The Strategic Planning Committee of Havering Council met on Thursday 17 September 2026 to consider a significant planning application for the redevelopment of the Como Street Car Park in Romford. The meeting's agenda focused primarily on this application, which proposed a large residential-led mixed-use scheme.

P0897.25 - Como Street Car Park (St Edwards)

The main item scheduled for discussion was the comprehensive redevelopment of the Como Street Car Park in Romford. The proposal, submitted by St Edwards, sought planning permission for a mixed-use development comprising 138 residential dwelling units and flexible commercial/community floorspace, spread across three blocks of between three and nine storeys, along with three terraced houses. The plans also included public realm enhancements, landscaping, and associated parking and refuse facilities.

The report pack detailed that the proposed development would deliver a significant number of new homes, contributing to the borough's housing stock. It was noted that while the development would not provide affordable housing on-site, a financial viability assessment had indicated that zero provision was the maximum reasonable outcome, with a review mechanism included in a Section 106 obligation to capture contributions if the financial situation changed.

The scheme proposed a car-free development, with exceptions for blue badge parking. It also included significant financial contributions towards health infrastructure (£179,909), education (£852,377), and highways improvements (£138,000 for the ring-road, £40,000 for the Active Travel Zone route, and £20,000 for Mawney Primary School accessibility measures). Further contributions were proposed for carbon offsetting (£74,812) and legal and administrative costs.

The report pack highlighted extensive pre-application discussions and reviews by the Council's Quality Review Panel, which had led to significant evolution of the scheme, including a reduction in the number of units and adjustments to building heights and massing. Concerns raised during public consultation included the lack of public engagement, the viability of retail units, parking provision, building heights, overlooking, and the impact on local infrastructure and the environment.

The report detailed the proposed materials for the buildings, aiming to use contextual materials such as red brick with white accents for the main blocks and buff yellow brickwork for the terraced houses. The landscaping proposals included new public realm spaces, native planting, and the naturalisation of the River Rom, which borders the site.

The report also addressed potential impacts on residential amenity, with assessments indicating satisfactory separation distances and daylight/sunlight provision for both future occupiers and neighbouring residents. The development was noted to exceed the London Plan's Urban Greening Factor target.

Regarding ecology and biodiversity, the proposals included enhancements to the River Rom's riparian zone, with the removal of concrete channel and the creation of a naturalised bank. The development was also subject to conditions to ensure compliance with biodiversity net gain requirements.

Flood risk and drainage were addressed through the proposed use of sustainable drainage systems (SuDS) to manage surface water. The site is located within Flood Zone 2, but the proposed development was considered to be acceptable in terms of flood risk management.

The report also outlined conditions related to construction management, noise control, air quality, waste management, and accessibility, ensuring compliance with various national and local planning policies. The proposed development was recommended for approval, subject to the agreement of planning obligations and conditions.

The supplementary agenda indicated that additional representations had been received since the main report was published, raising issues such as flood risk, climate resilience, drainage capacity, tree destruction, archaeological potential, wildlife impact, the car park's status as an asset of community value, loss of public car park, access for emergency vehicles, overdevelopment, and the use of CIL funds. Officers stated that these matters were either addressed in the report or could be managed through conditions.