Rockwell had hoped for approval for its development here
Controversial plans for 771 homes off Anchor & Hope Lane have finally been scrapped after the site was sold to a company promising to revamp it as a logistics hub.
Rockwell’s proposal for the VIP Trading Estate was the first to come forward as part of plans to transform the Charlton riverside to provide up to 8,000 new homes. The scheme was fiercely opposed by residents of Atlas and Derrick Gardens, whose homes would have been in the shadow of the proposed blocks, as well as community groups, councillors and local MP Matt Pennycook.
Rockwell’s proposals were rejected three times
The scheme was rejected by Greenwich councillors in 2018, with Sarah Merrill, the chair of planning at the time, saying it was “reminiscent of Stalingrad”. The decision was called in for scrutiny by Sadiq Khan, who rejected it himself. Rockwell then appealed to a planning inspector, but the scheme was rejected a third time.
Greenwich Council officers had originally recommended approving the 11-block development.
After Rockwell lost its appeal, the site was sold by its owner, the property investment company Zenprop, to another property company, Falconbrook. An industry website, React News, reported that Falconbrook had talked to Greenwich Council about building homes on the land.
The VIP Trading Estate will now become a logistics hub
GLI, which has already snapped up sites in Park Royal, Mitcham and Croydon as part of a push into London, said the revamped hub “will be highly energy efficient and redeveloped on a net zero carbon basis”,
The sale will be a setback to Greenwich and City Hall’s plans for new housing on the Charlton riverside, which have so far yielded just one new home – a flat at the Victoria pub, which is being redeveloped into a pizza outlet – after two other schemes were also refused.
The developer Aitch Group and the housing association Optivo are appealing against the refusal of their plans for new housing off Eastmoor Street, near the Thames Barrier, which together would have provided 255 homes, including 107 for affordable rent. Aitch has also submitted a new application for 149 homes on its site, with just 11 for affordable rent.
Neighbours disputed Rockwell’s images of what the scheme would look like
Plans for 771 homes close to Anchor & Hope Lane have been thrown out by the communities secretary Robert Jenrick, 17 months after they were rejected by London mayor Sadiq Khan and nearly two years after Greenwich councillors first turned down the scheme.
The huge development was the first to come forward as part of plans to transform the Charlton riverside to provide up to 8,000 new homes. The scheme was fiercely opposed by residents of Atlas and Derrick Gardens, whose homes would have been in the shadow of the proposed blocks, as well as community groups, councillors and local MP Matt Pennycook.
Greenwich Council officers had originally recommended approving the 11-block development – but councillors threw it out, with Sarah Merrill, the chair of the planning committee, calling it “reminiscent of Stalingrad”. It was feared that Khan would approve it after “calling in” the scheme to decide himself. But after he rejected it, Rockwell appealed to planning inspectors, who held a public inquiry last October. Speakers at the inquiry included Pennycook, Greenwich Council leader Danny Thorpe and Glenn Tilbrook, the Squeeze singer, who owns a recording studio next to the site.
The planned development would have been built here, behind Atlas and Derrick Gardens
The development “does not reflect the aims or vision” of the council’s masterplan for the Charlton Riverside, which was called a “considered and robust, and also to be a carefully crafted and well-informed document”, the rejection letter stated.
The rejection is a major victory for Greenwich Council’s plans to keep some level of control over the development of the Charlton Riverside, distinguishing it from Greenwich Peninsula and the Royal Arsenal in Woolwich where developers have largely set the agenda – in particular, to keep buildings to a maximum of 10 storeys in height – and for tall blocks to be an exception – and to make the development less dense than its neighbours.
“The Peninsula, with its strong relationship to the high-rise development of Canary Wharf and increasingly metropolitan character, is, for example, very different to Charlton,” wrote inspector Mike Robins.
“Here the character to the south of Woolwich Road, including Charlton Hill [sic] and Charlton Village, is residential, comprising well-established communities in traditional or more modern, low-rise and family housing, becoming increasingly more open as you travel east.
“While the established industrial character of the Charlton Riverside must change, it strikes me that the aspiration of the SPD [masterplan] to enable regeneration that respects the character of Charlton, promote increased linkages between the existing residential areas and the new neighbourhoods and enhance the permeability of the site to allow access to the river and parklands, is entirely justified.”
