NEW HOUSING IN SYDENHAM

[leenewham]

Now the scaffolding has come off in part, does anyone think the roundish building in Bell Green is an asset to the area?

The white render looks very poorly done with what looks like dirty yellow patches. Around the back it appears to be finished in pink breeze block, no doubt to reflect the rusty gas towers (who the hell thought that was a great idea?).

What do you think to the green building opposite (which to me looks like lots of stacked portacabins). I had high hopes for this because it was by the same guys that did the rather elegant doctors surgery in New Cross.

What about the fake church-esq building behind the Italian place I can never remember the name of next to the Golden Lion? I'm not sure why they have taken inspiration from probably the worst church conversion ever made.

With all the pretty dreadful buildings in Kirkdale erected since the early 90's, are there are new decent buildings in Sydenham? Why can't developers, or the council for that matter, create something truly beautiful? Or have all those times gone?

Or am I wrong? Are these genuinely beautiful buildings?

P.S. For the record, I rather like the Greyhound development, it's just too big).

[CaptainCarCrash]

No Lee you are right, I think it's tragic that councils are allowing such monstrosities to be built in the name of affordable housing.

Cost affective architects can do one as far as I'm concerned, it all about target audience which means the government are pushing these monumental monstrosities at the moment in the name of affordability. I say pah!

Look at those buildings from a by gone era of true craftsmanship, the brick work is amazing and the turrets and roofs look fantastic.



St Pancras station is a fine brick built structure, every brick bespoke cut and tailored to fit the architects specification. It seems anyone with a setsquare and protractor can get in these days.

Building in this country is in the doldrums at the moment, all in the name of over inflated prices.
It's the main reason councils are now opting for shoddily built MFI houses.

[Tim Lund]

Building in this country is in the doldrums at the moment, all in the name of over inflated prices.

So how does this logic work? Are prices inflated because building is in the doldrums, or the other way round? Surely the first. Why on earth don't these inflated prices mean developers can make a nice profit by building new houses?

It's the main reason councils are now opting for shoddily built MFI houses.

Why should only councils build houses?

[CaptainCarCrash]

Oh I'm not saying councils should only build houses, I'm talking about the planning offices within councils, the ones that give planning permision.

[CaptainCarCrash]

So how does this logic work? Are prices inflated because building is in the doldrums, or the other way round? Surely the first. Why on earth don't these inflated prices mean developers can make a nice profit by building new houses?

I'm not saying they can't make a profit but a lot of the newer stuff especially in london are really horrible characterless boxes.

I was directing my logic towards the actual cost of the materials etc. To build trad housing is really expensive now and I doubt you'll find many that build new homes that have real plaster instead of dot and dabbed plasterboard that gets tape and jointed. How much would an Edwardian/Victorian style house cost to build now? when I say building is in the doldrums I mean architecturally, new style houses are quite nasty IMO unless you go for the ridiculous in terms of cost.

[Tim Lund]

I was directing my logic towards the actual cost of the materials etc. To build trad housing is really expensive now and I doubt you'll find many that build new homes that have real plaster instead of dot and dabbed plasterboard that gets tape and jointed. How much would an Edwardian/Victorian style house cost to build now? when I say building is in the doldrums I mean architecturally, new style houses are quite nasty IMO unless you go for the ridiculous in terms of cost.

Good points, Mike, but there's something here which does not compute. It is beyond belief to think that, with the benefit of modern material science, it's not possible to build houses as good as traditional Edwardian/Victorian style houses, but at much lower cost. Building such trad housing would be rather like building replica vintage cars. Is it just snobbery that makes us all want traditional housing?

[Tim Lund]

So how does this logic work? Are prices inflated because building is in the doldrums, or the other way round? Surely the first. Why on earth don't these inflated prices mean developers can make a nice profit by building new houses?

I'm not saying they can't make a profit but a lot of the newer stuff especially in london are really horrible characterless boxes.

So who is making a profit out of this? Developers of the Greyhound and the new social housing at Bell Green?

[CaptainCarCrash]

I don't think it's snobbery, from my point of view it's more to do with asthetics and the affect that has on communities.

[CaptainCarCrash]

So who is making a profit out of this? Developers of the Greyhound and the new social housing at Bell Green?

At a guess I'd say everyone involved.

[Tim Lund]

I don't think it's snobbery, from my point of view it's more to do with asthetics and the affect that has on communities.

But your previous arguments were about shoddy workmanship. Would you be happy with modern materials being used to build efficient, lasting, adaptable energy saving houses as long as they looked more or less like Victorian terraces? Or would you call that pastiche?

If something aesthetically bolder was allowed, would you think it OK if 'the community' was bought off with say a similarly well designed modern library - such as we do not have in Sydenham. If so, who would negotiate on behalf of the community?

[Voyageur]

Any pics of the offending building?

[Tim Lund]

So who is making a profit out of this? Developers of the Greyhound and the new social housing at Bell Green?

At a guess I'd say everyone involved.

Is the wrong answer. Housing associations are not-for-profit, and their tenants are definitely not allowed to profit from illegal subletting of their flats, even though some may ...

