My first visit to LL (in decades)

[Maurice]

It's a shock of an admission but for the first time in many, many years, I ventured out to Lordship Lane over the weekend. To date myself, the last time I visited LL was when it was full of antique shops. Anyone else even remember that decade so very long ago?

Having read so much about it, I was sorely disappointed. Yes there are some nice shops, agreed. But let's be frank, it looks very much like Walworth High Street. Actually, architecturally, Walworth High Street is superior. And with its recent makeover and new paving/planting, superior in all ways save the quality of the shops.

The pavement is dirty and dis-jointed and my favourite pastime of looking above the shops at the architecture met with great disappointment. The Christmas decorations look like something you'd see in an American film set in a depressed mining town circa 1976.

I enjoyed a lovely meal and popped in to a few places and yes, the quality of shopping is high. It made me more depressed about Camberwell, which underneath beats Lordship Lane hands down. The architecture is so much better (yes, much of it beneath betting shops and off licence cladding) and the layout: a lovely village green with the parish church spiralling in the distance...and the housing stock heading south and, to a degree, west and slightly north. All of it so much closer to London. It really depresses one.

I guess it comes down to what I've always known. Camberwell, despite having a superior canvass underneath, is overwhelmed by a poorer population and more than its fair share of high density council housing. That's it in a nutshell.

Such a shame. Such a disappointment. With so much private investment there, surely you can get your share of what Walworth and Bellendon received from the public purse. It's those places in reverse: they take a 'if we build it they will come (and they really haven't)' versus you all - they've come and you've still to build it.

[Nero]

You know, Maurice, I agree with some of what you say. I think that we spend too much of our time thinking about content (ie shops, restaurants, cafes) and not enough about form (architecture, roads, trees, street furniture etc). LL is a bit grubby, really, in parts. The flats above the shops are not always pretty, paving stones are sometimes broken, there's a lack of greenery, especially from Budgens down to Goose Green, which is the most used section. Further up, the houses past the (horrid) police station, some of which are divided into flats, are past their prime. Interested to know whether others agree with this reality check? Nero

[Keef]

Maurice Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> my favourite pastime of looking above the shops at the architecture met with great disappointment.

Come and visit Sydenham, we have lovely architecture!

[*Bob*]

Maurice, does this mean that you'll be formally withdrawing your request for The grove to join East Dulwich?

I'm intrigued as to why you've spent the last however many months sucking-up to SE22 without having actually been here in many, many years. Bizarre.

[Big Jim]

I agree that there are a few scruffy buildings on LL but I'll swap a few broken paving stones and a couple of manky net curtains for not being stabbed. Walworth is a hole and no amount of 'street furniture' will change that.

[SeanMacGabhann]

His usual gripes about investment etc aside, Maurice (and Nero's follow-up) are pretty on the money with regard to LL's appearance

I think it was Keef some months back who raised the point initially - ED generally can't hold an architectural candle to many surrounding areas. But that's as much to do with history as anything else and the question would be - "given where we are what can we do about it if anything"

As an example, many people find the flast above the Budgens-Co-Op block pretty grim visually but as a resident of one of them came on to point out - those are people's homes, much loved and would put up a hell of a fight should anyone try and "change" them

Now I think the building is rank and would love to change it but

a) the resident has a more impressive and important point than me

b) modern architecture ain't so great anyway

So yes I wish the form was much better, but the content is stil the winner for me - I'm not moving anywhere

[Cassius]

Sorry Maurice, I'd rather have the choice of shops and restaurants that LL offer, even if the 'facade' is not so architecturally interesting and aesthetically pleasing.... goodness what a heathen I must be.

[rob]

To be honest, I couldn't give a monkey's. I'm much more interested what's going on IN the shops, bars and restaurants than what happens above them or round the back of them. But then, I am crashing Phillistine and should probably be ignored.

[Keef]

To be fair, I don't think Maurice ever called anyone a heathen, he just pointed out, quite correctly, that the archtecture on Lordship Lane is fugly. He did say the shops were good, and he ate good food.

[Maurice]

I mean no ill will, just my observations. I find it fascinating, actually. I, too, prefer it to Walworth and even Bellendon. But isn't it funny how putting a beautiful coat of paint on something at the public's expense does very little unless the private sector decides to step up?

I just think given the enormous tax base generated by LL, you all should push to the front of the queue to get your coat of paint.

[Maurice]

Oh I would add, the Foxtons is horrific. I now know why all the fuss.

[blinder999]

'fugly' is a bit harsh - I find a walk down Lordship Lane much more aesthetically pleasing than, for example, wandering round Bromley. Looks ok here:

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/123/332625792_89f869d99e.jpg?v=0

[Maurice]

Another thing I noticed while looking up. I spotted the 'Parkhill Properties' signs. Quite discreet but green and beige painted signs noting they had 'acquired for development'.

They have posted similar signage all about Camberwell.

[macroban]

A lot of plastic fascia polution in that photo.

[Maurice]

Doesn't hold a candle...

http://www.ideal-homes.org.uk/images/southwark/camberwell/camberwell-green-00671-640.jpg

[blinder999]

Maurice Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Doesn't hold a candle...

>

true:

STREET ROBBERY

Highest wards

Newham / Stratford and New Town 300

Southwark / East Walworth 266

Southwark / Camberwell Green 263

[Keef]

I don't really look up above the shops too often, so am not bothered by it, and I'm sure they're all lovely inside, but I still think the buildings look fugly. I do however agree that Bromley is a shocking place!

(can't see your photo as my work block flickr, much to my annoyance!)

At the end of the day though it makes no odds. Sydenham High Street has lovely buildings, but it's still nowhere near as nice. It does have a few absolute treasures though like the little iranian shop that sells some amazing breads and little sweet things. It will be interesting to watch it change, as I'm sure it will.

There are a lot of "middle class" people who are happy to see the arrival of The Dolphin in it's new form. Personally I think it's a souless and awful place but there you go. There are also lots of pubs filled with "working classes" and old men, and I wonder what will happen to these pubs and these people, and whether there will be the same bitterness about the area being "up and coming"...

Here is a link to a thread you may find interesting on the Sydenham Forum, in which there is a bit of East Dulwich envy.

[Maurice]

Do you read dear boy?

I was talking about architectural merit. I'm the first to admit it's a dangerous dump today.

[blinder999]

Maurice Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Do you read dear boy?

>

> I was talking about architectural merit. I'm the

> first to admit it's a dangerous dump today.

Sorry Maurice, couldn't resist. I agree really.

[Maurice]

And before anyone asks, I am in the photo.

[*Bob*]

The problem with placing too much emphasis on architectural merit is that if you're not too careful, you'll end-up living on Camberwell Grove (in an area full of people you despise), posting furiously on the website forum of an 'architecturally inferior' neighbouring area (full of people you seem to want to talk to).

[Maurice]

Or you could end up quite *angry*.

[rob]

my friend Angela used to live on Camberwell Grove. She was burgled three times in six months and her car was broken into almost weekly :( I lived in Camberwell for a couple of years and loved it, but there is no way i'd move back there now seeing as how, unfortunately, it's a complete, unsalvagable dump. be lovely if it wasn't, but it just is.

[*Bob*]

Maurice Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Or you could end up quite *angry*.

? ? ?

I'm a calm and content chap, Mozza. Happy in the knowledge that, in life, people are generally more interesting than buildings. Give it a go! You might like it.

[Keef]

rob Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> unfortunately, it's a complete, unsalvagable dump. be lovely if it wasn't, but it just is.

That's a bit harsh I think. I'm a bit indifferent towards it, but definitely wouldn't say it's a dump.