Skylines Village development rejected by planning committee
A plan of the Skylines Village development - Credit: Archant
The “Skylines Village” development which would bring more than 700 homes to the Isle of Dogs has been thrown out by Tower Hamlets Council’s planning committee.
It would have included a 50 storey skyscraper, among a host of smaller buildings in the Limeharbour and Marsh Wall area.
Planning chiefs had demanded developers pour more than £6 million into improvements to the local infrastructure to help cope with the extra strain.
But councillors sitting on the Strategic Development Committee rejected the plans, in the wake of fierce local opposition to more development on the Isle.
Cllr for Blackwall and Cubitt Town Peter Golds is among those who campaigned against the plans.
You may also want to watch:
“We just cannot deal with this”, he said. “I am not anti-development, but things need to be imaginative and on scale.”
The development would have incorporated 764 new homes, including more than 250 allocated as affordable housing.
Most Read
- 1 Fury as family homes vanish when Isle of Dogs landlord converts to bedsits
- 2 Man sentenced after teenage boy groomed on Snapchat to sell heroin
- 3 Two men arrested after police officers assaulted in Limehouse rave
- 4 'Racist consultation' protest rejected on Tower Hamlets street closures as Labour sticks to its manifesto
- 5 Police hunt after stabbing in Cable Street: One man hurt
- 6 Death of woman, 75, in Mile End fire could have been avoided
- 7 Airbnb house party violence leaves police officer with broken finger
- 8 Ethnic communities not taking up Covid jabs, Tower Hamlets Mayor warns
- 9 Covid vaccination hub opening in Westfield next week
- 10 Council fined for Alexia Walenkaki's playground death in Mile End and says sorry to family
Tower Hamlets Council’s strategic development committee cited the development’s height, density and impact on the surrounding community, as well as a lack of play space for children, as justification for refusing the application. The decision contravened the recommendations made by planning officers working on the case.
Cllr Golds also singled out the potential impact on drug services in the area.
The development was also rejected in December 2010 on the grounds that its height, scale and poor design would have am excessive impact on the surrounding area and its infrastructure.