[CaptainCarCrash]

Is the wrong answer. Housing associations are not-for-profit, and their tenants are definitely not allowed to profit from illegal subletting of their flats, even though some may ...

Explains why their buildings aren't very nice to look at.

[Tim Lund]

St Pancras station is a fine brick built structure, every brick bespoke cut and tailored to fit the architects specification.

Indeed. I think I read somewhere that it's just about the limit, in terms of height, that brick can do. At the base, the amount of material required to support everything above is enormous, and hideously expensive. The next technological leap was the invention of reinforced concrete, which allowed the development of skyscrapers, built round a central core. These can also be made to work for housing

http://forum.sydenham.org.uk/viewtopic. ... 831#p60757

[CaptainCarCrash]

St Pancras station is a fine brick built structure, every brick bespoke cut and tailored to fit the architects specification.

Indeed. I think I read somewhere that it's just about the limit, in terms of height, that brick can do. At the base, the amount of material required to support everything above is enormous, and hideously expensive. The next technological leap was the invention of reinforced concrete, which allowed the development of skyscrapers, built round a central core. These can also be made to work for housing

http://forum.sydenham.org.uk/viewtopic. ... 831#p60757

The sky is the limit.

Skyscraper housing is just plain wrong, towerblocks of flats are a blight on communities IMO.

Did I ever tell you my Dad was a site agent for an American property developer now retired?
He retired at 50 the lucky git They built traditional houses in places like Ewel, Epsom Downs Banstead etc. The nicest ones were 6 bedroom detached, the show house had a grand piano in it.

having seen houses built from a young age I learned a fair bit about construction but never found the idea of really hard work very appealing so I opted out of anything to do with it.

[leenewham]

Once upon a time even the most humble of houses were crafted. Look at any of the houses in Sydenham. Especially lower Sydenham like Sunnydene Street or Fairlawn Park. Window let in lots of light, good living space and storage, good sized gardens. This was housing for the masses, Victorian style and it hasn't really been bettered. Well built, well designed, beautiful and easy to adapt.

[Dorian]

Did I ever tell you my Dad was a site agent for an American property developer now retired?
He retired at 50 the lucky git They built traditional houses in places like Ewel, Epsom Downs Banstead etc. The nicest ones were 6 bedroom detached, the show house had a grand piano in it.

Were they sold to Housing Asscociations or priveleged rich people from the Banking world ?

I agree that modern , especially flatted development is bland an uninmaginative, and I sure in 30 years time they will be looked at with great distaste as are 60/70's built flat roof abominations.

Unless at the high end market as mikecg mentions, larger scale devlopments are designed to keep cost to a minimum, the render that Lee mentions at Bell green, WILL be flaking away in two years time as it will be the cheapest product that the H.A.'s contractors could find on a fixed budget. There are also very costly " sustainability " issues to deal with , a condition that L.A. put on permission being granted, with a " Code for Sustainable Homes" level being required, which has spawned a whole new parasitc industry to take " from the cake". This will now be compounded by the C.I.L., which will further encumber development.

Victorian and Edwardian build methods did not have modern Building regulation restraints put upon them and Victorian houses are notorius for subsiding due to next to none, credible foundations for example. "Social Housing" in that era was provided by the likes of philanthropists such as Peabody and Carnegie, and it was the norm to show off wealth by making these buildings oppulent in appearance, as the labour and craftsman and materials were very very cheap. They of course had no internal sanitation ( untill shared internal loo's were made compulsory in 1896) and shared water tanks on the roof, I think todays Social Houisng tennants would prefer the warm ,energy efficient new home they are given now than those Architecturaly superior ones that the Victorian rich provided.

[Blushingsnail]

I don't understand why the new round block of flats at Bell Green is so unpopular on this forum. I think it looks OK - not spectacular, but nothing so bad to be dislikeable. Mind you I've only really seen it from one side, going around the side to/from Sainsburys, so perhaps it looks worse when you approach from another direction.

I save my ire for the block of green flats opposite. What on earth were the architects thinking?? It's HIDEOUS. When it was being built I thought it looked odd because there didn't seem to be many windows. And then later I realised that that shade of green was to be the permanent colour. If Portacabin (registered TM) made multi-storey army barracks, that block is what I imagine the outcome would be.

[stuart]

Skyscraper housing is just plain wrong, towerblocks of flats are a blight on communities IMO.

Sorry, that's plain wrong. Having lived in one and having visited friends who have condos in New York and San Diego - they can be the most glorious ways to live and enjoy the world around you.

The problem is the way many LA's in the '60s built shoddy stuff and didn't even maintain them with misconceived housing policies.

Pity I can't afford an apartment in the Barbican.

Stuart

[Eagle]

Re terrible social housing look at Canal Walk of Venner Road.

In 60's and up to about 72 lovely Victorian terrace , like the terrace opposite still remaining thanks to Sir Lawrence Oliver .

Now , in my humble opinion looks terrible. I trust the councilors who insisted the houses were replaced are forced to live there.