Developer lodges appeal after Woolwich tower block rejected
Developer Purelake have launched an appeal after a proposed 48-flat housing block was rejected by Greenwich Council’s Planning Board earlier this year.
An extremely similar block had been approved back in 2017 on the same site which was formerly The Albion pub. It was later known as Le Wouri.
A revised block on site was rejected for three reasons:
- The proposed development by reason of its height, scale, bulk and massing in relation to the Grade II Listed Chimney to Steam Factory, Royal Dockyard would detract from its setting and cause less than substantial harm to this designated heritage asset.
2) The scheme is unacceptable due to the failure to sufficiently support and contribute to the Borough’s and London’s affordable housing delivery by providing insufficient affordable housing, having regard to paragraph 66 of the National Planning Policy Framework stating that, for major development involving the provision of housing, at least 10% of the total number of homes should be available for affordable home ownership.
3) Lack of a Section 106 agreement for affordable housing, parking restrictions for future occupants, car club membership, participation in GLLaB, details of fit-out and marketing of the Use Class E unit and carbon off-set payment.
Appeal
The developer offers a rebuttal to each reason for refusal. Firstly, in terms of height and scale they state:
“The Appellants have commissioned The Heritage Practice to provide a supplementary heritage statement/statement of case, in support of this appeal, submitted herewith.
“The enclosed statement demonstrates that the proposals are appropriate in terms of their height, scale, bulk and massing and that they have a sympathetic visual relationship with surrounding heritage assets. The proposals are of a high-quality design which is suitable for its Site and context, and which will preserve key views within the setting of surrounding heritage assets.”
Since the 2017 approval, a Thames Barrier and Bowater Road Conservation Area was adopted. The appeal states this is sufficient distance away.
That previous 2017 approval is again highlighted: “The Council’s officer report confirms clearly at paragraph 11.30 that “The previously consented (expired)scheme also did not identify harm to the listed chimney”.
“The current appeal scheme is very similar in form, architectural composition, profile, design and materiality to the 2017 Permission” except it is slightly shorter than before.
The appeal also states that very little else related to the chimney now exists.
Affordable housing
In terms of affordable housing numbers it claims that i’ss not viable to include affordable housing.
It also highlights that the council does not have a five-year housing land supply as required, with current figures half that at 2.5 years.
When it comes to the third and final reason given for rejection and a lack of Section 106 agreement the appeal document states: “As the application was recommended for refusal on two other grounds, the Appellants did not have the opportunity to enter into a Planning Legal Agreement, and this has therefore resulted in this additional reason for refusal.”
Various documents relating to the case can be viewed here.
The planning permission should be granted. The new tower block which will provide 48 new homes is needed and will improve the area which Is need of regeneration.
We seem to get a lot of double standards from Labour controlled councis of late.
They go on and on about the housing crisis and people being housed in temporary accommodation or on the housing waiting list. But refuse planning applications for new hones. Leave sites earmarked for housing to go undeveloped for years falling in to a further state of disrepair or sites completely empty and overgrown.
Instead choosing to build mote student accommodation and hotels instead.
Student accommodation I can accept but hotels in residential areas are not rreally needed as unlikely to be used by tourists.
We need more new affordable homes with rents set to match the local housing allowance set by each Local Authority..
‘The new tower block which will provide 48 new homes is needed …’. Needed by whom because there is no affordable element in this development on the grounds of non-viability. Those who can afford these shiny baubles, have plenty of choice of where to buy.