Jump to content

Railway Rise Demolition - Consultation now open


chazzle

Recommended Posts

I mentioned earlier an attempt to get the station and railway cottages listed. This is the decision that English Heritage returned.


http://www.heritagegateway.org.uk/Gateway/Results_Single.aspx?uid=1423554&resourceID=7


Although disappointing because this would probably have prevented the proposals from going forward, it is important to read through to the conclusion:


"CONCLUSION While of local interest as key elements of the suburban expansion of East Dulwich, individually and as a group East Dulwich Station and Nos. 1-3 Railway Rise, do not possess the special architectural or historic interest in a national context required for designation."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

PS I think the fact that English Heritage said that the 3 cottages were of 'local interest as key elements of the suburban expansion of East Dulwich' would support an application for 'local listing' of these houses. That's the point about 'local listing' I think - it's about what architecture matters in marking the history of an area. And that's why I'd miss these cottages. They were built in the 1860s - as the railway itself - and thousand of miles of track all over the country - were being constructed to herald in the age of steam.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If there's anyone out there who "knows about these things" and can object to the proposals on issues of PLANNING, then I think that would be especially useful.


Objecting on the fact that they are historic and part of the character of the area etc is all well and good (and what I intend to do as it's as far as my knowledge goes) but if people can come up with substantial and informed objections based on planning issues such as the 45 degree rule right to light, increased traffic, etc then this can only strengthen the case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This from the application form:


"2 small old and dated residential cottages of poor quality located in an area of redevlopment [sic] accessd [sic] by a private road."


Bet they were thinking: wonder if they'll bother checking any of this?


It makes you wonder why the developer once thought them to be charming and wanted to live there ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Comment submitted, text as below:


I question the claim that the cottages to be destroyed are not of architectural or historical merit. In their present context, I contend, they are very much worth preserving as a unit. The railway station is an important entry into East Dulwich. The three cottages along Railway Rise, viewed from the down-train platform and walkway, are a charming reminder of our local history. Perhaps that view will be lost as what was once the garden centre's yard is occupied by a modern building. Even after that loss, however, to demolish two of the cottages and to set in their place a disproportionately large and certainly clashing structure is, I believe, to squander a valuable asset. Our goal should be to conserve rather than to discard, and with that in mind I hope that the proposal to tear down those cottages will be DENIED.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the cottages remain residential dwellings, suggest you object on the grounds of loss of residential. Southwark have policies on this point. There's a need for family housing, so loosing these is also contrary to the development plan.


What's the reason for the demo?


Speak to councils heritage team. I don't think southwark have a "local list" but check. If so, you could ask it be put on. You'd need solid justification. Suggest victorian society and any local conservation area group (doubt this is in a ca though) will be well placed to advise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm writing to the planning officer to ask for the deadline for comments to be extended. We have not yet received a letter from the Council about this (which I'm sure is required) and there is some confusion over what the deadline is (10th or 13th March?)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought that Thames Water is now a mandatory statutory consultee.


Thames Water will address the impact on the Station Rise sewer. This sewer was originally built between 1865 and 1873 and sized for three small Victorian domestic premises.


It may be neccessary for Railway Rise to have a new sewer system with interesting Grove Vale excavations to make the join.


Pehaps the non-consultation with Thames Water is an oversight.


John K

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SteveO - The recent decision by Westminster Council to refuse permission for some Qataris to knock three (already palatial) houses together would seem to be an example of this. Though not sure the average person in the street will benefit from greater availability of housing from this action ...


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2932712/How-town-hall-planning-officer-halted-Qatari-royal-family-s-200million-London-palace-Council-announces-reject-plans-knock-three-Grade-listed-mansions-together.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

edhistory (John K) - That's great knowledge. The sewer used to get blocked quite frequently even with just the three cottages. It passes under number 1, so don't think it could be upgraded.


steveo - Give the old curmudgeon a red pen and s/he could mark up the spelling and grammar mistakes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

chazzle Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> There are no new public comments shown since

> Thursday. I guess that means the comments are

> moderated and will appear after they've been

> checked.


How odd! I received an e-mail acknowledging my comment...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...