Agenda item
St David's Square, Westferry Road, E14
- Meeting of Development Committee, Wednesday, 6th April, 2011 7.00 p.m. (Item 7.2)
- View the background to item 7.2
Decision:
On a vote of 5 for and 1 against, the Committee RESOLVED
That the application for planning permissions at St David’s Square, Westferry Road, E14, for the erection of entrance gates to Westferry Road, Ferry Street and Thames Walkway together with associated walls to perimeter estate be DEFERRED to enable further information to be obtained on:
- the levels of anti-social behaviour at St David’s Square and comparable levels with the remainder of the Isle of Dogs and the Borough;
- the availability of alternate routes to Thames Walkway and Westferry Road and any likely access restrictions.
The Committee also recommended that a meeting of Millwall Crime Team, the local Police and residents should be arranged to discuss problems of anti-social behaviour affecting St David’s Square.
Minutes:
At the request of the Chair, Mr Pete Smith, Development Control Manager, introduced the circulated report and Tabled update report concerning the application for planning permission at St David’s Square, Westferry Road, E14, for the erection of entrance gates to Westferry Road, Ferry Street and Thames Walkway together with associated walls to perimeter estate.
The Chair then invited persons who had registered for speaking rights to address the meeting.
Mr Tim Edens, the applicant’s agent, spoke in support of the application, stating that there was a high incidence of anti-social behaviour affecting the estate. This category of offence was not investigated by the Police but included vehicular damage, theft, graffiti and personal abuse. The gates at the main entrance would be set back and not be an alien or oppressive feature. There was no requirement for a public right of way through the estate and there was already clearly marked public access via Ferry Street. There was no record of any accidents at the entrance but Officer proposals would lead to vehicular/pedestrian conflict. He felt that there were shortcomings in the circulated report and it would be unsafe for Members to endorse that.
Ms Suzanne Parker, a resident of St David’s Square, spoke in support of the application pointed out that there had been problems in contacting the local Crime Prevention Officer. Access to the walkway was much easier through Ferry Street. There were many incidents of anti-social behaviour, including constant ringing of doorbells, defecation in the estate and noisy behaviour of young people around the pool made her nervous. She was also nervous about using the car park at night.
Councillor David Snowdon, a Millwall Ward Councillor, spoke in support of the application, stating that there were clear problems with anti-social behaviour on the estate. Residents were trying to solve this themselves using their own resources. There were clear precedents for approvals of estate gates, at Langbourne Place and Lockesfield Place on the Isle of Dogs and other locations throughout the Borough. Other partially social housing estates were gated and the issue did not relate solely to private housing. The measures had been taken principally to combat ant-social behaviour. He did not think there would be any impact on the Thames Walkway access. As a local resident he lived nearby and would not walk through the estate as there was no need to.
Ms Ila Robertson, Applications Manager, gave a detailed presentation based on the circulated report, Tabled update and a powerpoint map display. She pointed out that:
- St David’s Square had 484 households and over 1,000 residents, with the front entrance to the estate being the main vehicular access to Westferry Road. There were three pedestrian access routes to the site and a circular link road around the estate was a shared surface for cars, pedestrians and other vehicles.
- Statutory consultation had resulted in concerns being raised about crime, anti-social behaviour, precedents of gated developments and the use of the car park and water feature by non-residents. Objections to the application were that a gated community would create a prison-like environment.
- This was one of the largest riverside sites on the Isle of Dogs, which comprised mainly ungated sites. It was 18 months since the application for gates at Lockesfield Place had been approved. Other such requests had been denied on appeal and security issues could be addressed by means other than gates.
- Borough policy was against gated sites so they would be permeable and to avoid dividing communities.
- The Crime Prevention Officer had advised that there were few problems on this site and were not of a level to justify gates. Vehicle crimes were low in relation to other areas and security measures such as rising bollards were available. Specific security measures for particular buildings would be preferable.
The Chair then invited questions from Members.
Members then asked questions relating to: access routes through the site, recording of crime and anti-social behaviour, attendance at Ward panel meetings, the doctrine of precedent in planning law; impact on people who wanted to access the Thames Walkway and alternative routes; lack of community meetings regarding security and anti-social behaviour issues; whether the levels of reported crime were sufficient to over-ride wider planning policies; the need for the size of the proposed gates compared with the general design of the area.
In response, Ms Robertson indicated that:
· The information from the Crime Prevention Officer had been given in good faith and the Safe Neighbourhood Team had discussed issues of crime and anti-social behaviour on the estate. She made the point that a number of other appeals had been won for gated estates. The policy position had strengthened further since the adoption of the Core Strategy.
· Original commissions for the current gated estates would have been made in 1990 and 1997, when the London Docklands Development Corporation controlled planning matters. Subsequent projects such as the Millennium Quarter etc. were ungated.
· All other avenues should be exhausted before gating was considered.
· There had been discussions with the Crime Prevention Officer and Local Police Sergeant and there was no reason to doubt their advice. Much of what residents had said was not logged as evidence in the planning submission.
· The gate design had been provided by the applicants.
The Chair stated that, on the basis of comments made by Members during debate, there would be a vote on whether the report should be deferred.
Councillor Ann Jackson proposed a motion, seconded by Councillor Kosru Uddin and, on a vote of 5 for and 1 against, the Committee RESOLVED
That the application for planning permissions at St David’s Square, Westferry Road, E14, for the erection of entrance gates to Westferry Road, Ferry Street and Thames Walkway together with associated walls to perimeter estate be DEFERRED to enable further information to be obtained on:
- the levels of anti-social behaviour at St David’s Square and comparable levels with the remainder of the Isle of Dogs and the Borough;
- the availability of alternate routes to Thames Walkway and Westferry Road and any likely access restrictions.
The Committee also recommended that a meeting of Millwall Crime Team, the local Police and residents should be arranged to discuss problems of anti-social behaviour affecting St David’s Square.
Supporting documents: