"And so to Greenwich..." : 'Pepyshow' at National Maritime Museum

Pepyshow was the name of a community drama group in the 80s who put lots of shows on at The Albany. They were based at Pepys Estate. The clue is in the name. Samuel Pepys was Secretary to the Admiralty and used to spend a lot of time in Deptford, keeping an eye on the navy's operations at Deptford's Royal Dockyard (now Convoys Wharf), visiting his friend John Evelyn and cavorting with Mrs Bagnell, the wife of a shipwright. Hence the streets and tower blocks near the river in Deptford are named after all the prominent people of that time – including ships captains and slave traders such as Hawkins and Drake.

Under Pepys' stewardship, an ambitious new shipbuilding programme was initiated on the orders of Charles II, its purpose to counter the threat of the Dutch navy and a rapidly expanding French fleet. The construction of the 'thirty ship' programme represented the pinnacle of English shipbuilding practice. The famous diarist's adminstration helped carry the Royal Navy to a position of global maritime supremacy, and he regarded this work as his greatest lifetime achievement.

Pepys was also President of the Royal Society during a time of hugely significant scientific exploration (including the work of John Evelyn), and he was Master of Trinity House, founded at Deptford Strand. So you'd expect to see a mention of Deptford in this new exhibition about Pepys at the Maritime Museum, wouldn't you?

But no, true to form (like most of the other general exhibits in the museum), there is hardly a SINGLE mention of Deptford in Samuel Pepys: Plague, Fire, Revolution.

Considering this is a maritime museum which bills itself as the "gateway to intrepid exploration and endeavour at sea", the section entitled 'Control of the Seas' which covers Pepys' role in the navy and the consequent "development of Britain's place as a maritime, economic and political force on the world stage" is surprisingly small. The sections on plague and fire are similarly small and underwhelming, despite the exhibition's title.

There is a mention of his good friend Evelyn, also a famous diarist, in the penultimate section 'Science and Society' where an original copy of Evelyn's great work 'Sylva' is displayed. But no mention of Evelyn's home and experimental gardens at Sayes Court in Deptford, next door to the Royal Dockyard – and just a stone's throw from Greenwich.

An interactive map of important London places is on display in almost every room, but does not extend beyond London Bridge. Our search for any reference to Deptford exposed a map of Harwich in the navy section which bore the microscopic legend "presented to Pepys as Secretary of the Admiralty, President of the Royal Society, and Master of Trinity House of Deptford Strand".

And if you pay the extra £2.50 for an audio guide on top of the advertised £12.50 ticket price, you'll hear an actor reading exceedingly short excerpts from the famous diary. Next to the copy of Sylva, the talking guide begins "And so to Deptford by water..." as Pepys heads down to see Evelyn. That's it for Deptford.

There is much emphasis on Charles II's mistresses (while missing out a lot of them) but no evidence of Pepys' womanising with Mrs Bagwell. His love of theatre and music takes up a lot of space with a shadow theatre presentation of small segments of Macbeth and Dryden, but the main focus is on the 'repositioning' of the British monarchy after the English Civil war, aka the Restoration. Interesting as it is (unless you're particularly phobic about the monarchy), the information is still paltry and confusing.

They certainly make a big deal, as you enter the show, out of a grand painting of Charles I being be-headed, with special spotlighting on parts of the painting that tell the story and provide a context, all of which you could easily miss if you arrive before or after it's scheduled to be 'interactive'. We're not sure if we heard or saw the word 'Catholic' mentioned in the entire show, but see for yourselves.

The exhibition is designed around what artefacts were available. Pepys' actual diary is not one of those, unfortunately, as Pepys' will confined it to Magdalene College, Cambridge, never to be shown elsewhere. Extracts available either by audio or interactive screen are limited, yet the scope of the exhibition covers before and after Pepys kept his diary (which he stopped long before he died). Even so, the British Museum's 'A History of the World in 100 Objects' managed to say more about the whole world than this show does about the Restoration with 200.

If you really want to know what was going on, when, where and who, you'll have to buy the book, which is £25 (£30 hardback). According to the index, there are about four mentions of Deptford in it, which is a vast improvement on the exhibition itself. They're also selling a comprehensively illustrated tome called 'Pepys Navy' by naval historian David Davies which has countless references to Deptford, but it's displayed on an unreachable high shelf – as if they're unsure what a visitor to a maritime museum might actually be interested in.

Merchandise consists of expensive metal fire buckets painted grey (!), and tins of Twinings English Breakfast Tea. The important fact that tea was first introduced to the UK by Charles II's queen, the Portuguese Catherine of Braganza, is one that you could easily miss in the exhibition unless you'd read the caption for the Chinese porcelain teapot lurking among the display of silver coffee pots.

As for the flavour of Pepys and the people he dealt with in his day to day dealings...well we still have the diaries. The value of this exhibition is its political overview, and what the diary did not cover when Pepys stopped writing about London. But generally you'd be at a loss to find any evidence of ordinary people in this entire show.

