Master of Architecture Thesis / UCL by Ruby Ng

Ground-Up Heritage in Deptford: Contesting Heritage Narratives Amid Urban Change

NG Ying Tung, Ruby

The Bartlett School of Architecture, UCL Architecture MArch (ARB/RIBA Part 2) 2024/2025

Previous Page

Figure 1

Mapping of the Tudor Storehouse archaeological foundations at the Convoys Wharf site in Deptford, former Royal Naval Dockyard. Source: Author.

Next Page

2

Deptford Is Forever, a community-led advocacy group, drew a chalk anchor on Deptford High Street in 2016, petitioning for signatures to call for the return of the iron anchor sculpture that had been removed from the site. (London: Deptford Is Forever, 2017)

3

Archaeological foundations of the Tudor Storehouse uncovered at the Convoys Wharf development site during an excavation survey conducted by the Museum of London Archaeology (MOLA) in 2011. (London: Rex/ Shutterstock, 2011)

This thesis is presented to the The Bartlett School of Architecture in part fulfilment for Architecture MArch (ARB/RIBA Part 2)

NG Ying Tung, Ruby

Ground-Up Heritage in Deptford: Contesting Heritage Narratives Amid Urban Change

BARC0011: Advanced Architectural Thesis

Thesis Supervisor: Paul Dobraszczyk

Module Directors:

Oliver Wilton

Robin Wilson

Word Count: 9885

NG Ying Tung, Ruby

The Bartlett School of Architecture, UCL Architecture MArch (ARB/RIBA Part 2) Unit 17 2024/2025

This page is left intentionally blank

Acknowledgements

I would like to sincerely thank my supervisor, Paul Dobraszczyk for his invaluable guidance, generous insight, and unwavering encouragement throughout the composition of this thesis.

This page is left intentionally blank

Abstract

This thesis examines the complexities of heritage preservation and urban change in Deptford, London, focusing on how three distinct typologies in urban historical landscapes—an archaeological site (Convoys Wharf), a historic public garden (Sayes Court Park), and a fragmentary naval-industrial building (Paynes Wharf)—are navigated under redevelopment pressures. The concept of heritage and its relevance to contemporary realities, particularly within a rapidly changing urban context, necessitates ongoing and critical examination. Without a sustained discourse that interrogates what heritage is or what it can become, there is a risk of underutilizing its potential to challenge and redefine cultural and social meanings in the present.

Drawing on critical heritage discourse—particularly Laurajane Smith’s concept of Authorized Heritage Discourse (AHD) and Rodney Harrison’s Critical Heritage approaches—the paper situates both traditional and emergent groundup narratives in heritage preservation, opening a discussion on how historical urban landscapes manifests a ground for active negotiation, contestation, and redefinition in the face of urban development.

Through case studies of the three sites, the paper dissects the tensions between conventional top-down preservation models and community-led heritage initiatives. It reveals how different stakeholders value heritage in distinct ways, demonstrating how power asymmetries shape preservation efforts and urban transformation. The findings highlight both the opportunities and limitations of grassroots heritage activism, questioning whether a simple top-down versus bottom-up dichotomy is adequate for addressing the complexities of contemporary urban redevelopment.

Ultimately, the study contributes to broader discussions on the intersection of heritage and urban change by calling for a more inclusive and synergized approach to heritage preservation—one that recognizes the interplay between official heritage management and local community agency in shaping sustainable urban futures.

Keywords: Unofficial Heritage, Ground-up heritage, Urban redevelopment, Sustainable urban futures, Deptford, London 00.

This page is left intentionally blank

02

Deptford, London 02 Urban History of Deptford in Three Periods

Parish Period: Early Community and Local Economy Naval Dockyard Period: Rise as a Major Maritime Hub Post-dockyard Period: Decline, Disinvestment, and Heritage

01.

Introduction

The Call for Redefinition of Heritage Under Redevelopment Threats

The transformation of urban spaces through redevelopment, particularly in historically rich waterfront landscapes such as Deptford in London, raises critical questions about how post-naval heritage landscapes are defined, preserved, and potentially reconstructed within rapidly evolving urban contexts.

In urban planning and regeneration, heritage often functions as both an asset and an obstacle, positioned at the intersection of preservation interests and development pressures. As cities expand and transform, understanding what constitutes heritage becomes increasingly complex. Deptford, historically a royal naval dockyard site, vividly exemplifies the challenges communities face amid rapid urban change. The site is particularly distinctive and relevant to historical waterfront landscapes, as naval heritage represents a unique typology comprising multiple heritage subsets, including military infrastructure, industrial warehouses, and commercial activities that dominated much of the dockyard’s functions. Frequently, official determinations of what merits preservation contrast sharply with the heritage that local communities value. This tension creates a binary dynamic between ‘official’ and ‘unofficial’ heritage, with the latter encompassing buildings, spaces, or objects cherished by individuals or specific communities yet lacking formal recognition.

The concept of ‘unofficial heritage’, as discussed by Rodney Harrison, Professor of Heritage Studies at the UCL Institute of Archaeology, draws on terminology from sociocultural anthropology. Harrison defines this concept as referring to ‘customs’ and ‘traditions’ which, in the absence of a perceived threat or sense of loss, might otherwise be dismissed as mere ritualized practices. Such heritage includes repetitive, entrenched, sometimes ritualized practices that connect current community values, beliefs, and memories with those of the past,1 emphasising the often overlooked intangible agencies that constitute heritage.

1 Rodney Harrison, Heritage / Critical Approaches (London: Routledge, 2012), 18.

One illustrative example is the unsuccessful Save Earl’s Court campaign, led by the Earl’s Court Area Action Group (ECAAG) between 2012 and 2015, which sought to prevent the demolition of the Earl’s Court Exhibition Centre in London—an Art Deco building opened in 1937 that hosted exhibitions, trade shows, concerts, and cultural events for nearly 80 years.2 The case exemplifies how unofficial heritage emerges through community-led recognition of cultural and social value, even in the absence of formal recognition.

Building on this understanding, Deptford serves as a particularly relevant site where traditional and emerging heritage narratives collide, highlighting the need to critically re-examine the relationship between heritage and contemporary urban realities through sustained critical scrutiny. Without ongoing discourse examining what heritage is and what it can become, there is a risk of overlooking its potential to challenge and reshape present-day cultural and social meanings.3

Through case studies of three distinct sites in Deptford, this thesis explores tensions between conventional and community-driven heritage initiatives. The findings highlight both the opportunities and constraints of grassroots heritage activism and critically evaluate whether the traditional top down versus bottomup dichotomy adequately addresses the complexities inherent in contemporary urban redevelopment.

Next Page

Figures 5, 6

‘Give Us Back Our Bloomin’ Anchor: The Procession!’, a performative parade presented by community-led groups including Rediscovered Urban Rituals and Deptford Is Forever. The parade featured a full-scale cardboard anchor representing the call to restore the Deptford Anchor, which had been removed by Lewisham Council in 2013. (London: Deptford Is Forever, 2013)

2 3 “Together We Can Still Save Earl’s Court,” Save Earl’s Court, accessed March 8, 2025, http://www. saveearlscourt.com/.

Laurajane Smith, Uses of Heritage (Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group, 2006), 29.

Theoretical Foundations: Problems with Heritage

To understand the complexities surrounding current heritage practices, this thesis draws on theoretical frameworks from critical heritage studies. Laurajane Smith, Professor of Heritage and Museum Studies and editor of the International Journal of Heritage Studies, introduces the concept of AHD, arguing that dominant heritage narratives privilege tangible, monumental, and elite cultural artifacts—typically ‘old’ buildings and objects deemed worthy of reverence—while often overlooking intangible and everyday practices.4 The AHD represents a hegemonic, top-down perspective that privileges ‘innate artefact/site significance tied to time depth, scientific/aesthetic expert judgement, social consensus and nation-building’.5 In other words, under the AHD, heritage becomes focused on tangible assets such as monuments, facades, and sites whose value is defined by experts and official institutions, often associated with national history or elite culture.

Smith further argues that the AHD directs attention toward aesthetically pleasing material objects, sites, places, and landscapes, which are preserved and protected for future generations to educate them and forge a sense of common identity based on a certain reading of the past.6 This emphasis on material preservation treats heritage as something static, a physical legacy to conserve and display, rather than as a dynamic, evolving set of cultural meanings.

Consequently, the AHD tends to simplify heritage into what can easily be seen and managed, primarily focusing on the building’s appearance, historic façade, and visual continuity. This approach often results in practices such as ‘facadism’ in urban redevelopment projects, where only the outer shell of a historic building is retained while new construction emerges behind or within it. Such practice epitomizes AHD by preserving superficial visual elements as a veneer of historic authenticity, while the structural integrity and lived essence of the place are lost. These limited gestures of historical preservation are particularly prevalent in rapidly developing urban contexts as convenient solutions satisfying legal preservation requirements and superficially appealing to the public, who may lack the professional expertise necessary to critically assess spatial and managerial decisions.

4 5 6 Smith, Uses of Heritage, 11. Ibid. Ibid, 29.

Moreover, AHD marginalizes intangible heritage, including memories, lived experiences, and practices that significantly contribute to a place’s heritage value. Rodney Harrison, Professor of Heritage Studies at UCL, emphasizes that heritage ‘is not a “thing” ... but refers to a set of attitudes to, and relationships with, the past’.7 He argues that heritage is not limited to material entities but is fundamentally a relationship characterized by a reverence and attachment to selected objects, places, and practices that embody certain aspects of the past.8

Harrison further critiques traditional heritage approaches by highlighting the restrictive nature of top-down heritage management systems, which often ‘freeze’ cultural significance in time, preventing active community engagement and evolution. He notes that conventional heritage practices frequently operate through acts of categorization, selection, and omission, resulting in exclusive and narrow representations of heritage.9

These critiques highlight the limitations inherent within some institutionalized heritage frameworks, particularly their inability to sufficiently recognize and integrate community-driven initiatives and grassroots expressions of heritage. Drawing upon this theoretical foundation, this thesis contributes to discussions on the intersection of heritage and urban change in Deptford, advocating for a more inclusive and integrated approach to heritage preservation that acknowledges the interplay between institutional heritage management and local community agency in shaping sustainable urban futures.

7 8 9 Harrison, Heritage / Critical Approaches, 14. Ibid. Ibid, 35.

Location diagram based on information from Lewisham Council and Digimaps, showing Deptford’s position in relation to nearby areas. Due to their proximity, certain locations discussed in this thesis overlap with adjacent areas, including Evelyn, New Cross Gate, Brockley, and the Royal Borough of Greenwich. Source: Author.

Context: Deptford, London

Urban History of Deptford in three periods

Parish Period: Early Community and Local Economy (1086 – 1513)

Located in southeast London, Deptford now forms part of the London Borough of Lewisham, with its boundaries extending into the neighbouring Borough of Greenwich. It lies approximately four miles from central London, nestled between Greenwich to the east, New Cross to the south, and the River Thames to the north.10 Deptford originated as a modest riverside settlement— its name, historically ‘Depeford’, meaning ‘deep ford’, derived from its geographical setting where Watling Street crossed the River Ravensbourne at today’s Deptford Bridge.11 Situated in what was divided into Upper and Lower Deptford during Roman times, the parish’s identity was forged at the meeting point of land and water. Standing on the edge of Deptford Creek, I watched the Thames tide lap against reclaimed marshes that once yielded pasture and fertile market gardens—a vivid reminder that Deptford’s earliest economy relied on riverborne trade and agriculture.12

By the thirteenth century, Deptford Strand had emerged as a modest fishing hamlet, its boats facilitating trade along the Thames. The parish’s shallow ford and navigable creek underpinned a community adept at harnessing waterways for livelihood. Yet these same channels present ongoing challenges: the River Ravensbourne ranks as one of London’s most heavily engineered rivers today, and both it and stretches of the Thames fall within low to medium-risk flood zones.13

Lewisham Council, Deptford Ward Profile, 2022, 6, https://www.observatory.lewisham.gov.uk/wpcontent/uploads/2022/06/Deptford-digital.pdf.

Daniel Lysons, “Deptford, St Nicholas”, in The Environs of London: Volume 4, Counties of Herts, Essex and Kent (London, 1796), British History Online, accessed January 22, 2025, https://www.british-history. ac.uk/london-environs/vol4/pp359-385.

