together. Together these three projects introduce a holistic approach to Whitechapel’s public realm, which if delivered will create an altogether more welcoming and joyful place to live, work, and play.

EET STR

This document highlights three key public realm improvement projects that build on the wider strategic objectives and explains in detail how the principles set out in the CPRP Principles document can be delivered.

ROAD

The High Street

336

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

337

The High Street Whitechapel High Street is a road to be celebrated. It is an historic artery into London along which the Hamlet of Whitechapel was established around the London Hospital and the still-famous market. Fronted by a unique mix of quality architecture of different scales and prominence dating from the 16th to the 21st century, the area oozes history and diversity. Thanks to the generous offer of social housing, affordable business rates, the presence of a thriving University Campus, a prominent hospital and a superb PTAL (public transport accessibility level), the social and architectural mix for which Whitechapel is so well known can still be sustained. Today, however, the increasing congestion and pedestrian footfall has ‘cramped its style’. The highly trafficked road and busy market have divided the area into separate (north and south) sides and the market itself is in critical need of improvement.

338

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

As demonstrated in the Baseline Study, the market is of national importance, but at busy times it is hard to enjoy it. The footways are congested, and although the market somehow manages to operate with the challenging logistics the High Street presents, it is a struggle to navigate this area as a shopper or commuter. The prospect of the new Crossrail station and a series of large scale developments will further increase footfall along the road. The real issues of air quality and pedestrian safety (ironically alongside a hospital) are putting the effective functioning and enjoyability of Whitechapel’s unique retail offer at risk. Whitechapel can ill afford to lose its uniqueness to large scale developments and gentrified town centre branding. We need to enhance its special qualities so that everyone; residents, visitors, workers, shoppers, and business owners can better enjoy and profit from its amazing richness. This stretch of street announces this local neighbourhood with a unique but underrepresented identity. The proposal seeks to change Whitechapel High Street from a dividing line to a zone of connections, gently re-calibrating north and south to make room for the market and the greater footfall coming from new public transport links.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

339

All principles established in this guidance document for the area will be put into effect and can be delivered in the proposed Whitechapel High Street Scheme. Therefore, it can be the exemplar scheme: – Where the fragile assets of the area are protected and thrive; – Where history is something to be drawn on and the activities of civic buildings along it can enhance the streetscape; – Whereby the space available is made the most of, both when the market is in operation and not.

340

We have explored three options: One smaller scale intervention in which four uncontrolled crossings are introduced at the main desire lines. And a second and third options, in which the north pavement increases in width by circa 2.5 metres and the carriage way is reduced to two lanes.

benefits and stronger connections beyond the High Street.

The main objective of all of the proposals is to shift the emphasis from cars to pedestrians. This will knit together the north and south sides of the street, increasing safety, supporting the market, encouraging walking and delivering wider

The three options take on board consultations carried out with market services and their assertion that the designs help meet the existing demands of the market. This is why the proposals see the careful redeployment of market

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

The vision is to make this road, one of the best in London, where no attractions are needed because the life of the street itself becomes the reason to go there.

stalls to allow for new crossings and social spaces, without the loss of permanent pitches. In addition to this, extra space has been allowed for the delivery of new temporary stalls in Brady Street for a complimentary market offer.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

341

1 The heritage of the High Street is evident in the visibility of the Old Royal London Hospital building – this needs to be emphasised.

342

2 The market provides both commercial and civic amenity for local residents and visitors alike.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Site as existing Currently the High Street is dominated by traffic, including the delivery vans of the market traders, which create a visual and movement barrier for the pedestrians.

4 Site as existing Pedestrians and cyclists are left to negotiate their movement at risk as there are not enough crossing points and no other safety measures to support them.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

343

7500-10000 mm

1500

3000

1000

Option 1 This option represents the smallest intervention for the improvement of the High Street. It includes the realignment of the western end of the northern and southern pavements (where the space is more limited); the introduction of four uncontrolled pedestrian crossings on raised tables; the relocation or rotation of some market stalls to avoid loosing trading pitches due to the stations entry refurbishment; the creation of a meridian to allow for informal crossings; and testing the feasibility of further changes.

344

3000

1500

14000 to 19500 mm

5 Option 1 – proposed plan Four car lanes are retained but more space is made for the market and pedestrian movement supported by the introduction of a meridian strip all along the road.

6 Option 1 – proposed section Section view showing the four car lanes and the remaining space available for pedestrian movement.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

----

10000-12500 mm

2000 1000 3000 1500 3000 1000 2000

Options 2 & 3 These options are more ambitious and attempt to dramatically improve the environment by transforming the road into a pedestrian priority town centre. These two options complement the changes introduced in option 1, with the removal of two vehicular lanes and shifting the would-have-been road space to the north pavement for a much wider socialising and movement space. Options 2 & 3 differ in the fact that Option 3 has the traffic lights removed at the main junctions.

