You are about to be horrified. Foxtons coming to Rye Lane

[hpsaucey]

Nigello Wrote:

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

> Personally, I'm looking forward to a small area of

> the pavement which won't be an obstacle course of

> piled up rubbish.

> Spot on! The lane is long and busy enough for a

> variety of businesses.

Took this photo of Rye Lane back in March early on a Sunday morning. Walked by thinking the colours were rather beautiful. 2 seconds after taking this a bus ploughed through it the other way showering me with some of the soggy debris.. And there was a chicken carcass or two in there amongst other things!

HP

[Swit and bold]

I would not be suprised at all if Foxtons popped up between Camberwell Green and Elephant & Castle. Theses parts of South London are changing for the better. Most people on this forum would have never even considered live in these areas with in the last 15 years. I welcome Foxtons or any new company to Peckham, don't forget Peckhsm is ZONE 2

[nunheadbelle]

hpsaucey Wrote:

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

> Took this photo of Rye Lane back in March early on

> a Sunday morning. Walked by thinking the colours

> were rather beautiful. 2 seconds after taking this

> a bus ploughed through it the other way showering

> me with some of the soggy debris.. And there was a

> chicken carcass or two in there amongst other

> things!

>

> HP

Lordship Lane is missing out on all this. The sense of adventure, ploughing your way through goodness knows what, the smell of rotting vegetables and other things in the air, not knowing whether you will be covered in goo, it's the thrill of the ride, getting your adrenalin pumping. Don't you just love it!! LOL

[peckham_ryu]

The Guardian has quite a long article on Foxtons and its expansion to "outer London": http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/jun/17/is-foxtons-the-estate-agent-london-deserves?CMP=share_btn_tw

Apparently 'Foxtons selects its new markets with what it calls ?granular? attention to local sales and lettings data, and increasingly sees its future in more affordable outer London.'

[hpsaucey]

nunheadbelle Wrote:

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

> hpsaucey Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

>

> > Took this photo of Rye Lane back in March early

> on

> > a Sunday morning. Walked by thinking the

> colours

> > were rather beautiful. 2 seconds after taking

> this

> > a bus ploughed through it the other way

> showering

> > me with some of the soggy debris.. And there was

> a

> > chicken carcass or two in there amongst other

> > things!

> >

> > HP

>

> Lordship Lane is missing out on all this. The

> sense of adventure, ploughing your way through

> goodness knows what, the smell of rotting

> vegetables and other things in the air, not

> knowing whether you will be covered in goo, it's

> the thrill of the ride, getting your adrenalin

> pumping. Don't you just love it!! LOL

I'd have loved it a BIT more if I hadn't been on the way to an all-day meeting and sitting there in a 'soggy debris' jumper lol... one to tell the kids though.

[Cedges]

I've thought about it, checked myself over and all I've found is a touch if "unsuprised". Very little "horrified" at all.

False advertising OP.

[DulwichFox]

Swit and bold Wrote:

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

> I would not be suprised at all if Foxtons popped

> up between Camberwell Green and Elephant & Castle.

> Theses parts of South London are changing for the

> better. Most people on this forum would have never

> even considered live in these areas with in the

> last 15 years. I welcome Foxtons or any new

> company to Peckham, don't forget Peckhsm is ZONE 2

The Elephant & Castle Pub is to become a Foxtons..

http://www.elefest.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/elephant_and_castle-300x200.gif

Not much of a pub..

DulwichFox

[JohnL]

Cedges Wrote:

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

> I've thought about it, checked myself over and all

> I've found is a touch if "unsuprised". Very little

> "horrified" at all.

>

> False advertising OP.

A few people won't like it at all - but the Elephant & Castle proposal is worse.

(Squatters there now)

WOnder if the Thomas a Becket could become one - being auctioned today if anyone

wants it !!!

[JohnL]

Just noted on Southwark News.

Elephant and Castle pub now protected - no Foxtons then !!!

Thomas a Becket also protected and sale postponed.

http://www.southwarknews.co.uk/news/council-calls-time-on-plans-to-redevelop-historic-boozers/

[Administrator]

Moving to the Lounge as it's definately not East Dulwich specific anymore

[Louisa]

-- moved topic --

[MissKing]

Posted by JohnL Today, 08:23AM

Just noted on Southwark News.

Elephant and Castle pub now protected - no Foxtons then !!!

Thomas a Becket also protected and sale postponed.

[www.southwarknews.co.uk]

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

So the Elephant & Castle pub was closed down after someone was stabbed in the head with a pen? I see now why they want to protect the pub... a real community asset there! It's not even in a nice building. I think that whole shopping centre needs buldozing if you ask me.

The Thomas A Beckett pub is a lovely building, I can see why they would campaign to save it.

[Louisa]

Does anyone have any updates on this please? Why does it take the council so bloody long to decide on things?

Louisa.

[Eileen]

Louisa Wrote:

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

> Does anyone have any updates on this please? Why

> does it take the council so bloody long to decide

> on things?

> Louisa.

