Kanda Consulting reposted this
Tower Hamlets Planning Following last week surprise refusal, by the Development Committee, of the proposals for Montgomery Square, in Canary Wharf, the Strategic Development Committee in Tower Hamlets took their opportunity to embrace the chaos on Wednesday evening. Despite the committee failing to be broadcast live via the council's webcast service, something that is likely to be raised as an issue, the committee made decisions on two major schemes. Following the resignation of two Aspire councillors last week the committee also did not see a change of members ahead of Wednesday night. The membership of the committee, which should have changed to reflect the new political makeup of the council, appears to have remained in its previous state. This gave Aspire a majority on the committee which they used to push both applications through. The Harbour Exchange scheme, which has already been deferred twice, was approved by members with little discussion. The points raised at previous committees on the scheme, around family sized homes, were not touched on. Members appeared to just nod through the unchanged scheme, which does raise questions regarding the original deferrals. The Life Science development in Whitechapel proved more contentious. Having also been deferred once already the application was expected to face some scrutiny. It what appears to be a highly staged managed process the Aspire members made two changes to the application. Firstly, removing the word "womens" from the £2.5m contribution to women's health projects attached to the application. In a borough where women's life expectancy is 7.5 years less than men, against a London wide trend of women living 1.2 years longer than men, this is a shocking decision by the committee. It will add fuel to the fire around the issue of the Aspire group having no female representation among their councillors. More critically from a planning perspective, Aspire members of the committee add a section 106 commitment that changed an affordable workspace contribution to an affordable housing contribution. The condition was explicitly referenced in the heads of terms before the vote on the item in what, could arguably, appear to be a coordinated move by members. Though the item passed this will almost certainly need to be dealt with, possibly by returning to committee, before the scheme can move ahead. While these kinds of moves are not surprising in Tower Hamlets planning committees the lack of intervention by officers, including the legal officer was surprising. It raises serious questions regarding the knowledge of members but also the position officers now find themselves in regarding advising the planning committee. With the Best Value report due to be published, despite legal challenge, its likely the behaviour of committees in the borough will feature in the inspectors commentary to the Secretary of State.