Update on 549 lordship lane (Concrete House)

[Amelie]

From whom for heaven's sake?

[PeterW]

I'm sure there's no need to worry ? given that council has already agreed to go ahead with compulsory purchase, they're hardly likely to give in now. I imagine it'll be a while before the place is bought, let alone restored, but the council is very aware of the house's importance. Plus, of course, it remains Grade II listed.

[misspiggy79]

reasonably sure it is the same 2' business partners' as the last few applications...are we allowed to mention names on this forum?I'm new to all this :)

[TheePope]

misspiggy79 Wrote:

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

> reasonably sure it is the same 2' business

> partners' as the last few applications...are we

> allowed to mention names on this forum?I'm new to

> all this :)

The names are in the public domain so should be no problem mentioning them as long as you're factual!

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23635129-details/Saved+for+Britain:+the+old+concrete+house+of+Dulwich/article.do

I'm sure people would be interested if you oould link to the latest planning/demolition application.

[AllforNun]

basically these guys are taking the piss, the house they built is rented out so they are making money out of it. The bottom line is they, the council, should secure the site, and move whoever is in the ridiculous replica out. They should then demolish the building and bill these 2 idiots for all the cost if they can't pay go after their busineses and stick them i jail if need be. What i really do not understand is how they got away with building it over 12-18 months without plannning permission and without the council putting a stop to it ?

[Sue]

AllforNun Wrote:

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

> basically these guys are taking the piss, the

> house they built is rented out so they are making

> money out of it. The bottom line is they, the

> council, should secure the site, and move whoever

> is in the ridiculous replica out. They should then

> demolish the building and bill these 2 idiots for

> all the cost if they can't pay go after their

> busineses and stick them i jail if need be. What i

> really do not understand is how they got away with

> building it over 12-18 months without plannning

> permission and without the council putting a stop

> to it ?

xxxxx

But on the other Concrete House thread it says that the council agreed to the new building on condition the old building was renovated, which of course it wasn't. No idea if that is true.

[Siduhe]

This looks to be the new application:

http://planningonline.southwarksites.com/planningonline2/AcolNetCGI.exe?ACTION=UNWRAP&RIPNAME=Root.PgeResultDetail&TheSystemkey=9530218

Essentially what is now proposed is a "complete replica" of the exterior of the existing building (in terms of height and elevation - and using similar exterior finishes), but as a new development of flats, on the basis that the current building is no longer capable of being restored without significant rebuilding.

[hintza]

IS it worth challenging the planning application - and if so is there anything specific we should be saying in our challenge that would benefit the challenge?

[AllforNun]

ridiculous, the new one basically almost touches the old one, it looks fucking ridiculous. Who signed of on that balls up, same guy/girl who said ok to Goose Green fence maybe !

[nomoneypenny]

Hi

Can someone give me a brief update on the situation on 549?

It belong to my family for a couple of generations, my mum was gutted when she saw the recent photos of the house.

Thanks Penny

[Huguenot]

lol! Nothing's changed since the 4th NoMoneyPenny ;-)

If you want to know what's happening then just read the thread!

There's also a press cutting in this thread here.

[stereforth]

Compulsory purchase is not as straight forward as you may think. for example, through most of the 80s and early 90s Croydon Council attempted compulsory purchase of the old Grant's department store site after the owners consistently refused to fullfil their obligations. The process can take years as the developers just changed their planning application at the last minute, to considerable cost to the Council. After a while the Council more or less gave up.

[misspiggy79]

Looks like there maybe something happening at the concrete house this sunday!

[p_in_ed]

misspiggy79 Wrote:

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

> Looks like there maybe something happening at the

> concrete house this sunday!

?

Can you elaborate a bit mispiggy79. What sort of something?

[bob]

In what way misspiggy79

Bob S

[PinkyB]

Just went for a recce (I live round the corner) and couldn't see anything obviously dfferent. No new signs up, no sign of building work, nothing. Perhaps MissPiggy79 saw some people from the council just coming to have a look round or something? Who knows!

[bob]

Thank's PinkyB

Bob S

[kyrian]

Certainly seems as if the same is happening again by the way that another part of the property is fenced off again.

Yet another cream coloured eyesore next to that historic building, although I've not seen any planning permission notices to build anything else. I think I'll report it to the authorities if I see building work start illegally a second time. I usually give people one chance, but these people have had theirs and flouted the law before.

I'd buy the concrete house myself, and stop this nonsense if I could get answers out of the right people, and I've just done a proper query on the land registry to that end. My earlier query via someone who works there didn't get me enough info.

It may be structurally unsound, but who says you have to keep the innards of the building??, IIRC grade II listed means you only have to keep the facade intact (not that the current owner has done anything but ignore, or flout that regulation!) so it wouldn't be a problem to do just that.

The concrete house should absolutely not be knocked down, and all involved should stop mucking about and get serious about preserving and restoring this historic building.

[kyrian]

> I'd buy the concrete house myself, and stop this

> nonsense if I could get answers out of the right

> people, and I've just done a proper query on the

> land registry to that end.

>

Well, that's *really* useful, the address of the owner of the property is listed as the property itself.

Mail to it is of course being returned undelivered.

K.

[bob]

How can the present owner keep getting away with flouting the law is the council blind to whats going on or is some one getting a bung it realy ticks me off he has been getting off seems to me scott free for so long with no inforcment from the planing dept.

Bob S

[Ellis]

Planning permission is being sort to refurbish and repair work internal and external in connection with conversion to residentail units. We at Southwark Heritage Association have been fighting to get this building restored for some time and it looks like that is what will happen. Id like to see mr choudry's face when he sees the place in all its glory and not demolished like he wanted. Ellis

[Louisa]

I agree with most aspects of this new attempt for a 'planning application', however, I would have prefered to see the building passed on to English Heritage or a similar group so that the property can be fully restored and used for the local community to reflect upon the unique history of the surrounding area. It seems a shame to be that it will be yet another cluster of small residential properties.

Louisa.

[bob]

WHAT Louisa said big time, and pull the new build down.

Bob S

[Sue]

Yes I agree with Louisa and Bob, but hey, what is proposed is better than many of the other possible options and at least a unique building will be staying in ED.

[kyrian]

"mr choudry".

Does someone actually have contact details for this fellow, or was the name just lifted off the council's notice on the outside of it?

K.