Dorman Long Tower - Listed Building Status

Echoes of the industrial past are quite poignant. I had a walk up in Wensleydale a week or so ago and if you go up onto the top you can still find remains of the old Lead mining industries which shaped the dale. Unless we preserve something from the Iron and Steel industries in a few generations time there will be nothing left of the "Ironopolis". Whether that is the DL tower or something else we would be diminished by it's passing. I understand that those who have worked there have little love for it. I dare say the Roman infantryman had a very low opinion of a posting to Vindolanda. But a preserved monolith in parkland might well be something that would enhance the area with sufficient imagination if say it was surrounded by a natural woodland it could be rather nice in twenty or so years time.
That whole area is reclaimed land, it’s basically slag, as I’ve said, it would cost millions to grass it over. You have to bore the ground for analytical samples to test for contamination, that would have to be removed then topsoil added, it’s the wrong building in the wrong place. It would be cheaper to build a replica at the barrier and make it a climbing face cum zip wire ride.
 
That whole area is reclaimed land, it’s basically slag, as I’ve said, it would cost millions to grass it over. You have to bore the ground for analytical samples to test for contamination, that would have to be removed then topsoil added, it’s the wrong building in the wrong place. It would be cheaper to build a replica at the barrier and make it a climbing face cum zip wire ride.
nobody wants a replica. I fail to see how having one solitary concrete tower effects the rest of the land in anyway in terms of developing the area for any purpose.
 
I'm talking about heritage assets, not trinkets or mementoes.

Council 'cannot consider heritage' over demolition

"The Dorman Long tower is not listed and does not lie in an area of special control, and so it benefits from no protection under the Planning Act."

So, pretty much the owners of the site can do what they want with it and no one in terms of councillors or MPs has made one single effort to protect the tower.
nobody wants a replica. I fail to see how having one solitary concrete tower effects the rest of the land in anyway in terms of developing the area for any purpose.
Let’s keep the gas tank and the conveyer belts then, you want to keep it because you like it, no other reason. All this culture and heritage talk is just a smokescreen. It’s going but you’ll always have YouTube to console you.
 
Let’s keep the gas tank and the conveyer belts then, you want to keep it because you like it, no other reason. All this culture and heritage talk is just a smokescreen. It’s going but you’ll always have YouTube to console you.
The gas tank and conveyer belts are not heritage assets.
Incidentally you describe it as brutalist( because of the materials used I presume, )but it’s design seems more Art Deco to me, but what do I know.
Art Deco would be The Globe in Stockton, Sparks Daylight Bakery, Stockton, House of Fraser Building, Psyche Linthorpe Road and the now demolished Odeon Theatre.

You're right about the style being described as brutalist because of the materials used the term originates from the French description of raw concrete 'beton brut'.
Brutalism emerged during the 1950s as a rejection of nostalgia architecture, utilitarian, low-cost, poured concrete inspired by socialist principles most commonly used for city council buildings libraries, law courts, universities etc The worst examples came about in the 1970's when applied to social housing, cold and soulless and often linked with deprivation and poor living standards. Not many will be sad to see the cramped tower blocks from that period demolished.

The town centres of Billingham and Thornaby are examples of this also. Billingham being the inspiration behind Aldous Huxley's dystopian sci fi novel 'Brave New World' perhaps not as notable as ICI Wilton's influence on Ridley Scott and his vision for Blade Runner. It's not all good, it's not all important. The fact that lots of it inspired such nightmarish visions of the future is not necessarily something we want to be proud of or continue to live with. Dorman Long Tower is important and I am arguing a somewhat redundant point here as demolition has already commenced. I'm just sad that not enough people cared enough about it to have it protected. I'm not talking about the likes of me or you.. I'm talking about the people whose job it is to do exactly that. MPs taking pictures with the tower next to them saying how vital it is to protect.. yet not one of them actually bothered. It took me 20 minutes to apply for listing where no one who claimed it was important to do say had done.

I doubt it is a coincidence that works commenced ahead of time as listing was being considered. It's not right and it never is right, there is more to this than meets the eye. I've said before that that actions like the destruction of our heritage assets, the dissolution of our county council, the emergence of the 'tees valley' brand are all part of the same plan, a modern day harrying of the north. Where once they salted the fields and destroyed homes and land, they now take away our assets, our identity and name.

Harrying of the North
 
The gas tank and conveyer belts are not heritage assets.

Art Deco would be The Globe in Stockton, Sparks Daylight Bakery, Stockton, House of Fraser Building, Psyche Linthorpe Road and the now demolished Odeon Theatre.

You're right about the style being described as brutalist because of the materials used the term originates from the French description of raw concrete 'beton brut'.
Brutalism emerged during the 1950s as a rejection of nostalgia architecture, utilitarian, low-cost, poured concrete inspired by socialist principles most commonly used for city council buildings libraries, law courts, universities etc The worst examples came about in the 1970's when applied to social housing, cold and soulless and often linked with deprivation and poor living standards. Not many will be sad to see the cramped tower blocks from that period demolished.

The town centres of Billingham and Thornaby are examples of this also. Billingham being the inspiration behind Aldous Huxley's dystopian sci fi novel 'Brave New World' perhaps not as notable as ICI Wilton's influence on Ridley Scott and his vision for Blade Runner. It's not all good, it's not all important. The fact that lots of it inspired such nightmarish visions of the future is not necessarily something we want to be proud of or continue to live with. Dorman Long Tower is important and I am arguing a somewhat redundant point here as demolition has already commenced. I'm just sad that not enough people cared enough about it to have it protected. I'm not talking about the likes of me or you.. I'm talking about the people whose job it is to do exactly that. MPs taking pictures with the tower next to them saying how vital it is to protect.. yet not one of them actually bothered. It took me 20 minutes to apply for listing where no one who claimed it was important to do say had done.

I doubt it is a coincidence that works commenced ahead of time as listing was being considered. It's not right and it never is right, there is more to this than meets the eye. I've said before that that actions like the destruction of our heritage assets, the dissolution of our county council, the emergence of the 'tees valley' brand are all part of the same plan, a modern day harrying of the north. Where once they salted the fields and destroyed homes and land, they now take away our assets, our identity and name.

Harrying of the North
The fact it is not just a flat faced oblong but has those flutes makes it Art Deco for me, Not a bad design just in the wrong place to be of any use other than an ornament. It would look good on top of a hill surrounded by grassland. A latter day keep.
 

THEY SAW IT COMING: TEESPLAN 60 YEARS ON

The story of the 1960s idea that predicted the future – and the explosive scandal that ended it

For a hundred years, our region was the steel capital of the world. Steel forged in Tees furnaces found its way into the Sydney Harbour Bridge, and weaved across the Victoria Falls. When Churchill’s war cabinet met in their underground bunker, or when the ball hit the net at Wembley, it all happened under structures of Teesside steel. Our region has a proud industrial heritage – before steel, it was shipbuilding at Smith’s Dock, and after, it was chemicals at the Imperial Chemical Industries site. With high wages and good union jobs, in the 1960s it was classified as one of the best places to live in the UK.

But from the 70s onwards, we were ravaged by deindustrialisation. Between 1970 and 1985, a quarter of all jobs disappeared – and in the 90s, automation shrank the chemical industry too. Smith’s Dock launched its final ship in 1986; ICI left Teesside in 2007. The final nail came when the Tories’ apathy over Chinese steel dumping shut down the SSI steelworks in 2015. Three thousand people in my hometown of Redcar lost jobs, and almost two thousand children here now rely on foodbanks each year. Today, Teesside has amongst the highest poverty rates in the UK. Life expectancy is the lowest in Britain and going backwards. Youth unemployment is double the national average, and we have the highest suicide rate in the country. Shuttered shop-fronts line the high streets, at the highest rate anywhere in Britain. Not to mention the Boro were relegated.

This is our piece of the story that played out across the old industrial North. In our thriving golden age, when we were forging structures across the world, nobody could have imagined the decline that was to come.

Except, in the 1960s, one man did.

Frank Medhurst was a former WWII RAF pilot, who used his ex-service grant to study architecture and planning. It had been an exciting moment to become a planner – a field of post-war hope, bold dreams of building a better Britain. In 1965, he was headhunted to lead the Teesside Survey and Plan; it was to be Britain’s first sub-regional planning study.

