Agenda item

This report provides an update on the Council’s development pipeline and how it aligns with the Climate and Ecology Strategy.

Will Noton (Head of Development) gave a presentation on how the Council’s development programme responded to the Climate, Ecology and energy challenge. He showed slides that highlighted the following key aspects:

• The vison and context of the design strategy which focused on energy efficiency, passive design and biodiversity.
• All projects were being delivered to enhance sustainability standards.
• The importance of Energy, Climate and Ecology considerations in housing.
• The Council’s Commitment to carbon neutrality – including air source heat pumps and solar PV integration
• Measurable sustainability outcomes with three 3 Passivhaus schemes under construction
• A case study of Hartopp and Lannoy – delivering 100% affordable Passivhaus homes.
• Resident benefits and aftercare to ensure homes performed effictvely post-handover
• Legacy and Future Outlook – expanding Passivhaus adoption and circular economy practices.

The Chair thanked Will Noton for his clear and engaging presentation and asked for further clarification on financial costs. Will Noton explained that there were 10 live projects delivering around 750 new homes, and all schemes were being self?financed through a combination of S106 contributions, GLA funding, grants. There would also be an element of borrowing which would be paid off through rental income. He stressed that all projects must remain viable and not place pressure on other Council services.

The Chair asked whether delivering homes to such high “green” standards created significantly higher costs or whether these were offset by grants. Will Noton confirmed that the costs were higher, but the team was ensuring schemes remained financially viable and did not impact other services. Despite the increased sustainability requirements, the programme was still managing to self?finance.

The Chair asked whether rainwater was being considered as part of the development design. Will Noton explained that rainwater harvesting was included in schemes where it was feasible to do so. He added that he would seek further information from the consultants on its application across current projects and report back to the Committee.

Action: Will Noton

Councillor Nikos Souslous asked for further clarification on how the developments would interact with district heating networks. Will Noton explained that officers planned to work with the design team to ensure each development was fully self?sufficient and able to operate without reliance on a district heating network. However, he confirmed that schemes would be future?proofed so they could connect to a district heating network if required in the future.

Councillor Nikos Souslous asked how transport and cycling infrastructure, as well as the impact on highways, would be addressed within the developments. Will Noton explained that all Council developments were car?free, with parking provided only for Blue Badge holders. He noted that the Council aimed to provide additional cycle parking for each scheme to encourage sustainable travel. He added that highways impact assessments would be undertaken as part of the Planning process. In addition, most of the developments would not be eligible for parking permits to support a low carbon approach.

Councillor Wesley Harcourt (Cabinet Member for Climate Change and Ecology) added that the Council had an Active Travel Working Group, which was looking at all aspects of sustainable transport and how these considerations would be integrated into the wider transport strategy.

Councillor Liam Downer?Sanderson asked for an approximate figure for the additional investment required to deliver all the sustainable elements, and how much would come from Council funding versus central government grants. Will Noton explained that there was an approximately 5–10% uplift in construction costs to achieve the sustainability standards outlined. He noted that most of this uplift was funded through affordable housing grants, Right to Buy schemes and some Section 106 contributions.

The Chair noted that residents living in these developments would benefit from significantly reduced energy bills, which was a major advantage in terms of affordability. She asked whether the Council was planning to deliver similar benefits across the borough so that more residents could benefit. Councillor Wesley Harcourt explained that the Council had a retrofit strategy in place, with 516 properties across the borough currently undergoing retrofit works. He added that this programme would be expanded across the wider Council housing stock, and that the Council was also working separately with private housing to support improvements wherever possible.

Councillor Nikos Souslous asked about the White City Central development, seeking more information on the scheme and its sustainability features. Will Noton explained that the project aligned closely with the sustainability approach outlined in the presentation. The scheme included 253 new homes, along with a new primary school and community centre, for which the Council already had planning consent. He confirmed that the development aimed to incorporate as many green initiatives as possible and would be built to Passivhaus standards, although it would not be fully Passivhaus?certified, which was the main difference.

