KICC GET PREMISES LICENCE – BUT CAN’T OPEN FULLY JUST YET
 
THE PENTECOSTAL CHURCH which owns the cinema building at 25 Church Road have been granted a premises licence – but they will have to wait before they can open their doors fully.
 
A licensing committee at Bromley civic centre on Tuesday morning approving the application said that before introducing any of the proposed licensable activities the church – Kingsway International Christian Centre MUST:

(a) Submit a fire risk assessment in relation to capacity of the premises and exits for all types of use, to the London Fire and Emergencies Planning Authority (LFEPA) for their approval. When approved by the LFEPA, a copy will be submitted to Bromley council as licensing authority, and

(b) Submit to the licensing authority a dispersal plan covering the exit of occupants of the premises, including persons loading and unloading supplies and equipment, for the approval of the licensing authority.

The licensing committee’s decision came after Crystal Palace residents Rosie Hunter – whose Patterson Road home backs onto the rear of the building – and Francis Bernstein along with Crystal Palace ward Cllr Angela Wilkins raised serious concerns over traffic, noise and other issues about the proposals.

Mr Adeolu Aluko, business development manager for KICC The Open Door,  told the licensing committee: “The Open Door as it is right now the premises we bought at the moment are D2 usage.

“We need an entertainments licence to carry out some of those events. “A lot of people have come in to try and use the building and one of the things that’s limiting the use of the building is the fact we don’t have an entertainments licence.

“People have to apply for a TEN (temporary event notice) with a capacity of 499. “Once I tell them we don’t have a premises licence it discourages them and they don’t want to use it any more.

“Any event we do have we will have traffic ushers looking after people parking. “We are also talking to the police about hiring cones from them so we ensure we limit people stopping.

“We are just outside a bus stop.

“We as an organisation are really ready to enhance D2 use.”We’ve had wedding receptions, a fashion show – there are so many enquiries.

“We had a comedy club who use Lewisham theatre. “They said ‘We find your building to be more beautiful and more accommodating.’ “But when we said we don’t have a premises licence at the moment and they would have to apply for a TEN they got discouraged. “This is the story so far.”

Mr Bernstein asked if sound limiters had been in force at an event he attended at 25 Church Road on February 28th. Told they were, Mr Bernstein said the event was “exceptionally loud” and well over 100 decibels.  Mr  Aluko: “It was not”

Mr Bernstein: “Why was it neighbours 20 metres away could hear what was going on?”

At this point Mr Phillips interjected and said the event was not licensable and not controlled by a licence. He told Mr Bernstein: “We haven’t set the noise level yet. “If it was as disturbing we’d never set the noise level that high.

“It’s only for amplifiers. “We can’t do anything about singing. “If we decided to control it there would be a noise a limiter and we would set it.”

Mr Bernstein said music was going on after 11am in what was a commercially-driven operation. Performers had twice gone to the mixing desk and said ‘Put up the volume’ “If there’s going to be a noise limiter it needs to be a tamper-proof one.”

Mr Aluko responding said: “Quite a lot of things Francis Bernstein has said are not true. “You seem to know more about my building and organisation than I do” but did not elaborate on this.

Rosie Hunter – described by Cllr Wilkins as “working in the events management sector and having enormous knowledge” – said that during one event she was sitting in her front room and, over someone listening to a tablet, could hear noise from the venue.

“My seven-year-old daughter could hear screaming – through double glazing” she added.

The noise limiter should be set at 90 decibels, not 94, she argued  Soundproofing should be considered as part of the licence.

Rosie Hunter said she had given some thought to reasonable conditions to limit the impact on neighbours. “I don’t want to spend the next two years coming to officers with logbooks and complaints.”

She asked for no dispersal after events via the back lane and no vehicles unloading there between 8pm and 8am.

Answering questions from Cllr Wilkins, Mr Aluko said there would be no alcohol on the premises. “If there’s some corporate event like BT directors want to come in, have a glass of wine with a meal, we don’t have a problem with that.”

Team lead licensing officer Stephen Phillips said that would need a TEN (temporary event notice) of which 12 a year up to a maximum of 21 days would be allowed. “You could do one a month or a TEN could last for seven days” he added.

Summing up Mr Aluko said they did not want to disturb the neighbours. “We’re there to make friends.

“I do understand Rosie Hunter might have some objections but I can assure you there are people there saying great things about what we’ve done . “The building is ready to be used and we’re ready to comply with any regulations imposed on us.”

Rosie Hunter said one resident who did have a conversation with KICC was not happy.

And KICC had still not responded to the letter of January 31st asking for a voluntary agreement, she added. (See: CINEMA BUILDING: RESIDENTS TELL CHURCH OWNERS TO ‘CEASE AND DESIST’ February 20th)

In a statement after the hearing Bromley council explained: “Government guidance states that licence conditions should not duplicate other statutory provisions, but to be mindful of these.