What followed was something radical, not just on Teesside but anywhere. Frank’s team changed the idea of planning. They got out from behind their desks and drawing-boards, and into front rooms around the area. They held 110,000 interviews with members of the public. For the first time in their lives, the people of Teesside were being asked what they wanted their future to look like.


1631108401030.png

The team drew up a forty-year plan, anticipating the changes that were to come and the actions that would need to be taken. They predicted that the two massive industries that kept Teesside afloat – steel and chemicals – were heading for decline. They expected that a wave of mechanisation and changing markets that would cut jobs, and that Teesside would need a broader, more diverse economy to cope.

The first 25 years of their plan would have updated Teesside to Britain’s average. The team highlighted poor housing, schools, employment, infrastructure, and an “appalling” environment. They drew up a pollution report, uncovering a major environmental crisis for standards of living. They exposed extraordinary levels of grit and dust in the smoggy air; while the average amount for rural Britain was 1.5 tonnes per square mile, here it was 235.

After a programme of social and economic renewal, the next 15 years would have developed an innovative modern region. Instead of a string of post-industrial towns, Teesside would become one long, linear city, fifteen miles by four miles, spanning the river Tees. The river would be its backbone, and a fast, modern public transport system would zip along it. Frank recommended that the transit system be ‘enjoyable and free’, facilitating a phasing-out of cars.

Middlesbrough, with its links to the A66 and the A19, would be the economic centre of the region. Stockton would be a pedestrianised historic quarter. Redcar would be a leisure hub. Each would have access to open country; the drama of the North Sea coast to the east, the rolling hills of the Yorkshire Dales to the west, and the vast, wild purple of the North York Moors to the south.

Every centre would be designed with people in mind. There would be open community spaces for socializing, and urban spaces for strolling through and admiring. Routes would be accessible for disabled people, as well as encouraging cycling. The residential area would be at the southern end of the city, away from the heavy industry and smog; it would benefit from landscaping, high tree cover and a favourable wind direction. Land dominated by car parks and low-rise buildings would be returned to community food production and leisure – with allotments, parks and woodland.

It sounds like a utopian 1960s comic book or episode of Tomorrow’s World, but in reality it was a meticulously budgeted and mapped-out plan. It was flexible and innovative – with multiple possible futures programmed onto computer tapes, so that if there was a change in government policy or the regional economy ten years down the line, the local authority need only punch it into the plan to find a range of alternatives that still met the broad targets.

This technological element was far advanced for the time. The scene is comical now. Only one computer in the country was available for programming, the size of a laboratory, in Birmingham. The team had a dishevelled mathematician called Ernie Stringer, who travelled there for midnight every night – the only slot they could book. He would return the next morning with pages of data and in a state of complete exhaustion.

The whole of Frank’s team were similarly dedicated to the vision he was building; by January 1967, nineteen months after they first set up office, the final draft was complete. But the team planning forty years ahead for Teesside couldn’t foresee what the immediate future would bring.

In early 1967, Frank brought the draft report before a panel of senior figures in Government. The meeting was short: they fired him on the spot. These were the days before employment tribunals for wrongful dismissal; they gave no reason, and didn’t have to. He would later tell that if he had refused to go quietly, they had threatened that he would ‘never again obtain professional work in this country’. A statement was issued to the press that he had left amicably.

So ended the first and last effort in British regional planning for half a century. The name behind the move wouldn’t be revealed until several years later: John Poulson.

Poulson was a Trump-like figure, whose father set him up in the architectural business with extraordinary wealth and little knowledge. Between the 60s and 70s he amassed a web of corrupt transactions, involving dozens of councillors and MPs across the country. Teesside alone had 32 elected officials on Poulson’s payroll, in Redcar, Middlesbrough, Stockton and Eston. He spent years bribing council officials for building work. He promised quick and dirty developments – sketch plans within a fortnight, job done within the year. In Stockton, he oversaw work on the Castlegate Shopping Centre, which the town is still trying to demolish today. It was built backwards, blocking the view of the river.

On 22 June 1973, Poulson was arrested and charged with corruption. Many of his contacts were jailed or implicated too. Tory deputy leader and Home Secretary Reginald Maudling, tipped as a future Prime Minister, was forced to resign. Labour’s Dan Smith, a Newcastle councillor, was jailed. Teesside Mayor and leader of Middlesbrough Conservatives, J.A. Brown, was tied to the scandal – having simultaneously been a Poulson advisor for the best part of a decade.

