Greenwich.co.uk

Greenwich news and information

Pay As You Go Oyster Arrives in Greenwich

By

Greenwich commuters will finally be able to use Oyster pay-as-you-go for rail journeys from 2 January, after years of negotiations between Transport for London and the capital’s private rail operators.

But there’s a sting in the tail for some rail passengers, with cheaper off-peak tickets withdrawn for those who don’t use Oyster cards, and higher fares for all in the evening rush hour.

Many local passengers have been using Oyster on local rail services for some time, but because they have Travelcards loaded onto their tickets.

Now all passengers will be able to use the smartcards to pay for individual journeys, just as Tube and Docklands Light Railway users have done for the past six years. On the Greenwich line, this means the cards will be as valid as far out as Slade Green, on the edge of zone 6.

From 2 January, passengers who don’t use Oyster cards will be charged a flat rate of £2.40 from Greenwich and other zone 2 stations to London Bridge, Waterloo East, Charing Cross or Cannon Street, with a return costing £4.30.

Those travelling from Maze Hill or Westcombe Park, in zone 3, will be charged £3.10 single, or £5.30 return.

But passengers who do use Oyster cards will be charged cheaper rates, with all journeys being charged as singles.

From Greenwich, passengers for central London will have to pay £2.10 if their journey takes place in the morning or evening rush hour – between 6.30am and 9.30am, or 4pm-7pm.

If their journey avoids those times, or is at weekends, then they’ll be charged £1.70.

Oyster card holders from Maze Hill or Westcombe Park will pay £2.60 for a peak journey, or £2 off-peak.

The new system also means passengers can combine rail and Tube/DLR journeys. If their journey does not include Zone 1, it’s at no extra cost. Someone travelling from Maze Hill to South Quay DLR via Greenwich would be charged £1.80 in peak hours, £1.50 at other times – the same fare as Maze Hill to Deptford.

But there’s an extra £1.10 added for journeys through zone 1 – so Maze Hill to Goodge Street will cost £3.70 or £3.10 single.

A cap will apply on fares, so passengers making different journeys during the day will find they pay no more than the appropriate rate for a one day Travelcard.

For people using paper Travelcards or season tickets, it’s business as usual.

However, the Oyster deal will not make travel as convenient as some users might like.

Passengers with Travelcards who need to travel outside their zones will be expected to get a free “Oyster Extension Permit” from a ticket machine or ticket office, or Oyster shop, before they travel to a National Rail station.

So someone with a zones 1-3 Travelcard will need to get a permit before travelling to Abbey Wood, in zone 5, for example. However, permits can be picked up weeks or months in advance, and will stay on Oyster cards until they are actually used.

Gold Card holders – who have annual Travelcards – will still have to buy paper tickets to get their usual one-third discount on tickets outside their zones.

And all passengers wanting to travel to Dartford or deeper into Kent will need to buy a paper ticket as normal.

As part of a separate agreement, Thames Clippers river services have already started to accept Oyster pay-as-you-go tickets, offering a 10% discount on normal cash fares, while Travelcard holders will get a 30% discount.

A £5.80 single ticket from Greenwich or QEII piers to central London will be reduced to £4.80 with Oyster PAYG, or £3.55 with a Travelcard.

Andrew Gilligan: Pier Pressure

By

Last week, when I went to look round the part of the Naval College that Greenwich Hospital wants to cover with a temporary market, an actual rather than a potential eyesore sprung into view. What on earth is happening with Greenwich Pier?

Readers with very long memories may recall that planning permission for three new pier pavilions was granted by Greenwich Council in February 2007, two and a half years ago. The pier’s old wooden buildings were swiftly knocked down – but since then, nothing.

No sign yet of the “resolutely modern” development, incorporating new boat ticket offices, toilets and three cafe/bar-restaurants, that we were promised. (Not sure whether that’s a good or a bad thing – from the artists’ impressions, it looks pretty ugly.) There is currently no shelter at all on the pier, and a lot of wooden hoardings; tickets are sold from temporary portacabin-like buildings on the shore. The whole place is incredibly confusing to many pier users and is also, frankly, a mess.