16500 to 22000 mm

7 Option 2 & 3 – proposed plan Two car lanes are removed and more space is given to the market. This will support the expected increase in pedestrian footfall related to the delivery of the masterplan.

8 Option 2 & 3 – proposed section Section view showing the two car lanes and the increased space available for pedestrian movement.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

345

Brady Street & Cavell Street – the Mission Site

346

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

347

Brady Street & Cavell Street – the Mission Site 2

Brady Street and Cavell Street – the Mission Site (see chapter 1 of the Baseline Study for further background on this project) – is an essential project for Whitechapel, not only because it will complement the High Street scheme, but also for its symbolic value in communicating LBTH’s attitude towards development and change. The site runs north-south across Whitechapel Road, from the south side of Brady Street, flanked by the façade of the Idea Store and a row of shops (some of which date back to the early C19th), to the north of Cavell Street flanked by the Whitechapel Mission (a charitable institution for the homeless which has been at this location for over 140 years). These streets, on either side of the High Street, hold the full range of activities in Whitechapel: civic, commercial, philanthropic, religious and educational. Unfortunately, they are like much of

348

Whitechapel: dominated by traffic to the point that navigating this area, including the passageways to the hospital or the routes to the schools, has become dangerous and unpleasant. Pedestrians must negotiate busy bus stops, cars and ambulances, which in Cavell Street, Raven Row and Maple Place run both directions and cause almost nonstop congestion. Like all the proposed priority projects, the recommendations here all are rooted in the Baseline Study. The crossing from Brady Street to the Mission Site (part of the Whitechapel Vision’s ‘pedestrian loop’), characterises the type of opportunity and challenge highlighted in the Masterplan. Looking closely at the site and its current uses establishes strong grounds to depart from the pedestrian only footprint proposed within the Vision.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Cavell Street is the main exit for ambulances from the hospital and should instead be improved to help ease traffic flow. Given that developments coming forward will cast the site almost completely in shadow, there is also no justification for the removal of the Whitechapel Mission building. Instead, there are clear grounds for investment in the surrounding streets. Consultations with market services have also proved that there is demand for an extension of the market and the enhancement of the nearby street, to improve the pedestrian experience.

1 Cavell street/Ravens Row looking south Congested traffic, parked buses and slim pavements at the entry to the hospital make for an unpleasant and dangerous pedestrian environment.

2 School pupils spill out into the middle of Brady Street roadway due to narrow pavements.

3 View of Cavell street The current streetscape presents an uninviting and cluttered environment. Cavell Street also enjoys sunlight when the rest of the north side of the High Street is in shadow.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

349

CAMBRIDG E HEATH ROAD

5 BR

T EE

AR RW

T T

WIN

PEL

LA SP

PLE

LAC SP

PLE

PEL

C ITE

heated food display

chilled food display

EET

STR

EAS

O NR

VE RA

nce

bula

Single Busnce Am ckbula De

CAD-O

pedestrianised / shared surface vehicular surface clay paver surface

3 Existing – plan view Dominated by parking and congested traffic, the pedestrian experience is not simply unpleasant but unsafe as priorities are unclear. The Whitechapel Mission and the Idea Store are key institutions echoing the area’s philanthropic history, yet the spaces around them do not reflect this heritage. 350

Cavell Street – existing section The pavement adjacent to the Royal Mail site is extremely narrow, making it difficult for pedestrians, many of whom are hospital users, to walk safely.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Proposed – plan view Parking space is given over to the pavement with a raised table shifting priority to the pedestrians. The reclaimed space becomes animated by a new southfacing cafe in the Mission’s undercroft and market stalls along Brady Street for a lunch-time food market.

6 Cavell Street – proposed section A wider pavement on both sides of Cavell Street gives more generous space on this important hospital route, and allows for seating areas outside of the existing and proposed cafes.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

351

CAD-O

The project seeks to provide a holistic approach for the area which centres around the need for pedestrians to have priority throughout this very well-used route. Pedestrians use the Brady-Cavell streets route because it provides good connections to surrounding amenities, including the Mission, the Idea Store and Swanlea School, but also because other streets nearby are equally overcrowded and busy. Under the proposed designs, Brady Street, Raven Row, Cavell Street and Durward Street will all have raised tables in order to provide more space for pedestrians and slow the traffic flow. The raised table on Durward Street will help tie this project to the Crossrail improvements further down the road. Additionally, it is proposed that Cavell Street and Raven Row become one-way roads in order to reduce congestion. These changes will allow the pavements of both to be widened, providing more space for pedestrians.

