Reserved matters for 11 plots at Morden Wharf, Located off Tunnel Avenue, Greenwich

Changes to the scheme

The smallest block would increase by 30 centimetres, one block was removed, the retained blocks were reconfigured, and one was lengthened.

“The Planning Board accepted an illustrative presentation from the Planning Manager Major Developments who, in response to Member Questions the Planning Manager Major Developments advised that the smallest block, T4, would be increased by 30cm as set out in the report and agreed as part of the previous item on this agenda. One entire block was removed from the original proposal with the retained blocks reconfigured and one increased in length.”

Minutes

Flood risk concerns

The Environment Agency sought stronger safeguards for flood defences, phasing, nearby trees, access and independent design checking.

“ITEM NO: 8 PAGE NO: 18 impact the integrity of the flood defences in the future. Information should be provided on the closest trees to the flood defences including the species of tree, their minimum offset distance relative to the most landward extent of the flood defence, the full extent of their canopy when mature as well as any root barrier proposals. It should be noted that flexible barriers are likely to have a lifetime less than that of the development.”

“4) That the trees now proposed close to the flood defences so as to impact access or to have the potential to damage the flood defences over time. We are therefore seeking a change to condition 36, to modify / that part of the detailed element of the permission to ensure that trees are set back far enough for access and to not damage the flood defences and or a durable root barrier is installed to mitigate the risks.”

Officer report

What the applicant said

The agent and architect described reduced tower height, improved spacing, play areas, landscaping, cladding, the Thames Path and flood-risk measures.

Members’ views

Members welcomed the revised design, landscaping, biodiversity, play spaces, cycle provision and Thames Path improvements, while some retained concerns about tower height.

“Moving to determine the application a Member acknowledged past concerns about the height and scale of the development, given its low PTAL rating, but noted these matters have already been approved. They expressed strong support for the current scheme, praising the high- quality landscaping, strong urban greening and biodiversity outcomes, and the largely car-free approach with excellent cycle provision. The Thames Path improvements were also welcomed.”

“Another Member reiterated their longstanding concerns regarding very tall buildings but acknowledged improvements to the scheme, including the octagonal tower design and reduction in hight, increased 18-metre separation and removal of one building were welcomed. They were reassured by the architect about the careful selection and high quality of the cladding. While still fundamentally opposed to 35-storey buildings in…”

Minutes

The vote

The recommendation to grant planning consent was supported by six members, with no votes against and no abstentions.

“The Chair put the recommendation to grant planning consent to the vote with 6 Members in favour 0 Members against 0 Members abstaining…”

Minutes

The decision

The reserved matters were approved, subject to the listed conditions and authority for minor wording changes before the decision notice.

“That the Assistant Director (Planning & Building Control) be authorised to make any minor changes to the detailed wording of the recommended conditions as set out in Appendix 2 of the report and the minutes of this Planning Board meeting, where the Assistant Director (Planning & Building Control) considers it appropriate, before issuing the final decision notice.”

Minutes