"From the ground up...up...up..."; comments on recent press coverage.

The 'new' Farrells masterplan, is not a new masterplan.

The previous Aedas masterplan proposed 3,500 homes, three towers above 32 storeys, 2000+ parking spaces, shops, a hotel, some green space, and a nod to the history of the site.

There is not a single new concept in this masterplan, besides a gesture towards the ideas promoted by Deptford Is.... 

Masterplanning is a process of visualising, imagining and re-imagining. But this new-old plan is the same number of Lego bricks in the same size tin. 




© BBC London News, 19 October 2013

When Sir Terry Farrell was selected by Hutchison Whampoa to review the failed Aedas masterplan, Sir Terry, in the presence of Hutchison Whampoa’s UK director Edmond Ho, publicly promised the people of Deptford a new masterplan for the site of Henry VIII’s royal dockyard and John Evelyn’s Sayes Court Garden, now Convoy’s Wharf. They would start "from the ground up". What did he mean?

Farrell’s architects recently claimed on BBC London News (above) to have used the character and history of the site to inform their masterplan. But it must be remembered that the quantum of units at 3,500 apartments, the typology of high rise towers of up to 48 storeys rising out of 12 storey blocks with their enclosed private green spaces resting on the top of four storeys of car parking – plus blanket preservation in situ of the historic dockyard structures – were all features of the previous Aedas masterplan (2012) which was unanimously rejected by the local community, English Heritage, Council for British Archaeology, Naval Dockyard Society and Lewisham Planning and a number of London amenity societies.

The Aedas masterplan – the routes and the real green public spaces

Identical to the Aedas master plan, the Farrell’s masterplan again proposes the historic structures such as the GII listed Olympia Building and the Double Dry Dock remain as marooned stand-alone features amongst the Aedas typology of monolithic blocks. So what does this newly promised “from the ground up” Farrell’s masterplan deliver that the rejected Aedas masterplan did not?

The Farrells masterplan – routes and public spaces

Are the extant Tudor routes through the site expressed in the masterplan? Not yet, rather Farrells have opted to import a circulation feature of “one route back” from the river that has never been a feature of this enclosed self-contained site. What the Farrell’s monolithic gesture of “one route back” achieves is a cutting through of the extant Tudor routes, ignoring the historic perpendicular circulation to the river with pedestrian bridges crossing the potential open mouths of the dock, slips, basin and mast ponds – in favour of an imported notion. Rather than the circulation through the site being informed by the site’s own history and character, specific and characteristic to this internationally important historic site, Farrell’s have opted to impose an idea from elsewhere.

The expression of the historic dockyard structures in the Farrell’s masterplan is limited to an indication of a single slipway illustrated as a green space and the dry dock also illustrated as a green space. This decision to landscape these features does not reflect the historic maritime character of the site. Where, in the former dockyard basin for instance, there might be historic tall ships, a marina, a sailing centre, moored restaurant barges or a floating swimming pool, Farrell’s have proposed – exactly as Aedas did – that the basin is rendered as a dull hard landscaped 'town square feature' fronting the proposed Olympia building shopping centre, described by Sir Terry as the "heart" of the site. The question as to how a shopping centre purposefully reflects the history of London's most important maritime and shipbuilding centre remains unanswered.

When Farrell’s publicly claim that the archaeology and historic features have informed their designs to develop a masterplan from the ground up, it appears that in order to achieve three tower blocks of 48, 38 and 38 storeys, surrounded by monumental blocks of 12 storeys, the precise location for the massive extent of piling required to support this masterplan is determined by the ‘archaeology’. What is the effect of this masterplan on the archaeology? According to Museum of London reports, the effect of this masterplan on the archaeology is "severe". Preservation in situ means that the potential harm to the historic dockyard structures will go unmonitored and unnoticed.

Farrells masterplan overlaid on historic dockyard structures and Sayes Court Garden

Sir Terry Farrell talks about the ‘memory’ of the extant historic dockyard structures being ‘reflected’ in the masterplan. Why do we need memory to be reflected when the structures themselves exist and no-one yet knows whether these structures can be revealed because expert assessment has yet to take place? For example, studies need to be carried out to determine whether the yellow stock brick and hardwood slipways can be revealed in the masterplan. As heritage consultants, Alan Baxters Associates have stated the masonry and brick openings in the river wall, such as the masonry Dry Dock entrance, may be sustainable as a revealed structure.

If Farrell’s public promise has any value, we will see more than the currently proposed preservation in situ of the entire historic environment of the dockyard and Sayes Court Garden.

Naval Dockyards Society conference: 500 years of Deptford and Woolwich Royal Dockyards

The five-hundred year anniversary of the founding of Royal Dockyards at Deptford and Woolwich was the theme of the annual conference organised by the Naval Dockyards Society at the National Maritime Museum in Greenwich this weekend.

