Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Oh that sounds hopeful!


And after all these years, please can we get restoring it, before it really is too late?


If I win the lottery this week, I'll chip in ???s.


But, seriously, is there a way we could try and get funding to restore it?


There must be a Houses in Need trust or something!

The thing that really niggles with this property is the deliberate cynicism of the owner. They made the purchase in full awareness of their responsibilities, but would have been conscious that a greater retun could be made by letting it rot and then building an Altima Court.


It's not clever, it's w@nker.

Huguenot Wrote:

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

> The thing that really niggles with this property

> is the deliberate cynicism of the owner. They made

> the purchase in full awareness of their

> responsibilities, but would have been conscious

> that a greater retun could be made by letting it

> rot and then building an Altima Court.

>

> It's not clever, it's w@nker.


I suppose then the thing for locals to do would be


a) Make sure it never gets knocked down. Which would be a bit spiteful but serve the owner right.

or

b) Get the land rezoned so that they can?t build flats on it.

Most of the posts seem more concerned with ensuring that the owners or developers are prevented from making a profit than with any real desire to preserve this old ruin for any redeeming features it may have. Concrete isn't an aesthetically pleasing material, which was first realised by the Romans when they built the Colosseum and went to great lengths to disguise the concrete structural elements.

Travertine limestone apparently Dev. And the pyramids were made by aliens.


Regardless, are we suggesting that because it was made of concrete it should be pulled down? Had your original assumption on the Colosseum been right, are we suggesting that should also be pulled down?


In fact, goddamn it, should we pull down St. Paul's cathedral on the grounds that we could have built it quicker and more efficiently with glass and plastic?

Huguenot Wrote:

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

> Travertine limestone apparently Dev. And the

> pyramids were made by aliens.

>

> Regardless, are we suggesting that because it was

> made of concrete it should be pulled down? Had

> your original assumption on the Colosseum been

> right, are we suggesting that should also be

> pulled down?

>

> In fact, goddamn it, should we pull down St.

> Paul's cathedral on the grounds that we could have

> built it quicker and more efficiently with glass

> and plastic?



No doubt Wren would have used more glass,plastic and other modern materials if they had been available to him.

Well, they built a pineapple in Scotland although not of concrete...


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/41/The_Pineapple.jpg/250px-The_Pineapple.jpg


So far as the concrete house goes, I concur with the view that it's a damned shame and I hope the current owner doesn't see any profit from his cynical actions.

I am a building surveying student and am doing a project on this house (my choice). This forum is a great source of info - thanks!

I am looking at whether the current listing system has failed the house and what a conservation plan for the house should consist of should the CPO ever come off.

2 questions I'd like to put out there....

-Does anyone know if the newer structure that has been constructed is occupied? I have seen lights on and potted plants in the windows but I thought it didn't have proper planning permission?

-Having bought a copy of the title deeds and plans from the land registry, I can see that the current owner has seperated the land and registered it under a different title number leaving the original house with nothing but the ground it stands on. Does that mean that if a CPO ever came off the council would just get the house, or would they also get the rest of it inclucing the newer structure?

I think that the current owner perhaps saw a CPO coming and that's why he seperated the plot.

Gen17,


To answer your second question - the separation in the registered title means that the Council would only be granted a CPO over the original concrete house, not the newer building behind it. I suspect the reason for the separation in title is a bit more prosaic - it would have been almost impossible for the residents of the new building to get a mortage if there were oustanding breaches of covenant in the freehold in respect of the old house (for example to keep it in good repair etc). Splitting the title would have given the owner an opportunity to free the new title from any covenants which only relate to the old house (save where these are for the benefit of the old house, like right of access to do emergency works etc).

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

    • Thank you to everyone who has already shared their thoughts on this. Dawson Heights Estate in the 1980s, while not as infamous as some other estates, did have its share of anti-social behaviour and petty crime. My brother often used the estate as a shortcut when coming home from his girlfriend’s house, despite my parents warning him many times to avoid it. Policing during that era had a distinctly “tough on crime” approach. Teenagers, particularly those from working-class areas or minority communities, were routinely stopped, questioned, and in some cases, physically handled for minor infractions like loitering, skateboarding, or underage drinking. Respect for authority wasn’t just expected—it was demanded. Talking back to a police officer could escalate a situation very quickly, often with harsh consequences. This was a very different time. There were no body cameras, dash cams, or social media to hold anyone accountable or to provide a record of encounters. Policing was far more physical and immediate, with few technological safeguards to check officer behaviour. My brother wasn’t known to the police. He held a full-time job at the Army and Navy store in Lewisham and had recently been accepted into the army. Yet, on that night, he ran—not because he was guilty of anything—but because he knew exactly what would happen if he were caught on an estate late at night with a group of other boys. He was scared, and rightfully so.
    • I'm sure many people would look to see if someone needed help, and if so would do something about it, and at least phone the police if necessary if they didn't feel confident helping directly. At least I hope so. I'm sorry you don't feel safe, but surely ED isn't any less safe than most places. It's hardly a hotbed of crime, it's just that people don't post on here if nothing has happened! And before that, there were no highwaymen,  or any murders at all .... In what way exactly have we become "a soft apologetic society", whatever that means?
    • Unless you're 5 years old or have been living in a cave for several decades you can't be for real. I don't believe that you're genuinely confused by this, no one who has access to newspapers, the tv news, the internet would ask this. Either you're an infant, or have recently woken up from a coma after decades, or you're a supercilious tw*t
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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