Old River Lane: If financially troubled East Herts Council can't afford to hit the pause button, then let's go for a phased development

In a perfect world there would be little need for opinions. Everyone would respect and trust everybody else to get it right first time, opportunities would be seized and perfect solutions delivered.

In the real world, respect and trust are often in short supply when applied to our relationship with our elected representatives, resulting in opinions, based upon facts and assumptions, from those who think they know better. And why not? Alternative opinions can make positive contributions and improve outcomes – sometimes.

Unfortunately, the almost universal cynicism, born of the apparent refusal of councils to be liberal rather than economic with the truth, means we don’t get the whole picture and we tend to make assumptions which are probably incorrect.

We don’t understand why what appears to be obvious and easy just cannot be done or why there is no money available for a Bishop's Stortford theatre but apparently bucket loads can be found for one in Hertford. This is what makes an increasing number of us very angry.

I am offering my opinion this week against this background. I have no special access to the facts that support East Herts Council (EHC) decisions and strategy concerning Old River Lane (ORL), which are mostly responsible for the local anger and frustration, so I have made certain assumptions – hopefully sensible but neither populist or cynical.

In my piece last week ("Old River Lane must be mothballed to prevent another Riverside"), I suggested that to grant planning consent for the demolition of buildings on the development plot would be a big mistake. In fact, a very big mistake, because it opens the door to a developer to degrade further the ethos of the project and to propose alternatively a high-profit, high-rise but relatively low-cost solution that conflicts with the adopted Local Plan and makes no provision whatsoever for the cultural elements of the vision presented to us by EHC from the outset.

Far more importantly, though, a strategy that allows the developer to pack the site in a way that leaves no space for the provision of a cultural hub at some time in the future closes a door forever on the provision of an arts centre because it has nowhere else to go.

How can this be avoided? Well, the simple – and currently called-for – suggestion of a hold on everything is one way, but (big assumption here on my part) I reckon EHC has a lot of upfront money and possibly future income tied up in ORL, with an increasing burden of inflationary interest rates on loans.

New and increased parking charges and payments to clear garden waste are some of the additional income streams that we know about (how many don’t we know about?) that suggest our local council is in financial trouble, probably embarrassingly so, and it needs to get some big money in very quickly to get itself out of debt – and I’m guessing that giving the developer carte blanche to get something up and sold as quickly as possible would go a long way towards easing the pressure. It simply can’t afford to hit the pause button.

For this reason, I further assume that the council will feel forced to do something quick and dirty, and the community and its desires will be pushed to the back.

So far the assumption has been that the only option is a complete pause for reflection, but if EHC can’t afford that and it must get some early return to keep the wolves from the door, why not consider a phased development which could produce early cost recovery from retail and residential, thus creating the financial elbow room for maintaining a reserved space in the development for the arts centre?

Basic preparation of this area as a multi-purpose community space, hosting open-air productions, tented productions (I’m assuming it would be feasible to rig a big top on the space, for instance), perhaps a winter ice rink or an occasional drive-in cinema are but a few uses to which this space could be put.

The possibilities appear endless, and with proper programming and professional guidance we could get many of the benefits of an arts centre at a fraction of the cost, which could keep the idea alive whilst generating financial surpluses rather than losses until financial recovery allows a permanent structure to be considered.

Integrating a retained Water Lane United Reformed Church Hall into such a comprehensive venture could cater for interior-based activities supporting the visual arts and staging for low-capacity events.

To make this work is going to require imagination, design flexibility and determination. The proposed demolition of the URC hall and the three dwellings in Old River Lane to compensate Waitrose for the car parking lost to enable vehicular access to the site might be overcome by reconsideration of the access point.

With dedication, the enthusiastic application of expertise and full consultation with all parties on the possible nature of an alternative design that could be delivered in phases, it ought to be possible to save this project and eventually deliver on the promises made to the town.

This is my opinion. Test it and take it apart by all means – but for once, EHC, try being open and honest. Show us why it can’t be done.

I think Stortfordians have learned the lesson that a town that does nothing will surely get what it deserves, but, in all probability, nothing resembling what it wants, so, for us, those days are over.