352

A number of improvements to the Mission building will enhance its visibility and enable it to have a positive impact on its surrounding environs. To begin, providing a café on the Raven Row side of the building, alongside a space for the Mission’s service users to grow their own food, will help to improve their visibility and help integrate them into surrounding activities. Next, the building itself will be integrated with the surrounding streetscape through the choice of materials for the raised tables of Raven Row, Maples Place and Cavell Street matching the striking red brick of the Mission. Finally, the introduction of vertical planters on the sides of the Mission building will enhance the experience of pedestrians on Cavell Street and Maples Place, providing an attractive framing for the building.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

1 Existing & proposed sections through Ravens Row & the Mission Site Utilising the undercroft of the Mission building, a cafe greenhouse space is proposed to face onto Ravens Row. This will provide therapeutic benefit to the people supported by the Mission and a positive public frontage to the south.

St Mungos rooftop garden at the Southbank Centre Rooftop garden created by homeless volunteers through St. Mungos, Putting Down Roots and Woodworks to help people into employment and education. Greenhouse at the Maggie’s Centre, Manchester by Foster & Partners.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

353

CAD-O

To the north of Whitechapel High Street, Brady Street will be de-cluttered. The removal of parking and loading bays, as well as unnecessary bollards will provide space for the street market to expand up the west side of Brady Street. There are two spots on Brady Street that enjoy a lot of sunshine, these will be kept clear to provide inviting and comfortable social spaces for pedestrians and market users, planting a number of large mature trees to further enhance the pedestrian experience. The raised table on Brady Street will also help integrate the proposed linear public square within the Sainsbury’s development with its adjoining public realm. Additionally, the design also includes a proposal to provide planting and seating along the Idea Store Alleyway for library users and pedestrians.

CAD-O

4 Whitecross Street Market Lunchtime market allowing restaurants, cafes and outdoor seating. By muf architecture / art, 2005.

Brady Street – existing and proposed sections Space for market stalls, tree planting, and seating on a shared surface to improve the pedestrian experience, linking with Crossrail‘s and Sainsbury’s future public spaces.

Idea Store alleyway – as proposed. Whilst this passageway is closed off, this slither of space could be used as an outdoor reading room with planting and outdoor tables/seating.

354

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

355

The Green Spine Restorative Spaces

356

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

357

Restorative Spaces

The Green Spine Restorative spaces project is envisioned as a series of green open spaces to be realised north and south of Stepney Way, in advance of the completion of the new Civic Hub, setting the scene for what is to come. As a response to the current doorstep environment of the hospital, which does little to nurture an experience of wellbeing and healing, this project proposes a series of well-designed and carefully looked after open spaces or gardens, such as those of the old London Hospital, where patients and staff can enjoy respite from treatment, work and the city; where they can sit, read, enjoy the sun or go for a restorative walk. Pushing eastwards the turning circle outside the hospital’s main entrance, a new public garden is created at the front of the lobby. This can be achieved in two stages, firstly by greening the existing hoardings and secondly with further landscaping. In a second stage, pleached trees around the edges of the new front garden will create a green cloister, embracing one of the sunniest spots on the Hospital site. This new green square will provide a quiet and sunlit space for patients, staff, and visitors to escape for a few peaceful minutes. The proposed temporary workspace will be able to take advantage of the large amount of pedestrian footfall that flows 358

into and out of the Hospital. It is easy to imagine concerts, performances, or other appropriate events on this generous and open space. The design proposal also includes opening up a new north-south green route from the main entrance, outside and down along the western side of the Emergency Department. This route runs alongside the temporary workspace. This will help relieve the strain on the currently overused internal corridor. Following the demolition of Fielding House, St. Phillip’s Church now offers a fine backdrop to the outpatients department. The design takes advantage of this by including topiary alcoves against a green space with gym equipment that shields the small hospital parking which will be planted with trees and hedges. Enhancing the Outpatients Centre doorstep space will help the Hospital to become a welcoming place for patients. The Hospital site is currently covered in development hoarding and will be for the foreseeable future. In order to mitigate the negative and exclusionary elements of the ongoing development on the site and adjacent ones, the design includes a large amount of planting along all current and future hoardings.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

1 Existing view of Philpot Street looking north Area adjacent to Pollard’s Street is cluttered and messy. Planting is unattractive and lacks colour.

2 View of outpatients entrance from Stepney Way The newly revealed back of St Augustine’s Church, offers an excellent backdrop for a restorative space with benches that take advantage of what sunshine there is and pleached trees that screen a small car park behind.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

359

PEL

E HIT

TRE

S NT OU

EAS

APE

C ITE

APE

EAS

E HIT

EET

STR

AY NEY W

STEP

TURNER

STREET

K STRE

NEWAR

construction site indicative start-up / REET ELD ST studios ASHFI

REET

ELD ST

ASHFI

3 Existing – plan view At present the area around the hospital suffers from being a demolition site without valuable public realm.