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

Greenwich would be nothing without Deptford, and it's about time the museum acknowledged that fact. Hopefully, Deptford's homegrown projects will redress the balance in the future, offering a better understanding of the past and the part that ordinary people played in it aside from the political machinations of the time (though these cannot be ignored, especially now). The Lenox Project not only wants to construct a replica of the first ship in Pepys' thirty ship programme, but also intends to build a Deptford Dockyard Museum.

Most of the artefacts would have to come from the National Maritime Museum which holds them in storage never to be displayed. Whilst its less prominent staff are enthusiastic about the project, the snobby upper echelons have so far refused to support it. Meanwhile, John Evelyn's legacy will be celebrated by a centre of excellence created by Sayes Court Garden CIC, who are currently working with Greenwich University.

Both projects are still waiting to get started after their ambitious plans were successfully made a condition of the planning permission given to the Convoys Wharf's Hong Kong based conglomerate Hutchison Whampoa by the Mayor of London in March 2014 (after the decision was snatched by the GLA from the hands of Lewisham Council in 2013 because they were supposedly taking too long to decide)...

If you feel proud of Deptford's past achievements as an international powerhouse of scientific ingenuity and industrial prowess, and want to see it celebrated whilst the site gets buried under 48 and 38 storey 'luxury homes', these are the projects that need your support.

The Lenox Project CIC: www.buildthelenox.org
Sayes Court Garden CIC: www.sayescourtgarden.org.uk

Mayor of London gives Convoys Wharf the go ahead

Well, there's no turning back now. As Mayor of Lewisham Steve Bullock said at the hearing at City Hall on Monday at which Boris approved the Convoys Wharf outline planning application, "if we get it wrong now, we won't have the opportunity again in our lifetime". He asked for a bit more time to get it right. Unfortunately, Boris called time, and it's very, very wrong.

The heritage community projects Build The Lenox and Sayes Court Garden appeared to come out well, however, with Boris imposing two conditions on his approval that would help them get a better deal. But although this signalled his enthusiasm for their proposals, much is still to be negotiated and the developer will no doubt continue to stall and obstruct.

Indeed much remains still to be decided – for instance, the design of the buildings. This will happen at a later stage. But the developer now has the green light (and his architect's glossy illustrations) with which to start selling his luxury flats overseas. It doesn't really matter to those investors parking their money in London property what the buildings look like.

Rather too late in the day for Deptford, the debate on London's rising property prices, foreign investors and skyscraper luxury developments has gathered momentum. Only the day before the Convoys application was heard at City Hall, the Observer was publishing a petition by the great and influential which opposes the addition of another 230 skyscrapers to the London skyline. This was part of a response to a report and exhibition "London's Growing Up!" by New London Architecture (NLA) whose research has found more than 230 tall towers over 20 storeys in the pipeline for London. Ironically, the petition is signed by Alan Baxter, whose firm worked on the Heritage Strategy for the Convoys Wharf application.

Last Wednesday, the Prince's Foundation for Building Community published a report on London's housing which said we are under assault from 'faceless' towers and 'poorly conceived' mega-developments, with ordinary Londoners no longer able to afford to live here (download here).

And only hours before the Convoys hearing, the developer's architect Sir Terry Farrell (also an advisor to the Mayor of London) was launching his own government backed 'Farrell Review of Architecture and the Build Environment'. Apparently planners must think about Place with a capital P, working with local people and expert advisors to draw up real, proactive plans for the future.

That'll be the same Farrell who helped the Hong Kong conglomerate Hutchison Whampoa to devise a masterplan that builds over Deptford's Royal Dockyard and has helped them keep local people as far away from the planning process as possible. In fact the bloated old hypocrite turned up at the hearing after his lunchtime launch.

Despite giving the Farrell document a glowing review in the Telegraph, Jonathan Glancy observed "This week, the fight over dismal plans for a pox of hundreds of new and dimly designed skyscrapers defacing London along the Thames promises to become very heated, while planning permission will be granted somwhere near you for ever more cheap-as-chips housing – cheap, that is, to build on land acquired for next to nothing, yet sold as dear as the market will bear".
 
See also the Deptford Dame's comments, plus a report on Deptford Is.., Build The Lenox and local press. Meanwhile, here's Hong Kong...

Only 6 days left to object to the plans for Convoys Wharf

So, how do you help Mr Pepys to save Deptford's Royal Dockyard? 

The Mayor of London is 'keen' to hear your views about Convoys Wharf! 
Email graham.clements@london.gov.uk before 20 March 2014. Quote the application reference DC/13/83358 and include your name and address.

OR SIGN THE PETITION!

If you have previously written an objection to Lewisham Council, there is no need to write again to the Mayor of London. You can, however, make comments on the very slight changes to the application that have been agreed by the developer in talks with the GLA. These changes are so minor you might want to write to say that they're welcome but it's just not enough!

