Despite the Planning Inspectorate granting retrospective planning permission, stringent conditions have been imposed to address the numerous shortcomings of the development
The controversial Mast Quay Phase II development by Comer Homes Group in Woolwich has come under fire for its poor construction quality, with the Royal Borough of Greenwich citing significant deviations from approved plans. Despite the Planning Inspectorate granting retrospective planning permission, stringent conditions have been imposed to address the numerous shortcomings of the development, including a multi-million-pound compensation package and mandatory upgrades to the site.
The Planning Inspectorate’s decision requires Comer Homes Group to pay £7.8 million to the borough. This sum includes £4.4 million earmarked for affordable housing elsewhere in Greenwich, a £318,970 carbon offset payment, and £3.4 million dedicated to improving the local area. Additionally, the developer must implement key changes within 36 months, such as creating a children’s play area, making the development wheelchair accessible, and replacing the widely criticized orange cladding. Failure to meet these conditions will result in the reactivation of an enforcement notice, mandating the complete demolition of the development.
A Troubled Project from the Start
The Royal Borough of Greenwich originally issued a planning enforcement notice against Comer Homes Group in September 2023, accusing the developer of deviating significantly from the original 2012 planning permission granted to the site’s previous owners. During the appeal process, Comer Homes Group conceded that it had built unlawfully, deviating from approved designs. However, the Planning Inspectorate stopped short of declaring the development as an “intentional” breach of planning regulations.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/66db6/66db65a9791877d9a81e8bb02396f028c9e478ff" alt=""
We love our borough and have little sympathy for multi-millionaire developers who think they can bypass planning rules. Mast Quay Phase II is a prime example of what happens when profit is prioritized over quality.
– Anthony Okereke
Council leaders have expressed disappointment over this aspect of the ruling but welcomed the strict conditions imposed. “We are relieved the Inspector’s decision enforces meaningful improvements to the development,” said a council spokesperson. “This ensures that some of the harm caused by Mast Quay Phase II can be mitigated, and we will be closely monitoring compliance with these conditions.”
A Package of Reforms and Financial Accountability
The £7.8 million compensation package represents a significant step toward offsetting the impact of the development. This includes funding for affordable housing, local infrastructure, and environmental improvements. Comer Homes Group is also required to make the site more family- and disability-friendly, including the installation of a children’s play area, better landscaping, and improved accessibility for wheelchair users.
Leader of the Council, Councillor Anthony Okereke, emphasized the importance of holding developers accountable. “We love our borough and have little sympathy for multi-millionaire developers who think they can bypass planning rules. Mast Quay Phase II is a prime example of what happens when profit is prioritized over quality,” he said. “This £7.8 million package and the required modifications are the result of taking a firm stand. Without enforcement, none of this would have been achieved.”
Okereke also criticized Comer Homes Group’s decision to rent out flats before the council had completed its investigation. “We warned them against this, but they chose to ignore us, creating unnecessary uncertainty for residents. Everyone in Greenwich deserves a safe, high-quality home, and this development failed to meet those basic standards.”
Calls for Higher Standards in Development
Councillor Majid Rahman, Cabinet Member for Planning, Estate Renewal, and Development, described Mast Quay Phase II as a “blight” on Woolwich’s skyline. “Even with the mandated changes, it will remain a substandard development resembling stacked shipping containers. Woolwich deserves better,” he said.
Rahman highlighted the missed potential of the site, which could have delivered high-quality riverside apartments reflecting Woolwich’s rich maritime history. “Good design and sustainable development are fundamental to the planning process. Many responsible developers work with us to create homes we can be proud of. Comer Homes Group’s approach stands in stark contrast.”
He added that if Mast Quay Phase II had been submitted for approval today, it would have been rejected outright. “That’s why we couldn’t let this unlawful development go unchallenged.”
A Warning to Developers
The council’s decisive action has also sparked broader conversations about the integrity of the planning system. Councillor Rachel Taggart-Ryan, Cabinet Member for Community Safety and Enforcement, stressed that the system is undermined when developers flout rules.
“Comer Homes Group had ample time to seek planning permission for changes they deemed necessary but chose to proceed without approval,” she said. “The enforcement action we took was unprecedented but necessary, given the magnitude of the violations. Thanks to our persistence, the Inspector is forcing the developer to implement significant improvements, from creating green spaces to ensuring accessibility.”
Taggart-Ryan warned of severe consequences if Comer Homes Group fails to meet the 36-month deadline. “If they don’t comply, we will not hesitate to enforce total demolition. All eyes are now on Comer Homes Group to deliver real, visible improvements.”
A Cautionary Tale
The Mast Quay Phase II debacle serves as a stark reminder of the consequences of cutting corners in development. For residents, it has been a period of uncertainty, and for the council, a prolonged battle to ensure accountability. While the imposed conditions and compensation package offer some solace, the legacy of the development raises questions about the broader challenges facing urban planning.