Frank would never see his vision for Teesside fully come to life. In 2018, he passed away, aged 98. A diversified economy remains far off; in our postponed mayoral election, the incumbent Conservative candidate’s central pledge is to ‘bring steelmaking back to Teesside’, five years after his party let it go. So, too, is the pipe dream of fast, free public transit infrastructure. We’ve only just started to move on from the late, leaking Pacer trains – a 1980s bus body bolted to a freight wagon. Dozens of our bus routes have disappeared, replaced by ‘on demand’ services, with Arriva’s cuts isolating whole villages.

It’s not too late for Frank’s values and work to live on, though. We can have greater devolution, new community spaces, and modern infrastructure. We can tackle inequality, and bring good green jobs. The pandemic has demonstrated how rapid economic change is possible, and how essential our lowest-paid workers really are. As we look to the post-pandemic future, we can link up our isolated villages and towns with a plan for the 21st century. But just like Teesplan, it probably won’t come from politicians; it’ll have to come from us. And, unlike Frank, they’ll never see it coming.

Article By Luke Myer
 
The fact it is not just a flat faced oblong but has those flutes makes it Art Deco for me, Not a bad design just in the wrong place to be of any use other than an ornament. It would look good on top of a hill surrounded by grassland. A latter day keep.
I'm afraid it's not Art Deco, it is one of the finest examples of Brutalist Architecture and unfortunaly we can't pick and chose where our heritage assets would be best placed.
 
one mans heritage monument is another mans coal bunker, me auntie had a brutalist one in her garden in south bank, so did her neighbours.
I thought you said it was Art Deco? The fact is I'm on your side, I'm not trying to take anything away from you. You see the tower as a dirty useless pieces of junk, an awful and uncomfortable reminder of tough working conditions, a site where folks lost their lives. All that being said it still remains (for now) a hugely important monument historically, culturally and architecturally. I don't like to see our assets being given away or destroyed.

Your auntie would have been thankful after converting to gas central heating to have that coal bunker removed, to make more use of her garden. I doubt very much that should would have liked to have seen her home taken from her and that of her neighbours for them to be levelled and the land passed onto a private individual or company to build a car park or shopping centre of simply to have the land sit as an investment to be sold on to developers at a later date.
 

THEY SAW IT COMING: TEESPLAN 60 YEARS ON

The story of the 1960s idea that predicted the future – and the explosive scandal that ended it

For a hundred years, our region was the steel capital of the world. Steel forged in Tees furnaces found its way into the Sydney Harbour Bridge, and weaved across the Victoria Falls. When Churchill’s war cabinet met in their underground bunker, or when the ball hit the net at Wembley, it all happened under structures of Teesside steel. Our region has a proud industrial heritage – before steel, it was shipbuilding at Smith’s Dock, and after, it was chemicals at the Imperial Chemical Industries site. With high wages and good union jobs, in the 1960s it was classified as one of the best places to live in the UK.

But from the 70s onwards, we were ravaged by deindustrialisation. Between 1970 and 1985, a quarter of all jobs disappeared – and in the 90s, automation shrank the chemical industry too. Smith’s Dock launched its final ship in 1986; ICI left Teesside in 2007. The final nail came when the Tories’ apathy over Chinese steel dumping shut down the SSI steelworks in 2015. Three thousand people in my hometown of Redcar lost jobs, and almost two thousand children here now rely on foodbanks each year. Today, Teesside has amongst the highest poverty rates in the UK. Life expectancy is the lowest in Britain and going backwards. Youth unemployment is double the national average, and we have the highest suicide rate in the country. Shuttered shop-fronts line the high streets, at the highest rate anywhere in Britain. Not to mention the Boro were relegated.

This is our piece of the story that played out across the old industrial North. In our thriving golden age, when we were forging structures across the world, nobody could have imagined the decline that was to come.

Except, in the 1960s, one man did.

Frank Medhurst was a former WWII RAF pilot, who used his ex-service grant to study architecture and planning. It had been an exciting moment to become a planner – a field of post-war hope, bold dreams of building a better Britain. In 1965, he was headhunted to lead the Teesside Survey and Plan; it was to be Britain’s first sub-regional planning study.

