Residents want answers after Woolwich Dockyard Estate listed for redevelopment

Residents on the Woolwich Dockyard Estate want clarity over the future of their homes after Greenwich Council named it as a site suitable for over 1,000 new homes – without warning them first.

The estate, built around the old naval yard founded by Henry VIII, is singled out for possible redevelopment in the draft Local Plan, which will set guidance for how the borough should grow until 2037.

One resident told a senior councillor on Wednesday that she and her neighbours had been treated like “village idiots” by the town hall.

Scores of sites across the borough – almost all in the north, between Deptford and Abbey Wood – are assessed for their potential to be developed for housing or other uses. Every council in the country must have a Local Plan, which is then used to assess whether a development is suitable.

Back in March 2024, Greenwich Council announced it was looking at estates to “regenerate” but did not name any area. However, six areas of council-built housing were named as being “suitable for tall buildings” when the draft Local Plan was first published in December.

Of these, two – Woolwich Dockyard and Frances Street/Samuel Street – feature together in the detailed list of sites suitable for redevelopment, with the outlines of where possible new blocks could go. 

The combined site – described in the latest plan as “Woolwich Dockyard/St Mary’s” – includes the entire Dockyard estate as well as an area between Flood Passage, Samuel Street, Lord Warwick Street and Kingsman Street, containing a mixture of 1950s and 1960s blocks.

In total, 670 homes are in the area highlighted for possible development. The council says that an additional 1,020 homes could be built there. 

Most of the Woolwich Dockyard Estate, which opened in 1980, appears to be in good condition, although two community buildings are lying unused. Blocks on the St Mary’s Estate, which were built in the 1950s, are showing their age, along with the 1960s blocks at Bowling Green Row.

‘We weren’t told. None of us’

Patricia Roud, a leaseholder on the estate, had no idea of the plans until she leafed through a copy of the draft Local Plan in Woolwich library.

“It might have been just before Christmas, and it was in the back of the library at Woolwich,” she said.

“We weren’t told. Nobody, none of us. There was lots of it, with a big thick book: 283 pages. I’m nosy, and I thought, this is interesting, and I saw our estate ringed, and ‘oooh! It’s to do with us then!’

“So I had a look through this great big book. I took some photos and tried and pinched a lot of information to bring back, but I was surprised that the library staff didn’t know anything about it.”

Roud, who moved to the estate six years ago, took some photos of what she found, and sent them to her friend, Lesley Turner. Both women are  “housing champions”– a point of contact where residents raise issues about their estate, and they pass the concerns onto the council.

“Lesley was incensed because she discovered that her maisonette across the road was included, so she sent emails to all the people that we know on the council, because we go to the meetings and she knows them by sight and by name,” she said.

“The response she got was either nothing at all or ‘we don’t know anything about a plan’.” 

Roud, Turner and other residents started posting information about the council’s plans through their neighbours’ doors. “We were incensed that it was so secret,” Roud said. “Everybody, all the residents, needed to know.”

Greenwich Council responded in February by sending its own letter to residents, simply signed “Place & Growth Team”, claiming there had been “misinformation” about the plans. The residents angrily reject that claim, and say they only drew on the council’s own words. 

A later letter from Jamie Carswell, the council’s assistant director in charge of housing – a different department – later apologised for the lack of warning about the Local Plan.

Now the group have formally incorporated the Woolwich Dockyard & St Mary’s Residents’ Association (WDSM) and want a say in the future of their estate. In turn, the council says nothing has been decided because the Local Plan highlights sites that could be suitable for development, rather than places that definitely will be built on.

‘They treat us with contempt now’

An updated version of the draft Local Plan was approved by the cabinet on Wednesday and will go out to consultation during the summer holidays.

But it does not include what the Dockyard residents want, which is a specific consultation on the future of their estate, and a commitment to work with them.

Roud and Turner – who is now the chair of the WDSM – started raising the future of the Dockyard estate at meetings in their role as housing champions. But Roud said figures within the council had gone cold on them both.

“They treat us with utter contempt now,” she said. “Before we were friends – ‘oh, hello!’ – but not now. It’s silence.”

While they are still furious about the claim of “misinformation”, the residents insist they want to work alongside the council and do not want to be seen as “a moany bunch of residents”. 

“That’s why I got involved, because I wanted to make sure the ladies are professionally represented, but also that we are not crossing lines,” said  Sabrina Francis, who moved to the estate in 2002 after her old home near Woolwich Common was knocked down. She has experience of working with developers and has been helping the group with research. 

“I don’t want us to be accused of making personal attacks,” she said.

“Co-production is the new buzzword, right? You’ve probably heard of it. We’re asking for that. We don’t want it to be a tick box exercise where they’re consulting top down, and we just say, ‘Oh, that’s pretty, that’s nice, OK, yes, no.’ We want to be co-producers of whatever happens to our estate, whether it stays, wherever it goes.

“A lot of us like this area, like living here and like the access to the links that we have – doctors, schools, friends, family, care workers, and so on. So, having us move out is more than just about money.”

‘The finest possible housing site in London’

One worry is that leaseholders may not be able to return to a site that would be highly desirable for developers: on the river, close to a railway station and with a historic past. A handful of historic buildings, the old gates and two graving docks remain.

The dockyard closed in 1869 but the military stayed on site for another century before the land was bought by Greenwich Council. 

The Woolwich MP at the time, Christopher Mayhew, called the dockyard “the finest possible housing site in London”. Residents fear that private developers will agree and reflect that in the price they are charged to move back.

“The new-builds down the road from here on the Morris Walk Estate, three bedrooms, £675,000 – and that’s not on the riverside,” Francis said of the rebuilt estate close by now known as Trinity Park. 

