Agenda item

To review the Cabinet Member Decision on Church Street – Sites A, B and C after the decision was called in by three ward members. To note that, as some documents relating to this item concern matters under Section 100 (A) (4) and Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended), as per paragraph 3, the public and press will be excluded from the meeting for this item when discussing exempt documents because it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information.

8.1.      The Committee received a call-in for the Church Steet, Sites A, B and C Cabinet Member Decision which was called in by three ward members for review.  The Chairman advised that, in light of the information before the Committee, the report for Agenda call-in contained confidential appendices concerning matters under Section 100 (A) (4) and paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act (1972) (as amended).

8.2.      The Chairman to reminded members that any discussions of or questions relating to the confidential appendices should not take place in the public session; and Committee members should reserve questions relating to the exempt appendices until the private session.

8.3.      The Chairman advised that it was the Committees role to scrutinise the reasons for the decision and Committee members had the choice to either confirm the decision or to sent it back to the Cabinet Member for reconsideration. 

8.4.      Councillor Nobel presented the reasons for the call-in;

8.5.      Height and density – Councillor Nobel explained to the Committee that the scheme proposed buildings of up to 10 storeys along Church Street and up to 13 storeys (all plus barrel vaulting) behind. It was felt that the impact of this is to alter the character of the area almost completely and will have a serious impact on Church Street Market. Although there is a wind microclimate assessment this does not refer to the market at all.

8.6.      Councillor Nobel advised the Committee that Church Street was already the most densely populated ward in London, and the number of residents will increase (and therefore density alongside it) substantially as large schemes are constructed. He noted that the population density in the ward receives barely a mention in any of the documents accompanying the cabinet member report. There is ample evidence of increased population density having negative effectives on metrics such as physical and mental health and happiness but also on issues such as crime.

8.7.      Church Street is also one of the most deprived wards and therefore the impact will be more keenly felt. Councillor Nobel asked:

•           What assessment was carried out of the consequences of further increase in population density in Church Street Ward?

•           At any point was consideration given to applying for Mayor of London funding, which would have allowed delivery of more affordable homes without the need for as many private market homes?

8.8.      Environmental Impact – Councillor Nobel advised the Committee that the Cabinet Member Report states that the City for All agenda is being enabled by being ‘Cleaner and Greener’, however demolition of 5 entire blocks as well as a number of street properties followed by the construction phase will create significant carbon emissions which are not acknowledged in the EIA or HIA reports. He noted that the HIA states that there will be a shortfall in achieving zero carbon emissions which will have to be met through a cash-in-lieu contribution (one assumes WCC paying WCC).

8.9.      Community space inc library – Councillor Nobel explained that with an increase in population there should also be an increase in the amount of space given to the communities for their own recreation, enjoyment and development. He advised that the space allocated for the library however is significantly less than what is afforded at present. This too does not seem to marry up with the City For All agenda which commits to supporting people’s mental wellbeing by creating active environments through for example recreation facilities.

8.10.    Private sale – Councillor Nobel felt that the City for All agenda recognised the effects of the pandemic on low-income residents, among other hard-hit groups, and commits to building homes for Westminster to be inclusive at all income levels. He advised the Committee that the price of a one-bedroom private market sale properties built in the Council’s own developments in nearby schemes is as follows:

•           The Masefield on Shirland Road - £635,000

•           Carrick Yard (the Luton Street development) - £720,000 +

•           Venice Court on Edgware Road - £655,000 +

8.11.    On the figures above and based on a 10% deposit of £63,500 for the cheapest flat, a single person or a couple would need an income of between £115,000 to £142,000 to be able to get a mortgage. Anyone wishing to start a family would need much more for a two-bedroom property.

•           Assuming a similar price point for the 50% of all new homes in this scheme which will be for private sale, how is WCC meeting its City for All commitments?

•           What steps will WCC take to ensure these properties are not used by individuals or businesses to park cash obtained by suspicious methods or obtained in places where there is little regard for the rule of law.

8.12.    Councillor Heather Acton introduced the report responding to the call-in reasons.  Councillor Heather Acton introduced Debbie Jackson (Executive Director, GPH) to present the report with Setareh Neshati (Head of Development), Shama Sutar- Smith (Programme Director) and Serena Simon (Director of Communities).

8.13.    Councillor Acton advised the Committee that 80% of respondents felt positive or somewhat positive about the proposals for the Church Street Market.  She added that this high rate reflected the work that the project team had been conducting with the residents and community groups.

8.14.    Councillor Acton informed the Committee and the members of the gallery that the plans for the library had been amended to include a mezzanine floor to increase the size and flexibility of the space.

8.15.    Councillor Acton advised the Committee that in order to achieve 50% affordable homes the building height and density was necessary. With regard to the environmental impact, Councillor Acton advised the Committee that in terms of carbon zero, the design has adopted measures under each of the heads of ‘be lean’, ‘be clean’ and ‘be green’, as detailed in the City Plan, enabling a site wide reduction in regulated carbon emissions of 61%.

8.16.    The Committee discussed: the trade-offs for ensuring the quality of the project and the number or residents the scheme would house.  The Committee also queried the policy regarding tall buildings in light of Grenfell, the number of properties that would be council owned and likelihood of those decanted residents moving back into the new Church Street Scheme.  Officers advised the Committee that in the context of London the height of the building was comparative, and the council had taken on board the lesson from Grenfell.  Officers also confirmed 50% affordable housing inline with planning or which 60% will be immediate and 40% will be social housing.  It was noted that all council tenants have the right to return.

8.17.    The Committee sought assurances that enough services would be available for the scheme, especially access to schools and GP’s.  The Cabinet Member confirmed that there would be adequate School places and GPs, and this was addressed with the additional community spaces.

8.18.    RESOLVED: Members of the Committee voted to support the Cabinet Member decision to planning.

For: Councillors Rowley, Arzymanow, Hitchcock, Cox and Glen.

Against: Councillors Nobel, Taouzzale and Begum.