The developer of the Bell Green site, Castlemore Securities, went into administration three weeks ago.
http://www.propertyweek.com/story.asp?storycode=3135533
Bell Green developer goes bust
Thanks for this nasaroc. I dont know wether its good news or not. On the one hand I wasn't keen on a retail park down there and thought it a shame that the shops opposite were going to have to close. On the other, I suppose the social housing development will be delayed further and the site will just remain as it is for years.
Simon - I don't think that the housing will be delayed. The land for this was sold to the housing association some time ago. It's a good housing plan with attractive landscaping and its position at the "front" of the site will greatly help the overall look of the area.
What I think it means is that no commercial development will be forthcoming on the site in the foreseeable future. What is needed is a fresh approach to developing the site with more mixed use and less dependence on retail sheds. This approach has frankly not worked - no retailer has moved onto the site in the 15 years since Sainsbury moved there. What about some leisure uses such as a cinema for example?
Yes, it's a shame that the shops opposite have closed. But look out for a redevelopment of this neighbourhood with new housing and a greatly expanded health centre.
What I think it means is that no commercial development will be forthcoming on the site in the foreseeable future. What is needed is a fresh approach to developing the site with more mixed use and less dependence on retail sheds. This approach has frankly not worked - no retailer has moved onto the site in the 15 years since Sainsbury moved there. What about some leisure uses such as a cinema for example?
Yes, it's a shame that the shops opposite have closed. But look out for a redevelopment of this neighbourhood with new housing and a greatly expanded health centre.
Eagle - Any time there is news of any extra housing in Sydenham you recite the same mantra. Please expand on your views.
Can you let us know:
1. What evidence you have that this area is liable to flooding? The only piece of water remotely near this site is over half a mile away. Don't you think that we can control The Pool River?
2. You ask where are the jobs for the people occupying these new houses. We are talking about providing social housing here. What connection does this have with jobs?
3. You tell us that the population of Sydenham is too high. In fact, the population of the area in historic terms is low. The number of people in SE26, for example, was infinitely higher throughout most of the 20th century than it is now. Why do you think that SE26 is overcrowded?
Can you let us know:
1. What evidence you have that this area is liable to flooding? The only piece of water remotely near this site is over half a mile away. Don't you think that we can control The Pool River?
2. You ask where are the jobs for the people occupying these new houses. We are talking about providing social housing here. What connection does this have with jobs?
3. You tell us that the population of Sydenham is too high. In fact, the population of the area in historic terms is low. The number of people in SE26, for example, was infinitely higher throughout most of the 20th century than it is now. Why do you think that SE26 is overcrowded?
The river is a lot closer than that
You are stating social housing does not require jobs. I cannot believe I am hearing this . So people in social housing have no reason to work. You are surely being very unfair to a very large group of people. Did you really mean this , surely not.
If that is what you mean who do you think is going to pay for all these people in future if they are not working.
I have not got the facts about population but know we need every green nook and cranny to make living here acceptable. Most houses seem more full than say in my childhood. I have lost track of conversions of single houses into multiple occupancy.
My basis point is South East London is an employment desert and likely to remain so. Apart from state sponsored jobs how many jobs are there actually in the private sector in Sydenham .
Surely better new housing is in towns that can provide employment , hopefully when and if the economy picks up.
You are stating social housing does not require jobs. I cannot believe I am hearing this . So people in social housing have no reason to work. You are surely being very unfair to a very large group of people. Did you really mean this , surely not.
If that is what you mean who do you think is going to pay for all these people in future if they are not working.
I have not got the facts about population but know we need every green nook and cranny to make living here acceptable. Most houses seem more full than say in my childhood. I have lost track of conversions of single houses into multiple occupancy.
My basis point is South East London is an employment desert and likely to remain so. Apart from state sponsored jobs how many jobs are there actually in the private sector in Sydenham .
Surely better new housing is in towns that can provide employment , hopefully when and if the economy picks up.
Eagle, there is a serious shortage of affordable housing for people in the South East and London. People in public services and the lower paid in the private sector find it very difficlut to get decent housing they can afford.
If you have a look at map of London you will see that our little corner of South East London is greener than most and building over the Bell Green site is not like building over a park.
An increase in the population of Sydenham can only be a good thing in my opinion; not least for the local economy.
If you have a look at map of London you will see that our little corner of South East London is greener than most and building over the Bell Green site is not like building over a park.