“In relation to capacity restrictions, the sub committee took the view that the LFEPA had the specialised knowledge to impose an appropriate capacity restriction if necessary and imposed a condition to this effect.

“Whilst the sub committee recognised that they were not the appropriate authority to deal with traffic and parking issues, it nevertheless felt that it would be reasonable and proportionate for a condition to be imposed enabling the licensing authority to approve a suitable dispersal plan for persons leaving the premises.

“It was confirmed that the noise team would set the noise limitation device for amplified sound at a level which they, in their professional opinion deemed appropriate and that they were the appropriate authority with powers to deal with any noise nuisance problems relating to the premises.

“The sub committee were mindful of the fact that planning issues were not matters for them to consider, but that the majority of the activities forming part of the application fell within the permitted use of the premises, and the local planning authority was the appropriate authority to consider whether the carrying out of any licensable activity formed a breach of planning control.”

The post KICC GET PREMISES LICENCE – BUT CAN’T OPEN FULLY JUST YET appeared first on News from Crystal Palace - News & stories from the fresh air suburb - Crystal Palace, London SE19.

BACKGROUND TO THE NEWS: “CRYSTAL PALACE KNOWN FOR PARKING STRESS”

PARKING IS a major concern in Crystal Palace, the hearing heard.

“Crystal Palace is known for parking stress” said Francis Bernstein. “It’s all very well saying you can drop people off in Milestone Road. “There are no public car parks.

“Each time there had been a large scale event at 25 Church Road there had been problems with traffic and parking.

“They may have to work with police. “There were major problems that night.

“Whenever a bus stops outside you’re reliant on double yellow lines to make sure cars can go past. “That road was back to back parking.”

He said a sign had been flashed up saying police were outside and people left. “50 minutes after the event a police car came up with flashing lights and had to wait until the bus moved on.

“We strongly recommend to the licensing committee a special study to understand what the impact of this licence will have for parking and transport.”

Answering questions from the three-person committee Mr Adeolu  Aluko  said the biggest event they had staged was for 900 which they held at the end of the year. “We transport them but this was our own event.”

Mr Bernstein asked where the minibuses stopped when KICC held their own event. Mr Aluko: “In Milestone Road. “For all our events so we’re all together as a family to go into the New Year together.

Mr Bernstein: “You advertise you have parking for events.”

Mr Aluko:  “No we haven’t.”

Mr Bernstein: “On your website right now. “You check: limited parking.”

Mr Aluko: “Limited parking, yes. “It doesn’t state a figure.”

Mr Bernstein: “It will be the largest event space in Bromley.”

Mr  Aluko: “Around the venue there’s free parking. “As long as people don’t park on double yellow lines or block exits you’re not breaking the law. “We have never stipulated we have parking on the premises.”

Mr Bernstein: “At the last two events you had parking blocking the exit.”  (At this point a legal officer interrupted and said the highways authority would deal with that.)

Mr Bernstein said vehicles regularly blocked the fire exits at the rear of the building. Team lead icensing officer Stephen Phillips said the fire brigade had made two visits, one during a performance, and were completely satisfied there were no issues to raise.

“The only places which needed to be kept clear were the exit routes. “It’s like saying ‘There’s a pub on the high street and there’s a delivery van parked outside.’,”

At this stage someone said: “Maybe it was someone else’s car. “How do you know it prevented people escaping the building safely?”

Mr Phillips told the hearing:”A premises fire risk assessment should ensure all spaces are clear before the public come on board. that would be a management issue. “The fire authority would address it. “The committee can’t say ‘you must keep parking spaces clear’ because the fire authority allows that.”

News From Crystal Palace understands that in at least two other London boroughs parking is a consideration when licence applications are made.

IN LAMBETH: Licensing Act 2003 Statement of Licensing Policy 2011-2014 from Lambeth

http://www.lambeth.gov.uk/sites/default/files/brl-statement-of-licensing-policy-2011-14.pdf

11.1 When considering whether any licensed activity should be permitted, the council will assess the likelihood of it causing unacceptable adverse impact, particularly on local residents, by considering all following factors and other relevant matters:

a) the type of use, the number of customers likely to attend the premises and the likely behaviour of customers at the time of the application; b) the proposed hours of operation; c) the level of public transport accessibility for customers either arriving or leaving the premises and the likely means of public or private transport that will be used by the customers; d) the means of access to the premises which should have customer entrances and exits on the principal pedestrian routes;

e) the level of likely car parking demand on surrounding residential streets and on roads forming part of the Strategic London Road Network or the London Bus Priority Network and its effect on local residents, in comparison with the existing situation; and the effect on residential parking and the movement of priority traffic; f) the cumulative effect of licensed premises in an area. In judging the effect on residents of a particular activity the Council will take into account any affect that is already occurring as a result of other licensed premises.