Edward Hasted, “Addenda and corrigenda to volume 1”, in The History and Topographical Survey of the County of Kent: Volume 2 (Canterbury, 1797), British History Online, accessed January 28, 2025, https://www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-kent/vol2/pp553-567.

Gareth Potts, Overview of Deptford, London (BURA Director of Research, Policy and Best Practice, 2008), 4, https://www.ucl.ac.uk/urbanbuzz/downloads/projects_09/Deptford_Case_Study.pdf.

In the late medieval period, Deptford’s economy diversified further. Its proximity to London and riverside location attracted early manufactories: brick and tile works appeared in 1418, taking advantage of abundant local clay. A site visit in Deptford reveals vestiges of its early developments of the parish era: the Grade II* listed west tower of St Nicholas Church, constructed in 1500, remains the sole intact medieval structure—a testament to the parish’s capacity for mercantile growth even before the formal establishment of the Crown’s ship building dockyard.

The scale of Deptford’s late medieval industry expanded rapidly: by the early 15th century, local brickmakers were producing large quantities of bricks, which were transported downstream to construct Henry VIII’s manor house in Dartford. The presence of skilled labourers—such as brickmakers, craftsmen, and millers—alongside basic infrastructure, including simple wharves, foreshadowed the parish’s readiness for larger-scale naval activity.

By 1420, records show a royal ship being refitted at Deptford Strand, facilitated by an excavated dock. During the 1460s, King Edward IV’s admiral, Sir John Howard, stored warships there, and in 1487 local shipwrights repaired the royal vessel, Anthony Chamfer. Henry VII further demonstrated the Crown’s interest in Deptford’s strategic location by renting a storehouse to provide naval supplies.14

Deptford’s advantageous location on the tidal Thames, coupled with its proximity to Greenwich Palace, attracted sustained royal interest. The combination of skilled labour, riverine trade, and proto-industrial manufacturing laid the foundation for the parish’s transformation.

14 “Deptford Dockyard,” Layers of London, accessed March 13, 2025, https://www.layersoflondon.org/ map/records/deptford-dockyard.

Figure 8

St. Nicholas Church’s entrance is flanked by gateposts topped with stone skull and crossbones carvings—one of its most memorable features. The west tower of the church dates from around1500, built upon13th-century foundations. Source: Author.

Figure 9

The main body of the church was reconstructed in 1697 to accommodate a growing population, with further restorations carried out in the early 20th century and again after World War II due to bomb damage. Notable naval figures were buried there, including master shipwright John Addey (1550–1606) and English explorer Edward Fenton (c. 1539–1603). Source: Author.

Naval Dockyard Period: Maritime Hub (1513 – 1869)

In 1513, Henry VIII chose Deptford to construct a royal dockyard that would operate for over three centuries. Under royal patronage it eventually became England’s premier warship yard.

The early investment in Deptford was ambitious. A grand brick storehouse, measuring approximately 172 feet in length, was constructed to hold sails, ropes, and provisions for the fleet.15 Although the dockyard would eventually close and the Tudor storehouse was later demolished by successive commercial owners, its archaeological foundations remain preserved beneath the ground. The site’s historical significance was formally recognised in the early 2000s, when it was designated a Scheduled Monument in 2003 and listed in the National Heritage List for England.16

Alongside the construction of new buildings, substantial landscape modifications were made to support large-scale shipbuilding. A double dry dock, known as the ‘Great Dock’, was excavated to allow vessels to be built and repaired under cover. In later years, this space was enclosed by the Olympia Shed—a distinctive wave-like industrial structure made from cast and wrought iron—which was listed as a Grade II building in 1982.17

By 1517, a natural tidal pond at the mouth of Deptford Creek had been expanded into a basin, enabling ships to berth safely off the river. In addition to the structures already mentioned, the site included a smith’s shop with twenty forges producing anchors, as well as mast-houses, timber sheds, a mould loft, and various workshops.18 Officers lived on site in purpose-built housing, forming a near self-sufficient community.

Naval Dockyards Society, 20th Century Naval Dockyards: Devonport and Portsmouth Characterisation Report, December 7, 2012, 53, https://navaldockyards.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/part1twentieth-century-naval-dockyards-devonport-portsmouth-characterisation.pdf.

“Tudor Naval Storehouse at Convoys Wharf,” Historic England, accessed March 9, 2025, https:// historicengland.org.uk/listing/the-list/list-entry/1021239.

“Olympia Convoy’s Wharf,” Historic England, accessed February 12, 2025, https://historicengland.org. uk/listing/the-list/list-entry/1213012.

Lysons, British History Online.

12

The Master Shipwright’s House, built in 1708, served as the residence for the senior shipbuilder of the Dockyard. Today, it remains one of Deptford’s oldest and most intact surviving Georgian structures. (London: National Maritime Museum, Greenwich, 1774)

13

The Tudor Storehouse was a two-storey brick building, spanning approximately 50 meters long and 10 meters wide. The quadrangle building served as a prominent landmark for vessels navigating this stretch of the Thames. (London: National Maritime Museum, Greenwich, 1774)

Figure 14

The Double Dock was built in the early 16th century at Deptford Dockyard. It was one of England’s earliest dry docks that enabled construction and repair of major naval vessels. (London: National Maritime Museum, Greenwich, 1774)

15

The Mast Pond was used to soak and season timber for masts and spars essential to shipbuilding. (London: National Maritime Museum, Greenwich, 1774)

Page

Figure 16

The painting by John Cleveley the Elder depicts the launch of the 60-gun warship St Albans from the Great Dock at Deptford Dockyard in 1747. To the left, behind the trees, stands the Master Shipwright’s House; to the right, with the clock tower, is the Great Storehouse. (London: National Maritime Museum, Greenwich, 1747)

Figure 17

The painting, by John Cleveley the Elder, is a fictional combination of two events: the launch of the 80-gun third-rate ship HMS Cambridge (left) from the Great Dock at Deptford Dockyard in 1755, and the launch of HMS Royal George (right) at Woolwich Dockyard the following year. (London: National Maritime Museum, Greenwich, 1757)

Deptford’s present-day character still vividly carries the echo of its naval past. Stepping out into Deptford High Street from the train station, I noticed layers of history etched into brick, streets, and symbols. The naval anchor appears in shopfront logos, symbolising the area’s enduring maritime identity.

Drawing on several self-guided historical walking routes created by locals— such as Sean Patterson, a London history enthusiast who curated walks based on Charles Booth’s Poverty Maps, and Russell Kenny and Paul Hayes, co-authors of the Walk Past blog offering free self-guided London history walks—I mapped locations identified by grassroots voices as sites of ‘unofficial heritage’.19

Following this composite map, I made my way to the far end of Deptford High Street, where the Deptford Anchor, a sculptural landmark mentioned in several route guides, stood in place. The hulking maritime relic sat at the centre of the bustling market street: solid, grounded, and unmistakable.

The anchor has always been more than just a static street sculpture. Originally installed in 1988 by landscape architect Rosie Chard, it quickly became a gathering place for local people, though it also, at times, led to what some have described as anti-social behaviour.20 In 2013, Lewisham Council removed it as part of a redevelopment project of the area, citing concerns about anti-social behaviour and traffic congestion.21 Its absence, however, sparked discontent among residents who saw the anchor as a symbol of Deptford’s place identity and shared memory.

19 20 21 Russell Kenny and Paul Hayes, “Walk 11 - A Walk Around Historical Deptford,” Free Self-Guided London History Walks (blog), October 19, 2021, https://www.walkspast.com/p/walk-11-walk-aroundhistorical-deptford.html.

Sian Boyle, “Residents Want Anchor Returned,” Evening Standard, October 24, 2013, Deptford is Forever, https://deptfordisforever.net/the-anchor. Ibid.

Previous Page

Figure 19

Composite mapping showing the collection of locations, venues, buildings, and structures mentioned in local guided walk tours, as recorded from online sources. The mapping includes both official and unofficial heritage sites, highlighting how local history enthusiasts are interested not only in officially listed sites. Source: Author.

Top Row from Left to Right

Figure 20

A walk around historic Deptford, designed by two history enthusiasts on their free self-guided London history walks blog. (London: Walks Past)

Figure 21

A Charles Booth-inspired walk drawing on his pioneering socio-economic study of London and incorporating readings from his original notebooks. (London: Charles Booth Walking Tours)

Figure 22

A local guided walk tour developed by an MA graduate in London Studies, using ‘psychogeographic’ walking techniques. (London: Footprints of London)

Lower Row from Left to Right

Figure 23

A brief tour designed by a London Blue Badge Tourist Guide, focusing on both contemporary life and historical narratives. (London: Guild of Tourist Guides)

Figure 24

A self-guided walk supported by audio and written guides, focusing on the maritime history of Victorian Deptford. (London: Royal Geographical Society)

Figure 25

A guided walk led by a local and an architectural historian during Deptford X, one of London’s longest-running contemporary art festivals, focusing on the architectural heritage of Deptford. (London: Deptford X)

Figure 26

Anonymous anchor graffiti had been appearing around Deptford since August 2013. (London: Deptford Is Forever, 2013)

Next Page

Figure 27

The original Deptford Anchor was returned to Deptford High Street today.

Source: Author.

Deptford Is Forever, an artistic collective formed in 2013 by local artists and activists, organized creative protests.22 The Deptford Society, representing residents and businesses, was formed in 2014 and initiated a petition titled ‘Give Us Back Our Bloomin’ Anchor,’ which garnered over 4,000 signatures.23 SILO SE8, a collective of musicians and artists established over 30 years ago and still active today, participated in street performances supporting the anchor’s return.24 These collective efforts highlighted the community’s dedication to preserving Deptford’s maritime heritage and resisting unwanted top-down redevelopment decisions.

Protest songs were written, chalk messages appeared on the pavement, and petitions circulated on the street. In 2013, anonymous graffiti—anchors sprayed across the High Street—turned the disappearance into an act of resistance, rooted in a ground-up movement.25

The following year, in 2018, the anchor returned—reinstalled as a testament to the unwavering efforts of various local groups and a tribute to Deptford’s maritime history.26 Its removal, return, and relocation have come to embody the dynamics of urban change, place identity, and ground-up resilience— a tangible remnant of a maritime industrial past that once housed the working waterfront known as ‘the King’s Yard’.

“Bags & Tattoos 2013,” Deptford is Forever, accessed January 11, 2025, https://deptfordisforever.net/ bagsandtats.

“Deptford Society,” Peter Collins, accessed January 13, 2025, https://www.deptfordsociety.uk/.

“Silo SE8,” Silo SE8, accessed January 14, 2025, https://silo-se8.bandcamp.com/.

“The Deptford Anchor,” Deptford is Forever, accessed January 11, 2025, https://deptfordisforever.net/ the-anchor.

“DIF 2018,’ Deptford is Forever, accessed January 11, 2025, https://deptfordisforever.net/dif%202018.

By the mid-16th century, the Royal Dockyard had emerged as the second major centre for shipbuilding after Chatham,27 and its influence brought infrastructural improvements to the inner urban fabric. Funds were allocated to pave Deptford’s muddy high street in preparation for Henry VIII’s visit in 1550, as the road had been deemed ‘so noisome and full of filth’ that it hindered his travel.28 Sir Francis Drake was knighted here by Queen Elizabeth I in 1581, and his ship, the Golden Hind, was exhibited in Deptford for over 70 years.29

Throughout the 17th and 18th centuries, Deptford’s dockyard continued to expand in both scale and operation—until it was eventually deemed more practical to construct larger ships at Woolwich and other sites with access to deeper water.30 At times, as recorded, a ‘Great part of it, as well as its environs, is inhabited by people of good fashion and credit’.31

In 1698, Tsar Peter the Great of Russia visited the Royal Dockyard to study English shipbuilding techniques, indicating the dockyard’s international preeminence.32 His stay—recorded by famous diarist John Evelyn—left a notable mark on the exchange. Evelyn’s estate at Sayes Court, which had been lent to the Tsar for his short stay, was reportedly left in disarray following the visit.

