Scores of residents in Silvertown have opposed plans to build a twelve-storey block of homes – with many claiming the land was earmarked as green space.
Neighbours living at the new Royal Wharf development say they were told no more housing would be built on land at Royal Crest Avenue, opposite Royal Wharf Primary School.
Developers attribute the confusion to “an historic marketing brochure” which “did not accurately represent” approved plans.
Oxley Wharf Property wants plannning permission to build a block of housing reaching up to twelve storeys at its highest point.
It would be built on currently vacant land in the new Royal Wharf housing scheme, which Oxley developed with another firm, Ballymore.
As many as 79 people have written to Newham Council to object to the new housing, as part of the most recent consultation on the plans.
Some said they were told that the land would be public green space when they bought their homes. However, outline plans for the whole development, approved in 2012, show developers had earmarked the site for housing.
One neighbour’s objection letter said: “The fundamental issue is one of broken trust and misrepresentation.
“This development was sold to residents as complete, with explicit commitments that the remaining land would serve the community as public green space.”
Another said: “Residents purchased their homes with the clear understanding that no further construction would take place and that the remaining plot would be delivered as public green space.
“Given the high density of housing and limited open areas, such green provision is both appropriate and necessary for the wellbeing of the community.”
A council planning officers’ report states the applicant emailed the chair of the Royal Wharf Residents’ Association to explain. The email, quoted in the report, appears to suggest a 2023 marketing brochure included wrong information.
It says: “Ballymore are aware that there has been contradictory information
previously in the public domain about this site. It was not our intention to mislead.
“An image within an historic marketing brochure – which was titled
illustrative masterplan – did not accurately represent the masterplan as
it was consented in 2012.”
Planning officers are recommending that councillors vote to approve the new building.
They say councilllors can’t take marketing material into account when making planning decisions. Decisions can only be made based on plans submitted with planning applications.
The report says: “Marketing or sales information sits outside the planning framework, as it is illustrative or commercial material and does not inform the planning assessment.”
Planning officers also aknowledge that the new building would reduce the levels of daylight and sunlight neighbours and the school receive.
However they say they consider the impact acceptable in an urban area.
The planning report says: “The objections received from residents have been fully considered by officers.
“It is acknowledged that the development would result in some adverse effects on the amenity of certain neighbouring and future occupants, particularly in relation to daylight, sunlight and outlook.
“These impacts, however, are not considered to be unacceptable when assessed against the site’s established urban context.”
Councillors are set to vote on whether to approve the plans at a strategic development committee meeting on Tuesday (10th).
