295 replies to this topic

[RetiredMember2]

Lest we forget:

KICC has acknowledged the harm their proposed new uses and increased capacity numbers will have on the area. In December 2009 KICC's agent, in summing at the Bromley Planning Committee, said “It is worth noting the unrestricted nature of the permitted use could mean that the site is used more intensively i.e. additional seating and standing capacity introduced so that the building could hold numbers way in excess of the current 1150 capacity limit without any need for planning permission. It could also be used for other permitted uses including a dance hall, concert venue etc all uses with the potential to cause significant noise/disturbance and parking problems in the local area.”

Despite that ominous statement the application was refused on the following grounds:
1) The application to turn the only D2 venue into the 18th D1 building went against town centre policies for a mix of uses essential for maintaining the vitality and vibrancy of the district centre.
2) The volume of traffic and parking from proposed congregations of 500 people would have a damaging effect upon the area. The fact the venue has no parking would mean that KICC would rely on the availability of space on the surrounding residential roads and town centre shoppers' car park for its patrons.

So the council has acknowledged that an audience of 500 in a venue that relies on on-street parking for it's patrons would have a damaging effect on the area and KICC have acknowledged that an audience of 1150 would cause significant damage to the area.

Now we are (?)weeks away from KICC's new religious charity The Open Door operating what looks like a programme of mainly D1 events to maximum capacity audiences. The old layout with bingo tables greatly reduced the building's capacity but these were removed during the first stage of works and from the pics I've seen it is clear KICC has done exactly what it's agent threatened in Dec 2009 and introduced " additional seating and standing capacity introduced so that the building could hold numbers way in excess of the current 1150 capacity limit"

This year, there have been conflicting statements coming from KICC regards the intended uses for 25 CR, but those mentioned have included relgious services, Christian concerts, theatre, bookshop, offices, cafe, family friendly flims (sic) chosen by a pastor and hall hire.

Out of that bunch only the film screenings are D2, the rest are D1 and the theatre aspect is without use class.Until KICC reveals it's programme of operation it is impossible for individuals or groups or indeed Bromley Council to be able to challenge any unlawful proposal. I understand that KICC, through their agent, has said it will be operating The Open Door within the D2 use class. The proposals so far are not.

It seems strange that a Christian charity, having accepted that certain uses of 25 CR have "potential to cause significant noise/disturbance and parking problems in the local area.”has incorporated those same uses for this proposed new Christian entertainment emporium.

[charlie]

It is shocking frankly! Especially as in the run up to the December 2009 planning committee, Hyder Consulting (transport consultants) on behalf of KICC, in response to Bromley’s concerns regarding parking, traffic and pedestrian safety with regard to a proposed audience of 500, accepted that:

“the permitted uses without restrictions on capacity could give rise to much more onerous pedestrian conditions than those proposed.”

Hyder also reiterated that:

“ the building can be put to another use without the need for planning permission .......... with potential for significant parking and trip generation. Also certain uses could attract a lot of people (and cars) from outside the area especially if it is a concert venue like Brixton Academy.

If the site’s current lawful use is operated to its full capacity (which could be well in excess of the existing 1150 seating capacity as there is plenty of standing area and/or to cater for 2-3,000 people if all of the seats are removed) this would generate far higher levels of traffic and car parking demand than this proposal....”

It will be interesting to see if KICC proposes a restriction on capacity when it applies for its premises/entertainment licence.

[RetiredMember2]

In Spetember 2010 KICC submitted a planning application to Thurrock Council for a mixed use site. http://www.thurrockt...mp/656-9278.pdf

This is what it is being proposed for 25 CR yet an application for a mixed use site is not forthcoming.

Here's how KICC explains it's intentions for the Thurrock site:

Therefore, the primary uses which KICC consider to be essential to its needs are:
An auditorium capable of accommodating up to 3,500 KICC congregants for group worship;
A space for children and the youth to accommodate a range of activities;
Office floorspace for the administrative offices, counselling rooms and media/recording studios;

and check this out car parking is essential to facilitate use.

Essential ancillary facilities including a bookshop, food and drink facilities, car parking spaces.