For those who wish to object in general, here's some notes taken from Lewisham Council's report on the application, plus a couple of policy points from the Mayor of London's London Plan, which you might want to use (in no particular order):

SCALE & MASSING 

• The Mayor of London's London Plan states:

Policy 7.7:

Tall and large buildings should
•  generally be limited to sites in the Central Activity Zone, opportunity areas, areas of intensification or town centres that have good access to public transport
•  only be considered in areas whose character would not be affected adversely by the scale, mass or bulk of a tall or large building
•  incorporate publicly accessible areas on the upper floors, where appropriate (not offered in this application)

Tall buildings should not
•  affect their surroundings adversely in terms of microclimate, wind turbulence, overshadowing, noise, reflected glare, aviation, navigation and telecommunication interference
•  should not impact on local or strategic views adversely

General comments
• the buildings, and especially the towers, are too tall
• the density and number of units proposed is too high
• this site has terrible public transport links (in reference to London Plan's guidelines on tall buildings above)
• the tall buildings are out of scale with the surrounding area
• this proposal does not incorporate publicly accessible areas on the upper floors
• locals will lose satellite TV throughout construction and after (to be mitigated by being offered FreeSat)

• English Heritage note: “the cumulative impact of the three tall buildings within the proposal is at odds with London Plan Policy 7.12D.A which states that panoramas should be managed so that development fits within the prevailing pattern of building and spaces and should avoid a canyon affect on strategically important landmarks...the view that the impact of the three towers within the Blackheath Point and Greenwich Panoramic Views is dramatic and contributes towards a potential canyon effect.”

• Lewisham Council required a reduction in scale and massing on some of the proposed buildings, especially in relation to the historic buildings and spaces which they consider "overbearing in a number of locations and views"; Lewisham's Design Panel called the towers 'monolithic' 

NB: Minor revisions to the application have now been made that allow for greater flexibility at the design stage, plus a reduction in the heights of one of the blocks, but those towers will still be there.

The image below shows the Seager Tower on Deptford Broadway with the proposed 48-storey Convoys waterfront tower superimposed beside it. No, the Convoys building isn't nearer, they are side by side, that is the size it will be compared with the 26-storey Seager Tower – almost twice as tall, and twice as wide. (Click to enlarge)

Here's the architect's illustration which shows the new Paynes & Borthwick tower in the foreground of the proposed development. The foregrounding makes the waterfront tower look only twice as high, when in fact when pictured side by side it is three times as high (click to enlarge).

 

Here's the proposed waterfront tower side by side with Aragon Tower on Pepys Estate.

HISTORY & HERITAGE
 
• Deptford Royal Dockyard is an historic site worthy of international recognition that goes back 500 years: founded by Henry VIII in 1513, it was the most significant royal dockyard of the Tudor period, and central to the development of the British Royal Navy for the next 350 years

• It is strongly associated with several of Britain's most famous people: Henry V, Henry VIII, Elizabeth 1, Charles II, Capt James Cook, Sir Francis Drake, Sir Walter Raleigh, Nelson, Samuel Pepys, John Evelyn, William Bligh, John Rennie (and other famous engineers)...(see end of post for more detail on ships and people) 

• The World Monuments Fund has placed the site on its 2014 Watch List because it's endangered by insensitive redevelopment. See their statement on Deptford Is... here.

• The Mayor of London's London Plan states:

Policy 7.9:  Heritage-led Regeneration

Strategic
A  Regeneration schemes should identify and make use of heritage assets and reinforce the qualities that make them significant so they can help stimulate environmental, economic and community regeneration. This includes buildings, landscape features, views, Blue Ribbon Network and public realm.

Planning decisions
B  The significance of heritage assets should be assessed when development is proposed and schemes designed so that the heritage significance is recognised both in their own right and as catalysts for regeneration. Wherever possible heritage assets (including buildings at risk) should be repaired, restored and put to a suitable and viable use that is consistent with their conservation and the establishment and maintenance of sustainable communities and economic vitality.

• Many of the significant above and below ground remains are being ignored by the developer: inter-related heritage assets include a scheduled ancient monument, six listed buildings and structures, and a further structure under consideration for listing, in addition to the dockyard archaeology uncovered during recent investigations – but all except the Grade II listed Olympia Shed will be built over.

General comments:
• The plans do not go far enough to reflect the heritage assets
• The relationship between the river and the Olympia Shed is unacceptably restrained
• The scale of buildings around the Olympia Shed and its setting is wrong
• Failure to reference many of the dockyard features
• No feasible or sustainable use of the Olympia Shed is provided
• The treatment of the Double Dry Dock is ‘unimaginative and disappointing’.
• The archaeology on site should result in a reduction of the density

• The historic significance of the dockyard is classified as high under National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) guidelines; NPPF paragraph 131 states “In determining planning applications, local planning authorities should take account of: the positive contribution that conservation of heritage assets can make to sustainable communities including their economic vitality…”

• English Heritage "remain concerned that the overall scale of the development is such that the opportunity to create a distinctive sense of place which responds to the outstanding historic legacy of the site has not been realised"

• English Heritage believe "the overall scale of the scheme, including the tall buildings, will cause harm to the significance of designated and undesignated heritage assets"

• English Heritage remains concerned that "the proximity and massing of the feature buildings and 14 storey riverside block create a dominating scale around the listed building [Olympia Shed]...The narrow glimpsed view fails to make the best opportunity of this prominent and centrally located heritage asset...the current proposal would appear to represent the most restricted view.”