The expansion of the Navy’s Victualling Yard in 1742 added vast provisioning facilities to the Deptford waterfront, transforming the now-populous town into a logistical hub for the British Navy. One notable Georgian building from this era is the Master Shipwright’s House, located adjacent to the Convoys Wharf site. Built in 1708 as the residence for the Master Shipwright of the Royal Naval Dockyard, the Grade II* listed building is privately owned and managed today. While not generally open to the public, it occasionally participates in cultural events such as London’s annual Open House and serves as a venue for private events.33

Thousands of dockworkers, craftsmen, and naval officials moved to Deptford during the period, catalysing urban development. A series of Georgian terraced houses, constructed by local bricklayer Thomas Lucas along what is now Albury Street—now listed as Grade II* structures—was built to accommodate officers and senior staff from the nearby Deptford Dockyard.34 The elaborately carved door ornaments and fine brickwork showcases the high-quality craftsmanship of domestic Georgian architecture. These houses reflect the ambitious growth of Deptford’s social fabric during the naval dockyard period and the material aspirations of its professional classes.

“Former Master Shipwright’s House at Royal Dockyard, Deptford,” Historic England, accessed January 15, 2025, https://historicengland.org.uk/listing/the-list/list-entry/1213984.

“Charles Booth’s London,” Charles Booth’s London, London School of Economics and Political Science, accessed January 10, 2025, https://booth.lse.ac.uk/.

“Sir Francis Drake,” London Remembers, accessed January 9, 2025, https://www.londonremembers. com/memorials/sir-francis-drake.

Hasted, British History Online.

Ibid.

“Peter the Great,” Royal Museums Greenwich, accessed January 2, 2025, https://www.rmg.co.uk/ stories/topics/peter-great.

“The Shipwright,” Shipwright, accessed January 3, 2025, https://www.theshipwright.co.uk/.

Lewisham Council, Deptford High Street & St Paul’s Church Conservation Area Appraisal and Management Plan, 2019, 53, https://lewisham.gov.uk/myservices/planning/conservation/ conservation-areas/deptford-high-street-and-st-paul-s-conservation-area.

28

A memorial to Tsar Peter the Great was installed in London in 2000 to mark the 300th anniversary of his Grand Embassy. The memorial stands on Glaisher Street, in a corner of Deptford within the Royal Borough of Greenwich, near the meeting point of the River Thames and Deptford Creek. Source: Author.

Figure 29

Elaborate doorcases of Georgian houses on Albury Street, Deptford, constructed between 1705 and 1717. Source: Author.

Figure 30

The Victualling Yard Gate at Deptford Dockyard, part of what was once a critical hub for supplying food, drink, and naval stores to the Royal Navy, with much of the original complex now demolished. Source: Author.

The Convoys Wharf site boundary, which has shifted over time

Sayes Court Park, restored to public use following the closure of the Dockyard

The Tudor Storehouse, now buried, survives through its foundations today

Paynes Wharf, with its fragmented façades, remains partially intact today

Figure 31

Annotated historical map of Deptford (1853–1904), with base map sourced from Digimap. Source: Author.

Figure 32

Annotated historical map of Deptford (11894-1915), with base map sourced from Digimap. Source: Author.

33

More public buildings were also constructed. The Baroque church of St Paul’s, completed in 1737 and now the only Grade I listed building in Deptford, was one of the churches commissioned under the Fifty New Churches Act of 1711.35 Constructed in Portland stone, the church’s cylindrical tower rises above a semi-circular columned portico, which is accessed via a sweeping grand staircase. Its boundary wall, listed as a Grade II structure, encloses an island of green space around the church.

By the early 19th century, however, the rise of larger, deeper-draft iron ships and the silting of the Thames gradually diminished Deptford’s prominence. The conclusion of the Napoleonic Wars in 1815 led to a reduced demand for new ships, and despite brief revivals in the 1840s, the dockyard was officially closed in 186936 —marking the end of a maritime hub era that had lasted 356 years.

35

Peter Stone, “The Fifty New Churches Act,” The History of London (blog), April 23, 2021, https://www. thehistoryoflondon.co.uk/the-fifty-new-churches-act/2/. “Deptford Dockyard,” Royal Museums Greenwich, accessed March 9, 2025, https://www.rmg.co.uk/ collections/archive/rmgc-object-491976.

St. Paul’s Church, viewing from the garden. Source: Author.

34

St. Paul’s Church, viewing towards the entrance. Source: Author.

Post-Dockyard Period: Decline, Disinvestment, and Heritage (1869 - present)

The closure of Deptford’s Royal Dockyard in 1869 marked a turning point towards disinvestment. With the Navy’s withdrawal came job losses and a significant reduction in state investment, precipitating profound economic and social decline.

In 1871, the vast dockyard grounds were repurposed as the City of London’s Foreign Cattle Market, which operated until 1913.37 The adjacent Victualling Yard continued functioning until 1961, though by the end of the Second World War its role had diminished considerably.38 After its closure, most of the old Victualling Yard buildings were demolished, and a large council housing complex, the Pepys Estate was built on the site.39 A few historic structures, including the gateway on Grove Street and the ‘Colonnade’,40 as well as the terrace of former officers’ houses on Longshore and two former storehouses dating from the 1770–80s on the riverbank, were retained and adapted for housing or community use.41

As elite and middle-class residents, previously tied to naval administration, gradually departed, Deptford transformed predominantly into a working-class district. Many physical remnants of naval activity were demolished or destroyed during the World Wars, leaving Deptford in an accelerated state of urban decay. Overcrowded housing proliferated, and by the late 19th century, parts of Deptford had been extensively documented by social researchers. Charles Booth’s Poverty Map (1886–1903) classified the majority of households around the High Street as mixed-to-very poor.42 By the 1950s and 1960s, Deptford had become emblematic of inner-city poverty.

Next Page

Figure 35

The Pepys Estate, built in the 1960s on part of the former Deptford Dockyard site, reflects Deptford’s post-war transformation from a powerhouse of naval industry to a residential area dominated by working-class communities. Source: Author.

Figure 36

Upper Pepys Playground. Source: Autthor.

Robert Mason, “Greater London Industrial Archaeology Society,” December 16, 2009, http://www. glias.org.uk/news/245news.html.

A Cecil Hampshire, The Royal Navy Since 1945; Its Transition to the Nuclear Age (London: William Kimber, 1975), 209.

“Victualling Yard,” Layers of London, accessed March 3, 2025, https://www.layersoflondon.org/map/ records/victualling-yard.

Former houses and office fronted by a colonnaded passageway.

Bridget Cherry and Nikolaus Pevsner, London. 2, South (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1983), 34.

“Charles Booth’s London.”

In these shifting currents, Deptford’s historic potential now merges into tides of contemporary gentrification. The area’s strategic location along the Thames places the community under significant pressure for redevelopment; its attractive riverfront location and proximity to central London, have become a magnet for profit-driven developer investment. The riverside, historically a collective resource accessible to locals, is increasingly leveraged to attract new loft apartments, chain eateries, and upscale commercial developments catering primarily to affluent newcomers.

Deptford’s ongoing urban regeneration since the early 2000s has become a highly contested process, sparking debates among governmental bodies, councils, developers, and local communities. While pro-development supporters emphasize opportunities for economic growth and urban renewal, these initiatives risk undermining Deptford’s social, cultural, and historical integrity by neglecting and suppressing voices from underrepresented communities through top-down decision-making processes.

Figure 37

The loft apartments along Deptford Creek reflect the ongoing gentrification that is reshaping Deptford’s historic urban fabric.

Source: Author.

Next Page

Figure 38

The redevelopment converted Deptford’s railway arches into boutique shops and cafés at Deptford Market Yard, alongside a new residential complex near the station offering limited affordable housing.

Source: Author.

Recent redevelopment efforts, such as the Deptford Market Yard completed in 2016 and the new residential complex adjacent to Deptford Station, exemplify this tension. Although the project was promoted to provide partial affordable housing, it ultimately delivered 132 new homes and 11,000 square feet of commercial and retail space, with only eight affordable homes.43 Roman Makszimenko, owner of Jars Bar in the Yard for three years, expressed feeling ‘awful and hopeless’ after being notified of a 30 percent rent increase following the redevelopment.44 He criticised the new management of the Market Yard for ‘attracting different pop-ups but pushing away core businesses that created the community here,’ and described the redevelopment as ‘cosplaying Shoreditch’ while ‘destroying the ecosystem here in Deptford’.45

Equally contentious was the 2018 redevelopment of Tidemill Garden—a beloved community space known for its community-led wildlife garden. Despite substantial community activism—including petitions, protests, and legal challenges, local authorities ultimately approved plans to convert the garden into a housing complex.46

Anita In-Deptford, “Affordable Housing Is the Joke of the Century,” Deptford Is Changing (blog), March 18, 2018, https://deptfordischanging.wordpress.com/2018/03/18/affordable-housing-is-the-joke-ofthe-century/.

James Twomey, “Deptford Business Owners Forced to Close as Landlord Demands 30% Rent Hike,” South London News, September 30, 2022, https://londonnewsonline.co.uk/news/deptford-businessowners-forced-to-close-as-landlord-demands-30-rent-hike/. Twomey, “Deptford Business Owners Forced to Close as Landlord Demands 30% Rent Hike.”

Anita In-Deptford, “Tidemill Garden Is Part of the Cohesiveness of Deptford.”

Figure 39

The vibrant Deptford High Street, with its strong multicultural character, is reflected in the diversity of local businesses, with shopfronts and products displayed in many different languages. Source: Author.

In 2012, the Convoys Wharf development proposal by international developer Hutchison Whampoa, valued at approximately £1 billion, marked a significant escalation in Deptford’s urban redevelopment discourse. Occupying the historic Royal Dockyard site, the project spans approximately 16.6 hectares and is slated to deliver around 3,500 new homes, alongside commercial, retail, and cultural spaces.47 Despite extensive community objections aimed at preserving archaeological foundations on-site—and after protracted judicial processes involving both the Council and the Government—the development plans were ultimately approved. Today, the Scheduled Monument of the Tudor storehouse foundations lie buried beneath concrete.

Walking through Deptford High Street today reveals a vibrant multicultural community. The diverse backgrounds of its residents, from Vietnamese and Caribbean to Chinese and Turkish, are immediately evident in the array of independent shops, each flaunting vividly painted shopfronts, different languages, and distinct cultural identities. Yet beneath this kaleidoscope of vibrant energy lie signs of hardship: dilapidated buildings, peeling paint, and structures in disrepair hint at ongoing socioeconomic challenges. Despite these challenges, Deptford pulses with creative vitality. Walls and lampposts are plastered with vibrant posters advertising indie bands, community theatre productions, and community-led art events, reflecting a flourishing local arts scene and an embodiment of Deptford’s distinctive demographic mix and resilient spirit.

Moving away from the bustling market street towards the riverside, the atmosphere gradually quietens, and developments shift towards a larger scale. Council estates become more frequent, punctuated by historic pubs that hark back to the area’s maritime and industrial era, as noted in heritage walking guides. Scattered pockets of greenery, such as the areas around local churches and small public parks, offer respite, though they too bear marks of neglect and under-maintenance. These juxtapositions, between cultural vibrancy and visible deprivation, between animated street life and forces of redevelopment, capture Deptford’s complex urban identity today - a community poised between forces of urban regeneration and preservation.

47 “Convoys Wharf,” Hutchison Property Group (UK) Limited, accessed January 21, 2025, https://convoyswharf.com/.

Figure 40

A mural painted on the side of a building in front of a small plaza, with fresh paintwork that clearly indicates maintenance. Source: Author.

The Bird’s Nest Pub, known for its live music and role as an artistic and cultural space, is currently facing a renovation plan as part of a broader redevelopment plan, which includes the construction of 28 new residential units adjacent to the pub. Source: Author.

Music event posters found on a lamppost outside Deptford rail station, reflecting the area’s vibrant music scene. Source: Author.

Ground-up Heritage in Deptford: Conflicts and Comparisons

The case of urban renewal in Deptford distinguishes itself from many other London sites confronting similar challenges, largely due to the notable scarcity of officially recognized heritage, juxtaposed against numerous grassroots initiatives advocating for heritage preservation.48 This phenomenon prompts critical reflection on the authorities and institutions determining what constitutes heritage, who possesses the authority to shape heritage narratives, and the implications these narratives hold for the area’s historical identity and its relationship with future development.