To mark this historic milestone and draw attention to the plight of these sites that risk being forgotten, the NDS lined up a series of speakers who gave presentations on different aspects of the dockyards.

Local MP Joan Ruddock opened the conference, and voiced her support for the Sayes Court Gardens and Lenox schemes being put forward by Deptford Is.. to recognise the significant heritage of the site.

Chris Ellmers is president of the Dockland History Group and was instrumental in setting up the Museum in Docklands in 2003. His presentation examined the private shipyards at Deptford and how they related to Deptford Dockyard over the period from 1790 to 1869. He pointed out that attention is almost always focused on the Royal Dockyard, but that Deptford also has a very rich history of shipbuilding at private yards. Merchant sailing ships, innovative steamers and early iron ships were also built in these dockyards and during the Napoleonic War the private shipyards also built and repaired naval vessels.

Peter Cross-Rudkin from the ICE Panel for Historical Engineering Works spoke about John Rennie, who was effectively the consulting engineer to the Navy from about 1806 onwards. He was involved in planning and designing works at Deptford and Woolwich, as well as Chatham, Milford Haven and Sheerness. The dock gates and parts of the river wall at Convoys Wharf (above) were designed by Rennie.

Archaeologist Duncan Hawkins (above, at one of the open days on the site) who led the excavations at Convoys Wharf presented his findings so far. He noted that while few artefacts were found at the site, the nineteenth-century slipways, entrance to the Great Dock, and the Dockyard basin were in relatively good condition.

Mark Stevenson is English Heritage's archaeology adviser for national planning for South London, and he spoke about archaeology and development management in the context of the developments that have taken place in Woolwich Dockyard and those planned for Deptford.

Finally Chris Mazeika and William Richards (owners of the Master Shipwrights House) presented a paper on the Dockyards Officers Terrace at Deptford (above). Their presentation focussed on the Dockyard Officers' Terrace, tracing its early history from a WWII bomb damage map, plans from the 1930s and a photograph taken around 1900. By analysing these resources and comparing them with earlier naval records as well as further photographic and cartographic evidence, they established that a terrace was present as early as 1623 and survived in part until the post-war period.

This discovery prompts the question as to whether the terrace at Deptford is the first palace front terrace in a royal naval dockyard. 

They also showed a fly-through 3D model of the site showing the location of the former terrace. 

The Greenwich Industrial History blog has also published a report on the conference.

Five Hundred Years of Deptford and Woolwich Royal Dockyards

The Naval Dockyards Society are holding their Annual Conference at the National Maritime Museum on Saturday 20 April.
Five Hundred Years of Deptford and Woolwich Royal Dockyards will mark the 500th anniversary of the foundation of the Thames yards by Henry VIII and will be opened by Dame Joan Ruddock, MP for Lewisham Deptford.

Speakers include:

Chris Ellmers, Dockland History Group  
Deptford private shipyards and their relationship to Deptford Dockyard, 1790-1869
Peter Cross-Rudkin, ICE Panel for Historical Engineering Works  
John Rennie and the Naval Dockyards, 1806-1821
Philip MacDougall, Naval Dockyards Society  
Launch of the 120-gun Nelson - an exploration of Woolwich Dockyard based on a carefully executed print of 1814
Duncan Hawkins CgMs  
The archaeology of a Dockyard: Investigations at Deptford Dockyard 2000 to 2012
Mark Stevenson, English Heritage  
Block and Tackle: raising significance. English Heritage, archaeology and development management
Chris Mazeika and William Richards, Deptford Master Shipwright’s House  
The role of post-closure documentation in understanding the history of the dockyard officers’ terrace at Deptford

Cost: £40 (£35 students, senior citizens, unemployed)
(includes lunch – rolls, sandwiches, fruit, cake, tea and coffee 1.25-2.25pm)

Download the booking form.

www.navaldockyards.org
Facebook: Naval Dockyards Society
Twitter: @navdocksoc

Launch of a 60-gun ship at Deptford Dockyard, attributed to John Cleveley the Elder (c.1712-1777) © Ministry of Defence Art Collection

Meanwhile, in Deptford Docks...

SALON, the Society of Antiquaries of London, has covered Convoys Wharf in its latest online newsletter (14 May 2012).

Meanwhile, in Deptford Docks...

The Council for British Archaeology is engaged in another campaign with a maritime flavour down in Deptford Dockyard, in the East End of London, where developer Hutchinson Whampoa have plans to build 3,500 new homes, plus hotels, offices and a cultural centre on a huge site called Convoy’s Wharf. Local people, while welcoming the investment, do not feel that the current master plan for Convoy’s Wharf pays sufficient heed to the heritage of England’s first Royal Dockyard, founded by Henry VIII in 1513, and visited by Peter the Great in 1698 when the Tsar came on a three-month fact-finding visit prior to establishing the Russian navy.

