Eltham Residents Celebrate Victory as Council Upholds 8am Opening Restriction for Shurgard Facility
Residents in Eltham have emerged victorious in a planning dispute after Greenwich Council's Planning Board rejected a request from self-storage giant Shurgard to extend its opening hours at a new facility on Eltham High Street. The council decided to stick with its original decision, made last year, requiring the company to open no earlier than 8am instead of the requested 7am start time.
Noise Concerns Drive Council Decision
Shurgard, which was granted permission to build the new facility at 260 Eltham High Street a year ago, returned to the Planning Board on March 10 seeking permission to open at 7am rather than the previously agreed 8am. The company had originally sought a 6am opening time when the site was first approved.
While Greenwich planning officers and acoustic testing commissioned by Shurgard suggested that a 7am opening would not significantly impact neighbors, local residents and councilors strongly disagreed. Planning Board Chair Cllr Gary Dillon questioned whether anything had substantially changed since the last application, where councilors implemented the 8am restriction to address resident concerns.
Residents Voice Strong Opposition
Cllr Pat Greenwell, who lives mere meters from the site in Woodcroft Close, spoke against the scheme at the meeting. She dismissed as "absolute rubbish" the developer's claim that noise from the facility would be indistinguishable from existing road traffic.
"When asked whether noise from the family-owned removals company Whitewoods, which previously occupied the site, impacted residents, Cllr Greenwell said it was almost like it was 'part-time,' adding: 'It never affected anybody.'"
Jonathan Morris, another Woodcroft Close resident, called any noise before 8am "unacceptable" and described Shurgard's request as "arrogant, disrespectful and impertinent" for trying to change a decision that had already been made.
Personal Impact on Local Residents
David Sharples spoke against the application on behalf of his 78-year-old mother-in-law, who moved into a Woodcroft Close house just three meters from the Shurgard site in December to be closer to family. Mr. Sharples revealed that she had only purchased the property knowing the 8am opening time had been agreed, and the new proposal had created "a huge amount of anxiety" for her.
Shurgard's Defense and Economic Arguments
Representatives of Shurgard defended their request, claiming they were "very quiet neighbors" who had received only one noise complaint across all 91 UK sites in the last two years. They estimated there would be only two departures and two arrivals between 7am and 8am—the same traffic generated by the previous occupant Whitewoods during that time period.
On behalf of Shurgard, Will Foster argued: "There is an economic benefit and economic impact to this. If Shurgard isn't able to operate normal operating hours, it means small businesses and people who would benefit from having that flexibility won't be able to access and use the facility at that time."
Council Upholds Original Decision
The Planning Board ultimately decided to uphold their original decision, maintaining the 8am opening time compromise instead of the 6am start Shurgard originally sought, and rejecting the new proposal for a 7am opening. This decision represents a significant victory for local residents who had organized against what they perceived as corporate overreach in their neighborhood.
The case highlights the ongoing tension between commercial development and residential quality of life in urban areas, with Greenwich Council prioritizing local residents' concerns over corporate convenience in this particular instance.