This application includes a 500 space car park.

Then we get back to the nitty gritty, KICC's vision is not to become a D2 service provider. KICC's vision is as stated by KICC:

3.26 the continued support of its community and the spreading of its Christian message to as many people as possible...KICC views growth in the spread of its message achieved through the many activities and functions it carries out and new churches being established in the UK.

On p14 4.5 KICC quote PPS4 to support this app. Not sure how it can square PPS4 with the plan for 25 Church Road to attract an audience from such a wide catchment area, M25 and beyond therefore increasing the need to travel especially by car.

PPS4: Planning for Sustainable Economic Growth (December 2009) reiterates the comments made in PPS1 and seeks to deliver more sustainable patterns of development, reduce the need to travel, especially by car.

The KICC travel plan is a hoot http://www.thurrockt...mp/656-9280.pdf

check out the number fun:

If it is assumed that each motor vehicle travelling to the site on the two maximum attendance event days has 3 person which would equate to 1,500 of the maximum attendance and if the public transport provision detailed above is supplemented by the proposed shuttle bus and coach service then it is deemed that on event days approximately 3,500 of the 5,000 visitors could travel to the site by public transport and by foot if it is assumed that 1,500 members travel by motor vehicle which equates to 500 cars each with three passengers. Absolutely nothing to substantiate those figures whatsoever not to mention the defiance of all logic and existing data that records a 70% car use across KICC congregatnts nothing to substantiate those figures...

Fortunately the Highways Industry took saw through that charade see http://www.thurrockt...p/656-10615.pdf

and so did Pollution Control http://www.thurrockt...mp/656-9902.pdf

The Thurrock application was withdrawn 2 months ago.

Now I get why the KICC HQ is called Land of Wonders, the inconsistencies and misleading data in this application are minor compared to the smoke and mirrors of the CP app.

[Summit Lover]

Has anyone ever managed to dislodge KICC or its ilk from any property they have appropriated?

[CPAndy]

Has anyone ever managed to dislodge KICC or its ilk from any property they have appropriated?

Only the Olympic Authority it seems. At least we haven't got this http://news.bbc.co.u...don/7244798.stm (I know it;'s old) I noticed the refusal was based on traffic again.

Might have a go at this religious thing myself http://www.themonast...tion=ordination looks like a pathway to riches

[Norwood lad]

If you haven't had a chance to look at the three applications here is the link.

http://planning.brom...ction=firstPage


One refers to putting up a 20ft by about 9.5ft billboard on the side of the building and think it will in no way be detrimental to the Church Rd conservation area. Funnily enough in the section where you are supposed to go into detail about advertisements etc there is nothing but a line through it. Considering Bromley took action through the courts over the massive billboard that used to be outside the G&G I wonder why KICC think this wont be a problem.

Another application is for signage and changes to the entrance. Basically rip out the original entrance and put in huge plate glass windows and doors.














Throughout the documents it is mentioned the building ceased to open in June 2008 not 2009 .
Constantly the planning consultant refers to the area as having a 'sharp urban edge' whatever that is supposed to mean therefore any chances billboards etc KICC will make will not harm the conservation area as it has this 'sharp urban edge'.
Classy indeed.

What really gets me goat is looking at the docs and the recent pictures from inside 25CR its pretty clear they have done exactly ( and more so) what Bromley refused them in the original application.

There really needs to be a mass of local objections to these new applications.

[Fang]

It is essential that as many people as possible voice their objections to these proposals. The arrogance of the KICC is breath- taking.

[RetiredMember2]

The first document of this app, it's full of gems. Mr Oteng, KICC's agent, paints a grim picture of the area; dense residential flats, hard urban edge. Mr Oteng goes on to remark that CP "is no suburban idyl" and claims that KICC proposals will soften that edge. That is an offensive and isolated view and not one that the authorities hold, hence the CA status.