The news I bring you – you heard it here first – is that the development of the new pier is finally supposed to begin soon. Edward Dolby, resources director of Greenwich Hospital, which co-owns the land to be built on, said: “It is my understanding that the work will start in the autumn. It has been a long-drawn-out process getting all the legal agreements sorted out. The devil is in the detail – there are something like 17 documents.”

The problem with the pier area is that it has at least four owners. London River Services, part of TfL, owns the pontoon – that is, the bit that actually floats on the water, and alongside which the boats pull up. The Hospital and the Port of London Authority jointly own the promenade – the bit on dry land between the river and the boundary railings of the pier area, where the new buildings will fo.

Greenwich Council owns the pavement outside, which everyone must cross to reach the pier. To complicate this classic British muddle, the actual development is being built by yet a fifth party – the developer Stonehurst. And then the boats themselves are operated mainly by sixth and seventh parties – City Cruises, for tourists, and Thames Clippers, the high-speed commuter service.

You may not be wholly astonished to learn that the council has been one of the major holdups. According to one source involved with the project, “the developer is spitting feathers because he says he’s got the money but he’s had delays with the council in the final planning stuff that he felt was unnecessary.” You’d think that the council would have considered these issues before it gave planning permission – but apparently not.

I couldn’t confirm my information either with the council (its press office number was permanently engaged this afternoon) or with the developer (its number simply rang out, and its PR’s mobile and landline have been disconnected.) Let’s hope that in the current deeply hostile economic climate for development, the delays have not seen the money vanish and killed the project off.

If things do get under way, there is still the risk of massive disruption to the Thames Clippers service, which has seen a gigantic rise in passengers over the past two years and is becoming a real public transport alternative for Greenwich. The pier is not intended to close completely, but Sean Collins, the head of Thames Clippers, says that its capacity is likely to be seriously reduced.

“I am very disappointed with the lack of communication between the council, the PLA and London River Services,” says Collins. “Access could be severely disrupted and it doesn’t appear that they are joined up on it.” The pier redevelopment will cut right through the river’s summer 2010 season and may also touch summer 2011, Collins says. There is no plan yet in place for how the pier will cope with its current boat traffic when it becomes a building site.

One other thought occurs. The delay to the pier redevelopment means that it really starts to clash with several of Greenwich’s other pet development projects. The timings are now extremely difficult.

If planning permission is granted for the temporary market on the Naval College, the traders will load and unload on the eastern side of the Cutty Sark – and construction traffic will use it, too. But that same space will be needed – at the same time – for construction traffic on the pier.

The pier project also clashes with Greenwich Council’s absurd plans to close and tart up the foot tunnel. The council is investigating an alternative ferry service for cyclists. But if the pier’s capacity is reduced, it seems most unlikely that there will be room for a replacement ferry.

I’ve written before about the danger that the whole of central Greenwich is about to become a building site. But what I hadn’t realised until now is that the town centre may simply not be big enough to fit all the various schemes in. We seem to be faced with that most difficult of combinations – a council whose grandiose plans are not matched by the reality of its planning and co-ordination skills.

Woolwich Ferry may be tolled as new river crossings proposed

By

Toll booths could be introduced at the Woolwich Ferry and for the first time, as part of plans to pay for a series of new river crossings, it was revealed today.

Current legislation prevents any tolls at Woolwich. However, this could change under proposals to upgrade the existing ferries and boarding facilities.

Plans announced today for a series of new bridges, tunnels, and ferries across the river could also mean that existing crossings will be tolled.

Among the new river crossings proposed by Transport for London today are:

1. A Foot/Cycle Bridge between North Greenwich and Canary Wharf

This would be an expensive and tricky project. It’s position on the Thames means that any bridge would need to be at least 50m high in order to allow ships to pass. Despite this, TfL say that it would be an “iconic” scheme and would be “strongly supported” by both Greenwich and Tower Hamlets. The Canary Wharf group and AEG (O2) have also agreed to the bridge in principle.

