Plans for new council homes on the Barnfield Estate in Plumstead were approved on Tuesday night, two weeks after one of the area’s local councillors said the block would look like a “ghetto”.
Labour’s Ivis Williams, who represents Shooters Hill, had objected to the plans when they first came before Greenwich Council’s planning board last month.
She said the six-storey block of 24 flats was “unacceptable” because it was only 9.27 metres away from a neighbouring block where residents lived in overcrowded conditions. Her comments were later criticised by one her party’s MPs on social media.
Councillors on the planning board deferred the proposal so they could visit the site. But even though they eventually approved the plans, Gary Dillon, the chair, said the council “could do better”.
The block is part of the Greenwich Builds programme of new council housing, much of which is “infill development” – using land on existing estates. It would replace a community centre – which is being moved to a new location nearby – and public toilets, which would be moved across Herbert Road.
Williams told the committee members that the plan would mean her constituents losing light and “didn’t sit well” in an area that was already blighted by crime and antisocial behaviour.
“It gives the feel of a ghetto look – where you have minority groups living in impoverishment due to political, social and pressures, that’s the view this proposed block gives,” she said.
Williams was not present when the planning board reconvened on Tuesday – Dillion had ruled that the meeting should go straight to deliberation and a decision.
Asked if there was a precedent for building blocks so close to a existing homes Beth Lancaster, a senior planning officer, said that the planning board had previously approved new housing in Charlton that were as little as five metres from a neighbouring block, and that some tall blocks in the Royal Arsenal were just 13 metres apart.
Dillon pressed for design features and screening to improve privacy and make the new homes acceptable to those in Acworth House.
But this was not enough for two councillors. David Gardner, who represents Greenwich Peninsula now but whose old ward covered the estate, said: “I just think it probably is too close. When you look at how Barnfield and other estates were built, they were designed in a careful way to allow space and greenery between the blocks.”
He said that the plans breached industry guidelines on daylight as well as the council’s own policies.
“It could detract from the estate rather than add to it. I absolutely support the need for more council housing but on this occasion it’s a step too far,” he added.
Majella Anning, who represents Creekside, agreed. “I would have liked to have heard the reason why those guidelines are being breached,” she said. “Simply to say we have to build it this way, I’m not sure that’s the answer.”
But others raised concern about the council’s waiting list for housing, which has now reached 28,000.
“I just can’t justify in my heart that those concerns outweigh the number of people we have on the list,” Thamesmead Moorings councillor Olu Babatola said.
“There are people sleeping rough that we can help. I just find it difficult to say that I am living in a place now but I can’t see the sky, so don’t bother about those sleeping on the street.”
East Greenwich councillor Maisie Richards Cottell said: “I did understand what residents were saying. I do appreciate that it’s a fine balance but the princip;e and policy is so in favour of council housing that I think it’s hard to vote against. But I do have sympathy for the residents living directly opposite it.”
Dillon said: “28,000 people on our list and a dwindling supply of land is the biggest problem this council faces. Where do we put 28,000 homes? If you do a Google search of the borough, you will struggle to find places where you can build four or five flats apart from some brownfield sites or possible demolition.
“That is the task we face. The application is not perfect and if I had a different head on, I would say we could do better.
“But we are where we are and we are in desperate need of family homes. I believe there are possibly other conversations being had and explorations being made in close proximity that may provide an opportunity for a design review later on down the road, should something materialise. My fingers are crossed for that.
“But in the balance of things and knowing the task we have ahead of us for the next 10 years, I am going to fall in favour of this application subject to conditions that there is acceptable mitigation around privacy and sense of overlooking.”
The Greenwich Wire was the only outlet to cover last month’s meeting, but our reporting led to trouble in the Labour Party.
Williams’s comments criticising the development were criticised on social media by a Labour MP, Andrew Western, who represents the Greater Manchester seat of Stretford & Urmston, 180 miles from Plumstead.
“Looks like much-needed new housing to me, and a community centre,” he said, adding a “rolling eyes” emoji.
Western’s comments were later deleted, but not before they were retweeted by Danny Thorpe, Williams’ fellow councillor in Shooters Hill.
Thorpe, a former council leader who now works for the housing association Clarion, said on social media on Tuesday night that he was “delighted” that the block had been approved. He added: “Let’s get cracking!”
You must be logged in to post a comment.