Urban, suburban and rual areas are not awarded CA status unless they're considerd to be places of character, interest and archetectural merit. The entire proposal as well as two of these latest apps contravenes CA status on many levels. And, yes, the usual developer guff has already been played by this lot ie our proposal will regenerate this depressing, run-down backwater of a hicksville....Zzzzzzzzzz

In other correspondence I have seen Mr Oteng refuses to give details of his client's intended new and intensified uses for 25CR other than to say they will be D2.

Interestingly, a bit of digging revealed that this agent's company has never filed accounts with Companies House and that the website address so proudly proclaimed at the foot of his letter, on every page, is 'not of this world'. Well Google certainly has never heard of it, and the domain name system in the UK, governed by Nominet (for .co.uk domains), hasn't either. "No match for "developmentplanningconsultancy.co.uk". This domain name has not been registered. Hmmm, not suprising that the agent's submission is also misleading and inaccurate.

Here's the link NL posted earlier http://planning.brom...ction=firstPage. It is vital we all submit obejctions. The app to rip out the existing doorways and fenestration pattern, making a mssive big hole in the forntage of the building destroys the orginal symmetry of the building. The new materials and design contrast and conflicts with the building's frontage and histrorical design negatively impacting upon and detracting from the UN CA. The reasons given for destroying the building's frontage, to create more light for the foyer, do not balance the negative impact this proposal would have on the UNCA.

The app for the massive advertising board, 10x9.5ft, set high up on the flank wall of the building is inappropriate for the mostly residential character of this part of the CRCA. It sits opposite residential homes and is proposed to be set so high that it will inturde into the lives of those living opposite. The agent has declined to give details of the nature of the adverts. Advertising boards of this size are inappropriate for a CA, detract from the character and appearance of CR and should not be approved.

Here's link to Brmley's UDP, it offers a pick and mix of planning policies to support objections. Go crazy! http://www.bromley.g...ritten/cpt6.htm

[CPAndy]

The links above to the planning department seem to be down I hope it's the sheer weight of objections and not something more sinister like if "we take down the applications no one can object to them". Or am I just being paranoid.

[whydelilah]

If you do a search for 25 Church Road you can access them.

[Sylvester]

They're still down but will keep checking as I will definitely object in no uncertain terms. We cannot have these people running roughshod over us and our neighbourhood.

Their leader Pastor Ashimolowo is listed as one of the Forbes Five Richest Pastors in Nigeria but declined to agree with their estimate of his assets http://www.forbes.co...ors-in-nigeria/ (sorry if this link has been posted elsewhere).

[CPAndy]

As whydelilah says they are available if you do a search I have put one objection to one proposal so far. Interesting information on the agent is that he says his address is Advocate House 2ATalgarth Walk NW9 implying he has his business in an advocates or other solicitor building but I looked the address up on googlemaps using street level and it's a residential street and no Advocate House comes up in any searches or even actually 2A on the post office postcode finder though I have lived an A address before and it didn't come up either but I suspect this is a flat which he operates out of and the Advocate House doesn't exist but looks good on letters.

[Palacegirl]

it is in fact : Development Planning Consultancy Advocate House 2a Talgarth Walk London NW9 7HW (as per google)

[RetiredMember1]

Oops! Bet Mr Oteng won't be happy about his mobile number and email address being inadvertently revealed to all and sundry in the document for the billboard application!

I'm being really dim, I expect, but I can't see where to object. I can see where to make a public comment, and note that 4 people have used this facility, but I can't read them and would like to make mine non-publicly - how do I do that?

Edited by GillW, 01 September 2011 - 09:06 PM.

[charlie]

Evening All,

The Crystal Palace Triangle Planning Group and the Picture Palace Campaign will be posting reasons for objecting to the applications both on conformity with planning policy and "other" grounds. As part of your objection, we would like you to highlight certain issues to ensure they remain high on the planners' and politicians' agendas.

We would be really grateful if you could also copy your objections to both Croydon and Lambeth councils' planning departments plus your local ward councillors, GLA members and MPs.

Please could you also send the planning group a copy of your objection to: mailtocptpg@gmail.com

Please feel free to contact us if you want more information or pm or phone me directly.

Many thanks,

More details to follow on Monday/Tuesday.

Edited by charlie, 01 September 2011 - 11:23 PM.