2. North Greenwich to Canary Wharf passenger ferry

Cheaper than the bridge, this would require new piers on the Western side of North Greenwich and the Eastern side of Canary Wharf. Journey times would be quicker than the existing services from the Eastern side of the Peninsula. Cyclists would be able to use the crossing and like all other river services it would be fully ‘oysterised’ under current plans by the Mayor.

3. Silvertown Crossing

Talked about for many years, Boris Johnson has already signaled that he’s keen on this project. Running from Silvertown to the Greenwich peninsula, the crossing would feed into the Blackwall Tunnel approach via John Harrison Way.

Both a bridge and a tunnel are under consideration by the Mayor, although the former would almost certainly meet strong resistance from environmental campaigners and from the Port of London Authority. On the other hand, the latter would be less attractive to pedestrians and carry added safety risks.

As with any road crossing, the biggest worry is that it would just add further congestion to an already highly congested and polluted area.

4. Woolwich Ferry Upgrade

TfL say that the current ferries and landing stages are “coming to the end of their life” Under today’s proposals, tolls would be introduced to pay for replacement ferries and a full upgrade of facilities. Once finished, TfL say that the crossing would be able to carry a much greater volume of traffic. However, any tolling would need a change in the current legislation. TfL also say that tolling would be dependent on extra crossings being created elsewhere.

5. Gallions Reach Ferry (vehicles and pedestrians)

Following the route of the now abandoned Thames Gateway Bridge, this would be a relatively inexpensive way of opening up Thamesmead to much-needed extra jobs and transport links. Although not a long term solution, it would at least offer some extra provision to commuters and businesses. Supporters say that it would be unlikely to create anything like the influx of traffic that the Thames Gateway Bridge would have doneH.

6. Local Gallions Reach crossing

The final crossing under consideration, is effectively a smaller version of the Thames Gateway Bridge. Planned for a similar position as the TGB, this crossing would be designed for mostly local use, and unlike the TGB it has already received crucial support from Bexley Council.

Among the more ambitious plans ruled out by Transport for London today, were proposals for a joint vehicle and train Crossrail tunnel, and a cable car between North Greenwich and Canary Wharf. TfL say that the cable car would have created “significant access and privacy concerns” and would not have coped well with crowds at the O2.

The Mayor will now consider which, if any, of these proposals should go ahead.

Reactions

The Mayor’s decision to drop plans for the Thames Gateway Bridge last year was strongly welcomed by the London Green Party, who had long campaigned against it. They are also supportive of today’s plans for extra ferry and pedestrian crossings.

However, London Assembly Member for the Green Party Darren Johnson said today:

“Building a road tunnel or crossing is environmentally damaging and will do nothing to regenerate East london. The mayor is ignoring all the evidence that new roads just cause new traffic jams. It is incrediable that he would even consider building a new, traffic generating road, at a time when london is facing court action by the European commission over air pollution.”

Labour Assembly Member for Greenwich Len Duvall said the Mayor should “come to his senses”:

“The reality that Boris Johnson has so far failed to accept is that the Thames Gateway Bridge is the real solution to east London’s river-crossing needs. While it may be controversial to the few, it makes perfect sense for the many. A Silvertown crossing would have to go under rather than over the river and should be in addition to, rather than a replacement for, the Thames Gateway Bridge. Any other proposals, such as a pedestrian crossing, would have to allow for large ships to travel and berth up the Thames and would not redress the unequal distribution of vehicle crossings between west and east London.

“I’m glad the Mayor now finally accepts the need for a further crossing in east London, but his position still makes no sense. He opposes the Thames Gateway Bridge on environmental grounds, yet proposes a potentially damaging vehicle ferry and a road crossing at Silvertown. He should come to his senses, accept he made a mistake and go ahead with the Bridge for which London had already banked around £300 million of PFI credits.”