The last info is that a new planning application would have to be submitted after the Article 4 direction was issued. This Direction withdraws the permitted development rights for changes of use from of A1 (shops) to A2 (financial and professional services). See:

* http://www.southwark.gov.uk/info/856/planning_policy/3289/article_4_directions and

* http://www.southwark.gov.uk/downloads/download/4320/article_4_direction_2015_-_use_class_a1_to_a2_permitted_development

For the moment change of use to allow retail to be taken over by estate agents - ie change of use from of A1 (shops) to A2 (financial and professional services) which is what the Foxton's plan was - can't be allowed without a planning application for change of use. This means that local people have regained the chance to object to such a change, and the Council has regained the power to refuse the application. This will be confirmed after the consultation period on the Article 4 Direction is over in December.

[Eileen]

The last info is that a new planning application would have to be submitted after the Article 4 direction was issued. This Direction withdraws the permitted development rights for changes of use from of A1 (shops) to A2 (financial and professional services). See:

* http://www.southwark.gov.uk/info/856/planning_policy/3289/article_4_directions and

* http://www.southwark.gov.uk/downloads/download/4320/article_4_direction_2015_-_use_class_a1_to_a2_permitted_development

For the moment change of use to allow retail to be taken over by estate agents - ie change of use from of A1 (shops) to A2 (financial and professional services) which is what the Foxton's plan was - can't be allowed without a planning application for change of use. This means that local people have regained the chance to object to such a change, and the Council has regained the power to refuse the application. This will be confirmed after the consultation period on the Article 4 Direction is over in December.

[edhistory]

This applies to Station Arcade too.

[richard tudor]

So this means we could still end up with the same mess as now in Station Arcade?

[edhistory]

What mess it that?

[richard tudor]

As you would say. go take a look

[edhistory]

You don't seem to know the buildings very well.

Have you visited yet?

I see no mess. They are well designed art deco buildings.

Which features doo you think are a mess?

The front over pavement canopy?

The roof lights?

The Crittall windows?

The offset angle at the railway station end?

Give us a clue.

John K

[richard tudor]

After living in the area all my life you are right, I dont know the buildings that well. Having used the station for over 30 years on a daily basis I do admit I might have missed seeing them in their block glory

I find them depressing, creating a dark dank environment with mess. I actually thought that these buildings would be removed to create a clean, friendly open space to approach the station.

However I do find that they offer a wonder display of light to enhance the artistic balls of hair that tumble in a glorious display of dance in partnership with the other piles of mess. That is why perhaps I have never looked up trying not to step in anything.

Still lets live in the past and keep the area as is. If you want to keep the buildings above Khans fine.

Perhaps if you looked down instead of up you might have a different perspective around the station.

It does appear that the chance to make something of the area will be missed.

[Louisa]

I am all for preservation of Art Deco buildings, but sometimes the greater good of the area should come first. Look at the old Wembley stadium and the removal of the twin towers. The replacement building and arch is far more fit for purpose for this century and the memory of the old building lives on in the spirit of the new building.

The destruction of this station arcade will open up a dark space and create more retail by exposing the hidden railway arches once more (also of architectural importance and much older than the Art Deco one some people wish to preserve). It isn't as though this is the only building from that era in the specific area, and many of the other surviving buildings (125-131 for example) will be more visible upon exit of the station and hopefully can be taken on and fully restored by someone.

Louisa.

[DulwichFox]

Good post Lou..

I've been to both the old and new Wembley.. The new Wembley is certainly far more fit for purpose

and I don't think anyone who has been to Wembley would deny that.

Good point about the hidden railway arches. I hadn't considered that. much could be done refurbishing those.

The old C&A's building could be restored as a focal point coming from the station providing a suitable

business could be established there.

Problem is Rye Lane then becomes a Diamond in a Brass ring if the rest of the lane is left has it is.

It really is tatty, sad and run down.

Foxy.

[Louisa]

Totally agree Foxy. I have seen Rye Lane deteriorate over the last three or four decades and it is heartbreaking to see. I'm not condemning any one business here, and yes without the occupation we currently have the lane would have died a death soon after the channel tunnel fiasco in the early 1990's. However, you cannot have a major high street that lacks so many amenities with all that retail space on offer. Also, you can't just leave things as they are because it keeps a few people happy. The whole community needs serving and I think the station restoration and square goes part to achieving that, creating a pleasant environment for everyone who uses the area. I see it as a catalyst, and the rest of the lane will follow organically. A nice mix of old and new businesses, and some decent chain clobber/department stores for goodness sakes.

Louisa.

[edhistory]

richard tudor Wrote:

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

> After living in the area all my life you are

> right, I dont know the buildings that well. Having

> used the station for over 30 years on a daily

> basis I do admit I might have missed seeing them

> in their block glory

>

> I find them depressing, creating a dark dank

> environment with mess. I actually thought that

> these buildings would be removed to create a

> clean, friendly open space to approach the

> station.

>

> However I do find that they offer a wonder display

> of light to enhance the artistic balls of hair

> that tumble in a glorious display of dance in

> partnership with the other piles of mess. That is

> why perhaps I have never looked up trying not to

> step in anything.

>

> Still lets live in the past and keep the area as

> is. If you want to keep the buildings above Khans

> fine.

>

> Perhaps if you looked down instead of up you might

> have a different perspective around the station.

>

> It does appear that the chance to make something

> of the area will be missed.

So you can't identify anything about the buildings themselves.

It's something else that you dislike.

John K