Update on 549 lordship lane (Concrete House)

[TheePope]

Pretty sure it's not the Perrett house.

Perrett Tower's is the one in this vid I think - though hard to tell.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=2can93JGLSI&feature=related

Anyone who's interested in Perrett and the Only Ones should have a read of the "One and Only" by Nina Antonia, for a fantastically scuzzy account of fecklessness and addiction in Forest Hill.

But, moving smoothly back onto topic - I though the whole issue with the concrete house was that they couldn't track down the owners to enforce repairs under it's listed status? I'd assume if plans to develop are in then they've resurfaced?

[bob]

as said befor I think a deal was done were by the developer was allowed to build next to it with a view to renovating the old house he's now made his mony and run, the council will end up with the bill for what ever happens so WE the rate payers foot the bill for some developer to get rich.

Bob S

[HonaloochieB]

Brendan Wrote:

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

As an aside, I love Monday mornings. I can somehow

> without even trying turn a post about Victorian

> building techniques into a socio-political rant

> about the parlous state of our greed ridden

> society.

And Brendan, it's the deftness with which you form those socio-political rants about the parlous state of the society, while commenting on it's greed ridden state, while ignoring Victorian building techniques that cause some of us to ignore syntax completely.

Of a Monday.

[HonaloochieB]

philiphenslowe Wrote:

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

> Jah Lush Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> >

> > HB: Peter Perratt has long been a resident of

> > Forest Hill but I'd be surprised if even he

> > considered squatting here in the past even when

> he

> > was going through the worst ravages of his

> heroin

> > addiction.

>

>

> Peter Perrett's been living at Crown Point in

> Norwood for quite some time. His son (also called

> Peter Perrett) is a friend of mine so I'll ask him

> about the concrete house.

Thanks Philip. I definitely read somewhere that PP Snr was living in a house in Forest Hill that was in an advanced state of decay.

I hope I don't sound prurient, and I hope he wasn't living there, but I merely wonder.

For the record I like The Only Ones a lot.

[DerelictLondon]

The concrete house is surely beyond repair. I took the attached pics last year when writing a book on derelict buildings. I went back there recently to film a documentary for the London Programme but the building is now totally inaccessable.Essential structural works have been carried out by the council only to stop the building falling into the road. The owner's whereabouts are unknown and the council has put a charging order on the land registry deeds in order to reclaim repair costs should the owner resurface & attempt to sell the land.

Sorry for the plug but more pics & info can be seen at www.derelictlondon.com/id1535.htm or in the Derelict London book available via Amazon. Other local topics of interest in the book inc. Friern School, Sydenham Hill Woods & Crystal Palace ruins.

Regards

Paul Talling

[Sue]

Hey that's a great book, I was looking at it recently, it's in the Tate Modern Shop.

Now I've given you a plug, can I have a discount? :))

[SimonM]

Very cheap here!

[Sue]

Yeh but presumably cheaper from the author :))

[Jeremy]

Yep, it's obvious that it can never be restored, it is in a terrible state... huge cracks all over it, and apparently propped up with bits of metal. It's a shame, but surely the only choice is to knock it down, so at least the land can be used for something useful.

[Brendan]

HonaloochieB Wrote:

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

> And Brendan, it's the deftness with which you form

> those socio-political rants about the parlous

> state of the society, while commenting on it's

> greed ridden state, while ignoring Victorian

> building techniques that cause some of us to

> ignore syntax completely.

> Of a Monday.

When Yoda does it is profound but when I do it bad grammar it is.

[SteveT]

I lived in a concrete house for a short while, each time you closed an internal door the whole place drummed, a kind of ringing reverberation, as if the place was taut.

It was also a cold place too.

I dont care what listing it has, it aint fit for purpose.

[*Bob*]

Wot was yoo in for, Steve?

[AcedOut]

Surely it just needs a lick of paint and some new windows?

[Keef]

Agree totally with Jah, it was a wonderful looking place, and it still has character, but it was left to rot, and rot it did. Needs to go now. That said, is anyone going to buy a new flat at the moment he they do get built there?

[Jeremy]

Buildings take time to put up, perhaps in a couple of years time people will be buying property again.

You never know though, maybe it will be key worker part-ownership things, or council housing, or even a habitat for humanity site.

[bob]

The develepor who made all the mony from the new house he built should be made to re build the old house as it was in it's former glory

Bob S

[redrouge]

We've always been strangely attatched to the house, I even have an arty photograph of it framed in my bedroom...!

Surely some of you have got to admit there is a strange beauty attatched to the house? It's become a Dulwich Landmark, not an eyesore.

I really can't believe it's still not being rescued.

[lozzyloz]

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3149/3029457971_f8d254cc5e_o.jpg

[Nero]

It is a shame, but I think the time has past for it to be saved. Why not knock it down, flog off bits of it in an auction for charity, and use the land for some much needed housing. Generally I am all for saving old buildings, but the evidence here is that noone is that interested.

[Only me!]

Sad fate for what could have been a nice landmark property.

Does it's present state not highlight a weakness of the present Listing System?

Anybody who buys it is obliged to restore it in using correct materials etc, thus rendering it an uneconomic project.

But no penalty for just leaving it to rot & collapse, at which time I guess, site can be redeveloped with no such complications.

Letter of the law being obeyed, but achieving what?

[DeptfordDiva]

Can't believe i've only just seen this post. Tragic, scandalous. Every time i drive past it, i want it. My dream is to win the lottery and buy it. Still, i guess a few boxes on that corner will look just as good :X

[bob]

Thanks for the pic Lozzyloz it reminds me of the Munsters house.

Bob S

[Jeremy]

redrouge - I think you're missing the point, it's beyond repair now and I expect it's actually dangerous.

I think we all would have like to see it rescued... it's scandalous that it's been allowed to deteriorate. But the damage has been done, and now there's not really much choice other than to knock it down.

[Lewis]

As the ward councillor, and Executive Member responsible for the Borough's heritage, this is the position;

a planning application for the demolition of 549 Lordship Lane, the Concrete House, was submitted by the owner in October, That application is currently invalid. If the Council recieved a valid application for demolition and a new development it would be considered through the normal planning process and public consultation. Southwark Council recognises the historical significance of this building and its preference would be to restore the building, which from all the professional advice I have recieved, could still be done. Whilst this is the case, I have always made it publicly clear that I would oppose any plans to demolish.

Lewis Robinson

[lard]

They should give it to anyone willing to do it up, with the stipulation that they can't then sell it, they own it for their life and then give the title back.

It might become economically viable then to restore it, and would be done for the love and not the money.