Greenwich councillors have backed new plans to revive crumbling university buildings in Woolwich – but took a gamble by rejecting a £4 million offer to build more new homes for social rent.
The developer, Woolwich Island Ltd, plans to transform the old Greenwich University Island Site – much of which has sat neglected for two decades – into 485 co-living units and 20 flats for social rent. Many of the original buildings would be retained and extended while there would also be shops and offices in the development.
Many of the buildings date back to the original 19th-century Woolwich Polytechnic, the university’s predecessor, including a Grade II-listed gymnasium at the centre of the site. Woolwich Island has pledged to open up the little-seen space at the centre of the old campus to the public.
Co-living developments provide small ensuite rooms with shared facilities and are aimed at young professionals priced out of traditional flats. While each rented room would have basic cooking facilities, they would have shared kitchens and dining areas as well as a laundry, shared workspace, a gym and cinema.
They have become very popular with developers – part of the new Lewisham Gateway development has been given over to co-living while a 487-room block in Abbey Wood was approved last month. Detailed plans for another co-living development in Woolwich, at Macbean Street, are expected to be published soon.
A previous plan to convert the site into flats was approved in 2017 and again in 2020, but nothing happened and the site was sold to Woolwich Island. The updated proposal keeps more of the older buildings and reduces the height of the new ones.
The site has been largely empty since 2002, when the university moved to Greenwich. A Sixties extension still sports the logo of Thames Polytechnic, the university’s name through the Seventies and Eighties.
Guy Ziser, the developer behind Woolwich Island, said the previous plans were not viable and the previous owners had just wanted to sell the land. “The previous owners were a consortium, which had it for many years,” he said. “When we bought it we knew that that was not a viable consent, with the cost of the demolitions and where you would end up, it was never going to stack up.”
While they approved the latest Island Site plans, the town-centre scheme was criticised by both Labour and Conservative councillors for not providing any homes explicitly aimed at families.
There was also criticism of the size of the social-rent flats – which would be built in the listed buildings, so would have no balconies – and of the rent levels for the co-living spaces, predicted to start at £1,300 per month.
Because of the very low level of housing for people on the council’s waiting list, Woolwich Island had said it would pay Greenwich Council £5 million towards more social-rent homes elsewhere, but could bring more homes via a “late stage review”, which would assess how profitable the scheme was and whether the developer could provide more.
But this week Woolwich Island upped its offer to £9.3 million – which planning officers said would meet the council’s policy for “affordable” homes – on the condition that the late-stage review was dropped.
The developer said that the higher cash payment would make it easier to attract finance for the scheme.
Amid calls for more family housing on the site, councillors voted to insist on the “late-stage review” – a common feature of planning applications – and take the £5 million instead, hoping the review would bring more money for homes.
“You seem to be very nervous about having a long-term review,” Greenwich Peninsula councillor David Gardner told the developer’s agent. “Five days ago Savills predicted that house prices in London will go up by 23-and-a-half per cent over the next five years. Is that why you’re suddenly nervous about having a long-term viability review?”
Mark Pender, of PPM Planning, responded: “I’m not an expert, but my understanding is when there’s a late stage review, it makes it slightly more difficult to get funding. So if you don’t have a late stage review, and you effectively make that payment up front, it makes it slightly more attractive to a funder.”
There were calls for more family housing on the site, councillors voted to insist on the “late-stage review” – a common feature of planning applications – and take the £5 million instead.
Pushing for the development to be approved with a review in place, Gardner admitted that it was a gamble.
“While it would be nice to have an additional £4 million – which is what, ten homes? – it’s a swing of the dice with a 23-and-a-half per cent potential uplift [which could be] much greater with a late-stage review,” he said.
But he said that the scheme “could make a great contribution to bringing new life and vitality to Woolwich and to our night-time economy, given its significant number of younger people. It could make a big difference to the area”.
Labour’s West Thamesmead councillor, ‘Lade Hephzibah Olugbemi, supported the scheme, and said: “We need accommodation, we need homes, we need to reduce the number of people who are on our waiting list, on the housing register. And the majority of those who are there are families.
“They need family units. And what’s concerning for me is that a lot of people are more out for profit and not just about providing accommodation that is needed. For me it’s important that the developers take this on board, that they think of us having three-bed units to meet those needs and reducing the numbers that we have.”
Pat Greenwell, the Conservative councillor for Eltham Town & Avery Hill, abstained, saying: “I just can’t get out of my mind that we need family homes.”
A proposal to approve the scheme with the £5 million payment was approved by five votes to one abstention, with planning chair Gary Dillon also supporting. No councillors supported the higher payment and dropping the late-stage review.
Dave Sullivan, a Kidbrooke Village councillor, said: “I think it’s a very good response to a very challenging site. I just hope we’re not back here in a couple of years’ time, saying ‘we’ve misjudged the market’.”
London mayor Sadiq Khan will have to ratify the plans before planning permission can be granted.
Follow The Greenwich Wire on Bluesky, Facebook, LinkedIn or Threads. You can also sign up for WhatsApp alerts – or subscribe to our emails through the blue box above.
Comments are closed.