The Metropolis

People who object to a new Dalston tower block should sod off to Bedfordshire

Mike Pollitt | Tuesday 21 February, 2012 10:34

That’s essentially the argument made by skyscraper journalist (they exist) James Newman in the Telegraph. In his own words:

“If a 50-metre tall tower next to a railway station in central London isn’t suitable then where is it suitable?…It’s enough to make you wonder why people bother to live in the big smoke of London at all, let alone quite firmly in central London if they are so against urbanity. There are plenty of small-scale, sleepy English hamlets that would welcome them with open arms.”

Yes, well, there are lots of jobs for everyone in all those sleepy hamlets I’m quite sure.

Meanwhile OPEN Dalston reports that English Heritage have objected to the tower block because it will spoil the area.

This argument nicely illustrates one of the biggest issues in London right now. Rent is viciously high because, in part, of a shortage of housing. But local people and conservation groups objecting to new developments make building big new flat complexes extremely difficult.

In Dalston’s case the new tower is not really going to help lower rents, because the plans don’t include affordable housing. The penthouse flats will be marketed at £1m apiece, says OPEN Dalston. This, rather than the fact it’s going to spoil the view, is what’s really objectionable.

But as a matter of wider policy we should absolutely be encouraging tall buildings in zone 2 with a good proportion of affordable flats inside, even if sometimes that will upset the locals.

James Newman at the Telegraph – If you don’t like London rising up, then perhaps you should move out
OPEN Dalston – English Heritage object to Dalston Kingsland scheme
OPEN Daltson – Dalston Kingsland tower block – affordable housing abandoned
Snipe – Housing benefit cuts might be unfair to some Londoners – but so’s the status quo

---