What followed was something radical, not just on Teesside but anywhere. Frank’s team changed the idea of planning. They got out from behind their desks and drawing-boards, and into front rooms around the area. They held 110,000 interviews with members of the public. For the first time in their lives, the people of Teesside were being asked what they wanted their future to look like.


View attachment 24103

The team drew up a forty-year plan, anticipating the changes that were to come and the actions that would need to be taken. They predicted that the two massive industries that kept Teesside afloat – steel and chemicals – were heading for decline. They expected that a wave of mechanisation and changing markets that would cut jobs, and that Teesside would need a broader, more diverse economy to cope.

The first 25 years of their plan would have updated Teesside to Britain’s average. The team highlighted poor housing, schools, employment, infrastructure, and an “appalling” environment. They drew up a pollution report, uncovering a major environmental crisis for standards of living. They exposed extraordinary levels of grit and dust in the smoggy air; while the average amount for rural Britain was 1.5 tonnes per square mile, here it was 235.

After a programme of social and economic renewal, the next 15 years would have developed an innovative modern region. Instead of a string of post-industrial towns, Teesside would become one long, linear city, fifteen miles by four miles, spanning the river Tees. The river would be its backbone, and a fast, modern public transport system would zip along it. Frank recommended that the transit system be ‘enjoyable and free’, facilitating a phasing-out of cars.

Middlesbrough, with its links to the A66 and the A19, would be the economic centre of the region. Stockton would be a pedestrianised historic quarter. Redcar would be a leisure hub. Each would have access to open country; the drama of the North Sea coast to the east, the rolling hills of the Yorkshire Dales to the west, and the vast, wild purple of the North York Moors to the south.

Every centre would be designed with people in mind. There would be open community spaces for socializing, and urban spaces for strolling through and admiring. Routes would be accessible for disabled people, as well as encouraging cycling. The residential area would be at the southern end of the city, away from the heavy industry and smog; it would benefit from landscaping, high tree cover and a favourable wind direction. Land dominated by car parks and low-rise buildings would be returned to community food production and leisure – with allotments, parks and woodland.

It sounds like a utopian 1960s comic book or episode of Tomorrow’s World, but in reality it was a meticulously budgeted and mapped-out plan. It was flexible and innovative – with multiple possible futures programmed onto computer tapes, so that if there was a change in government policy or the regional economy ten years down the line, the local authority need only punch it into the plan to find a range of alternatives that still met the broad targets.

This technological element was far advanced for the time. The scene is comical now. Only one computer in the country was available for programming, the size of a laboratory, in Birmingham. The team had a dishevelled mathematician called Ernie Stringer, who travelled there for midnight every night – the only slot they could book. He would return the next morning with pages of data and in a state of complete exhaustion.

The whole of Frank’s team were similarly dedicated to the vision he was building; by January 1967, nineteen months after they first set up office, the final draft was complete. But the team planning forty years ahead for Teesside couldn’t foresee what the immediate future would bring.

In early 1967, Frank brought the draft report before a panel of senior figures in Government. The meeting was short: they fired him on the spot. These were the days before employment tribunals for wrongful dismissal; they gave no reason, and didn’t have to. He would later tell that if he had refused to go quietly, they had threatened that he would ‘never again obtain professional work in this country’. A statement was issued to the press that he had left amicably.

So ended the first and last effort in British regional planning for half a century. The name behind the move wouldn’t be revealed until several years later: John Poulson.

Poulson was a Trump-like figure, whose father set him up in the architectural business with extraordinary wealth and little knowledge. Between the 60s and 70s he amassed a web of corrupt transactions, involving dozens of councillors and MPs across the country. Teesside alone had 32 elected officials on Poulson’s payroll, in Redcar, Middlesbrough, Stockton and Eston. He spent years bribing council officials for building work. He promised quick and dirty developments – sketch plans within a fortnight, job done within the year. In Stockton, he oversaw work on the Castlegate Shopping Centre, which the town is still trying to demolish today. It was built backwards, blocking the view of the river.

On 22 June 1973, Poulson was arrested and charged with corruption. Many of his contacts were jailed or implicated too. Tory deputy leader and Home Secretary Reginald Maudling, tipped as a future Prime Minister, was forced to resign. Labour’s Dan Smith, a Newcastle councillor, was jailed. Teesside Mayor and leader of Middlesbrough Conservatives, J.A. Brown, was tied to the scandal – having simultaneously been a Poulson advisor for the best part of a decade.