• The Council for British Archaeology says “Currently, the proposed development of the site is considered to be at the cost of a proper historic appreciation, and is therefore unacceptable.”

• Lewisham Council says “there are parts of the site where historic connections and layouts have been lost or ignored...and more detailed aspects of the proposed layout fail to respect the underlying heritage assets or the location and setting of key buildings..."

• Paragraph 7.4 of the London Plan states that local people “should have access to a…built environment that reinforces a strong, unique local history and character.”

• Local heritage project Build The Lenox CIC should be accommodated in the Olympia building along with a Deptford Dockyard Museum; this is a better use of the listed building than shops and boutiques

• The Great Basin should be reinstated so that Build The Lenox can have a home port and be a venue for visiting ships; buildings infringing on the footprint of the basin should be altered, but will benefit from a larger waterfront

• Local heritage project Sayes Court Garden CIC should be fully accommodated on the site and their aims to create a John Evelyn Centre of Urban Horticulture fully supported, with more adequate surrounding space given to a new building so that a green area is created that joins the archaeological remains of John Evelyn's Sayes Court Manor House with the present Sayes Court Garden

See also the report from Deptford Is...here

AFFORDABLE HOUSING

General comments in local objections:
• The element of Social Housing proposed on the site is NIL
• The affordable housing allocation is only 14%
• The affordable housing includes shared ownership and would not be affordable to local people on incomes of £20K pa or less
• Housing units are likely to be marketed at a starting price of £300,000 for a studio and the wider Lewisham community is not likely to see any benefit whatsoever from this.
• Restrictions on units sold abroad and on the number sold as buy-to-let investments are required in order to stop the local rental market from seeing mass rent increases and more local people being priced out of the Borough
• A percentage of affordable housing should be by the River Thames to avoid ‘class distinction’.
• More family housing is needed to make the development sustainable

NB: This latter point is partly addressed in the minor revisions made since the application has been with the GLA to slightly increase provision for affordable rented units and provision of family-sized affordable rented units. Lewisham Council were challenging the developer's formula for 'viability' – more realistic 'growth' assumptions [property values] "would allow for more affordable housing...to be increased from the applicant's present proposals."

TRANSPORT

The application includes parking for at least 1800 cars. See Deptford Is... reports here and here.

General points raised by local objections:
• The use of misleading figures to ‘manipulate’ traffic statistics by including side streets with lower usage than Evelyn Street, plus misleading statistics for traffic on New King Street
• Existing bus journey times will be considerably lengthened
• Potential for bus and DLR overcrowding
• Rail capacity has been overestimated and the increased use of Deptford Station in recent years has not been accounted for
• Cumulative impacts on the road have not been assessed
• Construction impacts have not been assessed properly
• The potential for nuisance and disturbance during the construction period, including for homes ‘downwind’
• Parking for construction workers will infringe on local parking
• HGV traffic and the impacts on surrounding residents and safety for children on local roads
• Condition of local roads already poor
• Removal of parking spaces on New King Street unacceptable
• A CPZ will be unavoidable
• Access would be on to Evelyn Street, which when combined would greatly increase traffic and cause future gridlock
• All heavy traffic will have to be diverted along a route of Grove Street and Oxestalls Road and past the local Deptford Park School, causing hazardous air and noise pollution
• More effort should be put into using the river for material access rather than by road
• Parking provision for over 1800 cars on the site, without counting service vehicles, will add to vehicular congestion on the A206 which is already a very heavily trafficked road

• In Lewisham Council's report, Transport for London concluded that further assessments need to be made in order to comply with the London Plan.

• Lewisham Council said, "Given the scale of development and predicted vehicular movement to/from the site there will be a significant increase in traffic, both vehicular and non vehicular, on the local highway network, and modelling of key junctions by the applicant has highlighted potentially significant and unresolved capacity issues. These would be exacerbated if the London Mayor’s Cycle Superhighway scheme on Evelyn Street is implemented as this will reduce capacity..."

“….TfL acknowledge that when they come to look at the detail it may throw up impacts which have not been identified so far and that it cannot accept on the network. They also note that the extent of that risk is yet to be determined… [Lewisham] Officers have serious concerns with this approach and leaving matters for resolution after the outline application has been approved. ..[The GLA and] TfL must ensure that the impacts are fully assessed and understood before the case is determined.”

NB: We have not had time to read up on whether these very obvious transport issues have yet been reviewed, but there is certainly no modification in the 'minor revisions' that relates to the number of car parking spaces.

INFRASTRUCTURE AND ENVIRONMENT

• [the] impact on existing infrastructure…will place an unacceptable burden on existing services such as utilities providers, water supplies and sewerage

• Thames Water states in its consultation response: “With the information provided, Thames Water has been unable to determine the waste water infrastructure needs of this application. The existing water supply infrastructure has insufficient capacity to meet the additional demands for the proposed development."

• Thames Water had not been furnished with the finer details of “the points of connection to the public sewerage system as well as the anticipated flow (including flow calculation method) into any proposed connection point”. So they had not been able to determine the impact of the proposed development on the existing water and sewer system

• Local objectors and Lewisham Officers “remain concerned that daylight/sunlight impacts have not been properly assessed” 

MORE HERITAGE... 

• Over 300 ships were built or refitted at Deptford; warships include HMS Neptune and HMS Colossus, which fought under Nelson at the Battle of Trafalgar

• Refitted ships include HMS Endeavour, HMS Resolution and HMS Discovery used by Capt James Cook, as were HMS Discovery and HMS Chatham captained by George Vancouver, and William Bligh's HMS Bounty and HMS Providence

• Privateer Sir Francis Drake was knighted here by Elizabeth 1 in 1581 after his circumnavigation of the globe in the Golden Hind, which was moored for exhibition in Deptford Creek until the 1660s

• Explorer Sir Walter Raleigh had the Ark Raleigh built at Deptford; the ship was purchased by Elizabeth I and renamed Ark Royal; Raleigh laid his cloak before Elizabeth at Deptford

• Diarist Samuel Pepys, Secretary to the Admiralty and Master of Trinity House, initiated and oversaw Charles II's 1677 shipbulding programme here (including the Lenox)

• John Evelyn, diarist, author, horticulturist, inventor and founding member of the Royal Society,  lived here in Sayes Court Manor; his ideas formed the basis of the National Trust, and much of Deptford Dockyard was given by Evelyn to the Admiralty at a peppercorn rent as long as a ship lay on the stocks: with no ship in the dock, the yard actually belongs to Evelyn's descendents

• Tsar Peter the Great learned about the latest technologies in shipbuilding here in 1698 – because Deptford Dockyard was the "cradle of the Navy" and the 'Cape Canaveral' of its time

• Deptford was the first of the royal naval dockyards to have a wet dock or basin: where John Evelyn carried out the first diving bell experiments, where Cook hoisted the pennant on board the Endeavour in 1768, where Bentham built the dry dock in 1802 with Edward Holl, where in 1814 John Rennie rebuilt the basin entrance with the latest caisson gate technology, where Capt Sir William Denison built the slipways to the basin with slipway covers built by George Baker &Sons, where George Biddel Airey tested the effect of a ship's magnetism on navigation instruments...

Convoys Wharf update (and the Deptford Sea Shanty)

Local shanty group, the Deptford Shanty Crew, have recorded a special Deptford song that tells the story of how the historic Deptford Royal Dockyard is about to be buried under an uncaring developer's plan to build 3500 luxury flats. Click on the YouTube logo to read the lyrics in full.

The decision on the developer's application is now "in the hands of the London Mayor" and Boris has promised to decide very soon (originally by the end of February, now postponed to the end of March). But it's not looking good for Deptford's heritage or Deptford in general.

Crossfields residents were recently sent a letter from the Greater London Authority (GLA) Planning department, requesting comments on very minor changes to the developer's masterplan. Please don't ignore this letter, but use it as an excuse to object to the scheme in general! A Crossfields resident who has already written an objection has received a reply from the GLA Planners which states:

Thank you for your representations to the Mayor of London with respect to proposed development at the Convoys Wharf site in Deptford. The Mayor has asked me to respond on his behalf. The issues you have raised will be taken into account, and your comments (along with all other representations made on the case), will be made available to the Mayor when he comes to consider the case.

I can confirm that the Mayor is mindful of the historic importance of this site, and is committed to securing a well-designed scheme that would deliver benefits for Deptford, as well as for the rest of London. To this end the Mayor has instructed his GLA officers to work closely with the Council when negotiating on the case - to ensure that local priorities are appropriately considered and addressed as part of the determination of this application.

Planning negotiations associated with this case are currently ongoing, however, the Mayor is currently undertaking public consultation until 20 March 2014 on a number of minor revisions to the scheme. Further information is available on the GLA website here: www.london.gov.uk/priorities/planning/public-hearings/convoys-wharf.

In due course the Mayor will hold a public Representation Hearing, before considering the full details of the case, and deciding whether or not to grant permission. Further information, including the date for the hearing, will be made publically available on the GLA website here: www.london.gov.uk/priorities/planning/public-hearings/convoys-wharf. 

But in reality, there is very little of the "historic importance of the site" that is being saved, and the GLA appear to not be listening fully to either Lewisham Council's recommendations or those of English Heritage and the local heritage projects, Build The Lenox and Sayes Court Garden. The projects are still waiting to meet with the developer and are still marginalised in the plans. The GLA still does not recognise the full potential of the archaeological findings on the site and seem quite happy to let the developer build over and bury forever the significant and recoverable 'below ground' remains.

The 'Representation Hearing' referred to in the GLA letter above will allow only 20 minutes of public representation! So it is important for locals to write to the GLA (or sign the petition) as soon as possible. Email mayor@london.gov.uk (or graham.clements@london.gov.uk) and see guidelines from the Deptford Is... campaign here. This needs to be done by 20th March.

The Lenox Project wants to build their ship in the Olympia Shed but the developer still wants the Grade 1 Listed building (the only surviving 'above ground' building) to house boutique shops rather than anything meaningful relating to the building's history (such as shipbuilding!). The project also requires the re-instatement of the old Basin in front of the Olympia building, but this historic body of water is currently re-designed as a small shallow pool incapable of holding boats or ships. The Sayes Court Garden project requires more of the land due to be occupied by giant blocks of flats in order to restore the footprint of John Evelyn's original gardens.

Dame Joan Ruddock, as patron of both local projects, recently wrote to the Deputy Mayor Sir Edward Lister. She is not allowed to converse with Boris himself, in case he becomes prejudiced (even though one of his advisors is Sir Terry Farrell, the developer's architect). Joan said:

Although both projects have gained the support of the developer, neither is being given the opportunity to properly reflect the archaeology and history appropriate to their design. This failure makes both potentially unviable. 

The Lenox has a unique potential to create a tangible link to Deptford's history; to directly connect the Olympia Building to its heritage, and – by recreating a basin in front of the building – to re-establish its historic links to the river. 

Hutchison Whampoa...have proposed limited-term accommodation for the ship [7 years maximum] on the protected wharf [north of the site and reserved for other uses such as cargo handling]. Critical factors to enable the project to thrive are proximity to the National Maritime Museum in Greenwich, easy access for visitors, a future legacy for the site that perpetuates its heritage, and a permanent home for the ship and the Dockyard Museum...

The Sayes Court Garden has been developed to expose the John Evelyn heritage, in a collaborative venture with the National Trust...

...We were delighted with Hutchison Whampoa's proposal to expose the archaelogy of the [John Evelyn's] Manor House but their current proposal to 'capture' it within a large block bears no relationship to its historic setting and orientation. This design would divorce the archaeology from the open space which gives it meaning...

Hutchison Whampoa announced a record increase in their profits at the end of March. Due to their increased 'investment' in Europe, their net profits had risen 30%, yet they still insist Convoys Wharf cannot be 'viable' (profit making) if they provide more affordable housing, or make space for more of Deptford's heritage.

So please get writing!

Chorus:
And it's [stamp] sell her off to a big business man
there goes Deptford's dockyard
there goes our history and our land
way off in the hands of the London mayor

Convoys Wharf update – sign the petition!

Last week the decision on planning permission for Convoys Wharf was taken out of Lewisham's control when the Mayor of London stepped in at the developer's request.

Now that locals can no longer make their objections to the application, local campaigners Deptford Is have set up a petition to give a voice to the community so that we can let Boris know that we don't want this. 

PLEASE SIGN THIS PETITION AND SHARE THE LINK WITH FRIENDS.

See Deptford Is... and local papers. Also read this week's Private Eye (click on the image below).

BACKGROUND INFO

Heritage versus housing

Deptford's MP Joan Ruddock, in response to the Boris decision to "call in" the application, has described the site as "a heritage jewel in London's crown". The site is also of international significance, which is why the World Heritage Fund saw fit to include it on their Watch List for 2014-2016.

Boris's glib soundbite to news reporters was that "London needs more housing". Don't be fooled by the notion that London's housing crisis can be solved by the building of 3000 more luxury flats.

Originally, the percentage of "affordable housing" in new developments was set at 50% by Ken Livingstone. But most developers now claim that their sites are not "viable" (= massive profits) unless they deliver affordable housing at below 15%. In the Convoys application it is 14% – an extra 500 units at 80% market rent (still not affordable to the people who keep this city running), bringing the total to an impossibly dense 3,500 units.

It is also feared that, like other major new housing developments, the units will be sold off-plan to foreign investors before going on the market in the UK. Overseas investors currently earn enough from the rise in property values they needn't even bother renting their units out to those who can afford the high rents.   

The developers and Boris

It's feared Boris will look favourably on this application, despite the GLA's own reservations to it in their report to Lewisham Planning (in particular from Transport For London).

The developer is Chinese conglomerate Hutchison Whampoa, one of many holding companies owned by the 8th richest man in the world, Li Ka Shing. He also owns major utilities in water and power (ie, UK Power Assets who run much of the National Grid and London's power), fracking (via Husky, causing community uproar in Canada) and telecoms (3G and others – and they're currently being 'investigated' by the EU on their recent purchases of telecoms in Ireland and Italy), as well as major British container ports (see June 2013 post).

Boris Johnson has recently been courting Chinese trade. David Cameron is due to visit China next month "on a trade mission" and Li Ka Shing has been spotted in and out of No.10.  Boris is also mates with Rupert Murdoch. (Thanks, Transpontine). Having sold the site to Hutchison Whampoa, News International has a profit share in the sale of the 3000 luxury flats planned for the site.

And this week the PM launched the Regeneration Investment Organisation Advisory Board (RIO), "an inward investment body" with the aim of raising billions of pounds from overseas trading partners to "fund urban regeneration projects". Sky News reports, "Its remit has been borne out of a frustration expressed by many major overseas investors about the bureaucracy and complexity of finalising major deals in the UK". Like Hutchison Whampoa, for instance, who accused Lewisham Planning of making "unrealistic demands" and "unreasonable and unwarranted requests" that would damage their profit margins.

Lungs for the City
 
The application proposes to build over almost every inch of the historic site, which was founded in 1513 by Henry VIII as the home of shipbuilding for the Royal Navy (the Royal Dockyard that, along with Woolwich dockyard, preceded the grandeur at Greenwich).

