Concrete House

[redrouge]

I think Southwark Council asked for Compulsary Purchase because the building, the empty shell of a new build built behind 546 Lordship Lane is against planning regulations and goes against all Grade II listing laws or something. I read about it somewhere, but I can't find the original link for the life of me.

I sincerly hope Southwark Council has some pride in the history of our borough and does not give permission for the demolition, and perhaps the need for the house to be restored will be put in the limelight and someone will go and take care of the house.

My childhood dreams would also be destroyed. I always imagined myself living in the house, completely renovated back to full Gothic Victorian splendor!

Does anyone have a history of the house? I know bits and bobs... I've been facinated with it for the last 14 years...

[Peckham native]

Found this document on Southwark's website dated December 2005 for a compulsory purchase order.

549 Lordship Lane SE22 (excluding house recently constructed in the grounds)

3 storey detached grade II listed period house with approx. ? acre garden. Victorian built 1870

Condition - Very poor. The house has been partially boarded up, although recent surveys suggest it is still structurally sound. Needs extensive refurbishment.

The property has been empty to the EHO for at least 15 years. The property represents a possible health problem for adjoining owners and is continually flytipped and has a vermin problem and has an outstanding section 4 notice Prevention of damage by pests Act 1949 served by Public protection. A notification of dangerous structure was served on the owner in Dec 1997 under the London Building Acts 1939

The EHO, Building Control and Conservation teams have used all reasonable endeavours to contact the registered owner of the property (a Mr B Chandra Esq.), but have been unable to establish communications. The owner?s agent has applied for planning approval to demolish the property and new build, which was subsequently rejected on appeal to the planning inspector.

[Louisa]

I found what appeared to be family photographs in the early 1900's on a local history website. I know that the Dulwich Society website has a catalogue of listings for people who lived at specific addresses in the area. For example, I found out that before my family moved in my place in the 1930's, an engine driver and his family lived here.

[Tom]

I think that despite its grade II status, this building should really be consigned to the scrap heap. Architectural heritage is very important, but does this building really require saving? If a building is not economically viable or practical to use either as business or residential, it should move on to make use for a building than can be used. I am more in favour of high density metropolitan areas than urban sprawl into green belt or parkland. We must realise that there are too many people in London as it is (see recent ED house price debates - mainly caused by lack of suitable housing stock).

Knock it down and build some badly needed accomodation for young couples who can't afford ?500k 3-bed terrace houses.

Also - a footnote. English Heritage make repairing or renovating a listed building such a logistical and financial nightmare, most owners give up and let the property fall appart. If EH were a bit more enlightened, then a lot of these buildings would develop, flourish and remain utilised. They do - of course - do a lot of good work, what I am saying is that they are so unflexible that the Lordship lane situation is becoming more common.

[Huguenot]

Good points all Tom.

I reckon we might be ascribing too much good will to the owner of this property though. I reckon he bought at a knock down price because of the work required and the listed status, and then deliberately let it go unused and to ruin in order to make a killing on the market.

That's not put upon owner who cares about young couples. That's filthy cynical bar steward squatting on someone else's doorstep.

[Ant]

Morning all,

I spoke to my neighbours last night who'd been reading this thread. They're also concerned about the possible loss of the Concrete House and have asked me to say that if anyone is interested in starting up a campaign to save the house they're willing to set up a website to co-ordinate it all.

They were suggesting we write letters and leaflets, and use the freedom of information act to get even more information about what's really going on. So - anyone interested? The more people that get involved, the less each individual will have to do.

(And just a quick thought: if we get going in time we could even have something to show to people at the EDF Fair in May and reach even more people in ED.)

[redrouge]

I'm with you Ant, this house must be saved. You're right - the lack of information about the house seems to be affecting resident's view on the house. People seem to just think it's a dump.