Within the Deptford and Evelyn areas under Lewisham Council jurisdiction, there are 45 listed heritage sites classified as Grade I, Grade II*, and Grade II. More than half of these are Grade II listed, with St. Paul’s Church being the sole Grade I site—a marked disparity compared to the neighbouring Greenwich Council, which boasts over 650 listed buildings across the three categories, including 33 Grade I sites.49

Greenwich’s long-standing association with Crown land ownership and royal patronage has directly contributed to its abundance of heritage sites. The UNESCO World Heritage nomination for ‘Maritime Greenwich’ notes that the area ‘demonstrates the power, patronage and influence of the Crown in the 17th and 18th centuries’, encompassing an ensemble of landmark buildings such as the Queen’s House, the Baroque complex of the Royal Hospital for Seamen, and the Royal Observatory.50

42

Listed heritage sites across London, with the highlighted red area indicating locations related to maritime heritage within the Lewisham Council area. (London: Historic England)

Figure 43

Focus area of listed heritage sites across Lewisham and the adjacent Greenwich Borough. The map highlights the significantly lower concentration of listed heritage in Deptford compared Central London and its adjacent Borough. (London: Historic England)

48 49 50

See appendix I for a chronological summary of community-led heritage initiatives.

Royal Borough of Greenwich, Royal Borough of Greenwich Summary List of Listed Buildings, 2022, 1-14, https://www.royalgreenwich.gov.uk/download/downloads/id/5316/royal_greenwich_local_ heritage_list.pdf.

UNESCO World Heritage Centre, “Maritime Greenwich,” accessed March 21, 2025, https://whc. unesco.org/en/list/795/.

44

Typologies of Listed Heritage in Deptford. Source: Author.

Figure 45

Typologies of “Heritage” in Deptford Mentioned in Local Historical Walks. The two tables illustrate the differences between how official authorities and local community groups perceive and value heritage in Deptford. Source: Author.

Typologies of “Heritage” in Deptford Mentioned in Local Historical Walks

In practical terms, the dominance of Crown land ownership in Greenwich meant that its buildings were better shielded over time from redevelopment forces. In contrast, Deptford’s historical sites, while arguably just as significant in respects of a naval and maritime development, suffered from neglect and undervaluation, leaving far fewer buildings listed. Yet governmental bodies and heritage institutions have largely remained passive in recognising nonmonumental or traditionally undervalued forms of heritage, especially in areas with a working-class identity. Such reluctance may stem from planning strategies favouring urban redevelopment and structural removals, or from entrenched perceptions that prioritize preserving heritage in pristine or ideal states—an approach notably problematic for Deptford, where many sites exist in fragmented, incomplete, or deteriorating conditions.

As discussed in the AHD, systemic biases within heritage valuation processes are often shaped by socioeconomic hierarchies and aesthetic preferences. Institutionalized systems tend to favour monumental, visually impressive, and materially substantial heritage, reflecting the values and priorities of a relatively exclusive group of professionals and decision-makers. Consequently, intangible dimensions, lived experiences, and community-driven heritage advocacy frequently become marginalized, as evidenced by developers’ approaches in Deptford. Such approaches, potentially including the national listing system, prioritize economic gains and aesthetic considerations, often at the expense of the intangible and lived heritage deeply valued by local communities.

Deptford exemplifies the resilience and notable achievements of communitydriven heritage campaigns, despite facing prolonged and often repetitive legal battles that have hindered similar movements elsewhere. Paradoxically, challenges like urban decay and socioeconomic struggles have fostered a community deeply invested in recognizing and celebrating their local historical identity, inspiring artistic initiatives, performance arts, and ambitious heritage projects such as the Lenox Project. Despite fragmented physical remnants of official heritage, the narratives and significance of Deptford’s maritime past continue to be actively preserved and shared through grassroots efforts. Community-led historic walking tours have attracted attention from those interested in England’s naval heritage, enhancing awareness and reinforcing collective efforts to preserve and reconnect with Deptford’s vanishing history.51

As Deptford’s physical landscape undergoes dramatic transformations, residents grapple with concerns about displacement, the erosion of affordable living spaces, and the potential loss of the area’s distinct historical and cultural character. Redevelopment, therefore, is not merely a indication of economic and spatial transformation but also a stretched-out process that raises urgent discussions around spatial justice, imbalanced power relations, and heritage examination within aggressively capitalized urban contexts. These complex dynamics in Deptford compel consideration from alternative viewpoints that acknowledge the inevitable interaction between urban development and heritage preservation—where historical legacies meet future aspirations.

This thesis expands on the potential to redefine heritage typologies and extend the concept to better address contemporary urban challenges, transitioning heritage from static preservation toward an active mechanism for engaging current societal and urban complexities. Such discourses must transcend rigid categorizations, promoting adaptable negotiations, inclusivity, and flexible interpretations that reflect and support the ongoing evolution of culturally rich urban environments such as London, whose prosperity inherently depends on relentless urban dynamism and competitive redevelopment.

51 Sean Patterson, “Get a Guided Tour of Deptford From a Local,” Footprints of London, November 7, 2015, https://footprintsoflondon.com/live/2015/11/get-a-guided-tour-of-deptford-from-a-local/.

Newspaper cut-out featuring one of London’s largest redevelopment projects at Convoys Wharf. (London: Deptford Is Forever, 2014)

Combined mapping based on excavation locations carried out by MOLA on the Convoys Wharf site, revealing extensive archaeological foundations at the Tudor Storehouse area, which have been neglected and reburied today. Source: Author.

Three Case studies in Deptford: Contesting Heritage Narratives

Archaeology as Heritage? Convoys Wharf

As discussed in earlier chapters, the vast archaeological remains of the Royal Naval Dockyard’s structures lie beneath the concreted surface of Convoys Wharf today. Extensive archaeological evaluations have uncovered significant remains, including the original slipways used for shipbuilding and a massive double dry dock measuring over 100 meters in length and 5 meters in depth.52

Additional features such as basins, mast ponds, wharves, and building footings from various periods during the dockyard’s three century operation have also been recorded.53 Yet the physical traces of Deptford’s naval past are now largely invisible, buried beneath layers of concrete in preparation for new construction. The once thriving ‘King’s Yard’ now exists in a concealed, fragmented and stratified state, with its historical significance acknowledged primarily on paper, while its material presence remains underground. This tension between historical importance and physical erasure, cantered around the redevelopment plans proposed by the site’s current owners, raises an ongoing debate about how such archaeological landscapes should be valued and hence responded in the context of the city’s contemporary redevelopment priorities.

52 53 “Convoys Wharf,” Museum of London Archaeology, accessed February 21, 2025, https://www.mola. org.uk/discoveries/news/convoys-wharf. Museum of London Archaeology, Post-excavation Assessment Report and Updated Project Design, November 2013, 9, https://www.mola.org.uk/sites/default/files/downloads/Convoys%20Wharf%20 post-ex%20assessment%20Part1.pdf.

Following approval from the Mayor of London in 2014, the major redevelopment plan is underway to transform the 16.6-hectare riverside site into a high-density area of residential and commercial plot. A recent site visit shows that construction has primarily begun on the extended jetty structures, where a marketing suite for the development is currently under construction. The developers’ response to heritage has largely centred on the Olympia Shed, which is to be retained and repurposed as a feature building serving cultural and commercial functions. By highlighting the shed with promotional materials and adopting strategies such as using materials similar to the industrial iron cladding of the original structure, along with references to the location of historical slipways , the developers have made a symbolic tribute toward the listed building. Yet at the same time, they neglected the broader archaeological landscape of the dockyard, arguing that the subterranean remains ‘cannot be used in a meaningful manner’. The landscaping strategies and design of public spaces, as outlined in the design proposals, offer only minimal concessions to the site’s archaeological remains. At best, these are reflected through surfacelevel interventions such as information boards and placards integrated into green spaces to mark the positions of lost buildings. With no spatial design responses to support display, public access, or experiential engagement with the foundations of docks and storehouses, the proposed landscape design presents a disconnected and superficial approach that fails to sensitively address the site’s layered histories and distinctive character.

The debate over Convoys Wharf’s future has brought to light the differing attitudes toward what might be considered ‘grey heritage’ and redevelopment among various stakeholders. These are historically significant structures that fall within contested definitions and occupy ambiguous positions within heritage listing processes. The foundations of the Tudor Storehouse on the site, as the only archaeological feature in Deptford included on the national heritage list and designated as a scheduled monument, exemplify this complex and uncertain categorisation. Its listed yet pending status—formally recognised, but lacking legal protection—reflects broader conflicts and negotiations over what is acknowledged as heritage. It also underscores the challenges inherent in bureaucratic systems when attempting to ascribe value to remnants that are materially fragmented, largely invisible, or vulnerable to erasure.

54

Lewisham Council, Plot 08, 15 and 22, Convoys Wharf, London, SE8 3JH, June 9, 2020, 1, https:// councilmeetings.lewisham.gov.uk/documents/s73508/Item%204a%20-%20Convoys%20 Executive%20Summary%20FINAL%20for%20print.pdf.

Hutchison Property Group (UK) Limited, Convoys Wharf Heritage Design Proposal, December 2019, 13. Ibid, 5. Ibid, 23.

Developer’s render showing the proposed masterplan and its preservation strategy, which responds to heritage by retaining roof structures while replacing original façades with glass. (London: Hutchison Property Group, 2024)

Developer’s masterplan proposal showing the retained Olympia Square and a triangular green space adjacent to Sayes Court Park. (London: Hutchison Property Group, 2024)

The conservation of the Convoys Wharf site, predominantly driven by local advocacy, serves as a compelling example of the rise of ‘unofficial heritage’. Grassroots organisations such as Deptford Is... have campaigned for a heritage-led approach to redevelopment, organising community workshops that encouraged the participation of residents in both development and decision-making processes during the early stages of master planning.58 These efforts contributed to the successful incorporation of the Lenox Project into part of the developer’s community engagement campaign.59 Historical watch groups such as the Naval Dockyards Society, a scholarly organisation dedicated to the preservation of historic dockyard heritage, have long critiqued the regeneration proposals for the dockyard since 2004.60 In a public declaration supporting the local advocacy group Voice4Deptford in 2020, they criticised the proposals for failing to reflect Deptford’s maritime character and buried archaeology, describing the development as a ‘generic high-rise scheme with no specific connection to the site’.61 These efforts have succeeded in drawing international attention to the site’s significance, marked by the inclusion of Deptford Dockyard, together with the adjacent Sayes Court Garden, on the World Monuments Watch List of endangered heritage sites in 2013.62 This international recognition, despite the absence of national acknowledgment, has sent a clear signal that the archaeological landscape, not only its visible and intact structures, deserves preservation.

Previous Page

Figure 50

Convoys Wharf public exhibition held in 2012 by developer Hutchison Whampoa and masterplanners Terry Farrell & Partners. (London: Deptford Is..., 2012)

Figure 51

Local groups, including Deptford Is..., attended the event to engage with representatives from the developer and their consultants. (London: Deptford Is..., 2012)

Deptford Is, “Convoys Wharf Public Exhibition: Deptford Is.. Responds,” Deptford Is… (blog), July 22, 2012, https://deptfordis.blogspot.com/2012/07/convoys-wharf-public-exhibition.html. “The Lenox Project,” Build the Lenox, The Restoration Warship Project, accessed March 22, 2025, https://www. buildthelenox.org/.

Naval Dockyards Society, Naval Dockyards Society Statement to Voice4Deptford, September 1, 2020, 1-4, https://navaldockyards.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/nds-statement-to-v4d-sept2020-v2.pdf. Ibid, 1.

World Monuments Fund, “Deptford Dockyard and Sayes Court Garden,” Deptford Dockyard and Sayes Court Garden, 2014, https://www.wmf.org/monuments/deptford-dockyard-and-sayes-court-garden.

The new marketing suite, currently under construction on the jetty structure extending from the site. Source: Author.

The Olympia Shed remains untouched, with construction yet to begin. Photograph taken through the fencing; other areas of the site have also not yet started construction. Source: Author.

On the other side, while developers have largely prioritised economic gain and presented the redevelopment plan as a much-needed opportunity to deliver housing and employment opportunities, official heritage guardians— namely Historic England, an arm’s length public advisory body—have also, perhaps questionably, acquiesced too readily to development pressures. This is particularly evident in the decision to exclude all other elements of the dockyard, including the great dry dock, slipways, mast ponds, and other features deemed to have national importance, from the scheduled monument list. During the consultation process leading up to the approval of development plans, Historic England’s role was primarily to advise on and oversee archaeological work, including the approval of excavation method statements in collaboration with developers and the local council. In doing so, the organisation essentially endorsed a strategy of ‘preservation by record’ for the majority of remains on site, rather than advocating for a more sensitive or spatially integrated heritage response to the significance and complexities of this contested landscape.