This consideration will apply irrespective of any special policy which may be adopted of refusing licences in certain areas because of cumulative impact; g) the scope for mitigating any impact; h) how often the activity occurs. and, in considering any application in respect of premises that are already licensed, the council will take into account any evidence: i) of past demonstrable adverse impact from the activity especially on local residents;

or j) that the activity has caused a demonstrably unacceptable level of car parking in surrounding residential streets or on roads forming part of the Strategic London Road Network or the London Bus Priority Network; and k) that, if adverse impact has been caused, appropriate measures have been agreed and put into effect by the applicant to mitigate the adverse impact.

Reasons:

d) The main impact of customers arriving, queuing and leaving should be confined to principal pedestrian routes as far as possible. It would not be appropriate, for instance, to have licensed activities which caused large numbers of people to exit into a residential area as opposed to a situation where pedestrian movement takes place directly to and from nearby public transport services.

e) Car parking by customers of licensed activities can be a serious problem. This affects local residents in terms of noise and road safety, particularly after the hours when controlled parking zones are in operation. It can also affect the movement of essential traffic on primary routes and delay bus services. When considering the possible impact on residents, the Council will look at the area within which the impact could be experienced in particular the likely distance at which most customers arriving by car would seek to park. The potential parking area for major entertainments can be substantial.

f) Licensing law is not the primary mechanism for the general control of nuisance and antisocial behaviour by individuals once they are away from the licensed premises and therefore beyond the direct control of the licensee. Nonetheless it is a key aspect of such control and will be part of a holistic approach to the management of the evening and nighttime economy. In accordance with Government advice the decisions taken by the council in respect of individual licence applications will be focused on matters within the control of individual licensees and others granted relevant permissions and the steps they can take to achieve the licensing objectives. Accordingly, these matters will centre on the premises and places being used for licensable activities and the likely impact of those activities on members of public living, working or engaged in normal activity in the area concerned.

 IN ISLINGTON: Licensing Policy 2013-2017

100. Applicants for new licences and those wishing to increase their operational hours or the capacity of their premises will need to demonstrate that due consideration has been given to arrangements for the quick, safe and quiet dispersal of customers from their venues.

The fact that car parking facilities are limited and heavily restricted should be communicated to prospective customers at every opportunity. Emphasis should be on the promotion of the use of public transport or other modes of transport.

23 Islington has one of the highest densities of licensed premises in England. As there is no delineation between residential and commercial areas, this needs careful management and may result in conflicts between the different uses.

In considering applications for new licences, variations to existing licences and licence reviews, following the receipt of relevant representations, the Licensing Authority will take the matters listed below into account.

These criteria will apply in different ways, to different types of premises and licensable activities, in the following order: • whether the premises is located in an area of cumulative impact; • whether the premises is located in an area of special interest; • the type of premises and their cumulative impact upon the area and the mix of premises in the area; • the location of the premises and character of the area; • the views of responsible authorities; • the views of interested parties; • past compliance history of current management; • the proposed hours of operation; (etc – Ed.)

The post BACKGROUND TO THE NEWS: “CRYSTAL PALACE KNOWN FOR PARKING STRESS” appeared first on News from Crystal Palace - News & stories from the fresh air suburb - Crystal Palace, London SE19.

CHURCH PLANS FOR CINEMA BUILDING THROWN OUT – AGAIN “If you put lipstick on a pig it’s still a pig” – councillor

EXCLUSIVE

KICC’s latest plans for the former Granada cinema building at 25 Church Road were thrown out by a Bromley council plans sub committee tonight (Thursday).

Councillors voted to refuse change of use to a church – this time with mixed community use –  for the reasons recommended in an officers report. And this time there were NO votes in support of KICC’s application.

Crystal Palace ward Cllr Angela Wilkins told the meeting in the council chamber that KICC wanted to park in Crystal Palace park.

“They have not had the courtesy or concern to consult with the council” she said.

And she revealed the council were about to install height barriers in the park – which would prevent minibuses getting in.

“If this is approved there will be no use by the community, no benefit to business and the best building in the area will be operated for religious purposes.

“It’s not the community’s fault the church bought the building without getting the permission they need. “Our reasons for refusal are absolutely spot-on.”

Councillors also heard from Annabel Sidney of the Crystal Palace Triangle Planning Group, Crystal Palace ward Cllr Richard Williams and, on behalf of KICC, Alistair Thornton.

Sub-committee chairrman Cllr Richard Scoates, moving the motion to refuse, said he was drawn to the reasons why the previous application (to turn the building into a church) had been refused.

“When we get a similar application come up it’s important the reasons (for refusal) have been addressed. “The loss of community use hasn’t been overcome. “The parking survey…is not as accurate as has been made out.”

Seconding the motion to refuse Cllr Simon Fawthrop said he had been on the plans sub committee which had turned down the previous application in December 2009.

Thanking residents for their comments he said: “This is a similar application to the one before. “There’s a saying that if you put lipstick on a pig, it’s still a pig.

“I said on the original application it was a pig then. “I don’t think there’s anything more to be said.”

