This week in Greenwich:

Major Redevelopment Approved for Former Lewisham College Site

The Planning Board met on Tuesday 13 October 2026 and granted full planning permission for a significant redevelopment of the former Lewisham College site at 1 Deptford Bridge, London, SE8 4HH. This decision paves the way for the demolition of the existing building and the construction of new structures ranging from one to 30 storeys. The development will incorporate a mix of residential units, community spaces, educational facilities, and a drinking establishment, alongside landscaping and highway improvements.

The application, classified as an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) development, was approved subject to several conditions. These include referral to the Mayor of London, the satisfactory completion of a Section 106 Legal Agreement, and the fulfilment of conditions outlined in the report. Crucially, the permission is also contingent on the prior grant of planning permission for the corresponding element of the development within the London Borough of Lewisham.

The development promises to deliver a residential-led, mixed-use scheme that includes 10 affordable homes within the Royal Borough of Greenwich. This represents 5.1% affordable housing by habitable room, which falls below adopted policy targets but is considered viable. The scheme also includes affordable workspace within Block H for a period of 15 years. Significant public benefits identified include new homes, affordable housing and workspace, public realm improvements, new routes, play space, biodiversity enhancements, land remediation, improved flood defence arrangements, and access to Deptford Creek.

Despite the approval, the report acknowledged that the provision of affordable housing falls below policy targets. This decision was made after careful consideration of the development plan, national policy, and material considerations, including extensive consultation responses and detailed assessments.

You can find more details about the Planning Board meeting here: Planning Board on 13 October 2026.

Support for Residents with No Recourse to Public Funds Under Review

The Overview and Scrutiny Committee was scheduled to review the council's support for residents with No Recourse to Public Funds (NRPF) on Thursday 15 October 2026. This issue is of critical importance, as residents with NRPF face significant barriers to accessing welfare benefits and housing assistance, placing them at high risk of destitution and homelessness.

The council has maintained a dedicated NRPF service since 2014, supporting individuals under frameworks such as the Children Act 1989 and the Care Act 2014. As of June 2026, 146 people were receiving support from the NRPF team, with an average of 11 assessments conducted per month since April 2026. The report highlighted the increasing demand, influenced by national immigration policy and economic factors.

The review was set to examine the impact on housing and homelessness services, noting that these residents are often ineligible for mainstream homelessness assistance. The council's commitment to its Borough of Sanctuary status was also to be considered. Partnership working with community organisations and legal advice providers was emphasised as vital. The impending appointment of an NRPF Housing Inspector aims to ensure accommodation standards are met.

• Impact: For vulnerable individuals and families with NRPF, the council's support is a lifeline, preventing destitution and providing essential assistance. Inadequate support can lead to severe hardship, impacting health, education, and overall well-being.
• Stakes: Ensuring robust support for residents with NRPF aligns with the council's commitment to fairness and inclusivity. The effectiveness of these services directly affects the most vulnerable members of our community and their ability to access basic necessities and opportunities.

The committee was also scheduled to review the council's Medium Term Financial Strategy and Transformation Programme, receiving an update on the financial position and progress on savings delivery. A verbal update from the Leader of the Council and a review of scrutiny recommendations were also on the agenda.

You can find more details about the Overview and Scrutiny Committee meeting here: Overview and Scrutiny Committee on 15 October 2026.

Eltham Crematorium Notes Financial and Operational Updates

The Eltham Crematorium Joint Committee met on Monday 12 October 2026, noting financial reports and operational updates. The committee agreed to proceed with boundary wall repairs, opting for a two-brick thick wall at a cost of £68,526.39. This decision aligns with the council's commitment to providing sensitive bereavement services and improving environmental sustainability.

The committee also noted that no planned works are scheduled for 2026/27, and works to the small ponds are expected to result in an underspend. Financial reports indicated a projected underspend of £13,393 for the year, with the Repairs & Renewals Reserve projected to close at £570,000 for 2026/27. The committee acknowledged data on CO2 emissions for new cremators, supporting the commitment to a cleaner environment.

You can find more details about the Eltham Crematorium Joint Committee meeting here: Eltham Crematorium Joint Committee on 12 October 2026.