The scheme would “materially alter the appreciation and experience of” Atlas and Derrick Gardens
High-rise developments across the area would “in my view, be likely to divide Charlton rather than achieve the integration sought, and extensive use of high-rise development would be unlikely to foster the community led, mixed-use character that was the concluding vision of the stakeholder engagement and consultation that informed the SPD”, he wrote.
In part of the proposed development, the buildings were written off as “oppressive” with warnings that they would block out sunlight. The development would also “materially alter the appreciation and experience of” Atlas and Derrick Gardens, two cul-de-sacs originally built for workers at the nearby Corys bargeworks.
“The offer of 771 units with a relatively high proportion of affordable housing could easily be considered as overwhelmingly beneficial. However, such an approach must consider the quality of the development proposed and the effect that it would have on the area both now and into the future,” he added.
“The proposal fails to take the opportunity to promote a high quality of design, particularly in relation to scale and massing, that responds to its location and establishes a benchmark that accords with the design aspirations and guidance set out in the SPD.”
Greenwich and Woolwich MP Matt Pennycook called the verdict “the right outcome, a victory for the local community and a clear signal to developers to honour the vision set out in the 2017 Charlton Riverside masterplan”.
Len Duvall, the London Assembly member for Greenwich and Lewisham, said: “This decision comes a huge relief for local people and is a testament to the campaigning efforts of community groups, such as Charlton Together, who have vigorously opposed the scheme.
“Rockwell’s plans defy the framework laid by the Charlton Riverside Masterplan, with the excessive height of the tower blocks threatening to loom over neighbouring residents. The scheme also fails to deliver sufficient affordable housing on a site where it could be maximised.
“The council and the mayor have been right to reject these plans. Urban development needs to work for the whole community and should not come at any cost.”
Rockwell can seek a judicial review of the decision, or it can go back to the drawing board and submit a revised version of the scheme.
Six other schemes for Charlton Riverside have been announced since Rockwell first submitted its plans – none have yet been approved.
Neighbours have disputed Rockwell’s images of what the scheme would look like
Next month, there will be a public inquiry into plans for 771 new homes off Anchor & Hope Lane. The developer, Rockwell, is appealing against the Mayor of London’s rejection of the scheme; that followed an earlier decision by Greenwich Council to throw out the proposals. Community groups fear the scheme will get the Charlton Riverside redevelopment off to a bad start and want you to sign their petition. ANDREW DONKIN of Charlton Together, which represents groups including the Charlton Society and Charlton Central Residents’ Association, explains why.
If you care about the future of Charlton, I’d like to ask you to sign this petition calling on the Planning Inspectorate to dismiss an appeal by property developer Rockwell for its overcrowded and poorly-designed scheme on Charlton Riverside. The appeal is next month and Charlton Together urgently needs your help and signature now.
Regular readers of The Charlton Champion will recall how Rockwell’s application has already been refused by both the Mayor of London and Greenwich Council. It was refused because the plans submitted would result in the over development of the site and would fail to adhere to the vision and objectives for the redevelopment of the area set out in the Charlton Riverside Masterplan, adopted by the Council in 2017 as planning guidance for the area.
The well-received Charlton Riverside masterplan was developed over a period of five years, with the full involvement of the local community, at a cost of £854,000 using the council’s (eg, the public’s) money. The Rockwell development appeal currently before the Planning Inspectorate drives a coach and horses through the carefully created Masterplan in terms of building heights, levels of density/massing, and affordable housing.
Roden Richardson, the vice-chair of the Charlton Society, said: “If the Rockwell development appeal is allowed by the Planning Inspectorate it will set a precedent for all future developers to ignore the masterplan in respect of further planning applications for the wider site. This will have a huge impact on the whole of Charlton and beyond it across southeast London.”
Helen Jakeways, from Charlton Together, added: “It would set a dangerous precedent if this appeal is allowed at this density. There are many other developers waiting in the background to see what happens. All of their proposals for new housing are well over the density required for their plots in the Masterplan and the London Plan. There are no agreements currently in place for local infrastructure, which includes, roads, school places, doctor surgery places and public transport. This will affect everyone living and working in the SE7 area and all the areas around it.”
