Long suffering residents in Bow have been given some hope that this year’s festival season will be less disruptive after the promoters for LoveBox festival were told to consider Labour councillor Joshua Peck’s proposals to curb anti-social behaviour.
Presenting to the Licensing Committee last week Cllr Peck proposed:
- Reductions in noise by limiting the volume to 70DbL as many other festivals already do
- An earlier end time of 10.30pm to avoid disruption into the early hours
- Limits on the number of people who can attend each day with a maximum capacity of 25,000 at any one time
- More stewards on hand to guide crowds and minimise crime and anti-social behaviour in and around the park
The modest proposals were rejected by LoveBox’s promoters LiveNation despite the cross party Licensing Committee voting not to award a license for the event without some changes.
Cllr Peck also proposed granting a single year license instead of the four year deal which LiveNation were seeking. This was to allow the success of each years’ event to be reviewed and improvements made to better protect residents.
The intervention from Bow West Councillor Joshua Peck reflects many resident complaints and comes after crime spikes of 155% were revealed during previous LoveBox events.
Labour Councillor for Bow West, Joshua Peck, said:
“Lutfur Rahman has sold of Victoria Park for more events than ever despite growing resident concern.
“Previous years have seen massive spikes in crime, party goers urinating in residents’ gardens and worse. We don’t oppose holding some events in Victoria Park but they have got to be controlled. That’s why it’s only right we ask the promoter to agree to reasonable steps to limit disruption to people living around the Park.”
Labour’s candidate for Mayor of Tower Hamlets, John Biggs, said:
“We need to balance the use of our larger parks for occasional events against the rights of local residents to be treated thoughtfully and enjoy the peace to which they are reasonably entitled. This doesn't mean no events, and it doesn't mean no inconvenience but the licensing committee needs reasonably to strike the right balance.”