Agenda item
Former Caspian Works and Lewis House, 55-57 Violet Road, London (PA/14/01762 and PA/14/02059)
Proposal:
PA/14/01762 Full Planning Application for erection of entry gates at the main vehicular access fronting Violet Road.
Recommendation:
To REFUSE planning permission on the grounds of the reason set out in the Committee report.
Minutes:
Update report tabled.
Paul Buckenham (Development Control Manager) introduced the application that sought to erect entrance gates at the main vehicle entrance to the Caspian Wharf Development. The Chair invited registered speakers to address the Committee.
Vivienne Alps (speaking on behalf of residents of the development) and Councillor Danny Hassell, ward Councillor, spoke in support of the application The installation of the gates would help create a safer and secure community and protect amenity by reducing anti - social behaviour in line with policy. There was compelling evidence of serious problems with crime on the development. The application had been initiated by the residents. The occupants of all types of tenures supported the installation of gates, so it should not cause segregation within the development. There was a petition in support with over 300 signatures from local residents. The Crime and Prevention Officer and the Housing Association for the development supported the application.
The plans would not restrict public access to the site given it was not possible to access the Limehouse Cut through the site (as suggested in the report). Furthermore, the gates would be open in the day time. The gates would sit well with the area as they would be set back under the undercroft. In response to Members, the speakers explained that there had been a number of serious crimes recently within the development and incidences of dangerous driving in the square so the gates were required to prevent this. Other alternatives had been tried, for example additional security, but this had not been effective. Bollards would be unsightly.
Jane Jin (Planning Officer) gave a presentation on the scheme, describing the site location, the location of and nature of the proposed gates in the undercroft of the main vehicle access of the development. She also described views of the open space beyond.
It was considered that the installation of the gates would restrict access to the canalside walkway and the Limehouse Cut and the movement of people through the site generally. This would be contrary to the planning permission for the site that stated that the gates were to be permanently removed to allow such access and the wider planned approach to provide links throughout the wider area.
It was noted that access to the canal side walkway through one of the buildings, required by the permission, had not been provided as shown on the submitted plans. The Enforcement Team were investigating the breach in planning permissions in relation to this matter and the status of the existing gates south of the proposed gates.
However, the Committee needed to consider the applications for gates in this location in the context of the permissions for the site as approved with the obligations for unrestricted public access between Caspian Wharf and the Canal and the continuation of this route through Caspian Wharf and the residential scheme proposed on the adjoining site at Bow Enterprise Park
The Committee decision on this application would be a material consideration in considering other retrospective applications in relation to gates on this site.
Careful consideration had been given to the concerns about crime. However it was found that the crime rates per property for the development were lower than those for the Bromley by Bow Ward from 2011 data.
The proposed gate would also be an unsightly addition to the public realm
In view of the issues, Officers were recommending that the scheme was refused.
Members sought clarity on the planning policy regarding the installation of gates, the access routes to the canal and the importance of such routes and the enforcement investigation in respect of the canal side walk way restricting access to the canal. Confirmation was also sought that the building in its place was a storage unit as shown on the submitted maps.
Members also asked about the comments of the Crime and Prevention Officer in the report that stated that the gates would reduce crime and noted the strength of local feeling supporting the gates to improve security.
In response, Officers stressed the need to consider the broader material issues such as the impact on permeability, visual appearance along with the crime levels. Whilst careful consideration had been given to the crime rates, it was felt that, given that the crime rates were relatively low and the planning history to provide access through the site, that on balance, this should be given more weight.
The scheme conflicted with policy due to the impact on permeability amongst other issues rather than because it sought to install gates. The planning policy was not opposed to this in principle. The proposal would also impact on access via the Bow Enterprise Park by creating a cul-de-sac at the end of that route at an inconvenience to users. It was Council Policy to create public footpaths along the blue ribbon network as part of developments where possible.
Officers expressed caution about deferring the application pending the conclusion of enforcement action as this might significantly delay the determination of this application. Members should consider the application on its planning merits.
Members then made a number comments about the application.
It was felt that should the enforcement action be successful (to remove the unlawful barriers), then the proposal would restrict access to the Canal and movement around the site contrary to the Planning Permission for the site. However, should the enforcement action not be successful, the proposed gates might not necessary hinder public access to the site any more than present. It was also felt that the residents would benefit from action to reduce crime on the development especially in view of the potential for crime from congregation from under the under croft. Community safety was clearly an issue for residents
In view of these issues, Members requested to receive more information on the enforcement action to make an informed decision, including information on the current use of the storage building in place of the canal side walk way as shown on the submitted maps
Accordingly, Councillor Sirajul Islam moved a proposal to defer the item seconded by Councillor Marc Francis for the reasons set out below.
On a vote six in favour of this proposal and one against, the Committee RESOLVED:
That planning permission at Former Caspian Works and Lewis House, 55-57 Violet Road, London (PA/14/01762 and PA/14/02059) be DEFERRED for erection of entry gates at the main vehicular access fronting Violet Road.
The Committee were minded to defer the application for further information on the enforcement action and investigation in respect of the canal side access and the unlawful gates in the development and also for consultation with the applicant about other alternatives measures to minimise anti-social behaviour within the Caspian Wharf development site.
In accordance with Development Procedural Rules, the application was DEFERRED to enable Officers to prepare a supplementary report to a future meeting of the Committee about the above matter
Supporting documents: