← back to index
Full 2010 03 gla brownfield estate report

Sites E, G, I-1 & I-2, Brownfield Estate, Brownfield Street, Poplar
Planning

Greater London Authority, 2010

Quotes

p.1 The Proposal
The demolition of 30 flats on three sites, and the construction of 144 flats and houses on four sites, including a 20-storey tower, and 150 sq.m of community space, together with associated landscaping. 

p.3 Housing and affordable housing 
At consultation stage, the Mayor noted that the development would provide 48.5% affordable housing, which is higher than the Council’s current provision. The tenure mix and variety of dwelling sizes is appropriate. The applicant’s viability assessment is robust, with higher than average exceptional costs required as a result of decanting existing residents across the estate. The proposal complies with Tower Hamlets’ interim housing guidance and emerging core strategy. The additional justification demonstrates that the proposed housing provision is acceptable and will address local need, and GLA officers are satisfied that the maximum potential provision of affordable housing will be provided. 

p.5-6
In response to its consultation, Tower Hamlets received 208 objections from local residents. Objections were made on the basis of: 
Design: Effects on listed buildings and conservation area; the scale, mass and appearance of the proposed buildings, and the level of development proposed. 
Density: Overdevelopment of the estate manifesting through a lack of parking, open space, utilities and social infrastructure. 
Housing: A lack of affordable housing provision, including family provision. Amenity: Loss of light, effects on daylight and sunlight, effects of construction. 
Other: Increased energy consumption resulting from the new development, lack of consultation, views, management and property values. 

A further 82 letters were received in support of the proposal, along with three supporting petitions comprising 286 signatures. Issues of support included addressing the need for housing, the regeneration benefits of the scheme and the proposed improvements to the public realm. 

Additionally, one letter of objection has been sent from a local resident directly to the Mayor. The resident requests that the Mayor consider issues of local affordability, stating that the criteria used by the developer will not help local people (“income will need to be £30,000, while the local average household income is £18,000), and objects to the level of family housing that would be provided within the scheme. An objection is also made on the basis of local traffic impact and the resident requests that the Mayor consider the wider traffic impacts, stating that the residents wish to agree an infrastructure plan with the Council before building commences. It is not considered that there is not sufficient justification for the Mayor to act as the Local Planning Authority and determine the application himself (see commentary elsewhere within this report), and while the wish is expressed for the Council, the developer and local residents to work as closely as possible, he cannot intervene in local issues of need and traffic generation. 

p.12-13 Housing and affordable housing
London Plan Policy 3A.10 requires borough councils to seek the maximum reasonable amount of affordable housing when negotiating on individual private residential and mixed-use schemes. In doing so, each council should have regard to its own overall target for the amount of affordable housing provision. Policy 3A.9 states that such targets should be based on an assessment of regional and local housing need and a realistic assessment of supply, and should take account of the London Plan strategic target that 35% of housing should be social and 15% intermediate provision, and of the promotion of mixed and balanced communities. In addition, Policy 3A.10 encourages councils to have regard to the need to encourage rather than restrain residential development, and to the individual circumstances of the site. Targets should be applied flexibly, taking account of individual site costs, the availability of public subsidy and other scheme requirements. 

Paragraph 20.3 of the Housing SPG notes that in order for a development to achieve 100% replacement of demolished social rented units, development at significantly increased density may be necessary to generate sufficient value from market development to support replacement of affordable housing provision or to achieve a mixed and balanced community objective. In this instance it is important to note that there will be no net loss of affordable social rented housing. 

Three of the sites contain homes that will be demolished, incorporating 15 rented studio flats, 13 rented one-bedroom units and 2 private one-bed units. The development will provide 48.5% affordable housing (43.9% once demolition is taken into account). This overall figure is higher than the Council’s current provision. There is a high tenure mix across the estate, and although there will only be no net gain or loss of social rent affordable housing, there will be a gain in the number of habitable rooms. The net gain in the number of affordable units will be intermediate tenure (22 units), and this increase is supported by officers. Additional social rented units will be provided in future phases. Officers wish to inspect the scheme’s viability appraisal with regard to the level of affordable housing provision, as well as the wider benefits proposed by the scheme. 

