A group of campaigners gathered outside Greenwich Market on Sunday to protest against proposals to redevelop the market.
Car drivers honked their horns in support and a crowd gathered to watch as demonstrators held their “Save Greenwich Market” banner aloft outside the College Approach entrance to the market.
The demonstration organiser, Cllr Maureen O’Mara, was joined by her fellow councillors for the Greenwich West ward, David Grant and Matthew Pennycook, and concerned local residents. Some stall holders and shop owners from inside the market also came out to lend their support.
Plans to redevelop the covered market and add a new boutique hotel were rejected by Greenwich Council last year but could still go ahead after owners, Greenwich Hospital Estate (GHE), appealed the decision.
Cllr Maureen O’Mara commented:
The market is under the threat of complete demolition. GHE want to put a hotel here and I’ve got arguments about that but my whole principle about this is that the market is a much loved part of london. It’s one of London’s jewels and people come here every weekend – they love it and enjoy it. I think what GHE wants to put in its place is just a homogenised view of London.
Edward Dolby from Greenwich Hospital told Greenwich.co.uk that if they do get planning permission, the redeveloped market would retain “essentially the same footprint and character” and that trading would be continuous throughout the redevelopment – expected to take almost two years – because the market would move to a temporary site in Monument Gardens. He added:
The hotel that features in our regeneration plans will be a welcome addition to the town centre and not a threat or competitor to the market – rather it should provide additional custom for our traders.
Campaigners are planning another demonstration to coincide with the start of the Planning Inspector’s inquiry next month at Woolwich Town Hall.
|
Listen to Cllr Maureen O’Mara speaking to Greenwich.co.uk at Sunday’s protest: Listen! |
Listen to Cllr David Grant speaking to Greenwich.co.uk at Sunday’s protest: |
Councillor Maureen O’Mara being interviewed about the protest.
Greenwich West councillors – Maureen O’Mara, Matthew Pennycook and David Grant – outside Greenwich Market
Cllr O`Mara is quoted as saying the market is under threat of demolition.
I saw development plans for the market to continue some while ago which foresee only change NOT demolition.
Where does this scare story come from ?
As GHE and the market traders are well aware, moving all the stalls to a corner of the Naval College grounds for two years will effectively kill off all their regular custom. People will simply get out of the habit of going there.
How many people turned out in the end? I was only there briefly, but it seemed pretty quiet. Was hoping for a little more public support on something so important! With so many signatures on the petition, I thought it was pretty quiet.
Well done to the three councillors for not rolling over on this. What can we do to show the appeal that we don’t want this?
Dermot, there’s plenty being demolished to make room for the hotel and the accompanying restyled shopping area. The market will also lose a sizeable chunk of floorspace, which will also lose its cobbles and replaced by a more modern surface.
Oh, and the market roof is going too.
Dermot. This is not a scare story. This is the reality.
If you don’t want to take my word for it – or that of Cllr Maureen O’Mara – speak to the majority of stall holders who oppose these plans.
Speak to the majority of residents who turned out to the planning board and spoke out against Greenwich Hospital’s plan.
Ask yourself why there was cross party, unanimous opposition to these plans at the Council’s Planning Board.
Greenwich Hospital Estate’sproposals would have ripped the heart out of Greenwich. All they care about is making a fast buck out of a hotel that would have ruined our skyline. But then most – if not all – GHE’s leading lights dont live in Greenwich. They don’t care about out town. They only care about their profits.
So a big thank you to Cllr O’Mara for leading the campaign on this issue. Greenwich Hospital Estate cannot be allowed to get away with this.
Greenwich Market with an hotel attached is “demolition ” ? Get real.
New cobbles making for a flattter surface, improvements to the original roof – this is not demolition. It is improving what we already have (as long as they keep the food stalls of course).
The “majority of residents” ? What is the number of Greenwich`s population ? Were they all at the Council meeting ? How many thousands managed to squeeze into the Town Hall ?
The cobbles will be relaid to make for an even surface. Sounds eminently sensible to me. Did you not go to the exhibition in the market some onths ago ? Obviously not.
Maybe you just want to ban all tourism.
Why not attack Greenwich Hospital for their disgraceful neglect of their properties in central Greenwich ? The houses above the chip shop, Peter de Wit
Greenwich Market with an hotel attached is “demolition ” ?
Relaying old and new cobbles to make for a flatter surface, keeping and restoring the ORIGINAL roof – “demolition” ?
The “majority of residents” oppose this development ? How many thousands managed to squeeze into the meeting ?
Why not attack Greenwich Hospital for their disgraceful neglect of what I believe are their tatty and shoddy properties in central Greenwich (I say “believe” carefully) ?
The houses/flats above the chip shop, Peter de Wit etc – with rotting window frames for example – give Greenwich the image of real degeneration.
Unlike an improved market area which, having been to the exhibition in the market some months ago, is what I believe is being proposed.
Good luck to it.
Demot, you’re in LaLa land.