The ground floor corridor is an unintended popular public route through the hospital site. There are however, limited places for feeling well: for relaxation, contemplation, appreciating nature and exercising.

Proposed – plan view The proposal seeks to provide spaces for well-being around the hospital during a stage of continuing construction.

Unused space, left over from demolition, becomes space for start up businesses AY tree garden, and studios, an ornmental NEY W STEP tennis courts, a drop-off area and spaces for seating and parking.

REET

ST TURNER

360

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

361

5 North Hospital entrance – existing and proposed sections By reconfiguring the existing turning circle a large space is made available to become a tree garden in the sunniest place to be found around the hospital.

362

Historic photo of the original hospital garden Defining routes through intuitive wayfinding and spaces for relaxation. Pleached trees create a canopy. Creating a seasonal space in front of the hospital that could be kept in the long term.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Hoarding as a generous boundary outside the Outpatients department, Images for the temporary treatment for the boundary opposite the hospital. The delivery of some this could be done in conjunction with other LBTH’s initiatives (such as Fabric Lenny, Brickbox) and the planting could be maintained in conjunction with Stepney City Farm.

Hoarding as a generous boundary Examples of hoardings that go beyond a site security line to provide space for relaxation and improvisation amongst planting and lighting. Barking Town Square and Ruskin Square by muf, 2010 and ongoing.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

363

London Newcastle Development — Comments on the planning application 1

The Green Spine stretches from the future Civic Hub down to Commercial Road with multiple land ownerships and potential boundaries that require careful planning in strategy and detail. In order for the space to be cohesive the boundary between different sites needs consideration to avoid cliff edges where new development meets the existing and maintenance and care differences become most apparent. The London Newcastle group submitted a public realm design, from Tom Stuart Smith landscape architects, as part of a planning application for a masterplan of mixed used buildings along Philpot street. In response to this the WPROSG have proposed moves that could enhance the scheme and tie it into the existing area now and in the future: – Enhance rather than remove existing front gardens, layering history, rather then removing it. – Opportunity to enhance the ’pastoral patchwork’ concept with integrated SuDs for bioretention, dipping rather than mounding each ‘patch’. – Opportunity to express a hierarchy of

364

east and west side movement, one more meandering, one more direct for cycling, wandering, walking. – Enhance meadow with shrubs to provide spatial variation. – Retain space for access to existing building arcade. – Utilise the drum structure to create a strong biodiversity feature with green wall wrap that could be quite lofty (like at Tower Court). – Connect some of the patches to simplify the arrangement and provide bridges to path over bioretention gardens. – Present a clearer hierarchy of either specie trees to structure the space, or small ornamentals to embellish. – Demonstrate tree specie diversity for biosecurity (perhaps clipped pines are inappropriate) and work with the historical land use as inspiration. – Integrate a seating edge to protect the planting and optimise orientation. – Integrate permeable paving and commit to sustainable drainage.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

1 London Newcastle Proposal for Philpot street Planning application accessed on 9th Dec 2015.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

365

Doing the Ordinary Well (a draft material palette)

366

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

367

A draft material palette

Whitechapel Road, at the centre of the Vision, has been designed to TfL’s Streetscape Guidance.

1 It is important to ‘do the ordinary well’ in order to create a coherent network of public realm and open spaces. In order to achieve a seamless public realm, which does not communicate changes in ownership through changes in materials, we recommend that the TfL Streetscape Guidance palette and design principles are adopted. This will give plenty of freedom to individual designers, especially in routes such as the Green Spine, to adapt it 368

according to the specific brief. A basic material palette, alike music, will be open to interpretation. Not only this, but so long as certain rules are followed, it will possible to introduce exceptions whether to celebrate an entrance or create an edge around individual buildings such as the Mission. A simpler approach to materials will also allow for repairs and further changes to happen without compromising the quality of the whole environment.

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

Level Street Example of public realm where the pavements around the newer development (on the right) change materiality according to ownership.

2 Whitechapel Market View of a section of Whitechapel Road where the use of bespoke materials has resulted in patchy surfaces and a difficult to read environment.

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

369

Credits

muf architecture/art with Fenna Wagenaar J&L Gibbons Civic Engineers Robert Bevan Daisy Froud objectif Artelia for the London Borough of Tower Hamlets

370

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance

muf architecture/art / J&L Gibbons / Civic Engineers / Robert Bevan / Daisy Froud / objectif / Artelia

Whitechapel Public Realm and Open Space Guidance