388-home estate redevelopment at Silk House, Annesley Avenue, London NW9

What was proposed

The application proposed demolishing the existing estate and building up to 388 homes in buildings from six to 28 storeys, with a bridge and landscaping.

“The application proposes the comprehensive redevelopment of the Silk House and Shoelands Court Estate. The scheme seeks full demolition of all existing buildings and structures and their replacement with a high-density, landscape-led residential neighbourhood.”

“Buildings to be demolished include Silk House and Shoelands Court residential buildings (97 existing Class C3 dwellings total), forty five garages, energy plant room and associated ancillary structures – as set out in the table below:”

Officer report

The site and its condition

The estate contained 97 homes, parking, garages and open space, but structural assessments identified a disproportionate collapse risk and it was largely vacant.

“The application site comprises the Silk House and Shoelands Court Estate, a 1.54 hectare residential estate located in Colindale, NW9. The land is occupied by two blocks, Silk House along the eastern boundary, and Shoelands Court to the north. Together both blocks provide 97 residential units, 62 surface parking spaces, 45 garages, a multi-use games area (MUGA), green space and an energy plant room.”

“Adjacent to the site is the Silk Stream, a main river running along the northern and eastern boundaries. Part of the riparian corridor, including mature trees and semi-natural vegetation, lies within the red-line boundary and forms part of the Silk Stream and Burnt Oak Brook Site of Borough Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC). The site lies entirely within Flood Zone 3, indicating high fluvial flood risk.”

Officer report

Earlier planning history

Earlier permissions covered replacement windows, electrical cupboards, an energy plant room and an environmental impact screening opinion.

“Table 6: Recent Planning history of the Application Site Reference Description of development Decision Decision Date H/00711/09 Replacement of existing windows and doors with new white UPVC windows and doors. Approved 14th April 2009 H/00706/09 Replacement of existing windows with new white UPVC windows. Approved 21st April 2009 H/00712/09 Replacement of existing windows and doors with new white UPVC windows and doors.”

“January 2020 25/2330/ESR Environmental Impact Assessment - Screening Opinion Approved 23 rd June 2025”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval subject to conditions, a legal agreement and referral to the Mayor, because substantial benefits outweighed limited and mitigated harms.

“That the Committee authorise the Director of Planning and Building Control to GRANT planning permission subject to the conditions and informative(s) set out in Appendix 1 to this report and the completion of an agreement satisfactory to the Director of Planning and Building Control securing the obligations set out in the Heads of Terms below;”

“That, following completion of the section 106 legal agreement referred to in resolution 2.1 above and subject to resolution 2.4 above, planning permission be granted in accordance with the Planning Application subject to the attachment of conditions listed in Appendix 1 of this report.”

Officer report

Public comments

One objection raised concerns about compensation, leasehold rights, redevelopment uncertainty, displacement and the treatment of leaseholders.

“Summary of comment Inadequate compensation: The leaseholder considers the freeholder’s offer to acquire their interest to be below fair market value and not reflective of their financial investment. Unreasonable terms for retaining a flat: The option to retain their property within a redeveloped building is described as financially prohibitive and likely to reduce their existing leasehold rights.”

Officer report

Who spoke

The planning officer presented the report and addendum, and a governance officer read a statement on behalf of Councillor Humayune Khalick.

Members’ discussion

Members asked officers questions before the Chair put the recommendation to a vote.

“The Committee then had the opportunity to ask questions of the officers.”

“The Chair moved to vote on the Officer’s recommendation to approve the application.”

Minutes

The vote

The vote was tied, with three members supporting approval and three opposing it, so the Chair used a casting vote.

“The Chair used his casting vote to approve the application.”

Minutes

The decision

Planning permission was granted subject to conditions, completion of a Section 106 Agreement and referral to the Mayor of London.

“RESOLVED that planning be granted subject to conditions and completion of a Section 106 Agreement and subject to referral to the Mayor of London.”

Minutes