The Development Committee of Tower Hamlets Council met on Thursday 02 March 2023 to discuss a planning application for Tower Bridge Wharf and a roof extension at 22 Senrab Street. The committee voted to refuse the application for Tower Bridge Wharf, which sought to restrict public access to a Thames Path jetty, and to approve the application for a roof extension at 22 Senrab Street, contrary to officer recommendations.

Tower Bridge Wharf Planning Application

The committee considered a planning application for Tower Bridge Wharf, located at 84 St. Catharines Way, London E1 W1 UR, which proposed to amend an existing condition to restrict public access to a walkway and jetty to between dusk (or 7pm, whichever is later) and 6am. Officers recommended refusal of the application.

The application was made due to alleged anti-social behaviour (ASB) on the jetty, with residents of Tower Bridge Wharf supporting the restriction, citing issues such as smoking, littering, urinating, and noise. They argued that the public would still have sufficient time to enjoy the space. However, objectors, including residents from the wider Wapping area, the Turks Head Charity, the River Thames Society, and the Thames Path National Trail, argued that the proposed hours were too restrictive for those finishing work later in the day. They also raised concerns about the privatisation of public land, the negative impact on local residents' mental and physical health, and alleged over-reporting of ASB by Tower Bridge Wharf residents.

Officers presented data indicating that crime levels near Tower Bridge Wharf were not excessive compared to the borough as a whole and that restricting access would go against council and London Plan policies promoting public access to open spaces and the Thames Path. They also noted that the proposal would negatively impact the Tower of London Conservation Area by reducing evening views and would be contrary to council and Transport for London policies promoting walking and cycling routes.

During the debate, Councillor James King highlighted the importance of balancing ASB concerns with public access to open spaces and amenities, questioning the weighting of these considerations. Councillor Iqbal Hossain raised concerns about setting a precedent for restricting public access to open spaces. While officers acknowledged the difficulty in balancing these issues, they maintained their recommendation for refusal, stating that the reduction in evening access could not be mitigated.

Ultimately, the committee voted unanimously to refuse the application, aligning with the officer's recommendation.

22 Senrab Street Roof Extension

The committee also considered a planning application for a roof extension at 22 Senrab Street, E1 QE. The proposal included creating two additional bedrooms, two new roof lights, a biodiverse roof, and associated external alterations. Officers recommended refusal of the application.

The application was presented as a revised scheme following a previous refusal and dismissed appeal in 2020 for a similar roof extension. The previous refusal was based on the proposal introducing significant built form that would harm the character of the Albert Gardens Conservation Area. While the current application included modifications such as reducing the width and height of the rear dormer, adding a corner window, and reducing the surface area of PVs, officers concluded that the proposed scheme was not sufficiently different to address the previous concerns. They argued that the bulk of the extension remained materially similar and would appear out of scale with the modest host property, thus harming the conservation area.

Despite the officer's recommendation for refusal, the committee voted to approve the planning permission. Councillors cited the overwhelming support from respondents, including 24 letters of support, and the applicant's commitment to environmental features such as solar PVs, a biodiverse roof, and additional insulation. Councillor Suluk Ahmed noted that the existing properties at numbers 24 and 26 Senrab Street, which were built before the area was designated a conservation area, already had similar extensions, and he did not believe the proposed development would significantly harm the conservation area. Councillor James King also acknowledged the applicant's commitment to environmental improvements and suggested that the local plan could benefit from more specific policies regarding such developments in conservation areas. The committee's decision to approve the application was based on their assessment that the proposed extension was not unsympathetic to the character of the conservation area and that the existing extensions on neighbouring properties carried more weight in their decision-making.