Three thirty storey tower blocks. They also want to put a 15 storey tower block opposite the Tigers Heads at Lee Green. When I went there to the ‘exhibition’ for the (much needed) development and asked every representative what exactly was the price of an ‘affordable home’, nobody could answer, but every person took my contact details and promised to get back to me, or get in touch. It hasn’t happened of course. I asked them to relate affordability to the wage of a senior nurse in Lewisham Hospital, which seems perfectly reasonable to me. The closest I came to any honesty was one Galliard representative letting slip that affordability was related to profitability for them. Locally we have the nouveau Ferrier that sells matchboxes for half a million each, and central Lewisham now resembling New York where by all accounts the high rise flats have endless problems with lifts and services. Affordable homes huh?
Three thirty storey tower blocks. They also want to put a 15 storey tower block opposite the Tigers Heads at Lee Green. When I went there to the ‘exhibition’ for the (much needed) development and asked every representative what exactly was the price of an ‘affordable home’, nobody could answer, but every person took my contact details and promised to get back to me, or get in touch. It hasn’t happened of course. I asked them to relate affordability to the wage of a senior nurse in Lewisham Hospital, which seems perfectly reasonable to me. The closest I came to any honesty was one Galliard representative letting slip that affordability was related to profitability for them. Locally we have the nouveau Ferrier that sells matchboxes for half a million each, and central Lewisham now resembling New York where by all accounts the high rise flats have endless problems with lifts and services. Affordable homes huh?
hate what the council have done to Lewisham, especially up Loampit hill/vale. feels so claustrophobic now with all the tower blocks.
Mega Mosque in the corner of the ground I’ve heard.
Great...then when the media and society roll out the periodic lambasting of football fans for expressing/ holding outdated homophobic and sexist views they'll also now be able to pop next door to also extend the (correct and welcome) vocal condemnation to other such institutions well in need of it.
Mega Mosque in the corner of the ground I’ve heard.
Great...then when the media and society roll out the periodic lambasting of football fans for expressing/ holding outdated homophobic and sexist views they'll also now be able to pop next door to also extend the (correct and welcome) vocal condemnation to other such institutions well in need of it.
In all fairness, it's more likely to be a 'Church of Our Dear Faithful Lady Nothing To See Here' type of place.
Three thirty storey tower blocks. They also want to put a 15 storey tower block opposite the Tigers Heads at Lee Green. When I went there to the ‘exhibition’ for the (much needed) development and asked every representative what exactly was the price of an ‘affordable home’, nobody could answer, but every person took my contact details and promised to get back to me, or get in touch. It hasn’t happened of course. I asked them to relate affordability to the wage of a senior nurse in Lewisham Hospital, which seems perfectly reasonable to me. The closest I came to any honesty was one Galliard representative letting slip that affordability was related to profitability for them. Locally we have the nouveau Ferrier that sells matchboxes for half a million each, and central Lewisham now resembling New York where by all accounts the high rise flats have endless problems with lifts and services. Affordable homes huh?
Will you have to pay more for the ones where you can’t see the pitch?
Had a quick look at Millwall online north stand banter to get the Spanners' take on their potential new neighbours. Not many comments, but concern that the development could lead to them being bought out by an Arab or Russian looking for the next Man City. Their thread 'Quotes from Charlton No Life', which is an obsession for several of their 'well known members' (and great for an evening of belly laughs) is still going strong.
Three thirty storey tower blocks. They also want to put a 15 storey tower block opposite the Tigers Heads at Lee Green. When I went there to the ‘exhibition’ for the (much needed) development and asked every representative what exactly was the price of an ‘affordable home’, nobody could answer, but every person took my contact details and promised to get back to me, or get in touch. It hasn’t happened of course. I asked them to relate affordability to the wage of a senior nurse in Lewisham Hospital, which seems perfectly reasonable to me. The closest I came to any honesty was one Galliard representative letting slip that affordability was related to profitability for them. Locally we have the nouveau Ferrier that sells matchboxes for half a million each, and central Lewisham now resembling New York where by all accounts the high rise flats have endless problems with lifts and services. Affordable homes huh?
hate what the council have done to Lewisham, especially up Loampit hill/vale. feels so claustrophobic now with all the tower blocks.
I heard that the current Lewisham Mayor hates it too. It is awful, should be called Bullockville after the Lewisham Mayor who promoted it.
On a related note - who thinks Spannerville is a better name for the proposed new station than Surrey Canal Road?
Three thirty storey tower blocks. They also want to put a 15 storey tower block opposite the Tigers Heads at Lee Green. When I went there to the ‘exhibition’ for the (much needed) development and asked every representative what exactly was the price of an ‘affordable home’, nobody could answer, but every person took my contact details and promised to get back to me, or get in touch. It hasn’t happened of course. I asked them to relate affordability to the wage of a senior nurse in Lewisham Hospital, which seems perfectly reasonable to me. The closest I came to any honesty was one Galliard representative letting slip that affordability was related to profitability for them. Locally we have the nouveau Ferrier that sells matchboxes for half a million each, and central Lewisham now resembling New York where by all accounts the high rise flats have endless problems with lifts and services. Affordable homes huh?
hate what the council have done to Lewisham, especially up Loampit hill/vale. feels so claustrophobic now with all the tower blocks.
I heard that the current Lewisham Mayor hates it too. It is awful, should be called Bullockville after the Lewisham Mayor who promoted it.
On a related note - who thinks Spannerville is a better name for the proposed new station than Surrey Canal Road?
Yeah, I can believe that. Lewisham Gateway was approved in principle in 2009, so when the second phase - with that crappy-looking 30-storey tower - went for detailed approval a couple of years back, the current councillors weren't happy because there was very little they could do other than nod it through. The "affordable" housing in that second phase is a bit of a joke and far below what they'd push for now.
Three thirty storey tower blocks. They also want to put a 15 storey tower block opposite the Tigers Heads at Lee Green. When I went there to the ‘exhibition’ for the (much needed) development and asked every representative what exactly was the price of an ‘affordable home’, nobody could answer, but every person took my contact details and promised to get back to me, or get in touch. It hasn’t happened of course. I asked them to relate affordability to the wage of a senior nurse in Lewisham Hospital, which seems perfectly reasonable to me. The closest I came to any honesty was one Galliard representative letting slip that affordability was related to profitability for them. Locally we have the nouveau Ferrier that sells matchboxes for half a million each, and central Lewisham now resembling New York where by all accounts the high rise flats have endless problems with lifts and services. Affordable homes huh?
There are parts of you that I am beginning to warm to, and I don’t know whether I should be worried by this :-)
The towers by what was Lewisham Carpet Right are student accommodation. I believe the one that's starting to go up in Tescos Car Park (!) is going to also be 30+ floors.
I asked someone a couple of years back about Croydon and the policy of endless empty office space in countless tower blocks, this person was involved in the reconstruction of East Croydon station and the surrounding area, guess what it, is all about the amount of money this sort of development makes for the councils. It's criminal when you take on board the housing crisis.
Same company had a 27-storey tower thrown out in front of Woolwich Tesco (but will probably get 15 instead)
Side tracking from the thread, but it's more interesting than millwall, the shopping centre hasn't got long left so expect more flats and perhaps a public square!
Three thirty storey tower blocks. They also want to put a 15 storey tower block opposite the Tigers Heads at Lee Green. When I went there to the ‘exhibition’ for the (much needed) development and asked every representative what exactly was the price of an ‘affordable home’, nobody could answer, but every person took my contact details and promised to get back to me, or get in touch. It hasn’t happened of course. I asked them to relate affordability to the wage of a senior nurse in Lewisham Hospital, which seems perfectly reasonable to me. The closest I came to any honesty was one Galliard representative letting slip that affordability was related to profitability for them. Locally we have the nouveau Ferrier that sells matchboxes for half a million each, and central Lewisham now resembling New York where by all accounts the high rise flats have endless problems with lifts and services. Affordable homes huh?
Often wondered how 'affordable housing' was defined, as it usually seems anything but! How can you define 'affordable' by the developers' profit??
If you take £25k as an average salary and a 4.5 multiplier, you get £112.5k. Add say a 20% deposit gets you to £135k. Even two 25k salaries and a 2.5 multiplier only gets to £150k with the same deposit. Surely a cost of around £150k is therefore 'affordable' for a small 2 bed flat, as applied to an average salary. Which is not unreasonable if you consider the Thatcher principle of the masses owning their own homes instead of renting. I know modern mortgages allow higher multipliers and terms longer than the traditional 25 years, but this is surely down to low interest rates over the last 25 or so years? But you can't predict future interest rates and they were well into double figures 30+ years ago.
I also seem to recall at least one south London council stating death of high rise housing when they started to demolish some of the notorious high rise estates? Think the reasons given included poor design, vandalism and unsocial behaviour and the difficulties in controlling the last two in a high rise setting. So what has changed policywise if so many towers are now being built? Apart from developers' profit? I can see living on the 30th floor might be nice for a single person or couple, but add two small kids, pushchairs and a broken lift and the fun will disappear quickly! Assume some of these towers will house families? Irrespective of my points above, the no doubt 'world beating' British housing policy is broken beyond repair and the helpline to get it fixed is constantly engaged!
My suspicion is the one of the most basic of needs, housing, is riddled by one of the most basic of traits, corruption. For all it’s faults, the principle of good old council housing was a fundamental feature of a coherent society, destroyed by Thatcher. Now we have non doms buying loads, air bed and breakfasts everywhere, and no recognisable link between an honest days work and affording a roof over your head.
Load of unfilled new builds in Deptford(Lower Road) already, with building works paused on one new development due to low take up. Not sure who they think will fill more expensive flats in the area.
£650k for a 2 bed with no outdoor space on that one.
£650,000. Two bedroom. Affordable? What sort of wage can pay for that? Is it any wonder that if a worker organises, agitates and strikes for more income it is because of the cost of living?
Same company had a 27-storey tower thrown out in front of Woolwich Tesco (but will probably get 15 instead)
Side tracking from the thread, but it's more interesting than millwall, the shopping centre hasn't got long left so expect more flats and perhaps a public square!
I wouldn't expect the wrecking ball to come to the Lewisham Centre any time soon as the progress on Lewisham Gateway (the towers by the DLR station) has been glacial. Plans are certainly in motion, though: https://lewishamcentral.commonplace.is
The London and wider UK property market also now has overseas wealthy investors buying up houses and homes at a rate of knots for buy to lets.
Wealthy individuals from China, Hong Kong, Russia and the middle east are buying up not only the glamourous high rise central London yuppie apartment blocks but also everything down to terraced houses in Grimsby and Hull and everything in between up and down the country.
In a decade or 2 we will be a nation of renters with only the wealthiest of Brits owning homes whilst the rest will be paying rent to British landlords with property portfolios, and overseas investors who will likely never even set foot in the houses they own and just see them as investments/ pension funds.
It's bad enough with the monstrous tower block apartments that are permitted to sit empty/ under capacity in central London because the owners will happily enjoy the perpetual capital appreciation but it's bordering on criminal when it comes to bog standard housing for the average British citizen as is happening now and has been for a long while.
Very concerning and will be similar to what has happened to the institutions that are our football clubs.
Three thirty storey tower blocks. They also want to put a 15 storey tower block opposite the Tigers Heads at Lee Green. When I went there to the ‘exhibition’ for the (much needed) development and asked every representative what exactly was the price of an ‘affordable home’, nobody could answer, but every person took my contact details and promised to get back to me, or get in touch. It hasn’t happened of course. I asked them to relate affordability to the wage of a senior nurse in Lewisham Hospital, which seems perfectly reasonable to me. The closest I came to any honesty was one Galliard representative letting slip that affordability was related to profitability for them. Locally we have the nouveau Ferrier that sells matchboxes for half a million each, and central Lewisham now resembling New York where by all accounts the high rise flats have endless problems with lifts and services. Affordable homes huh?
Often wondered how 'affordable housing' was defined, as it usually seems anything but! How can you define 'affordable' by the developers' profit??
If you take £25k as an average salary and a 4.5 multiplier, you get £112.5k. Add say a 20% deposit gets you to £135k. Even two 25k salaries and a 2.5 multiplier only gets to £150k with the same deposit. Surely a cost of around £150k is therefore 'affordable' for a small 2 bed flat, as applied to an average salary. Which is not unreasonable if you consider the Thatcher principle of the masses owning their own homes instead of renting. I know modern mortgages allow higher multipliers and terms longer than the traditional 25 years, but this is surely down to low interest rates over the last 25 or so years? But you can't predict future interest rates and they were well into double figures 30+ years ago.
I also seem to recall at least one south London council stating death of high rise housing when they started to demolish some of the notorious high rise estates? Think the reasons given included poor design, vandalism and unsocial behaviour and the difficulties in controlling the last two in a high rise setting. So what has changed policywise if so many towers are now being built? Apart from developers' profit? I can see living on the 30th floor might be nice for a single person or couple, but add two small kids, pushchairs and a broken lift and the fun will disappear quickly! Assume some of these towers will house families? Irrespective of my points above, the no doubt 'world beating' British housing policy is broken beyond repair and the helpline to get it fixed is constantly engaged!
It's political. Pretty much anything from a 20% discount on sale price down to traditional council rent is "affordable" in planning terms. The system is completely broken and largely unfathomable to most people, including some of those making decisions.
As for high-rises - the population's bigger and younger than it was, there are more single-person households, it's an efficient use of land, and desirable if it's next to a station. Simple as that. And most of the outer London boroughs don't want development in their town centres (hello Bromley), so all the pressure gets put on the brownfield sites in inner London.
Some of the newer high-rises aren't great, but I'd take most of them over the dull places Bexley Council destroyed part of Old Farm Park in Sidcup for.
