Continuing today’s theme of the opacity of the Wapping Lido planning application we are publishing a letter from a resident who lives right next to Shadwell Basin who has not – repeat not – received the letter from the Council relating to the meeting on 9th August.
If someone whose home literally overlooks the Basin has not received a letter it seems improbable that the 679 letters were delivered properly.
No letter means no way to express views. So LW is publishing this instead. Over to you Dear Resident!
Residents comments on Wapping Lido proposal
“I went along to one of the original consultations about 18 months ago. The people, including John [Aldenton of The Turks Head Company] were all very falsely friendly when you went in but as soon as you say you don’t agree with the lido they can’t get you out of there soon enough.
They are rude and have no consideration for the area. They just want to line their pockets.
The fact that letters HAVE NOT been distributed for 9th August is of no surprise to me.
These people who are planning these lido building works do not see the land and water they will be disturbing everyday. I do. I’ve lived here for three & a half years and enjoy this land as it is in all seasons.
I believe the lido is a bad idea for a number of reasons:
Currently there is a family of moorhens & a family of Egyptian geese living in this space. They have built nests along the water way where the lido is planned. Every year a nest or two is built along there.
If the lido went ahead it would destroy their homes and drive wildlife away from the area.
The trees surrounding the land are also full of birds – the area is currently peaceful and you can hear them singing all the time.
There are a lot of trees on the piece of land the 2/3 storey building is proposed for. After the loss of trees in nearby King Edward memorial park (KEMP) this will be a further loss of trees in a close area. This will also affect wildlife (as above).
Further, the land at present is historic and aesthetically pleasing not only to those who live here but to visitors too.
The lido and building would be an eyesore.
3. Traffic implications
Wapping has narrow cobble lined streets. At present traffic can already be a problem when cars are parked on both sides of the road and buses are trying to pass.
The building of a lido would increase building works traffic in the first instance but then also increase traffic going forward from those using the lido.
Add the building works traffic onto other planned building works one way from KEMP and the other from King Henry wharves and Wapping will turn into a car park with cars and buses struggling to get through.
4. Loss of public space
The space (especially where the 2/3 storey building is proposed) is used by dog walkers, children, parents and those living in the area who do not have any outside space.
Wapping is mainly residential flats so it’s nice to have a free space to go to outside which is not on a road or near anything other than the water. It is used constantly by people and this would be a loss. The lido would cost to enter so the free space will be gone.
This area is very quiet and peaceful. This is one of the reasons wildlife are attracted to it.
The building of the lido would initially cause noise and then afterwards the area would be filled by those using the lido.
It would completely change it from being a tranquil historic place to a built up noisy activity park.
6. Swimming pool
There is already a council swimming pool [St. Georges] only 0.3 miles away. I feel the proposed Wapping lido is only being built to make money by ruining an area, not to provide swimming services.”
Ouch! Strong stuff. But exactly in line with other comments residents have made to us. In particular the negative comments about the consultation should be taken very seriously indeed by the Council’s planning committee.
We could not attend the Wapping Lido consultations but several people who did attend recounted the same story as recounted above.
Lots of love and attention from The Turks Head Company people when they turned up which instantly turned into contempt when they expressed views contrary to the Planning Application or indeed had the temerity to ask any questions at all.
This contempt for the views of others is nothing new. In a tweet this morning this resident reminds us that the attitude of The Turks Head Company has not changed since 2015.
“I tried attending their 1st ‘consultation’ twice in 2015. None was there to ‘consult’, been fed lots of nonsense when [I] enquired why”
Our understanding is that planning consent is conditional on a proper consultation process being undertaken. It is clear it has not. Therefore application PA/16/01978 should be refused on these grounds alone.