Late yesterday, we were pretty stunned to learn that the dominant black Heroes building – a site uniquely historic in Kentish Town – is earmarked for demolition. June 3rd, in fact. Less than a fortnight away.
Yes, once again, developers and Camden Council appear to be working in tandem with little thought or consultation with the public. In fact, while we’re at it, why wasn’t the Bull & Gate saved by the council as a cultural asset? Will the former Pizza Express’s art deco interior simply become boring flats? Why did the council refuse to allow a roof terrace at the excellent Grafton pub? And how the hell did they slip this latest wrecking ball through without any Kentishtowners noticing?
But let’s pause for a moment to take a look at the venue’s recent glory. After its incarnations as The Castle, Verge and Bullet Bar, readers may remember its moment in the sun came and went as The Flowerpot (2009-10), with their championing of now global artists like Mumford & Sons and Laura Marling. According to the Flowerpot’s promoters, the lease for the Kentish Town building was then sold, forcing them to relocate. “We’ve basically been scammed,” they said at the time, “and after building a successful venue from scratch the lease has been sold from beneath our feet.”
And let’s not forget this is a historic drinking hole in its own right, built in 1849 as replacement for the Castle Inn, whose pleasure garden once extended west to the now submerged River Fleet (around where Tapping the Admiral now is). The inn was ancient, dating back at least to the 17th century, and possibly the 16th as a hunting lodge. Even better, after the death of a certain Admiral Nelson, his distraught mistress Emma Hamilton relocated to Kentish Town to live near the Castle, and Nelson’s uncle, in what must now be Heroes’ weed-filled garden.
But note how there was no mention of the possibility of such a historic local landmark being demolished. So what happened? Who’s to blame here?
Let’s not permit more buildings with so much cultural weight be simply disposed of to make developers more money. Let’s not have a bland, generic high street.
It may yet dodge the wrecking ball – for now – as a possible development hints at (see comments below), but if you don’t want to see the end of another historic piece in Kentish Town’s mighty jigsaw, add your comments right here.
And act now as the application closes on May 30. Just one week’s time.
Words & Photos: Stephen Emms & Tom Kihl
36 thoughts on “For the wrecking ball? Historic pub, home to the legendary Flowerpot (and Verge, and Castle)”
This is shocking. We fought to help save the Pizza Express building from demolition and I can’t believe a matter of months later and another interesting historical building a stones throw away is under threat. I would HATE Kentish Town to become a generic high street with few old buildings left.
Where do I enter the application number on that link?
I just entered the application number and pressed return but got “no Records Found” – could someone at the Kentishtowner clarify if number is correct or if I am doing it wrong! Cheers
If you search the address 147 Kentish Town Road instead it works!
Surely they require some grounds on which to demolish a perfectly functional building?
According to the planning application the demolition was refused three days ago for the following reasons
In the absence of an adequate details of the proposed Method of Demolition, the proposed works are likely to result in harm to local air quality, cause obstruction, congestion, inconvenience and danger to pedestrians and other road users and damage to pavements, and cause harm to local amenity, contrary to policies CS5 (Managing the impact of growth and development), CS11 (Promoting sustainable and efficient travel) and CS16 (Improving Camden’s health and well-being) of the London Borough of Camden Local Development Framework Core Strategy and policies DP20 (Movement of goods and materials), DP26 (Managing the impact of development on occupiers and neighbours), DP28 (Noise and vibration) and DP32 (Air quality and Camden’s Clear Zone) of the London Borough of Camden Local Development Framework Development Policies.
In the absence of an adequate details of the proposed restoration of the site, the proposed demolition is likely to result in harm to the appearance of the local environment, contrary to policies CS5 (Managing the impact of growth and development) and CS14 (Promoting high quality places and conserving our heritage) of the London Borough of Camden Local Development Framework Core Strategy and policy DP24 (Securing high quality design)of the London Borough of Camden Local Development Framework Development Policies.
The decision on the planning application states that Approval for Demolition has been Refused and was actually refused on Monday. Therefore it can’t be being demolished… what’s actually going on?
Our very reliable source believes the demolition will still happen…the building is far from safe yet. And if it doesn’t get knocked down, the developers will undoubtedly appeal. So everyone should add their comments anyway if they’re interested in its future.
Not much of a reliable source when you didn’t even know about the planning permission being refused as Paulo states in detail above
this is appalling! i’m so saddened by this continual erosion of the historic parts of london. it all feels very sly and underhand. we need to be more vigilant from now on to make sure k-town doesn’t end up looking like a shiny new generic high street.
The pub is not Listed, nor is it in a Conservation Area. It is however an interesting piece of architecture and urban grain (despite the recent paint jobs). The most appalling this is that if they were to demolish it, there would probably be little Camden could do about it. The ‘Enforcement Team’ might sound powerful, but in practice they would only be able to issue a fine that would no doubt pail in comparison to the increased value of the site.
Yes…like when the old ‘Dawson & Briant’ Jewellers’ classic and historical hand-made wooden fittings and shop interior was ripped out illegally and replaced with
naff modern fittings….
