Wednesday, 30 June 2010

MERA comments on Site Remediation Application (and more news!)

Below you can find the summary of our comments in the covering letter to Mile End Residents Assocation's formal and detailed written response to PA/10/01093 - Approval of Details - Site Remediation (ref the planning conditions relating to the permitted development on the Eric & Treby Estate ref: PA/09/2065)
We are becoming more and more concerned about what appears to be a sloppy approach to the developments of both plans to discharge the planning conditions and site practices.

There are a number of problems with these proposals

Scheme Proposals for investigation and remediation of site contamination are incomplete - they completely ignore site 10.  On this basis alone we feel the Scheme should be refused, revised and resubmitted.

However other concerns include:
  • Site 3 has been "completed" and reopened without the recommended remediation works (ie no excavation of soil to an appropriate depth prior to replacement). 
  • The management of the Eric & Treby site also failed to inform other relevant agencies about the fact that Site 3 was being assessed for site contamination - contrary to recommended practice
  • Decontamination arrangements take no account of the dispersed nature of the various sites of soft landscaping where remedial works are required and make no provision for the protection of the public as the workers walk in their protective clothing across the estate to the area where they can clean up!
  • The traffic management plan is incorrect
  • Details of how noise will be suppressed are not as detailed as in the Construction Managament Plan
Please note that we are using our website, ( blog ( and Flickr account ( for updates, comments and photographic records for the duration of the contract. 

At present, we are noting almost daily breaches of acceptable practice for site management.  We will be seeking enforcement action in the near future if practices are not remedied immediately.
We now wait to hear what is the response from Tower Hamlets Planning

Site 2: Excavation of contaminated soil

However we did think it might be sensible to include a couple of examples of what we mean by sloppy practices.

Excavation of contamined soil on Site 2 (behind Coniston House)
BEFORE this is a permitted development
photo copyright MERA - some rights reserved.

Just a few problems with the work to this contaminated site between Tony Cannell Mews and Coniston House!
  • soil has been excavated BEFORE this development has been permitted by Tower Hamlets Council.  Our response above is to the formal consultation on the proposed site remediation scheme scheme for dealing with the site contamination.  Until this has been agreed there can be no works on site as per the original planning permission.
  • It looks like somebody forgot to read the report from Herts and Essex Site Investigations.  They observed that the whole site is contaminated and that the soil under areas of soft landscaping need to be excavated to the recommended depth of 0.5 metres (20 inches.  The excavation did not reach the required depth of 20 inches before they started patting it down.  We estimate they have maybe excavated 5 inches - just 25% of what is required.
  • This is a contaminated site and yet there has been no communication with the residents round about.  Unsurprisingly they are very unhappy about being kept in the dark about what's going on.
  • We could see no hazard warnings or protective practices in evidence during the process of exposing this contaminated site.

One of the requirements of the Site Remediation Scheme is that all excavation should be evidenced by photographs being taken of the measured depth of the excavation

Just in case they forgot we thought we'd help out by taking a photograph for them!  We'll be forwarding this to planning with a link to this blog post as evidence of yet another breach of planning permission/conditions.  The kerb stones provide a neat scale for indicating depth.

The trucks which have been on site have been engaged in all sorts of dangerous driving practices in addition to ignoring the Traffic Access Plan - which has yet to be approved.  This is what one of the MERA committee members  observed yesterday.
Followed a construction truck out of Hamlets Way into Burdett Road this morning. I turn left down Bow Common Lane, and he was waiting in the right hand lane at the traffic lights, which is for straight on. He then decided he wanted to turn left, didn't pay any attention to me and cut me up, nearly crashing into my car despite my very angry horn honking!!! It was really dangerous and quite frightening too... he either didn't know I was there or didn't care! He then parked on Bow Common Lane near the bridge, which is also dangerous, as it is difficult to see oncoming cars when overtaking. Hopefully this is not an omen for the future!
Response from the Head of Development Control

In yesterday's blog post - Eric & Treby Site Traffic "out of control" - we said we were going to be asking Stephen Irvine "What exactly is the point of planning conditions if they are ignored and flouted on a daily basis? "

Mark Taylor, Chair of Mile End Residents Association, wrote to Mr Irvine yesterday asking that question and highlighting the issues we are concerned about.

We're very pleased to report that we received a very prompt, detailed and constructive response from Mr Irvine.  We look forward to the follow up action which was promised in the letter.

More on this topic will be posted - watch this space!  (Meanwhile we'll keep watching the estate and construction site!)

If you want to be kept updated why not subscribe - you can do this by clicking the link under the map and near the top of the right hand column and you will automatically receive an email copy of each blog post.

No comments:

Post a Comment

We welcome comments however please note:
* All comments are MODERATED prior to publication (which means they are unlikely to be published straight away)
* Spam is NEVER published


Related Posts with Thumbnails