This week in Greenwich:

Schools Face Financial Storm as Pupil Numbers Drop and Deficits Grow

The Schools Forum was scheduled to meet on Wednesday 7 October 2026 to confront a stark financial reality facing Greenwich's schools. The core issue is the Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG), the primary funding stream for education, which, despite an overall increase, is being stretched thin by a significant drop in pupil numbers. This situation is particularly concerning for the High Needs Block, which funds support for children with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND), and is projected to have a massive overspend.

The Dedicated Schools Grant: A Growing Deficit

The 2026-27 Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG) shows an increase of £19,944,834. However, this positive headline figure is overshadowed by a loss of 1,098 pupils. This reduction in student numbers directly impacts the funding allocated to schools.

• High Needs Block Pressure: The most alarming projection is an overspend of £27.8 million in the High Needs Block. This block is crucial for providing essential support to children with SEND, including funding for Education Health Care Plans (EHCPs). The increasing demand for these plans is a major driver of this deficit. While a government grant may cover a substantial portion of the accumulated deficit, a £2.7 million ongoing financial pressure remains. This could mean longer waits for assessments, reduced specialist support, or difficult choices for schools struggling to meet the needs of all their pupils.
• Schools Block Challenges: Even the Schools Block, which funds mainstream education, faces challenges. Despite an overall funding increase, the drop in pupil numbers means less money per pupil. De-delegated budgets, where the local authority retains funds for specific services for maintained schools, also show a projected overspend of £52,610 within the Trade Union budget.
• Early Years Funding: The Early Years Block has seen a substantial funding increase of 16.15%. However, a projected underspend of £0.7 million is anticipated, primarily within central contingency and SEND inclusion budgets.

The Looming 2027-28 Deficit

Looking ahead to 2027-28, the projected accumulated DSG deficit is a staggering £54 million. This figure is particularly concerning as a statutory override that has helped manage deficits is set to end in March 2028. If the SEND reform plan is approved, some of the deficit may be covered, but significant financial risks will persist.

Schools Operating in Deficit

The meeting was also set to address the growing number of schools operating with deficit revenue balances. In the 2025-26 financial year, 23 maintained schools closed with a combined deficit of £8.8 million. This trend is expected to worsen, with modelling suggesting a continued weakening of school balances, particularly for smaller institutions.

• Impact: Falling pupil numbers and rising costs are creating a perfect storm for school finances. This could lead to larger class sizes, reduced extracurricular activities, cuts to essential support staff, and a strain on resources for students with the greatest needs.
• Stakes: The financial health of our schools is directly linked to the quality of education our children receive. A sustained deficit could impact teacher recruitment and retention, limit curriculum offerings, and ultimately hinder the academic and personal development of young people in Greenwich.

The report also highlighted strategic risks, including the potential for a collective net deficit across schools, continued reductions in pupil numbers, and the financial sustainability of smaller schools. A coordinated borough-wide approach involving schools, academy trusts, and neighbouring local authorities is recommended to address these challenges.

You can find more details about the Schools Forum meeting here: Schools Forum on 07 October 2026.

This week in Greenwich:

Planning Applications Deferred as Committee Faces Technical Issues

The Local Planning Committee met on Tuesday 29 September 2026, but a significant number of planning applications were either withdrawn by applicants or deferred for further consideration. This meant that no decisions were made on any of the listed planning applications during the meeting.

Key Applications Deferred or Withdrawn

Several applications were removed from the agenda or postponed:

• Felixstowe Road Dept and Mottisfont Garages, Abbey Wood, London, SE2 9SG (Ref: 24/2570/F): This application was withdrawn by the applicant.
• King William IV Hotel, 155-159 Trafalgar Road, Greenwich, London, SE10 9TX (Ref: 25/2650/F): This application was also withdrawn by the applicant.
• 82 Bramblebury Road, Plumstead, London, SE18 7TG (Ref: 25/3700/F): The committee resolved to defer this application to allow for a site visit.
• 12 Halons Road, Eltham, London, SE9 5BS (Ref: 25/4154/F): A site visit was requested for this application, leading to its deferral.
• 70 St Margarets Terrace, Plumstead, London, SE18 7RN (Ref: 26/0626/F): This application was deferred to enable a site visit to take place.