Mayor Boris Johnson said earlier today:

“Anyone that has ever tried to cross the Thames in East London is aware of the lack of crossings and the congestion this causes. The residents and businesses in this part of London deserve better and I am absolutely determined to deliver the improvements they require. This report makes a series of sensible recommendations that we will now dig deeper into and that I will consider as I put together my transport strategy for the capital.”

Greenwich River Crosssing

Remember, Remember the… seventh of May

By

You probably will have heard or seen the spectacular fireworks display over HMS Illustrious last Thursday at 10pm. The Greenwich Phantom has some excellent pictures and it certainly made for an awesome spectacle.

But the next day, Malcolm contacted Greenwich.co.uk to make the point that because there didn’t seem to be any advanced notice or publicity for the fireworks, not as many people got to enjoy them as might otherwise have done so.

He also raised the issue of pet owners who would have wanted to keep their pets safely in, as advised to on Bonfire Night, had they known what was about to be unleashed into the sky at 10pm. Malcolm also tells me that one neighbour’s dog bolted when the noise started and had shown no sign of returning by the next day – hopefully he has been found safe and well since then.

I asked on Twitter what people thought about the fireworks and got a very different response from Peter, who wrote: “really enjoyed fireworks from back window. Kids loved them too.Delighted to have random displays from river. More please!”.

So, two very different perspectives on the Royal Navy’s evening display – but what did you make of it? Was it a nice surprise (after the damp squib helicopter flypast) or was it a night-time nuisance?

Pictures from Fly Navy 100 Helicopter Flypast

By

As part of the Fly Navy 100 series of events, there was a “Centenary Flypast” today which saw a selection of Royal Navy choppers (apparently one of each of their frontline models) fly in formation over Greenwich, and HMS Illustrious which is moored here for a week. I thought long and hard about the best place to capture this moment and decided that wandering across to Island Gardens would be my best bet. Once I was over there, it didn’t feel like such a great move as the helicopters were so high, it wasn’t really possibe to capture much Greenwich scenery in the background which is what I was hoping to get.

I heard the occasional snippet of commentary drifting across the river so I think on that side it may have been a more informed experience. But across the river we got to see the marching band on Lusty strike up and perform some of their greatest hits (“Rule Britannia”, “God Save The Queen”… that kind of thing) for a lucky group of spectators onboard.

I’d have to say the Flypast didn’t really live up to its billing. It was over pretty quickly and they were so high up, it was hard to see them in any detail and I don’t think there was the 40 that we were expecting to see, unless the Navy has some stealth ‘copters available to them! I heard one guy call it “underwhelming” and I think that may be the right word for it.

Looking around at some of the camera equipment on display around me, my Canon Powershot G9 seemed distinctly underpowered, but here’s some of what I got.

Choppers over Greenwich

Helicopters

People Take Photos of Flypast

Band Entertains Guests on HMS Illustrious

Here’s a video I put together with images of the flypast and other stuff I saw, such as boats on the river and the band on HMS Illustrious who are just about audible.

See also: Darryl’s coverage at 853 and also IanVisits.co.uk

Fly Navy 100 Events

By

It was on May 7th 1909 that the decision was made to spend £35,000 on the development of an airship. That was the birth of British naval aviation, and a century later, a series of events are being put together to mark Fly Navy 100.

On Wednesday 6th May, HMS Illustrious (“Lusty” to her friends) will arrive in Greenwich, having made her way up the Thames. On Thursday at midday, there will be a centenary flypast as every current front line helicopter type will pass over the Thames and Illustrious.

There will be further demonstrations between 14.00 and 14.30 on the 9th and 10th of May, and there will be static aircraft available to view in the ground of the Old Royal Naval College.

Find out more about the Fly Navy 100 Events

Andrew Gilligan: Progress Report

By

THIS COLUMN has been going for just under six months, and there’s already been a bit of progress on some of the topics I’ve been banging on about in that time. I definitely wouldn’t claim credit – but perhaps in one or two cases, the publicity helped push things along a little.