The target of heavy bombardment during World War II, the historic docks were levelled after the war, but recent archaeological work carried out by MOLA has revealed that far more archaeology survives than was thought, including impressive eighteenth-century dockyard walls and slipways and the ground floor and cellars of Sayes Court, home to the diarist and horticulturalist John Evelyn (it was here that Tsar Peter lived during his three-month visit as a guest of the English government, leaving such a trail of destruction that the Treasury eventually agreed to pay £350 to Evelyn in compensation).

Such is the strength of local feeling in favour of retaining and restoring evidence of the site’s past use that Lewisham Council has sent back the initial planning application for further thought, saying that the master plan was not ‘sensitive enough to the unique heritage assets of the dockyard’. As a consequence, the developers, Hutchinson Whampoa, have called in Sir Terry Farrell to look at redrawing the master plan.

The Council for British Archaeology has offered a helping hand and has convened a panel of independent experts from the Naval Dockyards Society, the Garden History Society, the Panel for Historic Engineering Works and the London and Middlesex Archaeological Society. Hand in hand with the local campaign group ‘Deptford Is’, the CBA has offered to ‘assist the developers and English Heritage in their understanding and enhancement of the dockyard and its remarkable history … with the aim of achieving a better, heritage-led scheme that delivers wider public benefit and a more sophisticated approach to this internationally important site’.

The events that Deptford witnessed included the refitting of the Mary Rose, the knighting of Sir Francis Drake by Elizabeth I aboard the Golden Hind in 1581, the refitting of HMS Bounty in 1787, the rebuilding of Cook’s Endeavour in 1768 and the construction of several of the warships that served under Nelson at Trafalgar. Just as importantly, lying beneath the site’s concrete are the avenues, orchards and trial beds of John Evelyn’s garden, where he experimented with the new plants brought back by Deptford ships from all corners of the globe, thus having a enormous influence on garden design and planting in England in the seventeenth century; a re-creation of that garden is certainly one possibility that the group would like the developers to consider.

Thanks to Jon Wright from the Council for British Archaeology for forwarding.

King's Yard archaeology 'insufficient' evidence for statutory protection

Efforts made to extend the statutory protection to the docks and other underground structures remaining at Deptford's former Royal Dockyard have been dismissed by English Heritage, despite the fact that archaeological investigations at the site are not yet complete.

Excavations are due to continue until May

The body responsible for deciding whether to schedule or list heritage structures and ancient monuments has concluded that the four elements of the site that were submitted for consideration – the Great Dock, the Great Basin, the 17th Century Mast Pond and the Officer's Terrace – are not worthy of protection because 'insufficient evidence of the survival of nationally important archaeological remains'.

Deptford Is… in receipt of the EH report, released last month, which was furnished by the Heritage Protection Team at the Department for Culture, Media and Sport. The deadline for a formal request for it to be reviewed – with grounds – is 16 May 2012.

Deptford Is… disappointed and puzzled that EH has decided there is insufficient evidence of survival of national importance. The report does not take account of currently available data and admits "we are aware of on-going archaeological excavation…but the results of these investigations have not yet been collated."

English Heritage was asked to review its previous decision made in 2010 not to schedule the site, in the light of new archaeological information and because the decision was believed to based on erroneous assumptions and incomplete information. And although this review has concluded once again that the main elements of the site do not qualify for statutory protection, it does acknowledge that the river wall, which had previously been dismissed, is in fact worthy of assessment for listing after all.

Part of the river wall which is to be assessed for protection

EH also admits that some of the information on which it based its previous decision not to schedule was incorrect. It is our belief this 2012 review of the 2010 decision contains yet more errors.

The report conclusion states: "Based on present evidence we do not believe that the site meets the criteria for scheduling. However, further attention ought to be given to the river wall as mentioned above."

Reasons for Designation Decision:
Four elements of Convoys Wharf – the Great Dock, the Great Basin, the C17 mast pond and the site of the Officer’s Terrace – are not recommended for scheduling for the following principal reasons:
• Survival: insufficient evidence of the survival of nationally important archaeological remains;
• Potential: because of insufficient archaeological evidence of survival at present it is not possible to assign firm archaeological potential to these elements at Convoys Wharf.
• Documentation (archaeological): existing investigations are keyhole in nature and inconclusive. Good below ground survival cannot be assumed, nor can the extent of these elements of the dockyard be defined without much better archaeological evidence.

You can download the 10-page document here.

Deptford Is… intending to discuss the report with all interested groups in order to make a joint response, but in the meantime, readers and supporters can do their bit in the coming week or so by writing to MP Dame Joan Ruddock to request that she herself makes representation (by 16 May 2012) to the DCMS to get this decision reviewed yet again. We will endeavour to apprise Ms Ruddock of the relevant details with which to provide sufficient grounds.