Frank would never see his vision for Teesside fully come to life. In 2018, he passed away, aged 98. A diversified economy remains far off; in our postponed mayoral election, the incumbent Conservative candidate’s central pledge is to ‘bring steelmaking back to Teesside’, five years after his party let it go. So, too, is the pipe dream of fast, free public transit infrastructure. We’ve only just started to move on from the late, leaking Pacer trains – a 1980s bus body bolted to a freight wagon. Dozens of our bus routes have disappeared, replaced by ‘on demand’ services, with Arriva’s cuts isolating whole villages.

It’s not too late for Frank’s values and work to live on, though. We can have greater devolution, new community spaces, and modern infrastructure. We can tackle inequality, and bring good green jobs. The pandemic has demonstrated how rapid economic change is possible, and how essential our lowest-paid workers really are. As we look to the post-pandemic future, we can link up our isolated villages and towns with a plan for the 21st century. But just like Teesplan, it probably won’t come from politicians; it’ll have to come from us. And, unlike Frank, they’ll never see it coming.

Article By Luke Myer
I bought his book,

A Quiet Catastrophe: The Teesside Job

as my mum worked with him on the Teesside Survey and Plan. I don't know whether it could have been successful, but it at least showed vision and cohesion. I'm afraid it reminds me, as Boris's chums rifle the public purse, that it was ever thus. I'm not being party political either - people in positions of power and influence seem inordinately self-interested, regardless of the labels they wear.
 
I don't get this 'those who worked there should decide it's fate' argument. For what it's worth, I worked for BSC, as did my dad, uncle, cousin, school classmates et al.
Also, I've had jobs that I've been glad to leave, but I didn't particularly want to see the building demolished.
 
I don't get this 'those who worked there should decide it's fate' argument. For what it's worth, I worked for BSC, as did my dad, uncle, cousin, school classmates et al.
Also, I've had jobs that I've been glad to leave, but I didn't particularly want to see the building demolished.
Who said they should , no one on this thread, I gave an insight to working there and demythogilised this romantic notion by some of Teesside’s roots born of iron and steel and how we should all revere it. It was a job nothing more. One poster wants the tower to stay at any cost, i see no point and neither do the people who have the final say and pay the bills for it.
 
I bought his book,

A Quiet Catastrophe: The Teesside Job

as my mum worked with him on the Teesside Survey and Plan. I don't know whether it could have been successful, but it at least showed vision and cohesion. I'm afraid it reminds me, as Boris's chums rifle the public purse, that it was ever thus. I'm not being party political either - people in positions of power and influence seem inordinately self-interested, regardless of the labels they wear.
100% painting folks as tory or labour or as brexiteers or remainers it make not one bit of difference. we're all people looking to make the best way in life for ourselves and our families. whilst we point the finger at each other or raise a waggy finger those at the top are cleaning up, stuffing their pockets at every opportunity with no regard to the quality of life of those outside of their little bubble. jobs for the boys, public monies (or assets) to their pals and we're left blaming each other or falling out over which colour rosette we placed an x next to. like it or not we are very much in the american model of politics now. vote right or vote further right. very little difference between them. they will do as they wish and democracy will remain an illusion.
 
Who said they should , no one on this thread, I gave an insight to working there and demythogilised this romantic notion by some of Teesside’s roots born of iron and steel and how we should all revere it. It was a job nothing more. One poster wants the tower to stay at any cost, i see no point and neither do the people who have the final say and pay the bills for it.
I'm fully aware of the work carried out and the function the building served when it was in use for the purpose that it was built. I don't consider it a romantic notion to hold onto something of worth and value, I consider it to be quite a sensible and pragmatic notion to make the best with what you have.

Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.
 
It has no worth or value beyond your personal beliefs. It would have some purpose as a folly, a bit like grays monument but as it stands it’s a no from me, If I get banned for responding I’m blaming you.😎
 
It has no worth or value beyond your personal beliefs. It would have some purpose as a folly, a bit like grays monument but as it stands it’s a no from me, If I get banned for responding I’m blaming you.😎
You should be fair now and step back now and let others have a voice.
 
Back
Top