To get an idea of the density, have a look round the development at New Capital Quay. That's 1000 flats with a ground space a third of the Convoys site. Imagine that x3. To get an idea of heights, look at the tallest tower at the new Renaissance development in Loampit Vale – that's 24 storeys, half the height of the 48 storey tower proposed at Convoys (the other two being 38).

Convoys also contains the remains of Sayes Court Garden, where John Evelyn's innovative horticultural theories were developed and  which led to the founding of the National Trust. It was his theory that trees are the lungs of a city.

Considering the latest reports by the No To Silvertown Tunnel campaign, in which it was revealed that pollution levels at the end of Deptford Church Street on Creek Road have been breaching European limits for nitrogen dioxide for more than eight years, his advice is worth remembering more than ever. (Thanks, Deptford Dame).

Especially since Hutchison's plans include parking provision for 2000 cars (all housed in the giant blocks of housing units) that will cause ever greater pollution and congestion on Evelyn Street. The only public transport will be a diversion of the 199 bus and a Thames clipper, putting greater strain on existing services. And don't forget the ten years of construction traffic.

In an ideal world, the entire Convoys site should be planted with trees just to make up for the new IKEA being planned to go on the site the award-winning Sainsbury's eco-building at Greenwich peninsula, which will draw in traffic from miles around to unprecedented levels. (Thanks, 853 blog).

But Hutchisons were arguing over the necessity of widening New King Street to accommodate the bus making a two-way journey.

A people's history

The history of this site is amazing – it features loads of important historical figures (Drake, Raleigh etc), was the launch pad for some fantastic scientific discoveries (Cook, among others), and was built and designed by many celebrated pioneers in engineering and shipbuilding (Rennie, Penn etc), as well as being a place where ordinary people who worked in and around the dockyard have fantastic stories to tell (female shipwrights, black and Asian sailors), that were never recorded by Samuel Pepys who ran the yard for Charles II.

So much of Deptford's history has been buried and ignored (perhaps because of the shame of slavery), it is bursting to come through and speak to us. The site is monumentally multi-cultural – with links all over the world – as much as Deptford is now.

The archaeology

Many of the site's surviving below-ground structures (docks) will be buried under dense 12 storey blocks and 38-48 storey towers. The one remaining above ground structure, the Olympia Shed, will be overshadowed and hidden from view by the buildings closely surrounding it. You'll only be able to glimpse a small part of it from the river. Hutchisons were rejecting English Heritage's demands to open the view up.

The plans have been opposed by English Heritage, the Council for British Archaeology, the Naval Dockyard Society and other heritage bodies – not forgetting, of course, the local people who will have to live with ten years or more of building works and construction traffic.

The public space provision in the present application is laughable – a thin strip on the riverside and two strips on the sites of an historic dock and slipway, which are only not being built on because they're "protected". They could actually be listed by English Heritage, but not until the full archaeology report made by a commercial arm of the Museum of London which (had to be) commissioned by the developer has been published. It hasn't been published yet, despite the archaeology work being long completed – although not as thoroughly as it could have been (there is, according to Deptford Is, areas of the site yet to be uncovered).

English Heritage have recently listed the remaining walls on the site (including the river walls), which must make it the longest length of listed Thames wall in London. Meanwhile, with no full report, the archaeology of the site is not "fully understood". It would therefore be premature for the Mayor of London to make a decision until this report is published.

Local campaigners have emphasised the heritage of the site and how it can open up a tourism strategy for Lewisham, bringing in visitors from Royal Maritime Greenwich. Unfortunately, the owner of the site is so fixated on the simple formula of selling luxury waterfront residential units that it cannot envision the advantages of owning a site of world heritage – and the capital value that would add to a smaller number of units.  

Deptford Is are also advocating that an area on the site designated by the Greater London Authority (GLA) as a "protected wharf" (to be used for river business, very often simply cargo) should be developed as a Maritime Enterprise Zone incorporating boat building and repairs and other associated marine business that is presently lacking in this part of the Thames and which would bring great employment opportunities.

But this is strongly opposed by the developer, who will more than likely lobby the GLA, with Cameron, Osbourne and Johnson's help, to change the designation so that it can build even more luxury flats.

If you care about Deptford, you must sign the petition! This application must be opposed so that a better proposal can come forward – one that combines housing with a full appreciation of the site's heritage.

Update 18 Nov:  also see the Deptford Dame's take on the Mayor of London's new role in the process.

 

World Monuments Fund puts Deptford Dockyard and Sayes Court Garden on their "Watch List"

Local campaigners Deptford Is... were excited to be part of this BBC London News report which went out on Friday and Saturday last weekend. It was available on iPlayer afterwards for only a very short period, so lots of people took to recording the iPlayer output (which accounts for the buffering in this recording)...

The publicity centred around the announcement last week that the World Monuments Fund had included Deptford Dockyard and Sayes Court Garden on their list of places to watch, which also includes Venice and Syria among other places around the world which they consider are under threat.

