Dulwich Hospital Demolition

[Captain Marvel]

Mine too

[Pugwash]

I had mine at Kings - with the first I had a choice of Kings or Dulwich - was not keen on the ward at Dulwich- felt it was 'primitive' compared with Kings. (This was way back in the early 70s)

[Captain Marvel]

They had a shelf at the end of the ward with a sign saying 'Crash' on it.

On the shelf was a mallet

[sand12]

It is a shame that this local piece of community social history is being wiped out.

Not sure if this will be helpful, but I came across this recently and thought about posting here if folks want to do something. It looks like two wings have already gone. Considering the history of the site, why don't local schools/groups use it?

(Poorhouses, History of Nursing, WWII Hospital, History of NHS, and probably more).

It would be great as a learning centre for local history.

Have you noticed an abandoned and derelict Victorian building near you? Are you worried a beautiful Victorian building is going to be demolished? Send the details to [email protected] for a chance for it to be featured in our Top 10 Most Endangered Buildings Campaign.

[mikeb]

The choice is between it remaining derelict and / or not fit for purpose, or being demolished and replaced with new public buildings - the school and health centre.

[sand12]

Here is the Planning Information from Southwark's Website

https://planning.southwark.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?previousCaseType=Property&keyVal=_STHWR_DCAPR_9567474&previousCaseNumber=_STHWR_PROPLPI_130332_1&previousCaseUprn=200003468663&activeTab=summary&previousKeyVal=_STHWR_PROPLPI_130332_1

Captain Marvel Wrote:

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

> 'It is, of course, a lovely building, and would

> still be fit for many purposes'

>

> Exactly. Some things just need preserving for

> their own sake. In East Dulwich, there are

> precious few old buildings and one of them is to

> be levelled without so much as a whimper

>

> Pulling that down is vandalism and demonstrates

> the same poverty of imagination that permits the

> construction of identikit flats all over the

> borough

[pk]

mikeb Wrote:

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

> The choice is between it remaining derelict and /

> or not fit for purpose, or being demolished and

> replaced with new public buildings - the school

> and health centre.

sounds about right

[sand12]

Completely agree that the site should not sit derelict and it is wonderful that a school and health facility are to be located on a site where public services were offered to the most needy in years past. The issue is more about preserving the social and architectural heritage of the site. Reading about the planning, it seems the most economical and expedient options were considered in the final decision and historical or social interest was not. Complete demolition of the site is a final erasure of the site's legacy as a social resource for the most vulnerable: the poor, sick, war veterans, maternal health, and the early NHS.

There are also other grant making bodies which could help:

https://heritageoflondon.org/projects/#ourgrantscheme

[fishbiscuits]

sand12 Wrote:

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

> The issue is more about preserving the social and architectural heritage of the site.

But there will be a new health centre on the site. So surely it's purely an architectural argument, right?

I do wonder what people think the building should actually be used for..

[ed_pete]

sand12 Wrote:

> ....Complete demolition of the site

> is a final erasure of the site's legacy as a

> social resource for the most vulnerable: the poor,

> sick, war veterans, maternal health, and the early

> NHS.

>

As was made clear in earlier posts it is not being completely demolished. The central "chateaux" will be incorporated within the school buildings. See link to PDF's.

GIYF

https://www.southwark.gov.uk/assets/attach/3059/public_consultation_a1_.compressed.pdf

https://www.southwark.gov.uk/assets/attach/3063/Public_Consultation_Boards_low_res_Part3.pdf

[Peckhamgatecrasher]

Hope it's not like the old Co-op building on Rye Lane where the facade was going to be kept, but mysteriously fell down.

[Captain Marvel]

>

> I do wonder what people think the building should

> actually be used for..

I gather you're no fan of monolithic Victorian architecture Fish

Perhaps then you appreciate the irony of knocking down a hospital wing to build a health centre

[fishbiscuits]

Captain Marvel Wrote:

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

> I gather you're no fan of monolithic Victorian

> architecture Fish

>

> Perhaps then you appreciate the irony of knocking

> down a hospital wing to build a health centre

I think it's a lovely looking building... I do appreciate it. But I'm also a pragmatist, and I'm still wondering what the building, if preserved, could actually be used for.

Surely it has already been established that it's not viable as a hospital/health centre.

[Captain Marvel]

It has and I know I'm flogging a dead horse here but what does 'viable' mean?

I think in this context it means a bit expensive to repurpose

It's one of the last remaining Victorian edifices in the whole area and I reckon it would have been worth a few quid to retain it.

And in response to your 'bit of tarmac' comment on the previous page, the council resurfaced and paved the whole of Court Lane completely unnecessarily. The machines were down there for months. I'd love to know how much that cost

[Bic Basher]

I'd speculate that blood tests and SELDOC would move into the new health centre once the wing is closed.

[mikeb]

I think keeping the main front entrance is worth it. The rest, not so compelling

[fishbiscuits]

Captain Marvel Wrote:

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

> It has and I know I'm flogging a dead horse here but what does 'viable' mean?

It's a good question... I am probably a bit out of my depth knowledge-wise. But even in the best case scenario, it can be difficult and expensive to retrofit old buildings to modern standards, in terms of infrastructure, utilities, accessibility, thermal efficiency, structural integrity. James Barber stated that it's of poor quality construction, with single-brick thickness (even the Victorian houses round here, which are of terrible construction quality, have double-brick construction on the side walls). We have no reason to doubt this. It would probably need a brand new steel "skeleton" for starters, somehow slotted inside the existing walls.

So basically... it means it's too expensive to do. Totally unjustifiable under NHS budget. Would it get English Heritage funding? Of course not. Would the private sector take it on? Not if redevelopment would be more expensive than a new-build!!

Captain Marvel Wrote:

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

> And in response to your 'bit of tarmac' comment on

> the previous page, the council resurfaced and

> paved the whole of Court Lane completely

> unnecessarily.

Yes... we've all heard stories of councils re-surfacing roads to use up their budget (in fear of having it reduced if they don't spend it). Maybe it's true, I don't know. Resurfacing a long road like Court Ln will obviously be expensive. I've heard a figure of ?25 per sqm. So maybe... 25x8x1000 = ?200K, just for the road surfacing (not the paving)??? James Barber would know, I'm sure.

But I don't think it would be even vaguely comparable to the costs needed to bring that hospital building into the 21st century.

[seenbeen]

I see Willmot Dixon are involved- a friend in construction said-'think of a number and double it'- what on earth could he have meant?

[Mumofone]

As someone who works in the hospital fairly regularly, I can tell you it is NOT fit for purpose for any healthcare facilities these days. I can only imagine the cost to renovate it would be astronomical. In the summer the rooms are so hot you have to have windows fully open, the clinical rooms are tiny, the water supply is erratic...

It is a shame that it is not being preserved as I do agree it is a lovely building.

HOwever I would guess only about 5-10% of it is being used currently. The new buildings will hold a junior school/main school and a fit for purpose healthcare centre.

I don't think Seldoc will be there though.

[first mate]

Mumofone, where do you think SELDOC will go, please share if you can?

[Mumofone]

Don?t think it?s been decided yet. All change with the new 111 service.

[first mate]

Any insights as to options currently on table? In my view, it would be a shame to lose SELDOC. I don't have much faith in Concordia, the outfit that I gather has won the contract to run the new health centre.

[alice]

Selco is now part of 111. Got a 23.15 appointment saw an excellent doctor and out within an hour. A steady stream of people.