Bell Green Gas Holders Demolition [Approved by Council]

bell-green
news

#122

Kat, this thread demonstrates the ridiculous state of Lewishsms planning policy. They shun possible investment and employment opportunities, msintain sn old school site that is slowly deteriorating and abuse their powers where they feel they can bully or bribe.
If the effort to maintain wildlife, reduce traffic nuisance and maintain a decent environment were applied to the Bampton estate there would be no building plans. Perhaps the gas holders could be moved onto the green space to preserve both them and the environment as a wildlife haven?


#123

at the other end of Bellingham Ward is Beckenham Place Park - there’s issues there with trees being removed, and wildlife etc. I hope you’re all as up in arms about that too!


#124

The London Borough of Lewisham has considered the proposal as to whether the prior
approval of the authority will be required for the method of demolition and any proposed
restoration of the site, in accordance with Part 11 of Schedule 2 of the Town and Country
Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (as amended).

This Council determines that such prior approval IS REQUIRED and NOT GIVEN for the
proposed development specified in the schedule below.

The Council has considered the method of demolition as shown on the documents submitted
and determines that the details are UNACCEPTABLE as insufficient information has been
provided to demonstrate that the method of demolition of the gasholders and associated
structures would be acceptable with regard to traffic management and land remediation, as
required by Schedule 2, Class B, Part 11 of the Town and Country Planning (General
Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015.

DC_18_106293-Decision_Notice-672914.pdf (86.1 KB)


#125

Much talk about it previously here Jon.

Like many other things, there are reasonable factors to consider. That said, reasonable is open to interpretation, as it is on this thread also.

I have not visited the park this year, but will be interested to see how it has changed. What has been felled, and to what effect.

I have seen a number of tweets about it over the winter, and see there is a lot of unhappiness about it. I guess the end result is where these decisions can finally be judged on their merits.
Much the same here with the gas holders.

Fantastic news for the campaigners. Will be interesting to see the next move from all parties.


#126

It’s all a bit strange really, as this is such an obvious way to delay demolition, that you would imagine SGN etc… would have put in a watertight application. They haven’t even bothered to outline the method of demolition.

I think they are testing the waters.


#127

Or maybe a case of over confidence? Tis strange indeed, but a delay, if nothing else, is just what campaigners need to unite, and make a proposal, hopefully with some backing.


#128

This looks to be good news. (from the gasholders point of view)

I do think there needs to be a proposed basic plan for reuse/repurpose from supporters of the gasholders, I realise this has been raised before. But now the axe has been held off. (for the time being) This is the time to be creative and suggest something that will that will win the hearts and minds of the wider community. This may also give SGN and the council something to work with if a decision is to be made to keep them.

I feel that generally, people think that gasholders are dirty and unusable, therefore coming automatically to the decision that they should go to clean the area up. If a alternative is presented, then more support would be forthcoming.

Time to start working on a suggestion.


#129

I wont hold my breath! Sounds like blue sky thinking, however, I think if they dont get demolished this post will repeat itself for as many years as it takes for them to rust away.


#130

Further to my comments about how run down the site around the gas holders and Livesey Hall is, today I saw smoke from the pile of chairs and furniture I saw a few weeks ago in what SGN planned to make into a ‘memorial garden’.

As I was taking photos, two appliances arrived and started to put it out.

This is how the site is run atm. I don’t know who owns what, but I presume SGN is in overall charge of all this, as they put in the original planning application?

The question is, why are they not looking after what is already there and is the Livesey Hall in good hands?


#131

The site on which the gas holders are located is redundant. They appear to me to be partially accessible. It is not clear whether there is on-site supervision or a security presence.

The Livesey Hall however has a full-time business in operation and whilst there may be issues around rubbish on pavement and roadways after large scale events held in the hall, until now no-one has raised any issues over whether the Hall is in good hands.

Do you have any insight as to who actually owns the Livesey Hall and is it possible SGN do not own it ?


#132

My post said

I don’t know who owns what

You want to know if I know who owns what?

I don’t know. Do you?


#133

You are right.

And I don’t either

And this question posed by you is very pertinent too.


#134

I have done a Land Registry map search There are two plots of land. presumably different owners.

MapSearch-20180420-130249.pdf (864.8 KB)
MapSearch-20180420-130240.pdf (911.7 KB)


#135

Very interesting Jon.

Even more interesting that the site behind Livesey Hall has the title “ELECTRICITY SUBSTATION ON THE EAST OF PERRY HILL, LONDON”.

So that settles it, HM Land Registry cannot possibly be wrong - they are not gas holders after all.


#136

that would be the very small green rectangle next to the road, marked as something like Elec Sub Sta - that map has two green polygons.


#137

Yup - that will do it.

I almost missed the tiny green rectangle on HM Registry Map.


#138

I believe SGN have also failed to provide evidence that they have a big enough spanner.


#139

Interesting point.

But it’s just a pile of redundant meccano kit - surely a bog standard spanner will do.


#140

While reading up on something else today I stumbled across this piece on the King’s Cross Gasholder project.

Stunning work, but total cost Inc all the other buildings and works on the project was £3bn
Apartments selling FROM £810k and topping out at £5m

Interesting insight all the same,


#141

Here’s a real nugget from the article:

“The cylinder shape does not lend itself happily to the creation of useful apartments. They’re shaped like slices of pie.”