(There wasn’t – Ed).

The post CHURCH PLANS FOR CINEMA BUILDING THROWN OUT – AGAIN “If you put lipstick on a pig it’s still a pig” – councillor appeared first on News from Crystal Palace - News & stories from the fresh air suburb - Crystal Palace, London SE19.

CHURCH PLANS FOR CINEMA BUILDING THROWN OUT – AGAIN

“If you put lipstick on a pig it’s still a pig” – councillor

The post CHURCH PLANS FOR CINEMA BUILDING THROWN OUT – AGAIN “If you put lipstick on a pig it’s still a pig” – councillor appeared first on News from Crystal Palace - News & stories from the fresh air suburb - Crystal Palace, London SE19.

‘CINEMA BUILDING COULD JUST BECOME A CHURCH’

The former Granada cinema building in Church Road, Crystal Palace could end up as just a church if an application to turn the building into a church with mixed community use is approved.

The stark warning comes in an officers’ report to Bromley council’s plans sub-committee number four which will consider the application at their meeting on Thursday (March 5th).

KICC (Kingsway International Christian Centre) want a ‘change of use’ of 25 Church Road in Crystal Palace (former Rialto cinema) to a D1* church, conference and counselling centre with D2* add-on.

The report says that “whilst it may be appropriate to attach a condition limiting the church services as proposed, it is considered that a condition limiting any activity, or operation that could be conducted within Class D1  (non-residential institutions) would not only be imprecise;

“but that it would not be reasonable, or enforceable to do so given the intended use of the building as set out in the applicants submission.

“The planning application is for a mixed use of the entire building all of the time with only a specific activity within Class D1 being suggested for limitation.

“The ramification of this approach is that the building could result in a wholly Class D1 use irrespective of any limitation of a church service at selected times on selected days.

“And this would therefore result in the loss of a Class D2 (assembly and leisure) use of the site.
 
“The applicant has stated that should permission be granted it is their intention to make the premises available to outside organisations, or groups.

“But this in itself does not result in a use as defined within Class D2.”.

The report – which recommends refusal of KICC’s application but is ultimately the decision of councillors – adds that a number of objectors have proposed a cinema for the site.

“Whilst use of the building as a cinema would fall within the existing lawful planning use it cannot be assumed that refusal of this particular planning application will result in a cinema on the site.

“The applicant has purchased the site and the application proposal must be assessed on its individual merits, with regard to all material planning considerations.

“Policy C1 states that a proposal for development or change of use that meets an identified health, education, social, faith or other needs of particular communities or areas of the borough will normally be permitted provided that it is accessible by modes of transport other than the car and accessible to the members of the community it is intended to serve.

“Planning permission will not be granted for proposals that would lead to the loss of community facilities unless it can be demonstrated that there is no longer a need for them or alternative provision is to be made in an equally accessible location.

“From the accompanying planning statement (section five) it is clear that the first use of the building will be as a place of worship falling within Class D1 with the addition of Class D2 uses ‘at those times when it is not in use for church activities’ to ensure maximum community access to the building.

The times the use would not be in Class D1 church activities is not defined.

“It is proposed to allow community use for around 70 per cent of the time while the church services will operate at the stated times on Tuesday evenings and Sunday morning, but this does not form the full extent of the Class D1 church related activity.”

The report says a number of uses are listed as evidence of examples of programmes the church will operate, some of which consist of Class D1 uses such as training and educational activities, conferences, exhibitions.

“None of the listed activities and uses are specified by frequency” it adds.

“Although the church services themselves are within Class D1 and are stated as being at selected times, the remainder of the proposed Class D1 activity is open-ended with the Class D2 activities being aspirational.

“The planning statement refers to making the building available for wider community use to ensure an element of Class D2 uses at the site in addition to the primary use as a place of worship.

“But there is no specified opening or operating times for any specific class D2 uses and no suggestion that certain parts of the building would be retained for D2 uses.

“Whilst the application presents the opportunity for mixed class D1/D2 use of the site it has to be acknowledged that it will be possible for the entire building to be used for any activity within either of those use classes for any period of time; and in light of the information provided as part of the application it would appear that the majority of activities would fall within D1 Use Class.

“It is also noted that at paragraph 3.9 of the planning statement a total of six events are listed that have taken place since 2012 and that the applicant considers fall within class D2.

“Given the lawful use of the site, this is considered to represent a highly limited utilisation of the building and contradicts the wide range of proposed class D2 activities that would be actively offered should permission be granted” the report adds.

“The delivery of a genuine benefit to the immediate local community by making the building available to outside groups (para 3.17) has not taken place despite this forming an integral part of the applicant’s submission.

“The first refusal ground of the 2009 application relates to the loss of a use within Class D2 resulting in a reduction in the range of facilities provided within the town centre detrimental to the proper functioning of the daytime and evening economy and harmful to the social, cultural and economic characteristics of the area.