One of my very first pieces, in October, in Greenwich’s flagship shopping street, Nelson Road, with four shops empty and a general air of neglect. Three of the empty shops have now been filled, and not with chains either – not bad going in a recession – and the street has a perkier feel.

In February we pointed out the equally recession-salient fact that the , and offerered better quality food, than our main supermarket, Somerfield.

Now Dring’s the butchers in Royal Hill, one of the shops I mentioned, tells me that it has been shortlisted as “Best Local Shop” in the ITV London/ Smooth Radio Love London Awards. Congratulations, guys: thoroughly well deserved – I bought some chicken from Dring’s the other day and it was ace. Best of luck for the awards ceremony at the Cafe de Paris on 24 April.

Earlier this week, Boris Johnson announced that the Thames Clipper river service would take Oyster pay-as-you-go from November, something for which I campaigned in this space in February. Later this year, this column, my newspaper the Standard, a major think-tank and a number of key political figures in London will be making a great deal more noise about how to improve the riverbus: watch this space.

The biggest result against the forces of folly, though, has been in helping get TfL’s grotesque “Greenwich Waterfront Transit” completely cancelled, something which happened last week. As I wrote in November,  this scheme sounded impressive – but was in fact nothing more than the world’s most expensive bus route.

It would simply have replaced the existing 472 service from North Greenwich to Thamesmead, using the same sort of rubber-tyred diesel buses, running at the exactly same frequency, and along almost exactly the same route and roads. (There would have been a tiny amount of new bus-only road in the Woolwich Arsenal development and in Western Way, near Belmarsh.)

It was the rest of us who would have noticed the difference. The GWT was expected to cost £20 million – absurd enough for a scheme offering no real new benefits beyond a fancy name. By this year, however, the cost had risen to £46 million – more than the entire annual bus subsidy for the whole of Wales!

The cancellation caused some predictable gibbering from the kind of people who still can’t accept that they no longer live in the golden days of economic boom and Ken Livingstone, with great tides of dosh lapping around to be flung at any pointless vanity project that shines in the light.

GWT’s demise left the people of the east of the borough “again bereft of an adequate transport network,” stormed Chris Roberts, Labour leader of Greenwich Council. “At a time when the Government is quite rightly looking for infrastructure projects to support the economy and keep people in work, the Mayor of London is cancelling them.”

One person Roberts’ furious denunciations understandably neglected to mention was the local MP, Nick Raynsford – also Labour – who said last year that he was dropping his support for the scheme because “I no longer consider it justifying the substantial costs involved.”

Raynsford is right. The GWT was in fact a conscious and gigantic con-trick on the long-suffering people of Thamesmead – deceiving them that they were getting, in Roberts’ words, a new “transport network” or “infrastructure project” when in fact they were getting neither of those things.

It would actually have reduced the chances of Thamesmead getting the real transport “infrastructure project” it needs, a tram or rail link, because the bureaucrats would have been able to wave the existence of GWT in the faces of anyone who asked.

So for the sake not just of taxpayer value but of the transport needs of the east of the borough, we should celebrate GWT’s demise this week.

Tide Mill Discovered in Greenwich

By

Archaelogists from the Musuem of London have discovered the remains of a tidal water mill at Greenwich Wharf, dating back 800 years.

The medieval structure, which has apparently been well preserved for the best part of a millennium, would have included a large water wheel on the Greenwich shoreside, with a diameter of 5 metres.

Staff from the Musuem of London’s Archaeology Department have been working alongside local company, Erith Contractors, to excavate the site with key features being moved to York Archaeological Trust for conservation and research work.

Simon Davis, Contract Manager for Museum of London Archaeology, said: ‘Tide mills may have been numerous along the Thames foreshore in the early medieval period. Four mills in Greenwich are mentioned in the Domesday book of 1086 and over 6000 mills were recorded across the country at this time. However, little evidence of mills in use in the early medieval period has been found on archaeological sites, so the discovery of a 12th century tide mill at Greenwich is very significant and exciting. Detailed recording of the find following its excavation and dismantling by the Museum of London Archaeology field team will enhance our understanding of milling technologies and early medieval economies.’