What the experts are saying: Council for British Archaeology

The Council for British Archaeology issued the following press release on 13th April; it was picked up by the Newshopper (see previous post). We look forward to seeing its contents reported in other publications.

CBA forms expert panel for Deptford Dockyard

The Council for British Archaeology has convened a panel of independent experts to discuss an alternative future for the former site of England’s first Royal Dockyard at Deptford, founded by Henry VIII in 1513.

Calling on the expertise of the Naval Dockyards Society, the Garden History Society, the Panel for Historic Engineering Works and the London and Middlesex Archaeological Society, the CBA are hoping to inform a better, heritage-led scheme that delivers wider public benefit and a more sophisticated approach to this internationally important site – one that served this country for nearly 400 years, harboured the Mary Rose and saw the knighting of Sir Francis Drake on the Golden Hind.

Lewisham Council have sent back the planning application for Convoy’s Wharf, which is for over 3,500 new homes, for revisions, claiming rightly that, it was not sensitive enough to unique heritage assets of the dockyard. As a consequence, the developers, Hutchinson Whampoa, have called in Sir Terry Farrell to look at redrawing the masterplan. Meanwhile, DCMS have asked English Heritage to look again at the heritage status of the site, which along with the adjacent Sayes Court Garden currently has no overall designation.

Working with local group Deptford Is, the CBA and its expert panel are looking to assist the developers and English Heritage in their understanding and enhancement of the dockyard and its remarkable history. There is immense potential here, for a scheme to be delivered that benefits the local community, in our Olympic year and with the 500th anniversary of the founding of the site to follow in 2013, surely our first Royal dockyard deserves both protection and respect.

The dockyard at Deptford was founded by Henry VII IN 1513 to build vessels for the Royal Navy. As the dockyard closest to the Navy Board, Deptford grew to be the most important of all the royal dockyards, at its height it was known as the ‘Cradle of the Navy’ and the docks, slipways and wharves constituted 600 feet of river frontage. Buildings that survive on site include the Master Shipwright’s House of 1708, the first purpose-built dockyard offices of 1720 and Victorian slipway covers of 1846. However, what survive below the ground is more impressive. The Great Dock, slipways, mast ponds and the huge basin, along with Sayes Court Garden, constitute an enormous site – one that has had a pivotal role in England’s history.

Other facts -

 - Elizabeth 1 knights Sir Francis Drake aboard the Golden Hind at Deptford in 1581
 - HMS Bounty re-fitted in 1787
 - The rebuilding of Cook’s Endeavour in 1768
 - Several of the warships that served under Nelson at Trafalgar, designed and built at Deptford

Sayes Court Gardens, which was a key site in the formation of the National Trust, was the creation of Seventeenth century diarist, John Evelyn. Made up of an elaborate parterre, long avenues and a great orchard of three-hundred fruit trees, a lake with an island and a large grove of trees of many different species the garden was tremendously influential at the time. Now, unfortunately, it is now almost completely buried under concrete. The Garden History Society has a study day at the site on the 25th April and has recently stated: “The influence of the garden at Sayes Court on garden design and development in England in the 17th century is well documented and its location beside Deptford Docks was fundamental to John Evelyn's science of experimentation with new plants"

The Council for British Archaeology was established in 1944 and is the national amenity society concerned with protection of the archaeological interest in heritage assets. Heritage assets with archaeological interest are the primary source of evidence about the substance and evolution of places and the people and cultures that made them. Local authorities have a duty to notify the CBA of applications for listed building consent involving partial or total demolition.

Deptford Is.. are "a group of local residents who want to ensure that the redeveloped Convoys Wharf offers the best for Deptford and its future". They have proposed a number of alternative projects for the site; a recent consultation allowed them and other local groups to give their visions of the site. A report on the event can be found here.

Hutchison Whampoa Properties and its architect Aedas has submitted an application for more than 3,000 new homes, with a range of tenures, new public squares and the opening of Deptford's Riverside, details of which can be found here.

Deptford is...in the news again

The News Shopper has reported on the Council for British Archaeology's support for our proposals, and has also stated that English Heritage has been requested to re-examine the status of the site by the Department for Culture, Media & Sport.

ALTERNATIVES to a controversial £1bn high-rise development at a former royal dockyard will be put forward by archaeology experts.

The Council for British Archaeology has convened a panel of independent experts to discuss Convoys Wharf in Deptford, saying the current plans do not respect its history.

Deptford's dockyard was founded by Henry VIII in 1513 as the first royal dockyard, later harbouring the Mary Rose and the Golden Hind when Sir Francis Drake was knighted.

The panel will work with a group of concerned people in the area who have formed the Deptford Is campaign group.

Hutchinson Whampoa's application for 3,500 new homes at the site is currently undergoing revisions with the help of top British architect Sir Terry Farrell.

