Tower @ 562 Mile End Road – REJECTED! 8


 

On February 16th the Strategic Development Committee unanimously rejected the application for "Benjy Towers" on the 562 Mile End Road site - update to follow

PA/16/00943 562 Mile End Road & 1a, 1b, 1c Burdett Road

Demolition of existing buildings and construction of a mixed use development comprising part 3-storey, part 8-storey and part 15-storey building, 52 residential units, 760sqm (GIA) commercial floorspace (A1, A2 & B1), landscaping, public realm improvements, access and servicing (including 1 disabled car parking space; 107 cycle parking spaces; and associated highway works) and other associated infrastructure | 562 Mile End Road & 1a, 1b, 1c Burdett Road, London, E3

This application is expected to go to the Development Committee sometime soon. We have tried to get information from LBTH planners but they never call back

Write to:- Development & Renewal, Mulberry Place, Clove Crescent, E14 2BG or email planningandbuilding@towerhamlets.gov.uk

Please quote the application number (PA/16/00943)
and your postcode

compare_wentwoth_both-no1w580Why the height of the proposed 562 Mile End Road site should be reduced (PA/16/00943)

This proposed development is clearly significantly txxxxaller than the surrounding buildings

proposed_562_image_crop

All four corners of the junction at Mile End are low giving a sense of space. The existing buildings complement the junction. This is enhanced on the western side by the well set back green bridge. This balanced street scape would be destroyed by the proposed 15 storey block.

tall_buildings_evidence_base

Evidence Base

"The current policy approach, as set out in the Borough’s Core Strategy, is for the promotion of a hierarchy of interconnected town centres that offer a strong mix of uses, while acknowledging each town centre has distinct characteristics, role and function. However not all town centres are appropriate locations for tall buildings. Existing constraints such as heritage assets or the historic scale of development may preclude this. Areas outside of town centres are encouraged to be primarily residential or supporting uses which require lower levels of accessibility and connectivity". London Borough of Tower Hamlets Tall Buildings Evidence Base (2016)

building_heights

Town Centre Hierarchy

The LBTH Core Strategy indicates that Mile End is a Neighbourhood Centre. The Managing Development Document states in DM26 that proposals for tall buildings should be of a height and scale that is proportionate to its location within the town centre hierarchy and sensitive to the context of its surroundings.

explanatory_note

Explanatory Note

On 10 May 2016 LBTH Cabinet were asked to agree the Policy Position Statement which is intended to clarify the policy on tall building development in the Borough - more details here

The explanatory note agreed by the Mayor is to ensure that the existing Local Plan policy is being interpreted accurately, consistently and as
intended.

The Council’s Core Strategy (Policy SP10) identifies Canary Wharf and Aldgate as locations acceptable for Tall Buildings.

Tall Buildings are defined in the Core Strategy as "any building that is significantly taller than their surroundings and/or have a significant impact on the skyline".


Short video of LBTH Cabinet 10 May 2016


Ground Floor Commercial

Click image to view enlarged - Click here for full size plan


Design_&_Access_16_00943_All-44_1

Design_&_Access_16_00943_All-43_1

Design_&_Access_16_00943_All-42_1


Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

8 thoughts on “Tower @ 562 Mile End Road – REJECTED!

  • Alan Widdison

    Just another part of old London going for the sake of profit. No matter what Galliard are saying it’s for profit, end of. That facade is the one of the only remaining part of of Mile End, once it’s gone, it’s gone. It’s totally out of kilter with the area. I for one have opposed it on the grounds of the impact on the area. The whole idea of the Green Bridge is to have a nice walk without having to look at just another pile of overpriced rabbit hutches and hideous shop fronts. How about something for the community? Youth Club, Community Centre, something for older people, place of worship, indoor sports?? No…..let’s destroy Mile End for the sake of profit. Not only that Galliard/Bestzone Ltd have been a little liberal with the truth. The club on Wentworth Mews has been there for well over 30 years without any problem, this will be another part of history gone. (They forget to mention that!)

    Please don’t let them get away with it.

    • admin Post author

      Looks to be setting a dangerous precedent for the Mile End Road. CiL or 106 contribution towards an accessible underground entrance from a 7 storey building would be something I could go with – and adequate number of real affordable homes too.

    • Charles

      The regeneration will certainly modernise and lift mile end instead of destroying it. Mile end is traditionally known as an ugly, unsafe east London spot, with old and dirty council blocks and low income residents, an eyesore for many. The regeneration will bring the area back to life. If the “heritage” is old and filthy to the extent that it becomes an eyesore, it should be replaced by modern structure, which will become a greater heritage for future generations.

  • joe king

    What an eyesore and totally incongruent with the local area. It looks like one of the 1970’s carbuncles that they’re pulling down in the rest of the country. A brilliant piece of architecture that sweeps away local character for the sake of profit. Awful.

  • John Saxon Jones

    It is a great shame that the re-development would see the loss of one of the few remaining gay venues in East London. Well run and well attended venues such as Backstreet are valuable local assets.

  • Mark Aylward

    Yet another proposed ugly, faceless towerblock which demonstrates the total lack of respect for the surrounding green space and architectural heritage.

    • Charles

      If the current “heritage” is old and filthy to the extent that it becomes an eyesore and restricting future development, it should certainly be replaced by modern structure, which will become a greater heritage for future generations.