Green light expected today for Evergreen Field development

Revised illustrations for the site, via Redbridge Planning documents

Redbridge Council is expected give the go ahead today for a major development on the Evergreen Field which would mean a block of 24 flats being built on the site.

The development will be three and four-storey blocks with a children’s day nursery on the ground floor, and with part of the site being turned into a new public open space.

All the flats would be classed as “intermediate affordable housing in Shared Ownership”. Redbridge is under an obligation to deliver 1,409 new homes this year – these 24 would count towards that total.

The site on Wednesday morning

The plan inludes a new landscaped area to the back of the block with a small lake, ownership of which will be transferred to the council. The developers will make a one-off payment of £360,000 to fund Vision maintaining the park for 30 years.

Councillors at the Planning Committee are expected to accept the recommendation of planners that the scheme be approved.

The decision is expected to be a conclusion to a saga which has been running for at least 60 years since two houses which were previously on the site were demolished. The land has stood unused and fenced off since then, though the lack of buildings on one side of the high street has definitely been seen as one of the factors making Wanstead attractive.

8 thoughts on “Green light expected today for Evergreen Field development”

  1. As a Wanstead local and local business man I offer my full support to this development. Local homes are required at affordable prices. Local work for local trades men. We are tired in Wanstead of this abandoned site not being resolved in a positive manor. I can see from the plans that the developer is proposing affordable homes, community Garde’s, a nursery and refining the view of the church. I can not see us getting a better offer; let’s get on with it please.

  2. I’m really excited about this! The CGIs look great especially the pond/public realm area at the back. Finally we can get rid of that rat-infested eyesore! It will boost the local economy too.

  3. People need somewhere to live and if part of the greenspace is now for the public then this is a good thing.

    Everybody who currently lives in Wanstead lives in a house/flat that used to be green space and the building blocked someone’s view.

    It was a wasted space and now being put to good use. I just hope that they are in anyway affordable.

  4. As long as the 360,000 is put aside and only used for the maintenance of this new piece of park area. Can’t definitely say Vision will be in place over the next 30yrs but the monies have to be kept aside and not put into the Councils coffers………. And with that I also mean not to go into Vision’s account as well it needs to be kept very transparent.

  5. I wonder how robust are the provisions of the ‘good bits’, like the nursery but also the homes.
    I’m sure there are more local examples but I recall the Lidl near East Ham station had toilets – for a few weeks – when it opened and there was a childcare provision for a similar length of time when Morrison opened in Stratford. I also note the escalators from Stratford station to Westfield are regularly out of service – I suspect it costs less to generally shut them than leave operational and so have more repairs to do. Lots of promises are made to get planning permission and soon forgotten.
    I’m cynical about claims in planning applications to also be producing a public good. Let’s see if the ‘intermediate affordable housing in Shared Ownership’ homes arrive – and, if so, does that mean anything useful and whether any nursery continues as such.

    1. It way obvious that this plan would go through.I await the jams that parents dropping children off will cause as no access only from high street.This land should have been made part of the park or as a nature area for local kids.However money always talks!There are 7 nurseries in the area so not needed either.

      1. “made part of the park”? The council doesn’t own the Evergreen field. Are you suggesting that privately held property/land ought to be forcibly removed from the owners?

Comments are closed.