The latest iteration of the Lea Bridge Gas Works development is out for consultation. We previously wrote about the development here: https://www.saveleamarshes.org.uk/2020/06/24/save-lea-marshes-objection-to-gasworks-proposal/
Here is our latest objection, which you can use to craft your own:
Removal/Variation of Condition(s) – 252331 – Lea Bridge Gas Works, 78 Perth Road, Leyton, London, E10 7PB – Objection on behalf of Save Lea Marshes
1. In this, their latest and third application, Berkeley Homes claim they are seeking to comply with recent advice from the government as in the attached sections of their new planning statement.
For example:
3.22 Moreover, it is relevant that the 30 July 2024 Ministerial Statement on Building in the Right Places provides strong support for the development of Brownfield Land such as the Site. It states that: ‘… The first port of call for development should be brownfield land, and we are proposing some changes today to support more brownfield development: being explicit in policy that the default answer to brownfield development should be yes; … reversing the change made last December that allowed local character to be used in some instances as a reason to reduce densities; and in addition, strengthening expectations that plans should promote an uplift in density in urban areas’
However, Berkeley/St William have already received permission, twice, to build on this brownfield site so this alleged determination to respond to government policy is nonsense.
Berkeley also claim they are complying with the demands of the Prime Minister and others to ‘accelerate housing delivery’.
1.9 As we explain in Section 3, both the Rt Hon Sir Keir Starmer KCB KC MP (the ‘Prime Minister’); and the Rt Hon Angela Rayner, former Deputy Prime Minister, and Secretary of State for Quod | Lea Bridge Gasworks: S73 Application | Planning Statement | September 2025 3 Housing, Communities and Local Government (the ‘Secretary of State’) have issued many ministerial statements recently encouraging the delivery of new homes ‘now’ to stimulate and accelerate economic growth to address the national housing crisis and the one in London
1.10 This application responds to those directions.
1.11 Given the recognised need to accelerate housing delivery, the immediate urgency of the housing crisis, and the programme for construction on Site, it is critical that the S73 Application is determined within the statutory period of 16-weeks.
However, this is their third attempt at getting this project off the ground.
So despite their protestations that they are simply complying with government requirements, the reality is St William have actually failed to deliver this project despite gaining two previous approvals.
Site Delivery 9.5 Approval of this S73 application would ensure that the Development can be delivered and built out, meeting the Government’s clear direction to accelerate housing delivery, whilst providing St William with viability certainty and the Council with additional housing.
Given they have failed to deliver on two previous occasions, rather than accelerating delivery, it is plainly not critical to determine this application without careful consideration, if need be beyond the statutory period.
2. In fact, a review of Berkely/St William’s multiple applications shows that the key feature of their multiple failures to deliver is a steady decline in the benefits being offered to the community along with greater negative impacts on the neighbouring community in terms of overcrowding, increased stress on services, likely worsening air pollution, harm to local green spaces and the increased sense of being overwhelmed by ever higher buildings.
First proposal 2020
7.4 The Planning Application seeks detailed planning permission for the development as set out in the description of development. A comprehensive phased development comprising demolition of existing buildings and structures, and erection of buildings to provide a mixed use scheme including 573residential units (Use Class C3) in 10 buildings ranging from 2 to 18 storeys
First permission April 2021
This was then not delivered as reported in this July 2022 article in the Waltham Forest Echo (https://walthamforestecho.co.uk/2022/07/26/lea-bridge-gasworks-development-stalls-due-to-construction-industry-issues/)
in (2022) May, Berkeley told residents it had pulled out all of its machinery and stood down its team due to “multiple global and national issues” affecting the construction industry.
An email from the developer’s technical manager, seen by the Local Democracy Reporting Service (LDRS), said ongoing issues around “supply chains, labour availability and material prices” have worsened due to the war in Ukraine.
They added: “At present both our internal team and external team of consultants have been stood down and reallocated to other projects.”