Comments
So is Millwall's ground being gentrified?
They also want to put a 15 storey tower block opposite the Tigers Heads at Lee Green.
When I went there to the ‘exhibition’ for the (much needed) development and asked every representative what exactly was the price of an ‘affordable home’, nobody could answer, but every person took my contact details and promised to get back to me, or get in touch. It hasn’t happened of course.
I asked them to relate affordability to the wage of a senior nurse in Lewisham Hospital, which seems perfectly reasonable to me.
The closest I came to any honesty was one Galliard representative letting slip that affordability was related to profitability for them.
Locally we have the nouveau Ferrier that sells matchboxes for half a million each, and central Lewisham now resembling New York where by all accounts the high rise flats have endless problems with lifts and services.
Affordable homes huh?
Great...then when the media and society roll out the periodic lambasting of football fans for expressing/ holding outdated homophobic and sexist views they'll also now be able to pop next door to also extend the (correct and welcome) vocal condemnation to other such institutions well in need of it.
Their thread 'Quotes from Charlton No Life', which is an obsession for several of their 'well known members' (and great for an evening of belly laughs) is still going strong.
On a related note - who thinks Spannerville is a better name for the proposed new station than Surrey Canal Road?
Spanner Park Road, surely.
Cnut Halt.
Same company had a 27-storey tower thrown out in front of Woolwich Tesco (but will probably get 15 instead)
https://www.fromthemurkydepths.co.uk/2021/11/17/2500-homes-coming-at-lewisham-shopping-centre/
If you take £25k as an average salary and a 4.5 multiplier, you get £112.5k. Add say a 20% deposit gets you to £135k. Even two 25k salaries and a 2.5 multiplier only gets to £150k with the same deposit. Surely a cost of around £150k is therefore 'affordable' for a small 2 bed flat, as applied to an average salary. Which is not unreasonable if you consider the Thatcher principle of the masses owning their own homes instead of renting.
I know modern mortgages allow higher multipliers and terms longer than the traditional 25 years, but this is surely down to low interest rates over the last 25 or so years? But you can't predict future interest rates and they were well into double figures 30+ years ago.
I also seem to recall at least one south London council stating death of high rise housing when they started to demolish some of the notorious high rise estates? Think the reasons given included poor design, vandalism and unsocial behaviour and the difficulties in controlling the last two in a high rise setting.
So what has changed policywise if so many towers are now being built? Apart from developers' profit? I can see living on the 30th floor might be nice for a single person or couple, but add two small kids, pushchairs and a broken lift and the fun will disappear quickly! Assume some of these towers will house families?
Irrespective of my points above, the no doubt 'world beating' British housing policy is broken beyond repair and the helpline to get it fixed is constantly engaged!
For all it’s faults, the principle of good old council housing was a fundamental feature of a coherent society, destroyed by Thatcher.
Now we have non doms buying loads, air bed and breakfasts everywhere, and no recognisable link between an honest days work and affording a roof over your head.
£650k for a 2 bed with no outdoor space on that one.
Two bedroom.
Affordable?
What sort of wage can pay for that?
Is it any wonder that if a worker organises, agitates and strikes for more income it is because of the cost of living?
Wealthy individuals from China, Hong Kong, Russia and the middle east are buying up not only the glamourous high rise central London yuppie apartment blocks but also everything down to terraced houses in Grimsby and Hull and everything in between up and down the country.
In a decade or 2 we will be a nation of renters with only the wealthiest of Brits owning homes whilst the rest will be paying rent to British landlords with property portfolios, and overseas investors who will likely never even set foot in the houses they own and just see them as investments/ pension funds.
It's bad enough with the monstrous tower block apartments that are permitted to sit empty/ under capacity in central London because the owners will happily enjoy the perpetual capital appreciation but it's bordering on criminal when it comes to bog standard housing for the average British citizen as is happening now and has been for a long while.
Very concerning and will be similar to what has happened to the institutions that are our football clubs.
Some of the more expensive "affordable" stuff is coming to the old garage space at The Heights, above The Valley - work due to start this year - from a company that's been given a massive grant from City Hall to do this kind of thing. https://charltonchampion.co.uk/2021/02/17/pocket-living-micro-flats-for-the-heights-passed-by-greenwich-council/
As for high-rises - the population's bigger and younger than it was, there are more single-person households, it's an efficient use of land, and desirable if it's next to a station. Simple as that. And most of the outer London boroughs don't want development in their town centres (hello Bromley), so all the pressure gets put on the brownfield sites in inner London.
Some of the newer high-rises aren't great, but I'd take most of them over the dull places Bexley Council destroyed part of Old Farm Park in Sidcup for.