“As such the current application, by offering a mixed Class D1/D2 use which on the basis of the information provided within the applicants submission could result in an operation that would fall wholly within Class D1, is not considered to have overcome this ground of refusal.

“The site is the only Class D2 facility in the centre and its loss would …. lead to a loss of a limited social infrastructure without realistic re-provision harmful to the sense of place and cohesion of the wider community.”

RECOMMENDATION: APPLICATION BE REFUSED

The reasons for refusal are:

1 The proposed development, involving the loss of an important entertainment/leisure use within Use Class D2 and the introduction of a mixed use including a place of worship within Use Class D1, would result in a reduction in the range of facilities provided within the town centre detrimental to the proper functioning of the daytime and evening economy and harmful to the social, cultural and economic characteristics of the area, thereby contrary to Policies 3.16, 2.15 and 7.1of the London Plan.

2 The nature of the activity associated with a Class D1 use such as a place of worship is likely to have a wide catchment for attendees and attract a large number of cars and other vehicles.

As a result of this and the unsatisfactory parking and drop-off arrangements proposed, the development will have a significant adverse impact on the surrounding area in terms of parking demand and highway and pedestrian safety, contrary to Policies T3, T6 and T18 of the Unitary Development Plan.

*Class D1 (Non-residential institutions) includes clinics, health centres, crèches, day nurseries, day centres, schools, art galleries, museums, libraries, halls, places of worship, church halls, law courts, conferences, exhibition halls, non-residential education and training centres.

*Class D2 (Assembly and leisure) includes cinemas, music and concert halls, bingo and dance halls (but not night clubs), swimming baths, skating rinks, gymnasiums or sports arenas (except for motor sports, or where firearms are used) and convention centres.

The post ‘CINEMA BUILDING COULD JUST BECOME A CHURCH’ appeared first on News from Crystal Palace - News & stories from the fresh air suburb - Crystal Palace, London SE19.

“NO CINEMA USE FOR MORE THAN 45 YEARS” – KICC 

 A cinema use has not occurred at 25 Church Road for more than 45 years.

“It is in this context that any objection on the basis of a loss of a leisure/entertainment use should be set” say KICC in their submission in support of their application.

Support for KICC’s plans has come in around 200 emails – many from the county of Essex*.

Comments include:

• “These activities will make our neighbourhood more active, bubbling and enjoyable
• “A cinema will attract only those that go to cinemas.” and, somewhat bizarrely,
• “The building has hardly been used since Gala Bingo vacated it in 2009.”

In their submission KICC say they will:

• provide a place of worship for local people for which there is a need
• Meet the needs of a group (the BME community) who are recognised to experience disadvantage through the land use planning system
• Maintain a community use of the building both as a place of worship and importantly, for other non-religious assembly and leisure uses (e.g. concerts, films, conferences etc.)
• Support the wider economy of Crystal Palace throughout the daytime and into the evening period by hosting activities and events (both religious and non-religious) which would attract footfall to the locality
• Allow a continued assembly and leisure use of the building consistent with adopted and emerging policy
• Not have any detrimental impact on parking demand or pedestrian safety in the vicinity of the site
• The applicants have sought to proactively engage with the local community and key political stakeholders to hear, understand and react to their previous concerns and objections to the earlier application
• that a cinema use has not occurred for in excess of 45 years from this location. It is in this context that any objection on the basis of a loss of a leisure/entertainment use should be set
• That the submitted transport assessment demonstrates the development site is well located to encourage sustainable travel patterns and will not result in a significant adverse impact on the surrounding area
• The application building was designed and built to accommodate large capacity events on a regular basis and maintains the capacity to accommodate events of up to approximately 1,100 people
• Events which fall within the lawful use of the building (i.e. D2) and which attract significant numbers of people can currently operate from the building without the need for planning consent
• The proposals deliver economic development and in doing so help, albeit it in a complementary way, to achieve a strong and responsive economy
• The proposals perform a social role through ensuring the local community has access to a range of cultural, religious and leisure activities within a fit for-purpose multi-use building
• They perform an environmental role ensuring an important attractive building is protected and enhanced for the benefit and enjoyment of future generations.

An officers report to the plans sub-committee says that in support the following representations have been received, however it is noted that of the 200 received a large number do not include a supporting comment:.

