The separation of Pastures Centre and Good Shepherd Studios by a new six-foot fence has been criticised by locals, reports Josh Mellor, Local Democracy Reporter

Google Maps view showing Pastures Centre (left) and Good Shepherd Studios (right)

Waltham Forest Council has won a controversial planning battle to separate two Leytonstone community buildings with a fence and gate.

The council, which owns Pastures Centre and The Good Shepherd Building in Davies Lane, has insisted that the two sites should be separated for “safeguarding purposes”.

It has already erected a six-foot high fence in the garden previously shared by Pastures Centre, a youth centre and sports hall, and The Good Shepherd Building, which is currently home to a coworking community space and cafe called Good Shepherd Studios.

However, Waltham Forest’s plans have come under intense criticism by a user group of the buildings, Pastures Action Group, who says it has failed to properly consult them.

A planning application for a new gate allowing pedestrian access to The Good Shepherd Building from the street, put before a committee in February, was deferred “to allow time to engage and consult with the community” on the division of the site.

On Tuesday (14th) the planning committee heard the application again and approved the gate plans, but one member criticised council officers for holding only one meeting in the last four months.

A large community meeting organised by the action group was also not attended by any council officers.

Committee member Keith Rayner, who is a councillor for nearby Cann Hall ward, said: “That’s something like two months after the original decision.

“What happened here is a council department has come back with a planning application saying ‘we’ve done our bit and ticked boxes, can we have our decision please’.

“I know the planning department and committee can’t actually do anything about that because they can only look at planning grounds – which I think is a misuse of the committee.”

Cllr Rayner questioned how the youth and community facilities would be an “open” community hub if they are “completely secured” by a fence and gates.

He added that the council should “consult, not insult” if it wants to be taken seriously as an “outward facing local authority”.

However, planning committee chair Jenny Gray said: “What we’re here for tonight is to discuss only the erection of another gate and accompanying landscaping. That’s all we’re here for.

“Whether the council is great at community engagement or isn’t as outward looking as maybe we think is not a ground for this committee – we’re here to look at whether there are sufficient planning grounds to approve the gate.

“If the groups at Pastures get together and find a solution to the issue of the gate then that is clearly a management issue – that’s where it belongs.”

The committee approved the plans but added an informative condition that the council should “continue discussions with a view to reaching a mutually agreed conclusion”.

Following the meeting, a spokesperson for Pastures Action Group said the council has not yet engaged with its suggestion of the sites being closed only on a “time-managed” basis. They have suspicions the council wants to separate the two sites in order to develop one into flats, following a withdrawn plan two years ago.

However, Ahsan Khan, cabinet member for housing and regeneration, told the Echo in February the council had “no plans to redevelop the site”.

He added: “The site has been divided into two spaces, with one part, the Good Shepherd Studios, being let to an organisation on just over a five-year lease.

“The fencing that’s been installed is to separate the spaces, which was agreed with the main daytime user of the Pastures Centre, and is primarily in place for safeguarding purposes. The Pastures Centre remains a council building, which is available to use and hire.”

No news is bad news

Independent news outlets like ours – reporting for the community without rich backers – are under threat of closure, turning British towns into news deserts.

The audiences they serve know less, understand less, and can do less.

If our coverage has helped you understand our community a little bit better, please consider supporting us with a monthly, yearly or one-off donation.

Choose the news. Don’t lose the news.

Monthly direct debit

Annual direct debit

£5 per month supporters get a digital copy of each month’s paper before anyone else, £10 per month supporters get a digital copy of each month’s paper before anyone else and a print copy posted to them each month. £50 annual supporters get a digital copy of each month's paper before anyone else.