Following these deferrals and withdrawals, Councillor Jeremy Fraser, Chair of Planning, informed attendees that no further decisions would be made. The committee then moved to discuss the minutes of a previous meeting.

Discrepancy Over Vicarage Park Minutes

A point of contention arose regarding the minutes from the meeting held on 14 July 2026, specifically concerning item number five, which related to Vicarage Park. Councillor George Edgar raised a concern that the minutes did not accurately reflect a discussion about the adequacy of an environmental assessment and the potential for further conditions. Councillor Edgar recalled that the Chair had agreed to consider additional conditions if planning officers did not object, and that officers had not dissented.

Alex Smith, an officer, stated that after reviewing the video recording of the meeting, they could not find evidence of additional conditions being requested. Alex Smith explained that re-evaluating the ecological assessment would have been a fundamental step that should have occurred before a decision was made.

To resolve this, Councillor Jeremy Fraser, the Chair, suggested that Alex Smith and the minute-taker review the video recording again and then email Councillor Edgar. The Chair acknowledged that differing memories could cause issues for future applications. Alex Smith confirmed that the only conditions added were those already noted in the draft decision. The committee agreed to proceed on this basis, noting that the minutes could not be formally agreed at this meeting. Councillor Fraser remarked that it had been a wasted evening for the officers due to the lack of decisions.

• Impact: The deferral of planning applications means that residents and developers will have to wait longer for decisions on proposed developments. This can create uncertainty and delay projects that could bring new housing or amenities to the borough.
• Stakes: The accuracy of meeting minutes is crucial for transparency and accountability in local government. Discrepancies can lead to confusion and potential challenges in future decision-making processes.

You can find more details about the Local Planning Committee meeting here: Local Planning Committee on 29 September 2026.

This week in Greenwich:

Council Grapples with Planning Powers and Climate Resilience

Greenwich Council convened for a packed meeting on Wednesday 23 September 2026, tackling significant issues from the future of democratic oversight in planning decisions to the urgent need for climate change adaptation. The Council also approved a new voucher scheme to encourage children's active travel.

Planning Decisions: A Shift in Democratic Oversight Sparks Debate

A central point of contention was the impending National Scheme of Delegation of Planning Functions, set to take effect on 31 October 2026. This new legislation, which the government claims will speed up housing delivery, has been met with strong opposition from the Conservative Group, who proposed a motion to protect democratic oversight.

Councillor Charlie Davis, Leader of the Conservative Group, argued that the changes would significantly reduce the ability of elected councillors and residents to scrutinise planning applications, particularly concerning Houses in Multiple Occupation (HMOs). He highlighted examples, such as the rejection of an eight-person HMO conversion at 16 Montbell Road by the local planning committee, which was later upheld by an independent planning inspector. This, he argued, demonstrated the value of local scrutiny. The motion also pointed to the irony of the current Minister of State for Housing and Planning, Matthew Pennycook, who previously used the planning system to protect a community asset at the Vanbrugh, now being responsible for these restrictive changes.

However, the Labour Group defended the changes. Councillor Tom Creswell, Cabinet Member for Planning and Development, stated that the new scheme is designed to boost confidence in the planning system and speed up the delivery of much-needed homes. He argued that the overwhelming majority of decisions are already delegated to officers and that democratic control lies in setting strong planning policies, such as those in the Local Plan. Councillor Jeremy Fraser, Chair of Planning, dismissed the motion as political posturing, emphasizing that the council has been preparing for these changes and that the local planning committee will remain focused on more significant applications.

Ultimately, the motion was not carried, with 19 votes in favour and 31 against. Council did, however, approve changes to its Constitution to implement the new National Scheme of Delegation of Planning Functions.

• Impact: This shift in planning powers could mean fewer controversial applications are debated by local councillors, potentially reducing the direct influence residents have on developments in their neighbourhoods. While officers will still assess applications against council policies, the ability for councillors to call in applications based on resident objections will be significantly curtailed.
• Stakes: The core issue is the balance between efficient development and democratic accountability. Critics fear a loss of local control, while proponents argue for a more streamlined process that still uphns strong planning policies.