If you’re reading this and you care about Charlton, please sign the new petition. Numbers really will count when it is presented to the Planning Inspectorate in mid-November.
Neighbours disputed Rockwell’s images of what the scheme would look like
The developer behind plans to build 771 homes off Anchor and Hope Lane has appealed to planning inspectors to overturn Sadiq Khan’s rejection of the scheme.
Rockwell’s proposals, the first to emerge on the Charlton Riverside development area, were bitterly opposed by residents in Atlas and Derrick Gardens who feared their homes would be overlooked by the 10-storey blocks planned for the site of a trading estate.
Now Rockwell is putting its scheme’s neighbours through a third round of the fight by appealling to the Planning Inspectorate, where an inspector will decide on the development after a detailed public hearing.
Rockwell’s appeal is against Khan’s decision, not Greenwich Council’s. At the time, Khan said: “This is an underutilised, brownfield site in an opportunity area and very accessible. It is well-connected and in an area capable of accommodating growth. It is precisely the kind of site that we need to bring forward in order to create vibrant and active places, ensuring a compact and well-functioning city.
“However, I am clear that we must deliver good growth, not growth at any cost, where people have more of a say and don’t feel excluded from the process. I have listened carefully to the concerns of residents and considered the substantial amount of work done on the Charlton Riverside Masterplan. I consider that this is the wrong development for the site.”
Rockwell had hoped for approval for its development here
He urged Rockwell to “go back to the drawing board, in partnership with the community, the council and the GLA, to come up with a scheme that delivers on the strong ambitions we all share for the future of Charlton Riverside”.
But Rockwell have instead decided to challenge the decision. They may have been fortified by Greenwich’s Council’s approval of 10-storey blocks at Victoria Way – just outside the masterplan area – in January 2018 without any explanation to objectors, a decision that was later ratified by the mayor.
Rockwell’s scheme is one of five for the Charlton riverside, designated an “opportunity area” for redevelopment by City Hall. The other four are:
U+I plans 500 homes on the old Siemens glassworks site on the Charlton/Woolwich border, along with a co-working hub for local businesses and space for light industry. A planning application is also expected within weeks.
The scheme, which included building 10-storey blocks, was bitterly opposed by residents in Atlas Gardens and Derrick Gardens, who said the buildings would loom over their homes. It was rejected by Greenwich councillors in July, despite council officers recommending they approve it, because it did not conform with the recently-agreed masterplan for the Charlton riverside.
But Khan overturned the decision a month later, “calling in” the scheme to decide himself. City Hall’s planning officers recommended he approve a slightly amended scheme, but the mayor made the surprise decision to reject the scheme himself after a hearing last week. (See the full documents.)
In his written summary, Khan says: “This is an underutilised, brownfield site in an opportunity area and very accessible. It is well-connected and in an area capable of accommodating growth. It is precisely the kind of site that we need to bring forward in order to create vibrant and active places, ensuring a compact and well-functioning city.
Neighbours feared the development would loom over Atlas and Derrick Gardens
“However, I am clear that we must deliver good growth, not growth at any cost, where people have more of a say and don’t feel excluded from the process. I have listened carefully to the concerns of residents and considered the substantial amount of work done on the Charlton Riverside Masterplan. I consider that this is the wrong development for the site.”
Khan outlines four reasons: poor design; its effect on Imex House, a commercial building next door which houses Squeeze singer Glenn Tilbrook’s studio; the lack of space for existing local businesses on the site; and the lack of a Section 106 agreement for “affordable” housing and other mitigation of the scheme’s impact.
Neighbours disputed Rockwell’s images of what the scheme would look like
In his reasons, he urges Rockwell to “go back to the drawing board, in partnership with the community, the council and the GLA, to come up with a scheme that delivers on the strong ambitions we all share for the future of Charlton Riverside”.
Khan’s reasons may raise eyebrows elsewhere in Charlton, where 10-storey blocks at Victoria Way – just outside the masterplan area – were approved by Greenwich councillors in January 2018 without any explanation to objectors, a decision that was later ratified by the mayor. Indeed, Rockwell can still appeal to planning inspectors and challenge Khan’s decision.
Residents in Atlas and Derrick Gardens say the new development would loom over their homes
London mayor Sadiq Khan has thrown out plans to build 771 homes off Anchor & Hope Lane – the first major scheme to come forward as part of the redevelopment of Charlton Riverside – at a meeting at City Hall today.
