I'm fundraising for Haematology Cancer Care by cycling the 100 mile route of the #RideLondon
on Sunday, if you can spare a quid it would help the staff at UCLH cancer centre in London who treat my Uncle's Leukemia.
Thx!😄🚴🏽#HCCfamily
https://justgiving.com/page/michael-okarimia-1683384741240
@[email protected]
#TeamHaem #haematology #fundraising #uclhcharity #UCLH
A hospital charity can reduce the number of social rented homes on the site of the former Middlesex Hospital Annex in Fitzrovia, a planning inspector has ruled.
In a verdict published on 1 December, Gareth Hughes approved UCLH Charity’s appeal and quashed the decision of Camden Council’s planning committee which had refused the application.
It is the latest chapter in the long-running — and yet to be concluded — dispute over the number of social rented homes in the redevelopment of the historic site at 44 Cleveland Street, which was originally a burial ground and a workhouse for St Paul Covent Garden and the Strand Union.
The land is in the same street as a former home of Charles Dickens, whose novel Oliver Twist is partly set in a workhouse.
UCLH Charity bought the development site from UCLH NHS Trust in 2017 and won planning permission in 2019 to build 53 homes — 36 at social rent, four at intermediate rent, and 13 to sell at market rate — as well as commercial and healthcare accommodation.
Thirty of the social rented homes are the legacy units from a historic section 106 agreement to redevelop a number of hospital sites in south Camden.
In 2004 Camden Council agreed that the then owners UCLH NHS Foundation Trust should build 30 affordable homes as part of its plans to redevelop the site. If this did not happen by 2010 the land would pass to the council for £1 so it could build the social homes instead.
But in 2021 UCLH Charity asked Camden to approve a new scheme of 57 homes — with 17 at social and intermediate rent and 40 at market value.
Camden refused, and the Charity appealed to the Planning Inspectorate.
The inspector’s ruling now means UCLH Charity can push ahead with its revised plans and only 13 homes for social rent will be built.
UCLH Charity said the original plan was not viable.
“The charity is facing a significant financial loss,” its viability expert Andy Smith told the planning inquiry.
Camden Council had not tried to trigger the £1 clause because it was reluctant to pit one publicly funded organisation against another.
However the Charity disputed whether the “legacy agreement” is still valid, and the High Court is set to rule if it does next year.
Thomas in his ruling stated that the “main thrust of the Council’s continued opposition to the appeal development relates to the failure by successive owners of the land to deliver on its commitments set out in the 2004 s106 Agreement and subsequent iterations”.
While he noted there had been “lengthy and genuine negotiations” over the matter of the social rented homes he framed his deliberation around what he considered to be the main issues of the appeal.
“[W]hat is now before me is essentially a new proposal that needs to be considered on its own merits,” he said.
He also commented on the fact that a lot of time had passed without the Council taking any legal action to secure the building of those 30 social rented homes.
“I am also conscious that the Council has had many years to enforce the s106 covenant but has chosen not to do so; this separate matter will be considered by the High Court shortly,” he wrote.
Thomas therefore confined himself to weighing up whether the development would provide “a suitable housing mix”, including affordable homes; whether it would have a harmful effect on the Grade II listed workhouse building; and if the scheme was energy efficient in the light of the climate emergency.
“The uplift in housing provision on a previously neglected brownfield site that has laid empty for fifteen years and at a point in time when the Council is failing on its housing targets despite housing being identified as one of its highest priorities, carries with it significant weight in the balance,” he said.
He also said plans for some affordable homes “despite acknowledged viability concerns” was significant.
“The development will bring about economic benefits both in the short term as development proceeds and longer term when residents will contribute towards this growing vibrant community through spending.”
He added that the reopening of the historic Bedford Passage to allow a pedestrian route between Cleveland Street, Charlotte Street and Tottenham Mews also offered benefits to the community.
Thomas said that whilst the height of a proposed block to the rear of the site “would have a harmful” impact on the workhouse it would be “at the lowest level” of harm.
He ruled that overall “the adverse impacts do not significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits when assessed against the policies in the framework taken as a whole.”
Camden Council said it is “extremely disappointed” by the ruling which allows a “substantially reduced affordable housing offer and less family homes”.
“We expected the developer to honour its original commitments and provide the full amount of affordable housing, and we rejected attempts to weaken and reduce this offer after starting the development,” said a spokesperson.