However, resident Simon Rix, 57, said those living near the site are worried the real reason is that the two 26-storey towers being built at nearby Lea Bridge Station have set a new precedent for taller buildings.
He added: “We’re relieved that they’re not doing it at the moment but we’re also worried they may have plans for the future for taller buildings and cheaper materials.”
A spokesperson for Berkeley told the LDRS the company never makes public comments about the timetable of developments.
They said the project is still going ahead as planned and dismissed any speculation as mistaken.
Community before Construction member Ben Copsey, who lives nearby and campaigned for better management of the contaminated soil, said: “My understanding of it after reading about remediation they’re proposing… is it’s too expensive for them.
“So in my view what they are doing is taking a step back from that to say to the council ‘if you want this application to be built, you need to lower the offer of social housing or green space’.”
Second Proposal August 2023
This Waltham Forest Echo article below of 18 July, 2024, reported that in August 2023 St William made new proposals of towers up to 21 storeys along with dozens of new homes.
Plans for 643 new homes on the site of a former gas works have been provisionally greenlit, though concerns about piping lodged by the Environment Agency will need addressing.
Waltham Forest Council’s planning committee approved the scheme, which includes a new nursery and cycling routes, at a meeting on Tuesday (16th July).
Developers St William Homes – a joint venture between Berkeley and National Grid – was granted permission last year to build 573 homes on the land south of Clementina Road.
However, in August 2023 St Williams Homes unveiled plans for dozens more homes in towers up to 21 storeys tall, citing increasing costs due to “high inflation”.
It turned out that the solution to “high inflation” was inflation in terms of population and the height of towers.
Second permission
The same article above, published in July 2024, revealed that on 16th July 2024 Waltham Forest had been given a further permission, provisionally, for this inflation in numbers and heights.
Third and latest proposal
Amendments include: 770 homes (an increase of 127 homes), Minor mix changes to approved plans; Amendments to the building footprint of Blocks C, D, E, F, G, J; Removal of Block H; Increase in buildings heights up to 26 storeys
In this latest application Berkeley/St William have taken the opportunity to cram in yet more units and thus increase the population on the site and increase the height of the towers, while actually reducing the percentage of ‘affordable’ units.
3. Height of towers
The result of all this failure to deliver is an increase in the height of towers from an original 18 storeys to 26 storeys and thus a greater sense for neighbours of being overwhelmed and overlooked.
In addition, this project further adds to the string of towers along the east side of the Marshes which will impact on the wider neighbourhood and further impinge on the enjoyment of critical green spaces both in Jubilee Park and on the neighbouring Marshes.
4. Affordable Housing
The further result of this repeated failure to deliver is to reduce the percentage of affordable housing being delivered to the point where no figure of the amount of affordable housing is provided in this latest application.
2020/21 Original Proposal/Permission
Total units 573, Affordable 158
2024 Provisional permission 2025 Proposal
Total units 643, Affordable 166 (AR 104) Total units 770, Affordable Unknown
Percentages of affordable housing in Berkeley/St William planning applications
2021. The total of affordable accommodation in 2021 was 158, without a breakdown of the kind of tenancy. This is out of a total of 573 units, making a percentage of 27.5%
There was no social tenure
2024. The total of affordable accommodation agreed in 2024 was 166, which includes all forms of affordable homes. (Berkeley introduce confusion by referring to affordable housing by habitable room as well as by homes.) This affordable accommodation of 166 is out of a total amount of housing of 643 homes. This made a percentage of 25.8%
The affordable rent tenure as opposed to intermediate tenure was 104 homes, a percentage of just over 16%.
There was no social tenure.
2025. Affordable tenures subject to viability assessment.
No percentage provided
No social tenure
5. So it seems Mr Rix and Mr Copsey, quoted back in the Waltham Forest Echo article above in July 2022, provide the best analysis of the behaviour of St William/Berkeley Homes.
