A section of heavy wood fell down from the former EMD cinema building in Hoe Street, Walthamstow (From East London and West Essex Guardian Series)

Poor EMD :-(

JonathanB wrote:
Poor EMD :-(

Yes it is about time that the Church started to use it like a church and have a bit of respect and spend some money on it.

This has been an accident waiting to happen for the past year or more. Waltham Forest council has responsibility to protect listed buildings in this borough, so why has it done nothing?

The UCKG have been letting the building decay, as they are trying to force the council to let them use it for a purpose that was refused by a public inquiry.

The UCKG has gone too far now, allowing it to become a danger to the public. The council is also to blame for not taking action sooner.

Any chance of legal action to enforce protection of this listed building -- and of the public?

This is a complete disgrace. Squatters have been found in the building in the last few weeks too. UCKG are clearly not maintaining the building properly or providing adequate security. UCKG may consider such incidents as helping their cause to get planning permission. This building is on English Heritages 'at risk' register and for obvious reasons.

How long before the building is destroyed by arson or someone is injured or killed by further collapses?

Clearly the more decayed the cinema appears to be the more the church can protest it's not fit for purpose.

Very clever of them.

But if they can't look after the building now how could anyone believe that they would refurbish and protect the building in the future if they were granted planning permission? They clearly have no respect at all for it.

How did the council's conservation officer allow them to neglect the facade in such a way that it's falling apart?

And how do we know the church haven't let the interior fall apart too?

And the organ?

All are under a Grade 2* listing.

English Heritage should be told.

Why are UKCG getting ALL the blame?
The building is Grade II* listed and comes under the care of the council's long serving conservation officer who has a clear duty to survey the site every 12 months and in fact, has reported to English Heritage his observations. These reports are not made public or appear in the council website nor receive attention on the agenda of WWCC meetings.
Considering this canopy has been falling apart with holes appearing in it for the best part of 3 YEARS - what blame lands on his shoulders?
Search the Yahoo group site for messages 2007-2009.
Expect Guardian inquest in next issue?

Redfox wrote:
Why are UKCG getting ALL the blame? The building is Grade II* listed and comes under the care of the council's long serving conservation officer who has a clear duty to survey the site every 12 months and in fact, has reported to English Heritage his observations. These reports are not made public or appear in the council website nor receive attention on the agenda of WWCC meetings. Considering this canopy has been falling apart with holes appearing in it for the best part of 3 YEARS - what blame lands on his shoulders? Search the Yahoo group site for messages 2007-2009. Expect Guardian inquest in next issue?

A casual observer might think it was in the council's interest to allow this decay...

Might it not be argued that this is one of those orphan sites that the Council is keen for us to identify (so it can build 100 zillion flats on, more than likely).
The Council has a right to take over residential properties that are left unoccupied for as little as six months: is there any comparable power over neglected commercial property, if only on safety grounds?
The church has said on the record that renovation is conditional upon getting its Planning Permission, which is a clear breach of its legal duty. Perhaps we could initiate a little 'protection by occupation', as the Council did in the Coppermill Lane Library.

E-Number wrote:
Clearly the more decayed the cinema appears to be the more the church can protest it's not fit for purpose. Very clever of them. But if they can't look after the building now how could anyone believe that they would refurbish and protect the building in the future if they were granted planning permission? They clearly have no respect at all for it. How did the council's conservation officer allow them to neglect the facade in such a way that it's falling apart? And how do we know the church haven't let the interior fall apart too? And the organ? All are under a Grade 2* listing. English Heritage should be told.

Despite it's glossy appearance, UCKG have bodged refubishment at their 'flagship' HQ at Finsbury Park.

Maybe they used the same contractors and project managers as LBWF did for the Walthamstow Central Library refurb...