“It’s obvious what value they will put on what they put here. This is why we have to create a residents’ charter, we want to negotiate now.”

Lesley Bryant, who lets out a flat on the Woolwich Dockyard Estate, once worked as a midwife at the British Hospital for Mothers and Babies, which stood in Samuel Street until 1984. She said: “It’s such a young estate, which could be a jewel in the crown for Greenwich Council. The people on it are being held in contempt by this council. This shouldn’t be knocked down.”

‘We’re really keen to work with residents’

While the council did consult on the Local Plan as a whole – including holding an event for residents in February – there was nothing specific for the residents in Woolwich Dockyard who found their houses in a potential development area. 

Council leader Anthony Okereke told The Greenwich Wire last week: “We’re trying to reassure people that we’re not knocking down their homes tomorrow, and obviously we’ve seen previously how estate renewal does bring a level of anxiety, so if some people are going around, going around saying the council is coming and knocking down your home – well, no, that’s not what we’re doing at all, in any way, shape, or form.

“We wanted to set the record straight, and it’s important because we recognise how sensitive that feels. 

“We’re really keen to work with residents. Nothing happens to them, it’s all going to happen with them.”

Okereke said there were no firm plans. “An allocation [in the Local Plan] does not necessarily mean it’s going to be redeveloped tomorrow,” he said. “Any funding that’s needed has to be secured, and we don’t have that in our budget at the moment.”

‘We’ve been treated like village idiots’

But the divide between the residents and the council continued at the cabinet meeting on Wednesday, where Tom Creswell, the new cabinet member for regeneration, unveiled the new local plan.

WDSM made a submission to the meeting, and Okereke invited Turner to address the councillors.

“Every reply [we get] is just words that don’t actually say anything. We were led to believe that the council wanted to engage with us, sadly, this has not been the case,” Turner said, adding that a local councillor had accused them of spreading lies. 

“Nothing that we have told anybody has come from anywhere except the council’s own documents. We’re really not happy.”

After the meeting, Creswell – who was only elected last month – made a point of introducing himself to the residents and talking to them until the council’s deputy leader, Jackie Smith, called him away to attend another meeting.

“We’ve been treated like the village idiots,” Turner told him. “I hate to say this, but we’re regularly being ignored by everyone, and it’s disrespectful. We’re grown-ups, you can tell us things we don’t want to hear. But don’t be disrespectful, don’t be discourteous, because that’s unforgivable.”

“I’m hoping to turn a new page on that,” Creswell said, pledging to set up a meeting with the residents.

Afterwards, Turner said that the group had not been told that they could ask a question in the cabinet meeting. “It puts you on the back foot,” she said. “I actually don’t know exactly what I did say, because it was completely on the hoof.”

She said she was hopeful that Creswell would be as good as his word and get in touch. “If he doesn’t, then that makes a bad situation even worse,” she said.

Iffy Udoji, who has lived on the estate for 18 years, said she had spoken to a neighbour on the morning of the meeting who was still unaware of the potential redevelopment. “She said the council could not do that – she had applied for right-to-buy and the council had accepted it,” she said. 

Timandra Harkness, another resident who attended the cabinet meeting, said: “When you talk to them about the fact that the whole Woolwich Dockyard Estate might be knocked down or redeveloped, some tenants will say, ‘Well, that’s fine, my flat isn’t that great. I’d be quite happy if they gave me a new flat.’

“But the fact that the council seemed to have deliberately hidden the consultation process from us and tried to slip it past us, without anyone knowing, really got people’s backs up, because we deserve at least to be involved in the conversation.” 

What the council says

A Greenwich Council spokesperson told The Greenwich Wire: “We publicised the consultation widely because we wanted residents to share their views, suggestions and concerns. We understand that people care deeply about their homes and communities, and those views are vital in shaping the borough’s future.

“Inclusion in the draft Local Plan does not guarantee redevelopment, grant planning permission or represent a decision to proceed with estate regeneration. No decisions have been made about bringing forward proposals to redevelop the estates and residents will continue to be engaged as we consider future options.”

Asked why the council referred to “misinformation” in its letter, the spokesperson added: “We recognise that long-term planning and regeneration issues can be complex and can raise questions, which is why we wrote to residents to clarify what the draft Local Plan does and does not propose. 

“The letter also sought to reassure residents that no decisions had been made about bringing forward proposals to redevelop the Woolwich Dockyard Estate and St Mary’s Estate.”

Of the six areas identified for “tall buildings”, which also include the Orchard and Coldbath estates in Lewisham, the Glyndon estate in Plumstead and the Abbey Wood Estate, the spokesperson said: “Being in an area identified as suitable for taller buildings does not mean an estate will be redeveloped or that any decisions have been made about its future.

“The designations are based on planning criteria that looks at factors such as the existing character of different parts of the borough and where future growth may be appropriate in principle.

“Apart from Woolwich Dockyard and St Mary’s, none of the other estates in the tall buildings category are identified in the draft Local Plan as potential redevelopment sites. Any future proposals would require a separate process and be subject to extensive engagement with residents.”

The full draft Local Plan can be seen in the cabinet papers – the section about Woolwich Dockyard, with maps and plans, is at the end of part 2.

The Woolwich Dockyard & St Mary’s Residents’ Association will be taking part in the Community Festival at the Clockhouse Community Centre, Defiance Walk SE18 5QL, from noon to 5pm on Saturday July 18.

❤️ Get better local news on your phone. Add The Greenwich Wire as a preferred source on Google.

📩 Follow The Greenwich Wire on Bluesky, Facebook, LinkedIn  or Threads. You can also sign up for WhatsApp alerts – or subscribe to our emails through the blue box above.