Plans to add an extra floor to a five-storey block of flats in Greenwich have been approved despite strong objections from residents living below.
A proposal to add eight new homes on top of Woodlands Heights on Vanbrugh Hill was approved by Greenwich Council’s Local Planning Committee on February 19. The committee voted to approve the application with new conditions, in particular strengthening the construction management plan to assuage concerns of residents during the 15-month construction period.
This comes after a previous planning application to build more flats on top of the former nurses’ home was refused on appeal in 2023. The roof extension was deemed to be over dominant, having a detrimental impact on Woodlands Heights itself and nearby streets.
It was also refused because of the specific effect it would have on properties in Lasseter Place which lies just south of the 1920s building. However, the council ruled that the new application addressed these concerns.
Lasseter Place residents objected to the scheme as they felt an extra level on Woodlands would encroach on their privacy. Clive Corlett, speaking on behalf of Lasseter Place residents, said the new flats would have large windows “looking directly into our bedrooms, kitchen, sitting rooms and gardens”.
Mr Corlett said: “It cannot be right to permit the development intended for the luxury penthouse market and totally divorced from the real requirements for affordable housing in the borough all at the cost of making life a potential nightmare for local people, especially those living in Lasseter Place.”
James White, a top floor resident of Woodlands Heights, spoke on behalf of over 100 residents in the 42-flat block objecting to the scheme. He said that Woodlands residents felt the scheme was not materially different to the previously refused scheme.
Mr White said the design of the new floor was not in keeping with the surrounding area and that new balconies above his home would enable late night noise. He also said the construction phase would mean residents faced “15 months of scaffolding and hoarding, alongside noise, dust, loss of light, privacy issues and prolonged impact on physical and mental wellbeing”.
Other Woodlands Heights residents also spoke at the meeting, raising concerns that the new floor would affect their privacy, its construction would negatively impact their residential amenity and an increase in traffic from delivery and construction vehicles would cause potential highway safety concerns.
One resident objected to portable toilets being situated outside his flat during the 15 months of construction because of “persistent smells”. However, the council added in extra conditions so that the placement of toilets would not impact on current residents.
Cllr Mariam Lolavar, who represents Blackheath Westcombe ward in which Woodlands Heights is situated, objected to the proposal on behalf of her ward and other ward councillors. She raised concerns that the plans did not contain any affordable housing nor any family homes.
Cllr Lolavar said: “People are not able to see what the positives here are. People are really struggling, and all I think they can see is a developer looking to profit from putting another storey on top and I think it’s a site that will struggle to manage that in lots of different ways.”
In response to her concerns, committee chair Gary Dillon spoke of the pressures Greenwich Council was under to provide homes wherever necessary to combat the housing crisis. A council officer also said the small size of the scheme was below the threshold where its developer would have to provide affordable housing.
James Cohen spoke on behalf of the applicant Avon Group and said that the revised scheme tackled issues raised by the planning inspector, these being the new storey’s effect on Lasseter Place and on-site movement and servicing arrangements. For the latter point, a new layout “prioritising pedestrian safety” is proposed alongside two new loading bays.
For the Lasseter Place problem, Mr Cohen said the extension on the southern side of the building was set back by four metres to avoid overbearing. He also said the new storey had been redesigned and this “improves overall proportions, reduces perceived bulk and enhances the building’s appearance both in near and longer views”.
When it came to deliberating the proposal, Cllr Dave Sullivan said Mr Cohen addressed almost every concern raised in his “excellent and comprehensive” presentation and report. Cllr Sullivan also felt that if the proposal was refused, it would be overturned at appeal. Cllr Pat Greenwell, alongside Cllr Ann-Marie Cousins, voted against the proposal as she felt the new scheme did not differ enough from the previously refused scheme.