Greenwich Council rejected the plans last year, saying it was against the masterplan for the riverside land. But within weeks Khan “called in” the proposal to decide himself. Local councillors and residents fear that approval will set a precedent for the riverside, which has no major infrastructure improvements planned, to be developed with tower blocks rather than family housing. Many thought Khan would simply rubber-stamp the scheme.
The mayor said the site was easily accessible, and said council planning committees needed to bear in mind London’s housing crisis.
But he told the audience to cheers: “In my view, this scheme is not of sufficient design quality, and the layout and massing leads to a poor residential environment and poor quality public realm.”
He also voiced concerns on the effects on local businesses.
Neighbours and local businesses had lined up to reject the scheme, and Khan praised the contribution of residents, calling them “the opposite of NIMBYs”.
The chair of the Charlton Central Residents Association, Jodie Coughlan, laid into Rockwell’s lack of consultation – something highlighted by Khan in his verdict.
“This is a serious insult to the intelligence of the public, and our confidence in the GLA as a planning authority,” she told the mayor. “For something of this scale, an intelligent approach should have been taken from the beginning. Many residents are saying ‘why bother?’ … CCRA would strongly urge the mayor to reject this application and send Rockwell back to engage with the community.”
Squeeze singer Glenn Tilbrook – whose recording studio is next to the site – also spoke, to say he had been “locked out” of meetings between Rockwell and the Greater London Authority since 2015.
Rockwell’s revised scheme will be examined by City Hall, not Greenwich Council
All 11 councillors on Greenwich’s planning board rejected the scheme, with chair Sarah Merrill declaring: “This application in no way resembles the spirit of the Charlton Riverside masterplan, in terms of height, massing and design. It’s reminiscent of Stalingrad.” Other objectors include local MP Matt Pennycook, who says the scheme remains too dense and should be cut from a maximum of 10 storeys to six storeys, while it also needs more family-sized homes. He also calls the design “sterile and monotonous”, and says there needs to be a cut in car parking.
Rockwell wants to build 771 homes, with the possibility of 165 homes (21.4%) for “affordable rent” and 127 (16.4%) for shared ownership with a City Hall grant.
Residents, who believe the development would tower over the cul-de-sacs at Atlas and Derrick Gardens, have accused Rockwell have circulating misleading images of the scheme.
You can see a recording of the hearing, which began at 2pm and lasted two hours, on the City Hall website. Brief updates on what happened follow…
Live updates (most recent first) – refresh for updates
5.05pm. And that’s that – a surprising verdict, but not too much of a shock to those who heard the residents’ testimony this afternoon.
4.50pm — DECISION REJECTED
Khan says he called in the population to give it more scrutiny and that London has a booming population and needs housing. “In Greenwich alone, I’m told there are 17,000 households on the waiting list. We must optimise the development of underused sites while protecting the green belt… this needs to be recognised at a local level by council planning committees.” He criticises Rockwell’s lack of consultation, but says council planning committees need to bear London’s needs in mind. He says the site is clearly accessible… but then rejects it to cheers from the public gallery, citing a poor quality environment, poor quality public realm. Blimey.
4.49pm Khan is back in the chamber.
4.04pm Smith says Rockwell has had interest from three providers to take on the “affordable” housing. Khan is now going to retire to consider his decision. “Hopefully it’ll be today when I come back,” he says.
4.03pm Khan questions Greg Smith on Rockwell’s lack of consultation. He claims to have attended five different consultations. “We feel we’ve done everything we should be doing, and we’ve tried to do more.” Asked engagement with the riverside industries, Smith says Rockwell has agreed to send construction materials by river rather than road. Questioned about Glenn Tilbrook’s objections, Smith says Rockwell did engage, but Tilbrook responds but he did not get sufficient details in the answers given to him. “There is nothing in the reports about sound going into my premises, and I’ve asked.”
