Redevelopment of St Clare's Business Park in Hampton Hill has been approved despite falling short of Richmond Council's Local Plan. 

Notting Hill Home Ownership, one of London's largest housing associations, proposes to demolish the existing buildings on St Clare Business Park and 7-11 Windmill Road site, Hampton Hill.

In its place, it plans to erect a development site of a mixed use building between two and five storey site both of residential flats and a commercial space. Also part of the plan, the housing association proposes 14 residential houses and a two-storey commercial building.

Proposing 86 flats, only 35% (35 homes) would be affordable even though Richmond Council's Local Plan states at least 50% of affordable housing should be provided on site. 

It adds: "If the minimum level of affordable housing is not provided...the application for development will be refused." 

Elevations of the planning designs. (Photo: Notting Hill Home Ownership)

However, Chair Cllr John Coombs concluded at a Richmond Council planning meeting on 11 October: "Even if it doesn't comply totally to what our policies are, on balance, it is better to accept it than reject it." Cllr Coombs added he was voting with "a heavy heart." 

Amanda Ribbons, resident on the southern border of the site, spoke against the development at the planning meeting. She said: "It's too high, it's different, it's too dense, it's overbearing, it's unneighbourly, it's out of character and it's just too much for our crowded pocket of Hampton Hill." 

Ms Ribbons also raised concerns of lack of privacy and overlooking. She said: "We will be going from eight windows of a fairly benign office block to 22 habitable rooms looking into our lives- not obscured glazing." 

Objecting the motion was member of Hampton Hill Business Association, Georgia Ballantine. who said: "We need these houses, but the right sort and not fewer than policy stipulates." 

She added: "Policy requires 40% which is 28 for rent, 10% which is seven for shared ownership. The scheme proposes 15 for social rent and 20 shared ownerships, the reverse of your current policy." 

Further to her argument was a calculation from a Hampton Hill Estate agent which concluded: "No one on an average Richmond wage will be able to afford or get a mortgage for the shared ownership units." 

Ms Ballantine added: "The over provision of intermediate homes would be out of salaried jobs, not those we need in Hampton Hill." 

Current pictures of St Clare's Business Park. (Photo: Notting Hill Home Ownership)

Representing the Notting Hill Home Ownership, Julian Wane explained the 2019 proposal accounted for 50% of social housing, however, due to revisions and losing 12 homes, the new scheme had to reduce to 35%. Mr Wane also cited the different economic climate impacting the deliver.  

Responding to why the developer has prioritised more affordable housing than social renting, Mr Wane said the company "saw a local need for intermediate housing, particularly one and two-bedroom flats for shared ownership."  

He added: "We believe that these flats are affordable for people in the local area." 

Local resident in Hampton Hill Mr Winfield, argued in favour of the application citing the current housing crisis and needing to make housing more inclusive. 

 He said: "As a borough of London...we need to make sure we pull our weight and do our bit for building houses." 

He noted last year Richmond only built 38 affordable houses, compared to Greenwich's 2,426 affordable homes. 

Concluding, Mr Winfield said: "The housing crisis is not an abstract concept. It is a reality that affects my neighbours, friends and family. All I'm asking is that people, like myself, can have the chance that people like yourselves had when you were younger to find a wonderful place to live." 

Proposed building designs. (Photo: Notting Hill Home Ownership)

In his summary, Cllr Coombs spoke anecdotally of spending time with families in extremely overcrowded homes because of the lack of affordable and social housing. 

He said: "We have over 5000 families...stranded in appalling accommodation simply because the market is not building social housing. It's a national disgrace."  

"People will come to me in a one-bedroom flat with four children, and I'll know we'll never be able to house them, ever. Simply because we don't have the properties. It's heartbreaking  

"On balance, I'm going to grab the few social housing in this development because I know how huge the need is." 

The planning committee voted seven in favour of the proposals, and two against.

Public engagement on the proposal showed 370 objections, 13 comments and just two supporting documents.