I definitely got the feeling the majority of research on the area had been done by skimming this forum - I certainly didn't get the feeling that there was any first-hand experience talking.
JMLF wrote: ↑15 Feb 2019 12:04A huge proportion was taken up by the history of Sydenham which was essentially labelling who is on the Sydenham Centre Mural and peddling properties.
Don't you mean Peddling properties? I notice most of the other local estate agents didn't get a look-in. Made me wonder who'd actually instigated the feature (as I said, it doesn't seem that long ago that Syd was last featured, and there must be far more than 50 areas around London to be covered).
The Standard hasn't covered Penge in its Homes & Property supplement for 5 years (if you exclud pilfering of the Alexandra Cottages for Sydenham and the dinosaurs for Palace features) . The area has changed significantly since the last time.
Bovine Juice wrote: ↑16 Feb 2019 15:23
The Standard hasn't covered Penge in its Homes & Property supplement for 5 years (if you exclud pilfering of the Alexandra Cottages for Sydenham and the dinosaurs for Palace features) . The area has changed significantly since the last time.
And pilfering is not restricted to Penge.
The gas holders are not in Sydenham either.
But they won't not be in Sydenham for much longer - demolition is underway.
Robin Orton wrote: ↑16 Feb 2019 16:50
Why this obsession with the gasholders, JGD? It's beginning to sound like gloating. You know, like Brexit. 'You lost, get over it'.
JGD wrote: ↑16 Feb 2019 17:17
Who lost what Robin ?
The argument about whether the gasholders should be preserved.
In what way was that argument lost - the local authority has approved their demolition. The mayor has acknowledged he has no powers to prevent their demolition. His officers have advised him that a precedent should not be set whereby a demolition should be halted and thereby the owner - and any other owners in similar circumstances - would be entitled to compensation from the authority.
The demolition works are underway.
What argument or definition of lost are you blethering about ?
JGD wrote: ↑16 Feb 2019 17:17
Who lost what Robin ?
The argument about whether the gasholders should be preserved.
In what way was that argument lost - the local authority has approved their demolition. The mayor has acknowledged he has no powers to prevent their demolition. His officers have advised him that a precedent should not be set whereby a demolition should be halted and thereby the owner - and any other owners in similar circumstances - would be entitled to compensation from the authority.
The demolition works are underway.
What argument or definition of lost are you blethering about ?
Even though the gasholders are disused their presence triggers an adverse reaction among house buyers. The fear of a gas blast remains however irrational. Every property within a mile radius is affected. If some kind of building were erected that incorporated the structure within it then it could have been quite beautiful... A gleaming glass fronted building perhaps. However it would probably be prohibitively expensive and difficult to adapt to some useful purpose.
I shall be pleased to see the back of any reminder of a feature that blighted property values, in Sydenham, for so long.
I think the article probably did no harm and had some half decent pictures however the content was pretty uninspiring as I previously said and can’t imagine throngs if people are suddenly going to start looking at/coming to the area.
Property prices and what people want I guess is so different for different people (looking to sell in the next year or so you want things to go up, wanting more friends to move to the area want it to stay the same or drop maybe) and the effects of it can be good or bad for some (I.e: gentrification).
In terms of the gasholders, putting aside my personal views I really can’t imagine as they are at present (and have been) that they are any sort of attraction/positive influence for the area as a whole, especially with people looking to move nearby. Sure there will always be some people who think they are beautiful and enjoy looking at them but overall I really can’t see many people coming to the area, seeing them and thinking I’d love to live here/in eyesight of them. There may be a few that do, and some who won’t mind either way but my strong feeling would be the vast majority it would be in the negative coloumn when looking at whether to buy or whatnot.
Just one example I know, but my sister looked at a few houses a number of years ago in the area and was put off by the gas holders, which were in prominent view on the roads she looked at.
'In what way was that argument lost - the local authority has approved their demolition. The mayor has acknowledged he has no powers to prevent their demolition. His officers have advised him that a precedent should not be set whereby a demolition should be halted and thereby the owner - and any other owners in similar circumstances - would be entitled to compensation from the authority.
The demolition works are underway'.
Amen to that. Knock 'em down!! Why the Syd Soc would want to fight to keep them goodness alone knows. There can be no practical or reasonable thinking behind that but then this is the Syd Soc we're talking about...
I've now realised that my earlier post was technically ambiguous. But I'd have thought it wouldn't have been too difficult to guess what I meant. Those who argued for the retention of the gasholders (like those who argued against Brexit) lost the argument. So obviously they should now shut up and leave the victors to enjoy their triumph.
Robin Orton wrote: ↑19 Feb 2019 18:00
But I'd have thought it wouldn't have been too difficult to guess what I meant. Those who argued for the retention of the gasholders (like those who argued against Brexit) lost the argument.
On re-reading your post after seeing this - I agree -i should have realised there was a difference.
Gloating is not and never has been my intent - but SydSoc and ward cllrs have played so many last minute cards on this one perhaps I have become pre-conditioned in my response.
But that does not make my approach right.
I am sure there are many issues where retention is the right choice and where that outcome adds to the character of the area.
Robin Orton wrote: ↑19 Feb 2019 18:00
I've now realised that my earlier post was technically ambiguous. But I'd have thought it wouldn't have been too difficult to guess what I meant. Those who argued for the retention of the gasholders (like those who argued against Brexit) lost the argument. So obviously they should now shut up and leave the victors to enjoy their triumph.
- I certainly didn't get the feeling that there was any first-hand experience talking. 
I notice most of the other local estate agents didn't get a look-in. Made me wonder who'd actually instigated the feature (as I said, it doesn't seem that long ago that Syd was last featured, and there must be far more than 50 areas around London to be covered).