• The applicant wants to enrich the fabric of society for people in the area to empower and help the needy and hurting
• A communal location that attends to the youth can give the youth in the area something to spend their energy on
• The appearance of the street is improved with more life and activity brought to the area
• A positive impact on the well-being of the community through volunteered church events and community work
• Good transport links and will cut down on expenses travelling to central London to hire meeting halls for events
• The building has hardly been used since Gala Bingo vacated it in 2009.
•  A mixed use approval gives even greater scope for events and activities to take place in the building. This will generate much needed foot-fall in the Church Road area thus providing income opportunities for the benefit of all the local traders
• KICC Church not only has a positive spiritual impact on lives but it extends to social, physical, emotional and economic well-being of individuals, family and socially
• Will aid regeneration and drive other investment into the community
• This church will add benefit to the spiritual needs of the community
• It will bring a much needed injection of life into the community whilst also allowing the property owners to use it as they wish
• Bromley council should take into consideration the church’s track record and previous involvements in other communities, recognising this would be an opportunity to promote the multiculturalism of Britain
• Having a multi-purpose leisure centre will attract a wider range of people

THE CPTPG  (Crystal Palace Triangle Planning Group) say the majority of emails in support of KICC’s application were from Basildon, Thurrock Grays, Hornchurch, South Ockenden, Stanford le Hope, Dagenham, Hornchurch, Ilford, Waltham Cross, Rainham Havering, Brent Cross, and Brentford.

Others came from Roehampton, West Molesey, Carshalton, Epsom. Sutton, Merton, Wimbledon, Surbiton, Hammersmith, Wandsworth, Putney, Erith, Chatham, Thamesmead, Ashford Kent, Belvedere, Gravesend;

About 13 from Croydon residents including Shirley, South Croydon, Thornton Heath and Selsdon;  a  few from Streatham, Tooting, Morden, Putney

• About 12 from Bromley residents –  Orpington, Chislehurst, Beckenham but only five from one house in the locality of 25 Church Road .

The post “NO CINEMA USE FOR MORE THAN 45 YEARS” – KICC appeared first on News from Crystal Palace - News & stories from the fresh air suburb - Crystal Palace, London SE19.

“OVERWHELMING DEMAND FOR CINEMA”

There is an “overwhelming demand” for a cinema in Crystal Palace, say the Crystal Palace Triangle Planning Group in its objections to KICC’s plans.

“Planning policy clearly indicates that the loss of community facilities will not be allowed unless it can be demonstrated there is no longer a need for them.

“The applicant has not provided any evidence whatsoever to demonstrate that there is no longer a need for the existing Class D2 facility at Church Road.

“And there is no evidence whatsoever that this will ‘ensure’ any significant retained element of D2 use

“If planning permission was to be granted it is impossible to see what Bromley council could do to enforce the mix of uses.

“A place of worship is not a town centre use. “The council should be actively encouraging and planning for the provision of a cinema in the town centre.

“The best hope for 25 Church Road to be regularly used for entertainment is to retain the dedicated D2 Assembly and leisure use – there are no other D2 entertainment operators in Crystal Palace

“If the applicant’s desire was to allow for continued leisure and assembly use of the building when not in use as a place of worship, they would have proposed this as part of their original planning application in 2009

“KICC are a religious charity whose primary aim is to evangelise and advance the Christian religion.

“It is their stated aim to increase their membership and to grow. “It is their charitable duty to do so and the activities which they undertake to deliver their charitable object all fall within Class D1 use

“KICC has, first and foremost, refurbished the premises for their D1 needs not with D2 in mind

“It is our view that several of the potential uses to which the applicant’s statement refers fall within Class D1 e.g. conferences, musical conferences,graduation ceremonies, presentation evenings, business seminars, political conventions and christenings

“Class D1 conferences and business seminars are central to those activities as noted on KICC’s UK website

“KICC does not have a local congregation and there is no local need for another church

“A large proportion of attendees will be travelling significant distances and from outside of Crystal Palace’s immediate catchment

“Crystal Palace has a very diverse community which is already very well catered for through existing churches and community centres

“No explanation is given to explain why the demand for KICC in South London, Kent and Surrey and Essex cannot be met from the applicant’s churches in Hoe Street in Walthamstow and Prayer City in Chatham, Kent

“KICC are not a group set up with the aim of representing the interests of the BME (black and minority ethnic) community in general; they are dedicated to furthering and sharing their religious beliefs which are not directly related to ethnicity

“All KICC’s events are aimed at keeping the congregation in the building where free food is provided

“Members that arrive by mini-bus, will leave by mini-bus

“When members travel long distances by car, they are most likely to want to go straight home after an event.”

In their letter of objection the CPTPG also say that KICC have:

• given a “gross underestimate” of the likely frequency of large D1 events
• not given the true extent of the 25 Church Road’s catchment area for KICC’s congregants – and the consequential likelihood that attendance on a Sunday will exceed the estimated figures of 400-600 and involve much greater trip attraction by car
• failed to apply or disclose known modal split data from KICC’s operations elsewhere – but used inappropriate or inapplicable comparative data from venues operated by other churches to estimate modal split (the percentage of travellers using a particular type of transportation or number of trips using said type).

CPTPG add that outside of core church hours, 25 Church Road would largely be empty or underused.

