Planning alert - Brick Lane/Hanbury Street

[Sandy McCreery]

Dear all,

I've just heard that an application has gone in again for a huge 67 bedroom hotel at 45 - 47 Hanbury Street, just off Brick Lane. It will be a six storey building (seven with the lift motor room projecting above), and in my opinion will be completely out of scale with its surroundings. It is in a conservation area.

We only have until 7th February to make our opinions known. Please forward to anyone you think should be aware of this application.

Details of the application can be found here: http://194.201.98.213/WAM/showCaseFile.do;jsessionid=DDB4865AC953E4333F1001CB7CD8965F?action=show&appType=Planning&appNumber=PA/10/1617

Just a bit of history:
Planning permission and conservation area consent were granted for a 36 bedroom hotel in 2003. They have started the work, so those permissions still apply. Details are here: http://194.201.98.213/WAM/showCaseFile.do;jsessionid=DDB4865AC953E4333F1001CB7CD8965F?action=show&appType=Planning&appNumber=PA/03/1008

They have instead tried to put a behemoth on the site on several occasions, but the application has always been withdrawn (presumably on the advice of planning officers). One example is here (but I also remember a more recent 72 bedroom submission):
http://194.201.98.213/WAM/showCaseFile.do;jsessionid=DDB4865AC953E4333F1001CB7CD8965F?action=show&appType=Planning&appNumber=PA/02/1825

Sorry for sounding conspiratorial, but my understanding is that the developer financed the campaign of the new directly-elected mayor. It may take more effort to influence matters now.

And a couple of observations:
The 'visualisations' accompanying the application are misleading (intentionally?). They make it appear that a 6/7 storey building will be a similar height to the adjoining 3 storey building.

The proposed building is also shown rising above the roof line of 49 Hanbury Street. The roof of 49 Hanbury Street reached that height because an additional storey was erected without planning permission in 2006 (retrospective permission was later granted, largely because Tower Hamlets do not have any enforcement officers to commence proceedings regarding offending structures). The same developer is behind the adjoining hotel.

[William MacCormac]

Are the plans/drawings online?

2 yrs ago the developer started work without building control consent or a party wall agreement. There was a not very subtle attempt to 'warn me off'.. I then organised a meeting with council and developer/architect/engineer etc and got my dad (local architect) to pop over and look at the plans - he took one look and saw a structural problem and other issues, then asked the engineer if he had liability insurance etc and then it all went quiet until now

 

altho I still have a huge hole behind my house and no footings

W

--
WMd studio

12 Woodseer Street
Spitalfields
London
E1 5HD
United Kingdom

M +44 (0)7899 767195
T  +44 (0)20 7392 8975
wi...@wmdlondon.com
www.wmdlondon.com

[Sandy McCreery]

Yes, they're online. They do not appear to have been drawn by qualified professionals.

Perhaps your dad could have a look at them again?

[William MacCormac]

MIDI : Design & Build Ltd. 
38 Chester Road
Essex IG3 8PR
T:  +44 [0]208 597 7434
M: +44 [0]778 624 4205
E:  in...@m-i-d-i.co.uk

Ok,  will contact the company directly and request a meeting. It might be an idea to contact the previous architects.. I will see if I can find out their details.

[Sandy McCreery]

Incidentally I've been corrected regarding my conspiracy theory. I confused the two 'Restaurant Kings' of Brick Lane -  Azmal Hussain who wants to build the hotel, and Shiraj Haque who backed Lutfur Rahman the mayor. Apparently they're fierce rivals!

On 2 Feb 2011, at 15:12, William MacCormac wrote:

[William MacCormac]

Azmal Hussain was Respect Party treasurer... but the story is he was at college with Lutfur and they are firm friends 

Ask councillor Abbas about it.

[Lucy Rogers]

Planning decisions are not the business of the elected mayor as the planning system is quasi-judicial. If any committee member is shown to have been unduly influenced by anything other than planning considerations then it can be challenged in law. Of course we know that committee members often get a 'steer' from 'above' (eg 32-42 Bethnal Green Road with its connection to Rich Mix funding). The aim should be to get the evidence to prove it.

If anything the majority Labour members on the development committee, many of whom are against Mayor Rahman, would now be less likely to follow orders from 'above'. Labour still forms the majority in the council but the Mayor's 'party members' (the Labour councillors who chose to join his cabinet) are far fewer, see here:

http://moderngov.towerhamlets.gov.uk/mgCommitteeDetails.aspx?ID=320

Current Development Committee members:

http://moderngov.towerhamlets.gov.uk/mgCommitteeDetails.aspx?ID=312

• Councillor Carli Harper-Penman  (Chair)  LAB
• Councillor Judith Gardiner  (Vice-Chair)  LAB
• Councillor Peter Golds  CON  
• Councillor Ann Jackson  LAB  
• Councillor Mohammed Abdul Mukit MBE  LAB  
• Councillor Kosru Uddin   LAB
• Councillor Stephanie Eaton   LIB DEM
• Councillor Tim Archer  (Deputy) CON
• Councillor Shafiqul Haque  (Deputy)  
• Councillor Dr. Emma Jones  (Deputy)  CON
• Councillor Gloria Thienel  (Deputy)  CON

Lucy

[Sandy McCreery]

Thanks for that advice Lucy, which is good to know. I generally hate conspiracy theories, and it seems that in this instance I was thinking in an overly-conspiratorial manner!

[Lucy Rogers]

Always very important to think conspiratorially ! And to try to get evidence. It's just that in this case the conspiracy might work in favour of anti-hotel people, but who knows.