RichieA70 wrote:

E-Number wrote: Clearly the more decayed the cinema appears to be the more the church can protest it's not fit for purpose. Very clever of them. But if they can't look after the building now how could anyone believe that they would refurbish and protect the building in the future if they were granted planning permission? They clearly have no respect at all for it. How did the council's conservation officer allow them to neglect the facade in such a way that it's falling apart? And how do we know the church haven't let the interior fall apart too? And the organ? All are under a Grade 2* listing. English Heritage should be told.

Despite it's glossy appearance, UCKG have bodged refubishment at their 'flagship' HQ at Finsbury Park. Maybe they used the same contractors and project managers as LBWF did for the Walthamstow Central Library refurb...

Who would be surprised if there was another "rave" or similar any time now - just to put the point across?

By the time those who can do something actually taken any action, the building will probably be so beyond repair that it will have to be demolished and it seems to me, sadly, that this is the most likely scenario

E-Number wrote:
Clearly the more decayed the cinema appears to be the more the church can protest it's not fit for purpose.

Very clever of them.

But if they can't look after the building now how could anyone believe that they would refurbish and protect the building in the future if they were granted planning permission? They clearly have no respect at all for it.

How did the council's conservation officer allow them to neglect the facade in such a way that it's falling apart?

And how do we know the church haven't let the interior fall apart too?

And the organ?

All are under a Grade 2* listing.

English Heritage should be told.

Tell them then?

We walked past the Rio Cinema in Dalston last weekend and I thought "The EMD could be that."

:-(

Start a fund raiser?

Redfox wrote:
Why are UKCG getting ALL the blame?
The building is Grade II* listed and comes under the care of the council's long serving conservation officer who has a clear duty to survey the site every 12 months and in fact, has reported to English Heritage his observations. These reports are not made public or appear in the council website nor receive attention on the agenda of WWCC meetings.
Considering this canopy has been falling apart with holes appearing in it for the best part of 3 YEARS - what blame lands on his shoulders?
Search the Yahoo group site for messages 2007-2009.
Expect Guardian inquest in next issue?

Seems like someone has been reading these comments and attempted to try and find this information out. A Freedom of Information request has been made to the council here:
http://www.whatdothe
yknow.com/request/em
d_english_heritage_s
urveys

"A piece of wood fell from the roof." Don't these UKCG people know a good carpenter?

Shannon Wright wrote:
"A piece of wood fell from the roof." Don't these UKCG people know a good carpenter?

Brilliant!

Must be a sign from Heaven!!!! :--)

E-Number wrote:

RichieA70 wrote:

E-Number wrote: Clearly the more decayed the cinema appears to be the more the church can protest it's not fit for purpose. Very clever of them. But if they can't look after the building now how could anyone believe that they would refurbish and protect the building in the future if they were granted planning permission? They clearly have no respect at all for it. How did the council's conservation officer allow them to neglect the facade in such a way that it's falling apart? And how do we know the church haven't let the interior fall apart too? And the organ? All are under a Grade 2* listing. English Heritage should be told.

Despite it's glossy appearance, UCKG have bodged refubishment at their 'flagship' HQ at Finsbury Park. Maybe they used the same contractors and project managers as LBWF did for the Walthamstow Central Library refurb...

Who would be surprised if there was another "rave" or similar any time now - just to put the point across?

Great news - when is this rave? Will The Rolling Stones be playing?

Gordon Mandembota wrote:
Start a fund raiser?

For a billion pound organisation? I think they can afford their own maintenance staff...

mdj wrote:
Might it not be argued that this is one of those orphan sites that the Council is keen for us to identify (so it can build 100 zillion flats on, more than likely).
The Council has a right to take over residential properties that are left unoccupied for as little as six months: is there any comparable power over neglected commercial property, if only on safety grounds?
The church has said on the record that renovation is conditional upon getting its Planning Permission, which is a clear breach of its legal duty. Perhaps we could initiate a little 'protection by occupation', as the Council did in the Coppermill Lane Library.

It appears that the UCKG have this covered, as the building is registered as 'part occupied' on the English heritage site.

I suspect the 'squaters' may in fact be paid cronies, to ensure the building isn't left unoccupied.