P.S: … ORPINGTON’S GETTING A CINEMA AGAIN

News item: Work begins on Orpington’s new cinema and leisure complex by Joshua Barrie, reporter (Bromley News Shopper Wednesday 2 July 2014)

The Commodore cinema opened in 1933 and closed in 1982. Further reading:

http://www.ideal-homes.org.uk/bromley/assets/galleries/orpington/commodore-cinema

The post “OVERWHELMING DEMAND FOR CINEMA” appeared first on News from Crystal Palace - News & stories from the fresh air suburb - Crystal Palace, London SE19.

KICC CAR PARKING SURVEY ‘FUNDAMENTALLY FLAWED’

The car parking survey submitted in support of KICC’s application is fundamentally flawed in a number of material areas, says the council officers report.

No assessment has been made of the impact of the proposal at times when events are held in Crystal Palace park.

These events can attract very large crowds and require special event management strategies, which is likely to include controlling on-street parking around the park.

“This impact would extend to the capacity of public transport to accommodate the cumulative demand.

The assessment of vehicular traffic has been made by assuming the level of attendance as advised by KICC, and averaging around Sunday 400 and on Tuesdays 250.

“But it is noted that the capacity of the venue greatly exceeds this and the lower tier of the auditorium does not feature fixed seating, giving rise to the possibility of a greater attendance in addition to the other facilities and rooms within the building.

“Given that the majority of the intended congregation at Church Road will be transferred from an existing venue some eight miles away across South London, it is likely and reasonable to assume that a large proportion of attendees will be travelling significant distances from other areas and from outside of Crystal Palace’s immediate catchment.

“Concern is raised that there is insufficient parking capacity in the area and the proposed change of use will give rise to traffic congestion on the local highway network.

“The applicant has held two conference events at 25 Church Road since acquiring the building, one of which generated almost 1500 attendees which is well in excess of the figures which have been used for the purpose of the transport assessment.

“These events have resulted in congestion to the local highway network as reported by local residents and highways officers.

“Highways officers have cast doubt on the robustness of the assessment and the capacity of the venue must be taken as an expected figure of attendance.

HIGHWAYS / PARKING

The applicant states that four mini buses can be accommodated at the rear car park accessed from Milestone Road via an unmade narrow driveway, and passengers would be dropped off and picked up from the rear.

“TfL have commented that when in use, the car park blocks two fire exits and a fire assembly point.

“It is therefore not acceptable to consider this a suitable, formalised car park.

“Further to this, photos have been provided detailing dropping off taking place on Church Road disabled bays and then parked also elsewhere.

“This shows that suitable parking arrangements have not been arranged for the mini buses, a significant part of the proposal’s expected modal split.

“It is feared that this activity will continue with no proposals for the car park.

“Furthermore, the applicant has not addressed the frequency of other service vehicles using the rear driveway.

“Both rear and front access for deliveries are extremely limited and narrow rear access way, over which the residents of Milestone Road /Patterson Road have the right to pass and repass would be hindered by minibuses.

TfL (Transport for London) say the management of dropping off and picking up also raises concerns due to the expected number of visitors and percentage arriving by car.

Any traffic created is likely to affect the area given the one way and single lane strategic route as it is in close proximity and is unlikely to be successfully mitigated by unqualified marshals.

While issues identified in its current use appear to be addressed in the proposal’s transport assessment and addendum  these have not been fully mitigated to a level deemed acceptable by TfL, the report adds.

“TfL would not recommend approval given the transport issues highlighted however it should be explored by the borough and its highways department as to whether these issues can be suitably mitigated through conditions or a review process.”

The post KICC CAR PARKING SURVEY ‘FUNDAMENTALLY FLAWED’ appeared first on News from Crystal Palace - News & stories from the fresh air suburb - Crystal Palace, London SE19.

WIDE VARIETY OF OBJECTIONS TO KICC PLANS

A WIDE variety of objections are listed in the report to the council’s plans sub-committee.

In addition to a petition objecting to KICC’s latest plans organised by the Picture Palace Campaign with 6,427 signatures; 767 individual objections on postcards and a petition of objection by Church Road traders, reasons for objecting to KICC’s plans include:

• The majority of the congregation will not be Bromley residents and will travel from across London
• Church Road cannot cope with the extra traffic

• I have tried to enquire about hiring it on behalf of the Crystal Palace Brass Band and failed to receive a replyMany objections covered the wish to see a proper D2 use of the site:
• It would benefit the Crystal Palace community as a whole to restore the building to its use as a cinema
• The current lawful D2 use of the building would be far more appropriate and provide a community facility which would support Crystal Palace’s economy, vibrancy and viability throughout the day and the evening
• This location is too important to the Triangle to be thrown away. We need a large, exclusively D2 venue here
• The building ought to remain a community asset accessible to all, not just those who subscribe to KICC’s way of thinking
• The current proposal will signify the loss an important cultural meeting point for Crystal Palace which will affect every resident
• Placing a church in the middle of a vibrant “cool” area sends the wrong message to local businesses who have chosen this rundown area to start businesses that are now benefiting the area

Others are critical of KICC’s lack of involvement with the Crystal Palace community:

