DOCSLIB.ORG

Heritage at Risk Register: London Region

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Heritage at Risk Register: London Region HERITAGE AT RISK REGISTER 2009 / LONDON Contents HERITAGEContents AT RISK 2 Buildings atHERITAGE Risk AT RISK6 2 MonumentsBuildings at Risk at Risk 8 6 Parks and GardensMonuments at Risk at Risk 10 8 Battlefields Parksat Risk and Gardens at Risk 12 11 ShipwrecksBattlefields at Risk and Shipwrecks at Risk13 12 ConservationConservation Areas at Risk Areas at Risk 14 14 The 2009 ConservationThe 2009 CAARs Areas Survey Survey 16 16 Reducing thePublications risks and guidance 18 20 PublicationsTHE and REGISTERguidance 200820 21 The register – content and 22 THE REGISTERassessment 2009 criteria 21 ContentsKey to the entries 21 25 The registerHeritage – content at Riskand listings 22 26 assessment criteria Key to the entries 24 Heritage at Risk entries 26 HERITAGE AT RISK 2009 / LONDON HERITAGE AT RISK IN LONDON Registered Battlefields at Risk Listed Buildings at Risk Scheduled Monuments at Risk Registered Parks and Gardens at Risk Protected Wrecks at Risk Local Planning Authority 2 HERITAGE AT RISK 2009 / LONDON We are all justly proud of England’s historic buildings, monuments, parks, gardens and designed landscapes, battlefields and shipwrecks. But too many of them are suffering from neglect, decay and pressure from development. Heritage at Risk is a national project to identify these endangered places and then help secure their future. In 2008 English Heritage published its first register of Heritage at Risk – a region-by-region list of all the Grade I and II* listed buildings (and Grade II listed buildings in London), structural scheduled monuments, registered battlefields and protected wreck sites in England known to be ‘at risk’. A year later, this second updated regional edition of the register has been enlarged to include details of all scheduled monuments (archaeological sites) and registered parks and gardens, as well as conservation areas designated by local authorities that are also reported to be at certain or potential risk. In London Region the Heritage at Risk register uniquely character. In both urban and suburban conservation includes Grade II buildings in addition to those listed areas pressures from new development, both Grade II* and Grade I. Over the 18 years since residential and commercial, has the potential to affect recording of buildings at risk first began across the these special areas. In the context of local authority capital, the content of the register has changed and its budgets under strain and limited capacity in the reach has evolved to reflect the fact that the historic heritage sector across London, the challenges are environment is all around us. Over 90% of the buildings not going to be easy to address. on the original register have now been removed However it is not all doom and gloom; there have although every year new historic environment assets been significant successes – for example in tackling the at risk are identified and added so that the register is problem of mansions in parks like Valentines Mansion only ever a snapshot of what is a dynamic situation. in Redbridge. English Heritage also continues to work with partners in the High Street 2012 project that aims OF LONDON’S CONSERVATION to revitalise the historic environment of east London in AREAS ARE AT RISK OF LOSING preparation for the Olympics. Working in partnership 17% with the London boroughs, the Office of the Mayor, THEIR SPECIAL CHARACTER the Heritage Lottery Fund and the many local amenity societies and commercial and residents groups across This year the register also includes scheduled London, English Heritage’s London Region has monuments, registered parks and gardens and committed over £1,000,000 in the last year to repairing conservation areas that present particular challenges. and securing the future of the historic environment of Multiple ownerships and the complexity of issues the city both for its communities affecting these types of historic assets require a and its many visitors. comprehensive approach to the management of risk. Conservation Area Appraisals and Management Plans are tools that already exist and have proved effective in these situations and English Heritage encourages partners and those managing change to use them. There are an estimated 955 conservation areas in London, which has the largest percentage of suburban conservation areas of any region – a category that is particularly vulnerable to the small-scale, incremental Nigel Barker, Head of Regional Partnerships, loss of historic detail that leads to erosion of special London Region Contact: Cindy Molenaar, Business Manager, English Heritage London Region, 1 Waterhouse Square, 138-142 Holborn, London EC1N 2ST Telephone: 0207 973 3720 Fax: 0207 973 3792 Email: [email protected] 3 HERITAGE AT RISK 2009 / LONDON Heritage at Risk 2009 The 2009 register for England includes 5,094 nationally designated sites that are at risk, along with 727 locally designated conservation areas at risk.These sites are important and irreplaceable elements of our historic environment and help contribute to local and national character. By assessing their condition and identifying which are most at risk, we can define the scale of the problem and plan and prioritise the resources needed to bring them back into good repair – and, where appropriate, into practical use – for the benefit of present and future generations. The historic environment of London is under pressure. buildings at risk is also the result of work that has been Despite the contribution it makes to London as a put in by individuals and agencies over many years to world city, significant elements are at risk. In particular identify them and then secure their future. English the addition of registered parks and gardens to Heritage began assessing the condition of listed the Register has highlighted the plight of London’s buildings in the 1980s, publishing the first annual register cemeteries and the monuments within them. Often of Buildings at Risk in London in 1991, and the first overlooked, these landscapes have potential if restored national register of Grade I and II* listed buildings and and appropriately managed to make a positive structural scheduled monuments at risk in 1998. contribution to both local communities and visitors. The registers have enabled English Heritage and its London is often described as a city of villages each partners in local authorities, building preservation trusts with its distinctive character and appearance, which and funding bodies, as well as owners, to understand is often recognised by conservation area designation. the extent of the problem and to prioritise action and The addition of conservation areas to the register this resources. As a result, the proportion of England’s year highlights the pressures on what is often the most highest-graded (I and II*) listed buildings at risk has valued element of the historic environment to local fallen steadily from 3.8% in the baseline year of 1999 to communities – the places where they live, work and 3.1% this year. Of the Grade I and II* listed building and shop.The pressures are wide ranging and complex and structural scheduled monument entries on the baseline managing them successfully is particularly challenging. register, 48% have now been removed. It is a challenge we have to work on together. While the condition of the nation’s Grade I and II* listed buildings has improved, this year’s Heritage at THE NATIONAL PICTURE Risk registers show that England’s other nationally The table on the opposite page sets out the number designated heritage assets face much greater levels of and percentage of nationally designated assets that risk, and highlight the scale of the challenge and the have been identified as ‘at risk’.The significant variations resources needed, both at a national and local level. in the proportions at risk reflect important differences Working with property owners and our partners, not only in the physical character of the historic assets, we aim to achieve similar progress in reducing risk to but also differences in the way in which they are used. other heritage assets.This will be challenging in the Buildings generally have an economic value to their current economic climate, given the high proportion owners, particularly when capable of adaptive use. of heritage sites that do not, even in more prosperous The percentage of Grade I and II* listed buildings at times, generate an income.Their importance as part risk (3.1%) is thus lower than for the other asset types. of our heritage is nevertheless immeasurable, and their By contrast, assets that have far less economic urgent needs must not be ignored. benefit have higher percentages at risk. Archaeological Inclusion of sites on this register does not imply monuments have little direct economic benefit and, criticism of their owners, many of whom are actively as a result, often suffer from neglect, and a far higher trying to secure their future. While we have tried percentage,17.9%, is at risk. The main threats to historic to ensure that the information included is accurate, landscapes, parks, gardens and battlefields come from we will correct any errors or omissions brought either neglect or from unsympathetic development – to our attention. 6% of parks and gardens and 16.3% of battlefields are Further information on heritage at risk is given currently at risk. The main threats facing wreck sites on page 20, and on our website: www.english- are from the forces of the sea and natural decay, and heritage.org.uk/risk. An interactive
Load more

Recommended publications
  • GUNNERSBURY PARK Options Appraisal
    GUNNERSBURY PARK Options Appraisal Report By Jura Consultants and LDN Architects June 2009 LDN Architects 16 Dublin Street Edinburgh EH1 3RE 0131 556 8631 JURA CONSULTANTS www.ldn.co.uk 7 Straiton View Straiton Business Park Loanhead Midlothian Edinburgh Montagu Evans LLP EH20 9QZ Clarges House 6-12 Clarges Street TEL. 0131 440 6750 London, W1J 8HB FAX. 0131 440 6751 [email protected] 020 7493 4002 www.jura-consultants.co.uk www.montagu-evans.co.uk CONTENTS Section Page Executive Summary i. 1. Introduction 1. 2. Background 5. 3. Strategic Context 17. 4. Development of Options and Scenarios 31. 5. Appraisal of Development Scenarios 43. 6. Options Development 73. 7. Enabling Development 87. 8. Preferred Option 99. 9. Conclusions and Recommendations 103. Appendix A Stakeholder Consultations Appendix B Training Opportunities Appendix C Gunnersbury Park Covenant Appendix D Other Stakeholder Organisations Appendix E Market Appraisal Appendix F Conservation Management Plan The Future of Gunnersbury Park Consultation to be conducted in the Summer of 2009 refers to Options 1, 2, 3 and 4. These options relate to the options presented in this report as follows: Report Section 6 Description Consultation Option A Minimum Intervention Option 1 Option B Mixed Use Development Option 2 Option C Restoration and Upgrading Option 4 Option D Destination Development Option 3 Executive Summary EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Introduction A study team led by Jura Consultants with LDN Architects and Montagu Evans was commissioned by Ealing and Hounslow Borough Councils to carry out an options appraisal for Gunnersbury Park. Gunnersbury Park is situated within the London Borough of Hounslow and is unique in being jointly owned by Ealing and Hounslow.
    [Show full text]
  • Aylsham Town 7 Miles Circular Walk
    AYLSHAM TOWN 7 miles Aylsham is full of historic interest. The bustling market town bristles with charming features, including the John Soame Memorial Pump and The Black Boys coaching Inn, welcoming visitors today as it has for centuries. Humphry Repton (1752-1818), the famous landscape gardener, chose Aylsham as his final resting place. Sheringham Park, which Repton described as his ‘most favourite work’, is managed by The National Trust who are, coincidentally, Lords of the Manor of Aylsham and own Aylsham Market Place. You’ll pass Aylsham Staithe; opened in 1779 it was once the main artery to Aylsham’s agricultural industry. At its peak it carried over 1000 boats annually; mainly Norfolk wherries. The junction of river and roads, plus later railways, are crucial to the situation and importance of the town. Aylsham North, a Great Eastern Railway station, opened in 1883 only a short distance from the staithe. It quickly out-competed wherries for transporting freight. Devastating floods in 1912 destroyed bridges and locks, causing Aylsham Staithe’s final demise. The flood caused problems on the railway too. Over 200 people were stranded overnight after a train from Great Yarmouth was trapped at Aylsham North following multiple bridge collapses. Spa Lane, to the south of Aylsham, is named after the spa that existed there in the early 1700s. The mineral rich waters were considered good for health. Spa Lane can become muddy in winter. The alternative route shown, using another section along Marriott’s Way, offers a shorter, but drier, walk. A Norfolk Wherry moored at the water mill at Aylsham Staithe.
    [Show full text]
  • Arch 133, Deptford Railway Station, London
    Arch 133, Deptford Railway Station, London Location Rent Deptford in South East London has benefited from major investment £28,000 per annum exclusive. over the last few years and now has a thriving vibrant local community of creatives and professionals. Rates The listed arches are situated on the approach to Deptford Station, Rateable Value To be assessed. accessed via Deptford High Street. Rates Payable 2016/17 To be assessed. The arches share a market yard with The Deptford Project – a new mixed Interested parties are advised to make their own enquiries to Lewisham use scheme extending to 14 arches, 7 commercial units, 2 restaurants, 3 Council (020 8314 6000). town houses and 140 apartments. Specification Accommodation The arch will be handed over in shell condition with a new corrugated Ground Floor 1,038 sq ft 96.47 sq m lining and capped services – further details upon request. Total 1,038 sq ft 96.47 sq m Energy Performance Certificate To be assessed. Lease Term Costs Available on a new standard Network Rail leases – further details upon request. Each party is to be responsible for their own legal costs incurred in the transaction. Contact Tom Jamson +44 (0)20 7317 3722 [email protected] +44 (0)20 7317 3700 | www.klm-re.com Misrepresentation Act 1967 & Property Misdescription Act 1991. These Particulars are believed to be correct but their accuracy is not guaranteed, are set out as a general guide and do not constitute the whole or part of a contract. All liability, in negligence or otherwise, arising from the use of the particulars is hereby excluded.
    [Show full text]
  • Magnificent 7 Seminars: 'Diversity in Cemeteries' 11.00-4.30 PM
    Magnificent 7 Seminars: ‘Diversity in Cemeteries’ 11.00-4.30 PM | Small Crematorium Chapel, West Norwood Cemetery 10.30 Registration, teas and coffees 11.00 Welcome and the Future of Magnificent 7 | Greg McErlean, Ruth Holmes , Nigel Thorne | The Royal Parks Panel 1: Challenges to Diversity in Cemeteries 11.15-11.30 Rules, glorious rules: Challenges in introducing Diversity at Highgate Cemetery | Ian Dungavell Friends groups are often founded to protect cemeteries. You can protect cemeteries by keeping people out, but also by welcoming them in. There is no consistent set of rules to govern appropriate behaviour in cemeteries, and notions of what is ‘respectful’ vary enormously. Having too many rules risks alienating visitors and creates problems for those who have to police them. Having no rules invites mayhem. 11.30-11.45 Diversifying Audiences in Abney Park Cemetery | Tom Simpson | Abney Park manager For those of the Magnificent Seven that no-longer operate as working cemeteries, increasing the diversity of park users and uses is crucial in preserving and protecting these unique sites. However, encouraging people to engage with spaces that are ‘full of dead people’ can be challenging. This presentation explores how Cemeteries can diversify audiences and the challenges faced when trying to attract new users to a cemetery. 11.45-12.00 Q&A: Challenges to diversity in cemeteries with Ian Dungavell and Tom Simpson. Chaired by Nigel Thorne Panel 2: Biodiversity in Cemeteries 12.00-12.15 The Green Reaper - bringing life to a Cemetery | Kenneth Greenway - Cemetery Park Manager The Friends of Tower Hamlets Cemetery Park have been involved in site management since the 1990's.
    [Show full text]
  • Gladstone Park to Mapesbury
    Route 2 - Gladstone Park, Mapesbury Dell and surrounds Route Highlights Just off route up Brook Road, you will see the Paddock War Brent Walks Stroll through Gladstone Park and enjoy the views over Room Bunker, codeword for the A series of healthy walks for all the family to enjoy the city of London and the walled gardens. This route alternative Cabinet War Room also includes historic sites including the remains of Dollis Bunker. An underground 1940’s Hill House, a WWII underground bunker and Old Oxgate bunker used during WWII by Farm. The route finishes by walking through Mapesbury Winston Churchill and the Conservation area to the award-winning Mapesbury Dell. Cabinet, it remains in its original Route 2 - Gladstone Park, state next to 107 Brook Road. You can take a full tour of 1 Start at Dollis Hill Tube Station and 2 take the Burnley the underground bunker twice a year. Purpose-built from Mapesbury Dell and surrounds Road exit. Go straight up 3 Hamilton Road. At the end reinforced concrete, this bomb-proof subterranean war of Hamilton Road turn left onto 4 Kendal Road and then citadel 40ft below ground has a map room, cabinet room right onto 5 Gladstone Park. Walk up to the north end and offices and is housed within a sub-basement protected of the park when you are nearing the edge 6 turn right. by a 5ft thick concrete roof. In the north east corner of the park you will see the Holocaust Memorial and the footprint of Dollis Hill House. Old Oxgate Farm is a Grade II Exit the park at 7 and walk up Dollis Hill Lane, and turn listed building thought to be left onto Coles Green Road 8.
    [Show full text]
  • Microbiological Examination of Water Contact Sports Sites in the River Thames Catchment I989
    WP MICROBIOLOGICAL EXAMINATION OF WATER CONTACT SPORTS SITES IN THE RIVER THAMES CATCHMENT I989 E0 E n v ir o n m e n t Ag e n c y NATIONAL LIBRARY & INFORMATION SERVICE HEAD OFFICE K10 House, Waterside Drive, Aztec West. Almondsbury, Bristol RS32 4UD BIOLOGY (EAST) BIOLOGY (WEST) THE GRANGE FOBNEY MEAD CROSSBROOK STREET ROSE KILN LANE WALTHAM CROSS READING HERTS BERKS EN8 8lx RG2 OSF TEL: 0992 645075 TEL: 0734 311422 FAX: 0992 30707 FAX: 0734 311438 ENVIRONMENT AGENCY ■ tin aim 042280 CONTENTS PAGE SUMMARY 1 INTRODUCTION 2 METHODS 2 RESULTS 7 DISCUSSION 18 CONCLUSION 20 RECOMMENDATIONS 20 REFERENCES 21 MICROBIOLOGICAL EXAMINATION OF WATER CONTACT SPORTS SITES IN THE RIVER THAMES CATCHMENT 1989 SUMMARY Water samples were taken at sixty-one sites associated with recreational use throughout the River Thames catchment. Samples were obtained from the main River Thames, tributaries, standing waters and the London Docks. The samples were examined for Total Coliforms and Escherichia coli to give a measure of faecal contamination. The results were compared with the standards given in E.C. Directive 76/I6O/EEC (Concerning the quality of bathing water). In general, coliform levels in river waters were higher than those in standing waters. At present, there are three EC Designated bathing areas in the River Thames catchment, none of which are situated on freshwaters. Compliance data calculated in this report is intended for comparison with the EC Directive only and is not statutory. Most sites sampled complied at least intermittently with the E.C. Imperative levels for both Total Coliforms and E.coli.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction
    Official WANDSWORTH BOROUGH COUNCIL BUILDINGS OF SPECIAL ARCHITECTURAL OR HISTORIC INTEREST INTRODUCTION The Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport is required to compile lists of buildings of special architectural or historic interest for the guidance of local planning authorities. Conservation policies are often based on the lists, which are being revised within nationally applied surveys of specific building types. How Buildings are Chosen The principles of selection for these lists were originally drawn up by an expert committee of architects, antiquarians and historians, and are still followed, although now adapted to thematic surveys and Post-War buildings. Buildings that qualify for listing are:- (a) All buildings before 1700 which survive in anything like their original condition. (b) Most buildings between 1700-1840, though some selection is necessary. (c) Between 1840 and 1914 only buildings of definite quality and character, the selection being designed to include the best examples of particular building types. (d) Selected buildings from the period after 1914 are selected on the same basis. (e) Buildings under 30 years old (but more than ten) are normally listed only if they are of outstanding quality and under threat. In choosing buildings, particular attention is paid to:- � Special value within certain types, either for architectural or planning reasons or as illustrating social and economic history (for instance, industrial buildings, railway stations, schools, hospitals, prisons, theatres). � Technological innovation or virtuosity (for instance cast iron, prefabrication, or the early use of concrete). � Group value, especially as examples of town planning (for instance, squares, terraces or model estates). � Association with well-known characters or events.
    [Show full text]
  • Buses from Brentford Station (Griffin Park)
    Buses from Buses Brentford from Brentford Station Station (Griffin (Grif fiPark)n Park) 195 Charville Lane Estate D A O Business R W NE Park I R Bury Avenue N OU D TB M AS School IL E L AY GREAT WEST Charville W R QUARTE R Library O T D O D R M - K 4 RD YOR TON ROA RD M O R LAY RF Lansbury Drive BU for Grange Park and The Pine Medical Centre O D A OA E R A D D EW L R N I N Uxbridge County Court Brentford FC G B EY WEST R TL T R Griffin Park NE B Brentford TON RD D O OS IL O R OAD T AM O R A R GREA O H K N D MA D Church Road 4 M A R A A RO O RAE for Botanic Gardens, Grassy Meadow and Barra Hall Park NO EN A B R LIFD D R C SOU OA TH D Library Hayes Botwell Green Sports & Leisure Centre School © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035971/015 Station Road Clayton Road for Hayes Town Medical Centre Destination finder Hayes & Harlington Destination Bus routes Bus stops Destination Bus routes Bus stops B K North Hyde Road Boston Manor 195 E8 ,sj ,sk ,sy Kew Bridge R 65 N65 ,ba ,bc Boston Manor Road 195 E8 ,sj ,sk ,sy Kew Road for Kew Gardens 65 N65 ,ba ,bc for Boston Manor Park Kingston R 65 N65 ,ba ,bc Boston Road for Elthorne Park 195 E8 ,sj ,sk ,sy Kingston Brook Street 65 N65 ,ba ,bc Bulls Bridge Brentford Commerce Road E2 ,sc ,sd Kingston Cromwell Road Bus Station 65 N65 ,ba ,bc Tesco Brentford County Court 195 ,sm ,sn ,sz Kingston Eden Street 65 N65 ,ba ,bc ,bc ,by 235 L Brentford Half Acre 195 E8 ,sm ,sn ,sz Western Road Lansbury Drive for Grange Park and 195 ,sj ,sk ,sy E2 ,sc ,sd The Pine
    [Show full text]
  • South East London Green Chain Plus Area Framework in 2007, Substantial Progress Has Been Made in the Development of the Open Space Network in the Area
    All South East London Green London Chain Plus Green Area Framework Grid 6 Contents 1 Foreword and Introduction 2 All London Green Grid Vision and Methodology 3 ALGG Framework Plan 4 ALGG Area Frameworks 5 ALGG Governance 6 Area Strategy 8 Area Description 9 Strategic Context 10 Vision 12 Objectives 14 Opportunities 16 Project Identification 18 Project Update 20 Clusters 22 Projects Map 24 Rolling Projects List 28 Phase Two Early Delivery 30 Project Details 50 Forward Strategy 52 Gap Analysis 53 Recommendations 56 Appendices 56 Baseline Description 58 ALGG SPG Chapter 5 GGA06 Links 60 Group Membership Note: This area framework should be read in tandem with All London Green Grid SPG Chapter 5 for GGA06 which contains statements in respect of Area Description, Strategic Corridors, Links and Opportunities. The ALGG SPG document is guidance that is supplementary to London Plan policies. While it does not have the same formal development plan status as these policies, it has been formally adopted by the Mayor as supplementary guidance under his powers under the Greater London Authority Act 1999 (as amended). Adoption followed a period of public consultation, and a summary of the comments received and the responses of the Mayor to those comments is available on the Greater London Authority website. It will therefore be a material consideration in drawing up development plan documents and in taking planning decisions. The All London Green Grid SPG was developed in parallel with the area frameworks it can be found at the following link: http://www. london.gov.uk/publication/all-london-green-grid-spg .
    [Show full text]
  • Bexley Bird Report 2016
    Bexley Bird Report 2016 Kingfisher –Crossness – Donna Zimmer Compiled by Ralph Todd June 2017 Bexley Bird Report 2016 Introduction This is, I believe, is the very first annual Bexley Bird Report, it replaces a half yearly report previously produced for the RSPB Bexley Group Newsletter/web-site and Bexley Wildlife web- site. I shall be interested in any feedback to try and measure how useful, informative or welcome it is. I suspect readers will be surprised to read that 153 different species turned up across the Borough during the 12 months of 2016. What is equally impressive is that the species reports are based on just over 13,000 individual records provided by nearly 80 different individuals. Whilst every endeavour has been made to authenticate the records they have not been subject to the rigorous analysis they would by the London Bird Club (LBC) as would normally be the case prior to publication in the annual London Bird Report (LBR). This report has also been produced in advance of the final data being available from LBC as this is not available until mid-summer the following year – it is inevitable therefore that some records might be missing. I am, however, confident no extra species would be added. The purpose of the report is four-fold:- To highlight the extraordinary range of species that reside, breed, pass through/over or make temporary stops in the Borough To hopefully stimulate a greater interest not only in the birds but also the places in which they are found. Bexley Borough has a wide range of open spaces covering a great variety of habitat types.
    [Show full text]
  • 2021 First Teams - Premier Division Fixtures
    2021 First Teams - Premier Division Fixtures Brondesbury vs. North Middlesex North Middlesex vs. Brondesbury Sat. 8 May Richmond vs. Twickenham Sat. 10 July Twickenham vs. Richmond Overs games Teddington vs. Ealing Time games Ealing vs. Teddington 12.00 starts Crouch End vs. Shepherds Bush 11.00 starts Shepherds Bush vs. Crouch End Finchley vs. Hampstead Hampstead vs. Finchley Shepherds Bush vs. Richmond Richmond vs. Shepherds Bush Sat. 15 May Ealing vs. Brondesbury Sat. 17 July Brondesbury vs. Ealing Overs games North Middlesex vs. Finchley Time games Finchley vs. North Middlesex 12.00 starts Twickenham vs. Teddington 11.00 starts Teddington vs. Twickenham Hampstead vs. Crouch End Crouch End vs. Hampstead Brondesbury vs. Teddington Teddington vs. Brondesbury Sat. 22 May Richmond vs. Hampstead Sat. 24 July Hampstead vs. Richmond Overs games Crouch End vs. North Middlesex Time games North Middlesex vs. Crouch End 12.00 starts Finchley vs. Ealing 11.00 starts Ealing vs. Finchley Twickenham vs. Shepherds Bush Shepherds Bush vs. Twickenham Brondesbury vs. Finchley Finchley vs. Brondesbury Sat. 29 May Teddington vs. Shepherds Bush Sat. 31 July Shepherds Bush vs. Teddington Overs games Ealing vs. Crouch End Time games Crouch End vs. Ealing 12.00 starts North Middlesex vs. Richmond 11.00 starts Richmond vs. North Middlesex Hampstead vs. Twickenham Twickenham vs. Hampstead Richmond vs. Ealing Ealing vs. Richmond Sat. 5 June Shepherds Bush vs. Hampstead Sat. 7 August Hampstead vs. Shepherds Bush Overs games Crouch End vs. Brondesbury Time games Brondesbury vs. Crouch End 12.00 starts Finchley vs. Teddington 11.00 starts Teddington vs. Finchley Twickenham vs.
    [Show full text]
  • Assessment of Current and Future Cruise Ship Requirements in London
    London Development Agency June 2009 AN ASSESSMENT OF CURRENT AND FUTURE CRUISE SHIP REQUIREMENTS IN LONDON In conjunction with: 5 Market Yard Mews 194 Bermondsey Street London SE1 3TQ Tel: 020 7642 5111 Email: [email protected] CONTENTS 1. Introduction 3 2. Current cruise facilities in central London 4 3. The organisational and planning context 8 4. The cruise market and future demand 11 5. Views of cruise operators 19 6. Potential for growing cruise calls to London 22 7. Assessment of potential sites 24 8. Lessons from elsewhere 37 9. Conclusions 51 Appendices: Appendix 1: List of consultees Appendix 2: Seatrade cruise market report Appendix 3: Location plan of potential sites Appendix 4: Economic impact study Appendix 5: Overview of costs The Tourism Company – Assessment of current and future cruise ship requirements 2 1. INTRODUCTION This report was commissioned by the London Development Agency (LDA) and Greater London Authority (GLA), with support from the Port of London Authority (PLA) in response to a need for a better understanding of London’s future cruise facility requirements. This need is identified in the London Tourism Vision for 2006-2016, and associated Action Plan 2006-2009, under the theme ‘A Sustainable and Inclusive City’, one of whose objectives is to ‘Increase the profile and usage of services along the Thames’. London currently hosts a relatively small number of cruise ships each year, making use of the informal and basic mooring and passenger facilities at Tower Bridge and Greenwich. The aim of this research is to assess the extent to which the lack of a dedicated, more efficient cruise facility is discouraging operators from bringing cruise ships to London, and if there is latent demand, how might this be accommodated.
    [Show full text]