The discovery was made on the development site for Lovells Wharf.

Andrew Gilligan: We Are Sailing

By

Thames Clippers

IN THIS week’s absurd public transport meltdown, one of the very few links between Greenwich and the rest of the world which mostly kept going was also the least well-known, but arguably the best one, of all.

Even now, astonishingly few people seem to realise that there is a fast, regular and frequent riverbus service between two piers in Greenwich and central London – with rush-hour and evening service to Woolwich, too. It runs every 20 minutes for most of the day – see the timetable on the Thames Clippers website here – and on the fairly rare occasions when I don’t cycle into town, it’s my method of choice.

I several years ago largely gave up on mainstream public transport – a course of action I cannot recommend too highly. Buses and tube, in particular, are now exercises in low-level misery; until you stop using them, you just don’t realise quite how much they blight your life, how much time and mental energy they waste and how much money they screw out of you.

But there remain a few public transport options that are a genuine pleasure to use – and now, with the roads still a bit slippery for cycling and the Southeastern trains not back to a full service, is the time to discover one.

It’s time to liberate yourself from your cattle-truck carriages, your subterranean holes full of other people’s germs, your traffic jams and points failures; time to travel to work with the wind in your hair and the matchless spectacle of the world’s greatest city before your eyes.

As well as the views, you will find a seat, a good punctuality record and even a little counter selling tea and coffee.True, the single fare from Greenwich (£5) is about twice the train price – but if you buy a monthly season (£100) and work within walking distance of one of the central London piers (Tower, London Bridge, Blackfriars, Embankment or Waterloo) you will pay almost exactly the same.

The neglect of the river is one of London’s great transport scandals. We have spent the last twenty years – and will probably spend most of the next ten – tying ourselves in knots about Crossrail, with still a quite serious chance that it will not be built. But we already have a waterborne Crossrail, an almost unused six-lane highway through the middle of the city, which could be brought into the full embrace of the TfL system for a fraction of the cost.

Yet the existing service isn’t even integrated with the rest of the network – no Oyster pay-as-you-go (yet), no Travelcards (Travelcard holders do get a one-third discount).

Greenwich Pier

Greenwich council has recently started what it calls the “Clipper Campaign” calling for Oyster acceptance and a 10-minute peak-hour service. Very laudable aims, although I should point out that TfL had already promised to install Oyster readers for pay-as-you-go on the river service several months before the council started its campaign. Could Greenwich be trying to claim credit for achieving something that is going to happen anyway?

The council website says that “the Mayor of London has given no date for installing the Oystercard equipment on the boats.” That is perhaps a little misleading: I’m not sure what Boris himself has said, but his Transport Commissioner, Peter Hendy, told the last meeting of the TfL board that Oyster PAYG on the river was a “Mayoral priority” which “could be introduced by mid-2009.”

Answers last month to the Tory London Assembly member Gareth Bacon suggest that Greenwich’s “campaign” for the riverbus does not, so far, seem to have involved any contact with either the Mayor or TfL. As the local Tory leader, Councillor Spencer Drury, said: “I am curious what sort of campaign fails to contact the person or organisation which it is seeking to influence.”

It’s also worth pointing out the serious possibility that the Thames Clipper service will in fact contract, not increase, in the next few months. The extension from Greenwich to Woolwich is subsidised by TfL and the council, and was originally supposed to end this month, after the opening of the new DLR station. The subsidy has now been extended by another six months. It would be a shame if the next action of the leaders of the “Clipper Campaign” was to actually, well, clip the funding they give to the thing they’re trying to promote.

Still, let’s not bash the council spin-doctors too heavily this week. Their overall aim is good, and even once Oyster is available on the service, the real battle – for Underground-style fares and Underground-style frequencies – still needs to be waged.

In the meantime, take to the water. Even if it snows again, the Thames is most unlikely to freeze over.