However, resident Simon Rix, 57, said those living near the site are worried the real reason is that the two 26-storey towers being built at nearby Lea Bridge Station have set a new precedent for taller buildings.
Community before Construction member Ben Copsey, who lives nearby and campaigned for better management of the contaminated soil, said: “My understanding of it after reading about remediation they’re proposing… is it’s too expensive for them.
“So in my view what they are doing is taking a step back from that to say to the council ‘if you want this application to be built, you need to lower the offer of social housing or green space’.”
Mr Rix’s fear that the height of the buildings would rise to 26 stories was prescient while Mr Copsey’s view that Waltham Forest would be expected to lower its expectations of social housing or green space is borne out in the collapse of any clear statement of affordable housing delivery.
In fact, there is no social housing as such, as affordable housing is not actually social housing.
All this application offers in terms of affordable housing is a future negotiation subject to viability assessment.
All of Berkeley/St William’s protestations that they are complying with government requirements are entirely bogus. They have simply played the system in order to extract as much profit as possible.
6. Flood risk
This site is on flood plain 2 and 3.
The Sustainability Statement claims:
Lea Bridge faces a minimal risk of flooding from rivers and the sea, with an annual probability of flooding ranging from 0.1% to 1%. Due to the protection of the Thames Barrier and the River Lee Flood Relief Channel.
This statement is incorrect.
As is already known the flood relief channel is out of date. It has nearly overflowed on three occasions. Likewise, a further barrier on the Thames will need to be built further downstream as the present barrier is less and less effective.
Development further north in the Lea Valley has reduced the capacity of land to absorb flood water and has added further flows of waste water into the already overloaded sewage system.
The risk of extreme flash flooding is increasing with the acceleration of climate change.
This construction will be present for at least thirty years, almost certainly longer, during which time the risks of flooding in general and of extreme flash flooding in particular will further increase.
7. Climate change.
This application shows no sensible examination of the impacts of climate change and how flooding and other climate related risks are rising exponentially. Just now, for example, a new report highlights the ‘Increasing risk of mass human heat mortality if historical weather patterns recur’.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-025-02480-1
The UK and London are not immune to these impacts as was seen when temperatures reached the extraordinary level of over 40C in July 2022.
In terms of flooding, it is just under two years since Hackney Wick suffered severe flooding and the Old River Lea nearly burst its banks.
The reality is that temperatures are rising rather than falling, as they should be if effective action was being taken on the climate. The consequences are unknown but if the unprecedented kind of event that happened in 2022 is anything to by we can expect very severe impacts with extremes of weather becoming more frequent, even normal.
This section is simply appallingly complacent.
8. Impacts on open spaces and their enjoyment.
The developers and the council have already shown their disregard for the community and its enjoyment of open spaces by agreeing to substantial increases in population and by allowing ever taller towers in other applications. The Lee Valley Regional Park Authority has previously stated in its own documents that the Marshes will be negatively impacted by higher populations and by taller towers. Higher populations will degrade the park and the presence of tall buildings will reduce the enjoyment of those using the open spaces. The same applies with this application. The most severely affected park will be the neighbouring Jubilee Park. It is simply astonishing that the council can consider placing such tall towers right on the edge of such an important local green space.
This application does not seem to feature any analysis of these impacts or even refer to them. There does not appear to be any visual impact analysis. It is now widely recognised that people need green spaces and the experience of openness for their health and well being. This application is not just careless, it is foolish and fails to consider the health and wellbeing of the community.
9. Lea Bridge is already a crowded and deprived neighbourhood.
This is just one of a number of developments which include tall building planned or already constructed in the area and further south in Leyton. The agreed development at Lea Bridge station will demolish an important green space which includes a small wood. This development will greatly add to these pressures.
As shown above, Berkeley/St William have cynically delayed and expanded this project, added to the harmful impacts with ever higher towers, expecting the existing population and the public sector in an already stretched community to meet the extra pressures, all for profit.