“Whilst we understand the challenges that many developers are facing with viability, this is a natural part of the risk that the development industry takes on when embarking on a project.”
The council pledged to continue its fight for the 30 affordable “housing legacy units.”
“The High Court will soon consider the enforceability of the original obligation for the 30 legacy units and the associated £1 clause, and the council will seek to defend our position robustly,” it said.
A court date has not yet been confirmed but Fitzrovia News understands that it is likely to be sometime in March 2023.
44 Cleveland Street planning appeal decision.
Additional reporting by Linus Rees.
#camden-council #cleveland-street #housing #middlesex-hospital-annex #planning #social-housing #strand-union-workhouse #uclh-charity
Camden Council and UCLH Charity faced a government planning inspector this month in another chapter of a long-running dispute over social housing on a former hospital site in Fitzrovia.
During a hearing at Camden’s Crowndale Centre on Wednesday 19 October UCLHC warned it might have to find a commercial partner to deliver new homes on the former hospital site.
It bought the Middlesex Hospital Annex site from the UCLH NHS Trust in 2017 and won planning permission in 2019 to build 53 homes — 36 at social rent, four at intermediate rent, and 13 to sell at market rate — as well as commercial and healthcare accommodation.
Thirty of the social rented homes are the legacy units from a historic s106 agreement to redevelop a number of hospital sites in south Camden.
But last year UCLHC asked Camden to greenlight a new scheme with 57 homes but with just 17 at social and intermediate rent and 40 at market value.
Camden Council refused, saying it “strongly opposed” the reduction in social housing. The charity then appealed to the planning inspectorate to try to reverse the decision.
At the start of a two-day hearing UCLHC told planning inspector Gareth Thomas that the disputed scheme with 40 affordable homes, rather than the 17 it proposes, is simply “not viable”.
Planning inspector Gareth Thomas. Photo: Julia Gregory.The council and hospital charity dispute a “£1 clause” in a 2004 s106 agreement that would allow the local authority to buy the land for the nominal fee if affordable homes are not built there.
The charity’s lawyer Rebecca Clutten said there is no evidence that the council “has the resources to build 100 per cent affordable homes on the site” even it took over the land for £1 — which the Town Hall has threatened to do.
The charity is also challenging the council in the High Court over the historic clause.
“It is likely that if the high court action is successful it will see the 30 legacy units swept away,” said Clutten.
“There is not an alternative scheme waiting in the wings that can be brought forward.”
She told the planning inquiry that changes to the economy, including the increased cost of construction and the impact of Covid mean it is simply not viable to build those affordable homes.
Developers also faced challenges with the cost of excavation as the land included the burial place for up to 10,000 people, from the former Cleveland Street workhouse and an overflow burial ground for St Paul’s in Covent Garden.
Excavations revealed the remains of 1,017 people.
The charity said it would not make a profit on the site, but is trying to minimise the deficit.
“The charity is facing a significant financial loss,” said its viability expert Andy Smith.
The council’s lawyer Morag Ellis said it was an “unusual” case with a long-running history, including the disputed “£1 clause”.
Camden said it was concerned that the scheme did not have enough larger affordable homes, despite the demand on its waiting list. Families face waits of nine years for a four-bedroom council home and six years for a three-bedroom home.
Its lawyer Morag Ellis told the inquiry: “The risk is that those 30 families or individuals will not have a home on the site. There is a parlous condition of affordable housing in the borough.”
UCLHC’s lawyer Rebecca Clutten said: “I understand the strength of feeling around this but this scheme cannot deliver those numbers.”
UCLHC said the scheme “is the best use of the site” which has sat vacant for 15 years and it would be providing 30 per cent or 17 affordable homes, even though both sides agree it is not viable.
It said it is not a property developer and is considering finding a joint venture partner to help fund the development.
Professor Nick Bailey, who is an interested party and helped draw up the Fitzrovia Area Action Plan said: “We need more large units.”
He explained there was a shortage of homes for families.
Bailey said he supports the council and that residents were under the impression that the number of affordable homes had been agreed.
The council also said it was concerned about the proposed use of active cooling, rather than a less environmentally harmful method. The developers are planning a £326,000 carbon offset payment for using the system.
The rear of the Middlesex Hospital Annex site: Photo: Julia Gragory.On Thursday 20 October planning inspector Gareth Thomas paid a visit to the site to see for himself.