• The change of use from D1 (Church) to D1 (mixed) is obviously a ruse to get a church in through the back door
• Continued use by the KICC would benefit only a tiny minority, their record of allowing use by other community groups is non-existent
• I live very close to this venue and I see no indicator that this organisation have any real desire to link in with the community
• Consultation from the applicant with the community has been window dressing
• Given that the current licence for the property already allows for public gathering/entertainment, why is their door not already open?
• The six activities led by KICC between August 2012 – July 2014 made little attempt to involve or publicise these events to local residents
• KICC have failed to participate in any community events, notably the Westow Park (Crystal Palace Overground) festival or Crystal Palace fireworks
• Repeatedly failed to do anything of any benefit to the local community with the building
• No intention of making the building a place for assembly and leisure for the local community
• Earlier objections to the change of use application for 25 Church Road are still valid and have not been resolved.

The post WIDE VARIETY OF OBJECTIONS TO KICC PLANS appeared first on News from Crystal Palace - News & stories from the fresh air suburb - Crystal Palace, London SE19.

GLA MEMBERS, MPs AND COUNCILS AMONG OBJECTORS TO KICC PLANS

KICC have provided little evidence to demonstrate any serious commitment to the D2 components of the proposals  says GLA member Steve O’Connell in his objection to Bromley council.

Neither have they demonstrated any serious local interest and need which could not be met and better served through existing community venues,

“In view of the proposal not being for the good of the entire local community, there is little or no support in the local community for the project” he argues.

London Assembly Member Mr O’Connell (Con Croydon and Sutton) has also objected on the grounds that the proposal would cause the loss of the only remaining dedicated and valuable community facility in Crystal Palace within the D2 use class – and also have a negative impact on transport and parking in the local area.

“Church Road is already very congested and the problem will
be exacerbated by a congregation of up to 450 people amassing at the venue twice weekly.

“In view of there only being two car parking spaces on site, the rest of the congregation will have to park in streets adjacent to Crystal Palace, resulting in parking chaos.

“But if the site remained a D2 venue, events would be staggered throughout the week and a ‘bottleneck’ situation would not arise on any one day, thus avoiding extreme local congestion.

“There is mention of public transport being required to bring people from outside the local area which gives the impression there are not numbers locally to support a church.

“Furthermore local bus services are already oversubscribed.

“There is no need for further places of worship in the local area. “There is already a place of worship diagonally opposite the site” he adds.

Another London Assembly member Valerie Shawcross (Lambeth and Southwark) has objected to the proposal on the basis of the potential sustained impacts on traffic and road safety in the vicinity of the venue should large events be regularly held there.

“The events seems to be aimed at attracting large numbers of attendees from other parts of London rather than the local community which gives rise to concerns regarding traffic congestion and possible parking issues in residential roads around the venue” she says.

Steve Reed MP (Lab, Croydon North) has expressed concerns that the roads around Crystal Palace and Upper Norwood are already very narrow and often backlogged.

“Further cars being added to this would lead to disruption. “The site is also the last dedicated Class D2 venue left in the area and has an important role in furthering social, recreational and cultural interests of the local community.

“The proposed development would generate unacceptable noise and disturbance as a result of worshippers accessing and leaving the site.

“This would be exacerbated to harmful levels by virtue of the intermittent en masse gatherings associated with the proposed timetable of worship on both Sundays and Tuesdays.

“This effect would most certainly be felt over the course of any Sunday when the proposal would be operating at its peak intensity.

Adjoining planning authorities were consulted and have responded as follows:

Lambeth council continue to raise objection on land use grounds as they consider that there could be a potentially harmful impact from the loss of the lawful Class D2 use on leisure opportunities within the Westow Hill/Crystal Palace district town centre (as designated within the London borough of Lambeth Unitary Development Plan (2011).

“Such facilities make a valuable contribution to town centres and the local communities that they serve and should be retained.

“Notwithstanding the work the applicant has undertaken in the intervening period between the refusal of the planning application and the submission of the current application, Lambeth council still consider that the transport assessment submitted is deficient.

“Although the document is more robust and detailed than the earlier submission it still fails to include the future growth calculations which were requested previously.

“On this basis it is considered that the applicant has not adequately demonstrated that the proposed change of use would not have a harmful impact on parking stress and highway safety within the area.”

Croydon have objected on the grounds that the proposal would have a detrimental impact upon the vitality and viability of the Upper Norwood Triangle and that the transport assessment does not satisfy the requirements of policy 6.3 of the London Plan with insufficient information to be able to assess that the proposal will not have a negative impact on the surrounding highway network contrary to Policy 6.13 of the
London Plan.

Lewisham: no response received at time of officers report.

Southwark: no response received at time of officers report.

The post GLA MEMBERS, MPs AND COUNCILS AMONG OBJECTORS TO KICC PLANS appeared first on News from Crystal Palace - News & stories from the fresh air suburb - Crystal Palace, London SE19.