3.57pm Sadiq Khan commends planning chair Sarah Merrill for her engagement with residents, adding that “it is an example for other councils to follow…. the residents are “the opposite of NIMBYs”. But he asks her: “If an applicant reduces height and density, do you appreciate that it results in fewer homes and affordable homes?” She responds that Greenwich could make up the numbers because Charlton Riverside as a whole is such a land area. “If we’re given the leverage, we can deliver the affordable homes that would be lost here. We believe that this is housing at any costs… and we need to spread the housing along the vast area of riverside,” she said. Asked about Rockwell’s plan for businesses: “Our view is it’ll provably be Costa Coffee for want of a better word. We would have liked to have seen a greater mix with low-scale manufacturing and industry, not just retail space.” Senior planning officer Victoria Geoghegan backs her up.
3.51pm Now Greg Smith of GVA, Rockwell’s consultants says the site “has excellent transport links”, and says existing industrial occupiers will be helped to move locally. Rachel Huff of Simpson Huff architects promises a “vibrant, mixed-use” development, and outlines some of the changes to the scheme since the mayor called it in. It will “create a new working, thriving, living neighbourhood,” she says.
3.45pm London Assembly member Len Duvall speaks. “This site is simply too small for the number of homes planned on it, I’ve had people come to me and say the previous scheme that went to the council was better.”
3.42pm Glenn Tilbrook of Squeeze thanks the mayor for his over-60s Oyster card, then says Rockwell and the GLA have spent 16 hours in meetings since 2015. “We’ve been locked out of them,” he said. “The model of the proposed development was a model of misrepresentation – existing buildings were depicted as being larger than they are, I wish my studio was a three storey building.” He adds: “The GLA have ignored us and swept our concerns away.” He says he faces a loss of income from studio rental and a loss of access for his tour bus. “We thank Rockwell for the offer of soundproofing, but this needs to be dealt with by independent professionals answerable to us.” He adds: “Where’s the hope and where’s the love in this development?”, calling the scheme “a kick in the teeth for residents”.
3.37pm David Gayther of Charlton Together, a network of community groups, says the community feels “let down” by the GLA in calling it in. “Mr Mayor, you’ve said over and over that Londoners should develop their own communities, but nowhere in London is doing that better than Charlton. We have better relations than ever with our own council.”
3.33pm Phil Connolly of the Atlas and Derrick Gardens Residents Association. “I have Parkinsons disease, so I’ve joined the movers and shakers before I met you,” he jokes. “The planners have lost the plot a little – they think significance is related to quantity and scale,” he says, pointing out that Rockwell hasn’t monitored for PM2.5 pollution. “We have 13 deaths a year in our council ward… the Rockwell development is set to make that worse.” He adds: “You’re our mayor – we elected you. We beg you not to leave you in the bands of Rockwell, getting darker and colder, and we don’t want the pollution Rockwell is threatening us with.”
3.27pm Carol Kenna of the Charlton Society: “We believe the masterplan as it stands at the moment is a very good starting point for the development of the riverside area. On the contrary, at our first resident with Rockwell, the developers were offered sweeties – to tick a box if we wanted a creche. We were told we couldn’t discuss principles, and we feel we are not being treated that way. We were given two days notice of the latest consultation – two, two-hour slots at the weekend. The model was inaccurate, we were told by one representative it was in scale, another that it wasn’t in scale, and they had a public disagreement.” She says she is “puzzled” that the GLA has called it in based on inadequate Greenwich housing figures – but the GLA did not respond to a query on why. Kenna would like to know where Khan stands since he has recently called for community-led development.
3.23pm Jodie Coughlan from the Charlton Central Residents Association criticises Rockwell’s approach to consultation – four hours right at the end of the consultation period, with a 3D model produced right at the end. “This is a serious insult to the intelligence of the public, and our confidence in the GLA as a planning authority,” she says. “For something of this scale, an intelligent approach should have been taken from the beginning. Many residents are saying ‘why bother?’… CCRA would strongly urge the mayor to reject this application and send Rockwell back to engage with the community.”
3.18pm Local resident Yann Leclerc thanks Rockwell for listening to community concerns – but says the scheme still isn’t good enough. “The play street is a lovely idea, but in reality I doubt it will be used very much,” saying it will not be an attractive setting and will be used as an access route for industry. “How many children will actually use it?,” he says, pointing out the lack of family housing and the overshadowing.
3.15pm Phil Aust of Day Aggregates, representing the riverside industry. He talks about the importance of the aggregate industry to London – a third of the capital’s building industry’s needs comes through the Greenwich/Charlton wharves. This development itself will require “tens of thousands aggregates” – but he says current plans will mean that this will come by road, not by river.
