Monday, 12 March 2007

PCEG

I really wanted to go to the Plumstead Common Environment Group's meeting on Sunday. I believe they were discussing the plans for the Plumstead Manor School.

Well, here is my submission for designs. It plays homage to the English suburban vernacular style. Latin classes will be taught on a one-in-one-out basis.

31 comments:

Anonymous said...

Did anyone go to the PGEC meeting? What was reported about the school expansion?

Anonymous said...

The presentation lasted an hour so its really impossible to post anything useful in this space that wouldn't misrepresent a very big and complex plan. Sorry.
Nick Day (Chair PCEG)

Anonymous said...

Can you not post a short synpopsis of the key points/timelines?

Anonymous said...

yes, surely it's possible to give those not in attendance a short summary of key points!? there are people who are interested that aren't members of PCEG.

Pangloss said...

Hey, steady on people. What's your beef with the PCEG?

It takes alot of time to collate information from a meeting, and that's not even writing up the minutes. I guess this is all done in the PCEG member's own time.

So don't start bossing them around.

Plumstead Common is as gorgeous as it is because the PCEG put alot of work into it. So be grateful.

Anonymous said...

Doesn't seem to be such a 'very big and complex plan' according to greenwich watch...

As it transpired the reason for the CPO, so the Council said, was so that the school would have more playing field area for its ever-increasing student faculty

http://greenwichwatch.blogspot.com/

Anonymous said...

I've also heard this about the CPO for playing field use. I mean, Plumstead Manor are really lacking green spaces around the school aren't they.

Now where could there be some patch of grass nearby?

Do the Council know the area at all? If not, then maybe Plumstead COMMON could hold a clue.

Anonymous said...

Any change to the school which involves knocking down The Prince Albert has to be a bonus.

Anonymous said...

What do you mean? It looks such a friendly place to me...

http://www.beverleym.com/albert/gall.php?1x3

Nick Day said...

I should point out that the PCEG meeting was open to all and advertised as such. I'm really sorry that I just don't have the time for a summary - it isn't the PCEG's remit to act as a conduit of this sort of info. Besides my key points may not be someone elses' key points! And BTW the CPO is not pfr playing fields. Funny how rumours get going. I have the minutes to write up and a newsletter to compile now and very little time. You could always join the PCEG of course!

Anonymous said...

Fair enough Nick.
That Greenwichwatch is a nasty mean-spirited little site full of inaccuracies so I'm not surprised that they are ignoring the facts yet again in order to further their own agenda.

Anonymous said...

The ask for info doesn't need to be answered by Nick Day. Didn't anyone else attend the meeting? It would be interesting to hear people's impressions who were there, esp. for those of us who wanted to attend the meeting but were unable to.

By the way, I heard that Woolwich has been approved for Crossrail. Possibly announced yesterday, not sure.

Anonymous said...

Really????
Got any links?

Anonymous said...

You'll need to copy and paste this line by line.

http://www.newsshopper.co.uk/news/
lewgreennews/display.var.1278452.0.
woolwich_back_on_crossrail_map.php

Anonymous said...

Further to above link, this provides more detail:

Ministerial Statement issued on Woolwich Station, March 22

On Thursday March 22, Douglas Alexander, Secretary of State for Transport, made a statement to the Crossrail Select Committee concerning an additional provision to the Crossrail Bill of a station at Woolwich. He said:

' ... The key to this has been Greenwich Council's recent proposal for a major revision to its spatial plan, to allow a significantly higher density of development at Woolwich. This, in turn, has prompted Berkeley Homes to offer a means of enabling a station to be built at Woolwich but, crucially, without adding to the current cost of Crossrail.

In light of this, agreement has been reached in principle with Berkeley Homes under which they will build the basic box structure of a station at Woolwich and then construct their own development overhead. This will all be done at their own risk, using their own money, to the specification laid down by CLRL, with a payment back to Berkeley Homes of the saving CLRL will make through avoiding other works at Woolwich, when it constructs the line there.

