The controversial redevelopment of London’s Smithfield Market is not warranted by a shortage of office space in the capital, a public inquiry has been told.
The multi-million pound redevelopment of the Victorian market hall has divided opinion, both in the architectural profession and among heritage groups.
On one side of the argument are those who say that the proposed office and retail scheme will breathe new life into the neglected property. On the other, opponents claim that it will rip the heart out of one of the finest buildings of its type in Europe.
Last week the public inquiry into the scheme heard from a commercial property expert giving evidence for the developer Henderson Global Investors. Andrew Tyler, of Knight Frank, said that a rival plan, which would retain more of the building’s original fabric, was unviable on the grounds that it lacked detail and had not been properly costed.
Now, the inquiry has heard that a lack of office space cannot be used to justify implementing the plans as they stand,
Speaking on behalf of the Victorian Society and Save Britain’s Heritage, former town planner Alec Forshaw told the inquiry that there were a number of office development schemes in the pipeline which would satisfy demand.
“There may be a housing crisis in London but there isn’t an office crisis,” he said.
Under cross examination from the Corporation of London’s barrister Neil Cameron, Forshaw conceded that he was not an “office letting professional” and that he accepted that any use of the building was better than none.
But he insisted that the “restoration” of the property should not be considered to be “in the public benefit” if the scheme has to be weighed up against the harm it may cause.
Closing submissions from both sides are due to be heard on Friday.
Previous Post
Chinese Consortium acquires Landmark Birmingham Building
