What is happening with the Crystal Palace redevelopment?

A curious press release appeared on Bromley Council’s website on Friday, announcing a £2.4million improvement programme for Crystal Palace Park. Nine projects would be examined and a feasibility study drawn up. The projects included conserving the dinosaurs, conserving the sphinxes and south terrace steps and the Paxton basin. The amount of money is not huge and will not vaguely cover the nine projects listed. But the bigger question is why is Bromley Council spending any money on the park at all when the Chinese ZhongRong group are still in negotiations over a £500million reimagining of Joseph Paxton’s Crystal Palace?

On a sunny, unusually warm day in February this year hundreds of people crammed in to a sweltering, sweaty, room to hear what might become of the park if the ZhongRong group get the go ahead to their ambitious scheme. As I wrote here, it wasn’t particularly informative. Bad-tempered from the beginning, the local community, evidently distrustful of planners and the council after decades of promises and inaction, broadly displayed suspicion towards the scheme, drowning out the few voices of support. Consultants Arup, who led the event, struggled to provide much information at all, as did representatives from Bromley Council and the Mayor of London’s office, who were also in attendance. No one from the ZhongRong was there, or at least made themselves known.

What was clear was a shortlist of six architectural practices had been drawn up with a winner due to be selected by the summer. And while summer has some time to go (hopefully), no winner has yet emerged and the whole grand scheme has been notable for its silence. The notion that an application might be submitted in Autumn this year - and building commencing in Winter 2015 - seems unlikely to say the least.

The delay appears to be within the negotiations between Bromley Council and ZhongRong. They were always going to be somewhat fraught, being, as they are, about selling off a large swathe of a public park to a private venture on a 125-year lease. Some observers have suggested - plausibly enough - that 'ZhongRong are making demands that cannot lawfully be met' but a council spokesman would not be drawn on this. Instead, he insisted that 'negotiations are on going'.

'We are going one stage at a time. The first step was the exclusivity contract. ZhongRong would then develop their plans and negotiations would continue about a land deal. These negotiations are on going.'

And, asked about Bromley Council spending money on restoring land which could be part of the redevelopment according to a map released a few months ago, he said:

'The map of exclusivity doesn't necessarily mean ZhongRong want, or indeed, are going to get, all that area. The idea around that is to get an area of land about which Bromley wouldn't enter into negotiations with other people. It was a way of giving ZhongRong some security.'

And he refused to say whether the timetable was slipping or not.

'We couldn't comment on the timetable. We want to be as open as possible with people about it and will give updates when we can.'

As for the money now being spent, we need to go back to when ZhongRong just made their presence noticed. Bromley Council had submitted an application for Heritage Lottery Funding for the park and it is likely they would have been successful had ZhongRong never appeared. In which case, the HLF would have given a £5million grant towards the park, on top of about £2.4million from the local authority and the Mayor of London's office. This £2.4million is that money.

And they know it is just a drop in the ocean of the funding the park really needs. The £60million masterplan which was halted a few years ago would need be about £100million in today's money, I am told. The council spokesman added: 

'£2.4million won't solve everything. We know that. Is it a step forward? Yes. Will it make a difference? Yes.' 

One wonders whether the ZhongRong plan will be the latest Crystal Palace to fail to materialise; a colourful, flamboyant intervention, backed by an overly-enthusiastic Mayor of London who is searching for vanity projects to create something of a legacy, and a council keen to rid themselves of a troublesome park. We will have to wait and see.

We need to talk about Crystal Palace

It would appear that those behind plans to 'rebuild' Crystal Palace have underestimated levels of interest. The Mayor of London's office, Bromley Council and consultants Arup hosted a day long 'drop-in' event for local communities to hear an update on plans to redevelop the top terraces of the park, on the site of Joseph Paxton's original building. But, with a talk scheduled for 11.30am, the doors of the meeting room at the Lodge - inside a modern tower within the park - had to be closed as it was already bursting with at least a couple of hundred people (indeed, I only managed to squeeze in waving a toy to give to my wife to keep our daughter entertained!). 

While the planners may have the best of intentions, the event didn't seem to satisfy most attendees. There wasn't an enormous amount to update as there remains a lack of information and detail as to what is really intended. And, significantly, there was not, as far as I was aware, a representative from the Zhong Rong group, the Chinese firm who are eager to pay for the £500million redevelopment.

As soon as James Lough, associate director of Arup, began his speech, he was interrupted by challenging questions:

'Where is the brief for this? There is no brief that says, we want this. You don't have a brief you don't have a concept. You have got six disparate firms of architects, how can they come with a concept for Crystal Palace?

'A lot of us were under the impression that the Chinese organisation were going to rebuild Crystal Palace. A lot of us thought this would be according to Paxton's own design and now it seems that this in fact something completely different.'

Another lady exclaimed: 'We don't buy it, it's a sham and it's shameful.'

Mr Lough did his best to respond. The brief 'is being developed for the competition and the project'. Yet, it is clear the six short-listed firms have not been set any parameters within which to work. This is their opportunity to show off with flamboyant designs that will never be built.

The new building, Mr Lough admitted, 'isn't going to be a slavish adherence' to Paxton's design as that was of its time and the new building will have to conform modern building regulations.

An ambitious timetable was laid out. From the six firms, three will be selected later in Spring to submit more detailed - and presumably realistic - proposals, with the winner chosen in the Summer. Assuming all goes smoothly in planning (!), work would commence in winter 2015 with the final building opening in 2018.

There is nothing firm about what might be in the new palace, though the questionnaire they have distributed gives an interesting insight into what the local community thinks.

Would you like to see a new Crystal Palace developed in Crystal Palace Park?