In due course, Berkeley Homes would then arrange for the completion of the station box to full operational status. Both they and Greenwich Council recognise that the completion of the station would be conditional on receiving sufficient funding contributions from those developers and businesses that stand to benefit from a Crossrail station at Woolwich. The contributions would be in addition to any London-wide Crossrail funding arrangements that may be agreed and no additional public sector debt capacity would be made available. Fit-out of the station could take place only once sufficient private sector contributions had been received.

More work needs to be done to flesh out this deal but the House can now have sufficient confidence that Berkeley and Greenwich Council have the commitment and the right incentives to do that. This is a very significant change from the position last October as there is now a clear way forward that can deliver a station at Woolwich without adding to the costs of Crossrail already identified.'

The Chairman of the Select Committee on the Crossrail Bill, Alan Meale, remarked: 'We are delighted that the Department has seen sense and accepted the Committee's decision. This is an enabling step and moves towards the Committee's strong view that a station at Woolwich is an essential part of the Crossrail Bill. We must move forward on this important matter.'

This statement in full, and the Select Committee response can be downloaded (right).

The above can be seen at the following link by scrolling down to the bottom:
www.crossrail.co.uk/pages/latestdevelopments.html

So any of those worrying about house prices, just sit tight for a few years. May be then some nice cafes, restaurants and shops might start appearing.

Anonymous said...

Thanks a lot for the info.
Berkeley homes building the station, and private contributions being necessary to fit it out sounds a bit scary, but I suppose it's this or nothing?
The DLR is a waste of time, unless you regularly want to travel to Stratford. You won't even be able to get to Tower Gateway or Lewisham wihtout changing trains.
Crossrail however would give us regular trains to Tottenham Court rd, Liverpool street and even Heathrow without having to change, and that really would make a difference.Any idea when the completion date would be?

The Plumster said...

The DLR extension will provide a direct link to the tube network at Canning Town on the Jubilee Line. Far easier than getting to North Greenwich from Woolwich by Bus. Of course it's not a waste of time!!!!

If you want the doom and gloom view of Crossrail go to Greewich Watch. They seem to do a very good line in doom and gloom on pretty much everything

Anonymous said...

Indeed, not a waste in the slightest. Being able to connect up to the other lines with greater ease will make commuting a lot easier, and for many people going in to different parts of central London. Clearly it's in the interest of Berkeley Homes, for their sales, etc, but it is also in the interest of those of us that live around here and want shorter journey times to work. I really hope the Crossrail at Woolwich goes ahead! Also, Woolwich really does need that kind of investment.

Anonymous said...

Plumster, I was originally vey disappointed to find that our DLR station will be on a different 'branch' to Lewisham,and to Tower Hill. I assumed you would have to go to Stratford to join the tube network. If the journey time to Canning Town and access to the Jubilee line there proves quicker than a bus to North Greenwich, then I see what you mean, and take back my comment. Thanks for pointing that out.
It'd still not as useful as Crossrail trains direct to Liverpool St and Tottenham court rd though!

Mamaplum said...

Crossrail will be a massive boost for the area as will the DLR extension

Anonymous said...

Does that mean that the East London Line, DLR, Normal Train and CrossRail will all be at Woolwich Arsenal? Or will there be separate stations and if so does anyone know where the proposed site is for the Crossrail? i.e. is it closer to Plumstead station?
Also does anyone know the reason why Woolwich (and I am not knocking this) has all of the new stations or why they have not been spread out?

The Plumster said...

The East London line is not coming to Woolwich, unless you know differently. The DLR station will be adjacent to the present mainline station.

I believe that the Crossrail station will be located where the covered market current is on Plumstead Road, next door to the wonderful Woolwich Infant public house

sibonetic said...

The station will actually be on the other side of Plumstead Road, where the Car Park for the Royal Arsenal is located, but I believe the entrance may well be located near to the Villiage Idiot (sorry Woolwich Infant) Pub

The Plumster said...

Thanks for putting me right Sibonetic. What a prime location the Woolwich Infant will have, and the Ordanance Arms for that matter (is it still called the Ordanance Arms?) I remember a story a few years back that the people who bought this pub did so because they were 'advised' that Woolwich would be the 'New Islington' I'm still watching that space......

sibonetic said...