The local council, Lewisham Council, also found itself caught in the middle of these debates and imbalanced power dynamics. As the planning authority, Lewisham initially worked with the developer to revise the plans and secure certain concessions to heritage, expressing support in principle for community proposals such as the Lenox ship project. However, in 2013, the Mayor of London ‘called in’ the planning application, effectively removing the decision from the council’s hands.63

These conflicts—between the community and developers, the local and regional governments, and even the heritage organizations and planners—have made Convoys Wharf a representational case in the politics of urban heritage. It highlights the complex web of agencies involved in heritage processes and presents challenges and limitations inherent in the current heritage systems, particularly when confronting the multifaceted, yet often intangible and incomplete nature of ground-up heritage.

63 Laura Mark, “£1bn Convoys Wharf Scheme Given Boris Approval,” Construction News, March 26, 2019, https://www.constructionnews.co.uk/sections/news/1bn-convoys-wharf-scheme-given-borisapproval-01-04-2014/.

Garden as Heritage? Sayes Court Park

Southwest of the Convoys Wharf development site, Sayes Court Park appears to be an ordinary public garden. However, beneath its unassuming presence lies an ongoing struggle between grassroots heritage advocacy and the broader forces of urban redevelopment reshaping Deptford. Despite its significant historical and cultural value, the site has yet been granted recogni-tion at national levels, and governmental conservation efforts remain limited. Sayes Court Park has long suffered from neglect and inadequate maintenance; a situation exacerbated by the in-corporation of part of its original grounds into redevelopment plans associated with the Con-voys Wharf project. Numerous community-led initiatives emerged from 2011 onward, advocat-ing strongly for the regeneration of Sayes Court Park’s legacy as part of the redevelopment.

The origins of Sayes Court trace back to the Elizabethan era, with the surviving public park to-day representing only a small fragment of the original Sayes Court Estate designed by John Eve-lyn—an influential 17th-century diarist, horticulturist, and environmentalist.

The original Sayes Court Gardens were conceived as an elaborate landscape inspired by Europe-an formal gardens. Evelyn incorporated medicinal herb beds around a central fountain and maintained beehives within the garden, reflecting his broader horticultural interests. Architec-turally, the estate featured a banquet house at its southern end, a summerhouse at the north-ern end, as well as a laboratory, nursery, and kitchen garden. Evelyn envisioned Sayes Court as an experimental site for botanical research, sourcing plants both locally and from the continent. His design approach positioned the garden not merely as an ornamental and aesthetic space, but as a site of scientific inquiry. Alongside Evelyn’s extensive writings, Sayes Court Gardens in-fluenced early landscape design practices and emerging concepts of urban ecology.

Sayes Court Garden, “Documenting Sayes Court and the John Evelyn Archive,” YouTube, November 2, 2012, video, 33:48, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oVUVWfWDBL0. Bethany Hopper, “Lost Gardens of London: John Evelyn’s Sayes Court Garden,” Garden Museum, June 20, 2024, https://gardenmuseum.org.uk/lost-gardens-of-london-john-evelyns-sayes-court-garden/. Ibid. Ibid.

The Garden History Blog, “John Evelyn’s Elysium Britannicum,” The Garden History Blog (blog), December 18, 2021, https://thegardenhistory.blog/2018/09/15/john-evelyns-elysium-britannicum/. Kedron Jenkins, “Meet John Evelyn,” Norfolk Master Gardeners, edited January 4, 2022, https://www. norfolkmastergardeners.org/meet-john-evelyn.

55

Portrait of John Evelyn, the diarist who lived at Sayes Court between 1652 and 1694 and continued writing until his death in 1706. His diaries, rich in detail and storytelling, have been digitally scanned and are preserved today in the British Library Archive. (London: Wellcome Collection)

56

First publication of the Royal SocietySylva, or A Discourse of Forest-Trees (1664) by John Evelyn. (London: Greater London Industrial Archaeology Society)

Evelyn’s work garnered significant recognition during his lifetime, resulting in commissions for several other garden projects. As a founding member of the Royal Society—the world’s oldest national scientific institution—he authored its inaugural publication, Sylva, or A Discourse of Forest-Trees (1664), advocating large-scale afforestation to address England’s dwindling woodlands and enhance urban air quality, particularly in relation to naval timber supplies. Like many historical sites in London, the Sayes Court Estate underwent substantial transformations over subsequent centuries. After its brief lease to Peter the Great, the grounds were repurposed as market gardens before being acquired by the Admiralty to support naval operations. Following the closure of the Royal Dockyard in the early 20th century, John Evelyn’s descendant, William John Evelyn—later a Member of Parliament for Deptford— repurchased the remnants of the estate. By 1877, he had converted the remaining land into a municipal park, with approximately 14 acres allocated to almshouses and 10 acres designated as public gardens, providing much-needed green space for the rapidly industrializing and impoverished community.

William Evelyn’s advocacy played a pivotal role in the early conservation movements, aligning closely with reform initiatives championed by Octavia Hill, a pioneering social reformer who advocated for improvement of housing conditions for the urban poor and access to green spaces. In 1884, Evelyn sought to transfer Sayes Court into public ownership; however, no organization at the time possessed the legal authority to accept and maintain such properties for public benefit. This absence of an official public body capable of accepting stewardship of the park led Hill and her colleague Robert Hunter to formulate foundational principles that culminated in the creation of the National Trust. Although the Trust was constituted too late to acquire Sayes Court, Evelyn’s pioneering vision significantly influenced its creation. Nonetheless, despite its profound historical associations and heritage value, Sayes Court itself has received limited official recognition or protection today, reflecting persistent tensions between conservation priorities and urban redevelopment, and highlighting gaps within institutional heritage frameworks.

The decline of Sayes Court Park reflects a broader issue of how historically significant sites often lack official recognition amid shifting land uses and economic interests.75 In a fast-changing urban environment, heritage is not a static entity that is preserved because of its past; it is an active reconstruction through the contemporary values and priorities of various stakeholders. These differing priorities can spur proactive conservation efforts but also lead to the marginalization of certain sites. This dynamic is evident in the case of Sayes Court Park. Extensive grassroots efforts from the Deptford community have emerged to advocate for its revitalization amid profit-driven redevelopment pressures. The ongoing conflicts over the park’s future represent a continuous negotiation between conservation of urban historic landscapes and urban transformation. The site thus manifests a dynamic process of contestation over what constitutes heritage and a reflection of power struggles and imbalances in determining the future of historical urban landscapes.

“John Evelyn (1620 – 1706),” Exploring Surrey’s Past, accessed March 2, 2025, https://www. exploringsurreyspast.org.uk/themes/people/writers/john_evelyn/.

Helen Evelyn, The History of the Evelyn Family: With a Special Memoir of William John Evelyn (London: Eveleigh Nash, 1915), 469-470.

Sayes Court Garden CIC, “Sayes Court,” accessed March 26, 2025, https://www.sayescourt.org.uk/.

Ibid.

London Gardens Trust, “Sayes Court Park (Lewisham),” London Parks & Gardens, November 14, 2022, https://londongardenstrust.org/conservation/inventory/site-record/?ID=LEW049. Harrison, Heritage / Critical Approaches, 15.

The Sayes Court is in a state of undermaintenance today. Source: Author.

Over the past two decades, residents in Deptford and heritage enthusiasts have mobilized to revive the historic site of Sayes Court Park amidst the massive Convoys Wharf redevelopment, urging developers and authorities to integrate this historic legacy into new development plans. Numerous community organizations have emerged, advocating for the restoration of Sayes Court Park, gradually gaining support from established heritage watch groups.76

Community-led organizations have been central to efforts advocating for the preservation of Sayes Court Park during redevelopment. Groups such as Deptford Is… and Sayes Court Garden CIC have challenged conventional top-down planning by promoting grassroots-driven participation in planning processes. Deptford Is… embraced a ‘Yes in My Backyard’ approach, conducting planning objection workshops and information sessions and advocated for heritage-conscious alternatives. Sayes Court Garden CIC, supported by organizations including the National Trust and the Eden Project, successfully secured space for the historic Sayes Court Garden within Plot 18 in Convoys Wharf redevelopment, approved by the Mayor of London in 2014.77

Voice4Deptford, a broader coalition representing community interests, reinforced this collective voice. A spokesperson stated, ‘We must ensure our voices shape a development that respects both our past and our community’s needs.’78 The coalition actively organized public consultations, engaged with local officials, and initiated legal challenges. Most notably, they pursued a judicial review challenging the validity of the Convoys Wharf planning consent, arguing that it had expired.79 The judicial review ultimately failed, underscoring the considerable difficulties community groups face when confronting complex legal frameworks and large-scale development processes.

DeptfordFolk, a local amenity society focused on improving the park’s usability and environment, further exemplifies community commitment. A representative emphasized, ‘Our community’s heritage forms the foundation of our identity and guides our future,’ reflecting their dedication to preserving Sayes Court Park as a communal green space.80 The group secured a modest £500 grant, matched by Lewisham Council, to replace deteriorating wooden supports of the park’s ancient mulberry tree, believed to have been planted by John Evelyn in 1696.

World Monuments Fund, “Deptford Dockyard and Sayes Court Garden.”

“New Community Led Designs for Green Spaces on Sayes Court Estate,” Lewisham Council, February 11, 2022, https://lewisham.gov.uk/articles/news/new-community-led-designs-for-green-spaces-onsayes-court-estate.

“Deptford Docks: ‘There Will Be No References Left of What’s There,’” The Developer, June 1, 2022, https://thedeveloper.live/opinion/opinion/deptford-docks-there-will-be-no-references-left-of-whatsthere.

“Action for a Judicial Review of Convoys Wharf Planning Permission,” Crowd Justice, November 25, 2020, https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/v4d-action-for-a-judicial-review/.

The Landscape Institute, “Sayes Court Park Launches Crowdfunding Campaign,” Landscape Institute, August 1, 2017, https://www.landscapeinstitute.org/news/sayes-court-crowdfunding-campaign/.

62

Deptford Is... Poster calling for community partcipation in Convoys Wharf Objections workshop. (London: Deptford Is...)

63

Deptford residents participating in discussion over initial Convoys Wharf Master Plans. (London: Deptford Is...)

64

Model of the proposed extension of Sayes Court Park into Convoys Wharf Plot as a response to the lost gardens, together with proposals of a urban horticultural centre by David Kohn Architects. (London: Sayes Court Garden CIC)

The case of Sayes Court Park highlights that the notion of ‘ownership’ in heritage discourse often lacks sufficient scrutiny, particularly regarding how effectively community engagement can translate into tangible spatial manifestations and long-term preservation. Urban historic landscapes that embody extensive community engagement may offer a more authentic reflection of local identity, affirming them as significant spaces worthy of preservation for future generations. However, while such landscapes reflect a shared identity, transforming community engagement into sustainable conservation remains challenging. For instance, initiatives in Deptford have encountered significant practical hurdles. Limited financial resources— illustrated by DeptfordFolk’s modest grant for the ancient mulberry tree—have constrained both the scale and long-term viability of these community-driven efforts.

Practically, community groups often grapple with a shortage of technical expertise necessary for the successful long-term transformation of heritage spaces. Technical complexities—such as ecological conservation, structural maintenance, and landscape management—demand specialized knowledge that frequently exceeds the capabilities of volunteer organizations. Legally, navigating bureaucratic procedures to secure official approvals or funding presents a significant barrier for those outside the legal or political industry. As a result, community voices can remain confined to mere ideas on paper.

Within multicultural contexts like Deptford—where spatial identity is deeply rooted in its rich naval history, emerging music culture, and grassroots campaigns—massive redevelopment interventions in historic urban landscapes become inevitable arenas of tension and contestation. Rather than framing ongoing discussions as a binary conflict between preservation and development, the challenge lies in finding ways for these seemingly opposing forces to converge, thereby contributing to the meaningful evolution of the urban landscape. The inherent power imbalance between developers and local communities necessitates a collaborative model in which mutual benefits are recognized. Developers need active, engaged communities to sustain and enhance the spaces they create, while local groups depend on financial and infrastructural support to ensure the longevity of heritage-driven initiatives. Authorised bodies—such as the government, developers, and experts involved —should embrace efforts to equalize decision-making power among vulnerable stakeholders, working toward a more balanced and synergized model that transforms heritage from a static relic of the past into an active, evolving component of urban progress.

