34 East Dulwich Grove

[ed_pete]

Found in Planning Applications (sorry I'm a little bored...)

Location: 34 EAST DULWICH GROVE, LONDON, SE22 8PP

Proposal: Demolition of existing 3 storey residential property (including accommodation in the roof) and existing double garage and the construction of a 3 storey residential property (including accommodation in the roof) comprising 5no x 2 bedroom units and double garage.

Now I think that 34 EDG is the one on the corner of EDG and Elsie Road, that looks like its got severe subsidence caused by the massive Ash tree in the front garden. It's been surrounded by plywood hoarding for as long as I can remember.

Over to the regular forumites to debate (again) the merits of all property is theft, unsold developments, buy-to-let, incomers, Victorian/Edwardian vs contemporary architecture...

[She'llsurvive]

apparently it has been like that for seven years, and they have tried several times to get planning permission to knock it down, so far unsuccessful.

[Keef]

I'm a regular, and couldn't give a toss. What do you think then?

[Jeremy]

I'd rather have something new there than a crumbling old wreck...

[She'llsurvive]

well it does suggest giving people free rein to let houses with a bit of land go to rack and ruin on the basis that it will allow them to get planning permission to knock them down and put up flats with greater quick buck potential (and helping southwark council increase housing stock).

as long as it's only happening occasionally i agree it's probably best to let them get on with it. it is on the main road where there are plenty of other low-rise flats. plus given that the pct did the same at dulwich hospital a few doors down, there is some obvious precedent.

[Keef]

Plus they're only replacing 3 storeys with 3 storeys, so no biggie (see what I did there).

[Frisco]

_apparently it has been like that for seven years_

It's been like that (evidence of subsidence) for 20 years. It's probably been empty for 12 or more, and I'm pretty sure something could have been done before now to save the existing structure.

[citizenED]

I always pass that property with a glint in my eye - favourite pipe dream; lovingly restore it to its original status. Everybody happy. With this new development, I guess reality bites.

citizen

[dungdag]

Me too and I tried to buy the house next door. Let's hope the same fate doesn't befall East Dulwich Grove as befell Peckham Lodge which was demolished (due to subsidence??????!!!) to make way for flats more suitable to the Costa Del Sol than lovely Piermont Green

[Michael Palaeologus]

Is it of particular architectural merit? If not then a like for like replacement would be OK surely? Refrubishing it could easily cost more in money and resources than a new build - and a new build could be more energy efficient.

[Frisco]

"Is it of particular architectural merit? If not then a like for like replacement would be OK surely? Refrubishing it could easily cost more in money and resources than a new build - and a new build could be more energy efficient."

That depends on your view of architectural merit I suppose. It is a very good and attractive example of a large Victorian detached villa (which is unusual in ED) and it one of a short but complete row of them. My point was that had action been taken 20 years ago, it may be that the building could have been kept in use and saved. However, it seems to have been left to rot.

[Cllr Richard Thomas]

A new planning application for this site has been submitted which consists of:

Demolition of existing 3 storey residential property (including accommodation in the roof) and existing double garage and the construction of a 3 storey residential property (including accommodation in the roof) comprising 5no x 2 bedroom units and double garage.

details are available here

The decision is likely to be taken by the Dulwich Community Council.

Richard