Work has resumed on creating a 20mph zone through Charlton Village, several weeks after activity stopped in the early stages of the coronavirus crisis.
Most of the work is relatively minor, but as reported on this website in March, involves building speed tables in Charlton Road, The Village and Charlton Church Lane, while there will be news parking restrictions at the junctions of Victoria Way and Eastcombe Avenue with Charlton Road.
“Continuous footways” will be introduced along Charlton Road in an attempt to nudge people into driving more considerately in and out of Invicta Road, Sherington Road, Wyndcliff Road, Couthurst Road, Hassendean Road, Bramhope Lane, Mascalls Road, Cherry Orchard and Victoria Way.
Work began on Victoria Way at the end of March but was abandoned after a few days. Now road crews are back, with a sign telling passers-by that the workers all live in the same household – and asking for people to email with concerns rather than approach the crews.
Greenwich Council says: “The government is encouraging highway work sites to return to business as usual with amended working practices, revised risk assessments and guidance.
“Staff working on these sites will strictly comply with the government and health guidance, with safe systems of work in place, while providing an essential service. Please be kind and considerate and assured that work is being carried out safely and for everyone’s benefit.”
When work is finished, there will be a 20mph restriction on Charlton Road and The Village between the Springfield Estate and the junction with Fairfield Grove. However, speed limits on the stretches of road towards Woolwich and Blackheath will remain unchanged – including the stretch of Hillreach where three teenagers died in a collision with an out-of-service bus in 2008.
Local MP Matt Pennycook has reacted angrily after the developer behind 330 new homes being built on Victoria Way shrugged off complaints about the impact of construction work on the site’s neighbours.
Fairview New Homes dismissed a series of issues raised by Pennycook on behalf of residents about dirt, idling construction vehicles and work taking place outside permitted hours.
Its senior site manager, Matthew Hook, said “we can only assume that the points raised are generally historical” and said that Greenwich Council was happy with the cracked state of the road outside the development site, which is being branded Synergy.
After effectively being told residents’ complaints were groundless, Pennycook has now said he will name the company in Parliament as an example of bad practice in the construction sector. He is also asking for residents with complaints to get in touch with him and the company.
Hook also said that the points had been addressed in a meeting with the council on 25 February, and that no further complaints had been made since.
“So to summarise, all of the concerns raised in your letter have already been discussed, reviewed and mitigated following a meeting between [Fairview] and [Greenwich Council] on the 25/02/19 and to date, since the meeting we have had no further complaints or correspondence from local residents or [Greenwich Council] or any other industry bodies such as the Considerate Constructors Scheme regarding the development on Victoria Way,” Hook wrote.
However, the residents’ complaints were made to Pennycook at a roving advice surgery on 30 March, more than a month after the meeting with the council, with the letter written on 14 May.
How not to do "stakeholder engagement". One of the worst examples of a developer, in this case Fairview New Homes Ltd, simply dismissing concerns raised on behalf of local residents about poor construction management. pic.twitter.com/VoGAZYUiC8
Pennycook has responded: “It is patently the case that local residents do have outstanding complaints about construction management on the site. Rather than seeking to dismiss these complaints as you did in your letter, a responsible developer would have engaged with the substance of each of them and given due consideration as to what more could be done to alleviate them.
“I intend to name [Fairview] on the floor of the House of Commons and use your letter as an example of bad practice in the sector as well as making additional direct representations to ministers at the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government.”
The source of residents’ gripes was clear on Thursday afternoon, with surfaces on the lower stretch of Victoria Way covered in dust from construction. While a site worker hosed down the entrance to the development, nothing was being done about dust and grime outside people’s homes. The wheels of a passing construction truck did not appear to have been washed.
Fairview has not responded to a request for comment.
Cratus Communications, whose deputy chairman is former Greenwich Council leader Chris Roberts, handled the consultation for the Victoria Way scheme. Last month, the company published a blog post on its website claiming it was “quietly revolutionising and abolishing the traditional view of ‘faceless’ developers sweeping into town and ‘doing what they like’”. “Communication with existing residents has to be managed carefully and with tact,” it added.
If you live close to the Victoria Way development and are affected by the dirt and grime from Fairview New Homes’ Synergy development, please email matthew.pennycook.mp[at]parliament.uk, and copy in matthew.hook[at]fairview.co.uk. Comments are also open below.
Five new homes could be built on land behind houses in Victoria Way if a developer gets permission from Greenwich Council, which sold the property at auction 15 years ago.
One 4-bedroom home, two 3-bedroom semi-detached homes and two 2-bedroom flats would be built on the land adjacent to Wellington Gardens, between Victoria Way and Wellington Mews.
Henry Browne, a Guernsey-based developer, bought the land behind sheltered accommodation on Victoria Way in 2004 when Greenwich Council sold it. Planning documents filed by the developer say it was described as “suitable for development”. No price is recorded with the Land Registry for the sale, but its records state the land was worth £750,000 in 2015.
The developer says the land is covered in “thick bramble undergrowth”. “There are a number of self-sown sycamore trees, dying from sooty bark disease. There are many dead trees and fallen branches which could make the site unsafe if it could be penetrated,” planning documents state.
The new homes would be screened from Wellington Gardens by new trees, the developer says, with two trees on the site – protected by preservation orders going back to 1972 – kept. They would be next to a car repair yard and garage on Wellington Mews, an unmade road. Other schemes to build homes on Wellington Mews have been rejected over the years, the most recent being a scheme that was withdrawn in 2006.
The documents state that Greenwich Council planning officers stated the land was unsuitable for development in 2017 – despite the same council having sold it 13 years earlier. The developer responds “no reason is given… the site is surrounded by other residential developments”. It says “the five family homes would respect the scale and character of the area and the site”.