Putney’s historic buildings, parks, and conservation areas are at risk as a controversial overhaul of the council’s Conservation and Heritage Advisory Committee (CHAC) clears the way for unchecked development.
Wandsworth Council will vote next week on changes to the CHAC—which has long protected the borough’s architectural and cultural heritage—that threaten to weaken protections in favour of rapid urban development.
If approved, the changes would make it easier to demolish historic buildings, encroach on conservation areas, and disregard community concerns in the development of new buildings. The proposal reflects a controversial drive by Wandsworth’s Labour-run administration and London Mayor Sadiq Khan to build new houses in the borough with little regard to history or local concerns.
Appeasing politicians?
At the heart of the issue is a change to CHAC’s Terms of Reference that would oblige the committee to consider “the full range of policies set out in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), the London Plan, and the Local Plan” in its work. Previously, the committee only considered heritage and conservation issues when making recommendations.
All three documents that the CHAC will now be obliged to consider have been either created or updated in the past three months by politicians that have publicly argued for more housing developments and who have been roundly criticised for their dismissive approach to community concerns. As such, the change risks making a mockery of the committee’s longstanding role as an independent arbiter and protector of our heritage.
As well as historic buildings, the changes explicitly include parks and gardens, opening up areas such as Wandsworth Park, Battersea Park, Putney Vale Cemetery, Grove House and two parks on the Alton estate in Roehampton to potential development.
In effect, the change would put Wandsworth’s rich history under threat in order to meet arbitrary building deadlines.
What is the CHAC?
For decades, the CHAC – and the Wandsworth Conservation Area Advisory Committee (WACC) before that – has served as the borough’s last line of defence against inappropriate developments that threaten Wandsworth’s historic identity.
From stopping the demolition of the Victorian villa at 66 Alton Road in Roehampton in 2017, to preventing an effort to enclose part of Wandsworth Park for private use in 2018, to opposing an effort to demolish an entire block on Putney High Street in 2014, the Committee has been a crucial backstop to over zealous plans.
This month, it is protecting the Grade II-listed building Waterfall House in Tooting and the public green space that is Battersea Park. In short, the committee’s work has helped ensure that Wandsworth’s past is not erased in the name of so-called “progress.”
Now, however, Labour councillors are pushing for changes that will significantly reduce the committee’s ability to block destructive developments. Under the proposed new rules, CHAC will no longer focus solely on heritage but will be required to consider wider planning priorities, including housing targets and economic factors—an open invitation for developers to run roughshod over conservation concerns.
What are the arguments for making the change?
The intent behind the proposed changes is to make the CHAC more influential within the planning application process, its proponents argue.
The view from inside the council is that the CHAC can often represent the views of people who are instinctively opposed to new developments and don’t account for the need for change, especially in a busy London Borough like Wandsworth.
It is also the case that the council officers and the Planning Applications Committee are able to override CHAC recommendations through their delegated powers – and frequently do. If the CHAC is able to provide more rounded advice using the same language that those arguing in favour of new developments use, then, the thinking goes, that advice will be listened to more closely.
Will those arguments work?
It seems unlikely. Recent planning decisions have shown that the current Labour-run administration is prepared to push its plans past anyone – including its own voters – in order to hit its 1,000 Homes for Wandsworth target.
Last month, it approved a large construction program on Whitnell Way in West Putney despite unanimous opposition and a vocal campaign; at the end of 2024, it approved two more construction programs also in West Putney at Innes Gardens and Hayward Gardens despite an overwhelming amount of local opposition and loud protests at the council meeting where it was passed.
And later this month, the council looks set to approve a huge complex on the old gasworks in Wandsworth, again, despite widespread opposition to the plans by local societies who outlined a wide range of problems with the size of the proposal towers, especially due to their proximity to the River Wandle.