Yes - 54% No - 19% Not sure - 28%

What uses would you like to see in the new Palace?

                                           Yes          No

Hotel                                    32            45

Cinema                                 52            31

Museum                               86              7

Art Gallery                           85              8

Shops                                    25            52

Artist studios                        72            12

Restaurant/cafes                  81            13

Conference facilities            44            33

Viewing platform                  85              7

(The above figures are estimates. The only precise percentage given was for the 'yes/no' question, all the other figures are my interpretation of block graphs. I'm happy to be corrected)

A world class hotel is a crucial aspect to any development of this scale so the hostility to this is already striking. There is also strong opposition against the venue hosting shops. The backers say they will not compete with what is already available in Crystal Palace, but it's hard to imagine this project going ahead without shops, bars and restaurants.

The Q&A afterwards developed something of theme. There were repeated complaints about the failure to alert people about the exhibition, though I did wonder if this was perhaps a bit unfair; while I only found out the night before, the event was packed and I gather the later, similar, meeting was heaving too.

Were other councils being involved? Yes, but none were there at this session. They are being kept updated apparently. It is significant that, while Bromley Council control the park, those most affected do not live in the borough.

Concerns were raised over the funding of the project; how could it be guaranteed that the Zhong Rong Group would be committed to the project for the entire course? And what about the potential sale - the 'privatisation' - of a significant proportion of the park? A representative from the council said lawyers were already looking to securing funding and they would ensure open access to land is guaranteed for the future.

I don't want to give the impression there was only opposition to the scheme. It clearly has robust support. One man described it as the 'most exciting' of the various schemes he had seen over the 30 years he had lived in the area. Another called for prominent water features to be part of any new development, reminding the gathering how the park's fountains had once been the size of Nelson's Column.

The fountains of Crystal Palace

But overwhelmingly, there was a feeling of frustration at the lack of detail. Labour London Assembly Member Val Shawcross asked about the footprint of the planned building, saying it appeared to be way beyond was what allowed - presumably based on the current artist's impression which sees the an enormous structure covering spots like the bus station. The answer was no limits had been given to the architects to give them as much freedom as they needed to come up with their design. When Ms Shawcross begged for consultation to 'be cranked up' she was met with a round of applause.

The redevelopment of Crystal Palace has been dogged for decades by politics at all levels; local, council level, regional and in government. Indeed, I have heard the various Crystal Palace groups compared with the People's Front of Judea. Consultation so far has been dogged by a lack of information. Arup made no guarantee that the planning brief will be made public but they are looking at opening a shop in the Crystal Palace Triangle to try and keep people more directly informed. Perhaps that will help.

Those behind the project will surely hope so. The scheme will only have a successful outcome with careful negotiation. There is a vocal body of opposition which will only get stronger and louder if the current inadequate state of affairs continues.

A brief update on Crystal Palace

Yesterday, it was reported that six architects have been shortlisted for the £500million reconstruction of Crystal Palace.

The list includes the all of the likely candidates: David Chipperfield Architects; Rogers Stirk Harbour + Partners; Zaha Hadid Architects with artist Anish Kapoor; Grimshaw Architects; Haworth Tompkins Architects; and Marks Barfield Architects.

These six have been whittled down from an initial list of 40 firms and now each of them will submit a more detailed proposal for the site before three of the firms will, according to Property Week, 'be invited to produce initial concept designs. The scheme's backers hope to finally select an architect by the summer.

Mayor of London Boris Johnson is clearly delighted by all of this:

'This is a stellar line-up of talent demonstrating the world-wide interest in this unique and challenging project.

'The rebuild of the Crystal Palace is set to produce an extraordinary new landmark for the capital, which will support the rebirth of  this historic park and catalyse jobs and growth in the area.'

It does, however, raise a couple of questions.  

No deal has yet been signed with the Chinese Zhongrong Group, whose billionaire owner Ni Zhaoxing wants to rebuild the palace. It's certainly not unusual for such high profile firms to get involved at such an early stage, but one planning expert tells me the timetable is 'hasty, though not exceptional'. We know, however, Bromley Council are desperate to rid themselves of the responsibility for the park. And the mayor is dazzled by big, impressive, futuristic images and is eager for landmark vanity projects to give him what amounts to a legacy. And consultation with local communities has so far been woeful; there is no indication from this latest announcement if or when this will improve.

Also, while all of the shortlisted firms will no doubt submit spectacular proposals for the site, what little consultation there has been has indicated a replica of the palace was to be built; will these firms find their creative talents shackled by such constraints? It seems unlikely, especially as submitting grand proposals for such a prime site - regardless of whether they are built or not - is a major advertising tactic for such practices. 

Thus far, while the prospects for a rebuilt Crystal Palace could certainly be exciting, it all seems wearily reminiscent of the previous, overly-ambitious and flawed, schemes to rejuvenate the site.

Update

I have been reminded of a similar scheme to rebuild Crystal Palace which has been around for quite a while. My wife and I made a trip to Crystal Palace several years ago and dropped into the library in the Triangle where we were given a brochure by an enthusiastic fellow for a very ambitious scheme. This vision featured a new palace - two-thirds the size of the original - incorporating a world-class hotel, conference centre, restaurants and shops. A new Olympic-sized swimming pool would be built, as well as a ski slope, cinemas, a butterfly house, hanging gardens and a botanical centre. It would be a venue of international renown and be a new heart for south London.

In many ways it is very similar in scale to what is being envisaged now though obviously hasn't become a reality; the architect behind the scheme - Lewisham-based Raymond Hall - had a vision of it being reopened this year, although the updated video claims 2018 for a royal unveiling. For more information on this scheme go here.