The Gasholder - local blog artcle

The Gasholder – Darryl has actually hit the nail right on the head when he says the proposed demolition is about ‘safety and security’.   They are only proposing to pull down the framework,  but will leave the difficult bits at ground level, and – presumably – keep the site for a bit, where they still have functioning equipment.

Of course the empty frame is expensive to maintain and there are all sorts of safety implications around trespassers, vandalism, thieves and local ten year olds with an urge to climb!.  However, this is about an industry which has never really engaged with the public, and their only solution is to demolish.

Three or four years ago I went to a big conference about the future of our gasholders – it was run by the gas industry and they were taken aback that people had come from outside the industry – so suspicious were they that we all had to stand up and identify ourselves and explain why we were there.  Many distinguished industrial historians found their motives being challenged!!  One of the papers given was about an attempt to demolish a gasholder somewhere on the outskirts of Newcastle.  It was isolated on open ground but surrounded by a large council estate – and, when demolition began, the estate had erupted in fury.  It was their holder, they said, it was what made them different from other council estates – when they were away they could explain where they lived by referring to it and when they saw it they knew they had come home.

The gas industry just didn’t understand – and so they have missed a big and important opportunity to capitalise on their past. Would should have been assets have been turned into liabilities and working with local authorities and local communities has been beyond them.  All over London – and I am sure elsewhere – there has been community campaign after community campaign to keep – or rather to reuse – gasholders.  Most have been lost.  Lewisham have been quick to locally list Bell Green – but will the industry listen??  Poplar is coming down, despite vigorous campaigns there, as have holders on several sites in Hornsey  - and I could go on.  Sadly, for us, it means that Southern Gas Networks now have a lot of practice in getting demolition plans through Councils and putting down any opposition efficiently.

So – before I get onto the (very nasty) planning situation, can I recommend you have a look at the Report from the industry which is included with the planning papers. In most parts it is pretty good. 

The history of the holder is dealt with through Malcolm Tucker’s immaculate research for Historic England. Malcolm was however working here to a brief and there is some speculation he would not make in such a paper.  One of these is the issue of the holder as an early modern movement building. 

There are many indications of this in the ideas behind its great size and economies of scale, but mostly in the stripped down style.  I understand Malcolm’s problem here in that we have never managed to establish a link between the American design advisor and English industrial designers of the period (both with the same unusual surname).

Much of the paper is very interesting. There are some minor inaccuracies which I can spot quickly (ie the ‘gas stokers agitated for an eight-hour shift system’ – sort of right but they left their jobs for union recognition).   Some of this looks suspiciously like my research on Livesey (deposited with Southwark libraries) – although they only quote Francis Goodall in DNB and Malcolm in their list of references.

I am also not impressed with their constant harping on that the holder was built by Frank Livesey, not George. Frank had to do what George told him to do!!  Perhaps they should read some of the contemporary descriptions of the holder, rather than make assumptions.

It is some of the arguments they are using which are less impressive:

-          They say that the holder has ‘lost its context’ because the gas works itself has gone.  This has to be nonsense.  The two big holders were always on the edge of and slightly away from the main works – and in any case the industry commonly built holders, often at  a considerable distance from any gas works.

-          It notes Enderby House (thank you) as a local listed industrial structure but notes it is too far away to be associated with the holder. This too is nonsense – the holder looms over the whole area and is the first thing you see.  One of the things we are doing is looking at pathways through the peninsula and there is a well defined path between the holder and Enderby Wharf.  One idea about the holder site and its future as some sort of hub for the area  is its accessibility from Enderby Wharf, and other places.

-          Saying that the holder was the biggest in the world for only a short while is neither here nor there.  It was, and is, very much bigger than the rest. -          Together with No.2. it was the largest amount of gas storage ever.

So – can I also add in the community and place making aspects of all this.  It is very obvious that the holder is a landmark and an icon for the area, and particularly from the river.  As with the Newcastle Council estate holder – it is what marks our area out, and when you see it you know you are back in east Greenwich – and that means something to a lot of local people.

I am only too well aware that our community here in east Greenwich feels that they have lost something. They have gained vast numbers of new flats – far more than most other areas – and very little in the form of local amentities.  Some developers on the Peninsula have worked hard to put in facilities, art works and features for both their new residents and others – and – than you to them -  I would really not put them down.  But others have not done so and features which appeared in the original plans have sometimes not been built.   Quite honestly east Greenwich and the Peninsula need something to be proud of – which identifies them and also provides some facilities available for everyone.

Hence – as I said to start with – the gas industry has missed an opportunity here, as with all its holders. Use them, they should be an asset.

So to the current planning application.  Peter Luck has written an excellent analysis which he has appended to From the Murky Depths piece on the holder.  The application is a stitch up – and the Council has very little room, legally, to move in. Please don’t blame the Council – I do think they have tried to get this right.   

There is something in our society now, and in our institutions, which seems unable to think beyond short term finance – and the gas industry does not do imagination.