Figure 65, 66, 67

Community-led Engagement Workshops held by Sayes Court CIC. Weekly open days, gardening and cooking workshops, film screenings, forest school sessions, ping pong club, live performances and exhibitions engaging over 3000 participants. (London: Sayes Court Garden CIC)

69

Paynes Wharf and Borthwick Wharf under construction in 2013. (Flickr: Bill Green)

Fragments as Heritage? Paynes Wharf

Deptford’s deep-rooted naval heritage and historical connection to the Royal Dockyard extend beyond its immediate area due to the administrative boundary between Lewisham and Greenwich Councils along Deptford Creek. As a key site within this historically rich context, Paynes Wharf, located adjacent to Convoys Wharf, falls under Greenwich’s jurisdiction. Owing to its historical significance in naval engineering, its geographical proximity to key maritime sites in Deptford, and its preservation methodology, which retains only fragments of its architectural façade, Paynes Wharf was chosen as a critical case study in this research.

From the 1860s to 1913, Paynes Wharf operated as the boiler and distillery shop for John Penn & Sons Marine Engineers, one of the Royal Navy’s major engine suppliers.81 The company played a significant role in the expansion of naval, mercantile, and passenger steam shipping, embedding Deptford’s identity within Britain’s industrial and maritime history. However, with the decline of shipbuilding in the post-industrial period, the site underwent several adaptive reuses. Under the ownership of Palmers, Paynes Wharf was repurposed as a storage facility for general cargo, and then an egg-processing facility before eventually being vacated.82

The redevelopment of Paynes Wharf — submitted by United House Developments — was planned in conjunction with Borthwick Wharf as part of a riverside residential project. The proposal involved a 28,000 sq. ft. structure, primarily comprising 257 residential units, 10 studio live-work units, and commercial spaces arranged over three floors.83 The design integrated the Grade II-listed facade facing the Thames, while demolishing the rest of the building, including the east, south, and west facades, as well as the internal columns.84 The outer walls of Paynes Wharf remained standing for several years before any incorporation into the new development commenced and had attracted a lot of people, including London historical structures followers to capture the remaining facades from the gap of the gate’s hoarding up the site. Meanwhile, Borthwick Wharf was demolished. The project was designated as a ‘Creative Enterprise Zone’ by the government, aligning with broader efforts to support creative industries and economic regeneration in Deptford.85

Adrian Prockter, “Payne’s Wharf,” Know Your London, July 13, 2015, https://knowyourlondon.wordpress. com/2015/07/13/paynes-wharf/.

Paul Talling, “22 Years of Derelict London,” Derelict London, Social History and Guided Walking Tours, accessed March 13, 2025, https://www.derelictlondon.com/22years.html.

Alex Neil, “Paynes and Borthwick SE8 Development,” Alex Neil Estate Agents, accessed April 1, 2025, https://www.alexneil.com/development-paynes-and-borthwick-se8.

Talling, “22 Years of Derelict London.”

“Paynes & Borthwick Wharf,” The Deptford Dame, September 25, 2012, https://deptforddame.blogspot. com/2012/09/paynes-borthwick-wharf.html.

In 2006, Greenwich Council’s planning board approved the demolition of Borthwick Wharf and alterations to Paynes Wharf. Later, Mindoro Developments, a London-based design and build company, introduced a revised scheme, adopting a ‘shell and core’ concept.86 While the project sought to retain elements of the original structure, notably by fitting the façade’s arched openings with floor-to-ceiling windows to maximize views of the Thames, the intervention and new design only superficially preserved historic architectural features, ultimately failing to achieve a holistic integration of new and old elements.

The redevelopment of Paynes and Borthwick Wharves has brought diverse responses from various groups, reflecting conflicting perceptions of heritage in the context of contemporary urban change. While developers, policymakers, and community members acknowledge the site’s cultural and historical significance, their interpretations of its value and how it should be preserved and integrated vary significantly.

From the developer’s perspective, the project is framed as both a cultural and commercial asset. Mark O’Grady, director of P&B Developments — the cost consultant for the project — describes the redevelopment as an opportunity to transform the area into a ‘stunning new cultural destination.’87 This commercially driven narrative treats heritage as a branding tool, enhancing the site’s market appeal by selectively incorporating historical elements into contemporary urban living. By promoting the project as a cultural hub, developers frame the transformation as a positive contribution to the area’s identity, arguing that the preservation of visually significant elements offers a meaningful reference to the past. This approach reflects a tendency to prioritize aesthetic continuity over material and structural authenticity.

However, this optimistic framing is not universally accepted. Mr. Ellson, a community member and vocal critic of the project, opposed the demolition of Borthwick Wharf, arguing that the proposed tower block would create an “ugly stump” that disrupts the historical and visual coherence of the site.88 His view reflects a preservationist viewpoint, emphasizing that the material integrity of historic buildings is crucial to maintaining their cultural and historical value. This critique underscores broader tensions between architectural conservation and urban redevelopment, particularly where heritage elements are selectively preserved or entirely replaced.

86

“Paynes Wharf SE8,” Mindoro Developments, accessed April 2, 2025, https://www mindorodevelopments.co.uk/paynes-wharf.

Samantha Payne, “Wharf to Be Demolished,” News Shopper, December 27, 2006, https://www. newsshopper.co.uk/news/1091545.wharf-to-be-demolished/. Ibid.

In contrast, Eltham North Councillor Dermot Poston, who supported the development, highlighted the project’s public benefits, particularly its potential to enhance access to the river for both residents and visitors.89 By emphasizing the introduction of new roads and pedestrian routes, he framed the project as a pragmatic urban intervention, aligning heritage concerns with contemporary urban needs. This planning-oriented perspective prioritizes public access, urban connectivity, and economic growth, suggesting that heritage should evolve alongside urban development rather than remain static or restrictive.

The redevelopment of Paynes Wharf illustrates the challenges faced by traditional preservation models, particularly in the context of naval heritage sites that encompass infrastructural structures intimately connected to the maritime past. The treatment of Paynes Wharf aligns with the growing, yet increasingly contested trend of façadism, in which the preservation of a building’s exterior is prioritized over the retention of its original structure and material authenticity. While this approach is often justified as a pragmatic solution for integrating heritage within modern developments, it raises significant concerns regarding the authenticity and depth of heritage conservation. Façadism has become particularly prevalent in cities where high land values and stringent planning regulations impose heritage restrictions. Developers, recognizing the costs associated with evaluating, restoring, maintaining, and readapting heritage sites, frequently settle for a compromised outcome: the façade is preserved while the internal structure is entirely rebuilt. This allows developers to market properties as historically significant, while maximizing commercial potential through modern, high-density construction.

89 Mindoro Developments, “Paynes Wharf SE8.”

Figure 70, 71, 72

New floor plan proposals by a commercial fit-out company at Paynes Wharf in 2013 (London: Mindoro Developments)

Figure 73

Paynes Wharf before redevelopment. (London: Know Your London)

Figure 74

Paynes Wharf depicted in three stages: the naval period, demolition, and reconstruction. Shown in this first image is the outer walls of Paynes Wharf awaiting redevelopment in 2008. (London: Know Your London)

Figure 75

The completed development, viewed from the Isle of Dogs in April 2015. Payne’s Wharf is located on the right, with its original brick arches preserved within the new structure. On the left, the modern tower block now occupies the former site of Borthwick’s Wharf. (London: Know Your London)

As Robert Bargery, former secretary of The Georgian Group, explains, façadism generally involves retaining only the visible external façade of a historic building, often under the justification that it maintains the architectural or cultural character of the area.90 Eric Rodrigues, Heritage Architect & Founder of Boldera Architecture, argue that this approach reduces heritage to a mere aesthetic veneer, rather than ensuring meaningful preservation.91 While some consider façadism a pragmatic means of integrating heritage into modern developments, its execution often results in architectural incoherence, as the original symbiosis between interior and exterior architecture is lost.

The case of Paynes Wharf exemplifies these concerns. The redevelopment incorporates several protruding glass boxes as extensions to the original structure, intended to minimize the visual disruption of new additions. However, the result is a stark contrast between historical and contemporary elements, illustrating the limitations of façadism as a heritage strategy. Rather than seamlessly integrating past and present, the reliance on transparent materials to diminish the presence of new interventions suggests that the original façade functions more as a decorative backdrop than as an active component of the building’s historical narrative.

The designation of Paynes Wharf as a ‘Creative Enterprise Zone’ and its framing as a ‘cultural destination’ exemplify how heritage is often strategically leveraged for economic and branding purposes. While such designations align with urban regeneration goals, they also challenge traditional conceptions of heritage as a preservation-based practice. Although the project is marketed as a space for cultural and creative industries, questions remain regarding the extent to which these ambitions have been realized over time.

A site visit to Paynes Wharf on a weekday afternoon revealed little evidence of active cultural engagement, raising concerns about whether the development’s marketed identity as a cultural hub is truly being fulfilled. One possible explanation is that the developer’s responsibility is confined to the designated plot area, even though the public passage connecting the inner city to the waterfront must pass through the public spaces at Paynes Wharf. Although this passage was intended to enhance public access, it has received little maintenance and fails to promote a meaningful connection between the building and the riverside. On the day of the visit, the staircase linking Paynes Wharf to the Thames was found to be in poor condition, constructed from unstable steel structures that impeded access and visibly showed signs of neglect.

90

Robert Bargery. “The Ethics of Facadism: Pragmatism Versus Idealism,” Building Conservation, accessed April 1, 2025, https://www.buildingconservation.com/articles/facadism/facadism.htm. Eric Rodrigues, “The Problem With Facadism in Toronto,” Boldera Architects, May 27, 2024, https:// boldera.ca/the-problem-with-facadism-in-toronto/.

Additionally, the studio spaces currently occupying Paynes Wharf — including a Pilates studio, an artist studio, and a café — appeared largely inactive, with few people present in the vicinity. This reflects a broader issue in heritage-led regeneration, where the rhetoric of cultural revitali-zation does not necessarily translate into long-term, tangible community benefits. The case of Paynes Wharf highlights the discrepancy between the intended purpose of heritage-led devel-opment and its actual impact, possibly because these functions primarily target new, high-end users rather than the existing local community.

These conflicting interpretations of heritage — as a preservationist endeavour, an urban plan-ning tool, or a commercial asset — illustrate the negotiated and contested nature of heritage within Deptford’s redevelopment. The case of Paynes Wharf reflects broader debates on how fragmented heritage sites can more effectively engage with their historical narratives while ac-commodating economic and spatial transformations, to achieve sustainable heritage reuse.

Behind the glass-framed arches, creative studios sit quietly, with few passers-by in the so-called “Creative Enterprise Zone.” Source: Author.

Conclusion

The highly contested nature of the three sites studied demonstrates an ongoing dialogue of conflict and negotiation across multiple levels within both formal and informal heritage discourses. These tensions unfold among a diverse network of stakeholders—including community groups, developers, local and regional governments, heritage organisations, and urban planners—positioning Deptford as a compelling case that encapsulates the struggle between groundup heritage movements and dominant, top-down urban regeneration strategies. The complexity of these interactions reveals fundamental challenges within current systems of heritage listing and valuation, particularly at the national level, where decision-making becomes increasingly difficult when heritage is multifaceted, intangible, and fragmented, yet remains historically significant and deeply valued by local communities.

This thesis advocates for a more democratically informed approach to heritage, contributing to broader discussions around whose values determine what is preserved. The three typologies examined—archaeology, gardens, and fragments—each respond to different dimensions of contested heritage.

Firstly, what Smith term the AHD struggles to recognise heritage in the absence of physical structures, privileging material evidence over memory.92 The Convoys Wharf site directly challenges this reductionist assumption, as residents have actively redefined heritage through community workshops and rejected the notion that loss of archaeological structures equals to the loss of heritage itself.

92 Smith, Uses of Heritage, 237.

Secondly, as Harrison contends, heritage is not merely a collection of ‘things’ but a form of social ‘work’ through which the past is continually produced in the present.93 Initiatives such as school engagement and crowdfunded proposals for Sayes Court Park demonstrate how communities redefine heritage through performative acts. These activities carried out on the historical garden reveal that heritage endures through use, memory, and lived experience, not solely through monumental physical artefacts.

