British developers rushing to copy New York should be wary of its mistakes
From London to Liverpool to Glasgow
our cities are taking inspiration from Manhattan .
Yet an ugly vision lies behind its new developments
Feargus O'Sullivan
The Guardian, Sunday 3 August 2014 / http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/aug/03/british-developers-new-york-manhattan
Start spreading the news, they’re arriving
tomorrow. Urban revamps inspired by New York
are cropping up all over the UK .
A £3.5bn project to turn East London’s Silvertown Quays into a “London version of New York ’s
Meatpacking District” was announced recently, while redevelopment plans for
south London ’s
Heygate estate initially included an area called Tribeca Square . Liverpool has a project
to transform the city’s disused Churchill flyover into Merseyside’s answer to Manhattan ’s High Line.
There’s even a fledgling campaign to create a High Line lookalike in Glasgow ’s Gorbals. That’s
an awful lot of inspiration to come from one smallish stretch of southwest Manhattan .
It’s New
York ’s undeniable glamour that British developers
can’t resist. When your city’s default backdrop is drizzle, streaky concrete
and endless branches of Greggs, it’s easy to yearn wistfully for sparkling
skyscrapers, chrome-plated diners and avenue canyons stretching to infinity.
But are the New York models currently being
touted in Britain
ones we want to emulate?
Then there’s the High Line, Manhattan ’s park on top
of a former elevated goods railway. Ending in the Meatpacking District, there’s
no denying the walkway’s beauty and popularity with tourists (or the fact that
it has sent local property values skyrocketing). Its arrival nonetheless
reflects an ugly shift in New York ’s
priorities. The High Line arrived just as the city’s contribution to the
running costs of the parks where tourists never venture fell through the floor.
It created a template where a park could only attract attention and funding if
it was an agent of urban transformation (and often displacement) rather than an
everyday space for ordinary citizens’ recreation.
As David J Madden, of the London School of
Economics, put it to me: “In New York ,
public parks and other urban resources are languishing due to strained public
finances, while private money dictates the location and character of a few
lavishly funded projects. So if the goal is creating a democratic city that
serves everyone, the High Line isn’t the solution, it’s part of the problem.”
Not all of the British projects that refer
to New York
are repeating those mistakes. Liverpool ’s
plans for its own High Line, for example, seem sensible enough, using the money
it would have otherwise cost to just demolish the Churchill flyover to create a
public asset. Others have come up against local objections, such as those that
did for south London ’s
Tribeca Square ,
which is now going to be the innocuous-sounding One, The Elephant. It seems
that bulldozing social housing and then naming its private replacement after
the neighbourhood where Beyoncé lives was too much for locals to stomach.
We should be asking ourselves what these
New York-branded projects are selling us. Lower Manhattan ’s
transformation has happened against a wider backdrop of social displacement,
public spending cuts and growing inequality. British cities are already
experiencing more than enough of these as it is. We don’t need to import
American models to show us how to do it even better.
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário