# Cane hill's final fate



## King Al (Dec 4, 2007)

Cane hill's official redevelopment plans will be unveiled soon and work is scheduled to start in the New Year. This is the end after 16 years of derelict wonder land it is finally wrecked enough for them to knock it down and build 600 affordable houses which I suspect was the plan from when the gates closed. 

I am a bit shell shocked at the moment it does not seem real after all this time. They are planning to save the chapel and admin but obviously only because they have to.

http://www.thisiscroydontoday.co.uk...entPK=19086202&folderPk=115627&pNodeId=252344


----------



## Simon (Dec 4, 2007)

King Al said:


> Cane hill's official redevelopment plans will be unveiled soon and work is scheduled to start in the New Year. This is the end after 16 years of derelict wonder land it is finally wrecked enough for them to knock it down and build 600 affordable houses which I suspect was the plan from when the gates closed.
> 
> http://www.thisiscroydontoday.co.uk...entPK=19086202&folderPk=115627&pNodeId=252344



Where does it actually say that?

The website (www.canehill.org.uk) states:
"Once a shortlist of developers has been chosen there will be further consultation with the community. Detailed design is expected to take place during 2008, with an outline planning application likely in early 2009."

So, if the planning application gets approved in a timely manner, you're talking late 2009/early 2010 before anything happens.

Everything else seems to be a contradiction. For example:

When English Partnerships inherited the site
Its listing status
Whether the existing buildings (except the Admin Block and Chapel) will be saved.

All the best,
Simon


----------



## King Al (Dec 4, 2007)

Simon said:


> Where does it actually say that?
> 
> So, if the planning application gets approved in a timely manner, you're talking late 2009/early 2010 before anything happens.
> 
> ...



"Four different options have been drawn up for the site, all including 500 or 600 new homes, office space and some retail." 

The actual article was a two page spread and goes into a bit of detail about planning, beening in the green belt they can only build where the buildings are all ready although can vary the lay out there was talk of moving the developments down the hill to be less isolated! a bit of irony. 

They wheeled out someone from the council and it sounds like the final 4 plans looks to me like they will be approved with little official opposition, they where using phrases such as "keen to see the land in use"...

I think Croydon council wanted it to be a science museum or something but English partnerships said it couldn't be done and frankly I agree. 

Also "Simon Powell, senior regeneration manager, said it was still waiting the outcome of building surveys before they know how much of the rest of the buildings can be saved. 

Mr Powell said: "This has had 16 winters to decay, so although it looks quite sturdy from the outside, it really isn't." 

Perhaps I am being pessimistic but I took that as "we will destroy every last bit"

As for the listing status that’s what I am putting my money on to save the place

There never seems to be any strait answers where the hill is concerned but I think this will end up the last chapter. They are meant to be showing the plans to the public soon in a church some ware but that was in the article so I will have to post it tomorrow.


----------



## dungbug (Dec 4, 2007)

I'd better get myself there soon by the sound of it!:icon_evil


----------



## Simon (Dec 4, 2007)

King Al said:


> "Four different options have been drawn up for the site, all including 500 or 600 new homes, office space and some retail."



Thanks. Although I'm was more interested in the redevelopment plans. I couldn't find any reference to any demolition starting next year.



King Al said:


> As for the listing status that’s what I am putting my money on to save the place


The "listing" is also confusing. As far as I know, the Chapel and Admin block are "listed" as buildings of local interest but they not on English Heritage's list of buildings of "special architectural or historic interest" i.e. Grade I or Grade II.



King Al said:


> They are meant to be showing the plans to the public soon in a church some ware but that was in the article so I will have to post it tomorrow.



Coulsdon Methodist Church Hall
Brighton Road
Coulsdon
Friday 7th December 3PM - 8PM
Saturday 8th December 1:30PM - 5:30PM

All the best,
Simon


----------



## King Al (Dec 5, 2007)

Simon said:


> Thanks. Although I'm was more interested in the redevelopment plans. I couldn't find any reference to any demolition starting next year.



Are I see what you mean sorry about that, the "next year" part was refering to when they plan to have chosen which of the final 4 will be selected - more like the begining of the end - rather than the actual demolition.


----------



## King Al (Dec 5, 2007)

Simon said:


> Coulsdon Methodist Church Hall
> Brighton Road
> Coulsdon
> Friday 7th December 3PM - 8PM
> Saturday 8th December 1:30PM - 5:30PM



I am going away over the weekend so friday afternoon it will have to be, it had better be worth it!


----------



## lilli (Dec 5, 2007)

The councillor for that part of Croydon would like nothing more than to see it all gone!!



> Thank you for your email. I, and I suspect 99.9% of my constituents, would be only too happy to see the whole thing demolished. It has been nothing but a blot on our communities landscape and laden with memories of misery and deep unhappiness. I am sure it has architectural merit, but on this occasion it is not something I wish to preserve.
> 
> Richard Ottaway MP



Due to continued work  the chapel and admin are "locally listed" 

http://planning.croydon.gov.uk/LBOn...RIPNAME=Root.PgeResultDetail&TheSystemkey=827

http://planning.croydon.gov.uk/LBOn...RIPNAME=Root.PgeResultDetail&TheSystemkey=828

So that goes some way towards helping, even if the listing application which was sent in June (and still awaiting a final decision) does not.


----------



## King Al (Dec 6, 2007)

>Thank you for your email. I, and I suspect 99.9%
>of my constituents, would be only too happy to
>see the whole thing demolished. It has been nothing
>but a blot on our communities landscape and laden
>with memories of misery and deep unhappiness. I am
>sure it has architectural merit, but on this occasion it
>is not something I wish to preserve."

What an arse hole! he seems to have completely missed the point its about the history of England’s culture and communities (the stuff we did when we weren’t fighting people) you don't get that part from books about war! and in my opinion asylum culture is one of the most interesting and un-known parts of our history


----------



## iansradios (Dec 6, 2007)

Such a shame,there starting on loads of old hospitals in 2008..


----------



## Sami (Dec 7, 2007)

Such a shame!
Gotta get up there pretty damn soon in that case!!
Security sounds tight too! Does anyone know anyway of not running into these guys?


----------



## Simon (Dec 7, 2007)

I've popped down to Coulsdon to see the exhibition.

It comprises of several large posters explaining the project and detailing the four plans they have for the site. All the plans reveal how EP will demolish the entire hospital with the exception of Admin and the Chapel. The only difference between the plans is the housing layouts, percentage of houses/business etc. 

There is also a questionnaire to fill in which EP will use to determine which plan is most favoured.

They’re also showing some of Keith Bouchter’s footage of the interior of the hospital. Unfortunately it looks rather shaky; Keith’s suggested it’s a fault with the DVD player.

There are several representatives from English Partnerships there to answer questions. 

It’s a little surprising that EP have gone ahead with the exhibition before waiting for the results of the listing application (which is now with the Secretary Of State – thanks for the info Lillimouse) nor the results of their own surveys. (The asbestos surveys are *frightening* - Cane Hill is absolutely riddled with the stuff. Even the paper on the toilet cisterns is made from asbestos.)

More rides on the listing application than I’d ever realised. If it fails, expect the bulldozers to move in. Fast. King Al: you were right. But bear this statistic in mind: this year, security has apprehended over 900 people inside Cane Hill. Its popularity is mind boggling.

All the best,
Simon

PS If anyone from English Partnerships is reading this, I am not Keith Bouchter. 

PPS The bunker was also included in the asbestos surveys and shows hot spots of high contamination. Which is why EP have now sealed it.

PPPS Every official survey document, even including the bunker survey, uses maps and plans taken from my website. Gratis to EP I say: I've caused them enough trouble.


----------



## Simon (Dec 7, 2007)

>Thank you for your email. I, and I suspect 99.9%
>of my constituents, would be only too happy to
>see the whole thing demolished. It has been nothing
>but a blot on our communities landscape and laden
>with memories of misery and deep unhappiness. I am
>sure it has architectural merit, but on this occasion it
>is not something I wish to preserve."

Fair enough. Then, again, the Tower of London is associated with misery and deep unhappiness (especially for those tortured and/or executed). So by Richard Ottaway's argument, even it's architectural merit wouldn't save it from being completely obliterated.

All the best,
Simon


----------



## lilli (Dec 7, 2007)

I went too  

If the opinion is strong enough to save the tower, it will be saved (apparently) as it is considered a local landmark. Still I would prefer it listed to guarantee its fate. I too find it strange that they didn't wait for the decision which is "imminent" according to the EP bods I spoke to. 

Also there may be a small article in the Croydon Post next week as when I was there, there was a photographer, so look out for that.


----------



## King Al (Dec 10, 2007)

Its depressing, I feel sort of helpess. I realy want them to let the hill finnish out its days in peace (aside from me ratteling around the halls) none of the buildings can have more than five more years left any way thats without any more BBQs 

It seems like such a waste just to let them build cheap crapy homes and "business" on such an interesting and beautiful site


----------



## snappel (Dec 10, 2007)

Simon said:


> It’s a little surprising that EP have gone ahead with the exhibition before waiting for the results of the listing application (which is now with the Secretary Of State – thanks for the info Lillimouse) nor the results of their own surveys. (The asbestos surveys are *frightening* - Cane Hill is absolutely riddled with the stuff. Even the paper on the toilet cisterns is made from asbestos.)


How the hell did Keith get granted access then? Christ know's how much the abo removal contract is going to cost for that place...

A shame really, but inevitable that it would come down in the end. I just really hope the listing application is successful. So much history, and so many stories. Hard to imagine every single last brick going.


----------



## Richard Davies (Dec 10, 2007)

Did asbestos prevent the buildings from being redeveloped earlier? 

Before the fires, vandalism etc they could have at least been converted to something useful.


----------



## snappel (Dec 11, 2007)

Like what? Redevelopment takes a lot of planning. For any building of that age there'll be a considerable sized asbestos removal job - it'd be costed in to any development plan. I think it's taken this long because nobody has been able to decide what to do with it.


----------



## King Al (Dec 11, 2007)

It hasent been on the market that long I think the NHS let it go in 2005


----------



## Simon (Dec 11, 2007)

snappel said:


> How the hell did Keith get granted access then? Christ know's how much the abo removal contract is going to cost for that place...



When Keith was given access:
1. He was accompanied at all times by EP representatives.
2. He was given a strict dress code. For example, no laces on boots, as they could pick up all the free asbestos fibres on the floor.

But, then again, EP allow security access to the buildings! If the asbestos was *that bad* you'd think all personel would be banned without full bodysuits, respirators and showers.

All the best,
Simon


----------



## Simon (Dec 11, 2007)

snappel said:


> Like what? Redevelopment takes a lot of planning. For any building of that age there'll be a considerable sized asbestos removal job - it'd be costed in to any development plan. I think it's taken this long because nobody has been able to decide what to do with it.



They'll have to remove the asbestos before they do anything with it (whether it' demolition or conversion). So you've got that cost up front to deal with.

And all the contamination from former medical equipment and around the boilers. And, not to mention, the claims that there are bodies buried around the site.

All the best,
Simon


----------



## King Al (Dec 11, 2007)

Simon said:


> And all the contamination from former medical equipment and around the boilers. And, not to mention, the claims that there are bodies buried around the site.



I find its best not to think about all that when your sitting on an old bed with a flask of tea and a sandwidge worrying about weather it'll rain.


----------



## lilli (Dec 11, 2007)

King Al said:


> It hasent been on the market that long I think the NHS let it go in 2005



EP only took it over in Apr 2007, it seems they were looking to do a rather quick turn around on the site but _sadly_ due to the local listing  and the listing app that was not to be!


----------

