View report page

- 24 -
Many old houses, however, by reason of their original construction and
arrangement, or their maintenance or modernisation, are still in excellent
condition. In the case of those that are not, it becomes questionable
whether modem or improved living standards can be achieved by repair,
conversion and/or provision of modern amenities, and whether this is either
impossible or uneconomic and the better course is demolition and
re-building for housing or commercial purposes, or both.
In London, the obsolescence of residential buildings is gathering
speed. In 1966, some 30,000 dwellings were considered obsolete. During
the period 1967/81, some 216,000 (9% of the present total) are expected to
become obsolete, and a further 347,000 (14%) during the subsequent ten
years if appropriate action is not taken.
In the Royal Borough, houses range from the elegant and expensive to
the worst type of London slums. There exist such delightful town houses
as those around the oldest London garden square, where the Health and
Welfare Department is situated, and which formerly housed such notable
people as Talleyrand, Sir John Simon, Thackeray, Mrs. Patrick Campbell,
John Stuart Mill and Hubert Parry. These are now converted into flats,
offices and hostels. Even more imposing is the magnificent house in
Harrington Gardens, built by W.S. Gilbert in 1883. This magnificently
preserved residence was very avant-garde in its day, being fitted with
central heating, electric lighting, double glazing, a letter chute, and
a direct 'phone to the Savoy Theatre. It is now the headquarters of the
Central Midwives' Board, and still retains above its dining room door the
original inscription "All hope abandon ye who enter here". Above the
drawing room door" and those things do best please me that befall
prepost "rously" - cold comfort when viewed by the Board's examination
candidates.
Among the worst of the slums were the houses used by a film unit who
took over a derelict and emptied area of slum houses in the Lancaster
Road West redevelopment area, mocked up the frontage of three to produce
a most imposing facade of one large town house with Grecian pillared
portico, double entrance doors and a sweeping double marble staircase.
The remainder of the houses in the district were sprayed with black wash
to produce an illusion of utter sordidness and desolation.
The use of old houses may be considered individually or
collectively.
Individually, the possibilities are repair, nuisance abatement,
conversion improvements, closure or demolition.
Conversions by private enterprise may be into hotels, hostels,
offices, flats or bedsitters, or may be a reversion from multiple into
single occupation. For example, spectacular and expensive re-conversions
of 100-year old artisans' dwellings have taken place. Many of these, in
what was once looked upon as one of the worst slums in London, could have
been bought for £250 or less twenty years ago. After conversion they are
now selling for anything up to £21,000. A particular type of conversion
is that of mews cottages (originally over coach houses and stables) to
self-contained dwelling's with garages. So far as conversions assisted by
local authority discretionary grants are concerned, of the 46,606
nationally authorised in 1967, 49% were made to owner/occupiers. In the
Royal Borough, the percentage is 22. Many of these are in respect of
very expensive conversions, the most costly to date being £7,254 in
respect of a mews cottage conversion. Even in relatively poorer areas,
the cost of acquisition and conversion of an old terrace house into two
maisonnettes, averaging £5,312 each, approximates to the cost of a new
Council flat. Standard grants for the installation of absent facilities
are not helpful for houses in multiple occupation, but it is hoped that
regulations and the provisions proposed in the Housing Bill, 1969, may
make them available in this way. While the proposals in the Housing Bill