You can find more details about the Council meeting here: Council meeting on 23 September 2026.

Climate Change: A Call for Greater Adaptation and Resilience

A motion calling for a stronger focus on climate change adaptation and resilience was debated, with an amendment proposed by the Labour Group. The original motion, moved by Councillor George Edgar of the Green Group, highlighted the increasing severity of climate impacts, citing the record-breaking heatwave of 2026 and the wettest winter on record. It called for higher priority to be given to adaptation and resilience in decision-making and for stronger local action.

Councillor Calum O'Byrne Mulligan, Cabinet Member for Transport, Climate Change, Waste & Streets, proposed an amendment that, while acknowledging the urgency of climate change, focused on Greenwich's specific achievements and ongoing actions. He argued the original motion was too generic and did not reflect the council's existing efforts, such as reducing operational emissions, investing in council housing retrofitting, and supporting active travel.

Councillor Stacy Smith, seconding the original motion, shared personal experiences of climate impacts, emphasizing the need for greater action. However, the Green Group ultimately did not accept the Labour amendment, believing it diluted their original motion. The amendment was carried, and the substantive motion, as amended, was then agreed.

• Impact: The amended motion commits the council to continuing its work on climate adaptation and resilience, focusing on specific local actions. While acknowledging the global nature of the climate crisis, the focus remains on what Greenwich can achieve within its own remit.
• Stakes: The council's commitment to climate action is crucial for the long-term well-being of its residents and the environment. The debate highlights the ongoing challenge of balancing ambitious climate goals with practical implementation and resource allocation.

You can find more details about the Council meeting here: Council meeting on 23 September 2026.

Active Travel Voucher Scheme Approved for Children

A proposal to introduce a £150 Greenwich Active Travel Voucher for every child aged 4-16 was approved. The scheme, championed by Councillor Calum O'Byrne Mulligan, aims to help children purchase bikes, scooters, or safety equipment. Councillor O'Byrne Mulligan emphasized the benefits for children's health, independence, and the decarbonisation of transport, stating the scheme would be funded by developer contributions (Section 106 funds) and not council tax.

The Green Group, through an amendment proposed by Councillor Jo Land, suggested a more sustainable approach involving a worker cooperative model for bike retail, repair, and recycling, with a subscription scheme for children to exchange bikes as they grow. They questioned the long-term sustainability of the voucher scheme for low-income families. The Conservative Group, led by Councillor Charlie Davis, proposed a public realm improvement fund instead, calling the voucher an expensive electoral gimmick.

Both amendments were rejected. The original motion was carried, meaning the voucher scheme will proceed.

• Impact: This scheme could significantly help families afford bikes and scooters for their children, promoting active travel and independence. It aims to address childhood inactivity and obesity while contributing to the council's decarbonisation goals.
• Stakes: The success of the voucher scheme hinges on its accessibility and sustainability for all families, particularly those on lower incomes. The debate highlights differing views on the most effective ways to promote active travel and invest in community well-being.

You can find more details about the Council meeting here: Council meeting on 23 September 2026.

Other matters

Treasury Management and Capital Mid-Year Update

The Council received updates on the Treasury Management and Capital Programme for 2026/27. The Treasury Management Mid-Year Report indicated prudent financial management, with the council remaining secure in its liquidity and managing borrowing costs effectively. The Capital Mid-Year Report noted a reduction in anticipated capital programme spend due to rescheduling, but reaffirmed commitment to investing in council-owned properties. Proposals to use income from capital receipts for digital transformation and savings plans were also noted. Councillor Tamasin Rhymes, Leader of the Green Group, expressed concern about the lack of detailed discussion on proposals for spending money from the sale of council assets.

You can find more details about the Council meeting here: Council meeting on 23 September 2026.

Leader and Deputy Leader of the Opposition Conservative Group

Council noted the appointment of Councillor Charlie Davis as Leader of the Opposition Conservative Group and Councillor Luke Warren as Deputy Leader. Tributes were paid to the outgoing Leader, Councillor Matt Hartley.

You can find more details about the Council meeting here: Council meeting on 23 September 2026.