Plan submitted for 431 homes in Greenwich
Plans have been submitted to construct 431 homes on Greenwich Peninsula after pervious plans ground to a halt.
The site was consulted upon in April this year – covered here – after plans approved four and a half years ago in January 2017 didn’t proceed.
Revised plans in April 2021 saw an increase in homes from 281 to 431 with a corresponding decrease in design quality.
Simple blocks replaced recessed frontages and varied massing in plans revealed during consultation.
This latest application doesn’t change that to any great degree.
The top floor of some buildings have a balustrade of metalwork. The two taller buildings are 17 and 20 storeys with two lower buildings of 12 storeys.
Street levels with see commercial units to bring like to the area.
Transport
Just this past week Greenwich Council’s Cabinet member for transport has expressed concerns about traffic in the area and how it will be handled.
Quite why so little emphasis has been placed on that for over a decade remains a mystery as plan after plan in the area was submitted and approved.
Goodness knows it’s been highlighted on this site – and among many comments – that limiting parking at developments alongside allocating money from developments towards transport with improved pedestrian and cycling links for new residents can combat car dependency.
Time and time again Greenwich Council have refused to invest in improved public realm between the Peninsula, Charlton shops and east Greenwich.
I think my first posts highlighting awful links for those on foot towards amenities in east Greenwich were about eight years ago. Many of those areas are still terrible, as possible funding streams were never used.
It’s not just walking and cycling that’s lacking, as no money was allocated to a new rapid bus link long talked about.
The plan now is for a truncated Greenwich Rapid Transit from Thamesmead ending in Woolwich instead of North Greenwich – though TfL are to see severe cuts so it looks unlikely as while new developments could partly assist with capital funding, the remaining capital funds and operational funding would be limited.
One possible source for improvements now is using parking income. Another measure that should have long ago been utilised but the department has been a shambles for many years. This site would annually cover their income and budget misses.
The authority have now finally begun to address it alongside moving traffic violations, with resulting income ringfenced to transport. It is estimated that over £40 million will be received in four years that can be reinvested in transport projects.
Click here to view the application and brose documents.
John Smih you have been hightlighting the issues around new developments and the lack of investment in the public realm and transport project for year.
With the increase in new homes to 431 on this site then we do need to look at the issues like transport and public realm to make areas safe and pleasant for people to live walk and cycle in and have a local bus services serving new developments.
One developer a couple of years back even offered to pay towards extending route 202 from Blackheath Royal Standard to Notth Greenwich Station to serve new developments on the Greenwich Peninsula but this was rejected by Greenwich Council. Altough this would have also helped with the overcrowding issues on the section of route 108 between Blackheath Village and North Greenwwich station.
‘Just this past week Greenwich Council’s Cabinet member for transport has expressed concerns about traffic …’. Made all the worse by traffic orders that cut off through access of side roads funnelling everything on to the main arteries. Hyprocrite.
@Graham, I am not surprised that Greenwich rejected that proposal since the 202 goes from Blackheath Standard to Crystal Palace. That developer clearly had no knowledge of the 202 route, but this comes as no surprise when some of them [deliberately] conflate the London Borough of Greenwich with the geographical area of Greenwich. 🙄
@anoymous201481 that is very true all developments are marketed as being in Greenwich even when they are in Thamesmead.. Personally I would have liked to have seen the 335 also serve Blackheath Village. The route would be still relatively short.
@ anonymous201481 I Iagree.
However,I also agree with Graham I would have liked to have seen route 335 serve Blackheath Village and Charlton Retail Parks as part of the route to help reduce traffic congestion and increase passenger usage/revenue on route 335.
I agree re route 335. It does seem artificially short running only between North Greenwich and Kidbrooke. However, traffic is now so bad that extending any routes will make no difference.