Context

Most building work in this country is subject to the need for planning permission, and the Woodberry Down Estate is no exception.

Currently, the remaining phases of the development, phases 5 – 8, have been submitted to Hackney for permission to proceed. At this stage the plans are an outline of what will happen with details (reserved matters) to be determined when further plans are submitted.

You can find all the documentation on the Hackney website https://developmentandhousing.hackney.gov.uk/planning/index.html?fa=getApplication&id=80887

It seems likely that anyone wishing to submit comments on the proposals will have until the end of April to do so, even though the official deadline has passed. Any member of the public can comment.

WDCO’s response

WDCO has not yet determined what its response to this application will be. The three options are to support or to oppose the proposals, or to remain neutral.

A discussion paper has been submitted to the board as a step towards identifying the questions to be addressed. The paper in full can be seen here . How to proceed with consideration of this paper will be raised as a topic at the WDCO board meeting on March 20th in the Redmond Centre beginning at 7:15. All are welcome to attend this meeting.

In summary the paper reads:

WDCO Board’s Questions About the Hackney Masterplan

The Woodberry Down Community Organisation (WDCO) Board has raised questions about the development proposal awaiting approval by Hackney Council. The plan would significantly increase housing density with up to 3,200 additional homes and buildings as tall as 21 storeys.

The Board highlights five major points:

1. Infrastructure Problems: Local transport, healthcare, schools, and utilities are already stretched thin. The increased population would overwhelm these services, with no clear plans for improvements.
2. Housing Affordability Concerns: The proposal reduces genuinely affordable social housing compared to what was originally promised. Many “affordable” units would actually be unaffordable for local residents, potentially forcing families out of their community.
3. Natural Light Issues: The tall, densely packed buildings would significantly reduce daylight for both existing and new homes, creating dark living spaces that don’t meet recommended standards.
4. Poor Design Quality: Residents are unhappy with the design of previous phases, describing them as bland, over-densified, and creating unwelcoming public spaces. They don’t want these mistakes repeated.
5. Environmental Impact: More buildings and residents will increase pressure on green spaces, worsen air quality and noise pollution, and create an “urban heat island” effect that traps heat in summer.

For each concern, the Board requests specific assessments and guarantees before the plan moves forward, including infrastructure improvements, maintaining promised levels of social housing, proper light studies, design reviews with resident input, and environmental impact assessments.