One of the most striking comments in that case came from the widely respected Putney Society who ended their submission with an abrupt challenge:
“In short there is no public benefit from this scheme, which is an attempt to use the ‘housing crisis’ to excuse building to three times the height in the local plan regardless of the many adverse impacts this will have on the Wandle Delta, on two adjacent conservation areas, and on transport. It’s ‘try on’ for no better reason than ‘because Wandsworth usually says yes’. Please prove them wrong.”
What actual changes are being proposed?
There are three main changes proposed:
- Shift from a purely conservation-focused to a broader planning role
- CHAC decision-making will be more policy-driven
- CHAC’s influence on green spaces and historic parks is weakened
All three will reduce the ability of the Committee to force reconsideration of planning applications. More details on each, based on the documents for the 26 March 2025 meeting are given below:
What would be a better course of action?
While the CHAC hopes to see some benefit in incorporating the council’s own planning documents in its decision-making, it could instead award itself greater autonomy by adding a broader phrase such as “wider planning issues” or “economic and social impacts” instead of explicitly naming documents subject to change of contents and title in its Terms of Reference.
It could also use the current clear point of tension to negotiate a greater role within the planning process. Rather than giving in to the council’s recent tendency to aggressively ignore concerns, the CHAC could raise its concerns publicly and use the resulting outcry to pressure the council to take the CHAC’s advice more seriously in return for allowing planning issues to be a part of future recommendations.
When will the meeting to consider the change be held?
The Conservation and Heritage Advisory Committee (CHAC) will hold a meeting on Wednesday 26 March at 7.00 pm in Room 123 at The Town Hall on Wandsworth High Street.
The proposed changes in full:
The proposed new Terms of Reference [pdf] will introduce the three recent planning documents as items that must be considered in making any decisions – inserting them into paragraph 2a), which defines the role of the committee, and then adding references back to it in other parts of the document.
1. Shift from purely conservation-focused to a broader planning role
Reference: Paper No. 25-130 (Terms of Reference Update)
Previous CHAC role: CHAC primarily focused only on heritage and conservation matters, making recommendations based solely on the impact of proposals on listed buildings, conservation areas, and historic assets.
Proposed change: CHAC will now also consider wider planning factors, including housing, economic development, and sustainability. New wording explicitly refers to aligning recommendations with the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), the London Plan, and Wandsworth’s Local Plan. This means heritage concerns may no longer be the sole determining factor when CHAC makes recommendations on planning applications.
2a) “To advise and assist the Council in securing the care, maintenance, and enhancement of any areas in the Borough designated as conservation areas, taking account as appropriate of the full range of policies set out in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), the London Plan, and the Local Plan.”
(Paper No. 25-130, Annex A)
2. CHAC’s decision-making will be more policy-driven
Reference: Paper No. 25-130 (Terms of Reference Update)
Previous CHAC approach: CHAC could make objections based purely on heritage concerns, without needing to reference other planning policies.
Proposed change: CHAC must now justify its objections using formal planning policies, meaning objections must be framed in terms of policy violations rather than just heritage concerns. This limits the power of CHAC to reject developments on heritage grounds alone unless those concerns also align with planning policy frameworks.
“To advise the Council on development proposals which would, taking account as appropriate of the policies set out in 2a) above, in the opinion of the Council, be likely to affect the character or appearance of conservation areas, listed buildings, and locally listed buildings, whether within or outside of conservation areas.”
(Paper No. 25-130, Annex A)
3. CHAC’s influence on green spaces and historic parks is weakened
Reference: Paper No. 25-130 (Terms of Reference Update)
Previous CHAC role: CHAC had a strong role in protecting Registered Historic Parks and Gardens and could object to developments that impacted them.
Proposed change: CHAC must now consider other planning priorities (such as housing and infrastructure) when making recommendations about Registered Historic Parks and Gardens. This change weakens CHAC’s ability to object to developments on green spaces.
“To advise the Council on development proposals which would, taking account as appropriate of the policies set out in 2a) above, in the opinion of the Council, be likely to affect the character or appearance of Registered Historic Parks and Gardens and locally listed historic parks and gardens.”
(Paper No. 25-130, Annex A)
