Lewisham Council (then rather than now) didn't come out of it very well did they?
They're now knocking down the 60s/70s buildings and replacing them with the underground comunity free buildings that Sparrow mentioned on the previous page. Bromley council knocked down a large Victorian house which I used to live in a couple of years ago and replaced it with modern flats. It's still going on.
All about money now though. Not about improving peoples standard of living, in fact it's probably getting worse with smaller apartments, no gardens etc. Clear the land, pile 'em high & flog 'em. With the demand for housing they get decent wedge for it to whilst still hundreds of thousands can't afford to move out, it will just lead to more blocks of apartments to supply the demand.
Probably the same as the 60s, always comes down to money.
The Victorian house in Bromley had 4 flats with a large garden, I'm guessing there will now be over 20 flats on the same plot. I'm guessing the old flats would be classed as slums as there was no central heating...
We do not want to fall into the trap of considering all demolition and rebuilding work to be inhuman, wasteful and simply wrong. The issue is that blanket condemnation of huge tracts of cities and their subsequent demolition and 'redevelopment' during the 1940s,50s and 60s was carried out as a result of political and economic rather than more consensual policies, rather as if Bomber Harris was the lead consultant on urban development rather than Bertrand Russell. If there had never been planned urban development over the years we could still be living in wattle huts or even draughty caves. Development and social/economic progress are essential for the well being and future prosperity of the human race. The issue is how the planning and structure of development is assessed and maintained. As an aside, google 'Paulson' and see what you think of this chap and his cronies in all the major political parties.
They had a vision to regenerate and in the process destroyed a small community. The single issue they failed to factor into their equations was the pride, the women in particular, these people had for their homes. The documentary did unfairly place the council guy on the spot but at the same time they didn't rose tint the original community to much as they let the suez war vet tell his story about not being allowed in a pub because he was black.
No atmosphere there anymore because as they said communitys were replaced by flats where they can dump more people from different cultures.
You would've walked through their before to go to the market/shop/pub and seen people you know. Was a community whereas now it's been replaced by people who can't speak english/have no desire to interact or are simply hidden away.
Pubs have been replaced by these high rises and your local specialist shop is now an african barbers, a polish shop or halal chicken shop. The markets gone, no community at all.
Compare Deptford/Bermondsey to parts of Bexley, Eltham and even Greenwich to an extent.
The amount of railway buildings destroyed was shocking,politicans decided railways were dead and buried and tried to help them on their way. Saw a documentary and they tracked some of the arch to the bottom of a river somewhere in Greater London.What a waste.
Camberwell Grove should be interesting, my Mum and Gandparents lived there in one of the 60s built mid rise 2 story maisonette apparently on the same development as Scott Parker and his family.
Lived off Creek Rd for more than 10 years worked at the Power Station. I still remember buildings along Friendly Street that were proped up and were slums by any definition in 1980.
Worth a walk down deptford High Street taking a look at the roof tops. You can still see what the original buildings were --a Jewish salours mission etc.
The are great booklets about that area by a Christmas Sturdy if you can find em.
I live near friendly street, there's loads of terrace houses and a few pubs still standing, it's like a different world to the high street and nearby Lewisham. The old warehouse (?) by Deptford Bridge DLR station which is now an empty residential tower was practially falling down, I imagine the slums looked similar to that, if not worse?!
Back in those times, most terraced houses in the area were landlord owned and poorly maintained. Many had no bathroom and the loo was outside in the yard.
But they were structurally sound and only needed updating.
As many have said, they were victim of the politicans of the day.
Those surviving that have been modernised, are much sought after and fetch high prices .... if they are in the right area.
The old warehouse (?) by Deptford Bridge DLR station which is now an empty residential tower was practially falling down, I imagine the slums looked similar to that, if not worse?!
One of the best documentaries I've seen in a while.
I'm on the council here and have sat on the planning committee and I felt for the ex-councillor a bit. At the time there was a massive momentum to do what was done to parts of Deptford, all part of that whote heat of technology, going to the moon mood and it's unfair to blame one bloke who, as a brand new councillor in 1971, would have been able to do just about nothing to stop the GLC/Lewisham Council doing what it wanted. What's perhaps strangest of all is that the tower blocks that replaced the streets didn't often provide many if any more homes. There's a measurement called habitable rooms per hectare that shows how densely an area is or can be developed and because new blocks are often surrounded by a biggish parcel of empty land (originally designed for playgrounds and things that often never got built) the hra figures for tower blocks are around the same as for terraced housing.
Sometimes the difference between tower blocks and apartments is the people you put in them. Where the working/lower classes had a dependency on each other, these policies created a dependency on the state for those that couldn't escape and we see the social issues we have today.
The high rise thing is an interesting one. On the face of it the flats in these blocks ought to be quite desirable. Problem is that the stair wells and lifts are havens for vandalism and crime. If you moved one of these "slum" tower blocks to St. Johns Wood and stuck a 24 hour concierge at the entrance and had a decent maintenance programme for the communal areas I would think there would be a clamour to purchase a flat in one of these. Regardless of the location if the above was to happen I think they could be an asset rather than how they are viewed now.
The old warehouse (?) by Deptford Bridge DLR station which is now an empty residential tower was practially falling down, I imagine the slums looked similar to that, if not worse?!
I found this recently when clearing my late Fathers items, hope some of you "older" ones amongst us enjoy. I can remember some, but some is before even my time! If it has been posted before I do apologise, just thought it apt.
Bromley council have allowed the destruction of countless large beautiful old Victorian and Edwardian houses (just look at parts of Beckenham and Bickley, wall to wall blocks of luxury flats) over the last 30 years or so. Glad to say the penney seems to have dropped at long last (at least I'd like to think so) and there's not so many being demolished nowadays....or maybe that's simply because there aren't that many left to demolish!
Comments
The Victorian house in Bromley had 4 flats with a large garden, I'm guessing there will now be over 20 flats on the same plot. I'm guessing the old flats would be classed as slums as there was no central heating...
If there had never been planned urban development over the years we could still be living in wattle huts or even draughty caves. Development and social/economic progress are essential for the well being and future prosperity of the human race. The issue is how the planning and structure of development is assessed and maintained.
As an aside, google 'Paulson' and see what you think of this chap and his cronies in all the major political parties.
The documentary did unfairly place the council guy on the spot but at the same time they didn't rose tint the original community to much as they let the suez war vet tell his story about not being allowed in a pub because he was black.
Looking forward to bermondsey.
No atmosphere there anymore because as they said communitys were replaced by flats where they can dump more people from different cultures.
You would've walked through their before to go to the market/shop/pub and seen people you know. Was a community whereas now it's been replaced by people who can't speak english/have no desire to interact or are simply hidden away.
Pubs have been replaced by these high rises and your local specialist shop is now an african barbers, a polish shop or halal chicken shop. The markets gone, no community at all.
Compare Deptford/Bermondsey to parts of Bexley, Eltham and even Greenwich to an extent.
Saw a documentary and they tracked some of the arch to the bottom of a river somewhere in Greater London.What a waste.
Worth a walk down deptford High Street taking a look at the roof tops. You can still see what the original buildings were --a Jewish salours mission etc.
The are great booklets about that area by a Christmas Sturdy if you can find em.
Back in those times, most terraced houses in the area were landlord owned and poorly maintained. Many had no bathroom and the loo was outside in the yard.
But they were structurally sound and only needed updating.
As many have said, they were victim of the politicans of the day.
Those surviving that have been modernised, are much sought after and fetch high prices .... if they are in the right area.
family business celery seller selling on to polish mushroom importers...give me strength.
http://deptforddame.blogspot.co.uk/2010/03/old-seager-distillery.html
I'm on the council here and have sat on the planning committee and I felt for the ex-councillor a bit. At the time there was a massive momentum to do what was done to parts of Deptford, all part of that whote heat of technology, going to the moon mood and it's unfair to blame one bloke who, as a brand new councillor in 1971, would have been able to do just about nothing to stop the GLC/Lewisham Council doing what it wanted. What's perhaps strangest of all is that the tower blocks that replaced the streets didn't often provide many if any more homes. There's a measurement called habitable rooms per hectare that shows how densely an area is or can be developed and because new blocks are often surrounded by a biggish parcel of empty land (originally designed for playgrounds and things that often never got built) the hra figures for tower blocks are around the same as for terraced housing.
Glad to say the penney seems to have dropped at long last (at least I'd like to think so) and there's not so many being demolished nowadays....or maybe that's simply because there aren't that many left to demolish!