Plans for nearly 600 student flats next to Deptford Creek have been deferred after Greenwich councillors decided they wanted to take a closer look at the site and its impact on the world heritage site in Greenwich town centre.
The developer Your Tribe wants to build towers of up to 13 and 17 storeys on the Deptford side of the creek. The plans had been revised down from 15 and 20 storeys after objections were raised from Historic England about views from both Greenwich and Deptford town centres.
Royal Parks, the charity that runs Greenwich Park, continues to object to the scheme. The amended plans were lambasted by ward councillors and neighbours when Greenwich’s planning board met on Tuesday night. Councillors on the committee decided to postpone a decision until they had carried out a site visit.
The area between Greenwich and Deptford, on the doorsteps of the University of Greenwich, Trinity Laban and Goldsmiths University, is already a hotspot for student housing – with more planned on the Lewisham side of the borough boundary. Your Tribe also has permission for a 27-storey, 414-room block at Ravensbourne Wharf, and is hoping to build a further 614 rooms at Sun Wharf, across the borough border.
Your Tribe wants to build on a plot occupied by low-rise offices built in the 2000s, some of which have been turned into homes. The development is called Greenwich Quay, although historically the site was known as Crown Wharf. Some 35 per cent of the 590 rooms will be “affordable”, which under City Hall rules is defined as up to 55 per cent of an annual student maintenance loan.
Majella Anning, an independent councillor for Creekside ward – which stretches from the Cutty Sark in Greenwich to McMillan Street in Deptford – said that she represented the smallest and most-densely populated ward in the borough, and approving another student scheme would breach London planning rules.
“This ward already has large amounts of student housing provision: McMillan Student Village houses 900 students, Cutty Sark Halls houses 230 students, the recently-approved Ravensbourne Wharf student block will house 414 students,” she said.
“This current application, if approved, would house 590 students. That would make a total student provision of 2,134. That is 20 percent of the current population of my ward, the tiniest in the borough. Does anyone here really believe that this complies with the London Plan policy on mixed and balanced communities?”
Anning said student-only blocks were a “cash cow” for developers because they did not have to pay as much community infrastructure levy to Greenwich compared with other boroughs.
“We must provide housing for all sections of our community and that has to include permanent social housing for rent,” she said. “Student-only tower blocks do not provide any relief to the 28,000 people on our Greenwich Council waiting list. These are blocks of temporary accommodation, by their very definition.”
She said the scheme was “‘inappropriate, ugly and will create more wind tunnels. Our residents will find it an unfortunate addition to what is a beautiful and historic Deptford Creek.”
Labour councillor Calum O’Byrne Mulligan, who also represents Creekside, referred to continuing worries that the number of tall buildings in the area would put Greenwich’s world heritage site status at risk, after Liverpool was stripped of the accolade by Unesco in 2021.
“We should be conscious of the cumulative impact here arising from tall buildings along the creek, on the buffer zone of the world heritage site,” he said.
“I would just like to remind the committee that some of the language around ‘acceptable harm’ and ‘less than substantial harm’, these are the same types of language used by planners in Liverpool before it lost its heritage site.”
Scott Fitzgerald, a representative of residents at the low-rise Millennium Quay development next door, said emergency access to the site was “completely inadequate” as it relied on a narrow dead-end road, claiming it failed to meet London Fire Brigade standards.
Referring to a fire at the nearby Meridian Point development, he said: “Where emergency vehicle access was crucial and despite full accessibility, even that fire burned for 11 hours.” Fitzgerald said that the point where students were meant to be evacuated to was the same location where fire engines were meant to go.
He also said the narrow road, Clarence Road, would struggle with food deliveries for students. “It is beyond the scope of my understanding how 600 students will produce less deliveries than underutilised commercial space and nine residential developments,” he said.
However, Joe Higgins, a Greenwich Council planning officer, said the fire brigade had raised no concerns, and that it and the Health and Safety Executive were “happy” with the arrangements.
Another resident questioned why nearly 300 comments in favour had been received by the council, when “I’ve never seen an application with so many people in favour for something everybody around me seems to hate”.
Higgins said each of the 294 comments had been submitted via the council’s planning portal, and with unique email addresses. Gary Dillon, the chair of planning, said it could be a reflection of demand among students.
Charlotte Kiddy, another opponent, questioned the cost of the accommodation and the assertion that the flats would free up housing for local families.
“At the almost £500 a week to live [in another Your Tribe development] on the Old Kent Road, students could rent rooms in a shared flat,” she said. “It would be a cheaper total annual price and covering a full year rather than the partial year offered by Tribe. They could also rent a one-bed flat in New Capital Quay [on the Greenwich side of the creek] for similar prices.
“With this proposal, not only does the social housing waiting list remain untouched, we have overpriced buildings empty for parts of the year while local families remain in temporary accommodation.
“Who benefits from this proposal? Not those on the social housing register. Not local residents. Not London, which risks losing one of only four Unesco sites. Not Greenwich Council, unable to generate council tax, nor even the students who are being overcharged. The only party that benefits from this is the property developer.”
Phoebe Juggins, representing Your Tribe, said there was a shortfall in student accommodation in the area and said that a lack of purpose-built housing could put universities at risk and hit the local economy.
“If these academic institutions face setbacks due to housing shortages, it can jeopardise their growth, the employment opportunities they create, and the thriving sectors supported by major universities in and around the Royal Borough of Greenwich,” she said.
Juggins insisted that Your Tribe would try to ensure the blocks were occupied year-round, adding that it offered 51-week tenancies as well as ones of 38 weeks and shorter.
Quizzed by Labour councillor David Gardner on the affordability of the housing, Your Tribe director Nick Lawrence said: “I think it’s a misnomer that all students are poor. We are obviously offering the 35-per-cent affordable, which is the right thing to do, but we have a lot of other students because of the amenities and the support, the mental health wellbeing, the events we put on, 24-7 concierge and events.
“We have high demand for our accommodation, and in conjunction with universities, we set the rent. I know of students in certain areas of Bloomsbury that are paying over £800 a week and they’re not necessarily international students – that’s another misnomer.”
But the issue of height remained. Richard Coleman, from CityDesigner, a heritage consultant with YourTribe, said that it was “extraordinary that Royal Parks say that the development would be highly visible from Greenwich Park. Well, it won’t be highly visible. It’ll be visible in one view, and that’s the view where we come slightly up above the height of the secondary wing of the National Maritime Museum.”
But Dillon, the planning chair, said it was difficult to make an assessment because Your Tribe’s other block at Ravensbourne Wharf had not been built. “We’re making these assessments without the presence of the previous application,” he said “Members here raised concerns about the impact and it was like – okay – it got approved. But we’re now talking about a separate building which is going to be added on to another building that we can’t even see yet. So there is concern and we haven’t got the support from Historic England that we were looking for last time.
“So when we’re talking about ‘less than substantive’, that is an assumption, but it’s not the same assumption that’s shared by the community and other people that, that value the park and value the history of the Greenwich area.”
After two hours and twenty minutes of deliberations, the planning board voted for a site visit to look at the impact in Millennium Quay and the world heritage site. Gardner said: “Each application no doubt has great public benefit, but at some point you get to the tipping point.”
Councillors will make a decision on the scheme at a later date.
📩 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.