The brick-built Georgian workhouse is a few doors down from the first London home of novelist and social observer Charles Dickens.
The writer lived in the street twice — a fact commemorated by a plaque on the building. Dickens’ novel Oliver Twist may have been based on this very workhouse.
The workhouse and two neighbouring buildings became part of the Middlesex Hospital before falling vacant.
Work is already underway on the site which will include six medical diagnostic machines and a new home for the breast cancer centre.
The plans also include penthouse flats on the upper storeys of the listed building.
A decision on the appeal is likely to be made within weeks and will be published on the planning appeal website.
#camden-council #cleveland-street #housing #planning #planning-appeal #planning-inspectorate #social-housing #uclh-charity
A planning inspector will this month hear arguments from Camden’s planners and from University College London Hospitals Charity in what could be the conclusion to a long-running dispute over social housing on the former Middlesex Hospital Annex — and former Strand Union Workhouse — site in Cleveland Street.
I say “could be the conclusion” because this miserable saga and waste of public money is likely to drag on.
UCLH Charity are asking the planning inspector to overturn the decision of Camden Council which refused permission for it to slash the amount of social housing on the former hospital site which is currently being developed.
Camden could have resolved the long-running dispute many years ago by enacting a clause in a 2004 legal agreement to buy the whole site for £1 and build the housing itself.
But in 2015 the then leader of the council, Sarah Hayward, said that this would not be a fit and proper use of public money.
“What was agreed was that if they didn’t build it we would be able to purchase the site off them for £1. If we enforce that it would be one publicly funded taxpayer institution taking on another publicly funded institution. We are trying not to do that as we don’t want to line the lawyers’ pockets,” she told a public meeting.
But it seems that UCLH Charity have no compunction about spending its grant-making funds on legal fees and taking on another publicly funded body.
Its main argument is that the development is no longer viable with the amount of social housing it is obliged to provide. It cites the rising costs of construction and archaeological work, and that it has not benefited by the development of the other hospital sites which are part of the 2004 legal agreement.
UCLH Charity bought the site in March 2017 from UCLH NHS Trust which had redeveloped a number of sites in south Camden.
By that time the Middlesex Annex main building had already been listed by English Heritage and its history was well known, including the presence of a burial site.
Without having to stick a spade in the ground, a 2017 archaeological report anticipated — what many people already knew — that thousands of human remains were likely to be on the site.
Yet in their statement of appeal UCLH Charity claims:
“The extent of underground archaeology was unknown (and could not have been known) until the wings were demolished, and during that process, more than 1,000 articulated skeletons in communal burial pits were discovered, recorded and removed.”
Camden Council rightly dismisses the claims made by UCLH Charity and states, among other things, that the charity acquired the site with full knowledge of the circumstances.
When you buy a second hand building plot, you get it “as seen”. Caveat emptor, and all that.
No-one forced UCLH Charity to buy it… except, perhaps, UCLH NHS Trust. Who knows what goes on in a basement car park of a PFI-built hospital these days?
Camden’s planners, for a pleasant change, are having none of it.
“The Council considers that the Charity’s situation is of its own making (or its predecessor, The Trust) due to the long delays in the delivery of the legacy units,” says Camden.
“The Council considers that the need for The Charity to honour its obligations is of utmost importance and the unviability of the proposal is not relevant in light of the fact The Trust has benefited from the ability to defer its earlier commitments to the provision of affordable housing.”
A planning inspector will now attempt to settle the argument after a costly two-day hearing.
But the matter won’t end there because UCLH Charity is taking a belt-and-braces approach — ie, paying twice — and simultaneously “issuing a claim against LB Camden in the High Court to seek a declaration (amongst other matters) to confirm that the 2004 Agreement ceased to have effect as of 29 July 2009”.
So much for not wanting to line the lawyers’ pockets.
Appeal by University College London Hospitals Charity against refusal of a Variation or Removal of Condition(s). 10 am on Wednesday 19 October 2022 at the Crowndale Centre, 218 Eversholt Street, London NW1 1BD. (2021/3087/P – Middlesex Hospital Annex, 44 Cleveland Street, London W1T 4JT)
5th-Oct-Middlesex-Hospital-IHDownload#camden-council #middlesex-hospital-annex #planning #uclh-charity
michaelokarimia
Editors