Resident Questions

A resident asked whether an additional PAC meeting could be scheduled in the lead up to 2030, given the Council’s commitment to achieving its net?zero target by that year. He also asked how actions arising from meetings could be tracked by residents and councillors in a timely manner. He also requested an update on the progress of the transport strategy and the review of school streets.

The Chair explained that scheduling an additional PAC meeting was constrained by the Council’s meeting calendar and the volume of existing committee meetings, making it challenging to add further dates. She noted that regular discussions on the PAC work programme took place with Cabinet Members and officers, focusing on when items were sufficiently developed to return to the Committee. The Chair confirmed that both the transport strategy and the school streets review would come back to at a future meeting once fully formulated.

Councillor Wesley Harcourt added that he received regular reports and updates through his Cabinet Member Briefing sessions and would discuss with officers how these updates could be shared more effectively with residents and how reporting could be improved.

Action: John Galsworthy/Hinesh Mehta

A resident commented that it was encouraging to see the work the Council was doing on its own developments and praised the reopening of Hammersmith Bridge to cyclists, noting it was a positive step for active travel and felt that it should remain car free. He then asked about private developments, and how stringent the Council was when assessing major Planning applications and whether private developers were being held to the same sustainability standards, including Passivhaus principles. Councillor Nikos Souslous responded that, as Chair of the Planning Committee, green and sustainable design considerations were discussed regularly. He noted that officers consistently worked to maximise environmental standards and ensured developers incorporated as much passive and sustainable design as possible.

Hinesh Mehta (Assistant Director Climate Change) outlined the Planning policy framework under which applications were assessed. He explained that developers needed to comply with the National Planning Policy Framework, GLA guidance, and the Council’s Local Plan, all of which included detailed environmental and sustainability requirements. These standards must be addressed within proposals and were considered through the Planning Committee process.

The Chair added that, in her experience on the Planning Committee, many developments now voluntarily included solar panels, air?source heat pumps, and other green technologies, and she felt that larger schemes were often leading the way nationally in adopting these measures.

Councillor Wesley Harcourt noted that during his many years on the Planning Committee, issues relating to sustainability and carbon emissions were discussed in depth and remained an important part of evaluating Planning applications.

The resident expressed concern that they had not seen many green or sustainable features being incorporated into the Shepherd’s Bush Market development and requested further reassurance that environmental considerations were being applied to this scheme. The Chair requested for officers to feedback further information on the sustainability measures included within this development.

Action: Will Noton

A resident asked what percentage of Council properties would be retrofitted by 2030. Councillor Wesley Harcourt explained that the Council had approximately 17,000 properties, of which around 14,000 were rented and the remainder were leasehold. He noted that the Council was progressing the retrofit programme as quickly as possible, but it was currently difficult to provide a precise estimate of how many homes would be retrofitted by 2030. He reassured the Committee that housing remained a central part of the Council’s net?zero target.

The resident asked a follow?up question regarding the transparency of reporting and timelines, so progress could be measured more clearly. Hinesh Mehta explained that some elements of the Council’s climate work carried statutory reporting duties, and the Council had internal processes in place to track progress against climate targets. He noted that the Council published an annual climate report, with the latest edition due next month. He also highlighted that the Council Tax booklet, published each March, also included information on the borough’s progress against its climate commitments.

A resident asked for an update on the Council’s Green Investment Fund and how the

Council planned to invest the money. Rowan Ree (Cabinet Member for Finance and Reform) explained that the fund would be used to support a programme of capital projects designed to deliver environmental improvements across the borough. He noted that the money was required to be spent within two years of being raised, and the Council was working to ensure investment was allocated within that timeframe. He also confirmed that the Council would explore additional ways to share updates with residents and highlight the positive work being delivered through the fund.

RESOLVED:

That the Committee noted the report and the contents of the accompanying presentation.