Since 2018, the practice has put forward numerous plans to demolish two buildings on the City fringe site between Whitechapel High Street and Commercial Road. In 2022, a version featuring a 14-storey block on the 0.67ha site was refused by Tower Hamlets Council.<\/p>\n
At the time councillors objected to, among other things, the scheme\u2019s height, the demolition of heritage assets, its daylight and sunlight effects on neighbours, and the \u2018harm to the setting\u2019 of the nearby, Charles Harrison Townsend-designed Grade II*-listed Whitechapel Gallery.<\/span><\/p>\n The practice returned last year with a fresh application for the same developer, South Street Asset Management, working with architect Haverstock, which is overseeing the rejig of Canon Barnett Primary School within the development plot.<\/p>\n Although the scheme in the Whitechapel High Street Conservation Area is now three storeys taller and has a larger footprint, it involves less demolition, steps back at its edges and would retain, rather than remove, the frontage at <\/span>2-4 Commercial Street. The Edwardian fa\u00e7ade at 102-105 Whitechapel High Street would be kept, as before.<\/span><\/p>\n The 2024 scheme promises to create 3,260 jobs, provide incubator spaces for small and medium businesses and includes a relocated and expanded playground for the primary school<\/span>.<\/p>\n But the changes have not appeased either heritage campaigners or Historic England, and Tower Hamlets\u2019 planning officers are also unconvinced. They have recommended councillors refuse the scheme tomorrow night (15 January). A scheduled decision in December was deferred to allow councillors to visit the site.<\/p>\n The scheme has also prompted 294 objections.<\/p>\n SAVE Britain\u2019s Heritage conservation officer Lydia Franklin branded the plans \u2018highly controversial\u2019 and said that an \u2018office block towering 17 storeys above its neighbours is not what this area needs. Any development on this corner of Whitechapel should celebrate the area\u2019s history and identity\u2019.<\/p>\n She added: \u2018A building of this scale would tear through the conservation area which was created to draw a clear line between the bristling towers of the City fringe and the very different character of the historic East End.\u2019<\/p>\n Also objecting is the Victorian Society, which said that though the 82.5m-tall scheme now partially steps back, these design moves were a \u2018superficial attempt to assuage height concerns\u2019.<\/p>\n Historic England said it could not support the plans, claiming the height and massing \u2018would starkly contrast with the human scale\u2019 of the surrounding buildings. It said the \u2018robust Victorian commercial character\u2019 of the retained fa\u00e7ade of 2-4 Commercial Street \u2018would be significantly undermined by the overbearing presence of the 18-storey building immediately behind and partly cantilevering over\u2019 the frontage.<\/p>\n The planning officer’s report concluded: \u2018The benefits that would flow from the development when taken together do not carry sufficient weight in order to outweigh the harm to designated heritage assets and other harms that have been identified, in particular the adverse effects on existing residents and the learning environment at Canon Barnett Primary School.\u2019<\/p>\n Foster + Partners, Haverstock and South Street Asset Management have all been contacted for comment.<\/span><\/p>\n