Plumstead High Street improvements: £2.2m of £5.2m spent

A question at last months cancelled full Greenwich council meeting has revealed that £2.2m out of £5.2 million improving Plumstead High Street has already been spent.

The project is jointly funded by the Mayor of London’s Good Growth Fund and Greenwich Council.

So far any visual changes are minimal. The High Street is cluttered and dirty though some low cost improvements have been made. White Hart Road is the most visible change – which of course sees little footfall and changes are minor:

White Hart Road changes

Other planned changes are shop front alterations and landscaping. Both are modest cost-wise.

Could the Plumstead power station project see most of the funding? While promising, it’s some way from the High Street.

We already know Lakedale Road in Plumstead is mostly ignored by the upgrade project despite being an area with many shops, high footfall yet poor public realm and chronic parking issues.

A lack of transparency from Greenwich doesn’t help. There’s almost no ongoing updates at council meetings, nor renders of the completed High Street.

Long term maintenance?

In a response to a question on the project, Greenwich revealed that deep cleaning of the High Street has been stopped, which raises how long any improvements will last:

“Street Services no longer provide a pavement washing service (using the jet washing equipment) for Town Centres or Plumstead High Street.

Plumstead High Street has some fine buildings

This service was withdrawn in April 2020 as part of MTFS. If and when a deep clean is required for any part of the Borough it would need to be commissioned accordingly.”

In  research of Community Infrastructure Levy income and spending across London boroughs, it’s notable how many use CIL income for improvements such as planting trees and deep cleaning.

Redbridge, for example, will spend £250,000 on cleaning this year:

CIL spend for 2021/22 in Redbridge

Public realm will see £1.5m. There’s numerous similar examples all over London. This is in Islington borough:

Tree planting program funded by CIL



Due to Greenwich’s failure to collect CIL income since 2015, they have no money to do this as the authority have yet to pay their Crossrail tab. By their own estimates in 2015, this should have been long paid off (they estimated £27.5m income by 2021 v £9.7m collected). If they’d set a CIL rate at London averages – and as permitted in 2015 – it would have been paid off.

A very low rate for CIL rates by London standards (£70 per square metre for home sin much of the borough) is far below what the independent inspector said was feasible for parts of the borough (up to £265 per square metre) has benefitted developers.

They then failed to revise levels in 2018 despite committing in 2015 to review.

2018 review commitment made in 2015 report. There was no change unlike other London boroughs and being far below estimated income

Even the £2.5 million allocated by Greenwich Council – welcome though it is – could have been funded by developers if Greenwich had set a higher CIL rate, or revised levels to London averages.

CIL spend in Brent

In addition to minimal CIL income, Greenwich planners have also failed on a number of occasions to allocate Section 106 income towards improved pedestrian and cycle links from 2,100 homes across three developments.

Underpass next to three-lane one-way system taken from passing bus. 1,750 homes coming to rear

That includes 1,750 homes beside the three-lane one-way system (where substantial road changes have been dropped), 330 homes to the north west from Fairview Homes and more than 60 at The Reach. Each and every time those developments went before the Planning Board, improving links from new homes to nearby Plumstead station, Plumstead High Street shops and bus routes were ignored in Greenwich Council Planning Department reports on allocating incoming Section 106 funds.

1,750 homes near Plumstead bus garage. Links to station and shops ignored

It may seem very odd to have a project to improve a High Street while also approving developments which do nothing to bring thousands of new residents to the local High Street and assist businesses, but Greenwich have form. See Greenwich Peninsula and east Greenwich.

Much of Greenwich Peninsula is far from pedestrian friendly
Spring 2022

Shop front changes are expected soon in Plumstead, though as of last year the numbers of shopkeepers involved was low.

Hopefully the High Street will be substantially better upon completion. The town deserves it – but with almost half the funds already spent and the power station project project – will there be much change evident?

If there isn’t, the sooner Greenwich sort out their CIL problem and start to invest, the better. That could then improve the area around the station, the underpass and gyratory and places like Lakedale Road.

Everyone wins. Businesses will see thousands of new residents have easy and safe links to shops, while residents (both existing and new) have an improved and attractive High Street and easy, walkable access to amenities.



Adverts are far from enough to cover site costs and my rent.

You can support me via Paypal here

Another option is via Patreon by clicking here

You can also buy me a beer/coffee at Ko-fi here

There's also a Facebook page for the site here

Many thanks

J Smith

I've lived in south east London most of my life growing up in Greenwich borough and working in the area for many years. The site has contributors on occasion and we cover many different topics. Living and working in the area offers an insight into what is happening locally.

5 thoughts on “Plumstead High Street improvements: £2.2m of £5.2m spent

  • It is deeply troubling that nearly half of the alloted money has been spent and you can’t see where.

  • Real investment is greatly needed in public realm around the borough. Especially Plumstead. Fallen greatly into disrepair. A renewal programme is needed. New roads, pavement upgrades trees and hanging baskets for starters with regular maintenance. Nothing will change with this Labour administration.

  • The use of funds in Plumstead is shocking! £2.2m and no one can’t tell any difference? In that area you’d certainly expect to see some different with that injection of cash. Guessing it was the same team who managed to ‘spend’ £16m on the Plumstead “leisure centre”.

  • It’s diabolical, the way RBG is mismanaged!
    I have often wished there was a way to have the Council put under some type of Administration, whereby they can be ministered as to how the CIL can be increased, how it can be applied after it has been collected, where they would be required to study and apply new and better Street designs and improvements!
    The poor quality of the RBG Council’s decision making, and actions (and lack there of) in so many areas has me wondering, are they in Politics for all the wrong reasons? There just seems to be so many areas in which they continually and consistently fail.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.