And the Department for Culture, Media and Sport has requested English Heritage re-examine the site's status, particularly Sayes Court Garden - created by 17th century diarist John Evelyn.

Convoys archaeology on satellite mapping

Despite a time lag of six months or more, the first aerial views of the excavations at Convoys Wharf have appeared on Bing maps.

The status of the excavations on the aerial view, shown below, suggests it dates from about the time of the first public archaeological tours of the site last October.

Copyright: Bing Maps

Below you can see a picture of part of the 1774 Deptford Dockyard model, which has been annotated to show the locations of the docks and buildings that are revealed in the satellite photo. (Click on either of these photos to make them bigger and read the annotation).

With this photo and the evidence we have seen in more recent excavations - plus of course the many areas of the site that have not yet been fully excavated, including the double dry dock, it is clear that the extent of archaeology on the site is immense, and the case for proper listing and protection of the dockyard structures is overwhelming.

Copyright: National Maritime Museum

Open day at Convoys Wharf

The Convoys Wharf community consultation day attracted a large number of people from the local area and beyond, with tours of the site and presentations from local community groups.

It was fascinating to see how much of the original docks are still there, only just below the surface of the ground. Many of the stone and brick structures seem to be in pretty good condition where they have not been damaged by later construction, although the archaeologist Duncan Hawkins, whose company CgMs is working for developer Hutchison Whampoa, would not be drawn on the structural soundness or otherwise of the dock walls.

The turnout was impressive, and quite a few people were unable to find seats in the marquee, which had been set up with tables and chairs, but still remained standing throughout the presentations, demonstrating that they were keen to hear about the alternatives.

The head of the European arm of developer Hutchison Whampoa, Edmund Ho (below), welcomed everyone to the event during the introductions, along with Joan Ruddock, who attended the launch of our alternative vision last year, and declared herself to be in full support of our plans. 

Deptford Is.. member William Richards (below) introduced the three projects that we are proposing, and urged the audience to consider the future of the site very carefully.

"It must be said that anyone here should count themselves as crazy if they were to resist inevitable and necessary regeneration of this site, which has the assets of place, location, scale and heritage to make it remarkable in London.
"It is with a desire to achieve that the community offers its ideas. Some of the specific ideas are relatively new, some are the result of ten years of actively engaging with and researching the site; all the ideas are almost beyond imagination - but the challenge for everyone in this room is to elevate the future of the site beyond the banal, beyond the expedient and reflect the values of the site into the future. It must be excellent.
"It must work, for those who live here today and for those who will come to Deptford in the future."

William introduced other members of the group to talk about our three proposals - the Lenox project, Sayes Court Gardens, and the Seven Bridges, all of which were also presented at our alternative vision launch last year.

Other presentations included inspiring contributions from members of the Second Wave Youth Arts group in Deptford, who urged the planners to consult and engage with the young people of the area. It was not simply a plea to be consulted, it was a confident statement that the young people of Deptford have a lot to offer that the masterplanners can benefit from.

Architect Sir Terry Farrell, whose firm has been employed by Hutchison Whampoa to review the masterplan for the site, rounded off proceedings by explaining that he and his team would go away and consider all the comments and ideas, before starting on the next phase of the consultation process which would inform the masterplan review.


The Deptford Dame has also published a report on the event, which you can read here.

The significance of Deptford's dockyard basin

Museum of London Archaeology has published brief information on its website about the continuing excavations at Convoys Wharf. The latest post focuses on the Dockyard Basin, one of the most important below-ground structures on the site which lacks any kind of statutory protection.

MOLA says:

"The excavations... have unearthed several phases of the Dockyard Basin. This large pool probably began as a natural pond at the confluence of the River Thames with the small stream identified earlier in the excavation. Historical sources suggest that the basin was adapted to moor several of the King’s ships in the early 16th century and later used to season masts. By 1688, the Dockyard Basin (or ‘Wett Dock’) was hexagonal in plan, with slipways on the west side and a canal connecting it to the river. Once the ships were largely complete, they were launched into the basin to be fitted out.

"Excavations have identified a timber revetment wall that probably dates to the 18th century when the basin was remodelled. The revetment was held in place by large horizontal timber beams, called land ties, on the landward side.

(copyright MOLA)

The east wall to the canal linking the basin to the river, built in 1814 to John Rennie’s design. The recess to the right of the depth gauge would have housed an iron and timber gate. The wall replaced an earlier timber version, seen in the background of the image.

"The early 19th century saw a dramatic increase in the size of warships and the four slipways at the edge of the basin shown in the c1774 model had been replaced by two much larger stone slips by 1868. These stone slipways were protected from the weather by an open-sided cover building, now known as the Olympia building (listed Grade II). The cover building is one of only two structures visible above ground that date to the Dockyard period (the other being the Shipwright’s House outside the boundary of the site).

(copyright MOLA)

The same canal wall looking west from the landwards side; this side of the wall would not have been visible when the basin was in use as it was below ground level.

"The excavation has revealed the evidence for two phases of canal walls linking the basin with the river. The later phase, built in brick and stone in 1814 to a design by John Rennie, is shown in the first of these images with the earlier timber version, just beyond, to the east. Depth gauges were identified in both phases of walls – Roman numerals cut out of copper plate and nailed to the timber wall and carved into stone in the later phase."

But the extent of the excavations being carried out on this enormous site, which has huge significance for the nation's maritime heritage, are woefully inadequate. While the condition of the underground structures that have been uncovered has been found to be variable, it is impossible to state conclusively – as developer Hutchison Whampoa is doing – that these heritage structures cannot be saved. Only a tiny percentage of the dockyard has been excavated, yet the developer is dismissing any suggestion that these major structures be incorporated into the masterplan, instead proposing 'preservation in situ' which essentially means that no foundations will theoretically be allowed to damage the remains, but they will still be buried below a permanent building.

The current masterplan for Convoys Wharf completely disregards English Heritage guidelines on maritime & naval buildings (2011), which highlight works by John Rennie as worthy of a high grade of protection and describe sites such as the basin, basin slipways, basin slipway covers and caisson gate infrastructure as 'sites of collaborative genius'.

In the case of Convoys Wharf, these below-ground structures are all works by eminent Georgian and early Victorian engineers.

Deptford was the first of the royal naval dockyards to have a wet dock or basin and this technology was exported to outlying dockyards such as Chatham in about 1650. Under the administration of Sir George Carteret, Deptford's skilled workmen and naval dockyard officers built the wet dock at Chatham.

The basin is also 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, and from where in WWI and WWII, supplies were sent out to troops stationed around the world.

The developer's design team has also ignored English Heritage London area committee comments from 2003 and 2005 which requested that the Olympia building be visible from the river. Hutchison Whampoa has dispensed with the Richard Rogers proposal, which was to create a public plaza on the site of the basin – the current masterplan all but cuts the Olympia building off from the river, preventing the building and its importance to the site and the former dockyard from being properly understood, and making a mockery of PPS5 guidelines on planning for the historic environment.

What the experts are saying: the Naval Dockyards Society

Honorary secretary of the Naval Dockyards Society, Ann Coats, has responded to the Convoys Wharf planning application on behalf of the society. We have published extracts from the letter below (with NDS emphasis): the full text can be accessed via the link at the end of the article. 

The NDS is, in the main, commenting on the archaeological statements published on Convoys website and the future use and interpretation of the historic sites within the application site, following points made in the 2004 consultation: 

• In particular both EH and the Naval Dockyards Society felt that an approach was needed, that respected the original layout of the site, in order to restore the community to the lost link with its maritime past. Similarly CABE expressed some disappointment that higher aspirations have not emerged in the masterplanning of a site with a rich historical legacy in a location of strategic importance. (CgMs Ltd Environmental Statement Archaeology Technical Appendix, Convoys Wharf, p.17)

NDS does note and deplore the excessive height of the tall buildings, which will impinge upon vistas between historic Greenwich Park and the City and diminish the human scale at the application site.

It also deplores the project’s high density of buildings which will constitute an unattractive intrusion into vistas along the River Thames, an historic route and the cause of the town’s existence, linking royal Deptford and Royal Greenwich. A high quality design should celebrate 500 years of maritime history.

From the drawings, particularly the 'Finalised Illustrative Masterplan' (Design and Access Statement p. 143), there seem to be no effective views to the river from the site interior, including the historic shipbuilding sheds, which is also deplorable. 

The NDS does welcome river transport links, as in Venice and Sydney, to diversify travel options for residents and visitors.

The NDS supports stakeholder comments in Community Involvement (2011) which include concern for:

• the excessive height of the tower blocks, the high residential density and concomitant parking which would overwhelm the development and add to traffic problems in the area
• poor interpretation of Deptford’s history
• socially differentiated housing
• mediocre and indistinguishable architecture which is ‘oblivious to local culture’
• Olympia being called a warehouse rather than a slip shed;

and call for:

• celebration and revival of Deptford’s history and traditional occupations through a museum/interpretation centre

• dynamic use of the river, wharves and Deptford’s maritime heritage to ensure the Thames Path is accessible and user friendly.
• retention of the ‘unique sense of place and space’
• inspiring and distinctive architecture which resonates with Deptford’s singular history.

The NDS is concerned that outline planning permission may be granted in 2011, before the archaeological investigation is completed in May 2012.

Convoys masterplan a 'missed opportunity'

English Heritage has branded Hutchison Whampoa's outline proposals for Convoys Wharf a 'missed opportunity' to create a sense of place with clearer links to the site's heritage.

The assessment came in a letter written by EH archaeology adviser for national planning in London,  Mark Stevenson, who commented on the application in relation to the archaeology of the site.

Although Stevenson welcomed the developer's efforts so far to investigate the buried remains on the site, he reiterated his statement of the importance of the former King's Yard site, both historically and archaeologically, and he said that this information should now be used as an 'inspirational starting point for a celebration of the historic place of Sayes Court and Deptford Dockyard'.

Stevenson wrote:

'It has been an understanding from the first discussions concerning the possible development of this property, that includes the site of Sayes Court and Deptford Royal Dockyard, that the site is of national significance even though the site is covered in concrete and, until recently, large warehouses. The main significance is therefore related to the buried remains. 

The pre-planning application limited archaeological evaluation undertaken in 2000 led to the establishment that the remains of the Storehouse and in particular the Tudor element of the later extended building complex, was of demonstrable national importance. It was designated as a Scheduled Ancient Monument in 2003. 

Archaeology provides a clear opportunity to ensure the development is relevant to the historic context of the site. As a natural response to the national importance associated with the site’s heritage, the aspiration has been to ensure that the ‘sense of place’ that has been temporarily lost particularly through late twentieth century development, can be reattached through the opportunity to regenerate this major historic brownfield site. However, the creation of a ‘sense of place’ cannot be achieved by one or two individual actions; it requires a collaborative approach through the parties involved with the planning process. The Outline planning application is the opportunity to get the distribution of the main elements of buildings and spaces correct so that any future detailed applications for individual parcels can develop further the celebration of the historic significance of the place.'

His letter also underlines the need for the developer to revise its Scheme of Archaeological  Resource Management (SARM) as the excavation work proceeds, to incorporate any additional finds which are discovered.

In the environmental statement submitted as part of the application, for example, Stevenson points out that it is now superceded by finds which have been unearthed during the ongoing excavation: 


'Section 5.2.4, para.2 states that there is no evidence of human activity that predates the sixteenth century. This statement should be seen in the context of ‘at time of going to print’, given that a possible medieval dock and late Iron Age/early Roman features have recently been identified.'

Stevenson recommends that the framework represented within the SARM should be secured by placing a condition on the approval of the documents, such that no development should take place until the applicant has secured the implementation of the management of the historic environment framework SARM in accordance with the English Heritage briefing document 'Our Future Heritage'.  

In addition to the SARM, he also recommends that the public realm considerations are addressed by a S106 agreement, saying: 'In this context would be identification of the range of elements to best reflect the former historic environment within the site'.

Convoys wharf archaeology tour

1698 view of the Dockyard. © City of London, London Metropolitan Archives

Around 60 people turned up for the tour of the Convoys Wharf site on Saturday, which was led by Duncan Hawkins, the archaeologist from the Museum of London who is in charge of the programme of work at the site.

The historical significance of the Convoys Wharf site is so immense, and has such implications for our national heritage that large areas of the site are being dug and examined. Most of this work is not visible from the boundaries, and it was quite sobering to see the physical extent of the dig. It was also sobering to realise that what we were seeing was just a fraction of what has been uncovered - large areas have already been buried again for 'preservation'.

The current programme of archaeological investigations is approximately halfway through, Hawkins explained, with a lot more digging still to be carried out. Major below-ground structures such as the mast ponds and the dockyard basin have still to be properly opened up, and these will be the focus for the coming months. But some of the dock structures, including a substantial part of the Great Dock at the eastern end of the site, still have buildings standing on them. Other parts, such as Sayes Court Gardens, are not even included in the programme of works.

According to Hawkins, Hutchison Whampoa intends to use the building on top of the Great Dock for storage of the archaeological finds, hence the Great Dock will not be fully excavated until the development is well under way.

Likewise, the archaeological investigation of the mast ponds and dockyard basin are not expected to be completed until May 2012. Deptford is.. maintains that it would be totally shortsighted - perhaps even negligent? - of the council to grant planning permission for a site which is still being excavated. Proposals for the future redevelopment of the site can surely not be granted until the full extent of the archaeology is investigated and understood.

The first part of the visit focused on the remains of the Tudor storehouse, which dates from 1513 and is a scheduled ancient monument. Many of the old walls have been uncovered and it's still possible to see the shape of the building, although previous construction work has driven concrete piles through the walls in various places. Bricks from the upper parts of the walls were taken away and used to rebuild the garden wall at Hampton Court when it was demolished, incredibly as recently as 1954. Much of this part of the dig was still open but Hawkins said that it would be backfilled shortly to protect the remains from frost damage during the winter.

In the middle of the photo above, the dark grey area of soil is evidence of one of two medieval docks found on the site - these would not have been much more than holes dug into the clay. According to the archaeologists they represent the earliest evidence of ship-building left in London today.

From the jetty, Hawkins pointed out the dressed stone which marks the entrance to the Great Dock - one of only two double dry docks in the country, the other being in Chatham (you can see the dressed stone to the right of the post if you click on the photo below and view the larger version).