In this case, the threat comes from Chinese developers Hutchison Whampoa, who want to build 3,500 flats on what is now known as Convoys Wharf. 3,000 of those flats will be luxury apartments sold off-plan to overseas investors. Their latest application is presently with Lewisham Council, to be decided early next year.

Dr Jonathan Foyle (CEO of WMF-Britain) said: "2013 is Deptford’s 500th anniversary, and today the site awaits residential redevelopment. Yet Deptford’s most imminent threat comes from the failure of existing proposals to fully acknowledge and respect the heritage assets that the site has to offer. Incorporating the extensive archaeology and combining this with unique public spaces has the potential to strengthen Deptford’s local identity whilst securing this lost piece of the Thames jigsaw. It would also improve awareness of the little-known existence and overlooked history of the dockyard and gardens on a national stage."

The campaigners were particularly pleased at how the news team reported the story, but we noticed a a couple of inaccuracies that could have misled the viewer. The BBC team said there would be 3,000 "homes", rather than "3,000 luxury homes plus 500 at 80% of market rent". This gave the impression that the problem with London's housing shortage would be helped if building went ahead, which is certainly not the case.

And as we have pointed out before on this blog, Hutchison's present masterplan is misrepresented by this image, which was used in the broadcast:

In fact, the site will not be as "green" as this. Nearly all these areas will be private gardens above carparks, so most of the site will be private, as follows:

Still, at least they got most other details right, unlike some local newspapers, and the Deptford Is... team must be congratulated for their work in raising the profile of the incredible history of the site which led to the World Monuments Fund's listing.

We wonder how the Chinese would feel if Barratts went over to China and built a massive private luxury development on the Great Wall of China?

Deptford on telly!

We just got a ''newsflash'' from Deptfordis about the Convoys development's appearance on BBC television news.  Apparently it's only available to see before 6:59pm this evening (Sat, 19 10 13) so if you can, have a look here.  I'm sure it will find its way onto Youtube but for now....

Deptford Anchor spotted, among other things...

This is where the Deptford Anchor is, and where it will probably stay.

It's in the Oympia Shed at Convoys Wharf, courtesy of Hutchison Whampoa. Covered in cobwebs and pigeon shit. Why?

The council officer in charge of regeneration of the high street told us over a month ago that it will probably end up being 'part of a new development' – so here it is, in the hands of the least likely people to care about the history and heritage of Deptford, but who have probably got the best security.

The anchor's safe here, that's for certain. This place is so secure that visitors to London Open House at Convoys Wharf on Saturday had to SIGN IN with an exact time, and stay within the bollards and not stray off-piste or else they'd get a severe telling off, and then SIGN OUT with an exact time when they left.

That was apparently due to Health & Safety, yet not every visitor was given the flyer that carried the disclaimer that Convoys Wharf Properties and Hutchison Whampoa had absolutely nothing to do with you breaking your leg crossing the massive blue electrical cable that crossed the bridge to the pier where you could buy coffee and tea (and not much else) off a sole trader for £2 a hit and imagine what it would all be like when built.

Probably not very nice, since the imaginary tall buildings behind you might triple the wind factor on the pier. Oddly, we tripped ungainly on the electrical cable cover, which was exactly where the outgoing and incoming Directors of Hutchison Whampoa Properties European Division (Messrs Benyon and Hayden) spent most of their time on site....both armed with cameras, taking pictures of each other to pass the time on their trip hazard watch.

The signing in and out for visitors was probably very useful for Hutchison & Whampoa to claim they had completed yet another public consultation and be able to give figures, whilst manipulating all the actual consultation they did.

For instance, they asked visitors what we would like to happen in the Olympia Shed as though they had no ideas of their own. They did have some ideas, but as we understand it, English Heritage have firmly suggested the fabric of the building cannot be interfered with too much, although this wasn't fully explained. This is almost the only bit of the site they are not allowed to build on (so far), but now they've been told they can't turn it into the glass palace they envisaged last time round.

They intend to make a profit out of it somehow, so God knows why they were asking Open House visitors, who may be less likely to offer up the sort of ideas that could come from others less interested in architecture, such as a duplication of the Millennium Dome (cinemas, music venues, restaurants). Open House visitors might have chosen more heritage-related ideas, but we shall never know, since even when you put your name down just to be updated, you never are.

Here's a grumpy Henry VIII looking to get arrested...

 

Bill came over from London Open House at the Master Shipwright's House to have a gander and frighten the developers. (For a report on Open House at the Master Shipwright's go to Deptford Is...). Bill was part of the original campaign against excessive redevelopment at Convoys that began as soon as the previous owner Rupert Murdoch began putting in plans, that culminated in 2005/6 with Murdoch selling the site to Hutchisons. Deptford Is... are continuing Bill's and others' work through the Build The Lenox and Sayes Court Garden projects.

Here's a NEW misleading model of Terry Farrell's masterplan for the redevelopment of the Royal Dockyard of Henry VIII that was on show at Convoys Wharf. Note the weird disappearing 48 storey building which for some reason is totally see-thru and almost invisible. Do they imagine we will not note its presence when it is built? 

The other two 38-storey buildings are about seven times the height of Crossfields. This is not about providing more much needed housing for London. These are luxury homes. Are there not plenty of them already?