The empty 'luxury' flats on Overhill Road

[lenk]

jimbo1964 Wrote:

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

> I love the P13.

I've cycled out to obscure areas of south London that don't even appear on maps in the past.

If you wait around long enough, a P13 will go past.

It quite possibly stops on every road in south London.

[Brendan]

East Dulwich to Streatham is quicker by skateboard than by P13.

?strue

[????]

I, like Sean, am a bus fan....but i get the feeling a P13 is a bus you don't want to be seen on...er, never neen on it myself

[SimonM]

I am not sure the developer was necessarily so 'greedy' in this instance. I recall the broken-down house that stood derelict and vandalised on ths site for years. It must have cost a small fortine to have demolished this and then prepared the site for building the new flats. I can quite believe that two flats - even at the high prices of a few years back - would not have made the development viable. The flats are/were advertised as having cycle storage. I think digging out all that superfluous lawn on the Underhill Road side could perhaps have supplied off-street parking but for whatever reason they did not go with this. None of this denies how horrible the building is of course.

[seanmlow]

P13 is like the funeral wagon.

[jimbo1964]

The P13 has been rubbished on this forum before but it runs on time. That said I only ever take it from Underhill to West Dulwich station or vice versa. That's all I'll say as I know I've drifted off topic.

[Amelie]

The P13 is briliant for going to the Dog Kennel Hill Sainsbury's as it pulls right into the car park, and it stops just down from the end of my road so I don't have to walk far with bags of shopping.

[AD]

The P13 is the best bus of all time, it is amazing.

[Sherwick]

the time between each P13 is amazing.

[????]

If you bought one of those luxury flats by ED station and Sainsbury's there'd be no need for the p13...but hurry...last few available

[Mick Mac]

I'm still waiting for Starbucks to take their "coffee shop" spot at the front of those ED flats. Nice piece of misrepresentation by the vendors.

[Sherwick]

Soon we'll be able to take the P13 to the ED Waitrose! :)-D

[seanmlow]

Did you see these on Property Snakes and Ladders with Sarah Beeney last night? They were in the background.

[skidmarks]

I did but I was still laughing at the term she used???.aspirational flat?..?

What a load of arse!

[Brendan]

Well I suppose the falts do have aspirations, aspirations to be something more than poky, uncomfortable boxes of glass and laminate built by the lowest bidder.

[Lizziedjango]

They don't look very nice to me. 'Luxury'? Pah!

The windows are, IMO, way too big and hellish to get curtains for. You'd have all and sundry gawping through 'em unless you kept blinds or curtains drawn. The property developers could have at least got ready made blinds for these flats. Talk about being overly exposed!

There's no way I would pay anywhere near ?200,000 for flats that are so oddly shaped and with such bizarre windows as these.

[zephyr]

SimonM Wrote:

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

> I am not sure the developer was necessarily so

> 'greedy' in this instance. I recall the

> broken-down house that stood derelict and

> vandalised on ths site for years. It must have

> cost a small fortine to have demolished this and

> then prepared the site for building the new flats.

> I can quite believe that two flats - even at the

> high prices of a few years back - would not have

> made the development viable. The flats are/were

> advertised as having cycle storage. I think

> digging out all that superfluous lawn on the

> Underhill Road side could perhaps have supplied

> off-street parking but for whatever reason they

> did not go with this. None of this denies how

> horrible the building is of course.

From what I remember this house sufered badly from subsidance and had to be shored up for some time. It was also on top od a hill. They had to dig very deeply to set the foundations of the new flats which, I guess is partly why they are so expensive.

[*Bob*]

Everything has its price.

How cheap would they need to be to outweigh the catastrophic design and general repugnancy?

[Brendan]

About ?50K.

i.e. if you paid me ?50K I'd live in one.

For a while.

[Muley]

Brendan Wrote:

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

> Well I suppose the falts do have aspirations,

> aspirations to be something more than poky,

> uncomfortable boxes of glass and laminate built by

> the lowest bidder.

Run a spellcheck over your Freudian slips, you missed out a 'u'!

[Brendan]

Ah I see I spelt fats incorrectly.

I come to think of it I shouldn?t be so facetious about these places. I?m sure they aren?t that bad. I just wish every new build didn?t have to be so dam ugly and cheap looking.