An increase in the population of Sydenham can only be a good thing in my opinion; not least for the local economy.
I would be surprised, being a frequent walker along the River at Bell Green, if the site was liable to flooding. The Environment Agency think otherwise.
http://tinyurl.com/deubnb
Please be aware that current flooding maps are out-of-date and are currently being updated by the EA.
http://tinyurl.com/deubnb
Please be aware that current flooding maps are out-of-date and are currently being updated by the EA.
Thank you ALIB. What evidence do you have of a risk from flooding at Bell Green, Eagle?
Of course, I don't mean that social housing does not require jobs. And I absolutely did not say that people in social housing have no reason to work. But there is no direct connection beween social housing and work. Social housing is intended for people who do not have enough money to purchase a house, whether they are in work or not. Do you believe that we should leave this group with no housing just because they are poor?
Population density (as well as overall population)in Sydenham is very much lower than it was, say fifty years ago. People had larger families then, there were far fewer singletons, and fewer elderly couples or single elderly people because life expectancy was very much lower. I live in a series of streets of 4-5 bedroomed houses, many of which are occupied by two people or a small nuclear family. In the 1920, and 1930s those houses would have had 8 or more people living in them. And it isn't exactly overpopulated down at Bell Green - we're talking about many square acres of "scrubland". Why shouldn't that be used for housing?
South-east London has been an unemployment desert for the last 60 years. The vast majority of people in work in Lewisham go outside the borough for work and have done so since late Victorian times. That's the whole idea of a suburb like SE26. It's designed largely to provide housing, not industry.
Your views aren't based on logic - but on prejudice.
Of course, I don't mean that social housing does not require jobs. And I absolutely did not say that people in social housing have no reason to work. But there is no direct connection beween social housing and work. Social housing is intended for people who do not have enough money to purchase a house, whether they are in work or not. Do you believe that we should leave this group with no housing just because they are poor?
Population density (as well as overall population)in Sydenham is very much lower than it was, say fifty years ago. People had larger families then, there were far fewer singletons, and fewer elderly couples or single elderly people because life expectancy was very much lower. I live in a series of streets of 4-5 bedroomed houses, many of which are occupied by two people or a small nuclear family. In the 1920, and 1930s those houses would have had 8 or more people living in them. And it isn't exactly overpopulated down at Bell Green - we're talking about many square acres of "scrubland". Why shouldn't that be used for housing?
South-east London has been an unemployment desert for the last 60 years. The vast majority of people in work in Lewisham go outside the borough for work and have done so since late Victorian times. That's the whole idea of a suburb like SE26. It's designed largely to provide housing, not industry.
Your views aren't based on logic - but on prejudice.
Sorry Admin but I just don't like the word 'chav' being used as an umbrella term for the white working classes. It seems that people always need someone on which to offload their inherent prejudices. At the moment it's 'pikeys' and 'chavs' (of which Lee Newham is obviously one) Years ago you had the N-word and such-like but they are outlawed now and people can only use them in private. That said, a public outlet is needed hence the much used 'chav' and 'pikey.' I think it makes people feel big.admin wrote:Is it the weather (its appalling here in Wales) making people a bit bitchy today? I've just received an appallingly abusive email from a Westminster councillor I was trying to be nice to.
So, can you cheer me up please by being nice (or faking it convincingly).
Mumble, mumble
Admin
McLondres wrote:....a man with the world's 'chavviest' name. Lee Newham! Ho Ho Ho.
I don't like people getting all personal, which gives Admin the hump and makes him lock threads.McLondres wrote: just don't like the word 'chav' being used as an umbrella term for the white working classes.
I was quite looking forward to adding to the "Staffy bites man" thread when I got back from hols, only to find it had turned into a slanging match whilst I was away and been closed.
Call people chavs in The Pub!
I was only asking for some cheerful discourse. Hey the sun came out as we crossed the English border and passing thru Birmingham the air conditioning can't cope. So all is almost right in my world. and I'm not feeling grumpy anymore - sorry.
If its helpful - if we can distinguish between calling things chavvy (meaning you think it bad taste) from calling folks chavs. Working class people can have the finest taste and our overlords some of the worst.
BTW Barty hows the trains this weekend?
Admin
If its helpful - if we can distinguish between calling things chavvy (meaning you think it bad taste) from calling folks chavs. Working class people can have the finest taste and our overlords some of the worst.
BTW Barty hows the trains this weekend?
Admin