It's interesting you mention Woolwich might become the new Islington, I hope to god not!! Having lived in Plumstead Common for over 20 years, but worked in Islington for 14 of those years (though no longer thank God). The good people of Plumstead and Woolwich don't realise how lucky they are not to live in the crime ridden shithole that is Islington. Just take a look at the figures:-

12 Months to February 2007 (year)

Burglary (Per 1000 Population)

Islington 21.2
Glyndon (my ward)12.8
Plumstead 8.4

Drugs Offences (Per 1000 Population)

Islington 7.9
Glyndon 6.1
Plumstead 4.2

Robbery (Per 1000 Population)

Islington 7.6
Glyndon 5.9
Plumstead 4.9

Theft and Handling (Per 1000 Population)

Islington 91.7
Glyndon 27.6
Plumstead 26

So you are much more likely to get burgled, robbed, and stolen from, usually by a crack head in Islington than you ever are where we live.

Add in the fact that Islington has the least Green space of any London Borough (Greenwich has the most) makes the thought of becoming the new Islington distinctly unatractive!! OK they might have a few more wine bars and the odd gastropub, but that is a fat lot of good if some doped-up crackhead has relieved you of your wallet before you even get there.

On a different note, The Woolwich Infant got it's nickname the Village Idiot from the local Lesbian communities (they used to hang out there, don't know if they still do?) propensity to get there sperm donors from the same limited Woolwich gene pool. Leading to some unfortunate inbreeding problems.

Anonymous said...

So if Plumstead has less crime than Islington why does Plumstead feel so unsafe? I felt safer in parts of Central America

sibonetic said...

Presumably because you are slightly confused, your head seems to be telling you that a poor, relatively down at heel area must be a high crime area, well it ain't so. Take robbery and burglary as these are the things that probably make people feel most unsafe. Here is the reality:-

All figures are per 1000 of the population

Burglary Robbery
Plumstead 8.4 4.9
Islington 21.2 7.6
Camden 21.5 7.1
Westminster 21 9.3
Hammersmith and
Fulham 16.7 6.8
Southwark 16.5 10.3
Wandsworth 14.6 6
Tower Hamlets 14.6 8.5
Newham 14.1 9.9
Lambeth 14 10.2
Lewisham 14 10.1
Kensington &
Chelsea 13.9 4.8
Hackney 13.4 8

or put another way if you live anywhere else in inner London you are up to 4 times and likely to be burgled and up to twice as likely to be robbed

sibonetic said...

Sorry figures didn't come out to clearly, hope this helps

All figures are per 1000 of the population

Burglary first then robbery

Plumstead (8.4) (4.9)
Islington (21.2) (7.6)
Camden (21.5) (7.1)
Westminster (21) (9.3)
Hammersmith and
Fulham (16.7) (6.8)
Southwark (16.5) (10.3)
Wandsworth (14.6) (6)
Tower Hamlets (14.6) (8.5)
Newham (14.1) (9.9)
Lambeth (14) (10.2)
Lewisham (14) (10.1)
Kensington &
Chelsea (13.9) (4.8)
Hackney (13.4) (8)

Pangloss said...

There's a very interesting exchange going on here. The difference between reported crime figures and our personal perception of an environment.

Does experiencing fear correlate with reported crime figures? Don't know.

Is a dark alley in Chelsea, safer than one in Plumstead? Or Islington? From a fear point of view, I guess not.

Anonymous said...

i think the problem with the area is that there being relatively few new breeds you tend to stand out if you dont have large gold hooped earrings or a hooded top or some velour tracksuits and therefore feel more conscious and therefore like a target.
my concern is that with woolwich and abbey wood getting crossrail that plumstead will be squashed in the middle and get all the tat and wont go up in price/standard/amenities because the focus will be elsewhere.
Look at Tooting which is still a dump yet so close to clapham and wandsworth. I hope I am wrong but the high street is just so bad that it is going to take more than a few tweaks to get it anywhere near decent

sibonetic said...

Didn't want to waffle on too much on here so done my own thoughts on Plumstead etc.

http://sibonetic.blogspot.com/2007/03/plumstead-common-or-high-street-in.html

Have a look if interested,
Simon