I live opposite this old Pub and there was absolutely no local consultation by the new owners about their intended plans. I have since discovered through Camden Councils website that the new owners are in fact Clearview Homes Limited, http://www.clearviewhomes.co.uk/. From their website they seem to be a rather nasty little company that specialises in unimaginative, identikit, destructive architecture and who also seem to have a penchant for devastating historic pubs.
For once Camden Councils development team have got something right and the sustainability group that refused this application should be congratulated. The inevitable appeal against this decision by Clearview homes should be strongly opposed by as many local residents as possible. Hopefully this company will see the error of their purchase and sell it on to someone who is able to sensitively restore this landmark building.
This link should take you to the comments section on the application
http://planningrecords.camden.gov.uk/Northgate/PlanningExplorer17/PLComments.aspx?pk=355464
Assuming that CHL will appeal the refusal people should still comment on the application. The comments would be taken into consideration by the Planning Inspector at appeal.
Dear Anonanon
We have seen your comments re the Camden Pub and can state categorically we are not involved in this property
Please let us know how identified us with regards the above
As to your comments about our company I feel these are rather harsh we are a multi award winning company that uses top london architects to design our buildings
Kind regards
Steve Murphy
CEO
Clearview Homes LTd
In addition I would also like to express my intense disappointment with Ringleys Chartered Surveyors, who are conveyancing this development. As their office is located opposite this pub they had an obligation to demonstrate a much more sensitive approach to this property and should be ashamed of themselves for allowing this decision to move forward especially without any consultation with the local residents.
Anonanon has a great point – what hope is there if those who deal in property in KT have no appreciation of it? This building is so characteristic of the area… Of course profits must be made but it’s borderline absurd not to see the value – financial and cultural – already sitting under our noses.
There does not appear to be a licence for the scaffolding according to the search on http://maps.camden.gov.uk/StreetWorks/StreetWorks.aspx?area=kentish%20Town%20Road
Hi Kentishtowners
Yes, this is terrible news! BUT…you CAN object to this planning application now!
Objections must be sent in by 30th May.
Write to:
Conor McDonagh,
Planning Services,
London Borough of Camden,
Town Hall,
Argyle Street,
London WC1H 8ND
planning@camden.gov.uk
Reference: Application 2013/2482/P (The Castle, 147 Kentish Town Rd NW1 8PB)
I object to the application to demolish this building. I don’t know what will replace it….it’s outrageous that this building can be knocked down at all and especially that no designs have been put forward to replace it. If it’s demolished and nothing is built straight away it might just become another overgrown, ugly, vacant site like the one by Kentish Town Lock.
On the application form it says that demolition is due to start on 3rd June…but how can this be allowed to happen if objection letters are being accepted by Camden Council’s Planning Department until 30th May?
Thanks for the links and info. This is so sad! When I saw the scaffolding go up I thought it maybe was being refurbished.
I have heard from a local builder that if a property developer demolishes a building instead of restoring it they don’t have to pay rates. If they build flats and supply a retail area below they also avoid tax. For example, the Tally Ho pub that was demolished and replaced with flats and a supposed retail area below, which has been left empty and delapidated for two years rendering our road a slum. The council and property developers are working together; a very cosy relationship with no regard for the people that live in Kentish Town. I wonder what the council are gaining?
You don’t need planning permission to demolish a building if its not listed or in a conservation area. If the developer applies to replace the building the council can refuse ofcourse but the developer/owner can still demolish their building if they want, though that’s not usually in their best interest.
Lobby to get the building locally listed or emergency listed ASAP if you want it protected and genuinely think it deserves it. The council is not generally over helpful to developers… The council will gain nothing and cannot stop its safe demolition, they get a planning fee and maybe a bit if money from legal agreements but nothing they don’t put back into the area (unless your implying they are being bribed) . Also, why are some people so opposed to devolpers making money, if developers can’t make money they don’t build things? the council has never built much of note either? No one works for free. We need more homes, new business and builders need to work. Buildings get old, they get replaced with new ones…a community is made up of people, not old buildings. It’s what will replace it that’s really the key issue here. It might even be something that will be listed in the future (though probably not).
For what its worth I am going to try to have this building emergency listed with English Heritage. If you have any extra information/photos about this building please let me know so I can submit this with my application.
To save anyone interested the expense of looking up the new owners via the Land Registry, I have determined that they are actually ‘147 KENTISH TOWN ROAD FREEHOLD LIMITED (Co. Regn.No. 08223663) of Ringley House, 349 Royal College Street, London NW1 9QS.
Perhaps Ringleys should be asked to comment on their intentions…
Having looked through the English Heritage website, I think the best course of action would be to have as many Kentishtowners as possible petition Camden Council for a ‘Building Preservation Notice’ on this pub.
This would grant the building a compulsory six month reprieve whilst a listing decision was made. This may not of course be successful but it may just make the developers reconsider given the extra expense that will be incurred.
Please write to Conor McDonagh at the above email/postal address if you would like to have your say in this buildings future.
Seems surprising that the building is thought not to have any historical significance since, other than the Assembley rooms, it seems to be one of the most culturally significant historic Inns
http://pubshistory.com/LondonPubs/StPancras/CastleTavern.shtml
http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=45239
Hey Alfie, did you sell American cars in the 80’s mate?
Drop us an email! Blast from the past
Update on this story: it would seem a new application has been lodged on 29 May, also for demolition. See http://ow.ly/lxePj for the list of applications concerning 147 Kentish Town Road. The latest application – Ref 2013/3096/P – is currently second from the top on this page.
I find it very curious that the date given for the start of demolition, 3 June 2013 – as mentioned in the supporting application form at http://ow.ly/lxfs6 – is a full 16 days prior to the date given for close of comments on this application. How does that work? How is it that an application containing such an obvious error would even be accepted for submission?
Thanks for letting us know that they’ve launched another application- I’ve made my objections! again!
There are already workmen form R J Demolition Ltd on site and the roof has been removed with no waterproofing actions taken. I contacted Camden Planning about this yesterday and they did send round an enforcement officer. The site manager told them that the roof had dry rot and that it had collapsed! The enforcement officer I spoke with asked me to call back if anything else suspicious occurred on the site.
I have never heard of a demolition company doing dry rot repairs before! This company also does not have a contact number or email address to verify what services they provide.
I suspect this is the beginning of an unauthorised demolition. If anyone sees heavy machinery on site over the next few days please would you report this to Camden Planning enforcement on telephone number 0207 9742606.
Can Kentishtowner rerun this story to highlight what is going on here? Maybe even a little investigative journalism??
http://www.pam.ealing.gov.uk/PlanNet/documentstore%5CDC11123426-20-1_AF_A.PDF
look here, same demolition contractor, same developer, similar type of project, a pub in Ealing.
A quick google of the company shows it has dubious history, starting and folding repeatedly.
I work in construction and that dry rot excuse is a classic trick of the trade. From experience, whilst not related, if a tree on a project is not allowed to be cut down because of a TPO or other such planning condition, if the tree’s condition becomes unsafe (usually suspicious case of diesel injection into the roots) then for the safety of the public the tree can get chopped and the developer gets the land they need. Similarly, on grounds of safety a dry rot roof would have to come down, whether or not it actually has any damage is questionable.
This whole thing is very suspicious. Camden need to get their act together.
This goes beyond saving a local treasure, its just outright bending of the law.
Today they have been removing windowsills as well. On enquiry my son was informed that they are about to demolish. Maybe they will try to do enough damage over the weekend in order to knock on the head any possibility of interference by the council or anyone else. If a petition would help stall proceedings as suggested above then let’s do it, but I fear it’s too late. Anyone got any ideas about what action we can take NOW!?
V important to get your local councillors involved. You’ll find their details on the Camden website
I was walking past this pub a week or so ago. Large lumps of plaster / concrete / stone were falling from the upper floor / roof and hitting the pavement. No attempt was made to stop this stuff from bouncing out into the street.
Ringley manage the building I live in.
Yesterday they sent me an email encouraging me to support this planning application. They attached a drawing to show me what they are planning. I don’t know how to attach the drawing to this post, but I can describe it as a fairly generic looking block of modern flats with Ringley offices on the ground floor and in the basement. I think it looks terrible.
They encourage me to adopt their views, which in summary are:
1. The existing building has no features worth preserving: “I fail to understand what the Council feel they would like to protect”
2. As a music venue, Ringley say the pub was a magnate to noise, drugs and crime.
3. Ringley say they will create 28 jobs. They say office jobs are better for the community than pub jobs.
4. They would prefer the building not to be used as a pub.
5. Offices would look nicer than a pub.
6. The demolition and building work would provide work for the construction industry.
The building I live in is grade 2 listed. My experience is that Ringley are entirely unable to understand of the aesthetic value of a historic building. I won’t bore you with all the details; suffice to say Ringley feel my building and the gardens have benefited from the use of dull grey bare metal whenever possible and they think we needed industrial-style signs stuck all over the walls to remind us that the door is at the bottom of the staircase.
I am now going to contact Camden Council and explain why I oppose the planning application.
To everyone interested in this story please see the latest from Ringley’s on our home page today – http://www.kentishtowner.co.uk/2013/06/20/castle-pub-demolition-an-underhand-letter-from-ringleys/
We really must preserve everyday visual remnants of a past time, like the Castle pub. Our children deserve these historical reference points – without history their can be no future.
Adding my support to all those objecting to the Castle demolition. KT’s older buildings/features attest to a surprising past.
The Castle has been systematically neglected for years, including the scary-looking club (obviously the building is more attractive white than black !)
Several KT pubs are on historic sites. There is a charming 18-19th century picture of this one, with the River Fleet (before its burial) flowing through the grounds..
If Ringleys can’t visualise this, really believe what they wrote about the dispensability of old buildings and sites, and are solely commercially motivated, then they are probably beyond help.
KT (despite its current image) has many centuries of history – most of this fabric has gone. It must be worth the effort to preserve what remains.