Of the new affordable homes, there will be a tenure split of 60% social rented and 40% intermediate. This split is acceptable and is compliant with the levels recommended within the draft replacement London Plan. 

The proposed dwelling mix is appropriate and responds to local needs. 20 of the 114 units will be four- or five-bedroom homes. A further 23 will be three-bedroom homes. The combined figure of 43 units represents 38% of unit numbers as family homes.

Questions
& Answers

Will there be a net gain or loss of social rented accommodation within the Brownfield Estate following regeneration works?

Page(s): 1-13

The Proposal
The demolition of 30 flats on three sites, and the construction of 144 flats and houses on four sites, including a 20-storey tower, and 150 sq.m of community space, together with associated landscaping. 

Housing and affordable housing 
At consultation stage, the Mayor noted that the development would provide 48.5% affordable housing, which is higher than the Council’s current provision. The tenure mix and variety of dwelling sizes is appropriate. The applicant’s viability assessment is robust, with higher than average exceptional costs required as a result of decanting existing residents across the estate. The proposal complies with Tower Hamlets’ interim housing guidance and emerging core strategy. The additional justification demonstrates that the proposed housing provision is acceptable and will address local need, and GLA officers are satisfied that the maximum potential provision of affordable housing will be provided. 

In response to its consultation, Tower Hamlets received 208 objections from local residents. Objections were made on the basis of: 
Housing: A lack of affordable housing provision, including family provision. 

Additionally, one letter of objection has been sent from a local resident directly to the Mayor. The resident requests that the Mayor consider issues of local affordability, stating that the criteria used by the developer will not help local people (“income will need to be £30,000, while the local average household income is £18,000), and objects to the level of family housing that would be provided within the scheme. 

Housing and affordable housing
London Plan Policy 3A.10 requires borough councils to seek the maximum reasonable amount of affordable housing when negotiating on individual private residential and mixed-use schemes. In doing so, each council should have regard to its own overall target for the amount of affordable housing provision. Policy 3A.9 states that such targets should be based on an assessment of regional and local housing need and a realistic assessment of supply, and should take account of the London Plan strategic target that 35% of housing should be social and 15% intermediate provision, and of the promotion of mixed and balanced communities. In addition, Policy 3A.10 encourages councils to have regard to the need to encourage rather than restrain residential development, and to the individual circumstances of the site. Targets should be applied flexibly, taking account of individual site costs, the availability of public subsidy and other scheme requirements. 

Paragraph 20.3 of the Housing SPG notes that in order for a development to achieve 100% replacement of demolished social rented units, development at significantly increased density may be necessary to generate sufficient value from market development to support replacement of affordable housing provision or to achieve a mixed and balanced community objective. In this instance it is important to note that there will be no net loss of affordable social rented housing. 

Three of the sites contain homes that will be demolished, incorporating 15 rented studio flats, 13 rented one-bedroom units and 2 private one-bed units. The development will provide 48.5% affordable housing (43.9% once demolition is taken into account). This overall figure is higher than the Council’s current provision. There is a high tenure mix across the estate, and although there will only be no net gain or loss of social rent affordable housing, there will be a gain in the number of habitable rooms. The net gain in the number of affordable units will be intermediate tenure (22 units), and this increase is supported by officers. Additional social rented units will be provided in future phases. Officers wish to inspect the scheme’s viability appraisal with regard to the level of affordable housing provision, as well as the wider benefits proposed by the scheme. 

Of the new affordable homes, there will be a tenure split of 60% social rented and 40% intermediate. This split is acceptable and is compliant with the levels recommended within the draft replacement London Plan. 

The proposed dwelling mix is appropriate and responds to local needs. 20 of the 114 units will be four- or five-bedroom homes. A further 23 will be three-bedroom homes. The combined figure of 43 units represents 38% of unit numbers as family homes.