I also don't want to see more souless houses pollute East Dulwich. I seem to be one of the few that has actually grown up here, and my mother was born here too - the last thing we want to see is parts of Dulwich's unique heritage taken away by property developers building ugly square buildings for these annoying young couples.

It's bad enough all the nice Victorian houses are all slowly being converted into flats...

[*Bob*]

Perhaps turn the concrete house into a retirement home? That way we could keep all the miserable old gits well clear of all those 'annoying young couples', constantly irritating everyone with their unreasonable desire to find somewhere to live.

[Keef]

Yeah Redrouge, what makes a young couple annoying? I agree with a lot of what you said, but there's nothing wrong with people wanting a home!

[Huguenot]

Well I guess all that zest for life, optimisim, energy, mutual adoration, always seeing the good in people can be a real pain in the bum! ;-)

[Ant]

Perhaps this might be of use: http://www.victoriansociety.org.uk/adv6.html

[rob]

NOTE TO DEVELOPERS

Please knock this decrepit, rat-strewn, turd-heavy, tramp-magnet house down and take out the tile warehouse and the harvester while you're there. Leave EE House tho' - thanks.

[davidm]

how about that restoration programme with griff rhys jones? perhaps save it that way. make it into some kind of community centre

[redrouge]

The young couples have that look of smugness and have nice clothes and earn far more then me. Saying that I am only twenty. But I am about fifty at heart.

I mean... if that house was done up, properly, back to it's old spendor, it would probaly get on the market for a good million or more.

[*Bob*]

Jeez, Redrouge!

You're only 20. Isn't that a little too young to already be envious of someone else having a more expensive pair of trousers than you?!

[mockney piers]

Someone from the South London Press has been in touch interested in if the good folk from the forum are actually doing anything about starting some sort of campaign.

I'm usually inert to the point of moribund, but anyone fancy getting together to actually start doing something and getting some momentum. I don't want to be the one tutting saying someone should have done something once it's gone.

I'm obviously speaking to those who want to save the house, not the detractors.

[redrouge]

Ah yes Bob, it is a little young, but I do have expensive taste and a not-so well paid job!

I'd be interested mockeny piers, I'm not sure what use a lowly student like me would be to the SLP, but I've lived here all my life and I'm too attached to that house to see it go!

[mockney piers]

The SLP seemed to be interested in a 'the good folk of ED campaign to save house' story or something. But who knows, if we can get some momentum it could be useful publicity if they're still interested further down the line.

I'd step one is those interested meet up and see if any among us have some sort of organisational ability (mine doesn't stretch much past being able to remember a round). Then maybe we can start following up some avenues as suggested above like FOI and Ant's victorian website advice etc.

Sound tempting to anyone? Perhaps Caffe Nero some midweek evening in the next fortnight?

[Ant]

I'll just repeat that my neighbours have offered to set up and host a website to co-ordinate any campaign. I can do any evening next week apart from Monday. Week after is not quite as good.

[mockney piers]

OK, I'm in. Next week, shall we say Tuesday?

If we don't want to do a pub I'm happy enough to do it at my place and make cups of tea and stuff.

[Huguenot]

Mockers, do you know a simple site where you can set up a petition? Not the PMs please... ;-)

[mockney piers]

I've a feeling that online petitions are often dismissed out of hand and are considered to be less weighty than their paper brethren. particularly the rent a petition sites.

If Ant's neighbours can set something up though that might be better.

Barring that I've a few megs of webspace from my ISP, I might even manage something myself.

[Incitatus]

The concrete house will not be demolished; in fact the facsimile next door will go first, as it?s proving a rather large obstacle to Southwark attempts to line up any willing developers.

Once the council get their hands on the site either by CPO or the courts then the original will be developed under the guidance of EH into accommodation, this is by far the most high profile site in Southwark, the council will not let this one slide.

[Huguenot]

Hmmm, and does our favourite horse speak from insider knowledge, conviction or motivation? ::o

[Incitatus]

Now you can say that you "heard it from the horse's mouth", kinda.