This diagram from the May 2010 archaeology report shows the positions of the trial trenches (in red) overlain on the 1868 dockyard map. (If you click on it you can see a larger version).

Very little excavation work has been carried out on the Great Dock so far (marked here as 'stem dock' and 'head dock'); a large warehouse covers most of it and one trial trench has been dug at the river end of the site. This part of the site is slated to be retained for public use by the developers. However they proposed to recreate the 'footprint' of the dock as some kind of public park or garden area, not to excavate and reinstate it, which would be a much more appropriate solution for such a significant piece of heritage. Despite the minimal amount of investigation that has been carried out into this structure, the archaeologists were confident in their assertion that it would be impossible to reinstate it.

To the west of the Tudor storehouse remains, two wooden slipways have been uncovered. There were originally five slipways in the docks - three which opened directly to the river, and two which were covered by the Olympia building (in the background of the picture above) and led out to the huge dockyard basin.

Many of the wooden timbers remain, with the uprights showing that the former slipways had been modified over time to accommodate bigger and bigger ships. Some of the timbers are recycled from ships. The walls are brick and concrete - a very early version of the concrete we use today.

The next phase of excavation involves opening up the dockyard basin - a huge area of land enclosed by a brick wall, part of which Hawkins is standing on in the photo below. The upright timbers in front of the wall are old mooring posts. Although the top half metre or so is missing, the majority of the wall itself seems very well preserved. The archaeologists are intending to open up the whole dockyard basin, before moving on to the mast ponds and the other slipway at the far end of the site.

The last part of the visit was the Olympia warehouse, where the archaeology team have established that the granite slipways are still intact and remain just half a metre or so below ground level. This is a listed building and as such the developers must retain it - but as yet there is no clear indication as to how it could be used apart from some rather vague title such as 'cultural centre' or similar.

One of the issues that Deptford is.. wants to highlight is that Hutchison Whampoa is claiming that the revised planning application is an improvement on the earlier proposals, but in fact we believe it is a retrograde step. For example the Olympia warehouse was originally set next to a public area, which while not ideal, at least gave the structure some kind of dignity and respect despite it still being overshadowed by the neighbouring towers.

In the new plan, shown below, the public area is gone and the only connection between the covered slipways and the river - the feature which informs the very purpose and history of the structure - is via a narrow, tree-lined path which links one corner of the building to its natural partner like a lifeline that is gradually being snuffed out.

The structure of the building is largely intact, with its originally cast-iron columns and beams, although the cladding and some parts of the roof members are much more modern. The ability of the structure to bear any substantial loading will have to be thoroughly assessed before any design can be progressed for its rehabilitation - one of the cast-iron columns is already cracked and the brittleness of this material means that cracking is a risk for other parts of the structure.

The Olympia warehouse visit marked the end of the tour - rather prematurely, many of us thought, with no mention of the investigations into John Evelyn's former home Sayes Court and its famous gardens.

After being asked about this, Hawkins explained that excavations had been carried out and the team believed it had uncovered the remains of the house, which is mentioned in a news item on the Museum of London's archaeology page here.

This contrasts somewhat with an earlier archaeological update note published by Hutchison Whampoa, Museum of London Archaeology and CgMs Consulting in July 2010 which stated that: "On the site of Sayes Court, trial trenching has revealed no surviving trace of either the buildings or gardens of Sayes Court due to the impact of later development. Previous archaeological work in 2000 had revealed fragmentary remains of the main Mansion House of Sayes Court and this can now be shown to be an isolated find in a relatively small area of the site."

Clearly the original lack of surviving trace has since been found to be erroneous. But the claim that the site team have actually found the remains of Sayes Court is strongly disputed on the London's Lost Garden blog, which believes that the overlays used by the team have not been placed in the most appropriate locations. The authors – a qualified archaeologist and a landscape architect among them – believe that the structure uncovered by the Museum of London team was the former army pensions office, which was built next to the site of Sayes Court.

In discussions at the site, Hawkins stated confidently that his team had found the right building, but the excavation and the trenches had already been backfilled under a huge mound of rubble so there was no visual evidence to examine. The documents submitted with the planning application were written in April 2010, when the team believed no evidence of Sayes Court remained. We await the full report on this part of the dig with interest.

Despite this about-turn on the presence of Sayes Court, no attempt has yet been made to investigate the archaeology of the former gardens. London's Lost Garden blog explains the heritage significance and potential of the site thus:

Sayes Court is a site of national historical importance. Its archaeology has yet to be properly investigated and recorded.
Informed by a thorough archaeological excavation, the development proposals should include a historically-accurate restoration of a substantial part of the garden as a valuable local amenity, an economically-significant visitor attraction, and a worthy memorial to John Evelyn.

Update: Shipwright's Palace has posted more about this here.