3.12pm “The scheme is a complete travesty of that masterplan… this is housing at any price, and its legacy will be that it is a social mistake,” Merrill says to applause.
3.07pm Greenwich planning chair Sarah Merrill says that the leader of council was “not comfortable” with it, and says it “in no way” reflects the Charlton masterplan, which took six years and £1 million of work. She cites overdevelopment, adding that the new plan compounds this; points out the reduced level of family housing; and the effect on business neighbours such as Squeeze’s recording studio. “We don’t want Squeeze squeezed out,” she says.
3.06pm Provisions are in place for a “potential bus transit route”, while Rockwell will pay £2.1m for a new west-east access road towards Warspite Road. “Although there are planned public transport improvements, these will not be delivered before this is determined,” the City Hall officer says, justifying the large amount of car parking on the site. There will be £830,000 for bus services (presumably the “bus transit route”).
3.04pm Dealing with Glenn Tilbrook’s criticism that the scheme will damage his use of his recording studio, the City Hall officer this there will be access for a tour bus, heavy works will be taking place at agreed times and Rockwell has agreed put in soundproofing to protect the studio if needed.
2.55pm Residents’ windows on Atlas and Derrick Gardens will, at most, experience a “minor adverse impact”, apart from one which will be in a room where there is another window that isn’t affected. So that’s alright then.
2.52pm. We are being shown views of the scheme from Atlas and Derrick Gardens. Many locals say these visualisations aren’t accurate.
2.48pm. A City Hall planning officer has been talking. His delivery isn’t too exciting, but to sum up, he says the scheme is in “sustainable location” and complies with London Plan policies – the London Plan is the mayor’s masterplan for all of the capital. Those who struggles to take buses to North Greenwich this morning may beg to differ…
2.43pm. WE’RE BACK! Thank you to reader Paul Chapman for suggesting randomly hitting the “play” button on the webcast. Let’s hope City Hall’s planning decision-making is more sound than its IT.
2.16pm There is currently no sound on the City Hall webcast, rendering this attempt at a live blog rather pointless. If the sound reappears, we will try to resume it, otherwise, we will catch up with the result after it is announced. Apologies.
2.05pm. Still waiting to start. It’s fair to say that many local decision-makers are expecting Khan to approve the scheme. Greenwich & Woolwich MP Matt Pennycook has already written to Communities Secretary James Brokenshire today to ask him to consider calling in the scheme to be decided by a planning inspector if Khan gives it the green light today.
London mayor Sadiq Khan took control of the planning application in August, weeks after Greenwich Council’s main planning committee threw out the proposed development, and a public hearing at City Hall is due to take place on 29 January.
Neighbours in Atlas and Derrick Gardens had complained that the development – likely to be the first development on the Charlton Riverside to get planning approval, albeit from Khan rather than the council – would loom over their homes, while Greenwich’s planning chair Sarah Merrill called it “reminiscent of Stalingrad”.
While the plans have been altered to reduce the impact on the two cul-de-sacs, Pennycook says in a letter to Khan’s planning team that more needs to be done to make the scheme acceptable.
Rockwell is holding two brief exhibitions this weekend about the proposals from 9am to 11am today and tomorrow at the Anchor & Hope pub, while comments about the scheme need to be sent to VIPtradingestate[at]london.gov.uk by Monday to be considered by the mayor’s team.
Pennycook says the scheme remains too dense and should be cut from a maximum of 10 storeys to six storeys, while it also needs more family-sized homes. He also calls the design “sterile and monotonous”, and says there needs to be a cut in car parking.
“If approved, this application would constitute the first major development within the Charlton Riverside masterplan area and would set a clear precedent for all other developments that would follow,” he said. “That is why I have always argued that it is critical that we get this development right.”
“The masterplan stresses that the development of Charlton Riverside requires a very different approach to that taken in other parts of the borough, such as Greenwich Peninsula. Yet in too many respects, this revised application is at odds with the spirit of that masterplan.
“I continue to support development on Charlton Riverside but I urge the mayor to refrain from approving the application until the applicant is persuaded to bring forward further amendments along the lines I have suggested.”
The Charlton Champion 