If you asked the right questions at the ‘consultation’ you would have realised they propose to bulldoze several old buildings – the stables on Durnford Street which today house a flower shop were alleged to be dangerously decrepit, and hence the street needs improving – by replacing the buildings with a trash compactor.
I admit I personally wouldn’t have used the word ‘demolition’, I would have used ‘destruction.’ With new buildings all around it, a new floor, and entirely new traders, the market as it exists certainly won’t survive. Whether a spruced up, shiny, hotel with a market attached will make any commercial sense is open to question, too – the ‘redeveloped’ Spitalfields market sees a lot less foot-fall than previously, according to long-standing tenants. The tourists have deserted it for places with a real atmosphere, such as Drapers Walk on Brick Lane.
@ Steve: The market roof is not going to be removed. Unfortunately.
@David, unless there has been a change in plans for the roof, this is what GH want to install:
http://alexneil.co.uk/blogarticles.php?id=1784
@Dermot Agnew: “Maybe you just want to ban all tourism.”
Very mature.
(Having read his posts, does anybody else have a feeling they know where Dermot works?)
Thank you to Maureen O`Mara and all counsillors for the hard work concerning the market proposed revelopment..I do hope that as many as can get along to the appeal in September.
I have seen nothing in the plans that I think would do justice the market space ,unless, If one wants it to look like ever other town centre up and down the country. If you want “fake Briton” in Greenwich let GHE have their way .
As for a Boutique Hotel,I thought that ment something small with a certain amount of style. Before anyone says well you would say that as you run a small b and b some hundred yards from the market .I think it is healthy to have a choice. Perhaps if the GHE want a “Boutique Hotel” they should come and ask me for some advice .I have at least been running one for over 10 years in Greenwich.
GHE have modified their plans to draw some of the sting from opposition; they are now keeping the old roof. As the majority of objections cited the roof, I presume they will now claim that previous objectors will be happy with the new scheme. Which will still turf out the marketholders for 2 years, remove the original floor, demolish Edwardian stable and warehouse buildings, and have a large hotel, towering over the listed block of original Georgian buildings.
@ Steve: They are keeping the existing framework of the roof, and putting in clear panels – that is the cornerstone of their ‘amended’ plans and the appeal process. It was in their public displays during the very brief public consultation.
Isn’t the market being reduced in size?
I notice that “Dermot” has become very quiet. Whenever there is debate on any topic like this online, I often get the sense that there is a GHE mole being planted into the debate to pretend to be a local resident in support of the plans…
GB insinuates that some people “pretend” to be a Greenwich resident. Personally I do not pretend ; I am one. I bought my house in 1984 in the centre of Greenwich where I still live, about 3 minutes walk from the market.
And Steve – I work at the Royal Opera House as you well know. I have nothing to hide and I do not work for, nor have anything to do with, GHE.
I sometimes get the impression this online correspondence is a private club for grumpy old men who like to insult when they cannot argue.
.
@Dermot, that response is EXACTLY what we’d expect a plant from GHE to say…
A few people will indeed prefer the idea of a sleeker, pricier, smaller, more modern market, Dermot happens to be one of them.
There’s no reason to call him a liar – he just happens to be wrong!
Did anyone ask where those councillors were when local people held a meeting to discuss the council’s cack-handed pedestrianisation scheme?
Darryl, that pedestrian scheme is a classic ‘damned if you do, damned if you don’t’ scenarios.
One camp is complaining about the regular traffic gridlock blocking the public transport, adding pollution etc.
The other camp is complaining that the contraflow proposal is using a solution being dropped throughout London as it leads to fast traffic.
I suspect they are fully aware of this and see attendance as a lose-lose.
It’s not an easy topic. But some public show of interest in the issue, even if they sat on the fence, would be nice.
Paul T – We may ALL be wrong and only time will prove who is right or wrong.
I just find it sad that the Steve-type grumpy old man (and it is mainly men) prefers to cast unfounded aspersions on those who oppose their attitude rather than enter into healthy, civilised, intelligent debate.
The market is NOT being demolished, changed perhaps.
Some of us lived here 30 years ago and more when there was NO market. And everything is an improvement on that.
Dermot, of course you’re entitled to your opinion, it’s good to have debate, and I hate it when anyone who expresses their opinion is attacked as a stooge – that’s what has happened with many of the olympic debates here, and it’s really hampered the objectors.
My prime objection to the development isn’t an aesthetic one. It’s how they’re attempting to manipulate the planning process. There are many examples of this, but one is how in their original application they maintained the Durnford Street buildings, attractive Edwardian stables, are dangerous, a death trap. Now they’ve brought them back into use.
Worse, this subterfuge is counterproductive. If they retained Durnford St, reduced the height of the hotel so it doesn’t loom over the significant, listed buildings around it, and gave the traders some modest, reasonable guarantee they’d be able to get back into the redeveloped version, then they would have their new market and not have to spend millions pushing through a plan against the traders (all of whom oppose it) and residents.
All I personally want is for the market to be here in another 30 years. Look at the example of traders like Warwick Leadley, forced into a smaller space by steep rent rises, only for their old shop to stand empty, and the prospects don’t look good.