Summary
Greenwich Council’s demolition order for two Woolwich tower blocks reversed. Developer Comer Homes to implement design changes, including replacing orange cladding. The decision highlights the importance of adhering to planning permission and maintaining accurate building information.
Successful low-energy building design hinges on careful planning. Focus360 Energy can help.
** Main Story**
Woolwich Towers Granted Reprieve
In a surprising turn of events, two tower blocks in Woolwich, initially slated for demolition, have received a reprieve. The Planning Inspectorate has ruled that the 23 and 15-story structures, collectively known as Mast Quay Phase II, can remain standing, provided the developer, Comer Homes, implements specific design modifications. This decision overturns Greenwich Council’s September 2023 demolition order, which cited 26 material deviations from the original 2012 planning permission.
A History of Discrepancies
The council’s demolition order stemmed from significant differences between the approved plans and the final construction. These deviations included the visually jarring bright orange cladding, non-compliant fire safety measures, and discrepancies in the number and type of residential units. Comer Homes appealed the demolition order, leading to a public inquiry between July and September 2024. The inspector’s decision, released in January 2025, acknowledged the developer’s acceptance of the unlawful implementation of the original scheme. However, it also pointed to the council’s apparent awareness of the ongoing construction deviations, given the project’s prominent location and scale.
Conditions for Survival
While sparing the towers from demolition, the Planning Inspectorate imposed strict conditions on Comer Homes. The developer has three years to rectify 11 material deviations. Key changes include replacing the orange cladding with a more subdued color, enhancing fire safety features, and making accessibility modifications. Failure to comply within the timeframe will reinstate the demolition order. Comer Homes must also provide a detailed work schedule to Greenwich Council within three months and pay a combined sum of £6.7 million for local facilities and affordable housing contributions.
Implications for the Industry
The case of Mast Quay Phase II serves as a cautionary tale for developers, underscoring the significance of adhering to planning permission and maintaining accurate building information throughout a project’s lifecycle. As Daniel Parkin, Sales Director of construction-focused CRM firm KMS, noted, this incident highlights the importance of following approved digital twins and upholding the “Golden Thread of Information.” These digital records, containing up-to-date and reliable data about a building’s design, construction, and maintenance, become critical in demonstrating compliance and avoiding costly rectifications or demolitions. The Woolwich towers’ near-demolition also highlights broader changes in UK building regulations, particularly for Higher-Risk Buildings (HRBs). These regulations emphasize stringent safety standards, including fire safety enhancements like mandatory second staircases and sprinkler systems.
Changes to UK Building Regulations
The UK’s building regulations have undergone significant revisions in recent years, primarily driven by the Grenfell Tower tragedy and a subsequent review of building and fire safety practices. These changes aim to enhance safety, accountability, and transparency across the construction industry. Some noteworthy updates include:
-
Higher-Risk Buildings (HRBs): A new regime now governs the design, construction, and management of HRBs, which are generally residential buildings over 18 meters or seven stories. The Building Safety Regulator (BSR) oversees these projects, enforcing stringent safety requirements and demanding a “golden thread” of information throughout a building’s lifecycle.
-
Fire Safety: Amendments to Part B of the Building Regulations strengthen fire safety measures in new buildings. Key changes include mandatory second staircases in residential buildings over 18 meters, sprinkler systems in new care homes, and the transition to European fire safety standards (BS EN 13501).
-
Dutyholder Responsibilities: The new regulations introduce clear dutyholder roles for all stakeholders involved in a construction project, ensuring accountability at every stage. These dutyholders bear legal responsibilities for meeting building regulations and maintaining safety standards.
-
Building Control Procedures: The building control process has also been updated, with changes to how building work commences, the requirement for more detailed information submissions, and the automatic lapse of plans after three years for uncommenced work. These changes streamline the process while ensuring greater oversight.
Given the council’s awareness of the deviations, what mechanisms could be implemented to ensure more rigorous oversight during construction, preventing such significant discrepancies from occurring in the first place?
That’s a crucial point! Stronger oversight is key. Perhaps independent inspections at critical construction stages, coupled with digital tools for real-time plan comparison and discrepancy flagging, could help. Greater transparency through public dashboards showing project progress against approved plans might also increase accountability. What are your thoughts?
Editor: FocusNews.Uk
Thank you to our Sponsor Focus 360 Energy
So, about that orange cladding… daring choice! Glad they’re changing it. Anyone else have a favorite cladding color they’d like to see make a comeback? Avocado, perhaps?
That’s a fun question! Avocado is certainly a blast from the past. It’s amazing how much cladding colour can impact a building’s character and blend into the surroundings. Perhaps a more muted tone would be a better choice to modernise the building?
Editor: FocusNews.Uk
Thank you to our Sponsor Focus 360 Energy
The “golden thread of information” mentioned is critical. Do you think mandatory, publicly accessible digital twins could prevent similar discrepancies in future projects, allowing for easier public and regulatory oversight throughout the construction process?
That’s a really interesting point! The idea of publicly accessible digital twins raises some fascinating possibilities for increasing transparency and accountability. It would certainly empower both regulators and the public to identify deviations early on. The challenge would be managing sensitive information while still providing meaningful oversight. I wonder how that could be best achieved?
Editor: FocusNews.Uk
Thank you to our Sponsor Focus 360 Energy
£6.7 million for local facilities and affordable housing – is that enough of a deterrent, or just the cost of doing (non)business? Asking for a friend… who may or may not be considering building a *slightly* taller tower.
That’s a great question! The £6.7 million figure certainly raises eyebrows. It makes you wonder about the overall cost-benefit analysis for developers when deviations occur. Maybe this case will prompt a review of penalty structures to ensure they truly deter non-compliance on future projects. What do others think?
Editor: FocusNews.Uk
Thank you to our Sponsor Focus 360 Energy
£6.7 million seems a tad… optimistic. I mean, given the orange cladding escapade, shouldn’t there be a “penalty shade surcharge” for particularly egregious aesthetic offenses? Asking for an artist friend.
Haha, love the “penalty shade surcharge” idea! It definitely adds a colourful dimension to the discussion around planning enforcement. Perhaps a sliding scale based on the Pantone chart of offensiveness? What shade would you nominate as the ultimate surcharge trigger, asking for a developer friend?
Editor: FocusNews.Uk
Thank you to our Sponsor Focus 360 Energy