An extraordinary meeting of Tower Hamlets Council’ strategic development committee considered the applications this week.
However, the decision will be made by the secretary of state for housing and planning, Angela Rayner, after she called it in on 14th October 2024.
The committee rejected the application due to concerns over the impact on resident and tourist safety, heritage, police resources and highway safety given the congested nature of the area.
Rayner has been keen to be seen as “a builder not a blocker” and generally prefers it when local councils approve planning applications that come before them, rather than stand in the way of development, as she sees it.
For the Chinese embassy plan, a local inquiry will take place to determine planning and listed building applications. This is expected to start in the last week of January. Tower Hamlets Council’s decision will be considered as part of the local Inquiry.
A Tower Hamlets Council spokesperson said: “The strategic development committee considered the planning and listed building consent applications for the redevelopment of the Royal Mint Court complex to provide a new home for the Chinese Embassy last night.
“A range of concerns were discussed at committee, raised by objectors, ward members and members of the committee. The committee resolved to reject the application due to concerns over the impact on resident and tourist safety, heritage, police resources and highway safety given the congested nature of the area.”
The current planning application was submitted by the Chinese embassy in London on 16th July 2024. A separate listed building consent application was submitted on the same date in relation to works to the listed buildings and structures on the former Royal Mint site, in connection with the sought redevelopment of the site to serve as an embassy.
In December 2022, Tower Hamlets resolved to refuse an identical application for the redevelopment of the site to make for a new embassy. The planning application had four reasons of refusal in relation to: (1) adverse impacts on safety and security which would place increased strain on local police resources; (2) adverse impacts on local tourists due to concerns over the effect of protests, acts of terrorism; (3) increased congestion of the local highway network in relation to vehicular activity and pedestrian flow, due to potential protests and events, taking into consideration the existing busy and congested nature of the site; (4) adverse impacts on heritage asset.