Finally, the traditional emphasis on material continuity, such as preserving façades or fragments, risks reducing heritage to a static material representation. This is evident in the case of Paynes Wharf, where community interest significantly declined after reconstruction, revealing the limitations of preservation strategies that prioritise superficial appearance over active community engagement. Ultimately, it is the cultural and participatory processes that connect people to the past and shape the present-day identity that define the value of heritage today.

As redevelopment continues, Deptford stands as a critical example of how cities navigate the balance between urban growth and both official and unofficial forms of heritage, recognising them as valuable resources for fostering a sustainable and socially sensitive continuity of histories within the evolving urban landscape.

93 Harrison, Heritage / Critical Approaches, 113.

I. Appendix

Timeline of Major Community-led Campaign Milestones Between 2005 and 2025

This page is left intentionally blank

II.

List of Images

Figure 1 Author’s Drawing.

Figure 2 Graville, Ben. An empty space, still waiting for the anchor’s return. 2017. Photograph. Deptford is Forever. https://deptfordisforever.net/dif%202017.

Figure 3 Rex, Shutterstock. Convoys Wharf, Deptford, London. 2011. Photograph. Shutterstock. https://www.shutterstock.com/editorial/image-editorial/convoys-wharf-prince-streetdeptford-south-london-1481122c.

Figure 4 Farington, Joseph. Deptford Dockyard. Painting. National Maritime Museum, Greenwich. https://d3d00swyhr67nd.cloudfront.net/w1200h1200/collection/NMM/NMMG/ NMM_NMMG_BHC1874-001.jpg.

Figure 5 Lawes, Sue. ‘Give Us Back Our Bloomin’ Anchor: The Procession!’. 2013. Photograph. Deptford is Forever. https://deptfordisforever.net/the-procession.

Figure 6 Lawes, Sue. ‘Give Us Back Our Bloomin’ Anchor: The Procession!’. 2013. Photograph. Deptford is Forever. https://deptfordisforever.net/the-procession.

Figure 7 Author’s Diagram.

Figure 8 Author’s Photograph.

Figure 9 Author’s Photograph.

Figure 10 British Library. A plan of the Royal dockyard at Deptford. 1774. Plan. British Library shelf mark: Maps K.Top.18.17.10. https://flickr.com/photos/12403504@N02/50265318736.

Figure 11 National Maritime Museum, Greenwich. Topographic scenic model of the Royal Dockyard at Deptford, London. 1774. Topographical model. https://collections.rmg.co.uk/ media/544/533/l0459_001.jpg.

Figure 12 National Maritime Museum, Greenwich. Topographic scenic model of the Royal Dockyard at Deptford, London. 1774. Topographical model. Close up photograph of the Master Shipwright’s House. https://collections.rmg.co.uk/media/544/548/l0459_006.jpg.

Figure 13 National Maritime Museum, Greenwich. Topographic scenic model of the Royal Dockyard at Deptford, London. 1774. Topographical model. Close up photograph of the Tudor Storehouse. https://collections.rmg.co.uk/media/544/542/l0459_004.jpg.

Figure 14 National Maritime Museum, Greenwich. Topographic scenic model of the Royal Dockyard at Deptford, London. 1774. Topographical model. Close up photograph of the Double Dock. https://collections.rmg.co.uk/media/544/551/l0459_007.jpg.

Figure 15 National Maritime Museum, Greenwich. Topographic scenic model of the Royal Dockyard at Deptford, London. 1774. Topographical model. Close up photograph of the Mast Pond. https://collections.rmg.co.uk/media/544/641/l0459_037.jpg.

Figure 16 National Maritime Museum, Greenwich. The ‘St Albans’ Floated out at Deptford. 1774. Painting. https://collections.rmg.co.uk/media/387/69/bhc1046.jpg.

Figure 17 National Maritime Museum, Greenwich. The ‘Royal George’ at Deptford Showing the Launch of ‘The Cambridge’. 1757. Painting. https://d3d00swyhr67nd.cloudfront. net/w1200h1200/collection/NMM/NMMG/NMM_NMMG_BHC3602-001.jpg.

Figure 18 Author’s Photograph.

Figure 19 Author’s Mapping.

Figure 20 Kenny, Russell Kenny and Paul Hayes. 2025. Walks Past. Walk 11 - A Walk Around Historical Deptford. Webpage Screenshot. https://www.walkspast.com/p/walk-11-walkaround-historical-deptford.html.

Figure 21 Charlse Booth Walking Tours London. Webpage Screenshot. https://www. charlesboothwalks.com/.

Figure 22 Patterson, Sean. Get a guided tour of Deptford from a local. 2015. Footprints of London, Where Londoners Walk. Webpage Screenshot. https://footprintsoflondon.com/ live/2015/11/get-a-guided-tour-of-deptford-from-a-local/.

Figure 23 Russell Nash. Tour Local: a tour around the trendy, historical Deptford. 2020. Guild of Tourist Guides. Webpage Screenshot. https://britainsbestguides.org/blogs/tourhistorical-deptford/.

Figure 24 Discovering Britain. A walk back in time to vibrant Victorian London. Royal Geographical Society. Webpage Screenshot. https://www.discoveringbritain.org/activities/greaterlondon/walks/london-deptford.html.

Figure 25 Deptford X. Deptford: An Architectural Tour. 2017. Webpage Screenshot. https:// www.burwellarchitects.com/content-item/deptford-an-architectural-tour.

Figure 26 Deptford Is Forever. Anonymous Anchor Graffiti in Deptford. 2013. Photograph. https:// deptfordisforever.net/the-anchor.

Figure 27 Author’s Photograph.

Figure 28 Author’s Photograph.

Figure 29 Author’s Photograph.

Figure 30 Author’s Photograph.

Figure 31 Author’s Diagram.

Figure 32 Author’s Diagram.

Figure 33 Author’s Photograph.

Figure 34 Author’s Photograph.

Figure 35 Author’s Photograph.

Figure 36 Author’s Photograph.

Figure 37 Author’s Photograph.

Figure 38 Author’s Photograph.

Figure 39 Author’s Photograph.

Figure 40 Author’s Photograph.

Figure 41 Author’s Photograph.

Figure 42 Historic England. Search the List: Map Search. 2025. Listing. Search Result Screenshot: Deptford versus Central London. https://historicengland.org.uk/listing/the-list/mapsearch.

Figure 43 Historic England. Search the List: Map Search. 2025. Listing. Search Result Screenshot: Deptford versus Greenwich Borough. https://historicengland.org.uk/listing/the-list/ map-search.

Figure 44 Author’s Table.

Figure 45 Author’s Table.

Figure 46 Boyle, Sian, Residents Want Anchor Returned. Evening Standard, October 24, 2013. https://deptfordisforever.net/the-anchor.

Figure 47 Author’s Diagram.

Figure 48 Hutchison Property Group (UK) Limited. Olympia Shed Visualization. 2024. https:// convoys-wharf.com/.

Figure 49 Hutchison Property Group (UK) Limited. Convoys Wharf Master Plan. 2024. https:// convoys-wharf.com/.

Figure 50 Deptford Is. Convoys Wharf public exhibition. 2012. Photograph. https:// deptfordis.blogspot.com/2012/07/convoys-wharf-public-exhibition.html.

Figure 51 Deptford Is. Participants talking with Developer. 2012. Photograph. https://deptfordis. blogspot.com/2012/07/convoys-wharf-public-exhibition.html.

Figure 52 Author’s Photograph.

Figure 53 Author’s Photograph.

Figure 54 Greater London Industrial Archaeology Society. Map of Deptford Strand belonging to John Evelyn. Sketch. http://www.glias.org.uk/pics/convoys-7_fmt.jpeg.

Figure 55 Wellcome Collection gallery. Portrait of John Evelyn (1620-1706). General Collections. 2018. Photograph.

Figure 56 Evelyn, John. Title Page of Sylva, or A Discourse of Forest-Trees and the Propagation of Timber. 1664. Photograph. Wikipedia. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ commons/thumb/a/a3/Sylva_paper_1662.jpg/800px-Sylva_paper_1662.jpg.

Figure 57 Evelyn, John. Map of Deptford Strand by John Evelyn. 1623. Hand Sketch. British Library Archive. http://www.glias.org.uk/pics/convoys-7_fmt.jpeg.

Figure 58 Author’s Photograph.

Figure 59 Old Deptford History. Manor House transformed as Workhouse. 1840. Drawing. https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/ AVvXsEjPFl9yIIypfFldRzPqN6L4Cp6O-uXNXsbHLM7lCqZCeLq7eVrLooNYx6B gNtEM0XjObsFLpYUu3YE9PiMrMO-xDZxjKn80YOwUfJfNcT1IQ-hSD5brFu1yBgoqJEZwcJ2CJw-BTG7Rtvu/s400-rw/sayes-court-1840-01559-350.jpg.

Figure 60 Sayes Court Garden CIC. Sayes Court Park transformed into a municipal park in the 19th century. Date unknown. Photograph. https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/ spacehive/66f1d264-e17a-4ada-a8bd-21e7158420e6_xlarge_l-neg-1314.jpg.

Figure 61 Sayes Court Garden CIC. Excavation of Sayes Court by MOLA. 2011. Photograph. https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/spacehive/ea80d91e-6a01-4198-9685d9b6e2dc3a16_xlarge_area-6-sayes-court-looking-w.jpg.

Figure 62 Transpontine. Deptford Is…: Urgent Objections Workshop. 2011. Poster. Deptford Is… https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/ R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgMYEc8Ats8Jr28Xm9_SCdd3M9aH6yOxRuv8-_ c2RVBEePkUJbfmgSTGq4lXIFlKdJP-596XkNiRzXeZws5ANqzHi8jHF9r4CB4OiC22 w9XaWQ2GAwJw3oeWTmN7P_GoRTeHgw1rlC5H-k/s320/DEPTFORD-IS...e-flyer. jpg.

Figure 63 Deptford Is… Community Workshop on Convoys Wharf Development. 2012. Photograph. https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg8ubpCN0V3_NY NShOgXIUCHiZhRrZUwSylrFIUt0jStQsvf6-HYKq9ZBMbg1XkmtToxRzgsHPytWvai7ZyhV_qAPMLZOn5z4swKaq-OOs7k9moJ1CSs4kIGTff6u9DSO7FQn0oEAA0CI/ s1600/IMG_1498+copy.JPG.

Figure 64 Roo, Angell. Model of Convoys Wharf showing future Sayes Court, David Kohn Architects 2018. Photograph of model. Sayes Court Garden CIC. https://landscapewpstorage01. blob.core.windows.net/www-landscapeinstitute-org/2018/10/D01P12-roo-angell.pdf.

Figure 65 Sayes Court Garden CIC. The Sayes Court Project Presenting to Years 4, 5 and 6 at Deptford Park School. 1774. Painting. https://www.spacehive.com/sayes-court.

Figure 66 The Telegraph. Local Schoolchildren Look at a Model of Evelyn’s Garden, Based on the Original Plan From About 1651. 2013. Photograph. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/ multimedia/archive/02705/Workshop-01_2705293b.jpg?imwidth=1280.

Figure 67 Sayes Court Garden CIC. The Sayes Court Team Led a Heritage Tour at Sayes Court. 2013. Photograph. https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/spacehive/0df1838e-36a1-440a87c6-95276db5efc0_xlarge_deptford-walk-2.jpg.

Figure 68 David Kohn Architects. A new centre for horticulture and landscape urbanism in Deptford. 2013. Drawing. https://davidkohn.co.uk/img/ RFdQOGJTR0Z2NUVxK0NRWmZTNzFBQT09/dka-192-sayes-web-03.jpg.

Figure 69 Geocaching. Paynes Wharf before redevelopment. Date unknown. Photograph. https:// imgproxy.geocaching.com.

Figure 70 Jane 53. From the Convoys Wharf Jetty. 2008. Photograph. Flickr. https://www.flickr. com/photos/55136072@N00/6317728125.

Figure 71 Know Your London. The Completed Development Seen from the Isle of Dogs in April 2015. Payne’s Wharf Was on the Right. 20-15. Photograph. https://knowyourlondon. wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/px02160_800x500_av-hdr-28b-apr-2015. jpg.

Figure 72 Mindoro Developments. Paynes Wharf SE8, Existing First Floor Plan. 2013. Plan. https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/63f7d407d1ef2737b0ec88a6/277a ab52-7809-4de2-ac9d-2f36c488cfa4/IMG_7683.jpg?format=750w.

Figure 73 Mindoro Developments. Paynes Wharf SE8, Proposed First Floor Plan. 2013. Plan. https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/63f7d407d1ef2737b0ec88a6/4fd9a ef4-8dbf-48db-88bf-79729707a0c1/IMG_7684.jpg?format=750w.

Figure 74 Mindoro Developments. Paynes Wharf SE8, Proposed Second Floor Plan. 2013. Plan. https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/63f7d407d1ef2737b0ec8 8a6/47998780-37cf-4982-9570-5fbdbda257c4/IMG_7685.jpg?format=750w.

Figure 75 Green, Bill. Deptford Beach and Paynes and Borthwick Construction. 2013. Photograph. https://www.flickr.com/photos/bill-green/8977017732.

Figure 76 Author’s Photograph.

Figure 77 Author’s Photograph.

This page is left intentionally blank

Bibliography

Alex Neil Estate Agents. “Paynes and Borthwick SE8 Development.” Accessed April 1, 2025. https://www.alexneil.com/development-paynes-and-borthwick-se8.

Bargery, Robert. “The Ethics of Facadism: Pragmatism Versus Idealism.” Building Conservation. Accessed April 1, 2025. https://www.buildingconservation.com/articles/ facadism/facadism.htm.

Boyle, Sian, “Residents Want Anchor Returned.” Evening Standard, October 24, 2013. https:// deptfordisforever.net/the-anchor.

Build the Lenox. “The Lenox Project.” The Restoration Warship Project. Accessed March 22, 2025. https://www.buildthelenox.org/.

Charles Booth’s London. “Charles Booth’s London.” London School of Economics and Political Science. Accessed January 10, 2025, https://booth.lse.ac.uk/.

Cherry, Bridget and Nikolaus Pevsner. London. 2, South. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1983.

Crowd Justice. “Action for a Judicial Review of Convoys Wharf Planning Permission.” November 25, 2020. https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/v4d-action-for-a-judicialreview/.

Deptford is Forever. “Bags & Tattoos 2013.” Accessed January 11, 2025. https:// deptfordisforever.net/bagsandtats.

Deptford is Forever. “DIF 2018.” Accessed January 11, 2025. https://deptfordisforever.net/ dif%202018.

Deptford is Forever. “The Deptford Anchor.” Accessed January 11, 2025. https:// deptfordisforever.net/the-anchor.

Deptford Is. “Convoys Wharf Public Exhibition: Deptford Is.. Responds.” Deptford Is… (blog). July 22, 2012. https://deptfordis.blogspot.com/2012/07/convoys-wharf-publicexhibition.html.

Evelyn, Helen. The History of the Evelyn Family: With a Special Memoir of William John Evelyn London: Eveleigh Nash, 1915.

Exploring Surrey’s Past. “John Evelyn (1620 – 1706).” Accessed March 2, 2025. https://www. exploringsurreyspast.org.uk/themes/people/writers/john_evelyn/.

Hampshire, A Cecil. The Royal Navy Since 1945; Its Transition to the Nuclear Age. London: William Kimber, 1975.

Harrison, Rodney. Heritage / Critical Approaches. London: Routledge, 2012.

Hasted, Edward. “Addenda and corrigenda to volume 1.” In The History and Topographical Survey of the County of Kent: Volume 2. Canterbury, 1797. British History Online. https://www. british-history.ac.uk/survey-kent/vol2/pp553-567.

Historic England. “Former Master Shipwright’s House at Royal Dockyard, Deptford.” Accessed January 15, 2025. https://historicengland.org.uk/listing/the-list/listentry/1213984.

Historic England. “Olympia Convoy’s Wharf.” Accessed February 12, 2025. https:// historicengland.org.uk/listing/the-list/list-entry/1213012.

Historic England. “Tudor Naval Storehouse at Convoys Wharf.” Accessed March 9, 2025. https://historicengland.org.uk/listing/the-list/list-entry/1021239.

Hopper, Bethany. “Lost Gardens of London: John Evelyn’s Sayes Court Garden.” Garden Museum. June 20, 2024. https://gardenmuseum.org.uk/lost-gardens-of-london-johnevelyns-sayes-court-garden/.

Hutchison Property Group (UK) Limited. “Convoys Wharf.” Accessed December 21, 2024. https://convoys-wharf.com/.

Hutchison Property Group (UK) Limited. Convoys Wharf Heritage Design Proposal. December 2019.

In-Deptford, Anita. “Affordable Housing Is the Joke of the Century.” Deptford Is Changing (blog). March 18, 2018. https://deptfordischanging.wordpress.com/2018/03/18/ affordable-housing-is-the-joke-of-the-century/.

Jenkins, Kedron. “Meet John Evelyn.” Norfolk Master Gardeners. January 4, 2022. https:// www.norfolkmastergardeners.org/meet-john-evelyn.

Kenny, Russell Kenny and Paul Hayes. “Walk 11 - A Walk Around Historical Deptford.” Free Self-Guided London History Walks (blog). October 19, 2021. https://www.walkspast. com/p/walk-11-walk-around-historical-deptford.html.

Layers of London. “Deptford Dockyard.” Accessed March 13, 2025. https://www. layersoflondon.org/map/records/deptford-dockyard.

Layers of London. “Victualing Yard.” Accessed March 3, 2025. https://www.layersoflondon. org/map/records/victualling-yard.

Lewisham Council. “New Community Led Designs for Green Spaces on Sayes Court Estate.” February 11, 2022. https://lewisham.gov.uk/articles/news/new-community-led-designsfor-green-spaces-on-sayes-court-estate.

Lewisham Council. Deptford High Street & St Paul’s Church Conservation Area Appraisal and Management Plan, 2019. https://lewisham.gov.uk/-/media/archive/ deptfordhighstreetandstpaulschurchconservationareaappraisal_updated-spd-link.pdf.

Lewisham Council. Plot 08, 15 and 22, Convoys Wharf, London, SE8 3JH. June 9, 2020. https:// councilmeetings.lewisham.gov.uk/documents/s73508/Item%204a%20-%20Convoys%20 Executive%20Summary%20FINAL%20for%20print.pdf.

Lewisham Council. Deptford Ward Profile. 2022. https://www.observatory.lewisham.gov.uk/wpcontent/uploads/2022/06/Deptford-digital.pdf.

London Gardens Trust. “Sayes Court Park (Lewisham).” London Parks & Gardens. November 14, 2022. https://londongardenstrust.org/conservation/inventory/siterecord/?ID=LEW049.

London Remembers. “Sir Francis Drake.” Accessed January 9, 2025. https://www. londonremembers.com/memorials/sir-francis-drake.

Lysons, Daniel. “Deptford, St Nicholas.” In The Environs of London: Volume 4, Counties of Herts, Essex and Kent. London, 1796. British History Online. https://www.british-history.ac.uk/ london-environs/vol4/pp359-385.

Mark, Laura. “£1bn Convoys Wharf Scheme Given Boris Approval.” Construction News, March 26, 2019. https://www.constructionnews.co.uk/sections/news/1bn-convoys-wharfscheme-given-boris-approval-01-04-2014/.

Mason, Robert. “Greater London Industrial Archaeology Society.” December 16, 2009. http:// www.glias.org.uk/news/245news.html.

Mindoro Developments. “Paynes Wharf SE8.” Accessed April 2, 2025. https://www. mindorodevelopments.co.uk/paynes-wharf.

Museum of London Archaeology. “Convoys Wharf.” Accessed February 21, 2025. https:// www.mola.org.uk/discoveries/news/convoys-wharf.

Museum of London Archaeology. Post-excavation Assessment Report and Updated Project Design. November 2013. https://www.mola.org.uk/sites/default/files/downloads/Convoys%20 Wharf%20post-ex%20assessment%20Part1.pdf.

Naval Dockyards Society. 20th Century Naval Dockyards: Devonport and Portsmouth Characterisation Report. 2012. https://navaldockyards.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/part1twentieth-century-naval-dockyards-devonport-portsmouth-characterisation.pdf.

Naval Dockyards Society. Naval Dockyards Society Statement to Voice4Deptford. September 1, 2020. https://navaldockyards.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/nds-statement-to-v4d-sept2020-v2.pdf.

Patterson, Sean. “Get a Guided Tour of Deptford From a Local.” Footprints of London. November 7, 2015. https://footprintsoflondon.com/live/2015/11/get-a-guided-tour-ofdeptford-from-a-local/.

Payne, Samantha. “Wharf to Be Demolished.” News Shopper, December 27, 2006. https://www. newsshopper.co.uk/news/1091545.wharf-to-be-demolished/.

Peter Collins. “Deptford Society.” Accessed January 13, 2025. https://www.deptfordsociety. uk/.

Potts, Gareth. Overview of Deptford, London. BURA Director of Research: Policy and Best Practice, 2008. https://www.ucl.ac.uk/urbanbuzz/downloads/projects_09/Deptford_ Case_Study.pdf.

Prockter, Adrian. “Payne’s Wharf.” Know Your London. July 13, 2015. https:// knowyourlondon.wordpress.com/2015/07/13/paynes-wharf/.

Rodrigues, Eric. “The Problem With Facadism in Toronto.” Boldera Architects. May 27, 2024. https://boldera.ca/the-problem-with-facadism-in-toronto/.

Royal Borough of Greenwich. Royal Borough of Greenwich Summary List of Listed Buildings, 2022. https://www.royalgreenwich.gov.uk/download/downloads/id/5316/royal_greenwich_ local_heritage_list.pdf.

Royal Museums Greenwich, “Peter the Great.” Accessed January 2, 2025. https://www.rmg. co.uk/stories/topics/peter-great.

Royal Museums Greenwich. “Deptford Dockyard.” Accessed March 9, 2025. https://www. rmg.co.uk/collections/archive/rmgc-object-491976.

Save Earl’s Court. “Together We Can Still Save Earl’s Court.” Sayes Court Garden CIC. “Sayes Court.” Accessed March 26, 2025, https://www.sayescourt.org.uk/.

Sayes Court Garden. “Documenting Sayes Court and the John Evelyn Archive.” YouTube. November 2, 2012. Video, 33:48. https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=oVUVWfWDBL0.

Shipwright. “The Shipwright.” Accessed January 3, 2025. https://www.theshipwright.co.uk/.

Silo SE8. “Silo SE8.” Accessed January 14, 2025. https://silo-se8.bandcamp.com/.

Smith, Laurajane. Uses of Heritage. Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group, 2006.

Stone, Peter. “The Fifty New Churches Act.” The History of London (blog). April 23, 2021. https://www.thehistoryoflondon.co.uk/the-fifty-new-churches-act/2/.

Talling, Paul. “22 Years of Derelict London.” Derelict London. Social History and Guided Walking Tours. Accessed March 13, 2025. https://www.derelictlondon.com/22years. html.

The Deptford Dame. “Paynes & Borthwick Wharf.” The Deptford Dame (blog). September 25, 2012. https://deptforddame.blogspot.com/2012/09/paynes-borthwick-wharf.html.

The Developer. “Deptford Docks: ‘There Will Be No References Left of What’s There.’” June 1, 2022. https://thedeveloper.live/opinion/opinion/deptford-docks-there-will-be-noreferences-left-of-whats-there.

The Garden History Blog. “John Evelyn’s Elysium Britannicum.” The Garden History Blog (blog). December 18, 2021. https://thegardenhistory.blog/2018/09/15/john-evelyns-elysiumbritannicum/.

The Landscape Institute. “Sayes Court Park Launches Crowdfunding Campaign.” August 1, 2017. https://www.landscapeinstitute.org/news/sayes-court-crowdfunding-campaign/.

Twomey, James. “Deptford Business Owners Forced to Close as Landlord Demands 30% Rent Hike.” South London News, September 30, 2022. https://londonnewsonline.co.uk/news/ deptford-business-owners-forced-to-close-as-landlord-demands-30-rent-hike/.

UNESCO World Heritage Centre. “Maritime Greenwich.” Accessed March 21, 2025. https:// whc.unesco.org/en/list/795/.

World Monuments Fund. “Deptford Dockyard and Sayes Court Garden.” Deptford Dockyard and Sayes Court Garden. 2014. https://www.wmf.org/monuments/deptford-dockyardand-sayes-court-garden.